My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
COM 0199.013 2006-2008
ClerkCouncil
>
Council Records
>
Communications
>
2006-2008
>
COM 0199.013 2006-2008
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/13/2008 1:12:10 AM
Creation date
5/8/2008 5:48:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Communications
Communications - Type
COM
Communications - Council Term
2006-2008
Communication
0199
Point
013
Author
Christopher Manfredi
Communications - Referred To
COUNCIL
Comments
Presented: Council - 6/1/07
Document Relationships
AGE COUNCIL 2007/06/01 2006-2008
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Agendas\2006-2008\Council
BIL 062 Draft 01 2006-2008
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Bills\2006-2008
COM 0199.000 2006-2008
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Communications\2006-2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2
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
We addressed the sidewalk issue before the Planning Commission on February 2, 2007. <br /> There, I agreed to maintain the rural chazacter of Naalehu town in Condition D of <br /> `Conditions of Approval', which states: <br /> "The commercial development shall utilize the existing dwelling. Renovations and <br /> improvements which aze generally consistent with the current appearance of the existing <br /> home shall be allowed." <br /> I checked with the State Department of Transportation and reviewed the survey. The rock <br /> wall is in the `right of way' and will need to be destroyed to make room for a sidewalk. <br /> The existing trees are exactly where the sidewalk would go. We are also informed that <br /> DOT does not want a sidewalk on Highway 11. Can you imagine the community outrage <br /> if we start to cut down the trees and bulldoze the rock wall? The community will blame <br /> me, and I'm the one that wants to protect those features! All for a strip of concrete that <br /> leads nowhere and connects to nothing and may even decrease safety to those that walk <br /> on it. <br /> A letter from the Planning Director to the Council dated April 19, 2007, states condition <br /> D was deleted in both zoning ordinances of the adjacent properties because "there aze no <br /> sidewalk improvements anywhere along the mauka side of Mamalahoa Highway in <br /> Naalehu" and the construction of a sidewalk would affect the existing drainage system. <br /> The County Council voted to delete Condition D, and the requirement to provide curb, <br /> gutters and sidewalk improvements. <br /> In summary, I'm not looking to upset the rural character of Naalehu and request that no <br /> sidewalks be required in Bi1162. <br /> I remain sincerely, <br /> ' <br /> <br /> Chris Manfredi <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.