My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2006-05-26 TRoyal_Alii
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2006
>
2006-05-26 TRoyal_Alii
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2011 2:59:15 PM
Creation date
6/13/2011 2:59:10 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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
For me from what I have seen, including the proposed new Condition No. 13, Im prepared to <br />proceed with the decision. But considering that Commissioner Graham and Commissioner <br />Iwashita have some concerns about this application, we will not have five votes in order to come <br />up with some kind of action, whether its going to be approval or not. So its pretty much what <br />would satisfy the concerns that Commissioner Iwashita and Commissioner Graham have in order <br />that they can make this decision and move this application forward. <br />ALAMEDA:Thank you, Commissioner Galdones. Let me try and make a proposal, <br />just from what Im hearing. It sounds like we should continue this to the next hearing. It sounds <br />like we should maybe draft some conditions so that we can look at them in the meantime as a <br />prep to the next hearing. It sounds like we should get some pictures, and encourage testimony <br />again, like Mr. Tyler so that we have that kind of evidence as well at our next hearing and maybe <br />ask SHPD, some other entities to come forward as well to comment at that time. And perhaps <br />then we might be ready for a decision. How does that sound? Commissioner Graham? <br />CommissionerIwashita? <br />IWASHITA:Thatsfine. <br />SALAVEA:Idliketomakealsoonerecommendation,thattheintervieweesfromthe <br />report be furnished the cultural report and made aware of when this item is on the agenda again <br />so that we can as much as possible confirm what is in the report. I found it, for myself, just a <br />little troubling that Mr. Tyler didnt receive the report and wasnt able to verify things that were <br />reported here. Cause for myself I think this is where I am skeptical, is I trust what I read and if <br />there are discrepancies and nobody, and its not ever brought to my attention, then I take it for <br />face value. <br />ALAMEDA:Okay. Let me ask our counsel then if the proposal be what we want to do <br />next, how do we -? Do we need to make a motion for that or do we need to ask the applicants if <br />theyre okay with that? <br />TORIGOEYeah, I think both of those would be a good idea. You know, see if the <br />applicant has any objections to this; and then if its agreeable then go ahead and have a motion to <br />continue in order to achieve those objectives. <br />ALAMEDA:Youve heard the discussion and the proposal. Are you okay? <br />LAU:Yes. The only item that Id like to comment on would be getting the State <br />involved. What I would propose is that we would write a letter to the State advising them that <br />there is a continued hearing, and whether they choose to show up or not is their decision. And so <br />what Im saying is lets invite them to the dance. If they dont want to dance, well go on <br />without them. <br />ALAMEDA:Okay, that sounds good, sounds good to me. Is there a motion on the <br />table? <br />SALAVEA:Can I make a comment? <br />ALAMEDA:Sure, go ahead. <br />23EXHIBIT C <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.