|
On the other issue, Commissioner Rho raised some very pertinent questions relating to the
<br />validity of the data that was used; and we did have the traffic consultant examine those
<br />questions. And basically what he said, and which I passed out and shared with the
<br />Commissioners earlier, was that, true, the year that was used was I think 2002 and it was not like,
<br />you know, truly dated, because the traffic has certainly increased since that period of time. But
<br />what they did was in the absence of any data from the State DOT, what the consultant did was to
<br />use the highest growth projection and use that as your ambient traffic forecast. And, likewise,
<br />also, in terms of why, you know, in terms of like the school, you know, having the traffic counts
<br />taken on non-school days versus like the school day, he recognized also the deficiency behind
<br />that approach and, as a result, took the higher projection.
<br />There was also like another issue, it was a written issue, and I believe a person testified also,
<br />about the potential effects that a project like this could have like on the marine life in that area,
<br />you know, it was the turtles, or opihi, or whatever have you. So we had both Dr. Dollar and Dr.
<br />Tom Nance evaluate the question, and we also provided a response to that. And essentially what
<br />Dr. Nance and Dr. Dollar pointed out was that many of the pesticides that was cited as being,
<br />you know, really deleterious to the environment are no longer sanctioned by both the DEPA as
<br />well as the State Department of Health. For example, like chlordane, which is very, you know,
<br />which was historically very popular for termite, ground termite treatment, but it’s no longer
<br />allowed.
<br />Finally, like in terms of the other issues, I’m just kind of reiterating some of the questions that
<br />were posed earlier relating to the traffic and the evacuation route, I realized that that has been
<br />like a concern for the community and the Commission, as well as for the Applicant. I think that
<br />if you look at the Director’s proposed condition, Condition No. 7, his revised condition, it
<br />requires the Applicant to provide a north-south and mauka-makai kind of connection; and the
<br />Applicant has absolutely no reason not to agree with that.
<br />A touchdown to the Alii Parkway could be had provided that the Department of Public Works
<br />allows that opening. And so if the County allows it, allows a breach to the Parkway for
<br />emergency access purpose, then the Applicant would, you know, definitely comply with that;
<br />and in that way and so doing it not only address the evacuation needs for this particular project
<br />but also for the general community.
<br />If you were to look at the staff’s, I mean, the Background Report and, you know, the Planning
<br />and Environmental Report on Figure 2, it provides, there’s like a tax map, you know, of that
<br />area. And I think that should enable the Planning Commissioners to get a better sense in terms
<br />of, you know, the location of this property relative to the Laaloa Street proposed mauka-makai
<br />extension and like how this property fits into the overall scheme of things.
<br />There’s also like a requirement that the developer provide a left-turn lane at Alii Drive, you
<br />know, into the property, as well as making all of the necessary shoulder and related
<br />improvements to allow for a continuous flow of pedestrian traffic along Alii Drive, ‘cause that is
<br />a relatively heavy traffic area.
<br />The developer is also proposing that where the entrance to their property comes off of another
<br />parcel of land, which is also the subject of this SMA, so about like 6 or 7,000 square foot of land,
<br />that also provides access to the County’s wastewater pump station. And so what the Applicant is
<br />EXHIBIT B
<br />6
<br />
<br />
|