2004-03-19 timming - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

zoned for Multiple Residential as well as those properties to the south. The properties within the Seaview Circle Subdivision towards the west are desig Residential. There are a number of apartment buildings within t subdivision, indicated in areas designated brown, pink and brown on this side toward the south. The Applicant intends to construct 14 units of condominium, 14 condominium units within three buildings. One would be a proposed 3-story structure located in this, at this particular location. The other 3-story structure would be located on the lower or makai end of the property. There would also be a 2-story structure situated at the corner of Kuakini Highway and Seaview Circle. The ApplicantÓs proposal is to construct the access point at this particular location, which is on the Ka`u side or south side of Seaview Circle. Seaview Circle goes in this configuration. So this also is referred to as Seaview Circle. If you had looked at the Public WorksÓ comment, they had requested that we consider access from the west side of the property rather than the south side of the property. Based on this proposal, there is also an access located at this particular corner which is on the west side of the property. This basically shows the elevation of the subject, of the buildings proposed on the property. For those of you who are familiar with this particular location, this property is also the property thatÓs also, that was previously, there was Special Management Area Use Permit for a prior, previous condominium project applied for the Topliss, Larry Topliss. And, I think, basically, many of you are familiar with that particular case that went to the Third Circuit Court. We received a Petition for Standing to a Contested Case Hearing from the Kona Sunset Villas, AOAO. At this time, the Planning Director, the Planning Department is requesting that the Commission deal with the Petition for Standing filed by the Association of Kona Sunset Villas. Are there any questions at this time? FUJIKAWA:Any questions, Commissioners, with the staff? Commissioner Graham? GRAHAM:Norman, from, I did read that Topliss material and the court reporter stuff; and, I mean, the position of the court was that it was remanded back to the Planning Commission because of the difficulties in the way the decision was made, you know, what was wrong about it; but I donÓt know anything that transpired thereafter. Did they go back to the Planning Commission? Did the Applicant, Topliss, choose to go anywhere with the project? What happened since then? HAYASHI:If memory serves me correctly, I believe Mr. Topliss, after it was remanded back to the Planning Commission, withdrew the applicati Commission did not deal with the application, further deal with that application. 2