My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2013-09-26 Leeward Exh B - Hualalai Partners
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2013
>
2013-09-26 Leeward Exh B - Hualalai Partners
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/17/2013 1:43:59 PM
Creation date
10/17/2013 1:40:47 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
51
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
of the other neighborhoods are cluster planned as well. I think Sugar Cane Lane is the only one that <br />is not a cluster planned. But all the other ones have variances as far as the lot sizes and what they <br />are required to comply. <br /> <br />WHITTEMORE: And one last question. This came up in the last July meeting. Just for <br />clarification, you know, your map is showing that Pualena is integral part of the design there, and <br />yet it’s still my understanding, or maybe you can clarify, you have no agreement. Do you have any <br />intent to build, or to pursue that? And it may be something that we want to conserve being it a <br />condition of anything here just because of the access onto Hualālai Road being limiting. <br /> <br />LIM: The extension to the south through the, they call it Pualena Street Extension, will go into a <br />property owned by the Tincher family. As far as they know, they are not going to come in for <br />rezoning anytime soon, and so you’ll just have to wait for that unless the County decides to <br />condemn the right-of-way and build the road. Right past the Tincher property is the Sugar Cane <br />Lane property, and then the Hualālai Heights property, both of which have requirements to dedicate <br />their roadways to the County. <br /> <br />WHITTEMORE: So the developer has no intent to try and secure an easement over the property <br />right now and build the road. <br /> <br />LIM: No. If we had our druthers, we wouldn’t put the stub-way in. But the Department of Public <br />Works is requiring it as part of the north-south connectivity issue. <br /> <br />GIFFIN: Director. <br /> <br />COMMAND: Just for clarification, you asked about clustered developments and P.U.D.s, I believe <br />clustered developments are outside the Kona Urban Area, and you are inside so. <br /> <br />A. BARRETT: Thank you. <br /> <br />GIFFIN: Thank you. Any other questions? Brandi. <br /> <br />BEAUDET: One more question for me. If the request for a P.U.D. was not granted, would you still <br />proceed with development under the requested zoning? <br /> <br />A. BARRETT: I think we would have to address that at that point, but I would think, yes, we <br />would continue. <br /> <br />BEAUDET: Okay. <br /> <br />GIFFIN: Commissioners, any other questions of the applicant? Hearing none, thank you. Could <br />you please step back, and we do have a list of people who have signed up to testify. <br />Commissioners, before we hear from members of the public, we have a decision to make whether or <br />not you feel you would like to open up the meeting to public testimony. And if I may interject at <br />this time, not because just because I was one of those not here last month, and even though I did <br />read all of the testimony, my personal feeling is that the more community input we get the better off <br />our decisions will be. So hearing that I would like to know how you feel about this question before <br />us to open it up even though last month we did close public testimony. Tom. <br />13 <br />EXHIBIT B <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.