Laserfiche WebLink
extension to Condition 3, which is to complete construction of the facilities as well as the turn <br />lane. <br /> <br />WATANABE: Okay, but -. Is that the end of the presentation, Maija? <br />COTTLE: Yes. <br />WATANABE: Okay, but just for the clarification purposes, Maija, the April 3, 2010, <br />deadline to construct the turn lane is still in place in the separate agreement, right? <br /> <br />COTTLE: Yes, it is. <br /> <br />WATANABE: Yes, with a condition to extend Î I would assume that is probably limited <br />to another year because that was one year. Is that pretty much correct with the Planning <br />DepartmentÓs approval? <br />COTTLE: A time isnÓt specified, but itÓs written that upon mutual agreement of the <br />County and the church, it can be extended; it doesnÓt give a time period. <br /> <br />WATANABE: Okay. The only reason I wanted to clarify that is I suspect many people <br />from the audience are concerned mostly about the turn lane. <br />COTTLE: Yes. <br />WATANABE: Yeah. Mr. Housel. <br />HOUSEL: Maija, I had a question. You said that there was an agreement to, if the <br />church would do certain things, to grant them a certificate of occupancy. Now Condition H of <br />the rezoning ordinance states that a Traffic Impact Analysis Report will be required before a <br />certificate of occupancy. Is that still in effect? <br /> <br />COTTLE: A Traffic Impact Analysis Report was completed back in 1 <br />church facilities, which is the main traffic generator on that property. And the way this condition <br />is written, I think that that 1998 traffic study fulfilled that obligation. <br /> <br />HOUSEL: It does. <br /> <br />COTTLE: Yes. <br /> <br />HOUSEL: Okay. Okay, thank you. <br /> <br />WATANABE: Do we have any further questions for staff? Yes, Ms. Bowman. <br /> <br />BOWMAN: The final subdivision, your five-year extension, pardon me, but occupancy <br />is not contingent on that, correct? <br /> <br />COTTLE: No. <br />EXHIBIT A <br />4 <br /> <br />