2006-04-21 TShockley - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

MOOERS:Just a couple of points Id like to make. First of all in the action by the Council one of the issues was considered waswhat the real impacts of these rezonings are. And in that case it became very apparent after testimony from the applicants that there was no impact because there was going to be no increase in the number of cars that were going there. In one case it was a CPR that was being converted to sub-divided lots. And in the other case the applicant was desirous to build a house for his 87 year old father who neither has a drivers license or an automobile. I think you do need to look at cumulative impacts. In this case the owners who are sitting next to me have a home at the top of Kaloko Mauka. They are now divorced and they would each like to have a house on each lot. The number of people going up and down Kaloko Mauka will not change. As far as Mr. Gimpels comments about the incentive for State and County action, my belief is that the incentive should be that theyre here to serve the public and that they have repeatedly noted that, that intersection is not safe and that, that incentive should be enough for them to take action. We shall see if these applicants have any influence on the bureaucracy of the Department of Transportation or not. I would suggest that eithertheCommissionortheDepartmentortheCouncilwouldhavefargreaterinfluencethana group of 4 or 5 random you know individuals from the community. Clearly the incentive is there for all of us, whether or not these rezonings are granted to have them make the improvements to that intersection. And I know I personally am making efforts to meet with representatives of the Department of Transportation to try to find maybe other incentives for them to make these improvements. The last point I guess I would make when the, Mr. Gimpel indicated that there should be a public benefit and I think there are public benefits to this Change of Zone Application. The public benefits are those that are identified in the resolution and that is number 1, the preservation of 80% of the forest where there are no conditions presently. That preservation is not only for a watershed but also for a habitat for native species. And the second thing, which is what were talking about today, is the solution to correcting this intersection deficiency and that is that these rezonings are required to pay roughly $10,000 per lot toward that intersection improvement. While the State has consistently commented that the intersection is a problem they have never placed this project on their STIP, their State Transportation Improvement Project list. So, while it may be insufficient in design according to their comments, they have not chosen to place it anywhere on their improvement project list. So in other words they dont have a project, theyre not funding it. So therefore the solution to this problem has been identified by the Council and by the Commission to be that we assess a fee of these rezonings and apply that fee toward making those improvements. So the benefits of this Change of Zone in addition to the preservation of 80% of the forest is to provide funding for this intersection improvement. ALAMEDA:Thank you Mr. Mooers. Any questions for our applicant or its representative Mr. Mooers before we go into a discussion mode? Seeing none. Pleasure of the Commissioners? Excuse me? Im not sure what the protocol might be given that you came a little late so let me ask Mr. Torigoe. The applicants representative, actually the applicant would like to say a few words. Does that fit protocol or? TORIGOE:Yeah. Are what stage are we at? ALAMEDA:Actually were moving into discussion phase but I guess before then we could give her an opportunity to say something? Could you please raise your right hand? All EXHIBIT C 9