2021-07-15 Leeward Exh D (Amend SMA 286)

Home

like don't want to go through it, but all I wanted to also indicate is that the applicant is committed to seeing this project through under all of the terms and conditions of the SMA and any amendment, whether that project is done by itself, with a joint venture partner, or for that matter even possibly a new developer. In my preparing the application, I prepared the report as though it were like a brand-new application in the event the commissioners wanted to review this as a not necessarily a straight-on time extension request but a new application. I gave that option to not only the staff but the commission, and the staff decided that the appropriate way really would be to process it via the amendment route. But nevertheless, all of the information contained in the application is tantamount to like a new application. I really don't have any more to add, except that I know there was this, there was this one condition relating to a historic trail; that was thoroughly investigated, and to the extent that it could be barely discernible, it's kind of reflected in the site plan, and it will be continued to be reflected in any subsequent site plan. I noticed that the staff had proposed a condition requiring, to the extent practicable, delineation by metes and bounds of this remnant of any trail, and that will be done by the applicant. Having said that, you know, the other question, you know, related to the public testimony, talked about, you know, issues relating to being able to accommodate the concerns of the Kaulana at Kona project, and ironically, the Kaulana at Kona project was part and parcel of this original project. But at any rate, the applicant fully understands the comments and concerns, and based on that, when the commission approved the SMA amendment back in 2015, there were a number of conditions that specifically addressed that concern, and it's carried through in the current proposed conditions, and these are conditions 2, 10, 15, 16, and 17. And this morning I saw public testimony portion; the testifier noted the question relating to drainage, and I'd like to again direct the commission's attention to proposed conditions 8 and 11, which specifically relates to that on drainage. So, having said that, Mr. Chair and members of the commission, if there are any questions of me, I'd be more than happy to answer them. VITOUSEK: Thank you, Mr. Fuke. Commissioner Yates. Remember we are trying to keep everybody within a 10-minute fact-finding period YATES: Okay. VITOUSEK: —and then (indiscernible–broken connection) hopefully, and then we can move onto discussion. Please proceed. YATES: Okay. How close to Life Care is this construction project? FUKE: The smaller property is actually adjacent to the Life Care Center. 5 EXHIBIT D