COM 0073.004 2012-2014 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

What we would prefer is that they keep the original 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. daily because it's just easy to figure out and have the Council, encourage the Council to get rid of the 20 minutes after sunset provision that's currently in the draft bill. So with that I stand ready to answer any questions. ISHIBASHI: Any questions to staff from the Commissioners? ONO: Yeah. Mr. Chair? ISHIBASHI: Yes. ONO: I'm browsing through that, I don't know what I'm referring to but about three screens back where you're saying the Planning Department, yeah, that's the one. Try go back again, forward. Yeah, you see the second one"remove the need for", why is that, "remove the need"? ARAI: Right. When,basically, let me see, well, during the plan approval review process we anticipate the applicant to clearly identify on the plans they submit to us all the details of their project,how high the building,how big, where all the uses are going to go or how the parking lot is constructed. You know, if there, we would rather that the Depaitnient be left with the discretion to say like you know what, maybe better we go and check this one out, instead of if you put it in law it mandates us. In fact, you know, if an ag tourism was just in Kaumana and we knew the area back and front, the law says you've got to conduct a site inspection. We're forced by law to go out there, even though we probably knew that area back and front. So we'd rather not, things like this, not be mandated by Code, but discretion be left to the Department to determine. ONO: But it's like the recent,previous applicant. If, you know, we were talking about his warehouse and the construction whether, if you don't, I am not accusing the Planning Department. ARAI: Sure. ONO: But if you're lax in your process, you know, on a hit and miss thing, it's not going to be consistent. And practice becomes more, you know, from what previous people did. So I'm concerned if not more rigid in that sense you're going to have the kind of problems we just had with the applicant. ARAI: That, I understand that part. But, with the previous applicant, that was something that was established without our clear knowledge. So it's a matter of proper permitting versus someone who actually comes in, submits a plan to us. Because bear in mind plan approval in many instances proposes something. That's the way it should work, they propose something. So we can do a site inspection; but for the most part we're not going to see the finished product because they're applying for approval to build the finished product. So there are times when Planning, you know -. Especially when we know that the land is vacant and they want to build a brand new building, you know, again, we'd rather just have the discretion on determining when a site inspection is warranted versus being mandated by law. 3