2004-01-30 BayPacific - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

GRAHAM:Mr. Kornberg, I think these questions are for you. I have like three questions related here, I think. First, are you representing Waikoloa Village Association or Bay Pacific Development? KORNBERG:I represent Bay Pacific Development. GRAHAM:Do we have Waikoloa Village Association people here today or anything that -? KORNBERG:Yeah. GRAHAM:Yeah, so we will hear from them. Second, could you give us a little understanding of what are the land holdings of Waikoloa Land Company as opposed to Waikoloa Village Association, since they’re both involved in these things? KORNBERG:May I defer to Mr. Fuke for that response? FUKE:And I will defer that to Mr. Schick, who’s the president of the association, who will be testifying a little later. GRAHAM:Okay. Fine. And I did have one third question which probably Mr. Fuke could better answer. If the Waikoloa Land Corporation granted this land to the Village Association back in ’88, whatever, and the intention was that it remain an open as they say, yet, when I look at my General Plan LUPAG map, I see this kind of gray area there which I think is the Industrial-marked area. How did that come about on the LUPAG map, or do you understand how that might have been historically, or -? FUKE:If, I’m getting old, so I might forget. But if my memory serves me correct, I think that concept was initiated either by the Village Association or whoever owned the land at that time, or the Waikoloa Land Development Company. But, in either case, I think that was not part of the original General Plan, original being back in 1971. And, so, during the first course of the review, the 10-year review of the General Plan then that insertion was made with the support, I guess, of all affected property owners. I don’t recall like the Waikoloa Land Company filing any objections to that Industrial designation. KORNBERG:And, Mr. Graham, I’ll say that although the Waikoloa letter refers to the settlement agreement, we’ve reviewed the settlement agreement and it really doesn’t discuss a use restriction. I think some of the people were surprised. A very respected attorney, Diana Van De Car, reviewed the original agreement and she didn’t think that there was a use restriction valid on this property.So I’m not sure how much of it was actually all contemplated by the various parties, except I do know that the Village Association, as you’ll hear, is very much in favor of this proposal. GRAHAM:Good. The timing also seems very curious to me because, as 7