Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> a _ _ <br /> REPORT OF THIS <br /> COMMITTEE ON PLANNING <br /> DATE: April 1, 1997 Re: C-217 <br /> PLACE: Councilroom <br /> TIME: 2:35 p.m. <br /> Chair and Members <br /> Hawaii County Council <br /> Hilo, Hawaii 96720 <br /> Your Committee on Planning, to which was referred Bill No. 65, transmitted by Mayor Stephen <br /> K. Yamashiro per Communication No. 217, dated March 13, 1997, regarding the request to <br /> amend Ordinance No. 92-123 by Kapoho Properties at Olaa, Puna, Hawaii, TMK: 1-7-17:3, <br /> reports as follows: <br /> Bill No. 65 amends Ordinance No. 92-123 which changed the district classification for <br /> approximately 45.945 acres of land from an Agricultural-20 acres (A-20a) to an Agricultural-one <br /> acre (A-1 a) zoned district. <br /> The subject property is located at the northwestern corner of the Hawaii Belt Road-Huina Road <br /> intersection where the applicant proposes the subdivision of the subject property into 401ots <br /> having a minimum lot size of one acre. <br /> The applicant stated that the present economic conditions have affected the demand, value and <br /> the ability to finance the required improvements. Lenders require that financing and bonding of <br /> the project occur upon the satisfaction of preliminary sales quotas. At the time of the initial <br /> zone change, lending institutions had required twenty perspective buyers but because the value of <br /> real estate has dropped considerably, the lenders now require thirty perspective buyers. <br /> The applicant has submitted subdivision plans to the Planning Department and has shown an <br /> effort to complete the development by securing Tentative Subdivision Approval. <br /> Your Committee concurs with the following reasons by the Planning Commission and the <br /> Planning Director for recommending a favorable consideration for the amendment to Ordinance <br /> No. 92-123: <br /> l . Non-performance by the applicant is the result of several conditions that were <br /> beyond the control of the applicant and has not been the result of fault or <br /> negligence. <br /> 2. The granting of the time extension for two years to secure Final Subdivision <br /> approval would not be contrary to the General Plan, Zoning Code or the original <br /> reasons for granting this change of zone. <br /> PC REPORT NO: 39 <br /> <br />