Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-05-14 KCDP Minutes Final Harry Kim Michael Yee Mayor Director Duane Kanuha Deputy Director County of Hawai‘i PLANNING DEPARTMENT KONA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN ACTION COMMITTEE Aupuni Center  101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3  Hilo, Hawai‘i 96720 Phone (808) 961-8288  Fax (808) 961-8742 Tuesday, May 14, 2019 Meeting Minutes CALL TO ORDER Chair Young called the Kona Community Development Plan (KCDP) Action Committee (AC) to order at 6:03 p.m. in the Kona Imin Center. The following persons were present: ROLL CALL Action Committee Members Present: Charles Young (Chair), Shirley David (Vice-Chair), David Huerta, Franz Weber, Hiram Rivera, Janice Palma-Glennie, and Kari Kimura. Action Committee Members Absent-Excused: Barbara DeFranco, and Shane Palacat-Nelsen. Staff Planners: Bethany Morrison, Kevin Sullivan, Kamuela Plunkett, and Heather Bartlett. Planning Director: Michael Yee. Deputy Corporation Counsel: Ron Kim. Members of the public: 27 ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA: None. ANNOUNCEMENTS: At the start of the meeting Chair Young offered an ‘ōlelo no‘eau to the Action Committee. e iho ana o luha That which is above shall be brought down e pi‘i ana olalo That which is below shall be lifted up e hui ana na moku The islands shall be united e kū an aka paia The walls shall stand upright 1. Introduction of David Huerta, a new member of the Kona CDP Action Committee. th 2. General Plan Special Meeting scheduled for Wednesday, June 12 at the West Hawai‘i Civic Center Council Chambers. PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS: Two members of the public signed up to provide comment. Their comments were taken after the presentation in agenda item 3 and were incorporated into the discussion. 1. Michael Matsukawa, representing himself, testified on agenda item 3: Amendments to the Kona Community Development Plan (KCDP). He introduced himself as a member of the Hawai‘i County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer Page 1 Steering Committee during the initial creation and adoption of the plan, and he testified with general opposition to many of the proposed amendments. He reminded those present that the CDP won an award from the American Planning Association, and recommended improving upon the language or supplementing it with regional ordinances rather than lessening the authority of those provisions. A more detailed synopsis of his testimony \[Communication Number 2019-12\] may be viewed and downloaded at the following website: http://records.hawaiicounty.gov/Weblink/1/doc/100307/Page1.aspx 2. Ken Melrose, representing himself, testified on agenda item 3: Amendments to the Kona Community Development Plan (KCDP). He introduced himself as a past member of the Steering Committee who was involved in the effort of initially navigating the process of implementation. He expressed feeling that the CDP has prevented its own implementation through over- reaching its own authority. Through his involvement with the CDP Amendment Subcommittee, and having discussed the issues at length in the process, he felt that the suggested amendments do not dilute the plan. RECOGNITION OF OUTGOING MEMBERS: Planner Plunkett expressed his gratitude for Doug Payne’s 6 years of service with the Kona CDP Action Committee. Mr. Payne thanked everyone and expressed gladness to have a new perspective on the Committee. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Committee Member Kimura moved to approve the minutes of the March 12, 2019 meeting as submitted. Second by Committee Member Weber. The motion to approve the minutes as submitted passed with 7 votes aye, 0 votes nay. BUSINESS: 3. Amendments to the Kona Community Development Plan (KCDP) Progress Report. Note: for a better understanding of the policy and amendment references made in these minutes – please view the amendment package that was submitted to the Action Committee \[Communication Number 2019-11.\] Communication Number 2019-11 may be viewed and downloaded from the following website: http://records.hawaiicounty.gov/Weblink/1/doc/100226/Page1.aspx In Communication Number 2019-11 the red wording denotes the amendments proposed by both the Mayor’s office and the Action Committee, and the blue wording denotes the amendments proposed by the Planning Department and other County agencies. Planner Plunkett gave a brief presentation that gave some background of the process to amend the CDP, the reason for its initiation, and what the next steps would be. He explained that after the Action Committee had submitted their recommended changes, the Planning Department had discovered additional items that required amending such as the plan’s narrative and actions. Planning Department staff had cross-referenced the language of the plan with the Hawai‘i County Code and Hawai‘i Revised Statutes, and had additionally sought consultation from other County departments and agencies. The slides used in this presentation \[Communication Number 2019-13\] may be viewed and downloaded from the following website: http://records.hawaiicounty.gov/Weblink/1/doc/100308/Page1.aspx www.hiplanningdept.com kona@hawaiicounty.gov Page 2 Following his presentation, the Action Committee and members of the public were welcomed to share their viewpoints. Committee Member Kimura stated that implementation of the CDP since adoption has been very difficult. She noted that the plan has gone so far as to almost completely block development in general in the Kona area. She asked if it was the overall goal of the plan to prevent any development from happening and if so asked if