|
subject is, I’ll try to get up here, the applicant, right here is his property, their weeds grow ten,
<br />fifteen feet tall. If you are coming up Hualālai Road here and want to make a left turn onto
<br />Hienaloli, you stop, say a prayer, and pull out your gun and shoot yourself in the head and hope it’s
<br />not loaded, because there is no way to see. I’ve tried with the County, the owner of the property,
<br />about who is supposed to maintain visibility there, and the County says I don’t know, everybody
<br />else, I even got out there with a hedge clipper one day it was so dangerous to make a left turn there.
<br />That’s just one thing. I’m sorry my time is up, but I can say more. I’ll pass the microphone.
<br />
<br />VAN PERNIS: What’s important is what the Planning Department didn’t tell you nor Mr. Lim has
<br />not told you. In fact, there is a big question whether (inaudible) favorable recommendation, the
<br />Planning Department did an independent investigation of all these things. Some developers play by
<br />the rules, and it’s your job to make sure they all play by the rules. This property is part of a 60-acre
<br />RS-10 development, consisting of four 15-acre lots, B, C, E, D, those are, there is a map attached to
<br />Planning Director Yuen’s conditional approval of the consolidation-resubdivision. The
<br />consolidation-resubdivision that’s by a Bolton entity, which was carried out to avoid the state Land
<br />Use Commission process for a 60-acre development, by creating the false appearance of separate
<br />lots of less than 15 acres, which is separately processed by you. Two of these lots are controlled by
<br />Mr. James K. Schuler, the man who brought you condo vision a few years ago. The other two are
<br />controlled by Mr. Barrett, Sr. through family entities, which is Hu Ko Pa.
<br />
<br />There are major infrastructure problems for this 60-acre development, particularly on its makai end,
<br />which is in the (inaudible). Thus the division of the property into slightly less than 15-acre parcels
<br />to avoid the responsibilities of their 60-acre development, have the County and the tax payers pay
<br />for that. Are you going to aid them in this scheme?
<br />
<br />There are actually six lots. The additional two lots are mauka of the one along the highway,
<br />controlled by Bolton. The border lot I think 30 that Mr. Whittemore and others referred to was
<br />created as a result of this consolidation-resubdivision, and is under Bolton and the other owners’
<br />control; so it’s logical that they also improve that particular part of the road.
<br />
<br />Planning Director Chris Yuen saw this ploy when this scheme was brought before him for the
<br />division of the 60 acres into 15-acre lots. And he in his tentative approval letter, having seen that,
<br />imposed conditions. You can see that in my Exhibit A. And there was a development agreement
<br />that controls all six lots, not just four, that binds Mr. Barrett, and which required that there be joint
<br />development. It’s six lots, but four are going to be 60 acres. There is a 60-acre lot subdivision plan
<br />blueprint. I’ve seen it, Mr. Barrett has it, Mr. Schuler has it, Mr. Schuler’s straw man, Mr. Cook,
<br />has it, I’ve seen it. Why haven’t they produced it here? Why hasn’t the Planning Department
<br />required that it be produced? You have a duty to comply with Mr. Yuen’s requirement, the
<br />development agreement. Don’t excuse them from joint development.
<br />
<br />Lastly, I note that under the Kona Community Development Plan and the LUPAG, they all say
<br />ignore that. Half of this property is not supposed to be developed in this way, and they say ignore
<br />because Planning Director Leithead Todd said ignore it. Well, she has been proven wrong in the
<br />Missler case decided by Judge Ibarra. You have to consider it and comply. If they wanted to
<br />comply with the LUPAG -.
<br />
<br />BEAUDET: Sir, if you could wrap it up, please.
<br />
<br />17
<br />EXHIBIT B
<br />
<br />
|