Laserfiche WebLink
other hand, you know, in the general public not everyone would take the time, shall we say, to <br />read through that or maybe even have the opportunity to read through that. So I’m wondering if <br />you were to amend that by inserting “strive for” you know, “it shall be a priority of the County to <br />strive for a minimum of 1000 of 1000 foot setback, no buildable space….” You see what I’m <br />saying? Then it makes it clear that it’s not mandatory, that in discretionary approvals this is the <br />goal but not necessarily mandatory. Whereas the way it reads now it’s more open to a <br />mandatory interpretation. And that I’m putting it on the record that you needn’t answer right <br />now. Maybe there’s something that you all in the Steering Committee might want to mull over, <br />cause it’s going to have another read in Kona and also another read or multiple readings with the <br />Council and you may be able to iron something out there. I think the point being is I don’t think <br />there’s such great objection to the concept of a 1000-foot open no build area, but is there <br />confusion as to how people interpret the law. <br />YUEN: Well, yeah, I don’t want to jump in as to whether the insertion of “strive <br />for” is substantive or not. It’s a little bit of a complicated analysis. But I do want to repeat that <br />this is not 1000-foot no-build setback in the sense of the Zoning, in the sense that you have a <br />setback on your lot, you know where you, like the Zoning Code has a 15-foot side yard setback <br />or a 20-foot front yard setback, or even in the sense that the State Statute has a 40-foot shoreline <br />setback. This is something that applies to discretionary land use approvals where the owner is <br />seeking a change in what they got by getting an SMA major permit, a rezoning, State Land Use <br />Boundary Amendment or something of that sort. <br />MELROSE: If I might just add. <br />WATANABE: Mr. Melrose. <br />MELROSE: The Director referred to the voting on this as consensus. The voting on <br />this language was unanimous at 12-0, all members present on this provision as written. <br />WATANABE: After much mulling over? <br />MELROSE: Yes sir. <br />WATANABE: Thank you. Okay, well, we have any other questions? I don’t mean to <br />ignore you, Ma’am, but I honestly don’t know your name. So maybe you can give your name <br />and address. <br />FUKUDA: Hi. My name is Tracy Fukuda. I work with Wilson Okamoto under Earl, <br />address 1907 South Beretania Street, Honolulu. <br />WATANABE: You want to chime in on any of this? <br />FUKUDA: No. <br />WATANABE: Yes. <br /> EXHIBIT C <br />10 <br /> <br />