2008-01-11 TPDKOHALA LLC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

LIM: Well, it’s A-5 just immediately mauka of the project. WOODWARD: Okay, okay. LIM: Mauka of that is Ag-3. WOODWARD: All right. WATANABE: Okay. Would that roughly conclude your presentation or do you have anything else to add, Mr. Lim? LIM: Well, I think, you know I should go ahead and run quickly through my substantive presentation. Because I think once I finish doing that then you’d be acting on it -. WATANABE: Okay, okay. Certainly. LIM: Basically we’re at the point now where we’re seeing that the Planning Director’s involuntary downzoning and the revocation to the existing zoning ordinance for RS- 15 is in violation of the General Plan. You know, essentially I think that once, our position is that once the County Council and the Planning Commission issued their RS-15 zoning and their SMA Permit No. 379, that was a recognition and admission by the County that the proposed 50- lot project complied with the General Plan and zoning and SMA criteria. And for the Planning Director to now come in and involuntarily downzone the property from RS-15 to RA 5-acre lots, we believe, requires a General Plan Amendment. We believe that, because the project as presently zoned either complies with the General Plan or it doesn’t. And if he believes that the project as presently zoned does not comply with the General Plan, then he should be required to file a General Plan Amendment to initiate his downzonings. The property as you can see is in, you don’t quite have the State Land Use diagram up there but basically that whole area is State Land Use Urban and it goes all the way through to the Kohala Woodvale project on the brown on the south side. As I stated before the other properties in the area are zoned Multi-Family 4 and Ag-1, so why should we downzone this property from RS-15 all the way down to Residential – Agricultural 5 acres? The General Plan ordinance has not changed. There has been no, and that’s one of our strong points, I believe, is that the State and County regulatory entitlements, the laws, the General Plan in other words, has consistently provided that the property be used for Low Density Urban uses; and that was what was found by the Planning Commission and the County Council when they did those rezonings in the initial go-around. Even the 2005 General Plan Amendment procedure which was processed by Mr. Yuen recognized that the property in question should be used for Low Density Urban uses. You’ve heard the testimony by the public witnesses, this hearing and the last, that basically says that, you know, for years the North Kohala community has wanted to utilize, to keep the oceanfront areas makai of Akoni Pule Highway in Conservation or at least a lesser intensive use. And I think that in 2005 we see that the Planning Director and the County Council found that at least one of the parcels was worthy of this designation. And just immediately north of that parcel in the 2005 General Plan they took that area from Extensive Agricultural down to Conservation. That was in the General Plan processing, Item E-6. We believe that was a reflection of the EXHIBIT C 12