2008-12-05 TSONOMURA - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

WATANABE: Okay, Mr. Iwashita. IWASHITA: I’m an anti-spot zoning guy. And I know the prior Director had a legalese definition that basically if this is designated Low Density Urban then any zoning application within that area conforms to that designation is not spot zoning. I totally disagree with that. If you just look at this map you have that red outlined area, right? That’s a spot of red in a sea of green or a lake of green, whatever you want to call it. You know, I just cannot agree with those that think that, well, once we designate it as Low Density Urban that’s the way it’s going to be, no matter what. That’s not how I view my job. And in light of the need to really concentrate our development and to do smarter growth and not to have Hawaii Kai’s, Mililani’s, and Kapolei’s on this island, which we have a greater propensity to screw it up much, much worse than they did on Oahu if we just keep going down this road, keep thinking like that. We’ve got to stop doing it. And the way to do that is to not allow this kind of spot zoning, and to really take heed on what we want to do and for everyone to support funding the community development planning for Hilo so that we can all agree basically to that process how Hilo is going to look and where the Urbanization is going to take place. And if it’s necessary later on to change this back to Ag and take it out of Low Density Urban as a result of that process, then we do that. You know, it’s not like, planning is not fixed where once it’s done it’s always going to be that way. So we can change it if we have the political will as a community to do that; and that’s what I’m hoping that gets done in the next couple of years. Thank you, Mr. Chair. WATANABE: Any further discussion? Yes, Ms. Bowman. BOWMAN: Just so, to follow up a little bit -. You know, I appreciate the Brancos’s testimony. But without their testimony I still, as Mr. Iwashita feels, that it really is spot zoning. And my concern is you have this three-acre Urban, you know, with the potential, and once you set this precedence it’s -- again, I don’t know how many of them are developed or if they can come in for -- you know, if you did it up the street then we can further subdivide, which is already Urban State Land Use. I hear that it’s, you know, LUPAG Low Density, but that’s long-term planning. So, again, I voice the same sentiment as far as precedent setting and spot zoning. Thank you. WATANABE: Any further discussion? Well, for myself, let me throw in my two cents. I understand where a number of people are coming from. I’m not insensitive to the Brancos’s concerns. I’m sure that there are other people, neighbors, who may share those concerns. On the other hand we have heard testimony both from the Brancos as well as from the applicant’s representative that the soils there are very poor. In fact, the soils on this particular six-acre parcel is largely fill that came from a canal. The Brancos stated it’s mostly boulders, etc. The Brancos stated that their property has soils because they’ve planted nine different types of grasses, mowed them continually, and they’ve nurtured the land so they can produce ag. But they’ve also stated that the best Ag use for this is either Orchards or Pasture Land, nothing against Orchards or Pasture Land. At the same time the Brancos indicated that right now they still have mac nuts but it’s not feasible, it’s not agriculturally feasible or economically feasible to pick the nuts. They’re not going to destroy the trees because maybe mac nut pricing will come back some day. But that’s one of the best uses according to their testimony. I don’t see this so much as Important Ag Land. I don’t see this so much as a sprawl. EXHIBIT A 19