2018-03-13 KCDP Minutes Draft - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Chair Young expressed that the County should prioritize servicing the communities that are already established [such as Ho‘okena Village] before considering extending the waterline for new developments. He also stated that he hasn’t seen a lack of water impact the prospect of new development and that he feels the area experiences enough rainfall to support most of the crops grown there [coffee, sweet potato, etc.] Vice-Chair David expressed concern that by considering deleting policies the Committee is straying too far beyond just changing “shalls” and “shoulds”. Committee Member Palacat-Nelsen asked the AC if they had a unanimous agreement to keep their recommendation regarding this policy as stated in the subcommittee report. The group responded favorably and no objections were heard. Policy PUB-4.5: Wastewater Treatment and Effluent Reuse. Committee Member Kimura suggested changing the word “of” in this policy to “from” to enable developments located adjacent to Hina Lani Street to connect to the Kealakehe Sewer Treatment system. She believed this would allow development on the north side of Hina Lani to connect and therefore could reduce negative environmental impacts. Committee Member Rivera suggested removing the word “south” from this policy to further reinforce this intent. Committee Member Palacat-Nelsen asked the Committee if they had a unanimous agreement to change the word “of” to “from” and to delete the word “south” in the Action Committee’s recommendation regarding this policy. The group responded favorably and no objections were heard. Policy TRAN-1.1: Official Transportation Network Map & Policy TRAN-6.1: Official Concurrency Map. Committee Member Rivera read the summary of Roy Takemoto’s explanation of the concurrency requirements as written in the February 21 minutes and asked for clarification. Mr. Takemoto explained that the current concurrency requirements exceed what is proportional to the impact of development, and that developers are often either expected to wait until the government can initiate construction or else opt to construct the roadway themselves. He also stated that development agreements are utilized for larger projects. Mr. Takemoto explained that his version of the policy reduces the burden on developers of having to build these roadway improvements and instead requires them to define a right-of-way through metes and bounds. He reiterated his previous statement that there are sections of the concurrency map where the alignment is not clearly defined. Mr. Takemoto went on to suggest that funds from the Fair Share account could be used to do the preliminary engineering for these roadways. Mr. Takemoto also explained that his policy also creates consistency with the Zoning Code in which concurrency requirements kick in once a project triggers the Zoning Code requirement to present a Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) a part of a rezoning application. Mr. Takemoto suggested that the segment of text that the subcommittee proposed moving from TRAN-1.1 to TRAN-6.1 [colored in green on the report], would be best kept where it was originally written [TRAN-1.1]. He explained that this is because the Official Transportation Map [TRAN-1.1] applies to the whole district of Kona whereas the Official Concurrency Map [TRAN-6.1] applies only to Kona’s urban area. If the segment is written under TRAN-1.1 it would apply to the larger area.