2007-09-07 TSHEPARD - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

who wants to do that. It will allow her to continue using the property for agriculture. So to some extent, you know, the two operations that she’s proposing kind of complements it. Cause from a financial diversity and stability standpoint it allows her to continue to engage in these kinds of practices. If we look at the, you know, if we look at the standards for providing a special permit: It unusual and reasonable? Yes. Does it interfere with agriculture? No. Is it an irreversible commitment to some resource or activity other than agriculture? No. Does it create adverse impacts? No. Is it a burden on public agencies? No. Does it utilize space that would otherwise be available? Not at this point in time. She hasn’t developed that agriculture business to the point where she needs the entire space. Is it consistent with the General Plan and Chapter 205? Yes. Chapter 205 talks about special permits itself. The General Plan has all kinds of provisions that you can cite either for or against this application. But I think one of the primary ones that it does talk about is the ability to create, you know, financial stability and having uses that complement each other. If special permits were prohibited in agricultural spaces, that’s what it would say. If it was prohibited in prime lands, then that’s what the prohibition would be. We don’t have that here. And so out of these kinds of circumstances, we really feel that if anyone who has come before you deserving of at least a serious consideration for a special permit, Ms. Sheppard is the one. So thank you. GRAHAM: Any questions for the applicants from the Commission? Commissioner Domingo? DOMINGO: I listened to your reasoning. After listening to Mr. Yuen then I thought it would be best if you just be quiet, because I gather from Mr. Yuen he would be willing to entertain some form of concession. And then you came out very strongly in saying why this is appropriate and a legitimate application. As I read Mr. Yuen’s reasonings for a denial, he has strong valid reasons to support his denial, you know. For one thing, as you mentioned, the issues which would contradict what he’s doing, he said no, no. But in my, I was thinking what you had not mentioned was the fact that in my mind there is a circumvention of a zoning here. Because for this purpose you would usually find a zoned area which provides for a light industrial use, a storage facility, and all these, where she can do that, you see. So what she is essentially doing there is contradicting the Zoning Code, in my own belief. And, of course, the issue of precedence setting - if we approve this, if we approve this today, and someone else who may be in a similar circumstance applied for a permit, a use permit, a special permit, in this case with the same reasoning, you know, what are we to say? And, thereby, do we follow by many others who find that this is a way to get around finding a place in downtown where you can store your goods out in the country and truck it to the retail outlet and sell it? You know, and that can be done. You’d be in perfect, keeping with the law and the Zoning Ordinance. So this is a precedent that I don’t look at it very lightly. But, you know, I understand also as I make a decision this morning, I look at this particular circumstance. I find that an individual has diligently and has dedicated her efforts in trying to promote agriculture and has been successful up till now in doing what she planned to do from the past; and I commend her for that. And then we have people EXHIBIT B 12