2019-05-14 KCDP Minutes Final - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Following his presentation, the Action Committee and members of the public were welcomed to share their viewpoints. Committee Member Kimura stated that implementation of the CDP since adoption has been very difficult. She noted that the plan has gone so far as to almost completely block development in general in the Kona area. She asked if it was the overall goal of the plan to prevent any development from happening and if so asked if they should be having that conversation with the community instead. Committee Member Rivera stated that the CDP has effectively acted as a moratorium for the Kona area; its provisions cannot be abided and developers often fall short. He commended however that the plan creates a voice for the community that spans across administrations and could be a powerful tool if done the right way. Committee Member Weber expressed concern that the implementation table had been edited to remove the words “supplements/supersedes Hawai‘i County Code” but was not replaced with the department responsible for implementation. Nancy Pisicchio, an executive assistant to the Mayor, explained that the plan was adopted in 2008 by ordinance which is a format that differed from previous regional plans that had been adopted by resolution. She explained that at the time of its adoption they questioned if the plan had the ability to amend the code, or if it was possible to create regional ordinances. She encouraged community members in attendance to continue following the amendment package and to get involved in the conversation. Councilmember Eoff asked how much time the Action Committee had been provided to review the amendments after the Planning Department submitted their recommendations. Staff responded that they had initially shared the recommendations two weeks before and had submitted a second version, noting the changes, after incorporating comments from Corporation Council the afternoon before th (May 13). Committee Member Palma-Glennie had several amendments that she found concerning which she wanted to discuss. She additionally expressed that she had concerns about the CDP Amendment process from the beginning. \[Note: this section of the minutes is meant to be read alongside the CDP Amendment Package – Communication Number 2019-11\] TRAN-1.1 – Committee Member Palma-Glennie questioned why the word “designate” was changed to “recommend” in the second sentence of this policy. Planner Plunkett responded that the inability to change the roadway classification creates an unnecessary degree of inflexibility as the maps cannot be updated without going through the CDP amendment process. TRAN-1.4 – Committee Member Palma-Glennie asked why the word “would” was changed to “could” in the second sentence this policy. Staff clarified that the original CDP used the word “will”, the Action Committee suggested changing the word to “would”, and Planning Staff recommended “could”. Planner Plunkett explained that the change came from working with the County Subdivision Planners and was intended to create more flexibility in case of any unexpected circumstances. Action TRAN-1.5a(2)(a) – Committee Member Palma-Glennie suggested that this section of the policy be amended or deleted because the area for the roadway is narrow and surrounded by www.hiplanningdept.com kona@hawaiicounty.gov Page 3