Laserfiche WebLink
where it says Prior to the issuance of construction permit,‚ we€d like to delete construction‚ <br />and add in the word building.‚ <br />The Planning Department has received one letter this morning. There were copies made and <br />hopefully that letter has been passed out. It was a letter with several signatures from different <br />people, petitions in the area. <br />Additionally, originally we had approximately nine people submit the Petition for Standing in <br />Contested Cases. Since things have been resolved, just to backtrack for a minute, originally the <br />Applicant proposed that access be on the south side of Alii Parkway, which is right here of the <br />Alii Park Place Condominium project. This was going to be a temporary access until the <br />Parkway was constructed, and then they would have to construct a permanent access along Alii <br />Lani; and this would be deleted. But at this time, because of such opposition from the Park Place <br />residents, the Planning Director has worked out conditions with the Applicant to be able to begin <br />constructiononAliiLaniDrive. <br />Sosincethatoccurred,wehadtheApplicantnotifysurroundingpropertyownersfromthat <br />particular area; and since then we€ve received two additional Petitions for Standing. We€ve had <br />four people withdraw, correction, five people withdraw their Petitions for Standing. At this time, <br />we still have four that are pending, and these include Malcolm and Virginia Scott, James and <br />Karen Grimp --. <br />ALAMEDA:Could you show us what the letter is? <br />DARROW:Okay. Letter C, letter G, H and I. <br />ALAMEDA:The reason for the others to withdraw? <br />DARROW:The reason, I believe that the original, that these people had withdrawn, <br />again, because they were occupants of the Alii Park Place and once the Applicant had agreed to <br />move it further south that they had felt that that was accommodating to their needs. <br />ALAMEDA:Okay. <br />DARROW:The Planning Director is recommending that this permit be approved by <br />the Planning Commission. Are there any questions? <br />ALAMEDA:Yes. Commissioner Watanabe? <br />WATANABE: I have a question regarding that mauka-makai connector. You had <br />mentioned when we were at the south end of the parcel and we had, you know, these other five <br />people petitioning for a Contested Case Hearing status, according to what you described, that it <br />was going to be temporary. It was never considered a permanent mauka-makai connector? <br />DARROW:Correct. That€s actually addressed in the ordinance. It talks about a <br />temporary access and it addresses that in great detail; and then at such time that there was a <br />permanent access constructed, that the temporary access would be deleted. <br />3EXHIBIT E <br /> <br />