2004-06-04 DJSM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

referred to the original concept, which was a small subdivision. The original concept was a commercial development with commercial buildings on three lots. The -, as one speaker said, the commercial designation for this area, you know, is not only reflected in the zoning but it's also been part of the General Plan for about 15 years, and the land use, General Plan designation for this area is High Density Urban, you know. And so besides the fact that Dr. Takase, you know, has certain rights as landowner, etcetera, if one just steps back to think about this, you know, assuming this commercial office building were not built, there could be something else built which perhaps would have even greater impacts for that neighborhood. So I think it's good to look at some of these issues with the backdrop of what the County itself has indicated to be its plans for growth in this area on the face of the General Plan. Thank you. FUJIKAWA:Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Springer. SPRINGER:Maybe before we -, we could have some discussion on what's been presented to us? FUJIKAWA:You may. SPRINGER:I'm particularly interested in the Planning Director's response to -, sorry, Robin Kealoha Black's concern that Condition K stipulated that any of the conditions aren't met or not substantially complied with in a timely fashion, the Director shall initiate rezoning of Parcel 29 to its original residential zoning or something more appropriate, on the matter of drywell capacity, and if there are no traffic conditions given the opening of the Mohouli Street extension, and if those have been taken into consideration when evaluating this application. YUEN:Okay, three different questions. For about the last dozen to 14 years, that language of the conditions not being met in a timely fashion and then the Planning Director initiating rezoning, shall initiate rezoning to the original or more -, or another more appropriate designation, that's been standard, that was standard for about a dozen years. More recently, we have asked the Council to use the word "may" rather than "shall" because of it is a directive that the Director, that we're supposed to do it. I have not gone and I don't think the previous Directors have ever gone systematically through the old inventory of rezoning ordinances, trolled through the files and looked for ordinances that were out of compliance with the timeframes. And the basic reason behind this is that if we did that, both the Planning Department and the Planning Commission and the Council would be doing nothing else but looking at out of compliance zoning ordinances for the next couple of years. There are many, many, many of them. What we try to do though is -, and it's really brought on by seeing what -, seeing this application on the letter is making it clear that if you are out of compliance and you have a condition like this that says that you can only get one time extensive administratively, and that after that you have to go to the Council, you are, in effect, in a limbo. You -, we can't give you, administratively, approvals based on your zoning because your timeframe has run out. If you had asked for a time extension after your -, for administrative time extension after your administrative time extension 23