Blogging Bayport Alameda

June 28, 2017

That’s subjective

Filed under: Alameda — Lauren Do @ 6:08 am

A bit of a warning for our Planning Board and — really — our City Council in case they go down the road of not having objective reasons for denying a development.  From the Mercury News about Los Gatos:

Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Drew Takaichi issued a ruling on the North 40 lawsuit Wednesday, saying the town was wrong when it rejected the proposed development.

The developers sued Los Gatos after the town council rejected their application, saying they had complied with the previously approved North 40 Specific Plan.

The town council rejected the proposed North 40 development after receiving comments and emails from hundreds of residents who complained the development was too big, did not fit with the “look and feel” of Los Gatos and did not comply with the North 40 Specific Plan. The council also said it would like to see the homes spread throughout the North 40.

[Town attorney Rob] Schultz’s email addressed the issue of subjective versus objective issues, which was a cornerstone of the developers’ lawsuit.

“The Court concluded that the findings were discretionary determinations of subjective policies in the specific plan as opposed to objective findings,” Schultz wrote. “The decision and judgment states that the town must reconsider petitioners’ applications and the project under the provisions of Government Code section 65589.5 and if, during the course of reconsideration, the town determines to again deny the applications and project, the town shall specify the applicable, objective general plan, specific plan and zoning standards which the project failed to comply. If the town determines that the project does so comply, then the town shall make written findings, supported by substantial evidence on the record, that (1) the project would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety unless the project is disapproved, and (2) there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid that specifically identified adverse impact other than the disapproval of petitioners’ applications.”

Some of our Planning Board members and City Council members hover very close to the “subjective” line and it’s only thanks to the adults in the room who know their responsibilities that Alameda has not not approved a development project because of subjective opinions on the project.

Advertisements

1 Comment »

  1. “Some of our Planning Board members and City Council members hover very close to the “subjective” line and it’s only thanks to the adults in the room who know their responsibilities that Alameda…”

    That’s a great example of a subjective opinion. Takaichi would throw it out in a heartbeat.

    Comment by jack — June 28, 2017 @ 7:19 am


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Say what you want

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.