Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPL-REZ-2022-000033 K. WINTER TESTIMONY 12.12.22DeVera, Ashley From: Kathy Winter <khkealani@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, December 12, 2022 7:22 PM To: Planning Internet Mail Subject: Testimony re: Three application for renewal Attachments: KThree application.docx Regarding the application for building "Royal Vistas" south of Pualani Estates: Several things jumped off the pages that are important to Pualani Estates (PEK) owners and residents. Reading all 1900+ pages is too much for most of us, but here is a list of issues that especially concern the homeowners and community and the page numbers where the information can be found. Background - the past 38 years: the development planned has been in process as part of the project approved in 1984. County Council has subsequently extended time limits for development, most recently in 2002. In 2015, Kona Three purchased the land from the previous owners who had not commenced building, acquiring the 68.837 acres to build 450 "multiple family" units, some "flats" and others "courtyard." Population density: Zoning in 1984 designated much of the project site as "low density" which could include "residential, ancillary community and public uses including convenience -type commercial uses." p. 30. NOW the site is identified as "medium density", mid -market housing. These would be both for rent and for sale units. The builder acknowledges on p. 11 that "final distribution of these units may be adjusted during the final design." Think about that - given real estate prices as they are, how many of the units will end up being owned but used for vacation or other rentals? how many will be occupied by owner families with "pride of ownership" and other values congruent with Vistas and PEK? Essentially the development is designed for two communities: at the lower elevation, closer to the highway, rental units with their own community center with pool and park, and a mix of covered and open parking spaces for "residents and guests"and the upper increment 2 of owner units with its own community center with pool and park. p. 11. Do we want such implicit segregation in Kona? Timing: Now Kona Three is requesting a 10 year extension to complete construction of just the first increment. p.5, expecting completion in 2030. Water issues: Originally the developers were required to add a 12 acre parcel for "affordable housing" on the makai side of Queen Kaahumanu Hwy. FEMA found "flood zone " issues with that land. A good look at the map on pg. 15 shows that the two drainage ways in the parcels will join to send water down to the highway and into what now lies below. Now the County no longer wants to proceed with developing the original 12 acres for affordable housing and K Three is offering to donate land above Lowe's for 100 unit affordable rental units to be built by a qualified affordable housing developer. p. 24 Archeology: Another archeological review was made since the original one (p. 164 ff) that identified a total of 18 significant sites: 6 from the pre -contact era 3 habitation 1 agricultural 1 petroglyph 1 with 2 burials There may be more that would be uncovered during any development. The remaining 6 were "likely" from post -contact, historic eras. Roads connecting to PEK: this application says that no roads will connect to PEK streets Ho'omama and Paulehia across the intervening pasture land. Note that the map on p 19 fig. 7 shows the roads still connecting to PEK streets, however. Instead a road joining Queen Kaahumanu without a signal light may be built. It's design looks much like the intersection of Hualalai Road and the highway to the north of Puapuaanui. For more information on the handling of traffic issues, check pp 41-43. Environment: On p.11 the developer dismissively describes the open land to the south of PEK as "vacant ranch land" ignoring the non -human inhabitants of the land and not acknowledging the importance of pasture land to the eco system and future balance of air, earth and ocean in a time of global climate change. One of the consultant evaluations K Three includes a letter from arborists who urge preservation of the trees instead of wholesale grubbing and then additional care for any and all trees - just one example from the larger community of scientists and environmentally astute others. It is staggering to imagine what the addition of 450 residents' vehicles - more likely 1000 - and additional trucks, vans, and delivery vehicles - will add to the air pollution issues here in the lee of Hualalai. Schools: This development proposal shows no deep awareness of the impact of 450 more homes on local public and private schools. The data used to project a rise in students was done in the 1980's and projects only 10 years into the future. 