Laserfiche WebLink
BOWMAN: And just to clarify — I'm sorry I missed — so unfavorable with the bill, and the bill was <br /> initiated by the State? I'm sorry. <br /> ARAI: I'm sorry, the bill was initiated by the County Council and was transmitted to the Planning <br /> Commission for its consideration. <br /> HOUSEL: Daryn, does the Planning Department have specific recommendations on how to correct <br /> this problem? <br /> ARAI: We did make one recommendation is that we think that they should explore opportunities to <br /> support the efforts of the State and the County Civil Defense agencies to implement measures to <br /> provide tsunami sirens where there are none or where there is a deficiency. So we'd rather they <br /> pursue that avenue rather than trying to implement it through an existing administrative review <br /> process that was never designed in the first place to deal with these type of more regional problems. <br /> NELSON: So this recommendation by the Planning Director is not in favor of it, and we are talking <br /> about Chapter 25 adding a new division relating tsunami sirens. <br /> ARAI: Yes. We are not in favor of this proposed bill. <br /> BOWMAN: May I ask? So if we are not in favor of it, then what's the next step? If we forward it <br /> down, I mean -. <br /> LEITHEAD TODD: If you do an unfavorable recommendation, it goes back to the County <br /> Council, and at that point it's up to them. Our concerns are that we just think that it's, partially it is <br /> in the inappropriate place, and the way it triggers -. You can have a situation where, the way it's set <br /> up, an application comes in and it gets triggered, and yet the particular parcel of land that it may <br /> trigger is not the appropriate place to put a siren and they may not have control over the place that <br /> you want to put the siren. Also, because it's, at a rezoning, you know, you can put conditions in; we <br /> think that trying to put the condition in at plan approval is the wrong place to do it, because plan <br /> approval is where you are supposed to look for whether they've complied with the conditions of <br /> typically with a rezoning ordinance or typically with the Subdivision Code. This is adding a new <br /> condition and trying to put it in through the plan approval. And it also may unfairly place the entire <br /> burden of the siren on an applicant that may have difficulty bearing that burden, because one siren <br /> alone can be $100,000, and so it doesn't have that kind of evaluation. So we think that the place to <br /> determine whether someone has to put a siren up should be at rezoning, and it should be a condition <br /> that goes up as a recommendation from the Planning Commission and is then subsequently <br /> approved by the County Council, as opposed to being triggered through at an administrative process <br /> within the Department. <br /> BOWMAN: And the applicant would be responsible for the cost of the siren? <br /> LEITHEAD TODD: Yeah, and putting it in the right place. And the problem is is that, you know, <br /> you could, like this was really geared towards Waikoloa, and you've got quite a bit of development <br /> there and none of those developments would be required to contribute to the cost of this; but if you <br /> had somebody coming in with a new application to build something, you know, relatively small, but <br /> it met the aggregate of 50 people, they would end up bearing the whole burden. And yet, they <br /> might not be at the location where you want to put the siren up, and they may not have control over <br /> where you want to put the siren; because if the siren is going to be maintained and serviced by, <br /> 2 <br />