|
inadequacies that we have right now? You know, the County government has got to get going
<br />and improve the infrastructure. And, like I say, to me it’s a big disconnect.
<br />WATANABE: Mr. Domingo?
<br />DOMINGO: Thank you. Again, what we’re doing is we’re holding them hostage, the
<br />potential subdividers/developers. We’re holding them hostage because we don’t have the
<br />facilities. There are numerous ways or financing schemes that can be used and should be looked
<br />at. In fact, the impact fees have been instituted to address the lack of facilities in a district; and
<br />that’s why there are fees being attached to the ordinance bills today. So, you know, how far do
<br />we go in penalizing people who are not at all at fault because of the problems that we already
<br />have? Thank you.
<br />WATANABE: Mr. Iwashita?
<br />IWASHITA: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think we all recognize that concurrency is an
<br />issue on this island and that something needs to be done about it; and, you know, this is an effort
<br />or what’s being suggested arises out of that concurrency concern. I wanted to add my thinking
<br />after going to the HCPO Conference and listening to the concerns about peak oil and the benefits
<br />of localizing the economy, that in terms of where this goes and how to evaluate this or the
<br />concerns about concurrency that this raises, it’s really an infrastructure problem where you’re
<br />talking about parks or you’re talking about social service infrastructure, police and firefighters
<br />and so forth.
<br />The thought I would like everyone to consider is that if we localize and keep the urbanization to
<br />a more localized area to the ones we already have -- basically, as the Director pointed out, you
<br />know, that we have a lot of development/dwellings that can be built, you know, just based on
<br />what’s already approved -- and if we focus on, and my idea, you know, beefing up the CDP
<br />process and in the implementation of them and have the communities be engaged in focusing the
<br />delivery of the infrastructure in these concentrated areas, then that is the direction in which, if we
<br />look at any future proposals for development, to look at it, in that framework to minimize the
<br />sprawl, if you will, keep the future development localized to the benefit of minimizing the cost.
<br />Cause the infrastructure is going to have to be provided. So to minimize the infrastructure, both
<br />social and the parks and schools and all those things, and what would be required, that would be
<br />a bigger framework to look at, you know, in addressing these infrastructure concerns and
<br />concurrency concerns. Because if we keep going down, you know, the rezoning, whether it’s
<br />commercial or residential and that, and we continue to allow, you know, let’s say doing Ag,
<br />changing Ag zonings to residential developments and it’s on an essentially a sprawl model so
<br />you’re going to end up with Hawaii Kais and Kapoleis and all those kinds of areas; and we
<br />definitely are going to be aggravating the already existing infrastructure lag that we have. So, I
<br />mean, the concern is there. I agree that this probably is not the best way for us to address these
<br />issues. But I think it’s something that we all or, you know, I will continue to focus on in terms of
<br />any future applications for change of zone, in particular, that, you know, we get to review. But
<br />definitely I think we really, you know, I would focus on these other issues and keeping things
<br />localized so that we can -. In the end, you know, we talk about Ag and promoting agriculture. If
<br />we keep the urbanization localized then that’s how we protect our Ag lands. Thank you.
<br /> EXHIBIT E 6
<br />
<br />
<br />
|