Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-09-22 TDELUZ PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAI‘I HEARING TRANSCRIPT SEPTEMBER 22, 2006 JASON DELUZ DBA J. DELUZ AUTO A regularly advertised hearing on the application of BODY REPAIR (SPP 06-000034) was called to order at 2:43 p.m. at the Outrigger Keauhou Beach Resort, 78-6740 Alii Drive, Keauhou, Hawaii with Chairman C. Kimo Alameda presiding. PRESENT:C. Kimo AlamedaABSENT & EXCUSED: Allen Salavea Fred GaldonesRene’ Siracusa Bill GrahamRodney Watanabe Andrew Iwashita Jeffrey McCall Alvin Rho Ivan Torigoe, Deputy Corporation Counsel Christopher Yuen, Planning Director Norman Hayashi, Planning Program Manager Phyllis Fujimoto, Staff Planner Jeff Darrow, Staff Planner Ivan Torigoe, Deputy Corporation Counsel And approximately 8 people from the public in attendance APPLICANT: JASON DELUZ DBA J. DELUZ AUTO BODY REPAIR (SPP 06-000034) Special Permit to allow the establishment of an automotive body repair shop and accessory uses on 6,500 square feet of land situated within the State Land Use Agricultural District. The area under consideration is located along the south side of Mamalahoa Highway, across from st Kakanihia Road, Puukapu Homesteads 1 Series, Waimea, South Kohala, Hawaii, TMK: 6-4-1: portion of 4. ALAMEDA:We’re at Agenda Item No. 3, Jason Deluz dba as J. Deluz Auto Body Repair. Staff? DARROW:Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If I could direct your attention to the location map up on the board, the area of this application is within the South Kohala district of Hawaii, more specifically we’re looking at Waimea. Just for reference, we’re looking, as you’re moving in an east-west direction, this would be the Hamakua boundary, the old Mamalahoa Highway. We have Lakeland Subdivision as you’re coming from Hamakua into Waimea area. We have subdivisions on the right side. We have the Hawaiian Home Lands and the Mokuloa Subdivision in this area, and on the mauka side of the road identified in green is the area of this application. You might have seen a sign on the side of the road that states Deluz Auto Body Repair. EXHIBIT C 1 The applicant in this case, Jason Deluz dba as J. Deluz Auto Body Repair, is requesting a special permit to allow the establishment of an automotive body repair shop and accessory uses. Again, looking at the submitted site plan, we have the highway moving in an east-west direction. We have a long skinny lot. The application is only for a 6500-quare foot area of a proposed approximately 15-acre lot. The remainder of the lot is being utilized for agricultural purposes. The area identified in red is enlarged. In this area it shows the auto repair area. We have three booths or three bays, an office and spray booth areas. The squares identified in purple is an existing house and a storage area. Just this morning we received several letters of support that have been passed out to the Planning Commission. Let’s see, it appears to be four letters of support. I won’t go into a long history on this. You folks have the background and recommendation. The applicant is requesting a five-year time period for this permit. The Planning Director is recommending rather than five years that this permit be for a two-year period to allow for the relocation of the auto body repair shop. ALAMEDA:All right, any questions of Mr. Darrow? Commissioner McCall. MCCALL:Probably, mostly bookkeeping, but I just want to make sure the contested case application from Fumi Bonk was officially withdrawn. Is that correct? DARROW:Yes. MCCALL:So we don’t consider that? DARROW:Thank you for bringing that up. We did submit a letter to Mrs. Bonk after a telephone call between staff and herself; and she just reflected that she just wanted to submit testimony that she was in opposition to it and that she was not formally submitting a petition for standing in a contested case. ALAMEDA:Thank you, Commissioner McCall. Any questions? Seeing none, will the applicant/representative please come forward. First, I’d like to thank you so much for waiting patiently, all the way towards the end. I know you got a chance to review the recommendation made by the Department. Do you have any questions? Oh, I’ve got to swear you in. