Laserfiche WebLink
<br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />COUNTY OF HAWAII <br />HEARING TRANSCRIPT <br />JANUARY 11, 2008 <br />A regularly advertised hearing on the application of Initiator PLANNING DIRECTOR (REZ 07- <br />000067/REZ 866)was called to order at 4:37 p.m. at the King Kamehameha's Kona Beach <br />Hotel, 75-5660 Palani Road, Kailua-Kona, Hawaii, with Chairman Rodney Watanabe presiding. <br />PRESENT: William Graham ABSENT & EXCUSED: C. Kimo Alameda <br /> Takashi Domingo Andrew Iwashita <br /> Shelly Ogata Rene’ Siracusa <br /> Alvin Rho <br /> Rodney Watanabe <br /> Rell Woodward <br />Ivan Torigoe, Deputy Corporation Counsel <br />Norman Hayashi, Planning Program Manager <br />Phyllis Fujimoto, Staff Planner <br />Jeff Darrow, Staff Planner <br />Christopher Yuen, Planning Director <br />Steven Lim, Attorney for Kohala LLC <br />And 2 people from the public in attendance. <br />INITIATOR: PLANNING DIRECTOR (REZ 07-000067/REZ 866) <br />a. Continued hearing on the Planning Director’s initiation of a Change of Zone for 37.88 <br />acres of land from a Single-Family Residential 15,000-square foot (RS-15) to a <br />Residential and Agricultural 5-acre (RA-5a) district. <br />b. Continued hearing on the repeal of Ordinance No. 97-102, which rezoned 37.88 acres of <br />land from an Agricultural 5-acre (A-5a) to a Single-Family Residential 15,000-square <br />foot (RS-15) district. <br />The property involved, owned by Kohala LLC, is located along the southwest (makai) side of <br />st <br />Akoni Pule Highway and the Kohala Ranch Subdivision, Kahua 1, North Kohala, Hawaii, <br />TMK: 5-9-1:8. <br />WATANABE: We are on Agenda Items 4 and 5. Agenda Item 4 is a Planning Director <br />initiated revocation of zoning, REZ 07-000067/REZ 866. Item No. 5 is a request for an <br />extension of time by the applicant, Kohala LLC, REZ 866, for Condition C. This is Unfinished <br />Business; we’ve discussed this on a number of occasions. And I know there’s been some <br />discussion mostly about process procedure, we also apparently have some arguments about the <br />five agenda items, three of which are not agendized today, being consolidated at our earlier <br />meeting, I believe that was a July meeting. And I’m thinking that, if the applicant’s <br />representative would be in agreement, that we should take Agenda Item 4 on its own, the reason <br />EXHIBIT C <br />1 <br /> <br />