A decades-long proposed Kona development went before the state Land Use Commission on Wednesday to address questions related to the project’s status.
The proposed 450-unit Kona Vistas multiple-family housing project planned mauka of Queen Kaahumanu Highway, between Kona Vistas and Pualani Estates subdivisions, includes 174 two- and three-bedroom rental units with a manager’s unit in two-story units and an additional 274 two- and three-bedroom for-sale units in clusters of two- and three-story buildings, also with a manager’s unit.
In addition, there would be two community centers with a park, swimming pool and facilities for use by residents — one for the owner unit residents and one for the rental unit residents.
Developers KV3 LLC and Kona Three LLC purchased the 69-acre parcel and remaining lots in Phase I in 2015 from the previous developer Gamrex, which began the development in 1984 and built the 103-acre, 215 lot Kona Vistas subdivision, with plans to develop Phase II multifamily units based on approved permits and zoning changes.
The new developer set out to restart the project but has hit many roadblocks along the way, including having little to no support from surrounding communities.
The LUC set the meeting because of questions related to Kona Three’s annual status report which is required to be filed yearly.
Nearly a dozen Kona community members attended the meeting to give testimony in opposition of the proposed development, raising concerns ranging from traffic impact and flood planes to cultural finds on the land.
“What happens here is very important. It will make that land super valuable,” said David Blancett-Maddock.
He went on to testify that the reports of identification and classification of Hawaiian resources was completed by the developer’s consultants and did not identify two trails on the property, amongst other findings of significance.
“We can blame our predecessors for failing to stop this idea of erasing Hawaiian culture from our landscape, but now we know. History will bear our complicity if we don’t act on the true facts and protect our ‘aina from being erased from the landscape,” he said.
“The site has not been in compliance for development since 2012,” added Diane Blancett-Maddock.
Former Leeward Planning Commissioner Mark Van Pernis said the project is obsolete.
“They need a new plan that addresses the population growth in Kona. This plan is universally opposed by the community,” he said. “If you allow this project to proceed, you need to put a sunset clause on it.”
“It’s been 40 years. There are other developers that tried and passed. There’s waterway issues, there’s cultural issues. It’s almost like the land says no. I’m not going to let you build here,” said Renee Inaba. “Once the land has been assaulted, we can’t recover that.”
After testimony, Commission Chair Dan Giovanni said the concerns brought up by the community belong at the county level.
“We understand and sympathize with the testimony. The one aspect of enforcement the Land Use Commission has is to revert the property back to its original designation. Since there has been substantial development on a portion of the property, that option is not available to us,” said Giovanni.
Kona Three representative Darren Arai said the developer wishes to fulfill what was promised 40 years ago.
The developer’s affordable housing obligation was a matter of discussion. The original agreement for Kona Vista single family homes was agreed upon at 10% of homes developed, which brought the total to 22 affordable units. However, the original developer never fulfilled that requirement, and Kona Three is obligated to build those 22 along with the requirements for the new multi-family development.
Arai said a total of 67 units would satisfy their affordable housing requirement, but an actual number of affordable units to be constructed is dependent on the number of total units we are able to successfully place on the land.
The LUC wanted to know what assurance that 20 years from now the community is going to see the same situation with a new owner who comes in and gives commitments.
“Noting will happen unless the project moves forward,” said Arai.
Kona Three attorney Mike Masukawa said the magic moment came and went for the 22 affordable housing units when the single family lots were fully developed and sold.
“The Kona Vista homes were up. Affordable housing wasn’t up. They should have been done,” he said.
Commissioner Lee Ohigashi questioned why the 22 homes can’t be built now.
“Wouldn’t it be in good faith for your company to build 22 units to satisfy the existing agreement,” he questioned
Arai explained they had an agreement to build the affordable homes on 12 acres of land makai of Queen Kaahumanu Highway. “However, the contract was cancelled by the county housing office so we are back to square one,” he said.
Ohigashi pointed out that as a condition of extending the zoning, the county would require a 20% affordable housing contribution on the multi-family development which would nearly double the amount of units needed to satisfy the obligation.
Kona Three developer Richard Wheelock said his intention was to develop the 450 units and affordable housing can be part of it or outside of the project site. His estimate on the number of units required was 112.
“We will put affordable housing in the first increment, but until we get answers from the county we can’t commit,” he said.
The project still needs to go before the Leeward Planning Commission, which has not met since August and just canceled the February meeting during which the Cultural Resource Committee was scheduled to present its recommendations.
The Cultural Resources Commission voted to recommend the site be preserved in perpetuity or, if that is not feasible, that further documentation be made of the cultural history of the area in order for it to be integrated into the project’s design. The panel also recommended that the development plan be modified to include larger open space areas to better protect the sensitive sites.
The LUC concluded Kona Three, in addition to its yearly status report, should report the results of the Leeward Planning Commission and County Council within 10 days of any hearing.
“What happens on the ground depends on the council,” said Arai. “We are asking for a blessing to proceed forward.”
Since it was a status report hearing, Giovanni said there would not be any decisions made at this time and no motions for actions were required.
