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
be located just across from there, and a view of the intersection looking towards the existing access <br />easement, and then this is the highway looking Puna bound. <br /> <br />The Planning Director is recommending a favorable recommendation for the time extension request, <br />which was Condition C; and an unfavorable recommendation for the request to amend Conditions H <br />and I. And basically the reason we’re not supporting the amendment request for Conditions H and I is <br />that we think it’s more appropriate that the conditions remain as they are now, that the drainage <br />improvements and roadway improvements be installed prior to subdivision. This way the development <br />can be done in a more comprehensive way, rather than having the property be subdivided and sold off <br />to multiple landowners that then have to come in and do the drainage or roadway improvements more <br />on a piecemeal basis. <br /> <br />And with that, I want to just mention a couple more correspondences. The applicant was originally <br />represented by Nakamoto, Okamoto and Yamamoto. You should have a letter stating that they are no <br />th <br />longer representing the client. And then you should have another letter of January 27 from Yeh and <br />Moore letting you know that they are now the client’s representative and addressing some of the issues <br />that were raised in the Doi and Salazar letter. Are there any questions? <br /> <br />KERN: Any questions for staff? Commissioner Domingo. <br /> <br />DOMINGO: Is there a floodplain on this property? <br /> <br />COTTLE: The property is located within a floodplain, yes. There is also a floodway running along <br />the makai edge of the property. It’s a natural floodway. <br /> <br />DOMINGO: Yeah. I understand that there’s a possibility that that floodway will be diverted or part of <br />it would be filled so that they can go ahead and build one of the structures. <br /> <br />COTTLE: Yeah, the applicants represented in their application that they do intend to place some fill <br />on the property in order to develop the property; and some of that fill may be in the floodway. <br /> <br />DOMINGO: Your drawings do not indicate what part of the property is in the floodway and what <br />building would be situated on that particular corner. Do you have anything showing that? <br /> <br />COTTLE: I don’t but we could provide that. I don’t at this time. <br /> <br />DOMINGO: Thank you. <br /> <br />COTTLE: And part of the reason why we didn’t provide anything is that FEMA just did a remapping <br />or reevaluation of the area, and they are in the process of releasing new maps for this particular area. <br />So those changes haven’t been adopted yet by FEMA, but I could provide the current flood boundaries <br />for you to see. <br /> <br />KERN: Any other questions for staff? Seeing none, thank you, Maija <br /> <br />COTTLE: Okay. <br />5 <br /> EXHIBIT A <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.