My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2006-04-07 TFirst
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2006
>
2006-04-07 TFirst
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2011 12:40:10 PM
Creation date
6/13/2011 12:40:05 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
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
did not get notified, they will get an opportunity to make heir presentation later on. So I will <br />reserve any concerns about the two residents until we act upon the petition for standing. <br />ALAMEDA:The requests for standing. Okay. Commissioner Watanabe? <br />WATANABE:Chair, you know, in past applications we have - and I dont see any gate <br />on that site plan, but that doesnt mean they wouldnt necessarily put a gate in the future -- we <br />have put in conditions that require the gate to be set back from a roadway, yeah? And Im <br />wondering if thats something that we should include as one of the conditions. Thats one of <br />them, one of my questions. The second one is I believe we approved the prior application for a <br />church within this same subdivision and I think there was some condition about amplified music, <br />and Im wondering -. <br />SIRACUSA:No, it was in Volcano. <br />ALAMEDA:Yeah, I think that was in Volcano. <br />SIRACUSA:That was Volcano. <br />WATANABE:That was Volcano, oh, well, okay. Im wondering if we should address <br />thatthough. <br />ALAMEDA:The gate you mean? <br />WATANABE:The gate, and maybe even the amplified music, seeing that we do have a <br />couple of adjoining properties that are either opposed or applying for contested case standing. <br />ALAMEDA:Would you care to answer that, Mr. Darrow? Or shall we save that as a <br />part of a discussion item after we vote on whether the request for standing is approved, or youd <br />like -? <br />WATANABE:Well, I was hoping to give them a heads up. So if thats something they <br />want to consider that, Im assuming that were going ahead with the contested case, were going <br />to grant standing. But that would give them time to address some of those things so that the next <br />time we wouldnt be -. <br />ALAMEDA:Okay. Mr. Darrow? <br />DARROW:Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If I could just address Commissioner <br />Galdones concern. I wanted to also mention that those two parties that were not notified had <br />submitted letters to the Planning Commission. So they in some way or another were notified of <br />this particular application, whether or not it was from a mailing or not. But they had submitted <br />testimony, written testimony, for this application. One more, we have received a letter this <br />morning from Mr. Mya PawU, and that I believe has been passed out to the Commissioners. <br />Thank you, Mr. Chair. <br />ALAMEDA:Any follow-up, Commissioner Watanabe? <br />4EXHIBIT B <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.