COM 0998.007 2006-2008 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Honorable Angel Pilago, Chair April 7, 2008 Page 5 not exempt, and if the rezoning is going to be followed bya subdivision or plan approval, then the EA should be done prior to the rezoning. In the case of a rezoning that would not be followed by a subdivision or plan approval (which is probably rare), no EA will be required, even if there is a trigger. (Emphasis added.) Exhibit F at 3. By the Planning Director's admission, it is anticipated that the Downzoning would be followed by a subdivision of the Subject Property into 7 lots. Therefore, processing of an EA pursuant to the requirements of HRS Chapter 343 must be conducted prior to the Downzoning being enacted by the Council. Failure to follow stated County procedure with respect to rezonings and the preparation of an EA will only further Kohala's claims of substantive and procedural due process violations. V. Conclusion We respectfully request that the Planning Committee take these serious issues into consideration. The proposed Downzoning is illegal, unfair and unnecessary. Kohala has demonstrated a willingness to work in collaboration with the County to find acceptable and legal development criteria for the Subject Property. However, in the absence of any such collaboration, Kohala has also demonstrated a willingness to fight hard to retain its valuable and Constitutionally protected rights. At a minimum we ask you and the Council to defer action on the proposed Downzoning at least until the required EA has been prepared. Very truly yours, Steven S. . Li SSL/ghs Attachment(s) cc: Kohala LLC Amy Self, Esq., Attorney for the Planning Director Casey Jarman, Esq., County Clerk Lincoln Ashida, Esq., Corporation Counsel 4816.0888-8322.2 ' See, Planning Director's Background Report, at 7 (July 10, 2007): "More specific viewplane controls could be established if an Special Management Area permit is applied for (Subdivision of the property to 5-acre lots would still need an SMA Permit)." (emphasis added); Planning Director Getter to Committee on Planning, dated March 5, 2008, at 2, "The most important reason to rezone the property to RA-5a is to limit the total amount of development to preserve some of the open space in the area. This would be much easier to do in a development of seven homes, as would be allowed under the RA-5a zoning, rather than fifty homes." (emphasis added.)