Laserfiche WebLink
Dr. Sugai. You have listed what you’re planning on building. The question that Commissioner <br />Iwashita brought up was the question of a traffic impact statement if another structure was built. <br />You currently have no plans to build anything other than what you’ve detailed to us here, <br />correct? <br />SUGAI: Yes. Originally our goal was to build a single 20,000-square foot <br />structure. But we’re also debating whether we should start with a smaller building and then <br />build another in time, put up another building, or just start with a single larger building because <br />of the economy. We were just looking at different options. <br />WOODWARD: Okay. But you’re still talking about the same use for that building? <br />SUGAI: Yes. <br />WOODWARD: Okay, very good. Do we have any other questions from Commissioners? <br />Okay, seeing none, you may be seated. Thank you, folks. Do I hear a motion? Commissioner <br />Domingo. <br />DOMINGO: Mr. Chairman, regarding the application of Brian Sugai, Rezoning <br />No. 09-101, I move for its, recommend for its, a favorable recommendation to the County <br />Council, for approval. <br />WOODWARD: Do we have a second? <br />ISHIBASHI: Second. <br />WOODWARD: Any discussion? <br />DOMINGO: Mr. Chairman? <br />WOODWARD: Yes, Commissioner Domingo. <br />DOMINGO: Although, you know, I have the strong concerns about it. And I’ve looked <br />at the recommendations, and it seems like the concerns originally expressed by the Planning <br />Department has been alleviated to an extent in which I feel comfortable in approving this <br />recommendation. As you indicated, that the primary concern was that of the traffic. But you <br />know, I’d just like to mention that the original recommendation for denial stated that the subject <br />request will not conform to the following goals and elements, goals and standards of the natural <br />beauty element of the General Plan. And then, you know, it pinpoints the bullets here, protect <br />scenic vistas and viewplanes. Now those were some of the reasons why a recommendation of <br />denial was made, based on that, along with traffic and other issues. But then, in the revised <br />submittal for approval, a recommendation for approval, then it states, however, development of <br />the property will not significantly reduce scenic views of Hilo Bay. Now, you know, again, what <br />I’m trying to stress is that somewhere procedurally something was left out. There’s no <br />communication. If the applicants upon receipt of a denial notification could have gotten together <br />6 <br /> EXHIBIT A <br /> <br />