2005-01-21 TLAURANCE - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

SIRACUSA:When we were on the site visit and we were all walking along the wall, some of us ended up stepping off the wall and someone made a joking remark, oh, youre trespassing on private property. And, I could see your point where it could be very easy to- if a bunch of people are walking along to trip and fall off the wall; and if the pool were right that close there could be an accident and that Mr. Laurance, of course, I assume would be liable. So I can see that, when were talking about the reasons for variances or denying them that the question of public safety could conceivably come in there. Would you like to comment on that? ROTHSTEIN:Well, that, that is one of the points, public safety. There- public can walk makai of the wall throughout the entire subdivision as a result of a lawsuit pursued by the Kona Old Hawaiian Trails Group and through Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation. There is a 3-foot easement on the side of the- on the makai side of the wall, so, which the subdivision is supposed to be taking care of. Theyre supposed to be clearing it and maintaining it; and theyre not doing averygoodjobofthat.So,Ithink,didIansweryourquestion? SIRACUSA:Yes. ROTHSTEIN:Whatmy,whatmymostimportantconcernisthatthewaythisisgoingto be perceived by people, and accurately so, that my, I have a, my neighbors have pools and I want a pool, too, and thats my hardship. And thats what this is really all about. No matter what all this other testimony says, thats the bottom line. Its not a hardship and theres no reason to grant the variance. SPRINGER:Thank you, Mr. Rothstein. Are there any other questions of the testifier? Seeing none, Ms. Palma-Glennie, could you please give us your name and your address for the record. PALMA-GLENNIE:Yes, Aloha. My name is Janice Palma-Glennie and Im at P.O. Box 4849, Kailua-Kona. Thank you for allowing me this opportunity to speak today. To allow the Laurances request for a variance for an already minimal shoreline setback would be a breach of the public trust. Mr. Laurance bought his property knowing the restrictions upon it. In addition the new findings by the applicant that there was a similar variance given nearly a decade ago is moot. First, a variance is not a given, its a gift given by the public to certain landowners; and, second, two wrongs dont make a right; and also, third, luckily weve learned that what is reasonable to one person can be very unreasonable to the general public and the public trust, especially when it relates to shoreline. Owning coastal property has extra luxuries as well as responsibilities attached to it. Not encroaching upon the public domain is one of those responsibilities. I ask that you, in agreement with the Planning Directors recommendations, deny the above variance; and I appreciate the opportunity to provide this testimony. Thank you. SPRINGER:Thank you, Ms. Palma-Glennie. Are there any questions of the testifier? Thank you, you may step back from the table. Mr. Torigoe, may we request to go into Executive Session for the purpose of discussing with you our obligations under the definitions of the Planning Commission rules? 14