Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-06-24 KCDP Minutes Final1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 Kona Community Development Plan Action Committee County of Hawai'i Minutes Meeting Date: June 24th, 2015 Call to Order: 2:00 pm Place: Kona Planning Conference Room. Bldg. E, 2nd Floor West Hawai'i Civic Center 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Highway Kailua-Kona, Hawai'i 96740 Roll Call: 1. Members Present: Greg Ogin, Curtis Tyler, Hiram Rivera, Douglas Payne, Barbara DeFranco, and Kari Kimura. 2. Planning Department: Bobby Command, Bennett Mark, Terry Dunlap and Ali Catalano 3. Public in attendance: Jim McClean, Ken Melrose, Jeff Zimpfer, Dave Elbogen, Laurie Elbogen, and Charles Flaherty. The meeting was called to order by Chair Greg Ogin and introductions of AC members followed. Greg Ogin congratulated Kari Kimura on her new term with the Action Committee, as well as welcoming Shane Nelson and Charles Young (who were not present) who have been newly appointed to the Action Committee. STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC REGARDING ITEMS ON AGENDA Ken Melrose informed the Action Committee that he previously participated in the subcommittee meetings to try to make the CDP work more effectively. He stated that he feels the motion in front of the Action Committee is the right way to go, and that he encourages them to support it. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS 1. Minutes from the Meeting on May 27th, 2015 Meeting Barbara DeFranco made a motion to approve the minutes and Kari Kimura seconded that motion. All in favor, and the motion was carried unanimously. PRESENTATIONS TO ACTION COMMITTEE: None. BUSINESS OF COMMITTEE: ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION AND ACTION 47 1. Barbara DeFranco discussed her goals to have the CDP be reviewed by a 48 third party and have them identify the parts of the CDP that do not work, and 49 correct them. Barbara stated that there has been some frustration, and it was 50 brought up in the last meeting to define the purpose of the Action Committee 51 and making it functional. 52 53 Greg Ogin explained that he has been informed that the Planning Department 54 is going over the General Plan and the CDPs, and will be reviewing for 55 inconsistencies. If corrections are necessary, they will be identified and 56 implemented. 57 58 Barbara asked who is doing the updating, and explained that the Action 59 Committee may need to step in and do it themselves, and maybe with some 60 help from a third party. 61 62 Greg explained that his understanding of the General Plan is that it's general. 63 The General Plan works when it is supporting the CDPs. Barbara DeFranco 64 agreed with that language. 65 66 Doug Payne asked if there is any concern about the Community Development 67 Plan. He brought up that concurrency is a big issue that needs to be 68 addressed. 69 70 Curtis Tyler explained that he anticipated there would be some discussion on 71 this topic. He stated that he would like to make a motion that would more 72 directly relate to what Barbara is talking about. 73 74 Curtis Tyler made a motion that the Action Committee strongly recommends 75 and requests that the Planning Director take steps to initiate the 10 -year CDP 76 review process, such that is undertaken and accomplished concurrently with 77 the ongoing review and proposed revisions to the General Plan and to enable 78 the action committee to be directly involved in this process under the careful 79 guidance of and input from West Hawaii Planners. 80 81 Doug Payne seconded that motion. 82 83 Curtis Tyler went on to explain that the purpose of this recommendation and 84 request is to address the following serious impediments to 85 implementation/exercise of the CDP as written. For example, there is 86 confusion as to the legality of imperative statements (the "shall" statements), 87 lack of appropriate zoning districts in the Zoning Code to accommodate 88 specified development sizes and use combinations, confusion as to intent 89 regarding road concurrency requirements for individual development 90 projects, obsolescence with regard to mandated development moratorium 91 until major County and State roadways are constructed (Queen Kaahumanu 92 Highway and Alii Drive Bypass), conflicting procedures for mandated 93 governmental review, approval and conditioning of development projects 94 versus existing provisions of the Hawaii County Code, lack of clarity as to the 95 legal status of "guidelines" appendices B and C, and the modified appendices 96 A and B pursuant to AC action on calibration of those appendices. The action 97 is urgently needed and the lack of corrective action may inadvertently 98 promote increase sprawl by diverting growth to existing zoning, ohana 99 dwellings or suburban and rural lots because the desired community 100 development plan model would be impossible for developers to implement 101 due to confusion and conflicting requirements of the Hawaii County Code and 102 supposedly mandatory CDP standards. Furthermore, introduction and 103 approval of this motion will be consistent with the Action Committee's 104 previous discussions regarding a need to resolve inconsistencies between the 105 Kona Community Development Plan, General Plan, and the Hawaii County 106 Code. 107 108 Discussion continued amongst the Action Committee, and Doug Payne asked 109 if the West Hawaii Planners have the resources to take this on. Bobby 110 Command said that he felt it could put a strain on the department, but they 111 could assist. 112 113 Members of the Action Committee voted on the motion, and it was carried 114 unanimously. 115 116 2. Voting on the proposed motion from the May 27th meeting regarding 117 revisions to the Chapter 25 Zoning Code, Sections 6-41, 6-42, and 6-43. 118 119 The tabled motion from May 27th, 2015 was distributed to the AC members 120 with their meeting documents. 121 122 Curtis Tyler made a motion to bring this motion to the table, and Doug Payne 123 seconded that motion. 124 125 Hiram Rivera made a motion to approve the attached motion as distributed. 126 Curtis Tyler seconded that, and the motion was carried unanimously. 127 128 3. Discussion and clarification of the role of the Action Committee. 129 130 Hiram Rivera explained that there was a discussion on the discrepancies of 131 the code and the CDP. He explained that the obstacles that they've faced in 132 the CDP cannot be realized until there are examples to test against. 133 134 Barbara DeFranco explained that while they are not on this committee to 135 review individual projects, however, it is helpful to see projects to show them 136 how things work. 137 138 The Action Committee continued to discuss this and also circled back to 139 Curtis Tyler's previous motion in regard to the 10 -year review. 