My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
PD BACKGROUND REPORT (SLU-20-054)
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Board Packets
>
*Background/Recommendation Reports (June 2020-Sept 2022)
>
2021
>
2021-11-04 Windward
>
Item #2 Hawaii Island Community Development Corp. (HICDC)(SLU-20-054)
>
PD BACKGROUND REPORT (SLU-20-054)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/27/2021 11:23:16 AM
Creation date
10/27/2021 11:00:24 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
423
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
C. Mitigative Measures <br /> The applicant intends to develop the property for residential use. With <br /> any construction activity, contractors will be obligated to comply with <br /> appropriate State noise and air quality standards. <br /> Should unanticipated archaeological finds be discovered in <br /> conjunction with any further development of the site, work will stop (as <br /> is required by the State and County) and clearance will be secured <br /> before work is resumed. <br /> There are no identified existing drainage ways on the property. Any <br /> and all required grading or grubbing work would be done in <br /> conjunction with tie required permits. This is to assure that the <br /> development of this site does not adversely affect the drainage of <br /> surrounding properties or contribute to erosion or sedimentation. <br /> Finally, as the site is undeveloped land there will be no person or <br /> businesses to be dislocated by this project. <br /> D. Alternatives to the Proposed Project <br /> 1. No Project <br /> Under the status quo alternative, the site could continue in is <br /> idle state. The applicant would also not be able to develop the <br /> property. <br /> 2. Evaluation of Alternatives <br /> The project's impacts to the area's social and physical <br /> infrastructure would not be pronounced. Certain mitigative <br /> measures could be taken to address any possible impacts <br /> associated by the development of this project. Further, the <br /> project would be consistent with the land use objectives sought <br /> to be accomplished by the County General Plan LUPAG map. <br /> In view of the aforementioned; it would appear that none of the <br /> alternatives would be more prudenE and beneficial than the <br /> requested RM-4 alternative. <br /> 15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.