CC Min 1997-12-18 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

- . ~ ., out to us quite accurately that an office building could be built on that site during those public hearings. I have read every bit oftestirnony from 1993, and while there was some - talk about nurseries and some talk about warehousing, there was never a doubt in anybody's mind, and staff never misled anybody, that there conceivably could be an office building on that site. Can we blame anybody? I guess we can blame what we call good planning in some respect, because for those of us who have had the privilege of serving on the Planning Commission, which I have and Council Member Hartnett has, we know that it makes sense to go from an industrial zone to a commercial zone to high density to medium density to residential. That is precisely what is happening. The plant is an industrial complex, a very large one and a very necessary one. The reasonable planning in any planning environment would be to move from industrial uses to commercial uses, and at the time and even today it still makes sense. The problem is that individuals have invested and bought property. The Constitution of our country says that when you do that, you do have certain property rights. If we were to ignore that, we would be ignoring our oath of office to uphold the Constitution of the United States, the Constitution of California and our own Charter. While I don't like voting in favor of this, because I would really like to have a park out there, I could not in good conscience vote any other way than 'yes' upon this one. Again, staff didn't do it to us." Couneil Member Buchan said, "I was in the Mayor's chair in 1993. . .This is one of those times when despite everything you want to do, reality hits you right in the face. Reality says we have a big problem here, a legal problem if we choose to proceed with the moratorium. I do not think it will be a wise use of taxpayers' money to go on to a lawsuit - that we probably would end up losing, and Mr. Keech and his associates would have the development they originally submitted to us. Life is full of compromises, and this is one of them. It is not a joyous compromise for everybody, but it is one I think is workable, and one that I will support." Couneil Member Leipzig said, "On November 17 I was confused when I made the motion to introduce the moratorium. Everything has been said here tonight. I would agree with Viee Mayor Ruskin about foresight and vision, and it is one area that the staff and planning commission have to improve. We don't have much choice. It is clear and you have heard the legal opinion. We have to weigh the issues and make a decision. It is a tough one. We have to move forward. You have heard about the cost to the taxpayers as a whole, you've heard about property rights, fairness. Those are the issues we are dealing with. It is unfortunate. . .we have to move on and we have done the best we can to get a comprornise, and we have to look at that as a victory." Mayor Howard said she agreed with what had been said by her colleagues. "The Specific Plan is consistent with zoning and the Final Map is valid. These questions have been answered, and we move on from there. My concerns as stated in the last meeting were the overwhelming presence on a residential neighborhood. I feel that has been addressed by scaling down to the 2 stories, bringing the square footage down significantly, enlarging the landscape around the perimeter of the building, and several other items agreed upon. I feel - this has significantly lessened the impact on the residential neighborhood. I also ADJOURNED REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTE BOOK NO. 56 DECEMBER 18. 1997 MINUTES Page No. 123 PAGE 18