2003-06-06 TWOOD - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

HAYASHI:Thank you, Madam Chair. Before we go into the actual he portion, as you would recall there were two individuals that, or parties that requested or filed a Petition for Standing. One was Michael and Kimberly Lacates and the second was Orchidland GulsonÓs LLC. On, I believe it was July 19, 2002 the Commission granted standing to these individuals. However, on October 26, 2002, both parties requested that they be allowed to withdraw their Petition for Standing. So, at this point in time, itÓs, I think, in order for the Commission to act on the request for withdrawal. SPRINGER:Thank you, Norman. Can you continue with your presentation now, then? HAYASHI:Yes. With that, as you recall at the last meeting in Hilo, we had requested that this application be continued. And the reason for that was that in reviewing the petition that was submitted or amended request that was submitted by the Applicant, they also requested that the Condition 8 be amended. And Condition 8 was basically to, well, currently, Condition 8 states that the operation of this, the uses within this facility would be limited to daylight hours. And the Applicant is requesting that the operation begin, or the facility be, the uses within this facility begin at 6:00 a.m. up until 9:00 p.m. in the evening. And, secondly, in that Condition 8, it also restricts, or it was granted with certain uses allowed. One of the uses that theyÓre proposing is a restaurant or food service uses, and that was not included in the original request; therefore, the Applicant is requesting that those food service uses be also be part of this particular permit. Also, at the last meeting, there was an individual that spoke, one of the adjoining property owners, who indicated that there was some, excuse me, some grubbing activity that occurred on the subject property. We went back after that meeting and checked with the Department of Public Works as to whether a grubbing permit or gr issued for that particular property. We were informed that no grading permit was, or grubbing permit was issued. However, it could have been that the individual -. I mean, the grubbing was consisting of less than one acre; therefore, no grubbing permit would be required. A subsequent site inspection by the staff verified that the entire property was not grubbed. The perimeter boundary of the property was still in its native vegetative state. Therefore, on that basis, we did not further pursue the issue. SPRINGER:Thank you, Norman. HAYASHI:And that concludes the staffÓs report, unless you have any questions. SPRINGER:Commissioners, do you have any questions for Mr. Hayashi? Commissioner Kubota? 2