|
page 12, the last sentence in Section 23-73, technical review, add the word and after the, on the
<br />second line of the last sentence after the words final plat and before the word provided, and
<br />then further on in the sentence placing a period after the words request supplementary
<br />information, and then deleting the remainder of the language. And that would take care of the
<br />concern that I have as far as inoculating a defective subdivision from court challenge. I
<br />understand the Directors concerns about, I guess, what the actual practice is in terms of meeting
<br />the requirements of 23-69; however, in looking at 23-69 the requirements are for basically, you
<br />know, proper legal boundaries and surveys that locate the boundaries according to monuments,
<br />same things for easements, identifying lots, minimum setbacks and various certifications. All of
<br />those things, you know, if somebody is going to end up buying a subdivided lot, I would, you
<br />know, and for title companies that do properly handle title issues regarding subdivided lands, I
<br />think those should be met. And, therefore, I think that the approval of the final plat should
<br />reflect all of those requirements.
<br />ALAMEDA:Thankyou,CommissionerIwashita.CommissionerGrahamor
<br />Commissioners Springer, Salavea, Commissioner McCall, any response to that? Commissioner
<br />Graham.
<br />GRAHAM:Excuse me. Are you just recommending that the final clause be omitted
<br />entirely on that one?
<br />IWASHITA:In that, on page 12, yes -.
<br />GRAHAM:Yes.
<br />IWASHITA:That last sentence, yes.
<br />GRAHAM:So starting with the word and?
<br />IWASHITA:Right.
<br />GRAHAM:So, and the Directors issuance, you just want to omit that and just
<br />rewrite so that the previous makes a complete sentence, is that correct?
<br />IWASHITA:Yes.
<br />ALAMEDA:Commissioner Salavea?
<br />SALAVEA:I guess Im going to be the devils advocate in this instance and mention
<br />maybe something that kind of came to mind as we were on the break, for myself. I understand
<br />the concerns that my Fellow Commissioners have regarding, I guess, kind of like unfettered
<br />approval ability by the Director and having it solely, it seemed to be with the current language
<br />seemingly giving the Director sole discretion to give final approval for a subdivision. However,
<br />I think one thing that weve got to think about is if we change this and we do open it up, we
<br />dont inoculate the subdivisions that get approved, you know, we might be opening the door for
<br />something where 20 years, you know, an approved subdivision now gets built today, you know,
<br />in two years, bought by individual homeowners, occupied for 15-20 years and for some crazy
<br />reason somebody comes along and brings suit against that. Im just thinking, you know, as an
<br />27EXHIBIT D
<br />
<br />
|