HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0762.031 2004-2006
4/30/2006 7:04 PM FROM: Fax T0: 961-8912 PAGE: 001 OF 002
Written Testimony from Barbara E. Scott
75-5782 Lopeka Place
Kailua-Kona, HI 96740
(808) 327-1277
County Council Meeting
May 2, 2006
BILL 246, ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 23, SUBDIVISION CODE
STACY K. HIGH, Chair & Presiding Officer
VIRGINIA ISBELL, Rice Choir
JAMES Y. ARAKAKI _
PETE HOFFMANN
FRED C. HOLSCHUH, M.D.
VIRGINIA ISBELL
DONALD IKEDA _
BOBJACOBSON
K. ANGEL PILAGO
GARY SAFARIK
Honorable Chairman Higa, Vice Chair Isbell
and Distinguished Council Members:
The Subdivision Code includes reasonable preliminary development application requirements.
Although there is room for improvement in the Subdivision Code, apparently Mr. Yuen has
designed the proposed "housekeeping" amendments to address expediency for development
approvals, (due to the massive number of applications held in the Planning Department offices).
Mr. Yuen's comments, published in the Sunday April 30, 2006 edition of West Hawaii Today
(WHT), chastise those who oppose his proposed amendments as opposed to development. It is
important for Mr. Yuen to recognize that the majority of Hawaii County residents are opposed to
irresponsible development. Mayor Kim's constituency has the reasonable expectation for
responsible development without cavalier and arbitrary enforcement practices. In the WHT
article, Yuen identified the Subdivision Code purpose to "govem details specific to a
development after the owner is given the right to build on the property." In my opinion, the
proposed Subdivision Code amendments do not address those details, but only a method to rush
subdivision applications through the approval process with the business-as-usual practice.
Mr. Yuen also pointed out that land use is determined at an earlier Council proceeding, before
subdivision application submission to the Planning Department; therefore Yuen would like
County residents to think that concerns about land use issues are irrelevant to subdivision
applications. Think again.
The public may or may not be aware of the practice for Parcel Consolidation and Resubdivision
(PC&R), which allows a property owner to create smaller lots from a larger parcel under a State
Land Use Boundary Amendment application. This is the procedure where the parcel division
request does not identify plans for the property. The redesignated smaller parcels often
miraculously reappear before the County Council at a not-much-later date, and under different
LLC names and/or "property owner(s)" (who may have entered into a co-tenancy agreement
with the developer/property owner as an investor(s)). This practice allows development of large
CWt. No. 761.31
Ref. TpAM60Ni Coumn
Ref. Dote 6
4/30/2006 7:04 PM FROM: Fax 70: 961-8912 PAGE: 002 OF 002
tracts of land and, as long as the land area for each parcel is less than 15 acres, there is no review
by the Land Use Commission. On parcels of less than 15 acres, there is no scrutiny (outside of
the Planning Department) regarding all of the land use issues regarding environmental, historic,
and cultural considerations and no proposed amendment to create enforceable standards in the
Subdivision Code regarding those issues.
The proposed Subdivision Code amendments also fail to consider the number of outstanding
water commitments (particularly in North Kona), indicating that developed potable water
resources are insufficient to meet even current demand. It would be prudent to propose a
Subdivision Code amendment for specific well development standards that establish water
availability before subdivision approval - not by water commitment, but by developed wells.
The current County Council considers these factors, but there is no established standard. In
addition, there is no amendment whatsoever to address flooding at any point on the island. The
$50 million in State Tax cuts for recent flood relief should provide a wakeup call regarding the
practice of subdivision approvals in flood zones.
Yuen is requesting changes in subdivision applications to allow developers to provide details at
some other stage because they may have made an error and be required to make corrections and
resubmit. The request creates a perception that the incomplete applications will be tailored to
developer specifications and by Administration Agreements that the public hears about after the
fact.
Mr. Yuen specifically stated that fully implementing the Leslie decision would create hundreds
and perhaps thousands of hours of unnecessary work - and months of costly delay for people
applying for subdivisions. Considering island-wide infrastructure deficits, characterizing
development application details as unnecessary does not ring true. Furthermore, the public is not
concerned with approval delays that interfere with profit margins; the development approval
process is associated with the cost of doing business.
The logic behind the Subdivision Code amendment proposal continues to escape me. It is
evident that legally a complete review all of the details associated with a development
application must occur at some point - enforcement of the Subdivision Code simply requires the
Planning Department to require informational details at the submittal stage and not at a later
point in the approval process. The claim that an additional hundreds and "perhaps thousands" of
hours are associated with reviewing details at the application submittal stage raises a question
about how many hours are devoted NOW to reviewing subdivision application details at any
stage.
The Planning Director's proposed Subdivision Code amendments illustrate misplaced priorities;
the half-truths, the manipulative and insulting statements, and the supporting arguments for the
proposed amendments are disingenuous.
I respectfully request that the County Council require the Planning Department to enforce the
Subdivision Code without the amendments to support past practices that were ruled illegal by the
Hawaii Supreme Court.
Sincerely,
Barbara E. Scott
2