Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0632.022 2000-2002 AUG. 14.2002 9~10AM AHTP 808 9812644 N0.989 P.1i2 Fill 220, I3raft 2 g °Testimony by Steven Frank Parente ~~ugust 14, 2002 ~ _ ~ - - T®: C®u~ci~.~xl~b~i~ ®bbg~ J~a.~ ~~i~~:~ Cb.~.ir~.~ ~f t~ C~ itte~ E: ~iU ~0, Drift ~ ~3~: Stevella bra ~:~ll~t~ I am submitting in writing my testimony regarding the purchase of TMK~(3) 3-~- ~3440041-®Oa3, a lot that was originally created in a Condominium Property Regime in 1996. The origina119 acres tot was legally divided into 3 parcels, with 3 separate TMK's, each of which is separately taxed. When I purchased my Iot, each of the other two owners had homes built on their lots. I was denied the right to build a residence on my lot by Christopher Yuen, the current planning director, and have filed aII appeal. i am still waiting for a hearing date. I was granted a deed for my property in February of 1999 during previous Planning Department director Virginia C3oldstein. It was the first property I had ever purchased. It was my understanding when I purchased this property from Robert and ]Eli.~abeth Dolt that I would be able to build a residence for fancily, and thyself and farm agricultural crops. An attorney prepared the Condoinirtium Property Regime in 1996 and Derek Uatiemoto of Island Community Lending, who coordinated my loan for this property with CIE Credit, also verified the understanding that I would be able to build a residence. Ivlr. Umomoto was able to get thy initial loan for this property on a yearly basis until I was able to secure a building loan. I had just stetted a new company that sold tropical flowers and plants primarily over the Internet, I planned to raise long-term crops to be sold in 1~Iawaii, and plants for export. 1Vlr. molt, his counsel and Mr. Umomoto each stated that I should be able to build a resid®nce on my property, based oii the decisions of the planning department. It was my understanding that 3 homes on CP121ots were a common practice, and regularly granted isy the Planning Department for over 10 years. In addition, rice Planning Depattrnent had issued a separate TMI~ for my separate !ot and had also issued building pet~tits to both Mr. Irtolt and Mr. Pacheco. The other two partners of this CPIt were not required to file airy "additional fat7n dwelling applications", and simply went to the planning department with their house plans to build their homes. If there were any doubt lta arty miYtd that I wouldta't be able t® build a residence, I ~v®uld never leave purchased the prnpcr~. I can barely make the payments now because of having to pay tent for my family and I to live, in addition to the laud payments. I would also have great difficulty selling this lot because it is not worth what I paid for it {unless i win my appeal with the planning department to build a home). My only other option it seems is default on the loan and Coani~t. Noe ~ File N®. Etef. `To: ..i ttef. I3at~ . N0.989 P,2i2 AUG. 14.2002 9~10AM AHTP 808 9812644 BiI1220, Draft 2 ~ Testimony by Steven Frank Parente ruins my credit, Also, after I purchased this property for $75,000 (dollars), the County Department of Finance Deal Property Division appraised my lot at $70,000, or $35,000 per acre, a maach higher rate Haan a noa7nal agricultural rate of approximately $10,000 per acre because they made their appraisal based on the fact that I would be able to build a residence. I have paid this higher rate of tax far 2 years. Tliis was verified when I received nay most recent land tax bill and contacted their office about it. I appealed the tax, which was heard on August 13, 2002, and any lot was revalued at $35,700 until such a bane that I would be able to build a residence. `I'bis is a significant reduction in land value and a ga~eat loss in nay initial iaivestnaent if I am not able to build a residence. The welfare of my family and myself has been greatly burdened and adversely affected, both aaaonetarily, mentally and physically by the inconsistency of the County Planning Department and their decisions. In my case, there were two branches of the 1lawaii County Caoveraament contradicting each other, which might be a violation away civil rights according to legal counsel. When the current County Planning Department wouldn't allow me to build a residence, they told me I could apply for an additional farm dwelling. I sleeted dais process in June ar 2001. Ilecause of several technicalities, the planning department kept rejecting nay application. It wasn't until I enlisted the services of an attorney to help with the application did the planning department start to accept any application. After much effort to comply with their "unwritten" guidelines, my application for an additional faran dwelling was denied. As I had stated before, I have hired an attonaey to appeal this decision. Iaa closing, I believe that I have been treated unfairly by the current Hawaii County Planning Department, regardless of what the opinion is of the current Planning l3irector. I encaunbered myself and faanily financially based on how the previous planning department was doing business and interpreting the land use laws. I believe that my case, and others such as rYaine should be exempt from the current Planning Depaa~tment guidelines which 13i1I X20 addresses, but I would like to see it amended to allow, at a nainitnum, one dwelling per `r1VIIC, not 2 dwellings for the entire oe~aginal CPIg as I understand the proposed 13111 is currently written. Thank you for reviewing my testimony, ~ ~ Steven Parente 2