Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> SCD Kona 108 LLC <br /> 700 Bishop Street, Suite 1000 <br /> Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 <br /> <br /> <br /> October 16, 2006 <br /> <br /> <br /> County Council Chairman Stacy Higa <br /> County Council Members <br /> r 25 Aupuni Street, Suite 209 <br /> Hilo, Hawaii 96720 <br /> <br /> <br /> SUBJECT: Response to Comments on Bill 251 and Status Report <br /> <br /> r <br /> Dear Chairman Higa and Councilmembers, <br /> <br /> Stanford Carr and I have been working hard to address various issues and concerns raised by the public <br /> and Councilmembers concerning our Kona Coffee Estates project. We have been working with State <br /> and County agencies and have had numerous meetings with the various stakeholders over the last <br /> several months to address these concerns. This report summarizes the status of the project and the <br /> _ results of the meetings. <br /> <br /> Enclosed are written responses to the comments made at the May ls' Planning Committee hearing; the <br /> May 17'x' Council hearing; the June 21" Council hearing; and to written comments submitted to the <br /> Council during this time period. The responses are presented in summaries per each of these categories, <br /> and we have also put together a response based on the comments by category. We believe we have <br /> addressed all the comments that we have had access to, and are open to continue addressing the <br /> comments as they are made. <br /> r <br /> _ The vast majority of comments came from two distinct groups of people, one being some of the people <br /> living mauka of the project and the other group being residents of nearby Malulani Gardens. Some of <br /> these groups concerns overlapped and some were distinct to their geography. We will refer to the <br /> "Comments By Category" summary as it is the easiest to follow. <br /> <br /> A: Salvation Army <br /> As you know, the Honolulu real estate department of the Salvation Army made it known to us in May <br /> of this year that they are not committed to this site, and that they were not confident that this site was <br /> feasible for them, even if they got it for free. They told us they were going to do a site assessment to <br /> determine the feasibility of this site and get back to us "in a couple of months". We have not heard <br /> back from them so we are assuming they are not interested in this site, and intend to convert the five <br /> acres we had planned for them into about 40 additional multi-family homes. See attached Exhibit "A". <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> r <br /> <br /> <br /> r <br />