2006-03-09 Planning Commission Minutes

Home

districts, affordable housing projects, progressive residential fees, cost recovery, phase-in period and contact information. He said some groups felt for the County to subsidize or pay all of the fees should depend on the level of need and there was a suggestion made that fees collected in a district should be spent in the district but a certain percentage, 40 percent perhaps, would go to an island-wide fund. (SEE EXHIBITS A AND B) For Commissioner Grahams information, Mr. Duncan explained any improvement benefit exclusive to the property owner, such as local residential streets or a turning lane on an arterial that goes into a commercial project, is not eligible; and any improvement which is capacity enhancing on the system, such as traffic lights, or an arterial or major collector would be eligible. Mr. Mullen said it was possible to have situations where the value of the improvement is going to be more than the development is going to generate inimpactfeesandthattypicallyadevelopershouldbereimbursedorthereshouldbea credit given to the developer for the cost of the improvements made. Commissioner Siracusa pointed out the unfairness of a fee schedule based on the household size for an area that has all the amenities and an area that does not, noting in the Puna or Kau areas there is no electricity, no County sewer system, and substandard roads. Mr. Duncan noted that they are still learning the island and at their public meeting in West Hawaii, of which half the attendees were from Kona and the other half from Hawaiian Ocean View Estates, the most definitive response was about not wanting to be excluded from services and not wanting further developments to compound existing problems. Mr. Duncan noted that Mr. Clancy touched on cost of services varying where a separate fee could be calculated based on the localized cost or level of existing services. Commissioner Siracusa said she liked the idea of people in need being exempted, noting these individuals can be identified by obtaining information from the Department of Human Services or from the State Tax Office. In response to the Chairs inquiry, Mr. Duncan said the suggestion that fees collected in a district should be spent in the district with a certain percentage going into an island-wide fund made sense as people living in one judicial district do travel to another district. Commissioner Iwashita questioned whether it was legal to include public transportation infrastructure as part of the impact fee assessment; and he said he felt building roads would create more problems, noting he felt developments should occur in a way where people do not have to get in their cars to go to work, shop or go to school. Mr. Mullen said they were doing some studies on public transportation and considering person trips instead of vehicular trips, noting one problem with a transit system is generally the biggest cost is the operating cost. Mr. Duncan noted that for one area on the mainland the fees were exempted because they had a sophisticated rapid transit system; and in some central areas the fees were reduced 10 to 15 percent since many of the people either used the bus system, walked or rode a bike more than using their vehicles. He said currently they are attempting to look at each 2