2005-04-22 TUmphrey REZ 03-032 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

the applicant though than for anything else. So, with that, the only other thing Id ask for is that- Maker of the motion, you had mentioned your reasons for this I think in the previous discussion but I think for the guidance of the department if you would repeat that and fresh that out a little bit in this discussion about why you were moving to reject so that we have something firmly on the record if that is in fact the direction of the Commission. IWASHITA:Sure. Can I address that? GALDONES:Proceed. IWASHITA:Thank you Mr. Chair. The main reason that I bring your motion in this way is because of the uncertainty and time created by the condition for the road improvements or highway improvement being completed. As a precondition to the effective date of any legal zoning change and the effect on the owner obviously is that, owner cant do anything with the property.Youwouldhavesomethinginhandthatisessentiallyuselessbasedonaconditionout of your control up until whenever. You know if the Hawaii Supreme Court sustain Judge Ibarras injunction then that condition will never well- it will be way out in the future because in order for Hokulia to go forward they would have to go to the Land Use Commission and do the whole Land Use Commission process and get those changes done before the project could continue on. Thats years and years and years down the road. The County has not done one thing on the left turn only condition and that by definition is years and years down the road in just in terms of planning, not to mention funding and all of that. So, its really a very, in my mind from the owners side very impractical time wise as far as having this go forward. Based upon that definite uncertainty my concern is that many laws can be changed and there is much discussion now about the traffic problems and how the County needs to address the traffic problems developing on this island. One of the things that were looking at is sustainable growth law changes to our zoning code, to our building code and those changes in my mind if theyre going to happen will probably happen a lot sooner than any, either of these road conditions being met. And so, I believe that its best policy and Im not suggesting a moratorium, but under the circumstances of this case because a condition is for the improvement of these roads that are, in my mind may never happen. Its a good likelihood that neither of these improvements would ever be done and then youll have this law sitting out there that will never ever take effect. Its not good policy in my mind to do that and the fact that we will hopefully have changes in our zoning and building codes that will directly effect this and all other development in the future and how its done, not on a per parcel basis but generally as how we as a County go forward with development and improvements to minimize traffic problems won. That is a reason that I believe we should make an unfavorable recommendation to the County Council on this particular case for those particular facts. GALDONES:Further discussion? Jeff, Im not so sure but, have not the Planning Commission made some approvals on condition that future developments do occur before it triggers the approval of that project proceeding. DARROW:As long as I can remember, which hasnt been too long, I think its been about two years. I believe just before I came on board, Cliftos was a application that had a similar concurrency issue. In regards to others, Im not aware of any that Ive worked on. 15 EXHIBIT A