Laserfiche WebLink
traffic devices its required by Public Works is a crosswalk for pedestrian to cross Kapi`olani. <br />Instead of going all the way down to the shucks I call it the four-way stop or above on Kapi`olani <br />is a device for crosswalk devices the flasher. So, that might be to maybe for you is what do you <br />mean by traffic devices, there is a lot from streetlights to crosswalks, pedestrian flashing lights <br />and yes part of it too is traffic signal. <br />It all depends on what kind of impact you are going to do to our County roads.:—" but I think <br />the questions that I've asked you, you have answered it very well. Thank you. <br />RAFFIPIY: Thank you. Any other questions from the Commissi <br />CLARKSON: Yes, I have a question for the Director. <br />RAFFIPIY: Go ahead Mr. Clarkson. <br />CLARKSON: I'm curious about this Condition J. A -f. ublic Works is going to -have=the final say <br />every configuration of built out is going to be subject=to��Public Works review andUer <br />requirements. I'd like to have Director Yee explain wh_ths Tcondton needs to bd_*in here at all. <br />I thought that, I don't see it as a big deal for my point of view=but apparently this developer sees <br />it as an unnecessary hurdle to have to gAhrough Public Works and then come back to the <br />Planning Commission to have Condition T�fiN - ied. So, why dad?t=we just delete Condition J? <br />YEE: I'll give Christian a chance to respond=first <br />KAY: Sure, thanks fort question Joe. So, ulv <br />is right now. It is a standard condition and if you <br />set of standard conditions=that we add into our ret <br />in there. I would like to p• <br />streetlights and -traffic con <br />Public Works�(DP)_shal <br />t: to the language tho <br />be <br />concern_Tabout havingXnote <br />this. ; This=is just an inforrriat c <br />installed -if=DPW Traffic DviS <br />y the Condition is part of the ordinance as <br />ok at all of our rezone ordinances, we have a <br />ling_ ordinances. This is one of those that is <br />�h"and the intent of the condition. Is <br />s may =be_ required by the Traffic Division, Department of <br />bythe Applicant. There is no in my mind, there is no <br />he Planning Commission or the Council to try and amend <br />ton saying that these types of facilities may need to be <br />res them. <br />So, it is really just=advising th=-Applicant on next steps ultimately, So, basically as we stated in <br />our recommendation even if -we deleted this condition at the end of the day functionally <br />everything happens `the_sae way. So, we just wanted to default to our standard set of <br />conditions. I'm not sureAhere's a huge amount of heartburn one way or the other I haven't heard <br />anything in our conversations with the Applicants. We tried to express the same thing to them <br />before so, unless there is something that really like this is something for funding reasons or <br />whatever that's going to kill the project I don't see a huge reason to take it out. But that is just <br />my opinion. <br />YEE: Michael Yee, Planning Director. I want to add Joe that so there is kind of standard <br />language in our conditions that basically say a project has to follow Federal, State and County <br />laws right and we could always just write that and be one sentence and we will be done. We <br />EXHIBIT A (DRAFT) <br />15 <br />