2004-09-16 TCONTINENTALSMA 03-016

Home

here on the Change of Zone, State Land Use and SMA-009, be incorporated in this present proceeding so we dont have to repeat everything. GALDONES:Norman, do you see that as a problem? HAYASHI:Its not a problem. And all of the correspondences would be also included. GALDONES:So noted. LIM:Thank you. We have the same comment on proposed Condition No. 9 for SMA Use Permit 03-016, where wed request addition at the second line after the word "lot," where it says: "$15,000 upon the sale of each lot, up to a maximum of 11 lots, created by this permit." AndIguesswewouldalsoaddthesimilarconditionsasproposedbythePlanningDirector regarding the grading for the Phase 2 improvements for the Kula`imano, for the Pepeekeo Community Center, I mean, the Kula`imano Community Center for the Pepeekeo Community Association. GALDONES:Thank you. Commissioners, any questions of Mr. Lim? If not, we have one individual who has signed up to testify, Claudia Rohr. LIM:Excuse me. While Ms. Rohr is coming up, a procedural matter. We received a copy of a January 8, 2004, petition for standing in a contested case hearing by Eusebio Lapenia, Jr. And what happened was he submitted that just prior to the January hearing that we continued at our request to work with the community. So, technically, Mr. Lapenia has submitted a petition, you know, seven days prior to the first hearing on the SMA, which is today. I dont know whether he submitted his $100 or not, but I guess we would ask that the Commission take action on that. We understand that, I think Ms. Mendoza is here, who would testify that Mr. Lapenia has been participating in their discussions, and he is agreeable to withdraw it if he needs to. GALDONES:Norman? HAYASHI:Yes. As far as Mr. Lapenias request or petition for a contested case hearing, that was filed when the initial application was submitted, and he did file it in a timely manner. However, because of procedural, theres some procedural questions relative to notification requirement. We informed Mr. Lapenia that his petition would be returned to him, including his filing fee, and then he can reapply at the time that the notice, the applicant had resubmitted this notice for this application as well as for the, for this particular hearing. We have not received any new petition from Mr. Lapenia. We also informed Mr. Lapenia and his attorney at that time, Mr. David Frankel, of this meeting, so they were aware of the deadlines for filing of a new petition for standing. We have not received that petition. GALDONES:So, Norman, for all intents and purposes, a petition for a contested case hearing does not exist? HAYASHI:That is correct. 2