2024-05-06 Bill 127 Mark Van Pernis

Home

From: Mark Van Pernis To: LPCtestimonv; Kona Letters Cc: Inaba. Holeka; Baez.Wendv; Mark Van Pernis Subject: May Leeward Planning Commission Agenda, New Business Item 3 Initiator:County Council,PL-CCI-224-000006. Date: Monday,May 6,2024 8:15:07 AM This ordinance proposed by the Count Corporation Counsel to the Leeward Planning Commission is NECESSARY to fulfill the recently passed Ordinance empowering the County Council as the source for extending the time for approved Applicant projects. It was intended to end the abuses resulting from intentional delays in providing the public benefits carrying out the approved project of five to forty years,obtained from the Planning Director and others,without consideration of increased public benefit needs resulting from the long delays.The result has been huge infrastructure problems for West Hawaii and huge profits for not developing for applicants-developers. The applicant-developers and their representatives have been treating the Planning Commission(LP C)and County Council(CC)and Planning Director(PD )as fools,by: 1.Not stating when their proposed project and public benefits(e.g affordable housing,off site traffic improvements)would be delivered;2.Not revealing that the applicant had NEITHER THE DESIRE NOR CAPACITY TO CARRY OUTt THE PROJECT AND PUBLIC BENEFITS; 3.Their true intent was to get County approval for the intended project and the public benefits stated based on then current needs,and then sell the proposed project,with itself or the buyer,or the buyer's buyer to get 5 to 40 years+of delay without West Hawaii getting any of the promised benefits or any of the he profits realized by the applicants-developer. Sometimes the applicant reported the application was merely to facilitate a sale,but most often not. Thus LPC and CC are misled and played for fools to facilitate real estate sales transactions,which by law they're not to do with their powers.While the applicants-developers profit,West Hawaii suffers with ever increasing infrastructure problems and the whole County and or State must pay for the public benefits the applicant-developers were supposed to timely provide,but failed to do. P.D.participates by recommending approvals and granting endless delays in favor of the applicants-developers.Without requiring additional public benefits,and not addressing times for absolute completion of public benefits,regardless of sale of the project. An example is Palamanui,a huge project where the public was to get streets,signage,parks,and commercial and residential units over 20 years ago,including a bypass road from Mamalahoa to Queen Kahumanu that would take the ever increasing pressure and traffic jams off those roads,Kai'imi'nani and Palani. After PD and other allowed delays,without disclosure,Pallamanui sold to Nan,Inc,for a huge profit without providing any of the public benefits. The result:huge traffic jams and fatalities. Expect Nan,Inc.to seek more delays,and try to get the County or State to build the bypass road for which they are obligated,at public expense,to increase the private bottom line. Is LPC merely an applicant-developer profit accommodator for projects that don't get done? Or is it planning for the future for the benefit of the public,with 5 to 40 year delays,at the expense of the public and CC? Shouldn't the public be assured of timely getting the promised benefits exchanged for the huge increases in land values immediately given applicants? Or are these transactions one way profiteering or the benefit of applicants and at the expense of the public? The proposed ordinance must clearly require: 1.ALL APPLICANTS IN THEIR APPLICATIONS TO STATE THE ESTIMATED TIME PERIOD FOR COMPLETION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT;2.THAT FOR PROJECTS OF 9 OR FEWER UNITS 5 YEARS IS THE LIMIT,UNLESS THE COUNCIL EXTENDS THE TIME UPON APPLICATION,AND 7 YEARS IS THE LUIMIT FOR PROJECTS OF 10 UNITS OR MORE, UNLESS SO EXTENDED;AND 3.ALL APPROVALS TO BE OF NO FURTHER FORCE OR EFFECT UPON THE EXPIRATION OF THE TIME LIMITS ABSENT CC EXTENSION,I.E.A"SUNSET"PROVISION. This will keep the applicants honest,serve the public,is within the letter and spirit of the CC's ordinance,and is absolutely legal for such contingent approvals. Further specifics and examples can be given upon request in public testimony. Mark Van Pemis