COM 0042.077 2004-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

"~~9~ ~ethea, Ski ~n tt Frorn: Charles Flaherty [oneheart@aloha.net] Seat: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 11:28 PM To: Safarik, Gary; counciltestimony@co.hawaii.hi.us; 'Virginia Isbell'; 'Angel Pilago'; 'Pete Hoffmann'; 'Bob Jacobson'; 'Dr. Fred Holschuh'; 'Stacy Higa'; 'James Arakaki'; Ikeda, Donald Subject: General Plan testimony - Hokuli'alKeopuka Aloha Council members, I previously testified that I supported Draft 4 of the General Plan. Unfortunately, that testimony was based upon a misunderstanding. I do not support Draft 5 in its current form. I believe the Council was ill-advised to include Ordinances 97-34, -35, and -36 in the revised General Plan. The Third Circuit Court ruled these ordinances invalid and that a "zoning ordinance that conflicts with a general plan is invalid at the time it is passed." Therefore, the language on p. 419 of Draft 5 describing the members' lodge and a 1997 LUPAG map amendment and rezoning is inconsistent with the Court's ruling, as is the LUPAG map showing a Hokuli'a members' lodge resort node. Further, HCC 30-10 states: "The development agreement shall not prevent a government body from requiring the principal to comply with laws, ordinances, resolutions, rules, and policies of general applicability enacted subsequent to the date of the development agreement if under prior law they could have been lawfully applied to the subject property." The degree to which the County does not comply with the Court's rulings and orders only provides further evidence that the development agreement maybe illegal. The final judgment permanently enjoins the Planning Director and Director of Public Works "from granting any further land use permits, ground altering activities, or subdivision approvals for the Hokuli'a project until Defendant Oceanside has complied with this Order." Coev~~a ~ 9 ~ ~R 1 Ref. To: F _a~~