HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0884.000 2004-2006
~iY Oe M'•T,
Harry Kim Dixie Kaetsu
Mayor Managing Director
±:~c• Barbara Kossow
ry W4* DepatY Managing Director
County of Hawaii
25 Aupuni Street, Room 215 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720-4252 • (808) 961-9211 • Fax (808) 9616553
KONA: 75-5706 Kuakini Highway, Suite 103 • Kailua-Kona, Hawaii 96740
(808) 329-5226 • Fax (808) 3263663
April 26, 2006
Honorable Stacy Higa, Chairman
and Members of the County Council
County of Hawaii
25 Aupuni Street
Hilo, HI 96720
Dear Chairman Higa and Members:
Change of Zone Application (REZ 05-000023)
Applicant: Big Island Candies, Inc.
Request: RS-10 to CG-20
Tax May Key: 2-2-34:66, 78, 79
As required by Chapter 4, Sec. 6-4.3(C), Hawai'i County Charter, transmitted herewith for the
County Council's consideration and action is the Planning Commission's letter and enclosures
regarding the above-referenced request.
Sincerely,
~~`~~v7Y
Harry Kim
Mayor
IA30906may
Enclosures
cc: Planning Department
Hawaii Count), is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer
Comm. No. 984
Ref. To:
Ref. L'as,;
,~JMtV M M1yy,,
Harry Kim Christopher J. Yuen
Mayor Director
Brad Kurokawa, ASLA
LEED® AP
l'Lountu of ~In~atiii Deputy Director
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720-3043
(808) 961-8288 • FAX (808) 961-8742
April 26, 2006
Stacy Higa, Chairman
and Members of the County Council
County of Hawaii
25 Aupuni Street
Hilo, HI 96720
Dear Chairman Higa and Council Members:
Change of Zone Application (REZ 05-000023)
Applicant: Big Island Candies, Inc.
Request: RS-10 to CG-20
Tax Map Key: 2-2-34:66,78,79
This proposed rezoning ordinance is not consistent with the current Land Use Pattern Allocation
Guide Map for the area, because it requests a CG zone, while the LUPAG map calls for Medium
Density Urban. The CG zoning is necessary because of the manufacturing component of the
project. The Planning Director, who supports the proposed use, has initiated a LUPAG
amendment to turn the subject property into High Density Urban. The rezoning ordinance
contains a proposed condition that the rezoning would become effective only upon the General
Plan amendment being enacted.
After consulting with Corporation Counsel, we take the position that this is a gray area in the
current law and that it would be a safer process if the Council did not enact the proposed rezoning
until the General Plan amendment has passed the Council. Thus, we are suggesting that the
Council not act on this rezoning request until it has acted upon the proposed General Plan
amendment.
Sincerely
CHRISTOPHER J. YUEN
Planning Director
t.bigis'landeandiesrcz05-023pc3
cc: R. Ben Tsukazaki, Esq.
Big Island Candies, Inc.
Department of Public Works
Department of Water Supply
Department of Land and Natural Resources
Rodney Haraga, Director/DOT-Highways, Honolulu
Hawaii County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer.
p
,V Of
County of Hawaii
PLANNING COMMISSION
Aupuni Center • 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720
Phone (808) 961-8288 • Fax (808) 961-8742
April 26, 2006
Stacy Higa, Chairman
and Members of the County Council
County of Hawai `i
25 Aupuni Street
Hilo, HI 96720
Dear Chairman Higa and Council Members:
Change of Zone Application (REZ 05-000023)
Applicant: Big Island Candies, Inc.
Request: RS-10 to CG-20
Tax Map Key: 2-2-34:66, 78, 79
The Planning Commission at its duly held public hearing on March 9, 2006, considered
the above-referenced application for a change of zone from Single Family Residential
10,000 square feet (RS-10) to General Commercial 20,000 square feet (CG-20) for
approximately 45,450 square feet of land north of Kekuanaoa Street, at the northeast
corner of Kekuanaoa Street and Hinano Street and the northwest corner of Kekuanaoa
Street and Laukapu Street, Waiakea House Lots, Waiakea, South Hilo, Hawaii.
Although the Planning Director recommended approval of the application, the
Commission voted to send an unfavorable recommendation to the County Council five
votes to two based on the concerns raised regarding impacts to the community and the
legality of the process. It was raised that the proposed zoning change does not conform
to and is not allowed under the current General Plan designation of medium density and
in order to properly conform with the normal course of Commission procedures, the
General Plan should first be amended to properly process the application. The Planning
Director is initiating a General Plan amendment to High Density Urban for these
properties. However, the rezoning of these properties will not take effect until the
General Plan amendment is adopted. It was also expressed by the Commission that the
General Plan process did not involve the "larger picture" of what the community wants.
We have enclosed a copy of the Planning Director's Background and favorable
Recommendation and the draft bill with amended conditions for your consideration. A
transcript of the hearing, including the applicant's proposed conditions, is also enclosed
for your information.
Hawaii County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer
BBICmWiesRFZ.dm-1 /3/06
COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT
BACKGROUND REPORT
BIG ISLAND CANDIES, INC.
CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (REZ 05-023)
BIG ISLAND CANDIES, INC. has submitted an application for a Change of Zone from
Single-Family Residential 10,000 square feet (RS-10) to General Commercial 20,000 square feet
(CG-20) for approximately 45,450 square feet of land. The properties are located north of
Kekuanaoa Street, at the northeast comer of Kekuanaoa Street and Hinano Street and the
northwest comer of Kekuanaoa Street and Laukapu Street, Waiakea House Lots, Waiakea, South
Hilo, Hawaii, TMK: 2-2-34: 66, 78 & 79.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
1. Request/Project Description: Change of zone from Single-Family Residential 10,000
square feet (RS-10) to General Commercial 20,000 square feet (CG-20) to allow an
additional production/storage facility and related uses. The production/storage facility
will not be open to the public. The applicant proposes to construct an approximately
25,000 - 26,000 square foot two-story structure on parcels 78 and 79. The project site
will be landscaped similar to the landscaping for the existing facility. In addition to the
proposed production/storage facility, the applicant proposes to utilize the remaining
parcel (parcel 66) for an open area for visitors at some time in the future. The operations
of the existing retail/manufacturing facility will not change. There is not expected to be
any significant increase in the number of employees. The applicant hopes to commence
construction by the summer of 2006, with completion by June, 2007. The cost of the
project is approximately $2.5 million. (Exhibit A - Change of Zone application)
2. Reasons for the request: The proposed production/storage facility will provide
additional production capacity and assist in optimizing production efficiency as well as
additional cold storage and warehouse storage space to support the applicant's current
operations and expand the retail line. The applicant has reached the storage capacity limit
in the existing facility and has been renting two bays of off-site warehouse space as well
ATTACH: Coma. 884
Bill 282
as bringing in additional cold storage containers for use during the holiday season. The
proposed expansion would allow the applicant to discontinue these practices and expand
the mail order component of the operations. The proposed open area would serve as a
"rest area" to allow visitors the opportunity to enjoy Big Island Candies' products. The
applicant states that one of the main objectives for the rezoning and the future
landscaping is "to enhance the visual quality of the visitor experience, as well as the
visual character of the surrounding area."
3. Landowner: Allan and Irma Ikawa Revocable Trust
STATE AND COUNTY PLANS
4. State Land Use Designation: Urban.
5. General Plan LUPAG Map: Medium Density Urban. General Commercial (CG) uses
are not permitted in the Medium Density Urban designation. Thus, a General Plan
Amendment from Medium Density Urban to High Density Urban would be required to
allow the proposed uses on the properties. The existing facility is designated Medium
Density Urban. The Planning Director is considering an amendment to the General Plan
land use designation for the affected properties, among others (Exhibit B - Waiakea
Houselots proposed General Plan amendment map dated October 20, 2005). Until
such time that the General Plan amendment is approved by the County Council, the
requested zone change would be inconsistent with the current General Plan LUPAG
designation of Medium Density Urban.
6. County Zoning: RS-10.
7. Hilo Community Development Plan: The Hilo Community Development Plan adopted
by Resolution No. 1 on May 21, 1975 designates this area as RS-10.
8. Coastal Zone Management, HRS, Chapter 205A: The entire State of Hawaii lies
within the Coastal Zone Management area.
9. Special Management Area: The SMA is a part of the Coastal Zone Management
Program regulated by the County. The project site is not proximate to the shoreline and
not located in the SMA.
-2-
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA
10. Subject Properties: The project site comprises three parcels adjacent to the existing Big
Island Candies facility. Parcel 66 is located on the northeast corner of Kekuanaoa Street
and Hinano Street, adjacent to and south of the existing facility. The two existing
residences on parcel 66 are proposed to be demolished. This parcel is proposed for a rest
area for visitors. Parcel 78 is vacant, fronts Laukapu Street, and located immediately
south of the existing facility. Parcel 79, also vacant, is located on the northwest comer of
Kekuanaoa Street and Laukapu Street, immediately south of and adjacent to parcel 78.
Both parcels 78 and 79 were improved with residences at one time, but have been
demolished. The two parcels are currently graded and graveled.
11. Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses: The land uses in the immediate area are a mix of
residential, commercial and industrial uses. Parcel 80, located between parcels 66 and 79
on Kekuanaoa Street, is zoned RS-10 and is the site of The Gospel of Alpha and Omega
Church. Lands to the north of the project area are zoned CG-20, currently the site of the
Big Island Candies factory. Lands to the east and south are zoned RS-10. Parcels to the
west are zoned RS-10 and CN-10.
12. U.S.D.A. Soil Type: Keaukaha extremely stony muck, 6 to 20 percent slopes (rKFD).
The Keaukaha Series consists of well drained, thin organic soils over pahoehoe lava
bedrock.
13. Land Study Bureau's Productivity Rating: Unclassified.
14. Noise Impacts: Existing ambient noise includes airport/aviation use and traffic. Short-
term noise impacts associated with the project are temporary, and all applicable State
rules governing construction noise abatement will be observed. The processing operation
will not generate any noise.
15. Air Quality: The proposed project will not directly impact air quality in the area, as all
operations will occur within an enclosed facility. Fugitive dust during construction can
be mitigated by compliance with the Department of Health's regulations.
16. FIRM: Zone "X", an area outside of the 500-year flood plain.
17. Coastal Hazards: The property is not an oceanfront parcel, and will not affect, or be
-3-
affected by shoreline processes.
18. Recreational Resources: The proposed development will not reduce the size of the
coastline or other areas used for public recreational uses.
19. Scenic Resources: The project will not affect the line-of-sight toward the ocean. The
facility will be designed in a manner similar to the existing facility and as unobtrusive as
possible. Landscaping will be incorporated in a manner similar to the existing facility.
20. Flora/Fauna: No professional surveys were conducted of the site. As the project site
has been improved and located within an urban environment close to commercial,
industrial and residential uses, the applicant does not believe that rare or endangered
floral or faunal resources are on the site.
21. ArchaeologicaUHistorical Resources: No professional surveys were conducted of the
site, due to the history of extensive disturbance.
22. Cultural or Native Gathering Rights: 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.
23. Public Access: There is no record of a designated public access to the shoreline or
mountain areas that traverses the properties.
24. Traffic: The applicant states that according to an updated Traffic Impact Analysis
Report (TIAR) prepared in conjunction with the 1996 FEIS, "the proposed improvements
on the Big Island Candies site are not expected to generate additional trips when
completed."
PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES
25. Access: Parcel 66 will utilize the existing driveways on Kekuanaoa Street. The site plan
shows that Parcels 78 and 79 will take access from Laukapu Street as well as the existing
driveways on Parcel 67.
26. Water: Water is available to the project area.
27. Wastewater: Existing sewer lines will have sufficient capacity to accommodate the
project.
28. Solid Waste: A Solid Waste Management Plan has been prepared in compliance with
-4-
Condition H of Ordinance No. 97 92. Solid waste generated by the project will be
incorporated into the existing process established for solid waste disposal.
29. Essential Utilities and Services: Electricity and telephone services are available to the
site. County fire stations, police and emergency medical services are available to the
property.
AGENCIES' AND ORGANIZATIONS' COMMENTS
30. Department of Public Works: Exhibit C - December 28, 2005 memo
31. Department of Environmental Management: Exhibit D - November 16, 2005 memo
32. Police Department: Exhibit E - November 23, 2005 memo
33. Fire Department: Exhibit F - November 30, 2005 memo
34. Civil Defense Agency: Exhibit G - December 9, 2005 memo
35. Department of Health: Exhibit H - December 1, 2005 memo
AGENCIES - NO RESPONSE
36. Department of Water Supply, DLNR Land and Historic Preservation Division
PUBLIC COMMENTS
37. Exhibit I - October 28, 2005 letter from Debra A. Weeks.
-5-
APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONE
BIG ISLAND CANDIES, INC. -
Tax Map Key: (3) 2-2-034: 066, 078 & 079
Waiakea, South Hilo District,
Island, County & State of Hawaii
Applicant:
Big Island Candies, Inc.
585 Hinano Street
Hilo, Hawal'i 96720
Agent:
R Ben Tsukazaki
Tsukazaki Yeh & Moore
85 West Lanikaula Street
Hilo, Hawaii 96720
September 2005
EXHIBIT
A
Big Island Candies, Inc. Appiicadon for Change of Zone
CONTENTS
Application for Change of Zone:
Change of Zone Application
Departmental Questionnaire
Project Summary
Big Island Candies, Inc Application for Change of Zone
APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONE
Change of Zone Application Form
CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION
COUNTY OF HAWAII
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
(Type or legibly print the requested information)
APPLICANT: B' Island Candies, Inc.
APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE: DATE:_
ADDRESS: 585 Hinano Street
Hilo. HI 96720
LIST APPLICANT'S INTEREST IF NOT OWNER: Lessee
LIST PRINCIPAL(S) INCLUDING NAMES OF MAIN OFFICERS: President: Allan Ikawa
PHONE: (Bus. (809) 961- 2199 (Res.) NIA (Fax)(808) 961-6941
LANDOWNER(S): All & Irma I wa Revocable Trust
LANDOWNER SIGNATURE(S): DATE: --MK
(May be by letter)
LANDOWNER(S) ADDRESS: 585 Hinano Street
Hilo. 11196720
REQUEST: RS-10 TO CG-20
(Existing zoning) (Proposed zoning)
TAX MAP KEY: f3)2-2-034:066,078&079
STREET ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 1) 066: 655 Kekuanaoa St.: Hilo. HI 96720: 2) 078:
596 Laukagu St.: Hilo. HI 96720: and 3) 079: 673 Kekuanaoa St.: Hilo. HI 96720
SIZE OF PROPERTY OR AFFECTED AREA(S) TO BE REZONED: 45,450 square feet
AGENT: R. Ben Tsukazaki
ADDRESS:. 85 W. Lanikaula Street
Hilo. HI 96720
TELEPHONE: (Bus.) (908) 961- 0055 (Res.) N/A (Fax) (908) 969-1531
Please indicate to whom original correspondence and copies should be sent.
ORIGINAL: R. Ben Tsukazaki COPIES: Big Island Candies. Inc.
Big Island Candies, Inc. Applicadon for Change of Zone
APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONE
Departmental Zoning Questionnaire
ATTACHMENT
Commercial, RM, Resort, & Industrial
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
COUNTY OF HAWAII
APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONE
1. If your request is approved, do you intend to subdivide
The subject land in accordance with the approved change
Of zone? NO
If yes, please answer the rest of question 1 and then to
Question 3.
a. How many acres of the requested area do you intend
to subdivide?
b. Into what lot sizes?
c. If your request is approved, approximately how long
after the date of approval do you expect to submit
your subdivision plans to the Planning Department
for preliminary approval?
If you intend to subdivide, please submit a preliminary
schematic subdivision plan together with your change of
zone application form.
2. If you have no firm plans of subdividing the subject area,
Do you intend to:
a. Sell or lease the land to someone who has firm
plans? NO
b. Sell or lease the land to someone who has tentative
plans? NO
C. Sell or lease the land to someone who has no plans? NO
d. Keep it? Y8s
e. Other (please state)
Applicant seeks a change of zone in order to expand its current
facilities.
j
F
f
f. If you intend to do either a, b, or c, please elaborate
on the kind of plans the other party has. Please, also,
include in your answer approximately how soon after
approval of your rezoning do you expect to transfer the
subject land to another party.
3. What specific building plans do you have for the subject land?
Include in your answer the following: type of building
(apartment, office, launderette, etc.); financing arrangement;
Timetable for construction; and any other information which you
Feel might help us in evaluating your request.
The Applicant proposes to construct a two-story warehouse facility
approximately 25,000 - 26,000 square feet in area on TNRs: (3) 2-2-
.034: 078 & 079. The Project also involves the demolition of two
existing residences on TMK: (3) 2-2-034: 066 at some point in the
future and installation of extensive landscaping and accessory uses
(e.g., a rest area for visitors to enjoy BIC products). The
Applicant plans to utilize conventional (bank) financing.
Construction is expected to begin in the summer of 2006 and be
completed by June 2007, in time for preparation for the 2007 holiday
season. However, commencement of construction is dependent on the
securing of the change of zone and proper permits.
4. Have you performed any study which would demonstrate a need for
your proposed building and/or development? NO
If so, please elaborate on your findings in the space provided
below.
No external study has been commissioned. However, the Applicant has
reached the storage capacity limit in the existing facility and has
been renting two bays of off-site warehouse space as well as bringing
in additional cold storage containers for use during the holiday
season. The proposed expansion would allow the Applicant to
discontinue these practices and expand the mail order component of
BIC's business operations.
