Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0595.099 2020-2022 /PC- ,dill !12 MM. From: test Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2022 7:51 AM To: Council Testimony Subject: Fwd: Hawaii County Council Planning Committee: Feb. 22 further hearing; Bills 112 and.115. Subject: Fwd: Hawaii County Council Planning Committee: Feb. 22 further hearing; Bills 112 and.115. Date: February 14, 2022 at 10:55:24 AM HST To: ashler.kierkiwiecz@hawaiicounty.gov Cc: heather.kimballahawaiicounty.gov, sue.leeloy(c hawaiicount ..gov Subject: Hawaii County Council Planning Committee: Feb. 22 further hearing; Bills 112 and.115. Date: February 14, 2022 at 10:31:29 AM HST To: Publictestimony a().hawaiicounty.gov Cc: holekainaba(c�hawaiicounty.gov, Wendy Baez <wpbaez(0)-yahoo.com> Nater, mauka aquifer? Applicant has already taken a lot of water, and appears to want to take almost all of the remaining fresh water with unregulated mauka wells. If so, would this mean no future Waimea projects or developments or expansions, absent paid permission of the applicant? Would this be a monopoly against public interests! The applicant says it built out a project and met affordable housing requirement long ago, and erroneously argues that it shouldn't have an affordable housing component or fair share assessment now for a HUGE NEW, HOTEL LIKE PROJECT, bigger than anything on the coast. - OVER 1160 TIME SHARE UNITS IN OVER 240 CONDOS, AND SINGLE FAMILY LOTS, WHICH CAN AND WOULD BE USED AS SHORT TERM VACATION RENTALS Over 240 acres of open space, densely urbanized in exchange for a mere three acres of park in a development of thousands of acres. New affordable housing and fair share impositions are necessary. NO AFFORDABLE HOUSING is being promised for all those eligible. Instead, "work force housing" only for the applicant's benefit, regardless of income, is refered to - i.e all adults must be an employees; higher compensated employees are elgilblle, pa comm. y can be reduced because "affordable housing"benefit could be figured into Amo To: ilZef. Date FEB 2 2 2UL compensation; number of"work force" units are very little compared to number of employees; applicant or assignees controls. Instead, true affordable housing in its thousands of unused acres, is necessary for the County's benefit. Why can"t the Council require it for this dense new development- and not be misled by a reference to "work force housing"?. The applicant-developer can certainly can afford affordable housing in this billion dollar deal. Call it what it is: work force housing for the benefit of their development, controlled by it -not affordable housing for all entitled to it, controlled by County. Fair share contribution too. Are such items commitments, made enforceable by ordinance, or merely "intentions" and" argument"? Millions of dollars of value was previously given by this Council to this developer, and now millions more is being asked for, without anything of even remotely equivalent value for the County. What fools would make this one-sided deal? The developer is not your client: The County and the public are your constituency! Non-permitted commercial activities like weddings and parties, will take place if not enforceably prohibited, including by the County. Such illegal, non-permitted commercial activities are already happen on residential lots in existing subdivisions, including on lots solely purchased and advertised for such illegal, non-permitted activities, prompting complaints and litigation. (It appears that the Planning Director and Department are doing nothing about this.). Tis the Council going ratio OK such commercial activities by commercial zoning for everything, or a blanket special use permit. Real, enforceable conditions and covenants which bind the applicants and its SUCCESSORS, ASSIGNS, AND SUBSIDIARIES , including associations, owners, developers and their successors ,AND THE COUNTY, are necessary. Corporation Counsel sould be involved. Is honest„ complete land use planning going to become a reality with big developers now? Further delay is necessary essay to draft a sufficient and complete ordinance with conditions and restrictions. And that "trust" for Wakakloa, (not all of Kona or the Big Island), you may be impressed with- have you seen it? Discretionary, changeable, unenforceable as to the 2% beneficiaries, The 2%payment being bandied about is for timeshare units when all are sold(to independent third parties? when all sale proceeds are paid?). Pay over when EACH unit is sold, i.e. closes, regardless of terms deferring some of the price (there will often be contracts for payment over time), and regardless of foreclosures, (which so often happen with timeshares), instead of holding for the seller all the money until the last unit is sold, which may be never occur or be after a very long time. And what about the big money residential lots? The applicant should be committed and the Council should not be so naive or engage in political wishful thinking so as to consider an `Intention" or "argument"without enforceability. There are many legal ways an "Intention" or "argument"can be avoided by the applicant andlor its successor. It is likely the applicant will be replaced by some other entity before build-out. Suggested provision: "Two percent (2%) of entire purchase price of each time sharelcondo unit and single family residential lot upon closing shall be paid to non-profit Trust, or a like entity if that Trust is unavailable, or to in the absence of such a trust. " Corporate breakups or bankruptcies eliminate developer obligations after profits and assets are removed by one or some of the many entities under the applicant's control, (e.g Oceanside 1251). This older development is ripe for such an "exit strategy", which could bring it huge f nancial gain at public expense. The Council should not be lulled to sleep by the iNcomplete application 2 (perhaps intentionally so),fill of"don't knows unenforceable "intentions" and "trust us', without enforceable commitments, no enforceable "sunset"dates, and no bonds. One wants to trust a highly success past development with a slick but vague additional plan to make more money. You should instead be skeptical and do a complete job representing your constituency. Enforceable conditions and requirements in a complete corporation counsel drafted ordinance is necessary for the public's benefits as to this unprecedented long term development.. Being "nice" to the applicant, which is likely to be somebody else before the project is completed., is not a priority. TRUST, BLIT VERIFY. Who do you represent? Who and what is your priority>? Mark Van Pernis 3