My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
PL-REZ-2022-000033 D. BLANCETT TEESTIMONY (PETITION) 12.11.2022
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Board Packets
>
2023
>
2023-10-19 Leeward CANCELED
>
Item #1 Kona Three LLC (PL-REZ-2022-000033)
>
PL-REZ-2022-000033 D. BLANCETT TEESTIMONY (PETITION) 12.11.2022
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/13/2022 7:19:59 AM
Creation date
10/9/2023 10:05:53 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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
this intersection (and lower Lako Street) in accordance with the Ordinance requirements. Both of these <br /> intersections were built before or concurrently with Increment I of Kona Vistas. <br /> Numerous site layouts have been considered over the years, what I think was the first one that was submitted <br /> to the County in 1983 is attached. In accordance with your instructions and the request of the neighbors and <br /> Councilwoman Villegas, we continue to work on a site plan that can accommodate an entry onto the Belt Road, <br /> and will get that plan to you once we are confident it will work properly. <br /> Thanks, <br /> Ric <br /> From:Jackson, Maija [mailto:Maija.Jackson@hawaiicounty.gov] <br /> Sent:Wednesday,July 24, 2019 1:34 PM <br /> To: Richard Wheelock;zendo@zendokern.com <br /> Cc: Darrow,Jeff <br /> Subject: Kona Three Project <br /> Hi Richard &Zendo- <br /> Can you provide an update on the status of when you will be resubmitting an application to amend Ord. 02-131 <br /> for the Kona Three LLC project?We continue to receive testimony and petitions opposed to the project (see <br /> attached). <br /> I also need some clarification regarding the highway access. I recall Richard telling me in the past that the <br /> original ordinance and rezone project only envisioned and required one access onto the highway(Lako Street); <br /> however, a review of our files indicates the proposed subdivision map (attached) submitted with the original <br /> rezone application proposed two accesses onto the highway and the narrative in the application states DOT <br /> granted two access points to the landowner at the time. Condition L in Ord. 02-131 refers to improving the <br /> intersections on the highway. This condition has carried through without amendment from the original <br /> ordinance, which implies that the County Council never approved dropping a second access point onto the <br /> highway. <br /> Please clarify your understanding of the highway access requirements and let me know whether the <br /> resubmitted application will propose a second highway access to the RM-zoned lands. Give me a call if you <br /> would like to discuss. <br /> 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.