My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
COM 0314.001 2020-2022
ClerkCouncil
>
Council Records
>
Communications
>
2020-2022
>
COM 0314.001 2020-2022
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/28/2021 10:37:11 AM
Creation date
7/2/2021 9:18:45 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Communications
Communications - Type
COM
Communications - Council Term
2020-2022
Communication
0314
Point
001
Author
Jeffrey W. Darrow, Deputy Planning Director
Communications - Referred To
PC
Document Relationships
AGE PC 2021/07/20 (2020-2022)
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Agendas\2020-2022\Planning Committee (PC)
AGE PC 2021/08/03 (2020-2022)
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Agendas\2020-2022\Planning Committee (PC)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
29
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
that in mind, I would ask the Planning Department to state the amendments that have been <br /> proposed, including limiting the `ohana to Lot 5 or 6, and then I would make a motion to include <br /> those amendments in the recommendation. <br /> VITOUSEK: Commissioner Van Pernis, do you believe that if we leave Condition J as stated <br /> where we are restricting the use of a second dwelling to the entire subdivision, that would have a <br /> bigger impact on traffic? So we are not letting them do any additional `ohana dwellings. <br /> VAN PERNIS: I would agree with no additional `ohana or dwellings altogether, if that's what <br /> the stated conditions are. <br /> VITOUSEK: That's the current stated condition, is no, no `ohana dwellings at all. <br /> VAN PERNIS: All right, well, then where does the seventh water commitment go? Does that <br /> get turned back to the Water Department? <br /> VITOUSEK: Does the county have an answer to that? <br /> DARROW: It would, it's allotted for that particular property, so it's available to them whether <br /> or not they'll be able to utilize it. That goes without—doesn't appear so if we are going to be <br /> limiting the amount of dwellings that they can have on the overall development. I'm not sure if <br /> they would be able to sell that unit to an adjoining neighbor or something; they may be able to do <br /> that, but that's something that we would have to discuss with the Department of Water Supply. <br /> VAN PERNIS: I'm agreeable to the condition J of no `ohana-s,but the other amendments, the <br /> traffic improvements would have to be stated. <br /> VITOUSEK: Okay, would someone like to make a motion to amend the primary motion to <br /> include the revisions that have been— <br /> VAN PERNIS: I'll make that motion. <br /> VITOUSEK: Okay, motion by Commissioner Van Perris. <br /> CARR SMITH: I'm sorry, that,what does that mean? Can we be more specific? <br /> VITOUSEK: Sure. Ideally, we'll be making a motion to include with the language that has been <br /> suggested, and I need to clarify what that is, I mean clarify what the changes to the conditions <br /> will be. Commissioner Carr Smith. <br /> CARR SMITH: Can I go ahead and do that? <br /> VITOUSEK: Sure, yeah. <br /> CARR SMITH: Okay, thank you. So I make a motion to amend the recommendation, or amend <br /> the motion that's on the floor; so in the conditions,paragraph C, line nine, we are changing the <br /> word"application"to "applicant"- <br /> 21 <br /> DRAFT <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.