Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0393.006 1998-2000 Menezes Tsukazaki Yeh & Moore srspHEN7. MENEZes R. BE~i TSllKA2AK1 ATIpRNEYS AT LAW THOMAS L.H. YEN MICHAEL W. MOORE 100 Puuahi Street Suits 204 Hilu, H:uvuii 9tiT20 Telephone 1808) 967-0055 FAX (8@I) 969-Y531 August 16, 1999 RKEIVED Mte_~-g-r-~~~ 13obby Jean L,eithead-Todd, Chairperson Dme ~,TIS County Council Committee on Planning _cauny cound? . County of Ilawaii 25 Aupuni Street Kilo, Hawaii 96720 Re: Proposed $ill No. 114, Draft 2 Annlicant• North Kohala Land Company Dear Councilpersott Leithead-Todd: This i; to ask £or your consideration of alternative language regarding Condition "G" which is to be amended by the above-referenced bill, Subject to your review, perhaps this language could be considered for a third draft of the bill. Subsetluent to the Committee on Planning meeting on August 10, 1999, my client raised a ques~ion as to the possible interpretation of tltc amendatory language which. is contained in he current draft. Upon reviewing the language again, l agree that re- phrasing that language would be advisable and would help to avoid future misunderstandings. Attached is alternative language which would clarify that which we understand to be the intent of the amendatory language by: 1. Clearly stating that ttte roadway stubout is to be provided to the bowrdary of the third subdivisiota increment (Malin Ridge-Phase III), rather thazr some other portion of property which is left undescribed because of the proposed deletion of the original language; and 2. Allowing the stubout to a third increment boundary which is to be determined at the time when the third increment is in the process of being subdivided, rather than now detenttiaing that boundary to Ue the "western boundary." Although shown on past plans submitted by former owner Chalon lntemational of i lawaii, we believe that it tom. No. 393.006 Fite Na Z N G /K 14 Rat. Tot Prese^+~CO~11/GIL. Ref. Date AUG 2 5 1999 Menezes Tsukazaki Yeh & Moore Ar1URN6Y5 A7 LAW Bobby Jean Leithead-Todd, Chairperson County Council Committee on Planning County of H.iwaii August 16, 1999 1'agc 2 would be unwise to pre-determine the specific boundary to which the stubout will be provided. The plans of adjoining property owners will need to be taken into account when thc location of the stubout is deterniined, and this should and will be required at the tinge when Mailu Ridge-Phase III is processed for subdivision. The Department of Public Works and the Planning Department wiil therefore be involved in that determination. The alternative language would completely replace the one sentence of current ame~~datory language. We regret not having identified these issues previously. We believe that the followin; language is a relatively simple way to address them. "A roadway stubout to the perimeter boundary of the third increment for a future roadway connection shall be provided in conjunction with the subdivision of the third increment " Thank you in advance for your consideration of this request. Please contact me if you s);ould have any questions. Very truly yours, M~B/NEZES TSUKAZAKI YEH & MOORE l R. BEN TSU ZAKI RBT:sr xc: Planning Depardnent North Kohala Land Company