My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
PL-SMA-2023-000038 12.17.23 Mark Van Pernis Testimony
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Board Packets
>
2024
>
2024-02-29 Leeward
>
#4 Kona Hawai'i Development, LLC (PL-SMA-2023-000038)
>
PL-SMA-2023-000038 12.17.23 Mark Van Pernis Testimony
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/5/2024 11:44:26 AM
Creation date
2/6/2024 9:20:16 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Araujo, Jaclyn <br /> From: Mark Van Pernis <mvpvv@hawaii.rr.com> <br /> Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2023 2:04 PM <br /> To: LPCtestimony; Kona Letters; Inaba, Holeka <br /> Cc: Kimball, Heather; Kanealii-Kleinfelder, Matt; Villegas, Rebecca; Cindy Evans; Kagiwada, <br /> Jennifer; Lee Loy, Sue; Kierkiewicz, Ashley; Galimba, Michelle M. <br /> Subject: Special Management Area Permit,Kona Hawaii Development, LLC, December 21, 2023 <br /> Leeward Planning Commission meeting. <br /> The Hilo based West Hawaii Today on December 15 reports The Leeward Planning Commission (LPC) <br /> will consider another developer's proposed development for the obnoxious, hurtful and partially <br /> constructed structure on the site of the old miniature golf place. What isn't reported is that: <br /> 1. the developer received approval for the project, to be completed in five tears, i.e 25 years ago; <br /> 2, that developer had no intention or ability to build that project, and merely wanted approval so <br /> he could sell it to another developer, which he did for a big profit; 3. several more delays were <br /> obtained free of any charge penalty, wth further sale of the project, with the county getting <br /> nothing but more empty promises 4. The property became a hangout foR the homeless and drug <br /> dealing; 6.A few years ago( while I was on the LPC and before the Mayor let the Kona staff go), a <br /> new developer wanted another delay and a change in deign, without penalty, charge , over 30 <br /> years, and without any requirement of finish construction by any date. And without inquiry into <br /> how the neighborhood had changed. <br /> 7. There had been a lot of new construction, road and vehicle usage increase and huge population <br /> increase in the prior two or thee decades; 8. The neighbors without exception were against it or <br /> wanted conditions. Including completion. <br /> 9. The LPC approved further delay, but thinking the project in its new form might go towards a sale <br /> and further delay, the sunset provision was included. That applicant made mo effort to comply <br /> with the sunset, resulting in cancellation of the Special Management Act Permit. andnd selling to <br /> the current applicant ""Kona Hawaii Development, Limited Liability Company" (new or a form of <br /> the last developer?) which may be seeking to make the LPC and Count fools again with more and <br /> more delay under a claim of another change in design to a hotel. <br /> So the rich get richer, the foolish County gives away decades of development rights for no reason <br /> but private profits and Kona gets only empty promises, an eyesore and crime center. As the <br /> newspaper says, the LPC Commissioners are going to look into more development rights. The <br /> Commissioners, mayoral appointees, have no education or expertise in planning or as futurists. But <br /> they can and should do better for their constituency, the people of West Hawaii <br /> There was talk of denying further totally unjustified delay at the last hearing if this matter. At <br /> least, a sunset provision occurred,and was not met, meaning there no permits in effect. 1. There <br /> should be full disclosure and transparency as to who and what this applicant is. 2. There should be <br /> full disclosure and transparency as to the willingness and capability of the applicant to timely <br /> complete. 3.There must be sunset provisions for phases of construction. 4..There should be a <br /> current traffic study of the two intersections affecting thew property, pedestrian traffic, curbs <br /> gutters, sidewalks and parking. <br /> i <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.