2007-11-16 TKILGORE - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

DOMINGO: Well, you know, perhaps when we have the applicant or representative come up here, they can make a statement with regard to certain issues that have been updated as an attachment, as an exhibit to their application, because my only concern was that it goes far back and sometimes too far back. And we don’t know if, you know, it does not say in their, perhaps looking at the exhibit it shows that, you know, 2003 certain studies were done. But the statement here is they propose to replicate the conditions of the previously granted SMA Permit which is found in 318 as exhibits. YUEN: Yeah, we would certainly expect, you know, and I -. Say somebody had, an SMA Permit that was granted in, like in this one, 1991 and then revoked, somebody comes in 2007; we would certainly expect them to update the information in the previous application, not just xerox what was submitted in 1991, and say all this is still valid. That’s not what we would expect, no. WATANABE: Any further -. Mr. Rho? th RHO: On Exhibit 10, it refers to a letter dated August 10, I think, and in the back of that letter, they have comments. And I’m actually really interested in the last comment on the bottom – there is an X before it, additional comments – basically because I don’t understand it. So can you comment on that? That’s No. 1. No. 2, can you verify that the applicant actually made the changes? ’Cause I can’t find any documents in reference to the additional comments. I mean I can find it in the report, like Item 3-F (6), I can actually find that, but I couldn’t find any corrections. And it’s asking for, “please correct information on the following items.” And I don’t know how important that is, but I couldn’t find the corrections. DARROW: If you could give me one second. When I looked at this particular comment, they themselves, the applicants represent that the flood zone is VE; yet under Item 3-F (6) in the application, it confirms that it was in Zone VE. There could be a discrepancy on their base flood elevation of 12 feet, but that would be something that we would need to discuss with the applicant if there was a discrepancy on the base flood elevation. WATANABE: Follow-up, Mr. Rho? RHO: I could be totally wrong, but I think what this Eric Hirano is trying to get them to do is to reference the National Flood Insurance Program instead of – I can’t remember what, who they referenced – but they referenced somebody else. And like I said, I could be totally wrong on this. I just was curious as to this person making these comments and whether or not the applicant made written corrections, if that really was necessary. And I didn’t see that in writing, so I wanted to know whether or not that was actually done. WATANABE: Should we maybe bring up the applicants and ask them directly? RHO: We can proceed. I just, I didn’t want to bring it up when the applicants are up here, if in fact they submitted something and I just didn’t receive it, so -. EXHIBIT B 6