Laserfiche WebLink
76 Ms. Gloor presented the revisions made to Policy 5, Policy 8, and Policy 13. Chair Kurokawa <br />77 commented on the deletion of Policy 13. He stated that he understood it was removed to be in <br />78 line with State Land Use Laws but disagreed with the limitation on planning strategies within <br />79 State Land Use Laws and expressed that he hoped in the future the State Land Use laws <br />80 regarding minimum lot size in the Agricultural District could be revised to allow for clustering to <br />81 protect natural resources. <br />82 Ms. Gloor presented the revisions made to Policy 18, Policy 20, Policy 22, and Policy 34. She <br />83 spoke to an earlier question regarding Policy 18 and the requirement of a licensed civil <br />84 engineer to perform cliff stability and geological studies. She stated that the policy requires a <br />85 licensed civil engineer because the state of Hawai'i does not license geologists or other types of <br />86 soil scientists, and it is common in other states to require a licensed professional perform the <br />87 studies. Chair Kurokawa stated that he would like to see the County suggest a more specified <br />88 professional than a civil engineer and Ms. Gloor stated that since the policy is calling for a <br />89 future change in code and department rule, the exact wording of the rule/code change is still <br />90 to be determined and it is possible that further clarifying requirements can be added through <br />91 that public process of revising the code/rule to ensure that civil engineers have specific <br />92 geotechnical experience. <br />93 Committee Member Pahi'o expressed concern about consideration for inland cliff setbacks and <br />94 not just shoreline setbacks. Ms. Gloor explained that inland cliff setbacks are covered in Policy <br />95 39. <br />96 Ms. Gloor discussed Policy 39 and Policy 48. Chair Kurokawa inquired about the 40% slope <br />97 standard originated in Policy 39, and Ms. Gloor explained it was based on the similar guidance <br />98 used by other municipalities for slope setbacks. <br />99 Ms. Gloor presented the revisions made to Kokua Action 19 and Policy 78. Chair Kurokawa <br />100 inquired about Policy 78. He noticed that Honomu was not on the list and asked how they <br />101 determine where water availability may be inhibiting infill capacity. Ms. Gloor responded that <br />102 those communities listed in Policy 78 were previously identified as areas that may have water <br />103 issues that inhibit infill capacity, but that does not limit the Policy from applying to other <br />104 communities in the future who may have, or develop, water capacity issues that inhibit infill <br />105 growth. <br />106 A member of the public asked how Ninole will change when more houses are built. Ms. Gloor <br />107 responded that she was not clear about the question, but if it is referring to recent <br />108 development in Ninole, that development was based on existing zoning and there is nothing in <br />109 the CDP to facilitate growth in Ninole. <br />110 Ms. Gloor presented the revisions of Community Action 32, Community Action 34, Policy 108, <br />111 Policy 110, Policy 115 and Policy 118. <br />112 A member of the public inquired about Policy 18 and asked why parcels with cliffs over 40 feet <br />113 have recommended setbacks and not cliffs that are less than 40 feet in height. Ms. Gloor <br />114 answered that 40 feet relates to the current minimum setback. <br />115 Committee Member Carvalho expressed concern over the change in verbiage from "shall" to <br />116 "should" for policies 8 and 22. He believed that the committee was very deliberate about when <br />117 they chose to use the word "shall" and that removing it would take some of the teeth out of <br />www.hiplanningdept.com hamakut0hawaiicounty.-ov Page 3 <br />