Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/16/2012 PLANNING Committee MeetingMINUTES PLANNING COMMITTEE May 16, 2012 A meeting of the Planning Committee of the Council of the County of Kaua`i, State of Hawai`i, was called to order by Nadine K. Nakamura, Chair, at the Council Chambers, 4396 Rice Street, Suite 201, Lihu`e, Kaua`i, on Wednesday, May 16, 2012, at 9:56 a.m., after which the following members answered the call of the roll: Honorable Tim Bynum Honorable Dickie Chang Honorable Nadine K. Nakamura Honorable Mel Rapozo Honorable JoAnn A. Yukimura Honorable Jay Furfaro, Ex- Officio Member Excused: Honorable KipuKai Kuali`i, Ex- Officio Member The Committee recessed at 9:56 a.m.. The Committee was called back to order at 11:25 a.m., and proceeded on its agenda item as follows: Bill No. 2433 A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 8, KAUAI COUNTY CODE, 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE IN ITS ENTIRETY [This item was deferred.] Mr. Rapozo: I am going to make a motion to approve so we can get the discussion on the floor, and then I am hoping we can get this deferred, I will restate that motion at an appropriate time. Ms. Nakamura: Sure, that will be fine. Thank you. Mr. Rapozo moved to approve Bill No. 2433, seconded by Mr. Chang. Ms. Nakamura: There is a motion to approve and a second, and I would like to suspend the rules and ask the representatives from the Planning Department to come up. Dee, thanks for being here, can you introduce yourself for the record. There being no objections the rules were suspended. DEE CROWELL, DEPUTY PLANNING DIRECTOR: Good morning Councilmembers. I really had no formal presentation to make today; if you have any questions, I would be happy to answer them. COMMITTEE MEETING 2 MAY 16, 2012 Ms. Nakamura: Just the basic background here is that we had the first reading, the public hearing, we did not receive any public testimony, we have been through a very long protracted budget period, but we understand that there are some amendments that will be coming forward, do you want to explain that? Mr. Crowell: This is phase 1 of the CZO update process which is, if I can step back a moment to when I first got to the Planning Department. Back in 2010, we looked at this CZO update package and saw it was really visually just confusing; there were so many amendments being proposed. We decided to separate it out in Phase 1 - the non - substantial amendments which is reformatted, we condensed sections, changes that...theoretically you could hit the reject changes and you would get the existing CZO; there is no substantial changes. It also incorporated since 2006, which was the last codification of the CZO, the Council has passed I believe around seventeen (17) amendments to the CZO, so it incorporates that. So it should be easy to figure out; it just looks complicated right now. We saved the substantive changes for a later phase. Ms. Nakamura: And there are, so this is really a format change and presenting the information in a different way. Recently this Council passed a couple of amendments to the CZO, one (1) being relating to lot coverage, calculations for bike paths and bus stops and so forth, and then the second one (1) was the solar facility on ag lands. And so those two (2) amendments are going to be, and I think there is another typographical amendment. So three (3) amendments that are going to be proposed to be incorporated just so that all, so that it is current with all the seventeen (17) additional changes made since 2006. Mr. Crowell: Right. Ms. Nakamura: Councilmember Yukimura, we were just saying that since we have gone through the whole budget deliberation process we would like to have additional time to look at these changes, to work on those amendments, and then bring it forward at our next Committee Meeting. And also, everyone should have both the bill and then the underlined version so you can see what changes were made. Any other questions for Dee then? Councilmember Yukimura. Ms. Yukimura: So on page 6, is the purpose supposed to be in parentheses? Mr. Crowell: What section is that? COMMITTEE MEETING Ms. Yukimura: It might just be a typo. Mr. Crowell: Ms. Yukimura: Mr. Crowell: we can look at that. CZO. that. Ms. Yukimura: Ms. Nakamura: Ms. Yukimura: Mr. Crowell: Ms. Yukimura: Mr. Crowell: Ms. Yukimura: parenthesis is it? Ms. Nakamura: a look at then. Anything else? Ms. Yukimura: for format right? Mr. Crowell: Ms. Nakamura: Ms. Yukimura: Ms. Nakamura: Yes. 3 MAY 16, 2012 Page 6, it is the paragraph before Article 1. I think... Do you have a copy of the bill? I have it right here. Yes, it might be a typo, You mean to have the purpose there right? Are you talking at the top of the page? Yes. Ms. Nakamura: On the redline version, the top of the page is the portion