My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2012-05-17 Leeward Exh B - Mooers
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2012
>
2012-05-17 Leeward Exh B - Mooers
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/21/2012 3:00:14 PM
Creation date
6/21/2012 3:00:09 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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 />GIFFIN: And her wellbeing, you know, in addition to her privacy. I think that we should consider <br />all of that for any citizen. Ivan, is it necessary to include swimming? Ensure access for fishing, and <br />we have “and recreational purposes” – does that include swimming? Because it seems to me by the <br />pictures that Maija has that it might be a nice area for swimming as well. Or do you think that <br />that’s covered under “recreational purposes?” <br /> <br />TORIGOE: I would say it’s probably covered. And really the statute and your rules only require <br />that the condition maintain safe lateral access to and along the shoreline, and don’t specify the <br />activities. <br /> <br />GIFFIN: Oh, c’mon, no, thank you. So, Bobby Jean, if I hear you correctly, you are saying that <br />you are comfortable with the suggested changes that Mr. Vitousek is proposing. <br /> <br />LEITHEAD TODD: Yes, because I think it protects the public interest in that there is room there <br />that if the shoreline moves, you know, ten years from now, if the shoreline is up against the wall, <br />then it protects a six-foot access path mauka of the wall. Because I don’t think that it’s going to <br />change immediately, but ten years from now -. <br /> <br />GIFFIN: Who knows. <br /> <br />LEITHEAD TODD: Who knows, you know, because we’ve certainly seen that kind of movement. <br />But for the immediate present I think it strikes that balance between protecting the applicant’s <br />privacy, as well as protecting the future feasibility of having the six-foot mauka access. <br /> <br />GIFFIN: Okay. Commissioners, any questions of the applicant? And maybe the applicants can <br />come forward now. Greg and Randy, would you please come forward because Commissioners may <br />have questions. Maija, could you please put that slide back up that shows the wall? <br /> <br />COTTLE: Which part of the wall -? <br /> <br />GIFFIN: And her yard. So looking at it from, yeah -. <br /> <br />COTTLE: Here. <br /> <br />GIFFIN: Okay, okay. So, Randy, the portion of the wall that you are referring to with the six feet <br />is that section there -. <br /> <br />VITOUSEK: Right. Right now, the place where the certified shoreline is at the face of the wall is <br />on the makai side of this. <br /> <br />GIFFIN: Correct. <br /> <br />VITOUSEK: So there would be basically a strip, six feet, there. <br /> <br />GIFFIN: Right. Okay, and -. <br /> <br />14 <br />EXHIBIT B <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.