COM 0766.026 2004-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

as to KCE. It also takes a little pressure off of the existing Malulani Drive according to our updated TIAR (copy enclosed), although not very much. When we presented this revised plan (copy enclosed) to the MG residents, their response was somewhat undetwhelming. It appeared they were not pleased with this particular plan in spite of the safety benefits, as it would require the installation of the two new gates. Some MG residents requested would place Elie mid- eve road just above the homes at the top of MG, and I assume would leave the existing mid-level road through MG as a vacant land parcel. ~Pl~ r so we talked with the County DPW Traffic and Engineering ionsabou y t their posi ton on { such a matter. They pointed out that the existing mid-level road has been planned for that location from the inception of the MG project, and that the completion of that roadway will be both for traffic connectivity purposes and for safety purposes, as that will allow the 121 homes in MG to have a second ingress/egress from their cul-de-sac project. They also pointed out that the existing mid-level road was planned where it is as the extension of that road intersects Palam Road at a location acceptable for roadway planning purposes, whereas an intersection further mauka is not desirable. ' s 6099A ut it would be in addition to the existing mid level road, which they want connected in accordance with the stated conditions of approval for Malulani Gardens PUD. The residents of Malulam Gardens can approach the County Council to request an amendment of the conditions of approval for Malulani Gardens, but the County DPW will oppose this request based on or conversations with them. As to the Salvation Army, TSA has taken a nuetral position on the proposed 5-acre site within the KCE project. Their Honolulu division may or may not decide that they want a site here, so we are assuming at this time that there will not be a Salvation Army site in this project, but this could change. Assuming that TSA decides they do not want to be there, or the County Council instructs us not to inlcude TSA in the project, then we intend to increase the multi-family and affordable housing component of the KCE project to use the 5-acre site. It has been correctly pointed out that the additonal housing will produce less traffic than the TSA project as designed. If TSA does decide they want the site, they would be required to obtain a Use Permit for their project, which process includes public hearings and input. The MG residents will have ample opportunity to express their support or lack thereof for the TSA at that time. Again, we greatly appreciate your efforts to work with us on this matter, and ask you to circulate this letter and attachments to those involved and review the Options for the gated entryway for consideration. We would like you and other interested residents to attend another meeting in Kailua-Kona on August 6, 2006 at 5:30PM at the King Kamehameha Kona Beach Hotel to disucss our findings and options. As always, your comments and those of your neighbors are welcome.