5. Have you performed any study which discusses the
environmental impacts your request would have on the
surrounding area and/or the County? NO
If so, please elaborate on your findings in the space
provided below.
Aside from an update of the Traffic Impact Analysis Report, studies
were not conducted in relation to the subject request. However, in
1996, a Final Environmental Impact Statement (%FEIS°) was prepared
pursuant to Chapter 343, Hawaii Revised Statutes, in connection with
the General Plan amendment and rezoning for adjacent properties upon
which the existing retail/manufacturing facility is located. A
considerable amount of the information, assumptions, and assessment
in the FEIS are applicable to this proposed expansion.
6. Are there any buildings on the subject area? YES
If so, what-kind?
Two residential dwellings are located on parcel 066.
What do you intend to do with those buildings if your
request is approved?
At some point in the future, the two residential dwellings would be
replaced by landscaping and/or accessory uses.
7. Is the subject land currently being used for any
agricultural activity? NO
If so, please list the kinds of products grown on and
how many square feet or acres of land per product?
B. To your knowledge, has there been any flooding and/or
drainage problem on the subject area? NO
If so, please describe the problem.
9. Do you think that the roads leading to the subject area
need improvement? NO
If so, what kind?
Extensive improvements were completed in conjunction with the
rezoning for the existing facility in 1997. The proposed uses are
not expected to generate additional visitor traffic beyond that which
is generated by the existing facility.
10. What sort of governmental assistance and/or improvements
do you feel will be needed in the subject area when
developed?
yes no
a. Schools X
b. Roads X
C. Sewer X
d. Drainage X
e. Fire Protection X
f. Police Protection X
g. Recreational Facilities X
For those checked "yes," please elaborate what type or kinds of
Improvements and/or assistance are needed.
11. Have you performed any historic sites study and/or survey of the
subject area? If so, what were the results? Please, also,
submit a copy of the study together with this change of zone
supplement.
A historic sites study/survey was not conducted due to the extensive
and complete prior disturbance of all three parcels in connection
with past residential use.
Signature: G'
585 Hinano Street
Address : Hilo, Hawaii 96720
Telephone: 9611-(2199
Date: e)bnk
Big Island Candies, Inc. Application for Change of Zone
APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONE
Project Summary
Big Island Candies, Inc. Application for Change of Zone
Project Summary -
1. Introduction
The Applicant, Big Island Candies, Inc. (`BIC" or "Applicant"), requests a change of zone for
three parcels, totaling approximately 45,450 square feet from the Residential - 10,000 square
foot ("RS-10") zoning district to the General Commercial - 20,000 square blot ("CG-20")
zoning district to allow an additional production/storage facility and related uses. All three of the
parcels are adjacent to BIC's existing facility. The requested change of zone would allow the
Applicant to construct the production/storage facility which will provide additional production
capabilities as well as cold and warehouse storage space for raw materials and finished products.
In addition to the proposed production/storage facility, at some point in the future, the Applicant
proposes to utilize one of the parcels for an open area with extensive landscaping and related
uses.
The proposed production/storage facility and future landscaped area ("Project") may also require
a General Plan amendment from its current designation of Medium Density Urban to High
Density Urban.
BIC relocated to its current location in 1998 after a General Plan amendment and a rezoning of
seven (7) parcels (TMK Nos.: (3) 2-2-034:067, 068, 069, 076, 077, 104 and 106) from RS-10 to
CG-10 in 1997. Subsequently, six (6) of those parcels were consolidated into parcel 067, which
is the site of the existing facility. An Environmental Impact Statement (Final Environmental
Impact Statement; Big Island Candies Retail and Production Facility; "FEIS") was prepared in
accordance with Chapter 343, Hawaii Revised Statutes, and Chapter 11-200 of the Hawaii
Administrative Rules in connection with the General Plan amendment and subsequent rezoning
for the parcels, which are adjacent to the Project Site. A considerable amount of the information,
assumptions, and assessment in the FEIS are applicable to the proposed Project. Such FEIS is
available in the Planning Department's files. Additional copies can be made available upon
request. Rezoning Ordinance No. 97-92 is attached as Exhibit No. 1, which rezoned the property
from RS-10 to CG-20. Ordinance No. 97-64, amending the General Plan designation from Low
Density Urban to High Density Urban, is also attached as Exhibit No. 2.
This project summary is intended to provide an overview of the proposed Project, change of zone
request and conformance to State and County plans, policies and controls.
2. Project Location
BIC's existing facility is strategically located on Hinano Street, with roadway frontage on two
sides via Hinano Street and Laukapu Street. The parcels which are the subject of this rezoning
application are adjacent to the existing facility. One parcel is at the northeast corner of the
Hinano/Kekuanaoa Street intersection and the other two parcels are located at the northwest
comer of the Laukapu/Kekuanaoa Street intersection. A Location Map is attached as Figure 1.
The three parcels together total approximately 45,450 square feet, and are more specifically
1
Z II
v
L
7
b0
0
0 2 LS 11 1/N V7
c <
~ W
° N
1 s
WO/N V7/37
li/ 2
4 ~ N C
a
!s YO YN Yn Y3X Q
> C
< F L
N N N N Z
< O
15 /NY7YON
O W Y O
O O S{
W W 2 < 2 2< lO
< O t Y < C~.? ~ ~
3 G
15 /NY7l/d Q
LIL
o O
2 t O <
W 2 d
O
F-1 R YER .
o" V 3
is v.xrnv Of f z
3AY YN3NY N w y
o ° V
r W
V
LL
J
ca
G
r vx:i ~ mu 'w rN W .Y nx ~ mt'w .r. vm bM~ r~W~+.-w o~w w+~ r+ti - x~mn~-..n.w.n. r.n
Big Island Candies, Inc. Application for Change of Zone
identified as TMK Nos.: (3) 2-2-034:066,078 and 079. The Sites are located over 3,000 feet
inland from Hilo Bay and are not situated within the Special Management Area. The elevation
of the Project Site is approximately 20 feet above mean sea level. Access to the Sites would be
via the existing accesses off of Hinano Street and Laukapu Street.
3. Description of Proposed Development
The existing BIC facility is located just off of Kekuanaoa Street, which is a main thoroughfare to
Hilo. International Airport. The proposed production/storage facility would provide additional
production capacity and assist in optimizing production efficiency as well as provide additional
cold storage and warehouse storage space to support BIC's current operations and expand the
retail line. Additionally, the proposed production/storage facility will eliminate the need to rent
out additional warehouse. storage space. The Applicant currently rents two bays from a
warehouse facility located on Kdku uma Street.
The production/storage facility as proposed will be a two-story structure with a production area
and cold storage on the ground floor and warehouse space on the second floor. The structure
will be approximately 25,000 - 26,000 square feet in area The Project Site will be landscaped in
a manner very much in keeping with the landscaping for the existing facility and is not expected
to significantly impact view planes. It is the Applicant's desire to create a model operation
where the facilities blend in with the surrounding environment.
In addition to the proposed production/storage facility, the Applicant also wishes to rezone
TMK: (3) 2-2-034: 066. This parcel presently has two residences located on it. At some point in
the future, the Applicant hopes to replace the residences with an open area and utilize the parcel
for extensive landscaping and accessory uses. The Applicant feels that this comer parcel sets the
"mood" for the visitor's experience at Big Island Candies and, as such, envisions a possible
landscaped open rest area where visitors can relax and experience a peaceful environment while
enjoying Big Island Candies' products. One of the main objectives for the rezoning of this
parcel and the subsequent future landscaping is to enhance the visual quality of the visitor
experience, as well as the visual character of the surrounding areas, which are located on a main
thoroughfare to and from Hilo International Airport.
The operations of the existing retail/manufacturing facility will not change. There is not
expected to be any significant increase in the number of employees as the purpose of the Project
is primarily to add production capacity, storage and freezer space. The Applicant plans to move
some of the current employees to the proposed productiontstorage facility and does not anticipate
the need to hire a large number of new employees. The proposed uses are not expected to
generate additional visitor traffic beyond that which is generated by the existing facility. The
proposed production/storage facility will not be open to the public.
Construction is anticipated to begin as soon as the permitting process has been completed.
IdeAlly, the Applicant wishes to commence construction by the summer of 2006, with
completion by June 2007 in order to prepare for the 2007 holiday season. However, the actual
development schedule will depend on the timing of the permits and approvals. The estimated
cost of the production/storage facility stands at approximately $2.5 million.
2
Big Island Candies, Ina Application for Change of Zone
4. Environmental Setting
4.1 Physical Characteristics
4.1.1 Climate
The elevation of the Site is approximately 20 feet above mean sea level. Located on the
windward side of the Big Island, the mean annual rainfall is about 136 inches. Generally, the
wet months occur from October through April. The mean annual temperature is about 73
degrees Fahrenheit. Wind patterns are diurnal with dominant easterly tradewinds prevailing
during the day and cooler westerly winds sweeping down the slopes of Mauna Loa and Mauna
Kea in the evening.
4.1.2 Topography and Soils
The topography of the-Site is relatively flat. The Soil Survey Report classifies the soil as
Keaukaha Series (rKFD), which is extremely rocky muck, well-drained, thin (less than 1 foot)
organic soils overlying pahoehoe lava bedrock. Runoff is medium, erosion hazard slight, and
shrink-swell potential high. Although these soils are usually moist, when dried they have a high
shrinkage but low swelling potential.
4.13 Natural Hazards
Flood and Coastal Hazards:
The Flood Insurance Rate Map ("FIRM") designation of the Project Site is Zone "X", which
means that it is outside the 500-year flood plain. The Site is also outside the Civil Defense
Tsunami Evacuation Zone.
Volcanic and Earthquake Hazards:
The United States Geologic Survey ("USGS") classifies the area as Lava Flow Hazard Zone 3,
on a scale of ascending risk, 9 being the lowest risk and 1 being the highest. The Building Code
designates the entire Island of Hawai'i in Earthquake Zone 3 and contains certain structural
requirements to address the relative seismic hazards.
4.1.4 Flora and Fauna
The Project Site has previously been used for residential purposes. There are two residences
located on TMK No.: (3) 2-2-034:066. The yards consist of grassed lawns and some
landscaping. The parcel has been extensively disturbed and the only vegetation on the Site
appears to be made up of introduced species. TMK Nos.: (3) 2-2-034:078 and 079 each had
residences on them at one time. However, these residences were demolished at some point, and
the two parcels are currently graded and graveled. There are no structures on either parcel. Due
to the history of extensive and complete disturbance, it is highly unlikely that the parcels contain
3
Big Island Candies, Inc. Application for Change of Zone
any habitat for any federally or State listed, candidate or proposed threatened or endangered
plant species.
4.1.5 Archaeological, Cultural and Historic Resources
Again, due to the history of extensive and complete disturbance, the existence of any surface or
subsurface archaeological remains is extremely unlikely. The existing structures on parcel 066
are not historically significant.
4.1.6 Water Resources
There are no streams or watercourses located on or near the Project Site. The Hilo area is
underlain by basal groundwater. The nearest stream is the Wailoa River, located approximately
1,800 feet from the Project Site. The proposed production/storage facility is not expected to
significantly impact water resources.
4.1.7 Air Quality and Noise
All operations will occur within an enclosed facility. The processing operation will not generate
any noise or offensive odor, although there may be some increased baking aroma. The proposed
Project will not have any significant impacts to air quality.
Because of the Site's proximity to a major roadway (Kekuanaoa Street), the ambient noise level
from the traffic is quite high (equals or exceeds 65 Ld„ The Site is also subject to aircraft noise
due to its proximity to the airport. The average day/night noise level from aircraft in the vicinity
of the Site is approximately 60". Additionally, the noise generated by visitor traffic, especially
buses, will not be increased as the proposed production/storage facility will not be open to the
public and should have no impact on the number of visitors to the existing facility. It is
important to note that since BIC relocated its facility to the current location in 1996, there have
not been any noise complaints from any of the surrounding residents.
During the holiday season, it has been the Applicant's practice to rent freezer containers and
place them on parcels 078 and 079 in order to provide additional cold storage space. Applicant
has, at times, been concerned over the noise level of the freezer components and any potential
impacts upon surrounding residents. The proposed production/storage facility would eliminate
the need for the cold storage containers and thus also eliminate any potential impacts that might
be felt by the surrounding residents.
During the construction of the proposed production/storage facility, residents in the vicinity will
be temporarily exposed to increased noise levels. The contractor will comply with the
Department of Health's requirements pertaining to construction activities.
4.1:8 Scenic Resources
Currently, parcels 078 and 079 are maintained as a graded and graveled expanse with no
landscaping whatsoever. The proposed production/storage facility will be designed in a manner
4
Big Island Candies, Inc. Application for Change of Zone
that is very much in keeping with the existing facility and as unobtrusive as possible. It will also
incorporate landscaping very similar to that of the existing facility, thereby significantly
improving the scenic quality of the area.
At some point in the future, the Applicant wishes to replace the existing residences located on
parcel 066 with an open area and utilize the parcel for extensive landscaping and accessory uses.
One of the main objectives for the rezoning of this parcel and the subsequent future landscaping
is to enhance the visual quality of the visitor experience, as well as the visual character of the
surrounding neighborhood, which is located on a main thoroughfare to and from Hilo
International Airport.
4.2 Socio-Economic Characteristics
4.2.1 Social Impacts
In 1992, the County of Hawaii redesignated approximately 280 lots in the Waiakea Houselots
area bounded by Hualani-Mililani-Lanikaula-Kalanikoa Streets from Medium Density Urban and
Industrial to Low Density Urban. Apparently, this was in response to concerns of long time
residents of the area who were elderly and desired to live out their remaining years in peace. The
Waiakea Houselots were created as homesteads by the Territory of Hawaii in the early 1900s.
Most of the existing single-family dwellings average about 40 - 50 years of age.
In recognition of the transitional nature of the Waiakea Houselots area, due to its proximity to
the airport and the industrial/commercial areas off of Kanoelehua Avenue, the County had
designated the area as Medium Density Urban since 1971. The current mix of residential and
non-residential uses resulted from this past policy. Besides the increasing number of non-
residential uses, the diminishing number of owner-occupants is another indication of the
maturing and changing character of this area. During the most recent General Plan review, the
subject properties were redesignated as Medium Density Urban.
The Applicant has met with representatives of the Waiakea Houselots Upper Association kumiai
and provided information regarding the Project. The Applicant's proposal was well received by
the kumiai representatives and members in attendance. One attendee noted that since BIC
moved into the neighborhood, it is cleaner and safer than it was before. There have not been any
complaints known to the Applicant regarding the existing operations for any reason. The
proposed production/storage facility will be enclosed and will not generate any foul industrial-
type smells. Likewise, the future landscaped area is not expected to have any adverse impacts on
air quality and/or noise in the area. The proposed facility will be designed to fit in with the
existing facility and the surrounding areas with extensive landscaping. There is not expected to
be any significant increase in traffic due to the proposed Project beyond what is already
generated by the existing facility. The operation of the existing retail/manufacturing facility will
not change and there is not expected to be any significant increase in the number of employees as
the purpose of the proposed production/storage facility is to provide much needed storage space
for raw materials and finished products; additional production capacity; and logistical support for
the Applicant's growing mail order business. The schedule of deliveries of materials is not
expected to increase and may even decrease due to the additional storage space that the proposed
5
Big Island Candies, Inc. Application for Change of Zone
facility will provide. Presumably, the deliveries will be larger due to the additional cold and
warehouse storage capacity and more frequent deliveries will not be necessary.
4.3 Public Facilities, Utilities and Services
4.3.1 Roads and Traffic
The Traffic Impact Analysis Report ("TZAR") that was prepared in conjunction with the
preparation of the 1996 HIS was updated in order to reflect current traffic conditions. The
findings of the updated TZAR are summarized below.
The proposed production facility will be located on the adjacent parcels identified as TMK (3)2-
2-034: 078 & 079. The production/storage facility is expected to be completed by the summer of
2007. The proposed production facility will house space for storage, chilling/freezing,
maintenance and other related production activities. Some of these activities would be relocated
from the existing structure. The number of customers visiting and employees working at the site
is not expected to increase due to the Project, and the retail sales hours will remain unchanged.
Therefore, the construction of the proposed facility will not affect the current customer and
employee traffic levels.
Traffic turning movement counts were taken at two study intersections on Wednesday and
Thursday, July 6 and 7, 2005, during the morning (6:30-8:30 A.M.), mid-day (10:00 A.M.-12:00
P.M.) and afternoon peak periods (3:30-5:30 P.M.). The two study intersections were
Hinano/Kekuanaoa Streets and Laukapu/Kekuanaoa Streets. The morning counts correspond to
the period during which Big Island Candies employees arrive at work before the store opens.
The mid-day period corresponds to a peak traffic period and a busy customer period. The last
customers and employees leave the site during the afternoon period.
Traffic volumes on Kekuanaoa Street are highest during the mid-day and afternoon peak hours,
with slightly higher volumes during the latter period. Traffic volumes on the southbound
approach of Hinano Street were also at their highest during these two periods, with traffic
volumes in the 150 vehicle/hour ("vph") range. The traffic volumes on the northbound approach
of Hinano Street and both approaches of Laukapu Street can be characterized as "light". The
traffic counters reported occasional traffic queues on Kekuanaoa Street backing up from the
Manono Street traffic signal during the morning peak period, and a five car queue on the
southbound approach of Hinano Street in the afternoon peak. They did not report traffic queues
on other study intersection approaches.
