2006-04-21 TSeascape-development

Home

very worse case scenario is that the State or some other government agency would have to build this 3 or 400 feet of road if and when the State wanted to develop the adjacent property. Thats if everybody fell asleep at the wheel and let this go. So given the-. And I appreciate Mr. Dicklers candid answer and not trying to hold this as a negotiating point in the building of this project. But the fact of the matter is that any affordable project in West Hawaii is going to be done on small margins at best. Small profit margins at best. And we are trying to encourage people to do affordable housing. So if we see a way to help them cut their cost and a reasonable way where we can still protect the public interest were certainly willing to take the chance that the Planning Department is not sufficiently vigilant in 10 to 15 years time. In the end the community gets the government that it deserves. Community is, its a little up to the community to, people to watch this kind of thing. There are always instances where something was missed. We can point, and those become sometimes-public embarrassments. We can point and certainly you can point to situations in the past where a developer was supposed to do something and somebody missed it. We can also point to 10 times or 20 times where the developer was supposedtodosomethingandthePlanningDepartmentwasontheballandmadethemdoit. So, this will be a condition of the zoning ordinance. It will be a covenant in the deed. If and when theres a public project its hard for me to see that nobody would notice that there was this condition floating out there that the property, that the adjacent private property owner has to build the road has to build this 3 or 400 feet connector road. So, I do feel quite comfortable that it would be enforced in the future. ALAMEDA:Commissioner Graham follow up? No? Well go to Commissioner Iwashita and then Commissioner Watanabe. Commissioner Iwashita? IWASHITA:So, just so I get a clear understanding here. The way this language is written its the intent that whichever property-. Theres going to be some other piece of property that is going to be encumbered by a covenant running with the land which requires the building of this road at some time in the future. Whos going to determine whether or not that property is presently of sufficient value in a-? I guess Im not clear on the, if the developer, if whoever the owner is at the time does not comply then what is going to be the process by which the County can enforce this obligation? In other words you know I dont see a real clear legal path if its just a covenant as far as selling, forcing the sale of the property or you know, in order to get the money to get it done. And what conditions would have to be met by the County before such a sale could occur? Its not real clear to me how thats going to be set up and whether its going to be you know any, as Commissioner Graham indicated a relatively efficient process so that the road could be built you know in, within a reasonable time to facilitate whatever future development were talking about. ALAMEDA:Director can you respond to that? YUEN:The other parcels that are involved are 15-acre parcels. The value of those properties I have no doubt exceeds the cost of building this 3 or 400 feet of road. As a covenant, if the covenant is entered and then some day later the landowner refuses then the County would have to bring suit against the landowner to enforce the covenant. The property itself would be the security. Then the County would have won the suit and say won monetary damages equivalent to the cost of building a road. The property itself would be the security and EXHIBIT A 9