Aloha and good morning. Welcome to the 16th session of the Policy Committee on Planning, Land Use and Development. Today is Tuesday, July 9, 2024. I'm calling this meeting to order at 10.02 a.m. Members of the committee are meeting in the Healow Council chambers. All members are present today and I will introduce them. Council members Cindy Evans, Jennifer Kagiwata, Rebecca Villegas, Matt Kinele, Ekindfelder, Heather Kimball, Halaka Inaba, birthday girl, Michelle Lillimba, and a Sully Loy. My name is Ashley Kirkwoods, Chair and Presiding Officer of the Committee. Mr. Clerk, Mr. Araceli, do we have any testifiers for this committee? Thank you chair. Just noting that we do not have any testifiers either here in Hilo via Zoom, Conor or in any of your remote sites. Thank you for that. Seeing as there are no testifiers for today's committee meeting, let's move on to business of the day. Bill's for ordinances. Thank you so much Madam Chair. Checking again if we have any testifiers for Bill 127. Hearing none, Bill 127, a men's chapter 25 article 2, Division 4, section 25-2-44 of the Hawaii County Code 1983. 2016 edition as amended relating to conditions on change of zone. Requires the planning director to include time constraints for the completion or satisfaction of conditions imposed in change of zoning district ordinances. Introduced by Council Member Inaba, postponed on February 7, 2024 and referred to the Planning Commission February 2020-2024 and noting communications 694.5. From Mayor Mitchell D. Roth dated June 13, 2024, transmitting for Council's consideration in action, the Windward and Leeward Planning Commission's letters. Thank you. Mr. Inambo, would you like to make a motion? Yes, motion to forward bill 127 to Council with a favorable recommendation. Thank you. There's a motion by Council Member Inambo, second by Council Member Gilemba to forward bill 127 to the Council with a favorable recommendation. Yes, thank you. This bill was referred to both planning commissions and there was some really good discussions. So it did come to us with a negative recommendation by the director and that recommendation was awarded to both commissions. The Wendward Planning Commission, as you can see in the Transmental Weather Forwarded, a favorable recommendation on the bill, but recommended that we incorporate recommendations, number three and four from the Planning Director. So number three is creating an informed time matrix, and that's really to have a better understanding of the time frame in which different types of applications might take to get through certain approvals through different agencies. So that would be a departmental thing that would be led essentially by the planning department. And again, the planning department right now is the one who's putting forward the time frames in which the conditions are to be completed. The second recommendation from the Windward Planning Commission was the planning director's recommendation number four. And it was to allow certain exemptions from this time requirement. And there was discussion in the commissions regarding, let's say if you go back to open space, you wouldn't wanna put a timeframe on an ordinance like that. So I'm, those are those two. I'm just going to kind of give us the rundown of what the both commission said. The Leeward Planning Commission, they wanted strength and standard performance conditions. So that's kind of what's already included in our Change of zone ordinances, but they are asking that those conditions be strengthened and maybe re-tool to make sure that they're in a timely fashion or there's better checks rather than just letting in ordinance go. So the Leeward Planning Commission also discussed or recommended, I should say, the addition of tolling language, that's a conversation that we'll bring up again today. And then lastly, from the Leeward Planning Commission, was the sunset condition to revert land back to its previous designation should a change of zone ordinance not be complied with and a initial time extension not be secured. So what we have before us today is essentially those recommendations. I don't have amendments today because I really wanted to have this discussion and hold this over one. I guess for myself and I did represent this to both of the planning commissions regarding tolling. I think it's really hard and I think we've had this discussion before we are giving adequate time now and I think part of the recommendation for informed timing, Dricks, is to really give as best an idea as possible on how long things might take. And again, the code now guarantees folks that they will have the opportunity to come for an initial time extension via resolution. So I'm not ruling out the possibility, but I think we've kind of set things up for certain. What it says on the paper as the deadline is the deadline, tolling might make it a little bit confused. And then I guess I'm just going to, with those recommendations, as you see in the Trans Middle Letter, which is like to hear from the body at this point. I'll yield that floor. Thank you. Thank you. Come from Reenaba. And I did get word that planning director Zendokun is on his way in the event that members of the committee have questions for