Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0973.000 2020-2022 -O;�tY OF h. ' Lee E.Lord • Managing Director Mitchell D.Roth - •: ��s•.. • Mayor "` Robert H.Command e;4rEr;r°•�,�►`�: Deputy Managing Director pp�M!• CintitfV oftnfunt`i ®f t>CD of flip Altavor 25 Aupuni Street,Suite 2603 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 • (808)961-8211 • Fax(808)961-6553 KONA: 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Hwy.,Bldg C • Kailua-Kona,Hawaii 96740 (808)323-4444 • Fax(808)323-4440 N ca' , N " . August 24, 2022 • r;sh vti vi• ...� Maile David, Council Chair and Members of the County Council County of Hawai`i 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Chair David and Members: SUBJECT: Change of Zone Application (PL-REZ-2022-000028) Request: Single-Family Residential-10,000 Square Feet(RS-10) to a Single- Family Residential-15,000 Square Feet(RS-15) Applicant: Lehua Village Partners, LLC Tax Map Key: (3) 4-5-024:010 and 4-5-010:136, HAmAkua, Hawaii As required by Chapter 7, Sec. 6-7.5 (a)(3), Hawai`i County Charter, transmitted herewith for the County Council's consideration and action are the Windward Planning Commission's letter and enclosures regarding the above-referenced request. Sincerely, MITCHELL D. ROTH Mayor TCouncil LehuaVillagePartnersPL-REZ-2022-028 Enclosures cc: Planning Department ��� Comm. No. <1311\ 01) Ref.To: PC/ County of Hawai`i is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer. Ref. Date AUG 3 1 2022 - Mitchell D.Roth oJ,ty^us"•' •• Dennis Lin,Chair Mayor �,�• Michelle Galimba,Vice-Chair •: '� '; 01* Gilbert Aguinaldo Lee E.Lord =''�'� Lauren Balog Managing Director •'••oc, w;.� ••' ":".•411' : John C.Cross ''E os;"' Louis Daniele III Wayne De Luz County of Hawaii WINDWARD PLANNING COMMISSION Aupuni Center • 101 Pauahi Street,Suite 3 • Hilo,Hawai`i 96720 Phone(808)961-8288 • Fax(808)961-8742 August 17, 2022 Maile David, Council Chair and Members of the County Council County of Hawai`i 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Chair David and Council Members: SUBJECT: Change of Zone Application(PL-REZ-2022-000028) Request: Single-Family Residential-10,000 Square Feet(RS-10)to a Single- Family Residential-15,000 Square Feet(RS-15) Applicant: Lehua Village Partners,LLC Tax Map Key: (3)4-5-024:010 and 4-5-010:136,Hamakua,Hawaii The Windward Planning Commission (Commission), at its duly held public hearing on August 4, 2022, considered the subject application for a Change of Zone from a Single-Family Residential- 10,000 square feet (RS-10) to a Single-Family Residential-15,000 square feet (RS-15) zoning district for approximately 14.322 acres of land. The properties straddle the east and west sides of Lehua Street, north (makai) of the Hawai`i Belt Road and south (mauka) of the Honoka`a Park complex, portion of Papa'anui&Haina, Hamakua, Hawai`i. The Commission voted to forward a favorable recommendation to the County Council based on the Planning Director's recommendation with the following amendments: • Condition N(Fair Share): Deletion of the last line related to the exclusion of lots sold for excess housing credits. The-conditions in the draft bill attached to this letter reflect the Commission's changes discussed above. The Commission's concurs with the following Planning Director's reasons for favorable consideration of the request: Hawaii County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer Maile David, Council Chair and Members of the County Council County of Hawai`i August 17,2022 Page 2 The applicant is requesting to change the zoning district from Single-Family Residential-10,000 square feet (RS-10) to Single-Family Residential-15,000 square feet (RS- 15) for approximately 14.322 acres of land. According to the application, the downzoning request would reduce the mathematical density allowed on the subject properties from 60 to 40 lots. The applicant has concurrently requested a Planned Unit Development(PUD) for that same land area that would allow various exceptions from Chapter 23 (Subdivision) and Chapter 25 (Zoning) of the Hawaii County Code. The proposed development is a Master Planned PUD called Lehua Villages and consists of two development components, Lehua Village 1, and Lehua Village 2. Lehua Village 1 would be situated on Parcel 136 (7.137 acres of land) with lot sizes ranging from 10,000 square feet to 23,400 square feet. These 20 lots are proposed to be sold at affordable rates consistent with affordable housing guidelines for Hawaii County and pursuant to an executed affordable housing agreement between the applicant and the Office of Housing and Community Development (OHCD). Lehua Village 2 would be situated on Parcel 10 (7.185 acres of land) with lot sizes ranging from 10,000 square feet to 33,000 square feet. These 20 lots will be offered for sale at market rates. If the entitlement requests are approved, the applicant plans to submit a subdivision application by the end of 2022, with anticipated completion of the subdivision for both Villages within five (5) years, by the end of 2027. The applicant anticipates the project will cost approximately$3 million to$4 million. In order to consider an area for any type of zoning designation, the applicable goals, policies, and standards of the General Plan must be adequately addressed. It is only through such a comprehensive policy analysis approach that evaluations and decisions can be made to better time and stage developments to achieve growth determined by the General Plan and related planning documents. The implications of these evaluations and decisions must also be considered as they may have an impact on similar areas in the County. The Change of Zone request from Single-Family Residential 10,000 square feet (RS-10) to Single-Family Residential 15,000 square feet (RS-15) conforms to the goals, policies and standards of the General Plan and the Hamakua Community Development Plan (CDP). The General Plan is intended to be used as a policy guide for the coordinated growth and development of all sectors of the County. It sets forth goals, policies, standards, and courses of action to accommodate growth without congestion, to designate and preserve the lands needed for residential use, commercial and visitor services, industry, agriculture, and open space, and to coordinate these uses with the County's service and circulation systems. The overall goals, policies and standards are set forth to physically plan the lands in Maile David, Council Chair and Members of the County Council County of Hawai` August 17,2022 Page 3 the County in the best interest of the island's residents. Land use is one of the principal focal points of public concern and policy. The Land Use Element provides the primary basis for direct control and guidance of publicly and privately-owned resources. The proposed change of zone will be consistent with the following goals, policies, and standard of the Land Use- Single-Family Residential Element of the General Plan: • Designate and allocate land uses in appropriate proportions and mix and in keeping with the social, cultural, and physical environments of the County. • Allocate appropriate requested zoning in accordance with the existing or projected needs of neighborhood, community, region, and County. • Zoning request shall be reviewed with respect to General Plan designation, district goals, regional plans, State Land Use District, compatibility with adjacent zoned uses, availability of public services and utilities, access, and public need. • Designate and allocate single-family residential zoned lands at varying densities for future use in accordance with the needs of the communities and he stated goals, policies, and standards. The Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) Map component of the General Plan is a representation of the document's goals and policies to guide the coordinated growth and development of the County. It reflects a graphic depiction of the physical relationship among the various land uses. The LUPAG Map establishes the basic urban and non-urban form for areas within the County. Parcel 10 (Lehua Villages 2) is split between a Low Density Urban and a Medium Density Urban designation and Parcel 136 (Lehua Villages 1) is fully designated Medium Density Urban by the General Plan LUPAG map. The Low Density Urban designation allows residential use,with ancillary community and public uses, and neighborhood and convenience-type commercial uses, overall residential density may be up to six units per acre; and the Medium Density Urban designation allows village and neighborhood commercial and single family and multiple family residential and related functions (multiple family residential-up to 35 units per acre). The Hamakua Community Development (HCDP) was adopted by ordinance in 2018. The subject properties are located within the Honoka`a designated urban growth boundary and located in an area designated for Low and Medium Density Urban uses by the Honoka`a/Haina Land Use Guide Map, which essentially follows the land use pattern recommended by the General Plan. In addition, the proposed project conforms to several objectives of the HCDP, including concentrating new developments within existing town centers while limiting rural sprawl and providing affordable housing(lots). Maile David, Council Chair and Members of the County Council County of Hawai`i August 17, 2022 Page 4 Policy No. 70 of the HCDP is written as follows: "To improve safe pedestrian access and increase connectivity in Honoka'a: • Make safety improvements to downtown Honoka'a based on Complete Streets and/or other evidence-based planning principles. o Improvements to include additional pedestrian crosswalks on Mamane Street, additional sidewalk development (such as along Lehua Street), and safe, marked walkways to parking areas servicing downtown. " While this policy specifically recommends additional sidewalk development along Lehua Street, it is referencing improvements to the section of Lehua Street in the vicinity of downtown Honoka`a and is not meant to recommend additional sidewalk development on Lehua Street fronting the subject parcel (situated approximately 2,100 linear feet mauka of Lehua Steet's intersection with Mamane Street in downtown Honoka`a). The subject 14.322-acre project site consists of two irregularly shaped properties, each a little over 7 acres in size, that are separated by Lehua Street. The project site is bordered along the south by the Hawai`i Belt Road (Highway 19) and to the north by Lehua Street and its future extension. The project site is currently vacant of any structures or uses with an extensive cover of abandoned sugar cane and various non-native grasses. The overall slope of the project site ranges between 8 percent to over 13 percent, with the steepest portions adjacent to the Hawai`i Belt Road and Lehua Street and an adjoining dry ditch located to the west. The project site is situated along the makai side of the Hawai`i Belt Road within the urban core of Honoka`a town. To the east lies Tex's Drive Inn, situated on Commercial- zoned lands. In close proximity to the north (makai) lies the Honoka`a Elementary, Intermediate and High School complexes, the Honoka`a Park complex, and the Hale Ho`ola Hamakua medical complex. Immediately to the east of the project along Lehua Street is a recent 8-lot subdivision consisting of lots at least 10,000 square feet in size on lands zoned RS-10. To the immediate west of the project site are vacant lands zoned RS-10. While the downzone to RS-15 would reduce the residential density in this area, it is still consistent with the urban, residential nature of the surrounding community and consistent with the LUPAG designations of the subject parcels. Additionally, this rezone, along with an approved PUD, will allow the applicant to defray infrastructure costs associated with typical subdivision requirements in order to ensure that 50% of the proposed lots would be offered at affordable rates to prospective buyers. This Maile David, Council Chair and Members of the County Council County of Hawai`i August 17, 2022 Page 5 will be done through an affordable housing agreement between the applicant and the County Office of Housing and Community Development pursuant to Chapter 11 of the Hawai`i County Code, that will be executed prior to receipt of Final Subdivision Approval for any portion of the project.The preceding will be added as a condition of approval. Based on the preceding, the proposed RS-15 zoning conforms to the goals, policies and standards of the General Plan and the Hamakua Community Development Plan(CDP). All utilities and services are available to the site. Proposed access to the subject properties is from Lehua Street, a curvilinear, two- way, two-lane local roadway, between Pakalana Street and the Honoka`a County Park complex. Sight distances along Lehua Street are limited by its horizontal and vertical alignments and roadside vegetation and embankments. Lehua Street is a County owned and maintained roadway with an approximately 21- to 22-foot-wide pavement (in the area of the subject parcels) within an existing 50-foot-wide right-of-way. Both Lehua Village 1 and Lehua Village 2 will have a roadway connection from Lehua Street to a private subdivision roadway consisting of 20-foot-wide pavement and 10-foot-wide grass shoulders within a 40- foot-wide right-of-way. Each private roadway will end in an alternative "hammerhead" turn- around in lieu of a traditional cul-de-sac meeting with the requirements of the Fire Department. Finally, a condition of approval will require these private roadways to be maintained by the lot/homeowners. According to the Department of Public Works-Engineering Division, all road connections and construction within Lehua Street shall conform to Chapter 22, County Streets, of the Hawai`i County Code and access to Lehua Street, including the provision of adequate sight distances, shall meet with the approval of the Department of Public Works, Engineering Division. This will be added as a condition of approval.. According to the applicant, there will be no direct driveway access from individual lots to Lehua Steet as all driveway accesses will come off of the proposed private roadways. To ensure that this remains the case, a condition of approval requiring a 10 foot-wide no vehicular access planting screen easement be incorporated on properties with frontage along Lehua Street will be added. While the proposed 40-lot subdivision did not trigger a Traffic Impact Analysis Report(TIAR)under the Zoning Code's concurrency requirements, the applicant submitted a Traffic Analysis Report (TAR) dated May 22, 2020, that considered the traffic impacts for a larger, 80-lot subdivision including the subject properties and a third, adjacent parcel. The report studied the potential impact of traffic at the Hawai`i Belt Road/Pakalana Street and Pakalana Street/Lehua Street intersections and determined that with the addition of Maile David, Council Chair and Members of the County Council County of Hawai`i August 17, 2022 Page 6 as many as 80 lots, these intersections would operate at acceptable levels of service; thus, no intersection traffic mitigation was recommended. According to the Department of Water Supply (DWS), pursuant to a Water Development Agreement, dated September 15, 2014, between the applicant and Water Board, the applicant has a water commitment of 100 units of water, of which the proposed 40-lot subdivision will require 38 additional units of water. These units can be made available from the existing 12-inch waterline within Lehua Street. The applicant will be required to pay a water commitment deposit, pay water facilities charges and construct water system improvements meeting with the requirements of DWS in prior to receipt of final subdivision approval. The preceding will be added as conditions of approval. According to the Department of Environmental Management, there is no County sewer system in the area. The lot owners will need to construct individual septic wastewater systems meeting with the approval of the Department of Health. There is no municipal waste collection service in the County. According to the applicant, solid waste will be either be handled by commercial haulers who will dispose of the refuse at authorized landfill sites or by homeowners at the nearest solid waste transfer station. Electrical, telephone and internet services are available to the properties. Police, fire, and medical services are available nearby in Honoka`a town. A condition of approval will require the applicant or successor to pay a fair share contribution on lots designated for sale at market rates to mitigate potential regional impacts of the development. There are no severe geological or topographical problems which cannot be properly rectified, or which would render the land unusable. The overall slope of the project site ranges between 8 percent to over 13 percent, with the steepest portions adjacent to the Hawai`i Belt Road and Lehua Street and an adjoining dry ditch located to the west. The property is situated approximately 1.8 miles from the nearest shoreline and thus not situated within the tsunami inundation area or evacuation area. According to the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), The majority of the project site is situated within flood Zone "X," which is determined by FEMA to be an area of minimal flood hazard. However, the western boundary of the Lehua Village 2 is defined by a shallow drainageway identified as "Honoka`a Drainageway No. 2" which is also designated as a FEMA floodway subject to 100-year (AH) frequency floods with depths of 1 to 3 feet (usually areas of ponding). According to the applicant, however, none of the subdivision infrastructure will be built within the AH area mentioned above. If an individual lot owner chooses to build in the AH designated area, they will be required to build as required by Chapter 27, Flood Control, of the Hawai`i County Code. Maile David, Council Chair and Members of the County Council County of Hawai`i August 17,2022 Page 7 According to the Department of Public Works — Engineering Division, all development generated runoff shall be disposed of onsite and not be directed toward any adjacent properties. A drainage study shall be prepared by a licensed civil engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works prior to the issuance of a construction permit. Any recommended drainage improvements, if required, shall be constructed meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works prior to the construction of any proposed structures on the property. The applicant will also be required to comply with the County Flood Code. The preceding will be added as conditions of approval. The subject request is not contrary to Chapter 205A, Hawaii Revised Statues, relating to Coastal Zone Management. The property is not located in the Special Management Area. The subject property is located more than three miles from the shoreline approximately 1.8 miles from the nearest shoreline and will not be impacted by coastal hazard and beach erosion. There is no record of a designated public access to the shoreline or mountain areas that traverses the property. According to the applicant, it is not known whether the subject property or immediate surrounding area have been used in the recent past for the gathering of plants by Native Hawaiians. The applicant has not observed any Native Hawaiians on the site or adjoining properties gathering plants and there is no evidence of any traditional and customary Native Hawaiian rights being practiced on the site, nor existence of any known valued cultural, historical, or native resources in the area. The request will not have a signnificant adverse impact to traditional and customary Hawaiian Rights. In view of the Hawai`i State Supreme Court's "PASH" and "Ka Pa'akai 0 Ka'Aina" decisions, the issue relative to native Hawaiian gathering and fishing rights must be addressed in terms of the cultural, historical, and natural resources and the associated traditional and customary practices of the site: Investigation of valued resources: No professional archaeological, cultural studies, or flora/fauna studies were conducted on the subject properties as they have been heavily physically altered and used for intensive sugar cane cultivation for decades. According to the applicant, it is unknown if the subject property or immediate surrounding area was used in the past for the gathering of plants by Native Hawaiians. According to the applicant, vegetation on the subject properties primarily consists of abandoned sugar cane with a mix of non-native grasses and pockets of ironwood trees. Observed fauna include introduced bird species such as dove, Japanese White-eye, house finch and myna that are common in the surrounding area, as well as domestic animals such as cats, dogs, goats, chickens,rats, and feral pigs. The valuable cultural, historical, and natural resources found in the rezoning area: According to the applicant, the subject properties have been previously used for intensive Maile David, Council Chair and Members of the County Council County of Hawai`i August 17, 2022 Page 8 sugar cane cultivation for decades. Furthermore, the properties are situated approximately 1.8 miles from the nearest shoreline, thus it is unlikely that any valuable cultural, historical, or natural resources are located on the subject parcels. Finally, given the preceding and the urban nature of the surrounding area, the applicant does not believe that rare or endangered floral or faunal resources are likely to be found within the site. Possible adverse effect or impairment of valued resources: There may be a possibility that native plants could be destroyed by construction and ground alteration, but this is unlikely as no native plants have been observed on the site. The subject property does not abut the shoreline,therefore Hawaiian gathering and fishing rights is not an issue. Feasible actions to protect native Hawaiian rights: No known gathering is taking place on the site. Thus, to the extent to which traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights are exercised, the proposed action will not affect traditional Hawaiian rights; therefore, no action is necessary to protect these rights. Based on the preceding, it is believed that the project would have no adverse impact relative to the archaeological, cultural, or historical resources of the area. To the extent to which traditional and customary Native Hawaiian rights are exercised, the proposed action will not affect traditional Hawaiian rights and no action is necessary to protect these rights. Lastly, this approval is made with the understanding that the applicant remains responsible for complying with all other applicable governmental requirements in connection with the approved use, prior to its commencement or establishment upon the subject property. Additional governmental requirements may include the issuance of building permits, the installation of approved wastewater disposal systems, compliance with the Fire Code, installation of improvements required by the American with Disabilities Act (ADA), compliance with DLNR-SHPD requirements, among many others. Compliance with all applicable governmental requirements is a condition of this approval; failure to comply with such requirements will be considered a violation that may result in enforcement action by the Planning Department and/or the affected agencies. Based on the preceding findings, approval of this Change of Zone from a Single-Family Residential-10,000 Square Feet (RS-10) to a Single-Family Residential-15,000 Square Feet (RS- 15) zoning district would result in an appropriate land use pattern that will further benefit the general public. The accompanying draft bill to amend Section 25-8-15 (Hamakua District Zone Map), Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawai`i County Code, is provided for your favorable consideration. Please note the proposed conditions of approval attached to the draft bill. Maile David, Council Chair and Members of the County Council County of Hawai`i August 17,2022 Page 9 We are enclosing copies of the Planning Director's Background and Recommendation, Power Point presentation, and the draft transcript of the Commission hearing. Sincerely, Michelleelle 2022 14:12 FIST) Michelle Galimba, Vice Chair Windward Planning Commission P\wp60\PC\PCC2022-3\LehuaVillagePL-REZ-2022-028wpc 1 Enclosures: Draft Bill Planning Department Background Report Planning Department Recommendation PowerPoint Presentation cc letter only via email: Sidney Fuke,Planning Consultant Roger Meeker, Lehua Village Partners,LLC Daryn Arai,Land Use Planning Consultant Department of Public Works Department of Water Supply Jean K. Campbell Esq., Corporation Counsel B Lehua V it lageREZ-P UD.7.7.2022.crk COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT BACKGROUND REPORT LEHUA VILLAGE PARTNERS, LLC CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (PL-REZ-2022-000028) PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION (PL-PUD-2022-000001) LEHUA VILLAGE PARTNERS,LLC has submitted applications for a Change of Zone from pp a Single-Family Residential-10,000 square feet(RS-10) to a Single-Family Residential-15,000 square feet(RS-15) zoning district and for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) for 14.322 acres of land. The PUD would allow various exceptions from Chapter 23 (Subdivision) and Chapter 25 (Zoning) of the Hawaii County Code. The subject properties straddle the east and west sides of Lehua Street, north (makai) of the Hawaiei Belt Road and south (mauka) of the Honoka`a Park Complex,portion of Papa`anui & Haina, Hamakua, Hawaiei, TMKs: (3) 4-5-024:010 & (3) 4-5-010:136. PROPOSED ACTION 1. Applicant's Request: The applicant is requesting to change the zoning district from Single-Family Residential-10,000 square feet(RS-10) to Single-Family Residential- 15,000 square feet(RS-15) for approximately 14.322 acres of land. Additionally, the applicant is requesting a Planned Unit Development(PUD)permit to allow for the following exemptions to the Zoning and Subdivision Codes in order to facilitate the development of a 40-lot single-family residential subdivision across two separate properties: Exceptions Requested from Zoning Code (HCC Chapter 25) • Minimum Street Frontage (HCC §25-4-30). Request to waive requirements that certain proposed lots will have roadway frontages of less than 50 percent of the required minimum building site average width of 38 feet based on requested RS-15 zoning district. Additionally, only one lot(Village 2, Lot 5) will not have any roadway frontage nor access pole and will be accessed via a roadway easement due to -1- steep topography that would make it too difficult to extend the road lot for sake of a single parcel (see PUD application Figure 3 —PUD Master Plan). • Minimum Building Site Area; Minimum Average Width (HCC §25-4-31). Request to waive minimum building site area requirements to allow a minimum building site area of 10,000 square feet within the proposed RS-15 zoning district. Additionally, request to allow the minimum building site area average width to be 60 feet instead of the 75 feet required within the proposed RS-15 zoning district(see PUD application Figure 3 —PUD Master Plan). • Reduction of Building Site Below Minimum Area (HCC §25-4-32). Request to reduce building sites to no less than 10,000 square feet in lieu of the 15,000 square feet minimum lot size required by the proposed RS-15 zoning district (see PUD application Figure 3 —PUD Master Plan). • Minimum Building Site Average Width (HCC §25-5-6). Request to allow the minimum building site area average width of 60 feet instead of the 75 feet required by the proposed RS-15 zoning district(see PUD application Figure 3 —PUD Master Plan). • Minimum Yards (HCC §25-5-7). Request to allow a minimum front yard setback of 15 feet in lieu of the 20 feet required by the proposed RS-15 zoning district(see PUD application Exhibit 1 —Yard Designation). • Other Regulations (HCC §25-5-8). Request to allow for a minimum front yard setback of 15 feet for all lots, irrespective of minimum building site average width of 60 feet that is consistent with an RS-7.5 zoning district. Exceptions Requested from Subdivision Code (HCC Chapter 23) • Access to Lot from Street(HCC §23-34). Request to allow for one lot (Village 2, Lot 5) to not have any direct roadway frontage nor access pole, instead it is proposed to be accessed via a roadway easement due to steep topography that would make it too difficult to extend the road lot for the sake of a single parcel. Additionally, the applicant proposes that the Village 2, Lot 18 pole will also accommodate accesses for -2- adjoining Lots 19 &20 via a common access easement to minimize driveway cuts onto the proposed subdivision road (see PUD application Exhibit 2—Access & Utility Easement). • Minimum Right-of-Way and Pavement Widths (HCC §23-41).The applicant requests the allowance of the following roadway widths and turn-around radius: o Minor Street: 40-foot-wide right-of-way in lieu of 50 feet; o Cul-de-sacs and dead-end streets: 40-foot-wide right-of-way in lieu of 50 feet; & o Turn-around alternative designs that are acceptable to the Fire Department, such as "hammerhead" or similar turnarounds that have depths of at least 60 feet with corner radius of at least 30 feet(see PUD application Exhibit 3 —Right of Way Improvement). ■ Cul-De-Sacs (HCC §23-48). Request to allow the following: o A cul-de-sac roadway with a maximum length of no more than 1,000 feet and serving no more than 20 lots rather than 600 feet in length and serving no more than 18 lots. o Turn-around alternative designs that are acceptable to the Fire Department, such as "hammerhead"turnarounds that have turnaround depths of at least 60 feet with corner radius of at least 28 feet. o Turning radiuses as shown on Exhibits 5 & 6 to navigate mailbox kiosk parking area combined with turnaround area(see PUD application Exhibits 4, 5 & 6-Cul- de-Sacs). • Grades and Curves (HCC §23-50). Request to allow the following roadway grades and curves: o Vertical and horizontal curves of less than 300 feet provided that such curves conform to AASHTO minimum standards. o Proposed subdivision roads will have minimum radius as little as 80 feet, but as a dead-end road with no through traffic and design speed of 15mph, this should not be an issue according to the applicant. -3- o Allow for a minor subdivision road having maximum grade of 20 percent to accommodate anticipated short sections along the subdivision road that may exceed the typical maximum 12 percent grade (see PUD application Exhibit 7 - Street Intersection Angles and Radius). • Street Lights (HCC §23-93). Request to allow the use of custom street lights in lieu of those meeting the standard specifications on file at the Department of Public Works (see PUD application Exhibit 8— Street Lights). ■ Street Names and Traffic Signs (HCC §23-94). Request to allow the use of custom street name and traffic signs in lieu of the type of signs permitted by the standard specifications on file at the Department of Public Works (see PUD application Exhibit 9— Street Signs). • Right-of-Way Improvement(HCC §23-95). Request to allow design flexibility in the treatment of the right-of-way areas in lieu of what is typically required by the standard specifications on file at the Department of Public Works. The proposed subdivision road profile will consist of: o 40-foot-wide right-of-way; o 20-foot-wide travel-ways; o 10-foot wide grassed and landscaped shoulders lined with trees; and o No bike lane (See PUD application Exhibit 3 —Right of Way Improvement). 2. Proposed Development: The proposed development is a Master Planned PUD called Lehua Villages and consists of two development components, Lehua Village 1, and Lehua Village 2. Lehua Village 1 would be situated on Parcel 136 (7.137 acres of land) with lot sizes ranging from 10,000 square feet to 23,400 square feet. These 20 lots are proposed to be sold at affordable rates consistent with affordable housing guidelines for Hawai`i County and pursuant to an executed affordable housing agreement between the applicant and the Office of Housing and Community Development (OHCD). Lehua Village 2 would be situated on Parcel 10 (7.185 acres of land) with lot sizes ranging from -4- 10,000 square feet to 33,000 square feet. These 20 lots will be offered for sale at market rates. According to the applicant, the purpose for the requested PUD permit is to promote the development of a single-family residential development that is more neighborhood- friendly and consistent with the rural character prevalent throughout the Honoka`a town area. Another primary purpose for the requested PUD permit is to facilitate the design of this proposed residential community across two separate properties that are bisected by a meandering public road(Lehua Street) with unique topographic conditions that is not conducive to the typical platting of lots that you would normally find on sites with more moderate grades and not constrained by an existing road. Finally, both the downzoning from RS-10 to RS-15 and PUD will allow the applicant to defray infrastructure costs associated with typical subdivision design in order to ensure that 50% of the proposed lots would be offered at affordable rates to prospective buyers. 3. Project Timetable and Cost: If the entitlement requests are approved, the applicant plans to submit a subdivision application by the end of 2022, with anticipated completion of the subdivision for both Villages within five(5) years, by the end of 2027. The applicant anticipates the project will cost approximately$3 million to $4 million. 4. Landowners: Lehua Village Partners, LLC. 5. Supportive Information: The applicant has submitted the attached in support of the request (Planning Department Exhibit 1 & 2—Change of Zone Application & Planned Unit Development Application) STATE, COUNTY & COMMUNITY PLANS 6. State Land Use District: Urban. 7. General Plan LUPAG Map Designation: Parcel 10 (Lehua Villages 2) is split between a Low Density Urban and a Medium Density Urban designation and Parcel 136 (Lehua Villages 1) is fully designated Medium Density Urban by the General Plan LUPAG map. The Low Density Urban designation allows residential use, with ancillary community and public uses, and neighborhood and convenience-type commercial uses; overall residential -5- density may be up to six units per acre and the Medium Density Urban designation allows village and neighborhood commercial and single family and multiple family residential and related functions (multiple family residential -up to 35 units per acre). 8. County Zoning: Single-Family Residential-10,000 square feet(RS-10). 9. Hamakua Community Development Plan (HCDP): The HCDP was adopted by Ordinance No. 18-78, which became effective on August 22, 2018. The subject properties are located within the Honoka`a designated urban growth boundary and located in an area designated for Low and Medium Density Urban uses by the Honoka`a/Haina Land Use Guide Map, which essentially follows the land use pattern recommended by the General Plan. 10. Special Management Area (SMA): The subject properties are not situated within the SMA and are located approximately 1.8 miles from the nearest shoreline. BACKGROUND INFORMATION 11. April 24, 1978: Effective date of Change of Zone Ordinance No. 341, which rezoned 115+/- acres of land on the mauka and makai side of the Hawai`i Belt Road, which included the 14.322-acre project site, from Agricultural (A-40a& A-5a) to Single Family Residential (RS-10) (see Exhibit A of the Change of Zone application). 12. April 3, 1985: Effective date of Change of Zone Ordinance 85-18, which amended conditions of Ordinance No. 341. 13. June 14, 1991: Effective date of Change of Zone Ordinance 91-54, which amended conditions of Ordinance No. 85-18. 14. April 1978 thru April 2020: The original 115+/- acres zoned for single family residential uses have witnessed at least 15 individual subdivision actions resulting in about 70 lots, including commercial zoned property. These include the following subdivision actions that created the subject properties. 15. March 9, 2016: Approval date of Subdivision No. 16-001585 which created Parcel 136 (site of Lehua Village 1) -6- 16. March 18, 2016: Approval Date of Subdivision No. 15-001511 which created Parcel 010 (site of Lehua Village 2). DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA 17. Subject Property: The subject 14.322-acre project site consists of two irregularly shaped properties, each a little over 7 acres in size, that are separated by Lehua Street. The project site is bordered along the south by the Hawai`i Belt Road (Highway 19) and to the north by Lehua Street and its future extension. The project site is currently vacant of any structures or uses with an extensive cover of abandoned sugar cane and various non- native grasses. The overall slope of the project site ranges between 8 percent to over 13 percent, with the steepest portions adjacent to the Hawai`i Belt Road and Lehua Street and an adjoining dry ditch located to the west. 18. Surrounding Land Uses/Zoning: The project site is situated along the makai side of the Hawai`i Belt Road within the urban core of Honoka`a town. To the east lies Tex's Drive Inn, situated on commercial-zoned lands. In close proximity to the north(makai) lies the Honoka`a Elementary, Intermediate and High School complexes, the Honoka`a Park complex, and the Hale Ho`ola Hamakua medical complex. Immediately to the east of the project along Lehua Street is a recent 8-lot subdivision consisting of lots at least 10,000 square feet in size on lands zoned RS-10. To the immediate west of the project site are vacant lands zoned RS-10. These lands were included in the original and amended rezone ordinances. 19. Flood Zone: The majority of the project site is situated within flood Zone "X,"which is determined by FEMA to be an area of minimal flood hazard. However, the western boundary of the Lehua Village 2 is defined by a shallow drainageway identified as "Honoka`a Drainageway No. 2"which is also designated as a FEMA floodway subject to 100-year(AH) frequency floods with depths of 1 to 3 feet (usually areas of ponding) (Planning Department Exhibit 3- Floodway Map). 20. Flora/Fauna Resources: No professional floral or faunal survey was conducted of the subject properties due to their previous use for sugar cane cultivation. According to the -7- applicant, vegetation on the subject properties primarily consists of abandoned sugar cane with a mix of non-native grasses and pockets of ironwood trees. Observed fauna include introduced bird species such as dove, Japanese White-eye, house finch and myna that are common in the surrounding area, as well as domestic animals such as cats, dogs, goats, chickens, rats, and feral pigs. Given the urban nature of the surrounding area and since the property has previously been cleared and heavily cultivated in sugar cane, the applicant does not believe that rare or endangered floral or faunal resources are likely to be found within the subject parcel. 21. Archaeological/Cultural/Historical Resources: No professional archaeological and/or cultural studies were conducted of the properties as they have previously been used for intensive sugar cane cultivation. According to the applicant, it is unknown if the subject property or immediate surrounding area was used in the past for the gathering of plants by Native Hawaiians. In the event that legitimate gathering claims are made by Native Hawaiians, the applicant has stated they will provide access to the site for this purpose. 22. Public Access: There is no public access to the mountains or the shoreline that traverses the property. 