My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2009-10-02 TBOSCHETTI
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2009
>
2009-10-02 TBOSCHETTI
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/14/2011 10:51:23 AM
Creation date
6/14/2011 10:51:19 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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
IWASHITA:Thank you, Mr. Chair. So all of this land that’s part of the application is <br />Land Court property. And there is no, on this parcel that was intended to be the road is not <br />otherwise a buildable lot, yeah. But there’s no reservation of any access rights over this parcel <br />on the transfer certificate of title? <br />LIM:Not in favor of Mr. Paiva, no. <br />IWASHITA:But as to the only, it provides access to your client’s property? There are <br />some access rights reserved over this roadway? <br />LIM:That’s correct. <br />IWASHITA:It’s just curious to me that Land Court would approve a land-locked <br />property. I mean, it just makes no sense to me. But that’s, in fact, your review of the document, <br />that’s what is? <br />LIM:So far anyway. I believe what happened, like I said, was this was <br />supposed to be all jointly developed as a project area and it somehow, you know, didn’t work out <br />way back when, and so they started selling off pieces of property; and that’s why we have the <br />issue. <br />IWASHITA:Well. But you know as well as I do, you know, in Land Court everything <br />is, all the details are paid attention to. So I -. <br />LIM:What we think is that Mr. Paiva’s lot was supposed to have access across <br />this Parcel 80, which looks like a roadway lot, but the way that the deed was drawn was <br />incorrect. That’s what I think we’re going to find. But we still don’t know that for sure. <br />IWASHITA:Oh, when it was originally conveyed? <br />LIM:When it was originally conveyed it said that his lot was subject to an <br />access easement when it should have been saying together with an access easement. <br />IWASHITA:I see. Okay, well, Mr. -. <br />WOODWARD:Commissioner Ogata. <br />IWASHITA:Mr. Chair? <br />WOODWARD:Sorry, I’m sorry. Go ahead. <br />IWASHITA:My concern is that, you know, but in fact he has been able to use the land <br />to access his property and he has built a house on it. So to me the impression I would have is <br />there’s, unless he had built his house with cash, he’d have to have lender involved. And <br />somebody had to insure over this problem, I mean, if they, or they thought it wasn’t a problem. <br />But, anyway, my concern as to our involvement is that sending a favorable recommendation <br />10 <br />EXHIBIT A <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.