Laserfiche WebLink
Additionally, the Council had found that it is desirable to have standard expectations for <br />water supply for these new rezonings. The Council understood that in some rural areas <br />such as Ocean View and Hawaiian Ranchos that there is no reasonable prospect of a <br />public water system, but the County may wish to allow some commercial and possibly <br />light industrial rezonings to serve the growing rural population. The water supply <br />necessary for sanitation and fire fighting in these circumstances can be handled by <br />requiring adequate storage facilities. <br />So again these applications are unique in the sense that these are our first two change of <br />zones, State Land Use Boundary Amendment and Change of Zone applications in these <br />particular areas based on this new ordinance that has been passed by the Hawaii County <br />Council. <br />Again, at this time, the Planning Department is requesting that these two applications be <br />continued until a time in the future when we do receive that information that we’ve <br />requested. Are there any questions? <br />GRAHAM: Thank you, Jeff. Let me just ask you one about the continuance. <br />Just thinking back to the one we had in here less than a year ago which was out by the <br />KTA, maybe it was Ginger Patch or something; and that was a rezone. And it was kind <br />of clear, as I recall it was clear that the DOT was going to ask for a traffic impact <br />analysis. But it was presented to us that we were going to take action on it anyway but <br />that the final conditions would include that they have to conform to what came out of the <br />TIAR. But we’re not following that route now. Is that basically, rather you’re asking for <br />a continuance in this rather than that we take action. Is that because of the difference in <br />the rezoning process now due to the concurrency issue or -? Do you understand the gist <br />of my question? <br />DARROW: Would you like me to answer that or you want to answer that <br />question? <br />YUEN: I think the basic reason is yes. We had this discussion before about <br />when; and there wasn’t really a firm guideline as to when a TIAR should be required in a <br />rezoning, now there is. So that’s the reason for dealing with this differently. And then, <br />you know, to tell the truth there, and the Department had deferred action on other <br />rezonings pending Department of Transportation review of projects, wanting to see their <br />comments. So we did apply this more on a case-by-case basis. And now the ordinance <br />gives a threshold of expected number of trips. And clearly this project would exceed the <br />number of trips, and so-. They did submit report but the DOT had some criticism of the <br />methodology; and so we’re asking for a more comprehensive report and to give DOT <br />little time to look at it. And my expectation is that, you know, DOT will have some <br />discussion of improvements on the State highway that they would want to see, is my <br />guess on this. And then, so that’s what their input is likely to be. It’s not likely to be on <br />the overall, the basic question of whether this rezoning should be granted, but what would <br />be the conditions of approval. <br /> EXHIBIT C <br />4 <br /> <br />