The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPL-REZ-2022-000033 D. BLANCETT TEESTIMONY (PETITION) 12.11.2022 Araujo, Jaclyn From: D. Blancett-maddoc <dbmkona@aol.com> Sent: Sunday, December 11, 2022 8:22 PM To: LPCtestimony Subject: PL-REZ-2022-000033 Fwd: Comments and Concerns - Mayor [#2886] Attachments: KV DEVELOPMENT OPPOSITION PETITION SIGNATURES.pdf, KV DEVELOPMENT OPPOSITION PETITION SIGNATURES PART 2.pdf ALOHA, Please confirm that the handwritten petitions filed in 2019 are included in the public record for the agenda item #1 Kona Three ( PL-REZ-2022-000033) with aloha, Diane From: Maija.Jackson@hawaiicounty.gov To: DBM2DBM@AOL.COM, dbmkona@aol.com Cc: Donna.Urban-Higuchi@hawaiicounty.gov, Barbara.Kossow@hawaiicounty.gov, Jeff.Darrow@hawaiicounty.gov, Rebecca.Villegas@hawaiicounty.gov, Leinani.Wessel@hawaiicounty.gov, Michael.Yee@hawaiicounty.gov Sent: 8/26/2019 10.45.57 AM Hawaiian Standard Time Subject: FW: Comments and Concerns - Mayor [#2886] Aloha David and Diane- Thank you for providing this petition opposing the Kona Three LLC project next to Kona Vistas subdivision. As you know, the applicant has not resubmitted a rezone amendment application yet, but when they do I will forward a copy to you. The petitions provided by Kona Vistas and Pualani Estates will be made part of the record provided to the Planning Commission and County Council with the rezone amendment application, for their decision. I have also attached three emails between me and Mr. Wheelock regarding the issue of access to Queen Kaahumanu Highway. The second access appears to be required based on Condition L of the current rezone ordinance. The applicant is working with the State Dept. of Transportation to provide an access into the property directly from the highway. Please let me know if you have any questions. Maija Jackson, Planner County of Hawaii Planning Department (808) 961-8159 -----Original Message----- From: Urban-Higuchi, Danicita (Donna) Sent: Wednesday,July 24, 2019 8:35 AM 1 To: Newlon, Rosalind <Rosalind.Newlon@hawaiicounty.gov>; Bugado, Deanne <Deanne.Bugado@hawaiicounty.gov> Cc: Sauer, Noriko<Noriko.Sauer@hawaiicounty.gov>; Ley, Rachelle<Rachel le.Ley@hawaiicounty.gov>;Yee, Michael <Michael.Yee@hawaiicounty.gov>; Kossow, Barbara <Barbara.Kossow@ hawaiicounty.gov> Subject: FW: Comments and Concerns- Mayor [#2886] Good morning to All, For your information and handling. Please reach out to D & D Blancett-Maddock and send me any copies of your communication for the file. Thank you, Donna Urban-Higuchi Executive Assistant Office of the Mayor County of Hawaii-West Hawai'i 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Highway, Bldg. C Kailua-Kona, HI 96740 Phone: (808) 323-4442 Fax: (808) 323-4440 -----Original Message----- From: Office of the Mayor [mai Ito:no-reply@wufoo.com] Sent: Sunday,July 21, 2019 11:55 AM To: Urban-Higuchi, Danicita (Donna) <Donna.Urban-Higuchi@hawaiicounty.gov> Cc: Kossow, Barbara <Barbara.Kossow@ hawaiicounty.gov> Subject: Comments and Concerns- Mayor [#2886] Name: D&D BLANCETT-MADDOCK Phone Number: (808)443-9794 Email: DBM2DBM@AOL.COM Address: 76-101 KAMEHAMALU STRRET KAILUA KONA, HI 96740 United States Message Type: Complaint/ Concern Your Message: REZONE 470 KV DEVELOPMENT OPPOSITION PETITION PART 1 Attach a File: https://hawaiicounty.wufoo.com/cabinet/d0ef94fe-6957-490f-a5d6-d8d5da7f5ldc-4.20 MB TmFtZTogRCZEIEJMQUSDRVRULUIBRERPQOsNCIBob25IIE51bWJlcjogKDgwOCkgNDQzLTk3OTQN CkVtYWIsOiBEQkOyREJNQEFPTC5DT00NCkFkZHJlc3M6IDc2LTEwMSBLQUIFSEFNQUxVIFNUUIJF VCBLQUIMVUEgS09OQSwgSEkgOTY3NDAgVWSpdGVkIFNOYXRlcwOKTWVzc2FnZSBUeXBIOiBDb21w bGFpbnQgLyBDb25jZXJuDQpZb3VylEllc3NhZ2U61FJFWk9ORSAONzANC90KS1YgREVWRUxPUE1F TIQgT1BQTINJVEI PTi BQRVRJVE I PTi BQQVJ U I DI NCiAgICAgICAgQXROYW NoIG EgRm IsZTogaH RO cHM6Ly9oYXdhaWljb3VudHkud3Vmb28uY29tL2NhYmluZXQvY2RhMDhmNmltNDkwYS00ZmFILWEI YTYtY2Y1ODAwN m IzZm N hICOgNzUxLjc5l EtCDQoNCgOK Hi Richard &Zendo- 2 Can you provide an update on the status of when you will be resubmitting an application to amend Ord. 02-131 for the Kona Three LLC project?We continue to receive testimony and petitions opposed to the project (see attached). I also need some clarification regarding the highway access. I recall Richard telling me in the past that the original ordinance and rezone project only envisioned and required one access onto the highway(Lako Street); however, a review of our files indicates the proposed subdivision map (attached) submitted with the original rezone application proposed two accesses onto the highway and the narrative in the application states DOT granted two access points to the landowner at the time. Condition L in Ord. 02-131 refers to improving the intersections on the highway. This condition has carried through without