Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0896.113 2022-2024 P/Council 51( rq GOMM. 896 Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2024 8:13 AM To: Council Testimony Subject: FW: Oppose 169, Kona Three LLC 'ram 4 .. L-I From: inabapacific, Sent:Wednesday,July 10, 2024 8:10 AM To:Clerk-Council Subject: Fw:Oppose 169, Kona Three LLC Resending...third sending.This was sent originally at 4:41 p.m. on 7/7/2024. Yahoo Mail: Search. Organize, Conquer Forwarded Message From: "inabapacific To: "counciltestimony@hawaiicounty.gov" <counciltestimony@hawaiicounty.gov> Cc: Sent: Sun, Jul 7, 2024 at 4:41 PM Subject: Oppose 169, Kona Three LLC Aloha Elected Members of Hawaii County Council, I urge you to give fair hearing to all the testimony you have heard from community members, experts, committees and commissions within the county that have already reviewed this matter.The only party within the normal process of approval that has given this a yes*was the PONC which has put this land on its available purchase list and has offered to purchase the property to keep it as an important open space,while still providing for substantial profit to the purported developers far above they're$600,000 investment for ag land with long expired permits.All other key groups, commissions, committees including your own subcommittee have given this a "no". 1 Comm. • Ref.To: Ref.Date ' The 'No'from Leeward Planning, not just in the legalistic reasons that it was forwarded with a negative recommendation to County Council but also from the dialogue that occurred in the meetings leading up to then chairman Michael Vitousek being disinclined to to approve and referring it back to the Cultural Resources Commission for a more detailed review before they would even consider pushing any extensions or this developers request further.There was quite a lot of dialogue in that Leeward Planning Commission meeting under Vitousek that is quite relevant to the decision making process that you are currently undertaking.The community was left with the clear impression that this would not go further if it received a negative review from CRC, and even if it had come back with all clear/green light there were many conditions that would have required resolution it seems before Leeward would have forwarded it. Unfortunately you were not given the opportunity to fully understand the prior Leeward Planning Commission's dialogue and testimony, unless you did take the time to review the footage available on the record .Absent that review you would be only.relying upon hearsay and actually altered facts that were otherwise presented by the developer that differ from the actual video footage comments. Our Council Member from District 7, Rebecca Villegas, has reviewed those meetings and is well informed on the history of this proposed project, request for extensions of 40-year-old permits, community and infrastructure risks, etc. Please seek her counsel as you review these issues. The State Land Use Commission, also declined to comment or weigh in On whether or not this should go forward at all.They had concerns about the issues the public had brought forward including what appeared to be a misrepresentation made by the developers/KV3/Kona 3 LLC about the use of "borrowed" credits for affordable housing that were purportedly being given to them from another developer. There was a letter presented during that meeting with the Land Use Commission,from that other party that indicated that the Kona 3 LLC had misrepresented any arrangement that they might have had and that there was no arrangement. That is in the record and also very evident in the video recordings of the meeting. So that was a 'no' and just keep us informed of status changes from the Land Use Commission. Also, Cultural Resources Commission in their detailed review of this matter in 2023 concluded after much testimony, site visit/s, and expert input that"Due to the historic and cultural significance of the property,the CRC recommends that the property be preserved in perpetuity..."Their findings were firmly stated, again that's a 'no'to this development in this place by Kona Three LLC. In a recent meeting with the Kona Community Development Plan committee.The Committee assessed this project and location were not in keeping with the CDP for Kona and West Hawai'i and that there were too many infrastructure challenges and risks to the public for development to be done in this area where the property is located.This appeared to be going toward a 'no' on their part as well. Even though the vote margins were narrow during the last Council Committee meeting on this matter, I believe the right decision was made to decline to extend permits or extensions to Kona Three LLC for these parcels.The question I think each of you needs to ask yourself is fundamentally this, do we believe in the process or are we going to decide on our own outside of the process and outside of the wisdom and the mana'o of the groups, commissions, committees, experts that we have asked to weigh in and provide feedback before you make such a decision.They have all weighed in and the answer is clear. If you're listening to the people and you're listening to your own committees and commissions that roll up to you,the answer is simply these permits and extension's cannot be granted if you are dealing with the public in good faith and with your own committee and commission structure in good faith. 2 All that said, I both believe and hope that you will follow the process and respect the process and those parties that have dedicated their time to reviewing this matter in advance of your review.They have provided their input and it is a resounding'no'to development in this area for so many reasons that have been outlined by so many people in so many meetings. It is just simply not worth allowing an apparent profiteering effort to flip property, as there is no funding or investors for the project that have been presented by the developers at any point during this process.Any approval of extensions or permitting for this 40-year-old, 1984 Hilo based plan for Kona and West Hawaii with limited to no input from Kona citizens would seem pure folly. The land was acquired by Kona Three LLC (this is the current name they are using with Royal Vistas after many name changes that seem to serve only to confuse the public since the purchase) in 2016 for a mere$600K.As I understand it, it was purchased as zoned only as AG land with no valid building permits, no granted extensions, only expired, long expired permits and no legal promises of extensions or new permitting or re-zoning. It was