My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
COM 0176.175 2006-2008
ClerkCouncil
>
Council Records
>
Communications
>
2006-2008
>
COM 0176.175 2006-2008
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2008 11:27:37 PM
Creation date
5/8/2008 6:48:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Communications
Communications - Type
COM
Communications - Council Term
2006-2008
Communication
0176
Point
175
Author
David Arakawa
Communications - Referred To
COUNCIL
Comments
Presented: Council - 11/7/07
Document Relationships
AGE COUNCIL 2007/11/07 2006-2008
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Agendas\2006-2008\Council
BIL 051 Draft 05 2006-2008
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Bills\2006-2008
BIL 151 Draft 02 2006-2008
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Bills\2006-2008
BIL 151 Draft 02 2006-2008
(Related To)
Path:
\Council Records\Bills\2006-2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
BACKGROUND <br /> Bill 151 is a result of problems with Council revisions to Bill 51. Drafts 2. 3 <br /> and 4. We understand that Bill 151 is an attempt by a Council member to address the <br /> problems and complications caused by that Council member's revisions to Bill 51. We <br /> have been informed that the text for the original Bill 51 was originally intended by the <br /> Hawaii County Department of Public Works Department ("DPW") to be a <br /> "housekeeping" measure, proposing revisions to the Hawaii County Code to ensure <br /> compliance with various Federal and State regulations including those of the Federal <br /> Emergency Management Administration and that the original DPW draft bill satisfied the <br /> federal and state requirements. However, due to certain initial arbitrary amendments <br /> made by that Council members in Bill 51, Drafts 2, 3 and 4 ("additional arbitrary <br /> requirements") - - - professional engineers, developers and others described Drafts 2,3 <br /> and 4 of Bill 51 as "extremely problematic," and have raised, among other things, the <br /> following concerns regarding Bill 51: <br /> • Additional arbitrary requirements which are not based on scientific or <br /> engineering principles, practices and considerations; <br /> • conflicts with existing law and rules; <br /> • Additional arbitrary design standards more restrictive than federal and state <br /> requirements; <br /> • Additional arbitrary technical requirements based on ambiguous and <br /> undefined terms; <br /> • Additional arbitrary requirements which unreasonably restrict use of private <br /> property and increase costs of building affordable and market homes and <br /> business buildings; <br /> • Procedural inaccuracies; <br /> • Potentially detrimental impacts. <br /> As a result of the overwhelming criticism, several public informational meetings <br /> <br /> were held, which included Council members, DPW representatives, professional <br /> engineers, the members of the community. The County did the right thing by allowing <br /> professional and public comments. <br /> New Bill 151 still has major problems. While the County allowed the <br /> professionals and public to attend informational meetings, it appears that the <br /> professional engineers and community did not take part in the drafting of this new Bill <br /> 151. As explained in the August 3, 2007 transmittal to the Council Chair, this new <br /> Council bill was created based on private discussions between one Council member, <br /> the administration and staff from two Hawaii County departments and the Office of the <br /> County Clerk. It is claimed that Bill 151 reflects the effort of this small group to satisfy <br /> the minimum NFIP requirements and includes "additional changes to Chapter 27 as <br /> <br /> well." Many of these "additional changes." however, are arbitrary and are not <br /> based on scientific or engineering principles, practices and considerations. As a <br /> result, Bill 151 is still plagued with the same critical flaws described above <br /> 2 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.