2007-01-05 tginger - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

research on this. In California, for example, if you’re going to use one of the State highways when you’re looking for a rezoning they have a standard. And so if you’re coming in for an application then they’ll -. Somebody has to make a decision is it going to generate more than “x” number of trips. But that’s a fairly simple analysis to make. There’s a handbook that people work from for that. And then if you’re going to go over it then they want to see, they’ll notice that they’re going to ask for it. And as far as I know we don’t have a standard thing from either our Public Works Department or DOT as to when they’ll ask for the TIAR. And what happened, you know, I’ll just leave it at that. I’m not sure, Commissioner Alameda asked what kinds of things you might see, what the analysis will show with a TIAR. Typically say you have an existing intersection, they’ll analyze if you have a convenience store, gas station type of development, which I think is the general idea here, how many trips are anticipated; then they’ll look at the traffic on the road and they’ll look at what the delays are, typical delays that would be expected at an unsignalized intersection, they would tell you that. They would look at, you would have a cue, and say, take that -. There is an existing left-turn lane on Puainako Street to turn into Kekela. They’ll look at the cue by how many cars are going to line up on that and if it looks like too many cars will want to line up on that then the TIAR, if the people that are doing it are straight they will say, well, we recommend lengthening the left-turn lane. What I mean when I say that people doing it are straight, they will, you know, the engineers are supposed look at the TIAR, the engineer preparing the TIAR is also supposed to look at the analysis and recommend things that should be done to solve the problems. So that’s the kind of thing you might get. It might also be a signalization. But, you know, in defense of the way we’re processing this and the condition that we have -. If the system works, and I don’t know if Chair Graham meant it to sound this way, but the DOT is supposed to be looking at the public interest in say traffic flow along Puainako Street. I mean, they are the people that are supposed to be looking at that as their priority. And so the way that the condition is intended to work is that when the TIAR is done and the DOT looks at it, just to give a couple of examples, if you need a longer left-turn lane on Puainako Street DOT is supposed to say do it, and our condition says if DOT says to do it you must do it. If it says you need to signalize Kekela Street and DOT thinks that’s a good idea, then they will say Ginger Patch signalize Kekela Street intersection, and our condition says that you have to do it. So if we proceed with it on this basis, that’s the way it would work. If we have the TIAR in hand we would have a better idea of what kinds of things would possibly be called for. GRAHAM: If I may, just in my own personal response to what Mr. Yuen said about what my intention was with my comment is that, you know, let’s say DOT says given the volumes that are expected it is unsafe to have any left-turn lane going into Kekela Street anymore so you guys have to blot out the left-turn lane and then this project is okay. But there may be a lot of people that are using the left-turn lane and those people would say gee, we shouldn’t approve this project if you’re taking away our left-turn lane. But the DOT is not in a position to say, well, you can’t do the project because you shouldn’t take away the left-turn lane. That’s really more the County Council and our responsibility. So I’m not faulting the DOT on looking out for the public interest. It’s just that we will have gone too far downstream to deal with some issues that may arise as a result of what the DOT wants. Any other comments/questions from the Commissioners before I bring up the applicant? Yes, Commissioner Iwashita. EXHIBIT B 6