Laserfiche WebLink
to Alii Drive. But we do reserve the right to work with the County for safety improvements. We <br />gave a letter to Mr. Yuen, a letter today, that when things are built there are some, we’d just like <br />to be able to have input to the County. There’s utility poles that have to be moved. It’s really <br />necessary because it will be an evacuation route and a well-used road. It should have a dedicated <br />left-turn lane. It’d be nice to have some crosswalks across Alii Drive coming down, and issues <br />like that. So we’ll just reserve that right, please. But, yes, we have withdrawn our petition. <br />ALAMEDA: Thank you, sir. Let me check with the County. I just want to make sure <br />that’s okay and you’re seeing it how everybody else is seeing it. Name and address for the <br />record. <br />SELF: Amy Self, Deputy Corporation Counsel representing the Planning <br />Director. Yes, we agree with that, with their withdrawal. <br />ALAMEDA: Okay. All right, let me take it back to the Applicant. We did have the <br />proposed Findings or the Hearings Officer’s Report and, of course, the exceptions by the County <br />and the Applicant and the Intervenor. And then we’ve had this like a combined, the exceptions <br />kind of combined in one single document. Mr. Lim, would you like to explain this, please. <br />LIM: Yes. I guess before we move into that, could we have the Commission <br />act on the withdrawal of the petition? <br />ALAMEDA: Mr. Torigoe? <br />TORIGOE: Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I think, basically with all the stipulation of <br />the parties in writing and on the record today, I don’t know that there’s a need for a formal <br />motion on that. But perhaps if you just check and see if there’s a consensus among the <br />Commission that the withdrawal would be accepted -. <br />ALAMEDA: Fellow Commissioners, is there any objection for the withdrawal? <br />Commissioner Graham? <br />GRAHAM: I certainly have no objections. I’m just, I want to question Mr. Torigoe <br />about procedural matters. Since we have contested case hearing then the parties, including the <br />Planning Department, sort of provide all the exhibits and the evidence and all. And since our last <br />meeting we as Commissioners did receive some other material which I think is relevant to this <br />application as well relating to coastal resources and all. So I just wanted to maintain the <br />opportunity for us to introduce this material into this application if the Commission should find it <br />relevant. So I don’t want to sort of prematurely close the door to doing that. So are we at the <br />point now when we accept this withdrawal that we close the door towards accepting other <br />evidence, or does that come later? <br />TORIGOE: I think at this point all that’s happening is that the formal trial-like <br />contested case procedure that has been initiated by the Intervenors will then come to a close. I <br />think the, you still have an on-going, you know, an informal contested case procedure that will <br />allow for further introductions of evidence; or if there are Commissioners who would like to <br />request that other evidence be looked at, you know, that can be done also. It is a good idea, I <br />guess, to check with the parties to see if the evidence that has been introduced so far, including <br />EXHIBIT B <br />8 <br /> <br />