him. But in the meantime, do members have any questions for Councilmember Inaba? Councilmember Evans? Yeah. So I have a, I'm not that familiar with tolling, and I think other people like the public may not understand it. So what would tolling language, what would you, what would that look like? Councilmember Evans, do you have any other questions that you're going to be asking of Councilmember Inaba? I don't know. OK, that would be like. I would like to just avoid having a two-way conversation that is needed. Right, right, right. So I can ask the director that question. Perfect. Be happy to. Director. You're here at the right time. Good timing. We're talking about timing. Timing. So director, just a quick overview while you catch your breath. Councilmember Inaba provided an overview of some of the recommendations that each of the planning commissions had to strengthen the bill. And Councilmember Evans has just asked a question related to tolling. Yeah, one of the recommendations is to add toling language to time conditions. And I thought for myself and probably the public, what would that, what would that look like toling language? Good morning, Chair. Thanks for the committee. I'm Senator Kern, planning director. Thank you for the question. Tolling we'd have to establish basically language that when an application was under review for a various department or agency such as the Shifty Department of Public Works that the time would stop on the clock. So if there was a 10 years for the changes on application to get it done, let's just say that when the plans were under review, that clock stopped. And so, plans were under review for a cumulative of two years, and it was a 10-year overall, that would basically give it 12, a simple math. Because that's where this lot of uncertainty is. Have you used totally language in the past? I have attempted to put it into a changes zone ordinance at the previous council and the concept was talked about but it felt it was better done more of a as a universal change not on a per application. So it's been put out there, but it hasn't landed. Okay, and then with totaling language, it could be specific. Instead of accumulative, we're all collecting from all departments. Let's say it gets stuck in one department. But a reasonable time. Or if, let's say, two out of X just seem not to be able to get the answer to you after a certain reasonable amount of time, you know, whatever the kind of the normal standard, maybe you think you'll have an answer of six to eight months. Once it gets beyond that point, then you could start the tolling. So it wouldn't start when you send it out. It would start after X amount of months, you're not getting your comments back from maybe a couple of departments. I think there's different ways to approach it and look at it. It could be that, it could even be the, the converse to that where you told it for that six months, but once it started maybe going too long, maybe that the tolling stopped at the period time. Because what we're trying to do is give a reasonable amount, the concept is to give a reasonable amount of time for an agency or department to review an application that doesn't put the burden on the applicant that generally doesn't have all the ability to move it along, but also have the guard rails on it where it's not being utilized from the applicant side of it to even extend further than you'd want to. You know what I mean? It's trying to find that mutual accountability. Okay. I kind of like the concept actually. Finding the right language would be interesting if you have examples of the two the two ways. Then if there's anything in between I mean this way or this way or is there combinations? I can work on putting something together. I know we have the language from one of those previous re-zones I would say about maybe two or three years ago that we could kind of pull out as a discussion point because we already have that written Okay, and if it's looking like this is some direction that's going I can put a little bit more time and attention to it with the resources that I have if It's not going anywhere than I don't have the resources to spend on it to make sense so directly I can Put some gas to it or put the bright Okay, thank you. Are you? Thank you, councilmember. Anyone else? and put some gas to it or put the bread on it. Okay, thank you. Are you? Thank you, Council Member. Anyone else? Council Member Vegas. Sure, I have a quick question, and we'll humbly admit that they will expose some of my naivete with these terms. What would you, what is the definition? Because I'm sure there are people listening who don't understand what a tolling condition entails. Tolling is simply the clock stops. You stop the clock to toll something, the clock stops. Certain points in time when something might be under legal review, that's often times you'll see the tolling language come in like all the time has been told while this is being worked out. So tolling is simply while a certain action is happening, that's defined within however this language would be, the clock stops. So for example, 10 years time. No, I get it. Thanks. Yep. I got it from there. Okay. Yeah. I'm in support of this legislation and thank you, Mr. Inaba, for