Laserfiche WebLink
From: Kaulana Guss <br /> To: LPCtestimonv <br /> Subject: K. Guss Testimony-LPC July 18, 2024 Meeting,Agenda Items#3&#4 <br /> Date: Sunday,July 14,2024 11:43:11 AM <br /> Aloha, <br /> As a resident of Waimea, I'm asking the Leeward Planning Commission <br /> to NOT approve Kaupulehu Land LLC's applications for State Land Use <br /> Boundary Amendment from Agricultural to Rural and Change of Zone from <br /> an Agricultural-5 acre to Neighborhood Commercial <br /> and Residential Agricultural (Agenda Items #3 & #4, Applicant: Kaupulehu <br /> Land LLC) for the following reasons: <br /> Project is solely for speculation purposes <br /> Thus, is inconsistent with the 2005 General Plan. <br /> A prime example of spot zoning and urban sprawl <br /> The proposed commercial development is excessively huge with a 3- <br /> building, 2-story complex and is NOT compatible with this part of <br /> Waimea. The scale and size of this proposed commercial development is <br /> too large, similar to a `strip mall' and NOT compatible for this area. Likewise, <br /> it would degrade prime agricultural land and the "rural, ranching character" of <br /> Waimea. <br /> Would adversely increase traffic congestion near this area <br /> Also, this project would severely impact the traffic and create further congestion in <br /> this particular area on Mamalahoa Highway which is already difficult to <br /> navigate as the highway starts to narrow near here when driving west into <br /> Waimea Town. <br /> Would adversely increase property taxes for residents in this area <br /> This proposed residential development which is being built for the high-end <br /> market and not for the affordable range and would only increase the <br /> property taxes for residents of the area. <br /> NOT in compliance with the Hawaii County General Plan (2005) <br /> The proposed project fails to protect significant Agriculture lands by <br /> rezoning them and fails to preserve the rural, ranching character of Waimea <br /> as stipulated in the General Plan. Likewise, this proposed project is NOT <br /> consistent with the General Plan goals and policies that pertain to <br />