HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0977.005 2008-2010 Murashige, Laura cQ M4. 917 NOUN a „
From geomike5 @att.net
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 5:58 AM
To counciltestimony@co.hawaii.hi.us OC F 1 PP! q
Subject: Testimony on Res 405 -10 Forest City waiver request
Testimony on Forest City fee waiver and construction stand'ad "exemptionr4'quest
- Res. 405 -10 and related communications.
Council Members:
I can't think of any fee related to construction imposed in this County that actually
covers the cost of providing that service for which the fee is collected. We know how it
is supposed to work and how it works on many mainland
states and communities. A developer builds and infrastructure is built and maintained by
taxation on the structures. Perhaps bonds are floated so there is
indeed concurrency.
Developers are fully aware of the costs, the lack of infrastructure and the special
conditions presented by a 2,300 mile isolated Island State. Costs are increased for
everything. They can also calculate precisely how much additional
profit they will make by altering the standard rules, also known as building standards.
Without adequate fees, I would anticipate that the number of site inspections will be
reduced. A shortcut here or there may well lead to unintentional violation of building
codes and safety standards.
In the case that prompts my commentary, the developer is seeking to build a large number
of affordable homes. These homes are generally targeted for the economically
disadvantaged, those in the lower income levels that typically include the elderly, the
infirm, single parent families, and minimum wage earners. Who will provide the schools,
the health facilities, the fire and police buildings, the parks, the recreation
facilities, the libraries, the roads, and the transportation for a community of 5,000
homes?
Let me point out an enigma here. Although I hope it is not the case, I expect a
number of Council members to vote for this waiver of fees and standards and the
Administration to support it. In fact, I would not hesitate to predict that the
Council representatives from the poorer districts will support this elimination of fees.
Keep in mind the same group of people for whom affordable housing is supposed to boost
with a better life style, work- related quality of life, and a chance for future
opportunities for better jobs and education are the ones that will suffer from the
exemption providing them with a substandard project.
Below I provide some specific comments from a very preliminary review of the project
documents. i am sure most of the Council members have at least noted the problems I point
out and a number of additional shortfalls. This is too big
a project not to have a very complete and detailed review. Give it your time before you
hand out a blank check.
Mike Reimer
Kailua -Kona Comm. No. 7 � �
GeoMike5 @att.net
Ref. To
Brief observations: Ref, Date OCT 20 2011
1
How much money will the County "contribute" to this project with the waiving of all fees
requested? Review Forest City's calculations. It appears all fair share or impact fees
are to be waived. How will the savings be allotted to lower home costs?
•
As far as I can see, the KCDP does not allow substandard (building code) structures; the
proposal asks for exemption from those codes.
A topographic illustration would be important with indications of how much grubbing and
grading will take place.
This must be a document that states upon sale or transfer, if the project is not
completed, all granted exemptions terminate and are not subject to grandfathering.
"Substantial deviation" must be defined as it relates to subsequent changes in the plan.
The definition should be tight, such as 1 foot, 10 square feet, 1 degree, and 1 month.
Phase 1 must include all infrastructure for the entire project.
Fire, Police, schools should review the plan to see if what is provided for them
is adequate.
There should be elevators in the 3 story buildings. It does not appear that there is
adequate egress from the courtyards in case of emergency (fire escape). There is
inadequate parking in general and especially for mixed use buildings, retail, commercial
and residential.
I must presume that water, sanitation, and power are available. I recommend that some
effort on power sustainability be included.
There needs to be more detailed information on public transportation. There should be
pull outs for transit vehicles.
Makala Blvd should not be dead -ended by the Central Park and School. There might be a
future need for this Mauka -makai connector to extend further mauka.
As an example of the shortfall residents will get, not the size of the park,
about the area for a nice traffic roundabout. A small CENTRAL park requiring
crossing traffic to access it. There should be in the planning a provision for
a general civic area with perhaps a swimming facility, tennis and basketball
courts, baseball fields and soccer fields, at a minimum.
Entry and egress roads should have turn lanes on Palani and Ane Keohokalole Hwy.
Traffic signals should be the responsibility of the developer.
2