|
the brother, and the brother, as the staff had pointed out, is an accomplished chef, and so he wants to
<br />do his, you know, farm-to-market type of agricultural activities on his property. But, again, the
<br />concept behind having, you know, the mauka and makai portion is largely to accommodate the
<br />applicant’s parents’, you know, desire to have cattle grazing on both the mauka and makai portion.
<br />
<br />BEAUDET: I have a question, Sidney. Going to Condition J, you referred to constructing the
<br />pull-out on fronting the subject property, so I’m assuming that’s makai side of the road.
<br />
<br />FUKE: No, the property is on the mauka side of the old homestead road, so the pull-out would be
<br />adjacent to the property on the mauka side, rather than on the makai side of the right-of-way, because
<br />the makai side of the right-of-way, you know, the property is right in the back of Matsuyama Store, if
<br />you are familiar with that area, there is a severe drop, you know, and so to have the pull-out on the
<br />makai side would really not be feasible, you know, except at some considerable cost. The mauka
<br />section would be much more feasible.
<br />
<br />BEAUDET: But still within the right-of-way, the 50-foot right-of-way --.
<br />
<br />FUKE: Well, that’s why --.
<br />
<br />BEAUDET: -- or within its encumbrance on the property.
<br />
<br />FUKE: It could be within the existing right-of-way. Then, again, he may have to encroach into his
<br />own property. So if there is any encroachment, then the encroached portion would be subdivided and
<br />dedicated to the County. So that’s the reason why when I had proposed the language, it was, you
<br />know, like, “a vehicular pull-out fronting the property within the existing right-of-way and/or
<br />portions of the subject property ….” So, you know, until an actual survey is done, it’s difficult to
<br />determine whether their pull-out can occur entirely within the right-of-way or it may have to
<br />encroach, you know, into the private property. So if it does have to encroach, then he has the
<br />obligation to dedicate the portion.
<br />
<br />BEAUDET: Thank you. Staff, one of the conditions that was requested for amendment was
<br />Condition D. Was there any position from Planning, from the Department on the request?
<br />
<br />JACKSON: This was for Condition D?
<br />
<br />BEAUDET: Yeah.
<br />
<br />JACKSON: Yes, so we, the Department has actually included this condition in all rezones and all
<br />Agricultural rezones for about 15 years now, and we’ve done that as a way to kind of control density,
<br />residential density on Agricultural land. But in reality it’s kind of a form of contractual zoning,
<br />because when someone applies for FA zoning, FA zoning allows for additional farm dwellings; if
<br />you meet the farming thresholds, you can apply for and get an additional farm dwelling. So the, I
<br />spoke with the Director about this and he is agreeable to actually deleting the condition completely in
<br />order to allow for additional farm dwellings on the entire property, if they meet those criteria.
<br />
<br />BEAUDET: So what is the farming threshold for three acres, or three-point-something acres?
<br />7
<br />EXHIBIT A
<br />
<br />
|