2006-08-25 TJR - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

them subdivided because of our leases, although corresponding are separate on each of the three lots. SIRACUSA:Point of order. ALAMEDA:Okay. SIRACUSA:Were they sworn in? ALAMEDA:Yes, they were. SIRACUSA:I missed it. ALAMEDA:Commissioner McCall? MCCALL:Just to make sure, Norman, when you were talking about a consolidation/resubdivision, is that what you were referring to in No. 3 on the conditions? ‘Cause I think they, I believe the Applicants seem to think that we’re asking them to consolidate it into -. HAYASHI:Oh, yeah. I think the wording should be “Parcels 86 and 87 shall be consolidated and resubdivided.” We apologize for that. SUEDA:All right. COUSINS:Oh, okay. SUEDA:Thank you. MCCALL:Okay, so we’re clear then. COUSIN:We’d be happy to. ALAMEDA:Thank you, Commissioner McCall for that clarification. Any other questions for the Applicants? Commissioner Graham? GRAHAM:I have one concern in the SMA application here. Basically, it’s our duty on SMA applications to protect the coastal waters; and the only part of this application that’s a concern to me is it looks like you’re going to pave over that huge lot right there on the left which is, you know, quite close to the ocean. And I know the condition of your SMA permit says that “All development-generated runoff shall be disposed of on-site….” So you’re going to dispose of it on site, but on site is very close to the ocean. So, for me, there’s a concern that we are responsible for protecting the ocean so I expect you can do this and not harm the ocean. But I feel like I need a better showing from you, or the Planning Director, or whomever, just how you’re do it and a credible way that I can feel confident that we are not relinquishing our responsibility to the Department of Public Works or something to protect the ocean. So do you have any plans that you can tell me about or -? EXHIBIT C 5