My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2010-07-08 THNMP
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2010
>
2010-07-08 THNMP
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/14/2011 8:22:33 AM
Creation date
6/14/2011 8:22:30 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
YEH: IÓm not sure about that assumption. Because even on the plan approval which had an <br />expressed condition that tied that plan approval to compliance with this Ordinance 03-111, that <br />time condition expired there. The time conditions that apply to the construction of the roadway <br />improvements on Kahakai expired a year ago. Not until the Metcalf family said, hey, wait a <br />minute you guys gotta take another fresh look at this thing. We would have a big mess if we <br />werenÓt here, sitting here today and looking at these issues. I guess thatÓs my point. And then <br />the question is should the County and the State have been saddled with those kinds of costs that <br />are triggered as a result of this particular application? <br />WOODWARD: Okay, thank you. Mr. Weatherford, your turn. <br />th <br />WEATHERFORD: Thank you. My name is James Weatherford. I reside at 15-1886 6 <br />Avenue in Hawaiian Paradise Park, KeaÒau. And I have a farm in Phoa, also, and travel <br />through this area at least once a day. As a member of the community, the first question I have to <br />ask Î have the previous conditions been adhered to? And, of course, as itÓs clear they have not, I <br />have to ask why? And it brings to my mind a question as to whether the project has been <br />conducted in good faith with the laws and regulations that our community depends on. This <br />extension request has come late, it has come very late. And, again, itÓs an issue of credibility. <br />And I take issue with the comment by the attorney earlier that this development -- although I <br />donÓt oppose development per se but just another question of credibility -- it was said that <br />residents will have to drive, would have to drive beyond Phoa to get the services provided there. <br />ThatÓs not true. ThereÓs a pharmacy in Phoa, and there are food service establishments in <br />Phoa. So, again, I have to wonder about acting in good faith. <br /> <br />The result we see now is there is a real impending calamity of traffic snarl there. I donÓt know if <br />any of you have ever experienced this, but it is really, really quite shocking. ItÓs an issue of <br />safety. And in my understanding it has already impacted the MetcalfÓs business because when <br />the trucks and the cars were jammed up in the construction area there, their customers simply <br />cannot get to their store. If a customer canÓt get to your store theyÓre not going to buy <br />something. And if they donÓt buy something you wonÓt have a store pretty soon. <br /> <br />IÓm asking as a member of this community that the Planning Commission do the right thing. <br />You have an opportunity to partially redress the problem. We need conditions here, and at the <br />expense of the developer by the way, for taking care of the traffic problem that will occur. And <br />this needs to be done, of course, prior to the certificate of occupancy, prior to the opening of the <br />commercial development. I look forward to patronizing LongÓs Drugs myself if I need to, and <br />that is not the issue. The issue is that this has not been done right. You have a chance now to <br />redress at least some of it. Please do that. Thank you. <br /> <br />WOODWARD: Thank you. Any questions for Mr. Weatherford? Commissioner Domingo. <br /> <br />DOMINGO: Mr. Chairman, just for information, the Police Department, or what IÓm hearing <br />here now is totally different from what the Police Department has said in response to the request. <br />It said, ÐStaff upon reviewing the provided documents associated with the requested 5-year time <br />8 <br /> EXHIBIT A <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.