23. Traffic: Section 25-2-46 (d) (1) of the concurrency provision in the Zoning Code requires a Traffic Impact Analysis Report(TIAR) as part of any rezoning application in situations where the project can generate 50 or more peak hour trips. Given the number of proposed lots (40) allowed by the rezoning, this requirement was not triggered. However, the applicant did submit a Traffic Analysis Report (TAR) dated May 22, 2020 that considered the traffic impacts for a larger, 80-lot subdivision including the subject properties and a third, adjacent parcel. The report studied the potential impact of traffic at the Hawai`i Belt Road/Pakalana Street and Pakalana Street/Lehua Street intersections. With the addition of a project with as many as 80 lots, the existing Level of Service (LOS) "A" at the Pakalana Street/Lehua Street intersection would operate at"B" and"A" during the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. At the Hawai`i Belt Road/Pakalana Street intersection, the existing LOS "C"would continue to operate at "C" during the AM -8- and PM peak hours. According to the Zoning Code's Concurrency section, LOS A through C are all considered acceptable levels of service; thus, no intersection traffic mitigation was recommended. However, the report recommended that, "The project access driveway and subdivision roadway intersections on Lehua Street should be situated and designed so as to provide appropriate sight distances on all approaches to the proposed subdivision. "As discussed below, access to the subdivisions, including the provision of adequate site distances, will be required to meet with the approval of the Department of Public Works. Finally, according to the State Department of Transportation(DOT), the proposed change of zone and 40-lot PUD/subdivision does not appear to significantly impact the state highway system and DOT has no objections to the applications. UTILITIES AND SERVICES 24. Roadway Access: Proposed access to the subject properties is from Lehua Street, a curvilinear, two-way, two-lane local roadway, between Pakalana Street and the Honoka`a County Park complex. According to the TAR mentioned above, sight distances along Lehua Street are limited by its horizontal and vertical alignments and roadside vegetation and embankments. Lehua Street is a County owned and maintained roadway with an approximately 21- to 22-foot-wide pavement (in the area of the subject parcels) within an existing 50-foot-wide right-of-way. Both Lehua Village 1 and Lehua Village 2 will have a roadway connection from Lehua Street to a private subdivision roadway consisting of 20-foot-wide pavement and 10-foot-wide grass shoulders within a 40-foot-wide right-of- way. Each private roadway will end in an alternative"hammerhead"turn-around in lieu of a traditional cul-de-sac meeting with the requirements of the Fire Department. According to the applicant, there will be no direct driveway access from individual lots to Lehua Steet as all driveway accesses will come off of the proposed private roadways. Finally, the PUD Master Plan also shows a minimum 10-foot-wide pedestrian access pathway corridor, consisting of approximately 4-foot-wide pavement, connecting the end of each cul-de-sac to Lehua Street meant to allow pedestrian access to the Honoka`a Park -9- Complex makai of the subject parcels. These pathways are intended to be incorporated into an easement, with their maintenance responsibilities falling with a homeowner's association. According to the Department of Public Works-Engineering Division, all road connections and construction within Lehua Street shall conform to Chapter 22, County Streets, of the Hawai`i County Code and access to Lehua Street, including the provision of adequate sight distances, shall meet with the approval of the Department of Public Works, Engineering Division. 25. Water: According to the Department of Water Supply (DWS),pursuant to a Water Development Agreement, dated September 15, 2014,between the applicant and County Water Board, the applicant has a water commitment of 100 units of water, of which the proposed 40-lot subdivision will require 38 additional units of water. These units can be made available from the existing 12-inch waterline within Lehua Street. The applicant will be required to pay a water commitment deposit of$5,700 and pay water facilities charges and construct water system improvements meeting with the requirements of DWS prior to receipt of final subdivision approval. 26. Wastewater: As there is no County sewer line in this area, each lot resulting from the proposed subdivision will be serviced by individual wastewater systems meeting with the requirements and approval of the State Department of Health in conjunction with the building permit process. 27. Solid Waste: There are no municipal waste collection services in the County. According to the applicant, solid waste will be handled by commercial haulers, who will dispose of the refuse at authorized landfill sites. 28. Utilities and Services: Electrical, telephone and internet services are available to the properties. Police, fire, and medical services are available nearby in Honoka`a town. AGENCY COMMENTS 29. Department of Public Works-: (Planning Department Exhibit 4-June 1, 2022 memo) 30. Department of Water Supply: (Planning Department Exhibit 5-June 6, 2022 letter) -10- ' 31. Department of Environmental Management: (Planning Department Exhibit 6-May 17,2022 memo) 32. Office of Housing and Community Development: (Planning Department Exhibit 7- June 9, 2022 letter) 33. State Department of Transportation: (Planning Department Exhibit 8 -June 1, 2022 letter) AGENCIES -NO COMMENTS OR CONCERNS 34. Police Department, State Department of Land and Natural Resources-Land and Engineering Divisions, and State Department of Health. AGENCIES —NO RESPONSE 35. Department of Public Works-Traffic Division, Fire Department, and DLNR-State Historic Preservation Division APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO AGENCY COMMENTS 36. Response letter from the applicant: (Planning Department Exhibit 9-June 23,2022 Letter) PUBLIC COMMENTS 37. Richard Bidleman Testimony: (Planning Department Exhibit 10 -May 22, 2022 Email) 38. Jim Loewen Testimony: (Planning Department Exhibit 11 -May 26,2022 Email) 39. Bett& Richard Bidleman Testimony: (Planning Department Exhibit 12—July 27, 2022 Email) APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS 40. Response letter from the applicant: (Planning Department Exhibit 13 -June 23, 2022 Letter) -11- COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT COUNTY REZONING REQUEST - RS-10 to RS-15 APPLICANT: LEHUA VILLAGE PARTNERS LLC TMK: (3) 4-5-024: 010 and (3) 4-5-010: 136 I. INTRODUCTION Lehua Village Partners LLC ("Applicant") is the owner of two (2) properties identified by TMK: 4-5-024: 010 and 4-5-010: 136, consisting of a total of 14.322 acres ("subject site"). The subject site was part of an ordinance (Ordinance No. 341) that rezoned approximately 115+ acres of land that was rezoned from Agricultural (A-40a and A-5a) to Single-Family Residential (RS-10) in 1978. (Exhibit A) The purpose of that rezoning was to provide approximately 400 house lots for the former employees of the then applicant, Hamakua Sugar Company, while creating land exchange opportunities to foster the acquisition and subsequent retention of lands that were under sugar cane production then. By having the subject site rezoned from RS-10 to RS-15, the allowable mathematical density of the subject site would be reduced from 62 to 40 lots. However, in spite of the density reduction, through the Planned Unit Development ("PUD") process, the Applicant would like to do a 40-unit housing project that will consist of at least 50% affordable lots/units. It should be noted that the Applicant initially sought to amend the underlying zoning ordinance. However, upon consultation with the Planning Department, it was determined that going through a new rezoning instead of the zoning amendment process would enable the request to be reviewed with fresher lens. As a result, this report is intended to provide support of the requested downzoning request. II. PROJECT LOCATION The subject site consists of two (2) parcels, identified by TMK: 4-5-024: 010, consisting of 7.185 acres, and 4-5-010: 136, consisting of 7.137 acres for a combined area of 14.322 acres. ThesepP arcels straddle Lehua Street, located'within the upper portion of p the town of Honoka'a. Lehua Street is located on the makai side of the Highway. Tex Drive In is located immediately east of the to the subject site, while the Honoka'a School and community hospital complexes are located immediately makai and fronting Pakalana and Plumeria Streets, respectively. (Figures 1 and 2) Planning Dept. 1 Exhibit 1_ S J 404O W ,cTP .yi4 Sty /it. = HONOKA'A 2O 00/ PARK COMPLEX o 3 d (EX PROJECT SITE Figure 1 — Location Map Figure 2-Project Site & Parcels Composite Map The original 115+/- acres that were rezoned to residential in 1978 consisted of properties located on both the mauka and makai side of the State Highway. The subject site comprises only a portion of the makai area. (Figure 3) 2 3.--13..a..3-II.00irramsa •,...- - •- - ... - - - .3 .I -- 1 1 • •s. /--I'• ... ..-..Z..--.... . - - --.---.' ...-------------• - I • i . ,,..,, ,.,"-•, -.....,.,-.---,"......„ / ..„ ......---, i rs, ., /' .........--..-.1.< - / ... , ..,,., 7_,_.... .,......... ..' ......„, , ------.... ._ „., . . , .......„ .,.... , _. . „....„‘,...........,,.....-:„ , u . ,......_ 1 li / .'7-----N2--- ,/ ...... ._ ... I I.: , ./ ' • , . ,...• ,,- , i/ r. ...,..7---..-1 t...---i i e,•.c, . 1 P Allfr s/ --._.. 1 LI b u.z•-,r :"-t--;',Z..7.V ( / /4-----, It...--,,,,,,,,,,, . A tN11110. . -.7.-i ( I 3/60 i Z../..)V • • i h-r-L...--.,-...•.-,,,...... •....-C.w. 14 ....... 1 "............,• I e .1 I 0 ..,............... E . -S: • • •,-...s.. 5 i ; . . . .... .• /1------2 41 . I i . ,i ..-......_.; ri - . . • . , . 1 : . , . 33,CA II•••• 11 -....rfs - . e....le.•••....1, • . % .'*'.&',.• la ••••• • e . ...-.........^."''.. _ . .......W.:::.-.:'. \ ' • r .I. .I.T... -.... 3 . . I • / ./1./ \ 1 ......o.Ow . ...,r- V . 1 . . . . • . •• es-e ---- \ i • - ...._.„,....- i • ,...1 On-M , . i......c.o...c. =0...4 cz C............."...cr, VI ••........... /cc r...es.c.n..C. -,... ilt..--,.1. 9.-,e-voir • 10 .5(J85cG"Tror, 7.1m. (c-s) 0 k...."---...4. ' .....sie:cl_.,,L.1-.-. .AL- ("--.c).) ..A.G1m. ....,1.... .r,.--...--..._ (A-4.0-.) \ --.. T .1 • •••• ..•). .\ r-Z..7...=.5 I pc-r-eri^t__ (r.,-. --Itz,) 1.=- LiO -r--o-r-i......,!.... (rc.s-i c,) e s .....-C.....2,.r.=.S A...PC M..... . ".......M.c M. ....C.re M S l ® S .11 // :-:- A.C3....,Er: 5:77-:.:,..,-:. ..CL.,:._7"Lire-.....1..... .........,-C...) T-0. ,..-- r........1,irt__--, tc,a,SitD01.-4-1-I.A.1.__ (1"."2'S.-tC.) -.,-- c- C. .:-.-7. 1.L../ -7 /G) AG.rm.;^..7..t...,t...7 Li re.A.1_, (A.S.) re.tr s i 0 ra r,-r-i AL__ (FM /"..rM....2....i., .. . Sc ......C ....7-.5 ----"' '' -. i. ...'N- IN/1E---1.- r--.4=,__.1---- 7- 'TC THe- zr\nr-A .c..- CDa .. ..__ orylr---4-r t--4 cu. a -ro =c-rio NJ '7.I"E. --rt--..= r-i"rw\i-cu" Cis - 7 fr•-1 c-r p--f or-1 rr.......c, "rc.Ir._..,.., 7...1C r-4-S- N-1....y., ....ni tn ...,r,...,rr,p-4 rn r..--1 --,,,-.?•-+"7' . • 1 I • I p•-.1 C. . r0 _5 C =-r i as r- -7.i M '-r?--f 1 -. i---10 1....0 r<A.A. - ?-4. .I r...,...... -mi..)m.Li I 1-1".',I.L.= g 1 zor-4e N1.A?=, 5)i G/-1...›.rc."7-=re.. E3 (..M r•4 I 1^-1 C)C:) ..-.), . .re-r-I I.-•"*.e--- -a. 3 II 1-1.4,‘ ..,..1 1 =C>L.;1-.4 7"7 = C>"=-, AN S' "r‘r1 "-2--1 Cs C, "›,- Cr-t A,NJ 1r, "T-I-1Z- iC:,1 ---TT=1C--f- c-L__,.....,. / ;=.4,-7-1 0 r- rm O r,,,i ,..G r .I C L.),--.-7-,--;fr.:P's I- (."- N4 5) ..z.*G re 1 C-L.JL-71-1-Jr ..i...L_. ("-4-0 et) --i- .. tr-.., z......=- 1 ,.c,r,„...1 v,.....--/ 75,...53 am-r-4 7: ".L (rs 1.5 -r 5)) AT r' ,'-.....1..._A. A.,, .^.A,ro A a.IN u I, 1--1,a,1 N4,,,,, A.t•--i CD 1".4 e.,r.,1 C>r<-LI, 1-4 A.r..-.1.,...rs LJ...., I.-I,...y....1,4...,I. C.:- 1.....l., L.I C. "--1 r2-........r-G I/•.)s src•-r, s, u •-,7 • c:)......7-= c:,r- ......r.-.r....^.._....c,-v....L._ G.=C>11,-.4....1,4 G.M ,..........=. r.rc c r.......r. c.,c:::, 2=5"y• , r,..1......--...,--,,--,Sr, 515 r-,-..r51-7-1.--,c- =CJ 4-1 r.-r---,- OF 7,..4,., . ...,..5..IC . F...,7.,•-•---,C--//^-,.3 CI II-' I -, e '-.,, :-.c.7., , .... .- „ „..... Figure 3 — Ordinance No. 341 Map III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. Overall Description The Applicant has a pending subdivision application affecting one (1) of the parcels. This application is for a 13-lot subdivision, identified by TMK: 4-5-010: 136 (SUB 16-0011653). Due to topographic and other considerations, the proposed lots, ranging between 1/2 (one-half) to 1 (one) acre in size, were considerably in excess of the minimum 10,000 square feet requirement. (Figure 4) The application was deferred by the Planning Department on October 19, 2016. The Applicant also owns the TMK: 4-5-024:10, located directly across Lehua Street from TMK: 4-5-010: 136. Based on the RS-10 zone, the entire subject 14+ acre site could support a 62-lot project. Its goal then and now was to be able to have at least 50% of the lots marketed within the County Affordable Housing guidelines. However, given the topography and awkward configuration of the subject site, the infrastructure cost made it less feasible to achieve that higher density objective. As such, instead of proceeding with the conventional subdivision approach, the Applicant sought to develop the subject site into a 40-lot residential subdivision, with lots ranging between 10,000 to just under 33,000 square feet, through the PUD process. The PUD is a process that allows for public review of the application wherein design flexibility in the way of lot size, road design, and the like are proposed. Through a PUD, the Applicant would be in a better position to achieve its objective of having at least 50% of the lots marketed within the County Affordable Housing guidelines. Please note that with the dedication of a 15-acre site to the Hawaii Housing Authority, the affordable housing obligation of the original ordinance (of which the subject site is a part of) has already been fulfilled. (Exhibit B) The Applicant's plan of marketing 50% of the proposed 40-lot project consistent with the County's Affordable Housing Guidelines would thus amount to more than "doubling" the affordable housing requirement of the subject site. The existing requirement calls for 20%, whereas the Applicant is proposing 50%, which further underscores the added affordable housing contribution of the subject site. B. Proposed Project Details The project is called Lehua Village. The Village has two development components — Lehua Village I and Lehua Village 2. (Figure 5) 4 (Figure 4-SUB 16-0011653 Preliminary Plat Map) 5 .ae.n.o pan Lehua Villages t&2 A Planned Unit Development Master Plan ,i i C �'° #3'- i .r.art.F ' ` j 's a a rptittamf-'''- , C.S . .-;%- I w \` ^ ..rt -7O .c.y " cT CD ;,. ` — -- -ice , R>^-' •r` 4*\a j \T �it. - 4.C 9 a 19 r o_ • -;:. ,,,',.",, .,-,I '' - , , r \\ -, 8 `.,, - ',.r `^- -.` ( - \ILLAGE23.2:L07 SIZES JiLLAGEtLOT c5 0 Gla " - 0)101 91797 SF LOTS3 15559465, �� 7 \- 0' x Lei 01 S 61040 SF 10702 15141-4/SF / LOT OJ 571155 SF LOT D3 I2971 o1 SF -+ LOT 04 575174 SF LOT 04 1297134 Sf LO 105 It 590 51 SF LOT 555.3C: 11 254 8 S, SaamsI 1- + { t , <. _8 6A, ` " y -"•1� > <t,y - �T':<- (( - 0µ[1'71"JCD ' ��LP�� 1 LLLLLLO0OOOOTT706008ttt 111II00s11886/7050010368975955 10 SSS5SSFFF7FF LLLILLOOOOOOTTTTTT S90t8S7 2J — 17116515150573719W058A27 S5SF 4 `i \ ; -F— - 1LLLLLOLOO000OT7T 11tt1B6o32 1111350639�3306663410SS5S5FFFFEFE LL1LLtLO0OO000TT0TTT 1t6513 1111I21200188006571875896 W6o1T3 t594 5SSSSSSFFFFFFGi -5, 4 0 ., _.rLOT 19 10.8997956 LOT 19 14,751 W S 050100' LOT 20 12.771 u 27 5Fe LOT 20r 10 006 15 SF ' ' I., I,�� X .II/��,� iv) ,1 wrldLryr i5,rne, 1•I I f4., .-Il.r��sn r`..rt.'.L13l1119 1S..sri,n."i A- 1.1 1. Lehua Village 1 This would be a 20-lot subdivision situated on the makai side of Lehua Street on 7.137-acres of land with lot sizes ranging from 10,000 square feet to 23,400 square feet. These lots are intended to be offered for sale at affordable rates consistent with the Affordable Housing Guidelines for Hawaii County. 2. Lehua Village 2 This would be a 20-lot subdivision bordered by the Hawaii Belt Road along its mauka boundary and Lehua Street along its makai boundary and situated on 7.185-acres of land with lot sizes ranging from 10,000 square feet to just under 33,000 square feet. These lots would be offered for sale at market rates. IV. PROJECT TIMETABLE AND COST Should the request be approved, the Applicant intends to submit the subdivision application shortly thereafter and hopefully before the end of this year. Anticipated completion of both Villages is expected within five (5) years from the date of approval of the PUD Permit and accompanying change of zone, or by the end of 2027. Assuming there are no cost-related conditions of either the PUD or Rezoning Ordinance, the current estimated infrastructure cost of this project is between $3 million to $4 million. V. REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS A. State Land Use The subject property is designated Urban. As such, no State Land Use Commission action is required. The County of Hawaii can process the rezoning request. B. Hawaii State Plan Chapter 226, Hawaii Revised Statutes, outlines the long-range goals and policies of the Hawaii State Plan. Said Plan is intended to serve as a guide for the growth and future long-range development of the State. Pursuant to said requirement, a discussion of the pertinent policies and goals and the project's relationship follows: Goals • A strong, viable economy characterized by stability, diversity, and growth that enables the fulfillment of the needs and expectations of Hawaii's present and future generations • A desired physical environment characterized by beauty, cleanliness, quiet, stable and natural systems, and uniqueness that enhances the mental and physical well-being of the people • Physical, social and economic well-being for individuals and families that nourishes a sense of community responsibility and caring of participation in family life. Discussion The proposed project would achieve these goals. It would provide area residents an opportunity to purchase affordable and modestly- priced product. The decades-long water moratorium in Honoka'a has stymied the delivery of much-needed new housing product in the area. The project location is located in a historic multi-generational community where residents have deep roots, and where new workforce housing options are currently almost non-existent. The project would also provide both direct and indirect employment opportunities for current and future residents of the island; contribute to the island's overall tax base and hence, increase both State and County revenues; and complement and support other economic uses and in turn, contribute to the stability, diversity, and growth of local and regional economies. This short-term employment opportunity would come without adversely affecting the environment. There is no known wildlife or plant life listed as either endangered or threatened on the subject site. Also have been in intensive sugar cane production for well over a century, there should be no known significant archaeological features on the site. Any inadvertent finds will be addressed pursuant to the requirements of an approved Archaeological Monitoring Plan and the SHPD. Impacts to the surrounding areas would also not be significantly adverse. All required infrastructures will be in place by the applicant. These include new roads within the subdivision, drainage improvements, and the like. Furthermore, the provision and/or retention of natural landscaped buffers along selected portions within the project site would also help 8 mitigate any adverse visual and noise impacts to existing and potential neighboring residential or agricultural properties. C. Hawaii Coastal Zone Management Program The objectives of the Hawaii Coastal Zone Management (CZM) Program are outlined in Chapter 205a, Hawaii Revised Statutes. The principal goal is to assure the protection and maintenance of the State's coastal resources. Although the entire State falls within the CZM area, the permitting process is geared for those areas proximate to the coast and identified by the County as the Special Management Area. Nonetheless, a general review of a project's consistency to the CZM policies - regardless of its location - must still be made. In that regard, please note the following: • The proposed project will not have any substantial adverse environmental or ecological effect. (Please refer to discussions in pertinent Chapters below.) Any effect that may result will be minimized to the extent practicable and will be clearly outweighed by public interest. • The proposed development would be consistent with the objectives of the CZM program. Specifically: o there would be no impact to the area's recreational resources. This is not a shoreline property; o the site does not have any known historical resources that require preservation. Any inadvertent finds will be addressed pursuant to the requirements of the State DLNR- HPD. o the project will not affect any scenic and open space resources; o the coastal ecosystem will not be impacted; o the project will help stabilize employment opportunities by providing additional market house lots, and hence furthering the economic uses of the site; o the site is more than a mile from the shoreline, and thus there would be no coastal hazard or beach erosion or marine resource impacts; and 9 o public participation will be achieved through the hearings on this request as well as notification through the posting of a sign and notices to surrounding property owners. • The proposed development is consistent with the County General Plan, Hamakua Community Development Plan, and other appropriate regulatory tools, such as the Zoning Code. D. County General Plan The County of Hawaii General Plan is the policy document for the long-range comprehensive development of the island of Hawaii. The General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) map classifies the Project Site and immediately surrounding area for Low and Medium Density Urban uses. (Figure 6) Low Density Urban consists of single-family residential uses with ancillary community and public uses, and neighborhood and convenience-type commercial uses with an overall residential density of up to six units per acre. Medium Density Urban allows for village and neighborhood commercial and single family and multiple-family residential uses up to 35 units per acre, and related functions. K . a' MEDIUM DENSITY' § n PROJECT SITE 110° (Figure 6 — LUPAG Map) 10 • As such, the requested RS-15 zoning is consistent with the Low and Medium Density Urban designations, and no General Plan amendment is necessary. Further, no changes are contemplated in this area in the draft revision to the General Plan now being developed by the Planning Department. The RS-15 zoning would also be consistent with the goals, policies, and standards of the Housing and Land Use Elements of the General Plan. Specifically, the more pertinent ones follow: Housing Goals • Attain a diversity of socio-economic housing mix throughout the different parts of the County. • Maintain a housing supply which allows a variety of choice • Develop better places to live in Hawaii County by creating viable communities with decent housing and suitable living environments for our people • Improve and maintain the quality and affordability of the existing housing stock • Seek sufficient production of new affordable rental and fee- simple housing in the County in a variety of sizes to satisfactorily accommodate the needs and desires of families and individuals. Policies • Increase rental opportunities and choices in terms of quality, cost, amenity, style and size of housing, especially for low and moderate income households. Land Use Element (Residential) Goals o To provide for residential developments that maximizes convenience for its occupants. o To provide for suitable living environments which accommodate - the physical, social and economic needs of the island residents. 11 Policies o Appropriately zoned lands shall be allocated as the demand for multiple residential dwellings increases. These areas shall be allocated with respect to places of employment, shopping facilities, educational, recreational and cultural facilities, and public facilities and utilities. Standards o Areas shall be protected from incompatible uses by transition zones. o Provide adequate access to arterial streets, shopping facilities, schools, employment centers, and other services. O Development shall not be permitted in natural hazard areas unless proper on-site improvements are provided. o Development shall be located in areas where public utilities can be economically provided at a level of adequate to meet the demand for the concentrated service. Discussion The requested RS-15 zoning is consistent with the goals, policies, and standards of the General Plan document. For one, it will provide limited short-term economic opportunities largely through the construction of any improvements required for the residential development. Relatedly, longer-term opportunities could be created largely in providing the social support (housing) needed to sustain a strong economy. Furthermore, the project should add sustained revenues to the County and State coffers. The project intends to be energy conscious through the use and/or encouragement of solar energy and design features to take advantage of wind patterns. Maintaining and improving the quality of the environment is important to the success of this project. The General Plan identifies five (5) areas of environmental concerns - air pollution, water quality, soil pollution, solid waste disposal, and noise pollution. As proposed, the project would not be violative of any of those objectives. Aside from vehicular transmission, air pollution associated with the project should be negligible. All wastewater systems would he disposed off in a State approved septic system. This should be 12 • sufficient to address any potential groundwater or coastal water impacts. If required, a solid waste management plan could be prepared and implemented. Being a residential project, it should not be a noisy one. Any noise-generating facility - such as air conditioners -would be carefully placed to minimize their noise impacts to adjoining properties. Further, while the site has some on-site developmental constraints, they are not insurmountable. For the most part, the site is designated "X" on the FIRM map. A drainage system will be designed in a manner to protect the property as well as to minimize the volume of surface runoff generated by this development. There are no known archaeological or cultural features on the subject site, having been used historically for sugar cane cultivation. Furthermore, if there are inadvertent archaeological features found on the site, work will stop and the State DLNR and County Planning Department will be consulted before further activities occur within the affected area. Being partially disturbed and within an urban environment, the prospects of the site serving as a habitat for rare or endangered plant or animal life appear remote. As this,is a residential project, it will directly fulfill the goals and objectives - as noted above - of the housing element. Specifically, the more pertinent goals are: • Attain a diversity of socio-economic housing mix throughout the different parts of the County • Maintain a housing supply which allows a variety of choice • Improve and maintain the quality and affordability of the existing housing stock • Seek sufficient production of affordable rental and fee-simple housing in the County in a variety of sizes to satisfactorily accommodate the needs and desires of families and individuals The General Plan also emphasizes that developments be mindful of an area's natural beauty. In this situation, the project will be developed in a manner where it blends with the existing terrain and enhances the natural environment through the introduction of landscaping. 13 Although the project site is over a mile from the ocean, it is also separated by other developments from the ocean. As such, the usual coastal resources concern would not be pronounced. There will be no interference with shoreline access. There will be little impact to public facilities. The public school and medical complexes are situated less than a mile away. County water is already available for the project. All on-site improvements will be constructed by the Applicant. Traffic impact based on a traffic report and as will be discussed later in this report, noted that the LOS would still continue at the acceptable levels (A, B, or C). Finally, in terms of the Land Use element, the pertinent goals, policies, and standards of the General Plan note the following: • Designate and allocate land uses in appropriate proportions and mix and in keeping with the social, cultural and physical environments of the County • The County shall encourage the development and maintenance of communities meeting the needs of its residents in balance with the physical and social environment • Zoning requests shall be reviewed with respect to General Plan designation, district goals, regional plans, State Land Use District, compatibility with adjacent zoned uses, availability of public services and utilities, access, and public need • The county shall encourage the development and maintenance of communities meeting the needs of its residents in balance with the physical and social environment In view of the foregoing goals and policies, it is noted that the requested zoning would be consistent with the Medium and Low Density designations of the LUPAG map. It would also be compatible with the surrounding area and uses. There is a mixture of urban type of uses within a mile of this area, including a school, hospital, public park, residences, and commercial uses. The soil of the site is classified "C" or fair. While it does have some measure of agricultural potential, the site's proximity to urban uses renders it unfeasible for intensive agricultural uses The property has no severe topographic or geologic problems that would render the land unusable for the proposed subdivision and activity. 14 E. Hamakua Community Development Plan Relative to the CDP, Section 15.1 of the County General Plan called for the development and eventual County Council adoption of Community Development Plans. The General Plan states that the CDP "will translate the broad General Plan statements to specific actions as they apply to specific geographical areas." The General Plan also notes that should the CDP require a General Plan amendment, it could be considered concurrent with the adoption of the CDP. However, "If there is a direct conflict between the Community Development Plan and the General Plan, the General Plan shall be controlling." Pursuant to the above, the Hamakua CDP ("HCDP") was developed and adopted by the Hawaii County Council on August 8, 2018. It became effective on August 22, 2018 as Ordinance No. 18 78. From a land use perspective, one of the more critical recommendations or policy of the HCDP was the retention of the subject site's existing "Low and/or Medium Density Urban" designations on the General Plan LUPAG map. (Figure 7). Clearly, then, the existing RS-15 zoning is consistent with the HCDP. £iduie 12.Huncka'a/Mane Land Use Guide Map hI .j PROJECT SITE '� , ��; ' � '. _,„..,„ ,,,,,,,, , _ ..., , ,.. h ,-,7:--„i 111 /* H3m5kua CDP Revised Land Use Guide Map fur Hunoka'a!Haina i-Z'l di , I I (Figure 7 — Hamakua CDP Revised Land Use Guide Map) JJJ 15 The HCDP also identified 13 objectives. The first three (3) relate to Natural Resources and Ag and bear little relationship to the project site's planned development in accordance with the RS-10 zoning. Others have only marginal relationship. The more pertinent ones, however, include: • Objective 5: "Direct future settlement patterns that are sustainable and connected. Honor Hamakua's historic and cultural assets by concentrating new developments in existing' walkable, mixed use town centers while limiting rural sprawl." • Objective 6: "Develop and improve critical community infrastructure, including utilities, healthcare, emergency services, affordable housing, educational opportunities and recreational facilities to keep our'ohana safe, strong, and health." • Objective 8: "Promote, preserve and enhance a diverse, sustainable, local economy." • Objective 9: "Encourage the increase and diversity of employment and living options for residents, including living wage jobs and entrepreneurial opportunities that allow residents to work and shop close to home and that complement Hamakua's ecology, rural character, and cultural heritage." The focus of these objectives is having housing, including affordable ones, proximate to areas of service and employment. The subject site achieves those objectives. In so doing, being located in the core part of Honoka'a town, it would also minimize sprawl and add socio- economic strength to the Honoka'a town. In light the above, the Applicant maintains that the ability to develop the project in accordance with the requested RS-15 zoning and its provision of 50% affordable housing lots are not incongruous and, in fact, wholly consistent with the HCDP. F. County Zoning The County zoning of the subject site is Single Family Residential (RS- 10). If the requested RS-15 were approved, the use of the subject site would still be the same but with less density. All of the required infrastructure, except as may be modified by the PUD, would be constructed prior to the occupancy of any of the proposed 40 lots. (Figure 9) 16 PRo1Ett SITE ALM. • (Figure 9 — Existing Zoning) G. Other Permitting Considerations The site is not located within the County Special Management Area (SMA). As such, no SMA Use Permit would be required. However, other construction-related permits would still be required. These would be of the "ministerial" variety, such as Subdivision, building permit, driveway permit, and health clearances. V. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS A. General Description As noted in the PUD application, "The 14.322-acre Project Site consists of two irregular-shaped properties, each a little over 7 acres in size, that is separated by Lehua Street. The Project Site is bordered along the south by the Hawaii Belt Road (Highway 19) and to the north by Lehua Street and its future extension. The project site is currently vacant of any structures or uses with an extensive cover of abandoned sugar cane and various non-native grasses." B. Climate, Soil and Topography According to the Atlas of Hawaii 3rd Edition, the average annual rainfall in this general area is about 100 inches. This is confirmed by 17 the National Weather Service Office of the NOAA's annual rainfall data for 2014. Being on the windward side of the island, the wetter months tend to occur between October through April. The average daily temperature ranges from a minimum of 61 degrees to a maximum of 79 degrees Fahrenheit. Wind patterns are generally trade winds (easterly) during the day and westerly or mountain winds during the evenings. The PUD report also noted that "The overall slope of the Project Site ranges between 8 percent to over 13 percent, with the steepest portions adjacent to the Hawaii Belt Road and Lehua Street and an adjoining dry ditch located to the west." Thus, there are or should not be any perceptible topographic or geologic constraints. It is located at approximately the 1,200 to 1,300 foot elevation level. Being within an urbanized area, the Land Study Bureau Overall Master Productivity Rating does not have any classification for this site. Likewise, the site is classified Prime/Urban under the Agriculture Lands of Importance to the State of Hawaii (ALISH) classification system. Thus, the State's classification system recognizes the site, in spite of its agricultural resource potential, to be within the Urban area. The U. S. Soil Conservation Service, however, has designated the soil type in this are to be of the Kukaiau, Kaumoali, Kukuihaele series (C122). This soil type is described as being moderately deep, firm textured, well-drained, slight erosion hazard, and poorly suited for machine tillability. This soil type is typical of this area. C. Natural Hazards 1. Drainage The US Corps of Engineers' Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) designates most of the subject site to be in Zone X (areas outside of 500-year flood). The western boundary, however, has a shallow drainageway (Honoka'a Drainageway No. 2), and thus is designated AE, areas subject to 100-year frequency floods with depts of 1 to 3 feet (usually areas of ponding.) None of the major infrastructure (road/water) will occur within the AE designated area. Any use within that area will be subject to the requirements of the AE designation. As there will be an added level of impervious surface resulting from the road and related infrastructure, there may be an issue relating to potential increased run-off. As such, a drainage plan will be 18 prepared as part of the subdivision review/approval process. The plan will have to be approved by the County and subsequently will be implemented in conjunction with the development of the subdivision. The mitigation may call for installation of drywell or similar type of accommodations. 2. Tsunami Hazard The subject site is situated over a mile from the ocean and is outside of the Civil Defense's Tsunami Evacuation Zone. 3. Volcanic and Earthquake Hazards The United States Geological Survey (USGS) classifies the subject site and this general area as being within Lava Flow Hazard Zone 8, on a scale of ascending risk, 9 to 1. By way of comparison, the City of Hilo is designated Zone 2. The entire island of Hawaii falls within Earthquake Zone 4, according to the County Building Code. As such, the Applicant understands and accepts that there will be added structural requirements to address this seismic hazard. D. Fauna Resources Although there was no professional survey conducted of the faunal resources of the site, the Applicant does not believe that rare or endangered faunal resources are likely to be found within or proximate to the subject site. The site is not only within an urban environment, but was fully disturbed through its prior sugar cane use. Introduced bird species (such as dove, Japanese White-eye, house finch, ) m na are common in this area. Domestic animals such as cats myna) and dogs, and other animals like rats and mongoose are also common. These are all common and not endangered. As such, it is unlikely that the development of the subject property would cause any adverse faunal impacts. E. Flora Resources No commissioned flora survey was conducted of the site due in large measure to its past sugar cane use. There are some abandoned sugar cane with a mix of non-native grasses and pockets of ironwood trees. 19 In view of the above, it is unlikely that the subject site would be a habitat for any listed threatened or endangered plant life. F. Historic/Cultural/Archaeoloqical Resources For the same reason noted above, no commissioned archaeological inventory survey and cultural assessment study was conducted of the subject site. The past and current sugar cane use of the site, resulting in its extensive clearing, reduces the prospect of finding any archaeological remains. Nonetheless, during the course of developing this project, should any anticipated archaeological features or sites be uncovered, work in the affected area will immediately cease and the applicant will notify the Planning Department. G. Valued Cultural Resources In view of the recent Hawaii State Supreme Court's "PASH" and "Ka Pa'akai 0 Ka'Aina"decisions, the issue relative to native Hawaiian gathering and fishing rights must be addressed. Specifically, there must be a discussion of the cultural, historical, and natural resources and associated traditional and customary practices of this site. In this situation, the subject site is not adjacent and/or proximate to the shoreline. As such, fishing and/or coastal access is not an issue. It is not known whether the subject or immediate surrounding area was even used for the gathering of plants by native Hawaiians. However, as the site has been used for sugar cane production for over 75 years and now remain fallow, it would appear very unlikely that the site would serve such purpose today and/or in the recent past. There are also no known archaeological features on the subject property. Based on the above, it does not appear that the project would have any potential adverse impact relating to the cultural and historical resources of this area. H. Water and Coastal Resources The subject site is located over a mile from the coastline. As such, coastal impacts resulting from discharge of drainage systems from the. site should not be significant. Being a non-coastal property, no coastal access will be affected. 