My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
COM 0952.001 2022-2022
ClerkCouncil
>
Council Records
>
Communications
>
2020-2022
>
COM 0952.001 2022-2022
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/31/2022 1:06:21 PM
Creation date
8/29/2022 1:20:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Communications
Communications - Type
COM
Communications - Council Term
2020-2022
Communication
0952
Point
001
Author
Zendo Kern, Planning Director
Communications - Referred To
PC
Document Relationships
AGE PC 2022/09/06 (2020-2022)
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Agendas\2020-2022\Planning Committee (PC)
AGE PC 2022/10/18 (2020-2022)
(Original Version)
Path:
\Council Records\Agendas\2020-2022\Planning Committee (PC)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
40
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
HARVEY: --is that people are supposed to walk out on the vehicle lanes, I would hope <br /> respectfully that they check the facts and consider that and make sure that we're really <br /> talking about as-built. <br /> VITOUSEK: The commission will disregard this testimony regarding a previous agenda <br /> item. <br /> HARVEY: Okay, thanks. So, back to this agenda item, I actually have some odd <br /> comments and I don't know that they would be—they're in support but they're just <br /> comments about the approval, I think. So, this parcel is within, as the picture showed, the <br /> KCDP plan Pua'a Wai`aha Village TOD and it's not sure where the half mile diameter <br /> core village is to be located, or when it will be generally cited, but it looks like this parcel <br /> would be within a half mile of what would be the village core, and if it is that's in the <br /> secondary area in density for this TMK should actually be greater than FA-1. And so, it <br /> could be more equitable and affordable so, and should accommodate pedestrian and <br /> bicycle access to the future village in transit. <br /> If the Kakalina Street extension is still planned to run across the Bolton parcel below this <br /> and connect Nani Kailua with the Puapuaanui Street, is that still expected to be the <br /> location for the TOD village? And by that picture it looks like it is, but I'm not sure <br /> where that aspirational thing hits the road as far as talking to these developments because <br /> if that's the case this development should actually be higher density. <br /> This parcel's adjacent to Hienaloli and the Hualalai junction, and Hienaloli is one of the <br /> few natural multi-modal links across the kaluulu zone and should be planned and <br /> developed as a greenway for bicycle riding and walking. It could have been connected to <br /> the, connected the Konawaena schools to the Kealakehe schools, but no one planned it, <br /> and blocking developments are now sprouting up on top of the old Kona sugar railroad <br /> route. Threading around these is now necessary and the requirement for the subdivision <br /> to provide that roadway segment connector between Hualalai and Pualena Street would <br /> really help. I also request that please require reserving a frontage strip along Hualalai on <br /> the mauka side to accommodate this parcel, makai side of the roadway, to accommodate <br /> a wide pedestrian bicycle shoulder along Hualalai. Note that the recommendation reports <br /> states on page 2 that the property directly adjacent to the south is currently undeveloped. <br /> Well, if this refers to 7-5-017-022, this is untrue. Even your picture shows that parcel has <br /> five buildings on it on the mauka edge, and a big formal entry gate and large stone wall <br /> running parallel along Hualalai about 20 feet back from the pavement. So, this parcel also <br /> adjoins Hualalai, and Hualalai is a historic trail or road. So, we advocate for preserving <br /> its historic integrity. Widening the road for easier vehicle travel would result in faster <br /> speeds that's been proven over and over here, lower safety, and destroy its historic <br /> integrity as a rural narrow winding road. So therefore,please do not require the owner to <br /> 5 <br /> EXHIBIT F <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.