My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2005-12-02 TVURICH
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2005
>
2005-12-02 TVURICH
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/14/2011 4:03:26 PM
Creation date
6/14/2011 4:03:18 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
33
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
TORIGOE:Well, Ms. Leithead-Todd has a position. Maybe you should get that. <br />ALAMEDA:Okay. <br />LEITHEAD-TODD:I was just going to say that the discussion seems to be centering on the <br />existing landscaping plan for theexisting facility; and what we have in front of us is an <br />application for expansion of the facility. And perhaps instead of arguing about whether the <br />existing landscaping plan is compliant for the existing facility, we should limit our arguments to <br />whether the proposal for expansion of the facility should be approved or denied. <br />TORIGOE:Okay, just to limit our discussion to the photo, it sounds like <br />Mr. Eger has no particular objection to the use of the photo. In fact, maybe Mr. Eger you have <br />actually referred to it yourself and would like to use it yourself. <br />EGER:I dont need to use it, Mr. Torigoe, but I am suggesting to you that your <br />rulesaretolimitthisdiscussiontotheexceptionstothecontestedcasehearingwhichiswhatis <br />on your agenda. <br />TORIGOE:Right. And I think the Chairperson will try to do that. So at this point it <br />sounds like theres no real objection to the use of the photo. Well just proceed on that basis, on <br />the basis of it being used for purposes of oral argument. So, Mr. Chairman, if we can have the <br />applicant finish the oral argument and then allow Mr. Eger to proceed after that. <br />MR. VURICH:Okay. Another reason this was brought up is, Mr. Eger brought up the <br />landscaping right up, his first statement. <br />ALAMEDA:Okay. <br />MR. VURICH:And I, as I mentioned at the contested case hearing, I felt it was a great <br />disadvantage because we couldnt provide our visual aids to show what the property looked like. <br />And what we got were some photos that were crawling through the bushes to find a bad area or <br />whatever. And we were, let, my very first discussion with Larry Schneider was we needed to do <br />something about the back landscaping. Even though nobody could see it, including him, we <br />needed to do something before anybody had a, you know, changed it somehow. And then we <br />notified the County and we were told we were going to do, and we were told by the County to <br />give us in writing what we were going to do, and we did that. And we got back this letter from <br />the County stating that we are in violating of our landscaping. And we did everything, we went <br />th <br />right, and twice the time, not November 29, but a month earlier we sent the County the final <br />letter, the inspector came out and called us and said everything is fine. I just asked Mr. Yuen if <br />therewasanyotherthingwehadtodooristhereanythingtheCountyisgoingtoletusknow <br />that its all okay now. Asfar asplanting plants and having them grow fast, we did the best we <br />could. <br />EGER:Mr.Chairman,Ithinktheapplicantneedstoberemindedthatheisunder <br />oath. <br />MR. VURICH:What did I -? <br />10EXHIBIT B <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.