|
unanimity about what that should be. A lot of people support the idea of some kind of resort at
<br />one scale or another. And, but, but there is fairly, there's very high level of support for
<br />something other than housing there.
<br />But, then it gets a little more complicated. A lot of agreement as well about the suitability of a
<br />small-scale resort as long as the infrastructure challenges were considered `cause road
<br />improvements would be required, water system upgrades, and probably some other things as
<br />well. So, people were happy to see a small-scale resort there as long as it was mitigated
<br />appropriately.
<br />So, everyone's pretty much on the same page at that point. Not universally, but most people.
<br />And, then, then you run into this challenge and this gets confusing because fundamentally, the
<br />covenants of the community have nothing to do with zoning or County land use designations or
<br />what not. But, they came into play here because the CDP Steering Committee considered this at
<br />some length and decided that it didn't think it was practical to recommend a land use designation
<br />for an area that would, that it knew was inconsistent with CC&R's. Where it also knew that it'd
<br />be next to impossible to revise those CC&R's because the requirements, the legal requirements
<br />within the document in terms of the number of lot owners or homeowners required us consent to
<br />a, a change. So that was in the back of their minds. And, unfortunately, and I'll get to this in a
<br />second, the CCR's, CC&R's are a bit limiting in what they allow, but there's also debate about
<br />that.
<br />But, given the constraints, the Steering Committee understood about those, it wanted to honor
<br />the desire for non-residential. It didn't think Resort was possible given the CC&R's. It also
<br />wanted to recognize that Ka`u doesn't have a large enough population to support four large
<br />commercial centers, and that the General Plan and the CDP reiterated this. Had identified
<br />Pahala, Na`alehu, and Ocean View as those primary commercial centers. It didn't want to create
<br />a fourth, and so it compromised by, with the land, Low Density Urban designation, which is
<br />consistent with the existing residential development nature of that area. Plus, it does allow for
<br />some small-scale commercial development. It would even allow for small-scale resort
<br />development, potentially, but at very low density.
<br />A couple things to consider. And this, this is really geared towards folks from Discovery
<br />Harbour. I knowI know that I just explained that the CDP can designate and detail land use,
<br />but in this particular instance, the CDP is not going to be the driver for what happens on those
<br />two parcels `cause fundamentally, you gotta work with the State Land Use District that the
<br />parcels are in and the zoning that they have `cause the CDP doesn't change that anyway. And,
<br />it's in the State Land Use Agricultural District, and they're zoned Open. And, given that, the
<br />landowner can at any time, and could have for the last however many years they've owned it,
<br />submit a Special Permit application to propose doing whatever he would like at whatever scale.
<br />It would come to the Planning Commission for consideration, but that has been an option and
<br />still is an option.
<br />The other route there's two routes the owner has—the second route is the more arduous one, to
<br />actually go through the State Land Use Boundary Amendment, General Plan Amendment, and
<br />EXHIBIT A
<br />14
<br />
|