2008-05-22 TPUNACDP - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

like a sound process, we adopted it; you know, we said we’ll put this in the Plan. So Ainaloa, Nanawale, Leilani, Kehena Seaview, they’ve all had planning processes; some of them were facilitated by the County, some of them have brought in, you know, planners to help them do the work. So from that perspective our work has been pretty easy because all of these documents exist and time has vetted them, and there it is. BROWN: Could I just add -, there has also been some misunderstanding or misperception by some folks that the Puna CDP would have an impact on the existing land use entitlements. And other than the proposed downzoning of certain agricultural parcels in that provision in the Puna CDP, it would not impact any of the existing commercial or industrial zoned lands in Puna unless those parcels were included in a village or town center bubble, if you will, or boundary. And then if a zoning designation for that village or town center was adopted that was either one of the other existing zoning designations under Chapter 25 or a newly created floating zone designation, which is something that is suggested in the Plan, if that were adopted for that area, that then would impact the existing zoning designation. WATANABE: I might comment to that, Mr. Brown. I’ve read through the CDP, and I don’t see where you specifically identify any particular parcels. So it’s pretty broad, the statement about downzoning to whatever it is “appropriate zoning.” Do you get what I’m saying? I think that’s why, you know, you have this so-called wide-spread misperception. But you don’t have any particular list of any properties that -, which makes it finite. BROWN: Right. What the downzoning refers to is Ag zone parcels to prevent extensive further subdivision of large agricultural parcels in the district, the fear being that there would be additional substandard subdivisions being created. There are additional lots that really aren’t even needed in an area with 50,000 buildable lots already. WATANABE: I understand, and as Mr. Woodward pointed out, 80 percent of the 40 some odd percent of the land that can be transferred because it doesn’t belong either to the Fed or the State is Ag. So there is a lot of stuff that’s Ag that’s already residential. Right? Am I not correct on that? BROWN: Yeah, a lot of the lots that are zoned agricultural are in reality being used for residential purposes. WATANABE: My point being it’s still a taking. Any time you downzone and you reduce already approved entitlement, it’s going to cost you money. Or do you think everyone is going to just willingly downzone? BROWN: Perhaps Chris will help me out on this. But I think that the recommendations that the Director made to amend the Puna CDP’s provisions for downzoning the Ag lands wouldn’t be constituted as a taking. YUEN: Yes. Just a downzoning itself is not a taking. You can downzone and reduce the development intensity of a piece of property without it being a taking under constitutional provisions. EXHIBIT C 4