My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2003-10-03 TRUTTER
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003
>
2003-10-03 TRUTTER
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/14/2011 10:52:32 AM
Creation date
6/14/2011 10:52:25 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
53
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
BELL:Yeah. <br />YUEN:Send those out. <br />THIBADEAU:Okay. <br />GALDONES:Commissioners, any further questions? Commissioner Springer. <br />SPRINGER:Thank you for your comments, and they are -, we did receive copies of <br />your written remarks. Have you had the opportunity to have discussions on these points with <br />the developer yet? <br />BELL:Yes, we have. In fact, I was a part of that planning group that he <br />mentioned, and we have been in contact. And the wonderful thing about it is that we talk. <br />SPRINGER:Okay. And these remain outstanding issues for you, however? <br />BELL:Yes. <br />SPRINGER:Thank you. <br />BELL:And we've transmitted those comments to the Planning Director. <br />SPRINGER:Thank you. <br />BELL:Oh, sorry. <br />GALDONES:Any further questions? Thank you, Ms. Bell. <br />BELL:Thank you. <br />GALDONES:Mr. Rothstein. <br />ROTHSTEIN:Aloha, my name is Jerry Rothstein. I live here in Kailua-Kona on the <br />`` <br />Island of Hawaii, and I represent PASH, Public Access Shoreline Hawaii. <br />We have a deep and abiding interest in Kohanaiki. It was our case, the PASH and Pilago vs. <br />` <br />the County of Hawaii and Nansay that 10 years ago put a stop to the development on this very <br />same site, a development which was totally out of place, totally incongruous. The <br />development was totally insensitive to the public's needs, and as a result, it led to a lawsuit <br />` <br />which went to the Hawaii Supreme Court and some history was made regarding Hawaiian <br />rights in that case. And the SMA permit was withdrawn, and for the last 10 years, it's been <br />sitting idle until a new development plan came along. And this time it was completely <br />different than the other one because we had a developer who was very sensitive to the <br />19 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.