My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2012-02-02 Windward Transcript Graphic
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2012
>
2012-02-02 Windward Transcript Graphic
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/3/2012 3:35:29 PM
Creation date
4/3/2012 3:35:26 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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
<br />KERN: Okay. Thank you very much. So point of clarification on process – if indeed this does get <br />deferred, could you let us know how that would go, Madam Director, as far as which Corporation <br />Counsel would take care of that, and will the applicant and the testifiers’ attorney, will they have a <br />chance to weigh in on those? <br /> <br />LEITHEAD TODD: Well, because this is an issue that applies to the Zoning Code and the application <br />process, it would go to Corporation Counsel and probably go to the attorney who advises the <br />Department, Ms. Self, for a determination on what you can do. And then I’m assuming she would take <br />into consideration, since she’s here, take into consideration some of the issues raised. And both the <br />attorney for the applicant as well as the attorney for the people who testified, Ms. Song, who was <br />opposed, have an opportunity to communicate with Ms. Self and raise what they think the legal issues <br />are. And then Ms. Self can advise my department as to what we should do, you know. And ultimately <br />they filed an application, you know, I guess, and we processed it, you know. No guarantee that you get <br />to the Council and with these legal issues still in limbo that the Council would move for the time <br />extension. So I think we need to resolve that. <br /> <br />KERN: And the fact of the TIAR, is there any -? <br /> <br />LEITHEAD TODD: TIARS are only valid for a particular length of time. <br /> <br />KERN: Yeah. <br /> <br />LEITHEAD TODD: And so the problem for the property owner is that without a time extension and if <br />he had to start all over again, the existing TIAR might not be valid. And they would have to then go <br />and have a new one, and pay for a new one to be done. <br /> <br />KERN: Which I believe that date is coming up. <br /> <br />(Commissioner Au stepped out at this time.) <br /> <br />LEITHEAD TODD: But I don’t think that that’s an issue; and that shouldn’t be the determination on <br />whether this application moves forward or not. It should be purely based on whether the requirements <br />of having all of the property owners apply is applicable or whether you can proceed to just amend <br />conditions to a portion of the properties that were included in the original ordinance. <br /> <br />KERN: Okay. <br /> <br />LEITHEAD TODD: And so it, and I don’t think whether the life of the TIAR is really an issue and it <br />shouldn’t be a factor in the decision. And I’ll leave that up to Ms. Self to take a look at the legal <br />issues. <br /> <br />KERN: Okay. Just lost one of our Commissioners. And we’re basically are at the impasse of looking <br />for a motion to potentially defer. Is that right? <br /> <br />TORIGOE: Yes. <br />15 <br /> EXHIBIT A <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.