HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-03-01 Windward Transcript Project District
PLANNING COMMISSION
COUNTY OF HAWAI‘I
HEARING TRANSCRIPT
MARCH 1, 2012
A regularly advertised hearing on the PLANNING DIRECTOR INITIATED AMENDMENT CHAPTER 25
(ZONING CODE) OF THE HAWAI‘I COUNTY CODE 1983 (2005 EDITION, AS AMENDED) RELATING
TO NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR ZONING AMENDMENT, PROJECT DISTRICT AND
AGRICULTURAL PROJECT DISTRICT, was called to order at 9:51 a.m. in the County of Hawai‘i, Aupuni
Center Conference Room, 101 Pauahi Street, Hilo, Hawai‘i, with Chairman Zendo Kern presiding.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Zendo Kern, Dean Au, Takashi Domingo, Wallace Ishibashi, Stephen Ono
and Raylene Moses
STAFF PRESENT: Ivan Torigoe (Deputy Corporation Counsel), B. J. Leithead Todd (Planning Director),
Daryn Arai (Planning Program Manager), Phyllis Fujimoto (Staff Planner), Maija Cottle (Staff Planner), Jeff
Darrow (Staff Planner), and Sharon Nomura (Secretary)
And eight people from the public in attendance.
APPLICANT: PLANNING DIRECTOR INITIATED
Amendment to Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawai‘i County Code 1983 (2005 Edition, as amended)
relating to notification requirements for zoning amendment, project district and agricultural project district
applications. The proposed amendment will specifically amend Sections 25-2-42(b), 25-6-44(b) and 25-6-54(b),
and is a housekeeping matter that seeks to provide consistency among different sections of the Zoning Code.
KERN: Application No. 4, Planning Director initiated
Amendment to Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the
Hawai‘i County Code 1983 (2005 Edition, as amended) relating to notification requirements for zoning
amendment, project district and agricultural project district applications. Maija, please make the presentation.
COTTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I don’t actually have a presentation up on the screen but -. This is an
amendment to the Zoning Code that the Director is, again, initiating. And the reason this is being initiated is
because through the course of our work with the Zoning Code sometimes we see conflicts between different
sections of the Code. In this particular case, the County Council adopted an ordinance back in 2010 that
changed the language for notification to surrounding property owners. It used to be that when an applicant
submitted their application to the Department they had ten days from that date to notify their surrounding
neighbors of their application. The County Council changed that to where once the applicant submits their
application, the Planning Department acknowledges receipt and then it’s accepted, then they have 10 days to
notify their neighbors. It’s a little bit more efficient that way and less confusion for the neighbors as well.
So that change was made way back in 2010, but there were three sections of the Zoning Code that were left how
they were originally written. So it created a little bit of confusion and conflict. So this change, this amendment
is just to bring those other three sections of the Code into consistency with the change that was made by the
Council back in 2010. So it’s just a housekeeping measure. Are there any questions?
KERN: Thank you, Maija. Are there any questions for staff? I have just a quick point of clarification. We
might be confused on this. I see that, you know, it has been stricken out in these areas and then the new “B.”
This “B” is going to just replace these “B’s” in its entirety?
1
EXHIBIT C
COTTLE: The “B” on the first page was to show you the change that the Council made back in 2010. And then
if you look at the proposed bill that we have, on the second page, you’ll see that it still has the old language.
KERN: And so that is going to stay. What’s stricken out is going to be removed and what is underlined is
going to be put in, is that right?
COTTLE: Correct.
KERN: So with that there is nothing in there that says anything about 10 days. It’s basically just totally taken
out?
COTTLE: Right. So if you look at the bill, this section of the Zoning Code refers back to Section 25-2-4. So
we took out any reference in this part of the Code to the number of days. But it refers back to 25-2-4, which
refers to the 10 days.
KERN: Which takes care of that, 10 days -.
COTTLE: Yeah.
KERN: Perfect.
LEITHEAD TODD: And -.
KERN: Madam Director, yes.
LEITHEAD TODD: It eliminates the potential that the same type of mistake occurs in the future. Like any
time you have multiple references to timelines in a Code when you go and amend one section you need to go
and amend all the others. By removing the reference to ten days in these sections and referring back to just that
one section that talks about notification, then all you have to do is if you want to change it to 15 days you just
change that one section; and everything else comes into line because it just refers back. And so these are the
kinds of problems that we’re encountering when a bill gets initiated and one section -. Unless you carefully at
that time go running through every section of the Code, you sometimes don’t discover until afterwards that
there’s some inconsistencies. And this will take of the potential for future inconsistencies by just removing the
language.
KERN: Great. Thank you, Madam Director. And thank you, Maija, I appreciate that clarification. There is
nobody signed up from the public to testify on this. With that, anyone willing to entertain a motion. Anyone?
Commissioner Au.
AU: So moved.
DOMINGO: Second.
KERN: So moved to -?
AU: I move to send a favorable recommendation to the County Council to amend Chapter 25 of Hawai‘i
County Code 1983 relating to the notification requirements for zoning amendment, project district and
agricultural project district applications.
KERN: Per the Director’s -.
2
EXHIBIT C
AU: Per the Director’s -.
KERN: Recommendation.
AU: Recommendations.
KERN: Thanks, Commissioner Au. Is there a second for that?
DOMINGO: Second.
KERN: Thank you. Any discussion? Seeing none, Maija.
COTTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Commissioner Au?
AU: Aye.
COTTLE: Commissioner Domingo?
DOMINGO: Aye.
COTTLE: Commissioner Ishibashi?
ISHIBASHI: Aye.
COTTLE: Commissioner Moses?
MOSES: Aye.
COTTLE: Commissioner Ono?
ONO: Aye.
COTTLE: And Mr. Chair?
KERN: Aye.
COTTLE: Okay, motion passes six-zero.
The discussion ended at 9:56 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Sharon M. Nomura
Planning Commission Secretary
3
EXHIBIT C