2014-06-05HEARINGTRANSCRIPT-WALTERTAVARESSPP1212

Home

kind of reluctant to recommend that there’s no end term to Special Permits. However, in this particular area, and this particular situation, you know as mentioned by the community association folks, it’s obviously an area in transition. You know, you folks all know there’s a multitude of Special Permits for primarily these kind of uses within there. The General Plan I think will eventually need to address that. The Puna CDP Plan has sought to address that, so I would agree that within you know, within ten years, at least I’m sure that there will be the appropriate land use designations put in place whereby these Special Permits will be more consistent with the General Plan, the community development plans, and eventually zoning. MIYASATO: Any other questions, Commissioners? If not, I’ll entertain a motion. HENKEL: I’d like to move that we approve Special Permit, the amendment to Special Permit 1212, with the Director’s recommendations. MOSES: Second. MIYASATO: It’s moved by Commissioner Henkel; second by Commissioner Moses. Do I have any discussion? ONO: For clarification. The Director’s recommendation also includes the denial of the landscaping so for the record, I’d like to have that clarified that the Director’s recommendation is to approve however what denial on the landscaping amendment. Is that agreeable? Okay. COTTLE: Mr. Chair, if I may just further clarify. The recommendation was denial of the landscaping, but we recommended landscaping along the north and rear property boundary. And that’s reflected in the changes to Condition 9. So, if you read Condition 9, it doesn’t completely eliminate all landscaping. It just eliminates it for two of the property boundaries. MIYASATO: Commissioner Henkel, is that your motion? HENKEL: Yeah, that’s fine. MOSES: Second. MIYASATO: Any further discussion? COTTLE: Okay, Commissioner Henkel? HENKEL: Aye. COTTLE: Commissioner Moses? MOSES: Aye. 9 EXHIBIT C