Laserfiche WebLink
347 <br /> AGENDA (continued) ACTION TAKEN (continued) <br /> PUBLIC HEARINGS (continued) PUBLIC HEARINGS (continued) <br /> 2. continued <br /> ( ) real estate the publicity given to the Plan will <br /> be bad for property values. <br /> In response to request, Planning Director <br /> Schroeter explained that the Planning Commis- <br /> sion by State law must prepare such plans and <br /> that they wanted a citizens advisory committee <br /> to review the Plan and offer comment, sug- <br /> gestions, <br /> etc. An informational meeting was <br /> held for those appointed to the citizens com- <br /> mittee, but only three persons attended it. <br /> Unfortunately therefore members of the advisory <br /> committee apparently did not understand their <br /> role and quit rather than remain on the commit- <br /> tee to participate in a review of the Plan <br /> which might have resulted in changes and a <br /> better understanding of the nature of the Plan. <br /> Spencer Allen, 650 El Camino Real, Whitfield <br /> Building offices, asked if property owners have <br /> a right to refuse a zone change. It was ex- <br /> plained that the Council can make zone changes, <br /> but that that is not what is under considera- <br /> tion now. <br /> Jim Brockman, Burger King, stated he is afraid <br /> the Plan might lead to a "no growth" situation 11 <br /> and suggested that has happened in other com- <br /> munities, stating he does not want any change. <br /> Mr.Brockman acknowledged that an old building <br /> was destroyed to allow his business into the <br /> ,_., City. <br /> Mayor Biagi invited anyone elso present who <br /> hot <br /> wished to speak to do so. No one wished to <br /> speak. <br /> M/S: Britschgi/Bury to close the public <br /> hearing. <br /> Carried unanimously and public hearing closed <br /> at 9:30 p.m. <br /> Discussion followed concerning the desirability <br /> of long range planning for the City; the failure <br /> of citizens to participate in reviewing the <br /> Plan; the lack of understanding of the role of <br /> the advisory committee; whether Council should <br /> review the charge to the Planning Commission <br /> regarding long range planning; whether broader <br /> based citizen participation might not be more <br /> desirable; the importance of having advisory <br /> committee members understand their role in the <br /> planning process under State law; the fact that <br /> many oppose designating any private property as <br /> open space even in a conceptual plan; whether <br /> it might not be desirable to return the Plan to <br /> the Planning Commission for review and further <br /> recommendation; and the wisdom of planning for <br /> the future and the need for citizens to be in- <br /> volved in doing so. <br /> Reg.Mtg. <br /> 9/8/80 <br /> Page 5 <br /> Is <br />