20 The proposed lots within the project will have their own private wastewater system approved by the State Department of Health. At this time, it would probably be a septic system and constructed in conjunction with a residential building permit. As such, potential groundwater and coastal resources impacts would be mitigated. Further as noted earlier, prior to the installation or use of any drywells on the site to address on-site drainage concerns, the appropriate UIC permit from the State will be taken. At that time, impacts to water and coastal resources can and will be carefully examined. I. Noise, Air Quality, and Dust Impacts The existing background ambient noise level is associated with the wind, foliage, birds, and the like. This is relatively low, averaging less than 45 Ldn. Traffic along the Belt Highway, however, heavily influence manmade noise in this area. As such, although this project will introduce additional vehicular traffic to this area, it is not anticipated to contribute significantly to the long-term ambient noise level. Thus, any traffic increase should result in a noise increase of equal to or less than 55 Ldn, which is within acceptable levels within an urban environment. The short-term noise impacts will be associated with the construction of the project. These will be temporary. Further, all applicable State rules governing construction noise abatement will be observed. The Applicant also intends to not allow noise-generating construction activity to occur on Sundays and early morning and late evening hours. The proposed development should not generate any direct air quality impacts. During the short-term, there may be some fugitive dust associated with the construction of the project. However, compliance with the State Department of Health's regulations governing dust control should help mitigate this potential impact. From a long-term perspective, the project itself is not expected to have uses that generate adverse air pollutants. The only discernible air quality impact would be associated with residential vehicular traffic to and from the site. While the added traffic will have an impact to the ambient air quality, the impact should not be significant.,This is due in part to the higher EPA standards for automobile air emissions and the prevailing tradewinds. • 21 Accordingly, with the exception of minimal construction dust in the beginning, long term dust generated by the project should be insignificant. J. Scenic and Visual Considerations In the Natural Beauty element of the General Plan, there are sites or areas listed as scenic resources. The subject site is not listed as a scenic site. However, Mauna Kea and Waipio Valley are listed as scenic resources. The proposed subdivision should not create any adverse visual impacts on either of those resources from a public roadway. For one, the subject site is located makai of the Belt Highway. Further, the Waipio Valley is miles away and not visible from the subject site. Thus, there should be little, if any, adverse visual impacts resulting from this proposed residential subdivision. VI. SOCIAL AND RELATED CONSIDERATIONS A. Surrounding Land Uses The subject site is situated on the makai side of the Hawaii Belt Highway (Highway 19) on the outskirts of downtown Honoka'a town. There is a drive-inn restaurant to the east, as well as the Honoka'a School complex makai of the subject site and the Ho'ola Hamakua medical facility to the north. There is also an 8-lot residential subdivision adjacent to the subject site, developed by the Applicant, with lots consisting of 10,000 to 20,000 square feet in size on RS-10 zoned lands. As such, the proposed 40-lot residential subdivision would be consistent with this evolving mixture of commercial and residential land use pattern in this area. B. Economic Impacts The requested zoning would have some measure of economic impact, as it would provide short-term,employment opportunities for those in the construction and related industries. The nature of this project (house lots) does not have any direct long- term economic impact. However, it does have an indirect impact by providing the needed social infrastructure — housing - to support 22 growth on Hawai'i Island. In a sense, this type of project would be analogous to a school, which supports the needs of a community. The requested single-family residential zoning would be consistent with the residential pattern in this area, as well as increase the tax revenues to the County, as opposed to leaving the land in zoned but undeveloped stage due to regulatory and topographic constraints. C. Agricultural Impacts The subject site has not been used for commercial agricultural purposes since the closure of the Hamakua Sugar Company in the early 1990's. Further, its agricultural potential is diminished due to the urban type of uses surrounding the subject site. D. Housing Impacts The affordable housing obligation of the subject site subject site has already been fulfilled through the dedication of the 15-acre site to the Hawaii Housing Authority. (Exhibit B) Nevertheless, the Applicant plans to set aside.at least 50% in accordance with the County's Affordable Housing guidelines. Based on Chapter 11 of the Hawaii County Code relating to Affordable Housing Policy, the projected density of 40 lots and as a new standalone project, the project site's obligation would be eight (8) affordable housing credits. In spite of this "doubling" situation, the Applicant is prepared to comply with the requirements of Chapter 11, and to further committing 50% of the lots to fall within the Affordable Housing Guidelines. VII. INFRASTRUCTURE CONSIDERATIONS A. Road and Traffic Access to the subject site is from Old Lehua Street, a County road with a 40-foot wide right-of-way and a paved road varying between 16-18 feet wide. It is a curvilinear road that extends from Pakalana Street to the south and the Honoka'a Park Complex to the north. In conjunction with the Applicant's original request to amend the original ordinance, the Applicant included a Traffic Assessment Report ("TAR"). The requested downzoning and projected 40 residential lots will fall below the 50 AM/PM vehicular movements threshold. As such the Zoning Code's concurrency requirement (Chapter 25-2-46) relative to a Traffic Study is not triggered. 23 Nonetheless, the TAR, while addressing the impacts of an 80-lot project, sheds light on the project's impact and is thus included in this report. (Exhibit C). The study, dated May 2020, analyzed the project's impact not only at the intersection of Pakalana Street and the State Highway but also at the intersection of Pakalana Street and Lehua Street. In sum, it concluded upon build-out of a project with as many as 80 lots, the traffic impact at both intersections during the AM and PM peak hours would continue to operate at Level of Service ("LOS") C or better. With the addition of a project with as many as 80 lots, the-existing LOS "A" at the Lehua Street intersection would operate at "B" and "A" during the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. At the Highway, the existing LOS "C" would continue at "C" during the AM and PM peak hours. Per the concurrency provision of the Zoning Code, LOS "A", "B", and "C" are all considered to be "acceptable" levels of service". The study noted further that to "The project access driveway and subdivision roadway intersections on Lehua Street should be situated and designed so as to provide appropriate sight distances on all approaches to the proposed subdivision." That has already been confirmed by the Applicant's engineer in conjunction with the preliminary design of the subdivision. It will again be vetted by the County in conjunction with the subdivision review process. The report further recommended that to address existing conditions, having a "yield" sign erected and restriping to reduce the "skewed angle" of Lehua Road would help. That can be done if required. Because the traffic study concluded that the proposed development is not expected to significantly impact the intersection of Pakalana Street and the Hawai'i Belt Highway, no traffic mitigation was recommended. Given that the proposed project is 50% less than the project for which the TAR was predicated upon, it can be fair to conclude that the assumptions and/or conclusions contained in the report still apply. B. Water Water will be secured from the County water line fronting the subject site. The Applicant in 2017 already constructed and deeded to the Department of Water Supply ("DWS") a waer main extension partway down Lehua Street, adjacent to Village I. The applicant also deeded to DWS in 2016 a 1-acre reservoir site located just east of the subject site to accommodate expansion of the Honoka'a district water system. As a result, the subject site has already secured the required water 24 commitments from the DWS through the Applicant's participation with the provision of a water tank site. All DWS required improvements will be made as part of the subdivision approval process. C. Wastewater As there is no sewer line in this area, the project will be serviced with individual wastewater system meeting with the requirements and approval of the State Department of Health. The prevailing requirement is a septic system and will be installed in conjunction with the construction of a building permit requiring a wastewater system. D. Solid Waste Solid waste will be handled by either commercial haulers who will dispose of the refuse at the county landfill at Pu'uanahulu or homeowners at the nearest solid waste transfer station in the area. During the course of preparing the land for this project, the Applicant intends to retain as much of the material on the property. This should thus minimize disposal at approved disposal sites. E. Other Government Services As this area is already part of an urban area, it already has access to a number of services. All of the required police, fire, and related services are available. Police and Fire protective services are provided from the station located within Honoka'a town. The Hale Ho'ola Medical complex is situated less than 1,000 feet from the subject site. This facility is one of five (5) licensed hospitals on the island. This residential project is intended to address the housing needs of the community. As such, while it is not necessarily growth inducing, it will have school-aged occupants. In that regard, it is noted that the site is proximate to the Honoka'a School Complex. There is also a major County recreation center located directly across Lehua Street from the subject site. Given the project location, no extension of government services would be required. Further, the existing facilities should be sufficient to accommodate the demand expected from this project F. Other Utilities 25 All other utilities such as telephone and electrical services are available to the site. VIII. IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE ANALYSIS A. Relationship Between Local Short-Term Uses of Environment and Maintenance and Enhancement of Long-Term Productivity The short-term use of the site would probably be the same as the current use, which is a property vegetated with introduced plant species; This will continue until the full improvements are made in conjunction with the development of the project, which will hopefully commence before the middle to ending part of next year. This project should not result in any significantly adverse short or long- term impacts that cannot be properly mitigated. There will be direct and indirect economic benefits resulting from the construction and implementation of this project. There will be construction jobs created in the short-term. By providing additional house lots in the area, this project will have an indirect long-term benefit to the island's economy. Relatedly, the project will generate increased tax revenues that can supplement the State and County's fiscal resources. This project will provide market and affordable house lots in the core area of Honoka'a Town which is designated and zoned for residential development and is proximate to places of employment and shopping. The applicant will implement the required physical infrastructure to mitigate potential impacts of this project. B. Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources The area of the requested rezoning has somewhat been disturbed and proximity to urban areas. As such, the commitment of natural or other resources (such as botanical and avifauna!) would not appear to be significant. Given the disturbed nature of the site, due to its historical sugar can use, there should be no archaeological or cultural features on the site. Although unlikely, if inadvertent finds are made during the land disturbance process, the acceptable protocols and policies of the State will be adhered to. These include immediate stoppage of construction activity, consultation with the State Historic Preservation Division, and implementation of the agreed upon mitigation before commencement of further work within the affected area. 26 C. Mitigative Measures The Applicant intends to provide any required on-site infrastructure in conjunction with the development of this project. These will include on-site drainage system, landscaping, water, and roadway improvements. All of these will be done in conjunction with the permitting and permit implementation phases of this project. Although there should be no residual archaeological or cultural features on the site, any inadvertent discoveries would be subject to the SHPD protocols. D. Alternatives to the Proposed Project 1. No Project Under the status quo alternative, the site would remain in its present vacant, vegetative use. Under this scenario, the site would not be utilized to its highest and best use and much needed housing opportunities would be curtailed in the very heart of Honoka'a Town. That would be inconsistent with the visions sought by the General Plan and Hamakua CDP. 2. Development Based on Existing RS-10 Zoning Under this alternative, the area of the requested zoning could still be developed into 60 or more lots. However, the infrastructure cost would make it less feasible to market some of them at "affordable" levels. 3. Alternative Rezoning Another option could be to utilize this site for multiple-family or commercial uses. While that would still be consistent with the General LUPAG's map Medium Density designation, commercial uses within a growing residential area and the traffic pattern may not be appropriate. Additionally, given the existing single-family residential pattern in this area, multiple family (unless of a less density) may not be appropriate. 4. Evaluation of Alternatives 27 Leaving the property in its current state would not maximize the use of the land. The land could be subdivided into 60+ lots, but with its high infrastructure cost, the desired affordable housing price would be difficult to reach. While alternative residential densities — such as multiple-family and/or lower density single-family residential subdivision - are possible, the multiple family density would be incongruous with the surrounding single-family residential pattern. In that regard, the proposed project would be consistent with the land use objectives sought to be accomplished by the County General Plan LUPAG map and the Hamakua CDP. In view of the aforementioned, it would appear that none of the alternatives would be more prudent and beneficial than the requested RS-15 downzoning alternative. The residential uses would support the development of the town of Honoka'a, as the site is proximate to commercial, residential, and public uses. Equally important, it would provide direct and indirect affordable housing opportunities. 28 BILL NO. 369 COUNTY OF HAWAII - STATE OF HAWAII ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SEC.:ION 7. 12 THE HAMAEUA DISTRICT HOMEST7.:AD8 AREA ZONE MA':::" AND SECTION 7, 13 11HE HONOKAA-HA1NA-K.,:KUIHAELE ZONE AP OF CHAPTER 8 (ZoNING CODE' , ARTICLE 2, HAWAII COUNTY CODP, A8 AMENDED, BY CHANGING THE DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FROM AGRICULTURAL (A-5a) END AGRICULTURAL (A-40a) CO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-10' AT PAALAEA, PAPAANUI HAINA AND NAMOKU HAMAKUA, HAWAII, COVERED S. TAX MAP KEY 4-5-10:PORTIONS OF 1 , 2 AND 31. BE Ii ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII. SECTION I. Section 7. 12 of Chapter 8 (Zoning Code) , Article 2, Hawaii County Code, as amended, is hereby further amended by adding thereto the following subsections: 7.12 (c-1). The district classification of the following area situated at Nanoku, Hamakua, Hawaii, shall be Single Family Residehtial (RS-10) : Beginning at the Northeasterly corner of this parcel of land, on the Westerly side of Plumeria Street, the coordinates of said point of beginning referred to Government Survey Tri- angulation Station "KAAO" being 18. 20 feet North and 3,426. 15 'Feet West and running by azimuths measured clockwise from True South: 1 . Following along the Westerly side of Plumeria Street on a curve to the left with a radius of 840.00 feet, the chord azimuth and distance being= 7° 33 ' 32.8" 404.81 feet; 2. 353° 36' 50" 434.15 feet along the Westerly side of Plumeria Street; 3. Thence, following along the Northerly side of Lot 1-B, being the County of Hawaii Refuse Transfer Station, on a curve to the right, with a radius of 20.00 feet, the chord azimuth and distance being: 38° 36 ' 50" 28. 28 feet; si 36 , 50" 30.00 feet along the Northerly side or: r2 cOUIlLy or: oawdll ieruse Transfer Station; EXHIAIT A ,aT W Iawl (V) 71z2u71UOt 4-0age aY,a4 TT2gs apueuTP-7,:0 sTgq go z put T su0T40aSmo..TIDas - „ dgoeiaq e apem aouezegea Aq pue ,y, qTql-uxTi pe4.-zew 'oqeaeq pequeqe dew eql uo peJ UT peuTTquo se TTV.. 'sal0V TOZ *Ei g:o uu 5uTuTeq.uoq pue buTuuTbeq go quTod aqq. o 14s eueTe%ed zo ePT t3Maq4 51-10Pa lea; ZE'TIT 0ET '9Z !4ees4s uueTeecT go aPTs iTze4sem eqq 5uoTe 4aa; OZ9T .0E oTZ 'SZ :qaaaqs eueyelied 70 aPTs Arl-e4seM eq4 5u0Ta 4aa; OC'Wt ET eueTeNed g.o apTs ATzeqs7em eq4. buoTu gee; LOLL .0i Auedwoo zubns- ue:iouoH 0 6ZL9 auezD go e q.o7 zp JepuTewea eqq BuoTa Pua irof0140TaTaq 'd 'A 04 euedly '1466 tM1 uo7ssTmwoD pue-T zo zepuT'eulai aq4 8u0Te 'uuwzenv 'n 0 c9TE ;ue..TD zepuTEwaJ aq4 buoTe 2.uewu5TTees qeaa4s enqaq pasodoId egg- ;o apTs ATzeqnos eq4 buoTe qeag. TvE66 .0T LUZ 'ZZ !4e03 EZ 'EGT :buTeq euuequTp pue qqnwTze pzoqo 3144 tqesg„ 00'0IL ;0 snTlYea- e 441m 145T eq; of en.znp e uo ueuLzexpy -G ' r C4 cs,TE 4uuip zo zupuTeweaau - buoTe quawuBTTeez qeeiqs unqe7 Pas0d0:7-d aU.4 21.0 pt ATaeulnos eql buoTe buTmoTTog 'eouallz • !uewaepv 6c1 *5' O E9TE 4ue.zD go aepuTewea Gin buoTe 4uewv5TTee.: aqs unqeq pesodozzd auq 3o epT5 AT:zaq4nos eutz!, buoTe qee: p./ 42.sT : OE cq7. '0? „ :buTaq eue-4:5Tp pue wTzu eq.-; ,;0 sr1TP :z 4.;0T eq4 e up uetsilo-7. 00.2 c010,7 LTep cuoTe 'ApeH ab_Toei,7; o; EL0T 4u.E",-ED zepuTewo.:. eq4. bucTe uueulubTTeei unqe7 pescdo.ld 2'6:2 IC ep.Ts .k ; (50 euq- buoTe .5uT.,l0rT04 • CSEntat a revised master plan for t'he are.a cc tile ?lann:Lnc; Department r7ev2,e,wanda.r.-ceo;lar,ce, ta',:tng intc consication F., ch matters as rc,a6:way hiTitwork, open spac.2, etc„ in acondance w:ith the Sub:division Control Code and the Cluster Plan Development requirements).- No suivision plans for any of the propcse-ri phases of development shall be approved until the Master Plan has been reviewed and accepted by the Department7 (B) the petitioner/representative shall submit a subdivision plan for Phase I of its development and secure tentative approvaL within one ( 1) year from the date of acceptance of the overall master plan. The petitioner/representative shall also assume the responsibility forsecuring final subdivision approval; (C) in order to assure housing development on the proposed lots, the petitioner/rebresentative shall enter into an "Agreement", which may include a Surety Bond, with the County of Hawaii. The "Agreement" shall be approved by the Planning Director and the Corporation Counsel end shall be filed with the State of Hawaii, Bureau of Conveyances. Such "Agreement" shall be entered into prior to receipt of final subdivision approval of the first phase of development; (D) the petitioner/representative shall be responsible for providing a water system in accordance with the County of Hawaii Department of Water Supply standards (E) the method of sewage disposal shall conform to the rules, regulations , and requirements of the State Department of Health; (F) none of the proposed lots shell have direct access from the Hawaii Belt • Highway; (0) a channelized intersection with left-turn storage lanes and, acceleration and deceleration lanes be constructed at the Pakalana Street-Hauna Loa Street-Hawaii Belt Highway intersection meeting with the approval of the State Department of Transportztion, Land 13 - -Zranspertatior. )7arilitLes Division. The intersection shall be con- , stracfed o..:ncurrently with Phase 2 :mauka area; as shown on the mster plan; (H) the petitioner/representatve work elosely with the SoilConservation Service ie oPeranallze conservation or tires relative to the topogranhic condtions of the proposed developmtint; (I) a hydrologic/drainage study for the overall develop- ment be made by the petitioner/representative and be submitted with the overall master plan; and ( I) all other applicable rules and regulations shall be complied with. Should any of the foregoing , conditions not be met, rezoning of. the area to its original zoning designation may be initiated, SECTION 4. In the event that any portion of this ordinance is declared invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other parts of this ordinance. SECTION 5. This ordinance shall take effect upon its approval. INTRODUCED BY COUNCILMAN, COUNTY p? HAWAII Hilo, Hawaii Date of Introduction: Anril 1, 1.978 Date of Adoption: April 15, 1978 Effective Date: April 24, 1978 - 14 07,,,,,,,,,,,,,,777,,7,77,1,-,,,,,..-,-,,„,rer-771-77-,..7,..-"'"-..2',WF,..:4..11,- .I..70.2, ..117:X=R'...Mr...4,714.7Z.T.r.-*'''..."'.,-,77Z'W'''7'71.4.7.7„="2"7-7`1`"C1-7."""r"-7.•,.4,,,,..", •"...2-'17.44,21=9"'..1.71--.=.11* I 1,41 . -----„-",-4•-, ,/ .., Ri , :"... • ,.... 1 .,„,N .. • , :•-• .f.';-7;_•-•-y„.--4-__ , 3' tr 114 1 — , •_ . - — - y, • / .. , . • - i.4. •--. '4 •",. ,.,9 ; ' 4 • '( ,4'-',„ ,,,, ) ' ' ,• .11%,'. 7,-,,, ;-J" , : C.''. . 0 4,..,4 7..--,17:7", 1.=.....„. / a 5- „,,,,,.., ,,, ..,.. ,- • , 1, --1 d4--/ '7 i4•44 4 \\ u - 1 4 0 -7 - f i —,.. ---.-------------4._4_3 , r 1 ' ,,. ....4...... , , ) Cr) 34C-7 L7 1 ••......-- P • „: ) . 4---. , ,,, •4 „..„,- ( s, t ' — , -__1 t--4 A.,1 .1, 44„,,.1„„,,,,== -P-' _ -- ' - 4 ",,,,,' --1'....C.' `-',... /• • -4,' 4' 4 0,4.4.-z 7 1... .--: .., ” . ,,,./ ® ,.„. .,,,......._. Ji /\ I , , e ---- .r.-- --r't,..t..."..i; ,. 4•444 ,•///* : ,•,-,...4,4„.. z.,-,,,,..7.,77."7,7,-•—.•,",',.....,-;-- .P` , . ,sr- -.....t.7.; -.-...17.,,,,Z:".. C:•-'....\--iSr.,...-, / .a ---.4 -;4....:-4 44-, ,-ta,.17;) -4-4:•or.c:, -4,4 '..7.4.4'-.4, C;Lk.ra,...-.!c. 'T".7-, r.:5 4 '...-'-I- 4-4 47....---2'1-4, -RI,,-.. .....-7-ro,,, .31-,/,-",-:or•-: i--;A','-',(7-4 44' . /Th '.„4 /7 4 44 • ,A... latc L./LT t-JF-:,?.AL_ (,A &04,—-41-05c) \ II'4 IL Ir-ie t_.e F,A t" S-C-. 4,1 1 t.-"7. - -.. I r-4 4--C,.. .4 ,.•,1"--111-:°'4, , - 1..4. r&..... . 173.'L rs4.71,...L.- (c - ) p'.-=-..C—.,,I r:"c.-:rim 4,c4. f., -...4„,_-.-44.--4e›.) 4., 4- 17 •', . i :I 4e, 4- ."Nc r.._.u4 , /-•••••m4 ,,47.. r 4-1--44-..a•4.4...74,e ..4 N c re 444k i /I e ..0.. , .94.-1 , I-4,1 7.i,-a (4c-a.) ....-->t-1 S. ''r.`.._..,-2.-r-7 0 NI -4',...I e Id) ' .... L.7 r e...J re-A44.,L. (.,4.4.-.4-C)a) ..-,Ne re;c 4...)Lri-L.1 r'' .44N L. ("4",-•---4.%) r ..... iNJ 3 LE F 4-4*-14.1,4 I L-y TO ', '.4 1,--/se"1.._....*.i f, _..1 a r44.2-1-4.....4.__ re..a..--s)4 ,4,2=4-4"1"-1, 40.._ i're....."1 .) -.G.' -e..0 1 .---,4,-:....4 .a--4 5 /4;' 4- 4.....4 I CZ) ''. -I- 0 -../'- IN,1 .... ..-_.. .._ .....-- _ ,A .41 64 N o NI 1'444-3- N C. a 7-e..) z.,--4-3-a e-T-IoN --,...1-a, -y-r-41....... 1-1.A.-.1--1/4N,I'S.1-1.44-,NCD l-7.-'-; - 4 -1-•r=...• --r- :-I•:=, -7,.......L..... -r et-.. -4.r1-4..-7:-445 ,.....r-----14,4_44..,-.. -_"----.... r,,1-442 4-..--.4.--,,,,-„, ....--,..,r..., ......,,,1,..-1 c...r."--,"....7 is,1 tt..“r---4f"r' N 0: 41' "TED -. 7"4(Dr,: 74.,4-773, -1 44-4 E 14---ir° t--4 44.-a r•<-.4 ..etA4,- 4-4-1.4440 r-4,44t44,, - m.k...3 rcL4.-1 I r44-4./b,4 e-L.E.4f: 1 r, 1,_-4.n14-44 r••••,44,,...4 74. c),--- c44.444 14--1,/-Ths l''--y-4--_-,_4-4 r-ca 44;,... ,NH r4-1'..,47.; c4)4442-_, ) ..e.444,44.-...4--4-i c.i4....r74.4,- .i,..:-...., i i1-1 ,4,.....„)I .a.ok......1 7-4-1-7• .14n 0.....'., 4,4c,4,,'S f•-N.r4,4 -a:r44,4 4:::),--_-_,--.rz)„ --..-->, C.}-1,A4,./,--4 C...,"i 9 N-,1 '7-14-4i,- " 0 1 4---14-7 ; '4-7- c-1-__A4....-.4,...:-;.... 41 !=. r I c t-4 P4-7'reL.,4c:Dr,-4) ft-ED 1,......--r I-4 g. ,r444,4 tr) ,...44:4,, -re,iC"t__,1 L.:1-Li te.. i,..._ &c%-et-c, ‘.,) -r-c› 44,:,----)/-4 1...-444 ' ,44,sT-%-,-1 t Lr--4, re - t4 1 ID ,M4- --i 7 4, t,._ .Cre s -4 c) ..,-,-.--1-- 44,:::>,,=,,,,,:=4,L_,---.. ..,n,- r ,:=4,r /N N u t, p--t r44-.44.4,.. A.,t-4-a c4) t .,, NJANI J.-.,,...,, k-u....r.,4-14,---..mk....LA-,, 4-•-i,41.--1-4,4.-e--,1 t. car r‘,1.41..s+t..._7 c., r-t ..--,44,,... 4 rs,J C-B ' 14 t:,..,--...-r e...41 e. ,r4--, .4•=,r'r--"fe.C.),./^.',___'; ED re I r- -r.,4 44,=- 14-.4 ED -z4...4 ,---EDr.4t......444,r44-.4 r,..I I 4 444.4-,,:ez 4=:, r--,,,,-44.,,rs ,-r r...-; .=.....1.4-T- ,.. L.1 4,44 Ti.-'- ED7 ;--i-44.444-N.44.t i .1 iat 4 L Trsi m • --.4.-.-.4-44 04. , ror44e-74 4 cm t-,4 5- 1)P 1.a e :'-31 44:- -41 kt,..por,. 4.44 ..,., ^."'le........o.mar. .+4,.........aWa. tarr,,,,.. .aagaaMORPOPt a$aatasar, .-pAppar.igau.... ....ta.unelmon..,............,......V... . t. 14.,.......4temwor....1 X.P...1 I Ea 1 ......-...-- . ...„- —..„-- San-20-05 10:02 ROGER V. MEEKER 808-689-1S51 P.02 Harry Kim Edwin S.Taira Mayor :' v �,;.. i •. 4:411' Housing Administrator Comp ®f !�=►A �d� OFFICE OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NO Wa1uku'Drive•Hilo,Hawaii 96770.2956 VITT(Q09)961-8379 o FAX(808)96I4685 July 5, 2005 Sidney Fuke Planning Consultant 100.. Pauahi- Street, Suite_ 212 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Subject: Honoka"a Knolls Affordable Housing Condition TM: 4-5-10:1 & 121 After reviewing our records and discussions with the Housing and Community Development Corporation of Hawaii (HCDCH) , the Office of Housing and Community Development (OHCD) has determined that, based on current conditions, the parcels listed above do not have any outstanding affordable housing requirements to satisfy. Please note that the OHCD and HCDCH will NOT approve or recognize any credits sold or transferred from these parcels. Please also note that future zone changes may subject the parcels to affordable housing requirements in effect at that time. If you have questions or need additional information, please call us at 961-8379. Thank you. Edwin S. Taira Housing Administrator C: Janice Takahashi, Planner, HCDCH Chris Yuen, Planning Director jip 5284dest wet" EQUAL HOUSING OPPORTUNITY 'HAWAII COUNTY IS AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY PROVIDER AND EMPLOYER' TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED HONOKA'A PLANTATION COTTAGES HONOKA'A, HAWAII ISLAND TAX MAP KEYS: (3) 4-5-010:131 & 136 AND (3) 4-5-024:010 PREPARED FOR HONOKA'A PLANTATION COTTAGES, LLC MAY 22, 2020 k_ PREPARED BY TMC THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED HONOKKA PLANTATION COTTAGES HONOKA'A, HAWAII ISLAND TAX MAP KEYS: (3) 4-5-010:131 & 136 AND (3) 4-5-024:010 • PREPARED FOR HONOKA'A PLANTATION COTTAGES, LLC MAY 22, 2020 ,,®p. ,, . -.. ,, 14,\ ; LICENSED a,,PROFESSIONAL K' ENGINEER No.4922-C , r 1bfr4 i 1, 13• • THIS WORK WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER PAY SUPERVISION. P 4 4/30/2021 SIT/ATOM EXPIRATION DATE OF LICENSE ) 'IL PREPARED BY THE T AEE9.P_ AQ.FME T_ CO SULTA6 T RANDALL S.OKANEKU,P.E.,PRINCIPAL* 1188 BISHOP STREET,SUITE 1907* HONOLULU,HI 96813 Table of Contents Page Introduction 1 A. Project Description 1 B. Purpose and Scope of the Study 1 C. Methodologies 3 1. Capacity Analysis 3 2. Trip Generation 3 II. Existing Conditions 4 A. Roadways 4 B. Public Transit 4 C. Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volumes and Operating Conditions 4 1. Field Investigation and Data Collection 4 2. Existing AM Peak Hour Traffic 5 3. Existing PM Peak Hour Traffic 5 III. Future Traffic Conditions 5 A. Background Growth in Traffic 5 B. Year 2024 AM Peak Hour Traffic Without Project 8 C. Year 2024 PM Peak Hour Traffic Without Project 8 IV. Traffic Impact Analysis 8 A. Trip Generation Characteristics 8 B. Traffic Assignment 8 i _ Table of Contents (Cont'd.) Page C. Year 2024 AM Peak Hour Traffic Analysis With Project 13 D. Year 2024 PM Peak Hour Traffic Analysis With Project 13 V. Recommendations and Conclusions 13 A. Recommendations 13 B. Conclusions 16 u List of Figures Page Figure 1. Location and Vicinity Map 2 Figure 2. Existing AM Peak Hour Traffic 6 Figure 3. Existing PM Peak Hour Traffic 7 Figure 4. Year 2024 AM Peak Hour Volumes Without Project 9 Figure 5. Year 2024 PM Peak Hour Volumes Without Project 10 Figure 6. AM Peak Hour Site Traffic Assignment 11 Figure 7. PM Peak Hour Site Traffic Assignment 12 Figure 8. Year 2024 AM Peak Hour Volumes With Project 14 Figure 9. Year 2024 PM Peak Hour Volumes With Project 15 iii TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED HONOKKA PLANTATION COTTAGES HONOKA'A, HAWAII ISLAND TAX MAP KEYS: (3) 4-5-010:131 & 136 AND (3) 4-5-024:010 Introduction A. Project Description Honoka'a Plantation Cottages, LLC is planning the development of 80 single-family detached dwelling units on its properties in Honoka'a, Hawaii Island. The property is identified as Tax Map Keys: (3)4-5-010:131 & 136, and(3)4-5-024:010. The 35.113-acre project site is located on the makai (north)side of Mamalahoa Highway,between Pakalana Street and Plumeria Street. Site access is planned along Lehua Street. Figure 1 depicts the project location and vicinity map. Honoka'a Plantation Cottages will consist of a total of 80 lots, each containing one (1) single-family detached housing unit. The Honoka'a Plantation Cottages project is expected to be fully built-out and occupied by the Year 2024. B. Purpose and Scope of the Study The purpose of this Traffic Assessment Report (TAR) is to analyze the traffic impacts resulting from the development of the proposed Honoka'a Plantation Cottages. The scope of the TAR includes the following: 1. A description of the Honoka'a Plantation Cottages. 2. An evaluation of existing roadways and traffic conditions. 3. The analysis of the future traffic conditions without the proposed project. 4. The development of the trip generation characteristics of the proposed project. 5. The assignment of the site-generated trips onto the roadway network. 6. The identification and analysis of the traffic impacts resulting from the development of the proposed project. 7. The recommendations of roadway improvements, as necessary, which would mitigate the traffic impacts identified in this study. Honoka'a Plantation Cottages TMC f= 7r Traffic Assessment Report May 22. 2020 r�k_ a./Cw t;+'4 - .ro�ob>//e.Yetw wa-%s. Na/tord Neke ovas- !� q' . /�P•'• 74 5 Victoria K.Fbi� S/5 ‘ e '1 P �' (Theo H Oorrs d Co.,Ltel)L< o °u� �• 'y /0.4 P c.. U V rco....Nsys.,: — Por. Gr O h 'No.+0000.moose nwwnFex ,,q co,/F 90 .--STATION!Pre" IC 93�{ l8.4Q3Ac. u7,,,7'.',.,7:44:::%'—`) � •109 �- >, y �° 0� atss'f 7 ,o �yf ..Lara .s�f r N 7- D-§.1,1.1Z7 A° bu1:.,"lP'� i0:,.'''',`2 Il''Q(�IF�®�Q u if T �..,, . .\ P.r 'L ' uoU �y '(,' e l4 V , \_ c, „, r ".0 4, rte„ - �( - c. 5.000Ac V n` ,,so.ae.0� 12 srfi , Hawaii Ai.._, 1 ie„^°S:M"`�"fY.-"+�'_ • l 19, 129 I Il -m,r�:1 9 Authority �-.-� N' hvv <.. ••a s -a vrsse i1 • Oh, C ocua r w esVs/s (• J 'IN neo, c y �� °rr N119 PLA+ 4t"; '118 0,96 " 'F Y �2N ypyO Mp' 1'''' O Z Dee ?0.791 Ac EXCs I�A�r� NO9 PI TA 1 q1�fr \ I J 1a 9. : '. ;� Project Site s,{lir I A4 % • zv A . i, * '. 131 12G (� — 31 s ,/ 7 ,,,y: ' O Nb s _�� L ,59�y2A�t. Y `�S� • 1 !co..,y ?Ka,,.o;;; i2 1'asE- �,(e�8 O H.„-..k,.. Pen Etee. #'-.dot , 1 . k ^, a �� "�T Co+.tirai.rr pn Ro d H9�911 • aP7j9/'� W 9 y \ \ PL4 Y6'!b.n.0" `H� d 01 Is ;� 4r N,Nfpl , M r �A— _ _ GRGar' r ',"the; t _ M @4O_ e¢ 4�i r� i . ___O -Q 132_ 0 --_ Ili yew. Z Yt °, v ,¢ A - N - o.049 Ac q z. .3 / 6 AKIN O 3 7 A N in ;'.. 35. vii 134; r �lI�I.l Ns..>: jEe ;:;,4 ":""C' All /\ .oMro,1eewah.+J 44: a Vii. ire 4.eo.aea. 21 2l ¢.o,o,—"' � /� okl �Y� lel u. ,^09I' :74;6 rz :,,,-.,�:'(3,90Au., , ESE,,,,, .. . A O/A (NM�fj/ GOYYI.de , (Rini Q> is-o+.wI:el:w^,i„ v N.awi'./eel Ac c:' ze,�tt - ' 7 i l/zoap.. 6T� -. ` _-4. R N.< r7.7e9Acl 6.›r ie. ••—.E::— PL Ar C / --_ A. a e L • 7, ."''. PLA �- /"'..._.1 A /t .\ --- •�a iv*e,A-�_ _ ; — -- _ _.Y ___ ,..E , -------- -- ---_— , 1 _ 1 _ / :•,,,,,,,:;,,,,,,,,,,e,....---_ awns) Loa St AAO (/Jj e -E 1/ Study Intersections ,,..,b. l i i'a / / Figure 1. Location and Vicinity Map 2 • M Honoka'a Plantation Cottages Traffic Assessment Report May 22, 2020 C. Methodologies 1. Capacity Analysis The highway capacity analysis, performed in this study, is based upon procedures presented in the Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition (HCM), published by the Transportation Research Board. HCM defines the Level of Service (LOS) as "a quantitative stratification of a performance measure or measures representing quality of service." HCM defines the six (6) Levels of Service from the traveler's perspective, ranging from the best LOS "A" to the worst LOS "F". LOS translates the complex mathematical results of the highway capacity analysis into an A through F grading system for the purpose of simplifying the roadway performance for decision makers. The Hawaii County Code Chapter 25, Section 25-2-46 "Concurrency Requirements" define LOS's "A", "B", "C", and "D" as acceptable Levels of Service. LOS's"E" and "F" are considered to be worse than acceptable Levels of Service. The intersection LOS is primarily based upon average delay (d) in seconds per vehicle (sec/veh). Table 1 summarizes the HCM LOS criteria. Table 1. Intersection Level of Service Criteria—Unsignalized Control (HCM) LOS Delay d (sec/veh) Description A d<_10 Control delay is minimal. B 10<d .15 Control delay is not significant. C 15<d<_25 Stable operation. Queuing begins to occur. D 25<d<35 Less stable condition. Increase in delays, decrease in travel speeds. E 35<d<_50 Unstable operation, significant delays. F d>50 High delays, extensive queuing. Synchro is a traffic analysis software that was developed by Trafficware. Synchro is an intersection analysis program that is based upon the HCM methodology. Worksheets for the capacity analysis, performed throughout this report, are compiled in the Appendix. 2. Trip Generation The trip generation methodologyis based upon generally accepted techniques developed by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and published in the Trip Generation Manual,10th Edition.The Hawaii County Code"Concurrency Requirements" 3 Honoka'a Plantation Cottages TMC i= 7( Traffic Assessment Report May 22, 2020 cites the ITE methodology as the source for determining trip generation. The ITE trip rates for single-family detached housing were developed by correlating the total vehicle trip generation data with various land use activities/characteristics, such as the vehicle trips per hour (vph) per dwelling unit (DU). II. Existing Conditions A. Roadways Mamalahoa Highway (Route 19), also known as the Hawaii Belt Road, is the primary arterial highway along the north coast of Hawaii Island. Mamalahoa Highway is a two- way, two-lane highway in the vicinity of the project site. The posted speed limit on Mamalahoa Highway in Honoka'a is 45 miles per hour. Pakalana Street is a two-way,two-lane collector street in Honoka'a. Pakalana Street is stop-controlled at its four-legged intersection with Mamalahoa Highway, opposite Mauna Loa Street. Pakalana Street provides the primary access for Honoka'a High School,Middle School, and Elementary School. On school days, between the hours of 7:00 AM and 3:00 PM, Pakalana Street is one-way mauka bound (southbound) from Mamane Street to Kamani Street. As a result,makai bound(northbound)traffic on Pakalana Street is diverted to Lehua Street. Lehua Street is a curvilinear, two-way, two-lane local roadway, between Pakalana Street and Honoka'a County Park. Sight distances along Lehua Street are limited by its horizontal and vertical alignments and roadside vegetation and embankments. Lehua Street is stop-controlled at its skewed, Tee-intersection with Pakalana Street. About 500 feet west of Pakalana Street, Lehua Street reduces to a one-lane roadway at a drainage crossing. "Yield to Oncoming Traffic" signs are posted on eastbound Lehua Street at the drainage crossing. B. Public Transit The Hawaii County Mass Transit Agency operates the public transit service on Hawaii Island. The Hele-On Bus provides transit service between Honoka'a, Hilo, and Waimea. C. Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volumes and Operating Conditions 1. Field Investigation and Data Collection Turning movement traffic count surveys were conducted in November 2019, during the peak periods of traffic, at the intersections of Mamalahoa Highway and Pakalana Street/Mauna Loa Street, and Pakalana Street and Lehua Street. 4 Honoka'a Plantation Cottages • TMC Traffic Assessment Report May 22, 2020 2. Existing AM Peak Hour Traffic The existing AM peak hour of traffic in the study area occurred from 7:00 AM to 8:00 AM. Mamalahoa Highway carried about 550 vehicles per hour (vph), total for both directions, during the existing AM peak hour of traffic. Pakalana Street carried about 200 vph, total for both directions, while Lehua Street carried about 100 vph. During the existing AM peak hour of traffic, Pakalana Street and Mauna Loa Street operated at LOS "C" and LOS "B" at Mamalahoa Highway, respectively. The left-turn movement from eastbound Mamalahoa Highway onto Pakalana Street operated at LOS "A". Lehua Street operated at LOS "B" at Pakalana Street. Figure 2 depicts the existing AM peak hour traffic volumes. 3. Existing PM Peak Hour Traffic The existing PM peak hour of traffic in the study area occurred from 4:30 PM to 5:30 PM. During the existing PM peak hour of traffic, Mamalahoa Highway carried about 600 vph, total for both directions. Pakalana Street carried about 240 vph, and Lehua Street carried about 60 vph, total for both directions. • Pakalana Street and Mauna Loa Street continued to operate at LOS "C" and LOS "B" at Mamalahoa Highway, respectively, during the existing PM peak hour of traffic. The left-turn movement from eastbound Mamalahoa Highway onto Pakalana Street operated at LOS "A". Lehua Street operated at LOS "A" at Pakalana Street. The existing PM peak hour traffic volumes are depicted on Figure 3. III. Future Traffic Conditions A. Background Growth in Traffic The Federal-Aid Highways 2035 Transportation Plan for the District of Hawaii (TPDH) was prepared for the State of Hawaii Department of Transportation (DOT), in cooperation with the County of Hawaii Department of Public Works and Planning Department. The TPDH developed long-range travel forecasts for Hawaii Island based upon future socio-economic conditions. The 2035 Transportation Plan projected an annual growth rate of about 1.25 percent in vehicle trips in Honoka'a, and about a one (1) percent annual growth rate in regional traffic on Mamalahoa Highway between Hilo and West Hawaii. 5 TMC Honoka'a Plantation Cottages Traffic Assessment Report May 22, 2020 1 `1 co V i i c6 0 /rl �j✓ w +A 6 " ry 1 o)rvrn -30 cflrvcr 4-282 y x-11 17, =�te . *.. .. ' Mamalahoa Hwy 15-* T Mamalahoa Hwy 133- co CNI 5-y c�i cv c� r o v Figure 2. Existing AM Peak Hour Traffic 6 ) Honoka'a Plantation Cottages MC rTraffic Assessment Report May 22, 2020 )t"k �°�° • Y ccs er,J ti d r1 „,,.f ria 140 CO NCO CA)w+cn `-55 +145 ,04 � x ur .s '.` 427 ti to Mamalahoa Hwy 40'' Mamalahoa Hwy 327 o 23-* NN OL) ir r v —ICJ? rift; Figure 3. Existing PM Peak Hour Traffic 7 TMC Honoka'a Plantation Cottages i= ieTraffic Assessment Report May 22, 2020 For the purpose of this traffic assessment,an annual average growth rate of 1.00 percent was uniformly applied to the existing(Year 2019)peak hour through traffic on Mamalahoa Highway and an annual average growth rate of 1.25 percent was applied to the existing peak hour traffic on Pakalana Street and Lehua Street to estimate the Year 2024 peak hour traffic demands without the proposed project. B. Year 2024 AM Peak Hour Traffic Without Project Pakalana Street and Mauna Loa Street are expected to continue to operate at LOS "C" and LOS "B" at Mamalahoa Highway, respectively, during the Year 2024 AM peak hour of traffic without the proposed project.The left-turn movement from eastbound Mamalahoa Highway onto Pakalana Street is also expected to continue to operate at LOS "A". • Lehua Street is expected to operate at LOS "B". The Year 2024 AM peak hour traffic volumes without the proposed project are depicted on Figure 4. C. Year 2024 PM Peak Hour Traffic Without Project During the Year 2024 PM peak hour of traffic without the proposed project, the intersections in the study area are expected to continue to operate at the same Levels of • Service as during the existing PM peak hour of traffic. Figure 5 depicts the Year 2024 PM peak hour volumes without the proposed project. IV. Traffic Impact Analysis A. Trip Generation Characteristics The trip generation characteristics for the proposed Honoka'a Plantation Cottages were based upon the ITE trip rates for an 80-unit single-family detached housing project. The ITE trip generation characteristics for the proposed project are summarized in Table 2. Table 2. ITE Trip Generation Characteristics Land Use AM Peak Hour (vph) PM Peak Hour (vph) (ITE Code) DU Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Single-Family 80 15 46 61 52 30 82 Detached Housing (210) B. Traffic Assignment The traffic assignments were based upon the existing traffic patterns at the intersection of Mamalahoa Highway and Pakalana Street. The AM and PM peak hour assignments of site-generated traffic are depicted on Figures 6 and 7, respectively. 8 Honoka'a Plantation Cottages • Traffic Assessment Report May 22, 2020 FC jai (13 1P/,;:/ a�f eY ria o } Zi • NO) -32 w w co E-296 y X12 ,47,74.117 Mamalahoa Hwy 1C %140 T fi Mamalahoa Hwy 5-* N0-)°i x ' `fix 3 Q) o Figure 4. Year 2024 AM Peak Hour Volumes Without Project 9 dM Honoka'a Plantation Cottages Traffic Assessment Report May 22, 2020 yrJ i.. C CZ ° 1 + 1a X73' Y ,�� .: "Cr c�awcn R58 CO�l-I' E-152 � � �J22 X a,;^5. >...w ;7,7"--^s vvriwW.rt mTp;','. .,;... ..sET '-74i e�.!'