The traffic counts taken were compared to the traffic counts that were taken at the same study
intersections in 1996 for the Big Island Candies Relocation Traffic Impact Analysis Report,
Through traffic volumes on Kekuanaoa Street have increased in all three periods by up to 150
vph in one direction. The traffic volumes on the southbound approach of Hinano Street have
increased by 85 vph in the mid-day and by 65 vph in the afternoon peak hours. This increase in
traffic cannot be completely attributed to Big Island Candies, as other major traffic generators
are located on Hinano Street. These other major traffic generators include a credit union and a
restaurant. Big Island Candies officials estimate that on average, their customers add 20 vph
6
i
Big Island Candies, Inc. Application for Change of Zone
onto Hinano Street during the mid-day peak hour and 14 vph during the afternoon peak hour.
Some of these customers may travel north and not use the southbound approach at Kekuanaoa
Street.
Additional information provided by the State Department of Transportation's ("DOT") metered
traffic counting stations indicate a no or low traffic growth rate forecast for Kekuanaoa Street,
which would continue into the future unless major development occurs in the area. Analysis of
DOT's data also indicates that most of the traffic growth on Kekuanaoa Street occurred before
the year 2000.
The concept of level of service ("LOS") is used to quantify the quality of traffic flow on roadway
facilities. The two study intersection on Kekuanaoa Street are unsignalized. LOS A to E are
considered acceptable for unsignalized intersections. LOS F conditions could be tolerated if the
delays are not much higher than 60 seconds, traffic queues are short and there are no reasonable
mitigating measures available. Declining LOS could be caused by traffic increases on the minor
street, traffic increases on the major street or a combination-of both. It is possible for a minor
street with no increases in traffic to experience a decline in LOS as the traffic volumes on the
major street increase.
LOS are C or better during the morning peak hours when traffic volumes are lowest, indicating
desirable traffic conditions. However, LOS D, E and F were calculated for the Hinano Street and
Laukapu Street approaches during the mid-day and afternoon peak hours when traffic volumes
on Kekuanaoa Street are highest. LOS F was calculated for the southbound approach of Hinano
Street during the mid-day and afternoon peak hours. These calculations do not fully correspond
with the observations of the traffic counters who reported traffic queues on this approach during
the afternoon peak period, but did not see any queues in the mid-day period. Big Island Candies
officials said that the tour bus operators who regularly use the intersection have not reported any
problems with traffic congestion. For these reasons, the southbound approach of Hinano Street
is thought to be operating at LOS E rather than LOS F during the mid-day period, implying
acceptable traffic operations. The approach is operating at LOS F during the afternoon peak
period; however, the average delays are just above the threshold for LOS F and below 60
seconds.
Customers and employees of Big Island Candies are not the only contributors to traffic on this
approach. They have contributed to only a portion of the traffic increase experienced at this
intersection.
In conclusion, the TIAR states that the "proposed improvements on the Big Island Candies site
are not expected to generate additional trips when completed. Traffic on Kekuanaoa Street has
been stable for many years and is expected to remain the same for the next several years,.
Therefore, the current traffic conditions at the two study intersections of Hinano Street and
Laukapu Street are expected to remain the same, although the southbound approach of Hinano
Street is at level of service F in the afternoon peak, the conditions are tolerable and no mitigating
actions are required."
7
Big Island Candies, Inc. Application for Change of Zone
4.3.2 Water System
County water service is available via 6-inch water mains along Hinano and Laukapu Streets.
Currently, the existing facility is served by lateral service lines which were installed to connect
the existing facility to the County of Hawaii Department of Water Supply's ("DWS") 6-inch
water main running parallel to the property line on Hinano Street. DWS also has a water main
which runs parallel to the property line on Laukapu Street.
Based on DWS' Water System Standards Domestic Consumption Guidelines, the average daily
demand for commercial operations is 3,000 gallons/acre. The Project Area is approximately
45,450 square feet, or 1.04 acres, which would equal an average daily demand of approximately
3,130.7 gallons/day. Based on these numbers, the maximum daily demand would be
approximately 4,695.25 gallons/day and the peak hour demand would be approximately
15,650.85 gallons/day. The fire flow demand requirements are 2,000 gallons/minute for 2 hours,
or 240,000 gallons. The Applicant plans to install a fire sprinkler system in the proposed
production/storage facility.
4.3.3 Wastewater System
There are 8-inch diameter sewer mains along Hinano and Laukapu Streets. Both lines connect to
a 10-inch diameter collector along Kekuanaoa Street. All three lines are gravity-flow, The
existing facility is connected to the sewer main along Hinano Street by three lateral service lines
and along Laukapu Street by four lateral service lines.
The estimated average daily wastewater flow, based on 95 employees (at 35
gallons/day/person/shift) and 650 visitors (at 5 gallons/person/day) is approximately 6,575
gallons/day. The existing sewer lines have sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed
Project.
4.3.4 Drainage System
The proposed Project is expected to generate some increase in runoff. However, all runoff will
be disposed of onsite via drain inlets connecting to the existing storm drain system.
43.5 Electrical and Telephone Service
Electricity and telephone service is available to the Site via overhead lines on Hinano and
Laukapu Streets.
4.3.6 Police and Fire Protection
The Site is located within the service area of the County Fire Department's headquarters on
Kirioole Street as well as the 24-hour substation at Waiakea, and supported by additional
substations at Kawailani Street and Kaumana Drive. The police headquarters is located nearby
on Kapiolani Street, approximately 2 miles from the Site. The Applicant also employs the
8
Big Island Candies, Inc. Application for Change of Zone
services of Aloha Security, Inc., which patrols the existing facility at various times throughout
the evening hours.
4.3.7 Solid Waste
In compliance with Condition H of Ordinance No. 97-92, a Solid Waste Management Plan
(`SWMP") was prepared and filed with the County of Hawaii Department of Public Works on
July 25, 1997. The SWMP classifies the Applicant's solid waste as having three categories
which are as follows:
• Edible Solid Waste: includes food products that do not necessarily conform to the
Applicant's strict quality standards regarding appearance, taste, size, shape, etc.
The products that are not deemed suitable for packaging are sorted and donated to
the Hawaii Island Food Bank. The management and staff of Big Island Candies
are committed to non-waste of edible products. The Food Bank comes to the
existing facility once per week to collect available food stuffs for distribution to
the community.
• Non-Edible Solid Waste: includes solid waste items that are recyclable. These
items are carefully sorted out of the waste stream and stored in bins for pickup
and processing by Pacific Waste, Inc_
• Non-Recyclable Solid Waste: includes solid waste items that are not edible or
recyclable. These items are also stored in bins for pickup and disposal by Pacific
Waste, Inc.
Solid waste generated by the proposed Project will be incorporated into the existing process that
has been established for solid waste disposal.
5. Relationship to Plans, Policies and Controls
5.1 State Land Use Law
The State Land Use District Classification for the Property is Urban. Therefore, no district
reclassification would be necessary to accommodate the proposed production/storage facility.
5.2 Hawaii County General Plan
The site of the Applicant's existing facility is designated as "High Density Urban" ("High
Density") on the current General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide ("LUPAG") map.
However, the adjacent proposed Project Site's designation is "Medium Density Urban."
("Medium Density"). This Medium Density designation is intended for village and
neighborhood commercial and single-family and multi-family residential and related functions.
Because the proposed Project contains a manufacturing component, it does not fit the description
of village or neighborhood commercial, and thus it requires a High Density designation. The
High Density designation is intended for commercial, multiple residential and related services.
9
Big Island Candies, Inc. Application for Change of Zone
It is possible to view the subject properties as a part of a High density designation, especially
because of the integration of the proposed Project as part of the Applicant's overall operation on
the subject contiguous areas. It is also the Applicant's plan to consolidate the subject parcels
into the Site of the existing facility.
The proposed rezoning conforms with the following goals, policies and standards of the
Economic and Land Use Elements of the General Plan.
Economic Element:
Goals
(a) Provide residents with opportunities to improve their quality of life through economic
development that enhances the County's natural and social environments.
(c) Strive for diversity and stability in the economic system.
(d) Provide an economic environment that allows new, expanded, or improved economic
opportunities that are compatible with the County's cultural, natural and social
environment.
(e) Strive for an economic climate that provides its residents an opportunity for the choice of
. occupation.
(f) Strive for diversification of the economy by strengthening existing industries and
attracting new endeavors.
Policies
(c) Encourage the development of a visitor industry that is in harmony with the social,
physical, and economic goals of the residents of the County.
(o) Promote a distinctive identity for the island of Hawaii to enable government, business
and travel industries to promote the County of Hawaii as an entity unique within the State
of Hawaii.
(p) Identify the needs of the business community and take actions that are necessary to
improve the business climate.
Discussion:
The proposed rezoning furthers the County's goals of providing an economic environment which
allows new or existing businesses, such as BIC, to expand and diversify the County's economic
base, and thereby also increase the choice of occupations. The low-scale design of the proposed
production/storage facility and use of extensive landscaping for both the proposed facility and
open area will make it compatible with the existing facility as well as the surrounding residential
area, minimizing any potential social impacts.
10
Big Island Candies, Inc. Applicadon for Change of Zone
Land Use Element:
Goals
(a) Designate and allocate land uses in appropriate proportions and mix and in keeping with
the social, cultural, and physical environments of the County.
Policies
(a) Zone urban-types of uses in areas with ease of access to community services and
employment centers and with adequate public utilities and facilities.
(b) Promote and encourage the rehabilitation and use of urban areas that are serviced by
basic community facilities and utilities.
(c) Allocate appropriate requested zoning in accordance with the existing or projected needs
of neighborhood, community, region and County.
(f) Encourage the development and maintenance of communities meeting the needs of its
residents in balance with the physical and social environment.
Land Use - Commercial Development:
Goals
(a) Provide for commercial developments that maximize convenience to users.
(b) Provide commercial developments that complement the overall pattern of transportation
and land usage within the island's regions, communities, and neighborhoods.
Policies
(b) Commercial facilities shall be developed in areas adequately served by necessary
services, such as water, utilities, sewers, and transportation systems. Should such
services not be available, the development of more intensive uses should be in concert
with a localized program of public and private capital improvements to meet the expected
increased needs.
(c) Distribution of commercial areas shall meet the demands of neighborhood, community
and regional needs.
(f) The development of commercial facilities should be designed to fit into the locale with
minimal intrusion while providing the desired services. Appropriate infrastructural and
design concerns shall be incorporated into the review of such developments.
Discussion:
The Site is an appropriate location for commercial use for the following reasons: it is adjacent to
an existing commercial use; existing public facilities such as water and sewer have adequate
capacity to service the proposed production/storage facility; and it is located in proximity to
major thoroughfares. The General Plan recognizes the desirability of renewing old, underutilized
areas rather than sprawling into outlying areas. The General Plan also espouses the concept of
mixing compatible commercial and residential uses to create a more dynamic community.
11
t2Fo S4/
COUNTY OF HAWAII STATE OF HAWAII
BILL NO. 81
(Draft 2)
ORDINANCE NO. 97 92
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 25-8-33 (CITY OF HILO ZONE MAP),
ARTICLE 8, CHAPTER 25 (ZONING CODE) OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE, BY
CHANGING THE DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
(RS-10) TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL (CG-20) AT WAIAKEA, SOUTH HILO, HAWAII,
COVERED BY TAX MAP KEY 2-2-34:67,68,69,76,77,104 AND 106.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII:
SECTION 1. Section 25-8-33, Article 8, Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawaii
County Code, is amended to change the district classification of property described hereinafter as
follows:
The district classification of the following area situated at Waiakea, South Hilo,
Hawaii, shall be General Commercial (CG-20):
Beginning at the southwest comer of this parcel of land, being the northwest
comer of the remainder of Lot 15, Grant 9225 to Sadawo Sakamoto and on the east side
of Hinano Street, the coordinates of said point of beginning referred to Government
Survey Triangulation Station "HALAI" being 1,663.0 feet south and 9,631.0 feet east,
and running by azimuths measured clockwise from true south:
1. 1800 00' 300.00 feet along the east side of Hinano Street;
2. 2700 00' 225.00 feet along Lot 7, Grant 8825 to Fusae
Sunata;
3. 1800 00' 100.00 feet along Lot 7, Grant 8825 to Fusae
Sunata;
4. 270° 00' 225.00 feet along Lot 6, a portion of Grant 9735 to
Fusae Sunata;
5. 3600 00' 315.00 feet along the west side of Laukapu Street;
6. 90° 00' 140.00 feet along the remainder of Lot 14;
7. 360° 00' 85.00 feet along the remainder of Lot 14;
EXHIBIT 1
8. 90° 00, 310.00 feet along a portion of Lot 16, Grant 9133 to
Theresa Gonsalves and along the remainder
of Lot 15, Grant 9225 to Sadawo Sakamoto
to the point of beginning and containing an
area of 3.34 acres, more or less.
All as shown on the map attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A" and by reference
made a part hereof (herein after referred to as "subject property").
SECTION 2. This change in district classification is conditioned upon the following:
A. The applicant, its successors or assigns shall be responsible for complying with all
of the stated conditions of approval.
B. The required water commitment payment shall be submitted to the Department
of Water Supply in accordance with its "Water Commitment Guidelines Policy"
within ninety (90) days of the effective date of this change of zone ordinance.
C. Final Consolidation Approval of the subject property shall be secured from the
Planning Director within one (1) year from the effective date of this ordinance.
D. Construction of the proposed development and related improvements within the
subject property shall be completed within five (5) years from the effective date of
this ordinance. This time period shall include securing Final Plan Approval from
the Planning Director for the commercial development within the subject
property. Plans shall identify structures, fire protection measures, landscaping
and maintenance plan, paved and striped parking stalls and driveway and other
improvements associated with the proposed uses. Plans shall include a 6-foot
wide landscaping buffer along the northern and southern boundaries of the subject
property. Plans shall also indicate a 5-foot future road widening strip along the
subject property's frontage of Hinano and Laukapu Streets.
-2-
E. The 6-foot wide landscaping buffer along the northern and southern property
boundaries shall be in place in conjunction with any construction for any
development on the subject property, for the purposes of mitigating any potential
adverse noise and visual impacts to adjoining parcels.
F. Driveway access(es) to the subject property from Hinano and Laukapu Streets
shall meet with the approval of the Department of Public Works.
G. Prior to the establishment of any new -me or the issuance of a Certificate of
occupancy for any development on the subject property, the applicant shall
construct the following roadway improvements to commercial standards along the
subject property's Hinand Street frontage from Kekuanaoa Street to the northern
boundary of the subject property, meeting with the approval of the Department of
Public Works:
1. Construct half-section roadway improvements on Hinano Street's eastern
side consisting of a 16-foot wide A.C. pavement with curb, gutter and
sidewalk and drainage improvements within a half-section 25-foot wide
right-of-way;
2. Construct half-section roadway improvements on Hinano Street's western
side consisting of a 10-foot wide A.C. pavement; and
3. Construct intersection improvements at the intersection of Hinano Street
and Kekuanaoa Street which include a minimum turning radius of 40 feet
with curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements and A.C. pavement
transitions, to accommodate bus movements from Kekuanaoa Street to
Hinano Street.
-3-
Further, the 5-foot future road widening sections fronting the subject property
along Hinano Street and Laukapu Street, the Kekuamoa Street/Hinano Street
intersection improvements, and the Hinano Street roadway improvements thereon
shall be subdivided and dedicated to the County of Hawaii within five (5) years
from the effective date of this ordinance.
H. A Solid Waste Management Plan shall be submitted for review and approval to
the Department of Public Works in conjunction with the submittal of plans for
Plan Approval.
1. Sewer line connections shall be installed meeting with the requirements of the
Department of Public Works.
1. Should any unidentified sites or remains such as artifacts, shell, bone, or charcoal
deposits, human burials, rock or coral alignments, pavings, walls, lava tube or
cave systems be encountered, work in the immediate area shall cease and the
Planning Director shall be immediately notified. Subsequent work shall proceed
upon an archaeological clearance from the Planning Director when it finds that
sufficient mitigative measures have been taken.
K. Upon compliance with applicable conditions of approval, prior to the
establishment of any new use or the opening of the proposed development, the
applicant shall submit a final status report, in writing, to the Planning Director.
L. 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 Fee
Ordinance.
-4-
M. An initial extension of time for the performance of conditions within the
ordinance may be granted by the Planning Director upon the following
circumstances:
1. The non-performance is the result of conditions that could not have been
foreseen or are beyond the control of the applicants, successors or assigns,
and that are not the result of their fault or negligence.
2. Granting of the time extension would not:w ronttary to the General Plan
or Zoning Code.
3. Granting of the time extension would not be contrary to the original
reasons for the granting of the change of zone.
4. The time extension granted shall be for a period not to exceed the period
originally granted for performance (i.e., a condition to be performed
within one year may be extended for up to one additional year).
N. Should any of the conditions not be met or substantially complied with in a timely
fashion, the Director may initiate rezoning of the subject property to its original or
more appropriate designation.
SECTION 3. In the event that any portion of this ordinance is declared invalid, such
invalidity shall not affect the other parts of this ordinance.
-5-
SECTION 4. This ordinance shall take effect upon its approval.
