2008-01-11 TKOHALA LLC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

WOODWARD: We really didn’t decide the issue. There was not a majority vote. Now the Director’s recommendation has to go because there’s a time limit on it. WATANABE: Right. WOODWARD: This one we didn’t decide. So it makes sense, in fact I think we’re almost obligated to continue it till we get a decision. TORIGOE: Well, not necessarily. WATANABE: No, I believe there’s a, what, 90-day and -. TORIGOE: Yeah, but the thing is that, as Commissioner Woodward was saying, that with the Planning Director’s previous one it was clear that if you didn’t get five votes today then that would be the end of it. It would go up with a default negative recommendation. But this one you have the applicant saying, you know, I’m willing to extend it, in fact I want to extend it to the next meeting. So to close that out, I think you should take a motion to extend it or not; or if nobody makes a motion to extend, then that’s it. Then you’re done here. YUEN: Well, can I jump in for just a minute here. I think the applicant has the right to extend the time on their, on the bill that they initiate when the Commission has not come to a definitive vote. WATANABE: Right, well -. YUEN: In other words even if the Commission had a vote on whether to defer action and did not reach five to defer action, if the applicant does not want the matter to go to the Council with a default negative recommendation but would rather have it stay at the Commission to try to get five favorable votes, then the applicant should be able to do that. TORIGOE: So you’re saying that it should just stay on the agenda as long as the applicant wants it to stay on? YUEN: It’s the applicant’s request. You see, this is their request for a time extension. And if the applicant is content -. And I think that, you know, you get into a point of reasonableness. And typically the applicants have wanted to have their matter at some point go up to the County Council when it’s clear that they’re not going to get five votes at the Planning Commission or if they’re just tired of having it voted on the Planning Commission. But otherwise you’re forcing it to go up to the Council with a negative recommendation. And if the applicant does not want to do that, then it seems to me that the applicant should be able to keep the matter at the Planning Commission. TORIGOE: Okay, I think there’s an ambiguity in the rule because the way it reads it says unless a longer period is agreed to by the applicant, you know, and that sort of, it doesn’t say until, unless a longer, unless the applicant, or to the extent that the applicant requested or, you know -. It doesn’t make it clear that the applicant has the power to keep it with the EXHIBIT D 16