|
YATES: —you know, something about, something about schools, something about the roads, you
<br />know, those kinds of things. Those all are to be addressed or have been addressed?
<br />KAY: So the applicant in their most recent proposed favorable recommendations have asked, have
<br />gone back from asking for relief from a lot of those—affordable housing questions and issues like
<br />that. So, I think with the school, the condition there is, their request there is to still delete the
<br />school -related condition, and no, nothing else beyond that, just a deletion of that. And the
<br />justification was in I believe the applicants' previous, or the original application, or their previous
<br />favorable recommendation, probably the original application. But you want to have, Sid might be
<br />able to reiterate the reason behind that. At any rate, several of the conditions they were asking relief
<br />from, they've gone and put those back in in their latest favorable recommendation. If that answers
<br />the question I think you are asking.
<br />YATES: Okay, thank you.
<br />CARR SMITH: Did you want to respond to that?_
<br />YATES: Yeah, my concern is still regarding traffic because,. you know, that area is so terrible and,
<br />you know, that's where I'm concerned, you know, how" are they going to addressthat?
<br />CARR SMITH: Well, maybe that's an appropriate time to finally let Randall speak. He's the traffic
<br />expert on this. And you were with us all last two'meetings and_didn't get to say words. Do you
<br />want to address what your findings were?.
<br />OKANEKU: Thank^you, Madam Chair. My'name is-RandA Qkaneku. I'm with the Traffic
<br />Management Consultant;, and I prepared the traffic. impact analysis report for the Pualani Makai.
<br />And the traffic impact analysis report was prepared in accordance with the Hawaii County Code
<br />concurrency requirements.`Arid the concurrency requirements say specific guidelines for
<br />preparation.o.f the -report. Among those are traffic mitigation for any onset unacceptable level of
<br />ce;
<br />serviyou know, within a,five=year 1period. The�traffic study has recommended mitigation
<br />measures that would improve'Ahe level of service to acceptable levels within a five-year period, and
<br />we estimate diose mitigation measures to;inaintain those acceptable levels through a ten-year period.
<br />Beyond that, the'20-year forecast'would require a major rezone type of improvements to bring back
<br />the level of service"to acceptable level. And there's, there's several projects that the traffic impact
<br />analysis report points to, none of which are within a five-year period, maybe not even a ten-year
<br />period, but they are on thebooks, .one by the County and one by the State. But in any case, we've
<br />attempted to meet the County :Code's concurrency requirements as far as mitigation at the
<br />intersection of Queen Ka`ahurnanu Highway and Puapua`anui Street.
<br />There were comments about traffic congestions along the Queen Ka` ahumanu corridor. I went back
<br />to take a look at my traffic video, and I did identify, you know, queuing, which are basically outside
<br />of the study area; in the morning there was queuing north of Hualalai Road, which I could see on the
<br />video backing up, but it never reached Puapua`anui Street; similarly, in the afternoon, there was
<br />some backed queuing that appeared to start at Lako Street and kind of backed up to Kuakini, Kuakini
<br />Highway intersection, but again, never reached Puapua` anui Street, as far as queuing is concerned.
<br />So a lot of these concerns are in my opinion all outside our study area. And, so I didn't restudy
<br />24
<br />DRAFT
<br />
|