Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0331.009 2020-2022 PAC, 6111161 COMM.351 From: Thomas Yeh Sent: Monday, August 16, 2021 11:52 AM To: Council Testimony Cc: Aileen Yeh; Hank Correa; hank3@hankcorrea.com; Zendo KerrcOuNTY CLERK Subject: Testimony re Bill 57-Planning Committee Agenda for Augu@()XMT-Y0gW HAWAII Attachments: Bill 57-August 12, 2021 Email from T. Yeh to App-licants.pdf RECEIVED Tiw6�.�. 2 �M Date- AUG 1 6 2021 Aloha Chair Kierkiewicz and Members of the Planning Committee, As of the date and time of this email, I am submitting this written testimony,given the deadline for same. Please refer to our prior written testimony of July 30, 2021 for a detailed description and photos depicting our concerns regarding the use of a 50 foot wide easement to serve as a combined access for the proposed subdivision and Life Care Center use for vehicle and parking purposes. After your committee meeting of August 3, 2021, 1 spoke briefly with Hank Correa about our concerns,and he mentioned the willingness to accommodate parking along with a possible swale, presumably for pedestrian use. I mentioned existing curbs on the Life Care Center side of the 50 foot wide easement could remain as is. Thereafter, on Thursday,August 12, 2021,the Planning Dept forwarded a somewhat cryptic proposal from the Applicants sent to the Planning Dept. and my old email address that had been sent on the same day,which indicated Applicant would be"willing to create a three foot compacted gravel swath to allow for better walkability along our boundary." No further design details for the rest of easement were provided, or the location of the"gravel swath". On the same date, I sent an email to the Applicants indicating that a gravel swath would have maintenance issues. I suggest that within the easement,there be sufficient paving width to allow for parking, as well as a paved swale for pedestrian use, a less costly design which has been used with success in other contexts(as an alternative to curbs,gutters and sidewalks), and that Applicant might want to work with an engineer to provide conceptual design elements. Attached is a copy of the August 12 email to the Applicants. I forwarded a copy of same to the Planning Dept.this morning,for their information. Should I hear back from the Applicants before Wednesday's meeting, I will do my best to let you know. In the meantime, should there be any questions, I can be reached at this email, or at the following 808 numbers: 961-0055 (b), 937-2437 (c). It is my intent that this written testimony be in lieu of oral testimony unless I am requested to attend. I plan to be in Kona for some other matters on Wednesday. Much appreciated, Tom Comm. No.- Ref. To: PIP& Ref, Date AUG 1 8 20 11ltfl J/ Subject: Bill 57 From: Thomas Yeh Date: 8/12/2021, 3:56 PM To: Hank@hankcorrea.com, hank3@hankcorrea.com BCC: Aileen Yeh Hank and Henry, Christian Kay from Planning forwarded your email of today tome. Am sending from my current email address. In looking at the subdivision code, Section 23--34 does require that subdivided lots are to abut upon an approved private street, and hence, the issue of what improvements should or may be required for the easement are pertinent to the subject ordinance. Sections 23-89 and 23-91 in turn do allow for the Planning Director to recommend and the Council to require certain improvements on a street, including CGS. So the issue of what internal roads mean in the ordinance is both a DPW and Planning issue. As you know, our main concern is that with subdivision traffic, together with existing conditions, there needs to be sufficient area/width for vehicle use, parking and pedestrians to safely pass through, across and along the easement. When I spoke to Hank last week, I indicated that the curbs on the Life Cafe Center are fine. Hank mentioned improving enough area for vehicles to park and some type of swale along the boundary of your lot. I suggested he talk to an engineer to discuss possible design elements. While I understand that you have suggested compacted gravel for pedestrian use along your boundary, as we might anticipate, that will deteriorate over time, and also result in weeds and grass growth. Our suggestion is that there be sufficient paving width to allow for parking and also paved swales for pedestrians, in lieu of CGS on your side of the easement, to be approved by the Planning dept in conjunction with DPW. The design can be similar to the subdivision by the golf course. It will also be of benefit to the subdivision. An engineer should be able to provide some comments or input on design elements. I suspect Life Care Center would be willing to pitch in, but am not sure if you have been in contact with them. Let me know if the above works. Tom 1 of 1 8/12/2021,3:56 P