My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2005-07-01 TKNIGHT
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2005
>
2005-07-01 TKNIGHT
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/14/2011 7:58:04 AM
Creation date
6/14/2011 7:58:02 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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
SPRINGER:Thank you. Commissioner Siracusa? <br />SIRACUSA:In that case, should we be clarifying that condition to say that upon the <br />end of the special use permit these structures shall be removed, to make that clear, so that we <br />dont end up with a whole bunch of structures on the property afterwards? <br />YUEN:No, not necessarily. And I agree with Mr. Darrows explanation. The tarp <br />structure is not to Code, so thats why we cant approve this with the idea that theyre just going <br />to use the tarp structure, continue to use the tarp structure as the area that they repair cars under. <br />As far as having to remove it, they may build something thats very well suited to the use of a <br />single family residence. They may build something thats like an additional carport with some <br />area for storage of tools. It could work with a single family residence in the future, and so <br />theres no need to say that they have to tear it down. <br />SIRACUSA:Okay, thank you for explaining that. Im also concerned, I know this area <br />verywell.Obviously,ImfromPuna.AndIamconcernedaboutleavingitopen-endedlikefive <br />years or until industrial zoning is located, especially since this applicant has been in violation for <br />I dont know how many years, but, it doesnt say here in this thing. But, at any rate, I should <br />think five years would be enough time; and we dont have to leave it even more open-ended <br />because its not really compatible with the surrounding area. If you look at those photographs, <br />theres native forest all around that lot. <br />YUEN:Its five years -, its whichever comes first. <br />SIRACUSA:Pardon? <br />YUEN:Its whichever comes first. The way its worded now it would not exceed <br />five years. <br />SPRINGER:I have a question in that regard. If commercial/industrial zoned lands do <br />not come available within a five-mile radius at the five-year, within the five-year timefame, what <br />then happens? Wouldnt another permit need to be applied for? <br />YUEN:He would either have to relocate or apply for an amendment to this permit. <br />The way its worded that amendment could not be administratively granted. It would have to go <br />to the Planning Commission. <br />SPRINGER:Thank you. Commissioner McCall, and then Alameda. <br />MCCALL:Yeah, I just have a quick question. Jeff, the area is zoned Ag-1? <br />DARROW:Correct. <br />MCCALL:These lots are one-acre or -? <br />DARROW:Correct. This is -. <br />3EXHIBIT B <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.