|
FUKE: Mr. Chairman, I guess before the Commission goes into discussion, I’d like to offer
<br />some clarifying comments to Ms. Kimata’s comments. First of all, like I’m not responsible for
<br />the preparation of the Building Permit or processing of the Building Permit that resulted in the
<br />partially constructed structure on the property right now. As was included in the packet as part
<br />of the departmental submittal and also the application, there is a Building Permit that was—and I
<br />included a copy of the plans—there is a Building Permit that was issued on July 25, 2012, for a
<br />7,000 square foot single-family residential building. I realize that if you just look at it from a
<br />conventional standpoint that, that structure is very unorthodox in terms of you know whether in
<br />fact is a residential dwelling or not but the fact still remains that the, that structure for better, for
<br />worse was issued by the County, approved by the Planning Department, approved by the
<br />Engineering office, and also by the Building Department and certified for the Building Permit
<br />processes as a single-family residential dwelling. I noted in the application that should the
<br />rezoning be approved and they wish to entertain any type of commercial use other than a
<br />residential activity, then of course you would need to have a change of occupancy type of permit
<br />that would have to be issued by the Building Department. This would include things like maybe
<br />having to accommodate not only off-street parking, but also ADA or you know handicapped
<br />stalls as well as handicapped requirements within the structure. I know there’s, there’s been
<br />some comments about like the possible alleged violation that’s ongoing right now. That’s
<br />something that I cannot speak directly to. It’s something that if the Planning Department, as the
<br />enforcer of the Zoning Code, deems that whatever is happening on the property right now is not
<br />consistent with the existing residential zoning, then a notice of violation would have to go out
<br />and the Applicant would have to be responsible for whatever penalties are, are weeded out. I
<br />guess like, bottom line, however, from my perspective, you know, I’m just doing the, doing just
<br />the rezoning component of this application, so I guess from my standpoint that the fundamental
<br />question is whether that from a General Plan and a land use perspective whether the zoning is an
<br />appropriate use, and I think that as the Planning Department had pointed out and as we had tried
<br />to demonstrate in our application given the current mixture of commercial, quasi-industrial use in
<br />that area, that the proposed use would be compatible. We just hope that the Commission can
<br />concur with that reasoning as well as reasoning of the Planning Director and recommend its
<br />favorable approval.
<br />
<br />One thing I’d like to suggest, however, is that I did go through Ms. Kimata’s comments and then
<br />you know particularly as it relates to you know the, the mud and things like that you know going
<br />on the property right now as vehicles egress and ingress the property, I would like to make one
<br />proposal. This was discussed with the Applicant, and this relates to proposed Condition No.,
<br />proposed Condition F. This relates to the standard requirement of having curb, gutters, and
<br />sidewalks be placed fronting the property, fronting the property in addition to setting aside a
<br />five-foot additional road right-of-way. As you can see right now, Condition F requires that the
<br />curb, gutter, sidewalk requirement be completed within a five-year period, and I think this is
<br />pretty much standard when you deal with existing structure. However, in light of the concern
<br />that Ms. Kimata has raised, I discussed it with the Applicant, and he said like, no, we will do the,
<br />we will complete the curb, gutter, sidewalk improvement requirement prior to issuance of
<br />occupancy permit. So, it’s not gonna push down, you know, like five years from now, but if the
<br />building gets occupied in about year, or like even less than that, then the curb, gutter, sidewalk
<br />improvement requirement would be completed.
<br />
<br />5
<br />EXHIBIT A
<br />
<br />
<br />
|