Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> As citizens, we have obligations and rights. The obligations include obeying local, state and <br /> federal laws, and our rights include the expectation others will do the same. We also have a right <br /> to know our elected and appointed leaders and lawmakers will obey and enforce our laws. None <br /> of us has a right to decide, without ramifications, which laws or portions of them we will abide by <br /> andlor enforce. <br /> So why can a developer in Hawaii County select the portions of the laws they wish to follow? <br /> Ordinance 93-45, effective May 12, 1993, required an 80 foot right of way mauka-makai road <br /> that was to be extended to Queen Kaahumanu Highway when development occurred in what is <br /> now Palamanui. This same requirement was part of Ordinance 850, effective February 15, 1983, <br /> and was restated in Ordinance 88-23, effective February 29, 1988. Yet the road required by <br /> three laws for over twenty years was never built. <br /> Instead, we're saddled with a substandard road not built to applicable standards per our own <br /> County officials and therefore, according to the Hawaii Supreme Court in the recently decided <br /> case of Kienker vs. Bauer and the State of Hawaii, one that leaves the residents of Hawaii County <br /> exposed to significant legal liability as a public road. The existing road was designed, <br /> constructed and designated by the County as a minor road. Per the County Code, it may be used <br /> exclusively for access to abutting property and not as the required mauka-makai connector. It <br /> should therefore not be accepted by the County as the County Code requires roads accepted by <br /> dedication meet all appropriate standards. <br /> Using the figures presented in the March 2181 edition of West Hawaii Today, the anticipated value <br /> of Palamanui at build out will be $958 million. With land costs of $4.6 million and $300 million in <br /> infrastructure, the resulting $658 million is a return on investment of over 14,200%. The $25 <br /> million estimate provided by County Planning Director Chris Yuen for an alternate mauka-makai <br /> connector represents but 3.8% of that. Guy Lam's own estimate of $15 million is only 2.3%. <br /> Either estimate is a small price for a properly designed and constructed safe road that meets the <br /> County's standards as legally required. <br /> While we're toltl Hiluhilu is "actively pursuing" alternatives, it is unconscionable to grant any <br /> zoning changes and/or variances as requested in Bills 224 and 225 without a firm and binding <br /> commitment to meet its existing obligations. Anything less will leave us with another high density <br /> subdivision with lots of promise and excuses why promises can't be kept after the fact, exactly as <br /> has happened with the mauka-makai road. While Bill 225 contains a "housekeeping" component, <br /> the combined effect of the two bills relieves the developer of its obligations to build the road that <br /> meets County standards as has been legally required since 1983. This goes way beyond mere <br /> "housekeeping". <br /> The University is in question. The once promised hospital and golf course are gone. One acre <br /> lots have been replaced by high density lots. The required road doesn't exist. Concurrency must <br /> start someplace. Please, make it here. Require this developer to meet its existing legal <br /> obligations to the citizens of Hawaii County. <br /> Thank you. <br /> Jerry Schneyer <br /> 72-1173 Ho'opai Road <br /> Kailua-Kona, HI 96740 <br /> (808)937-0770 <br /> Comm. No. <br /> Ref. To: tnbcte <br /> Re#. Uata <br /> <br />