2010-06-04 T-MALOOF - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Community Plans. Certainly itÓs something we need get better at when we do the future community plans. But the fact is this is where we are and we have these kinds of inconsistencies. And we can either follow what the community has said theyÓd like to see happen, or we can say nah, nah, nah, weÓre going to wait and weÓre, you know -. So small things have to stop; and this is in fact a very modest use. And IÓll leave it at that. WOODWARD: Thank you. Do we have any questions for Mr. Melrose or Mr. Maloof? Commissioner Domingo. DOMINGO: Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just needed to, probably IÓm being repetitious, but I agree with you as you indicated that there will be inconsistencies with regards to that which is contained in the Community Development Plan and the General Plan. And it will continue, it will continue because what IÓm finding out is that there has bee Community Development Plan and the goals and aims of the Community Development Plan, as you compare them with that which is contained in the General Plan. And that is because the development plan does not reflect what the General Plan is. And thatÓs why as the Planning Director stated the Steering Committee of the KeaÒau Community h recommended amendments to the plan, which in essence would probably bring everything in step; and then as we look at applications then we can really determine that that is in actuality a reflection of the General Plan. And, again, you know, one of the primary reasons for recommendation for denial is that it is not consistent with the General Plan. And what weÓre going to find, what weÓre going to find and what IÓm finding is that in this particular case the Community Development Plan is driving the Council, is driving the Council, to start implementing changes to the General Plan. And that shouldnÓt be it. The General Plan should be just there. ItÓs a document that is rigid and it is policies and aims and goals, and that the Community Development Plan should structure their planning around that which is contained in the General Plan. And IÓm going to find this probably common to be with other applications that may come from Puna, or eventually in the long term from Hamakua. And I caution staff that, you know, personally I donÓt feel that the development plan should contain or force the Council to amend the General Plan. And if it is so, let it be done in a constructive way, in a systematic way, as prescribed by the process as outlined in the Zoning Code. And here weÓre finding, you know, the Council in the past has adopted a concurrency bill. Now how well the Council is adhering to the provisions of the concurrency bill, you know, is something that is of my concern too, because weÓre going along with these kinds of applications. And then here weÓre confronted with statements from the DOT with regards to its highways. Are going to keep on developing and developing to cause more congestion on the highways without the State ever having to develop their highways to accommodate the increased growth in any particular area? That alone itself is my concern, you know. And I think it should be the concern of the Council, too. Because eventually at the end the finger is going to be pointing to the Council when they have to explain the congestions and the lack of roadways, water developments, and environmental problems, issues. I just needed to vent off, Mr. Chairman. MELROSE: I appreciate it, Taka. And let me just, I think thereÓs partly a semantical issue here. Because I think consistency and inconsistency with the General Plan -. The General Plan you know is a LUPAG map done at a 135, 125,000 feet per inch. I mean itÓs a large, the LUPAG 14 EXHIBIT A