2022-03-17 Leeward Exh A (Item 1 Cravalho REZ 21-000248)

Home

I agree with the Planning Department's recommendation for the zoning of this parcel, and I think that the particulars on the use of it can be worked out between the applicant and the community. It wouldn't—if they've got the zoning that they need to do the commercial activity, I think that Mr. Cravalho is a member of Kohala community, and that he can work with his neighbors to operate his business in a way that doesn't impact on the community. I think people who are from the community, like Mr. Cravalho who want to maintain the importance of the place that they're from will have that respect for their community members and those around them. So, I would support a favorable recommendation and I think that the opportunity still exists for community involvement to refine the process through both the actual hearings at the County Council. Because we're not issuing the Change of Zone here, we're just issuing a recommendation to the County Council. So, that opportunity still exists for continued collaboration. And, as I said, once, if the zoning is granted, then it doesn't end Mr. Cravalho's efforts to collaborate with the community to have a low-impact business. So, I would be in favor of it. I'll note that with only four members present, we would need all four Planning Commissioners to vote in favor of this to send a favorable recommendation. If not, it would go forward as an unfavorable recommendation to the County Council. But that would be something that the Council would have to consider in their independent review of this application. I'll ask Commissioner Paishon-Duarte, is there anything that you've heard that would change your perspective, or are you staying fast with your original presented belief? PAISHON-DUARTE: I appreciate and respect the prospective that has been shared, and they are all valid perspectives. However, I think, I do believe that the applicant would benefit from more time to do another round of, of community outreach and conversation. So, I will stand on my current perspective. VITOUSEK: Okay. Commissioner DeFranco? DEFRANCO: Sorry, so then to do another round would mean we would have to withdraw the, we would have to withdraw the motion. Is that right? And then have him go back and do more community work, or would you allow it to go forward to the Council with the commitment and understanding that he would go back to his community and work with them? I mean, we're not the, we're not making a decision here, we're just making a recommendation. He still has a lot of opportunity to work with the community and to fulfillbecause, you know, my, again, my feeling is that he listened to us last time and he went and redid his plans because of our recommendation and, you know, he is making an effort to do something unique on a very funny little piece. And even though all of us are, you know, take serious note, this is in ag zoning and why this small piece got there and everybody else around is commercial is something for us to look at. I don't know, is there any words, Commissioner Duarte, that would--or things that we could tag onto this that would let this go forward? PAISHON-DUARTE: Thank you, Vice Chair. Perhaps I can ask support and advice from staff members, from the Planning Staff members, if there is a, do you have proposed language 8 EXHIBIT A