My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2003-11-21 tplant
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003
>
2003-11-21 tplant
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/14/2011 3:51:45 PM
Creation date
6/14/2011 3:51:41 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
29
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
Supply can basically supply that with their existing facilities; and thatÓs their choice to do <br />that. We canÓt sit here and say you have to, we want you to do a bigger development so <br />that the other people who might want to develop can also share in that later on. <br />GALDONES:Mr. Fujikawa, you had a question? <br />FUJIKAWA:Yeah, on this Background Report and agency comment from <br />Department of Public Works, theyÓre the ones who gave us the comments on the access <br />to that road, 20-foot wide pavement in good condition. So thatÓs what weÓre basing on <br />right now -? <br />YUEN:Right. <br />FUJIKAWA:ItÓs the Public WorksÓ study, okay. Thank you. <br />GALDONES:Commissioner Kubota? <br />KUBOTA:Yeah, I just wanted to ask the Planning Director. You know, in the <br />original ordinance, the Conditions E and F that were theoretically supposed to have been <br />done and have been done according to the ApplicantÓs representative, would they have, <br />would that, at that time, those requirements, E and F, would have taken care of the needs <br />of that particular subdivision as they saw it at that time, correct? And if they -. <br />YUEN:I -. <br />KUBOTA:If they had, wait now, and if they had been done like the <br />ApplicantÓs representative said they had been done, would mean that everything is in <br />place for this new project, right? <br />YUEN:Then everything would be in place. But I think that the <br />subdivision that was done in 2002 did not, they did not make them realign Kulana Kea <br />and build it to collector standards as stated in E; and that they did not, I shouldnÓt say <br />they, we, in the Planning Department, did not make, require the intersection <br />improvements at Mamalahoa Highway because this was processed as a parcel <br />consolidation and resubdivision which did not increase the number of lots. In other <br />words, they were lots up there in a certain configuration and they just changed the <br />configuration of the lots and did not increase the number of lots; so it did not trigger this <br />condition of the rezoning ordinance. This condition of the rezoning ordinance would <br />have been triggered if they had done a 15,000-square foot lot subdivision, then they <br />would have had to have done all this work. But the consolidation/resubdivision, thereÓs <br />an exemption in the Subdivision Code that says you donÓt have to do things to full <br />standards when youÓre not increasing the number of lots and youÓre just changing where <br />the boundaries are between the lots. So thatÓs my take on what happened back in 2002. <br />So itÓs not true -. Say, they kept, say they werenÓt coming for this rezoning, all right? <br />They would have this 15,000-square foot zoning up there, but they couldnÓt just come in <br />20 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.