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth now before the Hawaii Planning Commission? LIM:I do. ALAMEDA:Thank you. Could you please state your name and address for the record. LIM:My name is Stephen Lim from Carlsmith Ball representing the applicant, Jason Deluz. Mr. Deluz is seated right next to me. EXHIBIT C 2 ALAMEDA:Okay, please state your name and address for the record. DELUZ:Jason Deluz, PO Box 6198, Kamuela, Hawaii. ALAMEDA:Thank you, Jason. Mr. Lim? LIM:Thank you for your patience. I know you’ve been working hard all this time. We have come before you on a special permit for a five-year term to continue the operations of the J. Deluz Auto Body Repair. This is located, if you’re not quite sure, as you’re coming in from Hilo you’ll pass the DHHL office, then you’ll pass Kamehameha School’s pre- school, and wait a half second and right there on the left will be the auto body repair shop. Mr. Deluz has been conducting a clean and safe operation for these years and, you know, we haven’t had any significant complaints at all. The people that did call in during the application process, some of them were surprised that he was going for a special permit; and others were just thinking that he was going to expand his use, which is not the case. And I’ll have Mr. Deluz make a presentation to you to tell you what he has been doing and what his plans are for the property. The reason why we’re coming in for a special permit is because we believe this is a reasonable and unusual use in the agricultural district and it complies with the General Plan and State Land Use objectives and policies. As you probably know Waimea is a growing community. It’s similar in some respects to Hawaiian Oceanview, Puna, in those areas that are experiencing a growth in population and request for community services but not necessarily maybe a growth in the available lands zoned for a particular use, especially for an auto body repair shop which Mr. Deluz has been running. Basically he is, I think, only one of two shops in Waimea at this present time. And as far as we are aware, and I’ll defer to the Planning Department on this, but as far as, our checking reveals there is no other MG, General Industrial, zoned land in Waimea. I know that there is some Limited Industrial zoned land that has primarily been located out near the Waimea Airport where I think you’ve probably seen Jerry’s Auto sign and the self-storage bins out there. That’s zoned Limited Industrial - 20. I guess Kailua side of that is approximately 25 acres that Parker Ranch had rezoned on a conditional basis to Limited Industrial (ML-20) also. That project has not proceeded for whatever reason. So as a practical matter, there is very or, our position, there is no appropriate zoned land for him to go to. So it’s not like he could go down the street, buy a piece of property and try to do that. And, in fact, Mr. Deluz did explore just recently one of the Limited Industrial zoned sites because it was coming open for purchase. However, that particular site is being sold with a two-year moratorium against opening up any car repair business. So, you know, there really isn’t anything for us to utilize. Because it is an auto body repair use where he has frame straightening machine and a little other things, that proposed use is only allowed as a repair establishment major use, which under the Zoning Code is only allowed in the General Industrial zone. And, at least from our checking, there is no General Industrial zone in the area of Waimea. So I think that this gives you one of those situations in which the community’s need is very strong and that we have been operating a clean and safe operation servicing the community. I’ll kind of turn it over to Mr. Deluz to describe to you what his scope of his operations are. EXHIBIT C 3 ALAMEDA:Real quick question first, Mr. Lim, if you don’t mind. Commissioner Iwashita? IWASHITA:It’s not a question but I’m a lawyer, I represent one of the parties involved in the sale that Mr. Lim just mentioned. So, I guess, just a concern about conflict. I don’t really see it as a conflict but -. LIM:We have no problem with you acting on this matter. IWASHITA:Okay. I just wanted to disclose that. ALAMEDA:Mr. Torigoe? TORIGOE:It doesn’t matter to your client one way or another how this turns out today, right? IWASHITA:Does it matter to my client? TORIGOE:Yes. IWASHITA:My client is the seller, so -. TORIGOE:But what this special permit is trying to accomplish doesn’t have anything to do with what your client is doing, does it? IWASHITA:The only scenario I can see that, you know, the potential for me voting against it, right, that that would, I mean, that possibility is there. So that in that case it can be viewed that I at least have an appearance of a conflict because my client now is selling the business that the applicant here, you know, he can’t buy it because he won’t be able to run his business there. So I just wanted to disclose that because I see that, I mean, that’s, I’m not saying which way I’m going but, you know, the potential for me voting against it is there; and if I did, and if it didn’t go through, you know, I don’t want a hoo hoo from the applicant. LIM:Well, if you’re willing to, Mr. Iwashita, if you’re willing to represent that you can be fair and impartial, then we have no problem with you