My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2008-01-11 TKOHALA LLC
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2008
>
2008-01-11 TKOHALA LLC
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2011 8:38:44 AM
Creation date
6/13/2011 8:38:41 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
TORIGOE: Right. And then you could, as I said, you might also add to the transmittal <br />to No. 4 to the Council a notation that you are considering a time extension as requested and so <br />they should be looking out for that to be coming up. <br />WATANABE: Yeah. We do not have, however, the authority. Only Mr. Lim has the <br />authority, you know, as the applicant to extend the time, yeah. So, you know - <br />TORIGOE: Right. <br />WATANABE: You have to be in agreement. If you’re not in agreement with what was <br />just discussed then we would act upon this.If there’s a question as to whether it’s an <br />unagendized item, we can just discuss the Ramsayered portions and then send it up, because we <br />do regularly discuss revisions to conditions on previously agendized items. And that way, you <br />know, some of the discussion would be forwarded. But like I had said and like it is pretty <br />obvious none of it is going to pass tonight anyway, I don’t think so. <br />TORIGOE: You know, actually I look at this recommendation and it’s, well, your <br />draft recommendation, and I see it as really kind of a form of discussion on the agendized item. <br />And this being an advisory matter too, I wouldn’t have a problem if you decided to enter this into <br />the record as -. <br />WATANABE: Draft? <br />TORIGOE: A draft for discussion. And then if you decided, if you wanted even to <br />take a vote on it you know, and if you can’t come to a consensus or five votes one way or <br />another then it goes, you could send that up as well this way. But there are some options there. <br />LIM: In terms of the applicant’s position is I do need client authority cause <br />there’s some issues in here, especially the 100-foot setback from the ocean and a 150-foot <br />setback proposed from the highway. You know, I don’t know how big or how wide the property <br />is so I can’t make an assessment at this time. <br />WATANABE: Yeah. <br />LIM: But for purposes of just the procedural aspect, I think if the Commission, <br />you know, we’re not consenting to it, but if the Commission decides to send the recommendation <br />on Items 4.a. and 4.b. of the agenda today to the County Council, we would ask that you do that <br />with a special note that you are taking time to review Agenda Item 5 with the applicant and <br />coming back at the next Kona meeting to address that. <br />WATANABE: Okay, that will require you authorizing an extension to agendize to the <br />next Kona meeting. <br />LIM: And I think that I’m saying that I will authorize the continuance of Item 5 <br />to the next Kona meeting, with the proviso that we would like the Commission, if Items 4.a. and <br />EXHIBIT D <br />5 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.