Laserfiche WebLink
LIM: Okay. Thank you for your willingness to allow the applicant the time and <br />the ability to formulate our case and present you our feelings on the proposed downzoning and <br />our request for the time extensions for the zoning ordinance and the SMA permit in this case. <br />For purposes of the record, I would like to reiterate our preservation of any objections that we’ve <br />raised to the process and the substantive matters that have gone on in these proceedings. And as <br />I understand it, we are still in the consolidated proceeding; so I’d like to make my comments that <br />I’ve given throughout this proceeding applicable to both the Change of Zone application and the <br />Director’s action on that, and our SMA time extension and the Director’s action on that permit <br />also. <br />Also, for purposes of the record, to the extent that the public witnesses have given any expert <br />testimony, we’d like to object to that because they have not been qualified to testify as experts in <br />this matter. <br />Okay. I missed Mr. Darrow’s presentation a little bit. But am I to understand they’ve received <br />the March 18, 2008, letter? <br />DARROW: Yes. <br />LIM: Okay. What I’ll do is I’ll go over our overall presentation on the issues <br />relating to the Change of Zone and SMA application matters before you. And then I’ll go and <br />follow up with our proposed conditions that would be submitted as amendments to our proposed <br />Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, Decision and Order in the SMA matter, and also as our <br />proposed conditions for the Commission’s consideration on the time extension for the Change of <br />Zone. <br />As the Commission noted in its initial presentation, feelings have gotten strong. Apologies have <br />been made, and there are strong feelings on all sides. And it’s because this is a very important <br />issue for both the applicant and the County. The applicant’s position is that throughout the last <br />15 to 20 years all State and County authorities have recognized that the areas of makai of the <br />Kohala Ranch project, which by the way is – Jeff, can you do me a favor and put up the graphic <br />for the General Plan, GIS, for that area – that all the areas makai of the Kohala Ranch project <br />should be limited to urban development in that area as shown on the Land Use Pattern Allocation <br />Guide Map for this area. As you can see, both the State Land Use Commission and the County <br />General Plan since 1989 and also in that 2005 revision that you just went through have shown <br />the majority of the property as Low Density Urban and State Land Use Commission Urban for <br />the entire property. It’s our position that this is the County of Hawaii’s official policy position as <br />expressed by law in the General Plan. And this is something that the County of Hawaii has <br />supported for numerous years. As you can see, in the Kohala Ranch project, which is located <br />mauka of this project, that is an area of several hundred acres, which is presently entitled for <br />development of between 1,000 to 1,500 residential units and, I believe, a golf course also. <br />Located to the south of the subject property, one property away, is a multi-family residential <br />development that has been developed into half-acre, essentially, farm lots or residential lots. <br />In the past 26 years, based upon our research and a research done by the Planning Director, in the <br />past 26 years there have been no involuntary downzonings of any properties that have occurred. <br />th <br />Even then, and this was in 1982 – and this is part of our submittal to you in our last March 18 <br />EXHIBIT A <br />13 <br /> <br />