that is underlined, so does that mean that is to be added? Well you know it is like that in the original It has a parenthesis? Yes. But that is not appropriate to have a Okay. So that is something that we can take I mean we are actually looking at this thing Yes. Yes. Okay, so we can prepare an amendment for COMMITTEE MEETING 4 MAY 16, 2012 Yes. Ms. Yukimura: Okay thank you. Ms. Nakamura: Peter Morimoto did you get that? PETER MORIMOTO, SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST, COUNCIL SERVICES: Ms. Nakamura: Ms. Yukimura: Ms. Nakamura: Dee, thank you very much. Councilmember Rapozo. Okay, thank you. I do not have any other questions. Any other questions for Dee? Okay then. The meeting was called back to order and proceeded as follows: Mr. Rapozo: This is quite a exercise that we rarely do to actually amend the CZO in whole. I was hoping that you would be open into maybe setting aside a four (4) workshop day as opposed to a committee meeting so we can have some good dialogue between Planning and us, and not be restricted to time. Committee meeting days, today is pretty light, but I am not prepared because I really have not had the opportunity to go through these amendments because we were in budget, but to have the dialogue in a much more open forum with the Planning Department. It is just a suggestion that we do that on a separate day, possibly four (4) hours in my opinion then we can get a lot more done. Ms. Nakamura: Okay. Would any other Councilmembers like to comment? Councilmember Bynum. Mr. Bynum: I have been on the Council for five- and -a -half (5 ' / 2) years and I have been very patient with the CZO update. Last was the term when Council Chair Furfaro was the Planning Director... Ms. Yukimura: The Planning Committee Chair. Mr. Bynum: The Planning Committee Chair, we got a commitment from the Planning Department that by the end of that calendar year we would see the updated CZO that we have been waiting for for twenty (20) years at least, and it obviously did not happen. We were talking about having our own consultant to help us review the document when it came because it is so important to our County, and so comprehensive. This will all make sense in a second, and so now we have come into this new leadership at the Planning Department, new leadership as the Planning Chair, and I have heard loud and clear we want to do this in two (2) steps. First codify and get existing CZO with piecemeal amendments COMMITTEE MEETING 5 MAY 16, 2012 that have happened, get it all in the proper format. So I continue to be patient with that and I will continue. But then for Councilmember Rapozo's comments, I totally agree with him. I think we need to get to a point, because I started to engage with the Planning Department, what about this, what about this, and what I have heard for a couple of years now, well wait for the CZO update, wait for the CZO update. Do we have a timeline on when we will see, because we have paid consultants and they have worked for a long time, if we finish up with this in a couple of months, when will we see the next round of the comprehensive changes? Or maybe that is a Dee question. Ms. Nakamura: Let us suspend the rules and go back, and since Dee is conveniently sitting there... There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Mr. Crowell: We do have a set of proposed substantial amendments that we could get up expeditiously. However, things have happened since we even drafted this, like the idea of maybe incorporating some form based codes ideas. We may want some policy kind of direction if that is appropriate for Kaua`i, I do not know if it is appropriate on all areas, but that kind of discussion needs to take place also I believe. Mr. Bynum: So there is no time? If I can interject, we have been talking about form based codes and what role they may have on Kauai for at least two (2) years, and we all attended some trainings. I really like the Director's comments that I have heard that we are not going to adopt form based codes for the entire island, but for certain town cores and certain areas, and if there is a delay to do that I am fine with that. I do not mean to come across like I am critical but this is something I have been anxious for, ever since I have been a Councilmember. I have had some personal experience about how a 1972 code can be interpreted many different ways. I want to bring that kind of clarity and get this dialog before the decision makers eventually. So I am just trying to get a sense of when that timeframe is. Mr. Crowell: As I said it may require some policy kind of calls as to how appropriate form based codes are on Kaua`i and in what areas. So we may get some guidance through development plans but ultimately I think it is a general plan kind of question to be