bringing it forward. We need to remove and ensure that there are stop gaps from manipulation of the system and that not only, you know, I consistently hear that we need to make sure that we're not causing undue stress or delays on builders or developers, but I also want to make sure that we aren't. We're remembering our job is to serve the people of this community and of our communities and our constituents and residents of the island, not just the business people. And so I think that it's important that that balance be realigned and that we, I just have high respect for Mr. and Nava and his ability to navigate these documents and put in ways for a stopgap to ensure that there's a balance in in how we do things and that the priorities are an alignment with the value system of our communities with that a yield. Thank you. That's really nice. Thanks. A director, another recommendation from one of the commissions was like a timing matrix, right? And I'm really curious about this because I think therein lies the critical path on the ability for anybody to get anything done. What does that timing matrix or matrix looks like? And I'm asking that question because a 3-acre development compared to 100-acre multifamily multi-commercial project would look very different. Explain to me or kind of just thumbnail what timing metrics, matrix would look like. So it's an idea that we have that, I would say that needs to be worked out into the detail because as you say certain projects would be different size. So it's kind of trying to find an element. If you have a project of this type in this size, here's your general time frame it could happen. Here's what the review periods should be on this. And then have its scale. I'm not sure how many categories you'd have. That's where a lot more detail need to go into actually forming this. So down to a simple two lot subdivision up to a Kumoho project that we looked at a couple years ago. Those are kind of on both sides of it. So I think we need to look at right sizing that. I'd want to get some more feedback on it. We don't have it fully baked. It was just an idea of, say, if we're moving in this direction, potentially a timing matrix could be helpful in coming up with decisions. One concept that Cherkimbo introduced us to was a decision matrix, right? You put in all kinds of information. It'll tell you if you're going to landscape, it's going to cost this amount of money. Have we looked at that kind of technology to help us one, make the decision, but two, have a framework to allow developers, housing contributors to take a look at if these are the known inputs. Here's a decision matrix app for lack of a better description to help push out back to everyone to say, hey, here's the reasonable expectations. A project of this size is definitely a five to seven year project. Whereas a project of this size, we're looking at closer to 15 to 20 years for a full build out that doesn't mean you cannot get other things along the way. Have we looked at some of that technology? No. I might exist. I think it's in my mind of thinking that some point AI will help us with some of this. I think we're close. I haven't had a chance to dive into it. We've been just trying to handle normal business. But I do think that would be helpful. Yeah, I think we're trying to manage expectations. I think the bigger challenge is every piece in this complex process all has to work at a particular expectation and I think that's where I'm challenged when we start putting in kind of timing requirements which is why I do support the tolling language having done this for a number of years. Yeah I think I think it's tricky because we as a department or ask the developer who's the applicant, how long you think it's gonna take, and they generally wanna put their best foot forward, give the best time frame and say it's gonna happen really quick and then life happens. That's the consistency. So I think having something in there to say, hey, a project like this is typically in this arena would be helpful. I think on both sides of it from the applicant standpoint to the council standpoint to the community standpoint to get some framework around it. I think the other challenge too, as we craft our conditions of approval, and I really appreciate the expertise from planning department, which reaches out to all the other expertise is we layer in conditions of approval and community wants stuff like road widening, a traffic signalization, all these things, those things cost lots and lots of money and so to front load that makes it makes it more expensive on the front end. So to give developers more time housing contributors more time or commercial entities more time to pencil it out, I think is it's the layering of the conditions of approval. And you guys do a great job at that, but then it comes to us. And we hear community saying, well, we'll support it if you put in the hospital and the commercial and the traffic light before anything else. I think that is another challenge and how do we balance that director? That's a big question. I think what it comes down to me when I look at it is a level of certainty. The community, to the applicant, to the department, and to the council. And what are