My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2005-02-18 TRULE9
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2005
>
2005-02-18 TRULE9
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2011 11:04:12 AM
Creation date
6/13/2011 11:04:12 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
GALDONES:Commissioners, Hawaii County Planning Commission be back in order. <br />We are back on Agenda Item No. 10. Director Yuen would like introduce an addition. <br />YUEN:Yeah, this is a slight change. If you go to page 9, the section written on <br />number 6 and this is essentially what- puts in the application- says that they have to put <br />consideration of Native Hawaiian Rights in the application. The slight change would be at the <br />very beginning to say, “Unless otherwise exempted by law, a written description of the <br />anticipated impacts,” and so forth. That’s the only change. And the reason for this change is <br />that there are some kinds of properties that the- what’s required here by the PASH case doesn’t <br />apply, and that is a property that’s considered fully developed. And this would be the- <br />referencing the Hanapi decision. So that for- to give an example, a single-family lot with a home <br />on it that came in for a B & B in the SMA would not have to do this full analysis because the <br />Hanapi decision says that that’s not required when the property is fully developed. <br />SPRINGER:Question. <br />GALDONES:Commissioner Springer. <br />SPRINGER:In that regard and considering Hanapi on agricultural land, if the land is <br />fenced and has a water trough is that fully developed? <br />YUEN:No. <br />SPRINGER:Thank you. <br />GALDONES:Further questions? Hearing none, then the recommendation is to have this <br />approved. Commissioner Springer. <br />SPRINGER:Mr. Chair, I move that the Hawaii County Planning Commission approve <br />the Planning Director’s proposal to amend Planning Commission Rule 9 to incorporate changes <br />adopted by Act 169 and Act 76 of the 2001 and 2004 State Legislative Sessions, respectively and <br />for consistency with other applicable sections of Chapter 205A, Hawaii Revised Statutes, for the <br />reasons indicated by the Planning Director and including those additional changes that we just <br />discussed in Section 6. <br />GALDONES:Do I have a second? <br />MCCALL:Second. <br />GALDONES:It has been moved by Commissioner Springer, seconded by Commissioner <br />McCall, the amendment to Planning Commission Rule 9 to incorporate changes adopted by Act <br />169 and Act 76 of the 2001 and 2002- 2004 State Legislative Session, along with the amendment <br />introduced by Mr. Yuen be approved by the Planning Commission. Further discussion? Hearing <br />none. Norman. <br />3 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.