." ? x ,x Y',>k e: �Cv� .m Mamalahoa Hwy 343 43'f � �, Mamalahoa Hwy "'N 24-* N N O ,its cn Figure 5. Year 2024 PM Peak Hour Volumes Without Project 10 Honoka'a Plantation Cottages TMC 1=r%r Traffic Assessment Report May 22, 2020 cts („, .00Y o l 0 w N N R-10 ON Ac-O > as n ..: r •" _ �ak � ..# Mamalahoa Hwy OAR IN T if Mamalahoa Hwy 000 v s : c ift o Cn Figure 6. AM Peak Hour Site Traffic Assignment 11 )M Honoka'a Plantation Cottages i= lr Traffic Assessment Report May 22, 2020 t-`.i +� O ,1 C1) ; )4‘1/4c CJ V R30 coo-.I ÷ .14 14t.' �-w : ,727-1 Apr ' mss. ,, r�G�"r";'�, ;a. a��a ase ,�. se`.. ry ""x 47:t. Mamalahoa Hwy 22'* /it Mamalahoa Hwy 0-� Do0 e. 51) I— 0 � � C/) 4 Figure 7. PM Peak Hour Site Traffic Assignment 12 )M Honoka'a Plantation Cottages Traffic Assessment Report May 22, 2020 C. Year 2024 AM Peak Hour Traffic Analysis With Project Both Pakalana Street and Mauna Loa Street are expected to operate at LOS "C" at Mamalahoa Highway, during the Year 2024 AM peak hour of traffic with the proposed project. The left-turn movement from eastbound Mamalahoa Highway onto Pakalana Street is expected to continue to operate at LOS "A"with the proposed project. Lehua Street is expected to operate at LOS "B", during the Year 2024 AM peak hour of traffic with the proposed project. Figure 8 depicts the Year 2024 AM peak hour traffic with the proposed project. D. Year 2024 PM Peak Hour Traffic Analysis With Project During the Year 2024 PM peak hour of traffic with the proposed project, Pakalana Street and Mauna Loa Street are expected to operate at LOS "C" at Mamalahoa Highway. The left-turn movement from eastbound Mamalahoa Highway onto Pakalana Street is expected to continue to operate at LOS "A" with the proposed project. Lehua Street is expected to operate at LOS "A", during the Year 2024 PM peak hour of traffic with the proposed project. Figure 9 depicts the Year 2024 PM peak hour traffic with the proposed project. V. Recommendations and Conclusions A. Recommendations The following roadway improvements are recommended to mitigate the existing conditions on Lehua Street: 1. A"Yield to Oncoming Traffic" sign should be posted at the existing drainage crossing on westbound Lehua Street. 2. Appropriate sight distances should be maintained in both directions on Lehua Street at the existing drainage crossing. 3. Appropriate sight distances should be maintained in both directions along Lehua Street between the existing drainage crossing and Honoka'a Park. 4. Lehua Street should be restriped at Pakalana Street to reduce the skewed angle of the • intersection. • • 13 Honoka'a Plantation Cottages TMC Traffic Assessment Report — May 22, 2020 — sr, ! , tia AL -N--.I : i •. Tid, 0 Cp•-).-'''"2 /:,,..'Y -, (? , - 1--9 " ,,,A,) L7,7„...-,t-- ..r.,...., \/ i co 1\)(0 /. ' *-42 -296— ir A 12 Mamalahoa Hwy 21-* .rit A 4 Mamalahoa Hwy 1401 5-* ,1 CNN CO K ' si) 4 = r- ri o 1 1 t ri• [-1x I q ii Figure 8. Year 2024 AM Peak Hour Volumes With Project 14 Honoka'a Plantation Cottages TMC r Traffic Assessment Report ay22, 20 20 M ?"1 Cl) NNf q m :: a SVT ,,, erg cn w ' R-88 lv -� E-152 Ar22 s Mamalahoa Hwy 65'1 ' fi Mamalahoa Hwy 343 CON 24-u. N N v c 0 Figure 9. Year 2024 PM Peak Hour Volumes With Project 15 M Honoka'a Plantation Cottages Traffic Assessment Report May 22, 2020 B. Conclusions Lehua Street is a curvilinear roadway, both vertically and horizontally,along the project frontages. The development of the proposed Honoka'a Plantation Cottages is expected to improve sight distances along its frontages by removing the existing vegetation and roadside embankments that obscure the lines of sight, as necessary. The project access driveway and subdivision roadway intersections on Lehua Street should be situated and designed so as to provide appropriate sight distances on all approaches to the proposed access points. In the future, the existing one-lane drainage crossing on Lehua Street may require widening to two lanes with the increase of two-way traffic on Lehua Street. Pakalana Street operated at LOS "C" at Mamalahoa Highway, during the existing AM and PM peak hours of traffic. Pakalana Street is expected to continue to operate at LOS "C"at Mamalahoa Highway through the Year 2024 without and with the proposed project. Lehua Street is expected to operate at LOS "B" and LOS "A" at Pakalana Street, during the Year 2024 AM and PM peak hours of traffic, respectively, without and with the proposed project. Per the Hawaii County Code"Concurrency Requirements",LOS's"A", "B" and "C" are considered to be acceptable Levels of Service. As such, the proposed Honoka'a Plantation Cottages project is not expected to significantly impact the intersections in the study area. Therefore, traffic mitigation is not recommended at the intersection of Mamalahoa Highway and Pakalana Street at this time. • 16 TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED HONOKA'A PLANTATION COTTAGES HONOKA'A, HAWAII ISLAND TAX MAP KEYS: (3) 4-5-010:131 & 136 AND (3) 4-5-024:010 APPENDIX A TRAFFIC COUNT DATA ix x ix x s o o o o' p i P? A m o > W `n > w m p E > '`nt `''� o S 'Ac u � o n � � o = N a z 'T." o 1 D D D D y D D D D y D D D D Fy m o w o y m o m o m o m o y y _ 3 ? ? 3 3 3 E 3 z 3 E 3 3 3 3 3 0 3 3 3 3 E 3 3 3 3 m m w m W N m m N o - m a S m m m m m m o m a p 3 w m w N o o m o o a N o - o m 0 m m m En a s A. A m m m N o v ff s � n x o m .� m N m m w m ' 2 m N E' f°n m m o m m mco Ea a, co w CA CA A A N a m m J m W m m � � w m m m � m m N J 61 8 _ � 3 m m m m m o N w 0 0 w m m w m o m N t w 0 m N y o 3 n wo C mo �° NC W� WC aoy E WN a d a Q 3 C N� ,mo2umiu m ,.romPn ,mi, No W9 � m w mo w mNwo � m a NJ N w m oN w N N O °,N ,�J 0 Vy 3� a - m m w a m � � m w ,i o N N w m m � w m � N m V, m N 2 A z i , _ _ m W 0 o m o N N P m43 CO m A A m a w W w m moa a m m N w N m 8 m N A m ' m a N w o N 0 m m w m N m R; m m w m aa 0 m o N w w m m w 0 m w m w o m m m 3 -o(nNn ,E,T c w N w N m N0 m _ w a N o „ m 0 0 w m O w N m 0 0 -i w - z o o 3 -2m N m m o o m 8 8 m m a m V m o N m m W 8 <oo m 3 o N a n an d Mg m o 0 m m • a 0 x m ag, m m h mEg o w m m m 0 w W 8 w m N m N Si m J � m Jm m m m J m 0 m m A ,o �! a w m � W m � m m o � m N � w a a m m m N v o � S 2 2 SS m n 9 9 D D D D -i D D D D ti D D D D D y N o in o y pan o o y .an o en o y G o 8 o H 88 N o P. 1 e _ 3 3 3 x 3 3 3 3 _ 3 3 3 3 = 6 3 3 3 . 3 3 3 3 Q 3 3 3 3 a 3 3 3 3 . 3 3 3 3 m o o o N m m o m T u o a a m a a o N a u N a to Ti 8 a 8 m m c2 o w w u m m m m a m o o m 2 a V8 ,76; 28 u m m 8 o m o o m m w w m oT. ,_, T. w w o 12 m 2 m m8 m m a m 8 s m 8 m N 8 g & 8 m u w w o 2 a m w a m v0, w a a m m w m m mw -. 0 a I m m m m m m N w o m m v N m 2 8 w m 8 2m a o 2 8 m m w ' o N m m w m w o m o a 1p N a N m m w m w o o m w v o w o a m w m ' • r r r rc tt 1i 2 c rn o Q � o m The Traffic Management Consultant 1188 Bishop Street,Suite 1907 Count Name:Mamalahoa Hwy Pakalana St Site Code:Honokaa Plantation Honolulu,Hawaii,United States 96813 Start Date:11/19/2019 808-536-0223 tmchawaii@aol.com Page No:4 pkbstrsn 7., 8 8 19 1341 2066 3407 10 35 45 3 12 2 4 6 1364 21,26 3489 1 6 1 0 787 3. 881 0 8 1 5 0 0 1 3 9 806 .2 911 9 TM1 LT Pect 1-1 4 t .E1U'LOrg 11/1042019 2130 P7.1 T;t1726360 9:00 61141 T - 0.. ..e, r 0 LT 711 PT P. 178 269 329 0 1 2 2 2 0 10 0 0 2 2 3 9 8 17 856 775 1621 10 12 22 5 4 1191 804 1695 mama Loa SI NBI Turning Movement Data Plot • The Traffic Management Consultant 1188 Bishop Street,Suite 1907 Count Name:Mamalahoa Hwy Pakalana St Site Code:Honokaa Plantation Honolulu,Hawaii,United States 96813 Start Date:11/19/2019 808-536-0223 tmchawaii@aol.com Page No:5 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data(4:30 PM) Mamalahoa Hwy Mamalahoa Hwy Mauna Loa St Pakalana St Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Start Time Left-Tum Thru Right-Turn Peds App.Total Left-Turn Thru Right-Tum Peds App.Total Lett-Turn Thru Right-Turn Pods App.Total Left-Tum Thru Right-Tum Pods App.Total Int Total 4:30 PM 8 69 4 81 3 45 7 55 2 7 6 15 13 9 10 32 183 4:45 PM 9 83 5 97 5 36 16 57 0 2 4 „ 6 6 4 11 • 21 181 5:00 PM 10 89 8 J 107 8 28 23 59 0 6 4 10 12 9 9 30 206 5:15 PM 13 86 6 -• 105 5 36 9 50 1 6 6 •- 13 20 13 7 " 40 208 Total 40 327 23 390 21 145 55 221 3 21 20 44 51 35 37 123 778 Approach% 10.3 83.8 5.9 - 9.5 65.6 24.9 - 6.8 47.7 45.5 . - 41.5 28.5 30.1 - - Total% 5.1 42.0 3.0 . 50.1 2.7 18.6 7.1 28.4 0.4 2.7 2.6 5.7 6.6 4.5 4,8 15.8 - PHF 0.769 0.919 0.719 0.911 0.656 0.806 0.598 0.936 0.375 0.750 0.833 • 0.733 0.638 0.673 0.841 0.769 0.935 Motorcycles 1 1 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 Motorcycles 2.5 0.3 4.3 0.8 0,0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 Cars B Light Goods 39 316 22 - 377 21 143 55 219 3 21 20 - 44 51 35 36 • 122 762 %Cars 8 Light Goods 97,5 66.6 95,7 . 66.7 100.0 98.6 100.0 99.1 100.0 100.0 100.0 100,0 100.0 100.0 97.3 99.2 97.9 Buses 0 4 0 4 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 6 %Buses 0.0 1,2 0.0 • 1.0 0,0 0,7 0.0 - 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.7 0.8 0.8 Single-Unit Trucks 0 4 0 • 4 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 %Single-Unit Trucks 0.0 1.2 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0,5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 ' ,0.0 0.0 0.0 0,6 Articulated Trucks 0 2 0 - 2 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 • 0 2 %Articulated Trucks 0,0 0,6 0.0 - 0.5 0.0 0.0 0,0 • 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 0,0 0.0 0,0 • 0,0 0.3 Bicycles on Road 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -' 0 0 0 0 0 0 %Bicycles on Road 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0,0 - 0,0 0,0 0,0 0.0 • 0.0 0,0 B:oycles on Crosswalk - - - • - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 - - %Bicycleson - - _ - - _ - - . _ - - - - - - _ - - Crosswalk Pedestrians - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - • - - %Pedestrians - - - - - - - - - - - - - • - - - - . - - The Traffic Management Consultant 1188 Bishop Street,Suite 1907 Count Name:Mamalahoa Hwy Pakalana St Site Code:Honokaa Plantation Honolulu,Hawaii,United States 96813 Start Date:11/19/2019 808-536-0223 tmchawaii@aol.com Page No:6 Pakabna St ei 115 122 237 116 T. 239 RT h Ped N 1 4 ^ - Peak Hour Data ` tau o - w " '_0 o o °Z ,viz ois s�oa r y e v Y e u o _00000 a oar „�, a o oo_ h t r► 21 20 78 44 122 44 Ill Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot(4:30 PM) The Traffic Management Consultant 1188 Bishop Street,Suite 1907 Count Name:Mamalahoa Hwy Pakalana St Site Code:Honokaa Plantation Honolulu,Hawaii,United States 96813 Start Date:11/19/2019 808-536-0223 tmchawaii@aol.com, Page No:7 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data(7:00 AM) Mamalahoa Hwy Mamalahoa Hwy Mauna Loa St Pakalana St Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Start Time Left-Tum Thru Right-Turn Peds App.Total Left-Turn Thru Right-Turn Reds App.Total Left-Turn Thru Right-Turn Pads App.Total Lett-Tum Thru Right-Turn Pods App.Total Int.Total 7:00 AM 3 25 4 32 2 103 8 113 5 6 10 21 8 3 14 25 191 7:15 AM 4 32 0 36 5 69 12 86 6 3 5 16 4 11 18 33 171 7:30 AM 4 33 0 l 37 . 0 48 2 s 50 3 6 13 22 14 5 11 _ 30 139 7:45 AM 4 43 1 48 4 62 8 74 7 7 9 ` 23 39 3 26 68 213 Total 15 133 5 153 11 282 30 ' 323 23 22 37 82 65 22 69 156 714 Approach% 9.8 86.9 3.3 - - 3.4 87.3 9.3 - 28.0 25.8 45.1 - 41.7 14.1 44.2 - - Total% 2.1 18.6 0.7 21.4 1.5 39.5 4.2 45.2 3.2 3.1 5.2 • 11.5 9.1 3.1 9.7 21.8 - PHF 0.938 0.773 0.313 • 0.797 0.550 0.684 0.625 0.715 0.719 0.786 0.712 0.891 0.417 0.500 0.663 0.574 0.838 Motorcycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 %Motorcycles 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cars 8 Light Goads 15 118 4 137 10 270 29 309 23 21 36 • 80 63 21 67 - 151 677 %Cars&Light Goods 100.0 88.7 80.0 89.5 90.9 95.7 96.7 95.7 100.0 95.5 97.3 - 97.6 96.9 95.5 97.1 96.8 94.8 Buses 0 2 I 3 1 0 1 . 2 0 1 1 2 2 0 2 4 11 %Buses 0.0 1.5 20.0 2.0 9.1 0.0 3.3 - 0.6 0.0 4.5 2.7 - 2.4 3.1 0.0 2.9 2.6 1.5 Single-Unit Trucks 0 3 0 3 0 5 0 - 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 _ %Single-Unit Trucks 0.0 2.3 0.0 2.0 0.0 1.8 0.0 - 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.1 Articulated Trucks 0 10 0 • 10 0 7 0 - 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 %Articulated Trucks 0.0 7.5 0.0 - 6.5 0.0 2.5 0.0 2.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 • 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 • 0.0 2.4 Bicycles on Road 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 1 0 • 1 1 %Bicycles on Road 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 4.5 0.0 0.6 0.1 Bicycles on Crosswalk - - - - - - - • - - - - s - - - - • - - %Bicycles on _ _ Crosswalk - _ - _ - _ _ _ _ - _ - _ - - Pedestrians - - - - - - - • - - - - - - - - - - - %Pedestdans - - - - - - - - • - - - - - - - - - - - • The Traffic Management Consultant 1188 Bishop Street,Suite 1907 Count Name:Mamalahoa Hwy Pakalana St Site Code:Honokaa Plantation Honolulu,Hawaii,United States 96813 Start Date:11/19/2019 808-536-0223 tmchawaii@aol.com Page No:8 sei Exit Ent8r Total 65 151 216 67 16 223 6 22 65 RT 111 LT P881 /' 4 4 Peak Hour Data t A' ` '^ - _ ec; Few Q o 0 ,ssoo RA r"Butes w m u r _eveee a a. .rN� avev000_ tL RT r► 2 21 36 35 80 115 38 82 120 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot(7:00 AM) 2 2 3 2 2 1 2 S N N a A�n Z o N o A y m o y D D D y D D• Jy D y D D y D o r o to o tai o o - o y • • M a M 3 3 3 6 3 3 Er F 3 a 3 3 6 3 3 a x 3 0 0 3 m I I — 3 o0ao00oo000 000000o00m0 , 0000000000000002 N N N 0 m tJw m m m cA f, m a, EP E m N Wco w m , (“ 0, 1“ N31. 1.4 N o m m V m N m N m y� • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 + , 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o m o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 e. m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m o o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 o a 0 0 0 a o 0 0 0 0 m V. 0. --m Nc my w oy N a N� pK D .92. U N O3 1,2 o + 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 F,0 W3 ^^*N (2_• m A o m m \G N N a m m V m a w A m in o N W m w m V m pt N O „,C su pt Jy m v 3. o 2 5 '> 0 am W m S - 2 0 0 0 8 m m W m m m W 2 w A � d 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 + - 0 0 0 0 o , 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 y 8- g •o 8 V m m m N m N 2 8 N 8, N N a A . e 8 w 8 2 2m a w m N A m 257712 n 2 N N O N 2. V m {J m m 1�. o V m m ' N m m m V o w N m o A o �.i u m w m o V m N 0 y poz OP mf03 -.xm N o m m m N 1,-. 8t o m N o m m w N a N m m 5 O N m1 C 3 a o m T5/2 m D y W W o V u u o m m o w a {J W lu m o m V yt m o w 0y f0,3 m m u§ o • 2 a m m v J o m WP., m A m 2 o A w m C w a a e y dm 5. n a;m m - _ ; D x 2 7 x n ' ona' Pr ~� � � oyAu � o � eua ]1NoaYu 4 u E m n o n �. y s 4 m -� D D J D D D D -i D D ay D w o 1' [ 2 F 2 2 q m 3 3 a 3 E 3 E i x m � � ' ' ' ' m o 0 o a a o J N u m w o m m ' ' ao o 0N N J m m m o o w m m • a• to mNi a o a m u a m a t m J m w N m m a21 m N o w m m o o m m o �i a m J a u m uNi f.�i a m N 0 0 o a m w > ui N N m N w w w m N o w a " m 21 m N uai 4 21 w m a • The Traffic Management Consultant 1188 Bishop Street,Suite 1907 Count Name:Lehua St Pakalana St Honolulu,Hawaii,United States 96813 SSttte Code:Honokaa Plantation art Date:11/19/2019 808-536-0223 tmchawaii@aol.com Page No:3 Pakalana Csel 083 1283 1768 1 33 3i3 13.27 s`fiT r 223 1050 0 0 232 1095 0 6 ' 4,40eci� / _o�oo n�S to 00000- 000voc 000ao .—► >ooM �—� eeeee -w o o n ailiiois eeo am X 0 0 0�, '3 • h t r1 m0mm iamrn macro Daae oAOm EEMETIENIEZ ®imp ®mm ©ai0 i©©a ®QE" Turning Movement Data Plot The Traffic Management Consultant 1188 Bishop Street,Suite 1907 Count Name:Lehua St Pakalana St Site Code:Honokaa Plantation Honolulu,Hawaii,United States 96813 Start Date:11/19/2019 808-536-0223 tmchawaii@aol.com Page No:4 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data(4:30 PM) Lehua St Driveway Pakalana St Pakalana St Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Start Time Left-Turn Thur Right-Turn Peds App.Total Left-Tum Thru Right-Turn Peds App.Total Left-Turn Thru Right-Turn Peds App.Total Left-Turn Thru Right-Turn Peds App.Total Int.Total 999 4:30 PM 1 0 6 7 0 0 0 0 4 20 0 24 0 22 3 25 56 4:45 PM 0 0 4 ii 4 0 0 0 ` 0 5 20 0 ., 25 0 20 1 21 50 5:00 PM 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 .- 0 8 27 0 - 35 0 20 6 - 26 63 5:15 PM 0 0 8 8 0 0 0 0 i 8 21 0 29 0 25 1 26 63 Total 1 0 20 21 0 0 0 0 25 85 0 113 0 87 11 ., 98 232 Approach% 4.8 0.0 95.2 - 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 22.1 77.9 0.0 • - 0.0 88.8 11.2 - - Total% 0.4 0.0 8.6 - 9.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.8 37.9 0.0 48.7 0.0 37.5 4.7 42.2 - PHF 0.250 0.000 0.625 0.656 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.781 0.815 0.000 0.807 0.000 0.870 0.458 0.942 0.921 Motorcycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 %Motorcycles 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 1.1 - 0.9 - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 Cars&Light Goods 1 0 20 - 21 0 0 0 0 25 87 0 112 0 86 11 97 i 230 %Cars B Light Goods 100.0 - 100.0 100.0 - - - - 100.0 98.9 - 99.1 - 98.9 100.0 99.0 99.1 Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 0 - 1 1 %Buses 0.0 - 0.0 .• 0.0 - - - - - 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 - 1.1 0.0 1.0 0.4 Single-Unit Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 %Single-Unit Trucks 0.0 - 0.0 i 0.0 - - - • - 0.0 0.0 - o.o - 0.0 OA 0.0 0.0 Articulated Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 %Articulated Trucks 0.0 - 0.0 . 0.0 - - - - - 0.0 0.0 - - 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 Bicycles on Road 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 %Bicycles on Road 0.0 - D.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 0.0 - • 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 . 0.0 0.0 Bicycles on Crosswalk - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - %Bicycleson _ - - - - - - - _ _ - _ - - _ - - Crosswalk Pedestrians - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I - - %Pedestrians - - - - - - - - - - - - . - - - - - - - The Traffic Management Consultant 1188 Bishop Street,Suite 1907 Count Name:Lehua St Pakalana St Site Code:Honokaa Plantation Honolulu,Hawaii,United States 96813 Start Date:11/19/2019 808-536-0223 tmchawaii@aol.com Page No:5 ansa 88 W 185 11 87 0 1 `4 Pad Peak Hour Data a "„„ I _ o oaa000� • „„ „ „ opo„ s$oiasaaPM „oo„„ e°000 m3 nom e „ pa r' oa000 h tLT Th RT Red r► 25 87 0 0 ,os 112 218 107 112 220 Paka,..=,Mai” Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot(4:30 PM) • • • The Traffic Management Consultant 1188 Bishop Street,Suite 1907 Count Name:Lehua St Pakalana St Site Code:Honokaa Plantation Honolulu,Hawaii,United States 96813 Start Date:11/19/2019 • 808-536-0223 tmchawaii@aol.com Page No:6 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data(7:00 AM) Lehua St Driveway Pakalana St Pakalana St Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Start Time Left-Turn Thru Right-Turn Peds App.Total Left-Turn Thru Right-Turn Peds App.Total Left-Turn Thru Right-Turn Peds App.Total Left-Tum Thru Right-Turn Peds App.Total Int.Total 7:00 AM 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 . 0 12 3 0 15 0 18 2 20 37 7:15 AM 0 0 2 .. 2 0 0 0 i. 0 10 2 0 12 0 30 5 35 49 7:30 AM 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 1. 0 8 0 0 8 0 29 11 40 50 7:45 AM 1 0 1 2 1 0 0 1 15 3 1 _ 19 0 68 25 t. 93 115 Total 2 0 6 e 1 0 0 1 45 8 1 54 0 145 43 188 251 Approach% 25.0 0.0 75.0 - - 100.0 0.0 0.0 - 83.3 14.8 1.9 - - 0.0 77.1 229 - - Total% 0.8 0.0 2.4 3.2 0.4 0.0 0.0 • 0.4 17.9 3.2 0.4 21.5 ' 0.0 57.8 17.1 - 74.9 - PHF 0.500 0.000 0.750 1.000 0.250 0.000 0.000 0.250 0.750 0.667 0.250 - 0.711 0.000 0.533 0.430 0.505 0.546 Motorcycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 %Motorcycles 0.0 - 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 • 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 CarsS Light Goods 2 0 6 - 8 1 0 0 1 42 8 1 . 51 0 139 40 179 239 %Cars&Light Goods 100.0 - 100.0 100.0 100.0 - - 100.0 93.3 100.0 100.0 • 94.4 - 95.9 93.0 95.2 95.2 Buses 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 6 3 . 9 12 %Buses 0.0 - 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 - - . 0.0 6.7 0.0 0.0 - 5.6 - 4.1 7.0 4.8 4.8 Single-Unit Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 %Single-Unit Trucks 0.0 - 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 - - • 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Articulated Trucks 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 %Articulated Trucks 0.0 - 0.0 . 0.0 0.0 - - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 Bicycles on Road 0 0 - 0 - 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 %Bicycles on Road 0.0 - 0.0 • 0.0 0.0 - - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 Bicycles on Crosswalk - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - %Bicycles on ___ __ - _ _ - _ - - - - - -.. - ICrosswalk . Pedestrians - - - - - - - - - - - r - - - - ' - - %Pedestrians - - - - - - - - IV - - - - - - - - - ..,..+ - - • • The Traffic Management Consultant 1188 Bishop Street,Suite 1907 Count Name:Lehua St Pakalana St Site Code:Honokaa Plantation Honolulu,Hawaii,United States 96813 Start Date:11/19/2019 808-536-0223 tmchawaii@aol.com Page No:7 Pakalane St SET Egg Eg,g, 10 179 189 10 190 40 139 0 0 43 145 0 3 N 1 LT Pe -""-' t.-± Peak Hour Data t `��'"- • vao_ m000m 000.0.e4 oasts 4— 000v0 t ,� m e m oe000 �Z „arza,n,�oe, t" voo h tLT Th RT Ped r► 1. 51 197 To. Parau.a... Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot(7:00 AM) TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED HONOKA'A PLANTATION COTTAGES HONOKA'A, HAWAII ISLAND TAX MAP KEYS: (3) 4-5-010:131 & 136 AND (3) 4-5-024:010 APPENDIX B CAPACITY ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS Honokaa Plantation Cottages HCM 6th TWSC 1: Mauna Loa St/Pakalana St&Mamalahoa Hwy Existing AM Peak Hour Traffic Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 5.8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 44. Traffic Vol,veh/h 15 133 5 11 282 30 23 22 37 65 22 69 Future Vol,veh/h 15 133 5 11 282 30 23 22 37 65 22 69 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage,#- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade,% - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 Heavy Vehicles,% 0 11 20 9 4 3 0 5 3 3 0 3 Mvmt Flow 18 158 6 13 336 36 27 26 44 77 26 82 Major/Minor. Majorl Major2 Minorl Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 372 0 0 164 0 0 631 595 161 612 580 354 Stage 1 - - - - - - 197 197 - 380 380 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 434 398 - 232 200 - Critical Hdwy 4.1 - - 4.19 - - 7.1 6.55 6.23 7.13 6.5 6.23 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.1 5.55 - 6.13 5.5 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - 6.1 5.55 - 6.13 5.5 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.2 - - 2.281 - - 3.5 4.045 3.327 3.527 4 3.327 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1198 - - 1373 - - 396 413. 881 404 428 688 Stage 1 - - - - - - 809 732 - 640 617 - Stage 2 - - - - 604 598 - 769 739 Platoon blocked,% - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver1198 - 1373 - . 325 401 881 357 416 688 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 325 401 - 357 416 - Stage 1 - - - - - 795 720 - 629 610 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 503 591 - 692 726 - Approach EB WB : - NBa SB i HCM Control Delay,s 0.8 0.3 14.2 17.8 HCM LOS B C Minor Lane/Major Mymt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR, WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity(veh/h) 489 1198 - - 1373 - - 465 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.2 0.015 - - 0.01 - - 0.399 HCM Control Delay(s) 14.2 8.1 0 - 7.6 0 - 17.8 HCM Lane LOS B A A - A A - C HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.7 0 - - 0 - - 1.9 The Traffic Management Consultant Page B-1 Honokaa Plantation Cottages HCM 6th TWSC 2: Pakalana St&Lehua St Existing AM Peak Hour Traffic Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 1.8 Movement NBL NBT SBT SBR SEL SER Lane Configurations 4 1+ Traffic Vol,veh/h 45 9 145 43 2 6 Future Vol,veh/h 45 9 145 43 2 6 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 3 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage,#- 0 0 - 0 - Grade,% - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 55 55 55 55 55 55 Heavy Vehicles,% 7 0 4 7 0 0 Mvmt Flow 82 16 264 78 4 11 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 342 0 - 0 486 303 Stage 1 - - - - 303 - Stage 2 - - - - 183 - Critical Hdwy 4.17 - - - 6.4 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.263 - - - 3.5 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1190 - - - 544 741 Stage 1 - - - - 754 - Stage 2 - - - 853 - Platoon blocked,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuveri190 - - - 506 741 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 506 - Stage 1 - - - - 701 - Stage 2 - - - - 853 - Approach NB SB SE HCM Control Delay,s 6.9 0 10.5 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT SELn1 SBT SBR Capacity(veh/h) 1190 - 664 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.069 - 0.022 - - HCM Control Delay(s) 8.2 0 10.5 - - HCM Lane LOS A A B - - HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.2 - 0.1 - - The Traffic Management Consultant Page B-2 Honokaa Plantation Cottages HCM 6th TWSC 1: Mauna Loa St/Pakalana St&Mamalahoa Hwy Existing PM Peak Hour Traffic Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 4.3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol veh/h 40 327 23 21 145 55 3 21 20 51 35 37 Future Vol,veh/h 40 327 23 21 145 55 3 21 20 51 35 37 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage,#- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade,% - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 Heavy Vehicles,% 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Mvmt Flow 43 348 24 22 154 59 3 22 21 54 37 39 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 213 0 0 372 0 0 712 703 360 696 686 184 Stage 1 - - - - - - 446 446 - 228 228 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 266 257 - 468 458 - Critical Hdwy 4.1 - - 4.1 - - 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.23 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.1 5.5 - .6.1 5.5 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.2 - - 2.2 - - 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.327 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1369 - - 1198 - - 350 364 689 359 373 856 Stage 1 - - - - - - 595 577 - 779 719 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 744 699 - 579 570 - Platoon blocked,% - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver1369 - - 1198 - - 293 342 689 316 351 856 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 293 342 - 316 351 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 571 554 - 748 704 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 658 684 - 517 547 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay,s 0.8 0.8 14.2 18.1 HCM LOS • B C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity(veh/h) 437 1369 - - 1198 - - 404 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.107 0.031 - - 0.019 - - 0.324 HCM Control Delay(s) 14.2 7.7 0 - 8.1 0 - 18.1 HCM Lane LOS B A A - A A - C HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.4 0.1 - - 0.1 - - 1.4 The Traffic Management Consultant Page B-3 Honokaa Plantation Cottages HCM 6th TWSC 2: Pakalana St&Lehua St Existing PM Peak Hour Traffic Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 1.6 Movement NBL NBT SBT SBR SEL SER Lane Configurations 4 13. n� Traffic Vol,veh/h 25 88 87 11 1 20 Future Vol,veh/h 25 88 87 11 1 20 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 1 0 0 1 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized None None - None Storage Length 0 Veh in Median Storage,U- 0 0 - 0 - I Grade'% 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles,% 0 0 1 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 27 96 95 12 1 22 Major/Minor Majora. Ma "r2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 108 0 0 252 102 Stage 102 Stage 150 Critical Hdwy 4.1 6.4 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.4 [riti_ca| HdwyStgZ - 5.4 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.2 3.5 3.3 Pot[ap'lManeuver 149S 741 959 Stage - 927 Stage2 - 883 - Platoon blocked,% N1ovCap'1[Naneuver1494 - - 725 958 [WovCap-ZManeuver 725 Stage - - 908 Stage 882Approach NB _�_. SB_�_� SE HCM Control Delay,s 1.6 0 8.9 H[[WLOS A Minor ----�- %xvmt NBL NBT SELn1 nBT-SBn��'--���--- � _ �--�-� � �----�--�---] Capacity(veh/h) 1494 - 944 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.018 0.024 HCM Control Delay(s) 7.5 0 8.9 HCK4Lane LOS A A A HCM95th%ti|eQ(veh) 0.1 0.1 The Traffic Management Consultant Page B-4 TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED HONOKA'A PLANTATION COTTAGES HONOKA'A, HAWAII ISLAND TAX MAP KEYS: (3) 4-5-010:131 & 136 AND (3) 4-5-024:010 APPENDIX C CAPACITY ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS 2024 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC WITHOUT PROJECT Honokaa Plantation Cottages HCM 6th TWSC 1: Mauna Loa St/Pakalana St&Mamalahoa Hwy 2024 AM Peak Hour Traffic Without Project Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 6.3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4+ Traffic Vol,veh/h 16 140 5 12 296 32 24 23 39 69 23 73 Future Vol,veh/h 16 140 5 12 296 32 24 23 39 69 23 73 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage,#- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade,% - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 Heavy Vehicles,% 0 11 20 9 4 3 0 5 3 3 0 3 Mvmt Flow 19 167 6 14 352 38 29 27 46 82 27 87 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 " Minorl Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 390 0 0 173 0 0 664 626 170 644 610 371 Stage 1 - - - - - - 208 208 - 399 399 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 456 418 - 245 211 - Critical Hdwy 4.1 - - 4.19 - - 7.1 6.55 6.23 7.13 6.5 6.23 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.1 5.55 - 6.13 5.5 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.1 5.55 - 6.13 5.5 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.2 - - 2.281 - - 3.5 4.045 3.327 3.527 4 3.327 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1180 - - 1362 - 377 397 871 384 412 673 Stage 1 - - - - - - 799 724 - 625 606 - Stage 2 - - - - 588 585 - 756 731 - Platoon blocked,% - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver1180 - - 1362 - 304 385 871 336 399 673 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 304 385 - 336 399 - Stage 1 - - - - - 785 711 614 598 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 482 577 - 676 718 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay,s 0.8 0.3 14.8 19.4 HCM LOS B C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL ,WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity(veh/h) 469 1180 - - 1362 - - 444 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.218 0.016 - - 0.01 - - 0.442 HCM Control Delay(s) 14.8 8.1 0 - 7.7 0 - 19.4 HCM Lane LOS B A A - A A - C HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.8 0 - - 0 - - 2.2 The Traffic Management Consultant Page C-1 Honokaa Plantation Cottages HCM 6th TWSC 2: Pakalana St&Lehua St 2024 AM Peak Hour Traffic Without Project Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 1.8 Movement NBL NBT SBT SBR SEL SER Lane Configurations 4 14 Traffic Vol,veh/h 48 10 154 46 2 6 Future Vol,veh/h 48 10 154 46 2 6 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 3 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage,#- 0 0 - 0 - Grade,% - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 55 55 55 55 55 55 Heavy Vehicles,% 7 0 4 7 0 0 Mvmt Flow 87 18 280 84 4 11 Major/Minor Major' Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 364 0 - 0 517 322 Stage 1 - - - - 322 - Stage 2 - - - - 195 - Critical Hdwy 4.17 - - - 6.4 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.4 Follow-up Hdwy 2.263 - - - 3.5 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1167 - - 522 724 Stage 1 - - - - 739 - Stage 2 - - 843 - Platoon blocked,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver1167 .. - - 483 724 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 483 - Stage 1 - - 684 Stage 2 - - - - 843 - Approach NB SB SE HCM Control Delay,s 6.9 0 10.7 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT SELn1 SBT SBR Capacity(veh/h) 1167 - 644 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.075 - 0.023 - HCM Control Delay(s) 8.3 0 10.7 - - HCM Lane LOS A A B - - HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.2 - 0.1 - - The Traffic Management Consultant Page C-2 Honokaa Plantation Cottages HCM 6th TWSC 1: Mauna Loa St/Pakalana St&Mamalahoa Hwy 2024 PM Peak Hour Traffic Without Project Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 4.6 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol,veh/h 43 343 24 22 152 58 3 22 21 54 37 39 Future Vol,veh/h 43 343 24 22 152 58 3 22 21 54 37 39 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage,#- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade,% - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 Heavy Vehicles,% 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Mvmt Flow 46 365 26 23 162 62 3 23 22 57 39 41 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minorl Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 224 0 0 391 0 0 749 740 378 732 722 193 Stage 1 - - - - - - 470 470 - 239 239 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 279 270 - 493 483 - Critical Hdwy 4.1 - - 4.1 - - 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.23 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.2 - - 2.2 - - 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.327 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1357 - - 1179 - - 331 347 673 339 355 846 Stage 1 - - - - - - 578 563 - 769 711 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 732 690 - 562 556 - Platoon blocked,% - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver1357 - - 1179 - - 272 325 673 295 332 846 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 272 325 - 295 332 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 553 539 - 736 695 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 642 675 - 497 532 - Approach EB WB_. NB SB HCM Control Delay,s 0.8 0.8 14.8 19.7 HCM LOS B C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity(veh/h) 418 1357 - - 1179 - - 382 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.117 0.034 - - 0.02 - - 0.362 HCM Control Delay(s) 14.8 7.7 0 - 8.1 0 - 19.7 HCM Lane LOS B A A - A A - C HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.4 0.1 - - 0.1 - - 1.6 The Traffic Management Consultant Page C-3 Honokaa Plantation Cottages HCM 6th TWSC 2: Pakalana St&Lehua St 2024 PM Peak Hour Traffic Without Project Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 1.6 Movement NBL NBT SBT SBR SEL SER Lane Configurations 4 1+ Traffic Vol,veh/h 27 94 92 12 1 21 Future Vol,veh/h 27 94 92 12 1 21 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 1 0 0 1 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage,#- 0 0 - 0 - Grade,% - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles,% 0 0 1 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 29 102 100 13 1 23 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 114 0 - 0 268 108 Stage 1 - - - - 108 - Stage 2 - - - - 160 - Critical Hdwy 4.1 - - - 6.4 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.2 - - - 3.5 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1488 - - - 726 951 Stage 1 - - - - 921 - Stage 2 - - - - 874 - Platoon blocked,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver1487 - - - 709 950 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 709 - Stage 1 - - - - 901 - Stage 2 - - - - 873 - Approach NB SB SE HCM Control Delay,s 1.7 0 8.9 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT SELn1 SBT SBR Capacity(veh/h) 1487 - 936 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.02 - 0.026 - - HCM Control Delay(s) 7.5 0 8.9 - - HCM Lane LOS A A A - - HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.1 - 0.1 - - The Traffic Management Consultant Page C-4 TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED HONOKKA PLANTATION COTTAGES HONOKA'A, HAWAII ISLAND TAX MAP KEYS: (3) 4-5-010:131 & 136 AND (3) 4-5-024:010 APPENDIX D CAPACITY ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS 2024 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC WITH PROJECT Honokaa Plantation Cottages HCM 6th TWSC 1: Mauna Loa St/Pakalana St&Mamalahoa Hwy 2024 AM Peak Hour Traffic With 80 DU Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 8.2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4+ Traffic Vol,veh/h 21 140 5 12 296 42 24 23 39 91 23 97 Future Vol,veh/h 21 140 5 12 296 42 24 23 39 91 23 97 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage,#- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade,% - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 Heavy Vehicles,% 0 11 20 9 4 3 0 5 3 3 0 3 Mvmt Flow 25 167 6 14 352 50 29 27 46 108 27 115 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minorl Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 402 0 0 173 0 0 696 650 170 662 628 377 Stage 1 - - - - - - 220 220 - 405 405 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 476 430 - 257 223 - Critical Hdwy 4.1 - - 4.19 - - 7.1 6.55 6.23 7.13 6.5 6.23 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.1 5.55 - 6.13 5.5 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.1 5.55 - 6.13 5.5 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.2 - - 2.281 - - 3.5 4.045 3.327 3.527 4 3.327 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1168 - - 1362 - - 359 384 871 374 402 667 Stage 1 - - - - - - 787 716 - 620 602 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 574 578 - 745 723 - Platoon blocked,% - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver1168 - - 1362 - - 273 370 871 325 387 667 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 273 370 - 325 387 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 768 699 - 605 594 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 447 570 - 661 706 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay,s 1 0.3 15.6 24 HCM LOS C C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity(veh/h) 441 1168 - - 1362 - - 435 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.232 0.021 - - 0.01 - - 0.577 HCM Control Delay(s) 15.6 8.2 0 - 7.7 0 - 24 HCM Lane LOS C A A - A A - C HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.9 0.1 - - 0 - - 3.6 The Traffic Management Consultant Page D-1 Honokaa Plantation Cottages HCM 6th TWSC 2: Pakalana St&Lehua St 2024 AM Peak Hour Traffic With 80 DU Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 2.9 Movement NBL NBT SBT SBR SEL SER Lane Configurations 4 Traffic Vol,veh/h 63 10 172 46 2 34 Future Vol,veh/h 63 10 172 46 2 34 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 3 0 Sign Control • Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage,#- 0 0 - 0 - Grade,% - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 55 55 55 55 55 55 Heavy Vehicles,% 7 0 4 7 0 0 Mvmt Flow 115 18 313 84 4 62 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 397 0 - 0 606 355 • Stage 1 - - - - 355 - Stage 2 - - - - 251 - Critical Hdwy 4.17 - - - 6.4 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 Follow-up Hdwy 2.263 - - - 3.5 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1135 - - - 463 693 Stage 1 - - - - 714 - Stage 2 - - - - 795 - Platoon blocked,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver1135 - - - 416 693 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 416 - Stage 1 - - - - 641 - Stage 2 - - - - 795 - Approach NB SB SE HCM Control Delay,s 7.4 0 11 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT SELn1 SBT SBR Capacity(veh/h) 1135 - 668 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.101 - 0.098 - - HCM Control Delay(s) 8.5 0 11 - - HCM Lane LOS A A B - - HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.3 - 0.3 - - The Traffic Management Consultant Page D-2 Honokaa Plantation Cottages HCM 6th TWSC 1: Mauna Loa St/Pakalana St&Mamalahoa Hwy 2024 PM Peak Hour Traffic With 80 DU Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 6 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations112:, 4 4:13. Traffic Vol,veh/h 65 343 24 22 152 88 3 22 21 71 37 52 Future Vol,veh/h 65 343 24 22 152 88 3 22 21 71 37 52 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage,#- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade,% - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 Heavy Vehicles,% 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Mvmt Flow 69 365 26 23 162 94 3 23 22 76 39 55 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minorl Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 256 0 0 391 0 0 818 818 378 794 784 209 Stage 1 - - - - - - 516 516 - 255 255 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 302 302 - 539 529 - Critical Hdwy 4.1 - - 4.1 - - 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.23 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.2 - - 2.2 - - 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.327 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1321 - 1179 - - 297 313 673 308 327 829 Stage 1 - - - - - - 546 538 - 754 700 - Stage 2 - - - - - 712 668 - 530 530 - Platoon blocked,% - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver1321 - - 1179 - . 