the big issues there? So we try to condition to mitigate the impacts. And at what point in time are we needing to mitigate the impacts. And at what point in time do we are we needing to mitigate those impacts? The mitigation needs to occur before the actual impact occurs. To your point oftentimes we front-load things, we need to see everything now even though development doesn't happen for six, seven years down the road and we're kind of basing off the things that are current. Versus what I've been trying to get to is more performance condition. This makes sense, let's move it, but prior to actually impact, prior to a plan approval, prior to a subdivision application, we look at that and it's mitigated based on that time, a new traffic impact analysis report, if it's needed, it's done at that time and we mitigate for that. Same with sewer, same with water. So it's happening in real time, closest to the point of impact as possible. And we were just in a meeting with our code consultants talking about this very subject right now. And their concept was the TAR needs to be pushed closer to the point of the impact, not front loaded now when you're going to take a few years to go, a few years if you're lucky, oftentimes it's five, six, seven years later. If they know they're going to go and they have the level of certainty to get the do the TAR now and they're going to do it, that's fine. And so I come back to the conditions are supposed to create a level of certainty that the council is making a good decision if it's approving it. The community knows the impacts are going to be mitigated and the applicant understands what they need to do and the costs associated with that. To me, that becomes smart, good planning. Yeah, thanks, director. You know, to the maker. Yeah, I would love to see what kind of language. I think the tolling language that we've attempted to try in the past, where we stopped the clock is actually, it's healthy, it's healthy, because life happens. I mean, I've been on projects where Shifty took 10 years to evaluate an AIS. I've been on projects where DOT took the better part of six years just to evaluate the signalization plan not to mention flooding with a low mar and a clomar and I could go on and on and on about how there's the project but there's all these other complex things that need to be addressed. By individuals who don't sit here, who don't feel the pressure, who are just doing their job, but their job is complex. So to the maker, I think I would love to see that, the tolling for sure, but also some way to strike a balance between modest, size projects to, you know, very complex multi-family projects. I think there's a spectrum there. Thank you. Thank you director for being here. Are you okay? Thank you. Thank you. Councillor McKinley. Okay. Councillor member Kimbo. Thank you. And thank you, Director for being here. To the maker, just want to lend my support to the concept of some tolling language, whether or not it can live here or not, I think it's a question, but I am supportive of that. Also supportive of this matrix concept, and rather than being like a project-wide matrix of, you know, it's a 3 acre versus 100 acre or something like that, it would be maybe more directly related to certain conditions like we would expect this type of condition to be within this range and, you know, something like that. Speaking a little bit to what Councilman Raleigh-Leyhintedad and you spoke about with performance metrics. I'd love to see like a sequencing matrix too. Like you cannot do step B until you've done A, you cannot do C until you've done B. And you know to a certain extent based on the order conditions often are presented in the the change of zone ordinances. I think that is somewhat reflected there, but I can imagine how much easier it would be if there was just a table at the end of each change of zone that says these are the order of conditions. And even if it's the letters of the conditions, and what are the dependencies? Just to speak briefly around the idea of a decision tool, there's certainly folks that I know that April has talked with some folks that I had connected them with about that whole idea of giving us the view of the whole area for decision making. This would be a different type project, but we do have resources we can tap into to maybe look at something there that already exists for something like that. So I'm happy to further that discussion, but that's my feedback to the maker. