Laserfiche WebLink
NSV.oF H, <br /> <br /> Harry Kim 400.`. ~a'~9'• Lincoln S.T. Ashida <br /> Muvnr 7+ Curpnrution Coun.ce! <br /> f.~; Gerald Takase <br /> +rrE•cs M~~' A c.ri.ctunt Corporation Coun.re! <br /> Cn~~xxt~~r -~~xtt~t <br /> OFFICE OF TIIE CORPORATION COUNSEL <br /> 101 Aupuni Street, Suite 325 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720-4262 • (808) 961-8251 • FAX (808) 961-8622 <br /> MEMORANDUM <br /> TO: J. Curtis Tyler III <br /> Vice Chair, Hawaii County Council <br /> FROM: Patricia K. O'Toole <br /> Deputy Corporation Counsel <br /> DATE: May 14, 2001 <br /> RE: Keaau Bypass <br /> You asked for comments or advice as to the letter from Ms. Bonnie Goodell dated <br /> March 27, 2001 and addressed to Council Chair, James Arakaki. As I understand Ms. Goodell's <br /> letter, she believes that an environmental assessment prepared by the State Department of <br /> Transportation for what was described as Project No. 130B-O1-92, Proposed Keaau-Pahoa Road, <br /> Keaau Town Section, is in violation of Chapter 343 HRS. She contends that at least a new <br /> environmental assessment should be prepared. She also raises the issue of potential County <br /> liability for losses suffered by Keaau merchants as a result of County approval of <br /> W. H. Shipman's Gateway Shopping Center. We do not believe that her contentions are well <br /> founded. <br /> Ms. Goodell's specific allegation regarding the environmental assessment is that it fails to <br /> include information of the location of the proposed shopping center and its relationship to a <br /> bypass alignment. She states this is a violation because the shopping center was part of <br /> Shipman's plans, known since at least 1992, and were part of a Land Use Commission boundary <br /> amendment proceeding which began in 1993. <br /> In Docket No. BR93-699, dated July 18, 1994, In the Matter of the Petition of Office of <br /> State Planning to Amend the Agricultural Land Use District Boundary into the Urban Land Use <br /> District for Approximately 660 Acres at Keaau, Puna, (the Shipman property), the findings of the <br /> Land Use Commission were that "broad land use concepts were identified, no specific use or <br /> densities for particular areas within the Property have been determined.... uses identified as <br /> potential uses within the Property include residential, parks and open space, industrial, <br /> commercial, schools and other government facilities." (FOF#25). <br /> <br />