INTRODUCED BY:
jr", MEMBER, COUNTY OF HAWAII
Hilo, Hawaii
Date of Introduction: June 2, 1997
Date of 1st Reading: June 2, 1997
Date of 2nd Reading: June 18, 1997
Effective Date: July 3, 1997
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY
zzj4
pEpUn CORPORATION COLNSEL
DATED: 0.3
-6-
CL - 1.5 u - 1.5 CL - l.5 Ml 30
I
I
1 CG 7. It CG 1.5 CL 7.5 Ml - 10
g
1 [S • 10 I I Ry 10 [y - 10 Its 10 I Z
W
w ~1
r~ -
W [s - 10 W W 1 ML 20 W j _
Li s
(~/1 i W
[y - 1.! N ~
[y-10 I ML -10 N a
W
Z 1
[5-10 1s-10 3 [5-10 [5-10
W
HUALANI j FUTURE 50' 3/W LINE STRE'-T
3
W ~ [5-10
2
J ~
C~1 ti
3 Fs,
W z ~
~ j Rl-10 [y.10
W W
C
7
j RS 10
W
1.663.0 5 IL cs-lo to
9,631.0 E I a•
HALAI" A
rs-1o
is I 10 10
---I - ML - 20
RS-
KEKUANAOA -FUTURE 50' R N LINE STREET
[s.1o LRESIDENTIAL IRS --to ts to
GLE FAMILY
(RS-10)
O GENERAL
RCIAL (CG-20) Rs-1o
a
AREA: 3.34 ACRES
a it
O J
0. Y U
cl-10
O t! - lo z is-10 Y Q
Its-to
Z Z JQ Q I Q
3: Y ML - 20 v
LEILANI - STREET
r
AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING CODE
AMENDING SECTION 25-8-33 (CITY OF HILO ZONE MAP) ARTICLE 8, CHAPTER 25 (ZONING
CODE) OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE, BY CHANGING THE DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FROM
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-10) TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL (CG-20) AT WAIAKEA,
SOUTH HILO, HAWAII.
PREPARED BY : PLANNING DEPARTMENT
COUNTY OF HAWAII
TuK : 2-2-34:67.68.69.76.77.104 & 106 FEBRUARY 19. 1
boo lsw o c 0-c1l
EXHIBIT "A"
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY CLERK
County of Hawaii
Hilo . Hawaii C. _
I3PAUf Z n
UVr
~ FR i C3
ROLL CALL- VOTE
Introduced By: Bobby Jean Leithead-Todd C - AYES. .NOES ABS EX
June 2, 1997 Arakaki v' ` 1,
Date Introduced:
First Reading: June 2, 1997 Chun X
Published: N/A L eithead-Todd
Ray X
REMARKS: Reynolds X
Santangelo X
Smith X
Tyler X
Ya on
9 0 0
Second Reading: June 18, 1997 ROLL CALL VOTE
To Mayor: June 19, 1997 AYES NOES ABS EX
Returned: July 3, 1997 Arakakt x
Effective: July 3, 1997 Chung X
Published: July 13 , 1997 L eithead-Todd X
Ray X
Reynolds X I
REMARKS: Santangelo
Smith
Tyler x
Yagong X
I
1 DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the forejoing BILL was adopted by the County Council and publishcd as
indicated above,
F°UTV CC'nPOP.AT!ON COUNSEL
CCUNTY OF HAWAII
Ccto 6fz3 17
HAIRMAN
Appmred/Di.+K'd this - day C01L
of 1 19 11
COUNTY CLERK
MAYOR. COUNTYbF HA w-in Bill No.: 81 (Draft 2 )
Refcrcnce_ C-281/PC-49
Ord. No.:
COUNTY OF HAWAII STATE OF HAWAII
BILL NO. 64
ORDINANCE NO. 97 6.1
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE COUNTY OF HAWAII GENERAL PLAN, AS
ADOPTED BY ORDINANCE NO.89-142 AND AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE
NOS. 90-71,91-48,91-72,91-131,92-115,93-10 AND 93-11.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII:
SECTION 1. The County of Hawaii General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide
Map is hereby amended to redesignate approximately 3.341 acres of land, identified by Tax Map
Key: 2-2-34:67, 68, 69, 76, 77, 104 and 106 located at Waiakea, South Hilo, Island of Hawaii,
from "Low Density Urban Development" to "High Density Urban Development."
All as shown on the map attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A" and by reference made a
part hereof.
SECTION 2. If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person
or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of
this ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this
end the provisions of this ordinance are severable.
EXHIBIT 2
SECTION 3. This ordinance shall take effect upon its approval.
INTaODUCED BY:
'COCIL MEMBER, COUNTY OF HAWAII
Hilo, Hawaii
Date of Introduction: April 23, 1997
Date of 1st Reading: April 23, 1997
Date of 2nd Reading: May 7, 1997
Effective Date: May 14, 1997
pfERENCE, Comm, 2116
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
&R- VlR-LMB ve-, . a
CORPORATION COUNSEL
DATE: MAY 1 2 1991
(IMOYS![InL)
(MEDIUM DEN51fY)
(MEDIUM DENSIfI)
2 g
(MEDIUM DENSITY) <INVUSMALI
1 O L
W LJ F Z W
W W W W
U W
LLI e
A
K N z
(n (n ~ F7 - - (MCDIUM Q
(MCDIUM DEN51f Y) DCN51f1') (,NDYSTgwU
1 .1 (INOYTT[IwL)
HUALANI STREET
(LOW (LOW
DENSITY) (LOW DCNSITY)
DC NSIfY) (LOW
w
De N51fY) r
D
2
F
(LOW
DENSITY)
(LOW
DCNSITY) <
r
(LOW ~
DENSITY)
0
2
-4- H
KEKUANAOA STREET
(LOW (LOW
OC N S ITY) DCNSITY)
LOW DENSITY URBAN ` [N51TY>
DEVELOPMENT TO
HIGH DENSITY URBAN
DEVELOPMENT
AREA: 3.34 + ACRES
cLOW ¢ ? w
DeNsIfY) D O J
O d x LLJ
ZO (LOW Z Q (LOW Z (LOW Q
Z De NSITY) Z DCNSITY) g DCN51f Y) Z
= 5 Y Y
L~TIN ISTREET T-7
AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN
AMENDING THE COUNTY OF HAWAII GENERAL PLAN LAND USE PATTERN ALLOCATION GUIDE
MAP BY CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM LOW DENSITY URBAN DEVELOPMENT
TO HIGH DENSITY URBAN DEVELOPMENT AT WAIAKEA, SOUTH HILO, HAWAII.
PREPARED BY : PLANNING DEPARTMENT
COUNTY OF HAWAII
TMK : 2-2-34:67,68.69.76,77,104 dc 106 FEBRUARY 19. 199'
EXHIBIT °A" (P1wNN,NC w"Ec0w)
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY CLERK
County of Hawaii
Hilo Hawaii
00Y 14 I~CIllLIA"OTE
Introduced By: Eobbg .1Pan T ei thead-Todd . , -YES., NOES ABS EX
Date Introduced: April 23, 1997 Arak - kil
First Reading* April 23, 1997 Chun X
Published: N/A Leithead-Todd X
Ray X
REMARKS: Reynolds X
Santangelo X
Smith X
Tyler X
Ya on x
9 0 0 0
Second Reading May 7. 997 ROLL CALL VOTE To Mayor: May 8, 1997 AYES NOES ABS EX
Returned: May 14 1997 A'rakakt X
Effective: May 14, 1997 Chung X
Published: LAY 23, 1997 Leithead-Todd X
Ray X
REMARKS: Reynolds X
Santangelo X
Smith X
Tyler X
Yagong x
9 0 -0 0
I DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing BILL was adopted by the County Council and published as
indicated above. APPROVED AS TO
FORM AND LEGALITY:
DEPUTY CORPORATION COUNSEL
COUNTY OF HAWAII
Date mAY 1 2 1997
Approved/Diseppi"ved this day COUNCI HA! N
of '4~2
COUNTY CLERK
MAYOR. COUNTY OF HAWAII Bill No.: 64
Reference: C-216/PC-38 97 UT--
Ord. No.:
1 u
c ,
a,
0
I I
O
I
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I
I N
yy~~~I I N
lJ 1
I p
- -
1
= r
Z D
D C
Z _ _ Jc
- Q e17Aacn_ n_
m I ` . ` m
'
I
I r--- I
• i I
I
V ro
I ® ~ H (
I 1 q I
L L___ I
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I I
~ I ~ I I
I
N I N o 1 i
N I N I 1 I
~ i to i ~ 1 I
I I
L ma ~c*swl
_-_---_-_.L_---_--
KEKUANAOA STREET
I(
i
1
o " NUUI
s
o~
I ,
I
r
1~1 I
lJ I N
I +
- ~ _ - _ - _ - _ - _ - - - _ - _ - -
I
I
= r
Z D
D C
Z _ _ q x
i O
y I I C
I I
1 H I I ~
A i y
m 1 y i m
I -I
1 '
N
li
I
1
I
I Q
0 a
r_____, r_____________
IC I
I • ~ N
I I 1
I
c r r
y N
~ N , N I N
N I N I N I
0 I ~ I ~ 1
I 1
KEKUANAOA STREET
I/
F
2
l7
I
Print Date : October 20, 2005
N
Waiakea Houselots
w E
LEGEND
S Conservation
High Density Urban
Industrial
Medium Density Urban
Industrial to Medium Open Area
Density Urban B-5 M Proposed High Density Urban
0 Proposed Medium Density Urban
Medium Density Urban to
High Density Urban
B-6
A
n.d
Y
- ~t
i
L$rMkaula St.
r5 _
0.2 0 0.2 OA 0.6 Miles
S. Hilo - 4
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
COUNTY OF HAWAII
HILO, HAWAII
. J_I- DATE: December 13, 2005
~IGu~Gi~k
TO: Christopher J. Yuen, Planning Director
FROM: Department of Public Works
SUBJECT: CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (REZ 05-000023)
Applicant: Big Island Candies, Inc.
Request: RS-10 to CG-20
Tax Map Keys: 2-2-34:066, 078, & 079
We have reviewed the subject application forwarded by your memo dated November 15, 2005 and
offer the following comments for your consideration.
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 and the recommended drainage system
shall be constructed meeting the approval of the Department of Public Works.
The subject parcel is in an area designated as Zone X on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM)
by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Zone X is an area determined to be outside the
500-year floodplain.
All earthwork activity, including grading and grubbing, shall conform to Chapter 10, Erosion and
Sedimentation Control, of the Hawaii County Code.
Based on the intended zoning, we recommend the applicant provide full improvements to the entire
frontage along Kekuanaoa and Laukapu Streets consisting of, but not limited to, pavement
widening with concrete curbs, gutters and sidewalks, drainage improvements, and any required
utility relocation. Improvements shall be located within the future road widening setbacks.
Provide a minimum 20-ft corner radius (property line) at the intersection of the future road widening
setback lines along Kekuanaoa and Laukapu Streets. Provide 33-ft corner radius (conforming to
the back edge of the existing sidewalk) at the intersection of the future road widening setback lines
along Kekuanaoa and Hinano Streets. The sidewalk was constructed by Big Island Candies under
change of zone ordinance no. 97 92.
Commercial access should be prohibited from Kekuanaoa Street.
Install streetlights and traffic control devices as required by the Traffic Division, Department of
Public Works. The applicant shall be responsible for the design, purchase, and installation of such
devices.
Questions may be referred to Kelly Gomes o`f~u!EEnn~T
ering Division at ext. 8327.
KG GAS,
Cnun[~ ofHm%an is an 1-qual Ornonunit, Pro 'idcr and EmpIo.cr
c,"rr,or h~k
c: ay
/ jj . ~U6r1a~.
Harry Kim I• Barbara Bell
Mayor Director
OFNelson Ho
Deputy Director
&TUnfV IIf "Ufvz i
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
25 Aupuni Stree4 Room 210 a Hilo, Hawaii 967204252
(808) 961-8083 • Fax (808) 961-8086
MEMORANDUM
Date : November 16, 2005
To : CHRISTOPHER YUEN, Planning /D recto
From: BARBARA BELL, Director/II// "
Subject: Change of Zone Application (REZ 05-000023)
Applicant: Big Island Candies, Inc.
Request: RS-10 to CG-20
TMK: 2-2-34:66,78,79
We have reviewed the subject application and offer the following recommendations:
DEPARTMENT COMMENTS:
WASTEWATER COMMENTS:
( `-f No comments
( ) Require connection of existing and/or proposed structures to the public sewer in accordance with
Section 21-5 of the Hawaii County Code.
( ) Require Council Resolution to approve sewer extension in accordance with Section 21-26.1 of the
Hawaii County Code. Complete D.E.M. Sewer Extension Application.
( ) Require extension of the sewer system to service the proposed subdivision in accordance with
Section 23-85 of the Hawaii County Code.
( ) Other:
TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMENTSf ~.~'I -t{ S qn'7 -I !C'~%Cj
SOLID WASTE COMMENTS:
( ) No comments
(X) Commercial operations, State and Federal agencies, religious entities and non-profit
organizations may not use transfer stations for disposal.
(X) Aggregates and any other construction/demolition waste should be responsibly reused to
its fullest extent.
(x) Ample room should be provided for implementation of a recycling program.
( x) Greenwaste may be transported to the green waste sites located at the Kailua and Hilo transfer
stations, or other suitable diversion programs.
( )O Construction and demolition waste is prohibited at all County Transfer Stations.
( ) Submit Solid Waste Management Plan in accordance with attached guidelines.
Existing Solid Waste Management Plan is to be followed. Provide update to the department on
current status. C ,rD8.185
( ) Other: Y~/
cc: SWD,WWD, TSS EXH18IT 7683
D
rr w
`V
Harry Kim Lawrence K. Mahana
Mati'nr Polce Ch,ej
W"~w Harry S. Kubojiri
' -
County of Hawaii Depurt' Police Chtz!
POLICE DEPARTMENT
349 Kaptolani Street • Hilo, Hawaii 96720-3998
(808) 935-3311 • Fax (808) 961-8869
November 23, 2005
TO HRISTOPuR J. YUEN, PLANNING DIRECTOR
M•
FROM I MES M. DAY, ASSISTANT POLICE CHIEF, AREA I OPERATIONS
SUBJECT CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (REZ 05-000023)
APPLICANT: BIG ISLAND CANDIES, INC.
REQUEST: RS-10 TO CG-20
TAX MAP KEY: 2-2-34:66, 78, 79
Staff, upon reviewing the provided documents and visiting the proposed site, does not
anticipate any significant impact to traffic and/or public safety concerns.
Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to comment.
LW/Ili
EXHIBIT
'Hawai'i Caanty is an Equal Oppoitunip Prodder and Employer'
Harry Kim Darryl J. Oliveira
Mayor Fire Chief
rt' Desmond K. Wery
•ror w.a
Deputy Fire Chief
Couutp of'Wabnail
FIRE DEPARTMENT
25 Aupuni Street • Suite 103 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720
(808)961-8297 • Far(808)961-8296
November 30, 2005
TO: CHRISTOPHER J. YUEN, PLANNING DIRECTOR
FROM: DARRYL OLIVEIRA, FIRE CHIEF
SUBJECT: CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (REZ 05-000023)
APPLICANT: BIG ISLAND CANDIES, INC.
REQUEST: RS-10 TO CG-20
TAX MAP KEY: 2-2-34:66, 78, 79
In regards to the above-mentioned Change of Zone application, the following shall be in accordance:
Fire apparatus access roads shall be in accordance with UFC Section 10.207:
"Fire Apparatus Access Roads
"Sea 10.207. (a) General. Fire apparatus access roads shall be provided and maintained in
accordance with the provisions of this section.
"(b) Where Required. Fire apparatus access roads shall be required for every building
hereafter constructed when any portion of an exterior wall of the first story is located more
than 150 feet from fire department vehicle access as measured by an unobstructed route around
the exterior of the building.
"EXCEPTIONS: 1. When buildings are completely protected with an approved
automatic fire sprinkler system, the provisions of this section may be modified.
"2. When access roadways cannot be installed due to topography, waterways,
nonnegotiable grades or other similar conditions, the chief may require additional fire
protection as specified in Section 10.301 (b).
` *0.11 COL,
EXHIBIT ` y~Nrt
Hawaii County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer.
Christopher J. Yuen
November 30. 2005
Page 2
"3. When there are not more than two Group R, Division 3 or Group M Occupancies,
the requirements of this section may be modified, provided, in the opinion of the chief,
fire-fighting or rescue operations would not be impaired.
"More than one fire apparatus road may be required when it is determined by the chief that
access by a single road may be impaired by vehicle congestion, condition of terrain, climatic
conditions or other factors that could limit access.
"For high-piled combustible storage, see Section 81.109.
"(c) Width. The unobstructed width of a fire apparatus access road shall meet the
requirements of the appropriate county jurisdiction.
"(d) Vertical Clearance. Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed vertical
clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches.
"EXCEPTION: Upon approval vertical clearance may be reduced, provided such
reduction does not impair access by fire apparatus and approved signs are installed and
maintained indicating the established vertical clearance.
"(e) Permissible Modifications. Vertical clearances or widths required by this section may be
increased when, in the opinion of the chief, vertical clearances or widths are not adequate to
provide fire apparatus access.
"(0 Surface. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the
imposed loads of fire apparatus and shall be provided with a surface so as to provide all-
weather driving capabilities." (20 tons)
"(g) Turning Radius. The turning radius of a fire apparatus access road shall be as approved
by the chief." (45 feet)
"(h) Turnarounds. All dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length
shall be provided with approved provisions for the turning around of fire apparatus.
