My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
REP PC 066 02/05/2008 2006-2008
ClerkCouncil
>
Council Records
>
Reports
>
2006-2008
>
Planning Committee (PC)
>
REP PC 066 02/05/2008 2006-2008
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/27/2008 8:56:59 AM
Creation date
5/8/2008 7:08:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Reports
Reports - Type
REP
Reports - Council Term
2006-2008
Report
000
Committee
PC
Meeting date
2008-02-05
Document Relationships
COM 0980.000 2006-2008
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Communications\2006-2008
RES 516 Draft 01 2006-2008
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Resolutions\2006-2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
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
Communication 980 <br /> <br /> Resolution 516-08 <br /> Page 2 of 3 <br /> At the February 5, 2008 Planning Committee meeting, Council Chair Hoffmann expressed <br /> concern that although the resolution speaks to in lieu fair share credit as it relates to Phase III <br /> construction costs, he felt that determining other credits for Phase I or the need to find a terminus <br /> of the connector road at Kamamalu and Mamalahoa Highway (the key to the entire issue of <br /> beginning to solve some of the traffic problems) should have been included or at least have those <br /> numbers available also. <br /> Director Yuen stated that although the settlement agreement obligates applicant to build Phase I <br /> as well, it is not included in this resolution. Mr. Yuen explained this was brought forward as a <br /> condition of final subdivision approval which is normally the stage in the process when fair share <br /> or in lieu credit is presented. Mr. Yuen stated that the bond amount for Phase III more than <br /> covers the development. However, Mr. Hoffmann felt that applicant's obligations relating to <br /> other phases should also be included in the resolution or at least the responsibilities relating to <br /> other areas be set forth in Condition M. <br /> Council Member Ford expressed concern relating increases in construction costs each month a <br /> bonded road is not built. Particulazly, if the measure is approved and the road is not built until <br /> several years later, would the bond amount be sufficient to complete construction. Ms. Ford <br /> stated that although she was not comfortable with this resolution and would personally prefer <br /> that road construction be completed at this time, she would follow Mr. Hoffmann's lead. <br /> Director Yuen explained that there are two triggers for final subdivision approval. The first <br /> requires completion of so many lots and the second provides that approval be in conjunction with <br /> development of the immediately surrounding property. Mr. Yuen noted that applicant has done <br /> some development along Phases I and III, but none along Phase II of the road. Therefore, neither <br /> trigger has been reached for Phase II but the result is that there will be construction of Phases I <br /> and III. Mr. Yuen further explained that the Phases are in the order of Phase III, Phase I, and <br /> Phase II. Phase III is from across the Vacuum Cooling Plant to Kaomoloa, Phase 1 is from <br /> Kaomoloa to Pukalani and Phase II is from Pukalani back to Mamalahoa Highway in the vicinity <br /> of Kamamalu. <br /> Council Chair Hoffmann noted that this is a classic case of what happens when a developer is <br /> obligated to complete a road and then foot drags. Mr. Hoffmann noted this is a cleaz <br /> demonstration of a situation wherein had the applicant proceeded in 1998 and 1999 like the <br /> ordinance indicates, a road would have been completed and some of Waimea's traffic problems <br /> resolved at half the cost to Pazker Trust. He concluded that the resolution merely requests a fair <br /> share in lieu credit for what's basically Phase III of the road but it does not build the connector <br /> road. Mr. Hoffmann noted that this resolution has to pass or the matter won't go anywhere and <br /> expressed his absolute frustration over the fact that there is no clear cut way of ensuring that all <br /> conditions are known at this point in time. Mr. Hoffmann stated he would have preferred <br /> including references in the resolution that provided a cleazer picture of what is required of Parker <br /> Trust to build the connector. <br /> PC Report No. 66 <br /> 2 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.