Laserfiche WebLink
driveway as the key issue. And, its not an us versus them thing, this is a public safety issue that <br />needs to be addressed and you know theres one of my favorite prayers is the serenity prayer <br />which says you know God give me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage <br />to change the things I can and the wisdom to know the difference. And we are never going to <br />stop people from wanting to come to this island. Its a beautiful place and people will always <br />want to come here. We cant stop them we cant change that. But the one thing we can change <br />though is the way we design our roads and our driveways. We can make sure that its done <br />safely and I hope that the Commissioners today will have the courage and the wisdom to help us <br />modify that condition so that we will get that driveway that we need in there. And I did attach I <br />dont think all of you might have gotten a copy of it but some proposed language for that <br />condition that would change it and the key changes are it should say 24-foot width. It should <br />also say 24-foot flares and- 20-foot flares, Im sorry and the- it should designate the pavement <br />width not the easement width. So, thank you for listening. <br />GALDONES:CommissionersanyquestionsofMr.Haney?CommissionerSiracusa? <br />SIRACUSA:Yesitismyunderstandingthatitisnotwithinourprovincetochange <br />those shoreline setback rules and I can see where youre coming from on the points that you <br />raise. I would like to ask the Director would that be something that the County, would have to <br />be addressed by the County Council. <br />YUEN:No thats an Administrative Rule of the Planning Commission. I actually <br />agree with what hes saying, there is a quirk in the rules that when you get below 50% coverage, <br />when the shoreline setback and the other setbacks prevent you push you below a 50% useable <br />area on your lot you then jump from a 40-foot shoreline setback to a 20-foot shoreline setback <br />rather than it being graduated in. It could be, the simplest way would be to say you know take 5- <br />foot increments until you get to 50% rather than having to do a separate calculation each time <br />and ending up with say a 36.8-foot shoreline setback. But it is a quirk in the rules. On this point <br />and on the question of the driveway rule, which although the driveway is primarily a Department <br />of Public Works issue as far as being a lead agency on it, Id have to say I cant make any <br />promises about the Planning Department doing anything in the near future on it because of the <br />press of other projects that were working on. <br />SIRACUSA:Does that last statement refer to the driveway or the shoreline setback <br />issue? <br />YUEN:Both. <br />GALDONES:Any further questions from the Commissioners? Commissioner Graham? <br />GRAHAM:Id wanted to ask the Planning Director just to follow-up to Commissioner <br />Siracusas one since you brought up the driveway and this testifier was saying that the DPW did <br />recommend the flares and all and in our conditions we dont have the flares can you explain why <br />that wasnt put in the conditions? <br />YUEN:This being an SMA permit wed rather work on that at the time of Plan <br />EXHIBIT A <br />13 <br /> <br />