My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2005-12-02 TKULANA_KEA
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2005
>
2005-12-02 TKULANA_KEA
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/14/2011 4:06:33 PM
Creation date
6/14/2011 4:06:14 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
31
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
ALAMEDA:Commissioner McCall. <br />MCCALL:A simple thing would be to ask that they develop a conservation plan <br />through NRCS. Thats frequently whatis done with leasehold properties. If, like say when <br />Brewer was leasing properties, they would say that the person leasing the property needs to have <br />a conservation plan with NRCS and follow the plan, which would keep these drainage areas <br />going and that type of thing. <br />SIRACUSA:Thats agood point because that is always done for Ag land anyway, yeah. <br />ALAMEDA:Director? <br />YUEN:Thats a very good point. And its a kind of plan more than a drainage <br />studythat is needed here, is the kind of thing that NRCS does, is a conservation plan. Im just <br />tryingtoremember,theNRCSdoes,Ivehadsomediscussionwiththemwheretheydontlike <br />us to require NRCS plans because the NRCS process is supposed to be voluntary. <br />MCCALL:Yeah. But there are leasees that do exactly that. <br />YUEN:Where the lessor makes them do it. <br />MCCALL:Yeah, the lessor. Brewer out in Kau made it a requirement. <br />YUEN:Well, yeah. Well, that may be the best way to deal with it. It may be <br />some of the things that we had talked about with the NRCS where they felt were more, were not <br />really their area because they were more residential. So let me mull this over a little bit. I think <br />we do need some, based on what has been said, we need some kind of a condition here because <br />there is an existing problem. <br />SIRACUSA:My -. <br />ALAMEDA:Commissioner Siracusa. <br />SIRACUSA:Remember I said I had a question of Mr. Fuke. And the question is having <br />heard what the testifiers said about the road conditions and about the drainage, would you like to <br />address those two issues for us from the applicants point of view? <br />FUKE: Sure. Thank you very much. Thanks for this opportunity. First of all, Id <br />like make clear that what this project is designed to do and all of the infrastructure requirements, <br />you know, the developer as I mentioned earlier is trying to be responsible. And, you know, <br />theres really like obviously no short cut except that theyre trying to, theres no except. Theres <br />no really short cut from an infrastructure standpoint; and let me explain why. People may <br />disagree with the rationale. <br />First of all, from, relative to water, the water system, I mean, you know, there was a statement <br />made that the Water Department is going to be putting in that system - absolutely not. The <br />waterline obligation is a part of this condition. The Water Department will not put that in. <br />Without that system coming in, that area will not be able to have water, fire hydrants. With the <br />23EXHIBIT D <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.