Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-03-20 Leeward Exh D (Amend GP Comprehensive Review Timeframe) LEEWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAI‘I HEARING TRANSCRIPT MARCH 20, 2014 PLANNING DIRECTOR INITIATED AMENDMENT A regularly advertised hearing on the TO CHAPTER 16, SECTION 16.1, PART (1) OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAI‘I GENERAL PLAN was called to order at 10:23 a.m. in the West Hawai‘i Civic Center, Community Center, Building G, 74-5044 Ane Keohokālole Highway, Kailua-Kona, Hawai‘i, with Chair Geraldine Giffin presiding. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Geraldine Giffin, Brandi Beaudet, Thomas Hickcox, Barbara Nobriga and Thomas Whittemore ABSENT AND EXCUSED: Richard Nelson, III ALSO PRESENT: Duane Kanuha (Planning Director), Margaret Masunaga (Deputy Corporation Counsel), Jeff Darrow (Planner), Maija Cottle (Planner), Ron Whitmore (Planner), Bethany Morrison (Planner) and Noriko Sauer (Commission Secretary) And one person from the public in attendance. INITIATOR: PLANNING DIRECTOR Amendment to Chapter 16 “Amendment Procedures”, Section 16.1 “Comprehensive Review,” part (1) of the County of Hawai‘i General Plan (2005 Edition, as amended) in order to allow for the comprehensive review of the General Plan to be initiated 10 years after adoption of the previous comprehensive amendments, rather than the submittal of the comprehensive amendments to the County Council within that same time frame. GIFFIN: Commissioners, we are now on Agenda Item No. 4. The initiator, like the other two, is our Planning Director. Agenda Item No. 4 is an amendment, a proposed amendment, to Chapter 16, the Amendment Procedures, Section 16.1 Comprehensive Review, part (1) of the County of Hawai‘i General Plan, 2005 Edition, as amended, in order to review, I’m sorry, in order to allow for the comprehensive review of the General Plan to be initiated ten years after the adoption of the previous comprehensive amendment, rather than the submittal of the comprehensive amendments to the County Council within that same timeframe. Bethany? MORRISON: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is Bethany Morrison. I’m a long range planner in the Long Range Division in the Planning Department. And also with me today is Ron Whitmore, another long range planner, and we’ve been working on this project. I just, in addition to the background and recommendation that you’ve been provided, in addition to that narrative, just have a brief presentation to go over what the proposed amendment is and what that means for us. GIFFIN: Thank you. MORRISON: Okay? So the proposed amendment is to Chapter 16 of the General Plan, and this is a Planning Director initiated interim amendment. The General Plan, I’m sure you are familiar with, 1 EXHIBIT D is our long range planning document for the County of Hawai‘i, and it’s required by the State law and also by our County Charter. Our presentation is just going to go over the bottom line, the last comprehensive update process that we went through, what the anticipated update process will be, why the proposed amendments are necessary, exactly what the proposed amendment is, and the interim amendment process that we are going forward with today. So the bottom line is the amendment would change the timeframe for initiating the General Plan comprehensive review. So that actually reverted back to what was adopted during the last comprehensive review update in the February 2005 update. The amendment that’s being proposed is that “The Planning Director shall initiate a comprehensive review of the General Plan and prepare a set of recommended amendments for independent review by the Windward and Leeward Planning Commissions and then adoption by the County Council. The comprehensive review shall be initiated not more than ten years after the date of adoption of the previous amendments resulting from a comprehensive review.” And again, that date of adoption was February 2005. Our last comprehensive update process took seven years to go through. And you can see here from this timeline, we took a couple of years to do studies and analysis; this included economic study, land use study and infrastructure study. And then it went to, some draft amendments based on those, to the Planning Commission for review. It took four years before the process could get it to County Council for their review and action, and they took another three years to deliberate on that. So it was a lengthy process. Anticipated Comprehensive Update Process: 4 Years or More – and this is based on just what the requirements for timing are and trying to understand that the things that are needed for this next update. So there are five steps to the next update: Notice and Initial Input – from the public, County Council, and the Action Committees; Planning Department Review and Propose; Workshops and Comment period; Planning Commission review; and County Council Review and Action. Step 1, Notice and Initial Input, and so this will provide for opportunities for the public, the Community Development Plan Action Committees, and also the County Council to provide input on what proposed amendments they would like to see. Step 2 in the process is reviewing the input that’s received, completing an analysis, and this might again include the different studies as last time whether that be land use analysis, population analysis, those types of analysis, and then propose recommendations. Step 3 requires a notice to the public and affected property owners, and a public workshop to review the amendments being proposed, and also a public comment period. And Step 4 will be the Planning Commission review and recommendations. So once the comment period has ended, Planning Director will submit to Planning Commissions for their hearings and also recommendations to County Council. And finally, Step 5 in the process, County Council Review and Action, it