FROM: Larry Brown, Puna CDP Project Manager

MEMORANDUM

October 6, 2011

TO: Puna CDP Action Committee

FROM: Larry Brown, Puna CDP Project Manager

SUBJECT: Rational for Non-substantive Amendments Proposed in Bill 101

At the October 4, 2011 Planning Committee meeting of the Hawai‘i County Council the non-substantive nature of some parts of the Bill 101 were questioned. As you know, the amendments proposed in Bill 101 consisted primarily of formatting, grammatical and clerical revisions intended to make the PCDP more user friendly and to address several inconsistencies. On March 18, 2010, the AC voted to recommend the addition of these amendments along with their other recommendations during deliberations on the Council initiated amendments in Bill 194.

The purpose of this memo is to articulate the rationale behind the assertion of the PCDP Action Committee and the Planning Director that the amendments in Bill 101 that the Planning Committee identified as appearing substantive in nature.

The following sections within Bill 101 were specifically identified for your review and comment:

1. Pg. 5 relating to Section 3.5.3 c 3) parts (4) and (6): It was suggested that adding the word “Develop” was not a strong enough verb and that “build” or “construct” would be more appropriate.

1. Pg. 8 relating to Sections 4.2.3 b 3) and 4.2.3 e: Part “e” is proposed for deletion since the action articulated is already stated in Part “b 3)”, namely to provide express bus service for commuters from Pāhoa to Hilo and Volcano to Hilo. While Part “e” include additional reference to having local buses or paratransit services feeding into selected stops in order to service broader areas, it is not clearly stated as an action which would clearly be consistent with the goals and objectives of the Mass Transit section of the PCDP. Therefore, the additional language provided at the end of Part “b 3)” was inserted to ensure this provision was retained.

1. Pg. 13 relating to Section 2.4.3 b of the Implementation Table: Adding “in the coastal zone” to the description of Action Item “b” adds clarification to the Action Item that is clearly consistent with the completely stated Action Item in the narrative section of the PCDP as follows:

“Retrieve and record information on trails and historic resources in the coastal zone, including the research of old survey and plat maps and various records of the Mahele, Land Commission and Royal Patents.” (Emphasis added)

1. Pg. 14 relating to Section 3.1.3 h of the Implementation Table: The proposed revised language in the description of Action Item “h” was considered necessary to eliminate the potentially confusing original language that might not be interpreted to be consistent with the narrative language for this Action Item on Page 3-7, Section 3.1.3 h of the PCDP, which states:

“Propose reduction of property tax assessments and payments to token amounts for properties whose development right have been removed or significantly and permanently reduced by means of a conservation easement, land pooling or similar measure.”

1. Pg. 18 relating to Section 4.2.3 (E) of the Implementation Table: The deletion of this Action Item in the Implementation Table would be consistent with the proposed amendments described in #2 above. Any changes to the narrative section of the PCDP should be similarly made in the corresponding sections of the Implementation Table.

Aloha, Larry

Larry Brown, Planner

County of Hawaii, Planning Department

101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3

Hilo, Hawaii 96720

Tel: (808) 961-8135

FAX: (808) 961-8742

email:

xc: BJ Leithead Todd, Planning Director

April Surprenant, Long Range Division Program Manager