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
ALAMEDA:Who are you asking? <br />IWASHITA:I dont know. Whoever knows the answer? <br />YUEN:We had a letter in the file from the State that, where the State claims <br />ownership and fee of the Judd Trail by virtue of the Highways Act of 1892. What theyre saying <br />is there are portions of the Judd Trail that are physically in existence on the ground and can be <br />verified. There are maps that show the Judd Trail without enough detail to physically locate it on <br />the ground. And what theyre saying is there are portions where it has been obliterated, where <br />the physical description of it has been obliterated; and I believe there is no legal description of it. <br />We would be able to say that somewhere on mauka properties in an approximate location there <br />was a Judd Trail, but that you actually cant show it on the ground in certain locations. In this <br />portion of the property, very close to Alii Drive, though, you can. <br />IWASHITA:Well, you know, my concern is about the extent of this survey. Because in <br />mymindwhattheyshouldsay,andIdontknowifitdoes,isthatthemetesandboundssurvey <br />should include the portion of the Judd Trail from Alii Drive to the mauka boundary of this <br />property, wherever it may be located, whether on this property or adjoining, you know. But it <br />should follow, you know, the surveyor should be able to determine to the extent physically <br />possible; and by agreement with the owners in the end if, you know, theres no real physical <br />evidence to establish the location -. But there should be a clear understanding of the developer in <br />this case that, in fact, at the end of this process, theres going to be a survey of metes and bounds, <br />legal description of the Judd Trail from Alii Drive to the mauka boundary of this property. And <br />if thats not the case then . <br />MOORE:Presumably it extends off the property into the easement, you know, right <br />at the point where you see the walls ending on that map . <br />IWASHITA:Im not presuming to do the surveyors job. The surveyors job is to <br />locate the, is to locate the Judd Trail. Because title to the Judd Trail is not disputed, right? The <br />State owns the Judd Trail. Is that, on that point, is there an agreement? <br />MOORE:Oh, yeah. <br />LAU:Yes. <br />IWASHITA:Okay. Nobody is disputing the title. This is a classic example of an <br />unlocated, in this case, right-of-way, a trail, right, an old road, roadway. And so the only issue <br />that needs to be addressed in this application to me is to make it real clear that what the surveyor <br />is doing is not surveying a hundred feet of wall that he can find but to place on the ground, right, <br />the extension of the Trail up to the mauka boundary of this property. I just want to make sure <br />that thats the clear understanding of whats going to be done here. <br />LAU:May I make a suggestion? <br />IWASHITA:Id like an answer to that question first. <br />6EXHIBIT C <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.