2003-04-04 tdusel3 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

responding to, confirming that DLNR has accepted the archaeological report as well as mitigating measures. A letter dated March 27, 2003, from Department of Water Supply, basically outlining their requirements for water. And finally, a letter dated March 28, 2003, from the applicant's representative to the Planning Director outlining their response to Department of Water Supply's comments. I have nothing to further add at this point. YUEN:Let me just follow up one more thing about the variance application. When people apply for a variance, this does, you do have to, you send notice to the neighbors. There's a public notice, so the Director can't make a decision until those people have had a chance to comment. So I can't sit here and commit that there will be a variance granted. The point of having this discussion now though is that ordinarily we don't, the Department does not recommend rezoning, when even aft project will have to apply for a variance to go through, realistically. But in this case, given the circumstance, and that they do have the two meters and that it's only a two-lot proposal, we are giving some leeway from that normal rule and that normal condition that we have. KUBOTA:Thank you. May I just add to that? Perhaps my use of the word pre-empting was a little bit overzealous. However, I do understand that you are giving them some leeway by not pre-empting it. Of course, I don't think we have the authority to do that. Thank you for the clarification. I have one more, GALDONES:Commissioner Kubota. KUBOTA:Daryn, in the condition, oh, I just had it and I lost it. Okay, just a minute, I'll find it. It was a condition that I wanted to ask about, the wording on it. Norman, this is a good example of why I need to have this in goldenrod. Okay, I have it here. Condition G, on Page 2. The sentence about midway down, "The restriction prohibiting the construction of a second dwelling unit may be removed by amendment of this ordinance by the County Council." That's the first time I've seen that worded that way. Why was this addition put in there, that sentence? ARAI:The Director recommended that language simply in recognitio that once adopted into law, it becomes law. And I should say the subdivision owners affected by this restriction in the future may, say the situation changed. For example, water, it looks like the Director is going to -. YUEN:No, go ahead, finish what you're saying. ARAI:Should the restrictions that is necessitating this limitation at this time change in the future, say as access improves, water availability improves, they may amend their covenants and restrictions to then permit additional dwellings on the parcel, 5