2007-11-16 TKILGORE - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

DARROW: We did receive the letter from the applicant’s representative, dated th November 9, and I’m not sure if they addressed that issue within the comment letter. RHO: No, they don’t. DARROW: Yeah, it doesn’t look like they did. If we could defer that question to the applicant’s representative. Thank you. WATANABE: Thank you. Are there any other questions for staff? Then, may I call the applicants up? Or the applicants and their representative? I’d like to swear you in first, if I may. Would you please raise your right hands? Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth now before the Planning Commission? YEH: I do. KILGORE: I do. WATANABE: Okay. You may proceed with your testimony, but prior to providing any testimony, would you kindly state your name and address for the record. YEH: Sure thing. My name is Thomas Yeh. I’m attorney representing the applicant. And then with us here today -. And then my address is, business address is 85 West Lanikaula Street, Hilo, Hawaii. And then Mr. Kilgore is the applicant, so -. WATANABE: Thank you. KILGORE: My name is Matthew Kilgore with Koa Architects up in Waimea. My business is 65-1285 C Kawaihae Road, Kamuela, 96743. WATANABE: Thank you. You may proceed. YEH: Thank you. Well, what we wanted to do was – we were able to hear some of your questions and concerns – and what Mr. Kilgore wanted to do was to provide you with kind of a brief overview; it might answer some of the questions, give you some history of the project and how it’s come to be designed the way it is now. I think maybe the term “replication” wasn’t quite an accurate one; I don’t use that term myself too often. But anyway, he can tell you what this project is about, and then we can leave it up for questions. Thank you. KILGORE: Actually, I guess we can start up by saying due to the new shoreline certification from this year, earlier this year, that that severely reduced the buildable area of the site, so we did pull the building back quite a bit further than it was before. And in addition to that minimization of the site, the side yard setbacks were increased from the previous SMA Permit another 2 feet because we squeezed another floor into the building to try to get closer to our allowable unit count of 11 units. So our current envelope is actually quite a bit smaller than it was, say, in SMA Permit 318. As you can see from the rendering, we are proposing to maintain quite a bit of view corridor on the north side and also the south side of the project, and as well as right through the middle of the parking garage level of the project. So we are confident that the building will have a minimum impact on, say, a passerby from Alii Drive. EXHIBIT B 7