2014-07-03 Hearing Transcript - Scott Watson Amend SMA 450

Home

A presentation was made by the Planning Department to the public last Fall where anybody was allowed to comment and what have you, and you will see in the Background Report that you have that the response of the community was favorable to what we were trying to accomplish. Each of these matters will be clearly shown to you where you can identify and understand what we are asking and how it will serve the public interest if you take the view which we encourage you to do as Mr. Johnson’s letter requested. The last matter which hopefully will be resolved by the time we come back deals with a remnant in the middle of our Lot 23, that was purchased by the Aldersons. We purchased it from the Aldersons. Nowhere in our deeds, nowhere in the title policies, nowhere in the CC&R’s, is there any reference to a remnant. And the remnant is referenced as a, approximately a .4-acre piece in the middle of our lot. None of the advertising materials referenced this. None of the documents indicate that such a remnant exists. It was helpful yesterday afternoon to hear Chris Yuen indicate that that’s really a misnomer. There’s no remnant. The name shouldn’t even have been used. It doesn’t have a tax identification number. We’ve been paying the taxes on all, all of Lot 23. But, it is, it was a line that has been really misinterpreted as creating some property right, and there is no property right. So, it’s our hope between now and when we come back that, that issue will be resolved, but that’s—I’m just referencing it so you know because when you go out to the site, they’ll show you what we’re talking about, this piece right in the middle of our property, right where our house is built. Was never reserved by Continental Pacific in any document whatsoever. Hopefully, that will be resolved by the time we come back. That concludes my remarks, and I wanted just to again thank you for letting me go out of turn so I can get back to State-side. I’ll be happy to answer any questions that you may have. Scott will be here for the actual presentation at the time you call it, and you can ask him any questions as well. You have this agreement that was signed by the County that, that identifies what I’ve discussed and puts in a proper light what we’re trying to accomplish. We didn’t know about a different setback. We never knew about the Settlement Agreement. Nobody contests that. We never had it. No intention to violate anything in connection with the setback, but what exists is safe, as reflected by the report of the structural and civil engineer. Thank you very much folks. MIYASATO: Thank you. Any questions, Commissioners? KANUHA: Mr. Chairman, I have one question. MIYASATO: Go ahead. KANUHA: Gary, that Settlement Agreement that you just provided to the council, we have that on file but on the advice from our counsel, they considered that proprietary so that’s why it was not distributed to the Commission, but since you raised that, you know, we’re prepared to put that on the record and discuss that. But my one question to you—is there anything in that Agreement, is there anything in that Agreement which refers to or binds this Commission to act in any particular way? 4 EXHIBIT E