My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2004-07-02 TDJSMLL
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2004
>
2004-07-02 TDJSMLL
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/14/2011 8:08:38 AM
Creation date
6/14/2011 8:08:32 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
31
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
might provide the opportunity, when the County, you and the Public Works Department <br />can really look at how are we going to deal with this upstream waterway as it goes <br />through this neighborhood. You know, that might be the time cause these house <br />obviously were built way before there was, you know, real understanding about where <br />the stream-ways were versus the fringes. So, I just would like to speak in favor of <br />allowing this quality project to go forward. Thank you. <br />SPRINGER:Thank you. Commissioners, are there any questions of the <br />testifier? Seeing none, thank you all for testifying before us this morning. Id like to <br />invite now the Applicants representative toreturn to the table. <br />ALAMEDA:Commissioner Springer, I have a question. I was just wondering <br />whenwould it be appropriate for me to make public for the record Public Works <br />documents we dont have in front of us. <br />SPRINGER:What Id like to offer is the opportunity for the Applicants <br />representativetorespondiftheycaredtoanyofthecommentsthatweremadein <br />testimony and then when we go into discussion that would be the appropriate time. <br />ALAMEDA:Okay. Thank you. <br />SPRINGER:Youre welcome. Mr. Moore, do you have any response to make, <br />given the testimonies weve heard. <br />MOORE:More in context. You know, again, we talked about the Base <br />Flood Elevations, which is theoretical. The flooding is not. We understand that. And <br />there is a problem there, it is not caused by the Applicant; and, again, weve looked at <br />that. Again, the flooding is there, it will be there and it will continue to be there in the <br />future until, you know, either major changes are made or -. You know, it was just, the <br />people have built in places thats a wonderful neighborhood; but it is in a flood zone or <br />floodway, and theres not a lot that we can do with that. What we can look at is do we <br />impact it in terms of the regulations, and we dont; can we take care of the drainage <br />situation, and we believe we have. We believe that weve come up a process of, makes it <br />a little better, not a whole lot. Cause if were in a bad situation, but it doesnt add to it, <br />and thats really the standard here that weve been held to. And we believe that Public <br />Works has done a, done its responsibility in making us go through all of the necessary <br />hoops. <br />There is another requirement that we need to comply with all of the regulations, which <br />ties us into the FEMA regulations, as well as the grading permits and everything else, <br />which is what Yen has been looking at. <br />You know, with that, I think the Applicant is sensitive to the neighborhood and we need <br />to know that. You know, were going to be there a long time, theyre going to be there a <br />long time. You know, we are willing to talk to them. We believe that that is an <br />appropriate way do it, you know, just us and them talking. You know, they have certain <br />20 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.