HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0088.047 1998-2000 s two 0 1
- r RECEIVED ' QUESTIONS FOR THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT
_ RE BILL 250
ommittee on Planning Meeting, March 8, 1999 -,,
Date_. -- -• County Coun _P -
1. Shoreline setback I have reviewed the department's
reply to my earlier "New Zoning Code Deserves Your -
Consideration ". Am I correct in thinking the department
confirms that the code adopted in 1996 removes the
definition of a 40 foot shoreline setback from ordinance
(the zoning code)?
2. Did the planning department initiate a change of Planning
Commission Rule 8 such that, among other things, the 40 -foot
setback is no longer mentioned in Rule 8 either? Effective
early 1997?
3. If the setback width is now found only in a planning
department rule, does Chapter 91 HRS provide that this rule
can be changed with a public hearing and the Mayor's
approval?
4. Prison: The former code specifically required that
public uses conform to the County General Plan. The code
adopted in 1996 drops this and provides that public uses can
be approved with plan approval by the director. The
department doesn't find this an important change because
plan approval requires conformity to the General Plan.
So, does the department assume that a prison on
agricultural lands is in conformity with the General Plan?
5. Why didn't the department require a General Plan
amendment by the County Council when a prison was proposed
for agricultural lands in Glenwood? Why did the department
instead take the "special permit" route?
6. Auto speedway A very large auto speedway is proposed
for agricultural lands in North Kona. There is a bill in the
legislature concerning it. Does the code adopted in 1996
authorize this to be built with a special permit, without -
having to come before the County Council?
Does the department consider a commercial auto speedway
in conformance with the General Plan for agricultural lands?
Did the former code authorize such a thing?
7. Lodges The code adopted in 1996 defines a "lodge" as
transient accommodations up to 40 rooms. Could a developer
Comm. No. 22.147
File Na., 14GC' /2s
Ref. Tot Presented PC.
Ref. Date r1AR 9 1994
0 0 2
apply for a cluster of lodges, say five, on 25 acres of Ag -5
land, and effectively obtain a 200 -room resort from the
Planning Commission, without coming to the County Council
for zoning?
8. Unplanned District The former Unplanned District was
abolished and became Ag 5. Can much of the undeveloped
Mahukona Coast, which was formerly Unplanned, now be
developed as ag -5 subdivisions without coming before the
County Council? In other words, can the subdivisions be
processed administratively?
9. Did the department recently process such a subdivision,
Hoomalu on Alii, on former Unplanned land on Alii Drive,
without the developer coming to the County Council? This
was for Nohona Partners.
10. Contested case The code adopted in 1996 prohibits a
contested case before the Planning Commission when use
permits are considered. Due to the change of the Charter in
November 1998, the code no longer conforms with state law.
Is it proper for the County Council to consider ratifying a
section that doesn't conform to state law?
11. Conditions on zoning Does the department have any
objection to adding a reference to historic sites and
environmental concerns, to the kind of conditions the County
Council can set on zoning actions?
12. Expired golfcourses I participated in the EIS for the
supposedly small Amanresort above Waipio Valley. When I
noted that this resort was in fact situated at the center of
three golfcourses, previously permitted in the same area, I
was told by the department that the links had expired.
Did new provisions in the code adopted in 1996, which
require written notice to a landowner before revoking a
golfcourse permit, effectively reinstate these three
golfcourses?
Mahaloo,.y �� /-
o de / Jam`' L A C Mtom
Judith Graham
PO Box 1366
Kamuela HI 96743