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Agunamba. Thank you. So this is sort of in a different direction. Oh, sorry. You know, sort of philosophically, I really liked the idea of zones just being as stable as possible, certainty. So I'm just wondering, but I also get the idea of accountability and it's been, you know, the zoning has been used forever as the tool to get accountability. Is there another tool that we could use potentially that would not get us into these situations where we are putting pieces into Zone Limbo. And this is you know this is because we're all still in like baby stages of this somehow even though we've been doing this for a while. Yeah I mean I don't necessarily have to answer that now. I'm just kind of pulling it out. I mean, the concept that I've been running around has been around trying to get us in not all projects, but in many, having a certain sense that this only makes sense today. It should make sense in 10, 20, 30, 40 years if it's consistent with all the areas in the settlement pattern. So for example, like smack dab in the center of hellow. If you're going to do commercial, it's probably fine for commercial, for you know, remainder of the time to actually create a level of saying, hey, it's dumb, you're done. But once you want to take action, here's all your mitigation steps. So it's the same type of conditions. It just happens prior to actually doing it. And that's what a lot of other jurisdictions will do, is say your zoning set. And then when you're going to come in for your use, you're going to mitigate accordingly. And if your use came in for a single family residence, minimal. Your use came in for a drive-through restaurant. That's a different story. We're looking at queuing. We're looking at all of those things. And you mitigate based on the impact that's close to the time as possible. That's the other way that I'm seeing it's kind of the contrast to having the timing conditions in there. Again, still just trying to create the level of certainty for both sides of it. The community has to know mitigations happening. And the applicant needs to have a fair shot and moving forward. So I don't have any other brilliance other than that. I want to keep thinking about it, but that's the other side of the equation. Thanks. I mean, there are definitely our cases where zones, zoning that happened in the past are not appropriate, and so we can also need a way to change the zone that even doesn't have anything to do with the project. So there's two sides to it as well but thanks for that. Correct. And I would say if there's areas on the fringe then what I said wouldn't you know you'd want to be like it's now is a time we're looking at it now is a time so great right thanks. Thank you. Talks about our events. Okay. Thank you. Given this discussion I'm really more inclined to if someone comes in and says they want to do it I'm more inclined if they start on the process and submitting all their applications and you're putting them out to do the tolling at the beginning, just like give them six months or eight months or whatever. So it's very, very clear that you get the tolling from taking action. If you don't take action, you don't get to lane. But if you toll, then you can't play with to lane, right? Because you can't, you don't want to play with it and say we've sent it out to 10 agency and one agency sits for four or five years. Well, you can't control that agency, but maybe somebody else can. So I'm having a little bit of a trust factor going on here. So I'm thinking more like your one idea is at the beginning when they really are effectuating the, they're actually doing it and they come in and all of a sudden things are going out. Then I can see that a timeframe of tolling being given to them, but you just stop it. So yeah, I mean, I think trying to safeguard the abuse of the tolling is really important. I think at which point in time the tolling occurs will be based on the applicant's action, right? And whether it happens right at the beginning, partway through or towards the end, there's more risk if it goes towards the end if there's a timing condition on there. and then life happens, right? You could have come through, you got your changes on right at 2020, you're expecting everything's going to go and all of a sudden COVID happens and the world stops for a moment and you're two, three years later and you're starting to get your project going back up again, right? So there's different things that might occur, but the concept around tolling is once it's submitted, the clock stops, but it has to be within reason. And it's tricky because in certain cases, you know, maybe somebody not following up allows the time to go further. In other cases, I've followed up on things every single week. It's still tough two years. Well there has to be quite a lot to be side bars on it for safe guards. But I will say this, I thought, and maybe I'm making an assumption, but I was kind of hoping that you do have language that when things like a natural disaster earthquake, whatever, whatever happens that that two stops. That should also stop the clock. Do we have to put that language in here? Yeah. Because you don't have it anywhere else. Otherwise, we'd be putting it as a condition per zoning ordinance, but it would be more of a practice. Kind of like how the five. I can man made a man made more or a natural disaster that would definitely change. I do support that idea, because I've seen that many times in language over the years. And then, you know, and to that point, at what scale and to what geographic location, right, COVID is gonna affect the entire island, something like 9-11 effects, you know, the entire country, a COVID-effective entire country as well. 2018 Killoway eruption, very much affected Puna, anything happening in Puna, it affected the department's capacity in certain ways because they're responding, but it didn't have that same effect, say, in Hong Kong. Right, Hong Kong was still business