will go before the Planning Committee and then to full readings before the Council. So why is the proposed amendment necessary? We’ve had some challenges in our Planning Department. Currently, the four-year comprehensive review process must be completed before February 2015. And that means we would have had to initiate in 2011 to make the deadline. One of the challenges is that the 2015 deadline was established before the Community Development Plans were completed. The Community Development Plans have taken some time. We have adopted four, and we have two more that are pending completion. And the General Plan update really should not be initiated before those Community Development Plans are complete. Another 2 EXHIBIT D challenge that we faced is that when the Community Development Plans Action Committees were created, we did not get additional staff, and so our Planning Department staff serve those Action Committees, and that takes a significant amount of time. Also, there were furloughs and vacancies within our department. So without additional staff and funding, the Planning Department has not had the resources to initiate the comprehensive review. And finally, the third challenge would be the budget; the comprehensive review is expensive, requires extensive analysis and research, and due to budget constraints no funds have been appropriated for the review process. Okay, the proposed amendment, once again, is just changing the timeframe for when we would initiate the comprehensive update to initiate “not more than ten years after the date of adoption of the previous amendments resulting from a comprehensive review.” Implications of this amendment: The comprehensive process would have to be initiated by February 2015; that means in early this year the Planning Department will have to start planning community engagement, project and knowledge management, review of related documentation, stakeholder analysis, and engagement strategies – and we have already started this process. Also, the Fiscal Year 2014-2015 operating budget will need to include funds for the General Plan update – and we have included a line item for those funds in our draft budget to the County Council. So the current amendment process that we are in right now to make this change to the time line, I’ll go over that real quick just so that we understand where the process is. Step 1 is Notice, Workshop, and Input. The Planning Director initiated an amendment. Notice was provided to the Commissions, the Council, and the general public. We held two workshops, one in Hilo and one in Kona; no public attended those workshops. And also, input was to be received but also we did not receive any comments or input from the public. Step 2 is to go before the both Planning Commissions for independent review and separate recommendations. We went before the Windward Planning Commission on March 6, and they recommended a positive recommendation with a vote of six to zero. And so now here we are today. And then the third step will be Planning Committee, again, at the County Council, and two full readings at the full Council. And we are available, if you have any questions. GIFFIN: Commissioners, any questions of Bethany? Hearing none, I do, Bethany. Could you please go back to your Step 4? Yeah. My question is in regards to the second bullet point, the hearings within 60 days of receipt. Do you think that the amount of time that you’ve allocated for this process, this whole Step 4, is sufficient? MORRISON: These deadlines are specifically set up in either the Charter or the General Plan as far as when the timings are required. And so in particular, this particular step is very timely; there is no wiggle room in there. The only deference is that in the Recommendations the Planning Commissions within 150 days of receipt may hear, so there is a little bit of time in there. But the hearing dates are already set forth. GIFFIN: But under the Recommendation there is some wiggle room. Only because I understand you had no public input regarding, you know, this whole initiative. But I just wanted to make sure that in the event you went beyond, that there was some time. 3 EXHIBIT D MORRISON: Just to make sure that we are clear, this particular process is talking about the comprehensive update and not the interim amendment process that we are going forward with right now. GIFFIN: I got it. Okay. Thank you. MORRISON: So for the interim amendments there was no public comment or concern. GIFFIN: Okay, great. Thank you. Commissioners, any other questions? Hearing none, if you will take a look at Page 4 in the background report, you will see the Director’s recommendation. And do I hear a motion? Oh, I should also interject that Agenda Item No. 4 there was no one that has signed up for public testimony. HICKCOX: Madam Chair? GIFFIN: Tommy. HICKCOX: I recommend that this Planning Commission send a favorable recommendation to the County Council for the proposed amendment of Chapter 16 of the County of Hawai‘i General Plan as provided by the attached bill. GIFFIN: Do I hear a second? NOBRIGA: I second. GIFFIN: It’s been moved by Commissioner Tommy Hickcox and seconded by Commissioner Barbara Nobriga that we send a favorable recommendation to the County Council for the proposed amendment to Chapter 16 of the County of Hawai‘i General Plan as provided by the attached bill. MORRISON: Okay, roll call? GIFFIN: Bethany. MORRISON: Thank you. Commissioner Hickcox? HICKCOX: Aye. MORRISON: Commissioner Nobriga? NOBRIGA: Aye. MORRISON: Commissioner Beaudet? BEAUDET: Aye. MORRISON: Commissioner Whittemore? WHITTEMORE: Aye. 4 EXHIBIT D MORRISON: And Chair Giffin? GIFFIN: Aye. MORRISON: Thank you. GIFFIN: You’re welcome. MORRISON: Motion passes. GIFFIN: Thank you very much. You did a good job. The discussion ended at 10:35 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Noriko Sauer, Secretary Leeward Planning Commission 5 EXHIBIT D