voting on it. IWASHITA:That is my representation. LIM:We accept that. ALAMEDA:Thank you. Mr. Deluz, you have the mike now, go ahead. DELUZ:As a resident of Waimea, born and raised in Waimea, I’ve been servicing the Waimea community for maybe about 15 years. And my service to the Waimea community is, I made it easy for them to bring their cars to me where they don’t have to go to Hilo or Kona. A lot of the Waimea residents are elderly retired people and our service is good also for the EXHIBIT C 4 businesses there. A lot of times we do service work, they don’t have to be off of work. We can go down right to the business, pick their cars up and deliver their cars. I know that I was doing wrong by not doing, my special use permit. So I apologize for that. But I had a business, family business, I had five employees with family, so I needed to continue my business without stopping. And so if I could ask if you guys could please grant the five years special use permit, that would really help me. ALAMEDA:Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Deluz. All right. Any questions for applicant’s representative or Mr. Deluz himself? Commissioner Iwashita? IWASHITA:No matter what the period of time we decide on, I guess, I’m just curious, you know, where you’re going to have to, you know, what are the potential areas to relocate? Because it doesn’t seem to me that realistically maybe even in that five years that there is going to be any planning action that would open up a space that will allow you to, you know, to move some place in the Waimea area. LIM:Well, we don’t know what will happen. It, obviously, will require a significant investment to go get a change of zone for General Industrial zoning. And it’s one of those situations, like I said, where you’ve got increased requests for services, Mr. Deluz has shown that he can operate the auto body repair shop within the confines of the community. And, like I said, I don’t think we’ve any significant objections to his operations. You know, we’re hoping that some other places come open. But as of right now, we don’t believe that there’s anything available. So we think that that does meet the test for the special permit. ALAMEDA:Let me go to Commissioner Graham and then Mr. Director. GRAHAM:I wish, Mr. Lim, you, or Mr. Deluz could just clearly explain, and I think we’ve been alluding to it, what’s the situation with the Haina site, which is the proposed relocation. We originally got something from you folks in the application about the time frame and how it dealt with the courts, and then you wrote a follow-up later saying, well, it’s going to take you a lot longer to do stuff and all. Can you just give us a nice straight rundown of where it sits? LIM:Basically the Haina mill site was intended as a second site for Mr. Deluz’s operation so he could service the Hamakua-Hilo side. What has come up in the meantime is that we’ve uncovered that there are some entitlement issues that may be preventing him from using it, but we’re going to be discussing that with the Planning Director. But that is a second site, so it’s not a relocation site. It’s just a second site. ALAMEDA:Mr. Director? YUEN:Yes. I just wanted to make a statement on the record as to what zoned areas a project like this can be done in. And there is a potential that this kind of a business can be done in a CV zone. A CV zone is what we call Village Commercial zone, and most of the commercial property in Waimea and Honokaa is in a CV zone. The dividing line is you can EXHIBIT C 5 clearly do auto repair in a CV zone. That’s called a minor repair establishment, including painting. What Mr. Deluz does, though, that puts him out of the minor is, the definition of minor says that it does not include repair of body and fender and straightening of frame and body parts. So if you do that you become a major repair establishment under the Zoning Code. A CV zone allows a major repair establishment as long as there are not more than five employees with approval of the Director, that’s the condition for going into a CV zone with a business like this. So it’s not out of the question that the business could be done within a CV zone. ALAMEDA:Thank you for that. Any other questions? Commissioner Iwashita? IWASHITA:Just so, in Waimea then, are there currently areas that are underutilized as far as zoned CV that would be potential areas for Mr. Deluz to run his business? ALAMEDA:Mr. Director, you’d like to answer that? IWASHITA:Dos anybody know? YUEN:I’m sure that there are vacant CV zoned areas. Whether there is, say, an available vacant building, that I don’t know. ALAMEDA:Okay. Other Commissioners, questions? GALDONES:Mr. Chair? ALAMEDA:Yes, Commissioner Galdones. GALDONES:Thank you, Mr. Chair. ALAMEDA:You’re welcome. GALDONES:Mr. Yuen, is