My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2008-07-18 TKONACDP
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2008
>
2008-07-18 TKONACDP
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/14/2011 8:37:21 AM
Creation date
6/14/2011 8:37:17 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
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
ALAMEDA: Mr. Chair. <br />WATANABE: Mr. Alameda. <br />ALAMEDA: I’m just curious and a little perplexed. Why wouldn’t you want to add <br />something that makes sense, to me at least? <br />HERKES: It’s already in the Plan; there is already improvements. To open it up to <br />adding things if somebody else wants to add something, somebody else wants to add something <br />– the Plan is a well-balanced document; it has some very good planning philosophies in it. And <br />safety improvements are already in the Plan. Mamalahoa is already on line to be improved <br />through the scenic byways. So why would you add that one? <br />ALAMEDA: So the idea of somebody adding something here and something there <br />concerns you. <br />HERKES: Yes, it does. <br />ALAMEDA: Because -? <br />HERKES: It throws the balance of the Plan off. <br />ALAMEDA: But those somebodies are part of the community; I mean, that’s the <br />Community Development Plan. So I’m a little confused on that. But thank you anyway. <br />WATANABE: Okay. We’ve talked quite a bit specifically about Mamalahoa Highway. <br />And in Mr. Murata’s testimony he did indicate he was more concerned about it returning to rural <br />nature and the safety. Possibly that’s not necessarily something that goes into a Community <br />Development Plan where you are talking potentially more about, you know, arterial roads and <br />the size of the roads; maybe this is something that is more Public Works kind of an issue where <br />we are addressing, you know, roadway maintenance. And like I indicated earlier, I have the <br />feeling that if some of the other major arterial connections do eventually materialize, that people <br />will not select that particular route; they are selecting that route because of the current congested <br />traffic conditions. <br />ALAMEDA: Mr. Chair. <br />WATANABE: Yes. <br />ALAMEDA: In response. I don’t see it so much as the issue as opening up the Plan for <br />amendments. That’s what I see the issue really is all about, not so much the road. So the <br />question that I have, maybe later on in deliberation, is what is the danger of opening it up for <br />amendments now because that’s part of the process, huh? Or no – I don’t know. <br />WATANABE: Yeah, I’m not entirely against that, either. Okay, thank you, thank you. <br />Okay, last call. Yes, Mr. Matsukawa, I assume you’d like to testify. <br />EXHIBIT D <br />14 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.