233 285 673 261 298 829 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 233 285 - 261 298 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 509 502 - 703 684 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 612 653 - 456 494 - Approach EB WBS NB'. SB HCM Control Delay,s 1.2 0.7 15.9 24.8 HCM LOS C C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR ,WBL WBT' WBR SBLn1 Capacity(veh/h) 379 1321 - - 1179 - - 349 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.129 0.052 - - 0.02 - - 0.488 HCM Control Delay(s) 15.9 7.9 0 - 8.1 0 - 24.8 HCM Lane LOS C A A - A A - C HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.4 0.2 - - 0.1 - - 2.6 • The Traffic Management Consultant Page D-3 Honokaa Plantation Cottages HCM 6th TWSC 2: Pakalana St&Lehua St 2024 PM Peak Hour Traffic With 80 DU Intersection Int Delay,s/veh 3.3 Movement NBL NBT SBT SBR SEL SER Lane Configurations Traffic Vol,veh/h 79 94 92 12 1 51 Future Vol,veh/h 79 94 92 12 1 51 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 1 0 0 1 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage,#- 0 0 - 0 - Grade,% - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles,% 0 0 1 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 86 102 100 13 1 55 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 114 0 - 0 382 108 Stage 1 - - - - 108 - Stage 2 - - - - 274 - Critical Hdwy 4.1 - - - 6.4 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.4 Follow-up Hdwy 2.2 - - - 3.5 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1488 - - - 624 951 Stage 1 - - - - 921 - Stage 2 - - - 777 Platoon blocked,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver1487 - - - 585 950 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 585 - Stage 1 - - - - 864 Stage 2 - - - - 776 - Approach NB SB SE HCM Control Delay,s 3.5 0 9.1 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT SELn1 SBT SBR Capacity(veh/h) 1487 - 939 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.058 - 0.06 - - HCM Control Delay(s) 7.6 0 9.1 - - HCM Lane LOS A A A - - HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0.2 - 0.2 - - The Traffic Management Consultant Page D-4 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ( PUD) PERMIT APPLICATION APPLICANT: LEHUA VILLAGE PARTNERS LLC PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: LEHUA VILLAGES 1 and 2 A proposed 40-lot Single Family residential subdivision Tax Map Keys: (3) 4-5-010:136 and 4-5-024:010 Papaanui and Haina, Hamakua District Hawaii Island Prepared by: Daryn Arai and Sidney Fuke, Planning Consultants April 2022 Planning Dept. Exhibit, 2 Ail of,:-.= • H,-,1:-, Kill: •,7.,,->.'•-•.• .-1'.,A :\i:c11:1,1-::-.-:, • 't', ' ''. ;•" Office ,c4 74 1:ott,7.-, 4 ----,-- 1---- ',.1.'•f,A -.-: .-.1.,:.:,.. :.i.::--zii,:,i,...- -•,-1 : --i.1:it:, f:Ir...1-Kc.:::: F...f.-.7C 0 ti DtV C„)fff H awai‘i IL._ `,.-I...'C DE.P A 1-:\I L N I Planned Unit Development (P.T.:„a) Application . . PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY OR USE FILLABLE FORM 1 APPLI('ANTiPETITONER Name: Lehua Village Partners, LLC Mailing Address' PO Box 57 City: Hawaii National Parkstate: Hawaii• I Zip: 96718 DayPh.: ( ) (808) 557-2223 . , Email: rvrn.tiki©gmail.com Signature: i/-',..,...--,-,:)/ 4•-/0_),,-,---/ , Date: April 8, 2022 - LANDOWNER (IF DIFFERENT FROM THE APPLICANT) Name: Mailing:Address: I City: I State: I Zip: I I Day Ph.: ( ) I -Email i I Sigmture: I Date: i CONSULTANT/REPRESENTATIVE 1i Name: Daryn Arai 1 . Mailing Address: PO Box 4501 City: Hilo , State: Hawaii zip: 96720 I Day Ph.- ( )(808) 895-3218 I Emailiparyn.Arai@outlook.com 1 Signature: .,,,C(30-,--(2/-: • Dale: April 8, 2022 _ . IPlease NotQ: St,..ming the application above indicates that to the best of your'Knowledge.all the information provided for this application is true i and complete. It is understood that the Planning Director or Planning Commission may nullify any decision made in reliance upon information Igiven on this application farm should Mere be any willful misrepresentation or willfill lack of'full disclosure on the part of the signee. i PROJECT INFORMATION • I Tax Map Key(s 1: (3) 4-5-010:136 & 4-5-024:010 , Size of Property or Affected Area(s): 14.322 acres 1 1 Address(es): Lehua Street • ; City: Honokaa Stare: HI Zip:96727 . . i Project Description: proposed 40-lot subdivision State Land Use:Urban Zoning-.RS-10(existing)/RS-15(proposed) LUP.A.G:LDUNIDU SMA: N/A y,:,y-,y,cp_4r,p44:itizogpi,,c.gy. Hmoi.1 coov:p is an E,quai.Co porrunky Provider and Employer 2.12r41-11.1WittlaS.1,7*.colgt,'.PS SUPPORTING INFORMATION PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) PERMIT APPLICATION FOR LEHUA VILLAGE PARTNERS, LLC Affecting Tax Map KeyS: (3) 4-5-010:136 &4-5-024:010; Papaanui & Haina, Honoka`a A. INTRODUCTION OF APPLICANT AND NATURE OF REQUEST 1. Applicant and Landowner n landowner of both Parcels 10 and 136 is Lehua Village Partners LLC, The Applicant and pp g whose mailing address is PO Box 57, Hawaii National Park, Hawaii 96718-0057. 2. Applicant's Request Lehua Village Partners LLC, hereinafter referred to as "Applicant", is requesting a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Permit to allow for certain exceptions to the Zoning and Subdivision Codes in order to facilitate the development of a 40-lot single family residential subdivision across two separate properties having a combined land area of 14.322 acres (Project Site). As provided by Section 25-6-5 of the Zoning Code regarding Procedure for processing of a PUD, a change of zone accompanies this PUD application that will "downzone" the Project Site from its current Single-Family Residential-10,000 square feet (RS-10) zoning to a Single-Family Residential-15,000 square feet (RS-15) zoning district that will align with the overall lower residential unit density as presented within this PUD application. As further stipulated by Section 25-6-10, (f) of the Zoning Code regarding criteria for granting of a PUD Permit, then basic intent of this PUD application is to develop the proposed 40-lot single family residential subdivision in a manner that will promote "The development of a harmonious, integrated whole justifies exceptions, if required to the normal requirements of this chapter, and the contemplated arrangements or use make it desirable to apply regulations and requirements differing from those ordinarily applicable under the district regulations." The Applicant is requesting these variances to improve the overall quality, aesthetics, and to make for a more pedestrian oriented community that would not otherwise be possible with the current standards and requirements specified by the Hawaii County Zoning and Subdivision Codes and Department of Public Works standard details for construction. - fl Page 3. Location of Subject Properties The subject properties, each consisting of just over 7 acres, straddles Lehua Street within the upper part of Honoka`a town, and situated mauka of the Honoka`a Park complex and makai of the Hawaii Belt Road (State Highway 11), as shown on Figure 1- Location Map and Figure 2-Project Site & Parcels Composite Map. SNI WO QJ h0% 2 ,t• 4-0004 .OO hico HONOKA'A < PARK COMPLEX p A n � OD TEX PROJECT SITE Figure 1-Location Map Figure 2-Project Site & Parcels Composite Map 2j 4. Statement of Objectives and Reasons for the request The purpose for the requested PUD Permit is to promote the development of a single- family residential that is more neighborhood-friendly and consistent with the rural character prevalent throughout the Honoka`a town area, as shown below in greater detail by Figure 3-PUD Master Plan and Figure 4-Master Plan Concept. Another primary purpose for the requested PUD Permit is to facilitate the design of this proposed residential community across two separate properties that is bisected by a meandering public road (Lehua Street)with unique topographic conditions that is not conducive to the typical platting of lots that you would normally find on sites with more moderate grades and not constrained by an existing road. This PUD Permit application is being accompanied by a change of zone application that will rezone the Project Site from its current Single Family Residential-10,000 square feet (RS-10) to a 15,000 square foot (RS-15) designation, thereby reducing the allowable mathematical maximum residential unit density permitted within the Project Site from 62 lots down to 40 lots, and through the approval of this PUD Permit, proposing individual lot sizes ranging from no less than 10,000 square feet to just under 33,000 square feet. The following is sought to be accomplished via a PUD Permit: a. provide a neighborhood and streetscape that is more human-scaled and pedestrian-friendly; b. develop a landscaping theme with open space that will reinforce a neighborhood friendly environment; and c. provide residents with a planned residential community that better addresses their needs and lifestyle than is possible utilizing a typical subdivision layout with County-dedicable roadway standards. 5. Proposed Project Details a. Lehua Village 1: 7.137 acres i. 20-lot subdivision situated on the makai side of Lehua Street on 7.137-acres of land with lot sizes ranging from 10,000 square feet to 23,400 square feet; ii. Lots to be offered at more affordable rates in conformance with the "Affordable Housing Guidelines for Hawaii County". b. Lehua Village 2: 7.185 acres i. 20-lot subdivision bordered by the Hawaii Belt Road along its mauka boundary and Lehua Street along its makai boundary and situated on 7.185-acres of land with lot sizes ranging from 10,000 square feet to just under 33,000 square feet. ii. Lots to be offered for sale at market rates. 31P age A 22 00 PROJECT INFORMATION v 1l 1 A, pMestrla++yn,,, Lehua Villages 1&2 rt) TAX MAP,,,I. A Planned Unit Development PAPICEL A,•,, Master Plan _. PROPOSE 0 GOLIN1 v.:cuNlne, .,..1. . .. TFyG �S7 13 ( } i t7 1 t` 9 10 11 , i 14 i �1 '> T� l y 5 1] TI :• ��Y 4 , 'off 7. - 4110144". '44--- x � ,l .4.,,_ .— -4) i , , 5S Y1 is C z,".4' L F•rUA 5711; - ,X 4 j0 a) N - i j�VILLAGE 2 LOT SIZES VILLAGE 1 LOT SIZES `; 101 01 917 87 ST 101 01 15 5 46 ST — T.) 4r ..� , TOT02 15.87040 SF 10102 1544 97 SF Th_ LOT 03 15311 55 SF LOT 03 14 959 61 SF LOT 04 15.35474 SF torW 1297134 SF j, LOT 05 11590 51 SF LO1 05 11 261 81 Si 101 06 13.788 55 SF 1.01 06 111679 67 SF 101 07 12.650 10 SF LOT 07 23 396 88 SF LOT 08 10.025 58 SF LOT 08 21 303 87 SF ' LOT 09 11.480 37 SF 101 09 I 1551 52 SF 101 10 10.1 1088 SF 101 10 11 428 05 SF WI 1i 11 886 36 SF 1 01 11 11 51.100 51 - LOT 13 12 1829981 334 18 ST LOT 13 1107564 S2 1 1 616 73 F Rat-4*- ,N.itj LOT 14 10.369 34 SF LOT 14 10680 00 SF LOT 15 11.94265 SF 10115 10/1948 10' __ 101 16 13.63986 SF 1.0T 16 12 083 15 SF LOT 17 11 40502 SF 101 17 12.51611 SF . 'e111i17 nnY,P'.te "`" LOT18 15,585 87 SF I OT 18 12 185 45 SF LOT 19 10.699 79 3F LOT 19 74/51 04 SF i ,\ 101 20 12.771 27 SF 101 20 10 006 15 SF .F) 0 50" 100' 1.. 11.Ilii VII 1..A I ._ 1',1 r.,1 1,,,11;,1 Nahon.oi1.nk ;1 - 1.1 . pedestrian accessway central mail kiosk in i each village asii—\ 10 linariami1 0.00.,......44...... .....„ 4/004t 15 0,,,,,,:, 117_18 ,49. ik, 2 likly 1 \ � ` \ � 40' private street 5 idilhhh._ roads designed to be more in °�~- with amnd character keeping LEHUA VILLAGE 2 with street trees access utility easement � � =� . ( ii r /00. mn Figure 4—Master Plan Concept ` Wage . ' 6. List of Requested Deviations from the Zoning and Subdivision Codes In order to accomplish these stated objectives, the Applicant is requesting, through this PUD Permit application, the following code exceptions as detailed below: Zoning Code Section Requested Exception Section 25-4-30.Minimum street frontage. The Petitioner request the requirements of Section 25-4- The following minimum street frontage standards apply to every 30 be waived for: (also see Figure 3-PUD Master Plan) building site: • Certain proposed lots will have roadway frontages of (a) Fifty percent of the required building site average width for any building site in a zoning district providing for a minimum building less than 50 percent of the required minimum site of one acre or less,except for flag lots,any building site building site average width of 38 feet based on located at the end of a cul-de-sac,and any building site where requested RS-15 zoning district. the access to the building site is by means of a roadway • Only one lot(Village 2,Lot 5)will not have any easement. roadway frontage nor access pole,and will be (c) The width of the pole or fifteen feet for any flag lot. accessed via a roadway easement due to steep (d) Fifteen feet for any building site located at the end of a cul-de- topography that would make it too difficult to sac. extend road lot for sake of a single parcel. (e) No street frontage shall be required for any building site where access to the building site is by means of a roadway easement Section 25-4-31 Minimum building site area;minimum average The Petitioner request the requirements of Section 25-4- width. 31 be waived to allow for:(also see Figure 3-PUD Master (a) Unless otherwise specified in this chapter,each main building Plan) must be located on a building site having not less than the • established zoning district minimum building site area. Minimum building site area of 10,000 square feet (b) Any building site which has less area or width than that required within proposed RS-15 zoning district. by the established zoning district,may be used as a legal building • Minimum building site area average width of 60 feet site;provided that the owner of the building site owns no in lieu of 75 feet within proposed RS-15 zoning adjoining property at the same time. district. (c) A building site shall be deemed to conform to the requirements for building site average width if any portion of the building site considered separately has the minimum building site area with the minimum average width. Section 25-4-32 Reduction of building site area below minimum The Petitioner request the requirements of Section 25-4- area 32(a)be waived to allow for:(also see Figure 3-PUD (a) A building site may not be reduced below the established zoning Master Plan) district minimum building site area,and an existing building site, • Reduction of a building site to no less than which is below the minimum building site area,may not be further reduced in area,except as provided under section 25-3- 10,000 square feet in lieu of the 15,000 square feet 5 minimum lot size required by the proposed RS-15 zoning district Section 25-5-6 Minimum building site average width The Petitioner request the requirements of Section 25-5- Each building site in the RS district shall have a minimum average 6 be waived to allow for:(also see Figure 3-PUD Master width of sixty feet,plus two feet for each five hundred square feet of Plan) required building site area in excess of seven thousand five hundred • square feet,except that no building site shall be required to have an Minimum building site area average width of 60 feet average width of more than one hundred fifty feet. in lieu of 75 feet within proposed RS 15 zoning district. Section 25-5-7(2)(a) Minimum yards The Petitioner request the requirements of Section 25-5- On a building site with a required area of ten thousand square feet 7(2)(a)be waived to allow:(also see Exhibit 1-Yard to and including nineteen thousand nine hundred ninety-nine square Designation) feet: • Minimum front yard setback of 15 feet in lieu of (A)Front and rear yards,twenty feet;and (B)Side yards,ten feet. 20 feet Section 25-5-8.Other regulations. The Petitioner request the requirements of Settion 25-5- (d) If a legal building site in the RS district has less area or average 8(d)be waived to allow for: width than is required,then the yard requirements for the • minimum front yard setback of 15 feet for all lots, building site shall be the same as in the RS district having the largest requirements for which the building site can comply. irrespective of minimum building site average width of 60 feet that is consistent with an RS-7.5 zoning district. ;-Subdivision Code Sections Requested Exceptipn"s Section 23-34.Access to lot from street The Petitioner request the requirements of Section 23- Each subdivided lot shall abut upon a public street or approved 34 be waived to allow for: (see Exhibit 2-Access&Utility private street.No lot shall be platted without access on a street.The Easement) director may indicate the side or sides of any lot from which • Only one lot(Village 2,Lot 5)will not have any direct driveway access shall be permitted or prohibited roadway frontage nor access pole,and will be accessed via a roadway easement due to steep topography that would make it too difficult to extend road lot for sake of a single parcel. • Village 2,Lot 18 access pole will also accommodate accesses for adjoining Lots 19&20 via a common access easement to minimize driveway cuts onto subdivision road. Section 23-41.Minimum right-of-way and pavement widths. The Petitioner request the requirements of Section 23- (a) Unless otherwise indicated on the County general plan,the 41 be waived to allow for:(see Exhibit 3-Right of Way width of a street in feet shall not be less than the minimums Improvement) shown in the following table: • Minor Street: 40-foot wide right-of-way in lieu of 50 • Minor Streets-50 feet minimum right-of-way with 20 feet feet. of pavement • Cul-de-sacs and dead-end streets: 40-foot wide • Cul-de-sacs and Dead-End Streets-50 feet minimum right- right-of-way in lieu of 50 feet. of way with 20 feet of pavement • Turn-around alternative designs that are acceptable • Radius for turn around at end of Cul-de-sac-45 feet to the Fire Department,such as"hammerhead"or minimum right-of-way with 35-foot radius similar turnarounds that have depths of at least 60 (b) When sidewalks,curbs,and gutters are required,pavements in feet with corner radius of at least 30 feet. collector streets in urban areas shall be thirty-six feet wide and pavements in minor and dead-end streets in urban areas shall be thirty-two feet wide. Section 23-48.Cul-de-sacs The Petitioner request the requirements of Section 23- (a) A cul-de-sac shall be as short as possible and shall not be more 48 be waived to allow for:(see Exhibits 4,5&6-Cul-de- than six hundred feet in length nor serve more than eighteen Sacs) lots;provided that longer streets may be approved by the • A cul-de-sac with a maximum length of no more than director when unusual conditions exist. (b) All cul-de-sacs shall terminate with a circular turn-around of 1,000 feet and serving no more than 20 lots. forty-five feet radius,except that a T-turn-around or other • Turn-around alternative designs that are acceptable suitable turn-around may be permitted,if in the opinion of the to the Fire Department,such as"hammerhead" director,this type of turn-around meets the requirements of the turnarounds that have turnaround depths of at least situation. 60 feet with corner radius of at least 28 feet. • Turning radiuses as shown on Exhibits 5&6 to navigate mailbox kiosk parking area combined with turnaround area. Section 23-50.Grades and Curves. The Petitioner request the requirements of Section 23- (a)A grade of a street shall be a reasonable minimum but in no case 50(a)and(b)be waived to allow for:(see Exhibit 7- be less than one-half of one percent and shall not exceed seven Street Angle Radius) percent on major arterials,eight percent on secondary arterials,ten • percent on collector streets,or twelve percent on any other street. Vertical and horizontal curves of less than 300 feet No grade shall be less than one-half of one percent at the gutter. provided that such curves conform to AASHTO Vertical and horizontal curves shall be so designed as to give minimum standards. • nonpassing distance visibility in conformance with the following Proposed subdivision roads will have minimum radius minimum requirements: as little as 80 feet,but as a dead-end road with no through traffic and design speed of 15mph,should • Minor Street: Vertical Curve of 300 feet Horizontal Curve not be an issue. of 300 feet • Allow for a minor subdivision road having maximum grade of 20 percent to accommodate anticipated • Cul-de-sac: Vertical Curve of 100 feet Horizontal Curve short sections along subdivision road that may of 200 feet exceed the typical maximum 12 percent grade. (b)Variations from the required grades or curves may be permitted by the director and the director of public works where advisable to meet unusual conditions and the director of public works may specify additional standards accordingly. 7 P d 2 Section 23-93.Street lights. The Petitioner request the requirements of Section 23- Street_lights shall be constructed within the subdivision.The street 93 be waived:(see Exhibit 8-Street Lights) lights shall conform to the standard specifications on file with the department of public works.The construction of street lights shall be •to allow the use of custom street lights in lieu of those made a part of the contract for subdivision improvement and meeting the standard specifications on file at the installed coincident with other required improvements department of public works. Section 23-93.Street names and traffic signs. The Petitioner request the requirements of Section 23- Street name signs showing the names of intersecting streets shall be 94 be waived:(see Exhibit 9-Street signs) erected by the subdivider at each street intersection.The type and location of street name and traffic signs which shall be created by •to allow the use of custom street name and traffic the subdivider shall be subject to the approval of the director of signs in lieu of the type of signs permitted by the public works and shall conform to the standard specifications on file standard specifications on file at the department of at the department of public works. public works. Section 23-95.Right-of-way improvement. The Petitioner request the requirements of Section 23- The subdivider shall be required to improve the entire street right- 95 be waived to:(see Exhibit 3-Right of Way of-way.The improvements shall conform to the standard Improvement specifications on file with the department of public works. •allow design flexibility in the treatment of the right-of- way areas in lieu of what is typically required by the standard specifications on file at the department of public works. As presented within this PUD application,the proposed subdivision road profile will consist of: • 40-foot wide right-of-way • 20-foot wide travel-ways • 10-foot wide grassed and landscaped shoulders lined with trees • No bike lane 7. Anticipated Timeframe for Development Should the PUD Permit and accompanying change of zone requests be approved by the end of 2022, the Applicant will promptly file subdivision applications for both Villages 1 and 2 with the Planning Department. Anticipated completion of both Villages are expected within 5 years from the date of approval of the PUD Permit and accompanying change of zone, or by the end of 2027. B. RELEVANT HISTORICAL PROPERTY INFORMATION 8. April 24, 1978: Theo H. Davis, Ltd, through its subsidiary, Hamakua Sugar Company, secured rezoning for 115+/- acres of land on the mauka and makai side of the Hawaii Belt Road, which included the 14.322-acre Project Site, from Agricultural (A-20a) to Single Family Residential (RS-10) with the objective of providing an initial 286 residential lot subdivisionfor its employees and pensioners with the potential of eventually providing up to 400+/- residential lots. 9. March 9, 2016: Parcel 136, site of Lehua Village 1, was subdivided to carve out a 10,462 square-foot lot now identified as Parcel 001, reducing Parcel 136 to 7.137 acres via SUB 16-001585 10. March 18, 2016: Parcel 010, consisting of 7.185 acres and the site of Lehua Village 2, was created via Subdivision No. 15-001511. 81 Page 11.April 1978 thru April 2020: The original 115+/-acres zoned for single family residential uses have witnessed at least 15 individual subdivision actions resulting in about 70 lots, including commercial zoned property. • C. LAND USE AND OTHER REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS 12. General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) Map: Medium Density Urban The County of Hawai'i General Plan is the policy document for the long-range comprehensive development of the island of Hawai'i. The General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) map classifies the Project Site and immediately surrounding area for Low and Medium Density Urban uses. The existing RS-10 zoning of the Project Site and its proposed RS-15 zoning are both consistent with the Low and Medium Density Urban designations. Low Density Urban consists of single-family residential uses with ancillary community and public uses, and neighborhood and convenience-type commercial uses with an overall residential density of up to six units per acre. Medium Density Urban allows for village and neighborhood commercial and single- family and multiple-family residential uses up to 35 units per acre, and related functions. (see Figure 5-General Plan LUPAG Map) 13. State Land Use Designation: Urban. The State Land Use Commission relegates uses permitted within the Urban district to those activities or uses defined by the County's Zoning Code (see Figure 6-State Land Use Map). The proposed single family residential subdivision is a permitted use within the State Land Use Urban District. 14. Current County Zoning: Single-Family Residential-10,000 square feet (RS-10) The RS (single-family residential) district provides for lower or low and medium density residential use, for urban and suburban family life. It applies to areas having facilities to carry out the above stated purpose (see Figure 7-Existing Zoning). As previously mentioned,this PUD Permit application is accompanied by a change of zone application that would rezone the Project Site into Single-Family Residential-15,000 square feet minimum lot size (RS-15). The requested PUD Permit, as detailed above, requests a number of exceptions related to minimum lot and building site configuration and roadway design, but does not increase overall permitted density nor introduce a use that is inconsistent with the existing and proposed Single-Family Residential zoning district classification nor will it permit a residential unit density that exceeds the density allowed by the requested 91 Page RS-15 zoning district, which is less than the density allowed by the Project Site's existing RS-10 zoning. URBAN PROJECT SITE L''''\ ::"3 Figure 5—State Land Use Map I , MUMMY, DENSITY PROJECT SITE L l Figure 6—General Plan LUPAG Map 10 N5:` PROJEt'f SITE I 441 44 iihop: Figure 7—Existing Zoning 15. Hamakua Community Development Plan (HCDP): The HCDP was adopted by Ordinance No. 18-78, which became effective on August 22, 2018. iguIe 12 Hunka'a/Haina Land Use Guile May New , PROJECT SITE a t 41 +rte 1°� c" HSntbkua CDP Revised Land Use Guide Map fur Honoka'a/Haina 114'\t,i1. %1 Tia z- Figure 8— Hamakua CDP Land Use Guide Map 11l As shown in Exhibit 8—H5makua CDP Land Use Guide Map above, the Project Site is situated within an area designated for Low and Medium Density Urban uses by the Hamakua CDP Revised Land Use Guide Map, which essentially follows the land use pattern recommended by the General Plan. Relative to the HCDP, Section 15.1 of the County General Plan called for the development and eventual County Council adoption of Community Development Plans. The General Plan states that the CDP "will translate the broad General Plan statements to specific actions as they apply to specific geographical areas." The General Plan also notes that should the CDP require a General Plan amendment, it could be considered concurrent with the adoption of the CDP. However, "If there is a direct conflict between the Community Development Plan and the General Plan, the General Plan shall be controlling." As the HCDP and the General Plan are in alignment, we would argue that both land use policy documents are supportive of establishing a single-family residential subdivision within this portion of Honoka`a. D. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA 16. Project Site Description: The 14.322-acre Project Site consists of two irregular-shaped properties, each a little over 7 acres in size,that is separated by Lehua Street. The Project Site is bordered along the south by the Hawaii Belt Road (Highway 19), bisected by.Lehua Street, and a future road extension along its northern boundary. The project site is currently vacant of any structures or uses with an extensive cover of abandoned sugar cane and various non-native grasses. The overall slope of the Project Site ranges between 8 percent to over 13 percent, with the steepest portions adjacent to the Hawaii Belt Road and Lehua Street. 17. Description of Surrounding Area: The Project Site is situated along the makai side of the Hawaii Belt Road within the urban core of Honoka`a town, as shown on the location map and various land use maps included within this report. To the east lies the well- known Tex's Drive Inn, situated on Commercial-zoned lands. In close proximity to the north (makai) lies the Honoka`a Elementary, Intermediate and High School complexes, the Honoka`a Park facility, and the Hale Ho`ola Hamakua medical complex. Immediately to the east of the Project Site along Lehua Street is a recent 8-lot subdivision consisting of lots at least 10,000 square feet in size on lands zoned RS-10. A little further to the east along Pakalana Street are a number of small subdivisions created by Frank Texeira in the mid-1950s to the early 1960s with parcels having lot sizes of at least10,000 square feet to just under 30,000 square feet, all of which are serviced by grass-shouldered, 30-foot wide'roadways with pavement widths of roughly 15 feet. To the west of the Project Site lies vacant lands. The western boundary of the Project Site is defined by a shallow drainageway identified as "Honoka`a Drainageway No. 2" which is also designated as a FEMA floodway subject to 100-year (AH) frequency floods with depths of 1 to 3 feet (usually areas of ponding). 18. Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM): The US Corps of Engineers' Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) designates most of the subject site to be in Zone X (areas outside of 500- year flood). The western boundary, however, has a shallow drainageway (Honoka`a Drainageway No. 2), and thus is designated AE, areas subject to 100-year frequency floods with depts of 1 to 3 feet (usually areas of ponding). None of the major infrastructure (road/water) will occur within the AE designated area. Any use within that area will be subject to the requirements of the AE designation. As there will be an added level of impervious surface resulting from the road and related infrastructure,there may be an issue relating to potential increased run-off. As such, a drainage plan will be prepared as part of the subdivision review/approval process. The plan will have to be approved by the County and subsequently will be implemented in conjunction with the development of the subdivision. The mitigation may call for installation of drywell or similar type of accommodations. 19. Flora/Fauna Resources:' No professional floral or faunal survey was conducted of the Project Site due to its previous cultivation in sugar cane, with abandoned sugar cane dominating the ground cover along with a mix of non-native grasses and widely scattered clusters of ironwood trees. 20.Archaeological Resources: Due to its previous use for sugar cane cultivation, an archeological survey of the Project Site was not conducted. According to the Applicant, no archaeological or historical features are known to exist on the Project Site nor are the affected properties listed as a historic site on the State or National Register of Historic Places. During clearing and grading of the Project Site, the State Historic Preservation Division will be notified and all work shall immediately cease upon inadvertent discovery of any archaeological or historic features. 21. Cultural or Native Gathering Rights: According to the Applicant, there are no known traditional or customary Native Hawaiian cultural rights being practiced within the Project Site, which is not surprising given its historical use for sugar cane cultivation. 22. Public Access: There is no record of a designated public access to the shoreline or mountain areas that traverses the Project Site. 13 [ P a ge STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PERMIT A. The construction of the project can begin and be completed within a reasonable period of time from the date of approval. Should the PUD Permit and accompanying change of zone requests be approved by the end of 2022,the Applicant will promptly file subdivision applications for both Villages 1 and 2 with the Planning Department. Anticipated completion of both Villages is expected within 5 years from the date of approval of the PUD Permit and accompanying change of zone, or by the end of 2027. B. The proposed development substantially conforms to the General Plan, any adopted community development plan or adopted master plan and, if applicable, any adopted design guidelines and/or standards affecting the project area. HAWAII COUNTY GENERAL PLAN In order to consider an area for any type of zoning designation,the applicable goals, policies and standards of the General Plan must be adequately addressed. It is only through a comprehensive policy analysis approach that evaluations and decisions can be made to better time or stage developments to achieve quality growth. The implications of these evaluations and decisions must also be considered as they may have an impact on other similar areas in the County. Land use is one of the principal focal points of public concern and policy. The Land Use Element of the General Plan provides the primary basis for direct control and guidance of publicly and privately owned resources. It is also intended to be used as a policy guide for the coordinated growth and development of all sectors of the County. It sets forth goals, policies, standards and courses of action to accommodate growth without congestion, to designate and preserve the lands needed for residential use, commercial and visitor services, industry, agriculture and open space, and to coordinate these uses with the County's service and circulation systems. The overall Land Use goals, policies and standards are set forth to physically plan the lands in the County in the best interest of the island's residents. In addition to its goals, policies and standards, the General Plan also includes the Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) Map, which is a graphic representation of the document's goals and policies to guide the coordinated growth and development of all sectors of the County by presenting a graphic depiction of the physical relationship among the various land uses. The LUPAG Map establishes the basic urban and non-urban form for areas within the County. 14I Page The Project Site, being situated makai of Highway 19 that frames the mauka boundary of Honoka`a town, is designated for Low and Medium Density Urban uses which would allow for village and neighborhood commercial and single-family and multiple-family residential uses (up to 6 units per acre for Low Density and 35 units per acre for Medium Density) and related functions, consistent with the requested PUD Permit and accompanying RS-15 zoning in support of the proposed 40-lot Lehua Village project. As highlighted in Figures 4, 5 and 6 regarding the LUPAG, Zoning and HCDP maps, approval of this PUD Permit will be entirely consistent with the single-family residential land use pattern already established along Lehua Street. Both the requested PUD Permit and RS-15 zoning are intended to accomplish one thing; presenting a single-family residential subdivision with lot sizes ranging between 10,000 to just under 33,000 square feet with an overall average lot size of over 15,000 square feet. This presents an overall lower unit density than currently allowed by the Project Site's existing RS-10 zoning. The requested PUD Permit seeks certain exceptions from the Zoning and Subdivision Codes to facilitate the appropriate design of the proposed 40-lot subdivision while maintaining and enhancing its overall design to conform with the character of existing residential subdivisions in the immediate vicinity while also providing a range of choices, from varying lot sizes to it affordability. Therefore, approval of this PUD Permit will conform to the following goals and policies of the LAND USE ELEMENT of the General Plan: Goal • Designate and allocate land uses in appropriate proportions and mix and in keeping with the social, cultural and physical environments of the County. Policies • Encourage the development and maintenance of communities meeting the needs of its residents in balance with the physical and social environment. • Encourage urban development within existing zoned areas already served by basic infrastructure, or close to such areas, instead of scattered development. Goals • To provide for residential developments that maximizes convenience for its occupants. • To provide for suitable living environments which accommodate the physical, social and economic needs of the island residents. 15Ipage More specifically, approval of the requested PUD Permit will also conform to the following relevant goals and policy regarding the Single-Family Residential component of the LAND USE ELEMENT: Goals • . To maximize choices of single-family residential lots and/or housing for residents of the County. • To ensure compatible uses within and adjacent to single-family residential zoned areas. • To provide single-family residential areas conveniently located to public and private services, shopping, other community activities and convenient access to employment centers that takes natural beauty into consideration. • To enhance the overall quality of life in our residential communities. Policy • Incorporate reasonable flexibility in codes and ordinances to achieve a diversity of socio-economic housing mix and to permit aesthetic balance between single- family residential structures and open spaces. And most importantly, approval of the requested PUD Permit will also conform to the following relevant goals and policy regarding the HOUSING ELEMENT: Goals • Attain safe, sanitary, and livable housing for the residents of the County of Hawaii. • Maintain a housing supply that allows a variety of choices. • Develop better places to live in Hawaii County by creating viable communities with decent housing and suitable living environments for our people • Improve and maintain the quality and affordability of the existing housing stock • Seek sufficient production of new affordable rental and fee-simple housing in the County in a variety of sizes to satisfactorily accommodate the needs and desires of families and individuals. • Encourage and expand home ownership opportunities for residents. 16IPage Policy • Vacant lands in urban areas and urban expansion areas should be made available for residential uses before additional agricultural lands are converted into residential uses. HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Relative to the CDP, Section 15.1 of the County General Plan called for the development and eventual County Council adoption of Community Development Plans. The General Plan states that the CDP "will translate the broad General Plan statements to specific actions as they apply to specific geographical areas." The General Plan also notes that should the CDP require a General Plan amendment, it could be considered concurrent with the adoption of the CDP. However, "If there is a direct conflict between the Community Development Plan and the General Plan, the General Plan shall be controlling." Adopted in 2018, the Hamakua Community Development Plan (HCDP) was developed with a 20-year time horizon with a planning area that included the subject property and the judicial districts of Hamakua and North Hilo, and a portion of the South Hilo district commonly referred to as Rural South Hilo. The HCDP Revised Land Use Guide Map designates the Project Site for Low and Medium Density Urban uses, consistent with the same General Plan designation, as shown in Figure 6-Hamakua CDP Land Use Guide Map. The requested PUD Permit, along with the accompanying RS-15 zoning, would both be consistent with the Hamakua Community Development Plan's Revised Land Use Guide Map for Honoka`a/Haina. From a land use perspective, one of the more critical recommendations or policy of the HCDP was the retention of the Project Site's existing Low and Medium Density Urban designations on the General Plan LUPAG Map as shown on Figure 5—General Plan LUPAG Map, which thereby affirms that single-family residential uses, as presented in this PUD Permit application, is consistent with the HCDP. The HCDP also identifies 13 objectives. The first three (3) relate to Natural Resources and Agriculture and bear little relationship to the Project Site's planned development in accordance with the requested RS-15 zoning and PUD Permit in support of a 40-lot single-family residential subdivision. Others have only marginal relationship. The more pertinent ones, however, include: • Objective 5: Direct future settlement patterns that are sustainable and connected. Honor Hamakua' s historic and cultural assets by concentrating new development in existing, walkable, mixed- use town centers while limiting rural sprawl. 