as usual, so it's like how do we write ties? So, there's this little recession that's been called. I mean, you know, always resessions have a beginning in an end, but that can be done at the State Department of Business and Economic Development for the Hawaii State being in recession, not the country. Yeah, maybe it's under emergency proclamation. I think, and that's where this dialogue is kind of fluid. Anything else? Thank you. You're welcome. Mr. Knieley, can I start your mic on again? Asking now. Okay. Councilor Rodriguez. Thank you. You know, I think it's interesting I hear so many times up here. Yeah, life happens. Change is constant. How we manage it and handle it. Also, investment by builders or developers or land owners has a certain risk when you have a project there. And only so much of that can be mitigated by what we do here. But that's where the wisdom and the experience and the understanding of the place in which this resides, I think, comes into play. You know, we were, most of us were at the into the conditions of approval that that developer paid the impact fees, built the park, put in the stoplight, every single part had an impact fee that had to be completed on the front end before they could sell or build one home on that property. And it wasn't too much for them and they abided by it. If we hold those standards of accountability, we sit on the most priceless resource in the world potentially. And so holding and transitioning to that level of accountability and requirement, I think is a courage that it's wise for us to take because for years It's been the assumption we're dealing with one now somebody buys 20 acres. It's just assumed. I'm gonna buy it and I'm gonna get a zoning change And then I'm gonna sell off a parcel to pay for my parcels I'm wondering where this conversation is as it relates to the discussion or what the maker of this bill is looking for. Thank you for the leeway. I tend to tell things with a story and that's where I'm going with this as it relates to my district. And that's what I'd see this bill relating to. this bill relating to and prospecting and change of zone being a given I think is something that is part of the purpose for this kind of legislation so that we can realign the decisions that are made in planning and here on the council to be more authentically aligned with value systems that ensure that our properties and the developments that happen are authentically in the best interest of our communities. May I respond? Yes, please. Dr. X. So, Connie, he is an example of a project that is a higher level or more on the higher-end side of things. So that being said across the board, does that also apply then to your affordable housing project? Is that also applied to the person that's just trying to do a small family subdivision for themselves or say the local family that's trying to do a change of zone so they can open up their grocery store or something like that. There's just no one size fits all. There's maybe different categories. So what I'm hearing is that we just apply that to everybody. Any change of zone? You're paying for it. Any change of zone? There's impact fees right now all the way through it any given time because they can do that. Is that true? I think that's a rhetorical question I'm not looking for a response. Actually I would like to respond because you yielded the call and I'm moving on to councilmember Evans and I'm not looking for us to get into a tit for tat at this point. Councilmember Evans. Yeah one of the recommendations from the commission is to look at adding a sunset condition. My question has to do. I know a couple times you have said zoning goes stale. Okay, so stale meaning it just sits there. But so they don't have to come back to the council and ask, quote, for an extension because it's just sitting there. So I like the idea of sunset, but how is that? I just need to hear more about how that would get applied. Sure. I'm going to run through that process really quickly just so we can get to that stale, that zoning and limbo. So a project comes through, it gets to change its own approval with, say, a five-year time condition on it to do subdivision or plan approval. Time goes on, that condition isn't met, the time is lapsed, okay? So at that point in time, let's just say the zoning went from Ag1 to RS10. So from agriculture zoning to residential zoning, the time has lapsed. They come in and say I want to do something on my residential zone property. We say we're sorry, you're timing is laps. You can no longer do that on that property. If you'd like to use your residential zoning, you need to go back through the process and get it current, which means submit your request to the Pliant Department, go through the Planning Commission, make your way back to Council, as you've seen them happen, and then the Council will then grant you a potentially grant and extension on the timing. Then they say, okay, great, I don't really don't want to do that right now, I just like to use it for the agriculture purpose that it was originally zone. We say, we're sorry, your property's no longer zone for agriculture, and you can't do that use either. If you'd like to take it back to agriculture, guess what you