Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> Ney-13-05 14:05 From-GODOSiLL ANDERSON ~8085475s80 T-Boa P 05 F-o05 <br /> l7VVUJ1L1-t1NllhKJUN ~ULNN CA~~ L' <br /> A LM1TS0 LInBILiTY LnW Pnnml_a$I IIP LLC <br /> Pete Hoffman <br /> Council Member, Disaict 9 <br /> 1-Iawaii County Council <br /> May 13, 2005 <br /> Page 4 <br /> iv) Once recorded, the use restrictions continue to encumber the ]and, even <br /> if the zoning designation or zoning conditions are later amended by Waikoloa or <br /> subsequent landowners. <br /> v) The language which requires that private use covenants be submitted to <br /> the Planning ]7irectior for approval is unnecessary since the Planning Director and <br /> Corporation Counsel have already approved of the decd resaiction language <br /> submitted by Waikoloa. In any event this language should be clarified to make <br /> clear that only use covenants penaining to the number of dweDzn$s on each lot <br /> must be submitted. <br /> Deletion of Prior Paragraph H (Commission ]tecornmendation stn. 3) <br /> We object t0 the doletion of prior paragraph H which allowed for extension of <br /> time for the performance of conditions within the ordinance. Additional Extensions of <br /> time, for reasons beyond Waikoloa's control, may be necessary and should not be <br /> precluded. We request that the language remain in Change of Zone Ordinance 95-51 and <br /> that the Planning Director be authorized to allow future extensions of time <br /> administratively, as allowed by Section 25-2-44(b) of the Zoning Code. <br /> New Paragraph I-1 (Commission Recom endati~n at A. 31 <br /> Since the initial rezoning and granting of previous extensions of zoning, the <br /> Planning Department, Planning Commission as well as the County Council have never <br /> required Waikoloa to obtain a reclassification from the Land Use Commission. The <br /> Planning Depatvnent and Waikoloa agree that the currant lend use law does not prohibit <br /> the development planned for Waikoloa Highlands. The Hawaii Supreme Coup has <br /> denied motions to expedite consideration of the Oceanside Partners case, meaning that if <br /> the appeal is resolved in tho ordinary course, a decision maybe several years awa}. <br /> We also object to the affirmative obligation that this Condition imposes on <br /> Waikoloa to pursue reclassification from the State Land Use Cormission, In the absence <br /> of such a condition, Waikoloa would have the ability to decide whether to undertake dtc <br /> substantial time and expense of seeking suth reclassification or whether to await the <br /> <br />