Who does the county, its commissions, departments, and council represent? Their job should exclude delivering financial benefits to landowners while waiving and/or extending into oblivion benefits already contracted for that residents severely need.
But this is what the county is being asked to do by the Kona Three LLC application. The county announces a commitment to reduce traffic accidents and deaths (WHT Feb. 2), yet considers a subdivision application for the Lako Street area in Kailua-Kona that would increase accidents and deaths by having the county waive decades-old conditions for street safety and add traffic to accident-prone streets that aren’t built for and can’t handle the increased traffic, while depreciating the value of existing homes in the neighborhood.
Is this Hilo-centric government, or a false fear that the landowner might get a more favorable result on appeal if the county just says no, as it should?
Here are the facts:
1.) Just over one year ago, the county approved a massive up-zoning of large agricultural zoned properties to residential lots and subdivisions for lands, which also included dense condominium zoning for the subject property, and which also included as conditions for the up-zoning traffic infrastructure improvements to Queen Kaahumanu Highway in the neighborhood and internal public streets, based on traffic estimates made way back then.
2.) The conditions were lessened 15 years later.
3.) The subdivisions and lots were profitably built out and populated, as were maybe a dozen other subdivisions in the neighborhood, adding maybe 1,000 cars to the new streets.
4.) Recently, a cheap sale of the dense condo zoned land was made.
5.) The old traffic estimate was woefully underestimated, and now traffic to and on Queen Kaahumanu Highway and feeder streets, including on Hualalai Road, presents the worst traffic jam in or near Kailua-Kana.
6.) Yes, Hualalai Road, a substandard old wagon trail, is an issue, being much used by the neighborhood in trying to avoid the excessive traffic makai. It needs huge improvements, which residents in the area know. Will improvements made a condition of further subdivision in the area? Will its use will be exacerbated by the proposed development?
The new developer bought the remaining 70-acre condo zoned land on speculation that it could get a timid county to waive the infrastructure requirements of 25 and 15 years ago, while keeping for free the very valuable condo zoning, worsening the traffic problem, while opening the adjoining Gomes family agricultural land to residential zoning and maybe dump the infrastructure needs (e.g. schools) on them.
8.) Outrageously, the developer in the application would also get up to 20 more years out of public sight and hearings for its and its successors’ condo developments. That is over 50 years of avoiding county requirements and adding to the serious traffic problems in the neighborhood; residents be damned.
9.) The developer and its predecessors have not complied with the ordinances’ requirements, which enables the county to easily negate this developer’s no-infrastructure, 20-year plan, while retaining the very valuable zoning for future development.
10) The developer has built/will build no affordable housing, even though the need has grown tremendously over the last 30 years.
What is most offensive, and where the county is most susceptible, is the developer’s apparent opportunity or plan to not build any infrastructure at all, regardless of county requirements, and instead bond the job in today’s dollars, and just sell the condo lots for a quick profit, leaving the county to build the infrastructure, after the developer takes the money and runs. Which it can easily do as an LLC with no personal liability. This is the Hokolia (Oceanside 1250) model:
After receiving its very valuable zoning and permits in Hilo in exchange for infrastructure improvements it was to build, the Hokolia corporation “bonded” some of the improvements in 1990 dollars, proceeded to subdivide and build, didn’t do all the infrastructure, took the money out, and declared corporate bankruptcy, leaving the county in a lawsuit and to build the infrastructure itself at a later, more expensive cost in 2000 dollars.
The county should have learned a lesson, and should smell a rat with this application. It should say no to waiving existing conditions, and impose more to accommodate current and future conditions, including building affordable housing, make the conditions non-transferable, and require any future condo builder who’s not the applicant to apply for approval prior to building. It should also insist on a short-time requirement to actually build infrastructure and requirements should not be “bendable” or “bondable.”
This is very valuable, densely zoned subdivision land and will remain so. The developer, when purchasing it, knew very well of these 35-year-old requirements for development that were in exchange for the density up-zoning. It can well afford them. Now the developer wants to keep the very valuable 35-year-old up-zoning for free or little cost for another 20 years, while ignoring the community and its long past due infrastructure needs.
This should be an easy decision. Deny the application, which leaves the valuable up-zoning, so that the developer or its successors and eventual condo or lot builders will file another application when they’re actually going to develop. Infrastructure needs can be determined then. Who does the county represent?
Mark Van Pernis is a resident of Kailua-Kona.
