HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0896.029 2022-2024 p/1AAc
Sill ►0
GOMM.816
From: Janet Matlock
Sent: Saturday, June 1, 2024 2:33 PM
c
To: Council Testimony =
Subject: Oppose Bill 169/ Kona Three LLC
Aloha Chair Inaba and members of the Council,
Mahalo for this opportunity to voice opposition to Kona Three LLC's application for a 10-year extension for a ptopos: .d
subdivision that was initially approved 40 years ago. I encourage you to deny this application.
Even if this proposal had merit (which it does not), I object to the gamesmanship that the developer and the planning
director/department are playing by short-circuiting the public process under the guise of a 90-day rule.
The only delays in hearing this application at the Leeward Planning Commission level were at the request of the
developer, with the single exception of a cancelled meeting in March 2024. There have not been 90 days without
opportunity for a hearing; the LPC met in April 2024, and again in May 2024. This application could have, and should
have, been put on either of these agendas.
It is clear that the developer did not want a well-noticed public hearing on this application, even though the public was
promised. "There will be plenty of opportunity for more public testimony throughout the process,"former LPC chair
Michael Vitousek said upon the LPC's request for the Cultural Resources Commission's expertise.
It is clear that the developer did not want the LPC to publicly discuss the findings of the Cultural Resources Commission -
findings that clearly state:
"Due to the historic and cultural significance of the property, the CRC recommends
that the property be preserved in perpetuity."
This application is a poster child for why the Council voted to no longer have extensions
rubber-stamped by the planning director. It was first approved 40 years ago, when Kailua
Kona was different, when our ecological, historical, cultural and archeological awareness
was different. Much has changed.
Now there are huge subdivisions already approved (Sunstone Kona, 289 multiple family
units; Pualani Makai, up to 490 multiple family units) within less than a mile from this
property. Where is the consideration for the cumulative impact of all these
developments? (While problematic, at least these have some on-site affordable housing
included, something only now being minimally added to this application.)
Given less than a week's public notice, I haven't had time to comb through the over 2,000
pages of the application to compare where changes have been made, and I imagine you
haven't either. But the applicant has been under no such pressure. They delayed public
hearings for several months ("to continue efforts to prepare," per one letter), only to skip
the process —to try to quickly gain 10 more years.
Enough is enough. Since this hearing was forced and fast, please let your response be
equally short and simple: DENIED. ZQ
Comm. i Ref. To:
1 Ref. Dote ' 4
Mahalo for your service to our county and especially to our `aina.
janet Matlock
Kailua Kona
2