|
ANDREWS: I can kind of begin, and I'm sure Kimberly and Evan can chime in, but the primary
<br /> reason actually is related to making contact with SHPD regarding a comment that OP included in
<br /> their agency comments, and there was a series of months - - - and I'll let the applicant's agent
<br /> address this more, where they multiple times tried to make contact with SHPD. We as the
<br /> county Planning Department reached out to SHPD to try and receive more comments regarding
<br /> this project, but we were almost entirely unsuccessful in being able to contact them.
<br /> CARR SMITH: Kimberly, go ahead.
<br /> K. YOSHIMOTO: Thank you, Chair. Yes, we applied in November of 2018, and we were
<br /> proceeding with the process. And there was a lava tube found on the property prior to Diamond
<br /> Resorts acquiring it. And based on the, you know, the information we had, they - - - it was filled
<br /> and, you know, I think it was in 2008 planning commission minutes, it was determined by the
<br /> planning director that there were no concerns. So,you know, this process kept evolving. We
<br /> thought that was sufficient, but then in working with Jessica, the Planning Department—and I
<br /> appreciate this concernthey wanted us to get a direct written confirmation as to SHPD's
<br /> perspective from SHPD. So we proceeded to do that. So we had to pause the timeline, which
<br /> created another really long delay for the developer. We tried to reach SHPD many times. We
<br /> were unsuccessful, as Jessica mentioned. So finally, we coordinated with I think it's Jessica and
<br /> Jeff, and because they were working with SHPD on a number of other projects, including ours,
<br /> with regards to these kinds of delays. And finally, we were able to get a letter this year; the letter
<br /> was dated March 2019, but we got it this - - -. So from that point we've worked with Jessica to
<br /> continue this process.
<br /> CARR SMITH: Does that satisfy you, Mike?
<br /> VITOUSEK: Well, so, my question is then, are we dealing with an expired ordinance, I mean,
<br /> expired SMA permit, or is this, because there was delays from - - - government agencies, is this
<br /> still a valid SMA that can be extended?
<br /> ANDREWS: We might need Jeff or Michael Yee to weigh in, but we, this has been postponed,
<br /> so we've been considering it still as a current application. I'm not sure that totally addresses
<br /> your question, Mike.
<br /> VITOUSEK: So we are, basically, we are treating it as if it's not expired because of the delay
<br /> between the application and hearing back from the Historic Preservation Division?
<br /> FUKE: My understanding is that the application for a time extension was filed, was timely filed.
<br /> It's just that disposition of it is like, is past the deadline.
<br /> CARR SMITH: Jeff, did you want to weigh in?
<br /> DARROW: Sure. I think Jessica had talked about, as well as the applicant, when this came in, it
<br /> came in prior to, quite a distance before the expiration, and we had realized that there was this
<br /> issue that was being brought up regarding a lava tube, and it was concerning to us, and we
<br /> 14
<br /> EXHIBIT E
<br />
|