"(i) Bridges. When a bridge is required to be used as access under this section, it shall be
constructed and maintained in accordance with the applicable sections of the Building Code
and using designed live loading sufficient to carry the imposed loads of fire apparatus.
"o) Grade. The gradient for a fire apparatus access road shall not exceed the maximum
approved by the chief." (15%)
Christopher J Yuen
November 30, 2005
Page 3
"(k) Obstruction. The required width of any fire apparatus access road shall not be
obstructed in any manner, including parking of vehicles. Minimum required widths and
clearances established under this section shall be maintained at all times.
"(1) Signs. When required by the fire chief, approved signs or other approved notices shall be
provided and maintained for fire apparatus access roads to identify such roads and prohibit the
obstruction thereof or both."
Water supply shall be in accordance with UFC Section 10.301(c):
"(c) Water Supply. An approved water supply capable of supplying required fire flow for fire
protection shall be provided to all premises upon which buildings or portions of buildings are
hereafter constructed, in accordance with the respective county water requirements. There
shall be provided, when required by the chief, on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of
supplying the required fire flow.
"Water supply may consist of reservoirs, pressure tanks, elevated tanks, water mains or other
fixed systems capable of providing the required fire flow.
"The location, number and type of fire hydrants connected to a water supply capable of
delivering the required fire flow shall be protected as set forth by the respective county water
requirements. All hydrants shall be accessible to the fire department apparatus by roadways
meeting the requirements of Section 10.207.
DARRYL OLFVEIRA
Fire Chief
JCP:lpc
4 J~tV O! N~~4
Troy M. Kindred
Harry Kim I Arm~,ntr:,,uo,-
Mayor
Lanny T. Nakano
Assistant Adnunatrr:er
Caunflr of (~!!Hnfuaii
CIVIL DEFENSE AGENCY
~~25
920 Ululani Street . Hilo. Hawai'i 96720-3938
(809) 9',5-0031 • Fax(808)935-6460 COURW OF HAWAII
PWiNIN0
DEPT.
TO: Christopher Yuen, Director, Department of Planning
Attention: Norman Havashi
FROM: Lanny T. Nakano, Acting Civil Defense Administrator
DATE: December 9, 2005
SUBJECT: Change of Zone Application (REZ 05-000023)
Applicant: Big Island Candies, Inc.
Request: RS-10 to CG-20
Tax Map Key: 2-2-34:66, 78, 79
We have reviewed the above application in regards to hazards and hereby confirm that
the subject property is outside of the tsunami evacuation zone.
We support the efforts of the Big Island Candies, Inc, to enhance the visual quality of the
visitor experience and the visual character of the surrounding neighborhood.
If you have any questions, please call Neil Gyotoku or me at 935-0031 .
EXHIBIT
CD
Havwl') County is an cq.tal opportunity plodder and cmploycr
~if Bl9N•4
(Df `dYy4 L•~
LINDA LINGLE 3y j CHIVOME LEINAALA FUKINO. M.D.
GOVERNOR
DIRECTOR OF HEALTH
p9
Yfa
STATE OF HAWAII
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
P.O. BOX 916
HILO, HAWAII 96721-0916
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 1, 2005
TO: Christopher J. Yuen
Planning Director, County of Hawaii
FROM: Larry K. Shiro
Acting District Environmental Health Program Chief
SUBJECT: Change of Zone Application (REZ 05-000023)
Applicant: Big Island Candies, Inc.
Request: RS-10 to CG-20
Tax Map Key: 2-2-34:66, 78, 79
The subject project is located within or near proximity to the County sewer system. All
wastewater generated shall be disposed into the County sewer system.
WOREI REZ05-000021my
EXHIBIT
y
Planning Commission October 28, 2005
101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3
Hilo, Hawai'i 96720
RE: Big Island Candies' change of zone request for TMK: (3) 2-2-034: 078 & 079
As a neighbor of Big Island Candies (BIC), I received notice of a change of zone request for the
corner across the street from my property. I believe building to the corner will cut down on
visibility from Laukapu Street onto the busy Kekuana6'a Street and vice versa This would be
unsafe. Having a commercial structure on the corner will give the neighborhood a very
industrial feel, which I think is detrimental to the predominantly residential area. Also, the
current building already is very noisy all night long and blocks views of Mauna Kea. Extension
of the facility would only increase and focus the noise even more to the houses behind BIC, and
would block Mauna Loa views, as well.
Besides the noise, BIC has not been the best neighbor. Their trash pick-ups are sometimes as
early as 3:30 in the morning. Not only are the garbage trucks noisy, but they swing wide to fit
into the very narrow opening into the BIC back parking lot (where the bins are stored.) This puts
a very heavy truck onto the pavement and even grass in front of my house and the driveways
opposite BIC. This has gradually destroyed the pavement. We have potholes in front of our
driveways and I now have large potholes and depressions out front, so that whenever it rains, as
it frequently does, there are deep puddles making it difficult for people to park or stop in front of
my house. I spoke to a worker at BIC about the trash pick-up noise and the trucks driving off the
edge of the pavement (where their weight destroys whatever they drive on) but to no avail.
I hope BIC is not allowed to build this poorly thought-out addition and that something can be
done about the destruction of the pavement by the additional and often extra heavy-weight traffic
that they support. If the city could widen the road on the BIC side, (since this is to facilitate
THEIR business) and get them to re-do their back entrance so the trucks don't have to swing out
to make it in, that would be a good start. I would also appreciate if BIC or the city would repair
the pavement in front of my house and drive. The unusual wear is caused by a commercial
venture and they, or the higher taxes they pay, should be used to repair the damage the trucks
have caused.
Finally, it seems to me that we already have a paucity of affordable housing in Hilo. In my view,
it is a shame to let one of the more centrally-located neighborhoods be converted to commercial
use. Property along Route 1 I seems more suited to commercial endeavors and is not particularly
desirable for residential use. You, no doubt, have thought of other alternatives. Thank you for
your attention to this matter.
Debra Weeks r
595 Laukapu Street
Hilo, Hawai'i 96720
(808) 974-7318
cc: Iylr. Norman Hayashi, Planning Program Manager EXHIBIT
Pleas 4rwczrd 4-o Mr. ftwygrh. _T_
RBICandiesREZ2-doe-3/23/06
COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT
RECOMMENDATION
BIG ISLAND CANDIES, INC.
CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (REZ 05-000023)
Upon careful review of the request against the guidelines for granting a change of zone,
the Planning Director is recommending that a favorable recommendation of the Change of
Zone request 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:
Change of zone from Single-Family Residential 10,000 square feet (RS-10) to
General Commercial 20,000 square feet (CG-20) to allow an additional
production/storage facility and related uses. The production/storage facility will not be
open to the public. The applicant proposes to construct an approximately 25,000 - 26,000
square foot two-story structure on parcels 78 and 79. The project site will be landscaped
similar to the landscaping for the existing facility. In addition to the proposed
production/storage facility, the applicant proposes to utilize the remaining parcel (parcel
66) for an open area for visitors at some time in the future. The operations of the existing
retail/manufacturing facility will not change. There is not expected to be any significant
increase in the number of employees. The applicant hopes to commence construction by
the summer of 2006, with completion by June, 2007. The cost of the project is
approximately $2.5 million. The proposed production/storage facility will provide
additional production capacity and assist in optimizing production efficiency as well as
additional cold storage and warehouse storage space to support the applicant's current
operations and expand the retail line. The applicant has reached the storage capacity
limit in the existing facility and has been renting two bays of off-site warehouse space as
well as bringing in additional cold storage containers for use during the holiday season.
The proposed expansion would allow the applicant to discontinue these practices and
expand the mail order component of the operations. The proposed open area would serve
as a "rest area" to allow visitors the opportunity to enjoy Big Island Candies' products.
The applicant states that one of the main objectives for the rezoning and the future
landscaping is "to enhance the visual quality of the visitor experience, as well as the
visual character of the surrounding area."
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 General Commercial 20,000 square feet (CG-20) will conform to the
goals, policies and standards of the General Plan Economic and Land Use Elements.
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 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. The project area is designated Medium
Density Urban on the LUPAG Map. General Commercial (CG) uses are not permitted in
the Medium Density Urban designation and a General Plan Amendment from Medium
Density Urban to High Density Urban would be required to allow the proposed uses on
-2-
the properties. However, the Planning Director is considering an amendment to the
General Plan land use designation for the affected properties as part of an interim
amendment package. Thus, the rezoning would be consistent with the proposal to amend
the General Plan for the project site. A condition will be included stating that the change
of zone will not become effective until the General Plan amendment is adopted.
The State Land Use designation as well as the Land Study Bureau's Productivity
Rating for the project site is Urban. The Hilo Community Development Plan (CDP)
adopted in 1975 suggests the retention of residential uses in this area. However, land
uses in the immediate area are a mix of residential, commercial and industrial uses.
Parcel 80, located between parcels 66 and 79 on Kekuanaoa Street, is zoned RS-10 and is
the site of The Gospel of Alpha and Omega Church. Lands to the north of the project
area are zoned CG-20, currently the site of the Big Island Candies factory. Lands to the
east and south are zoned RS-10. Parcels to the west are zoned RS-10 and CN-10. The
proposed change of zone would complement the existing commercial land uses that
already exist in this area and will provide for an orderly development of the area.
The project site comprises three parcels adjacent to the existing Big Island
Candies facility. Parcel 66 is located on the northeast corner of Kekuanaoa Street and
Hinano Street, adjacent to and south of the existing facility. The two existing residences
on parcel 66 are proposed to be demolished. This parcel is proposed for a rest area for
visitors. Parcel 78 is vacant, fronts Laukapu Street, and located immediately south of the
existing facility. Parcel 79, also vacant, is located on the northwest corner of Kekuanaoa
Street and Laukapu Street, immediately south of and adjacent to parcel 78. Both parcels
78 and 79 were improved with residences at one time, but have been demolished. The
two parcels are currently graded and graveled.
All utilities and services are available to the site. Parcel 66 will utilize the
existing driveways on Kekuanaoa Street. The site plan shows that Parcels 78 and 79 will
take access from Laukapu Street as well as the existing driveways on Parcel 67. Access
shall be prohibited from Kekuanaoa Street, except for access to the two existing homes
until they are demolished. County water is available to the site. The properties are
connected to the County's sewer line. Solid waste will be handled by commercial
-3-
haulers. A Solid Waste Management Plan has been prepared in compliance with
Condition H of Ordinance No. 97 92. Solid waste generated by the project will be
incorporated into the existing process established for solid waste disposal. Electricity and
telephone services are available to the site.
There are no severe geological or topographical problems which cannot be
rectified or which would render the land unusable. The project site is located within
Zone "X", area determined to be outside the 500-year floodplain. All development
generated storm run-off shall be disposed of on-site and not allowed onto adjacent
properties or roadways.
As the project site is developed, no professional archaeological survey was
conducted of the site. Should any archaeological features or sites be discovered during
the development of this project, work will immediately cease and the applicant will notify
the Planning Department.
No professional flora or fauna surveys were conducted of the site. As the project
site has been improved and located within an urban environment close to commercial,
industrial and residential uses, the applicant does not believe that rare or endangered
floral or faunal resources are on the site. The project site is located in an urban setting
close to existing commercial uses and is developed with residences.
The request is not contrary to Chapter 205A, Hawaii Revised Statues,
relating to Coastal Zone Management. The properties are not located in the Special
Management Area. The project site is not proximate to the 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 project site. According to the
applicant, no valued cultural, historical or natural resources exist on the properties and
there is no evidence of any traditional and customary Native Hawaiian rights being
practiced on the site. Thus, it is not anticipated that the proposed request will have any
adverse impact on cultural or historical resources in the area. Therefore, no action is
necessary to protect these rights.
Based on the above findings, approval of this change of zone request from
Single-Family Residential 10,000 square feet (RS-10) to General Commercial 20,000
-4-
square feet (CG-20) would result in an appropriate land use pattern that will further
benefit the general public.
The accompanying draft bill to amend Section 25-8-33 (City of Hilo Zone Map),
Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawaii County Code, is provided for your favorable
consideration. Please note the proposed conditions of approval attached to the draft bill.
-5-
C13ICand1esREZ.dx-3/23/06
BIG ISLAND CANDIES, INC.
CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (REZ 05-000023)
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
A. The applicant, successors or assigns shall be responsible for complying with all of
the stated conditions of approval.
B. The change of zone ordinance shall be effective only if the General Plan Land Use
Pattern Allocation Guide Map for the project area is amended to High Density
Urban.
C. The required water commitment payment shall be submitted to the Department of
Water Supply in accordance with its "Water Commitment Guidelines Policy"
within 90 days from the effective date of this ordinance.
D. Construction of the proposed improvements shall be completed within five (5)
years from the effective date of this ordinance. This time period shall include
securing Final Plan Approval from the Planning Director in accordance with the
Zoning Code. Plans shall identify proposed structure(s), fire protection measures,
access roadway, driveway and parking stalls. Landscaping shall be indicated on
the plans for the purpose of mitigating any potential adverse noise or visual
impacts to adjoining parcels. Landscaping shall be provided in accordance with
the requirements of Planning Department's Rule No. 17 (Landscaping
Requirements).
E. A five-foot wide future road widening strip along the Hinano Street and Laukapu
street frontages and a 10-foot wide future road widening strip along the
Kekuanaoa Street frontage shall be subdivided and dedicated to the County within
five (5) years from the effective date of this ordinance.
F. The applicant shall provide full improvements to the project's frontage along
Kekuanaoa Street and Laukapu Street consisting of, but not limited to, pavement
widening with concrete curb, gutter and sidewalk, drainage improvements, and
any required utility relocation, meeting with the approval of the Department of
Public Works. The improvements shall be located within the future road
widening setback.
G. Provide a minimum 20-foot corner radius (property line) at the intersection of the
future road widening setback lines along Kekuanaoa Street and Laukapu Street.
Provide a 33-foot comer radius (conforming to the back edge of the existing
sidewalk) at the intersection of the future road widening setback lines along
Kekuanaoa Street and Hinano Street.
H. Access shall be prohibited from Kekuanaoa Street, except for access to the two
existing homes until they are demolished.
1. Install streetlights and traffic control devices as required by the Traffic Division,
Department of Public Works. The applicant shall be responsible for the design,
purchase, and installation of such devices.
J. 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 and
the recommended drainage system shall be constructed, meeting the approval of
the Department of Public Works prior to the receipt of a certificate of occupancy.
K. A Solid Waste Management Plan shall be submitted to the Department of
Environmental Management for review and approval prior to the issuance of a
Certificate of Occupancy.
L. All earthwork activity shall conform to Chapter 10, Erosion and Sedimentation
Control, of the Hawaii County Code.
M. Should any remains of historic sites, such as rock walls, terraces, platforms,
marine shell concentrations or human burials be encountered, work in the
immediate area shall cease and the Department of Land and Natural Resources -
State Historic Preservation Division (DLNR-SHPD) shall be immediately
notified. Subsequent work shall proceed upon an archaeological clearance from
the DLNR-SHPD when it finds that sufficient mitigation measures have been
taken.
N. Should the Council adopt an 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.
-2-
O. 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 Affordable Housing Policy. This
requirement shall be approved by the Administrator of the Office of Housing and
Community Development prior to final plan approval for any new residential
structures.
P. If the applicant, successors, or assigns develop residential units on the subject
properties, the applicant shall make its fair share contribution to mitigate the
potential regional impacts of the properties 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 Plan Approval. The fair
share contribution for each lot shall be based on the actual number of residential
units developed. The fair share contribution in a form of cash, land, facilities or
any combination thereof shall be determined by the County Council. 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 $6,411.25 per multiple family residential unit ($9,991.20 per
single family residential unit). The total amount shall be determined with the
actual number of units according to the calculation and payment provisions set
forth in this condition. The fair share contribution per multiple family residential
unit (single family residential units) shall be allocated as follows:
1. $3,162.49 per multiple family residential unit ($4,817.93 per single family
residential unit) to the County to support park and recreational
improvements and facilities;
2. $99.95 per multiple family residential unit ($232.42 per single family
residential unit) to the County to support police facilities;
3. $307.46 per multiple family residential unit ($459.06 per single family
residential unit) to the County to support fire facilities;
-3-
4. $137.04 per multiple family residential unit ($200.98 per single family
residential unit) to the County to support solid waste facilities; and
5. $2,704.31 per multiple family residential unit ($4,280.82 per single family
residential unit) to the County to support road and traffic improvements.
In lieu of paying the fair share contribution, the applicant 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.
Q. The applicant shall comply with all applicable County, State and Federal laws,
rules, regulations and requirements.
R. An annual progress report shall be submitted to the Planning Director prior to the
anniversary date of enactment of the ordinance. The report shall include, but not
be limited to, the status of the development and the extent to which the conditions
of approval have been satisfied. This condition shall remain in effect until all of
the conditions of approval have been satisfied and the Planning Director
acknowledges that further reports are not required.
S. An initial extension of time for the performance of conditions within the
ordinance may be granted by the Planning Director upon the following
circumstances:
1. 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.
2. Granting of the time extension would not be contrary to the General Plan
or Zoning Code.
3. Granting of the time extension would not be contrary to the original
reasons for the granting of the change of zone.
4. The time extension granted shall be for a period not to exceed the period
originally granted for performance (i.e., a condition to be performed within
-4-
one year may be extended for up to one additional year).
