COM 0307.019 2006-2008 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Estimate the level of service likely to be experienced on each such road or highway five years into the future, taking into account "other approved or proposed development that is expected to impact the project area, with reasonable assumptions about the build-out of such development." • Identify and evaluate alternative plans for mitigating the impacts likely to be created by the project, if the current or projected level of service on any given road or highway is below level C. The evaluation is to include "budgetary cost estimates for the capital and operating costs of promising alternative plans." If the TIAR for any proposed project determines that the current or projected level of service on any road or highway is less than level C, then "any rezoning of the property, if approved, shall contain conditions that require mitigation of adverse traffic effects before occupancy of the project is permitted, or that occupancy be delayed until the level of service has reached the acceptable level and is no longer projected to be worse that the acceptable level." We strongly believe that this approach needs further consideration. As noted in previous testimony and again in our analysis of the current draft under consideration, the role of the public sector continues to be missing from the overall dialogue. In particular, our analysis raises the following concerns and questions: Overall, should the task of identifying and prioritizing capital improvement projects, and appropriate funding mechanisms for implementation be undertaken by the private sector which does not have authority for implementation, or is this a role that leadership, i.e., the County and Council should assume? • Is it not more appropriate for Hawai' i County to determine the existing and projected levels of service on our existing roads and highways, rather than delegate that important task to a succession of private consultants working for developers? • Should the County be identifying the improvements needed to solve level of service problems, rather than delegating that responsibility to individual developers? o If in fact many of our existing roads and highways currently fail to provide the minimum required level of service, or are projected to do so in the near future, then each zoning applicant would be required to identify alternative solutions for each road or highway likely to be used by residents or users of the proposed new project -and to provide cost estimates to implement those solutions. This is an enormous, and we believe inappropriate, burden and responsibility to place on the proponent of a new project. Rather, liawai~ i County should be developing alternative plans to address roads and highways which provide, or are projected to provide, inadequate levels of service to their current and projected users; and new projects should contribute appropriately to that effort, as opposed to being delegated the role and responsibility for identifying areas that need attention and formulating (and leading the effort to rank) alternative solutions.