Laserfiche WebLink
<br />PATEL: Excuse me, Chair, maybe I can provide some light. To answer your question, as far as the <br />appellant, just to clarify, are you referencing something comes before the Commission, the <br />Commission denies the P.U.D., the appellant, meaning the applicant, appeals to the Third Circuit <br />Court? <br /> <br />BEAUDET: Correct. <br /> <br />PATEL: In that instant, yes, normally the appellant when you are appealing, they would be <br />responsible for their own cost. <br /> <br />BEAUDET: I just wanted to clarify that. <br /> <br />KANUHA: And that, again, Mr. Chairman, that also applies to approval, yeah; if the Commission <br />approves a P.U.D., and, you know, there is a party that’s involved in the process that disagrees with <br />the decision, they too can appeal as well. <br /> <br />BEAUDET: Thank you. Go ahead. <br /> <br />UNGER: Daryn, And the current Zoning, partial approval is allowed in the P.U.D., and then in this <br />new bill it’s not. What is the reasoning behind that? <br /> <br />ARAI: I’m not sure of the exact reasoning behind it. We just noticed that it was not a component <br />within this bill that was transmitted down by the County Council. So I’m not exactly sure why the <br />particular component was not included in this draft bill. <br /> <br />HICKCOX: Mr. Chair? I think that maybe perhaps, after going through some of the reading on <br />this, that what’s being sought after along with all of these other things is more stringent compliance <br />to the CDP, right? Correct? That seems to be the direction this is headed for, if I’m not mistaken. <br /> <br />BEAUDET: I would agree, but then, again, you know, let’s be aware that the zoning conditions as <br />they are, as they currently dictates the density of the proposed development, right, which is in <br />accordance with the CDP to begin with, or should be, right, unless you are asking for rezoning. But <br />if all stays current, densities don’t change, rather, if the property were to be developed under the <br />current zoning or under a P.U.D. application. Correct, right? <br /> <br />ARAI: Yes. And maybe to further clarify the Community Development Plans, previously <br />Community Development Plans were frequently adopted by a resolution, which is just an <br />expression of policy, you know, policy direction. However, more recently, like these North and <br />South Kohala CDPs, the Kona CDP, those have been adopted by ordinance, so there have been <br />some questions about, by adoption by ordinance, it’s then law, and that has been, I believe, an <br />appealable point, or at least made part of an appeal, past appeal. So I think to kind of avoid that <br />type of potential, it’s best to just incorporate it within the proposed code amendments; that way, it’s <br />clearly articulated and expected as part of the review process. <br /> <br />BEAUDET: I think one of the other main primary focuses here with Bill 281 is creating, or <br />increasing, transparency for those concerned in our communities, or in surrounding communities of <br />the area. And I can appreciate that. It also gives, provides community members and neighbors the <br />4 <br />EXHIBIT A <br /> <br />