Laserfiche WebLink
theaccess road was functioning, rather than the impact on the neighboring properties. So that <br />would, that is the effect of this, is that it does not have any further public review; it€d be listed as <br />a permitted use. <br />SIRACUSA:In that case, I would feel more comfortable with not passing this so, <br />because that way we would have a little more control over extenuating circumstances. <br />GALDONES:Commissioner Graham? <br />GRAHAM:Well, personally, if the Planning Director€s comfortable, I would be <br />comfortable with it. But it seems to me an alternative would be it€s a permitted use that requires <br />a Use Permit. That€s the way things were, are in a number of things. So if the Planning Director <br />thinks that€s more appropriate, you know, that sounds good to me, but that is an alternative. <br />Rather than saying no or yes, we could have the middle ground, which is it is an approved use <br />butittakesaUsePermitfromthePlanningCommission. <br />GALDONES:Furtherdiscussion?CommissionerSpringer? <br />SPRINGER:ThePlanningDirector€sresponsetoCommissionerGraham€sproposal? <br />YUEN:Youknow,let€sdeferthisitemandletmethinkaboutit.Itisworth <br />thinking about it, and it€s a little late in the day. <br />GALDONES:Okay. The Planning Director has requested deferment on this subject <br />matter and has removed it from the agenda. Therefore, there will be no motion to entertain, <br />procedurally, that we will hold this in abeyance. <br />SPRINGER:Do we need to move to defer? <br />GALDONES:Seeing that, being that he is the maker of it, he€s the initiator, he has <br />removed it, I do not see the need unless counsel states otherwise? <br />TORIGOE:Well, I think just for the record, would anybody object to there being a <br />deferral for that purpose? No, okay. Then you got a consensus on that. <br />GALDONES:Okay. <br />The discussion ended at 4:31 p.m. <br />Respectfully submitted, <br />Sharon M. Nomura, Secretary <br />4 <br />