2008-03-20 TKOHALA LLC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

WOODWARD: Yeah, I got confused by that last time. So I just wanted to kind of clarify it. So, but there’s obviously a wide range there from 1-acre to 3-acre to 5-acre to 20-acre to 40- acre; and it all surrounds this property fairly closely. But the immediate surroundings are Ag-5. Correct? YUEN: Correct. WOODWARD: Okay. Thank you. RHO: Okay. Let’s -. SIRACUSA: Excuse me. Can we take a 5-minute recess? RHO: Yes. That’s what I was just going to suggest that we take a 5-minute, or let’s make it a 10-minute recess. RECESSED The Chair called a recess at 10:30 a.m. RECONVENED The meeting reconvened at 10:41 a.m. RHO: The Planning Commission will now come back to order. What I wanted to do is -, we haven’t given the Planning Director time for his presentation; so, Mr. Yuen, now is your time. YUEN: Okay, great. Thank you very much. Good Morning, Members of the Commission and Mr. Chairman. There’re a few things that I’d like to talk about with this application. I know we’ve been over this in quite a bit of detail. But let me step back a minute, and first talk about fairness. And there has been quite a bit of discussion of fairness in connection with this application. Fairness is a concept that means a lot of different things to different people. And it’s related to legality. It’s different from legality; something can be legal but unfair. And I accept that. But it’s related to legality in a sense that the legal system sets some of the bounds for what you do and it creates the context for what you do. So really the argument about unfairness seems to be that rezoning is a one-way street. What I mean by that is the idea that once you’ve zoned something to a higher density – for example, in this case it was zoned from Agricultural 5-acre lots to Residential 15,000-square foot lots – once you’ve done that, it’s unfair to ever change that. I have to reject that proposition. As a legal statement, it’s wrong. You can rezone property to a lower density; you can downzone property. The legal boundaries for that are, as I discussed in the memo to the Planning Commission, are vested rights and takings. In this case we don’t have a problem with that. And it’s something that has to be in the repertoire or the inventory of tools that the County has in dealing with land. Conditions change, public attitudes change, policies change; and you have to have the ability then to also change zoning subject to the legal limits. This is done. It’s done many times throughout the country. It has happened in this county, not very commonly but it has happened. And it is something that in a right case – and I wouldn’t say it should ever be done casually or for poor reasons or not in support of a significant policy – in a right case you can do it. It’s even more clear and perhaps more clearly fair to do it in a context of a time extension when somebody is -, EXHIBIT A 23