|
But we have made a point of keeping those closed. We have met with all of our lessees in
<br />different groups to talk with them about the theft problem to come up with ideas. We’ve met
<br />with the prosecuting attorney, we’ve met with the Police Department. We’ve had some times
<br />where we’ve had the Police Department assist us in being available, or setting up times when
<br />they would be hidden in our area so that we could try to find people who are at theft. Our own
<br />patrols through the areas have increased. So we have done all of that throughout 2008. It has
<br />had some help. But, again, if, you know, the economy deteriorates we’re probably not ahead of
<br />the power curve. And it’s a matter of, you know, holding back and saying, hey, you know, we -.
<br />Again, I would like to stress that there were many other uses that were suggested that we said,
<br />yeah, you know, the traffic is going to be minimal for that, we don’t, you know, we’re not into
<br />that. But if you open it up to all of the zoned, all of the uses available, then you start getting
<br />some real theft problems as you do infrastructure.
<br />WATANABE: Okay.
<br />DOMINGO: May I -?
<br />WATANABE: Okay, go ahead.
<br />DOMINGO: My feeling is regardless of this or any application that does go through
<br />which would essentially use those lands adjacent or in that vicinity, that the issue of theft would
<br />be, that’s already being addressed by Shipman by installing all of those preventive measures, and
<br />that, those measures that have been put into place today discourages or prevent people from
<br />going down to the property. And if any development comes in there that would certainly not
<br />change the situation because you have those measures in place already.
<br />WALTER: Well, it discourages it. But, you know, frankly speaking you have a gate
<br />and it’s, you know, people actually have gone through the extent of cutting through our gates.
<br />They do that, they come around the gates. We have about in round numbers 14 or 15 miles,
<br />excuse me, probably 12 miles of access to the property. And so it doesn’t take much to figure
<br />out, you know, the weak links in there. And so, you know, it’s just a matter of familiarity and,
<br />again, there are many uses that don’t impact that and there are some that do.
<br />WATANABE: Okay. I’d kind of like to get back on to some of the other issues because
<br />safety and adequate infrastructure certainly is within the realm of land use considerations. And
<br />to that end we have earlier testimony by both Mr. Moore, as well as Mr. Fuke, etc., that the
<br />negotiations did not break down over infrastructure adequacy, meaning that the applicant was
<br />willing to provide adequate infrastructure to Shipman’s satisfaction. And I’d like to have
<br />confirmation from you that basically that wasn’t the stumbling block.
<br />WALTER: Well, let me clarify something. You know, these things are all linked.
<br />And so there was a willingness to provide adequate infrastructure that was linked to the uses that
<br />would be there; and those uses that would be there were much less than are in the ML zoning.
<br />Our opinion is that if you go to just wide open ML zoning that you then, I am not confident that
<br />the zoning that would be required typically Public Works or by the County for such zoning
<br />would be provided or could be provided. To begin with the right-of-way there is only 40 feet of
<br />which only 20 feet is paved. It would require the applicant to somehow buy the extra 20 feet in a
<br />situation where -. Again, the background is that much of this was under plantation days and
<br /> EXHIBIT A
<br />17
<br />
<br />
|