|
COLON: Certainly, we'll consider that. And not to belabor the already lengthy discussion
<br /> already, we actually—one of the reasons that we've been doing this, you know, three years with
<br /> the county is because there, and the Planning Department, is because there was some initial
<br /> discussion of us going to the LUC first, and we actually went to the LUC first. And instead,
<br /> basically the guidance we got was, no, you know, get the conditions amended at the county level,
<br /> then we are going to go to the LUC. So we already know we are going to be going to the LUC.
<br /> We certainly will be taking everything you've mentioned, and more, into consideration. We
<br /> recognize this is quite a process, lengthy process - - -
<br /> CARR SMITH: Robyn, DPW, I wanted to give you an opportunity, if you wanted to weigh in
<br /> on this road talk at all.
<br /> MATSUMOTO: Thanks, Nancy. You know, I only have been doing this for a couple of years,
<br /> involved in this particular project, so I wasn't aware that there was a discussion about changing
<br /> the Road I with another section of Ane Keohokdlole. I mean, it does sound like it's a possibility,
<br /> you know, we just don't have another mauka-makai road, though, you know, other than the—
<br /> Ka'iminani is the next closest one, so. It's definitely a possibility.
<br /> CARR SMITH: Thank you, Robyn. Mr. Van Pernis.
<br /> VAN PERNIS: Concerning that road, the mauka-makal connector road, and what Mr. Vitousek
<br /> said, we are making decisions that are not going to be in effect for 10 or 20 years; we are not
<br /> making it for now. So - - -whether you feel a mauka-makai connector is necessary now—I feel
<br /> it's necessary now—but it's certainly going to be needed in 10 or 20 years. Since the applicant
<br /> won't commit to when they are going to start, I have to assume 10, 20 or even 30 years, or more.
<br /> So I don't think that road should be messed with. I think that Mr. Yee has negotiated long and
<br /> hard in that regard, and I think that we should think about—this related to the parks, too—what
<br /> is going to be in place 10, 20, 30 years from now, not now. And if you don't think it's needed
<br /> now, although I do, it's certainly going to be needed then. Same thing with the stop lights.
<br /> That's why I'm asking the traffic study be done 10 years from now, and that that be- - -the
<br /> developer. The traffic generated by P51amanui is going to come down Mdmalahoa, too.
<br /> CARR SMITH: Can somebody inform me what the guidelines are for traffic studies? Do they,
<br /> are they obsolete after a certain period of time or does something else trigger the need for an
<br /> updated one? Maija?
<br /> JACKSON: Yeah, sure, I can try to respond to that. So we do have a couple of conditions in the
<br /> ordinance that are asking for an updated traffic study. The Department of Transportation has
<br /> asked for an updated traffic study prior to construction of University Drive. Then the next point
<br /> in time where one would be required is if they do not complete full buildout within 20 years, it
<br /> would have to do an updated traffic study when they come in for a time extension to the
<br /> development period.
<br /> 33
<br /> DRAFT
<br />
|