Laserfiche WebLink
Communication 662 <br /> <br /> Bill 175 <br /> <br /> Page 2 of 6 <br /> director have informally supported through discussions with a developer because she felt it is <br /> <br /> very important that the public is aware of what's going on and what's being planned in their <br /> communities. <br /> Committee Chair Pilago relinquished his seat to Vice-Chair Dominic Yagong. <br /> Council Member Pilago outlined a proposed floor amendment to Bill 175 incorporating <br /> discussions with Corporation Counsel and Planning Director Yuen and noted the following: <br /> 1) the term "advisory" was deleted from the Purpose clause in Section 1; 2) that Section 6-4.5(c) <br /> expressly provide that each commission havejurisdiction over land use matters within <br /> geographic areas covered by each commission, that each commission reviews rezoning <br /> ordinances within their azeas, but both commissions review changes to zoning and subdivision <br /> codes; 3) a "Transitional Clause" is added to allow current commission member hold over for the <br /> remainder of their term in their respective districts, that vacancies are appointed by the mayor <br /> and that the new planning commissions become effective April 1, 2009; and 4) Uniform rules of <br /> procedure be adopted by majority vote of the combined membership and that the old Planning <br /> Commission Rules, except for meeting places, shall apply until new rules are adopted. <br /> Discussion on the proposed amendments relating to nomination of new members should be <br /> subject to approval of the Council and how to address a perceived difficulty when a matter falls <br /> between two geographical areas and how it would be heard and voted upon. <br /> A motion to approve the floor amendment as proposed by Council Member Pilago was <br /> unanimously approved. <br /> Council Member Pilago noted the importance of letting the people decide through the proposed <br /> charter amendment, how best to deal with our future land use planning decisions. Mr. Pilago <br /> noted that the commissions were divided into judicial districts with geographical boundaries that <br /> aze permanent and not subject to change every ten years through reapportionment. He also noted <br /> that two commissions is a valid tool, it decreases the perception of Hilo/Kona differences, it <br /> promotes sensitivity to regional and unique demographics and clear and concise level of services <br /> and eliminating a "one-size-fits-all" method of planning. <br /> <br /> Planning Director Chris Yuen outlined pros and cons of two commissions noting more <br /> advantages than disadvantages. He explained the advisory authority of the planning commission <br /> over rezoning ordinances and state land use boundary and general plan amendments that <br /> ultimately come to council for final decision. Therefore, the advisory function under two <br /> commissions is less significant because final decisions are made by the council. Under state law <br /> however, the planning commission is the authority and do render final decisions on SMA permits <br /> in the Ag district and on SMA permits, shoreline setback variances and Use Permits. The <br /> favorable aspects of two planning commissions for these matters aze that the bulk of the <br /> decision-making are primarily local in effect, generating public interest primarily from people <br /> living within the community and considered by commissioners from the area better in tune with <br /> community attitudes. A second favorable factor is that the workload of one island wide <br /> commission borders on unreasonable for a body of citizen volunteers who are required to attend <br /> PC Report No. 47 <br /> <br />