COM 0526.033 2010-2012 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

06 September, 2010 To: Hawaii County Council From Daniel Taylor, resident of Volcano Subject: opposition to Bill 168 . ► CD Bill 168 represents an egregious mistake in regional planning. The main flaw in this''Till is that it violates any reasonable protocol in planning by enabling an auto repair shop to set up alongside a highway corridor. Access to the proposed repair shop would add to existing congestion along this stretch of Highway 11, and increases the probability for traffic and pedestrian accidents. Moreover, Bill 168 ignores the mandate contained in the Puna Community Development Plan, Ch 4.3 and 4.4, which intends to guide County planners toward a safer and more scenic roadway network. Besides adding to congestion and hazard along the highway, the auto shop would cause significant adverse impact on the neighbor properties, many of which have historic and scenic value. Although it is true that the State government has jurisdiction over the Highway 11 corridor, County government has jurisdiction over land use zoning. County government is responsible, therefore, to ensure proper development alongside the State highway corridor, and with the advent of the PCDP County is obliged to respect the opinions and desires of communities who will be affected. The opposition to this Bill, and the conflict among neighbors the re-zone application has generated, suggests there are serious problems with it, as follows: The re-zone application has not been properly vetted by the Mountain View Community. The decision by County Planning Dept to approve the permit was made essentially by the planning bureau and the applicant. This arrangement diminishes the value of the Puna Community Development Plan, with its broad base of support throughout the communities of Puna and particularly the opportunity the PCDP provides for the Mountain View community to develop its unique long range community plan. Significant representatives of community organizations oppose Bill 168. Council members are advised that all three members of the PCDP Action Committee who live in Puna mauka (Ms Pinto, Mr Commendador, Mr Taylor) oppose the re-zone permit, and have formally testified before Council. In addition, Council members Smart and Ford, who serve in adjoining districts, are particularly familiar with the situation. It is regrettable that Council members who favor Bill 168 do not live in or near Mountain View, and therefore do not perceive the problems the re-zone will cause. The re-zone represents an outdated and inappropriate example of"spot zoning." Such careless land use planning has created unsightly and inefficient commercial strips along many of Hawaii's roadways. One need look no further than the segment of Comm. No.Vetwiti S Z�p• 3 Ref.To: Re f. Date 6 TZ