COM 0547.001 2002-2004 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Mr. Klaus D. Conventz dba Baumeister Consulting Pagc 3 March 12, 2003 The attached DPW-Building Division memorandum dated January 10, 2003, states in part: "We oppose the approval of the application for the reasons noted below. The projections do not meet setback reyuirements and should be corrected. Others: shall conform to Section 504, of the 1991 Uniform Building Code." b. The State Department of Health (DOH) memorandum dated November 20, 2002, states: "The Health Department found no environmental health concerns with regulatory implications in the submittals." 4. Notice to Surrounding Property Owners. Proof of mailing a first and second notice was submitted to the Planning Department. For the record, it appears that the first and second notice was mailed on December 9, 2002 and January 8, 2003 by the applicant. 5. Comments from Surroundine Property Owners or Public. No further written agency comments were received. No objections were received from surrounding property owners or public. SPECIAL AND UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES It appears that the building encroachment problems were recently discovered after a survey of existing property was prepared for escrow purposes. The applicant is trying to resolve building encroachment issues created by previous contractor or builders. The variance application's site plan map was prepared by a surveyor and shows the dwelling positions and other site improvements, "AS BUILT", on Lot 108. County records indicate that portions of both single- family dwellings were constructed "by others" beyond the lot's building lines or building envelope into the I,ot ] 08's minimum yards, pursuant to the Hawaii County Zoning Code. The applicant and owner became aware of the encroachment issues created by the contractor or previous owner(s). No evidence has been found to show indifference or premeditation by the original contractor or current owner to deliberately create or intentionally allow the building Mr.