1968 339- 485 _ 1-8 to 4-15-1968

Browse Search

34 Councilman Petersen expressed his favoring intent of proposed amendment as pre- sented, and moved that Planning Commission's Resolution of Intention for amend- ment to Article 46, Ordinance No. 1130, be set for public hearing on February 12, 1968, seconded by Councilman Rosselli. Councilman Granger questioned whether Council would have more authority under this proposed amendment if requirement for a 5/7ths majority vote retained. It was pointed out this point had been dis- cussed as not being meaningful because Council could amend the basic ordinance by a simple majority vote. Motion carried (MINUTE ORDER 68-34) Planning Commission report and recommendation concerning the Preliminary Regional Plan. It was noted this matter had been referred to Planning Commission by Council for a review and recommendation, copy of statement approved by the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors having been submitted to Council, together with the conclu- sions which had been made after a thorough study by the Planning Commission. Planning Director briefly reviewed how Preliminary Regional Plan had been submit- ted about a year ago, as prepared by ABAG from a two year study by experts in various fields; how Preliminary Plan had been prepared to generate discussion. He advised most criticisms on review of the Plan came from cities that have already adopted a General Plan and find Preliminary Plan at variance with their own. He advised in this respect Redwood City is an exception as Plan not incon- sistent with City's adopted Downtown Plan, Redwood Shores General Plan, Parks and Recreation Element of a General Plan, nor with other local planning which has not reached a point of adoption. He advised, while most cities had reacted to Plan by comparing it with their own, Planning Commission had attempted to take a more realistic viewpoint to realize the directions which such a regional plan should take, and to also consider specific things which sould be included. Mayor Herkner reported 14 cities of the County had responded and it was felt our City should submit a response before the deadline date of January 31st, if possible. Discussion and questioning held on the following conclusions presented by the Planning Commission: 1. There is a definite need for regional planning to guide the future development of the San Francisco Bay Area as a coor- dinated metropolitan organism, and, while recognizing its shortcomings, the Preliminary Regional Plan is a logical starting point in this planning process. No changes or criticism. 2. The importance of the plan to Redwood City is not confined only to what is shown in the plan at the location of Redwood City, but also to how Redwood City relates to the region and functions within it, and to how the region's functions affect Redwood City and the region of which it is a part. Planning Director cited example of bridges, even though not located in Redwood City, would affect the City and the City would affect the bridges. In other words, he indicated any major plan in Bay area would affect Redwood City and re- late to it. Council questioned whether this point might affect "home rule" JW 29'66