Laserfiche WebLink
194 would eliminate these matters which clog the LPC agenda, and allow the Commissions to concentrate on the <br />matters for which they do have authority . <br />9. Certainty as to conditions, infrastructure and affordable housing for the County, developers, and the public would <br />come into being. Who would be against this bill, and why•? <br />Even the PD and Assistant PD are not against the bill, and have testified that they are. "neutral •". They may say they <br />don' t alway hand out free delays, but this author has found no record of that. And also found no record of any "beyond <br />the control" reasons for delay. Below are some recent examples. The author would be happy to elaborate and/or give <br />more examples. <br />A. Keauhou condo <br />B. Palamanui <br />delay after giving earlier extensions, all without examination contemporar4y of many County officials. It was supposed <br />to build a bypass street from Mamalaoa Highway to Queen Kaahumanu Highway, interconnecting with streets on the <br />way, by 2005, to alleviate traffic on Mamalahoa and traffic to its huge residential and commercial project. Palamanui <br />obtained delays and extensions to 2025. The result: huge traffic jams and accidents, including fatalities,on Mamalahoa <br />and Palani Road to Hina Lani and into town. Palamanui at the last hyering for further delay, promised that they would <br />build it out. But instead they SOLD to NAN, Inc. Expect Nan, Inc. to ask for further delay <br />C. Diamond Resorts, an SMA. A time share condo project, makai side of Alii Drive past the hotel and tennis courts. It <br />was approved about 1998, based on conditions then. After completing only the parking garage cement monstrosity on <br />the ground there, which blights the area, the project was SOLD. The buyer asked for a delay to 2025, with its <br />representative, Mr. Fuke, refusing any new infrastructure, not even a new traffic study on Alii Drive, which he said was <br />all that was required. The delay was recommended, but thankfully a "sunset" clause was added. <br />D._________________________________This commercial and residential project was to be located off of Kuakini <br />Highway and Queen Kaahumanu near Lako Street. Its ordinance expired in 2005, although its representative argued <br />expiration in 2015. The ordinance was ""resurrected", and an extension until 2025 sought. Then project would have <br />dumped about a thousand vehicles onto Queen K into the worst traffic jams in Kona, from Lako north and south. <br />Representative Fuke misrepresented, in the author's opinion, that the land would revert to inappropriate ag.zoning if <br />the project was not approved. He also presented a traffic study, which did not at all mention Henry Street, mauka and <br />makai, the biggest by far traffic generators into the traffic jams on Queen K, arguing that traffic would not be a problem. <br />It also represented that any traffic problem would be taken care of by the State adding a lane to Queen K and/or <br />building out the Alii Drive realignment by 2025. The project received a negative recommendation by then PD Yee and a <br />unanimous LPC. Later, in what this author thinks was a shocking display of disrespect for PD Yee and the LPC, under the <br />guidance of council person Kierkewitz, the negative reccomendation was changed to positive! Thereafter the project <br />was promptly SOLD to BIG Springs Development LLC. Expect them to ask for further delays. <br />West Hawaii wants quality development, infrastructure and affordable housing on a measurable and definite scale and <br />schedule. It's a very taxpayer expensive 25 years behind because of the developer friendly archaic system, which badly <br />damages the people of West Hawaii, whopm you represent. Please support Bill 194.. <br />Mark Van Pernis <br />