5. 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.
Should any of the conditions not be met or substantially complied with in a timely
fashion, the Planning Director may initiate rezoning of the subject area to its
original or more appropriate designation.
S-
`oJNtr oe
COUNTY OF HAWAII STATE OF HAWAII
a.ra.~
BILL NO.
ORDINANCE NO. (PLANNING DEPT.)
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 25-8-33 (CITY OF HILO ZONE MAP),
ARTICLE 8, CHAPTER 25 (ZONING CODE) OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983
(2005 EDITION), BY CHANGING THE DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FROM SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-10) TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL (CG-20) AT WAIAKEA
HOUSELOTS, HAWAII, COVERED BY TAX MAP KEY 2-2-34:66,78 AND 79.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII:
SECTION 1. Section 25-8-33, Article 8, Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawaii
County Code 1983 (2005 Edition), is amended to change the district classification of property
described hereinafter as follows:
PARCEL "A":
The district classification of the following area situated at Waiakea Houselots,
Hawaii, shall be General Commercial (CG-20):
Beginning at the southwest corner of this lot and the northeast comer of Hinano
and Kekuanaoa Avenues, the coordinates of said point of beginning referred to
Government Survey Triangulation Station "HALAI" being 1763.0 feet south and 9631.0
feet east, as shown on Government Survey Registered Map No. 2566 and running by true
azimuths:
1. 180° 00' 100.0 feet along the east side of Hinano Avenue;
2. 270° 00' 225.0 feet along Lot 13, Block 21;
3. 360° 00' 100.0 feet along Lot 16, Block 21;
4. 90° 00' 225.0 feet along the north side of Kekuanaoa
Avenue to the point of beginning and
containing an area of 22,500 square feet.
EXCEPTING AND RESERVING from the above described parcel of land all that
portion thereof conveyed to the COUNTY OF HAWAII by Deed dated August 29, 1967,
recorded in Liber 5791 at Page 245, described as follows:
Being a Portion of Lot 15, Block 21,
Grant 9225 to Sadawo Sakamoto
1
Waiakea House Lots, First Series
Waiakca, South Hilo, Hawaii
Beginning at the southeast corner of this parcel of land, on the north side of
Kekuanaoa Street, the coordinates of said point of beginning referred to Government
Survey Triangulation Station "HALAI" being 1763.00 feet south and 9651.0 feet east and
running by azimuths measured clockwise from true South:
1. 90° 00' 20.00 feet along the north side of Kekuanaoa
Street;
2. 180° 00' 20.00 feet along the east side of Hinano Street;
3. 315° 00' 28.28 feet to the point of beginning and containing
an area of 200 square feet.
PARCEL "B":
The district classification of the following area situated at Waiakea Houselots,
Hawaii, shall be General Commercial (CG-20):
Beginning at a point at the Southeast corner of this parcel of land and the
Westerly side of Laukapu Avenue, the coordinates of said point of beginning referred to
Government Survey Triangulation Station "HALAI", being 1,663.00 feet South and
10,081.00 feet East and running by azimuths measured clockwise from True South:
1. 90° 00' 140.00 feet along Lot 16, Block 21, Waiakea
Homesteads, First Series to a pipe;
2. 180° 00' 85.00 feet to a pipe;
3. 270° 00' 140.00 feet to a pipe on the Westerly side of
Laukapu Avenue;
4. 360° 00' 85.00 feet along the Westerly side of Laukapu
Avenue to the point of beginning and
containing an area of 11,900 square feet,
more or less.
PARCEL "C":
The district classification of the following area situated at Waiakea Houselots,
Hawaii, shall be General Commercial (CG-20):
Beginning at the northeast corner of this lot, the southeast comer of Lot 14, and
on the west side of Laukapu Avenue, the coordinates of said point of beginning referred
to Government Survey Triangulation Station "HALAP' being 1,663.00 feet south and
10,081.00 feet east, as shown on Government Survey Registered Map No. 2566, and
running by true azimuths:
1. 360° 00' 100.00 feet along west side of Laukapu Avenue;
2. 90° 00' 112.50 feet along north side of Kekuanaoa Avenue;
1 180° 00' 100.00 feet along the remainder of this lot;
4. 270° 00' 112.50 feet along Lot 14 to the point of beginning
and containing an area of 11,250 square feet,
more or less.
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, Hawaii County Code 1983 (2005
Edition), 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
(B) Fulfillment of the need for public service demands created by the
proposed use.
(SEE ATTACHED CONDITIONS)
SECTION 3. In the event that any portion of this ordinance is declared invalid, such
invalidity shall not affect the other parts of this ordinance.
SECTION 4. This ordinance shall take effect upon its approval.
INTRODUCED BY:
COUNCIL MEMBER, COUNTY OF HAWAII
Hawaii
Date of Introduction:
Date of 1st Reading:
Date of 2nd Reading:
Effective Date:
r Rs•t0 r ~T
~ CN-Z5 - - 'S "f0 - RS-10 K.d. rO NIL-20 > U' F -
~RS-7.b 0 M~.-10
o _
~RS-10 R -10 RS-10 RS-10 RS-10 RS-10
r -
HUALA
o RS-10 RS-10 R d0 S-10 RS-l0 ML 20
0
ML-20
- - RS-10 S-f0 _ - - RS-10 RS{10
- 111111
CN-20 RS40 CG2p c PARC L "B"
a SINGLE FAM y_
_ o _ _F__ - RESIDENT AL (RS-10) -
0 RS-10 CN-20 TO GE ERAL
.
RS-10 CG-20 1,900 Q. F
0 Q S
R 10 CN-10 r 10, _BLDOE o
`qE
RS 10 RS-10 G`~ ~RS-10 RS- 0 2S-10
KEKUANAOA ST
o F IRS-10 RS-10 RS 10 PAR EL "A„ RS-10 RS-10 CN 10 o
ILY o a
ss1.o0E RESIDEN IAL (RS-10) PARC L "C'RS-10
'NAtAr,<,,,_ Ola FAMIL - -
COMMER IAL (CG-20) RESIDENT AL (R •10) Y
22,30 SQ. FT. TO GE ER
AL
- " - RC AL (CG-20)
RS-10 RS-10 RS-10 RS-10 RS40 1,250 SQ. FT. RS-10 h
ff
260 130 0 260 520 780 U40 1 300
Feet
AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING CODE
AMENDING SECTION 25-8-33 (CITY OF HILO ZONE MAP)
ARTICLE 8, CHAPTER 25 (ZONING CODE) OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE
1983 (2005 EDITION), BY CHANGING THE DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION
FROM SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-10)
TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL (CG-20)
AT WAIAKEA HOUSE LOTS, FIRST SERIES, SOUTH HILO, HAWAII
PREPARED BY: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
COUNTY OF HAWAII
MK. 2-2-034.066, 078 & 079 Date: December 7, 200
EXHIBIT "A" (Big Island Candies, Inc 1188)
PLANNING COMMISSION
COUNTY OF HAWAII
HEARING TRANSCRIPT
MARCH 9, 2006
A regularly advertised hearing on the application of BIG ISLAND CANDIES, INC.
(REZ 05-023) was called to order at 10:20 a.m. in the County Building, Councilroom -
Room 201, 25 Aupuni Street, Hilo, Hawaii, with Chairman C. Kimo Alameda presiding.
PRESENT: C. Kimo Alameda ABSENT & EXCUSED: Fred Galdones
Bill Graham Rodney Watanabe
Andrew Iwashita
Jeffrey McCall
Allen Salavea
Rene' Siracusa (left at 1:30 p.m.)
Hannah Springer
Ivan Torigoe, Deputy Corporation Counsel
Christopher J. Yuen, Planning Director
Norman Hayashi, Planning Program Manager (left at 3:00 p.m.)
Phyllis Fujimoto, Staff Planner
Jeff Darrow, Staff Planner
Kelly Gomes representing Ex-officio Member
Director of Public Works Bruce McClure
And approximately 7 people from the public in attendance.
APPLICANT: BIG ISLAND CANDIES, INC. (REZ 05-023)
Change of Zone from Single-Family Residential 10,000 square feet (RS-10) to General
Commercial 20,000 square feet (CG-20) for approximately 45,450 square feet of land. The
properties are located north of Kekuanaoa Street, at the northeast corner of Kekuanaoa Street and
Hinano Street and the northwest corner of Kekuanaoa Street and Laukapu Street, Waiakea House
Lots, Waiakea, South Hilo, Hawaii, TMK: 2-2-34: 66, 78 & 79.
ALAMEDA: We are on unfinished business. This is our Agenda Item No. 1, Big Island
Candies; and this is a Change of Zone from Single-Family Residential 10,000 square feet
(RS-10) to General Commercial 20,000 square feet (CG-20) for approximately 45,450 square
feet of land. The properties are located north of Kekuanaoa Street, at the northeast corner of
Kekuanaoa Street and Hinano Street and the northwest corner of Kekuanaoa Street and Laukapu
Street. Staff?
HAYASHI: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good morning members of the Commission.
Referring to the overall location map, the subject properties are indicated by these two red dots.
They are situated, one of the properties is situated at the corner of Hinano Street and Kekuanaoa
Street. This particular facility is, brown-shaded area is where the existing Big Island Candies
facility is located. The other red dot, property, is situated along Laukapu Street, at the corner of
Laukapu Street and Kekuanaoa Street. This would be towards the airport or Kanoelehua
Avenue.
The colors on the map indicate the various zoning districts. The yellow-shaded areas are areas
that are currently zoned for Single Family Residential purposes. The existing Big Island Candies
facility is zoned General Commercial 20,000 square feet. And this particular property was
rezoned back in 1998, I believe, 1998. Across the street, there are some properties that were
recently rezoned to Neighborhood Commercial 20,000 square feet. That would be these pink
shaded areas. We also have these areas indicated in gray that are zoned for Industrial uses.
Going to the site map that was prepared by the applicant's architect, first of all, again, this would
be the existing facility. This is Hinano Street, this is Laukapu Street, and this is Kekuanaoa
Street. These two properties is where the proposed two story 25,000-square foot building would
be located. At this particular location at the corner of Hinano Street and Kekuanaoa Street, there
are two existing dwellings on that property. Both of them are currently being rented out. Those
houses will eventually be removed and a visitor recreational area or visitor stop area would be
located at that particular property.
Again, going to the top map, the proposed production and storage facility, the two-story building
would be located at this particular corner. This particular property is currently vacant.
ALAMEDA: Very good.
SIRACUSA: Norman, excuse me.
ALAMEDA: Commissioner Siracusa.
SIRACUSA: Yes. To the left of the proposed facility in the upper-right hand corner, to
the left of it, is that an access on to Kalanikoa Street, I mean, that Laukapu
HAYASHI: You're talking about this
SIRACUSA: Yes. Is that an-?
HAYASHI: Yes. This is basically an access that provides access to the employees'
parking in the rear.
SIRACUSA: Okay. Well, when I look at the other map with the color coding, I see that
the Commercial is on Hinano and it's all Residential across the street from Big Island Candies on
Laukapu Street. And putting an exit or entrance on to Laukapu, it seems to me would suddenly
create a whole impact of commercial-oriented traffic onto Laukapu that isn't there now and
impact the houses there. Where if it were put onto either Kekuanaoa or Hinano Street where
there already is some of that development, then it wouldn't be as much impact. Had the, is there
any special reason, like DOT or something, reasons for having that driveway on to Kalanikoa, I
mean, Laukapu, as opposed to having it on Hinano Street?
2
HAYASHI: Well, let me backtrack a little bit. The existing driveways for this facility,
this is the existing Big Island Candies facility. The primary access is at this location off of
Hinano Street. And we also have an exit at this particular location off of Hinano Street. This
already exists; and that particular driveway is basically for the employees parking to the rear of
the property. So that's already permitted.
SIRACUSA: Will that also be used for the trash pick-up trucks that Ms. Weeks was
complaining about?
HAYASHI: Okay, I'm not too sure. So that question has to be
SIRACUSA: I'll hold that one for Ben.
HAYASHI: Yeah, but if I may complete my presentation.
SIRACUSA: Okay.
ALAMEDA: Yes, you may.
HAYASHI: Okay, according to the applicant, there will be no significant increase in
employees as a result of the addition of this new storage facility. The improvement costs would
be $2.5 million according to the applicant. There is, for those of you who are familiar with the
area, an existing church is at this particular location. So the Big Island Candies facility will
surround an existing church, which is the Alpha and Omega Church; and that was granted by use
permit back in 1984.
As I indicated earlier, there are some other Commercial zoned properties in the area, as well as
Single Family Residential uses. The current General Plan is Medium Density Urban
development; therefore the General Commercial zoning is not an appropriate zoning under that
General Plan category. However, the Director is initiating an amendment to the General Plan.
All of you have or will be receiving a copy of that proposed amendment to the General Plan; and
basically the area surrounding the Big Island Candies facility including the two areas under
consideration today are being proposed for High Density Urban development.
So basically as our recommendation would show that we will be recommending approval; and
the effective date of the zone change would be upon the approval of the General Plan
Amendment that would appear before you and subsequently to the County Council.
We did receive a letter from Debra Weeks, an adjacent property owner, and she lives across the
street of Laukapu Street; and that would be at this particular location. All of you received a copy
of that letter; and the applicant also provided some response to Ms. Weeks' concerns.
Going to the recommendation, we are recommending approval with several conditions. And we
also will be adding a new Condition E, which we circulated, and that's the yellow sheet. And it
basically states that, and I'll read that, a new Condition E, "A 5-foot wide future road widening
strip along the Hinano Street and Laukapu Street frontages shall be subdivided and dedicated to
the County within 5 (five years) from the effective date of this ordinance." And all other
conditions will be realphabetized.
3
There is one other addition, change that I wanted to make, and this is to be consistent with prior
conditions regarding drainage; and that would be current Condition I in your orange sheet. And
at the very end the condition should read, well, let me read the whole thing. Condition I, "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 and the recommended drainage system
shall be constructed meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works," and we're
adding that, "prior to receipt of a certificate of occupancy." And that is a standard language that
we're now using for this drainage condition.
Okay, there are several changes that are being handed Okay, Condition G is also being
amended, and it starts off "Commercial;" and what we want to do is delete the word
"Commercial" and start the condition with "Access shall be prohibited from Kekuanaoa Street,"
and also adding "except for access to the two existing homes until they are demolished."
And those are the changes that we're proposing. Are there any questions at this time?
Oh, by the way, we were also handed a set of conditions for changes; and these were prepared by
the applicant's representative, or applicant and their representative. So they would be discussing
those proposed changes.
ALAMEDA: Okay.
HAYASHI: And that is the white sheet like this.
ALAMEDA: Okay. Fellow Commissioners, we also have the presence of Mr. Kelly
Games over here, so if you guys have any questions for Public Works as well, he'll be happy to
answer that. Any questions for our staff? Commissioner Graham.
GRAHAM: Norman, I can see in the map there where we have mostly Residential and
some Neighborhood Commercial, the brown area which is not today's application but it's for the
existing facility and all in a different zoning category which as you said took place in '98 or
something. I also notice when I look at a General Plan map of the area, the General Plan itself
has change currently, already changed just for that existing area. So can I assume that the
General Plan was changed just in one spot to accommodate this applicant to have that facility in
the currently location in the past?
HAYASHI: You're referring to the existing facility?
GRAHAM: Yes.
HAYASHI: Okay. The General Plan was amended back in 1997; and that was
initiated at that time by the then Planning Director for a change from, I believe it was Medium
Density to
GRAHAM: High density.
HAYASHI: Oh, Low Density Urban to High Density.
4
GRAHAM: And that was specifically for this application?
HAYASHI: Yes.
GRAHAM: Any sort of general planning principles
HAYASHI: Yes.
GRAHAM: Went behind that at all?
HAYASHI: Well, there must have been reasons for the initiation of the General Plan
Amendment based on land use principles or General Plan principles.
GRAHAM: All right, thank you.
HAYASHI: Just one other change before, and this was also handed to me, Condition
B. We are also deleting the word "interim." So the condition would state, "The Change of Zone
Ordinance shall be effective only if the General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide Map for
the project area is amended to High Density Urban.
SIRACUSA: Excuse me. What condition was that, Norman?
HAYASHI: That would be Condition B, B as in boy.
ALAMEDA: We have several questions for you, Mr. Hayashi.
SIRACUSA: Would you repeat that then, please.
HAYASHI: Okay, Condition B, all we're doing is taking out the word "interim."
SIRACUSA: Oh, "interim?"
HAYASHI: Yeah.
SIRACUSA: Okay.
MCCALL: Mr. Chairman?
SIRACUSA: I
SALAVEA: Mr. Chair?
ALAMEDA: I'm going to go to Commissioner McCall, and then Commissioner
Siracusa, and then Commissioner Salavea. Commissioner McCall?
MCCALL: Norman, two things. One is that before Big Island Candies was here, it
was a nursery, right, that was
5
HAYASHI: Yes. That used to be Orchids of Hawaii.
MCCALL: Orchids, that's right, that's right.
HAYASHI: Yes. So that was, well, actually it was a nonconforming use way back for
several years.
MCCALL: Yeah, but it was zoned RS-10 at that point, is that right?
HAYASHI: That's correct, yes.
MCCALL: And we have the church that's their RS-10 property with a use permit.
Are there any other parcels around there that have, that are commercial but without Commercial
zoning? I know the old Hilo Mowers and Saws is a little farther away. That's another block
away. But I'm trying to remember if there's anything else over there.
