Commission Impossible

Interesting document, especially considering the Council's action last night to unanimously overturn the Commission's denial of the scrupulously compliant Las Palomas subdivision project.

It's also interesting inasmuch as the Orland City Council solved its Planning Commission woes the other night by sacking the lot of them and assuming their duties. There is some speculation as to whether this was even legal, but it's certainly an encouraging, uh, development.

I've read a few letters to the editors of various papers recently, defending the obdurate Chico Planning Commission, arguing that they shouldn't just be a "rubber stamp" for developers' proposals. And yet, if a project is indeed compliant with the General Plan, the Subdivision Act, the tree ordinance, and existing zoning requirements, a "rubber stamp" is precisely what is required of the Commission. Having confirmed that the applicant had cleared all of the regulatory hurdles, it should have approved the project unanimously. Instead, it chose to deny on the basis that it failed to comply with their personal preferences. Clearly, some housecleaning is in order.

Kudos to the Council for recognizing, and explicitly admitting, that the appellant deserved to be approved on the first pass through the Commission. They should give due consideration to the appellant's recommendation that the Council give due consideration to the defects in the process as it is currently administered.

Alan,

Well said. If there's going to be a rule book in the development game the referees should be the first ones required to follow it.

Last night's unanimous approval on appeal shows the Council to be more moderate than some of their appointees.

Lon

At this point I think we're at the "Death Watch" stage with Merz. He has the opportunity to do the honorable thing and save face by resigning his seat (in protest, say, to being overturned), although nothing in his character indicates that he's even familiar with the concept. Or he can be sacked outright, which would be messy but satisfying. I think there's sufficient sentiment on the council to make that happen. The only remaining question is whether Minasian goes, too, or learns from the example.

Alan,

I'd be very surprised if the council changed the makeup of the Planning Commission if there wasn't some overt legal transgression. Merz has a lot of knowledge and could be an asset to the Planning Commission if it was a balanced body. As it stands today, it has more of an activist mentality, and seems to be causing more work for the council as opposed to less.

Planning Commissioners should not be under the impression that they have some kind of mandate from the voters. Only councilors have that. I think there may be some confusion over that reality.

Lon

FYI: Merz is widely considered a moving force behind attempts to remove thousands of people from the park system. I'm speaking of disc golf of course.

What glee you all evidence at the discomfiture of the planning commission-largely caused by one-sided comments of the type made on this blog.

How many more conservative councilors have to be voted off the council before you and they get it? So keep up the good work.

I think that at the workshops that are planned to examine the remit of the commission and amend the general plan you will all be outraged to find that the community will tell you that the general plan is out of sync with today’s more enlightened expectations.
So it does not encourage many developers (especially those from out of town) to do their best for the community, its housing stock or the environmental impacts of what they propose.

The staff in the planning department does not seem to have registered the fact that the perceptions of the citizens have changed in favor of more intelligent design and that requires more advanced presentation techniques, if obfuscation is not their aim.

If developers were moved to show us what they were really doing they would provide plans rendered in CAD 3D which showed lots and architecture in conjunction with natural features, flora and fauna, and would have adapted their lot layouts and house designs to consider them. Then they would be doing themselves and us a favor. They would cut down their design costs, revisions, appeals and frustration because it would be clear what they were about from the beginning and their plans would be passed and the city saved a lot of money in the process.

AlanG,

Thanks for the post. It's always nice to hear from you.

I think the planning staff are trying to implement the requirements of the General Plan and other code requirements. I think the commission is, in general, trying to do the same.

But when you have projects turned down that meet the legal requirements for approval that are then unanimously approved by a liberal majority council, I think there can be some concern that the Planning Commission was a bit off target.

I think we can both agree that Andy Holcombe is a supporter of the current Planning Commission. His second letter should be seen as Jon Luvaas saw it (in the recent ER story). It is a correction of the Commission, meant to be helpful to their deliberations.

But nobody should deny it is a correction.

Lon