a gamble, with the hope and maybe a whisper that something could be done about permits or extensions,who knows. It was a gamble on land that was already frankly surrounded by too much housing. So much housing that there are thousands of homes surrounding this property with multiple parties in each home, lots of traffic, and lots of infrastructure load already.This particular piece of land/parcels that they purchased,was it seemed, rejected for development by other builders because of the complications with the land and the waterways and other issues. I know it's been mentioned in several people's testimonies as well as documented in writing, but there are petitions with over 1,000 signatures of local people and vested citizens that wholly oppose any extensions or permits being granted to the Kona Three LLC for development on this land. Please note that you would have a lot more local people showing up for these meetings to weigh in if things were done at a time that they could attend that did not interfere with their work schedules and other commitments.That said,you will see that many people have alter their days and work schedules in order to be present at your meetings and have done so for all the commission and other meetings that rolled up to these Council meetings. Please do not underestimate the commitment of the people on this issue.We have followed the process and attended the meetings of all of the roll-up committees to you. It is but for you to make the right decision here. Any further consideration of a request for extension or permits to build on this property would only serve to put the Community,West Hawai'i writ-large at risk for flooding, infrastructure strain in multiple areas, road and traffic safety issues, etc. We have incomplete and insufficient infrastructure to deal with 1,000 more cars per day twice a day in already congested areas that is bottlenecked into a virtual parking lot for hours every day. Of course there are the other issues the multiple other issues including the endangered species in fact federally endangered species, and cultural and historical attributes on this land. I think this Council would want to take this moment to pause and reflect upon how different things are on our Island since 1984.Today, hopefully we are more aware of the risks posed to ourselves and the land if we destroy open spaces and habitats and put more strain on already overburdened and out of compliance infrastructure. Furthermore, it's so important that we follow the processes and respect those that have been assigned to assist in making these informed decisions.Those that you have assigned by a commission, committee, professional input of all manner have given you their impressions and their resounding recommendation of"no"to any extensions,to any development,to any alteration that could damage habitats or quality of life and environment for the people and the creatures of West Hawai'i.The impacts go beyond just this ahupua'a...The impacts are pervasive and damaging. Damaging 3 if you were to approve extensions due added infrastructure cost that the developer would never be able to pay, added tax load to our citizens which would only make living here even more unaffordable to our people,very serious risk and hazards created due to roadway and flooding concerns, loss of habitat and open space that we now know is really important because of global warming and other issues. Perhaps most importantly, or just as important, would be utter loss of confidence in our County Council and our/your committee structure/s if you choose to ignore the overwhelming recommendations to decline any time extension or permits on these lands. Why so long a testimony you say,why repeat things you say? Because it's important and because it needs to be heard.The people, the Community in West Hawai'i needs to be heard about the things that happen in West Hawai'i particularly when we are in alignment with all the Commissions and Committees that have already reviewed this matter.And...frankly we are standing in the gap for those who cannot speak,those that cannot attend, but also those that have no voice like the endangered species and the cry of the land for protection from more hazard, desecration, and danger.This is really a matter of being true kama'aina. Not lip service,truly caretaking in stewardship what we have been given particularly given the risks we know are evident in the world today.We can only do the right thing by honoring the land and the people if we call ourselves kama'aina. This is simply a matter of the wrong time/40 +years too late given other developments and factors; the wrong place/too dangerous, too costly, too many identified factors of concern; and the wrong parties/Kona Three LLC made a gamble on cheap at land seemingly hoping for it to become a golden goose. All three prongs of this decision point have devastating issues and impacts that have just not been overcome or accepted by all the critical reviewing parties that preceded your hearing of the issue. Again if you have not fully read the transcripts or viewed the video tapes of all the prior meetings I don't see how you can vote to extend. You would not be affording yourself full and complete information on what came before you to make a good decision. In the end the people, both newcomers and local longtime kama'aina families, need to know that you hear us, that you respect us, and that you hear and respect the recommendations of the Committees, Commissions, and others that you have appointed and put place to support County government and decision making.They have said resoundingly NO.That is the right and proper decision,that is the pono decision for this time and these conditions for our Community(all of West Hawai'i and frankly both North and South Kona and beyond as well) and for these lands today. Respectfully submitted, Renee Inaba Kailua-Kona, Hawai'i inabapacific( aol.com *[This PONC"yes" is, as a practical matter, a "no"to development and extensions on these particular lands. The PONC is and has provided and avenue for significant profit to the Kona 3 LLC parties to monetize and profit from their$600,000 investment.All this will still protecting the community's infrastructure,the land,the open spaces and other items that have been raised. It was a path that was/is seemingly available for the protection that the PONC,the Hawai'i County Cultural Resources 4 Commission, and the Community desire to protect against many concerns regarding any development, desecration, destruction of key elements on these parcels and the surrounding areas.] Yahoo Mail: Search. Organize, Conquer 5