Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0941.007 2022-2024P / LaaC- Rb.11i-2q cowl -W From: Cheryl Tanguay Sent: Monday, July 22, 2024 6:45 PM To: Council Testimony L� Subject: IN SUPPORT OF RES, 561-24 for County to make PONC purchase. _= am firmly insupport of Council member Villegas' Resolution 561-24 for County to nY6,,ke PONC purchase of development `aina. -y'- participated'as a Community Representative on the Revision Committee of the KCDP, hoping that with our recently acquired knowledge regarding a 68 acre parcel, mauka of Queen K and slated for dense development of 450 housing units could be instructive to the CDP for future permitting of similar projects. The referenced 68 Acre site was the remainder of a 3 tiered plan of Kona Vistas, of which the first 2 sections were built between the early nineties and nearly yesterday, with that 3 d section undeveloped AG land, steeply sloped and bisected by 2 major drainage ways off Hualalai (which have contributed to flooding on Kuakini near the dental offices.) The parcel remained in Ag use long after the original owner's heirs transferred the 68 acres at a pittance in 2016, long after the previous owner's development window had expired, reverting the land to its Ag status. Knowing that, with 450 units in the proposed build, 900 additional vehicles would be injected into Kuakini and Queen K traffic at least twice daily was enough to spur the neighborhood that uses that intersection into action, We also discovered many of the existing conditions that the KCD Revised Plan lists in 4.3.1 and in Managing Our Impacts: Flood Insurance: The 2 streams and their confluence are fully on the property as illustrated on FEMA maps of flood zones. Trails: 2 Ancient Hawaiian Trails cross the property. Additionally, there are numerous archeological artifacts, including parallel rock walls, petroglyphs, a sugar cane railroad trestle remnant and the transcribed oral histories provided by several generational natives of using the trails. The information gathered was so persuasive that PONC selected the site for purchase as a future mauka open space that would truly give "sense of place" to future generations, if the developer would sell. The 68 Acre site aligns with the Holualoa Inn which has long preserved a holua segment and displays a papa holua, the sled used to ride the holua, that was found on the Inn's property. I'm told there had been a heiau in Holualoa near the Post Office location and beyond the makai end of the Comm. "i`T Ref.To: Ref. Date ' surmised holua was the restored Heiau at the Kuakini/Queen K merge. Oral histories hold that this ahupua'a had belonged to Queen Liliuokalani among other long tales of royal usage that abound. The 1'o ground nests are here. Hoary bats and great moths are here. We've often been on water use advisories and we've experienced "rolling blackouts" to deal with greater electricity demands than the available supply, especially during cloudy stretches. So much for infrastructure! When I(ona3LLC applied for final approval on an extension of the development in 2019, Harry Kim warned that the KDCP Revision might make any extension moot. Kona3LLC is not likely to be the actual builder but instead gathering all the permits they can in order to garner a higher market price. 2 requests were made of the developer by the Leeward LUC in Dec 2022 before they voted to submit the development to the Cultural Resources Commission for input: 1) Redraw the plat respecting all the trails and artifacts as well as 2) Performing the study to determine at what price is market -value housing. To my knowledge, the developer has done neither. Then the Cultural Resources Commission returned the opinion that "the site should remain undeveloped in perpetuity." While in his May 8, 2024 letter, the Developer has attempted to dismiss and deride all previous opposition, the fact remains: once developed, the destruction of the site's history and present day wildlife will be irretrievable. Has the Developer even yet submitted the requested overlay respecting the artifacts? Indeed, the May 81' letter is worded to minimize any significance that this site, which in renaming the project ROYAL Vistas the Developer has already subtly conceded its pedigree. AM trod here. This of all sites bears such provenance as to forever cloud any permission to develop it. What does the Revised Plan mean for such an obvious case of wrong place, ever? Purchase of the 2 parcel site by PONC is the perfect solution and will free up the developer to move on to a more amenable location for this project. Respectfully submitted, Cheryl Tanguay Kona Vistas