the two-year the standard basis in which you use, or is that a discretionary timeframe? YUEN:I can’t say that there is any standard basis for this. It’s something that we discussed, you know, administratively in preparing this recommendation. In a way it’s an unfavorable recommendation in a sense that we don’t look at this as being a long-term. We’re not in favor of this as a long-term location for this business, that we think businesses like this should be located in zoned areas. We make an exception when there clearly are no known zoned areas within the vicinity that needs to be served. So we’ve made exceptions for areas like lower Puna where there are no zoned areas. And in the lower Puna area we put these five-year terms on with the idea because there were areas designated in the General Plan but they were not available for use. We were hoping that within that five-year term that they would become available for use. That’s really not the same situation here because we have CV zones in Waimea and Honokaa. So for that reason we aren’t recommending, we’re not following the five years as being a precedent for this area. We’re looking at it differently. EXHIBIT C 6 The Commission, to give another example, I believe the McNicoll application which was similar in the sense of being an existing business that had been in operation for several years, and in violation, the Department had an unfavorable recommendation on that. The Commission wanted to give the individual some time to close up business; and we had no great objection to giving the individual some time to phase out that business and move some place else. And that was, am I mistaken? And that was a year that the, the Commission voted to give Mr. McNicoll a year. So I don’t think that there’s a hard and fast rule on this. So it is a matter of discretion with the Commission. But we did feel that given that there is a possibility of going to a CV zone, given that the applicant has been on notice for some time that they had to do something that two years would be sufficient. ALAMEDA:Commissioner Galdones, follow-up? GALDONES:According to the applicant, thank you, Mr. Chair -. Mr. Lim, couple of things. If you could address Mr. Yuen’s remarks regarding the availability of a possible building in a CV zone in the Waimea area; and, secondly, if you could address the notice that Mr. Deluz has received for a long period of time, and if you could inform us what attempts have been done by Mr. Deluz since the notice was given to him of the violation. LIM:From the time of the violation, well, actually before that, what he has been trying to do is to secure a second site as a backup. We knew that we would have to come for a special permit. And so what he has done is he has secured a Haina site which is, we believe, a site for a non-conforming industrial use although it is zoned Agricultural. That’s something that we have to discuss with the Planning Director. And because that issue came up relatively recently, he started to do his search for other appropriately rezoned areas, and Mr. Iwashita’s client being one. And we’ve been looking at Commercially zoned areas and looking for Industrially zoned areas. And as far as, we’ve been looking for maybe 2 years now, 2 ½ years now. We haven’t found anything suitable. Like I said, it’s not like being in Hilo or Kona where you have a significant amount of Industrial or even Commercial zoned uses and properties. There’s just a very, very limited portion. And so that’s why we’re asking for the five-year term to hopefully, maybe there will be more sites that open up. We know what there was a special permit issued for RT Service, just kind of a similar truck operation. That was a five-year term that the Planning Commission gave them. So we’re just asking to see, you know, basically if there was a wealth of Industrial or Commercial zoned lands that we could move to, then I would say maybe, you know, we would agree with Mr. Yuen’s two years. But there really isn’t, not in Waimea. ALAMEDA:Commissioner Galdones, follow-up? GALDONES:Thank you. Well, question to Commissioner Iwashita. It seems that you are representing the clients along this line of available property -. MCCALL:Sounds like testifying. GALDONES:I’m just trying to follow-up on the availability. How bad is real estate, for this type of real estate, if you have any knowledge? EXHIBIT C 7 ALAMEDA:Mr. Torigoe, where are we on this line of questioning? TORIGOE:Well, we don’t normally like to have Commissioners testifying as to factual background. LIM:All right, we‘ll do some testifying. We’ll represent that the sale of that property indicates it’s rare Commercial property. GALDONES:Okay. ALAMEDA:Commissioner Galdones? GALDONES:Thank you. ALAMEDA:You’re welcome. Any other questions? Commissioner