Laserfiche WebLink
CLARKSON: And, so I have a question for the Director. So, at the time this property was <br />rezoned, even though it's in Medium Density Urban, apparently, the County Council felt that it <br />was appropriate to rezone it because of the possibility of getting affordable housing. Now, do <br />you believe that that was a mistake on the part of the Council to rezone the property and it should <br />have always remained Residential 7,500? <br />YEE: In the presentation, we said at this time it doesn't make sense. You know, obviously, if <br />the market forces were there to have it happen, it probably would be happening, and I <br />remembered my question so let him answer this question, because this is kind of important. So, <br />prior to buying this property, Mr. Tai, did you have experience upzoning properties? <br />TAI: Yes, I do, many times. <br />YEE: Okay, thank you. <br />RAFFIPIY: Thank you, Mr. Tai. We're going to move into public testimony. <br />JACKSON: Chair Raffipiy, if I may ask Mr. Tai one more question before— <br />RAFFIPIY: Go ahead. <br />JACKSON: public testimony. Mr. Tai, as far as I understand, Public Works in their <br />January 301h email to you said that the Backyard Monkey report that was done and Mr. Barrios' <br />February 4 1 letter only addressed or evaluated trees that were related to the June 2019 unsafe <br />flora violation. And, then you were issued another violation letter in January of this year? <br />TAI: June 31 [sic]. <br />JACKSON: June of last year? <br />TAI: No, you said January? <br />HALL: Twenty-eighth. <br />JACKSON: January 281h of this year. <br />TAI: January 281h, I didn't get it until January 301h, yeah, but is that the one you're talking <br />about? <br />JACKSON: Yes. <br />TAI: I'm sorry. <br />JACKSON: Yes. <br />TAI: The one that dated January 28h? <br />EXHIBIT A <br />15 <br />