My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2003-11-07 TRUTTER
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003
>
2003-11-07 TRUTTER
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/14/2011 11:27:03 AM
Creation date
6/14/2011 11:26:56 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
51
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
closer you do it the more in jeopardy itÓs going to be; and itÓs going to wash away in 20 <br />years. So thatÓs it. I thank you very much. <br />SPRINGER:Thank you, Mr. Rothstein. Are there any other, are there any <br />questions or comments from the Commissioners for the testifier? I have a few questions <br />for the Planning Director based on Mr. RothsteinÓs testimony. Regarding the Gold or <br />Silver standards, Audubon standards, as represented in Condition No. 66, can you <br />respond as to why the Silver rather than the Gold was pursued? <br />YUEN:As I wrote in a letter to the Planning Commission, it would not be <br />proper for us to put a condition that required the use of a particular paid consultant for a <br />project without the consent of the Applicant; and in this case the Applicant consented to <br />Silver. To put this in some perspective, as Mr. Rothstein has said, and I think as youÓll <br />look, as youÓll know by reading the conditions, the conditions on this golf course are by <br />far the most comprehensive and stringent from an environmental point of view that have <br />ever been put on a golf course project in this County. So I would like to have that in <br />perspective. The Applicant has volunteered to meet the concerns to the point of going to <br />the Silver certification. We seem to be then discussing primarily an issue of what plants <br />are chosen for the landscaping of the facility. I would, again, put into perspective that <br />weÓre dealing with an SMA permit for an area that is zoned for w <br />visitor and residential and commercial units that has been scaled down to 500 residential <br />units and where the entire shoreline, 45 acres is a public park, with public park facilities <br />put into them, and IÓm sure that, and then, which is a condition that goes far beyond <br />anything done on any project ever approved. I donÓt think I can, thereÓs any, thereÓve <br />been any controls over any of the other coastal resort-type projects that limit the kinds of <br />plants that they put it on a landscaping project. <br />SPRINGER:Mr. Yuen, if I understood correctly from Mr. RothsteinÓs <br />testimony, one of the benefits of the Gold standard is the, I think it was 20 visits by the <br />Audubon Society to assure conformance. With Silver standard, there are 9 visits. Any <br />comments with regard to conformance, assurance, the differences between the 9 and 20 <br />visits? <br />YUEN:Well, just that by taking the Silver standard, it is far in <br />any permit. There was a golf course that actually was never been developed and it, <br />because it involved, it did not involve a residential component. So some of the <br />differences between Gold and Silver didnÓt, that make Gold more difficult did not apply <br />in that case. <br />SPRINGER:Thank you. With regard to Condition 70 or N.70 that lining should <br />be comprehensive rather than limited to those holes below a thousand feet behind of sea <br />level, do you have any comment? <br />YUEN:As you get farther away the ground rises and thereÓs a greater lava <br />area that would absorb any nutrients. <br />29 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.