The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCOM 1006.001 2008-2010 Murashige, Laura COMM - 1 0U0 dam- 32-c7 ‘,` Pc From: barrieparker @hawaii.rr.com Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 11:10 AM To: counciltestimony @co.hawaii.hi.us r; Cc: joye @kona.net t Subject: proposed subdivisions 3 -7 -5 adjacent hualalai road Attachments: View Point .pdf View Point .pdf (53 KB) - please accept as our testimony Mr. Van Pernis's letter regarding the impending subdivisions. i submit this on behalf of Heights on Hualalai Association and on owners behalf for Sugar Cane Lane. We engaged the services of Mark Van Pernis to oppose these subdivisions as presented, and the attached viewpoint represents our rationale. Barrie Parker Heights on Hualalai Association Comm. No. /°°C • J Ref. To ri PC - 1 1 Ref. Date NOV 1 20113 THE COUNTY PLANNING DIRECTOR IS THE ENEMY OF WEST HAWAII Proposed developments must comply with State Land Use Commission (LUC) requirements which protect public and the environment, and comply with approved State and County long term development plans like the Kona Community Development Plan (Kona CDP). The Kona CDP is law as County Ordinance No. 08 -131. An exception to going through the LUC is proposed developments of less than fifteen acres, which can be processed by the County but still must comply with the Kona CDP. The assumption is that the County will protect the public interest and environment in such smaller developments and insure compliance with the Kona CDP. There is an opportunity to avoid the LUC, obligations of public and environmental protection, and compliance with the Kona CDP if the developer divides his big project into 14.9 acre pieces and gets the County to ignore such obligations and cooperate in the developer's end run around the LUC. The County should easily spot such scams, alert the public, and act of the public's behalf. But the Hawaii County Planning Department and its Hilo Planning Director have teamed up with off -shore developers to promote profits in an unwanted West Hawaii development at public expense, keep the public in the dark, mislead the Leeward Planning Commission, and avoid compliance with the Kona CDP. The development is an approximately 60 acre proposed subdivision in excess of 250 lots, some as small as 7,000 square feet, from Kuakini Highway to substandard Hualalai Road. The sixty acres has been cut into four parcels of 14.9 acres each with the ownership of the four parcels separated and hidden in a confusing array of businesses entities. In reality two of the four parcels are controlled by Lee Barrett of Huntington Beach, California, and the other two parcels are controlled by Honolulu developer James K. Schuler. Mr. Schuler was responsible for the Kamani Trees subdivision makai of Komohana Kai, where he obtained the County's approval of a subdivision of approximately seventy 10,000 square foot lots, than exploited a loophole in State law to slap a "condovision" on top of the subdivision to cut the lots in half with two houses each, resulting in severe densities. The County Planning Director from Hilo knew these four parcels were part of a sixty acre integrated development, and the developer's maps and plans showed that. The Planning Director knew that the small lots at the top of the proposed development (7,000 s.f., 10,000 s.f., etc.) were much smaller and denser than anything in the area along substandard Hualalai Road and much smaller than adjoining rural and agricultural lots and neighborhoods, and that the development would lessen the value of those properties. The Planning Director knew that the development was not in compliance with the Kona CDP. The Planning Director knew that the development would put much more traffic on substandard Hualalai Road . The Planning Director knew the development would convert some prime agricultural land to dense urban use, denser than nearby and agricultural lands. The Planning Director knew that the four 14.9 acre lots was an end run around complying with the LUC requirements. The Planning Director knew the sixty acre development was set up to use the roads and infrastructure of other adjoining developments (e.g. Pualani Estates) for free so as to minimize contributions for the public's benefit. The Planning Director read and heard the universal opposition to the project from the many public testifier — not a single testifiers supported the project. Did the Hilo Planning Director do the right thing? She accepted and promoted this single large proposed development as 14.9 acre pieces and expedited them together through 2 the Planning Department. The Planning Director recommended approvals without revealing all this information to the Leeward Planning Commission. When testifiers at the public hearing of September 30, 2010, before the Leeward Planning Commission and some of the commissioner voiced concerns about how the proposed development was not in compliance with the Kona CDP and its proposed density clashed with and overwhelmed the neighborhood, the Planning Director from Hilo and her staff responded by speaking on behalf of the developers, saying the plan should be ignored, expanded, "painted with a broad brush," to allow such dense development beyond the boundaries of the plan. Some commissioners of the Leeward Planning Commission heard and acted on behalf of the West Hawaii public who they represent despite the Planning Director's support of the proposed development. Some didn't get it, thinking that the Planning Director's recommendation must always be followed and all development approved, good or bad, publicly opposed or supported, Kona CDP compliant or not. The Planning Commission vote was 3 to 3, inconclusive, resulting in no recommendation to the County Council. Now, the matter goes to the County Council, without a Leeward Planning Commission recommendation. The developers will try to rush the project through the County Council before the upcoming elections take effect and lobby the Hilo dominated County Council for approval of their end run around the LUC and the Kona CDP, even through it is, without exception, opposed by the West Hawaii public and contributes nothing of significance to West Hawaii. And the Planning Director in Hilo can be expected to be there at their side, lobbying for developers' profits over West Hawaii's public interest. The Planning Director is on record as considering her mission to be to promote all West Hawaii proposed development, in a campaign to increase the real property tax base in West 3 Hawaii to support the rest of the County. But the public interest of West Hawaii should not be so callously ignored. This "public be damned" policy relies upon a complacency among West Hawaii citizens, a don't register to vote, don't vote, don't organize, leave it to the old boys," complain but do nothing more, attitude. This is why we don't have "concurrency" in the private developments approved by the County, despite "concurrency" being an accepted and successful policy in most other places. This is why West Hawaii doesn't get the necessary public infrastructure, and the quality of life here declines. We can depend on most Hawaii County council members from West Hawaii to support the people of West Hawaii and the Kona CDP, and will recognize the "no" of the Leeward Planning commission vote. But will the Hilo "old boys" respect West Hawaii and its council persons and wait for the elections to present the new representation? The support and participation of West Hawaii citizens in County Council proceedings to counter the Planning Director's lobbying is needed. You can find out when and where the matter is on the County Council's agenda by calling the County Council Clerk at 961- 8271, or Council persons offices at 326 -5684 or 327 -3642, and you e -mail testimony at couneiltestimony@ co.hawaii.hi.us, or testify by video in Room 109 of the Kailua Trade Center. Register, vote in both the primary and general elections, and participate in the local government process. It affects all of our and our children's lives. 4