Rho? RHO:On Exhibit 7, in the back of that exhibit, it’s a memorandum from the Building Division; and they’re recommending opposition because the building permit for the subject structure was never finalized. And in Exhibit 11, I’m referring to your letter, I think, to the Director under Department of Public Works, it says “The applicant will comply with all Department of Public Works and Building Division requirements.” So I wanted to know whether or not that permit was finalized. LIM:The permit has not been finalized. The drawings are being prepared by Frank Cole’s Drawing; and once those are completed, we’ll submit for building permit application. Mr. Deluz has been talking with, I think, the building inspector already on that. RHO:Thank you. LIM:We’ve had trouble not only getting those plans but also getting anything done on the Haina site. If you could imagine a lot of the contractors are very busy; and so that’s why we’ve been stuck on that one also. ALAMEDA:Any further questions? Commissioner McCall. MCCALL:When you first were discussing looking for places, were you aware that the CV zone was available? It seems like that’s kind of something that’s only available with the permission of the Planning Director. Is that -? LIM:That’s correct. They were looking for anything, Commercial, or Industrial, or anything, yes. ALAMEDA:As you can see, we’re trying to get a sense of like what’s available and what’s fair. So, any other questions? Seeing none, I’m going to ask that instead you be seated. EXHIBIT C 8 You can sit there but not say anything. Fellow Commissioners, it’s our choosing now to entertain a motion, have discussion, or have discussion first to help us. GALDONES:No public testimony? ALAMEDA:No public testimony at this time. So, Commissioner Graham? GRAHAM:I’d just like in discussion to just sort of say I think the feelings probably we all have is we don’t have a bunch of complaints about this business so I think we’d like to see the business prosper and continue. On the other hand, it is prime Ag land so we don’t want to have a situation of using prime Ag land for any more Industrial purposes like this. And the only other thing, it doesn’t seem to me that the location for this kind of business is quite as important, let’s say, as maybe we had a cattle trucking operation come before us a year ago or something where he’s handling Parker Ranch and handling this other stuff. And I’m just thinking like when I got rear-ended in Honokaa an insurance company picked up the car and hauled it to Kona for their work. So it’s sort of like if the vehicle is out of service it’s going to get towed anyway, so towing it to Waimea or towing it to Haina is not that big a difference. And if the vehicle is still driveable then you can drive it to Haina or -.So, anyway, I don’t see that having this business exactly in Waimea, along with perhaps one other business, is crucial for the operation of the business. On the other hand, we don’t really have objections either. So I sure want to support you continuing the business and I’m sort of floating around on what’s the proper length of time. I certainly understand the Planning Director’s recommendation. ALAMEDA:Other discussion items or perspectives? Commissioner Iwashita? IWASHITA:I notice that there’s no, the standard extension language in here; and I would suggest perhaps incorporating some standard administrative extension showing good faith compliance, whatever the standard is on the part of the applicant in terms of trying to relocate; and perhaps they can handle it that way. ALAMEDA:Okay, other ideas? Mr. Director, do you have any comments to that or -? YUEN:We didn’t put it in for a reason. If it’s the Commission’s wish I don’t have a strong objection to it. ALAMEDA:Fellow Commissioners, going back to Commissioner Graham’s point, I think there seems to be a consensus around everything but the time, the two years, five years. So where are we at on that? Commissioner McCall? MCCALL:Maybe just a little clarification from the Planning Director. As I recall the administrative time extension is at the discretion of the Planning Director. I mean, so even if we put it in, you could say no.Would that be correct? YUEN:That’s correct. Just to say a little more about my reasons. It does give a little more clear direction to the applicant when there isn’t a time extension. Given past practice, I think that the applicants mentally tack on the time extension. But as I say I don’t, the EXHIBIT C 9 Commission is the one that takes the final vote on it. I don’t have a strong objection to it. The applicant should be aware that we would want to see the efforts made to locate it to a zoned area or seek the special permit in another area, and strong indication of a real effort on that part to get a time