|
GALDONES:Mr. Tyler, specifically in the conditions or the recommendation, where
<br />does that appear?
<br />TYLER:LetÓs see, I think it was in the water -.
<br />ARAI:Maybe while weÓre looking, I should note that Condition E, as in Edward,
<br />requires the applicant to subdivide or complete subdivision within five years. So itÓs a
<br />requirement.
<br />TYLER:Okay. So if they subdivide, then under Chapter 23, they have to put in a
<br />wider road. Is that what I understand? A 50-foot, or at least there has to be a provision for it?
<br />ARAI:Subdivision Code standard is 50-foot wide right-of-way and 20-foot wide
<br />pavement. However, in recognition of the scope of this project, the Director would be amenable
<br />to considering a variance from those requirements. The applicant has -.
<br />TYLER:That would be subsequent, subsequent to approval of the rezoning?
<br />ARAI:Correct.
<br />YUEN:Let me explain here, and what Daryn said is correct. ThereÓs some
<br />technical problems with what they want to do, given that after zoning you still have the
<br />Subdivision Code, as you pointed out. The zoning, the language of the zoning, normally we
<br />would put in everything that you would, we load up on the rezoning, everything that you have to
<br />do in the end. Given the, and there would be, as you point out, youÓd have to do a 50-foot right-
<br />of-way and a, say, the access road would have to be improved 50 feet, 20 feet right-of-way. We
<br />would, what we are going to do, given that this is a relatively small subdivision and weÓre giving
<br />a leeway to that fact that only two lots are being created, we have not included the specific
<br />Department of Water Supply request which we would normally do in larger subdivision. In a
<br />larger rezoning, we put that in as a specific requirement. They are then able to apply, they would
<br />have to apply for a variance to do the subdivision from the Subdivision Code if this rezoning
<br />goes through. They would also have to apply for a variance on the roadside. And what weÓre
<br />signaling is that we would entertain both those variances.
<br />The intersection, though, I had not realized that it was such a sight distance limitation. Being a
<br />safety issue, we would recommend putting that into the rezoning ordinance.
<br />TYLER:Thank you, Mr. Yuen. Yeah, the applicant has, or the applicantÓs
<br />representative, Mr. Fuke, has pointed out that, you know, thereÓs very large outcropping just
<br />prior to this at the turn. I mean, it is a major one. And what has happened is more and more
<br />properties are being developed off of this road. If you look in your map youÓll see them all there.
<br />And, so, thereÓs more and more traffic coming out of that roadway. ItÓs not just these two lots.
<br />You have to think about whatÓs there now. And the fact that no conditions were previously
<br />imposed, it does seem, you know, that maybe the applicant is where the straw breaks the camelÓs
<br />back, I donÓt know. But it is a safety problem and the engineer is correctly pointing it out to you.
<br />IÓm not sure what the ultimate solution is going to be. And the
<br />20
<br />
<br />
|