2018 projects an addition of 99 students to local schools. The lack of qualified teachers is one of our state and local deficits, one that current demographics, not pre -pandemic numbers, need to include. p. 164 The Royal Vistas project is another dead end exploitation of open space. It is not a thoughtful or forward-looking use of precious land. 2 Dr. Kate Kealani H. Winter Co-chair Keau Kukui'ula Heiau Hui Pualani Estates homeowner 3 Regarding the application for building "Royal Vistas" south of Pualani Estates: Several things jumped off the pages that might be important to Pualani Es- tates (PEK) owners and residents. Reading all 1900+ pages is too much for most of us, so here is a list of issues that might be especially of interest to PEK folks and the page numbers where the information can be found. Background - the past 38 years: the development planned has been in process as part of the project approved in 1984. County Council has sub- sequently extended time limits for development, most recently in 2002. In 2015, Kona Three purchased the land from the previous owners who had not commenced building, acquiring the 68.837 acres to build 450 "multiple family" units, some "flats" and others "courtyard." Population density: Zoning in 1984 designated much of the project site as "low density" which could include "residential, ancillary community and pub- lic uses including convenience -type commercial uses." p. 30. NOW the site is identified as "medium density", mid -market housing. These would be both for rent and for sale units. The builder acknowledges on p. 11 that "final distribution of these units may be adjusted during the fi- nal design." Think about that - given real estate prices as they are, how many of the units will end up being owned but used for vacation or other rentals? how many will be occupied by owner families with "pride of owner- ship" and other values congruent with Vistas and PEK? Essentially the development is designed for two communities: at the lower elevation, closer to the highway, rental units with their own community cen- ter with pool and park, and a mix of covered and open parking spaces for "residents and guests"and the upper increment 2 of owner units with its own community center with pool and park. p. 11. Do we want such implicit segregation in Kona? Timing: Now Kona Three is requesting a 10 year extension to complete construction of just the first increment. p.5, expecting completion in 2030. Water issues: Originally the developers were required to add a 12 acre parcel for "affordable housing" on the makai side of Queen Kaahumanu Hwy. FEMA found "flood zone " issues with that land. A good look at the map on pg. 15 shows that the two drainage ways in the parcels will join to send water down to the highway and into what now lies below. Now the County no longer wants to proceed with developing the original 12 acres for affordable housing and K Three is offering to donate land above and Lowe's for 100 unit affordable rental units to be built by a qualified af- fordable housing developer. p. 24 Archeology: Another archeological review was made since the original one (p. 164 ff) that identified a total of 18 significant sites: 6 from the pre -contact era 3 habitation 1 agricultural 1 petroglyph 1 with 2 burials There may be more that would be uncovered during any development. The remaining 6 were "likely" from post -contact, historic eras. Roads connecting to PEK: this application says that no roads will connect to PEK streets Ho'omama and Paulehia across the intervening pasture land. Note that the map on p 19 fig. 7 shows the roads still connecting to PEK streets, however. Instead a road joining Queen Kaahumanu without a signal light may be built. It's design looks much like the intersection of Hualalai Road and the highway to the north of Puapuaanui. For more information on the handling of traffic issues, check pp 41-43. Environment: On p.11 the developer dismissively describes the open land to the south of PEK as "vacant ranch land" ignoring the non -human inhabit- ants of the land and not acknowledging the importance of pasture land to the eco system and future balance of air, earth and ocean in a time of global climate change. One of the consultant evaluations K Three includes a letter from arborists who urge preservation of the trees instead of whole- sale grubbing and then additional care for any and all trees - just one ex- ample from the larger community of scientists and environmentally astute others. It is staggering to imagine what the addition of 450 residents' vehi- cles - more likely 1000 - and additional trucks, vans, and delivery vehicles - will add to the air pollution issues here in the lee of Hualalai. Schools: This development proposal shows no deep awareness of the im- pact of 450 more homes on local public and private schools. The data used to project a rise in students was done in the 1980's and projects only 10 years into the future. 2018 projects an addition of 99 students to local schools. The lack of qualified teachers is one of our state and local deficits, one that current demographics, not pre -pandemic numbers, need to in- clude. p. 164 It is this PP editor's opinion that the Royal Vistas project is another dead end exploitation of open space. It is not a thoughtful or forward-looking use of precious land.