|
CLARKSON: I'm looking at the Recommendation. So, Condition D is on page one. Once
<br /> again, to remove the first sentence of Condition D. Condition F is on page two, to make the 10-
<br /> foot future road widening strip contingent, not on time but on actually getting a Certificate of
<br /> Occupancy to use the new building that's already got Final Plan Approval and a Building Permit.
<br /> And, then, on page three, Condition P, having to do with additional time extension. That would
<br /> be irrelevant because Condition D has been modified. And, then, in Condition Q,just to remove,
<br /> "in a timely fashion." And, the reason I suggest this, this is a property that was rezoned in 2009.
<br /> Its surrounding area is Light Industrial, Commercial. I think it should remain that way regardless
<br /> of what Mr. Rodrigues does and that this should be a permanent rezone.
<br /> AU: Mr. Chair? Question? Has the Applicant been discuss.-- ith these changes or is this—?
<br /> CLARKSON: Will the Applicant—do you have anykectrcn to having the time limits
<br /> removed from these conditions?
<br /> FUKE: I haven't had a chance to discuss it wit Rodrigues, but ifi-concept, you know, I
<br /> think it's good. I mean like, you know, recogram that this is an area th industrial, and so
<br /> what you want to do is like basically allow the pf6wto occur,without any 5ft constraints, and
<br /> so from that standpoint,you know, how you had proposed to-ly6u know, ame 'Conditions D, F,
<br /> _
<br /> -guess the only questions that I would
<br /> P, and Q, you know, substantively, W-6h .---no obi ecti dw 1-f
<br /> have is a little bit more on a philosophibiltdAis--whether this Vis,in moving forward, whether this
<br /> is going to be the consistent position of-th-e CosSion and Department. But,relative to
<br /> this application, you knowTwould recoft—Imend to Dr. odriguesrthat he would accept that.
<br /> -- ----- --- ---------
<br /> CLARKSON: Thank 1550- veryffil much. As to y_ #---s.,,-.,cond i§§�4B.2-maybe Jeff Darrow would like to
<br /> y
<br /> speak to that? ConsigMe
<br /> going 115TWard?
<br /> DARROW-:'Thank-,.vou. Mf i_:_-Gh Good morning, Members of the Planning Commission.
<br /> As been kind of doih 4rairiffion time extensions, trying to figure out
<br /> -9
<br /> which- ayi jj- those-:discussions
<br /> ,W_,,_- d'during-to go, an (un ere was direction towards how to deal with
<br /> time conditions on permits is normally related to permits that come before the Planning
<br /> Commission such as Use Pef S, Spec'ilhl,,Permits, SMA Permits, those types of permits. And,
<br /> then the directf :,of going thr gh time 6hainges or time conditions in ordinances,which come
<br /> before the PlanningZ11-Commiss Ins io but ultimately are approved by the Hawaii County Council.
<br /> And, so, in our dis6_1i`S§1Qns on the-prdinances, there were discussions on both sides of the island,
<br /> the Leeward Plarining_-C is''S"60-oftz as well as the Windward Planning Commission, and it's—
<br /> you know there really h;i f'h6&n a vote or kind of a, you know,whether or not everyone agrees
<br /> or not but the direction seemed to be that if a zoning is appropriate for a particular area, why do
<br /> we need time conditions. That was one question. The other question is if we do have time
<br /> conditions, we just have them come back and refresh the time condition. We don't do the whole
<br /> zoning ordinance again.
<br /> But, the problem is, in certain situations, is that right now we're going through the General Plan
<br /> Amendment, and so, if everything stayed the same, no problem. But, let's say in a particular
<br /> area, in the future General Plan Amendment, they change it from say Commercial to Residential,
<br /> and we've already approved the rezoning for Commercial with no time limits. And, so, then the
<br /> 6
<br />
|