My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2008-11-24 TCROWN
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2008
>
2008-11-24 TCROWN
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/14/2011 3:53:33 PM
Creation date
6/14/2011 3:53:30 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
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: That he wasn’t notified -. <br />HAYASHI: That he didn’t receive the notice. And the notice went out on November <br />th <br />17. <br />WATANABE: Okay. For the record -. <br />BLANCATO: The notification went out the day – I understood that we were only <br />allowed a week to file a contested case – and the notification went out that day. We had to roll <br />into Kona and file the contested case hearing. That’s when we were notified; one week prior to <br />this meeting was when the notification did go out. <br />WATANABE: Okay. With all due respect, Mr. Blancato, a timely application for a <br />contested case hearing has been filed with the $100 fee, etc. and that will be considered later. So <br />the important part for us to proceed is to establish that you were notified in a timely fashion. <br />And I believe that condition has been satisfied, yeah? <br />BLANCATO: Is one week considered a timely fashion? <br />IWASHITA: Mr. Chair, I guess my concern is that, I don’t know if there was a check on <br />whether there were any other proximate owners that were entitled to notice and did not receive <br />notice, so that -. <br />WATANABE: According to what I can determine so far, it seems that Ms. McCullough <br />also indicated she wasn’t noticed, but she is also the one that filed the contested case. <br />IWASHITA: I understand that, but if it’s -. <br />WATANABE: What I’m trying to get to is Danette Mettler, if I might -. Mr. Hayashi? <br />HAYASHI: Yes, as far as the notice requirements, once an applicant submits their <br />application, they have ten days after submitting the application to the Planning Department to <br />notify the surrounding property owners; that will be the first notice. Once the hearing date has <br />been established, the applicant is again required to send a second notice to the surrounding <br />property owners within ten days after – excuse me. <br />WATANABE: Not ten days, yeah? <br />HAYASHI: After receiving notice from the Director of the date of the scheduled <br />hearing but not less than ten days prior to the hearing, they need to notify the property owners. <br />So apparently the gentleman received it less than ten days of the hearing. <br />WATANABE: So we have defect in the notice, the second notice. <br />EXHIBIT D <br />8 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.