COM 0964.036 2004-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

~lc~.~~~ro~ Cbrnvr~lssraN I-I~~.~~c~ TfQV~(,~fi s~a(~'oCe G~n~:~ Pla.r Z~n~CGntiv~ (~^Q~-~rnQ,~kg. TXtTeftlowh-ru T~mo W,\ f: Now the development of F-2 proposes to change this developer s land to County land use designation of Rural. Rural as defined in the County General Plan has typical lot sizes of 9,000 square feet to two acres. Therefore, this amendment is potentially going to take the lot sizes from 200 acres and greater down to 9,000 square feet to two acres; and as I understand it you can build a house on half-an-acre. I talked to the Planning Department, that's what they told me. Since SMA No. 269 was issued about 20 years ago, the Coastal Zone Management Studies had documented a complex array of problems affecting coastal waters arising from NPS (Non-Point Source Pollution) and CSI (Cumulative and Secondary Impacts), the combined impacts of by human land use activities and development. Amendment F-2 does create an opportunity for present and future developers and lot owners to apply for rezoning in the hopes of subdividing your land further. Higher density development can only increase the exposure of Kealakekua Bay to Non-Point Source Pollution and Cumulative and Secondary impacts. To put it in plain English, we don't have the science yet to know what exactly will end up in the Bay, when it will end up there, and what it will do when it gets there. The coral reef, fish and dolphins are already stressed by human use. If we ruin the water, we ruin the reef. If we ruin the reef, we kill the fish. The General Plan mandates protection for natural resources, natural beauty, unique habitat and coastal resources. Kealakekua Bay and the marine preserve qualify on all these levels. Therefore, I hope the Planning Commission will delete Amendment F-2 and protect K-Bay. Thank you. ALAMEDA: Thank you. Very good. Any questions? ~t.t "~t~~ Q "T'~fvr~P~CT~ri`oN IZaal WILLS: Hi. Margaret Wille and I want to make a couple of comments. One is o yo ransportation Road Map F, I think that's not in detail. And perhaps you've already agreed to this, but I'm unaware, and this has to do with the mini-bypass which Parker Ranch had requested to be removed and Director Yuen agreed not to promote that. But I iust want to make sure that the corresponding road man in the Plan includes this road. And I believe Director Yuen wasn't opposed to that, but that it had been overlooked or an oversight that this be, this mini bypass or the two Can we put that map on? Or maybe it's not detailed enough. But I have, what I gave you I handed out in the testimony showing this map. Currently Parker Ranch, under its rezoning ordinances, is required to build about one-half of that road and then the County section, which the County has substantial funds, could put that in. We're really pushing to get this road in. And I just want to make sure, as Chris Yuen said it's important for it to be on the maps in order to, if additional funding is needed. ALAMEDA: Okay. WILLE: It's also just in terms of looking at working on the State's bypasses, I mean, one of the engineers said, well, we didn't even know that map was being, that road was being considered as they were looking at the General Plan. And just so that everyone is on the same page that it's important, so I just stress that. 16