COM 0453.000 2008-2010 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

4 The Honorable J Yoshimoto, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 2 Code Sections 25-2-72 and 25-5-117 and the Planning Department's Rule 17 (Landscaping Requirements) for the commercial development within the subject property. Plans shall identify structures, fire protection measures, landscaping, paved and striped parking stalls and driveway and other improvements associated with the proposed uses. Plans shall include landscaping along property boundaries for the purpose of mitigating any potential adverse noise and visual impacts to surrounding properties." The original owner and applicant, Mabel S. Kubota Trust, was granted a change of zone from RS-10 to CG-10 on April 4, 2001, to allow the conversion of a single-family dwelling into an office building. The original applicant's potential tenant made alternative plans and the applicant was unable to find another potential tenant for the office building. The applicant received an administrative time extension until April 4, 2005, to comply with Condition B (secure Final Plan Approval). The property was sold in 2004 to Pa`a Aina Trust with the intention to move their real estate business offices to the new site. At the time of purchase, the new owner overlooked the requirement regarding compliance with Condition B. The non-performance is the result of conditions that could not have been foreseen or are beyond the control of the applicant, successors or assigns, and that are not the result or their fault or negligence. At the time the property was sold in 2004, the new applicant, Pa`a Aina Trust, overlooked the requirement for Condition B to secure Final Plan Approval by April 4, 2005. Once the new applicant was made aware of the unmet requirement, it was very difficult to secure a planning consultant, contractor and/or architect because they were extremely busy because of the robust economy. The new owner decided to wait for the economy to slow down before proceeding with the time extension request and the project. Although non-performance of the condition could have been avoided at the time the property was purchased, the applicant admits that it was an error on their part. At the time they were made aware of their mistake, they could not correct it because of conditions beyond their control. Approval of this request would not be contrary to the General Plan or Zoning Code nor the original reasons for the granting of the Change of Zone. There have not been any significant changes to the General Plan for this area or the Zoning Code since this request was originally approved that would affect this project. Additionally, the request is not contrary to the original reasons for granting the change of