2020-06-18 Leeward Exh D (AMEND REZ 2004-024 & AMEND REZ 2004-025)

Home

Then you look at for other reasons why the Commission or the Department might recommend denial. The infrastructure - - -; you don't have enough water, you don't have enough sewer, you don't- - -. But here is a situation, you have the water, there is a county sewer line right below the street, and the State Department, there's a traffic study done, their mitigation has been proposed pursuant to an approved traffic study by the State Department of Transportation. I just mentioned that, you know, the Department of Transportation reviewed the traffic study, and they concurred with that study. The other reasons why like maybe a project might be denied is that you have unresolvable environmental or also historical issues. Say, for example, you have a major floodway going through the property; there is no way that you want to have development be occurring in that area. Or if you have like archaeological sorts of things that cannot be resolved, then, you know like, then they are basis for its denial. So then, you've got to ask yourself like why is the Planning Director recommending—if you look through, you know, like three or four pages and 15 minutes of recitation of the reasons why, you know, they talk a little bit about the General Plan saying speculation, they are talking about separating the Land Use Commission process. But the linchpin argument is really that if you want the project, the landowner, to go through the State Land Use Commission at the Project District rezone, now we all know that that's a process that's very time-consuming, that's very expensive, and most critically, you don't know the outcome. Maybe you like the project. But what if the Land Use Commission denies it or imposes conditions that are totally, amount to like an impossible situation for the developer to pursue. So what it boils down to I think, there are two ways of like how this application can be processed. One is that you can take what the Director or the staff has recommended, stay denial, and then force the developer to go through the Project District and the State Land Use Commission - - -, and I've already explained some of the liabilities behind all that. Or on the other hand, you can take the recommended approach; you can pick and choose what you want from the conditions to favorably recommend and conditions you don't want to favorably recommend, but take it up to the County Council and let the Council make the decision. Now, in so doing, what you do is that you are keeping the decision-making down to this level; you are not kicking the decision-making up to nine Land Use Commissioners of which seven of them don't reside on this island. So I guess what I'm asking, you know, as dealing really like with this Commission, is that if you can put your real life common sense to the end result and ask yourself, you know, given the County's high unemployment and the economic uncertainty especially created, excessively created, by the COVID-19 issue, you know, shouldn't government be more encouraging and supportive of private initiatives? Especially on a project that, number one, is consistent with the CDP and the General Plan, as recommended, you know, by planning, two previous planning directors and the County Council, project that could help the economy, provide much needed jobs, provide goods and services, provide affordable housing both for sale and rental, provide much needed road connectivity between Kuakini Highway and the Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway extension. So I presented to you at the last Commission meeting, and I think I also emailed it to Planning staff to provide it to the Commissioner who was not there, you know,proposed recommendations for both the Suffolk and the Puaa applications. Now, I had to do that because otherwise, you know, should, 24 EXHIBIT D