2019-03-21 Leeward Exh B (Discussion on condition deadlines)

Home

know, but on occasion we get questions; how come that is becoming that use now and they propose that? And so those things do come up. But again, when it’s talking about an ordinance, when we look at zoning, we shouldn’t be looking at a specific project, even though when an applicant may come in and say, look, I’m looking at doing this. The reality is, is this the appropriate zoning in this area to allow these permitted uses here? Because the reality is maybe even this guy may build this, whatever it is, but ten years down the line it doesn’t work and something else comes in there, you know, that’s allowed in that particular zone. But in regards to permits, that’s different; they are required to build that particular project and they have to stick with it. The only way then can change it is coming for an amendment. So that concludes our presentation. We can try to answer any questions that the Commission may have. UNGER: I think I’d rather hold off on questions right now. I’d rather take testimony from the public, and then once that’s closed you can address some of the questions that invariably will come up, and then I think then we can open for, one time for the Commission to have a discussion. DARROW: Thank you. UNGER: Yeah, let’s do that. We have a five-minute request for a break. Five-minute break. Thank you. RECESSED: Chairman Unger called for a short recess at 11:03 a.m. RECONVENED: The meeting reconvened at 11:12 a.m., with approximately 15 people in the audience. UNGER: Let’s go ahead and start the public testimony on Administrative Matters No. 1. I’ll call – actually, why don’t we, everybody who wants to testify, if you would raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth before the Planning Commission? TESTIFIERS: Yes. I do. UNGER: Thank you. First four testifiers: Mark Van Pernis, Greg Olsen, David Blancett-Maddock and Keola Childs. Please state your name and area or residence. VAN PERNIS: Mark Van Pernis. Makalei, North Kona. I’m a retired attorney and I’ve studied this issue significantly. First of all, let me digress to say if – he didn’t tell us what the recommendation of the Planning Director and the Department were on the prior application – but if they recommended approval, it shows how out of touch they are with the local community. I would argue that the Planning Department presentation, which took about half an hour, was incomplete, and certainly stilted; you didn’t get a fair statement of everything. The truth of the matter is that the Council, or the County – and when I refer to the County, I’m talking about you, the Planning Director and Council, everybody – they give the developer hundreds of thousands, 10 EXHIBIT B