Laserfiche WebLink
of barrier will be put up so that it will deflect any noise coming from the development. Is that <br />understood? <br />GRAHAM:Commissioner Watanabe? <br />WATANABE:Yes. I believe we had that neighbor here the last time testifying; and an <br />agreement was that they would put up, construct a 6-foot rockwall. <br />DOMINGO:Okay. Then I understand that rather than putting that as a condition of <br />approval that this perhaps could be taken up during the plan approval process and that item be <br />addressed at that time. I just want that to be documented so that in the event its forgotten and <br />put aside then whoever the neighbor may be or neighbors may be they have a recourse to reflect <br />on that and hold the developer liable for that particular improvement. I just want that to be <br />documented and officially understood. <br />GRAHAM:Thank you, Mr. Domingo. Is that, are we handling that properly with the <br />rockwall,Mr.Yuen,asfarasyouunderstand? <br />YUEN:IftheCommissionwantstomakethataspecificcondition,Icertainly <br />dont have a problem with that. My understanding right now its simply a private agreement <br />between the two. And it is true that unless that it was a condition of the ordinance when the <br />Department reviews the building plans we wouldnt know about it. I mean, the normal rules <br />require a landscaping separation between a residential and a neighborhood commercial; but it <br />wouldnt require something like the rockwall. So if its not in the ordinance the Planning <br />Department wouldnt pick it up and wouldnt require it; and it would simply be up to the <br />neighbor to enforce the conditions of their private agreement. <br />DOMINGO:Okay. Yeah, thats right, Mr. Chairman, rather than inserting that as a <br />condition of approval, just noting that it has been agreed by the developer and the neighbor that it <br />will be done. I think mentioning of that in this meeting is just for the record that the discussion <br />has taken place; and that in the event of the developer reneging on that commitment then there is <br />some document that the neighbor can reflect upon that would hold them responsible for it. And <br />Im not saying that the developer will be as scrupulous as to deny any conversation, but -. I <br />know them, they have an excellent track record in their developments; but its just a <br />precautionary measure that I feel should be done and would satisfy me. <br />GRAHAM:Thank you. Commissioner Siracusa. <br />SIRACUSA:Yes, its an interesting point that Commissioner Domingo brings up and <br />since Mr. Yuen has indicated that the Planning Department would not know about that when it <br />came to final plan approval about the agreement on the rockwall they would probably want to <br />institute Rule 17 for landscaping along that line. Is that correct, Mr. Yuen? <br />YUEN:Right. We would still -. I think Rule 17 would allow the rockwall to be <br />substituted for a shrub layer. You know, if this condition is put in for the rockwall it would still <br />require landscaping per Rule 17. I think, Id have to sit and look at the rule. I think that because <br />the purpose of the rule is to provide a visual block at a low level between the residential and the <br />commercial that you can substitute a rockwall for the lower level landscaping. I dont think you <br />9EXHIBIT A <br /> <br />