REP PC 099 07/18/2006 2004-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Communication 939 Resolution No. 383-06 Page 3 of 4 Council Vice Chair Virginia Isbell stated that the State can do whatever it wants to do. She noted her greatest concern is that DHHL supports Jacoby's proposed development because DHHL wants to build homes for its people and the Z00 acres leased to Jacoby gives DHHL funding to build homes for Hawaiians. This was why she introduced the Resolution so that a feasibility study could be done. Ms. Isbell stated she's caught in between because Jacoby already has State entitlements. Ms. Isbell stated that DHHL's desire for this income generator is a strong plus and believes the feasibility study will give the County more credibility. Planning Director Yuen stated that the State does have the power to exempt itself from county control and that current state law with respect to DLNR lands provide that commercial developments on State land must be consistent with county zoning. With respect to this project, he said the State should get rezoning from the county but that DHHL is a little different. He said the County authority over DHHL lands is outlined in a Memorandum of Agreement between the State and County of Hawaii. in fact, Mr. Yuen noted that on two prior instances, the State did come before the Council requesting rezoning. Mr. Yuen supports the commercial activity and urban expansion in the Honokohau azea, however, he cannot support a Resort designation. Mr. Yuen commented that if a Bill came to the Legislature requesting that the State be exempt from following County zoning, he will testify against it regardless, as development has to be controlled. Council Chair Higa inquired whether the feasibility study would take into account cultural issues and Director Yuen stated the study would not go into detail with regard to cultural issues but would be more in terms of what issues need to be considered in the final master plan for the property. Mr. Higa requested and Mr. Yuen agreed, to provide a scale out comparison between the 1989 General Plan Map of Resort designation in the area and the Resort designation area that is being requested by Jacoby. Council Member Safarik confirmed that the process of interim General Plan amendments call for a Resolution and no application would be needed from the applicant because the Charter states Interim General Plan amendments have to be initiated by either the Planning Director or the Council. Mr. Safarik also noted that Mr. Yuen, having elected not to initiate this particular interim General Plan amendment, results in a Council initiated measure, for which a feasibility study is the proper process. Mr. Safazik also said that based on the Director's stated opposition to the Resolution, it appears the study was already being made. Director Yuen responded he knows where he stands on the project and despite any negative recommendation, he would make some suggestions if the Council reflects an approval. Mr. Yuen said the likely result of a negative recommendation is based upon all of his stated concerns and that further study would not reveal more information that would change his mind. In comparison, Mr. Yuen noted he supported the Hiluhilu project and objects to this one because the Hiluhilu rezoning was a residentially supported development as opposed to a Resort income-generating project being proposed by Jacoby. Committee Chair Pilago noted that admittedly, as testified today, the quality of life has seriously deteriorated in West Hawaii and it is now being exposed to an enormous economic generator that will add approximately 2,000 hotel rooms to a community already unable to supply adequate workforce and adequate affordable housing. Director Yuen stated ideally, you would develop housing nearby and then bring in workers who have families. However, in the current situation of no unemployment and businesses looking for workers, why add this kind ofgrowth-generating development. PC REPORT NO. 99