COM 0314.001 2020-2022 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

VITOUSEK: Actually, can I stop you there DARROW: Sure. VITOUSEK: —on that ane? I'd like to take my time to— DARROW: No problem. VITOUSEK: —ask the questions, if that's okay. DARROW: Thank you. VITOUSEK: And then after I get that,you are welcome to jump in, but I really would like to just add my time. Okay,my first question is of the Planning Department staff. What alternative zoning options are considered for this parcel besides RS-22? Are we looking at, I mean, is there— DARROW: Because—I can answer that—this is kind of driven by the amount of water units available. That's kind of what's driving this. You could, this is only a three-acre,3.9-acre parcel. You know, again, when we go through a change of zone, we have certain layers that we have to look at and meet. The primary layer is the General Plan, and this particular area, you are looking at Low Density Urban, so they are looking fora residential type zoning in this area. The second would be the Community Development Plan; in this particular area you are in the Kona Urban Area, they want to see a residential type zoning. This happens to even go further that it's a type of infill rezone. It's adding six additional lots to the area,we are in a housing crisis, there was talk about the agricultural potential of the land, but this really is poor soils, it's not prime ag land, and again, it's, the long-range plan for this area is to promote residential uses. So as far as what we looked at was the availability of water. There is a zoning that we have, RS-22, which seems to meet that particular area,that particular limit of water for the units that were available. VITOUSEK: Okay, thank you. My next question is in regards to the SHPD letter dated April 19, 2017, that is essentially the completion of the 6E review process for this change of zone application. And I just want to make sure that the county acknowledges that the condition of the—so the overall determination for this project for 6E is effect with proposed mitigation commitments; that's one of the few determination criteria that can be used to end historic preservation review. The mitigation commitments that are referred to in this letter are established in the preservation plan approved by SHPD, January 2016, or, sorry, Hann and Henry, 2016. And so, that establishes the preservation measures for the archaeological sites, 29789 and 29794. So, in essence, I just want to make sure that the county agrees that SHPD's review of this project is tied to the fact that these sites will be preserved. KAY: If I may, Mr. Chair? VITOUSEK: Yep. 12 DRAFT