My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2011-02-23 KCDP Minutes Final
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Action Committees (AC)
>
Kona Community Development Plan Action Committee
>
Minutes
>
2009 - 2015
>
2011
>
2011-02-23 KCDP Minutes Final
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/14/2011 8:22:42 AM
Creation date
6/14/2011 8:22:33 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Possibly within Article 1 include or create a method therein to allow smaller acreage <br /> <br /> <br />TND neighborhoods to aggregate up to TOD with Design Center direction at <br /> <br />locations with multiple ownerships- <br /> <br /> <br />Need to create an open space network plan that will give a regional understanding of <br /> <br />the Kona district. <br /> <br /> <br />A concern that the transects will create more commercial than is viable. <br /> <br />The current issues that were addressed or identified were as follows: <br /> <br />Regarding the VDG Article 1. Marni Herkes moved to have the Chair and Planning <br /> <br />Staff merge the Article 1 from the KCDP and the proposed Rule, drafted by <br /> <br />PlaceMakers, and bring to the next meeting for consideration by the AC to insert <br /> <br />back in to the VDG, Bob Ward seconded. Unanimous approval given. <br /> <br />Article 2 Process – concerns were raised to make sure that the areas that have been <br /> <br />red-lined from the VDG have been incorporated elsewhere. Such as page 6 Section <br /> <br /> <br />2.3.2, page 8 Section 2.3.3 (b) or page 9 Section 2.3.3 (e). <br /> <br />Article 2 Process - Section 2.2.3 and 2.2.4 that deal with the application of a TOD <br /> <br /> <br />Project District Application could be a more appropriate location for Architectural <br /> <br />Standards to be developed or required. <br /> <br />Discussion on the proposed change reiterated concerns over having <br /> <br />o <br />Architectural Standards developed on a regional level and the constraints that <br /> <br />they would put on the development of buildings and land. <br /> <br />It was pointed out that the some examples here locally of the target that the <br /> <br />o <br />KCDP is looking for (to live, work, and play) came about, not thru <br /> <br />government planning efforts but thru an evolution of need of the <br /> <br /> <br />owner/proprietor. <br /> <br /> <br />On the other side it was pointed out that Architectural Standards are needed to <br />o <br />develop a cohesive and beautiful place to live that welcomes both local and <br /> <br />visitors. <br /> <br />Article 3 Village Scale Plans – Section 3.3.1 (b) – Proposal made to suggest that <br />where there are minimum acreages that they be changed to 14.5 acres. The premise <br /> <br />would be to allow for landowners who are not able to meet the current acreage <br /> <br />requirement to be aggregated into a TOD that will address the concerns raised by the <br /> <br /> Planning Department/Planning Commission. <br />Concern raised regarding how to deal with the green-belt required within a <br /> <br /> <br />o <br />TOD as a whole and also if the acreage is decreased. <br /> <br />A further proposal was made to make the minimum be at 10 acres. <br /> <br /> <br />o <br /> After discussion that this option could be further clarified to target those <br />o <br />designated TOD with multiple landowners. <br /> <br />With regards to the concern that the TODs will create more commercial than is viable <br /> <br />a suggestion was made (by Susan Henderson, PlaceMakers, during the 12/9/10 <br />tm;E <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.