2006-04-07 TAinaloa - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

voted to contract out a hearings officer for this particular hearing. The hearings officer that was hired was Mr. Colin Love; and he had conducted the hearings and also prepared his findings and recommendations to the Planning Commission. On November 22, 2004, the Planning Commission reviewed and acted upon the Petition; and basically the Commission adopted the Planning Directors proposed findings with some modification. And basically the Planning Commission adopted the request to extend the time to Condition 2 to submit and secure Plan Approval under Special Permit No. 827. Regarding Use Permit No. 106, Condition No. 3, the Planning Commission also voted to extend the five-year time to secure Final Plan Approval. Regarding Condition No. 6, the Planning Commission agreed to delete that particular conditionsincetheimprovementstotheAinaloaBoulevardandHighway130 intersection improvements were already completed; and that was done by the State. Condition No. 7, the Commission voted to retain the language of that condition which was originally adopted. So, basically, they did not agree with the amendment to the condition as proposed by Ainaloa Development Corporation. And, finally, regarding Condition No. 9, the Planning Commission, oh, Condition No. 8 was not the part of the proposal for consideration at that time, it was Condition No. 9. And the Planning Commission agreed to delete the donation of the water tanker as well as the asphalt paver to be purchased and turned over to the Association. On December 04, 2004, the Ainaloa Development Corporation appealed the Planning Commissions decision to the Third Circuit Court and indicated that the Planning Commission failed to accept the request to amend Conditions 7 and 8, excuse me, 7 and 9, as requested by Ainaloa Development Corporation at that time. The Court, headed by Judge Glenn Hara, urged the parties recently to enter into settlement talks amongst the parties. And as a result of those discussions, the settlement agreement was drafted; and the agreement is noted in the Planning Directors April 6 06 letter to the Planning Commission, which you all have a copy of. I guess thats basically the background leading to where we are today. ALAMEDA:Okay. HAYASHI:Are there any questions? ALAMEDA:Fellow Commissioners, you can see theres plenty history behind this agenda item. So, questions, clarifications? Commissioner Graham and then Commissioner Siracusa? 3EXHIBIT D