2021-11-18 Leeward Exh A (Public Testimony re Items 1 & 2)

Home

think they have a limit of an 85,000-pound Gross Vehicle Weight(GVW) and with trucks now in excess of 500 or 600 horsepower they can rev up and pull those loads at a high rate of speed. Time is of the essence for truckers. I was a truck driver in the past. So, we have a scenario here between the 2 ports, high rate of speed, traffic, truckers exceeding the speed limit in that area, which I think is thirty-five (35) I believe we need to monitor that. What I would suggest Commissioners is that again re-emphasizing an impact statement, a comprehensive impact statement projecting out maybe 5, 10, 15, 20 years and then coming to a decision on this matter with Mr. Metzler. That's really all that I have at this point, and I appreciate you allowing me to say my peace. VITOUSEK: Well, thank you very much for your testimony, Mr. Lindsey. I'm moving on to Kristin Counter. COUNTER: Hi, good morning. Thank you for the time today to share my objection to the rezoning and the State Land Use amendment for the Pu`ukapu subdivision. I'm actually born and raised on Oahu and my husband I moved to Waimea in 2019. Really to create a more sustainable future for ourselves and our than 1 year old daughter. Before we left all around us homes are being demolished and monster home after monster home developed in their place. I'm sure you guys have heard about this fiasco happening there. These homes were technically "- - - " and no one stopped them until there was a crisis. Backtracking on that is almost impossible and neighborhoods and infrastructure are pretty much crumbling down around them. We thought we moved away from that, but here we are today. I'm sharing a property line and a private road with the proposed subdivision. And really the bottom line is this. The subject properties are Ag land and we're really not talking about just this parcel, we're talking about setting the precedent for the others surrounding it. Seventeen (17) acres right next door, which is former Parker Ranch land was bought by another developer. He's now also subdividing and based on this application is already talking about changing the land use to create more density. Others have already mentioned that by approving this application it doesn't just mean converting the 5 acres it means setting the precedent to convert another 17 more and then probably more after that. So, it's sort of like the monster homes on Oahu, one after another, after another until somebody finally woke up and said, this is wrong! For Oahu it's too late, but if we can avoid making the same mistake here. In 2002, when the applicants purchase the property and they wanted to subdivide the lot. Actually, personally repealed Ordinance 93-65 and converted the property to Ag. By doing so, they avoided a road widening, a left turn lane, curb gutters and sidewalks, drainage improvement and a traffic signal. "- - - " I think it would be the equivalent of a couple hundred thousand dollars in property tax savings over the next twenty (20)years. So, I don't understand why these aren't requirements now. These improvements are not any less necessary 20 years later then they were when they were established. As others have mentioned the entire property is in a flood zone with additional grading and improvements required to develop the parcels. I have no idea how that flood impact will create more flood risk to the surrounding properties. I suppose others has concerns based on previous flooding history of the property. 5 EXHIBIT A