17IPage • Objective 6: Develop and improve critical community infrastructure, including utilities, healthcare, emergency services, affordable housing, educational opportunities and recreational facilities to keep our ohana safe, strong, and healthy. • Objective 7: Establish a rural transportation network that includes improving roadway alternatives to Highway 19, expanding and improving the existing transit system, and encouraging multiple transportation options. • Objective 8: Promote, preserve and enhance a diverse, sustainable, local economy. • Objective 9: Encourage the increase and diversity of employment and living options for residents, including living wage jobs and entrepreneurial opportunities that allow residents to work and shop close to home and that complement Hamakua' s ecology, rural character, and cultural heritage. The focus of these objectives is having housing, including affordable housing, proximate to areas of service and employment. This Project Site achieves those objectives. In so doing, being located in the core part of Honoka`a town, it would also minimize sprawl and add socio-economic strength to the existing towns like Honoka`a. C. Any residential or agricultural development shall constitute an environment of sustained desirability and stability for the district that is in harmony with the character of the surrounding area,that-results in an intensity of land use no higher than that otherwise specified for the district,and that maintains the standards of open space at least as high as that otherwise specified for the district in which the development occurs. Lehua Villages 1 and 2 are presented as a manner that is consistent with single- family residential subdivisions within this particular part of Honoka`a town, such as the various phases associated with the Frank Texeira Subdivisions, created in the mid-1950s to early 1960s, located to the south of the Project Site along the east (Hilo) side of Pakalana Street consisting of single-family residential lots ranging in size from 10,000 to almost 30,000 square feet along 30-foot wide grass-shouldered roadways (Kamani, Ohai and Kou Streets). Through this PUD application, the Applicant seeks reasonable relief from the standard requirements of the Zoning and Subdivision Codes that places a "one-size-fits-all" approach to subdivision design, rather than allowing for certain exceptions that do not compromise the intent and purpose of these code requirements, but applies it in a way that better fits the character of the surrounding community, while also taking into consideration some of the physical constraints of the Project Site itself. 18IPage In many ways,the proposed Lehua Villages PUD subdivision wishes to compliment these existing 1950s/1960s subdivisions but also allowing for a wider 40-foot wide road right-of-way to provide for additional shoulder landscaping that will further enhance the rural character of this particular area. Allowing use of alternative turn-around concepts, as approved by the Fire Department, will minimize the amount of land area required to accommodate the typical 90-foot wide circular cul-de-sac in favor of a modified hammerhead turnaround that will also accommodate a cluster mailbox and associate parking area. This is an innovative and reasonable approach to addressing both vehicular turnaround as well as the cessation of individual mailbox delivery by the U.S. Postal Service, requiring all new subdivisions to provide areas for on-site clusterbox mail facilities. The Project Site, comprising a total of 14.322-acres with an existing zoning of RS-10, allows for a maximum single-family residential unit density of 62 lots. As this PUD application is accompanied by a change of zone to the RS-15 zoning district, the Applicant is reducing the maximum unit density to 40 lots. Therefore, the proposed Lehua Villages PUD, at 40 proposed lots,will not exceed the maximum density allowed by its requested RS-15 zoning district. D. The development of a harmonious, integrated whole justifies exceptions, if required,to the normal requirements of Chapter 23 and Chapter 25, Hawai'i County Code, as amended, and the contemplated arrangements or use make it desirable to apply regulations and requirements differing from those ordinarily applicable under the district regulations. Lehua Villages 1 and 2 are proposed single family residential subdivisions that do not depart from the single-family residential character within this part of Honoka`a town, as discussed above. The requested exceptions from certain requirements of the Zoning and Subdivision Codes are to simply allow the proposed subdivision to compliment the existing community in design while also accommodate the existing topography and physical constraints of the Project Site being bisected and bordered by existing State and County roads as well as a drainageway along its western boundaries. To discuss some points in greater detail, one particular exception being requested is a 15-foot minimum front yard setback in lieu of the standard 20-foot setback. This requested exception is to provide the lot owner with the greatest opportunity in properly siting a proposed home on any of the proposed lots in the hopes of reducing the need for grading given some of the topographic constraints within the Project Site. Other requested exceptions are specific to minimum lot configuration standards, such as minimum street frontages, minimum building site average width, and so on. Due to existing slope conditions and the desire to minimize the extent of grading, Lehua Villages 1 and 2 attempts to mold itself into the existing landform and within the physical constraints caused by the gradual, but sometimes steep topography as well as the existing roadway systems and drainageways that really limit how the proposed lots can be reasonably and 19IPage properly configured. The proposed subdivision layout as shown on Figure 3—PUD Master Plan represents many hours of fine tuning to fit the proposed lots and associated roadway improvements in a manner that provides a reasonable building site and adequate infrastructure systems. Finally, a 40-foot wide right-of-way is deemed adequate to support both 20-lot subdivisions as these roadways are not through-roads channeling a lot of traffic. These roadways will be dead-end streets that will primarily serve the residents of this subdivision and not general traffic passing through. And as with many dead-end streets, it also becomes a community resource for residents by becoming a focal-point for community engagement, such as when walking the dog, exercising, children learning to ride their bicycles, and so forth. A narrow streetscape with landscaped shoulders is always so much more personal and inviting, and will promote these types of community-engagement activities. And with a narrower streetscape, it will promote lower vehicular speeds and create for a safer street environment for all users. E. Assessment of archaeological, historic and valued cultural resources. In view of the Hawai'i State Supreme Court's " PASH" and "Ka Pa`akai 0 Ka'Aina" decisions, the issue relative to native Hawaiian gathering and fishing rights must be addressed in terms of the cultural, historical, and natural resources and the associated traditional and customary practices of the_site. As the Project Site has been physically altered over many decades due to sugar cane cultivation, it is unlikely that there are any valued cultural, historical, and natural resources to be found within the Project Site. The Project Site is vacant of any structures or uses and is vegetated predominately by abandoned sugar cane and non-native weeds and grasses. For similar reasons, the Project Site does not host any floral or faunal resources that are protected, threatened or endangered nor could it be considered as providing a resource for any cultural practices. Finally, there is no known public access to mountain or shoreline areas that traverses through the Project Site. CONCLUSION As presented in the discussion above,the Applicant finds that granting of the proposed Lehua Villages PUD will encourage comprehensive, inclusive site planning of the proposed 40-lot single-family residential subdivision in a manner that will be compatible with the character of the surrounding community and that adapts the design of proposed project to the particular characteristic of the land. As discussed, approval of the PUD will allow for a project that conforms to the goals, policies and standards of the General Plan; adheres to the general policies and objectives of the Hamakua Community Development Plan (HCDP); will not have a significant adverse impact upon coastal resources; and would result in an appropriate land use pattern that will further the public necessity and convenience and the general welfare. 2O Page • Exhibit 1: Yard Designation Variance Request-Zoning Code Request: The Petitioner request the yards be designated as indicated below. <hGg0, LEHUA VILLAGE 1 r,s.Fr < 13 C 12 I r-1 ` ` \ \ 12 I I 13 I I I , r r - 15 1 I \ r\ \ ` 11 I I I I 14 I I 15 I I I \ J<, I 1 \ 9 1\ `\L^O \ ` \` L--J L __J L 11 I 16 1 1 17 1 I l C 17 `> ` _J I J < ` 1 I II 1 1 I I r 18 ` 10 /„ ---1 L , - '^I r ,� , 1 4 1 1 3 1 1 I I \I ' 5 \ I , 1 1 2 1 1 1 -- -� i / I r I I L--J L I I 1 I 1 / r - - - l 1 v< 18 1 1 1 I - J L I 9 1 ` 19 > ''.- _ - I I I 6 b -J � J I 7 > L - .- ' I lE UA STREET t 20 ._ ` .. 2 1 6 > lv / 1,,ti 3 5 l lL •J rJ„ 4 HAWAII BELT ROAD front yard setback 15' rear yard setback 20' side yard setback 10' © 0' 100' 200' - Exhibit 2: Access & Utility Easement Variance Request- Subdivision Code Request: Below is the reference site plan indicating the location of the access and utility easements: <FyGgs LEHUA VILLAGE 1 T 41 t• 4 �FFT ,it, 16 piiIUiIi 10 di 18 9 19 LEHUA STREET ll/ 20 20 111110L -\ 2 1 1 bit t 3 - 4 HAWAII BELT ROAD LEHUA VILLAGE 2 access utility easement © 0' 100' 200' Exhibit 3: Right of Way Improvement Variance Request-Subdivision Control Code Request: The Petitioner request that the requirements of Section 23-95 be waived to allow design flexibility in the treatment of the right-of-way areas as indicated below: ���'" , gG+ t' '' ^ate'\ I t �° �4 'r .z s Z �~ d' Tom' '• l ti, ,J ➢aa�a^. ':h 6 �d 5 6 ✓L /�K ,pv - 3 ''Z7V 7 ` •/ — HOA to maintain street pavement A\ 4 � 1" I - _ __ ., - 1 a SECTION shoulder drive lane drive lane shoulder 10' 10' 10' 10' ' } 40' 1 1 right-of-way -0 edge of,pavement <__, shoulder street trees. is PLAN Private Street 40' Right-of-Way 0' 5' 10' Exhibit 4: Cul-de-Sacs . Variance Request - Subdivision Control Code Request: Below is the reference ,,ite plan indicating the location of the cul-de-sacs for referral to exhibik 5 to h: EXHIBIT 6 EXHIBIT 5 / 12 .4 1_ LEHUA VILLAGE 1 4* i T % 14 1' . , 17 4 5 2 , 113 .. 16 / 18 41114110,$‘ 2 2° 4 61111—_,_______ ,...„. „ w•A,7;---..---tr -._, / 20 19 __..----..-.------- . ----N.MNPft Ba,T ROAD , . LEHUA VILLAGE 2 ,N NW 0. 100 200' , . . . . Exhibit 5: Cul-de-Sacs Variance Request- Subdivision Control Code Request: The Petitioner request the cul-de-sacs be permitted to be as detailed below: \ '\...., lot line 12.9' \ \____,,----A (31 \ \ Zp \ o \ \, r= 18' o 11.0\K�osK \ r= 18' �� r=28' r=28 SCeet. r=10' ., -- ,----,, A ----\ i- edge of pavement y------ road right-of-way 1 \, N © 0' 20' 40' Exhibit 6: Cul-de-Sacs Variance Request-Subdivision Control Code Request: The Petitioner request the cul-de-sacs be permitted to be as detailed below: / / lot line '/' • / 1/ / T=8' r 18' O , r=28' co / �� '/ 0' Xr= 18' / '10,,0,, / edge of pavement road right-of-way NIF 0' 20' 40' Exhibit 7: Street Intersection Angles and Radius Variance Request- Subdivision Control Code Request: The Petitioner request the street intersection angles and radius be designated as indicated below: <ryGgs LEHUA VILLAGE 1 TRFPr a� phi 0 Willa 15 ` `� (1,411 42018 11101111111 24LEHUASTREET0 Vrathus aft ilk4 HA`NArl BELT ROAD LEHUA VILLAGE 2 © 0' 100' 200' Exhibit 8: Street Lights Variance Request - Subdivision Control Code Request: The Petitioner request that the requirements of Section 23-()3 be waived in lieu of a custom street light fixture, allowing flexibility in color and housing type selection. Pole type lighting fixtures may be used at street intersections while bollard type lighting fixtures may be used to aid pedestrians.Typical examples of custom light fixtures that might be used •in the project are as indicated below: A • � I C ) . Pole Lighting Fixture Pole Lighting Fixture Bollard Lighting Fixture Contemporary. Traditional Traditional • F. J Exhibit 9: Street Signs Variance Request- Subdivision Control Code Request: The Petitioner request that the requirements of Section 23-94 be waived in lieu of custom street name and traffic sign fixtures, which are more in keeping with the design goals of the project. Typical examples of custom fixtures that might be used in the project are as indicated below: O O custom sign standard /I. '\ Street Name Sign Traffic Sign 0' 1' 2' State of Hawaii,Department of Land and Natural Resources Flood Hazard Assessment Tool '. f . .. , .Z % . N '), .. • .:“ . •.„..t i "4"' ON 1 228 I_I 1V1 1 T n F / TMK:(3)4-5-010:136 TMK:(3)4-5-024:010 1- ii ' 1 ' .ri i r-,,, :.) E . •_ . _ ... . .. ... •,......... 0 ,,,•'i 34 2 , ..)11,0,1faci -, -,-- , . ,1374 ,_. - Is • - 1, ge ia_ 21 a % ' --- __, _... D------t- , ? . :inning Dep'. ,hibit 3 1 ! i :,is--:.ar-IER ini,ralat or carol ned r 0,,i,f,Eli,5 deeeed from publ',records that are constantty utl.ergemg change and. — •'' DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS COUNTY OF HAWAII HILO, HAWAII DATE: June 1, 2022 MeNtatafidaat TO: Planning Department artment 'frt.Y FROM: Department of Public Works SUBJECT: PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION PL-PUD-2022-000001 Applicant: Lehua Village Partners, LLC Location: Papaanui and Haina, Hamakua, Hawaii TMK: 4-5-024:010 and 4-5-010:136 We have reviewed the subject application forwarded by your memo dated May 10, 2022 and have the following comments: 1. All development-generated runoff shall be disposed of on-site and not directed toward any adjacent properties. A drainage study shall be prepared and the recommended drainage system shall be constructed meeting the approval of the Department of Public Works. 2. All earthwork activity, including grading and grubbing, shall conform to Chapter 10, Erosion and Sedimentation Control, of the Hawaii County Code. 3. A portion of the subject parcels are located within Zone AH according to the current Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Any construction within the designated FEMA flood zone shall comply with the requirements of Chapter 27, Floodplain Management, of the Hawaii County code. 4. Identify all watercourses and drainageways and encumber with drainage easements. 5. All road connections and construction within Lehua Street shall conform to Chapter 22, County Streets, of the Hawaii County Code. Access to Lehua Street, including the provision of adequate sight distances, shall meet with the approval of the Department of Public Works, Engineering Division. Planning Dept, Exhibit, 4 Memo to Planning Department Page 2 June 1,2022 6. We believe the minimum road improvement requirements codified within Chapter 23 of the Hawaii County Code provide public welfare and safety. However, should the Planning Director determine that the requested code exceptions are acceptable, DPW would recommend that the proposed cul-de-sacs be kept in private ownership as the roads would not conform to County-dedicable standards. Questions may be referred to Melanie DeMello at 961-8927. MD • County of Hawai.i is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer iks as+., s b ±+".rte "" e�.� • 0:- DEPARTMENT O1•° WATER SUPPLY u COUNTY i� Or HAWAII ,� � � 345 KEKUANAO'A STREET, SUITE 20 • HILO, HAWAII 96720 ^-_ .A TELEPHONE (803) 961-8050 • FAX (808) 961-8657 June 6. 2022 i. P.�, _1' Fi ;1 �t 0E-12,,,F-RFD 1ERED P. t _ � To: iv'1r. Zendo Kern. Director Planning Department FROM: Keith K. Okamoto. Manager-Chief Engineer SUBJECT: Planned Unit Development Permit Application Request—To Allow Various Exemptions from Chapter 23 (Subdivision) and Chapter 25 (Zoning) of Ilawai`f County Code for Development of a 40-lot Single-Family Residential Subdivision Applicant— Lehua Village Partners, LLC 'Fax Map Key 4-5-024:010 and 136 We have reviewed the subject application and have the following comments and conditions. Pursuant to the Water Development Agreement ("Agreement"), dated September 15, 2014, between the applicant and the Water Board, the applicant has a water commitment for :100 units of water, for • properties designated at Tax Map Key 4-5-010:001, and formerly Tax Map Key 4-5-010:121. As the subject parcel is a portion of the former Parcel No. 001, the subject parcel has a water commitment for the subject application. Water can be made available from an existing 12-inch waterline within Lehua Street. Based on the proposed 40-lot development, 38 units of water are required to be allocated for the proposed subdivision. Therefore, pursuant to Rule 5 of the Department's Rules and Regulations, a copy of which is being forwarded to the applicant, a water commitment may be issued. Based on the 38 additional units . requested'in the proposed 40-lot development, the required water commitment deposit is $5,700.00. Remittance by the applicant of the $5,700.00 is requested as soon as possible so that a water commitment may be formally issued. The commitment will he in writing with specific conditions and effective dates stated. Please keep in mind that this letter shall not he construed as a water commitment. Final subdivision approval will be subject to compliance with the following requirements: 1. Construct necessary water system improvements, which shall include, but not be limited to: a. service laterals that will accommodate a 5/8-inch meter to front each lot, Planning ®eta,. . . . Water, Our fvost Precious1Resource . . . KaWaiA % ne. . . Exhibit, The Department of Water Supply is an Equal Opportunity provider and employer. i °Ir. /.endo Kern. Director Pai e 2 .lune 6. ?t)-_ b. cut and plug existing service lateral (Account No. 6/0-05650). c. eater mains capable of providing \\ater at adequate pressure under peak-Ili,\\ and Iire-floe• conditions: minimum diameter of which shall be 6 inches. d. fire hydrants spaced no more than 601) feet apart. On dead-end streets, the last lire hydrant shall be located at one-hall`the distance from the last house, or unit. fronting the property or driveway or access to the property, and e. subject to other agencies' requirements to construct improvements within the road right-of-way fronting the property affected by the proposed development. the applicant shall be responsible for the relocation and adjustment of the Department's affected water system facilities, should they be necessary. Submit construction plans prepared by a professional engineer. architect, or land surveyor, licensed in the State of I-lawai'i, for review and approval. '. Remit the prevailing facilities charge balance, which is subject to change, as shown below: FACILITIES CHARGE (FC): 1'` service to Parcel 010 $1,319.00 I5` service to Parcel 010 $1,319.00 3$ additional units (cid $6.095.00/unit $231.610.00 Total FC Balance S234,248.00 This is due and payable upon completion of the installation of the required water system improvements and prior to final subdivision approval being granted. For your information, water commitment deposits are credited towards the final facilities requirement for the development. Note that the amount of water commitment deposit may exceed the prevailing facilities charge amount; for example, when requests for time extensions continue and are approved. Until the development is finally completed. these are separate and unrelated items. In the event that water commitment deposits exceed the facilities charge. no refunds are applicable. 3. Comply with all other applicable policies and requirements of the Department's Rules and Regulations. Noncompliance may be cause for voiding this water commitment, at which time availability will be subject to change in accordance with prevailing water system conditions, policies, and Rules and Regulations. Mr. /end° Kern. Director Page 3 .lune 0. 2412? 4. Submit the appropriate documents. properly prepared and executed_ to convey the required easements to the `Vater I�oiard or the County or f lU\\ai'i prior to final subdivision approval being. granted. \ registered land surveyor shad) stamp and ccrtil\ the metes and hounds description \\ithin the convexance documents. However. prior to \\ meter services being granted to the de\elopmcnt_ or any lots within. the conveyance documents shall he accepted b\ the Water Board. Should there be any questions, please contact Mr. Troy Samura or our Nater Resources and Planning Branch at (808) 961-8070. extension 235. Sincerely yours. Keith K. Okamoto. P.B. Manager-Chief t:?ngineer I S•dft1 copy — Behua Village Partners, 1..I_.0 J+�Y.Ov N� Mitchell D.Roth Ramzi I.Mansour Mayor ; •„. � Director ;� ��`�a?��:r Lee Lord %I�j Brenda lokepa-Moses Managing Director °f"'• Deputy Director County of Hawai'i DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 345 Kekuanao`a Street,Suite 41 Hilo,Hawai'i 96720•cohdem@hawaiicounty.gov Ph: (808)961-8083•Fax:(808)961-8086 MEMORANDUM TO: Zendo Kern, Director Planning Department FROM: Ramzi I. Mansour, Direc i v t, • Department of Environmental Management 1 DATE: May 17, 2022 SUBJECT: Planned Unit Development Permit Application (PL-PUD-2022-000001) Applicant: Lehua Village Partners, LLC Request: To Allow Various Exemptions from Chapter 23 (Subdivision) and Chapter 25 (Zoning) of Hawaii County Code for Development of a 40-lot Single-Family Residential Subdivision Tax Map Keys: (3)4-5-024:010 and 4-5-010:136; Hamakua,Hawai`i The Solid Waste Division has reviewed the subject application and offers the following comments and/or recommendations (contact the Solid Waste Division for details): ( ) No comments. (X) Commercial operations, State and Federal agencies, religious entities and non-profit organization may not use transfer stations for disposal. (X) Aggregates and any other construction/demolition waste should be responsibly reused to its fullest extent. ( ) Ample and equal room should be provided for rubbish and recycling. (X) Green waste may be transported to the green waste sites located at the West Hawai`i Organics Facility and East Hawai`i Organics Facility, or other suitable diversion programs. (X) Construction and demolition waste is prohibited at all County Transfer Stations. ( ) Submit Solid Waste Management Plan in accordance with attached guidelines. ExistingSolid Waste Management Plan is to be followed. Provide update to the ( ) g p department on current status. ( ) Other: Planning Dept. County of Hawaii is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer Exhibit_ 6 - Ramzi I. Mansour, Director May 17, 2022 Page 2 The Wastewater Division has reviewed the subject application and offers the following comments and/or recommendations (contact the Wastewater Division for details): ( ) No comments. ( ) Require connection of existing and/or proposed structures to the public sewer in accordance with Section 21-5 of the Hawai`i County Code. ( ) Require Council Resolution to approve sewer extension in accordance with Section 21- 26.1 of the Hawai`i County Code. Complete Sewer Extension Application. ( ) Require extension of the sewer system to service the proposed subdivision in accordance with Section 23-85 of the Hawai`i County Code. ( ) Check or line out as applicable: [ ] If required by the Director of the Department of Environmental Management("Director of DEM"), [ ] Applicant shall conduct a sewer study in accordance with the applicable wastewater system design standards prior to approval to connect to the County sewer system. Applicant shall provide such sewer line or other facility improvements as the Director of DEM may reasonably require,which the sewer study may indicate are advisable for mitigation of impacts of the proposed project. Contact Wastewater Division Chief for details. ( ) Proposed activity may be subject to existing or future federal, state, or county regulation under Title 40 CFR 403.5,prohibiting discharge of certain pollutants into publicly owned treatment works. Contact the Hawai`i Department of Health for information regarding pretreatment standards. (X) Applicant shall follow Depautalent of Health regulations. ( ) Other: • RM:pls 2 ) ilMitchell D.Roth --------.----/ . fl f Mayor --cr.'c',-,- . ••1%.'t Susan K.Kunz • • ,n- i Lee E.Lord :*iNk....11, f,i*; Housing Administrator 1 Managing Director . ...—it_,F4rer : ; Harry M.Yada %. ..*•- rii.: ,,: I Assistant Housing,4dministrator Robert H.Command Deputy Managing Director I County of Hawaii I Office of Housing and Community Development 1990 Kineole Street,Suite 102 • Hilo,Hawai9 96720 • (808)961-8379 • Fax(808)961-8685 Existing Housing:(808)959-4642 • Fax(808)959-9308 Kona: (808)323-4300 • Fax(808)323-4301 I . June 9, 2022 Via Electronic Mail l Hawaii County Planning Department i Attention: Christian Kay 101 Pauahi Street#3 Hilo, Hawai`i 96720 I Email: planning@hawaiicounty.gov , 1 SUBJECT: COMMENTS FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION (PL-PUD-2022-000001) APPLICANT: LE}IUA VILLAGE PARTNERS,LLC TMKs: (3)4-5-024:010 and 4-5-010:136 Dear Mr. Kay, Thank you for the opportunity to comment. The Office of Housing and Community Development (0IICD)does not object to the Applicant's request for change in zoning and : o respectfully submits the following comments. To ensure that the goals and policies of the Housing Element of the General Plan are implemented, the Applicant shall comply with the requirements of Chapter 11, Article 1, Hawaii County Code, relating to the Affordable Housing Policy. Compliance with Chapter 11 shall be approved by the Administrator of the OHCD prior to Final Plan Approval and/or Final Subdivision Approval. : , It is recommended that the applicant reach out to the OHCD to discuss an Affordable Housing Agreement. Should you have any questions, contact Neil Erickson at (808)932-5959. ) (71 I I /2,1 Susan K. Kitinz Ilousing Administrator / i 1.4 BM = Manning Dept. i Exhibit__ 7 EQUAL HOUSCNG OPPORTUNITY ';' DAVID Y.IGE �.a�.-.'"61'.;;',,,, JADE T.BUTAY GOVERNOR .0:176-3'.4; :+W a DIRECTOR :h n Y s Deputy Directors ry .�* � ROSS M.HIGASHI a4an � v�.� EDUARDO P.MANGLALLAN EDWIN H.SNIFFEN STATE OF HAWAII IN REPLY REFER TO: DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DIR 0494 and 0495 869 PUNCHBOWL STREET HWY-PS 2.8621 HONOLULU, HAWAII 96813-5097 June 1,2022 VIA EMAIL:planning@hawaiicounty.gov Mr.Zendo Kern Director Planning Department County of Hawaii 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo,Hawaii 96720 Dear Mr.Kern: Subject: Lehua Village Partners Planned Unit Development Permit Application Development of 40-lot Single-Family Residential Subdivision Tax Map Key Nos. (3)4-5-024:010 and (3) 4-5-010:136 Thank you for your letters dated May 10,2022,requesting comments on the request to allow various exemptions from Chapter 23 (Subdivision) and Chapter 25 (Zoning)for a 40-lot single-family residential subdivision. The applicant proposes to reduce the residential unit density by downsizing the project site from its current Single-Family Residential-10,000 square feet(RS-10)zoning to a Single-Family Residential-15,000 square feet(RS-15)zoning district. In the project site,the applicant will construct 2 20-lot subdivisions for a total of 40 lots'on 14.322 acres. The project location is adjacent to Mamalahoa Highway(State Route 19) and approximately 0.3 miles from Honokaa-Waipio Road. The Hawaii Department of Transportation(HDOT)reviewed the Planned Unit Development Permit Application and has determined that the project does not appear to significantly impact the state highway system. Therefore,HDOT has no comments or objections on this permit application. If you have any questions,please contact Jeyan Thirugnanam, Systems Planning Engineer,Highways Division,Planning Branch at (808) 587-6336 or by email at jeyan.thirugnanam@hawaii.gov. Please reference file review number PS 2022-090. Sincerely, 41-1:*at JADE T.BUTAY Director of Transportation Planning Dept. Exhibit 8 SidneyFuke. Planning Consultant P.O. Box 1345 a Hilo,Hawaii 96720 Cell:(808)989-0640 °Planning°Variance.Zoning E-mail:sidneyfuke@gmaii.com °Subdivision=Land use Permits °Environmental Reports • June 2'3, 2022 Mr. Zendo Kern. Director • Planning Department COUNTY OF HAWAII 101 Pauahi.Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Mr. Kern: Subject: Response to Agency Comments Applicant: Lehua Village Partners,LLC Change of Zone (PL-REZ-2022-000028) and Planned Unit Ieveloprent Permit(PL-PU1-2022-000001) 'MIK: (3) 4-5-024: 010 and (3) 4-5-010: 136 This is in response to agency and other comments posted in your EPIC system relating to the subject applications. We note that some of the comments were directed at only one of the two applications, whereas others commented on both. Where both, we note that comments were generally identical. Accordingly, for those comments referencing only one application, our responses will be predicated upon their applicability to both. STATE AGENCIES The State Department of Transportation"determined that the project does not appear to signrjIcantly impact the state highway system. Therefore, HODT has no comments or objections on this permit application. " Neither the State Department of Land and Natural Resources—Engineering Division nor Land Division—Hawaii District had any comments or objections to the requests. The State Department of Health 'found no environmental health concerns with regulatory implications.... " In sum, to date, none of the State agencies had any objections or adverse comments on the requests. COUNTY AGENCIES The Police Department noted that it `does not anticipate any impact to traffic and/or has any public safety concerns. " The Department of Environmental Management—Solid Waste restated its policies, to wit construction material may not use the transfer stations and that green waste needs to Planning Dept. ! Exhibit 9 • Mr. Zendo Kern, Director June 23, 2022 Page 2. be disposed of at either the East I1.awai'i or West Hawaii authorized Organic Facilities. The applicant will comply with these requirements. It should be noted that to the extent practicable; the applicant intends to use much of the graded material on-site to create finished lots, thus minimizing the need to transport material off property. The Wastewater Division commented that wastewater must meet the requirements and approval of the State Department of Iealth. The applicant will comply with this requirement; which will probably be the installation of a septic system by individual homeowners in conjunction with the building permit process. The Department of Water Supply noted that the applicant has a water commitment for 100 units of water. Thirty-eight (38) water commitments are required for this project and that a commitment deposit of` 5,700.00 is required. The applicant intends to submit this deposit immediately upon favorable action of the applications. Further, payment of the water facilities charge and construction of the required water improvements as outlined in its memo will also be complied with in conjunction with the subdivision of the subject properties and prior to receipt of final subdivision approval. The Department of Public Works —Engineering. Division (DPW)noted that site- generated water must be contained on the property. This will be addressed during the subdivision process wherein on-site construction plans relating to utility and roadway installation will address this requirement. The plans will require the approval of the DPW. Further, drywells will probably be required to contain site generated water, in which case the appropriate NPDES Permit from the State will also be secured. Prior to any grading/grubbing activity, the appropriate land disturbance permits from the DPW will be applied for in accordance with Chapter 10, Erosion and Sediment Control of the Hawai'i County Code. DPW noted that a portion of the project site is situated within the Zone AE drainageway situated along the western boundary of the project site. No major subdivision infrastructure (roads or water systems) will be constructed within the Zone AH, which is a shallow drainageway. Any uses contemplated by individual lot owners within this drainageway will be subject to the requirements of the Zone AE designation. DPW noted that Lehua Street is a County Road. As such, all connections will be subject to the approval of the DPW. Prior to or in conjunction with the subdivision review process,the applicant will provide information to DPW to assure the proposed accesses have adequate sight distances. Further, the streetlights within the subdivision and at its intersection with Lehua Street will be installed per the requirements of DPW. Mr. Zendo Kern. Director June 23, 2022 Page 3 Relative to the interior road standards, DPW noted that it would defer any deviation from the standards to the Planning Director and; if approved, "recommend that the proposed cul-de-sacs be kept in private ownership... . " If the PUD is approved, the applicant intends to have all interior roads be privately owned and maintained by the various homeowners. The Department of Housing and Community Development (OHCD) informed the applicant that the project requires compliance with the requirements of Chapter 11, Article 1 of the Hawaii County Code relating to Affordable Housing Policy. Please note that with the dedication of a 15-acre site to the Hawaii Housing Authority, the affordable housing obligation of the original ordinance (of which the subject site is a part of)has already been fulfilled, as confirmed in a June 5, 2005, letter from OHCD included as Exhibit B of the change of zone application. The Applicant's plan of marketing 50% of the proposed 40-lot project consistent with the County's Affordable Housing Guidelines would thus amount to a "doubling" of the subject site's affordable housing obligation. We trust that the aforementioned adequately responds to the comments to date. If not or if there are questions relating to this matter, please feel free to direct them to me or Mr. Daryn Arai. Thank You very much. Sincerely. �s • SIDNEY M. FUKE planning Consultant Copy—Lehua Village Partners, LLC via email Mr. Daren Arai via email Mori, Ashley From: richard@bidleman.net <rbidleman@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2022 1:23 PM • To: Planning Internet Mail Subject: RS-15 notation Attachments: Subdivision Sign Posted by County,4-21-22 jpg See the attached. If the designation RS-15, does the mean multifamily developed. Does the designation allow the building of duplexes? Also, there is pedestrian accessway in both subdivisions that spills out onto Lehua. It would seem pedestrian infrastructure improvements will need to be developed concurrently by the County or the developer. Please clarify. Thank you Richard bidleman Honokaa Nanning Dept. Exhibit 1 ® 1 l. f`" 1 / ,`/ * '‘. / ,- - J'..,� r - x +.17' I i ''t , )/ . Ti A r/r/S, - ` A , •i t , • r' f` f' ' •� �/ / T f�`PP /ti?,,,,---...* / y1',, ,t.r It ��. ',, .--,•;f•:,,/ s ,3•;f�sz /.. K :,AeF }€`"/ ,;k `� g f,�, a ti ,� f %r ti ,�• i , lf,!," fM,�. t. �r �,�, ,f °� �-r 1 '� -11 (' �''- j� 3J f R , .),,/,,?\,' ..":,, , , i 7�r +� j,41 ""'t 0;` / /X, 't4 f/ t f ry WrZ,Pr, '' �� `,,,I, i/ , /,• .'!-',, 4,it:t . / I-4-)4 :r/t''rt i� '• �', r 8.'; 0' ''' 'r C /'. i„:,,i .,,,4 ifi , 1,f l,,, 1 ,t , // . NOTICE OF FILING OF APPLICATIONS PROPOSED CHANGE OF ZONE 4 Az RS-10 ANDA A r PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TORS-15 PERMIT fi -�� • TO OW CEPTO THE ° " ' ' � ZONING ANDCERTAIN SUBDIVISIONEXTIONS CODES _ TMK'S: 4-5-010:136 AND 4-5-024:010 PROJECT AREA: 14.322 ACRES , PROPOSED PROJECT: 40-LOT SUBDIVISION , • FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT: Planning Department ' ' 101 Pauahi Street, #3 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 ' Phone: (808) 961-8288 ,......,--4...,- �. -�- r r\ f ,, _ " / • ' J / +: ast.„„:-..-4,•%... f_ � P,' * ;C kl'r '7, ,,. it A 1 = +� 44 a .. \� v .'r4 tib. '4"'"':.'''-'":2,`'. \-' it:�-, I• ' I4 Po r1 *• f . ' it/ / i , N' .4!e' , `. _ i e 4 ,lam/ '\ / i' ' .b .., / .- roi, AP From: .. To: Subject: Re: Lehua Village 1&2 Date: Thursday,May 26,202 5:09:28 PM 1 have sent each individual as p d f Mahalo On May 25, 2022, at 12:59 PM, Kay, Christian �L|xi:;lxu1.1\o` ,/ hu`�ui� wrote: Aloha Mr. Loewen, Unfortunately,the attached documents will not open and I get a message that the contents of the documents are unreadable. Would you please save or print them as a .pdf and re-send? Please let me know if you have any questions. K4aha|o, Christian Christian KayPlanner County of Hawai'i Planning Department AupuniCenter, 1O1PauahiStree�.SuiLeNo. 3 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Phone: (808) 961-8136 Fax: (808) 961-8742 Email: chh»dan.kayPhawaiicuuntv.gov //wAGEO01 .PNG> The County of Hawaii is launching its new Electronic Processing & Information Center (EPIC) permit system on July 28' 2021. Only electronic applications will be accepted after that date. For more information go tOhttps://wvvm/.dpm/.havvai|comnty'gmx/dixisions/bui|ding/p1anm- pgrmnits'and-iOspect]ons-systemn. _-- ._ From:Jim Loewen <muuntainkayakO4Pyahoo.com> Sent:Wednesday, May 25, 2022 12:45 PM To: Kay, Christian <Christian.Kayhawaiicounty.gov> Cc: Dan Miller<drksmiller@gmail.com> Subject: Lehua Village 1&2 Planning Dept. ���,�� � � ^-.�"^^_°.- ' ' Proposed New Subdivision T.M.K. (3) 4-5-010:135 a a I €tt . The following are are concerns for future 40 lot subdivision. 1 Access and egress from Lehua St. We have a single lane Bridge. This Bridge has no sight distance. There are near misses every Day.We would be better served to move entrance and exit to both Sub divisions between lot 8 and 15. This would require a 4 way stop sign. 2 Everyone here purchased lots for an ocean view. Height restrictions are very necessary, not to obstruct this view. This would include trees. 3 With Height restrictions, all utilities should be underground. Poles and wires are blocking the view. We were promised underground utilities and that promise was broken. 4 Proper drainage. This is very important this is a flood plane.This was not initiated on our subdivision and mud slides and a huge amount of water was inidated on our property. 5 Internet we were put in a position to bring in our own internet. This was not easy. Hawaii tel corn can not handle any more customers on this line. Infrastructure is very necessary in this area. I am lot 14 T.M.K. (3) 4-5-010:135 • • • O e a . 4aa04,, ew • Community concerns for proposed Village 1&2 subdivision None of the community or Hamakua action committee member concerns from the September 15, 2021 meeting have been addressed. Please see the meeting minutes for comments and concerns. This is • alarming to the community that no changes have been made. The changing from 10k to 15k lot sizes seems counter intuitive to the affordable housing concept. Smaller lot size should equal smaller price. Bridge congestion at the one lane bridge on Lehua Street.The current bridge has no line-of-sight distance opportunity due to plant growth. The use of cul-de-sacs have shown to be a bad idea in regards to emergency evacuation planning. Roadway interconnectivity should be used to allow for multiple access and egress from Lehua Street for each addition. . The current drainage culvert under Lehua Street located between Village 2 lot 1 and village 1 lot 7 is undersized. During high rain events the culvert capacity is exceeded and water flows across Lehua Street. \UnhcU [lRoth ZcndoKem ]1(on, • /Vuv*v • Le E Laid Jeffrey W. Darrow .1/0/wgnr,t.,,0ir,ur /hyx'y10�,/ur County of0������&^�^ • -' - - PLANNING DEPARTMENT BAMAK@A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN ACTION COMMITTEE Ao'uo/ w/ vzuh/ Suilex • lido./uwai` *,720 Phone m)v^���x Wednesday, September 15, 2021 Meeting Minutes CALL TO ORDER Chair Kurokawa called the Harnakua Community Development Plan (HCDP) Action Committee (AC) to order at 5:13 P.M. Due to restrictions related to the COVID-19 pandemic, this meeting was held via the Zoom interactive video platform. ROLL CALL AC Members Present: Nicolette Hubbard, Carol Ignacio, Tawn Keeney, Crystal Kua, Brad Kurokawa (Chair), Jeff McKnight (Vice-chair), Robert Nishimoto, Rhonda Pollard AC Members Absent-Excused: None County Staff: Planners -Alexis Ching and Keiko rVlercado County Officials: Council Member Heather Kimball 5 members of the public observed the meeting via Zoom. The Meeting was also available for synchronous viewing via the COH Planning DepartrnentYouTube Live Stream.The live stream recording is available at: Hãmãkua CDP AC Meeting-September 15, 2021 -VouTube. