HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 1021.004 2004-2006
Murashige Laura
From: Margaret Wille [WILLEM001@hawaiisr.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 7,46 PM
To: counciltestimony@co.hawaii.hi.us
Subject: Res 430-06 for 8/23/06
Attachments: higa gen pl study doc
higa gen pl study
.doc (48 KB)...
Please distribute the attached testimony to the County Council on
8/23/06 prior to 9 am. Thank you.
Margaret Wille, as a concerned resident
r.,
- Q"
f~?
`.D
J
Comm. No 102.1' I
Ref. To: Ores
Ref. ~ateAnr n nQBr
i
Margaret Wille
Attorney at Law
65-1316 Lihipali Road
Kamuela, Hawaii 96743
August 23, 2006
To: Chairman Stacy Higa, and Members of the County Council
Re: Res. 430-06 Initiates interim Plan Amendment relating to Procedures
for Initiating an Interim Plan Amendment
Position: SUPPORT for Resolution 430-06
I support Resolution 430-06 for all of the reasons set forth in Resolution 430-06.
Suggested "Friendly" Amendments to Resolution 430-06 regarding Interim
Amendments Initiated by a Member of the Public
A. Streamline Procedures for Interim Amendments by the Public:
For the same reasons set forth in Resolution 430-06, amend Resolution 430-06 to direct
the Planning Director to also conduct a feasibility study to streamline the General Plan
Interim Amendment Procedures that may be initiated by a member of the public under
section 16.3 of Ordinance No. 05-25, including the following changes:
1. Reduce the period the Planning Director has to reject or initiate the proposed
amendment from 120 days to 30 days [subsection 16.3(c)]
2. Retain the same time frame for action by the Planning Commission [conduct a hearing
within 60 days of receipt of the proposed amendment and submit its recommendation to
the County Council within 30 days from the close of the hearing: subsections 16.3(e), (f).
3. Add a subsection 16.30) stating: "In the event that the Planning Director rejects the
proposed amendment under either subsection 16.3(c)(i) or 16.3(1), the Director shall state
in writing his reasons for rejection of the proposed amendment." The Planning Director
should not be able to reject a proposed amendment without stating the reason in writing.
4. Reduce the filing fee required to be paid by a member of the public to initiate an
interim amendment from $500. to $100. under subsection 16.3(b)(i). Initiation of a
General Plan Amendment should not require an excessive fee.
B. Require that Developers initiate their own interim amendments to the General Plan
instead of the current process of having the Planning Director do so on their behalf,
without any necessary explanation or notification to the public: Add a new subsection
16.2(g) to state: "The Planning Director shall not initiate interim amendments on behalf
of a developer or his representative, but shall instead require that the developer follow the
interim amendment procedures provided for the public under section 16.3. The Planning
Director can support the Developer's proposed amendment but should not be initiating
the amendment as a "Planning Director's" proposed amendment.