My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2004-12-02 THOAWE
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2004
>
2004-12-02 THOAWE
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/14/2011 4:00:20 PM
Creation date
6/14/2011 4:00:18 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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
SPRINGER:This goes to the Planning Director and perhaps Mr. Emler. Im <br />looking at Exhibit C, the second page, Item 3, which indicates Palani Road, the County <br />road serving Pamahoa Place, is a primary arterial road. And it goes on to say that It is <br />substandard based on width, alignment and roadside hazard clearances. Palani Road <br />should be improved to an 80-ft. right-of way according to the Countys General Plan. <br />Average daily volume was 15450 vehicles per day in 2002. This will be identified as a <br />deficient link based on daily volume under criteria established in the 1998 Hawaii Long <br />Range Transportation Plan. Im wondering if I might have a discussion of that comment <br />with regard to this application and a statement by the Applicant that this application does <br />nothing to increase the density that has already been approved. <br />FUJIKAWA:Mr. Emler? <br />EMLER:Well,becausetheissueofconcurrencyontrafficissueshavecome <br />up in the recent past on other applications, we thought we should make a comment <br />regarding what the daily traffic volumes were or are on Palani Road and make a <br />statement about what, in comparison to what some traffic volume standards have been <br />established in the, and, using some type of source as like a guideline to determine what, <br />how it compares. And there is a table in the 1998 Long Range Transportation Plan that <br />gives a very basic comparison of daily traffic volumes to level of service; and it indicates <br />that this would be deficient link based on those traffic volumes. <br />SPRINGER:Mr. Emler -. May I continue? <br />FUJIKAWA:Go ahead. <br />SPRINGER:Mr. Emler, the Applicants representative has indicated that this <br />application does nothing to change the population density. And so there, I imagine, the <br />implication is so there would be no increase in numbers of cars on the road. Is that <br />accurate to the Applicant? <br />HARLOW:That would be true if the four lots, the four existing lots, were <br />developed with two homes, a primary dwelling and an ohana dwelling. Because the <br />Applicant owns all four lots and has the necessary water commitments from the <br />Department of Water Supply, that is completely within the realm of possibility now. <br />SPRINGER:Thank you. So, Mr. Emler, I guess, and maybe Mr. Yuen can enter <br />into this discussion as well, Im just trying to understand how to take the Department of <br />Public Works observation that we have conditions of substandards and deficiency with <br />what the Applicant is representing. <br />EMLER:Well, given the Applicants response to that issue, I dont disagree <br />or Public Works would not disagree with that assessment, that if they were to develop <br />ohana dwellings on these lots, in other words, two dwellings per existing lot, it would not <br />increase the potential traffic generation from the properties to subdivide them, otherwise <br />6 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.