|
serious reservations. It’s nothing personal with the applicant or what. But if we’re going to
<br />uphold the provisions of the Zoning Code and the General Plan, then for me I’m saying you’ve
<br />got to look at this very seriously and think about what ramifications may come about in the
<br />future, you know. Now we’re saying let’s give him, if this body decides to go ahead and
<br />approve that, and we’re saying, okay, let’s give him five years. Upon questioning he said he
<br />would, intending, his intent is to use this property for an industrial use as long as he can, as long
<br />as his business is in operation. Now would the time of its operation make any difference? I say
<br />no. Why should it make any difference? It’s an agricultural property.The residents are not
<br />situated on this property. So what impact would it have, with what impact would it have on his
<br />neighbors? You know, so if we said if there are impacts, then what I’m saying is this use should
<br />be located in a Light Industrial zone where all those kinds of commotions and activities and
<br />traffic would be prevalent. So, you know, that’s why I have some serious reservations about this
<br />application.
<br />WOODWARD: Thank you, Commissioner Domingo. I would just make a comment that one of
<br />the things that this -. This is admittedly kind of a peculiar amalgam of telecommunications
<br />business with macadamia nuts. I mean that doesn’t generally come on the radar screen. But
<br />what has happened I think is that we have, that Mr. Mizukami has managed to maintain his
<br />macadamia nut farm only because he has a profitable business. If he didn’t have a profitable
<br />business, he might be with all the other people bulldozing their macadamia nut trees to make 20-
<br />acre single family dwelling lots, which is cut, you know, that is his right. I mean if he wanted to
<br />do that he could bulldoze those macadamia nut trees right now.
<br />So it’s, I can see your concerns and, but I think in this particular instance we’re actually
<br />maintaining the agricultural use of this land by allowing this particular use of a building which is
<br />already in existence. We’re not, it’s not that he’s building another building that wasn’t there.
<br />And it does have a combined use, not only for this telecommunications business, but a good -.
<br />Most of these machines, I think with the exception of one, are also used to maintain the orchard.
<br />So I agree with your concerns, but I think that the greater good is served by this, by approving
<br />this. Do we have any other comments?
<br />DOMINGO: I just, Mr. Chairman?
<br />WOODWARD: Yes, Commissioner Domingo.
<br />DOMINGO: I’d just like to mention and, you know, thank you for your opinion and your
<br />comments; and in a certain way I agree with you. But, I mean, setting a precedent is the key
<br />issue right here. You know, we can extend and give him the permit. And if others are in line
<br />and apply for the same, come in with the same situation and apply for a permit, are we ready, are
<br />we ready to say, yes, go ahead? You know, and it’s not like the Cable Systems Inc. is coming
<br />before us and claiming poverty, by no means. You know, I think they’re well equipped, they
<br />have a wide inventory of equipment that they work with. But it seems like the major part of this
<br />business is in Hilo, because he said all of his employees are situated in East Hawai‘i, whereby
<br />his base is located, his business is located in Kona, you know. So I don’t know how you can
<br />rationalize that. But what I’m saying is that, you know, if it’s going to be good for him, let us
<br />make it good for everybody in the public who wants to enjoy that same privilege, you know. If
<br />13
<br /> EXHIBIT A
<br />
<br />
|