1999-09-29 Charter Commission Minutes

Home

HAWAII COUNTY CHARTER COMMISSIONPage 13 of 51 construction is done, the inspector’s responsible to make sure it’s built within the setback. Is that correct? TANAKA: Yes, I think he looks at his own criteria that he needs to look at, and not necessarily the criteria of the Planning Department. I mean, you would think that he would know, though. HIGASHI: But if it’s a 10 foot side yard setback, it’s a 10 foot side yard setback. TANAKA: That’s right. HIGASHI: The inspector’s responsible to make sure that it’s built outside of that setback. TANAKA: He should be, but the comments that we received as we were discussing this, was that it’s not happening. HIGASHI: Well, I don’t know if it’s happening, but - IRVINE: I know there are a lot, like you say, variances and whatnot, that come up with the Board of Appeals. I was on the first Board of Appeals and we were having those problems then, but I’m not sure it’s a Charter issue, but there’s something the matter. RAY: Kevin. BALOG: I was just going to ask if Mr. Tanaka thought that stuff like setbacks and even you brought up road standards, could be adopted outside of being reviewed by the general public in a Charter Amendment? I mean, they could handle themselves without being put on the Charter, yes? TANAKA: True. I think this is something they could do administratively, so the only reason that it was brought was, are they too busy? Because they could have done it, like you said, in house. Could have been done a long time ago, so these are just some of the concerns that they have. RAY: Gary. YOSHIYAMA: Mr. Tanaka, I guess one of the reasons this Division of Permitting was brought up, I guess the primary reason was to be more efficient. I guess one theory was to get rid of redundancies in Public Works and Planning. Another reason was for one-stop processing where the public, people, wouldn’t go back and forth, and I assume the Planning Commission considered this. Can you comment on that? TANAKA: Yes. I’m here to represent the Planning Commission, although I’m not necessarily in agreement with that. As the question was posed by Mr. Balog, as a contractor, wearing another hat, yes, I think it is beneficial. So if you’re asking me the question as a personal business person or individual, yes, I can see the benefits. If you’re asking me as a representative of the Planning Commission, just by the way the votes went, those are the concerns that they have. YOSHIYAMA: But, the Commission was aware of these factors, or these theories, or assumptions? TANAKA: They were very much aware, yes, but I cannot give you a reason. I’m sorry. I know. YOSHIYAMA: Well, similar to us, we got to weigh the pros and cons so I understand. file://\\coh01\cohweb\council\charter_commission\minutes\minutes 9-29-99.html7/1/2011