amendment from the original ordinance, which implies that the County Council never approved dropping a second access point onto the highway. Please clarify your understanding of the highway access requirements and let me know whether the resubmitted application will propose a second highway access to the RM-zoned lands. Give me a call if you would like to discuss. Thank you, Maija Aloha Maija: Our engineers continue to work on the proposed highway access plans, there are a number of issues related to the matter, and we want to be thorough in our analysis and planning related to same. Given the importance this access has to everyone, I'm sure you understand. As soon as we have completed this process, we will update the Report as you have instructed and re-submit. As to the highway access you reference in Paragraph 2: Condition K in the original Ordinance 84-23 reads "Improvements to the intersections of Kuakini Highway and the Kuakini Highway extension shall be constructed meeting with the approval of the State Department of Transportation, Highways Division. The improvements shall be constructed concurrently with the development of the first increment of the IRS or RM zoned properties, whichever occurs first." This language carries forward into Ord. 02-131, and I believe is in force. You will note that the language required BOTH INTERSECTIONS to be built CONCURRENTLY with the development of the first increment of the project, which did in fact occur. See attached map showing the two intersections referenced in this language, both of which were built before the first increment was occupied. The first intersection referenced was the intersection of then existing Kuakini Highway, where it met then existing Kailua Keauhou Road (which served as the only access to the project from the North at that time, and was deemed inadequate to service the development) as well as the then under development Hawaii Belt Road project. The project contributed land and funds to this intersection as required. The second intersection referenced was the planned intersection of Lako Street(mauka) and the Kuakini Highway Extension. This serves as the primary access point for the existing Kona Vistas homes. The project built 3 this intersection (and lower Lako Street) in accordance with the Ordinance requirements. Both of these intersections were built before or concurrently with Increment I of Kona Vistas. Numerous site layouts have been considered over the years, what I think was the first one that was submitted to the County in 1983 is attached. In accordance with your instructions and the request of the neighbors and Councilwoman Villegas, we continue to work on a site plan that can accommodate an entry onto the Belt Road, and will get that plan to you once we are confident it will work properly. Thanks, Ric From:Jackson, Maija [mailto:Maija.Jackson@hawaiicounty.gov] Sent:Wednesday,July 24, 2019 1:34 PM To: Richard Wheelock;zendo@zendokern.com Cc: Darrow,Jeff Subject: Kona Three Project Hi Richard &Zendo- Can you provide an update on the status of when you will be resubmitting an application to amend Ord. 02-131 for the Kona Three LLC project?We continue to receive testimony and petitions opposed to the project (see attached). I also need some clarification regarding the highway access. I recall Richard telling me in the past that the original ordinance and rezone project only envisioned and required one access onto the highway(Lako Street); however, a review of our files indicates the proposed subdivision map (attached) submitted with the original rezone application proposed two accesses onto the highway and the narrative in the application states DOT granted two access points to the landowner at the time. Condition L in Ord. 02-131 refers to improving the intersections on the highway. This condition has carried through without amendment from the original ordinance, which implies that the County Council never approved dropping a second access point onto the highway. Please clarify your understanding of the highway access requirements and let me know whether the resubmitted application will propose a second highway access to the RM-zoned lands. Give me a call if you would like to discuss. 