|
And so just real briefly to touch, I'm just going to touch base on those, I know there are some
<br /> folks here that are going to testify on it, and this is all part of the process and it's good. So the
<br /> first one regarding the flooding issue on this, we understand that there are obviously flooding on
<br /> the bottom area. I think mitigating the entryway where the cars would come off of by doing the
<br /> change to the bottom of the flag will help that drastically. This condition exists, it has existed
<br /> and does exist, and what we are doing there doesn't, doesn't change that. We're going to be
<br /> required to, as Commissioner Vitousek talked about earlier, we are required to, you know,
<br /> mitigate any additional water that would be generated from,you know, the house,pavement,
<br /> anything else. And that actually is a County law in general even without a Change of Zone; you
<br /> have to maintain your water on your property. So they'll be doing that, they are fully aware of
<br /> that. I think we could potentially do something more, if the flooding was coming from our
<br /> property, you know, from the subject property,but it's just coming through it, so there is not too
<br /> much that we could really do there. We understand that's an issue and, like I said, the applicant
<br /> is prepared to address that along the highway and do what they can to, you know, mitigate that.
<br /> So, that addresses the concern.
<br /> There was a letter that was sent in by another property owner that is basically referring to the
<br /> original request, and he talks about, you know, wanting to keep that area ina'little bit larger size
<br /> Ag parcels, and I believe this basically completely goes along with what he was hoping for, so
<br /> that takes care that.
<br /> And, you know, the other one from Mr.Davis tliat.just came in,-,we looked over that, and, you
<br /> know, we feel that our request really matches the area and actually takes a very challenged lot
<br /> and makes it actually more achievable to actually have people do some e type of agriculture on
<br /> there. And, again, it meets the surrounding area. So from a land use perspective with the
<br /> zoning, the surrounding:zoning, and the lot, it meets all the criteria, and if it didn't, the Planning
<br /> Department would not be recommending a favorable recommendation on this.
<br /> So, at that, at this point I think we'll open it up, and then we'd like the opportunity to, you know,
<br /> come backafter testimony, and talk story.
<br /> UNGER: Very good. Great—
<br /> KERN: Thank you very much.
<br /> UNGER: —thank you. You may be seated. At this time I'd like to open up the hearing to
<br /> public testimony. We do have two people signed up—if you would both like to come up at the
<br /> same time—Daniel Wadahara and Sherry Kalaniopio.
<br /> Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth before the Planning
<br /> Commission?
<br /> WADAHARA: Yes.
<br /> UNGER: Please state your name and area of residence.
<br /> 14
<br /> DRAFT
<br />
|