|
Blancett-Maddock and I live in Kona. Deadlines for complying with conditions for zoning
<br />changes should not be routinely ignored or extended by the Planning Department or receive
<br />favorable recommendations from the Planning Commission. I applaud you for considering this
<br />issue that is of great concern to residents of our side of the island and complies with planning
<br />standards adopted through the State and exist in your code.
<br />
<br />The practice of entitling landowners to extend zoning changes and land use plans forever
<br />negatively impacts the community that the planning process is supposed to protect.
<br />
<br />I urge you to revert changes after a reasonable time, maybe five years, when required conditions
<br />have not been met and substantial progress has not been made based on the code. Thank you.
<br />
<br />HOXSIE: Aloha. Bob Hoxsie. I live in Kona. So, my question I guess is – I’m going to use the
<br />Kilohana as an example, but there’s much larger ones obviously that go on that are much more
<br />impactful, but, you know, in this case no construction has been done in twelve years, their
<br />extension has expired, the rule seem to give the authority to revoke the permit – so my question
<br />is why hasn’t this happened on this one, why hasn’t it happened on many other ones? And so, so
<br />that’s something that I’d love to hear in your discussion is if we have rules to address this, why,
<br />why isn’t this enforcement happening? Thank you.
<br />
<br />P. MCMICHAEL: Aloha. I need to show you all these pictures \[her collage of photographs in
<br />front of the Commissioners\] and—
<br />
<br />UNGER: For the record, please state your name and area of residence.
<br />
<br />P. MCMICHAEL: Oh, sorry, Paula Simmy McMichael. I’m in the Ahupua‘a of Hōlualoa I and
<br />II.
<br />
<br />UNGER: Mahalo.
<br />
<br />P. MCMICHAEL: So this project, Kilohana Makai, \[inaudible\] addressing, they never gave
<br />proper notice on that lot ever. And I would have been right there on it, and that is because I was
<br />fighting with DLNR, County Planning and the State on these walls and erosions and it went back
<br />and forth till 2010, and then that was just Bali Kai. The other one is Banyan Tree Condo, which
<br />happened years, a couple of years later. So in this process that this was accepted, was never
<br />notified to the public; there was not, not ever a sign that I saw there, I never, I never saw any ads
<br />about it, no one there knew about it. Jerome Kanuha has lots there; he never heard about it. So,
<br />how did this all get passed, and this fact that in 2007 it was administratively extended, was in this
<br />process of going back and forth with the County, with the State, with DLNR, and what it was is
<br />all the bickering between who had the responsibility. The County would say the State, the State
<br />would say DLNR, and it went back – my file in the back there is very heavy, it’s this thick, I can
<br />bring it forth, and it’s all the paper trail of going back and forth. So I’m saying that this was all
<br />done in-house, and we should, the public, the public has been affected by it. And the record
<br />show that the Bali Kai lost over an acre and it was 20 feet out. It’s not 20 feet out. They try to
<br />get a shoreline survey – what happened is the seawall was old and the waves took it out, they
<br />tried to repair, restore, what they did is they took it out and they brought in dredging machines,
<br />16
<br />EXHIBIT B
<br />
<br />
|