4 Thank you, Maija Hi Richard- I am glad to hear you are working on securing a second highway access with DOT. There is still some confusion about the second intersection referenced in the record. Your first map shows the second intersection that was required in Condition L is the Kuakini Highway/Queen Kaahumanu intersection. But I could not find anything in the record indicating Gamrex provided lands and funds for this intersection and that this is the intersection referenced in the condition. Perhaps you can point me to it. The LUC and Rezone files indicate a second access point to the property was permitted by DOT and the maps confirm 'access permitted' north of the drainage way on Queen Kaahumanu Highway. From the 1983 rezone background report: "Access to the property from Kuakini Highway extension (this section is called Queen Kaahumanu Highway today)will be permitted from two points. One would be Lako Street intersection which is planned...... The other access point would be to the north in the vicinity of the Horseshoe Bend stream and will have a right-of-way width of fifty feet. Both roads will be built to County dedicable standards." This description matches up with the original rezone map exhibit that I sent to you in the last email. This info seems to confirm that Condition L envisioned the second intersection on the Kuakini Highway extension would be on the north side of the property and built to County standards with a 50-foot wide right-of-way heading east into the project site. I've also attached info and maps from the 1993 LUC Order file which confirms a second access intersection was proposed in this vicinity to provide direct access into the RM-zoned lands. Please share with us if you are able to find information in the files or in your records that indicates the second intersection referenced in the condition was the Kuakini Highway/Queen Kaahumanu intersection rather than the one referenced above. We are just trying to confirm whether the second access from highway is mandatory per the ordinance and record. Any info you can provide would be helpful to clear this up. Let me know if you have any questions. Maija From: Richard Wheelock [mailto:Richard@eastwestrealty.org] Sent:Thursday,July 25, 2019 2:42 PM 5 To:Jackson, Maija <Maija.Jackson@hawaiicounty.gov>; zendo@zendokern.com Cc: Darrow,Jeff<Jeff.Darrow@hawaiicounty.gov> Subject: RE: Kona Three Project Aloha Maija: Our engineers continue to work on the proposed highway access plans, there are a number of issues related to the matter, and we want to be thorough in our analysis and planning related to same. Given the importance this access has to everyone, I'm sure you understand. As soon as we have completed this process, we will update the Report as you have instructed and re-submit. As to the highway access you reference in Paragraph 2: Condition K in the original Ordinance 84-23 reads "Improvements to the intersections of Kuakini Highway and the Kuakini Highway extension shall be constructed meeting with the approval of the State Department of Transportation, Highways Division. The improvements shall be constructed concurrently with the development of the first increment of the IRS or RM zoned properties, whichever occurs first." This language carries forward into Ord. 02-131, and I believe is in force. You will note that the language required BOTH INTERSECTIONS to be built CONCURRENTLY with the development of the first increment of the project, which did in fact occur. See attached map showing the two intersections referenced in this language, both of which were built before the first increment was occupied. The first intersection referenced was the intersection of then existing Kuakini Highway, where it met then existing Kailua Keauhou Road (which served as the only access to the project from the North at that time, and was deemed inadequate to service the development) as well as the then under development Hawaii Belt Road project. The project contributed land and funds to this intersection as required. The second intersection referenced was the planned intersection of Lako Street(mauka) and the Kuakini Highway Extension. This serves as the primary access point for the existing Kona Vistas homes. The project built this intersection (and lower Lako Street) in accordance with the Ordinance requirements. Both of these intersections were built before or concurrently with Increment I of Kona Vistas. Numerous site layouts have been considered over the years, what I think was the first one that was submitted to the County in 1983 is attached. In accordance with your instructions and the request of the neighbors and Councilwoman Villegas, we continue to work on a site plan that can accommodate an entry onto the Belt Road, and will get that plan to you once we are confident it will work properly. Thanks, Ric From: Jackson, Maija [mailto:Maija.Jacksona-hawaiicounty.aov] Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2019 1:34 PM 6 To: Richard Wheelock; zendo zendokern.com Cc: Darrow, Jeff Subject: Kona Three Project Hi Richard &Zendo- Can you provide an update on the status of when you will be resubmitting an application to amend Ord. 02-131 for the Kona Three LLC project?We continue to receive testimony and petitions opposed to the project (see attached). I