Laserfiche WebLink
apparently there will not be a lot of traffic on the bridge. He said <br /> there has been no testimony about health or safety problems that would <br /> result from this proposed use. He said that if the ground cannot be <br /> used for houses, then he is inclined to vote for the project. <br /> Comm. Demichelis said he objected to the construction of a 60 foot wide <br /> bridge that would go nowhere. He said it would be wasted effort. <br /> Chief Deputy County Counsel said that if the Commission is going to <br /> approve this as a conditional zone, he did not think the bridge issue is <br /> a CEQA issue as much as it is a bridge issue for circulation. He <br /> suggested a condition: "That the bridge meet the requirements of the <br /> Department of Water Resources. " He said that the applicant would have <br /> to meet the County standards for a public roadway. <br /> Attachment A was discussed (possible conditions for an I-G zone) . Mr. <br /> Moyer said he could meet the conditions with the exception of the bridge <br /> requirement. <br /> Mr. Iwamiya, representing the Department of Public Works, said that the <br /> size of the bridge is substandard and they could not approve a 25-foot <br /> wide bridge. <br /> Mr. McGrew said that the bridge should meet current standards. <br /> MOTION: Moved, seconded (Jungeblut-Rojas) and carried by a vote of 6-0 <br /> to forward General Plan Amendment Application No. GP-92-14 and Zone <br /> Reclassification Application No. ZR-92-16 to the Board of Supervisors <br /> with a recommendation to: <br /> 1. Approve the Negative Declaration; <br /> 2 . Approve the General Plan Amendment; and <br /> 3 . Approve the Zone Reclassification subject to the Conditions listed <br /> in Attachment A of the staff report. <br /> Vote- <br /> Ayes: Demichelis, Jungeblut, Holly, Zunino, Rojas, Carter <br /> Noes: None <br /> Absent: Morri <br /> ------------------------------------------------------------ <br /> r, <br /> 1 <br /> -3- <br />