COM 0827.000 1996-1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 2 requirements, performance, archaeological, park, housing, infrastructural requirements and the performance requirements in line with current practices for similar rezonings. The inability of the applicant to comply with the requirements of Conditions C to N of Change of Zone Ordinance No. 91-22 is a result of conditions which could not have been foreseen or are beyond the control of the applicant. In the letter of January 5, 1998 to the Planning Director, the applicant has requested amendment to Conditions C to N for the following reasons: "The need to comply with a number of conditions plus a sagging economic conditions have made it difficult for the applicant to proceed with the development of the subject site in a timely fashion. As such, the applicant requested a time extension to Condition D which required the submittal of subdivision plans before September 9, 1992. The Planning Director issued a year's extension to September 9, 1993. In August 1993, the applicant then requested a time extension for both the submittal of subdivision plans (to September 1994) and multiple family plans (to September 1995). The Planning Commission recommended the approval of these extensions on April 14, 1994; and this matter was forwarded to the County Council. After some measure of consideration, the request was referred to your office by the Council for some technical update. "Since the subject ordinance became effective on September 9, 1991, the County has articulated policies relating to matters such as no ohana covenants, incremental developments, infrastructural requirements, and the like through the adoption of rezoning ordinances within the County. These policies reflect the County's concern for the welfare of the broader community, as well as making requirements reasonable and equitable. "As such, rather than continuing to pursue only a time extension, the applicant believes it prudent to submit and have the County consider a request that attempts to more comprehensively address prevailing development and zoning policies. It is in that spirit that the applicant makes this request." Approval of this amendment request would not be contrary to the General Plan nor would it be contrary to the original reasons for granting the change of zone. Over the years, the applicant has been before the Planning Commission, and the applicant has shown perseverance in managing the many requirements which they have to deal with. The applicant has either complied with or initiated the process of compliance with other conditions of approval within the subject ordinance.