My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2016-07-21 Leeward Exh B (Amend SMA 05-007)
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2016
>
2016-07-21 Leeward Exh B (Amend SMA 05-007)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/15/2016 3:57:11 PM
Creation date
9/15/2016 3:57:08 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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
<br />MCMICHAEL: — Two thousand and, March 2005, 2011 and 2013 were the last studies at <br />Kahalu‘u, and then the other one was as of March 2016. <br /> <br />KAHOLO: Okay, thank you. If I read the paper right yesterday, I see something different. <br />That’s my concern. What I’ve seen in yesterday’s West Hawai‘i paper, it tells me something <br />different. It was in the front page, headline. So, now, when your data says that, okay, I’m a little <br />concerned from what the Department of Public Works came out with and presented to the <br />Council for them to decide what route they’re going. So with that said, you know, I only read <br />that there, because your data is where you are at, what I read is what I read, and what the Council <br />decided, that’s what they decided, so. Thank you. <br /> <br />MCMICHAEL: Okay, but this was from the County, the report I got from Ron Thiel. He <br />emailed it to me, so it’s his report. And they did not mention that Kahului-Keauhou Parkway <br />and the Lako was included in the study. They failed to do that. And that would have alleviated <br />the traffic for sure. And that’s the whole thing, if you, without the project, that was the traffic <br />study. And that was paid for by Stanford Carr, the developer. And DOT use their study as <br />analyzing it because that’s the study that they emailed me, too, so. <br /> <br />KAHOLO: Thank you for your opinion. <br /> <br />MCMICHAEL: Okay. <br /> <br />UNGER: Thank you. Commissioners, reminder, we have a motion on the table open for <br />discussion and comment. I have a comment. I’ll be supporting the motion. I also agree that <br />while the petitioner’s concerns are valid and real and things that we are all taking into <br />consideration, I just don’t see how her interest are separate from the general public. And the <br />process here is to address the concerns from the general public, so these issues and her issues <br />will be heard as part of the process. So I will be supporting the motion. Any other comments? <br />Staff, roll call, please. <br /> <br />DARROW: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The motion before us is to deny standing. With that, <br />we’ll take the roll call. Commissioner Carr Smith? <br /> <br />CARR SMITH: Aye. <br /> <br />DARROW: Commissioner Kaholo? <br /> <br />KAHOLO: Aye. <br /> <br />DARROW: Commissioner Nobriga? <br /> <br />NOBRIGA: Aye. <br /> <br />DARROW: Commissioner Shimaoka? <br /> <br />13 <br />EXHIBIT B <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.