HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-04-02 KCDP Minutes Final
1
2
Kona Community Development Plan Action Committee
3
County of Hawaii
4
Minutes
5
Meeting Date: April 02, 2014
6
Call to Order 2:00 p.m.
nd
7
Place: Kona Planning Conference Room. Bldg. E, 2 Floor
8
West Hawaii Civic Center
9
74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Highway
10
Kailua-Kona, Hawaii 96740
11
Roll Call:
12
1. Members Present: George (Keoki) Schattauer Jr., Aaron Nagata
13
Hiram Rivera, Greg Ogin, Douglas Payne and Ken Melrose
14
2. Planning Department: Terry Dunlap, Keola Childs, Bennett Mark and Bobby
15
Command
16
3. Public in attendance: Jeff Zimpfer, Peter Young, Bill Moore, Barbara DeFranco,
17
Riley Smith, Kanani Aton, Roy Hardy, Jim McClean, Janice Palma-Glennie,
18
Robert Puaokalani, Charles Flaherty, Reggie Lee, Steve Bowles, Mana Purdy, Tad Nottage,
19
Alex Leonard, Dorothy Bowers, Bo Kahui and Mac McInnis
20
21
The meeting was called to order by the chair, Greg Ogin and introductions of AC members followed.
22
23
STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC REGARDING ITEMS ON AGENDA
24
1.Janice Palma-Glennie - Support NPS petition to create Keauhou aquifer designation
25
2.Jeff Zimpler: Environmental Protect Specialist at Kaloko-Honokohau National Historical Park
26
3.Riley Smith: Testimony concerning the National Park Services public statements concerning
27
their petition on the Keauhou aquifer
28
4.Charles Flaherty: testimony provided to the County Council from the Kona Hawaiian Civic
29
Club related to the Water Management Action Plan petition agenda item.
30
31
Copies of all above referenced testimonies can be requested from the Planning Department
32
33
ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
34
1.Minutes were unanimously approved
35
2.No changes to the agenda.
36
37
38
39
40
GUEST SPEAKER
41
1.Peter Young gave a power point presentation where he presented his perspective on the process
42
and consequences for the water management area designation, particularly related to the
43
proposed designation for the Keauhou Area Sector Aquifer.
44
Discussion among the Action Committee members continued with Ken Melrose
·
45
commenting on the right of the Action Committee to defend its right to implement the
46
KCDP.
47
Ken recommended that the chair should establish a sub-committee to work with the
·
48
administration to work on investigating all aspects of this aquifer and to focus on
49
sharing all aspects and information of the data collected in an open scientific study.
50
A motion was made by Ken and seconded by Hiram to oppose the petition. A copy of
·
51
the motion was circulated to all action committee members.
52
Douglas Payne questioned why the action committee should get involved.
·
53
Bennett pointed out that the motion would need to follow the subject being added to the
·
th
54
April 30 agenda.
55
56
BUSINESS OF COMMITTEE
57
1. Items presented for Chapter 25 Zoning Code discussion by Ken Melrose are:
58
#1. 25-1-5 Definitions
59
#2. 25-2-42 Amendments (rezoning) initiated by property owners
60
#7. 25-6-70 through 73 (New Division of Article 6) Community Design Code
61
#8. 25-6-80 through 89 (New Division of Article 6) Clustered Rural Development
62
#9. 25-7-40 through 49.2 (New Division of Article 7) Transit-Oriented Districts
63
#10. 25-7-50 through 63 (New Division of Article 7) Urban Overlay District
64
65
Douglas Payne is concerned that these recommended changes will impact existing
·
66
zoning. Concerned about inconsistencies within the CDP. In some instances, the plan
67
needs to be modified or changed to clean up these problems.
68
Ken is suggesting that we support this approach so that the AC can see the actual
·
69
changes proposed by the Planning Department.
70
Planning Director will decide whether to go forward with these changes after hearing
·
71
from the AC.
72
73
74
2
75
76
Ken Melrose proposed a motion to these listed items that the AC send a favorable
·
77
response to the Planning Director to bring forward the language and to explore this
78
methodology. Second by Keoki Schattauer. Motion was unanimous.