posed. Ms. Nakamura: Councilmember Bynum, I have had conversations with Director Dahilig and this is the first phase, the second phase I am told is following and the question is when, and I think if we can pose that as a question to the Department so that we can anticipate that date, can we do that as a follow -up question Mr. Morimoto? Thank you. As a follow -up to that, Mr. Bynum. COMMITTEE MEETING 6 MAY 16, 2012 Mr. Bynum: I started to engage with Mike or with you or with Miles and it is because there is specific areas I am interested in and I want to know what direction you are headed with. The response I have got consistently is not yet, let us not have that conversation yet, we are working on it, and I am okay with that. So we will follow -up with this follow -up question, but I think this is very important and very significant and very overdue. If we need to take more time to get it right I am fine with that. At some point I want to start that engagement and help educate myself and understand because of some fundamental policy decisions that are in that document and I just do not know where we are going with it right now. I will continue to be patient. Ms. Nakamura: Okay. Councilmember Yukimura. Ms. Yukimura: I understand and actually have been advocating the need to evaluate the usefulness of form based codes because I actually think it is good to make that decision before we go into the General Plan update. It makes a lot of sense to also know what the policy direction is going to be of this County before we even do a major overhaul of the CZO. So I am glad that that is a thought process right now in the Planning Department, but we need to have some timelines on this, and some processes for grappling with that policy decision. We have so many things going on that, to me form based codes is a decision about the basic framework of our land use planning. And so all these pieces of our land use planning that is going on from the CZO update to all the area development plans to the general plan update, we really need to make some decision. Even if it is, we think form based codes is the direction but we are not going to a wholesale change overnight, we are going to do it in a gradual way; we still need some map of how we are going to do that. So I think maybe, Chair, the question would be to ask for what kind of process does Planning Department have in mind for making that policy determination, and then creating the map for making the transition from eucledian zoning to form based code, or whatever future framework we are going to adopt for our land use planning, it might be a hybrid, I do not know. Mr. Crowell: Okay. To me form based codes are a real paradigm shift. Ms. Yukimura: They are. Mr. Crowell: If the zoning code has uses and development standards, it is less dependence on what is allowed uses and more dependence on what is a development standard, like setbacks and building heights, that kind of thing. So the part about lessening the dependence on allowable uses may come as a COMMITTEE MEETING 7 MAY 16, 2012 shock to people who like to use the zoning code as a weapon against their neighbors, it may not get wide acceptance. Ms. Yukimura: But we need to know what are the benefits of doing that and what are the potential downsides, and are there ways to offset those downsides if we feel the benefits are really good. You know? Mr. Crowell: Yes. Ms. Yukimura: We are looking for a paradigm or a framework that is going to address some of our land use issues including the major conflicts that seem to arise in the present system, and whether form -based codes will help us address that better. But also I am thinking because form -based codes are touted as a way to get great places not just not have bad places. Eucledian zoning was keeping out the noxious uses and we are about creating great places, that is what we want to do. Form -based codes, we have been told and shown to a certain extent, can do that better. I am not totally convinced, more importantly I do not know how we do that, but I think it behooves us to really study it and know because our system is not adequate right now. Ms. Nakamura: Okay. So let us just agree that some of the follow -up would include a process for policy determination regarding form -based codes, what that might look like, a form -based code timeline and framework, and the CZO update part 2 timeline. Ms. Yukimura: When you say form -based code and timeline... Ms. Nakamura: In terms of if we are, if once we make that determination what policy direction we are going to go through, then what? Ms. Yukimura: Right. Ms. Nakamura: How do we implement that? Ms. Yukimura: Okay. Good. Thank you. Ms. Nakamura: So those were the three (3) questions and we will expect to send that correspondence to your Department. Mr. Crowell: I