My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2003-02-21 TORCHIDLAND
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003
>
2003-02-21 TORCHIDLAND
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2011 11:07:31 AM
Creation date
6/13/2011 11:07:27 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
29
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
IMAMURA:Thank you. The recommendation was sent out, however, the <br />Director would like to add a new condition. And the new condition would be Item <br />No., would be inserted as Item No. 6. I will read what it says, "Applicants shall pay <br />their reasonable share for infrastructure improvements that may be required of other <br />commercial developments in the immediate area." So that would be a new Condition 6, <br />and a subsequent renumbering. <br />YUEN:If I could explain the purpose behind this. We have a pending <br />application for another commercial development at the, across from Orchidland Drive, <br />a block mauka. That's referred to the Vern Wood application. Pending, that's pending <br />preparation of a traffic impact assessment report, which was never, which we required <br />of this, for the new application. It was never required of the earlier application. There <br />may be, that still hasn't been done yet. There may be, the department, State <br />Department of Transportation, which has the State highway there, potentially could <br />require some improvements to the intersection in connection with further development <br />of commercial activity in the area. We think it's only fair that all of the new <br />commercial activity would share in that and pay a reasonable share of that, rather than, <br />in effect, grandfathering in a permit that has not been used for over 12 years. So that's <br />the purpose behind that condition and other infrastructure that may be required in -. <br />We don't know whether the Commission will, in the end, approve the other application. <br />If it does, with certain, if there are infrastructure requirements along with that that <br />would be, in fact, shared by and to the benefit of this particular application. We would <br />require that those be shared between the two developments. <br />GALDONES:Thank you, Mr. Yuen. Esther? <br />IMAMURA:I forgot to include testimony from Richard Howard as part of the <br />submittals that were received this morning. <br />GALDONES:Thank you. <br />IMAMURA:And the Planning Director recommends that the amendment to <br />the special permit be approved subject to conditions. Are there any questions? <br />GALDONES:Commissioners, questions of Esther? Hearing none, I have a list <br />`U <br />of people who have signed up for testimony. Mya Paw, Richard Miner, John <br />McElvaney, and Carl Okuyama. If there are any others who wish to testify, please let <br />the Staff know so we can include you on the list of testifiers. <br />Could I have the Applicant or its representative please come forward. <br />KUBOTA:Mr. Chairman? Mr. Chairman? <br />3 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.