S.P.A.C.E. Community Meeting - March 6th

[Bob Orts]

The issue isn't even about buffer zones.

When a special use permit is issued, the County is basically saying that specific activities and uses are within the intent of the zoning classification, that it does not adversely impact the deliver of county services, and it does not adversely impact the adjoining properties or community.

Who is conducting the activities, what form of organization, how well it's liked or needed in a community are not part of the statutory determination. The County can take all the other items into consideration, and indeed it does have an impact on their decision, but from the position of a special use permit, only the three statutory items mean anything when push comes to shove.

Let’s say a Puna community nonprofit wanted to build an environmental education center in a community. They obtain a special use permit based on that education function. If after awhile, they started holding hazardous, material recycling and reclamation activities to get rid of the toxic chemicals and material that pollutes a community, that activity would be in violation of the special use permit. But if the community comes out yelling and screaming in support of the organization, and they convince the County that the activity is in the best interest of the community, the county may grant the amendment. Now, along comes Big Mega Mainland Inc who wants to build a for profit hazardous material recycling and reclamation center on AG zoned land within a community. How can you stop them? You already said the “activity” is good. All Big Mega Mainland Inc has to do is sue. The courts will look only at the three statutory items and since you already said it’s not a problem for one, it shouldn’t be a problem for another.

That is the danger you face when you cloud the issues. When you open a door for one, you may be opening the door for all. As I said before, many of the development lobbyists are pushing the County to approve all of SPACE's needs. Can you guess why?

[missydog1]

Ah, informative and thought-provoking as usual with your posts, Bob.

Kat, one TMK owned by Village Green is 3-1-2-9-34, a 10 acre parcel, and here's a map link:
http://www.hawaiipropertytax.com/Forms/MapDatalet.aspx?sIndex=1&idx=1&LMparent=20
Not sure if that was the right one.

In 1998 they were applying to lease the adjacent State-owned parcel of 3-1-2-9-15
and here is the report on their environmental assessment, which includes a very well written proposal that is most likely much like the subsequent application, although of course the one in place should be found as things may have changed.

http://oeqc.doh.hawaii.gov/Shared%20Docu...LDINGS.pdf

Having just read the 1998 proposal, it focus exclusively on providing services to at risk children and cites all the problems they face such as suicide risk, delinquency and so forth. The stated purpose is altogether admirable.

As for the neighborhood, it stresses that the community is wholeheartedly behind the project, that at most about 25 vehicles might come in and out, that there are no surrounding homes, and that there will be no noise impact and no significant traffic impact on the roads, and there is nothing about public performances or events.

I just looked this up on line, and I don't know why they switched to doing everything on private property, as the land lease application seems from this doc to be smooth sailing.

[JWFITZ]

No doubt, if the county should decide to favor the community will and back SPACE-- no doubt we run a grave risk of having for profit drum circles, farmers markets, and art studios run by massive mainland corporations springing up all over Puna. . .I quiver in my boots at the thought of it.

http://sensiblesimplicity.lefora.com/

[missydog1]

Very funny, Jay, and I share your concern.

I ran into a document earlier when I ran the search, of the Kalani people talking to the Planning Commission (a transcription of the meeting), that I think is a good read:
http://www.co.hawaii.hi.us/planning/comm.../TKOOB.pdf

One can skip through faster by reading Chris Yuen's comments if you mostly want to get the PC's position. Yuen speaks concerns along the lines of what Bob tells us. They have to think about what they're opening up as precedent as much as the project at hand. Specifically, there's a huge concern here that people use the special use permit as a way to accomplish goals that should have been done through applying for a zoning change. That the SUP is a back door.

First you get a special use granted on a sort of no brainer proposal, and then you expand the parameters to exceed the scope that was envisioned. Then you argue all the benefits to the community and the innocuous nature. But it should have gone through an application for rezoning.

ed to fix overly long link.

[Greg]

And then there's Puna's primary development inhibitor that has been in place for centuries; Pele.

Small, grassroots community projects that benefit residents are easily relocated or recreated when the lady visits. Megacorporations tremble in her presence.

It is now as it always was and forever shall be.

Stoneface

[peregrine]

After looking at the second link posted by KathyH, is no one wondering how what is currently built, with permit or not, can be so COMPLETELY different than that proposal? Is no one wondering how what was originally leased with the explanation "We are not interested in purchasing State Land since we believe it is the property of the Hawaiian people being held in trust by the State and should not be sold" is now called Private Property?
The neighborhood is very different than it was then. Most changes are improvements, but the fact remains that, while there may have been little conflict between with proposal of 1997 and the few neighbors of that time, that does not justify forcing current illegal activity on a different set of neighbors. Village Green has had many opportunities to purchase a number of adjacent lots, yet has chosen not to. Ms.Kral (Ikal of page 5) lives in one of the unpermitted structures, on the property line. She boasts that the funders of SPACE never intended it to be "run by the members of the Seaview Owners Association, much less renters in the subdivision" but does not seem to see the hypocrisy in making this statement while asking for community support, the community being OTHER RESIDENTS of Seaview including (gasp) RENTERS.

[peregrine]

"It is easier to beg forgiveness than ask permission" is the phrase which I believe sums up the approach taken by Village Green et al.
For what it's worth, there has been talk of eventually having a gas station at the site. Talk about incompatible...

[JWFITZ]

For myself, I'm much more captivated by wondering how we got ourselves to a state of affairs where the community is obligated to serve the law, and the law has no responsibility to serve the community.

http://sensiblesimplicity.lefora.com/

[Rob Tucker]

Jay, that is a great point and FoPF is intending to explore it this year and beyond.

[peregrine]

Could someone please define community? There seem to be different interpretations depending on one's point of view. What does community mean to you?