My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2004-06-04 DJSM
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2004
>
2004-06-04 DJSM
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2011 3:25:14 PM
Creation date
6/13/2011 3:25:04 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
43
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
FUJIKAWA:You may proceed. <br />TSUKAZAKI:By the way, the Applicant has reviewed the Department's Background <br />Report and Recommendation and accepts it, has no objections to it. <br />FUJIKAWA:Okay. <br />TSUKAZAKI:In regard to the material received this morning, although we obviously <br />haven't had time to read it very carefully, it appears to me that two things, some of the neighbors' <br />concerns really relate to whether this particular property should be zoned at all for office use, and <br />I do not believe that that particular issue is on the table at this point, or at least from the <br />Background documents that I see, this hearing has not been based on any action to nullify <br />zoning, to take away any rights that the landowner has. I think quite correctly the Planning <br />Department noted that the plan approval process really could not be administered because a time <br />condition in the ordinance had not been satisfied. So the Planning Department advised my client <br />that that particular requirement of the ordinance had to be addressed first before there could be <br />any plan approval process, and so I believe that's the nature of this application and the nature of <br />this hearing. So I believe with regard to the issues regarding whether the ordinance is valid and <br />so on, I think those are issues for another quorum, another proceeding. <br />With regard to the -, some of the concerns about the impacts of the project, I believe some of <br />them would look to be appropriate for the plan approval process. And if this extension is granted <br />on the request to be able to submit documents for plan approval, then that process would be the <br />appropriate one to address many of the concerns of the neighbors. <br />Some of the other concerns relating to FEMA, the grading issues, perhaps in combination with <br />drainage issues, I believe those are issues within the jurisdiction of other agencies. The project <br />has grading permits issued by the Department of Public Works. I believe the record indicates <br />that FEMA has allowed a map revision to federal Flood Insurance Rate Maps, and Public Works <br />has approved that, as well as the grading permits that exist currently for the project. And so I <br />believe that if there are issues relating to those grading permits, whether things were done <br />properly or improperly, there is an appropriate agency for those concerns to be taken. <br />So, again, I guess in a certain way, I'm saying that although I've only been able to look through <br />this correspondence served on us this morning very quickly, it appears that -, there appear to be <br />many issues to me that are really not relevant, directly relevant to the scope of this hearing, and <br />so it's not possible for us to address all of those here. <br />FUJIKAWA:Any questions? Commissioner Springer, you have a question with the <br />Applicant? <br />SPRINGER: Well, more I'd like the Planning Director's comments. <br />FUJIKAWA:Go ahead. <br />4 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.