2007-09-07 TSHEPARD - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

YUEN: Well, I’ll leave it to the Commission to discuss the timeframe and whether there would be a time extension clause of not. Commissioner Siracusa mentioned a condition about the applicant maintain agriculture as a primary use of the property during the life of the permit. In our list that we would have recommended, if the Commission was inclined to grant this, we also said no commercial sales or pick up of materials by customers shall be allowed. In other words, the applicant conducts all pick up and deliveries to and from the property. Otherwise, it’s hard to distinguish it from a retail sales outlet, that we wanted to limit hours of delivery to 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Mondays through Fridays. There’s a standard condition on remains of historic sites in the area, but maybe that’s not necessary given that the building has already been built; comply with all applicable County, State and Federal laws. Should any of the conditions not be met or substantially complied with in a timely fashion the Director may initiate procedures to revoke the permit. And one point of possibly, besides the timeframe, one point of possible discussion would be landscaping. Normally we have a landscaping requirement attached to these permits that are basically commercial or industrial in character. The twist here is that the building is legitimate as is, as an agricultural building, and under the terms of the permit is primarily in use as an agricultural building. So that would be the consideration of not putting in the landscaping requirement. GRAHAM: Hold a second, Rene’. Commissioner Iwashita and Commissioner Woodward, are you okay with the specifics that Mr. Yuen has introduced? IWASHITA: Yeah, I really don’t see a need for the historic sites condition because there’s no construction that’s involved here.We’re approving an existing structure, a use of an existing structure and there’s not going to be any renovations or anything. So other than that, that’s fine. WOODWARD: Yeah, I would agree. If we eliminate the historic provision and the landscaping condition, those are fine. GRAHAM: Yes, Commissioner Siracusa. SIRACUSA: I have no problem eliminating the landscaping conditions, seeing as how the property is already planted in agriculture and, you know, fields of taro and that sort of things. I’m having trouble with the five years timeframe though. DOMINGO: Mr. Chairman? GRAHAM: Yes, Commissioner Domingo. DOMINGO: I, too, have a problem with the five-year time extension; and it’s because of this: Ordinarily on the basis of the Planning Director’s comments submitted with this recommendation for denial, it’s very strong with regards to a zoning aspect and the use that’s being proposed there. Whereas this can be done at another location. I’m concerned of public perception with regards to their thoughts on how much concern we have with regards to the action that we’re taking today. To extend this to five years EXHIBIT B 17