|
community, you already have to pay your prorata share. And I think this is a relatively pro-
<br />active way, realizing that there is this under-serviced infrastructure area in this area and
<br />government does not really like have all of the financial wherewithal now to make all of these
<br />improvements. So theyÓre looking at the private developers to help or to participate in
<br />addressing these issues. And I think that the condition, thatÓs kind of structured and identified in
<br />Condition No. 21, or the DirectorÓs Condition Y, I think, pretty much addresses that.
<br />SPRINGER:Commissioners, have you had a chance to review those conditions to
<br />which Mr. Fuke is referring to? Are there any questions or comments to either the Applicant,
<br />Planning Director or Counsel?
<br />As we go into decision-making, you know, here we are in another area that has been identified
<br />for urban expansion but, again, the discussion comes up about infrastructure inadequacies. And
<br />while thereÓs some discussion that the proposal will indeed add to the infrastructure, I think
<br />weÓre still grappling with the juxtaposition of lands designated for urban expansion but which
<br />donÓt yet have infrastructure leading to them. Commissioners, if there is no further discussion -.
<br />Commissioner Graham?
<br />GRAHAM:Since I was the lone dissenter on the rezoning, I feel like I ought to, again,
<br />now weÓre dealing with the SMA permit but, at least explain what my problems are with this
<br />application for everybody to hear. I made a little list of, you know, I could run on too much, but
<br />I want to try to keep on certain topics. I made a list of five things, so if I can just try to follow
<br />them and catch them one at a time.
<br />Within the last month, we went over to Maui for the Hawaii Conference of Planning Officials, a
<br />number of us did. And I wanted, certain things, there were some talks and there was different
<br />speakers but certain things kind of catch your ear. And, for me, you know, the planning issues
<br />certainly got my interest. They spoke of infrastructure problems, and specifically traffic
<br />problems, not as just a result of growth but as a result of poor planning, saying that was a base of
<br />them. And in that regard, a Mr. Michael Dietz, you know, I just wrote down when I was there,
<br />one of the quotes came from him, which was, ÐDonÓt let developer
<br />you are trying to do with your planning.Ñ So, when I look at this proposal, you know,
<br />immediately south of the airport for a 400-room hotel, 240 units of residential housing, and I try
<br />to think of our Planning Director, and suppose our Planning Director had come up with a plan for
<br />how he wanted to use this property, I donÓt see any way weÓre anywhere close to that. I havenÓt
<br />heard anybody in the public say we need an airport hotel -. So, anyway, I feel like, as
<br />Ms. Kubota said, if this Applicant is proposing this, we should treat it seriously and we deal with
<br />it on the merits; and I have no problem with that. I just find that the merits as far as proper
<br />planning donÓt match up at all if the planning were to be initiated by the Planning Department.
<br />Secondly, as I said the last time, on the K-to-K Plan, which is the Kailua to Keahole Plan, which
<br />is the sort of subsidiary to the General Plan, in other words, it speaks of just one specific area and
<br />was passed by the Council as resolution only, it speaks of three
<br />between Kailua and the airport. And it says, ÐThe coastal zone, which is the low-lying lands
<br />makai of Queen K Highway, are planned primarily for public recreational facilities, parks, open
<br />space and resort development.Ñ So, again, the residential housing, the hotel, which is not a resort
<br />13
<br />
<br />
|