COM 0230.004 2004-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Mav-13-05 tq:05 Frum-GOODSIIL hNDERSON +808547588D T-804 P.O4 F-006 1y00D5T1 I_ A'~DPRSON ~L~'\~ Fit. S~ T - A LiAM'En l.ineL.IT' Lnw PART>Ea:m^ V t> Pete Ho£fman Council Member, District 9 Hawaii County Council May 13, 2005 Page 3 Para¢r@~h G (Commission Recommendation at p. This paragraph imposes new conditions and requirements that are not contained either in current Zoning brdiriance 95-51 or in the current zoning code for the County of Hawaii. As previously stated, we object to the imposition of any new condirions far the extension of time to satisfy the existing subdivision approval condition under existing Zoning Ordinance 95-51. We also object more specifically ko Paragraph G on the following grounds: i) In connection with the Highlands Golf Eata[es Project (Subdivision 89- 172 and PUD Permit 9]-3}, Waikoloa has already submitted and obtained the Planning Director's approval for deed restrictions which limit residential improvements to one single family dwelling. Therefore the imposition of additional conditions as set forth in proposed Paragraph G are unnecessarily duplicative. The additional conditions also unnecessarily create confusion with respect to a requirement on which Waikoloa and the County planning agencies have already agreed. )~nalosed for yonr information are copies of Waikoloa's submittal dated November 19, 1993 enclosing the proposed language limiting the number of dwelling units on lots, Corporation Counsel's letter dated December 28, 1993 approving of the proposed language, and the Planning Director's letter dated January 6, 1994 advising Waikoloa that its language had been approved. iij We object to the restriction on condominium properly regimes as an improper means of controlling use. A condominium property regime represents a form of real property ownership, not a form of land rise control. The language previously submitted to the Planning Director and Corporation Counsel contatns no restriction as to condominium property regimes and was approved by them a: to form and legality. iii) The language of Paragraph G is overbroad in that it applies to all lots within the subject property, including lots which will be used for roadway and other infrastructure or utility purposes or for open area uses. Amendments to release any restrictions from lots Created for such purposes should not require action by the County Council.