Laserfiche WebLink
Araujo, Jaclyn <br />From: Antonio Eshabarr <fxresh@aol.com> <br />Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 6:02 AM <br />To: LPCtestimony <br />Subject: Oppose Item # 2, Applicant:Shawn Maile Nakoa, Esq. (PL-REZ-2022-000017), TMK: (3) <br />7-7-008:062 <br />Aloha Planning Commission members: <br />I wanted to express my opposition to the subject subdivision for the following reasons: <br />1. The application for this subdivision, submitted by Land Planning Hawaii (LPH), stated it would post a sign <br />regarding the rezone application at the property's entrance. There is no visible signage at the entrance to the <br />property at Pomaikkai Street or Kuakini Highway. <br />2. The applicant "does not believe" that rare or endangered floral or fauna are likely to be found within the subject <br />site even though there were no professional surveys conducted. Each of the subject species named, Hawaiian <br />Hawk (I'o), Hawaiian Owl (Pueo), and the Hawaiian Hoary Bat have all been observed hunting on and around this <br />property and the surrounding areas. <br />3. The Planning Director's recommendation again includes language to potentially extend the application approval <br />from 5 years to 10, for a variety of reasons that usually are rotely approved. This follows the letter but not the <br />intent of Bill 194, introduced by Councilperson Inaba and approved by both Planning Commissions. The intent <br />was to stop having projects go dormant and be revived years later. All this language does is bypass the Planning <br />Commission directly to the Council - which may have the unintended consequence of removing, not adding, <br />oversight and public input.it would seem that if standard language can be changed from "Planning Director" to <br />"Deputy Planning Director" - in acknowledgement of the conflict of interest with the current Director's former <br />firm being they applicant's representative - then surely the language on extensions can be removed. <br />4. The DOT specifically requested the applicant only access the property from Pomaikai Street, not Kuakini <br />Highway for safety reasons. LPH continues to push for Kuakini Highway access, stating, "As the lot layout has not <br />been finalized, the applicant wishes to retain the possibility of access to Kuakini Highway by one resulting lot if <br />required by other factors. There are two concerns here. The first, obviously, is public safety. The second is that <br />LPH also represents out-of-state landowners who have applied to build a cul-de-sac subdivision off Kapukapu <br />Street. LPH has already stated in writing that they have contacted owners of the parcels between the Kapukapu <br />property and Kuakini Highway to explore options to access the site. <br />Mahalo for your consideration <br />Antonio Eshabarr <br />77-205 Kapukapu St <br />Kailua Kona, HI 96740 <br />