Laserfiche WebLink
to be one that controls at least for 10 years under the timeframe. And, so, any kind of interim <br />amendment process shouldn€t be made easier to me. It should be one that, you know, I don€t see <br />any real problems with the timeframe, this 240 days and all of that, because I think any proposed <br />change to the General Plan, which is always in this forum, argued tobe,you know, it complies to <br />the General Plan, so it has to be good. We should protect the integrity of the General Plan and <br />maintain a process so that it can. If the General Plan can be changed as easily as doing a zoning, <br />zoning change, then it€s not, you know, the perception is going to be it€s not thislong-term <br />planning document. If we think something else needs to be done with this particular part of our <br />island that, no problem, we go for the zoning change, you can go for the GP amendment, same <br />process, and we€ll get it done, that€s not how it€s supposed to be. The case law makes it real <br />clear, cause the General Plan is supposed to be a long-range planning document. Ten years is <br />sort of a minimal timeframe to me as far as long-range planning, but that€s the timeframe that <br />we€re working with. So that the amendment process, again, to me, should not be minimized or <br />made easier. If anything, we should be looking at it, any amendment process as one which <br />protectstheintegrityoftheGeneralPlanasalong-rangeplanningdocument. <br />ALAMEDA:Anycomments?CommissionerSiracusa? <br />SIRACUSA:OnPage4,2D,Exhibit3.We€restillonExhibit3.Iknowthey€renot <br />numbered, I just counted back. It says, The Planning Director shall notify a property owner of a <br />proposed amendment that would redesignate its property to Open or Conservation, unless the <br />property is already designated Conservation,‚ da, da, da. Well, why isn€t it also unless the <br />property is already designated Open.‚ I don€t understand why you left Open out there. Could <br />you please explain that to me? <br />YUEN:Yes, this has to deal with one set of designations as the General Plan Land <br />Use Pattern Allocation Guide Map designation; and then we refer to the State Land Use <br />Commission designation, that€s the State Land Use designation, is Conservation. So that€s, and <br />it does get a little confusing cause the same terms are used; but there are areas that are in <br />Conservation under State Land Use Commission that are not Conservation under the County <br />General Plan. So, actually, this is, this section although is what we would, this is one of the, this <br />is actually a section that already is a requirement when the Planning Director initiates such a <br />change. That is part of what we put in. There€s another requirement before it. Some people felt <br />that it€s such a significant effect potentially on the landowner that the landowner should be <br />notified. Other than this, there are no landowner notification requirements for General Plan <br />amendments at all. All right? So because the General Plan does not in itself change the zoning <br />with the use of the property, so, but, you know, certainly, that change to Open or Conservation <br />could affect the landowner€s range of options. <br />So when the Planning Director, under the current law, when the Planning Director initiates a <br />change to Open or Conservation, you have to notify the landowner. But it doesn€t say that for <br />when the Council initiates a change. So we really should be consistent and, you know, the effect <br />is the same. So this just puts it in for the Council-initiated amendments that the landowner has to <br />be notified. And the provision of, unless it€s already designated Conservation by the State Land <br />Use Commission, that€s just because, all right, they€re already in the Conservation District, all <br />right, so you€re just making the County, you change the County General Plan to be Conservation <br />as well. Maybe that is not such a drastic change for that landowner and that, again, that€s <br />consistent with what€s already in for the Planning Director-initiated amendments. <br />9EXHIBIT B <br /> <br />