|
KUBOTA:You represent the community association. My understanding is, as
<br />I understand it anyway up to this point, the community association in the initial, the onset
<br />of this project, supported the project. Today, your testimony is flipped; it's entirely
<br />against this project, it seems to me. And the conditions that you are proposing that the
<br />Commission impose on the time extension seems, as Mr. Yuen point
<br />outside of the realm of the initial "agreement" that was made some years ago. The fact
<br />that the developers have not come out with the extension of the waterline, the
<br />improvements of the road, and so forth and so on, are things tha
<br />agreed to as this project goes on with the extension of time. Now can you tell me what
<br />other event or events occurred that makes the community organization so totally opposed
<br />to something that they were totally with before? Other than the fact, excuse me, other
<br />than the fact that Mr. McElvaney et al and the developers didn't get in touch with the
<br />community association, but the developers gave an explanation of why they didn't do
<br />that. Now tell me, other than that, am I missing something? I feel this vast turnover of
<br />attitudes. Something must have occurred, and I'm curious.
<br />PAW`U:Yes, ma'am. What our concerns are, number one, our community
<br />has changed over the intervening two decades since the project was, the inception of the
<br />project. We also, at that time, were not incorporated as we -, we're the same corporation
<br />but we were not collecting mandatory fees until 1992, when we were given our issuance
<br />and permit by Judge Kimura. Since then, we have formed a very p
<br />association. Before that, it was very, very loosely run, it was not very effective. Since
<br />then, we've become much more effective in representing the commu
<br />community input, getting community feedback.
<br />At the time of the previous permits and renewals, we did not understand the problem with
<br />the effluent, the trash of fast food; and that has changed our viewpoint on the fast food
<br />portion of it. We also have had a subsequent problem with the neighboring subdivisions,
<br />Hawaiian Acres and `inaloa. Since the County has closed the road from Hawaiian
<br />Acres to the highway along `inaloa Boulevard, there has been a lot of traffic through
<br />Orchidland, a lot of it destined for the Wiki Wiki Mart and the gas station. Many of these
<br />are four-wheel drive vehicles, four-wheelers, dirt bikes that are doing substantial damage
<br />to our semi-improved roads. These are unlicensed drivers with unlicensed vehicles. We
<br />consider the existing development to be what's called in legal terms an attractive
<br />nuisance. They attract people, in addition to our community, people from outside our
<br />community using our infrastructure, a large amount of it, without any compensation to us
<br />for the negative impact, the fees, the money we have to pay to m
<br />infrastructure.
<br />We feel that it would be fair that this be a condition of the extension, that they be
<br />instructed that they must meet with us, they must meet our concerns. And we are not
<br />going to be unreasonable, as you -, as we evidenced by coming before this body to testify
<br />firmly in favor of the other project, Mr. Vern Wood's project, because he did include us
<br />and meet our concerns. And, by the way, he has agreed to put no fast food in his project.
<br />That was agreed to. And this -, your body, I believe it was at that time you were Madam
<br />Chairperson, did agree to that condition.
<br />18
<br />
<br />
|