also need some clarification regarding the highway access. I recall Richard telling me in the past that the original ordinance and rezone project only envisioned and required one access onto the highway(Lako Street); however, a review of our files indicates the proposed subdivision map (attached) submitted with the original rezone application proposed two accesses onto the highway and the narrative in the application states DOT granted two access points to the landowner at the time. Condition L in Ord. 02-131 refers to improving the intersections on the highway. This condition has carried through without amendment from the original ordinance, which implies that the County Council never approved dropping a second access point onto the highway. Please clarify your understanding of the highway access requirements and let me know whether the resubmitted application will propose a second highway access to the RM-zoned lands. Give me a call if you would like to discuss. Thank you, Maija 7 PETITION PETITION OF AFFECTED HOMEOWNERS AND PROPERTY OWNERS TO COUNTY ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT OF TMK (3) TMK 7-6-021:16 and TMK 7-6-021 .17 (AKA Kona Three LLC: Kona Village) We, the undersigned homeowners and property owners, having homes and properties adjacent to development of TMK (0) TMK 7-6-021:16 : TMK 7-6-021:17 (AKA Kona Three LLC: Kona Village) immediately impacted by the zoning changes, oppose and contest all Developer's past present and continuing application for and approvals of zoning extensions for this development and all involved Developers' past and current proposal for development on this property. Developer has engaged in undue delay and prejudice through extensions of time without adequate notice or opportunity for us to be heard. Approvals of extension were granted without proper justification and without adequate notice and opportunity to challenge. Conditions which may have warranted the initial zoning changes have changed significantly in the affected properties during Developers undue delay. Developers current proposal departs significantly from the approved zone change. Developer's new proposal calls for two and three level apartments (aka: townhouses) in high densities with exclusive ingress and egress through our adjacent subdivision, abandoning the required ingress and egress to the main Kuakini Highway. The primary ingress and egress to Kuakini Highway as required in the zone change was fundamental to that approval and the direct impact that this development has to our property. The proposed development will produce undue and unfair traffic congestion and burden on our properties by backing up traffic on our neighborhood streets and impacting arterial traffic flow on Lako Street and our access from our community to the main Kuakini Highway. The proposed development and changes to the Zoning will create undue excessive noise in direct proximity to our homes and properties; dangerous traffic conditions for our children and families on our neighborhood streets, obstruct views, and interfere with our quiet and peaceful enjoyment of our property and homes. We, the undersigned homeowners and property owners, as set forth on the separate continuation pages, oppose and contest this matter formally. Contact: Page_of_ Kona Vistas Petition Signatures: PETITION OF AFFECTED HOMEOWNERS AND PROPERTY OWNERS TO COUNTY ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT OF TMK (3) TMK 7-6-021:16 and TMK 7-6-021:17 (AKA Kona Three LLC: Kona Village) We, the undersigned homeowners and property owners formally oppose and contest this matter formally as described in the attached petition: Owner Name Street Address S g nature PO W J-1 7/4 - � 16 - 1-7 Contact: Page_of_ Kona Vistas Petition Signatures: PETITION OF AFFECTED HOMEOWNERS AND PROPERTY OWNEPS TO COUNTY ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT OF TMK (3) TMK 7-6-021:16 and TMK 7-6-021:17 (AKA Kona Three LLC: Kona Village) We, the undersigned homeowners and property owners formally oppose and contest this matter formally as described in the attached petition: Owner Name Street Address Signature r - y/ — _; - -1�4 C6(on, C) r -b 3 4,7 kilk a P 0 '5� lal-ole- Ze'--c 76 -6,3)W kllolkc 1)c, -1� C1, 0 LI\6-m �Ukl)1 71j��w 67 Contact: Page_of Kona Vistas Petition Signatures: PETITION OF AFFECTED HOMEOWNERS AND PROPERTY OWNERS TO COUNTY ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT OF TMK (3) TMK 7-6-021:16 and TMK 7-6-021:17 (AKA Kona Three LLC: Kona Village) We, the undersigned homeowners and property owners formally oppose and contest this matter formally as described in the attached petition: Owner Name Street Address Signature . / s n e1_3 t ei F S� l A/cd'1 'X 1 s- � nE Cecn,4 e"7 v 4 t . D