|
I'll briefly go over why we feel that we have checked all those regulatory boxes. For example,
<br /> for regarding the SMA criteria and guidelines, have those criteria and guidelines for the SMA
<br /> Use Permit changed since the initial approval of the SMA permit back in 2009? And the answer
<br /> is no. More specifically, for archaeological and cultural and environmental, I'm sorry, an
<br /> archaeological inventory survey was prepared, as well as a Cultural Impact Assessment, that was
<br /> done both in 2006. The data recovery plan and burial treatment plan was prepared and
<br /> ultimately approved by SHPD in 2017. The applicant did follow all the archaeological protocols,
<br /> including basically completing five of the six historical preservation review steps required by the
<br /> State of Hawaii. And the condition that we presented to you also is a commitment to go up and
<br /> beyond for the requirements of the State Historic Preservation Division. Regarding flora and
<br /> fauna resources, there are none. A biological survey was conducted of the property. Regarding
<br /> coastal water impact, the project itself will connect to County sewer and, which is required by
<br /> Planning Director Condition L. A non-point discharge NPDES requirement to adjust pollutants
<br /> from surface runoff into coastal waters is required as per Director's Condition, proposed
<br /> Condition N. Let's see, as far as recreational resources, the project site itself is not located
<br /> adjacent to the shoreline nor is an impediment to existing or proposed coastal accesses in the
<br /> area. And on that note, the applicant is also working to provide, as required by Condition C, a
<br /> three-acre neighborhood public park in the vicinity of La`aloa, and that will basically add to the
<br /> non-coastal recreational resources within this particular area of Kona. As far as zoning
<br /> considerations are concerned, the General Plan has not changed; it still remains Low Density
<br /> Urban, as it was back in 2009. The project as a single-family residential development is
<br /> consistent with the General Plan designation. Kona Community Development Plan, likewise, no
<br /> change, the project remains within the Kona Urban Area and is considered an infill development,
<br /> and that was confirmed in the Planning Director's assessment and recommendation. As far as
<br /> the zoning ordinance and concurrency requirements, there are Civil Defense sirens within
<br /> proximity of the project site. Traffic Impact Analysis was done, and the applicant will abide by
<br /> the mitigating requirements, and those are prescribed by Conditions F, G, H, and I within the
<br /> proposed conditions of approval recommended by the Director. And finally, regarding water,
<br /> water is still available and committed to the property, and the applicant,per the Condition D, will
<br /> comply with these standards as far as water, design for water availability. So again, the bottom
<br /> line is, does this project check all of those regulatory boxes? And we believe that it does.
<br /> Now, as far as the comments from the general public regarding traffic, unfortunately, you know,
<br /> that is a consequence of infill development where you try to focus development within a specific
<br /> area. There will be added traffic in that particular area, but with the proper mitigation required
<br /> by the TIAR and the applicant's contribution in the matter of fair share contributions to traffic
<br /> improvements, we believe the applicant has taken,basically provided its fair share. Regarding
<br /> nature of housing, is this project designed for outsiders? The answer is no. There will be an
<br /> affordable housing requirement that will be made,that is a condition within the conditions of
<br /> approval. Short-term vacation rentals are not allowed in a project like this. And again, the
<br /> project is trying to create basically a community, a new community, within this particular area of
<br /> Kona.
<br /> Finally, I kind of want to focus on performance because this is what it's really about, right? The
<br /> conditions prescribe a certain time frame for which the project is to be completed. The applicant
<br /> was not able to satisfy the particular requirement, but it doesn't mean that since the landowner's,
<br /> 10
<br /> EXHIBIT G
<br />
|