2007-04-05 TMIRANDA - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

WATANABE: Well -. GRAHAM: Commissioner Watanabe. WATANABE: May I make a comment. I understand what Mr. Iwashita’s concerns are; however, I think the Department is trying their best to work with Mr. Miranda. And I think if there is substantive progress this issue will not be before us again. And, hopefully, Mr. Miranda is convinced that these conditions are important so compliance will occur, and I’m satisfied with that. I think we should trust the process and see what happens. DOMINGO: Mr. Chairman? GRAHAM: Commissioner Domingo. DOMINGO: Yes. I will speak in favor of the motion. And I’d just like to point out that this motion has been made with respect to the discussion that preceded it, and that it would be the questions that the Commission had and the answers that we received from the applicant and that somehow, someone indicated the willingness of the Commission to see that we work things out amicably to the satisfaction of the Department and at the same time of the applicant. And for me personally I felt, as I indicated I have sympathy for him, for the applicant; but I think along with that there has been a great amount of, I’m going to put it simply, ignorance to the process and the requirements that should have been met; and as the Planning Director indicated had he hired those who were so-called professionals in the various fields he wouldn’t have gone to this point of having it be considered for revocation. Because if had done so the plan approval would have been submitted in the earlier stages of the development, but instead unfortunately Mr. Miranda had gone out and purchased the building, prepared the land and is in the final stages of having the concrete poured. Now I think having gone through all these hours of discussion, I’m sure that Mr. Miranda is appreciative of the whole planning processing and that there is a need to comply with the requirements. That’s the most important thing. And I think that was the reason why we deferred action on the revocation of this permit the last meeting here in Hilo, and th that was on March 5. And the whole, I think it was the statement made, I made a statement that unless the primary requirements for plan approval are met, you know, it’d be hard for us to go forward and consider continuing this permit. But in view of the fact that the Panning Director sees some positive, I think, some positive light on this whole issue by sitting down with the applicant and working out some plan and being confident that it can be worked out, then there would be no need for us to consider a request for revocation. On that basis, Mr. Chairman, I will vote for the motion. WATANABE: Mr. Chair? GRAHAM: Hold a sec. Commissioner Woodward, did you have something? WOODWARD: Yeah, I just wanted to say, the question was brought up about the duration of the extension. My understanding is that we can only extend for the same period that the original time provided was. That is if it was a one year period, we can extend it for one year. Is that correct, Mr. Yuen? EXHIBIT A 17