2016-10-06 Hearing Transcript - John & Lori Kai REZ 16-210

Home

HENKEL: Oh, I'm sorry, Mr. Clarkson CLARKSON: —Could we just go back to the—the site, the area that shows the existing zoning. The slide that shows the zoning and the immediate vicinity. There. Okay. So, there is Ag -3 immediately adjacent to the north; Ag -3 across the road; Ag -5. DARROW: Correct, the light green is Ag -5. Ag -1 is the darker green. You have some to the south and to the north. CLARKSON: And do the—this is going to come up? Does, do the existing Ag -3's have 50 foot right-of-ways? DARROW: I believe they do. Unfortunately with this pole, they're not going to make the 50 - foot right-of-way. CLARKSON: How wide is that right-of-way? DARROW: Its 20 feet. CLARKSON: Twenty feet. DARROW: Yeah. The problem is, is they would have to acquire land from the other private landowner that's mauka which would be very difficult. CLARKSON: Okay, so I'm new at this so forgive me if this seems— DARROW: No, definitely CLARKSON: why, I would think that right-of-ways as density increases, would gradually get wider and wider to allow for bigger and bigger roads. Why is there a 50 -foot right-of-way required for Ag -3, and a 20 -foot right-of-way required for Ag -2. DARROW: That is a good question. I'm not sure when—when we went and spoke with the subdivision section, it's, there's certain requirements for sizes of lots, and there are also requirements for the amount of lots that are not a particular size. In this particular case, as long as they did not increase to six lots, that they would be able to utilize the existing right-of-way for the additional lot. If they were to go with a higher density or the larger lot, then it would have required the 50 -foot right-of-way, and it's just something in the Subdivision Code. I'm sorry, there must be a reason for it. I'm just not sure what it is. HENKEL: Are there any more questions from [sic] staff? Then, will the Applicant or their representative please come forward, please? DARROW: Thank you. EXHIBIT E 3