2007-11-16 TKILGORE - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

run up to 14 stalls. So we were more than happy to try to get the extra 3 in there for 17, but the Kona Traffic Safety Committee was really shooting for, I think, 2 per unit, so 22. Theoretically that’s possible if we utilize tandem parking along the southern edge of the site at 14, 15, 16 and 17 listed as stalls there, but from a practical standpoint it’s extremely difficult and not very pretty to look at. There is a revision to the parking ordinance that’s pending that would further complicate the issue. But at this point in time we’d like to run with the 17 stalls that we’ve provided. RHO: I’m not clear on that. You said 13 covered? KILGORE: Yes. There is a dash line on the site plan that indicates the extent of the upper floor, and our current -. We have 2 stalls on the north side and 2 stalls on the south side that are actually half-covered. RHO: And that comes out to 17. KILGORE: Total 17. RHO: How many are visitor? KILGORE: Well, one could assume 3, if the ordinance requirement is 14. The 2 out front on north and south sides that was 4 total. RHO: So for residents you have 14. KILGORE: Yes. I mean we could, that would be subject to the, I guess, CC&Rs of the condominium, but we think that, well, without getting too obligated, delete but we could probably provide 2 visitor parking or three, yeah. YEH: Yeah, I think part of the – if I can add a little bit to the discussion – but part of the demographics for the ownership of the units, there is a good chunk of owners who will be like second home owners who probably won’t have 2 cars per unit. And from a practical standpoint, I think, you know, if experience really shows that parking is an issue, you know, as you get all these units sold and occupied or used, there always is going to be a natural push. Let’s say the association of owners, they hear that, hey, we don’t have enough parking for our guests or visitors, from a real practical standpoint or for the owners, they will probably do what they can to try to squeeze more parking on there. But for right now even where the way the footprint is, I think from an aesthetic and design standpoint, it is believed that that number of stalls is sufficient. And we have some disagreement with the current parking ordinance even in terms of how we get to the numbers that they do. I don’t know if there’s really any study that’s been based, or predicated for these new numbers that are coming out now. So I think given the current code requirement of 1.25 per unit and then the additional I think 3 stalls that’s going to get put in, I think it’s believed to be sufficient at this time. So I think that’s just the basic answer that we can provide at this time. KILGORE: And in the historical reference the previous estimate had 12 units and 16 parking stalls, and we have 11 units and 17 stalls. EXHIBIT B 14