|
think that's a good idea. I think if the trail is addressed correctly and protected, which I think it
<br /> can be, it's on a corner of that property, and I don't understand why, you know, they can't come
<br /> up with a solution there. And because this is an SMA extension that's going on that we are
<br /> trying to agree upon, I, for me, I think that they ticked all my boxes that I see to go forward with
<br /> this project. I think it's a good project. It's located in a good place, it has the turning lanes, it
<br /> has the sidewalks. Right now sitting empty, it's a place for homeless people to hang out, and
<br /> goats. You know, it's right, it's in a perfect place really, with the country club there and the golf
<br /> course there and, you know, I think it fits nicely. And if it's, if it's not changed anything to,
<br /> environmentally impacting anythingI mean, it's got the wastewater hooked up, you know
<br /> I'm looking at it as a good project. So if there is a way for all of us to look at it and not put all of
<br /> our frustrations on this group, because we are upset, because time extensions seem to be always
<br /> asked for. I don't know how to take that and calm that down, without making some, you know,
<br /> verbal commitment. Let's hear from these owners, and they intend to go through with this
<br /> project and live up to their word. And, and if they don't, you knowI don't know what a sunset
<br /> clause is or what we can do, but I know in financing things, you can't say three years. I mean,
<br /> what if Young Brothers or somebody like that, you know, decides that they are not sailing ships?
<br /> Who knows what can happen? You know, there is a lot of things that can happen. So, anyway,
<br /> thank you.
<br /> VITOUSEK: Commissioner Yates.
<br /> YATES: Again, you know, like where I started earlier about the different, you know, extensions
<br /> of time, I guess I'm just a little bit confused, because, you know, we are saying you want a time
<br /> extension for final Plan Approval, which I would have thought would be already there since they
<br /> were ready to build, and then there is the project will begin in the next five years. And so that's
<br /> what's a little bit confusing. I agree that, you know, housing is needed in Hawaii. And for this
<br /> developer, I mean, this is a fabulous time, you know, you get it done as soon as possible because
<br /> people need homes and prices are really great. So this is why my concern about these time
<br /> extensions. So I agree, you know, if you can get it going, then get it going.
<br /> VITOUSEK: Yeah, I meanoh, is that, Mark, you have your hand up? Commissioner Van
<br /> Pernis, do you have your hand up?
<br /> VAN PERNIS: Yes.
<br /> VITOUSEK: Okay, go ahead.
<br /> VAN PERNIS: I disagree with Ms. DeFranco—since I (indiscernible–muffled). This is an
<br /> appropriate project for that area; that's not the question. The question is they've had since 1989
<br /> to get it done. And these people bought into it in 2012 or something, still haven't got it done.
<br /> One thing she did say that I agree with is let's get it done. And the way to get it done is to have a
<br /> requirement that it'll be done by a certain period of time, that the construction start and/or end at
<br /> a certain time, or the permits are invalid. We would have a situation where the build-out would
<br /> take place, rather than the endless delays and possibilities of resale upon resale. So I think that
<br /> we represent the people of Kona, including developers, but primarily the people of Kona, and
<br /> they are not getting what they are supposed to get here. We can accommodate developers up to a
<br /> 26
<br /> EXHIBIT D
<br />
|