2007-01-05 tginger - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

not new. So as this project unfolds I guess my question really is why is it that we don’t require the TIAR prior to our Commission meeting? You know, I mean, if it was a project where we really don’t know that traffic would be a problem, I could see it coming to us and I could see a recommendation or the Condition E listed as is. But sitting here for the last hour and a half, my question is why isn’t it that all of this stuff isn’t address prior to the Commission meeting so that at the Commission meeting we can have the materials so that a judgment can be made or a decision can be made and the developer can either proceed or stop? I mean, this whole discussion for an hour and half is traffic. It has nothing to do with whether or not it’s a good project, it’s beneficial to the community, etc. It’s just a right-turn/left-turn. Excuse me, but I just don’t get it. And we’re going, I mean, I guess the Council has its own thing about West Hawaii and Kohala. So is everything going to stop really truly on traffic? Cause we have that in West Hawaii; and I guess in Kohala, I don’t know, I don’t live there. Anyway, that’s just a comment and I really don’t expect an answer. But I guess I needed to say that because it seemed like we’re spending an inordinate amount of time on this project that I think we all kind of agree that we want it to go except for traffic. Thank you. YUEN: I think that there was a comment like this right at the beginning of the discussion. Given, I understand the discomfort of the Commissioners. I think that what we need to do as a Department is to try to flag this sort of thing, you know, up front and try to develop our own radar as to when we should tell an applicant that -. You know, we typically, sometimes the applicant will discuss things with us beforehand. Typically though we get an application over the counter and it has usually, as in this case for example, it has the elements that you normally expect to see in an application; and then we process it along. We send it to the Department of Transportation and they would say they want a TIAR. And at that point we’re well along in the processing. We have a certain time to bring it to the Commission; and if the applicant does not voluntarily extend the time, you know, we’re obligated to bring it to the Commission. But we could try, you know, I think we should try to, at an early stage when it’s clear that traffic is going to be a major consideration, try to determine whether we’re going to say that you need to provide additional traffic studies before we send your application along.I mean, we could do that. And this is a level of prescreening that we will need to do in the Department. As I say there are places where they have, you know, a set criteria. You know, if you’re going to generate “x” number of trips you do a TIAR. And we would look at doing that. You know, being a small county we’ve tended to do things on a case-by-base basis; and whereas, you know, I did some research and I see oh, you know, Santa Clara county for example, in California with a million, you know, couple of million people they have it really spelled out so that a shopping center “x” amount of size seeking a rezoning, they have a rule that you’re going to have to submit a TIAR. We haven’t done that in Hawaii County. All I can say is I think what you’re saying is valid, that if we feel that this is the kind of decision that should be done at the rezoning stage and not left to an administrative stage, you know, where you’re having the DOT make the decision on the access then, okay, let’s get everything out front; and then we’ll try to flag situations where it may be, where we would at least try to anticipate this level of discomfort and move on, and let the applicant know that they’re going to have to give us something more. EXHIBIT B 23