Laserfiche WebLink
a. The Required Public Roads were not designed or constructed/built to dedicable <br /> County Standard. <br /> Conditions M(4) and L(4) of Ordinance 96-7 and 96-8 (respectively) require that "[p]rior <br /> to the issuance of Final Subdivision Approval for any portion of the subject property" Oceanside <br /> "shall . . . construct the extension of Halekii Street through the subject property . . . which phasing <br /> of improvements shall be approved by the Department of Public Works." Condition M(5) and <br /> L(5)of Ordinance 96-7 and 96-8 (respectively)require Oceanside to"provide roadway stub-outs[, <br /> the Connector Road]. . . to provide future connections between the subject property and the <br /> adjacent properties to the north and south; provided that such stub-outs shall be constructed in <br /> accordance with the construction phasing as approved by the Department of Public Works." <br /> Section 16 of the Development Agreement also echoes this language, stating that"OCEANSIDE <br /> shall provide roadway stub-outs[, the Halekii Extension and Connector Road], to provide future <br /> connections between the [Hokulia Lands] and its adjacent north and south boundaries". <br /> Oceanside has expressly admitted to its failure to design and construct/build the Required <br /> Public Roads to Dedicable County Standards. First, in its 2010 application for the Variance, <br /> Oceanside admits to the fact that the Mauka Halekii Extension does not meet right-of-way <br /> standards as set out under applicable County Code. See Exhibit "7" (requesting relief from <br /> improvements made to right-of-way). Further, in a letter dated January 23, 2020, Oceanside <br /> expressly admits and acknowledges that the Connector Road and Makai Halekii Extension were <br /> "constructed in 1999, based on a non-dedicable roadway design approved by the Department of <br /> Public Works at the time, and these improvements were completed a short time later" and that <br /> rather than dedicate the two roadways the County should allow them "to remain in private <br /> ownership, based on the current `as-built' construction, without improving the roadways to a <br /> County-dedi cable standard." Exhibit "4". There, Oceanside also admits that the Mauka Halekii <br /> 14 <br /> 843682 <br /> 16 <br />