|
three-acre lots but just no smaller than one acre, so there would be a limitation there according to
<br />this document. And I can pass this along.
<br />
<br />BEAUDET: Let me just interject, okay? So we are talking about CC&Rs that are not related to the
<br />applicant.
<br />
<br />KAY: Correct.
<br />
<br />BEAUDET: So the CC&Rs of a neighboring subdivision shouldn’t factor into our decision; our
<br />focus should be on the regulations and the restrictions that guide us to make the decisions that we
<br />make here, not the restrictions on neighboring property. They bought into that knowing that, and it
<br />shouldn’t influence our thought process, yeah? Okay, I mean we have in black and white what
<br />guides us to make the decisions and the recommendations that we have here, okay?
<br />
<br />CHURCH: I agree with what you are saying, but I would like to make a comment with regard to
<br />the fairness question, which was raised by another Commissioner, which I think was a good point.
<br />However, with the CC&Rs, I want to point out to the Commissioners that it will be possible for
<br />people within the subdivision to modify those CC&Rs. And with unanimous approval, I haven’t
<br />read the CC&Rs myself, but there is a mechanism that these people could change the language of
<br />the CC&Rs to modify it, so the subdivision, so I think that the issue of fair play in my, in front of
<br />me, is not really a factor because there are ways to level the playing field, if everybody wanted to do
<br />that.
<br />
<br />KAY: One more thing to clarify: These CC&Rs were given to Mr. Lipps when he bought the
<br />property nine years ago. So they may have changed in the interim. But just to clarify that.
<br />
<br />One more thing, Mr. Whittemore, I did find the CTAHR finds the Coffee Belt as 700 to 2,000 feet
<br />in elevation, 20 miles from Palani Junction to Pu‘uhonua Road; so it’s a 20-mile strip from 700 to
<br />2,000 feet elevation.
<br />
<br />BEAUDET: I have one question for staff, maybe Jeff. But adjoining properties, the lots, yeah, to
<br />the bottom of the photo, you know, they look like they are one acre or less. Do we know when the
<br />subdivision took place?
<br />
<br />KAY: Yeah, we, thank you, Mr. Chair, yeah, we did do some research on that at the applicant’s
<br />request based on the differences in lot sizes that don’t conform to the zoning. It looks like the
<br />half-acre lot right here that’s zoned Ag-3 but is roughly 0.51 acres, was created in 1958 prior to the
<br />adoption of our zoning laws in 1967, and it was also covered under the subsequent change of zone.
<br />This whole area was Ag-5, the zoning was changed to Ag-3 in 1972. These other five lots here that
<br />area zoned Ag-5, but obviously smaller than five acres in size, were created through a parcel
<br />consolidation and resubdivision process in 1990 and 1993, respectively. The process doesn’t
<br />require the resulting lots to meet the minimum parcel size requirements in this case, Ag-5. So,
<br />yeah, the applicant’s parcel, this subdivision here, the three-lot subdivision, was done in 1989, and
<br />they were required to meet the three-acre size limitation.
<br />
<br />13
<br />EXHIBIT A
<br />
<br />
|