PC 012203 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Sullivan noted that the new language on page 74, Program 192 stated, "The land use studies on designated unincorporated sites with potential for land use changes to residential will be conducted as follows= _ .. ~2) Sites identified for potential residential use will be redesignated for such on the General Plan and pre-zoned to a residential zoning district-" He inquired what the designated unincorporated sites were, and how the redesignation was accomplished. Mr. Iserson replied that it was part of Table 6, listing the potential sites, and that when the General Plan was updated, they would be evaluated as to their potential as residential sites_ The Planning Commission would make recommendations, and the City G'ouncil would ultimately decide which properties would be redesignated. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Roberts, Mr. Iserson confirmed that it would go along with the East Side study because there were unincorporated sites in that area. That would constitute a first step, and the General Plan for the whole city would be updated in terms of land use and circulation_ Tn response to an inquiry by Commissioner Sedlak, Nir. Iserson noted that the State wanted the items iii the Housing Element to be concretely identified and addressed. The State is looking for a sign that the City would be capable of producing the housing that has been identified. Commissioner Sedlak noted that in reading the Housing Element report, and talking with different sources, it seemed that the City had made a great effort to put forth a direction to follow with the constraints that were addressed. He believed it showed an earnest effort to the State that the City was on the right track. He was not sure why the State was exerting so much pressure to get the Housing Element exactly right the first time, rather than it becoming a living document with dialogue to move it along. Mr. Iserson noted that he did not disagree with Commissioner Sedlak, and added that the State's job was to show that Housing Elements meet the State law. Their interpretation of that requirement was to clearly and directly show a linkage between the goals, policies, and programs' abilities to produce housing. The State was concerned that without the tighter linkages, communities may not produce the housing that was identified. The State employed atop-down approach to ensure that the housing needs were met He noted that the State was still evaluating the document. In response to an inquiry by Chairperson Arkin, Mr_ Iserson replied that the State will continue to take public comment until they write the letter. A discussion of the certification process ensued. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES January 22, 2003 Page 18