COM 0451.001 2010-2012 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

The last reason we would ask Condition M to be waived is the financial burden it would place upon our family. My wife and I are both self employed and while I am proud of the work we do,the truth is fmancially we struggle. A lifestyle that was difficult five years ago has become even more so since this recession has taken hold. The thought of having to come up with$12,316.47 upfront seems insurmountable to a family just barely getting by. The "Fair Share"contribution condition of$12,316.47 would represent well over 30%of our gross family income, while also seriously putting into doubt our ability satisfy all the necessary conditions to finalize our rezoning and future subdivision. We would ask the Committee to consider our financial situation when reviewing this matter. For the reasons listed above we ask the Planning Committee to please waive Condition M from our application. The second condition we would like to address is Condition F. The current condition states that"a fifteen (15) foot wide road widening setback along the subject property's Akala Road frontage shall be delineated on subdivision plans. The future road widening setback shall be dedicated to the County of Hawaii prior to Final Subdivision Approval". The issue we have with this is two fold. The first is that this condition is written in a manner different from several past examples in which setbacks were written as such"The applicants shall provide a 15 foot wide future road widening setback along the entire property frontage along Akala Road" We feel the latter is more in line and more consistent with past conditions placed on applications. The other point we would like to make is that the relevance of this setback has come into question since the adoption of Bill 99. The purpose of Bill 99 among other things is to remove the"future road widening setback" for the area where Akala Road and Haleloke Streets meet. The effect of this is to essentially take the first step in removing Akala Road as a future road widening. If there exists a possible intent to remove the road widening setback from Akala Road then there is less need for Condition F and certainly no need to dedicate land. I have spoken with the Planning Department and they also are in favor of a change. We would ask that Condition F be altered or re-written to match the language used in other recent rezone applications such as the one on Akala Road in 2009 (REZ 07-000066). We ask that the language be changed to state: "The applicants shall provide a 15 foot wide future road widening setback along the entire property frontage along Akala Road". I appreciate your time and consideration in these matters. Marc Butz