My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2003-07-18 tkapoho
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003
>
2003-07-18 tkapoho
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/14/2011 8:33:46 AM
Creation date
6/14/2011 8:33:42 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
MOORE:Thank you very much. IÓd like to address a couple of questions. <br />Just for the record, IÓd like to point out that IÓm representing this project. IÓm also one of <br />the part owners of the property. The Managing Partner is Vern Yamanaka, whoÓs here <br />today. So IÓm here in both capacity as part of this but also the representative, just to <br />make it clear for the record. <br />We have reviewed the conditions. Couple of concerns that we have about the existing <br />language, one of which a suggested amendment. And I apologize, <br />touch base on this, is that, clearly, we understand that the signals are needed now. The <br />previous condition had a five-year time limit on development. I think theyÓre intending <br />to move quicker. Their project can absolutely move quicker than the subdivision process <br />can with the construction plans. And as part of some suggested or proposed amendments, <br />IÓd like to offer one which would allow us some flexibility in that and, again, if <br />acceptable. But IÓd like to go through some other conditions if I can first. <br />Again, in general, we really appreciate the staff and then the coordination that has been <br />going on this in moving this through. And we thought it was important that we be on the <br />agenda as the prior action so that the two projects are talking to each other in <br />coordinating on this. We understand the importance of this. <br />The first condition, Condition B, I found out today that there is an existing driveway <br />taking access from the property; and if we have a no-access limitation completely, then <br />that driveway may be restricted. Norman is pointing to that location. So we would like <br />to include an exception for that driveway access. That serves the existing parcel and not <br />the property, so it serves the adjacent house. So itÓs just making sure that weÓre not <br />hurting somebody else as an adjacent property. <br />YUEN:Is that part of your rezoning, though? <br />MOORE:No, it is not part of the rezoning. I mean, itÓs part of our rezoned <br />area that theyÓre getting access over; and, again, we have no objections to that. But under <br />the current conditions, they could not use that portion of the property. <br />YUEN:I donÓt understand because if itÓs not part of this rezoning, then the <br />condition doesnÓt affect it. <br />MOORE:No, their access is over a part of this property, the driveway access. <br />YUEN:Oh, I see. <br />MOORE:So theyÓre actually, theyÓre accessing their driveway through this <br />property. So we would like to add an exception for that driveway access to the no-access <br />planting screen along Hawaii Belt Road frontage, except for that existing driveway <br />access. <br />FUJIKAWA:Okay. Just an add-on? <br />5 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.