Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-04-03HEARINGTRANSCRIPT-CCINITIATEDBILL#182 WINDWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAI‘I HEARING TRANSCRIPT APRIL 3, 2014 County Council Initiated Bill No. 182 relating to site visits A regularly advertised hearing on for subdivision applications was called to order at 10:42 a.m. in the County of Hawai‘i, Aupuni Center Conference Room, 101 Pauahi Street, Hilo, Hawai‘i with Chairman Ronald Gonzales presiding. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Ronald Gonzales, Charles Heaukulani, Gregory Henkel, Wallace A. Ishibashi, Jr., Myles Miyasato, Raylene Moses, and Stephen Ono. ALSO PRESENT: Duane Kanuha (Planning Director), Margaret Masunaga (Deputy Corporation Counsel for the Windward Planning Commission), William Brilhante (Deputy Corporation Counsel for the Planning Director), Daryn Arai (Planning Program Manager), Jeff Darrow (Staff Planner), Maija Cottle (Staff Planner), and Sarah Hata-Finley (Secretary). And approximately 15 people from the public in attendance. INITIATOR: COUNTY COUNCIL Bill No. 182 amending Chapter 23, Article 4, Division 1, Section 23-61 of the Hawai‘i County Code 1983 (2005 Edition, as amended) relating to site visits for applications for Subdivisions. More specifically, the amendment will require the Planning Director or representative to conduct a site visit of property(ies) affected by a proposed subdivision action to verify accuracy of information shown on the preliminary plat map or any omissions required by the Subdivision Code, and site conditions that could result in deleterious effects to general welfare and health of the community. GONZALES: Item No. 5 on the agenda is Initiator County Council, Bill No. 182 amending Chapter 23, Article 4, Division 1, Section 23.61. Mr. Arai. ARAI: Hi, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning, Commissioners. If I may direct your attention to the presentation screen. What you have before you is a Council Initiated Bill No. 182 which amends a section of the Subdivision Code to require site visits for subdivision applications. The Council created the bill and submitted for your consideration in attempt to amend the Subdivision Code to require the Planning Director or its authorized representative, to conduct a site visit of any designated property subject to a proposed subdivision action prior to tentative approval or disapproval of a preliminary plat or subdivision map. What the intent of the bill is--to ensure that or to verify that information provided in the preliminary plat and supplemental material is accurate; determine if there are any omissions with the consideration for the required contents of a preliminary plat as provided in the section of the Subdivision Code; determine if there are any conditions on the designated property that, with consideration for the proposed land use as expressed by the preliminary plat and supplemental materials, could reasonably be conceived to result in a potentially deleterious effect to the general welfare and 1 EXHIBIT E health of the community; and should any such conditions exist, the Director shall notify the subdivider, and the subdivider shall, in consultation with the Director, revised the preliminary plat map and supplemental materials to mitigate those conditions indicated by the Planning Director. That was a mouthful, I know, but what it basically—let me give you a brief preface of what occurs during the subdivision process. A subdivider or land owner or their consultant prepares a preliminary plat map which is a subdivision map that shows how a given piece of property would be carved out. That map is then submitted to the Planning Department. The Department reviews the map for minimum requirements as required by the Subdivision Code. The map is then distributed to the various reviewing agencies which include Department of Transportation, Public Works, Department of Water Supply, and Department of Health. And there could be other agencies if we determine that certain information is necessary to be reviewed by the reviewing agencies. When the information and comments from the various agencies are received by the Planning Department, we then envelope that into what we called a tentative subdivision approval, which lists all of the requirements that the subdivider needs to comply with before we can grant them final subdivision approval. I should note that the final subdivision approval requires the submittal of a final plat map which is the final layout, and that must be prepared by a licensed engineer or surveyor. What Bill 182 is attempting to do is mandate to the Planning Department site visits to each and every parcel that is subject to a subdivision application. We simply don’t have the resources available to conduct a site inspection of each and every single property subject to a subdivision application. We rely on the applicant and/or their consultants to provide the information, the site conditions, the location of easements, the location of utilities, to be shown accurately on the map, and that map is then presented to the Planning Department for review. We do not have the expertise; we do not have the resources to go out to each and every single one of these properties, some of which could cover hundreds of acres to verify each and every bit of information that is shown on a preliminary plat map. That is why the final plat map is required to be prepared by a licensed engineer and surveyor. That is where the burden lies. That is where the responsibility lies. It should lie with the subdivider and their consultant. We simply do a check to verify that their information as shown is at least represented, and that’s where the responsibilities and the requirements lie so with that, that is why we’re recommending unfavorable consideration of this Bill 182. However, as part of your recommendation, we also note that, we offer a suggestion to the County Council as well. Along with an unfavorable recommendation that maybe the Council should consider an amendment to the Subdivision Code to require that the preliminary plat map also be prepared by a licensed engineer or surveyor. Right now, the way the Code is constructed, the preliminary plat map does not have to be prepared by those professionals. So, as a reasonable compromise, we are offering that to the Council as well, as well for your consideration. So with that, I stand ready to answer any questions you may have. GONZALES: Any questions for staff from the Commissioners? Mr. Henkel. HENKEL: Has the, has this been brought before the Leeward Planning Commission yet? 2 EXHIBIT E th ARAI: It is scheduled for the April 17 meeting. HENKEL: Thank you. GONZALES: Any other questions? No? Okay, thank you. Motion please. There is no public testimony. Nobody signed up. MIYASATO: Chair, you know I, I know that our process, you have to either go with your complaints on the process, how to try expedite the process, and I see this as even slowing it down even further, as well as manpower and just the Big Island alone. If you look to an undeveloped parcel, a site visit a lot of times will not do any justice. If you got vegetation, 8 feet high, 10 feet high, there’s no way to assess. So, with that, I would like to send an unfavorable recommendation to the County Council regarding Bill No. 182 relating to site visits for applications for subdivisions. ISHIBASHI: I second that. GONZALES: It’s been moved by Commissioner Miyasato for an unfavorable recommendation, seconded by Commissioner Ishibashi. Any discussion, Commissioners? HENKEL: Mr. Chairman? GONZALES: Yes, sir. HENKEL: Were you going to include the recommendation by the Planning— MIYASATO: The only reason I’m not including that is for me, it’s a little unfair for someone to pay for that expense, not even at a preliminary point, so I would, I guess I would leave that up to the Council if they want to put that in, but for me, I feel that’s a little unfair to incur those expenses. HENKEL: Maybe we can recommend to Council to look at the site. GONZALES: Any other discussion? Mr. Arai. ARAI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So, motion is to send an unfavorable recommendation on Bill No. 182, and the motion does not include the suggestion to amend the Code as recommended by the Planning Director. So with that being said, I’ll call the roll. Commissioner Miyasato? MIYASATO: Aye. ARAI: Commissioner Ishibashi? ISHIBASHI: Aye. 3 EXHIBIT E ARAI: Commissioner Heaukulani? HEAUKULANI: Aye. ARAI: Commissioner Henkel? HENKEL: Aye. ARAI: Commissioner Moses? MOSES: Aye. ARAI: Commissioner Ono? ONO: Aye. ARAI: Mr. Chairman. GONZALES: Aye. ARAI: Mr. Chairman, motion carries with seven aye votes. GONZALES: Thank you. The discussion ended at 10:51 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Sarah Y. Hata-Finley, Secretary Windward Planning Commission 4 EXHIBIT E