My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2010-02-05 TTUTTLE HALE OHIA
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2010
>
2010-02-05 TTUTTLE HALE OHIA
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2011 10:54:14 AM
Creation date
6/13/2011 10:54:06 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
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
WOODWARD: Thank you.Commissioner Ishibashi. <br />ISHIBASHI: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yeah, I’m going to be voting against this proposal. Split <br />hairs, what is an owner, what is an operator of one bed and breakfast. I’m not against bed and <br />breakfasts. But for us to split hairs and to allow to have an operator, hire an operator to run <br />additional rooms on a property, this is expanding again, just expanding more for one current <br />property owner. So this can expand beyond. So I don’t know how we can split hairs on <br />allowing to have, hiring an operator and an owner living on the same property and that can <br />expand to the adjacent properties and to other bed and breakfasts around the island. So I’m <br />going to be voting no against this. <br />WOODWARD: Commissioner Kern. <br />KERN: One of the challenges in living in East Hawaii when people come over is where you <br />stay, right? And I know the hotel industry on the island is quite large. Majority of that is on the <br />Kona side. You come here, you know, Hilo side, we know what the options are; and they’re <br />okay, they’re not that great. So we have options of bed and breakfasts and vacation rentals. And <br />being that there is not a major hotel industry up there in Volcano, I wouldn’t think that we’d be <br />taking away jobs from other folks by approving that.I do agree that it is splitting hairs. I <br />definitely empathize with the concerns on both sides. But it’s so out there on its own deal and its <br />own entity that I support it. I think it’s a good thing. And other ones that we passed, you know, <br />the owner says that they’re going to be the operator, they can simply just move out afterwards, <br />go to the mainland and have an operator there they’re paying to do it. So it’s kind of challenging <br />when really anybody can say one thing that they’re going to be the owner/operator and then bail <br />out afterwards when there’s nothing requiring them to do that. So, yeah, that’s basically all I’ve <br />got to say, is that it’s so far out there, there’s no major hotel industries in that area that I don’t <br />think we’re pulling people away. And we’ll see how that goes. Thank you. <br />WOODWARD: All right, I’ll just give my two cents worth too. I think the points that have <br />been made, there is a lack of lodging facilities in that area. There are a number of small <br />businesses that require the tourists to be there for their livelihood; and this, in a way, helps the, in <br />my way of thinking, helps the community of Volcano to support the little mom and pop <br />businesses that have sprung up there. So I think in the greater good of things that this, there’s <br />merit to this. So I have no problem with it. Does anybody else have any further comments? <br />Commissioner Au. <br />AU: That carport still bothers me. Is there, I just came on the Commission so I’m fairly new. <br />What would have to be done to get that thing removed? Do I make an amendment to remove <br />that carport? I would like to do that. <br />GONAZALEZ: Well, at this point if you make a motion for them to have to remove that <br />structure without explaining the rationale basis you open up yourselves to a challenge from them, <br />I think, for taking property of value. So you’re going to have to explain a very good basis on the <br />record on why that structure should be removed, I think. <br />21 <br /> EXHIBIT D <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.