My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2016-01-07 Hearing Transcript - Arrow SPP 09-076 & Rodrigues SPP 15-178
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2016
>
2016-01-07 Hearing Transcript - Arrow SPP 09-076 & Rodrigues SPP 15-178
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2016 3:35:17 PM
Creation date
2/4/2016 3:35:14 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />HENKEL: There’s a motion on the table then? <br /> <br />PATEL: So, presently, the motion is to conduct a site inspection. With the discussion that just <br />took place, is there a time frame, Commissioner Moses that you would like to conduct the site <br />inspection within? <br /> <br />MOSES: Yeah, I would like to conduct it as, as soon as possible, but if we do that and—are we <br />able to come back? I’m a little confused. You’re saying that we would have to come back by <br />the end of January. Correct? <br /> <br />PATEL: Correct. <br /> <br />MOSES: Or, if it doesn’t happen in that time frame, then we’re actually reopening the hearing? <br /> <br />PATEL: There’d be a motion to reopen. <br /> <br />MOSES: To reopen? <br /> <br />PATEL: Yes. <br /> <br />VITOUSEK: If I may, or the parties could agree— <br /> <br />PATEL: —Correct, or the parties could agree otherwise. <br /> <br />VITOUSEK: Or the parties could agree. So, and I don’t mean to intrude on the Planning <br />Department, but if we could get an idea of possibly when we could come back, then that would <br />make us, you know, give us concrete information on deciding whether to agree to the <br />continuance. In other words, if we had an idea of when we could come back and get on the <br />docket of the Commission again, that would make it easier to decide whether we can agree to <br />that extension. <br /> <br />HENKEL: And that would be up to the Planning Department. <br /> <br />YEH: And while they’re checking that, one additional thought here which is, you know, really <br />by implication or operation, when you have—and we had obviously requested the site inspection <br />in the beginning prior to the close of the hearing—but when the Commission votes on doing a <br />site inspection, which I think it has, or will do, by implication that actually reopens the hearing <br />because now you’re taking new information anyway. So, whether you call it that or not, it has <br />that effect of reopening it, so— <br /> <br />PATEL: Yeah, for clarity, but, you know, we can still make the motion just so we’re all on the <br />same page if that’s the case, right? So, Mr. Chair, I would suggest if we can take a short recess <br />because we’ll need to figure out what’s going to be doable because we’re going to need to see if <br /> <br />13 <br />EXHIBIT C <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.