2008-08-22 TYERLICK - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

know, but it seems like an exorbitant amount to pay in return for a bed and breakfast, so -. Thanks. WATANABE: Yes, Mr. Alameda. ALAMEDA: Point of Order. I just want to make sure that we have a motion on the table already, yeah? WATANABE: Yes. ALAMEDA: So we’ve just got to be careful not to engage the applicant back and forth. WATANABE: Yeah, I realize that. ALAMEDA: So you could have them sit down, or -. WATANABE: I gave her a bit of leeway, I know that. ALAMEDA: Okay. WATANABE: Okay. Mr. Iwashita. IWASHITA: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just looking at – and I don’t know if it’s appropriate to ask that to clarify this for me – but by looking at the legal description that’s part of our record for this driveway, which the applicants have a 1/10 undivided interest in, I can’t figure out or it doesn’t appear to me that this driveway lot is more than 20 feet wide, and Condition 7 is talking about a 24-foot wide pavement, so -. WATANABE: Yeah, for the first 40 feet, exactly. You bring up an interesting point, though, with regard to the ownership and it being divided, and -. IWASHITA: Well, the point I was trying to make and if staff – I don’t know if staff can clarify – but is that the revised Condition 7 as written would not, it would be impossible for the applicant to accomplish, if the width of this roadway lot is only 20 feet. WATANABE: I see, I didn’t look that part up, but I was heading in a different direction. I understand your point -. IWASHITA: Yeah, I understand about the undivided interest, but that’s another point. But my initial concern is that, you know, if the actual width of this roadway lot is only 20 feet, then I don’t see how we can require 24-foot -. WATANABE: Then you can’t do 24 because someone else owns the property, the other four feet, right? EXHIBIT A 12