o fiUP � E 5t � � > Contact: Page—of Kona Vistas Petition Signatures: PETITION OF AFFECTED HOMEOWNERS AND PROPERTY OWNERS TO COUNTY ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT OF TMK TMK 7-6-021:16 and TMK 7-6-021:17 (AKA Kona Three LLC: Kona Village) We, the undersigned homeowners and property owners formally oppose and contest this matter formally as described in the attached petition: Owner Name Street Address Signature 0 C&A-1-e-guj-L- qL-,-�3q (<',,,\)A-ct 417 YL r-= 1 5- 00 IA—" 1_ I" Q Contact: Page_of Kona Vistas Petition Si natures: PETITION OF AFFECTED HOMEOWNERS AND PROPERTY OWNERS TO COUNTY ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT OF TMK (3) TMK 7-6-021:16 and TMK 7-6-021:17 (AKA Kona Three LLC. Kona Village) We, the undersigned homeowners and property owners formally oppose and contest this matter formally as described in the attached petition: Owner Name Street Address Si a_ tore c6A �b(A4-6-\ a4 5:14 c Contact: Page _of Kona Vistas Petition Signatures: PETITION OF AFFECTED HOMEOWNERS AND PROPERTY OWNERS TO COUNTY ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT OF TMK (3) TMK 7-6-021:16 and TMK 7® ® 21-17 (AKA Kona Three LLC: Korea Village) We, the undersigned homeowners and property owners formally oppose and contest this matter formally as described in the attached petition: Owner Name Street Address S pature k/1 3 -�-e �06 f� V� t PETITION PETITION OF AFFECTED HOMEOWNERS AND PROPERTY OWNERS TO COUNTY ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT OF TMK (3) TMK 7-6-021 :16 and TMK 7-6-021 :17 (aka Kona Three LLC: Kona Village) We, the undersigned homeowners and property owners, having homes and properties adjacent/near to development of TMK (3) TMK7-6-021 :16 and TMK 7-6-021 :17 (aka Kona Three LLC: Kona Village) immediately impacted by the zoning changes, opposes and contest all Developers' past, present and continuing application for and approvals of zoning extensions for this development and all involved Developers` and current proposals or development of this property. Developer has engaged in undue delay and prejudice through extensions of time without adequate notice or opportunity for us to be heard. Approvals of extension were granted without proper Justification and without adequate notice and opportunity to challenge. Conditions which may have warranted. the initial zoning changes have changed significantly in the affected properties during ;; i-rs' undue delay. Developer's current proposal departs significantly 1r m the approved zone change. Developer's new proposal calls for two and three level apartments (aka: townhouses) in high densities, abandoning the required ingress and egress to the main Kuakini Highway. The primary ingress and egress to Kuakini Highway as required in the zone change was fbndnmental to that )rproval and the direct impact that this development has to r ?property. Thy a sposed development will produce undue and unfair tray-:tC Coilgcs lon and burden on our properties by backing up traffic on our neighborhood streets and impacting arterial traffic flow on Lako Street and our access from our community to the main Kuakini Highway. The proposed developmentand changes to the zoning will create undue e-,,. essive noise and in direct proximity to our neighborhood streets, obstr"-c7 ,Vs, and interfere with our quiet and peaceful enjoyment of our propert, homes. We, the undersigned homeowners and property owners, as set forth on the separate continuation pages, oppose and contest this matter formally. Contact: Page 4-of . '.Petition Signatures: PETfTION OF AFFECTED HOMEOWNERS AND PROPERTY OWNERS TO COUNTY ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT OF TMK (3) TMK 7-6-021:16 and TMK 7-6-021:17 (AKA Kona Three LLC: Kona Village) Vife, the undersignedhameo',unewsand prory wersna! " pp ndcpas mNooseaonie-&- � Owner Name Street Address Signa.turrh T dk J _.7V_X: L Gav,,j J� 01 0 </ 4,�A Contact: Page_ of Kona Vistas Petition Signatures: PETITION OF AFFECTED HOMEOWNERS AND PROPERTY OWNERS TO COUNTY ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT OF TMK (3) TMK 7-6-021:16 and TMK 7-6-021:17 (AKA Kona Three LLC: Kona Village) —i !"F, n-J"Jir: bas-d Owner Name Street Address Signature L IS �� c, � 6 J 7-61 0 \J\-U IT V �6 -6 �05 5XVILEW kwz-r q-4 V-3 u 19 A - 6362- �u cl;�cA v6 r Scz1+ , , 4E - lU -\ ) S ` CLtL �Z- 3,&3 la M, S 4? -::--T3 y S, S E,4 74 --4 -3 F-5 vq L6 1v Contact: Page_of Kona Vistas Pet iti2L��irlj4tureS., PETIT' OF AF-FECTED HOMEOWNEIRS AND PJ? IPI0LnIIE:,RIrY OWNERS TO COUNTY ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT OF TMK (3�� T.MK 7-6-021,16 and TMK 7-6-021,17 1 (AKA Kona Three LLC: Kona Village) Ma Jf - e-�-crbed s nraU. s Owner Name Street Address Sipature P*' � r N I