|
things, any other consequences of that are not within your purview. So I would ask that
<br />you kindly consider this favorable. Thank you.
<br />FUJIKAWA:Any questions, Commissioners, to any of these testifiers? None.
<br />Thank you very much. Will the Applicant’s representative, please step forward.
<br />Mr. Fuke, you have heard the testifiers. Have you anything to say?
<br />FUKE:Just very quickly. First of all, we agree with the Planning
<br />Director’s analysis inasmuch as this is a private matter between the Village Association
<br />and the Waikoloa Land Company. It’s something that may ultimately wind its way in
<br />court but, nonetheless, the issue before you is a land use issue. Specifically with respect
<br />with what Mr. Yuen had to say, you know, there was a discussion about the, not
<br />Mr. Yuen, the other Yuen, was saying about like, you know, like there is a vision. But I
<br />think that what’s, the vision that’s really important for the Planning Commission or the
<br />County to consider is what is the public vision; and the public vision is what’s reflected
<br />in the General Plan. And on the General Plan, and I do have a map over here which kind
<br />of outlines pretty much generally along the line like what Mr. Leighton Yuen pointed out.
<br />All of that area that’s in green is owned by the Village Association, and it’s suggested for
<br />some sort of an open space use. The only exception, of course, being the industrial area.
<br />And if you look at the Waikoloa area, as testified by Mr. Shick, and you look at the
<br />General Plan, there’s very, very limited area that’s presently zoned or planned for future
<br />commercial or commercial-related type of uses. And if, as Mr. Shick had indicated that,
<br />you know, you’re talking about over 2,500 homes today, 70 homes under construction
<br />and 800 to 900 more in the very near future and 2,000 additional more homes coming on
<br />line, you have ask yourself, where are you going to put the service? And I think that
<br />when you look at the General Plan, the General Plan is suggesting that the area that’s
<br />being proposed right now is an appropriate area for service. It’s not right next to the
<br />Waikoloa Road. It’s approximately 2,000 feet from that Waikoloa Road. So in terms of
<br />like a visual and open space type of buffer, you do have sufficient distance to afford that
<br />buffer.
<br />In addition to that, you know, the Commission is well aware that Rule 17 of the Planning
<br />Commission, the Planning Department’s rules, does provide adequate landscaping
<br />requirement which I think should help mitigate any potential visual concerns that were
<br />raised earlier.
<br />So, in a nutshell, I think that’s kind of like our position. We respectfully request that the
<br />Commission, you know, look at it purely from a land use standpoint, look from the
<br />infrastructure standpoint, I think we’ve addressed the infrastructure issue. And we
<br />believe, and continue to believe, that this is an appropriate request.
<br />FUJIKAWA:Thank you. Commissioners, any questions of Mr. Fuke or the
<br />Applicant? If not, Mr. Director, you have anything to say?
<br />YUEN:Nothing further.
<br />15
<br />
<br />
|