2015-08-20 Leeward Exh A (REZ 04-022)

Home

BEAUDET: Okay, so, and then now it’s on record that the property owner is in violation of the covenant. SHIMAOKA: It is on record. BEAUDET: Well, it’s on record this morning. KAY: It’s on our record. SHIMAOKA: Now. KAY: Yeah, and my understanding from Mr. Tyler is that he’s made a formal complaint with SHPD relative to that. Is that? Yeah. COMMAND: I have one question of Mr. Tyler. Have you filed a complaint with the Department of Public Works? TYLER: I did. COMMAND: Thank you. TYLER: And they did, they went out there and said there was no violation. And also, I did first speak with Mr. Vitousek, the State archaeologist for this island, and he also went out there and told me there was no violation. BEAUDET: I think violation can, this conversation is kind of getting gray, so let’s keep things in perspective. They are in violation of the covenant, okay, but that’s not what is the issue, right, today, right? It’s the extension of time on the, for the application, or for the ordinance, or one condition of the ordinance. TYLER: If I may, Mr. --. BEAUDET: But, but – just, let me flow. TYLER: I’m sorry, sir. BEAUDET: Okay, so I think when observers of who have been out to the site for physical and visual inspection and say that there is no violation, maybe, I’m assuming, but there is clarity that needs to be there that no violation means that none of the historical or cultural sites were damaged. Okay, but, but, going onto the parcel with heavy equipment is still in violation of the covenant, and that needs to be addressed. But it’s not going to, it’s been communicated here, but this is not the forum to address the violation. KAY: We’ll continue to follow up with Mr. Tyler and the applicant to look into this as far as following up and working with SHPD as well. 11 EXHIBIT A