My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
COM 0964.045 2004-2006
ClerkCouncil
>
Council Records
>
Communications
>
2004-2006
>
COM 0964.045 2004-2006
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2008 12:48:52 AM
Creation date
5/9/2008 12:12:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Communications
Communications - Type
COM
Communications - Council Term
2004-2006
Communication
0964
Point
045
Author
Dore Dokos-Loewenthal
Communications - Referred To
COUNCIL
Comments
Presented: Council - 8/23/06
Document Relationships
BIL 309 Draft 01 2004-2006
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Bills\2004-2006
COM 0964.000 2004-2006
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Communications\2004-2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Page 2 of 2 <br /> <br /> We know F-2 doesn't automatically change zoning. We are asking, under the proposed <br /> F-2 Rural LUPAG LAND Use Designation, what would be the minimum size house lot <br /> allowable if applications for rezoning and subdivision are submitted? <br /> We know that simply applying for rezoning does not guarantee receiving it. Mr. Yuen <br /> and Captain Cook Ranch LLC have said there is no cause for concern over F-2 because <br /> there is no present intention to seek rezoning and F-2 "doesn't imply support for <br /> rezoning." However, we also know that given an opportunity to apply for higher density <br /> development, developers and owners do just that. And we know that DEVELOPERS <br /> APPLYING FOR HIGHER DENSITY SUBDIVISIONS SEEM TO ENJOY AN <br /> ENVIABLE RATE OF SUCCESS IN OUR COUNTY. Therefore, Mr. Yuen's <br /> assurances, since they are not legally binding, do not resolve the community's concerns. <br /> <br /> The community is concerned that if F-2 passes, higher density rezoning could then be <br /> applied for and permitted. Higher density development could pollute and adversely <br /> impact Kealakekua Bay and Marine Life Conservation District. It could destroy the <br /> agricultural characteristics of this area above the Pali. It could usher in commercial uses <br /> which would alter the agrarian nature of this community. It could erase the strong <br /> historical and cultural aspects of these lands. According to the Mandate of the Hawaii <br /> County General Plan, THESE ARE VALID CONCERNS. <br /> <br /> THE GENERAL PLAN MANDATES: <br /> -First, the protection of Natural Resources- such as our fragile and irreplaceable coral <br /> reefs in Kealakekua Bay. <br /> -Second, the preservation of our agricultural lands- (The nearly 100 acres affected by <br /> F-2 were part of the historic Kona Field System. These lands are on County Water. They <br /> can produce coffee, lychees, avocadoes, citrus, rambutans, bananas, vanilla orchids, etc.) <br /> -Third, the General Plan mandates retaining the essence and characteristics of our <br /> communities. <br /> <br /> F-2 causes our community deep concern on all these issues because F-2 is the opening <br /> that can lead to higher density development. The rationale for F-2 is written as though it <br /> only involves a pending sub-division of two acre lots. (Perhaps that is why some people <br /> sounded like they were protesting a sub-division. It is a misleading description). <br /> The F-2 rationale does not mention the additional 22+ acres not included in the pending <br /> subdivision. People are concerned that rezoning could be applied for to subdivide this <br /> 22+acre parcel to the highest density allowable under F-2. Is that 1/2 acre house lots or <br /> 9000 sq. ft? They are also concerned that the pending sub-division itself could be rezoned <br /> in the future for further sub-division into smaller lots. <br /> Captain Cook Ranch LLC owns all the nearly 100 acres affected by F-2 Other than <br /> greatly increasing their property value by moving their land from an agricultural LUPAG <br /> Map designation into the rural LUPAG land use designation, what is the purpose of F-2? <br /> WHO DOES IT REALLY BENEFIT TO PUT KEALAKEKUA BAY AND OUR <br /> AGRARIAN COMMUNITY AT RISK? <br /> Sincerely, Dore Dokos-Loewenthal, P.O. Box 503, Captain Cook, Hi. 96704 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.