Laserfiche WebLink
have all four of them here. Will Robin Black, Jordan Stewart, Bruce Hansen, Nancy Cabral <br />please step forward. I need one more seat up there. Are there any other people whose name I <br />haven't called that are going to testify on this case? Okay, none. Okay, all four of you, can you <br />kindly raise your right hand. Do you swear to tell the truth on this matter now before the <br />Hawai`i Planning Commission? <br />TESTIFIERS:I do. <br />FUJIKAWA:Thank you. You want to state your name and your address first of all. <br />BLACK:My name is Robin Black. My address is 43 East Lanikaula Street in Hilo. <br />FUJIKAWA:And the next person. <br />STEWART:Jordan Stewart, 257A Ululani Street in Hilo. <br />FUJIKAWA:Okay. <br />HANSEN:Bruce Hansen, 82A Kaiwiki Road, Hilo. <br />CABRAL:Nancy Cabral, 591 Alawaena Road, Hilo. <br />FUJIKAWA:Okay. Now let's start with Robin, you may proceed. <br />BLACK:Okay. Several things. The neighbors and I have been quite concerned <br />about this for some time, and one of the reasons that we were getting more and more concerned <br />is that there seemed to be a situation where it was kind of like it's easier to ask for forgiveness <br />than it is to ask for permission, so let's go ahead. And we live there, this is our home. And <br />because it's close to my heart and I was concerned I might become emotional, we prepared a <br />group statement and we all signed it and I've asked Jordan to read it to you. <br />However, following that, one of my neighbors, Mr. Aguiar, who is undersigned on the letter, told <br />me that he felt I did not address the traffic concerns enough and so he wrote his own letter and <br />asked me to read it, so I will read his letter first. I'm sorry. First I'll let Jordan read our group <br />letter. <br />STEWART:"Dear Members: We the undersigned have concerns regarding the <br />property located at TMK: (3) 2-2-028:029 in Hilo. We thank you for this opportunity to express <br />these concerns. As we understand it this hearing is a request to amend the conditions stated in <br />Ordinance 92-91. We feel strongly that this request be denied, for several reasons. <br />"Originally zoned RS-10, the County Council passed Ordinance 89-50 and the property was <br />rezoned to create a small subdivision of homes. Since construction in the flood plain proved <br />expensive, this concept was changed to build a single, commercial structure and the County <br />Council amended Ordinance 89-50, resulting in Ordinance 92-91. A large and spacious older <br />home that graced the property for decades was sold and moved off the premises. For whatever <br />9 <br /> <br />