COM 0121.003 1996-1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Richard & Ann Knapp P. O. Box 586 Papaikou, Hawaii 96481 February 6, 1997 ~ ~ RECEP/ED nR1e------------Y~-- pv ogre ~z - RESPONSE TO RESOLUTION NO. 33 97 c~~~,,y c~,~~~~n 1. Kaapoko Hmstd Rd. sewer extension was not included in the original bid to install sewer piping, and other than an old report this had not been mentioned until the County had bids which were lower than they estimated. A. All meetings were with the housing area located in the town proper and are on small lots and the addition of the sewer piping solved a problem. 2. County reference to EPA impact statement of 1972 A. Was this done at that time with the plans that C Brewer bring their flow to the ocean up to standards with the housing being part of that project. 3. Kaapoko Hmstd. Rd. homes which is a dead end street, have larger lots than those of the Papaikou proper and in fact a few of the homes located there now have new operating systems approved by the county with-in the last 4 to 5 years. A. The remainder of the residences have never experienced the to need to have their systems pumped, where as the county rumors lead people to believe the opposite. Part of this might be explained by most have larger pieces of property. B. Many of the homes located on larger properties would have to provide extended pumping systems just to connect to the proposed piping system. 4. If the County is concerned about increasing plant use and keeping run off from the ocean, than it should look at the area below the Belt highway and along Mamaaloa Highway. There is a greater density of people and being closer to the ocean would increase the possibility of proposed pollution. 5. Addressing revenues by the County is another matter to not put this plan up Kaapoko Hmstd. Rd. A. The small amount of homes located here will never make up even a small portion of the cost of installing the extra piping. The only added thing it will do is force those living on fixed incomes the added cost of paying for something that is not needed. 6. Reference to EPA by states that only a percent is required which will be met by the added systems already being put on line, and now the county wants to spend unnecessary money at this point when they realized that the bids are less than expected, and that they have not considered the cost of putting the road back to the condition prior this project starting. 7. There is nothing wrong with returning federal funds when they do not benefit the people they serve and will cost the county added cost owed when they can not show it will pay for itself. ~0. / 2 O 3 Etta no, sEw Prasentad ~ ~ ~ ti ~ ~ Ref. 2b~ Ret. Date fF9 7 1997