think you would have to also include some education and developing a baseline level of understanding what a form -based code is. COMMITTEE MEETING 8 MAY 16, 2012 Ms. Yukimura: Absolutely. Ms. Nakamura: Yes. And I think that is what that process should involve. Ms. Yukimura: Include. Ms. Nakamura: Yes. Councilmember Bynum. Mr. Bynum: And then I assume that is where Mel, that is where you were coming from right, we got to get grounded and it is not a Council Meeting, it is Workshop kind of format. I agree with that, I just, I do not know for this one (1) because this is kind of the update, but I am anxious to get to the next step, and I think that would be the best format. Ms. Nakamura: Councilmember Yukimura. Ms. Yukimura: I can save it for coming back into discussion. Ms. Nakamura: Any more questions for Mr. Crowell? Okay. Mr. Bynum: Thank you Dee. The meeting was called back to order and proceeded as follows: Ms. Nakamura: Coming back into session, Mr. Rapozo. Mr. Rapozo: Yes, I just want to have the workshop on Phase 1 and specifically on what was presented to us and not so much the expanded form -based codes, that is a whole other component that obviously needs some attention. But as far as my request it is really to focus on Phase 1, get through that and whatever is generated out of that can be set -up for a subsequent workshop later as we approach some significant or some substantial changes in the code as we move forward. But for Phase 1 I think we can probably get it all cleared up in four (4) hours. Ms. Nakamura: Councilmember Yukimura. Ms. Yukimura: You know, as I understand Phase 1 it is mainly format changes, it is putting paragraphs in different places and making sure there is consistent numbering and so forth. I do not know if we need a workshop on that. I just started, but I have the ramseyered or the tracking system and then the bill itself which is a complete re- statements, and I think it is quite easy to track using the two (2). And so, I am not sure we need four (4) hours of workshop. COMMITTEE MEETING 9 MAY 16, 2012 Ms. Nakamura: This is what I would like to recommend, that we make sure we have adequate time if it is going to be a Committee Meeting or a workshop, but would like the Planning Department to have someone here to walk us through just the type of, even if it is format change why we did that format change. Just kind of walk us through so we understand what the, why you are portraying this information in a different way, and what are the benefits of doing it this way so we can follow that through for this first phase and understand your rationale. Councilmember Rapozo. Mr. Rapozo: I just want to make a comment that, in eight (8) years I have sat through dozens of workshops here, I have never ever said we never needed a workshop, most of if Councilmember Yukimura was at your request. I am simply asking for four (4) solid hours so we can get through front to back in one (1) sitting and not interrupt the rest of the Committee meeting. I am just asking for that courtesy, and I understand maybe you do not think it is necessary, maybe it is easy for you. I went through this, I looked at it and I am saying if we can get Planning here and us here and we can get it all out we can clear it out in one (1) sitting, that was the hope. I would ask that, if I have to make a motion, I am just hoping that the Chair would honor my request. Thank you. Ms. Nakamura: Councilmember Yukimura. Ms. Yukimura: I was not speaking against it I was just raising the question of whether we needed to do it. I am sorry if there was offense taken, I did not mean any offense. Ms. Nakamura: Okay. Councilmember Bynum. Mr. Bynum: I would be happy to sit through that workshop. I think it is likely to bring up a lot of dialog that might be helpful for the next phase. Ms. Nakamura: So I will coordinate with the Planning Department and with staff. So we have a motion to approve. Mr. Rapozo: I will make a motion to defer if there is no more discussion. Ms. Yukimura: And set -up a workshop? Mr. Rapozo: I will leave that up to the Committee Chair when she wants to set -up the workshop. This would be deferred, if we defer this I can make the motion to defer pending workshop. So let us do it for two (2) COMMITTEE MEETING 10 MAY 16, 2012 Committee meetings. Let us just defer it pending the workshop, and once the workshop is concluded if the Committee Chair agrees we can repost. Upon motion duly made by Councilmember Rapozo, seconded by Councilmember Chang, and unanimously carried, Bill No. 2433 was deferred pending the scheduling of a workshop. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:49 a.m. APPROVED at the Committee Meeting held on August 29, 2012: ffeada NADINE K. NAKAMURA CHAIR, PLANNING COMMITTEE Respectfully submitted, Ihilani C.J. Laureta Secretary