My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2005-04-01 TYAMADA
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2005
>
2005-04-01 TYAMADA
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2011 12:28:07 PM
Creation date
6/13/2011 12:28:05 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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
liability for this should a person be ingress or egressing the property and sustain bodily injury. <br />Two thousand four hundred and five lot owners who own the roadway in common could put <br />their personal stake at jeopardy. And as the duly elected representative, it is my obligation to <br />stand up for them. <br />The second point on which weve askedfor the contested hearing is that even though were not <br />an official government organization as the representative of the people of the small village, so to <br />speak, 2405 lots, we are a quasi-governmental organization and, therefore, have an interested in <br />the development and the orderly development of our organization. <br />SPRINGER:Thank you, Mr. Pawu. We have the application before us and we all have <br />the opportunity to review it. Are there any questions for the petitioner? <br />IWASHITA:I have. <br />SPRINGER:Commissioner Iwashita. <br />IWASHITA:Mr. Pawu, have you discussed your request for a contested case hearing <br />withtheapplicant. <br />PAWU:Yes,sir,wehave. <br />IWASHITA:And is it your understanding that they are going to agree with you or not <br />to do the contested case hearing? <br />PAWU:What they had proposed to me earlier is that the matter be deferred <br />because we are still in discussions. They have been most cooperative in trying to meet the <br />concerns of the community; but they have not met all the concerns. And the latest vote from my <br />Board is to request a contested case hearing and deny the application. However, the applicants <br />have come back with further request and would request a further consideration by our Board, <br />which I feel obligated to give them. Because even though they are a minority they are still <br />property owners and deserve the full treatment of our board and, like all property owners, we feel <br />they have the right to develop their property to the highest and best use. <br />SPRINGER:Thank you, Mr. Pawu. <br />IWASHITA:So, may I have a follow-up question? <br />SPRINGER:Sure. <br />IWASHITA:So is it my understanding that you wish to have the Commission defer <br />your request for a contested case hearing until you have an opportunity to discuss the proposal by <br />the applicant with your owners. <br />PAWU:If its appropriate with the applicant, it would be appropriate for our <br />organization. We are willing to do it if the applicant is willing to postpone this matter. <br />3 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.