extension. ALAMEDA:Commissioner Iwashita? IWASHITA:I have a question for the applicant. ALAMEDA:Sure, Commissioner Iwashita. IWASHITA:Commissioner Graham mentioned basically our insurance covers most of body fender, the kind of work that you do, Mr. Deluz. So I guess that’s my sense of how the business works, is that unlike lawyers a lot of body fender work is insurance work. So I wanted to ask you how about how much of your business is insurance work? DELUZ:With the insurance I would say maybe three-fourth would be insurance; and with Mr., William, that was their particular insurance that probably towed that car. But we have AIG, I don’t know if -, we have Progressive, that’s all insurance companies that towed the cars to the shop to get it repaired. And a lot of the shops in Kona and Hilo they’re so busy, some of the cars are getting towed from Hilo, to Kona, to our shop. And we also service some of the rent-a-cars too, Avis, Budget, and Thrifty’s; and we put their cars on the road, looking good and safe so the tourists can use the cars on the island. So we do some of the rent-a-cars also, and the small number of people that, from other parts of the island, comes over to get their car repaired. ALAMEDA:Commissioner Iwashita, any follow-up? IWASHITA:No. ALAMEDA:Commissioner Graham, now that you’ve heard that, do you have any thoughts? GRAHAM:No. ALAMEDA:Okay, Fellow Commissioners, again, what do you want to do? Are we struggling with the time, the two years, the five years, the three years? Commissioner Galdones, enlighten us. GALDONES:I move that Jason Deluz dba J. Deluz Auto Body Repair Special Permit application (SPP 06-000034), along with the background report and the recommendation, be approved by the Planning Commission with an amendment that the timeframe may be administratively extended as, I don’t know the proper verbiage for it, but as Director Yuen had stated. ALAMEDA:Is there a second, or clarification on that, or do we need to -? EXHIBIT C 10 YUEN:I suppose it would be the standard language for time extension, administrative time extension. MCCALL:Question. ALAMEDA:Okay, Commissioner McCall. MCCALL:I’ll second -. But maybe the time extension is usually, what, not to exceed the original, is that correct? So like if it’s two years then a two-year time extension, is that correct? YUEN:That’s the standard, yes. ALAMEDA:And is there a second? MCCALL:Yeah, I second that. ALAMEDA:Commissioner Graham? GRAHAM:Because of what the Planning Director said before about the applicant usually seeing the time extension is kind of automatic or something, I think our intention is that we do want to see this business eventually moved to a suitably zoned area. So my thinking is that we might want to amend, if Mr. Galdones is in accord, that the Planning Director may grant a time extension based on his finding that suitably zoned properties in the area are not available to the applicant, something like that, rather than just sort of agree to it sort of administratively just because he’s a good guy, or whatever like that. So, you know, just meaning that all of the conditions are such that if the applicant doesn’t really have the ability to move then on that basis he can grant it. So that’s my intention. GALDONES:My motion was along the same line of thinking that you had, Commissioner Graham, that the Director would be making his decision based on the points that you did raise. ALAMEDA:And to be more specific, in the Waimea area? GRAHAM:Well, I don’t have to be too specific, but I’d just like to have that since that is Mr. Galdones’ intention that we sort of put that in writing, in the paper, that the decision to grant would be based on the unavailability of suitably zoned property in the area, and let the area be a little fuzzy. ALAMEDA:Okay. Commissioner Iwashita? IWASHITA:Well, I don’t know if I really agree with that. And just based on the point raised by yourself, you know, that basically the work is brought to the shop. So, you know, Mr. Deluz having to relocate basically would mean that he and his people he hires would have to go to like Haina or some other place, you know, to do the work. But it wouldn’t really EXHIBIT C 11 negatively impact his business in terms of the amount of work that he had. You know, I mean if the rent-a-car companies are shipping their cars from Kona or Hilo, you know, to his shop in Waimea, I mean, that’s then, you know, it’s not going to, whether it’s in Haina, or Waimea, or Waikoloa, you know, that seems to me like it’s not going to really negatively impact his business. So I don’t really agree with the nature of the condition, I guess, that you’re suggesting. In a way, frankly, if Haina does work out as a site and he can have ten days instead of five days there, you know, then to me his problem is