COM 0230.004 2004-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

MaY-13-06 14:05 Fram-GOODSILL ANDERSON +8089479800 T-804 P O6 F-005 1.i00D5ILL FLIJDER50f1 I;,~L?lr!?J o: °l A LIMITED LInCILfTY Ln0.' iART~ER9H!P LIP Pete Hoffman Council Member, District 9 Hawaii County Council May 13, 2005 Page S outcome of the appeal in the ©Ceatlside 1?arttters case. In view of the 5 year deadline for final subdivision approval, the imposition of Paragraph FI denies Waikoloa this choice, and forces expense and action which may not be necessary, depending on the outcome of the Oceanside Partnars appeal. Parag~gp~ts I and J (Commission Recomlttendation at p, 4~ We object to the disprpportionatc impact of the fair share contribution required by Paragraph I, which totals $1,74$,461.7S. We note that the incorrect Ramscycr format of this recommendation does not reflect deletion of the following language from Paragraph G of Change of Zone Ordinance 95-51, G. Should the council adopt a Unified Impact Fees ordinance setting forth criteria for the imposition of exactions or the assessment of impact fees, conditions included herein may, at the developer's election, be satisfied by performance in accordance with the requirements of the Unified lmpact Fees Ordinance; The foregoing language allowed Waikoloa either to satisfy condirions of the Change of Zone Ordinance or to comply with a Unified Impact Fee ordinance, if adopted. The Planning DcparCment's current recommendation, however, requires that Waikoloa not only comply with the conditions in the Change of Zone Ordmance, but also pay a duplicative fair share contribution. Costly conditions previously imposed an Waikoloa by this Change of Zone Ordinance already address issues encompassed by the fair share recommendation. In 1995, during the last amendment of this Change of Zona Ordinance, the County Counci l impnscd the following rcquirtrntnts, at the following cost;