HAYASHI: I can't recall if there are lands in this particular area that are used for
commercial purposes that are currently zoned for single family residential purposes. But there
are other commercial activities within these areas here indicated in red or orange, I guess. Like
Don's Grill is located in this general area. There are some apartments here and several other
commercial establishments.
MCCALL: Thank you.
ALAMEDA: Thank you, Commissioner McCall. Commissioner Siracusa?
SIRACUSA: Yeah. I just wanted to clarify my understanding of something, that the
General Plan was amended a while back in order to allow a change of zone from Low Density to
High Density Urban, is that what you said?
HAYASHI: Yes.
SIRACUSA: And now the Director is planning to put through another amendment to the
General Plan specifically to accommodate this parcel that's under consideration today. Is that
correct, Director Yuen?
HAYASHI: Well, it's not only for those two properties. Based on the map in the
General Plan proposal, it shows other properties abutting the existing facility proposed for High
Density Urban.
YUEN: If I can explain, this has to do with the The underlying issue here is the
integration of the General Plan and the Zoning Code. A manufacturing type facility like this
would be possible in a Light Industrial They have both manufacturing and retail sales here.
The manufacturing side is, if you look at the Zoning Code, perhaps unfortunately, it cannot be
done in a CN or a CV zone. All right? It needs to be in a CG zone or General Commercial zone,
which by practice of the, if you read how the Zoning Code works and the General Plan, the CG
zone should go in a High Density area. A CN zone could go in a Medium Density area. Now
6
maybe we should be working on that aspect of the Zoning Code, but, all right, be that as it may
That was the reason why when this proposal came up in '97 the Planning Director wouldn't
allow it without the General Plan Amendment. But they initiated a General Plan Amendment to
High Density Urban for the immediate area and then they processed the change of zone to CG;
and, essentially, we're doing the same thing.
SIRACUSA: Okay. So to beat Commissioner Iwashita to the punch on this that we still
do not have a Community Development Plan for this area and things keep coming up,
recommendations and requests keep coming up in this area, without a Community Development
Plan to address that, it looks to me like we're looking at spot zoning. And I'm wondering, would
you say that it's not spot zoning because the Big Island property adjacent has already been or
should You know, I'm wondering if it's the same owner do we really count that in as being a
consecutive property, that would, according to the rules, not then be spot zoning because it's not
separated by anything else? Am I making myself clear?
YUEN: Yeah
SIRACUSA: I'm not clear myself, so
YUEN: Well, it's not spot zoning if it's consistent with the General Plan; and so
you change the General Plan, it's not spot zoning. That's one thing. And then it's adjacent to an
existing facility. And we have to get down to the
SIRACUSA: Yeah, but it's their own facility. It's the same owner, you know.
YUEN: Yeah, we have to get down to the real life of it, is that it is I mean from
the standpoint of what is the use of the property, I support it. And we really had no difficulty
with it from the beginning. The business is there, it's a very busy location. If they had a
different site plan, for example, for example if they were doing just parking on the site, we could
have done it without a General Plan Amendment. We could have just done a zoning amendment.
But because of the production portion of it going on to the site, we had to do the zoning
amendment. But as far as just the use of the property, the location along Kekuanaoa Street,
which is one of the busiest streets in Hilo, adjacent to existing facilities, just an expansion of the
existing facility, we support it as far as the use of the property. We have to be consistent with the
Codes, the General Plan; and so we're going through this double jump procedure rather than the
one jump of the rezone.
SIRACUSA: I have another question.
ALAMEDA: Commissioner Siracusa, follow-up?
SIRACUSA: Yes. I noticed that in our conditions of approval that are before us today,
there is no condition related to hours of operation. We have had conditions in the past for other
things where we looked at hours of operation and stated specifically what those should be. And
considering that we have had a complaint about hours of operation and that in their application it
says that during the holidays when they're increasing production they would be working at night
shift also, I am concerned that we haven't bothered to put something in about that.
7
ALAMEDA: Is that a question to somebody?
SIRACUSA: Is there a reason why that has been
ALAMEDA: Okay, Mr. Hayashi?
SIRACUSA: Not included?
HAYASHI: Yeah, I can respond to that. As far as imposing hours of operation, we've
done that for special permits; but we've never done that for any kind of change of zone requests,
to my knowledge.
SIRACUSA: Is there a reason for that, Norman, I mean, a legal reason, or is it just, we
haven't done it?
HAYASHI: Well, basically what we're looking at is what the zoning should be for this
particular property. And they may have other operations that could go on the property that may
not be, it would have lesser impacts. So in that case I guess that's the reason why we decided not
to put any kind of hours of operation. From a legal standpoint, you, I don't know whether we
can do that for a change of zone application. That question could be perhaps better directed to
legal counsel.
ALAMEDA: Okay, Mr. Torigoe, you have any thoughts on that? Good question, huh?
TORIGOE: I'm not really prepared to give you a definitive opinion on that. I think I'd
have to do some research on it.
ALAMEDA: All right. Commissioner Siracusa, follow-up?
SIRACUSA: Yeah. I have a concern that we've got all of these residences around the
property. No matter what the zoning is, there are residences and people live there, and they have
to get a good night's sleep so they can go to work the next day or school the next day with their
kids. And I'm concerned about, you know, this complaint about noise at night which would be
increased during the holidays when they're in increased production. And the fact that we haven't
even put a, any kind of a limit on decibel levels, or hours, or anything like that does cause me
considerable concern. Because one of the things we're supposed to take into consideration as
criteria are impacts on neighboring properties.
ALAMEDA: Very good. Thank you. Point well taken, Commissioner Siracusa. And
I'm sure we'll include that in our discussion. I wanted to go to Commissioner Salavea and then
Commissioner Iwashita.
SALAVEA: Two questions, points of clarification, Norman. The first is, it's the
understanding of the Planning Department that the existing roadways on Kekuanaoa Street will
not be used once the landscaping and the open area is developed or these, both of these new sites
are developed? Is that true?
8
HAYASHI: That is correct; and that is the reason for the change to that particular
condition. There are two existing single family dwellings on the property which are currently
taking access off Kekuanaoa Street; and once those structures are demolished and improvements
as proposed are provided on the property, then those accesses shall be deleted.
SALAVEA: Okay. And then just a quick follow-up to that, it will be, the ingress and
egress will be contained to the two existing on Hinano and the existing on Laukapu, is that
correct? And that's it?
HAYASHI: Yes, that is my understanding. Perhaps if it needs further clarification
then the applicant's representative could perhaps explain any changes that may or may not occur.
SALAVEA: Okay. But from the Planning Department's perspective that is what has
been submitted?
HAYASHI: Yes, based on the information that was provided to us and the maps.
SALAVEA: Okay, thank you, Norman. My second clarification is for, I'm not sure if
it's Chris the Director or Norman. Is the initiation for the General Plan revisions for the CG
zoning, is it just to include these two parcels and the existing where Big Island Candies is right
now, or are there other parcels, surrounding parcels, that's part of that General Plan change? I
didn't get the clarification on
ALAMEDA: Mr. Director?
YUEN: It includes the one more property on Kekuanaoa Street, that fronts
Kekuanaoa Street. If you look at the amendment, the Zoning Code amendment map there, you'll
see three parcels that are colored in as part of this change of zone. The General Plan
Amendment would also include that other RS-10 property fronting Kekuanaoa Street.
ALAMEDA: Follow- up? Thank you, Commissioner Salavea. We're going to turn to
Commissioner Siracusa.
SIRACUSA: Yes. And is that other property also owned by Big Island Candies, per
chance?
ALAMEDA: Mr. Director?
YUEN: I don't know, but I don't think so.
ALAMEDA: Okay. Commissioner Siracusa?
SIRACUSA: Okay. I'm wondering if there would also still be the, the church would be
the only one then that would have access from Kekuanaoa?
ALAMEDA: Mr. Hayashi?
9
HAYASHI: Based on our condition, yes. And just as a matter of information, the
General Plan proposal does also include the church property to be included in the High Density
Urban.
ALAMEDA: Okay. Follow-up questions, Commissioners, before I invite the applicants
up? Oh, Commissioner Graham, of course.
GRAHAM: Thank you. Norman, it does seem a little unusual to be doing the zoning
change before the General Plan change; and I understand it's conditioned on a later General Plan
change. Just so that we have some sense of the process and the time involved, could you just tell
us how that General Plan revision is going to be treated process wise and time wise from here
forward?
HAYASHI: Yes. The General Plan proposal has been transmitted to the Planning
Commission on March 3`a. You may not have a copy now but you should be getting it either in
your packet today or in a day or so. The Planning Commission has 60 days in which to conduct
a hearing and act on the proposed General Plan Amendments. So based on, from a timing
standpoint, the proposal is to have two hearings, one in Hilo and one in Kona; and we have
tentatively set the April meetings for the General Plan Amendments. So should the Commission
decide to review, oh, after reviewing the application then it goes to the Council. So that goes
through our normal process.
ALAMEDA: Commissioner Graham, follow-up?
GRAHAM: And in that regard presumably the Council would also act on this prior to
acting on the General Plan revision?
HAYASHI: Well, we can't speak for the Council; but, you know, that's a possibility
because we do have that proposed condition that states the zoning does not become effective
until the General Plan Amendment is adopted by the County Council.
GRAHAM: Sure. And the General Plan revision, does that include a number of other
properties elsewhere on the island besides this one right here?
HAYASHI: Yes. There are a number of proposals.
GRAHAM: Thank you.
ALAMEDA: Fellow Commissioners, other questions? Commissioner Springer?
SPRINGER: Condition E addresses full, the old Condition E addresses full
improvements to the project's frontage along both Kekuanaoa and Laukapu Streets. I'm looking
at the correspondence from Debra Weeks of October 28, 2005 where she discusses impacts from
traffic to Big Island Candies on the roadway fronting her property, which is across Laukapu
Street, apparently, from Big Island Candies. Is there any relief for this resident from impacts
made to her frontage by traffic from Big Island Candies?
ALAMEDA: Mr. Hayashi?
10
HAYASHI: I don't quite understand the possible relief What do you mean by
possible relief?
SPRINGER: For her, in her correspondence she's talking about having large potholes
and depressions in front the property generated from traffic from Big Island Candies and their,
among other things, the trash pick-up, the heavy trucks associated with that. So I'm wondering
if while we're asking Big Island Candies to make certain improvements to their frontage, I'm
wondering about any properties across the street from them that may have been affected by
traffic to their property.
HAYASHI: I think that question would be better directed to the applicant. However
SPRINGER: Well, I'm wondering how the County, if the County took that into
consideration when they were developing the old Condition E. I'm wondering how the County
would process a comment like that from a resident describing impacts from the business
activities of Big Island Candies. So this is a question as to how the County processes that sort of
complaint and if there's any possible relief for the complainant from the County.
ALAMEDA: That's a fair question, Commissioner Springer. Thank you for that. I
wonder if Mr. Director or Norman would you like to answer that?
YUEN: On the sidewalks and the frontage, a standard condition for commercial
zoning would involve putting in sidewalks on your frontage, the notion being that a commercial
area should have a sidewalk. The complaints about, I have to say that I don't have a solution for
the homeowner, that some of this is generic with having a commercial, busy commercial facility
across from your home. And it is a decision that was, it's a weighing process in whether to
rezone something like this. I think that her primary impact is from the zoning that was done, you
know, back in '97 or '98 which allowed the facility in the first place. I'm sure that it did increase
the number of people using both Laukapu and Hinano Streets and there are impacts to people in
the neighborhood from that. And I don't have a real solution for the neighbor. It sounds like the
maintenance of the road itself is a public road, so it's really up to the County to maintain the
road. There are badly maintained County roads that are not used by commercial facilities as
well, so I don't know that Laukapu Street would be worse if Big Island Candies weren't there.
And there are downsides to the immediate, to people living in an immediate area from having a
commercial facility next to it.
ALAMEDA: Commissioner Springer, follow-up?
SPRINGER: I wonder if the Planning Department in any way can influence Department
of Public Works in placing any sort of priority on doing repairs, if not increasing regular
maintenance, in the event where there are residential units across from High Density Urban
zoned or Commercial properties?
YUEN: I wouldn't want to make that commitment that we really can do anything
on the Planning Department about that.
11
ALAMEDA: Commissioner Springer, is that something that you want Mr. Gomes to
answer or, since he's here?
SPRINGER: Okay, please.
ALAMEDA: All right, Mr. Gomes, you've heard the discussion. Any thoughts?
COMES: Yeah, generally, if we have a complaint, I guess, about potholes, we
would refer people to our Highway Maintenance Division, because they are the ones that
maintain the roads.
SPRINGER: Have you received a complaint from Debra Weeks?
GOMES: I don't think I got that in my packet.
SPRINGER: I wonder then if, Mr. Yuen, when Debra Weeks submits her testimony
such as this to the Planning Department, is there a response to her that indicates receipt of her
letter and a recommendation that if not Public Works the appropriate agency would be that she
should correspond with them?
ALAMEDA: Director?
GOMES: Well, I think that's a good suggestion. We do send a response saying that
we got it, and that it would be forwarded to the Planning Commission and made a part of the
record on this. Something that's in the nature of a complaint to another department, I think that
would be a good suggestion for us to send that on.
SPRINGER: So would that be done in this case?
YUEN: We'll do that.
SPRINGER: Thank you.
ALAMEDA: Thank you, Commissioner Springer, very good discussion. Commissioner
Siracusa, any questions for our staff before we let them go?
SIRACUSA: Yes. There's a big blank area up there on the upper left; and it's not filled
in with anything indicating what the use is of that. Do you see which part? It's the L, upside
down L part that's sticking out. Could you inform us what that's about?
ALAMEDA: Mr. Hayashi, on the big map.
SIRACUSA: The colored, the middle map, the upper middle map.
HAYASHI: Yeah, I know where it is. I'm trying to recollect as to what I saw there.
Can I defer that question to the applicant?
SIRACUSA: It's blank except for an outline of greenery.
12
HAYASHI: Yes, I understand. That's this particular area.
SIRACUSA: And there's nothing to indicate what that is or what the plans are.
HAYASHI: Yes, so if I could defer that to the applicant.
ALAMEDA: Okay?
SIRACUSA: Okay.
ALAMEDA: Very well. Yes, Commissioner Iwashita.
IWASHITA: Just a follow-up on that. Is there anything that prevents the new facility
from being built on that space that staff is aware of?
HAYASHI: I would defer that question to the applicant.
ALAMEDA: Commissioner Iwashita?
IWASHITA: I guess, yeah, I wanted to know if there's any Building Code restriction or
ALAMEDA: Or encumbrance?
IWASHITA: Or, I looked through the prior approval and I didn't see anything in the
prior approval for this area that would prevent the building from being made there. So I'm just
wondering if there's any legal or regulatory administrative impediment to making this additional
structure on that area.
HAYASHI: I don't think there was any kind of legal requirement to prevent them from
using that particular property.
IWASHITA: Thank you.
ALAMEDA: Thank you, Commissioner Iwashita. All right, without further adieu, I'd
like to invite the applicant or its representative up to the front, please. We do have testimony on
this matter as well, so let us proceed in that fashion. Could you please raise your right hand. Do
you swear or affirm to tell the truth now before the Hawaii County Planning Commission
TSUKAZAKL Yes, I do.
ALAMEDA: Thank you. Could you please state your name and address for the record.
TSUKAZAKL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is Ben Tsukazaki. I'm an attorney
in Hilo. My address is 142 Kapaa Street. I represent the applicant. With me here this morning
are representatives from the applicant: Mr. Ikawa, the president, Sherry Holi who's the chief
operational officer, and Bonnie Honda who's the chief financial officer.
13
ALAMEDA: All right. Thank you and welcome. By the way, did you get a chance to
read all of the recommendations and
TSUKAZAKL Yes, I did.
ALAMEDA: I also notice that you've added a few conditions or modified the conditions
as well. Would you like to go over that (ATTACHMENT I, on file) with us?
TSUKAZAKI: Yes.
ALAMEDA: Okay.
TSUKAZAKI: Now in talking with Mr. Genres prior to the hearing starting, I understand
that standard conditions are used by the Department of Public Works as just the general practice
with regard to change of zone applications. So I'm mindful that, you know, there was not an
intent to say with this specific project that all the requirements or improvements that are
mentioned would necessarily be applicable. I understand that to be more standard language; and
he can speak to that himself if he wishes.
As to the new Condition E proposed by the Planning Director, we have no problem with that. So
assuming that it is incorporated then the conditions that we had addressed would indicate the
former designation, the Condition E. The previous Condition E was one of those conditions
which contain standard language. And the discomfort that I have with it arises from other
projects dealing with other agencies where the language is so broad that there's often subsequent
disagreement with those agencies when it comes time to actually implement what is going to be
designed, what is going to be built. So we offer that initial phrase there in order to address the
potential impacts of the project, because we would understand that that would be the intent
anyway, that the Department wouldn't be asking an applicant to make improvements which are
unrelated to the impacts of the project. So we have added that phrase just to make that clear.
Again, we've no problems with dealing with Mr. Gomes, but I'm not sure if we'll be dealing
with Mr. Gomes later or someone else. So the changes that we offer in that particular condition
are consistent with the idea that Public Works will later on determine what type of improvements
are related to the project; and that's what we'll be asked to do.
Condition F, the previous Condition F, upon my conversation with Mr. Gomes before the
hearing and talking with my client, we understand that the 20-foot corner radius is really related
to an area to round out the corner of Kekuanaoa and Laukapu Street. Right now it's a rectangle.
