HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-11-18 Lancer Keeling From: Kaeo Keeling
To: LPCtestimonv
Subject: Sma21000078 Mysin Special Management Area Use Permit
Date: Monday, November 18,2024 4:10:31 PM
Aloha Honorable Members of the Planning Commission,
I am writing to formally oppose the approval of the JEKATERINA MYSIN
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT APPLICATION (SMA 21-
000078), which is set for review at the upcoming Leeward Planning
Commission meeting on November 21, 2024. After thorough review and
careful consideration of the multiple, evolving proposals submitted by the
applicant, it is clear that this project has become mired in confusion,
inconsistency, and substantial deviation from the originally agreed-upon
plans. There are serious concerns surrounding the handling of the permit
application, the shifting nature of the intended use of the property, and the
overall impact of this development on the local community. I urge the
Planning Commission to postpone this review until the applicant provides a
clear, coherent, and consistent plan for the proposed project.
Confusion and Chaos Due to Multiple Site Plan Updates
The process for reviewing this permit has been beset by a disturbing level
of inconsistency and confusion. Since its original application in
December 2020, the applicant, Ms. Jekaterina Mysin, has submitted
numerous updated site plans that contradict one another and significantly
alter the scope of the proposed development. To date, there are multiple
versions of the site plans, including changes submitted in May
2021, April 2022, October 2023, and most recently, an extensive 40-
page addendum added in November 2024—just days before the
Planning Commission's scheduled hearing. These frequent updates have
created an environment where it is impossible for the public or the
Commission to properly evaluate the full scope of the proposal.
It is also important to note that these revisions were submitted after
mediation took place in 2022. The mediation agreement outlined certain
parameters that were agreed upon by all parties involved, yet subsequent
changes to the plans have not only ignored these parameters but in many
cases, directly contradicted the prior agreements. For example,
the background report issued in May 2021 indicated that the property
would be developed for residential use, specifically six residential
condominium units. Yet, in August 2021, the applicant shifted the
intended use, declaring their plan to host weddings, graduations, and
other events. This departure from the original residential application has
created widespread confusion and undermines the integrity of the process
and the faith in which the background report was approved.
The public has been given no opportunity to review these changes in a
timely manner. The latest revisions were filed on Wednesday
afternoon, November 13, 2024, just two business days before the
deadline for written testimony. This late submission has deprived
concerned citizens, including legal counsel, of the opportunity to thoroughly
review and respond to these substantial changes. Given the evolving nature
of this project, it would be irresponsible for the Planning Commission to
move forward without first providing the community with adequate time to
review these modifications.
Shifting Use of the Property — A Complete Departure from
Original Intent
One of the most troubling aspects of this proposal is the dramatic
shift in the intended use of the property. When the applicant first
submitted their request for a Special Management Area (SMA) permit in
December 2020, they stated that this development was an opportunity
to revitalize a long-neglected property for residential use.
The background report from May 2021 specifically outlined that the
project was to consist of six condominium units—units intended
for residential occupancy by local families, as per the zoning
requirements of the area.
However, by August 2021, the applicant began shifting their focus, stating
that the property would be used to host events such as weddings, class
reunions, and graduations. This is a fundamental change in the
intended use of the property, one that completely undermines the
original purpose for which the SMA permit was requested. The applicant's
statements in public forums, including social media posts and public
comments, further emphasize that they do not intend to sell the property
but rather plan to operate it as an event center. This dramatic shift in use
—from residential development to an event venue—was never part of the
original application and runs contrary to the community's understanding of
what this project was supposed to be.
This change in use is deeply concerning for several reasons. First, it
is inconsistent with the zoning for the area, which is intended to
accommodate residential development and not commercial event
centers. Second, the operation of an event center would lead
to significant increases in traffic, noise, and activity, which would
disrupt the quiet, residential nature of the surrounding neighborhood. The
project, as proposed now, would significantly alter the character of the
area, with profound implications for the quality of life of those who live
nearby.
Traffic Impacts and Public Safety Concerns
The issue of traffic congestion is one of the most pressing concerns
raised by the community. The original application claimed that the traffic
impact of the project would be minimal, limited to unit owners and
their guests, and would be comparable to typical residential traffic levels.
However, the applicant's change in use to accommodate weddings,
graduations, and other events is fundamentally at odds with this initial
traffic assessment. Event traffic—particularly for large gatherings such as
weddings—can involve dozens, if not hundreds, of guests, resulting in a
much larger traffic footprint than would be generated by a residential
project with six units.
The property is located on AIN Drive, a narrow, two-lane road that is
already heavily congested, particularly during tourist seasons. The
introduction of event-related traffic will exacerbate this issue, leading
to increased congestion, delays, and potential safety hazards. There
has been no adequate assessment of these additional traffic impacts,
nor any plans to mitigate them. The Planning Department's reliance on
outdated traffic assessments is concerning, especially given that the
intended use of the property has changed so dramatically since the initial
application.
Overdevelopment of the Site
Another major concern is the overdevelopment of this small property.
The applicant proposes a five-story building with four dwelling floors,
a structure that is completely out of scale with the surrounding area. Most
neighboring properties consist of low-rise condominiums or single-family
homes, and a 45-foot-tall building would dramatically alter the
landscape, blocking views and creating an unsightly presence in an
otherwise residential area. Furthermore, the construction of this massive
structure on a small, narrow lot will create significant environmental
impacts, including potential issues with erosion and stormwater runoff,
which have not been adequately addressed in the applicant's submissions.
The applicant's use of the property has evolved from a simple residential
development to a project that aims to create a commercial venue.
This shift in use, combined with the proposed scale of the development,
represents an overdevelopment of a site that is simply not appropriate
for such a large structure. This project is an inappropriate and
disproportionate use of the available space and runs counter to the
principles of responsible development that should guide land use decisions
in our community.
Request for Postponement and Further Review
Given the substantial issues outlined above—the confusion caused by
multiple conflicting site plans, the change in use of the property
from residential to event hosting, the significant traffic impacts,
and the overdevelopment of the site—I respectfully request that
the Leeward Planning Commission postpone the review of this permit
application until the applicant can provide clear, accurate, and
consistent plans for the proposed development. Additionally, I urge the
Commission to carefully consider the community's
overwhelming opposition to this project, as evidenced by the numerous
letters and testimony submitted to date.
The public has been denied adequate time to review these latest rushed
changes and additional plan submissions and it is crucial that the
Commission respect the community's right to due process.
The shifting nature of the application, combined with the lack of
transparency and inconsistent plans, makes it impossible to evaluate
the full impact of the proposed project.
It would be irresponsible to approve this permit based on the current
state of the application and as such,
I respectfully request that the Commission postpone the Planning Meeting
and Deny the Application as Presented.
Mahalo Nui Loa,
Lancer Keeling