My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2006-01-06 TPD
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2006
>
2006-01-06 TPD
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2011 8:46:37 AM
Creation date
6/13/2011 8:46:36 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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
Corporation Counsel said, well, the rezoning ordinance is no good because noneof the <br />conditions have been met, so treat it as an Ag-1. So tentative approval was issued and tentative <br />approval for subdivision basically means you can go forward with the subdivision as shown on <br />the map. Then we came in, and I dont know if I agree with that approach, but the gist of it is <br />that tentative approval had been given for the subdivision as a one-acre lot subdivision under <br />one-acre zoning. So we allowed the subdivision to be finalized, but we sent a letter to the <br />landowners, all the landowners, making it clear that we considered this to be under one-acre <br />zoning, the subdivision was allowed under one-acre zoning so now dont come in, you bought a <br />lot, dont come in and try to use 7500 square foot zoning on the lot that you bought. It wasnt <br />done that way, okay. <br />So if you have a residential 7,500 square foot zoning, you have access issues, you have <br />sidewalks, curbs, gutters, all that kind of improvements would have been called for in the <br />improvements. So we could have initiated this repeal at any time after that. <br />But things being, you know, other things coming up, we didnt do anything about it until <br />Matsunocameforwardtorezoneaportionofthepropertytoacommercialuse;andthatreally <br />made it clear that we have to do something formal to throw out this zoning thats still on the <br />books as far as the last rezoning ordinance on the property. So we really need to do something <br />to clean it up. Because once with, if you look at the conditions of zoning, you cant decide, well, <br />what is the first increment, what is the second increment. If somebody wants to build a house on <br />one lot do we say no because there are not 60 houses built on another lot that, you know, the first <br />increment is supposed to have? It says the first increment is supposed to have 30 or 40 houses, <br />and then you can do the second increment. So thats why we brought this forward to clean it up. <br />Now they go back to the, the end result if we repeal the RS zoning ordinance is that they are <br />zoned Ag 1-acre. We dont look at that as necessarily the best zoning long-term for the <br />property; but, then people will come, if they have other ideas and other plans, then they need to <br />come forward to rezone it to something else from the Ag-1. <br />SIRACUSA:Question for the Director, please. <br />ALAMEDA:Commissioner Siracusa. <br />SIRACUSA:Does this mean that we acted precipitously when we rezoned the Matsuno <br />portion, or should we have done the whole thing the other way around, done this first and then <br />taken up the Matsuno change of zone? <br />YUEN:This is really more of a house cleaning and it didnt -. The ideal thing <br />would have been to do this first, but I dont think that its a critical matter that Matsuno went <br />first. <br />SIRACUSA:Its not going to make that change of zone, raise any questions about its <br />legality because were doing this first? <br />YUEN:No. <br />5EXHIBIT C <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.