Laserfiche WebLink
The Comnissioi'4Cts requested information regarik hours of operation and the <br />change of action by the Planning compission regarding the scoring of this project. Mr. <br />3 Bright explained that Mr, Gosney had stated at the Planning Comnission Riblic Hearing <br />there was no wetlands on the.site. Therefore, the planning Cannission asked Mr. Bright <br />to re-score the. project and although Mr. Bright's score was a negative, the Planning <br />6 Comiission has the right to perform their own scoring and the score they reached was a <br />+7. Commissioner Klatt noted from the documentation presented that it appears that in <br />the past the applicant has not always done things as pranised. Mr. Bright noted that <br />9 condition number two regarding all verbal, written and graphic representation of the <br />applicant is a condition of approval. He explained the course of action the planning <br />Department takes upon complaints if conditions are not enforced. The final action would <br />12 negate civil action if complaints were founded and the applicant did not comply. <br />Regarding the hours of operation, Mr. Bright stated that Sunday operations would require <br />the applicant to contact adjacent property owners with a notification. Mr. Bright also <br />15 noted that as of this date, he has not received a call upirequest other than the one <br />presented by the Friedley's. chairman Brown discussed the Friedley's indication of a <br />conflict of interest for this project since Gosney and Sons was a supporter in Chairman <br />18 Brown's recent unsuccessful re-election campaign. Mr. Graves, County Attorney, indicated <br />that he does not believe this is a conflict of interest after he reviewed the State <br />Statute on contributions. <br />21 Ccemtissioner Klatt stated that the cal l up letter brought tip a number of points <br />but the answers have been given today. He does not see sufficient reason to call up this <br />project. Commissioner Klatt moved to affirm the recc n,ridation of approval by the <br />for aacall up. Class <br />24 Plano to Project No. 92-164 <br />conditionsoandydeand ny SonsrGravel Pit <br />II subject <br />27 <br />Commissioner Klatt Aye <br />Courmissioner Brennan Aye <br />Commissioner Brown Aye <br />Affi imtion or Call U - Project No, 92--187 Kinoshita Class I Land Use Permit - <br />30 The applicant is Gilbert Kinoshita and the surveyor is Coff Engineering. This is a <br />request for approval of two dwelling units, consisting of a main residence with a guest <br />house on a 6.88 acre parcel. This project is located in Handley Subdivision, Tract A-1; <br />33 Section 24, T37N, R9W; approximately 2110 feet north from mile mark 36 on U.S. Highway <br />550. <br />Ms. Erin O'Neal present }he staff Report to the Commissioners dated December <br />36 22, 1992. (Film CR#1 She noted that no requests for a call up have been <br />received to date. In accordance with the La Plata County Permit System, the Planning <br />Staff has reviewed this project and approved the project with the following conditions: <br />39 i. That =ail= _epM5entattons=of--the applicants are <br />deemed conditions of approval. <br />2. The applicant is encouraged to work with the Animas <br />92 Fire Protection District. <br />3. The applicant shall meet the requirements of the <br />county Building Department. <br />45 4. That the duration of this approval shall be for the <br />period of three years as specified by Article 69 of <br />title 24, C.R.S. as amended and as specified in <br />December 22, 1992 5 <br />Hearing on Permit No. M-1987-038 <br />Bayfield Pit No. 1 <br />SUIT00057