79
80
2. Items presented for Chapter 25 Zoning Code discussion by Hiram Rivera are:
81
#4. 25-2-70 Plan Approval
82
#5. 25-6-10 PUD Approval Criteria
83
#6. 25-6-30 Ohana Dwellings
84
85
Hiram recommended that these sections could create confusion and potential
·
86
misinterpretation on future urban development therefore he does not recommend
87
Planning Departments recommended changes at this time.
88
Motion, by Hiram Rivera, that the AC does not support these changes with a second
·
89
by Douglas Payne. Motion was unanimous.
90
91
3. Item #3: 25-2-46 Concurrency presented by Hiram Rivera
92
At this time the ad-hoc committee can not support any changes or amendments to the
·
93
zoning code. Hiram moves that the item of concurrency be placed back on the
94
agenda for full committee discussion at the next meeting. Second by Ken Melrose.
95
Motion was unanimous.
96
Discuss the concept of concurrency and methods to implement this. This is related to
·
97
the finance plan in order to be implemented.
98
99
4. Discussion on Subdivision Chapter 23 by Ken Melrose
100
#1. 23-3 Definitions
101
#2. 23-6 Applicability of State and County general plans
102
#3. 23-13 Large scale developments
103
#12. 23-89 through 95 exceptions for CDC and CDP standards
104
Ken Melrose moves that these items be brought forward and ask the Planning
·
105
Department to bring forward the text to support these items second by Hiram Rivera.
106
Motion was unanimous.
107
108
109
3
110
5. Report by Ken Melrose on a sub-committee meeting with Dave Freudenberg on Public
111
Financing Alternatives in Hawaii.
112
Douglas Payne and Ken Melrose attended a meeting with Dave to discuss financing.
·
113
A fee proposal from Dave to update certain information will be sent to Planning.
·
114
Potential impact fee for Kailua-Kona was discussed.
·
115
Review restricting legislation for implementing these tools.
·
116
Douglas Payne discussed the need for a financing plan with updates
·
117
118
6. Discussions on the CIP priorities followed with these top recommendations:
119
Kuakini to Pottery Terrace and from Palani to Kealakehe WWTP.
·
120
Mauka Makai connectors: Lako Street and Nani Kailua Drive
·
121
Kailua Redevelopment TOD Village Scale Plan
·
122
Open Space Network Plan
·
123
Motion made by Ken Melrose to specify these four items as the top priorities in the
·
124
CIP. Second by Keoki Schattauer. The motion was unanimous in approval.
125
126
7. Request to meet with Warren Lee to discuss highway planning. Duane Kanuha has been
127
requested to set up a meeting with Warren and the traffic sub-committee of the KCDP.
128
129
8. Comments from the Deputy Planning Director, Bobby Command
130
Bobby provided information that a comprehensive review of the General Plan is
·
131
about to be undertaken. The General Plan will be a bridge between all CDPs on the
132
island.
133
Recommends that the AC invite the Director to discuss the impacts of this process for
·
134
all CDPs on island so that they have connection to the entire process.
135
Recommends that this should be included on a future agenda as soon as possible.
·
136
The CDPs are generated by the General Plan.
·
137
138
STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC
139
1. Charles Flaherty spoke on several items
140
Concerned about distribution of his testimony because of information in contrast to
·
141
Mr. Youngs presentation, Countys responsibility to provide water quality data and
142
to report any degradation such as was found in the 2006 review, pay raises are
143
proposed for the Mayors staff while funding of the water monitoring program was
144
stopped due to lack of funds, funding for highways that streets are not being built is a
4
145
violation of trust such as Alii Drive and asking for detailed drafts of what is being
146
proposed since this is supposed to be a transparent plan for the community.
147
148
2. Janice Palma-Glennie Comments on the aquifer including golf courses, National Park is
149
not trying to block development but about taking part in the LUC process. Do not wait for
150
a disaster to happen to the aquifer.
151
152
3. Bo Kahui commented on the aquifer.
153
154
4. Alex Lenoard stated what the National Park is trying to get out of this process. Federal
155
law mandated that each permit be reviewed to determine whether there may be a negative
156
impact to the aquifer. Do not see how this can be resolved. Will create a halt.
157
158
Meeting adjourned
5