do. You submit an application or submit a request that the applying department then processes, it goes back to commission and makes its way back to the council to get it back to its original zoning. So the way it's currently set up once that timing condition goes into limbo, either way you look at it, it's around the eight months process on the minimum to get it back to either its original zoning, which you've seen them come through request to refer it back to its original zoning, or to get it back to the new zoning under in good standards, basically I back under a time condition. In either case it comes back. And so it's tricky because it basically makes that parcel unusable once that time comes up. And that is tricky because I don't think property should necessarily be unusable unless it's really intended to be unusable like a conservation easement or something like that. And so that automatic reversion was a concept that came up. And I think that should be looked at a bit more. I think it gets a little bit trickier because it is an ordinance and we should probably have corporation counsel opine on that, a house something like that would automatically revert by way of an ordinance, right? Because the change is on is an ordinance, which is a law. And so can you have that big in there where it like automatically reverts? I want to think that is possible, but I think that's a legal question. Does that make sense? It does, but if you have the language in there that it sunsets, and within the ordinance, the condition is there that it will sunset if no actions taken. Of course, then that's where any corporation like what is because I remember there was always a when the EIS is when they say you know substantial. So what's considered substantial action versus no action because let's say someone does too you know. So what do you when you sunset it is because they haven, maybe they're seven or eight of the way. I mean, I get that, but I love the idea. I just, you know, I like the idea of sunset. I do. I have to write it and get it. It's going to be a little tricky, but I like the idea. It's easier if nothing is happened. It's harder if somebody is so far down the road and they get vested rights. That's where it gets much more complicated if it's towards the tail end of it. A lot of times what we'll see is somebody just that doesn't line up, things happen, whatever, but they weren't able to actually get the project done or they're looking to get it done towards the tail end and then the lender will look at it and say we're not touching that because you only have a year left on your changes on timing. And then if that doesn't work, you know, ideally they'd be proactive, they'd come in, they'd ask for a time extension and go forward on that. If it doesn't, can it rip her back? I think it's a possibility. I think it's better than sitting in limbo. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Third time's a charm. Councilman Reckon, you leave quite a few. Thank you. I was not listening. People were asking the question that was thinking about. No, I have this floating question. I think it really is. If we amend the bill, does not go back to the Planning Commission or were done without and we just proceed as business? That is not my jurisdiction. The Planning Commission provides us with a recommendation and then the council takes that into consideration and we can incorporate their recommendations or not, but we get final say on the ordinance at the past. Even if we do, like major amendments to the bill. Yes, that is correct. Thank you. You're welcome. Council Member Kagiwata, thank you chair. Just good discussion. Don't, doesn't sound like we're ready to really move too much on this because there's so much more to be done here. So looking forward to learning more about what we can do and what we should do. I'm definitely in support of looking further into some of these timing issues, matrices, trying to make it so that developers do have some of the community efforts that the community really wants up at the front of some of these building developments and stuff. But yeah, it just doesn't seem like we're quite ready to move forward on this yet. Thanks. Thank you. Before I pass it back to Council Member Inaba to postpone, because it sounds like there is some work to do. Director, just thank you for your collaboration and suggestions as part of your report. I just want to take through the five things that commissions have identified and provide some insights. So with the informed development timing, I like the idea of taking a look at the project's complexity to make that determination, but other things that kind of come to mind just based on all the different time extensions we've seen. There's the cultural and historical features, so Shifty, I remember my first re-zone application of time extension was Kalpulehu, and they were waiting for Shifty to respond for seven years, so that has to be part of that timing matrix. I also think about whether or not there are native species that need to be preserved. So that's part of the timing element. The requirements have put in any infrastructure and if it's in a FEMA floodplain. So those are things that just kind of came top of mine when you