COM 1077.001 2018-2020 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

CDP was reviewed, and they made that expressed policy commitment that this is your best place to have a TOD. So if—but it requires the participation and cooperation of the landowner—so, what happens, if you have the property all, you know, go back to Ag -5, I don't want to have any more headache and just chop it up into a five -acre lot subdivision based on the distinct zoning, then it frustrates the ability to do something that the CDP wanted to have accomplished. CARR SMITH: And no more mauka-makai road, no improved drainage necessarily, no neighborhood store for the Pualani community and all of that, so, I understand the frustration. VITOUSEK: And then a question to the County on that. Is there.,County involvement in that? Now that the zoning ordinance is stale and, you know, the condition for'Planning Director initiating a more appropriate zoning seems all the more relevant, given the; --statement from the applicant about the reversion to Agricultural -5. So, is there a plan that we can address to maintain this Transit Oriented Development in this location? CARR SMITH: Go ahead, Christian. KAY: Yeah, I would say that the request to revert.would still Have to go through this process; it would be a rezone back to Agricultural -5 acre and State Land Use Boundary Amendment back to Agricultural from Urban. So like we did -in -this case, we would look at consistency with the General Plan, we would look at consistency with,'the CDP, and our -.other analysis against criteria for granting those ordinances. In this case, it's unlikely, because_of the General Plan and the CDP, that reversion back to Ag -5 and State Land .Use Ag would be appropriate in this area, as it is now. CARR SMITH: Mike. VITOUSEK: So that reversion would have to come back to the Commission and the Council for it to go through.,- KAY:, hrough.KAY:, That's correct, because it'would be a Change of Zone. CARR SMITH: Sid. FUKE: - - - CARR SMITH: Unmute. . FUKE: Okay, so here is a dilemma. So the property right now is what you call a zoning in limbo; you can't do anything with the land. But you have to still pay taxes based upon the higher and best use value, which is a commercial and multiple -family. So, even that then, I would—you know, I'm not an attorney but I would suspect that if you were to file a suit against the County for an inverse condemnation of the property because you can't use the land, you can't use the land. And so now if he comes in and rezones the land, it's an applicant initiated, to Ag -5, and if you were to deny it, then the question is like what are you rezoning it to? Are you going to keep that existing CN and the RM zoning? Where you can't do anything? Then that - - - I think a litigation --- 41 -- 41 DRAFT