2004-06-04 DJSM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

reasons the proposed development never got off the ground. For more than ten years the conditions of the amended ordinance went unmet, the property sat empty and was recently sold. "This is not the first time amendment issues have been raised.The facts regarding the conditions of the rezoning were known at the time this property was acquired, however, no effort was made to address the conditions. In fact, no action of any kind was taken until after the complaints about the illegal grading activities, and a March 10, 2004 letter to Mr. Yuen from Robin Black stating concerns over the potential illegality of the commercial zoning situation. "As stated in that letter to Mr. Yuen, in reading the ordinance we found that: 'According to Ordinance 92-91 (effective: August 18, 1992) it amended Ordinance 89-59 4. Condition K stipulated that if any of the conditions are unmet, or not substantially complied with in a timely fashion, the Director shall initiate rezoning of Parcel 29 to is original residential zoning, or something more appropriate. This is a mandatory action required of the Planning Director.' "As we read this, since the conditions were not met, the action required of the Planning Director is clear: revert the zoning to RS-10 or change it to 'something more appropriate,' or the developers must go back to the County Council again to amend the ordinance. It seems we are -, or should be - back at square one. "We are very concerned about the problems associated with commercial development of this size in our residential community and we urge you to think about the negative impact on our families and properties and deny the request of the developer to amend the conditions. The initial plans submitted to the Planning Department were a shock to the neighborhood and we were very disturbed by what we saw. We understand that the Planning Department rejected consideration of these plans, due in part to reasons outlined in the previously mentioned letter to Mr. Yuen, nevertheless they are indicative of the developer's intent and vision. "Leveling the entire property completely changes the movement of rainwater through the neighborhood. While we acknowledge the existence of the flood plain and the need to address runoff, complete leveling and grading of the property creates other effects. A small stream that meanders during rainy weather will cease – leaving that property considerably changed from its current conditions. Proposed drywells to contain rainwater will likely be unable to deal with Kilauea Avenue storm runoff during peak rains. "Leveling the ground, and then further increasing the elevation in preparation to build a massive structure on top of it completely removes the view of Mauna Kea for all the accompanying residents – some 7 residential homes. A massive two-story building imposes itself into our living room and bedrooms not only visually but with sound pollution as well. A glance at the proposed building plans submitted showed placement of air conditioning ducts facing towards the residences, as well as placement of the industrial sized dumpsters closest to three residential backyards. This poses all kinds of concerns for health hazards as a huge building deposits garbage right next to our play yards, fruit trees, and clotheslines. They proposed pavement or 10