2017-08-17 Leeward Exh B (AMEND SPP 07-000044)

Home

CARR SMITH: All right. So, I would amend the motion to read I move that the application to amend Special Permit 07-44 be approved based on the Planning Director’s findings, recommendation and proposed conditions, including the change of the Preservation Site from “S-15” to “S-31” and a change in Condition 2 to read, “Prior to construction,” it’s “Prior to issuance of occupancy, the applicant … shall secure Final Plan Approval …. KAY: Pardon me, it should be “issuance of certificate of occupancy.” CARR SMITH: Okay. KAY: Yeah. UNGER: Do I have a second? NOBRIGA: Second. UNGER: Open for discussion. CHURCH: Yeah, hate to sound a little bit negative, but I still think that 25 years is too long. I mean even ten years or so, having gone through the process myself, if there are not really major issues, then the cost to make application for extension and the time required, it’s not gigantic. If there are issues, then it would be useful to come before the Commission again and have those issues addressed. So, I just, my personal opinion is 25 years is a long time for a Special Permit to be issued for such a use. UNGER: To clarify, there is no 25-year time limit right now; there is no time limit. So, part of the motion, if that’s — CHURCH: I’m sorry, to wait till the last lot is sold — UNGER: Okay. CHURCH: — is to me too indefinite. UNGER: Since you are, since this is your point, why don’t you amend the motion to put a timeframe out there? And that way we can discuss it, then — CHURCH: Well, I would recommend ten years. UNGER: Okay. So, let’s open for discussion. I mean it is kind of moot to a certain extent. I agree, though, I mean, essentially we would be approving an open-ended use permit, so I definitely agree on the timeframe. I was throwing out 25 years. We have ten years here. Any other, I would like to put a time limit on it, though. 8 EXHIBIT B