My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2009-08-28 TKONACOUNTRYCLUB
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2009
>
2009-08-28 TKONACOUNTRYCLUB
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/14/2011 9:38:17 AM
Creation date
6/14/2011 9:38:16 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
WATANABE: Okay. I donÓt have the template wording. I know the typical is a 60-foot <br />setback from the public highway, right? <br />EMLER: Something like that. That would be good enough for us; any vehicular <br />security gate shall be located a minimum of 60 feet from any Cou <br /> <br />WATANABE: Okay, that sounds good. Mr. Fuke, is that something that is acceptable? <br /> <br />FUKE: We have no objection to it. <br /> <br />WATANABE: Okay. With that, then, letÓs see, where are we going to place this? Which, <br />we are running out of letters, yeah? And we certainly donÓt want it to be after S, I donÓt think. <br />Actually thatÓs T now because we renumbered. Shall we say -? <br /> <br />LEITHEAD TODD: Maybe in E. <br /> <br />WATANABE: You want to insert it in E? Okay, so shall we agree that we will insert the <br />standard language for requiring a 60-foot setback, within Condition E, from any County <br />dedicable -? County ÐdedicatedÑ road, right? Well, if we say ÐdedicableÑ and they create to <br />dedicable standards within the private property, then theyÓll never meet Î so County Ðdedicated.Ñ <br /> <br />EMLER: ÐCounty dedicatedÑ is fine with me because the condition of accepting a <br />road would then be if they made that gate too close to the road, theyÓd have to set it back, I <br />would think. <br /> <br />WATANABE: Yeah, yeah. <br /> <br />EMLER: They would have to move it. <br /> <br />WATANABE: Exactly. I think that would be good for you, yeah? Mr. Hayashi, do you <br />have comments? <br /> <br />HAYASHI: Yes. As far as placement of that particular condition, we can label it after <br />Condition E; so that would be a new Condition F, then all the other Conditions will move back <br />down. <br /> <br />WATANABE: Okay, cause, yeah, I know typically we have that as a separate, yeah, the <br />standard language. <br /> <br />HAYASHI: Yes. <br /> <br />WATANABE: Okay, that will be good. And then that would also affect the renumbering <br />of the new N, etc. But I think weÓve got the gist of it, right? WeÓre all good? Okay. If we are <br />settled then on the conditions, then -. Ms. Bowman? <br /> <br />BOWMAN: Are we taking vote? <br /> <br />EXHIBIT A <br />11 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.