Morano asks practical consequences if mapping corrections are not made
Morano asks what affected homeowners would face without corrections; Todorovic says Sites 1 and 2 could not be built, Site 3 could not be enlarged, and even after adoption CPC review would remain because DOS would still exist on the sites.
Okay, finally, finally.
If these mapping corrections were not made, what would the practical consequence be for the affected homeowners?
Would they continue to face restrictions or approval requirements based on boundaries that everyone now agrees are inaccurate?
And more broadly, how does this amendment advance the original goals of the South Richmond zoning relief without weakening environmental protections that were intended to remain in place?
If retained, the homes would not be able to be enlarged or built.
Site number one, not built at all.
Site number two, not built at all.
Site number three, enlarged.
So they wouldn't be able to utilize their full property rights or development rights.
Site number one might need to go to the BSA.
Site number two would need to do a complete orientation.
And site number three, again, would be modest, but they wouldn't be allowed to do kitchen additions, enlargements in the rear yard to that extent.
These sites, even if and when, or if this is approved, even if adopted, they still need...
City planning commission approval because there will still be DOS on the site, just less of it.
So they will have flexibility again laterally to reorient their site, design their site.
to a better extent for a more superior, sometimes we say, or a better site plan, but they will still need additional review, and the community board will get that review if and when that reoriented building footprint is proposed and developed.
Thank you for your work on this.
Madam Chair, thank you for your patience.