140 141 Curtis Tyler made a motion that the Action Committee recommends and 142 requests the Director initialize and involve the AC and interested community 143 members, under the careful guidance of and with input from the West Hawaii 144 Planning office, in a process that will lead to the "Redevelopment Plan for 145 Kailua Village" called for in the KCDP. Such a process would include the goal 146 of compiling a priority list of essential elements that must be included in a 147 new, consolidated Master Plan, which, per the KCDP, would encompass the 148 KCDP's two overlapping and surrounding lands mauka of Kuakini and north 149 of Kailua Village (centered on Makae'o); a review the 1994 Kailua Village 150 Master Plan would be part of this process. Once compiled, the AC would 151 provide the Planning Director with a three-tier set of redevelopment - 152 development planning elements and objectives, which should be addressed 153 as soon as possible thereafter. [By way of clarification, per the KCDP. the 154 three tiers are the Kailua Village "core" which must be treated uniquely, the 155 mauka-south side of "Kailua-Kona," and the north half, which is Lanihau 156 makai and Keahuolu makai. 157 158 Hiram Rivera seconded this motion. Curtis Tyler made a motion to table this 159 item, and Kari Kimura seconded that. All in favor, and the motion was carried 160 unanimously. 161 162 SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS 163 164 None. 165 166 STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC 167 168 Chuck Flaherty stated that he was asked to attend this meeting by Janice Palma 169 Glennie with regard to the attached motion that was made. He said that he reviewed 170 Chapter 25 to try to understand why this motion was made. He explained that he 171 doesn't see the specific issues and conflicts, and as a member of the public, he is 172 having a hard time understanding it. 173 174 Doug Payne spoke up to clarify that the Project District has a 50 -acre minimum lot 175 size, but the CDP has a 20 acre minimum lot size - meaning there is an inherent 176 conflict right there. He went on to explain that there are many issues and instances 177 where the Community Development Plan doesn't reflect reality. 178 179 Chuck went on to explain that this is supposed to be the Kona Community 180 Development Plan, not the Kona Community Developers' Plan. He stated that there 181 was no announcement of this meeting, no outreach to the community, and that this 182 is a huge problem. He explained the need for examples and getting everything in 183 writing so everyone can be on the same page. Not just the committee, but members 184 of the general public who may not be able to attend the meetings, and would at least 185 like to follow what's going on. He also explained that if a motion is being made, that 186 before votes are being taken to consider it, a copy of the motion should be made 187 available to the committee so there isn't so much dictation. He noted the rules for 188 the design guidelines on the wall stating to "follow the no surprise rule," but there is 189 quite a bit of surprise happening here. He also went on to discuss the lack of 190 community outreach for the General Plan review. 191 192 He suggested that resolutions be proposed, explaining context, solutions, etc. This 193 would really help people to understand, and not just the people on the committee, 194 but going forward historically to understand why this decision was being made. This 195 would wind up being a report and a motion all in one. 196 197 He went on to discuss the basic problem in regard to burial sites and archaeological 198 easements being put in place. Lastly, he explained that the Action Committee has 199 inherited problems, and that he is going to go through his emails and see if he can 200 find what he saw as a big problem in years passed, and provide some context. 201 202 Curtis Tyler responded by explaining that he is a major supporter of public input 203 and involvement and he has stated this on numerous occasions. He also stated that 204 under the Sunshine Law, they are required to post the minutes and agendas, and 205 have those available when they come to the meetings. There were a few instances a 206 year or so ago where these documents were not available, and he voiced his 207 concerns. Curtis went on to apologize for not having his motions written out in full 208 today, and that this is entirely his fault. With respect to the burial issues, he 209 explained that this is not an issue before this body and that it is an issue before 210 County Planning and the Public Works Department. He thanked Chuck for bringing 211 this up. 212 213 He went on to explain that when it comes to the General Plan and the lack of 214 involvement with the public, he made it very clear that he was disappointed that the 215 public was not going to be involved in Phase 1. He clarified that the public will be 216 involved in Phase 3, but he will continue to voice his disapproval of that. 217 218 Discussion continued throughout the Action Committee and Chuck Flaherty and 219 bringing the CDP into the county code and special interests. 220 221 Ken Melrose then spoke in regard to the project district that was passed and 222 explained that he hopes the director picks it up. He brought up the role of the CDP 223 and encouraged the Action Committee to not be the ones who take on all the work, 224 but become participants. He also brought up a motion that was considered in 225 October of 2013 that is on the record. This motion asked the Planning Department 226 to affirm their commitment to the vision, guiding principles and strategies, and for 227 the Planning Department to provide the Action Committee with a concise 228 articulation of the timeline and a definition of the areas they thought were 229 problems. Ken stated that he thinks the Action Committee should ask again and that 230 there be a one page memo with bullet points by section. 231 232 Curtis Tyler asked that we find this motion from 2013 and review it so that if no 233 action has occurred, that we follow up. He suggested the planners follow up with 234 finding this motion, attaching it to the minutes, and ask the Planning Director for a 235 follow up. 236 237 ANNOUNCEMENTS 238 239 Greg Ogin announced that the Planning Director is still working on the items from 240 2014. He has acknowledged that and will be updating the Action Committee and 241 responding soon. 242 243 Next meeting Wednesday, July 29th, 2015. 244 245 A motion to adjourn was made by Curtis Tyler and seconded by Doug Payne. 246 Meeting adjourned at 3:32 PM. 247 248 Minutes submitted by Ali Catalano, of Kinoshita Communications.