My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2012-11-15 Leeward Exh A - Riverbend
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2012
>
2012-11-15 Leeward Exh A - Riverbend
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/14/2012 1:17:42 PM
Creation date
12/14/2012 1:17:35 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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
the shopping center on that side. But, yes, this is a very tight situation with this development. And <br />that’s why in my review I -. By the way, I had to draft up my own illustration of where, to scale, of <br />where those entrances are to try to figure out whether I thought there was going to be any feasibility <br />at all of this working out. And that’s why I recommended a traffic circulation plan that showed all <br />of this on one plan where you also considered what the necessary length of turn lanes and so forth <br />and whether they could fit within the area. And this is definitely going to take some in-depth <br />consideration for traffic movements and whether such movements can be made across two lanes of <br />traffic without a signal. And it does require additional sight distance for making those additional in- <br />width movements. So, yes, those things are taken into consideration, but it has to be something that <br />the consultant presents in depth. And that’s why you either do it before this thing gets approved, in <br />which case Department of Public Works has a chance to review that and vet that or -. That’s why <br />we put it in as a condition of approval, and the Planning Director did insert it as a condition. <br /> <br />FUKE: That’s your proposed, that’s the Director’s proposed Condition H, which basically reads <br />that the applicant shall submit a multi-modal road and traffic circulation plan prepared by a licensed <br />civil engineer prior to final plan approval. Is that the one? <br /> <br />EMLER: Yeah. <br /> <br />GIFFIN: Okay. Sid, are you pau, or did you want to say anything else? <br /> <br />FUKE: Basically I’m done. I just got -. The reason why -. I think that Ki’s comments are very <br />pertinent and -. <br /> <br />GIFFIN: Yeah, I do, too. <br /> <br />FUKE: The community’s, too. So I just wanted to, you know, have placed on the record that there <br />is an opportunity that when, you know, what was shown there is all in concept, and so obviously, <br />prior to their finalizing the plans, a lot of these additional technical studies would have to be done <br />and vetted by the Department of Public Works, and Public Works in turn will take into account all <br />of the existing driveways before sanctioning where would be the most appropriate location for a <br />driveway on Paniolo Avenue would be. <br /> <br />GIFFIN: Okay. Commissioners, any questions of Mr. Fuke? Lani. <br /> <br />BOWMAN: I do. Just a quick question. You mentioned that the landowners discussed about the <br />park above, they had land above the Stables. <br /> <br />FUKE: Yes. <br /> <br />BOWMAN: Would be, you know – oops, now where is the picture, yeah – so -. <br /> <br />FUKE: Yeah, you can see the Stables. And so above of the, they own properties on the mauka side <br />of that. <br /> <br />BOWMAN: Okay, so mauka. And, you probably don’t know, but, is that like a, is that a roadway <br />that runs right next to the place where the people live? What is, yeah, what is that? Is it a roadway? <br /> <br />PUBLIC: Utility. Fire break. <br />19 <br />EXHIBIT A <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.