they should be having that conversation with the community instead. Committee Member Rivera stated that the CDP has effectively acted as a moratorium for the Kona area; its provisions cannot be abided and developers often fall short. He commended however that the plan creates a voice for the community that spans across administrations and could be a powerful tool if done the right way. Committee Member Weber expressed concern that the implementation table had been edited to remove the words “supplements/supersedes Hawai‘i County Code” but was not replaced with the department responsible for implementation. Nancy Pisicchio, an executive assistant to the Mayor, explained that the plan was adopted in 2008 by ordinance which is a format that differed from previous regional plans that had been adopted by resolution. She explained that at the time of its adoption they questioned if the plan had the ability to amend the code, or if it was possible to create regional ordinances. She encouraged community members in attendance to continue following the amendment package and to get involved in the conversation. Councilmember Eoff asked how much time the Action Committee had been provided to review the amendments after the Planning Department submitted their recommendations. Staff responded that they had initially shared the recommendations two weeks before and had submitted a second version, noting the changes, after incorporating comments from Corporation Council the afternoon before th (May 13). Committee Member Palma-Glennie had several amendments that she found concerning which she wanted to discuss. She additionally expressed that she had concerns about the CDP Amendment process from the beginning. \[Note: this section of the minutes is meant to be read alongside the CDP Amendment Package – Communication Number 2019-11\] TRAN-1.1 – Committee Member Palma-Glennie questioned why the word “designate” was changed to “recommend” in the second sentence of this policy. Planner Plunkett responded that the inability to change the roadway classification creates an unnecessary degree of inflexibility as the maps cannot be updated without going through the CDP amendment process. TRAN-1.4 – Committee Member Palma-Glennie asked why the word “would” was changed to “could” in the second sentence this policy. Staff clarified that the original CDP used the word “will”, the Action Committee suggested changing the word to “would”, and Planning Staff recommended “could”. Planner Plunkett explained that the change came from working with the County Subdivision Planners and was intended to create more flexibility in case of any unexpected circumstances. Action TRAN-1.5a(2)(a) – Committee Member Palma-Glennie suggested that this section of the policy be amended or deleted because the area for the roadway is narrow and surrounded by www.hiplanningdept.com kona@hawaiicounty.gov Page 3 sensitive natural and cultural resources. Planner Plunket responded that her point is valid but that it might be an item for a future comprehensive review. Land Use 4.2.2 Overall Strategy (1.) (d) and (e) (page 19) – Committee Member Palma-Glennie questioned changing the “will” to “may” and “shall” to “should” respectively in these narrative bullet points. Planner Plunkett responded that these mandating policies could create liability for the County if the resources do not exist. Deputy Corporation Counsel Ron Kim added that loosening the language also creates flexibility in the case that funding opportunities come from other sources, using the State Revolving Fund as an example. Policy LU-2.5 – Committee Member Palma-Glennie asked why the word “conceptual” was added before the words “master plan” in this and other policies. Nancy Pisicchio responded that the language was added to give consistency with the Project District application requirements stated in the County Code. Environmental Resources 4.3.2 Overall Strategy (4.) – Committee Member Palma-Glennie suggested changing the “should” back to a “shall”. Planner Plunkett responded that the reason “shall” was changed to “should” was that it created liability for the County. Ron Kim added that this change is in line with the unpredictability of budgeting in the case that there is not enough money to support the maintenance and that it does not clearly create parameters on what would be considered “adequate funding.” Vice-Chair David also expressed her objection to changing the “shall” to “should” in this narrative. She reasoned that there could be public safety concerns if the public infrastructure is not properly maintained. Committee Member Weber agreed that the liability issues for the County need to be considered and suggested that the sentence needs to be better spelled out to avoid those issues. He expressed concern that if the CDP dictates the budget then it is competing with County Council’s duties outlined in the County Charter. Vice-Chair David stated that if they do not agree on every amendment, at least the County Council would have the final word. She stood by her stance of keeping the “shall” in this instance and offered that the Council should opt to change it back if necessary. Staff Plunkett asked if this amendment could be considered for the future comprehensive review, then suggested flagging it as such. Policy ENV-1.2 – Committee Member Palma-Glennie asked why the words “it is recommended that” was added to the policy. Staff Plunkett responded that the Kona Mauka Watershed Partnership Action Plan has yet to be created. Committee Member Rivera noted that the CDP will likely go through further amendments as it goes through the process and he felt comfortable that they would be sought for input