2007-08-31 TIBBETSON - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

GRAHAM: Excuse me? MATSUKAWA: May I stand? GRAHAM: You may. And please start with your name and address if you would. MATSUKAWA: Thank you. My name is Mike Matsukawa. My address is 75-5751 Jt`jhmhGhfgv`x-Hll`ssnqmdxfor Mr. Dean Kaiawe, the intervdmnqvgnlr`krnoqdrdms- For those of you who were with us at the beginning of this proceeding, there was an original skirmish of some sorts over what is the Commirrhnmlritqhrchbshnm-In other words, was it within your responsibility as Commissioners to look at the deed restriction of the 1915 deed? A decision was made that you would, although I believe your agency is competent to look at all legal issues. A decision without objection from the parties was to allow that legal question of what can and cannot be done on the premises be separated from this application and be left to the Circuit Court for determination. The case proceeded, therefore, on the basis that assumption must be made that sgdgntrdsg`slrmnvsgdqdv`rvalidly put there, because the issue of use was bifurcated out of this proceeding and sent to the Circuit Court. As things have turned out there is a Circuit Court case now pending that was not pending at the time the application first came in. So in our proposed findings we point out that as a result there is a possibility now that if you grant the permit application the Circuit Court could say in the separate Circuit Court action, whhbgvdludkds+vdkk+lnudcenqv`qd, could decide that the use is illegal, it goes beyond the restriction that the deed covenant put on the use of the land. So the question like we put out in our proposed findings is that is this reasonable for the Planning Commission to, in essence, if you grant the application knowing th`ssgdqdlr`onssibility that the Circuit Court might say, well, thank you but this use is prohibited -. You did not want to address this issue and you allowed that issue of use to come to the Circuit Court. So if that scenario were to happen based on the PlannimfChqdbsnqlrqdbnlldmc`shnmr+xntlqdfnhmfsn give Mr. Ibbetson an unconditionakodqlhs-Mnsghmf+sgdqdlrno condition being proposed that says if the application were granted it would be subject to whatever the Circuit Court might rule as far as the issue of use and the deed covenant. So what happens then? Our argument is in this scenario it would be unreasonable to grant an application under those circumstances. Thank you. GRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. Matsukawa. Do we have any questions from the Commissioners? All right, thank you. Mr. Yuen, please, name and address first. XTDM9Xdr+HllBgqhrXtdm, Planning Director, 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3. First I want to apologize to the Planning Commission, staff, and the public for being so late this morning. Our position is that the Planning Commission should grant the special permit with the conditions attached to the findings of fact, conclusions of law, and Decision and Order. This is simply a special permit for a bed and breakfast. The impacts are not significantly different than that of a Single family home. The bed and breakfast with the conditions presented can be operatechm`v`xsg`slrbnmrhrsdmsvith the presence of the graves on the easement on the property. EXHIBIT A 5