My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2003-11-21 tplant
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003
>
2003-11-21 tplant
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/14/2011 3:51:45 PM
Creation date
6/14/2011 3:51:41 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
29
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
GALDONES:Excuse me, IÓll have to -. Later on you can testify. <br />FUJIKAWA:So, anyway, my question with the Director now is that what are we <br />doing advising a private landowner how to do it? Because if, in case thereÓs a liability <br />situation, itÓs a private road. So how do you take care this? <br />CARDOZA:But just remember, thatÓs when they, when they wanted to <br />acres, that was part of the infrastructure. <br />FUJIKAWA:Well, that was the past there. But now present is that all of you are <br />liable for the road. So the question with the Director I have is -. I donÓt think the County <br />should get involved with this. <br />CARDOZA:And they didnÓt make any difference before and now, laws are <br />laws. <br />GALDONES:Mr. Yuen? <br />YUEN:As part of rezoning, we should look at safety of the road, even, and <br />the adequacy of the road, even if it is a private road. We, in working this application up, <br />we did rely on the comments of the Department of Public Works that the road is in pretty <br />good condition. I think actually the road is a pretty good road for this level of <br />development, except for, and IÓm not familiar with the upper part of the road. The <br />intersection comes at a, thereÓs a little funny angle at the intersection; and, Mr. Cardoza, I <br />donÓt have any reason to doubt him talks about there being a bad curve on it. We are <br />dealing with, we canÓt simply say that it used to be zoned for 25 and now itÓs now going <br />to be zoned for less. Because in developing that 25, they were going to have to improve <br />the road substantially from what it is now. It doesnÓt look to me like those improvements <br />actually -. I drive by that intersection all the time and I know nothing has ever been done <br />at that intersection. I donÓt know about the road itself. And looking at the subdivision <br />file, it does not look like the road improvements were required for that subdivision and <br />the reason was that subdivision, in turn, did not create any more lots. It was what we call <br />a consolidation/resubdivision. <br />I hear the Commissioners saying, I donÓt think -. This question that Mr. Cradoza is <br />raising of make the first person do a big job and then have the other people reimburse <br />later, it comes up all the time; itÓs very difficult to do in practice. There are mechanisms <br />for doing it but theyÓre quite cumbersome. There are things like Improvement Districts <br />and the like. I donÓt think itÓs something that for a small project like this we could put in <br />place. If the Commission, you know, the Commission has several options here. The <br />Commission can continue and get more comments from the Department of Public Works. <br />I think that the minimal, as I say, theyÓre talking about a minimal increase in the use of <br />the property in this rezoning, from what is. I think you actually have four lots there now, <br />am I correct? You have four lots on the property now? <br />18 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.