in the event that any substantial changes are considered. He stated he was in favor of moving forward with the amendments. Chair Young expressed that he was comfortable with the process and that he felt the AC has thoroughly vetted the CDP through the various stages of the amendment process thus far. Councilmember Eoff stated that the Action Committee’s voice would hold a lot of weight while the amendments move forward. Committee Member Palma-Glennie said she would like to hear more of Michael Matsukawa’s points and that the discussion he brought up should continue. She expressed looking forward to continuing www.hiplanningdept.com kona@hawaiicounty.gov Page 4 the conversation as the CDP goes through the amendment process, and hoped that the AC is consulted should the amendments stray the CDP away from its original vision. Committee Member Kimura moved to approve Communication Number 2019-11 Kona CDP Amendment Package. Second by Committee Member Rivera. The Committee discussed that the amendments noted as appropriate for the future comprehensive review will be recorded in the meeting’s minutes and do not need to be part of the motion. Committee Member Kimura stated that the comprehensive review will involve many more suggestions and edits in a robust process. She noted that the amendments flagged for the comprehensive review in this discussion would likely be only the beginning of that future conversation. Committee Member Weber stated that there should be plenty of opportunities to provide input during the comprehensive review process. Upon the motion to approve Communication Number 2019-11 Kona CDP Amendment Package, a vote was taken. The motion passed with 6 votes aye and 1 vote kānalua. Planning Director Yee reminded the Action Committee that the comprehensive review is not due to begin until after the General Plan has been adopted and staff time is freed up from other projects. He also shared his thoughts on the CIP process in relation to the CDP and to the Action Committee. He suggested exploring how the CDPs can better influence the budget to get funding for community projects in the future. REPORTS and OTHER PRESENTATIONS: 4. Open Space Network Update. Planner Kevin Sullivan presented on the current progress of the Kona Open Space Network Plan. His presentation slides Communication Number 2019-14 can be viewed and downloaded from the following website: http://records.hawaiicounty.gov/Weblink/1/doc/100309/Page1.aspx Action Committee members asked clarifying questions and engaged in discussion. Community Members suggested wanting to see nearshore coastal waters included as open space for environmental conservation/protection; navigating partnerships with the State in relation to nearshore water; prioritizing creating relationships and getting more people involved, and applying generous consideration for cultural resources and practices as part of the planning process. 5. Presentation by Antu Harvey of Pulama ia Kona Regarding Hōlualoa Village and the proposed formation of a Māmalahoa Kona Heritage Corridor. Antu Harvey provided a brief overview of the efforts of her community group Pulama ia Kona and identified the roadblocks they have encountered in maintaining and preserving the historic Māmalahoa Kona Heritage Corridor. She asked for partnership with the Kona CDP Action Committee and Long Range Planning staff as they continue on their mission. Her presentation, Communication Number 2019-10, may be viewed and downloaded from the following website: http://records.hawaiicounty.gov/Weblink/1/doc/100310/Page1.aspx The Action Committee engaged in discussion in an effort to understand what their relationship with this community group could look like and what they might be able to do to find solutions. They www.hiplanningdept.com kona@hawaiicounty.gov Page 5 discussed the importance of compiling information, understanding potential funding sources, and talking to decision-makers. Director Yee explained how financing can be broken down into smaller hurdles and encouraged the community group to use the Planning Department to leverage public-private partnerships. Committee Member Kimura suggested collecting survey data and topographical maps for the area. She explained that understanding the boundaries of roadside encroachments and compiling and presenting these facts to stakeholders and would be greatly beneficial for grant seeking. Committee Member Rivera suggested developing a community consensus on the specific elements of their vision – for example: being able to identify the ideal location of sidewalks, where the road needs to stay narrow, where it could be widened for safety reasons, suggested width of these sidewalks, etc. would be valuable information and would save effort in the future. The Action Committee generally agreed to maintain a community partnership with this group, which could mean helping them to have their voice heard by decision-makers, providing Planning expertise, endorsing their mission, and helping to bridge communications as the need arises. 6. Ali'i Parkway Investigatory Subcommittee. Committee Member Kimura moved to defer agenda items 6 and 7 for a future meeting. Second by Committee Member Weber. The motion to defer the agenda items passed unanimously. BUSINESS (continued): 7. PONC Investigatory Subcommittee Proposal. Deferred. PROPOSED AGENDA ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING: (June 12, 2019) ADJOURNMENT: The Chair, without objection, adjourned the meeting at 9:15 p.m. All Action Committee information can be viewed and downloaded from our website: http://www.hawaiicountycdp.info/north-and-south-kona-cdp www.hiplanningdept.com kona@hawaiicounty.gov Page 6