|
question then, you know, is that can you not then, therefore, look at this project and, on
<br />that basis of what youÓre recommending for the Project District, make your
<br />recommendation accordingly? ThatÓs all weÓre saying. The recommendation that I had
<br />structured, you know, for the CommissionersÓ consideration, is predicated largely on the
<br />DirectorÓs reason for recommending the Project District zoning. There are a few changes
<br />only in relation to the conditions; but aside from that theyÓre
<br />WeÓre not representing a project, you know, through conditions that would be
<br />significantly different from what you see on the board and whatÓs contained in the
<br />application.
<br />FUJIKAWA:Okay. Thank you, Mr. Fuke. Commissioners, you have an
<br />question with Mr. Fuke or the Planning Director?
<br />KUBOTA:Mr. Chair?
<br />FUJIKAWA:Go ahead, Ms. Kubota.
<br />KUBOTA:IÓd like to clarify my comments earlier in the morning to the
<br />Planning Director in regards to procedure. I guess, it didnÓt dawn on me what it was that
<br />was bothering me but it was something that was bothering me. An
<br />Mr. Fuke give his testimony, it brought to light the fact that we were operating under a
<br />set -- I hate to call it past practice because I donÓt think that holding to, solely to past
<br />practice is the right way to go -- but we have a set of procedures that we follow, like a set
<br />of past practice. Okay. Now, without making any changes to that, weÓre suddenly
<br />confronted with a, IÓm suddenly confronted with a recommendation from the Department
<br />that is entirely different from what I was used to; and I think that was really bothering
<br />me. Because the reasons for the deferral that the Planning Director postured in the
<br />recommendations are similar, that, that could apply to any that we considered before. So
<br />I wondered why this particular one was so different that it had to be deferred, other than
<br />the fact that the size and the conceptual design is there. And I donÓt see that that differs
<br />from any other applications that we received and processed. So I couldnÓt see any
<br />difference. And so I kept asking, what is the difference, what is the difference in this
<br />particular one that is different from all the rest that we processed? And part of the thing
<br />thatÓs bothering me, I guess, is that it came upon a Commissioner, I. And I donÓt know
<br />how you others feel, but I feel that I didnÓt expect this change in procedure without being
<br />notified because these are, I guess, rules that we have and our rules permit concurrent
<br />processing. And weÓve never had what I just heard as a nice word, bifurcation. So it
<br />bothered me, and I kept looking for a reason for it, and I still donÓt feel IÓm satisfied.
<br />FUJIKAWA:Okay. Commissioner Graham?
<br />KUBOTA:Wait a minute, wait a minute. Just before I leave, I wanted to ask
<br />the Planning Director, is it my understanding that, hereafter, hereafter, all, what shall I
<br />say, applications for SMA will be looked upon at, on individual basis? It will not be any,
<br />we will not, they will be bifurcated or they may not be bifurcated, they will not, we will
<br />not automatically process them concurrently?
<br />20
<br />
<br />
|