2010-04-01 TWAILANI - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

existing language as it’s currently written. And basically what it says is that, you know, Wiliwili Street, for example, shall be reserved, you know, like only for emergency access . What we’re suggesting here is that if the neighborhood at some point in time determines that there really is a need for like, you know, to remove the bollards permanently, you know, then this condition, the proposed language would enable the Planning Director after discussing it with the community to kind of lift that condition without formally having to go and amend this particular condition. That’s all we’re saying, just giving the Director or the administration the opportunity to lift it, if the community so desires that that restriction be lifted. On Condition U relating to the updated TIAR, again, we did submit a traffic impact analysis report; and we agree with the staff’s recommendation that, you know, because the development kind of stretches into “x” number of years that it may not be realistic, so you may need to have the traffic studies periodically updated so that you know exactly when certain requirements get triggered. All we’re saying here is that when the updated traffic study is done or when it’s required, we would want to have it required at the time of plan approval or at the time the subdivision application for a development is submitted, not when you’re ready to get your certificate of occupancy permit or when you’re ready to get final subdivision approval, because that’s kind of too late. You know, we want that requirement to be articulated way up front so that whatever costs that’s associated with doing the development can all be wrapped up into the infrastructure cost itself. That’s all Condition U is stating. It’s not stating that, you know, they’re going to be running away from that, escaping from any responsibility. We just want the requirements to be articulated much earlier than later. Condition W, again, it’s pretty much the same thing. All we’re just saying is that, you know, in terms of not having it applied to a bulk lot subdivision. And, you know, if you noticed like the last sentence of Condition W it says that the applicant shall maintain the two major floodways free of debris, obstruction, etc., etc. What we’re saying is that, we’re trying to be more proactive and try to think from the County’s perspective because, you know, 20 years down the line, you know, applicant, which is Wailani, may no longer be here and then you’re going to have all these different entities that’s, you know, a shopping center here, medical facility here, then the question becomes who then should become responsible for maintaining all of that. So all we’re saying is that let the applicant provide a program of maintenance of this area and let it be approved by Public Works, and let that dictate what and when and who should make all these maintenance responsibilities for the stream beds. Condition Y relative to the FIRM and FEMA, again, you know, this relates to the bulk lot subdivision. Likewise with Condition DD. Condition HH is purely an editorial changing from be to me, I mean me to be. And, finally, on Condition K which is kind of a like a substantive proposal, or at least like a substantive amendment, it relates to the fair share. All we’re stating here is to make clear that since the developer is absorbing the responsibility of constructing this Ponahawai Street Extension which has regional benefits, and if they’re going to be providing a park that’s eventually going to be dedicated to the County, and if the County accepts it, then to please enable the developer appropriate fair share credit from the roadway and the park and recreational component, because they are doing things that are not necessarily peculiar to their project but something that has much more of a regional impact. WOODWARD: All right. 9 EXHIBIT C