2007-12-12 TIBBETSON - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

The subject application is identified with a blue dot that is just south of the Kona Palisades Subdivision – I’m sorry, Paradise Subdivision, Kona Paradise.Looking at the submitted site plan, we have Mamalahoa Highway running on the top of the map; to the left side of the map, we have the driveway access from the Highway to the property, and we have the layout of the bed and breakfast operation as well as the dwelling.This is a 3-bedroom single family dwelling, the 2 units for the bed and breakfast are identified in purple and pink, and we have the owner’s bedroom. We also have a pool area. As you might recall, we also have two areas identified as Area A and Area B, which are in red that signify the areas where there are gravesites located on the property. The applicant in this case, Daniel Ibbetson, has requested a Special Permit for a 2-bedroom bed and breakfast. The application was denied by the Planning Commission originally on January 20, 2006. The applicant had appealed the Planning Commission’s decision to the Third Circuit Court, at which time the Third Circuit Court reversed the decision of the Planning Commission and remanded it back for further proceedings. At our last Planning Commission on November 16, 2007, a motion was made to deny the applicant’s request and adopt the intervenor’s proposed Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, Decision and Order. The motion did not pass, two ayes to three noes. Are there any questions? GRAHAM: Thank you, Jeff. I think next I was going to ask our corporation counsel to give us a little update on how we should proceed at this point.But if you have anything specific for Jeff, we could ask now. Ivan, could you give us, then, a little synopsis of how you think we should proceed today? TORIGOE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As you know, the Commission has gone through a contested case hearing; that hearing has been completed. You have the record before you. The parties have submitted proposed findings, conclusions and decisions; you have three different versions of that. And at the last meeting, I believe that the parties agreed to extend the time for decision at least until this meeting. And so at this point, it is for you to make a decision either to grant or deny the permit. You can use any of the three proposed sets of findings and conclusions as a base for that. And you can also make changes to the conditions or other parts of the proposed decisions. WATANABE: Mr. Chair? GRAHAM: Thank you. Commissioner Watanabe? WATANABE: Yeah, at the last meeting, Mr. Ibbetson had already left at the time that we concluded that we could probably continue it to this meeting and the deadline was this meeting. And I’d like to take the opportunity now, since Mr. Krueger is here, to see if he will confirm that Mr. Ibbetson had agreed, or at least in principle, to continuing it to this meeting; just because it may become technicality that, you know, could be interpreted as this meeting, any decision we arrive at this meeting is null and void. GRAHAM: Mr. Torigoe, do you have any thoughts on that? TORIGOE: I think that will be appropriate. EXHIBIT D 2