2020-10-15 Leeward Exh E (AMEND SMA 388)

Home

FUKE: Yeah, I can understand, I can understand the traffic issue that you raised and the neighbors also raised, and so that's why I have to kind of like preface my presentation by noting that, you know, like the permit that we are going for right now is not a zone change permit, it's not an extension for zoning; it's like for an SMA permit, whose primary policies and objectives are kind of like coastal related. And, you know, the other thing in terms of like, you know, the owner picking up the property and why didn't they do anything within the last year and a half? I think I tried to explain that, you know, they had some organizational issues, and so until that organizational issues, you know, the company itself, were settled, and then from there they can kind of move on to determining how to make the improvements. And the question was, the major question that they had to ask themselves is that, do they tear down and restart again or do they do something that takes advantage of something that's partially completed right now? So that's an evaluation that they had to make. And at the same time they were faced with the deadline of having the SMA condition stating that you had to be done by 2019. And if you have like less than a year to complete the construction and not knowing where you are going to go if the extension is denied, then it doesn't make sense for any reasonable person to spend money not knowing whether you can complete the project within the window that's allowed. CARR SMITH: Understood. Mike, I think you had your hand up next. Go ahead. VITOUSEK: Thank you. My question is in regards to the applicant's—let's see nonperformance of the conditions. So, the reasoning, the justification stated in our recommendation packet is that, "According to the applicant, there were numerous reasons [for the delay], which include financial [fiscal] challenges with the previously proposed design of the project that make it impossible to meet the current deadline [to complete construction]. After assuming ownership of the property in 2013, Diamond Resorts had the opportunity to conduct a feasibility study to determine the current actual cost for the original design of the project. The study revealed that the actual cost exceeded the budget allotted for the project by a range of 20 to 30 million dollars." Is that, was that feasibility study done on the 2017 Plan Approval? FUKE: Commission- - - can II'm not aware of the feasible study per seso, can I defer that question to the applicant's attorney who are based on Oahu right now? VITOUSEK: Sure. CARR SMITH: Evan, would you like to respond to that, or Kim? K. YOSHIMOTO: Aloha, Chair, thank you. So, from my understanding, the feasibility study was conducted prior to the 2017 Plan Approval, but they were still, you know, and they currently are still revisiting the design. So it was prior to that, in answer to your question. VITOUSEK: So, would that have been satisfied by the design that the applicant submitted in the Plan Approval? 11 EXHIBIT E