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
MCCALL:Theres, no, not to the conservation districts. <br />ALAMEDA:Thank you, Commissioner McCall. Commissioner Watanabe. <br />WATANABE:I had a follow up for, by the way, I like that addition. But I have a follow <br />up for the Director. I think he had some concerns about the wording -. <br />FUKE:Sight distance? <br />WATANABE:Well, yeah, maybe that also. But the Director expressed some concern <br />about the wording for the height limitation because once you subdivide various lots would not <br />abut anymore, the lots youre trying to protect the sight distance from. And so I think thats one <br />that wed want to address; and the other, I guess, would be this new one that was just brought up <br />withregardtothesightdistancethatMr.Fukeofferedupasaconcession.So,youknow,Isense <br />that the Commission as a whole is ready for a motion except maybe what we do need is some <br />clarification on how were going to work out these additional conditions. <br />YUEN:The height one, I would do this by having a separate condition saying <br />The height of any building shall not exceed that allowed in an RS district. <br />And as far as the consultation, was it the idea that, say you create these lots. Lets number them <br />one to five from top to bottom, okay? And is this in favor only of one piece of property? Is that <br />the idea or is it in favor of several pieces of property? <br />FUKE:Ultimately the applicant intends to have like CC&Rs that would try to <br />identify placement of dwellings or structures on each of the respective five lots. So the idea <br />behind that is that the internal five lots would pretty much like have their own self-policing <br />mechanism. The idea behind this condition was to provide some measure of potential relief to <br />the surrounding property owners, particularly the mauka property owners. <br />YUEN:Well, say you own Lot 3 and youre in the middle of the subdivision, are <br />you supposed to consult with people who are on the mauka end now after this -? <br />FUKE:No, thats not the intent. <br />YUEN:Only the person who owns Lot 1? <br />FUKE:Lot No. 1, correct. <br />YUEN:The mauka lot. <br />FUKE:Yes. <br />YUEN:Okay. And are you able to identify what lots are supposed to be consulted <br />with? Are they, you know, we have TMKs there somewhere. Id like to do this by TMK if we <br />could. <br />27EXHIBIT D <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.