HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0042.077 2004-2006 "~~9~
~ethea, Ski ~n tt
Frorn: Charles Flaherty [oneheart@aloha.net]
Seat: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 11:28 PM
To: Safarik, Gary; counciltestimony@co.hawaii.hi.us; 'Virginia Isbell'; 'Angel Pilago'; 'Pete
Hoffmann'; 'Bob Jacobson'; 'Dr. Fred Holschuh'; 'Stacy Higa'; 'James Arakaki'; Ikeda, Donald
Subject: General Plan testimony - Hokuli'alKeopuka
Aloha Council members,
I previously testified that I supported Draft 4 of the General Plan. Unfortunately, that testimony was based upon
a misunderstanding.
I do not support Draft 5 in its current form.
I believe the Council was ill-advised to include Ordinances 97-34, -35, and -36 in the revised General Plan.
The Third Circuit Court ruled these ordinances invalid and that a "zoning ordinance that conflicts with a general
plan is invalid at the time it is passed."
Therefore, the language on p. 419 of Draft 5 describing the members' lodge and a 1997 LUPAG map
amendment and rezoning is inconsistent with the Court's ruling, as is the LUPAG map showing a Hokuli'a
members' lodge resort node.
Further, HCC 30-10 states: "The development agreement shall not prevent a government body from requiring
the principal to comply with laws, ordinances, resolutions, rules, and policies of general applicability enacted
subsequent to the date of the development agreement if under prior law they could have been lawfully applied to
the subject property."
The degree to which the County does not comply with the Court's rulings and orders only provides further
evidence that the development agreement maybe illegal.
The final judgment permanently enjoins the Planning Director and Director of Public Works "from granting any
further land use permits, ground altering activities, or subdivision approvals for the Hokuli'a project until
Defendant Oceanside has complied with this Order." Coev~~a ~ 9 ~
~R
1 Ref. To:
F _a~~
1 ask the County Council to respect and defer to the Circuit Court's rulings, not a development agreement
created by an administrative act of questionable legality.
Please remove all references to the Hokuli'a members' lodge from the revised General Plan. The General Plan
can always be amended as it was in 1997, only this time to be in conformity with the Land Use Commission
rather than in spite of it.
In addition, bonds covering the construction costs of the Bypass Highway expire at the end of this year
(12/31/05). Please ask the Corporation Counsel to determine if the Court's ruling impacts the
construction bonds covering the Bypass Highway and subdivisions Phase 1 (262 lots) and 2 (99 lots).
Finally, I havejust learned that H-1 was removed from the Draft 1 LUPAG map during the Council's January
4, 2005 meeting. H-1 moved several hundred acres in the culturally-significant ahupua'a of Keopuka
and Ka'awaloa into the Conservation District. H-1 was appropriate because the area contains
countless cultural and burial sites and encompasses the Kealakekua Bay scenic view plane. Past
plans for development within this area created enormous community opposition and conflict. Also,
complete removal of the conservation area is not consistent with a prior agreement between the
Planning Director and Pacific Star, which owns 660 acres in the ahupua'a of Keopuka.
Please reverse the decision you made on January 4"' and reinstate H-1 as proposed in Draft 1.
Mahalo nui loa,
Charles Flaherty
P O Box 922
Captain Cook HI 96704
z