|
And then kind of this, the way the proposed condition is structured, that the Director is
<br />recommending, that improvement would need to be done, would need to start within five years
<br />and be completed within ten years of the date of the amended ordinance. And, then there's a
<br />second component to that which says that when future developers come in, individual developers
<br />that do the subdivisions or other commercial components, they would then need to add the curb,
<br />gutter, sidewalk to the roadway before getting Final Subdivision Approval.
<br />So, Condition P, this is the Director's proposed condition, I believe. Let me make sure. No, this
<br />was the Applicant's original Condition P proposal. So, the two that you want to look at today are
<br />the Director's proposals in the goldenrod for Condition P and then the Applicant's most recent
<br />proposal for amendment in the handout that you received today. And, the only difference
<br />between the two is that the, there's no commitment on the part of the Applicant to provide curb,
<br />gutter, and sidewalk improvements at some future date.
<br />Moving onto Condition Q. Condition Q, the Department of Public Works does not support this
<br />condition change. This was to remove the access restrictions onto Mohouli Street or Komohana
<br />Street so that the Applicant could have a driveway directly from the project site onto those
<br />streets. So, the Department of Public Works is okay with having road lots built and connect to
<br />the arterial streets, but they and the Planning Department are not supportive of having driveways
<br />connect directly to the arterial streets. And, one of the main reasons for that is the purpose of an
<br />arterial street is to move people quickly, and the more you add driveways, it kind of defeats the
<br />purpose and function of the roadway.
<br />And, let's see here. So, Condition R, again I want to point out that for Condition R, you want to
<br />look at the Director's recommended condition as well as the Applicant's most recent revision
<br />that they're requesting. So, the reason the Director is not supportive of the amendment to
<br />Condition R is that even though the subdivision does not mandate curb, gutter, sidewalk
<br />improvements for residential subdivisions, the pedestrian roadway standards in this Code have
<br />not been updated since 1983. So, the Subdivision Code is fairly outdated when it comes to
<br />providing complete streets. As I'm sure you are aware, Hawaii County has placed a greater
<br />emphasis on implementing complete streets to provide safe pedestrian and bicycle facilities on
<br />our public roadways. This is to improve the overall health of the community.
<br />The Subdivision Code does provide the Director with discretion of providing sidewalk
<br />improvements. It's also the policy of Public Works to require these curb, gutter, sidewalk
<br />improvements for all residential subdivisions on lots sized 10,000 square feet or smaller. And,
<br />so that's why you'll see the Applicant's most recent request for amending the condition. They
<br />are acknowledging Public Works' policy, and they are basically saying, okay, well, let us, let's,
<br />we agree to provide curb, gutter, sidewalk on lots smaller than 10,000 square feet in residential
<br />subdivisions, but they are still seeking that relief for lots greater than 10,000 square feet in
<br />residential areas.
<br />And, then—let me go back here. So, that's the presentation I provided last time. Since then,
<br />Chair Clarkson, you contacted staff and asked for some additional information on underground
<br />utilities as well as connectivity, so do you want me to present that now? I've added a couple
<br />more slides to explain that.
<br />EXHIBIT C
<br />7
<br />
|