2003-12-04 TCLIFTO120403 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

ÐThe Hawaii County Council adopted Ordinance No. 96-17 in 1996 to require the dedication of land for public rights-of-way as part of subdivision approval or the issuance of building permit for the construction of multiple-family residential development under certain circumstances. The County may also require the establishment of public rights- of-way as part of the issuance of other types of land use approval such as Change of Zone or Special Management Area Use Permits. Based on the General Plan, the County should require the developer to donate, build and maintain a public park on the makai parcel owned by the developer as a condition to any development on the mauka parcel under consideration. Ð4. The developer has refused to cooperate with Na Keiki He'e Nalu O Hawaii and Kohanaiki Ohana in prior clean up efforts. Developer is lying about his prior efforts. He promised to help clean and maintain the property but has refused to do so. The property is in the worst condition it has been in over a decade due to CliftoÓs neglect and refusal to spend even small amounts of care to care for the land. His latest and recent efforts are a show timed with the rezoning request. The developer has not been cooperative or forthcoming with community groups. His posturing that heÓs cooperating now is a sham. ÐWe have reviewed and agreed with the testimony for the Moku Loa Group, Sierra Club, Ponoiki Kanawai and Kohanaiki Ohana. The entire development proposal is a sham. The developer has admitted he has not enough money to care for t seeks permitting and zoning to enable the sale of the property at higher value and has not presented it in good faith. In view of this, the Planning Commi conditions on the limits of any development to be satisfied in written and in binding form binding all subsequent purchasers, prior to any approvals or permits in order to protect the public interest. ÐThank you for your help. I look forward to your continued support in working with you to develop a park at O'oma. ÐVery truly yours, James Sogi, Vice President, Na Keiki He'e Nal Okay. ÐAloha, Chris Yuen and Planning Commission members. On behalf of the Kohanaiki Ohana, I would like to urge the Commission to deny CliftoÓs SMA Permit request for Ooma II. ÐThe Kohanaiki Ohana has been involved in legal issues, stewardship programs and projects along this coastal area since 1990 when we organized to protect the natural and cultural resources of both Kohanaiki and Ooma from the threats of resort development. The Kohanaiki case, PASH and Angel Pilago versus Hawaii County Planning Commission and Nansay Hawaii, was a victory for native Hawaiian gathering rights and the rights of citizens to participate in agency hearings that affect our quality of life and future growth of the island. The current project proposed for Kohanaiki is a reflection of the last 13 years of work and should be a template for future de 21