think about in addition to like the base timing for a project. If there are other things that make the projects a bit more complicated and require more time. I just like to see that as part of the matrix. Can you provide examples for exemptions to timing condition requirements because that was one of your recommendations in your report? It says ad provisions to allow exemptions from timing condition requirement. Yeah, I believe that would be in the case like we were reverting back to original zoning or something that was maybe going to like an open zoning where nothing's really going to happen. Then they should just stay that way. That was the concept there. Okay, that was the only example. That's coming to my mind at the moment. Okay, if in the next couple weeks you could think of other examples that would be really helpful as part of our deliberation. And then I'm sure you touched on this a little bit, but I just want you to be a little bit more specific around strengthening and clarifying standard performance conditions. What more can be done to improve these conditions? I think the actual performance conditions are generally right-sized. It's the timing of one they get done. Okay, so this is where the sequencing would come into play. Or sometimes they're... I think it's something we need to be sensitive to. Sometimes they're too great, but an applicant feels like they don't really have anything else to say other than yes. And we've seen that with projects in Upper Hilo that they had to come back through and get relief where they thought they'd be able to kind of handle the requirements of a certain roadway or a certain improvement. But it's so great that it didn't pencil. So they come back and say, hey, we really can't do this. And that goes kind of slows things down. So I think when you're looking at traffic, that's the big one. Water, wastewater, public access, things like that. We have those in there. It's really trying to write, size them, and time them. Okay, that makes sense. Thank you. And it sounds like you've got a good sense of how to craft the tolling language to time conditions. On the sunset piece is your deputy court counsel going to provide an opinion on whether or not we can achieve this through ordinance. Because I hate that once time conditions, sorry, ordinances, laps, now the zoning is in limbo, right? It's stale and can't do anything. So again, I wonder if that can be a condition that's in there about reverting back to original zone but I also want to be able to explore. If zoning makes sense today this rezone that it should be good in perpetuity but I want to make sure that we have guardrails for that in our code and that the council will make that ultimate decision, that there can be a very grounded, methodical, formulaic even recommendation that's provided by the planning department, that we take into consideration, and make a determination, this zoning is good in perpetuity, or if we want to sunset it. Okay. I'll ask you. I'll ask you. I'll ask you to check that out. Awesome. Thank you. Thanks for collaborating with Councilmember Inaba. Councilmember Inaba, if everything you need, what would you like to do? Yeah, I'm just going to recap what we're, what I'll be working on with the planning department. And that is an amendment for exemptions from the time requirement for those things like open or reversions. Bringing out communication regarding tolling language. You know this conversation today kind of highlighted their support for it and I think I just want to remind my colleagues that Bill 194 did guarantee a method for an initial extension via resolution. So, you know, when we come up with this matrix and we come up with this informed decision making, it's to help us put a solid timeframe on an application. And if the applicant for some reason, godly on godly, whatever it may be, happens and they're not able to get it or if that agency has it for five of the ten years they can come and get that extension via the resolution. So again I just I don't want something on paper to not mean anything which is my only concern with the told me but we will bring language at our next meeting that we can discuss to see if it's how we can potentially make it work. And then lastly, that language again, with the sunset condition. The other two recommendations and the commissions, which were the matrix and the standard performance condition, I'm not, those aren't necessarily things that would be inserted into the bill, but perhaps more a continued effort with the planning department that would be a planning department led effort. So if we have it right, I will make the motion to postpone bill 127 to the July 23rd Committee meetings. Thank you. There's a motion by Councilmember Inaba, second by Councilmember Lee Loy to postpone bill 27 to the July 23rd Committee meetings. Thank you. There's a motion by Councilmember Inaba, second by Councilmember Lee Loy to postpone bill 27 to the July 23rd. Bill bill 127 to the July 23rd meetings. Any discussion? All those in favor of please say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries with nine aye votes. Bill 127 is postponed to July 23rd. Thank you director for being here. This committee is adjourned at 10.50 a.m.