solved, frankly. ALAMEDA:Commissioner Graham, response? GRAHAM:Just a clarification. Mr. Iwashita, so you’re supportive of the motion allowing a two-year extension but you don’t want additional language in there saying the basis for the extension? IWASHITA:Yes. GRAHAM:Thank you. ALAMEDA:Maker of the motion, do you have any comments? GALDONES:I’m not so sure where Commissioner Graham on his statement, but perhaps let me hold my remarks. I understand that Mr. Director has something to say. ALAMEDA:Okay, Mr. Director? YUEN:I’d say our standard language encompasses the thoughts that you’re expressing. What I mean by that is that the standard language is something like through no fault of their own the applicant cannot comply with the time condition. And if the Commission is going to give a time extension one of the elements in that analysis would be the efforts that they have made to relocate their business. And that’s the point that you’re getting, that the applicant has to show the Director, in order to qualify for the time extension, the applicant has to show the Director the efforts that they’ve made to relocate their business and that there’s no way to do it. And I think that is included, that’s the kind of thing that you would look at under the standard conditions. ALAMEDA:All right, Commissioner Graham, you’re okay with that? GRAHAM:Yes. ALAMEDA:Okay. Motion made on the table by Commissioner Galdones, seconded by Commissioner McCall. Any further discussion? Seeing none, staff? DARROW:Thank you. Mr. Chairman, before we begin with the motion, if I could just do some housekeeping real quick. On page 3 of the background, I just have a minor change, th No. 12, top of the page, it states Special Permit No. 991, on January 16 it says 2006. The actual EXHIBIT C 12 date is January 16, 1998, so I’ll be changing that. And in the background report, on page 2, first paragraph, there’s no period at the end of the paragraph. I’ll be adding a period to that. GRAHAM:You mean in the recommendation. DARROW:I’m sorry, on the recommendation. Thank you. Additionally, if I could just read for you our standard language so that you’re aware of it. I mean, I’m sure you’ve seen it before. But this would be an added Condition No. 8. It’s our standard initial administrative time extension condition. It states: “An initial extension of time for the performance of conditions within the permit may be granted by the Planning Director upon the following circumstances: A.Non-performance is the result of conditions that could not have been foreseen or are beyond the control of the applicant, successors, or assigns and that are not the result of their fault or negligence. B.Granting of the time extension would not be contrary to the General Plan or Zoning Code. C.Granting of the time extension would not be contrary to the original reasons for the granting of the permit. The time extension granted shall be for a period not to exceed the period originally granted for performance (i.e., a condition to be performed within one year may be extended for up to one additional year).” ALAMEDA:Okay. DARROW:Thank you. With that I’ll take roll. ALAMEDA:Hold on real quick. Commissioner Iwashita. IWASHITA:I guess in the seven existing conditions, I don’t see a condition to relocate, that he relocates his business -. Am I missing it? DARROW:No. ALAMEDA:All right. IWASHITA:Okay. So the presumption is that, well, the language of the extension talks about meeting a condition. So if there’s no condition that he relocate, you know, and the thing expires -. I’m thinking that that language should be just attached on to 4 as opposed to being a separate one so it’s clear it applies just to 4. EXHIBIT C 13 ALAMEDA:Okay. IWASHITA:Four is the life of the permit. ALAMEDA:Mr. Darrow, does that make sense to you? DARROW:Well, we have Condition No. 3 and also Condition No. 2, which both have time constraints. And so that that point, if you want to place it on just 4 it would only apply to 4. ALAMEDA:Okay. Commissioner Iwashita, follow-up? IWASHITA:As long as everyone understands it also applies to 4, ‘cause 4 is not really a condition but just the timing. ALAMEDA:Okay. That’s for the record. So everything is good? Go ahead, Mr. Darrow. DARROW:Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Galdones? GALDONES:Aye. DARROW:Commissioner McCall? MCCALL:Aye DARROW:Commissioner Graham? GRAHAM:Aye. DARROW:Commissioner Iwashita? IWASHITA:Yes. DARROW:Commissioner Rho? RHO:Aye. DARROW:And Mr. Chairman? ALAMEDA:Aye. DARROW:The motion passes six to zero. ALAMEDA:Okay, Mr. Lim, Mr. Deluz, you will be informed in writing of this decision. EXHIBIT C 14 LIM:Thank you very much. ALAMEDA:You’re welcome. The discussion ended at 3:32 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon M. Nomura, Secretary EXHIBIT C 15