PL-CCI-2022-000002 E. DUNN TESTIMONY 10.4.2022

Home

Letter Supporting Item No. 2, Bill No. 194 (PL-CCI-2022-00002), Conditions on Change of Zone Actions Aloha Winward Planning Commission: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on and support Bill No 194, PL-CCI-2022-00002, the bill proposed by Councilperson Inaba to have the County Council approve an extension of time for a previously approved rezoning application, as well as the conditions of approval of this approval, and not have this approval occur at the staff level. I live on the leeward side, and see the signs for development proposals all around me, as well as drive past projects that have recently broken ground for development. I am concerned about the approved, but not yet implemented projects, that I know have been or will be considered by the Leeward Planning Commission: Royal Vistas (450 units north of Lako Street), 77-6565 Naniloa (62 units on one parcel; an adjacent makai parcel would be phase 2 of development with an equal amount of units); Sunstone Kona, 289 multi -family units approved by the Leeward Planning Commission in June 2018; and Puaa Development, a mixed use project including 100 multi -family units that was approved by the County Council in December 2020. There may be more, but these are the projects I am aware of. These languishing projects do nothing for the local residents except add to the already congested roads, exacerbate water availability, create more pressure for an enlarged or new wastewater treatment plant, and desecrate lands where Native Hawaiian (pre -contact) artifacts exist. More workforce housing is needed - not more housing that is unattainable to existing families, and bought up as investment vehicles for in -or -out-of-state investors. I am not against development. I am against poor development, and poorly planned development. I am also concerned about the uncomfortable feeling that there is an all too cozy relationship with some in the Planning Department and the larger development community. In the past six years, there have been at least three Planning Directors - this doesn't foster continuity within the Planning Department; former Planning staff who've left the public sector are now the proponents and consultants to private property owners and developers who want to maximize their profits on their investment on vacant (and speculative) land. This comes at the expense of the neighbors who must live with the uncertainty that vacant land - that has previously been approved but no development has started - will be developed, and the multi- year process this development takes. I'd ask the Winward Planning Commission also consider these enhancements to Bill 194: Formally establish time limits within the conditions of approval, and Zoning Code, for rezoning applications. This way, the public has a clear understanding of how long an approved rezoning application is valid. Section 25-2-7 of the Zoning Code establishes that Planning applications, except fro rezoning requests, are valid for two years. I have not been able to locate language in the Zoning Code that establishes a time limit for rezoning applications. Additionally, I have not seen similar language in the conditions of approval for rezoning applications. 2. If Bill 194 is approved by the County Council, establish that the time extension is a one- time extension, and valid for a specific time period - say two years. Once the time extension has run its course, and no further action has been taken by the developer to secure a grading or building permit to vest the project, the project should be deemed abandoned, and invalid. No subsequent time extensions should be allowed.