Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/10/2001, L-1 - JUNE 27TH PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION .1 TING AGENDA DATE ITEM F LIAISON REPORT July 12, 2001 Agenda oywClL D biR ® FIN DIR To: Council collea NEY ❑ FIR DIP HIEF From: Ken Schwartz ' RtE ❑ POLIE CHF Copies Ken Hampian, dy George,Lee Price;John Mandeville. ❑ KH EA So ❑ REG DIR ❑ S ® UTIL DIR Re: June 27h Planning Commission Study Session 0 SIR DIR The PC's annual`retreat"was a dinner meeting held.at the Cafe Roma. All commissioners were present and all participated in a lively discussion on the following topics: 1. Legal issues: Assistant City Attorney Gil Trujillo updated the commissioners on several cases with community development implications. 2. Roles of the.Planning commission and ARC: There is obvious confiision regarding the roles of these two commissions. To what degree is/should land use authority and EIR review divided between the two? When should the PC have input on"design"issues? Can the issues of land use and building design ever be completely segregated? If not,how can the two commissions better work together to achieve quality projects? It was agreed that more joint study sessions between the PC and the ARC would be useful until these matters are better resolved. (The Cannon project proposed for the Tank Farm and Broad Street intersection was pointed to as a case in point.) 3. Commission procedures and-Robert's Rules: This discussion revolved around the issue of "calling for the question." Apparently, some/all commissioners tend to drag out discussion with small points to the discomfort of others,hence the question of how to terminate discussion and move for action. There was obvious desire to "get to the point"but also reluctance to invoke the strict order that the application of Robert's Rule's of Order requires. The conchision—at least as I interpreted it—was to leave the matter in the hands of the Chairperson. 4. Staying Connected with the Council and Council Policy. This topic produced considerable discussion,but no concrete conchWons. Each commissioner would have to use his/her own devices. Obviously, PC'ers could contact individual Council members to gain clarification for the Council member's action or comments with respect to a particular issues. Additional joint meetings between the CC and the PC would appear usefid as well. 5. How does the Commission Accomplish Changes to the General Plan: John and Gil sketched out the legal process. There seemed to be an undercurrent concern that the PC could not do anything unless a GP change was initiated by RECEIVED Council. Hopefiilly,this misconception was diffused. SLO Cir( COUNCIL Page 2 6. Review ofthe Planning Commission Work Program Priorities and Major City Goals: The hour was getting late and with little discussion on this topic,.the Commission adjourned. I was impressed with the dialogue. Everyone participated It was clear that mutual respect existed between the commissioners and staff For me,that was a good omen. -� o000000000000000000000000000o DD o cncnNNF\) N) NN) c NN4h- oo W W W W WM00000000o m m W N N N N N N N N N N A 4, 46 W W W W W N N N i i i i i i i � � 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 O W W W W W N N i i i W W W V V V V O N N N N IV N N O O O Z Cpiiiii V NAW W OOOOD CD V CT 0 V V V V V 0 CO Qli y � C O 66666666666666666666666 '0 '0 '0 '0 '0 '0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CT A i 0 0 0 N O N m N i N i i N N i 0 0 W N -• O O O N i W A p m iW0) CTAOV iODOtpAtoODCTA -� N W W O (7D0> W NODO W V � C p m t_ Z3 c3 3 CD cr W m O 7 cc m D) SJ 37 31 31 37 3] ]] 37 37 37 37 37 37']7 37 ]] 37 37 37 37 3] ]] 31 31 37.31 37 31 31 N /"� 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i i i i i 1 1 1 i i i N N N i i i N i -;-I, 1 1 1 N C O J o � gmS' $ oC. � ymfl7Dl00CD 0=ID = (DOoomoa f o SD 0 3 m m v, m � E m m m .m �.� � � co m 'm m m 7C`M W, m o = � m 2m o _ � CD Sm3 � m o ' o` > > m o 0 c -+ m o � �' < mm � y m o n -0 � 0 � mm s � Dm 3m " � CL 3 � � wr'0. cn < cL '0 = =go xss n � « a) = D9' 0 N �mom90goDm 90 9, z � v m - 2. sem n goc c s ; 7 .y.. O 7 0 CJ N N `C 90 n N � L A N w �7 CD `G Al m — =. Q .< c z w z a s CD m y m m � a' rm vv xm 90 cv m —I o'< D fA r � w• D ju 37 • N D 33 m 37 'Jl\•v i i N. N i. N A i coN N i W W Ul i N i i i N i W i 0 W A w N N N i O' co N N CT i OD i CD G) V A N CO 0) N V M i W M W i O 0 A W W N f0 V N V •.r.N A -f I-4b V V I — biCA " MM4MWNWQ� CnOOC71C0 W -+ G70i LnOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO00O00 D n m W y i O W O O O O CP O i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A 0 i 0 0 0 0 0 N i 0 V CTN ? A W WA �4. NA6IV ALD A ? ODAiMvO V Vn6 Ln :D' 1� Com A WCPNCO .W CDACD.OAOCDOCTCOA -+ AW O.V (bACJ7iA VO .N � E \ § k = ccwr6 $ Q % Ik • e" " ]4W E (D § 66666 - k 0 , o © 7 COC 8W � � ] � � � a A � CD rCD 2 a 2 �a ■ � § — a E f ° E .. ODO § o � �. ; 7 , § © o _ , ) ƒ go = M = MIN � orL0 _CD , � 6266 � ■ ACL ) � ■ &.c , U n 2 § ) S2SD00) m , � , o , % 2 { / CD ƒ § a SD _ „ � (D § 0 � o $ � CD � 7kF m • E _ � \ % k -1x I=n § 70 k } k � , 2G % k \ \ / S . ER < CD OD k \ ° fes > :3] moo ƒ2 m \ / (D > > \ ƒ m ■ _ CL 7 CD ® : / � d d\ ' ) CD k 8 § § 8@ n ; § A \/ » % J-4§i CD\ N) 000 .m � w0CD oocn � [Z:ICD data distribution iMrSIDISL0 city.. ./ Scale 1:2056.002 ON i` l � f h{ > t S' i z pts �, `� ;' � ��n { � ��• � ''�` � ;` r. 9' 'z". f .70 MrSID Viewer V.ICD data distrihutionlMrSIDISLO city.,, Scale 1:15.10.371 O fi o M-1111 v t � } # a 7x s a 411, -1 MiR WM P %%% WrSID Viewer °1 C` data distributionlMrSIDISLO_ciA Scale :1510.3 71 N:- a ry. f a ` A ' a ' x��`� 3 S 1 Nk gl NW KNII z c h r h % + J � �'Tg �.�* e s,�«^�, a• w.,�.: z rya.i^i�:. '� s,'. pp � >,fix„ ; �E dr' uis R. ' ��",,.y6 m sz-L i �y�xziey ?� �T'•r� _ ,. '�C�,E €x l' �',.�� -qtr, x up WSID Viewer rszny yxe t'•~+4d• �a' x ✓=�� C'y "3 '�� aa�„�'� '`�g; "e-t '�„ �,���,".. � r_^f� a m �� [Z.ICD data distributionlMrSID1 SIO city. / Scale 1:2059.264 MrSID F, f �y Viewer