My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2023-01-19 Leeward Exh C (Item 3 Stevenson & Fumo PL-REZ-2022-000035)
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2023
>
2023-01-19 Leeward
>
Stevenson, Stevenson & Fumo (PL-REZ-2022-000035)
>
2023-01-19 Leeward Exh C (Item 3 Stevenson & Fumo PL-REZ-2022-000035)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/16/2023 4:25:01 PM
Creation date
2/15/2023 11:11:05 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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
they also must have fees related to land use approvals as well but, that's one that brings in quite a <br /> bit of monies toward infrastructure projects is through building permit applications. <br /> PIPAN: If I may Chair,to add— <br /> DEFRANCO: Yes. <br /> PIPAN: —just a little bit to this topic. We've had a number of rezones with <br /> similar features. No increase in intensity or dwellings permitted on the lot not too far from this <br /> one. Kalawa, in Waimea as well. Neither of those and quite frequently many others similar to this <br /> don't have such a fair share requirement. It's just this Kaloko Mauka area. So, instead of doing <br /> this piecemeal almost discriminatory approach on this neighborhood. I think maybe it's through <br /> the ongoing subdivision and rezone code amendments a more systematic approach is taken to <br /> impacts on transportation infrastructure and what that actually means and how that's implemented. <br /> And I think the building permit example is a great example because that is an impact,right. <br /> You're building a structure, there's going to be traffic to and from it. But, in this case, there is no <br /> new structures, traffic is going to be as it has been since 1986 when these houses were built. <br /> KNOWLES: I just had a question. <br /> DEFRANCO: Yes. <br /> KNOWLES: I think what you say is true potentially. But basically, what we are <br /> doing now is subdividing it so that there are 2 fee-simple lots. Both of which can be sold and that <br /> theoretically could increase density on the property. I mean, maybe its only 2 or 3 more drivers or <br /> whatever it is but it still may have impact, correct? <br /> PIPAN: You're saying in terms of like family size that would— <br /> KNOWLES: Sure, I mean for example, or they could come before us and make <br /> another request to subdivide their 10 acres. I mean, you know density can increase hypothetically <br /> with this kind of subdivision. <br /> PIPAN: I think in this specific case, there are conditions that prohibit that in <br /> this ordinance. So, let me pull it up, pardon me. Okay, Condition F, "restrictive covenants in the <br /> deeds of all the proposed lots within the subject property shall give notice that the terms of the <br /> zoning ordinance prohibit the construction of a second dwelling unit and condominium property <br /> regimes on each lot", it goes on. But that's the crux of it. So— <br /> KNOWLES: Okay. <br /> PIPAN: — if a request to do like a Special Permit use or to come before the <br /> Planning Commission that's a discretionary permit you'd then be able to evaluate the impact of <br /> that use. But as it is,we're looking at 90% dedicated native forests and 2 single-family <br /> residences. <br /> 7 <br /> EXHIBIT C <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.