|
testify; and I know Mr. Fuke that you have some summaries to produce. Would you like to go
<br />first with the summary of the negotiations. And for formality could I swear you in. Do you
<br />swear or affirm to tell the truth now before the Planning Commission?
<br />FUKE: I do.
<br />WATANABE: And, of course, name and address.
<br />FUKE: Sure. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Commission.
<br />My name is Sidney Fuke. I’m a planning consultant assisting Hawaiian Rainforest with this
<br />rezoning application. My business address is 100 Pauahi Street, Suite 212, Hilo, Hawaii.
<br />Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You know, regrettably after probably about four to five weeks of
<br />active negotiation with representatives of W. H. Shipman, you know, the understanding basically
<br />kind of fell apart. So, you know, regrettably we could not reach any sort of an agreement. And
<br />the applicant has thus requested that it, you know, that it be given the opportunity to proceed
<br />with the current applications before you. Having said that, I’d like to just generally kind of like
<br />reiterate some of the points behind this particular rezoning application. The applicant bought the
<br />property in 2007. His initial plan was to, and still continues to be, to not only renovate the
<br />existing abandoned warehouses in that area but to rent or lease out those buildings for some sort
<br />of light industrial uses. In addition to that he also wants to, he has a permit for a waterwell and
<br />wants to do a bottling and beverage facility on this site. He had, prior to his purchasing the
<br />property back in 2007, one of his associates sought and received an opinion and a letter from the
<br />Planning Director at that point in time attesting that procedurally the way to go through the
<br />entitlement process would be not the special permit but to go through the rezoning; and this is
<br />predicated upon the site’s designation as Industrial. And so, you know, with that letter, in
<br />reliance of that letter, then the acquisition was made. He had also early part of last year applied
<br />for and then subsequently was qualified by the State and the County as an enterprise program;
<br />and this enterprise program, you know, enables the applicant to get certain tax relief in exchange
<br />for generating, assurance of generating “x” number of jobs. And I think that the Commissioners
<br />are well aware of the current state of the economy; and this being on this enterprise program,
<br />which was also endorsed by the County, you know, I think speaks volume relative to the
<br />importance of the program, I mean, the development of this nature.
<br />Basically all of the required infrastructure, whether it’s like wasterwater system, you know, the
<br />access, the archaeological issues were addressed in the application that I provided you earlier.
<br />So in the interest of not being redundant I’ll just kind of like pass on that. The residual issue, of
<br />course, you know, just dealt with the question about the legality of the access. And, you know,
<br />to that, you know, I’ll have to defer to the applicant’s attorney, Paul Sulla, you know, who at
<br />some point in time would like to address that in a little bit more detail. I would like to, however,
<br />apologize to the Commission for having to bring this access question, you know, before this
<br />Commission because it’s my belief that the proper body to make a determination on this access is
<br />really like not the Planning Commission or the County Council, it’s really, if there is some
<br />question regarding the legality of the access, then the appropriate body really should be the
<br />courts.
<br />Finally, that’s about it, I think. So I’ll just kind of open ourselves up for any questions. And
<br />then -.
<br /> EXHIBIT A
<br />2
<br />
<br />
|