2008-07-10 TKONACDP - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

done it, always done it and admittedly there are some innovations. But basically you have a large group of small meetings and then a smaller group of large meetings and then, you know, the suggestions that start in the thousands get winnowed down, sent on to the Committee, Steering Committee, and then are put together by the consultant. But there’s no reason to say that you can’t do that. The only thing that’s spelled out in Section 15.1 is once it gets to the Steering Committee, where you can do anything you want as far as gathering information before that time. So, you know, I think we need to kind of think outside the box; and that’s my approach. We’re not, you know, we have a very diverse population in Kau. We’ve got Micronesians, Mashallese, haoles, native Hawaiians, you name it we’ve got it. And, you know, like I say, the people that show up at these meetings are retirees, people with special interests, developers, and not a lot of other people. Now I think you’ve done a wonderful job because I think you’ve really captured the essence of what Kona is and what you need to do; and I am surprised you did it with such a small sample size. But what I would like to see happen is that this process be expanded so that we get -.You know, we talk about inclusivity and, you know, increasing diversity or diversion, you know, but you know when you have only 3 percent or so of the population it’s hard to say that that’s representative, to be honest. That’s my concern. PISICCHIO: And I wanted to make a brief comment about your concern about the 1000-foot setback, that is not mandatory. That is, I think, the word was used as aspirational. So it would be, it’s more of a policy preference that when a situation comes up where a property owner has property that deep then a discussion could take place to find a way to actually acquire that or to do a density transfer. But there’s nothing mandatory about that as a goal. WOODWARD: Well, would you have a problem with saying if the property is more than 1500 feet deep you have a 1000-foot setback? Because they’re going to have to jump through some hoops. Okay, it may be that they can get a variance, but that requires them to jump through some hoops. PISICCHIO: It’s not regulatory in that respect. It wouldn’t require a variance or something that would, it would inspire a conversation to occur, but it isn’t ordinance in that respect. WATANABE: Okay, may I interrupt a bit, a second? WOODWARD: Sure. WATANABE: For those of you who might be interested in seeing the actual wording, that would be on page 4-39; and it’s policy LU-1.5 Enhanced Shoreline Setback. And I think maybe where the perception of it being required is the word “minimum” cause you’re using the word “minimum.” Actually, what you, what you actually say is it shall be a priority of the County to maintain a minimum of a 1,000-foot open space, no build setback for undeveloped lands adjacent to the shoreline on parcels which currently exceed 1,000 feet in depth in discretionary land use approvals such as SMA Major Permits, Rezonings and Land Use Boundary Amendments. To that end the way I interpret this, I had some concerns also that’s why I kind of read this prior to this meeting kind of carefully. In my mind what this is saying is maybe if you have a larger parcel it would be preferable to have an open space shoreline setback of approximately 1000 EXHIBIT C 5