COM 0107.015 1996-1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

1 March 7. 1997 3~7(~~7 To; Chairman and T~'Iem rs, Hat~rai'i County Council ~ ~i~rT From; Kona Conservation GrouF (Ll'fl~h Re; BiLLs 37L, 372, and 373 re Oceanside L250's Villages at Hokukano Please do no approve T~i'_Ls 37L, 372, and 373 before you. We o~~rn sed this project from the beginning and stitL oppose it for these main reasons; L. LACK OF A REGIONAL PLAN. There is no regional plan for this area, so we urge you n~~~ con£inu-e to spot-zone Kona any more. Earlier examples are the Opihihate golf course, KDC, and the Riviera resort projects. 2. DESTRUCTION OF THE RURAL ATMOSPHERE. The planned miLLionaires' en- clave doe s- n~~i in with this area o Kona. As stated by the UH Environ- mental Center, "the cumulative effect of the Life styles promoted and employment generated are not rural in character." (Comment to the Draft EIS.) 3. !~?RONGLY DESIGNATED AS "AGRICULTURAL LOTS." Do any of you reaLLy be- lieve that the residential Lots wilt be used for agriculture? The Dept, of 4gricuLture commented that "our main concern is that the proposed agricuLturaL Lots be put into bona fide agricuLturaL use. In the brief description of the proposed agricuLturaL program, it appears that agricuLturaL uses are mainly for Landscaping purposes." (Comment to the Draft EIS) 4. POLLUTION OF CLASS AA 'rlATERS AND KEALAKEKUA BAY. Even the developer concedes that "there is a potential threat that those chemicals applied as part of the Landscape and golf course maintenance, if persistently and/or improperly applied, could potentially migrate to the area of the coastal waters" and that the "enforcement (in the use of chemicals) may not be prac- tical" in residential Lots. We must Look at the cumulative effects of such pollution of the offshore waters and of KeaLakekua Bay, only L.3 miles away. ~~?e should not take the chance that this project will result in irreversible degradation to this important and famous bay. 5. DESTRUCTION OF NATIVE HAV7AIIAN CULTURAL FEATURES. Of 473 sites and site complexes, 289 may be destroyed after "data recovery," according to the Letter from the planning Commission to the County Council, L2-3-93,p.8. This is desecration. Further, this miLLionaires' homes and golf course-type of devetopment is incompatible with the preservation of the integrity of these sites--the golf course weaving around burial sites, a Lodge or restaurant up near a heiau. The cumulative effect may be the Loss of the designations such as the Kona Field System on the National Register. 6. UNPLANNED GRO,~dTH RESULTING FROM THE "BYPASS HIGHWAY." Since the developer will be reimbursed for the cost of the road as devetopment occurs along the road, there will be tremendous pressure to develop along this road so that the County can collect higher property taxes and the developer can get his money back. So this is not reaLLy a "bypass" road as many people in the community have been Led to believe, one that would relieve traffic congestion in KeaLakekua and ?ainaLiu. We can therefore expect two results from this road; more traffic congestion created by development along the road and the decline of business in KainaLiu and KeaLakekua. 7. OUR TAX BURDEN WILL IPTCREASE MORE THAN THE TAX BASE. The developer is not planning to pay for his share of costs for such services as police and fire protection, parks and playgrounds, education, and medical facilities, so we taxpayers of the State and County triLL be paying more to provide this prcj- ect ~.uith these services than the project wilt generate in revenue. Further, nearby residents' property taxes will be raised, so their tax burden will be even greater. Even the developer concedes that this proj- ect "could conceivably affect the assessment of nearby properties...by making the area more valuable to potential buyers, Leading to higher market prices." This means higher property taxes. , ~ ~ ~ ~r~~ flu u ~r 'lls. ~l,«,~~ yr, i~.~ ~ ~,~,,.,iE r«.~e ~ ~ , C - 107. IS ZNa~w PresentA.~ ~ ti~~.-