Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0200.028 2006-2008 Page 1 of 1 Murashige, Laura From: Broussard & Pomeroy [broupome@kona.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 5:13 PM To: County Council; Hoffmann, Pete Cc: Yagong, Dominic; Ikeda, Donald; Yoshimoto, J; Higa, Stacy; Naeole, Emily; Jacobson, Bob; Ford, Brenda; Pilago, K. Angel; Harry Kim Subject: Support of Bill 156 As with the Concurrency Bill, passage alone won't mean much unless the zoning provisions are enforced. Again, I'll use Kohala Ranch as an example since I can document what I say about it, in detail. The current developer submitted a revised rezoning for the urban developmment which involved a substantial reduction in the number of units. The reason for doing so was simply to have the Housing Committee reconsider the $15,000,000-plus affordable housing requirement.Once he was "excused" from paying the major part of that amount, he withdrew his revised rezoning request and is now subdividing the parcel. What's the point of demanding affordable housing and then dropping the requirement or substantially modifying it to the developer's benefit? c ~.T Z~o.28 ~F.,.,,,e,~. ~ 4/18/2007 Rr~;, ,''c% ~ P/ G_-----"'=_`~~---"