COM 0050.001 2020-2022 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

i I i I i CARR SMITH: Mr. Van Pernis, the county has, there is an easement there, so what, why do we need to remove this sentence? j I VAN PERNIS: - - - object to language that does not limit- - -respect and object to language - - limit, or the proposed motion limits the developer, Palamanui, to the easement area whether they go on streets on Makalei. They - - - CARR SMITH: - - - VAN PERNIS: - - - easements that are limited to the easements. We don't want them tearing up or develop lots. CARR SMITH: You are assuming that the developer would go beyond their easement rights. Is that what you are saying? VAN PERNIS: That's what the language impertinently stated; that's not limiting to easements. HARRIS: This is Roger again. I, I mean, the language to me seems okay; it says we will not utilize Makalei Drive for ingress for construction except for construction work within Makalei on the water system— VAN PERNIS: Beyond the easement areas. HARRIS: You can, you can add in"beyond the easement area." CARR SMITH: Go ahead, Mike. VITOUSEK: Yeah,that was generally my suggestion, because I agree that it seems redundant to remove because they need it. And I understand where Mark is coming from about protecting the areas that are not included in the easement, so instead of eliminating the whole thing, if we just add "within existing easements,"that would seem to cover both bases. CARR SMITH: Makes sense to me. VITOUSEK: Would you be okay with that, Mark? VAN PERNIS: Yeah, I'm okay with that. Instead of exempting that language, we'll add at the end "except for easements of record in favor of Palamanui." CARR SMITH: Does that language still make sense? HARRIS: Yeah, we have no objection, we have no objection to adding that section on the end. Maija, can, can you draft something that goes there? Or just use that wording, "except for easements of record." 38 DRAFT