2007-05-04 TMILLER - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I mean I wouldnt have a problem with it if the legal boundary was where it is. But since weve just widened the flood zone by 100 percent, thats a substantial impact on the thing. Now we didnt do a full-on site study. This was a zoning application, not an engineering study for this project. So perhaps its something I should have looked at more closely at the beginning. But as you say its standard procedure that you have the surveyor prepare a subdivision map that has the legal boundaries of the drainage easement in line with the 100-year flood zone, that is standard practice. And for a subdivision thats only five years old to be 100 percent off is a substantial surprise. So I should have checked it. SIRACUSA:Mr. Chair? GRAHAM:Excuse me. Commissioner Siracusa? SIRACUSA:I had a procedural question. And I was just wondering that when its time to make a motion on this I would like to have either the Director or Mr. Torigoe work up some wording that would reference a new engineering study or whatever it is thats, a new drainage study, whatever would be necessary to bring reality in line with the maps so that everything is very clear, you know, and there shouldnt be this discrepancy between whats on paper and whats on the ground. GRAHAM:Yeah, I think Mr. Ross is surprised by the extent of the difference compared to what he had expected. If you would like us to continue the hearing maybe so that you can work this out. ROSS:No, I dont think, I mean at the end of the day the Commissioner -. Its unfortunate but it really doesnt matter whats on the ground. What matters is whats legal; and thats a whole other story. If were going to change to get legal maps to match whats on the ground, it costs a lot of engineering funds which this project is not large enough to do. So once we get clear on what the boundaries are, and theres ways to do that, and Ill work with Public Works, it wont be a problem, well establish what that is. I understand what the Planning Director is telling me, I dont hear an invitation to have something else done, so I dont know if theres any more discussion needed. GRAHAM:All right, thank you. Sir? MILLER:Id just like to add one more comment. As I stated before I believe there was a study done in 2001 which I can provide to the Planning Department to review which took into account to the new channeling of water from upstream into the conduit or corridor adjacent from the property. GRAHAM:Okay, thank you. Any further questions from the Commissioners? We do haveMr.JustinPittullosignedupforpublictestimonyhereforaminute.So,Mr.Pittullo, maybeyoucancomesitontheendthere,andyoufolkscanstaythere,andjustusethat microphone. PITTULLO:Goodafternoon. GRAHAM:Andmaybejustgiveyournameandaddresssincethisisanewitem. PITTULLO:MynameisJustinPittullo,POBox67,Hilo,Hawaii96721.Mr.Millers propertyisabovemineandImveryfamiliarwiththedrainageissuesathand.Imnotan engineer but Id just like to add my two cents. Ive looked at this section of land extensively for the last probably 8 or 9 years. I bought this property in 2005. And what Mr. Miller is saying is accurate. The water flow is not nearly what it was before. I mean things were getting washed away to where I wouldnt even consider buying this property before the corrections were made. 11EXHIBIT C