My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2005-04-22 TUmphrey REZ 03-032
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2005
>
2005-04-22 TUmphrey REZ 03-032
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2011 2:08:18 PM
Creation date
6/13/2011 2:08:14 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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
GRAHAM:If that is accurate Id like to just follow up to the Planning Director. <br />DARROW:Sure. <br />GRAHAM:Kind of wondering when theres a situation where a zoning cannot take <br />place immediately but its only contingent on things that may happen in the future. Im kind of <br />wondering where you draw the line as to when its appropriate to do the rezoning contingent on <br />future things or when you would say, you should come back when one of those things is in place <br />and do the rezoning then. <br />YUEN:Well I dont know that we have a set policy on that but the application did <br />come in. Its generally in an area that we would- thats general planned and has some <br />commercial uses around it so its consistent with the general plan but because of the exiting <br />traffic situation we couldnt recommend going ahead with the construction of the project now. <br />Giventhattheyveappliedandgonethroughtheprocess,wedecidedtorecommendapproval <br />with these conditions that essentially keep it from going ahead until these other improvements <br />are made. That, in one case they dont have control over and then the other case they would <br />probably, they would be so expensive as to not be economically justified by this project. <br />GALDONES:Commissioner Springer? <br />SPRINGER:My question and concerns were similar to those raised by Commissioner <br />Graham and I guess I would just ask it the Condition I then satisfies the Department of Public <br />Works concerns about the applicants ability to conform to the minimum sight distance <br />requirement. <br />DARROW:Commissioner Springer if its okay if I could direct that attention to our <br />representative from the Department of Public Works. <br />SPRINGER:Thank you. <br />GALDONES:Mr. Emler. <br />EMLER:Well the answer to your question, I just in briefly looking at both <br />Conditions H and I and I see nothing in either one of those conditions that would specifically <br />address the sight distance issue. We would prefer that there would be something to address that <br />in the conditions. <br />SPRINGER:Mr. Chair <br />EMLER:But, its something we generally would look for but it would be better if it <br />were in the condition. <br />GALDONES:Commissioner Springer? <br />3 <br />EXHIBIT A <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.