COM 0953.023 2004-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

i RE: Bill 305, Rezoning Request (RS10 to RM 1.5) By Ivan Mochida TMK: 2-2-36:101, 103 I am Victoria Saito Abe and I cannot forget the Houselots neighborhood I grew up in at 757 Laukapu Street directly across the proposed development. It was a multi-cultural neighborhood with the Masons next door, Carvalhos in the back, Wongs and Yabes in the front, Chings on the side, Kekunas a few houses down and Mimakis and Uratanis across. There was a mixture of owner occupants and renters quite similar to what it is today. The renters were accepted as part of the community because we did not discriminate between renters and owners. I am here to speak against Bill 305, rezoning for Laukapu Street. I am against this for several reasons of which among them are the following; 1. It has been stated that if Mr. Mochida does not receive his rezoning application for 24 townhouse units that 12 Ohana type rentals will be built. It has also been stated that the 12 Ohana rentals will bring in low end renters. Walking the neighborhood on Nov 4 & 5 we encountered some Ohana units and found their residents were like you and me, with the same concerns. Is it fair to assume that 12 Ohana rentals will attract renters of lower quality? This is unfairly based on the assumption that the quality of renters is determined by socio-economic status. I for one would welcome these Ohana units as an addition to our neighborhood since they would be in line with the present low density zoning. 2. On July 31 the Planning Committee postponed their vote to allow the parties to come to a compromise. Mr. Fuke made contact with us and met on September 22 with my husband and on October 4 with my husband and me. He offered to bring the number of units from 25 to 24 units and to build sidewalks fronting our properties only. We asked Mr. Fuke "What about the others in the neighborhood?" He replied "Don't worry about the others. It's only for your two properties." We then reiterated that our concern has always been the density and that 12 units or houses would be acceptable. We expressed to Mr. Fuke that lowering the density would benefit everyone in the neighborhood. Mr. Fuke informed us that the numbers would not come out at anything lower than 24 units and that there is only one and a half acres to work with. We pointed out that for that very reason the area was too small for such a project. We also expressed an interest in sitting Comm. No. 9k S 3 Ref. To: Ref, Date NO~ U_ 1_ 4 06