Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0896.237 2022-2024P / coun cl ( From: Janice Kerr Sent: Monday, November 18,2024 7:39 PM To: Council Testimony Subject: Bill 169 DATE: November 18, 2024 TO: Hawaii Island County Council FROM: Janice Kerr 76-4320 Leilani St. Kona, HI 967740 SUBJECT: Opposition to Bill 169, Draft 3 If all of the testimony that has been received over the last few years in opposition to Bill 169 was put on one side of a dual scale, and all of the testimony in favor of Bill 169 was placed on the other side of the scale, the weight of the testimonies opposed to Bill 169 would be like the weight of rocks compared to the weight of feathers on the other side. The same analogy applies to the overwhelming number of individual local residents who testified under oath opposing Bill 169, and the miniscule number of local residents who testified under oath in favor of BiI1169. As you know, there is an extensive list of local Government and Private Agencies, Commissions, Committees, Districts, Programs, Clubs, Associations, etc., that have officially and consistently communicated to the County Council the reasons for their opposition to Bill 169. Their input should be carefully and seriously considered. There are also hundreds of specific concerns that have been continually and repeatedly voiced by the local Community, including (but not limited to) the fact that the subject property is in a Floodplain, the inadequate infrastructure to support the residents of the development and existing residents, the increased traffic that has nowhere else to go but onto the already overcrowded streets, the loss of native habitat, the desecration of archeological sites, the shortage of water, the lack of concurrency required by the Kona Development Plan, the inadequate sewage capacity, the downstream flooding of homes west of Kuakini Hwy. and Ali'i Dr. (Question: will the County be held liable for their losses?), the changes that have occurred over the 40-year time period since someone thought it was a good idea to build in a Floodplain, etc., etc., etc. I have listed just a few of the many, many issues that have been raised by those opposed to Bill 169. This is the issue raised by supporters of the Bill 169: Affordable Housing. Ref. NOV 2 0 2024 Those that are in favor of this development proclaim "Affordable Housing" is badly needed. Yes, it is, but is a price tag of $2-$3 Million "affordable"? The layout of the structures in this development pretty much assures ocean views throughout. Neighboring properties with similar views are currently in that price range. By the time this development would have structures ready to "move into", it is highly likely the prices will be much, much higher. Besides, the developers can still play around with "Affordable Housing Credits" and build somewhere else, or not at all, because no one know the true status of the existing Affordable Housing Credit trading schemes. The developers cannot "contain" Mother Nature's rainfall on their property, no matter what they promise. They cannot say that it is not a Floodplain. They cannot do anything to mitigate traffic snarls. They cannot fix the Kealakehe Waste Water System. They cannot relocate the native species found on their property. And they will not accept liability for downstream flooding of existing homes. The number of local residents and the number of valid reasons for opposing this development continues to increase unabated over time. That should tell you something, and you are obligated to listen and act with integrity. Respectfully Submitted, Janice Kerr jkkona(cbhawaiiantel. net F-MITIONOIT-Olow M: