My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2008-01-11 TPDKOHALA LLC
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2008
>
2008-01-11 TPDKOHALA LLC
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2011 8:38:53 AM
Creation date
6/13/2011 8:38:51 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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
year; and the Commission made a finding that that was consistent with the General Plan and <br />granted an SMA Permit. So having a development of 5-acre lots in an area which has all the <br />same General Plan designations, actually that area is entirely Low Density Urban in the General <br />Plan, has the same State Land Use designation, that is as consistent with the General Plan as <br />well. <br />WATANABE: Any follow-up, Mr. Graham. No? <br />GRAHAM: No. <br />WATANABE: Okay, I, for clarification purposes, the subdivision you’re referring to or <br />the SMA Permit you’re referring to was the Belt Collins application where we did so many <br />height limitations, etc., on that? <br />YUEN: I’m trying to remember what the -. I know that Greg Mooers worked on <br />it. I’m not sure if Belt Collins was -. And let me just say one more thing, that when I said <br />consistency with the General Plan as, the RS-15 is consistent with a LUPAG Map Low Density <br />Urban. You also have other aspects of the General Plan goals and policies that the development <br />may not be consistent with. But as speaking of the LUPAG, yes, it is consistent with Low <br />Density Urban. But, anyway, I can’t remember if, I think Belt Collins was involved. I <br />remember Greg Mooers was also involved as the applicant, but that did come to the Commission <br />last year and was granted an SMA Permit for 5-acre lots. <br />WATANABE: Thank you. Do we have any further questions for either the applicant’s <br />representative or the Director? Do you have anything else to add, Mr. Yuen? <br />YUEN: No. I’d be happy to answer any more questions, but nothing else I need to <br />say. <br />WATANABE: Okay. Do we need to enter into, well, Mr. Lim, if that concludes your <br />presentation I think we’ll attempt to go into deliberation on Agenda Item 4. So you may be <br />seated in this case. Yes, sir? <br />WOODWARD: Do we need to close the hearing? <br />WATANABE: I guess technically we do. You know, I would entertain a motion to that <br />effect. <br />WOODWARD: So move. <br />RHO: Second. <br />WATANABE: And second. All in favor of closing the hearing say aye? <br />COMMISSIONERS: Aye. <br />EXHIBIT C <br />15 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.