2003-04-17 thaks - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

KUBOTA:Full movement which is left and right, they can -? FUKE:Correct. Yeah. KUBOTA:Come in and out? They are now, the Department is saying there will be full access on one of the lots, which is 38. So you're asking that another be allowed on 37? FUKE:That's correct. KUBOTA:In the event that the sale or the development is done separately? FUKE:Correct. KUBOTA:I may be way off base and I may not understand the traffic flow and the conditions that egress-ingress provides on a side street like Laukapu Street, but it seems only fair to me that each lot be given an access point. And if the, if it were that these two lots were owned by two separate people, you would be allowing that anyway, wouldn't we? It just so happens that this, these two lots, 37 and 38, belong to the same person. But had you and I owned these lots separately, I don't think we would force each, I don't think the Planning Department would force us to have common egress and ingress points. And I think that's the point I'm trying to make, where's this element of fairness if the Applicant wants it? If they don't, well, that's another story, but they're here asking for that consideration; and I think it's only fair that we do consider. GALDONES:Commissioner Kubota, is that a statement or are you asking for a response? KUBOTA:It's just a statement. GALDONES:Okay. Thank you. KUBOTA:And being that Department of Public Works doesn't specifically speak against that move, they don't refer to it as a no-no. GALDONES:I just got a question before I call upon Commissioner Springer. This is the second applicant that we are being faced with, and the Public Works statements have been questioned. Are they mandated to be here at a meeting, the Commissioners' meeting, or is it upon request that we do -? I'm not sure who to direct that question to. 14