My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2005-08-05 Planning Commission Minutes
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Minutes
>
2005
>
2005-08-05 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2011 2:39:08 PM
Creation date
6/13/2011 2:39:04 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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
Ms. Covington stated several months ago when she began this process the Planning Department <br />suggested she consolidate Lots 17 and 18A as her home actually straddles the original lot line <br />and she questioned if this would be a condition of the granting of the use permit. Mr. Yuen said <br />he did not know how the house was split by a lot line and it is not a condition of the B&B <br />approval that the lots be consolidated. <br />For Ms. Covingtons information, Mr. Yuen said that if the house burned down and she wanted <br />to rebuild in the same configuration, the lots would have to be consolidated because she would <br />have to meet setback requirements. On the other hand, if the house burned down and she wanted <br />to build two houses, the lots would have to be subdivided because there would not be enough <br />space for two houses. <br />Ms. Covington said the house was built in 1933, and she suspected that two lots were purchased <br />and the house was constructed straddling both lot lines. She noted that the property is one parcel <br />fortaxpurposes,butdoeshavetwolotsassignedtoitinthesurveybooks. <br />Mr.Yuenstatedthat,atthistime,thePlanningDepartmentdoesnothaveastrongfeelingeither <br />way whether the lots are consolidated or not; and there is not a condition of approval that the <br />property remain consolidated. <br />The Director agreed with Commissioner Graham that Condition 7 should be deleted because <br />there are no time conditions to be complied with. <br />Ms. Covington stated Bill Shackenfield, her husband, agrees with her testimony. <br />The Chair called on George Leonard to testify, to which Ms. Covington stated he has left the <br />meeting. <br />It was moved by Commissioner Iwashita and seconded by Commissioner Siracusa that the <br />application (USE 05-003) be approved based on the Planning Directors recommendation and <br />proposed conditions, with the deletion of Condition 7. There was no discussion on the motion. <br />A roll call vote was taken and motion carried with seven ayes (Iwashita, Siracusa, Graham, <br />McCall, Salavea, Watanabe, and Alameda) and two absent and excused (Galdones and Springer). <br />SPP 05-013The Commission took this item up at 3:46 p.m. with <br />DIDIER FLAMENTapproximately 6 people from the public in attendance. <br />KEHENA, <br />PUNA <br />APPLICANT: DIDIER FLAMENT (SPP 05-013) <br />ApplicationforaSpecialPermittoallowa4-unitbedandbreakfastestablishmenton0.5acreof <br />land situated within the State Land Use Agricultural District. The property is located along the <br />northeastsideofKipukaStreet(12-118KipukaStreet),acrossfromtheKipukaStreetPunakai <br />Street intersection, Puna Beach Estates Subdivision,Kehena, Puna, Hawaii, TMK: 1-2-33:4. <br />Mr. Darrow oriented the Commission and public of the subject and surrounding properties on the <br />locationmapandsiteplan,summarizedtherequest,andnotedthePlanningDirectoris <br />recommending approval of the application, with conditions. <br />6 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.