2013-02-21 Leeward Exh A - Director Initiated Amend re PUD

Home

GIFFIN: So thank you very much for coming. Please go back to your seats. Members of the Commission, any questions of the Director? And I did have -. Daryn, maybe we need to speak to this proposal that I think I heard Mrs. McInnis allude to regarding the sequence of the meetings, and I think that the Director also acknowledged that that was something well taken. Any questions? Director. LEITHEAD TODD: I was going to say let’s take a look at Page 4, Section 25-6-6, “Actions by director on P.U.D. applications.” And so I’m looking at adding a subsection (1) to (a), and the subsection would say that within sixty days of receiving, of acceptance of a P.U.D. application, the director shall hold a public meeting either, or have a meeting through the action committee – so one or the other, not a director meeting and an action committee, but if there is a public meeting through the action committee, then that would take care of that. If there is no action committee like, let’s say this is Ka‘ū, then the director would hold a public meeting. And we would do that within sixty days. So there would be an opportunity by then to have had comments from the departments, public comments come in on the application. There would also have been an opportunity for the action committee to have seen the application and potentially decide whether they wanted to hear it, so that we would hold some kind of a public meeting, notice it publicly. And I don’t have the exact language, but that’s where I’m looking at putting it is under (a) so that -. Because, since we are expanding it from sixty to ninety days in this proposal, say that within sixty days you have to hold the public meeting, so then this proposal would then have a community meeting before the application is submitted, and it would have a community public meeting where people could come after the application is submitted. But that would also still reserve the opportunity to appeal any decision that was made to the Board of Appeals. GIFFIN: To the Board of Appeals, right. Okay, I got it. Commissioners, any questions of the Director? Members of the public, did I enable all of you to have the opportunity to testify today? Great. BEAUDET: I have one -. GIFFIN: I’m sorry. Brandi. BEAUDET: I’m looking at Section 25-6-11, Paragraph (a), and my question was as to why 75 feet and how does that account to typical stories or levels within a building. LEITHEAD TODD: That was existing language in this section; this is not new language. And I think it’s partially because you are looking at different districts, including Agricultural districts, and different types of things. But it is a concern. BEAUDET: Wouldn’t it be better just to follow the zoning height requirements of the area rather than having an exemption to go higher than what is currently zoned for? LEITHEAD TODD: I think you can currently get a variance for height limit that’s outside of the P.U.D., you know, for specific conditions like, let’s say there’s flooding issues or something and so you need to elevate -. But it does seem, I mean, that would make me nervous, if somebody had 75 feet next door to me. And I’m only allowed to be 15 feet in my subdivision. Let me -. May we take a five-minute recess and have staff pull up some of the other stuff? 20 EXHIBIT A