Laserfiche WebLink
Page 1 of 1 <br /> Murashige, Laura <br /> From: Broussard & Pomeroy [broupome@kona.net] <br /> Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 5:13 PM <br /> To: County Council; Hoffmann, Pete <br /> Cc: Yagong, Dominic; Ikeda, Donald; Yoshimoto, J; Higa, Stacy; Naeole, Emily; Jacobson, Bob; Ford, <br /> Brenda; Pilago, K. Angel; Harry Kim <br /> Subject: Support of Bill 156 <br /> <br /> As with the Concurrency Bill, passage alone won't mean much unless the zoning provisions are enforced. <br /> <br /> Again, I'll use Kohala Ranch as an example since I can document what I say about it, in detail. <br /> The current developer submitted a revised rezoning for the urban developmment which involved a substantial <br /> reduction in the number of units. The reason for doing so was simply to have the Housing Committee reconsider <br /> the $15,000,000-plus affordable housing requirement.Once he was "excused" from paying the major part of that <br /> amount, he withdrew his revised rezoning request and is now subdividing the parcel. <br /> What's the point of demanding affordable housing and then dropping the requirement or substantially modifying it <br /> to the developer's benefit? <br /> c <br /> ~.T Z~o.28 <br /> ~F.,.,,,e,~. ~ <br /> 4/18/2007 Rr~;, ,''c% ~ P/ <br /> G_-----"'=_`~~---" <br /> <br />