2006-03-09 Tplanning_director - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

he finds out that this is why it is. Legally, that house still needs to be within the correct setback. That house might need to be moved or they get a variance or something for it. But I think what, if I understand what Chris is saying is that the entire subdivision is not invalidated because of this one line being put wrong. Is this something in the right vein? ALAMEDA:Director? MCCALL:You know, the thing would have to be corrected, but it doesnt invalidate the entire subdivision? YUEN:Well, it wouldnt invalidate the entire subdivision. Under the current Code or under this provision, there may be something that has to be fixed in that situation. I mean, if there is a difference between, if the pins are improperly set, for example, thats just a problem that has to be fixed. Typically, the subdivision will work on paper but it will not work ontheground.Thatsmorelikelytohappen.Liketheexamplethatyougaveofhowyouwould wind up mislocating the house, it would be mislocated against the pins versus mislocated against the lot line. ALAMEDA:Commissioner Iwashita, Im just thinking out loud as I hear you speak, too. I wonder if it would be, sounds like the 23-73, that whole amendment, if we, it seems like we want the Director to kind of revisit that and maybe craft a more satisfying kind of language. Im wondering if, Mr. Torigoe, maybe you can help me out. Like what if, this is just another option, what if say we move it to Council, could the Director kind of craft it there as well at the Council? TORIGOE:I think what you could do is if youre basically comfortable with what the Director is proposing regarding preliminary approval but youre not comfortable with whats going on up at the final under 23-73, one option would be to basically send this up to the Council but telling them youre not comfortable with the 23-73 and that you, you know, basically what I said, that you think it is appropriate to allow for the omission of certain information at the preliminary stage but that you think that the elimination or the allowance of omission of some information at the final stage needs to be look at much more closely, and so youre not including the recommendation at the end of 23-73 and recommending that the Council would look at that, you know, very closely, and see if -. The Director could propose some more precise or different approaches to that perhaps at Council. But it does seem to be a problem that needs to be acted on with some dispatch. ALAMEDA:Right. Thats kind of what Im feeling. So I was wondering if Commissioner Iwashita, and maybe Commissioner Graham, how you guys feel about something like that? Commissioner Iwashita? IWASHITA:Im trying to just be more precise in how Im thinking about this and on the specific language, so -. ALAMEDA:Okay. IWASHITA:Thats where Im at. 25EXHIBIT D