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA: None ANNOUNCEMENTS: 1. Kolekoie Bridge Capacity: Council Member Kimball provided information from the Department of Transportation around the sudden closure of Kolekole Bridge to vehicles over 4 tons. PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS:One{1) member of the public signed up to provide oral testimony. Daniel Fujii' testifying on agenda item 3, lives next to the pr'oposed Lehua Village 1. Mr. Fujii expressed concern over the influx of subdivided lots and its impact on roadway safety for Lehua Street, which is used as a bypass road when school is in session. He specifically asked that the one lane bridge be taken into consideration for safety reasons (walkers, traffic flow). Mr. Fujii referred to one of the major issues for the rnakaisubdivision being heavy rain/flooding ontherond. Hedoesno\opposethe development but wants to ensure it is good for everyone in that area. He believes they are cbrrently unprepared to handle an influx of lots. Mr. Fujii also inquired about CCRs regarding height restrictions• to maintain view planes. flAwai'i County is an Equal Opportunity Pro i.ieIej urn!En2ployer Page� APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Cornmirtee Member crystal Kuo moved to accept the meeting inThutes from July 1, 2021. Motion seconded by Committee Member Town Keeney. Motion to approve minutes passed with 7 votes aye, 0 votes nay. Committee Mernber Nicolette Hubbard moved to accept the meeting minutes l`rom August 12, 2021. Second by Committee Member Rhonda Pollard. Meeting minutes were unanimously approved with 7 votes aye, 0 votes flGj/. BUSINESS: 1. Update on Shoreline Setback ProjectMs. Mercada upda ted the AC, stating that contracts had been signed with UniversityofHavyai'i (UH) andTetraTech. UHw/iUdothe'datacoUecUonand analysis, and Tetra Tech will synthesize the information to propose revised setbacks. UH is curently collecting images and LIDAR of coastline areas (one case study is along the Kona coast and one along the Hamakua coast). Public hearings are anticipated tor the sumnier Of 2023. 2. Presentation by Dennis Flemming, Ha[nakUa Institute: Dennis Flemming, Executive Director of the HarOakua Institute described their approach to sustainable rural development, which is focused on systems thinking to developing the economy, agriculture, and community. Their work prioritizes partnerhsips, collaborative programs, and helps to facilitate groups to work towards solutions. Their work has led them to the Hawai'i Island Agricultural Partnership (HAP), a public/private partnership:focused on island agricultural development. They conducted the Hawall Island Ag and FoodSystennStudy,rnappin8agrifoodsysterns (needs/opportunides) andvvhatactions *Dp|econ tehetq improve it. They looked at: value chain functions, farm to consumer process, what info is available to agricultural businesses to make informed decisions, applicable policies, etc. H|AP acMonleamsandcornrn)tLeesvverzthen [orrnedtofocusonthreeihin8s: va|ue'addedQrovvth, new employment pathways, and market opportunities. HIAP (a 50106 entity) acts as a neutral platform,where various agricultural groups can form and team up to share projects, assets, contracts,or business opportunities. Mr. Flemming offered this space to the Haroakua AC and looks forward to supporting the AC's work. Click here for Comm. No. 2021'09 (HarnAkua Institute Presentation): htLp://records.haxvaiicounty.gov/VVeb\ink/l/doc/112614/PaRe1.aspx Committee Member Keeney and Committee Member Jeff McKnight serve on the Agricultural Committee of the Environmental Caucus of the Democratic Party ofNavvai'i,which reviews agriculture bills presented to the legislature each year. They would like to collaborate with Mr. Hemming on this type of work. Committee Member Q+A: * [}: Where does.funding come from? A: The establishment of the Institute was mostly self- undad by Mr. [lemming.They have also received funding through grants from Kamehameha Schools, UH Foundation, Ulupono Initiative, and a collection of funds from different organizations that are supporting this agriculture partnership. 0 Q.:Are there adequate lands devoted to agriculture farming projects? A: Access to land was something few people mentioned in their study. More of a concern was access to labor recruitment/good labor and economic viability, i.e., cost of inputs and operational costs. hnpsu0nm^/lmudnzgo" Page 2 * Ct: Are there any projects where people can be on site? A: The Institute is not set up for that yet. Currently there is a-srnall office and training space, but they have only held about four in person meetings since the pandemic began. • Ct: What are some of the goals of the action teams? A:The action teams are finalizing the details for each objective in recommended plans, starting with identifying what everyone is already doing, and then determining where coordination or opportunities are for existing projects or planned projects. Cmrornii1eeMem,ber [aro| |gnacioernAhasizedthatrnakinga |ivin8byfarrningisdhaUenQinQ' and she would like to see whether some of the plans are based on what the reality has been.on the Harniakuacoast, when hcomes bothe success oflocal farmers. Council Member Kimball stated that Committee Members Kua and Pollard are helping in the AC agriculture working group and encouraged them to continue a relationship with Mr. Flemming, stating that the AC is a great networking body that can help share out information with the cQmmunrty and herself, to continue advancing actions forward. S. Presentation by Lehua Village Partners, LLC— Proposed 40-Lot Subdivision in Honokaia: Roger and Terri Meeker, and Jack Larson of Lehua Village Partners, LLC, along with planning consultants Sidney Fuke and Daryn Arivvereina(1emdancetnpresentanddiscusstheirproposedoffordab|e housing project inHonmka'a. TheyfirstspokctoCnuncilMernberKirnba||, vvhosuB8estedtheytake an audience with the Hãrnãkua COP AC. Mr. FukebeganbyprovidinQabhefdeschpdonofthe |andusehistoryford`ispnjectarea, beginning at the end of the sugar plantation era. Mr. Meeker then provided the AC with a brief introduction to their proposed project. Ud|izing Zoom's screen sharing feature, Ms. Ching shared a location map as well as a detailed plan that had been provided by Lehua Village Partners, LLC. Mr. Meeker stated that their project conforms with both the General Plan and the Harnakua CDP, which has the'proposed area labeled medium to low density urban, He added that although County Code requires a pject to be 20% affordable, they want to designate 50% of the units in their project to affordable housing, according to the County's affordable housing guidelines. Lehua Village will target first drneloca| buyers, workforce housing, • etc. to help satisfy that need. Mr. Meeker shared that once the project is approved, they would enter into an agreement with the County's Office of Housing and Community Development (OHCD).The process requires preference be given to first time, local buyers for the first seven months, after which, it could be open for other Hawai'i residents. • Lehua Village 2 may be a combination of lots and homes (uncertain at this point). The Planned Unit Development (PUD) allows for more flexibility. Mr. Meeker described the roads, and other aspects of the proposed project, such as a pedestrian path and native tree landscape.They intend to have roinirna| CC&Rs and would maintain an appropriate design aesthetic, referencing the historic plantation design of that area. They have met with OHCD and the Planning Department, and both agencies are supportive of their project's vision. Mr. Meeker then opened the conversation hzy questions and feedback. Concern over roads and the one lane bridge were expressed, and a discussion ensued about the roadway placement for Lehua Village 2, Chair Kurokawa advocated for smaller roads, and wasn't sure if the County has adopted roadwy standards which call for complete streets. Looking at the PUD aspect he recommendedthey consider natural drainage ways. Mr. Meeker explained the hitps://www.planniim.hawaiicounnwoW honmkuu(iihawu1ic^untr.gp' Page 3 ' engineers and PUD designer placed the location of the access road to meet adequate line of sight requirements and to avoid the area's flood zone. Committee Member Keeney asked if the project would go before County Council for approval as an affordable housing project. Mr. Meeker replied that 201H was not applicable to this project because they are working within the existing zoning. Council Member Kimball added that the project would still go through the PUD process and go before the Planning Commission. The project would also go before County Council for review because they are applying for a rezone. She thanked Lehua Village Partners, LC forcoming out to the community early to begin this dialogue. Francine Robyexpressed concern for this area being labeled "high susceptibility" for landslides under the HCDP's communithazards profile on hazards. Ms. Roby also stated that cul-de-sacs are not a good idea because it only allows people with one exit route when a hazard occurs. Chair Kurokawa agreed that for higher density areas in town you want more connectivity for distribution of traffic. Committee Member Carol Ignacio commented that the 2019 medium income in Havvai'| County was about$63,800 and "affordable" for people is about 3096 of that. She queried what affordable would look like for this project. Mr. Meeker stated that they did not have fixed pricing right now. TheOHCD has affordable housi88uide|inesvvith numbers for 80%, but this project will bew/eU under those numbers.They won't know for certain until they have fixed infrastructOre costs. Chair Kurokawa asked if they were planning on building homes or subdividing the land. Mr. Meeker stated that Lehua Village 1 would be finished lots for buyers to build their own homes on. They remain uncertain about Lehua Village Z. Chair Kurokawa noted there may be some extra costs for building because of the sloping terrain, versus a fiat site. He also noted thaLaMbujab|e housing usually entails having smaller lots, so the developer can develop more, and the lots can be lowered in cost. Chair Kurokawa also shared concerns around maintaining visual screening from Havvai'i Belt Road, so the View does not become rooftops. Mr. Meeker encouraged everyone to view the area firsthand and look at the gentle slope, especially Village 1,stating the topography does not present a challenge in this area.View planes will be protected by ensuring only one-story homes can be built on the rOakais|de. Committee Member McKnight asked to what extent outreach had been done with the surrounding community.. Mr. Meeker acknowledged that this is the start of that process, and that they would be meeting with the Honoka'a Business Association in a couple weeks. He added that they have nothing currently scheduled in terms of meetings with residents, but they are open to do whatever is appropriate. Click here for Comm. No. IO2I-07.I - Lehua Village Partners, LLC map and concept plan: htto://records.haxvaiicounty.Rov/VVe6|ink/l/6oc/112472/PaAe1.aspx 4. Island-wide Action Committee Member Initiatives: Chair Kurokawa incorporated this business agenda item with #5—Implementation Updates from Action Committee Mernbers(read below). 5. Implementation Updates from Action Committee Members: a. Emergency Preparedness& Hazard Mitigation—Francine Roby0'Jeff McKnight: Ms. Roby has federal emergency planning experience and has adapted that planning process to a household nnndeJ. She has looked at plans from various counties, including the COH Multi-hazard Mitigation Plan, and created a self-instructional document that helps households learn and think about the types of decisions they need to make for emergency preparedness. It includes https://www.planninzhawaiicountr.p,oll`/ 8un,nliux(iihuwallo/xwty.no`' yxAe4 • links to up-to-date online resources, guidance on home preparedness, and contains a vital records section, and emergency financial first aid kit. It is a fillablc document that is customizable for each household. The idea is to have households work on this first, and then • take it to a community level, connecting networks of comunities together to enhance preparedness. b. Affordable HousinHubbard & Rhonda Polla : Committee Members Hubbard & Pollard will connect with one of the Action Committee members in Kohala that could be a • valuable resource and will get back to the AC with this information. Council Member Kimball offered to bring in a speaker from the Office of Housing and Community Development to talk about affordable housing with the Action Committee. c. : Committee Member Keeney has been attending meetings about Waipi'o Valley, focusing on the valley's rim area and public acCess. Committee Member Keeney spoke about a property below Pa'auhau. Council Member Kimball shared that there is a collaborative working group comprised of various nonprofits that are working in the valley (taro farmers, He ole oVVaipi'o, POhahe i ka Lani) and they have received $100,000 from Hawaii Tourism Authority (destination management program) ' facilitate a discussion with the entire surrounding community on what they would like to see for the future of Waipi`o and management of that destination. They're in the process of selecting a vendor to provide the facilitation services, and some of the input received from the groups in the valley is the need for a facilitator that knows the history hut has riot been intimately involved. Council Member Kimball also shared that there is a potential investor for Jack Wayne Hell (roadside building between Waipi'o and Honoka'a town). The investor is willing to make it an education gateway to the valley, and will expand parking, potentially provideshut•des, education services, etc. d. Recycling& Solid Waste—Jeff McKnight& Francine Robv: Committee Member McKnight received several cells about the transfer stations abrupt COVID-related closures and limited hours—which has since been temporarily resolved but seems to be a recurring issue. Council Member Kimball said she will connect him with solid waste contacts at the County. e. Roadway 0e1w/orkfbridges)--Brad Kurokawa & Nicolette Hubbard: Chair Kuro:I:evva reached out to John Cross, formerly of C. Brewer& Co , and said there is qLlite a bit of information that the plantation has on old roadways. He believes there should be another data gathering effort so that they can identify some of these routes for emergency preparedness.. f. Agriculture—Crystal Kua & Rhonda Pollard: Committee Member Kua said it was helpful seeing Mr. Flemming's presentation, and she will connect with Rhonda on the topic of agriculture. g. Protection of Coastal Resources—Robert Nishimoto: Committee Member Nishimoto is hoping to serve as a bridge between the AC and the agencies working on the shoreline setback study. Committee Member Nishimoto asked about the new owners of tile 'D'5ka|a Dairy and recalled that the former owner had various land issues with others (dumping sewage off the cliff etc.). He requested that the new owners be asked to do a presentation to the AC about their plans. Council Member Kimball offered to arrange for the presentation with the new owners Stephanie and Chad Buck, as well as Chanlene Nishida. 6/»ps:/xm,mnlwvx&g.6yxm1icooatr.ov*' yaAc5 • Other: Chair Kurokawa requested clarification and information on a recent director's memo regarding Farm Dwellings. Ms. Mercado will follow up with information on the memo. PROPOSED AGENDA ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING: None ADJOURNMENT: Committee Member Keeneymotioned tt adjourn slt meeting. Second by CCRlm,ti c Member Hubbard.. The motion passed unanimously. e g was adjourned7:15P.M.The meeting ..as at f • All Action Committee information can be viewed and downloaded from our website: https://www.hawaiicountvcdp.infoJhamakua-cdp hllps://www.p/manine.hawaiicounk.eo+=/ Irumaluuafuhawaiicarurhr.2ov Pate 6 - From: To: Cc: Subject: Testimony on Application by Lehua Village Partners(LLC)for Change of Zone and Development Permit on Lehua Street in Honoka'a Date: Wednesday,July 27,2022 10:48:22 AM We are submitting,the following as written testimony in advance of a public hearing on the applications filed for a Change of Zone (PL-REZ-2022-000028) and Planned Unit Development Permit (PL-PUD-2022-000001) for TMK -4-5-010:136 and 4-5- 024:010. Applicant is Lehua Village Partners, LLC. We reside year-round at 45-2805 Lehua Mauka Place, Honoka'a, HI 96727 in the home owned by our son Pfister Matthew Week, situated close to the proposed development. We support rezoning of these lots provided that infrastructure improvements are made to Lehua Street before the lots are sold. We are aware from frequent media reports and from personal experience that the island has a housing shortage. These Honoka'a lots are close to village services, including public schools. They offer our community an opportunity both to address the countywide housing shortage and the specific need for affordable housing for local families. In that regard, we hope that this development is a success. • However, as you must know, Lehua Street is a very curvy and steep narrow road with poor visibility for both motorists and pedestrians at this location, further hindered by a one-way bridge, also with poor visibility. We believe strongly that, at a minimum, a sidewalk is needed on the makai side of Lehua Street from Plumeria Street to the bridge. The one-way bridge must be replaced with a two- way bridge, with a mauka sidewalk continuing to Pakalana Street and a crosswalk placed appropriately for school children. The improvements we are proposing should have been made years ago. We have lived at the above location for 2 1/2 years and have experienced numerous incidents when oncoming motorists do not yield to traffic already on the bridge. If the above change in zoning is approved and forty new homes are built on Lehua Street, the one-way bridge will not only increase as a hazard but will also become a traffic issue, as vehicles back up on Lehua to deal with drivers failing to yield. The sidewalk issue is a long-standing one. There are blind corners that make it impossible for pedestrians and drivers to see one another as they turn those curves. The need for a sidewalk on Lehua was specifically noted in the Hamakua Community Development Plan [See Policy 70 under Sect. 5.3 Improve Roadway Network (pp 81-82)]. Having lived on Hawai'i Island for over 16 years, our experience is that County government does not resolve dangerous road conditions until numerous accidents and pedestrian or motorist casualties have occurred. So promises that poor infrastructure will be corrected "later" hold no weight with us. If the County decides to approve this subdivision plan without these improvements being mandatory before homes are sold, we cannot in good conscience support further development of Lehua Street. Sincerely, Planning Dept. Exhibit 1.2 _ Bett and Richard Bidleman 808 756-1808 45-2805 Lehua Maika Place Honokaa, HI 96727 .v11= SidileyFLike. Planniria amsultani d g , ANWit*4441e., .tremosee• P.O.Box 1345 -Hilo,Hawaii 96720 argwol";ire Cell:(808)989-0640 •Plunning Vnriance-Zoning astimeW - E-mail:sidneyfukeSubdivision-Lanct Usebivson-•Environmental Repois June 23, 20.77 Mr. Zendo Kern,Director Planning Department COUNTY Oh. HAWAII 101 Pauahi Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Mr. Kern: Subject: Response to Public Comments Applicant: Lehua Village Partners,LLC Change of Zone (PL-REZ-2022-000028) and Planned Unit Development Permit (PL-PUD-2022-000001) TMK: (3) 4-5-024: 010 and (3) 4-5-010: 136 This is in response to public comments posted in your EPIC system relating to the subject applications. We note that some of the comments were directed at only one of the two applications, whereas others commented on both. Where both, we note that.comments were generally identical. Accordingly, for those comments referencing only one application, our responses will be predicated upon their applicability to both. • To date,there were two (2)public comments —Mr. Richard Bidleman (unknown address) and Mr. James Loewen (TMK: 4-5-024:001). Mr. Bidleman offered two (2) comments. The first was whether the RS-15 designation would allow multifamily units. The short answer is"no". Each of the proposed lot would allow the construction of only one single-family residential structure. His other comment related to the pedestrian pathways that connect the private roadways to Lehua Street and the park located makai of the proposed subdivision. The objective is to enable future residents of the Proposed Lehua Village communities to have direct access to the park and schools without having to take a more circuitous route via Lehua. Street. These pedestrian pathways are private and will be maintained by the homeowner's association(s). They will be constructed in conjunction with the development of the proposed subdivision. Mn Loewen outlined several "concerns" while attaching a copy of the September 15, 2021, minutes of the hlamakua Community Development Plan Action Committee. His comments revolved around a) the single lane bridge along Lehua Street which could compromise safety; b) the need to preserve view plane for lots within his subdivision; c) drainage and adequacy of the size of the culvert within Lehua Street; d) cost of the affordable housing lots; and c) adverse impacts of cul-de-sacs. Planning Dept. • Exhibit 13 Mr. Zendo Kern,Director June 23. 2022 Paget The applicant understands and appreciates the fact that I.ehua Street, as do so many other public streets on the island, does not meet the County of Hawai'i's dedicable road standards. This may relate to the cited bridge, drainage (culvert), or even road width. To address situations, the County's approach on rezoning application like this has been to apply the judicial principles of"nexus" and "proportionality.- Specifically, if a project's impact has some reasonable physical relationship to an existing infrastructure (in this case, Lehtta Street), it can be maintained that there is a"nexus." Once that is established, its"proportional" obligation could be determined. Where there are perceived infrastructure impacts, the County through the rezoning process has sought to equitably address a proposed project's "proportional" obligation through a "fair share assessment" condition. The assessment equitably addresses traffic/road, parks, • police, fire, and solid waste. The Applicant believes that this system, if applied, is most equitable and proportional. Funds derived through this process, coupled with the County's Capital Improvement Program or its road maintenance budget, could make some of the desired improvements if deemed appropriate. As with other applications, the "fair share"imposition of an additional $15,000 or more per an affordable lot would make its availability more tenuous. As such and as with other applications, all of the affordable lots/units have been exempted from this fee. We trust that, if approved,this exemption will be applied here as well. On the matter of view plane preservation, the applicant sympathizes with the concern. This is an unavoidable situation, whether the property is developed based on the existing RS-l0 or requested RS-15 zoning. In deference to this concern,the applicant will develop and require covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs) for the project that will, for the most part, restrict the height to one-story. The few exceptions would be;for a few lots along the maulalhighway border and/or other lots where because the'topography or their location lends themselves to multi-level without significantly compromising view plane of existing lots. While underground utilities are ideal, it is a significant cost item according to the applicant's electrical consultant. This is a cost that would affect the applicant's ability to deliver more houselots and/or housing at the County's affordable rate or guidelines. Accordingly, the applicant is not prepared to have underground utilities. On the matter of cul-de-sacs, while through streets facilitate overall traffic circulation, there arc some situations where a through street is not reasonable (such as connecting to nowhere or topography or other landform making a connection unfeasible) or let alone, preferred or desired. As such, 'the Subdivision Code allows cul-de-sacs but caps the maximum number of lots Mr. /endo Kern, Director June 23, 2022 Page 3 at 18. In this situation, through the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process. we arc requesting a 2-lot exemption to allow up to 20 lots. The layout was designed in a manner to enable the applicant to develop the project in a cost-efficient manner and thereby provide more affordable housing/lots. As noted in response to the County Office of Housing and Community Development's comments, in spite of the project's affordable housing obligation already having been fulfilled, the applicant is still prepared to provide at least 50% of the lots within the County's affordable housing guidelines. There are several other things to note. For one, from a traffic circulation standpoint and other considerations, there is no '`magic" in the number 18. The Code could have easily capped it at 16 or even 20. In this case, because of local terrain (embankments, drop-offs, etc.), site distance concerns, as well as the desire to minimize the number of lots having direct access to a public street(in this case, Lehua Street), having all 20 lots of each Village access via the cul-de- sac road would appear to be a better option -- especially in light of the option of having more affordable homes/lots. Finally, it should be noted that a prime objective of a PUD concept is to have all proposed lots be functionally part of the subdivision. Sharing, accessing and contributing to the same private road achieves that objective. The applicant recognized that the existing RS-10 zoning could mathematically yield more lots (62) than the RS-15 zoning(40). While the applicant's goal has and continues to be how best to address the affordable housing market in this area, it was equally concerned over wanting to also have a "quality" type of project that a less dense project would render. Further,the added development cost to reshape the undulating property to create buildable lots could result in the applicant not being able to provide the desired level or number of affordable lots. We trust that the aforementioned adequately responds to the comments to date. If not or if there are questions relating to this matter, please feel free to direct them to me or Mr. Daryn Arai. Thank you very much. Sincerely, 1\,N\ N SIDNEY M. FUME Planning Consultant Copy—Lehua.Village Partners, LLC via email Mr. Daryn Arai via email RLehuaVillageREZ.7.I7.2022.crk COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION REPORT LEHUA VILLAGE PARTNERS, LLC CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (PL-REZ-2022-000028) Upon careful review of the request against the guidelines for granting a change of zone, the Planning Director is recommending that a favorable recommendation for a Change of Zone from a Single-Family Residential-10,000 Square Feet(RS-10) to a Single-Family Residential-15,000 Square Feet (RS-15)zoning district for approximately 14.322 acres of land be forwarded to the County Council. Since this recommendation is made without the benefit of public testimony, the Director reserves the right to modify and/or alter this recommendation based upon additional information presented at the public hearing. This favorable recommendation is based on the following findings: The applicant is requesting to change the zoning district from Single-Family Residential-10,000 square feet(RS-10) to Single-Family Residential-15,000 square feet (RS-15) for approximately 14.322 acres of land. According to the application, the downzoning request would reduce the mathematical density allowed on the subject properties from 60 to 40 lots. The applicant has concurrently requested a Planned Unit Development(PUD) for that same land area that would allow various exceptions from Chapter 23 (Subdivision) and Chapter 25 (Zoning) of the Hawaii County Code. The proposed development is a Master Planned PUD called Lehua Villages and consists of two development components, Lehua Village 1, and Lehua Village 2. Lehua Village 1 would be situated on Parcel 136 (7.137 acres of land)with lot sizes ranging from 10,000 square feet to 23,400 square feet. These 20 lots are proposed to be sold at affordable rates consistent with affordable housing guidelines for Hawai`i County and pursuant to an executed affordable housing agreement between the applicant and the Office of Housing and Community Development (OHCD). Lehua Village 2 would be situated on Parcel 10 (7.185 acres of land) with lot sizes ranging from 10,000 square feet to 33,000 square feet. These 20 lots will be offered for sale at market rates. -1- If the entitlement requests are approved, the applicant plans to submit a subdivision application by the end of 2022, with anticipated completion of the subdivision for both Villages within five (5) years,by the end of 2027. The applicant anticipates the project will cost approximately $3 million to $4 million. In order to consider an area for any type of zoning designation, the applicable goals,policies, and standards of the General Plan must be adequately addressed. It is only through such a comprehensive policy analysis approach that evaluations and decisions can be made to better time and stage developments to achieve growth determined by the General Plan and related planning documents. The implications of these evaluations and decisions must also be considered as they may have an impact on similar areas in the County. The Change of Zone request from Single-Family Residential 10,000 square feet (RS-10) to Single-Family Residential 15,000 square feet (RS-15) conforms to the goals, policies and standards of the General Plan and the Hamakua Community Development Plan (CDP).The General Plan is intended to be used as a policy guide for the coordinated growth and development of all sectors of the County. It sets forth goals, policies, standards, and courses of action to accommodate growth without congestion, to designate and preserve the lands needed for residential use, commercial and visitor services, industry, agriculture, and open space, and to coordinate these uses with the County's service and circulation systems. The overall goals, policies and standards are set forth to physically plan the lands in the County in the best interest of the island's residents. Land use is one of the principal focal points of public concern and policy. The Land Use Element provides the primary basis for direct control and guidance of publicly and privately-owned resources. The proposed change of zone will be consistent with the following goals, policies, and standard of the Land Use-Single-Family Residential Element of the General Plan: ■ Designate and allocate land uses in appropriate proportions and mix and in keeping with the social, cultural, and physical environments of the County. ■ Allocate appropriate requested zoning in accordance with the existing or projected needs of neighborhood, community, region, and County. -2- • Zoning request shall be reviewed with respect to General Plan designation, district goals, regional plans, State Land Use District, compatibility with adjacent zoned uses, availability of public services and utilities, access, and public need. • Designate and allocate single-family residential zoned lands at varying densities for future use in accordance with the needs of the communities and he stated goals,policies, and standards. The Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) Map component of the General Plan is a representation of the document's goals and policies to guide the coordinated growth and development of the County. It reflects a graphic depiction of the physical relationship among the various land uses. The LUPAG Map establishes the basic urban and non-urban form for areas within the County. Parcel 10 (Lehua Villages 2) is split between a Low Density Urban and a Medium Density Urban designation and Parcel 136 (Lehua Villages 1) is fully designated Medium Density Urban by the General Plan LUPAG map. The Low Density Urban designation allows residential use, with ancillary community and public uses, and neighborhood and convenience-type commercial uses, overall residential density may be up to six units per acre; and the Medium Density Urban designation allows village and neighborhood commercial and single family and multiple family residential and related functions (multiple family residential-up to 35 - units per acre). The Hamakua Community Development(HCDP)was adopted by ordinance in 2018. The subject properties are located within the Honoka`a designated urban growth boundary and located in an area designated for Low and Medium Density Urban uses by the Honoka`a/Haina Land Use Guide Map, which essentially follows the land use pattern recommended by the General Plan. In addition, the proposed project conforms to several objectives of the HCDP, including concentrating new developments within existing town centers while limiting rural sprawl and providing affordable housing (lots). Policy No. 70 of the HCDP is written as follows: "To improve safe pedestrian access and increase connectivity in Honoka'a: • Make safetyimprovements to downtown Honoka`a based on Complete Streets P and/or other evidence-based planning principles. -3- o Improvements to include: additional pedestrian crosswalks on Mamane Street, additional sidewalk development(such as along Lehua Street), and safe, marked walkways to parking areas servicing downtown." While this policy specifically recommends additional sidewalk development along Lehua Street, it is referencing improvements to the section of Lehua Street in the vicinity of downtown Honoka`a and is not meant to recommend additional sidewalk development on Lehua Street fronting the subject parcel (situated approximately 2,100 linear feet mauka of Lehua Steet's intersection with Mamane Street in downtown Honoka`a). The subject 14.322-acre project site consists of two irregularly shaped properties, each a little over 7 acres in size, that are separated by Lehua Street. The project site is bordered along the south by the Hawai`i Belt Road (Highway 19) and to the north by Lehua Street and its future extension. The project site is currently vacant of any structures or uses with an extensive cover of abandoned sugar cane and various non-native grasses. The overall slope of the project site ranges between 8 percent to over 13 percent, with the steepest portions adjacent to the Hawai`i Belt Road and Lehua Street and an adjoining dry ditch located to the west. The project site is situated along the makai side of the Hawai`i Belt Road within the urban core of Honoka`a town. To the east lies Tex's Drive Inn, situated on Commercial-zoned lands. In close proximity to the north (makai) lies the Honoka`a Elementary, Intermediate and High School complexes, the Honoka`a Park complex, and the Hale Ho`ola Hamakua medical complex. Immediately to the east of the project along Lehua Street is a recent 8-lot subdivision consisting of lots at least 10,000 square feet in size on lands zoned RS-10. To the immediate west of the project site are vacant lands zoned RS-10. While the downzone to RS-15 would reduce the residential density in this area, it is still consistent with the urban, residential nature of the surrounding community and consistent with the LUPAG designations of the subject parcels. Additionally, this rezone, along with an approved PUD, will allow the applicant to defray infrastructure costs associated with typical subdivision requirements in order to ensure that 50% of the proposed lots would be offered at affordable rates to prospective -4- buyers. This will be done through an affordable housing agreement between the applicant and the County Office of Housing and Community Development pursuant to Chapter 11 of the Hawai`i County Code, that will be executed prior to receipt of Final Subdivision Approval for any portion of the project. The preceding will be added as a condition of approval. Based on the preceding, the proposed RS-15 zoning conforms to the goals, policies and standards of the General Plan and the Hamakua Community Development Plan(CDP). All utilities and services are available to the site. Proposed access to the subject properties is from Lehua Street, a curvilinear, two- way,two-lane local roadway, between Pakalana Street and the Honoka`a County Park complex. Sight distances along Lehua Street are limited by its horizontal and vertical alignments and roadside vegetation and embankments. Lehua Street is a County owned and maintained roadway with an approximately 21-to 22-foot-wide pavement(in the area of the subject parcels)within an existing 50-foot-wide right-of-way. Both Lehua Village 1 and Lehua Village 2 will have a roadway connection from Lehua Street to a private subdivision roadway consisting of 20-foot-wide pavement and 10-foot-wide grass shoulders within a 40-foot-wide right-of-way. Each private roadway will end in an alternative"hammerhead"turn-around in lieu of a traditional cul-de-sac meeting with the requirements of the Fire Department. Finally, a condition of approval will require these private roadways to be maintained by the lot/homeowners. According to the Department of Public Works-Engineering Division, all road connections and construction within Lehua Street shall conform to Chapter 22, County Streets, of the Hawai`i County Code and access to Lehua Street, including the provision of adequate sight distances, shall meet with the approval of the Department of Public Works, Engineering Division. This will be added as a condition of approval. According to the applicant, there will be no direct driveway access from individual lots to Lehua Steet as all driveway accesses will come off of the proposed private roadways. To ensure that this remains the case, a condition of approval requiring -5- a 10 foot-wide no vehicular access planting screen easement be incorporated on properties with frontage along Lehua Street will be added. While the proposed 40-lot subdivision did not trigger a Traffic Impact Analysis Report(TIAR)under the Zoning Code's concurrency requirements, the applicant submitted a Traffic Analysis Report(TAR) dated May 22, 2020, that considered the traffic impacts for a larger, 80-lot subdivision including the subject properties and a third, adjacent parcel. The report studied the potential impact of traffic at the Hawai`i Belt Road/Pakalana Street and Pakalana Street/Lehua Street intersections and determined that with the addition of as many as 80 lots, these intersections would operate at acceptable levels of service; thus, no intersection traffic mitigation was recommended. According to the Department of Water Supply (DWS),pursuant to a Water Development Agreement, dated September 15, 2014,between the applicant and Water Board, the applicant has a water commitment of 100 units of water, of which the proposed 40-lot subdivision will require 38 additional units of water. These units can be made available from the existing 12-inch waterline within Lehua Street. The applicant will be required to pay a water commitment deposit,pay water facilities charges and construct water system improvements meeting with the requirements of DWS in prior to receipt of final subdivision approval. The preceding will be added as conditions of approval. According to the Department of Environmental Management, there is no County sewer system in the area. The lot owners will need to construct individual septic wastewater systems meeting with the approval of the Department of Health. There is no municipal waste collection service in the County. According to the applicant, solid waste will be either be handled by commercial haulers who will dispose of the refuse at authorized landfill sites or by homeowners at the nearest solid waste transfer station. Electrical, telephone and internet services are available to the properties. Police, fire, and medical services are available nearby in Honoka`a town. A condition of approval will require the applicant or successor to pay a fair share contribution on lots -6- designated for sale at market rates to mitigate potential regional impacts of the development. There are no severe geological or topographical problems which cannot be properly rectified, or which would render the land unusable. The overall slope of the project site ranges between 8 percent to over 13 percent, with the steepest portions adjacent to the Hawai`i Belt Road and Lehua Street and an adjoining dry