HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-11-18 David Hall From: David Oasav
To: LPCtestimonv
Subject: Request for Continuation(Postponement)of JEKATERINA MYSIN Special Management Area Use Permit
Application(SMA 21-000078)
Date: Monday,November 18,2024 3:57:34 PM
Dear Honorable Members of the Planning Commission,
I am writing to request,in the strongest terms,the immediate posiponement of the
Special Management Area Use Permit(SMA 21-000078) application for the property of
Jekaterina Mysin. The upcoming review of this application, scheduled for November 21,
2024, must be delayed until a proper,transparent, and comprehensive public review can
take place. The current state of this application presents a number of severe issues—
issues that cannot be ignored without compromising the integrity of the planning process
and undermining the trust of the public.
As a property owner that lives adjacent to the proposed site on Ali'i Drive,I have been
closely following the progress of this application and the ongoing changes in its
proposals. From my perspective, and from the feedback I have seen from the broader
community,it is clear that the planning commission must postpone this review for a
number of important reasons.
One of the most significant issues is the confusion surrounding the multiple conflicting
site plans that have been submitted. Since the initial application was filed in December
2020, there have been several revisions, each one introducing discrepancies and shifts in
the proposed scope and scale of the project. The applicant has submitted plans that, at
times, have been incompatible with earlier submissions,leaving the public—myself
included—with no clear understanding of what exactly is being proposed for this site,
and the record currrently has a 40 page amendment that was just added just a few days
ago that clouded the already confusing record with multiple submissions and revisions
after the background report was issued.
The record is now scattered with versions of the proposal that are not only inconsistent
but actively contradictory. The public comment period,which ends today, offers
insufficient time to review such a rapidly changing record,let alone provide informed
feedback.As a result, community members have no clear idea of what they are being
asked to support or oppose, and this leads to an untenable situation where decisions are
being made based on incomplete and conflicting information.A clear, unified site plan
needs to be presented before any further action is taken, and the site plan needs to reflect
the background report or a new background report must be written.
The current Background Report provided by the County of Hawaii's Planning
Department,which serves as the basis for evaluating this application, no longer reflects
the application or permits or plans submitted on the public record and it obsolete and
now outdated. Originally drafted in May 2021,this report does not account for the
substantial changes that have been made to the project's scope in the interim. Notably,
the applicant now proposes the construction of a massive underground parking garage—
a seismic shift from the earlier plans that envisioned only minimal grading and ground-
level improvements. This new proposal would require extensive excavation and
stockpiling,which was never addressed in the original report, and the county never
approved this when the report was written.
The existing Background Report is no longer relevant to the current application, as it
fails to reflect the new, much larger scale of the project. It is a serious concern that
decisions regarding a project of this magnitude could be based on outdated and
incomplete information. The Planning Commission cannot move forward with an
evaluation until an updated, accurate, and comprehensive report is provided—one that
takes into account all the latest revisions and changes in the plans.
Under Hawaii's Sunshine Laws,there are strict requirements for public access to
information and participation in the decision-making process, especially when it involves
projects that could have significant impacts on the surrounding community. The
applicant has submitted revisions at the last minute, mere days before the scheduled
hearing. This lack of advance notice leaves the public with insufficient time to properly
review the new plans, understand their implications, or provide feedback, and
submitting multiple site plans is not transparency and needs to be addressed before the
Commission can hear the Application.
The applicant's failure to provide timely, clear documentation is detrimental to the
transparency that the Sunshine Laws require, and it risks alienating the community
from a process that should be open,participatory, and inclusive.Without proper public
access to all the relevant materials, it is impossible for residents to make informed
decisions or to advocate effectively for their concerns. This rush to move forward is a
clear violation of the public's right to due process. It also deprives the community of the
opportunity to engage with the planning process with an accurate public record.
Given the strong opposition from the community,it is clear that the project as currently
proposed is not in alignment with the interests of the residents who will be directly
affected. The concerns raised by the public deserve a thorough and thoughtful review,
not a rushed decision made without proper consideration of the community's objections.
Moving forward with this hearing would be premature and could result in decisions that
are not in the best interest of the public.
Another key factor that cannot be overlooked is the unprecedented level of public
opposition that this project has generated.As of this morning,I understand that 100% of
public testimony submitted to date has been in opposition to the project,with no letters
of support. This level of community pushback is remarkable and speaks volumes about
the deep concerns that local residents, including myself, have about the proposed
development. These concerns are not insignificant; they touch on critical issues such as
the scale of the project, the impacts on traffic,the strain on local infrastructure, and the
environmental risks associated with such an intensive development.
In addition,we must consider the history of public opposition in 2021,when the original
application faced overwhelming opposition. Many of the concerns raised at that time
remain unresolved, and the subsequent changes to the plans have not been adequately
communicated to the public. The lack of transparency about how the plans have evolved,
coupled with the failure to properly update the Background Report, makes it all the
more difficult for the public to follow the changes and understand the true scale of what
is being proposed versus what has been preliminarily approved in the background
report, creating an inaccurate public record.
In light of all these concerns—the conflicting and unclear site plans,the outdated
Background Report, the lack of transparency, and the overwhelming public opposition
—it is absolutely critical that this hearing be postponed until the applicant can address
these issues fully and clear up the public record, and be transparent with the intentions
of this permit. It is only fair to the public, and only responsible for the Commission,to
ensure that the planning process is conducted with integrity,transparency, and
ACCURACY so there is no confusion for the Ohana of Kona that are clearly opposing
this application.
Therefore,I respectfully request the Commission to postpone the review of the SMA Use
Permit until the application is brought into alignment with the legal and procedural
standards that the public is entitled to expect. Only once the record has been corrected,
the concerns addressed, and the public properly informed can a fair and informed
decision be made, and having multiple site plans is impossible for the community to
evaluate and understand, and should never have been submitted.
Thank you for your time and attention to this critical matter. I look forward to your
response and to the Commission's thoughtful consideration of this request to postpone
this meeting until the public record can be fixed and the public actually knows what is
being approved or declined.
Mahalo for your time and consideration addressing the inaccurate record and
addressing multiple plans submitted for SMA 21-000078.
Aloha
David Hall