COM 0045.030 2002-2004 - Laserfiche WebLink

Metadata

Thumbnails

Annotations

Jump to thumbnail

IMPLEMENTATION AMENDMENTS 13. DEVELOPMENT PLANS Both drafts emphasize the importance of (community) development plans to direct physical development and public improvements within a specific area. Both drafts, directly or indirectly, acknowledge the limited success in adopting development plans whether by ordinance or resolution. Both drafts commit the County's resources towards serious implementation—that is, preparing development plans, prioritizing capital projects, funding those priority projects, and adopting short-term regulatory measures like an impact fee ordinance or new zoning categories. We wholeheartedly agree that the need for a development plan should be assessed considering various factors and that development plans should not be mandated for every region. The contents of a development plan are laid out in both drafts, albeit with greater specificity in Draft 1. Draft 2 clarifies or expands the definition of development plans to include functional or public facility plans. The County has prepared numerous functional or public facility plans, a few of which are recommended in the General Plan policies for updating. They include the Sewerage Study for All Urban and Urbanizing Areas of the County of Hawaii, the Water Quality Management Plan, County Bikeway Plan, the County Recreation Plan, and the Drainage Master Plan for the County of Hawaii. Examples of in -progress regional facility plans include the Kealakehe sewerage system study, the Keahole to Honaunau Regional Circulation Study, and the Puna Alternate Route Plan. It is incumbent upon the Council, administration, and the public to be aware that functional and public facility plans must also be developed in the framework of the General Plan. Thus, development plans will be initiated by the Council, the Planning Director or the responsible County department/agency, with the consent of the Council, by resolution. Draft 2 does not require every development plan to have a steering committee appointed by the mayor and confirmed by the council. Steering committees may currently be formed without a requirement in the General Plan. Additionally, the planning director should be given flexibility over how to gather information and advice depending upon the nature of a development plan. If a steering committee is necessary and defensible, the initiating resolution could establish the process for a steering committee for a particular development plan. The precise procedures for adopting a development plan should be set forth in Chapter 16, Hawaii County Code, and have been deleted. 14. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM We are pleased to see attention given to the coordination of the capital improvements program in the General Plan. However, the conditions by which a CIP is developed and prioritized should be adopted as a separate section of the County Code rather than the General Plan. Establishing conditions for the preparation of the CIP is a mid- to short- range tool and includes the director of finance. As policy -makers, the Council should be given more time to scrutinize the proposed CIP process on its own merits. A separate bill should be drafted for the Council's review.