ditch located to the west. The property is situated approximately 1.8 miles from the nearest shoreline and thus not situated within the tsunami inundation area or evacuation area. According to the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM)prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA), The majority of the project site is situated within flood Zone "X,"which is determined by FEMA to be an area of minimal flood hazard. However, the western boundary of the Lehua Village 2 is defined by a shallow drainageway identified as "Honoka`a Drainageway No. 2"which is also designated as a FEMA floodway subject to 100-year(AH) frequency floods with depths of 1 to 3 feet (usually areas of ponding). According to the applicant, however, none of the subdivision infrastructure will be built within the AH area mentioned above. If an individual lot owner chooses to build in the AH designated area, they will be required to build as required by Chapter 27, Flood Control, of the Hawai`i County Code. According to the Department of Public Works—Engineering Division, all development generated runoff shall be disposed of onsite and not be directed toward any adjacent properties. A drainage study shall be prepared by a licensed civil engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works prior to the issuance of a construction permit. Any recommended drainage improvements, if required, shall be constructed meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works prior to the construction of any proposed structures on the property. The applicant will also be required to comply with the County Flood Code. The preceding will be added as conditions of approval. The subject request is not contrary to Chapter 205A, Hawaii Revised Statues, relating to Coastal Zone Management. The property is not located in the Special Management Area. The subject property is located more than three miles from the shoreline approximately 1.8 miles from the nearest shoreline and will not be impacted -7- by coastal hazard and beach erosion. There is no record of a designated public access to the shoreline or mountain areas that traverses the property. According to the applicant, it is not known whether the subject property or immediate surrounding area have been used in the recent past for the gathering of plants by Native Hawaiians. The applicant has not observed any Native Hawaiians on the site or adjoining properties gathering plants and there is no evidence of any traditional and customary Native Hawaiian rights being practiced on the site, nor existence of any known valued cultural, historical, or native resources in the area. The request will not have a signnificant adverse impact to traditional and customary Hawaiian Rights. In view of the Hawai`i State Supreme Court's "PASH" and"Ka Pa'akai 0 Ka Aina"decisions, the issue relative to native Hawaiian gathering and fishing rights must be addressed in terms of the cultural, historical, and natural resources and the associated traditional and customary practices of the site: Investigation of valued resources: No professional archaeological, cultural studies, or flora/fauna studies were conducted on the subject properties as they have been heavily physically altered and used for intensive sugar cane cultivation for decades. According to the applicant, it is unknown if the subject property or immediate surrounding area was used in the past for the gathering of plants by Native Hawaiians. According to the applicant, vegetation on the subject properties primarily consists of abandoned sugar cane with a mix of non-native grasses and pockets of ironwood trees. Observed fauna include introduced bird species such as dove, Japanese White-eye, house finch and myna that are common in the surrounding area, as well as domestic animals such as cats, dogs, goats, chickens, rats, and feral pigs. The valuable cultural, historical, and natural resources found in the rezoning area: According to the applicant, the subject properties have been previously used for intensive sugar cane cultivation for decades. Furthermore, the properties are situated approximately 1.8 miles from the nearest shoreline, thus it is unlikely that any valuable cultural, historical, or natural resources are located on the subject parcels. Finally, given the preceding and the urban nature of the surrounding area, the applicant does not believe that rare or endangered floral or faunal resources are likely to be found within the site. > -8- • Possible adverse effect or impairment of valued resources: There may be a possibility that native plants could be destroyed by construction and ground alteration, but this is unlikely as no native plants have been observed on the site. The subject property does not abut the shoreline, therefore Hawaiian gathering and fishing rights is not an issue. Feasible actions to protect native Hawaiian rights: No known gathering is taking place on the site. Thus, to the extent to which traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights are exercised, the proposed action will not affect traditional Hawaiian rights; therefore, no action is necessary to protect these rights. Based on the preceding, it is believed that the project would have no adverse impact relative to the archaeological, cultural, or historical resources of the area. To the extent to which traditional and customary Native Hawaiian rights are exercised, the proposed action will not affect traditional Hawaiian rights and no action is necessary to protect these rights. Lastly, this approval is made with the understanding that the applicant remains responsible for complying with all other applicable governmental requirements in connection with the approved use, prior to its commencement or establishment upon the subject property. Additional governmental requirements may include the issuance of building permits, the installation of approved wastewater disposal systems, compliance with the Fire Code, installation of improvements required by the American with Disabilities Act(ADA), compliance with DLNR-SHPD requirements, among many others. Compliance with all applicable governmental requirements is a condition of this approval; failure to comply with such requirements will be considered a violation that may result in enforcement action by the Planning Department and/or the affected agencies. Based on the preceding findings, approval of this Change of Zone from a Single- Family Residential-10,000 Square Feet (RS-10) to a Single-Family Residential-15,000 Square Feet(RS-15) zoning district would result in an appropriate land use pattern that will further benefit the general public. -9- The accompanying draft bill to amend Section 25-8-15 (Hamakua District Zone Map), Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawai`i County Code, is provided for your favorable consideration. Please note the proposed conditions of approval attached to the draft bill. -10- ;.4pJ�SY,UF . COUNTY OF HAWAII <•: :=�� /:• STATE OF HAWAII qTE•OF M�p�= BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. _ (Planning Dept.) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 25-8-15 (HAMAKUA DISTRICT ZONE MAP), ARTICLE 8, CHAPTER 25 (ZONING) OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 • EDITION, AS AMENDED), BY CHANGING THE DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FROM SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL— 10,000 SQUARE FEET (RS-10) TO SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL— 15,000 SQUARE FEET (RS-15) AT HONOKA`A, HAMAKUA, HAWAI`I, COVERED BY TAX MAP KEY: 4-5-010:136, AND 4-5-024:010. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII: SECTION 1. Section 25-8-15, Article 8, Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawai`i County Code 1983 (2016 Edition, as amended) is amended to change the district classification of property described hereinafter as follows: The district classification of the following area situated at Honoka`a, Hamakua, Hawai`i, shall be Single-Family Residential— 15,000 square feet(RS-15): REMAINDER LOT 10 Beginning at the southeast corner of this parcel of land and on the north side of Old Lehua Street, the coordinates of said point of beginning referred to Government Survey Triangulation Station"KAAO"being 688.58 feet South and 1,345.83 feet West and running by azimuths measured clockwise from True South: Following along Old Lehua Street for the next nine (9) courses, the azimuths and distances between points being: 1. 126° 00' 39.35 feet; -1- 2. Thence along a curve to the left having a radius of 375.00 feet, the chord azimuth and distance being: 113° 00' 168.71 feet; 3. 100° 00' 240.84 feet; 4. Thence along a curve to the left having a radius of 100.00 feet, the chord azimuth and distance being: 77° 30' 76.54 feet; 5. 55° 00' 144.75 feet; 6. Thence along a curve to the right having a radius of 100.00 feet, the chord azimuth and distance being: 79° 00' 81.35 feet; 7. 103° 00' 80.33 feet; 8. Thence along a curve to the right having a radius of 50.00 feet, the chord azimuth and distance being: 143° 45' 65.28 feet; 9. 184° 30' 327.46 feet; Thence along Lehua Street for the next four(4) courses, the azimuths and distances between points being: 10. Thence along a curve to the left having a radius of 430.00 feet, the chord azimuth and distance being: 271° 35' 39" 121.09 feet; 11. 263° 30' 193.78 feet; 12. Thence along a curve to the right having a radius of 770.00 feet, the chord azimuth and distance being: 270° 00' 183.23 feet; 13. 277° 10' 357.88 feet; 14. 353° 00' 110.00 feet; 15. 330° 30' 160.00 feet; • 16. 22° 30' 70.67 feet; -2- 17. 112° 30' 79.37 feet along Lot 1; 18. 22° 30' 67.08 feet along Lot 1; 19. 36° 00' 50.00 feet along Lot 1 to the point of beginning and containing an area of 7.137 acres. LOT 12 Beginning at the northwest corner of this parcel of land and on the westerly side of Lehua Street, the coordinates of said point of beginning referred to Government Survey Triangulation Station"KAAO"being 132.19 feet South and 2,386.68 feet West and running by azimuths measured clockwise from True South: 1. Following along the westerly side of Lehua Street, along a curve to the left, having a radius of 430.00 feet, the chord azimuth and distance being: 302° 59' 42" 242.00 feet; 2. 4° 30' 335.24 feet along the west side of Old Lehua Street; 3. Thence along the west side of Old Lehua Street, along a curve to the left having a radius of 100.00 feet, the chord azimuth and distance being: - 323° 45' 130.55 feet; 4. 283° 00' 80.33 feet along the north side of Old Lehua Street; 5. Thence along the north side of Old Lehua Street, along a curve to the left having a radius of 150.00 feet, the chord azimuth and distance being: 269° 25' 45.5" 70.39 feet; 6. 345° 51' 31" 106.24 feet along Lot 13; Thence along the north side of Hawai`i Belt Road F.A.P. No. F- 019-1(1) for the next six courses, the azimuths and distances being: -3- 7. Thence along a curve to the left having a radius of 2,979.79 feet,the chord azimuth and distance being: 88° 27' 12" 363.82 feet; 8. 354° 57' 12" 75.00 feet; 9. Thence along a curve to the left having a radius of 2,904.79 feet,the chord azimuth and distance being: 84° 16' 59" 67.96 feet; 10. 83° 36' 46" 182.97 feet; 11. 173° 36' 46" 20.00 feet; 12. 83° 36' 46" 107.00 feet; 13. 199° 49' 07" 845.41 feet along the center of dry ditch and all its windings and along Lot 11 to the point of beginning and containing an area of 7.185 acres. No vehicle access is permitted along courses 7 to 12 of the above description. Vehicle access is only permitted along courses 1 to 5 on the west and north sides of Old Lehua Street. All as shown on the map attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A" and by reference made a part hereof. SECTION 2. In accordance with Section 25-2-44, Hawai`i County Code 1983 (2016 Edition, as amended), the County Council finds the following conditions are: (1) Necessary to prevent circumstances which may be adverse to the public health, safety and welfare; or (2) Reasonably conceived to fulfill needs directly emanating from the land use proposed with respect to: (A) Protection of the public from the potentially deleterious effects of the proposed use, or -4- (B) Fulfillment of the need for public service demands created by the proposed use. SEE ATTACHED CONDITIONS SECTION 3. Severability. If any provision of this ordinance, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance, is held invalid, the invalidity does not affect other provisions or applications of the ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are severable. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall take effect upon its approval. INTRODUCED BY: COUNCIL MEMBER, COUNTY OF HAWAII , Hawai`i Date of Introduction: Date of 1st Reading: Date of 2nd Reading: Effective Date: -5- CBLehuaV i llageREZ.7.17.2022.crk LEHUA VILLAGE PARTNERS,LLC CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (PL-REZ-2022-000028) CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL A. The applicant(s), its successor(s), or assign(s) ("Applicant") shall be responsible for complying with all of the stated conditions of approval. B. The required water commitment payment for the additional lots shall be submitted to the Department of Water Supply in accordance with its "Water Commitment Guidelines p pp Y Policy"within one hundred and eighty(180) days from the effective date of this ordinance. The Applicant is responsible for maintaining valid water commitments to support the proposed development until such time that required water facilities charges are paid in full. C. The Applicant shall construct necessary water system improvements as required by the Department of Water Supply, which may include, but not be limited to: 1) service laterals that will accommodate a 5/8-inch meter to front each lot; 2) cut and plug existing service lateral (Account No. 670- 05650); 3)water mains capable of delivering water at adequate pressure and volume under peak-flow and fire-flow conditions; minimum diameter of mains shall be six (6) inches; 4) fire hydrants spaced no more than 600 feet apart. On dead-end streets, the last fire hydrant hall be located at one-half the distance from the last house, or unit, fronting the property or driveway or access to the property; and 4) subject to other agencies requirements to construct improvements within the road right-of-way fronting the property affected by the proposed development, the application shall be responsible for the relocation and adjustment of the Department of Water Supply's affected water system facilities, should they be necessary. D. Final Subdivision Approval shall be secured within five (5) years from the effective date of this ordinance. E. All subdivision roadway connections and construction within the Lehua Street Right-of- Way shall conform to Chapter 22, County Streets, of the Hawai`i County Code. Access to Lehua Street, including the provision of adequate sight distances, shall meet with the approval of the Department of Public Works. -1- F. Vehicular access to individual lots shall not be allowed from Lehua Street. The Applicant shall provide a 10-foot wide no vehicular access planting screen easement on the properties with frontage along Lehua Street. G. All development generated runoff shall be disposed of on site and shall not be directed toward any adjacent properties. A drainage study shall be prepared by a professional civil engineer licensed in the State of Hawai`i and submitted to the Department of Public Works. Any recommended drainage improvements, if required, shall be constructed meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works prior to receipt of Final Subdivision Approval. H. The Applicant shall comply with Chapter 27, Flood Control, of the Hawai`i County Code. I. All earthwork and grading activity shall conform to Chapter 10,Erosion and Sedimentation Control, of the Hawai`i County Code. J. A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES)permit and an Underground Injection Control (UIC)permit, if required, shall be secured from the State Department of Health before the commencement of construction activities. K. The method of sewage disposal shall meet with the requirements of the Department of Health. L. In the event that surface or subsurface historic resources, including human skeletal remains, structural remains (e.g., rock walls, terraces,platforms, etc.), cultural deposits, marine shell concentrations, sand deposits, or sink holes are identified during the demolition and/or construction work, the Applicant shall cease work in the immediate vicinity of the find,protect the find from additional disturbance and contact the State Historic Preservation Division at(808) 933-7651. Subsequent work shall proceed upon an archaeological clearance from DLNR-SHPD when it finds that sufficient mitigation measures have been taken. M. As represented by the Applicant, 50% of the proposed 40-lot Planned Unit Development (PUD)project shall be set aside for affordable housing, in accordance with mutually agreeable terms between the Applicant and the County Office of Housing and Community Development, using the provisions of Chapter 11, Article 1, Hawai`i County -2- Code relating to Affordable Housing Policy. Said agreement shall be executed prior to receipt of Final Subdivision Approval of any portion of the project. Should the PUD not be developed, the Applicant shall comply with the requirements of Chapter 11, Article 1, Hawai`i County Code relating to Affordable Housing Policy. N. The Applicant(s) shall make its fair share contribution to mitigate the potential regional impacts of the property with respect to parks and recreation, fire,police, solid waste disposal facilities and roads. The fair share contribution shall become due and payable prior to receipt of Final Subdivision Approval. The fair share contribution for each lot shall be based on the number of lots developed. The fair share contribution may be adjusted annually beginning three years after the effective date of this ordinance,based on the percentage change in the Honolulu Consumer Price Index (HCPI). The fair share contribution shall have a maximum combined value of$15,636.59 per single family residential lot. The fair share contribution per single family residential lot shall be allocated as follows: a. $7,540.24 per single family residential lot to the County to support park and recreational improvements and facilities; b. $363.74 per single family residential lot to the County to support police facilities; c. $718.44 per single family residential lot to the County to support fire facilities; d. $314.54 per single family residential lot to the County to support solid waste facilities; and e. $6,699.63 per single family residential lot to the County to support road and traffic improvements. In lieu of paying the fair share contribution, the Applicant(s)may contribute land and/or construct improvements/facilities related to parks and recreation, fire,police, solid waste disposal facilities and roads within the region impacted by the proposed development, subject to the review and recommendation of the Planning Director, upon consultation with the appropriate agencies and approval of the County Council. This condition shall not apply to any lots included in the executed affordable housing agreement referenced in Condition M, excluding any lots sold for excess housing credits. -3- O. Should the Council adopt a Unified Impact Fees Ordinance setting forth criteria for imposition of exactions or the assessment of impact fees, conditions included herein shall be credited towards the requirements of the Unified Impact Fees Ordinance. P. The Applicant shall comply with all applicable County, State, and Federal codes, laws, rules, regulations, and requirements for the proposed development, including the State Department of Health. Q. An initial extension of time for the performance of conditions within the ordinance may be granted by the Director upon the following circumstances: a. The non-performance is the result of conditions that could not have been foreseen or are beyond the control of the Applicant, successors, or assigns, and that are not the result of their fault or negligence. b. Granting of the time extension would not be contrary to the General Plan or Zoning Code. c. Granting of the time extension would not be contrary to the original reasons for the granting of the change of zone. d. The time extension shall be for a period not to exceed the period originally granted for perfonnance (i.e., a condition to be performed within one year may be extended for up to one additional year). If the Applicant should require an additional extension of time, the Planning Director shall submit the Applicant's request to the County Council for appropriate action. R. Should any of the conditions not be met or substantially complied with in a timely fashion, the Planning Director may initiate rezoning of the area to its original or more appropriate designation. -4- i RS-l0 R5-10 A 40a 1 1 A-5a R5-10 #44:ti m688.58'S 1,345.83'W ,R5-10 y "KAAO" �? .. •'�TCr) Lot 12A-5a0 , -,., SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL rJa (MIL 0)E . SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-15) rig 7.185 ACRES R5-10 RS 10 `� illffet k'-10 Ha NA KAMALII PL Aug , .. ..., ,. , , ,„ S RS � • • . , .. , , , .. . . _ , :::. ' '-,,-: : - ., _ - ' ,Atom, - - - ' -„Ai . , . , .„.. ,. ,, 10it* - ..:_ -:-----_. -::_-, -,,,,:-. --:-.,. ', -- , w7E/71dErk, at ,,,,wErtv-, , , , 2 R--10 Q' HAWAII BELT ROAD YLip4 Wme ' ` I Lot 10(REMAINDER) SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL yq it(GLE-)MI 688.58'S ��1/e RS SINGLE-FAMILY �CT q RS 10 1,345.83'W A-40a R 7.137 ACRES "KAAO" � R5-10 °Q 0 TO HiIO Pe° O �P�P 1 �PSiertill • . Mak ANL Feet 0 400 800 1,200 1,600 2,000 AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING CODE AMENDING SECTION 25-8-15 (HAMAKUA DISTRICT ZONE MAP)ARTICLE 8, CHAPTER 25 (ZONING) OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), BY CHANGING THE DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FROM SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (10,000 SQUARE FEET) (RS-10) TO SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (15,000 SQUARE FEET) (RS-15)AT HONOKAA, HAMAKUA, HAWAII MAP PREPARED BY: TMK:(3)4-5-010:136;(3)4-5-024:010 COUNTY OF HAWAII, PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE:July 29,2022 Lehua Village Partners"A""A" rtners LLC.Map: 1446 1 i. Ad.t , ' • _ • LEHUA ... ...., I, , LL E P• . .. . . 1 ,i,,,lic„, .... EftCA. .. • •. . :. . . ., . ,,. .. .. . % :ie,5r.1 CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (PL-REZ-2022-000012) , ril PLANNED UNIT DEVELO'PIviENT APPLICATION (PL-PUD-2022-000001 ) • 44441 a r r tiy:-..4%,1 : • • . . , --.• •••.: •• - — . . - : „ :•-• .Prge°, a ,.=r ,w =,.r ::',1 `` 4.,^°.;;;d 4 � '3s,. "c r e ;�. ' °. wet „ a°.. , °m.: . °. �-: ea $,°,�"¢;,';',:4';`7°- %-:.,w t _ "; ,4%.°�'�'w =`rw•'. •4 d , r b ° s v w, a ,.'s 3 °._ .:,• . • ,-....___ / . , •°, ° . -; ,-;i ! )----, -,.. ------. 1 . , ,...,, :, ,,,-_, , f----,' T--..---C.I r°°-,A 1.--,_. •r--:-..-• /•°''2---..7-1 11-----.4-1.--;i----...1 , . ‘--- 4 . _ . - --,.-/-,•..., ,.,„;,-,,-...._-&-.....1..i...‘ i -,1 I 1 1 „M---,=-•-•,,, I t , 1"-},z',-,.-cY; i 1.14.4. ,"/ I / 'y• 'i i •r- -' -7, ,' -,1,-----,-,•r. ' r ; , --,..7,..; , ,r r r --• ff. '-i i ,, .. ., ''',---,f ;tr i; .' -1, , --,'.1., ,4114-1a,,,,, 1 ' / C' J' .!- If -,, 1 i T. 1 1 f r--.:--°1 i • -- -----1 . . .. . : „,... `°,----r: - ° r •°----7 }--- ? ° ° r . ° ,°.r'If.,.,° ••:.--. ....; I 'r°,•4 1 i( q„ :PA; L.,.,...„,, 1---/--1 -----z!", ,'/R. 7 1 .-‘4. ,4 '' i'','I, I I ','•-••••-1,. ; ----,.. // '.-----;,/ , i -.`-t .•,. , ' c, •4-, •-•-,1 --•,..s.,,,4 h.2- i ,..„,:-(:, - ,g,4 1 ,,,1•AL.-0-_,Tat„.1., •- -, , . 1-ri !/ 'i.,-,:- / -n,°,...... .1 ,"!----7--4-1 f.1 r-/- /--.-°-'"---1--J.,,, -.'4--- , ,F,,,_,, ,,,,,,,_i, ;,,,,, „ g IP--.r.,-,•• 17-,---1i. i '' '-'•-••-'--1,5. ' s- t-,..1-1-•-•,, `'••-••11,, ''.--: H-,,••1 11---- ----/'•-•-.1 I i I i••••••-...._;,----•,--__i i•‘-.,. 4_. 1 /.1---7.,..,. i ,,,? 4-.../ i-r.s. '----LJ 1---1/ -- „,.:/ 2--..-.i,, ..-•..11/.J / -r---- 1 ? , /--, p i --4,, 2! ._ I.,., 4-1-...,----4_, #--,,.f/4 e i; / --,-,, .•''''---... 4;7 /, -----t- /-••••- •-.i 1 r'-•:.---1. I( i -'"---4J -1 i ''' 1 -''''''•••.:-'••,.i '' 4 )--,--;,....i // '---• ------d 1 ; 4 . . ., .. . ... , ..-., i ii , .., .4 \ I ,' 4 i i „ , , i I----.°1 ° • , . . .1 0 1, ' CL: • i i,, - cri 4......, i .i. -.,-...,•-_,; ,_ I --„,-----.._ , f i •-,..J. rio .. ..‹. _ . ... 5.Z• '5. ° --•••... -----„I .5, J ! / , kr Zi, / ,,,,i,,,,,.__J • i ---j i f/t; .Z' i 1 1 1 ' 4 ,..---- ,--• .z. _.,..°T i i 5 1 i5 r----4-1-:-'5:-- HONOKA'A ‘i00 //5.e i t,, l''''--- ''---,.. i ,/,_ l"";,-, "'•-- , .----.' ''''''..'''''' •-•----' '.4. t ' '''l' 1 1., z --;i---: :--,../ / :-7?----..„ :' I , -.....,,, .. , 1 1 \ PARK COMPLEX kM ", 0 ! ~,--'. ''-',::: ri 77--:,:•-• 1-t--Vr-t--;','---f,J 1,„., '.---. -- . ., •, -ri ----1 / i #,,,i I; '-'---i,i / / ., . . .- • , t ; 1. 7 ‘ ,-.-1',.:-.,---,, , ''''f 5 5',.,, ,, ° i •-••••—•„_:- •° '55 °5- •''' ll / -,--- 15 \ ‘‘ \ ° .7 \\-----: •,- 7 / / r'.!-55. I I •1'7•555-....I 5 5 I „, „ „ , .... .„.. •• ,, ,....--; . . .. ., . r- \\,' ;-i , • ,.---- \\ I ',44,-, • --- --.,--- ,--..- ..--- !I 3 s''°, F--- „ --,, ° .,- „.„ --/ r / .--...„. -„. r ( \°,,,,/ !7-2,,,, / : .7 / ”, '',..„,,,•::',,°;55".51:5,,'--i .7 i',,„ ',.. ,......„.. ., ....., -----<' - -----------) ! : ,z„, 11-----„!-----..„ ----,.. -,,...„, 7/-4,,,,, ,, , ,, ,,,,..,„ , . 1 1 ''',,•'"'-r.,1 i i;'---I , , ., . ./ . ,,i ,, / 7/ ------' '.,./.'"-/,, / .i':;‘-•,./ .',,,..:::',,/ /f---r.i.„,,,. .,.....,.„„:4,,, 1 1 .....--, J;,,.- C,N?:53I4 - i::',:•-t.4'1i'''''''''''''''':'''' ',.:--••,-'..V'''''' r . I , - - = —=. . . „., , . ,.=,,:N , . „..---r•-•••,—,.. :-=..,,' , ---,-. :,...0-7 I grz.—.; -,---i.„ ;•• ,•=. / .,- .2-4,„. ,r7 ' .- -;.,;„,••.. ,,',A.:1'i=-;. -4A:,..„......_ -- ..,:f.F.,..,444 , ---..--!_.../.....-------i i ./"--'sg,,,, ,' ; ..-.7---„,:,/ ..----- ,=--,:y .„,',--.=,-,./ / r--,-./ ,•„,A--,/ i ., „ / i ---,'.=, =r-=-'2,-..,./.7 . .._. .,.. , ‘ . ' ° , ,,....,,,;.,.,,,,..- _.,/ / , - '' //"''''...1--'(,,, ,:(1, --.--..._ -' ° - _...,••• ___........ -..,---,---,----- , ' c /°V 1 /_ „: .,, ,,,,,I,-,,... -•;,..,:---,e' ./ -7,-.1 ,,\ „, ),,,,../:• '-',5 ,5 i 5 — I '-.: , . ,, . - ",,,c1,4 ,21 zi<49 7_:',,%A.i 'Pl:4g,' ,,,,,_I e, / C, / 4 1 '';'' .,/,',, '''','"' .14.C..'"'.''',•'' :'-"c' _,- ., '" ----4----3,_ . , ,...„. „... ‘;'-'—t-----4 / R. 4; . „ f ) ,---4. ", / / ' " -1 ' ''''- - ' — ,, „, .„ '4-----!. ' , „..,--.....r. °-1 i / --,----/ i- "Po ----;«. .., . - // r .....-- •• 11\ ". -. ,..'• 1 'r./ / 1---,,,,, --4r4V,-//---/ •-',4:,'\,,<'. ../n,,,.... . 11 -- 1 ' "--°-:`-.-/ „..° r / / / ---„ -<„,./. '' '' "' , ,, -- ' , ,--' / ,,''''.,, I y 1,4er,/ / i e 1/'----, ,•-• __ PROJECT SITE , , .._ ,,4 ,---,--4„ i ,'...,.., /j/ , gi ,• d '^---;,. i 1 I 71:r.`',.''' / / "--,/ , ".., , ... WHAT IS A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) PERMIT? ■ ACCORDING TO THE ZONING CODE (HCC §25-6- 1) , THE PURPOSE OF PLANNED UNIT I— DEVELOPMENT (PUD) IS TO ENCOURAGE COMPREHENSIVE SITE PLANNING THAT IS COMPATIBLE Ui W WITH THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY AND THAT ADAPTS THE DESIGN OF DEVELOPMENT TO THE LAND, BY ALLOWING DIVERSIFICATION IN THE RELATIONSHIPS OF VARIOUS USES, BUILDINGS, STRUCTURES, OPEN SPACES AND YARDS, BUILDING HEIGHTS, AND LOT SIZES IN PLANNED 0 BUILDING GROUPS, WHILE STILL ENSURING THAT THE INTENT OF THIS CHAPTER ZONING CODE) IS Ja OBSERVED. , �W ■ A PUD APPLICATION INCLUDES A LIST OF REQUESTED EXCEPTIONS FROM THE ZONING & t SUBDIVISION CODES THAT WILL ALLOW FOR A SUBDIVISION DESIGN THAT IS A DEPARTURE FROM A TYPICAL SUBDIVISION LAYOUT ALLOWED BY CODE. Z • PUD PERMITS HAVE BEEN APPROVED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT ADMINISTRATIVELY FROM 1996 To 2015, WHEN THE ZONING CODE WAS AMENDED BY THE COUNTY COUNCIL TO SHIFT 0v w DECISION MAKING AUTHORITY FROM THE PLANNING DIRECTOR TO THE PLANNING Z COMMISSIONS. • THIS IS THE FIRST PUD THAT WILL BE HEARD BY A PLANNING COMMISSION SINCE THE CODE Q, CHANGE IN 2015. _ PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT • THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS A MASTER PLANNED PUD CALLED LEHUA VILLAGES, A 40- LOT SUBDIVISION CONSISTING OF TWO DEVELOPMENT COMPONENTS, LEHUA VILLAGE 1 AND LEHUA VILLAGE 2. W; ■ LEHUA VILLAGE 1 WOULD BE SITUATED ON PARCEL 136 (7. 137 ACRES OF LAND) WITH LOT � SIZES RANGING FROM 10,000 SQUARE FEET TO 23,400 SQUARE FEET. THESE 20 LOTS ARE PROPOSED TO BE SOLD AT AFFORDABLE RATES CONSISTENT WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING `x ^a No GUIDELINES FOR HAWAII COUNTY AND PURSUANT TO AN EXECUTED AFFORDABLE HOUSING `� V) AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND THE OFFICE OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY F— " DEVELOPMENT (OHCD) . eZ • LEHUA VILLAGE 2 WOULD BE SITUATED ON PARCEL 10 (7. 185 ACRES OF LAND) WITH LOT U SIZES RANGING FROM 10,000 SQUARE FEET TO 33,000 SQUARE FEET. THESE 20 LOTS WILL BE OFFERED FOR SALE AT MARKET RATES. 0_ 0_ • • • APPLICANT'S REQUEST • A CHANGE OF ZONE 'FROM SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL-10,000 SQUARE FEET (RS-10) TO SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL-15,000 SQUARE FEET (RS-15) FOR 14.322 ACRES OF LAND. ■ ADDITIONALLY, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR THE FOLLOWING EXEMPTIONS TO THE ZONING AND SUBDIVISION CODES IN ORDER TO FACILITATE THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 40-LOT SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION ACROSS TWO SEPARATE PROPERTIES: W EXCEPTIONS REQUESTED FROM ZONING CODE (HCC CHAPTER 25) • MINIMUM STREET FRONTAGE (HCC §25-4-30). REQUEST TO WAIVE REQUIREMENTS THAT CERTAIN PROPOSED LOTS WILL HAVE ROADWAY FRONTAGES OF LESS THAN 50% OF THE REQUIRED MINIMUM Z a BUILDING SITE AVERAGE WIDTH OF 38 FEET BASED ON REQUESTED RS-15 ZONING DISTRICT. ADDITIONALLY, ONLY ONE LOT (VILLAGE 2, LOT 5) WILL NOT HAVE ANY ROADWAY FRONTAGE NOR ACCESS POLE AND WILL BE ACCESSED VIA A ROADWAY EASEMENT DUE TO STEEP TOPOGRAPHY THAT WOULD MAKE IT TOO DIFFICULT TO EXTEND THE ROAD LOT FOR SAKE OF A SINGLE PARCEL. • MINIMUM BUILDING SITE AREA; MINIMUM AVERAGE WIDTH (HCC §25-4-31). REQUEST TO WAIVE MINIMUM BUILDING SITE AREA REQUIREMENTS TO ALLOW A MINIMUM BUILDING SITE AREA OF 10,000 ` SQUARE FEET WITHIN THE PROPOSED RS-15 ZONING DISTRICT. ADDITIONALLY, REQUEST TO ALLOW THE MINIMUM BUILDING SITE AREA AVERAGE WIDTH TO BE 60 FEET INSTEAD OF THE 75 FEET REQUIRED WITHIN .,•. THE PROPOSED RS-15 ZONING DISTRICT. APPLICANT'S REQUEST (CONT.) • EXCEPTIONS REQUESTED FROM ZONING CODE (HCC CHAPTER 25) (CONT.) • REDUCTION OF BUILDING SITE BELOW MINIMUM AREA (HCC §25-4-32). REQUEST TO REDUCE BUILDING SITES TO NO LESS THAN 10,000 SQUARE FEET IN LIEU OF THE 15,000 SQUARE FEET MINIMUM LOT SIZE I REQUIRED BY THE PROPOSED RS-15 ZONING DISTRICT. W • MINIMUM BUILDING SITE AVERAGE WIDTH (HCC §25-5-6). REQUEST TO ALLOW THE MINIMUM BUILDING SITE AREA AVERAGE WIDTH OF 60 FEET INSTEAD OF THE 75 FEET REQUIRED BY THE PROPOSED RS-15 U W ZONING DISTRICT. • MINIMUM YARDS (HCC §25-5-7). REQUEST TO ALLOW A MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK OF 15 FEET IN LIEU OF THE 20 FEET REQUIRED BY THE PROPOSED RS-15 ZONING DISTRICT. • OTHER REGULATIONS (HCC §25-5-8). REQUEST TO ALLOW FOR A MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK OF . Q 15 FEET FOR ALL LOTS, IRRESPECTIVE OF MINIMUM BUILDING SITE AVERAGE WIDTH OF 60 FEET THAT IS '®U CONSISTENT WITH AN RS-7.5 ZONING DISTRICT. --J EXCEPTIONS REQUESTED FROM SUBDIVISION CODE (HCC CHAPTER 23) r¢�.Q • ACCESS TO LOT FROM STREET (HCC §23-34). REQUEST TO ALLOW FOR ONE LOT (VILLAGE 2, LOT 5) TO NOT HAVE ANY DIRECT ROADWAY FRONTAGE NOR ACCESS POLE, INSTEAD IT IS PROPOSED TO BE ACCESSED VIA A ROADWAY EASEMENT DUE TO STEEP TOPOGRAPHY THAT WOULD MAKE IT TOO DIFFICULT TO EXTEND THE ROAD LOT FOR THE SAKE OF A SINGLE PARCEL. APPLICANT'S REQUEST (CONT.) EXCEPTIONS REQUESTED FROM SUBDIVISION CODE (HCC CHAPTER 23) • ACCESS TO LOT FROM STREET (HCC §23-34). ADDITIONALLY, THE APPLICANT PROPOSES THAT THE VILLAGE 2, LOT 18 POLE WILL ALSO ACCOMMODATE ACCESSES FOR ADJOINING LOTS 19 & 20 VIA A COMMON ACCESS EASEMENT TO MINIMIZE DRIVEWAY CUTS ONTO THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION ROAD. , V) W • MINIMUM RIGHT-OF-WAY AND PAVEMENT WIDTHS (HCC §23-41). THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THE ALLOWANCE OF THE FOLLOWING ROADWAY WIDTHS AND TURN-AROUND RADIUS: `W o MINOR STREET: 40-FOOT-WIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY IN LIEU OF 50 FEET; n o CUL-DE-SACS AND DEAD-END STREETS: 40-FOOT-WIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY IN LIEU OF 50 FEET; & o TURN-AROUND ALTERNATIVE DESIGNS THAT ARE ACCEPTABLE TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, SUCH AS x "HAMMERHEAD" OR SIMILAR TURNAROUNDS THAT HAVE DEPTHS OF AT LEAST 60 FEET WITH CORNER RADIUS OF AT LEAST 30 FEET. • CUL-DE-SACS (HCC §23-48). REQUEST TO ALLOW THE FOLLOWING: o A CUL-DE-SAC ROADWAY WITH A MAXIMUM LENGTH OF NO MORE THAN 1,000 FEET AND SERVING p= NO MORE THAN 20 LOTS RATHER THAN 600 FEET IN LENGTH AND SERVING NO MORE THAN 18 LOTS. ad— ' 3 o TURN-AROUND ALTERNATIVE DESIGNS THAT ARE ACCEPTABLE TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, SUCH AS Qa "HAMMERHEAD" TURNAROUNDS THAT HAVE TURNAROUND DEPTHS OF AT LEAST 60 FEET WITH CORNER RADIUS OF AT LEAST 28 FEET. o ALTERNATIVE TURNING RADII TO NAVIGATE MAILBOX KIOSK PARKING AREA COMBINED WITH TURNAROUND AREA. APPLICANT'S REQUEST (CONT.) EXCEPTIONS REQUESTED FROM SUBDIVISION CODE (HCC CHAPTER 23) (CONT.) ■ GRADES AND CURVES (HCC §23-50). REQUEST TO ALLOW THE FOLLOWING ROADWAY GRADES AND CURVES: = o VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL CURVES OF LESS THAN 300 FEET PROVIDED THAT SUCH CURVES CONFORM , e TO AASHTO MINIMUM STANDARDS. o PROPOSED SUBDIVISION ROADS WILL HAVE MINIMUM RADIUS AS LITTLE AS 80 FEET, BUT AS A DEAD-END rt ; z ROAD WITH NO THROUGH TRAFFIC AND DESIGN SPEED OF 1 5MPH, THIS SHOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE ACCORDING TO THE APPLICANT. o ALLOW FOR A MINOR SUBDIVISION ROAD HAVING MAXIMUM GRADE OF 20 PERCENT TO ACCOMMODATE ANTICIPATED SHORT SECTIONS ALONG THE SUBDIVISION ROAD THAT MAY EXCEED THE A Zpy TYPICAL MAXIMUM 12 PERCENT GRADE. rQlh = " ■ STREET LIGHTS (HCC §23-93). REQUEST TO ALLOW THE USE OF CUSTOM STREET LIGHTS IN LIEU OF THOSE MEETING THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS ON FILE AT THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS. J • STREET NAMES AND TRAFFIC SIGNS (HCC §23-94). REQUEST TO ALLOW THE USE OF CUSTOM STREET ,3. NAME AND TRAFFIC SIGNS IN LIEU OF THE TYPE OF SIGNS PERMITTED BY THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS ON FILE AT THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS. STANDARD SPECIFICATION APPLICANT'S REQUEST (CONT.) a 50' la ' r 10' 5' 10' t 10' 5' 10' 1 ' Shoulder Bike Bike Sho�der ' EXCEPTIONS REQUESTED FROM SUBDIVISION CODE Swale bane _ sane swale (HCC CHAPTER 23) (CONT.) t foo p,� MINOR & CUL—DE—SAC .s_:,.,v • RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPROVEMENT (HCC §23-95). STREETS , -.L1J REQUEST TO ALLOW DESIGN FLEXIBILITY IN THE ° TREATMENT OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY AREAS IN LIEU OF '��s�f `.. 4r.tr_,. �, "' ¢� 0 WHAT IS TYPICALLY REQUIRED BY THE STANDARD : '�,� `' 'v.„ d SPECIFICATIONS ON FILE AT THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC • 1 _Hoy,°ma; ; WORKS. THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION ROAD PROFILE —, WILL CONSIST OF. SECTION . O 40-FOOT-WIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY; 1 I, ,C� , f Q o 20-FOOT-WIDE TRAVEL-WAYS; 40' 1 U o 10-FOOT WIDE GRASSED AND LANDSCAPED My = I SHOULDERS LINED WITH TREES; AND Mop— `4°'°°�°�°' ` l j C-- o No BIKE LANE. fr , ,,, ....„:, ,,,,:. H: .- ‹ , ,, ,, „..,_ . rt.,-(:-.: .' ', 1,... --- -,-:-.-,1 „,..,„„.,,,,„„,, ,-1-- - 111111 !-;:,,Sidi15, , 1 PLAN Private Street 40'Right-of-Way I I I °_ P 3' ]0' PROPOSED EXCEPTIONS REASON FOR THE REQUEST ■ ACCORDING TO THE APPLICANT, THE PURPOSE FOR THE REQUESTED PUD PERMIT IS Q TO PROMOTE THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SINGLE—FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT IS MORE NEIGHBORHOOD FRIENDLY AND CONSISTENT WITH THE RURAL CHARACTER PREVALENT THROUGHOUT THE HONOKA`A TOWN AREA. `. • ANOTHER PRIMARY PURPOSE FOR THE REQUESTED PUD PERMIT IS TO FACILITATE THE DESIGN OF THIS PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY ACROSS TWO SEPARATE PROPERTIES THAT ARE BISECTED ° W BY A MEANDERING PUBLIC ROAD (LEHUA STREET) WITH UNIQUE TOPOGRAPHIC CONDITIONS THAT IS NOT CONDUCIVE TO THE TYPICAL PLATTING OF LOTS THAT YOU WOULD NORMALLY FIND ON SITES WITH MORE MODERATE GRADES AND NOT CONSTRAINED BY AN EXISTING ROAD. v9�z. • FINALLY, BOTH THE DOWNZONING FROM RS-10 TO RS-15 AND PUD WILL ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO DEFRAY INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH TYPICAL SUBDIVISION DESIGN IN U / ORDER TO ENSURE THAT 50% OF THE PROPOSED LOTS WOULD BE OFFERED AT AFFORDABLE RATES TO PROSPECTIVE BUYERS. .: -=a •;�s a� a • IF THE s Qv, ENTITLEMENT REQUESTS ARE APPROVED, THE APPLICANT PLANS TO SUBMIT A SUBDIVISION APPLICATION BY THE END OF 2022, WITH ANTICIPATED COMPLETION OF THE SUBDIVISION FOR BOTH VILLAGES WITHIN FIVE (5) YEARS, BY THE END OF 2027. THE ESTIMATED COST FOR THE TOTAL PROJECT IS $3 MILLION TO $4 MILLION. _ ; COUNTY ZONING MAP ei .----). 1441 ft ' .: °- AtiP 1 11 *III h4.4 It 0 r•••mi a W4* .\.. . iri? i L- URBAN Nati . '• , . 411 C4(1) s.. 4 -,* ' -„,,,- ,...litaoll -- 1 m ,,, iv 11101111111ai wil • .• 714111 Ilit 4 0 . 41111" ft s si .„... i i rili tillet) -4* ...) Z J w - go 1 a 111111,111„„."''%ft%., Ail ,0 llik,TO iftl41%\*..... ibra lb N ill ow 11 * 2 ?;,,,,, .... -LEHuAsi--------„-----/ ..____,. . , ,, ...k.,„„.„ Arifir L___--------- vr-: - air 'r L.. ,$-N4ip Amtinow ,,,,,, „ 4. 4117.11 sat ifilf0AYA leap Olt / PAKALAPAsr ifyofitai 'AV imirke sit A a p •iip I* fift" . ' 4724.4.' ' it* . lipiti * : / // 44$** Art *AllirtriArra p ft • . 4 iikt.A. , , , ..A1 ,..„ ... siot, Asirte...4%44aboo:A \\.. Ldi GENERAL PLAN LUPAG MAP PROJECT iNFORMATiON VILLAGE 2 , ,,,1�II Lehua Villages 182 PROJECT INFORMATION VILLAGE 1 pedeTAX MAP KEY TAO(t3)45024:010 A Planned Unit Development TAX MAP KEY TLo((3)4.0010.135 PARCEL AREA 7165 ACRES Master Plan PARCEL AREA 7.137 ACRES EXISTING COUNTY ZONOtG RS-10 a EXISITNG COUNTY ZONING RS-10 PROPOSED COUNTY 2C3ING RS-1S PROPOSED COUNTY ZONING RS-15 l'Ox4/4 NOTE SFRONT YARD SETBACK REAR YARD SETBACK 205'T ._. SIDE YARD SETBACK iff `a fL€� ' v C f. r------,--, 1 415 11 a 15 '`� ..' t a 18 . 18 19 ,.) 9 6 - 19 -,... -----‘ , - -A-...714.€, _-..L.:• ,4,,„ ,,../NNN.7, / ' . y �1' _ YIILAGE 2 LOT SIZES _VILLAGE 1 LOT SIZES \' •/ - - _ LOT 07 32,917 87 SF LOT 07 15.55946 SF 7 \\ X rj4 LOT 02 15,87040Sf LOT 02 15,441 97 SF \ - LOT 03 15,311 55 SF LOT 03 14,959 61 SF U l a LOT 04 15,354 74 SF LOT 00 12,971.34 Sf /I LOT 05 11,590.51 SF LOT 05 11,264.81 SF , ate. t., ';\�.,,, 2 1 • LOT 06 13,788 53£F . _LOT OB 18,679 67 SF 6 �/ v 1LOT 07 12,650 70 SF LOT 07 -23,396.88 SF r1 }. LOT 08- 10.025 56 Sf LOT 08 -21,303.87 SF LL _._ LOT 09 11.480.37 5E LOT 09 11,551 52 SF CL— \\ '` _ - - - - -- - - LOT 10 10,110.68 SF LOT 10 11,428.05 SF "' ' ./. 3 .. LOT 11 11,886.36 SF LOT 11 -11,57300 SF . / LOT 12 13,331.78 SF LOT 12 71,61673 SF 041/(44 C' i 5 4 LOT 73.. 16299.61 SF LOT 13`.71,079.64 SF = - - LOT 14_10,36934 SF - LOT 14 101380 00 SF +. w.NNcas _' - -- - LOT 15_-.11,942.65SF LOT-15 10,719.48 SF - Aerwcun _ LOT 16 13,639.66 SF LOT 16 12,063 15 SF _ "----—- _1 RO�`� LOT 17 11.405.02 SF LOT 17 :12,518.11 SF ,o o,�W,a�,,t;,,,,,,,.,° ,04,�I.,z�,,,, I{A;r�pi BELTLOT 18 15,585.87 SF LOT 18 12,185-45 SF LOT 19 10,899 79 SF LOT 19 14,751.04 SF LOT 20 12,771.27 SF LOT 20 10,006.15 SF - N 0' 50' 100• mu M am aepcleu a.m. T Ham tb,a,Ha-uu,e () Lchw L'lltagr Par tncn LLC ell l l r� 111��R F S (� P.O-Box 57,Hawa I National Park,Haata't 96715 Date.4.1122 Sheet No- A - 1.1 ' ;. 4t -. *'Rz. e- AFI Nit ), , - . . - , ,.., . . .,, j R _ ,,,.., gyp ,,,. . ,. , , ...P00_,,4 : ,;' .....0*', I. N'n ';' '.', i , ,, f..r '''''AL!.; 1 11; '41; '• ; !'. .1 t . .°�°tel r: ,"..,',,,,f : ' x ' . 1 :e4.,,,, X°W'- Z. uy"y4 pc x a`,' P'- �ne aE'66 '. / 1 " . -; �" A , ) f . ,./.1iiiiifiliiir x t AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS ., ... . •- _ ,-;-Zvt,-•;n/';'-,•;• ::04.-''... ® W'''A.t..,..-,..2,4.r',.4.,.... V ..,..,,,,,,,.',.../t.7.7.1., • ,,,..-,--I-.-i..-'-';• ,:' • . ., ''' ; ,,„ , ,..„ . - . . . .... -... - , , .. . • V)1 , = ,,..„._.„...--. 40..--- < Ce ' MIMI, . . Google Ear • 0 IMMINII, ..-.0." 0 ,- -. ,-. ••. ........ . . ..." ......., :i';.•-;-',';'.'.!‘'., I- 0 0 'hial 01 CL ;II LU I--- 1 .I k VILLAGE 1 VILLAGE 2 1 (/) , . .... , ............., -..., ,,,.... T E X ti _...,..., .... Googl- . lr ...: v.- • Z PLANNING DIRECTOR' S RECOMMENDATION 0 FORWARD A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNTY COUNCIL FOR THE CHANGE OF ZONE REQUESTLll APPROVAL THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT REQUEST o cew o :