My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2008-10-03 TSONOMURA
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2008
>
2008-10-03 TSONOMURA
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/14/2011 10:53:47 AM
Creation date
6/14/2011 10:53:46 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
WATANABE: Okay, you may begin your testimony. <br />BRANCO-AZEVEDO: Well, actually, I represent my family. We are life-long residents of the <br />area. And we’re just really concerned with the property being divided to half-acre lots. We’re <br />definitely opposed to half acre ag lots. It’s just not feasible to properly farm on a half acre lot. <br />That’s our concern. <br />And second of all the traffic, the impact that it will make to the area is a big concern of ours. <br />One-acre, that’s fine. Also, if it’s definitely going to be a half acre lot we have a little <br />restrictions, we would want to make sure that there’s not an ohana dwelling on the property or <br />condos which would eventually add up to 40 something dwellings in the area. And we just don’t <br />think that we could withstand that. <br />WATANABE: Okay. Anything further? <br />BRANCO-AZEVEDO: No, that would be it. <br />WATANABE: I believe as the recommendation is proposed now there are restrictions <br />on ohana dwellings on the half-acre. I’m correct, am I not right, Mr. Yuen? I believe that was <br />one of the conditions that they, you know, condominimization, and that it would be recorded in <br />the deed. <br />YUEN: Yes. <br />WATANABE: And the only way that they could change that is to come back to the <br />Planning Commission and also get approval from the County Council. So the way it’s stated <br />right now it’s already included in that, so it wouldn’t double the density. However, I would like <br />to open it up to the other Commissioners to see if they have any other questions they might have <br />of your testimony. Mr. Iwashita? <br />IWASHITA: As I understand your testimony, Ma’am, you want to, if it’s going to be <br />allowed to go forward you want to limit it to one acre as smallest? <br />BRANCO-AZEVEDO: That’s what we would prefer, the smallest, one acre, correct. <br />IWASHITA: And why is that? <br />BRANCO-AZEVEDO: Again, just for future development; and if they are going to be using it as <br />an agricultural district or agricultural lands, a half an acre is pretty difficult to sustain agricultural <br />farming. Second of all, it would just impact, lengthen the impact in our area. <br />IWASHITA: Okay. So my impression then is you want to keep this area as <br />agricultural and so one acre is the smallest it should be? <br />BRANCO-AZEVEDO: Yeah, yeah. And I think, I believe in the General Plan there is some use <br />of urban, some knowledge of urban use, I think, in the area. I’m not real certain, but we just <br />don’t want urban use right now in the area. And -. <br /> EXHIBIT C <br />2 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.