And even if there is a dedication of a future road widening with a strip along Kekuanaoa without
a corner radius, an area to round out that corner, it would be a rectangular corner; and we agree
that that would not work. So I'd like to withdraw the amendment that we had proposed there for
the existing Condition F. The applicant, in other words, is willing to provide the area of the
minimum 20-foot radius, changing the property line right at that corner.
Condition H, again the previous Condition H relates back to the kind of improvements that are
determined to be necessary based upon the traffic impact analysis report that was done and as
agreed to by the Traffic Division of the Department of Public Works and, again, trying to
provide some relationship between what is going to be done and the actual impacts of the
14
project. As the Commission may have noted that the construction of this production storage
warehouse building does not involve the hiring of more employees; and if there would be, it
would be, you know, just one, or two, or three employees. So the traffic impact analysis report
does not reflect any additional significant traffic impacts on the streets surrounding this project.
So, again, we just want to be careful now that we're not representing to you that, you know,
we're going to be putting in traffic control devices, and street lights, and everything that will not
be related to the impacts and that, in fact, Public Works itself may not ask us for later on.
So I don't know if you would like me to be open to questions on that right now or whether I
should just finish the rest of my comments. Mr. Chairman?
ALAMEDA: Why don't we hold off on the questions for now; and we'll come back to
that issue.
TSUKAZAKI: That's fine.
ALAMEDA: You can continue.
TSUKAZAKI: All right, thank you. You know, I would like also some clarification from
staff. There was a question from one of the Commission Members relating to the General Plan
LUPAG Map designations for this area; and I think what has been described are the amendments
that are going to be initiated, that are being initiated at this point. We believe that in the 2005
General Plan Amendments there was an amendment which redesignated a number of the
properties, including the properties that are subject for this application, actually changed them
Low Density to Medium Density Urban. And I believe those amendments, that redesignation,
also covered the church property. It's just to, for the record, be clear that, you know, there have
been other gradual General Plan Amendments. And if we're wrong on that information, then we
would like to be corrected, because I think we've made that representation based on our review
of the General Plan, we've made that representation in our application. So if what we're saying
is true then these properties, including the church properties, you know, are in Medium Density
Urban right now. And from what I've heard from staff earlier they were being proposed for
High Density Urban in the current round of amendments being initiated by Mr. Yuen. So
ALAMEDA: I have that noted. Could you maybe proceed in your
TSUKAZAKI: Sure.
ALAMEDA: And then we can come back to that.
TSUKAZAKL Sure.
YUEN: Well, that is correct, that the surrounding area was redesignated from Low
Density to Medium Density in the amendments that were passed in 2005, and that we are
initiating an amendment to High Density for the Kekuanaoa Street frontage of the block with the
current round.
TSUKAZAKI: Right, correct.
15
ALAMEDA: Okay, continue.
TSUKAZAKL I just wanted to make sure we got that on the record because we had talked
earlier on the record about the 1997 General Plan Amendments and then the ones that are being
proposed now. Okay?
ALAMEDA: All right.
TSUKAZAKI: Regarding complaints, I'd like to talk a bit about Ms. Weeks' allegations
and I'd like to approach the Chair to present some colored prints (ATTACHMENT II, on file)
of the property.
ALAMEDA: I wonder if you can give it to our staff.
TSUKAZAKI: Okay. Thank you.
ALAMEDA: Mr. Tsukazaki, would you like this as part of the official record?
TSUKAZAKI: Yes, please.
ALAMEDA: Okay, so noted. Thank you.
TSUKAZAKI: If everybody has a copy, at the top of the first page we're on Laukapu
Street. The photo is taken looking towards Volcano. And Ms. Weeks' property is that property
on the left there with some canoes. Is that a canoe or Yeah, looks like a canoe. Okay, and
then I'd like to make also or register a complaint with Mr. Gomes to fix my street while we're at
this Mine looks a lot worse than this.
Okay so the bottom photo is another, you know, angle on Laukapu Street still looking at our
property.
ALAMEDA: All right.
TSUKAZAKI: Turn the page, please, again, we're on Laukapu Street, I believe looking at
her driveway.
And then we're looking on Laukapu Street kind of more towards the makai direction, another
view of the canoes and whatever else she has up there. It looks like a little
ALAMEDA: Are these recent photos?
TSUKAZAKL Yes, hold on, this past Tuesday.
ALAMEDA: Okay.
TSUKAZAKI: So, and I'm sorry, and our office did this. Okay. And then the last page, I
guess, a closer view of some water that has collected. You know, I don't know how you would
view this. The pavement, actually the roadway pavement is pretty much intact. Off the
16
roadway, you know, the shoulder, some of which is pavement, some of which is gravel, yes,
there's pending; and there are a couple of holes as you move makai up the street. And I think as
someone may have pointed out, it's all within the County right-of-way.
I wanted you to have a visual idea of what we're talking about here because I think, you know,
Mr.Yuen, you know, was bringing some reality to it. And I wanted to bring a little more to it,
that while the Commission wants to be sensitive to what neighbors' comments are, you know,
it's not always that the allegations made in a written form really portray a very accurate picture
of thing. In our response to her letter, which we have filed with you and you may have had a
chance to read that, or maybe not, what we were trying to say there is that it's wear and tear, I
would call this wear and tear, or just, you know, a need for periodic road maintenance, just like
all of the public streets we have here. We have a lot of rain, the rain causes erosion and we have
similar situations to what exists in front of her property. But we strongly take exception to the
allegation that the traffic from Big Island Candies' operation itself is the cause of any
deterioration here of the shoulder in front of her property. She has had herself trailers moving
canoes, those all have an impact on your shoulders. And, again, you know, these photographs do
not reflect any serious impairment of the roadway pavement itself. So we're not talking about a
safety hazard created on the roadway portion of the street itself.
I do not, I'm sorry I need to add one other thing, you know, because she did, Ms. Weeks did
make a complaint to Big Island Candies regarding late night traffic. And as I indicated in our
comments there was a change made and the trash pick-up is not using the access on her side; and
that has, you know, been the case for quite some time.
The cleaning that's done at night, we're talking six people. We're talking some regular vehicles,
not big large trucks. So it's, you know, it's a low intensity type of cleaning operation.
Noise, I don't think she has really alleged or expressed the concern about noise from the
production process. But as many of you may know the process in there is making chocolate, and
making the candy out of the chocolate. It's not a heavy industrial operation. And I would note
that she had not made any allegations of noise from the production activities at all. So evidently
that's not a problem.
Oh, there was a question regarding the future use of property, that's kind of towards the east,
yeah, of the existing retail production center. That is going to be a future parking area for
employees and/or whatever. So it has been graded. Initially quite a while ago this production
facility had been considered to be located there; but the amount of infrastructure work and design
and change to the existing building makes it cost prohibitive. So it's not being located there at
this point.
ALAMEDA: Okay. All right, thank you.
TSUKAZAKI: Any other questions?
ALAMEDA: Well, I wanted to go back to Condition H, just to make sure that we
address kind of your question first and then open it up for Commissioners if they have other
additional questions. Would you like to help me revisit that Condition H on your part?
17
TSUKAZAKI: Yes. What we did was add some wording to the, what I understand from
Mr. Gomes to be a standard condition. And, you know, it may be worthwhile to have
Mr. Genies speak to this. Because when I talked with him just before the hearing, you know, he,
I believe, indicated to me that he didn't, you know, and after reviewing the traffic impact
analysis report, he didn't think it would warrant installation of, you know, traffic control devices
and things like that. So if that is the case and he wants to say that for the record, then some of
our concerns would be alleviated. So, okay?
ALAMEDA: Okay, thank you.
TSUKAZAKI: But, again, we're just trying to reign in the scope of possible
improvements to what is said in the traffic impact analysis report and what the Traffic Division
of Public Works feels is appropriate.
ALAMEDA: Okay. I would like to attend to that at this time. Mr. Gomes?
GOMES: Yeah, I believe applicants are afraid when they hear the term traffic
control devices. I think in a case like this what they're concerned about is traffic light; and what
I told Mr. Tsukazaki is that traffic control devices can be, you know, something as little as
pavement markings and that sort of thing, yeah. And 1 think in this case we would not require a
traffic light but we may require some pavement markings and that sort of thing, or our Traffic
Division will.
ALAMEDA: Thank you. Mr. Tsukazaki, that has been noted for the record. Does that
suffice or would you like a more formal
TSUKAZAKI: No, I'm fine. I'm fine with the representations. It'd be better to have it in
writing but I, you know, place a lot of credence in what Mr. Gomes is saying; and we just, again,
don't want to create an impression that the applicant is committing to install signals at an
intersection or something where it would not be appropriate.
ALAMEDA: Okay. Thank you. We have, I'm sure, a bunch of questions. We'll start
off with Commissioner McCall.
MCCALL: Yeah. My question is for the Planning Director. Now on a situation like
this where these are conditions for the rezoning of the property, not necessarily conditions, I
mean, they are conditions based on what Big Island Candies is proposing to do with it. But our
zoning conditions, the conditions are for rezoning of the property which, I mean, market
conditions could indicate ten years from now that they want to put up apartment houses here or
something else, in which case these zoning conditions need to be somewhat generic for that. Is
that correct? Is that an error or am I off-based?
YUEN: Right.
ALAMEDA: Mr. Director?
YUEN: Right.
18
ALAMEDA: Okay. Commissioner McCall, follow-up to that?
MCCALL: No, that's it.
ALAMEDA: Okay, Commissioner Siracusa.
SIRACUSA: Yes. Looking at that map and the blank area on the upper left that you say
is being set aside for future parking, I look at that and then I look at the garden park-like area on
the lower right which seems to be to my naked eye to be considerably smaller, and that's an area
where there are already two homes. And I was wondering if Big Island Candies had considered
keeping the homes there, since we do have an affordable housing shortage in Hilo, and using the
big blank upper left-hand portion as a combination park-like garden and parking as well. In
other words, so you can have both of everything, if that had been considered; and if not then, you
know, what were the reasons why that wasn't considered as an option?
ALAMEDA: Mr. Tsukazaki?
TSUKAZAKI: Yes. Two things, first of all, the plan is to make the Kekuanaoa Street
from a visual perspective a very pleasant one, a very aesthetic one. So that's why landscaping is
envisioned there. Also, if you've been to their retail center, there's no place for people to sit and
have coffee and have a cookie. So there have been some suggestions, you know, to eventually
have an area, a rest area. Some of the people, many of the people actually who visit the property
are on tours and they're brought in on tour busses; and so the idea was to eventually plan an area
where people could sit and take a break and have, you know, have something to eat before
moving on. There's no immediate plans to demolish those dwellings. One of the Big Island
employees, actually, rents one of those homes. The other one is in a rental pool that's managed
by a real property management agency. But that is something that is not as immediate as being
able to create the production and storage building because that's a rather urgent need. As to
whether, you know, single family dwellings or other kind of dwelling structures should be
located to the back area, I don't recall that we've had any conversation about that.
SIRACUSA: No, you had me backwards.
TSUKAZAKI: I'm sorry.
SIRACUSA: Okay. What I was talking about was retaining the single families where
they are now and moving that garden area where people could relax and have a cup of coffee and
a cookie to the big blank upper left portion which you're saying will be future parking. Because
since it's larger than that lower right portion it seemed to me that you would have room for both
there, that you would have room for parking and there would be an area there where people
could sit under a tree and have some refreshments. That's what I was talking about.
TSUKAZAKI: Okay. The parking, again, I mean, I think your suggestion is definitely,
you know, worthwhile discussing with Big Island Candies as to the future design there. But I
wanted to be clear the parking area for the back open area that we're talking about was to be an
area where they could move employee parking right now. Because where it is right behind the
building, it's an inadequate area. And so they'd like to concentrate all of the employee parking
19
in one place. They also did not want to mix employee parking with the retail parking out in that
front area. So, again, that was what was intended, what is intended.
ALAMEDA: Commissioner Siracusa?
SIRACUSA: I see, I was just sort of looking for a win-win situation here where we
could retain two affordable housing units and say accommodate the plans that you wanted.
Because if you extended the employee parking along the Laukapu end and still had the lower
part in, you know, for recreational use, you could always separate it out with a planting screen,
or even a low stonewall and a planting screen. That's, you know, that's doable and would allow
for both. I'm just trying to figure out a way that all of this can happen at the same time and
addressing all those concerns.
ALAMEDA: Thank you, Commissioner Siracusa. Let me go to Commissioner Salavea
and then Commissioner Graham. Commissioner Salavea.
SALAVEA: I have a question for the applicant, but prior to that I'd just like to get
clarification from Norman. The big open area on the upper left-hand part, that is currently
designated on the General Plan as, or is it currently designated on the General Plan as High
Density?
HAYASHI: That is correct. It's designated for High Density as well as zoned for
General Commercial.
SALAVEA: And it is, all right. And then for the area on the bottom right-hand corner
where the houses currently exists, to do such a, to do landscaping of that nature that they're
proposing, does it need to be in, does the designation in the General Plan need to be changed to
High Density, along with the zoning change to CG?
HAYASHI: Well, I think this would be the overall development of the Big Island
Candies' facility. Therefore, to include that, or not to rezone that property or change the General
Plan
SALAVEA: Could they do the landscaping without the
HAYASHI: See, they cannot have any commercial-related aspect to that property since
the property would be zoned for Single-Family Residential use. So, yes, I guess, my response
would be, yes, they need to have it changed.
SALAVEA: Okay, okay. Okay, my question for the applicant now is, from my
perspective, and I'll be candid, is I'm seeing a lot of areas being put into High Density Urban
uses with very few, let's say, infrastructure developments, like buildings and then that sort of,
you know, for Industrial use, for a higher use, parking area and there's no structures going up.
And I guess my great concern is that if permitted and the General Plan designations go through
and the zoning changes are made that 1 see later on we may be, and I'm not saying that you
would do this, but later on we'd be open to a lot more development because of everything being
in place in terms of the zoning changes and the General Plan changes. And that's my great fear.
Because of the surrounding nature of that neighborhood, I'd hate to see, you know, 10 years
20
from now the nature of the neighborhood be pretty much the same and then the plans for Big
Island Candies' expansion, you know, be exponentially increased and, you know, the two areas
where the landscaping and the parking lot is proposed, boom, we get two new two-story
buildings and the area, that plat, becomes very heavily industrialized right in the middle of a,
kind of an older neighborhood. So how would you respond to that concern?
TSUKAZAKL I think it's a good issue. I mean I think you've raised a good point
because from my perspective this House Lots area is one of those areas in transition from a land
use policy standpoint and from the County's own land use long-term growth policies. And I
think what you're pointing out is if there were no residential area there at all, you know, then you
would not expect the kind of impacts to come from the transition to High Density Urban uses.
So I think that, you know, it is definitely a challenge, there are definitely issues. And I believe
when zoning applications such as this one comes before you and the County Council, there are
going to be issues regarding those kinds of impacts that need to be dealt with, and, because,
again, it's a changing area and you have residential uses that are affected or may be affected.
don't think there's any easy answers, but the plans promote Urban use gradually in this area.
There are ways to mitigate what those impacts will be. I don't know if there's a foolproof way to
avoid them all, but quite frankly I think a local government will just have to use its best efforts to
deal with them as time goes on. So, and just an example, in this case, you know, right, we've
had a neighbor raise concerns; and I think that's just indicative of how the community,
surrounding neighborhood will react as this transition takes place over the next, you know, 10 to
20 years.
ALAMEDA: Director Yuen has a response.
YUEN: Yeah, can I, let me give you my idea of Waiakea House Lots because it
comes up over and over again; and this is what is proposed verbally in the General Plan and in
the interim amendments and the map, and partially in the map amendments.
We've had a lot of rezoning applications in the Waiakea House Lots area. Some of them, this
area, there was an area in here that was already Industrial and Piilani Street was Commercial;
and so you had a number of rezonings previously. And the 2005 General Plan made a big
Medium Density area in the House Lots area and then made an Industrial area along Laukapu
Street in this block here. The major map change is that we're proposing to take the Industrial out
of the Laukapu Street block and make that Medium Density. I think it was a mistake to change
that to Industrial. When 1 drive down, it's a street of, there are just houses on the street. And to
take a Residential area and have Light Industrial businesses come in, I don't think it's that
compatible. And so that's the map proposal on that.
As far as what happens in the, you know, Medium Density in the General Plan is a big, there are
a lot of different things you can do in Medium Density. You can have, potentially Commercial
zoning, you can have a 7-Eleven, you can have businesses that don't look any different from the
house that's there, like the mortgage company rezoning that we saw a couple of months ago, you
can have apartments or townhouses. All of these things are really different. So, and we don't
have a fine tuning in the General Plan that's better than those categories. And, hopefully, you
know, if we had a Hilo Community Development Plan we're able to do that.
21 EXHIBIT C
One of the amendments in the General Plan says that we should encourage, that the Commercial
should be on the major streets. And if you know the area, Kekuanaoa is a major, major street in
Hilo. It takes people from the airport to the main part of Hilo; and there are lots of people going
on Kekuanaoa every day. Lanikaula, and Lanikaula and Kawili are also major streets; and there
have been quite a few rezonings along both Lanikaula and Kawili. Manono is another major
street for people going across. And the major streets are the better locations for Commercial
zoning; and so there's an amendment that says something like that. And then the side streets like
Leilani Street or Hinano Street off of, say from Hinano Street going from Kekuanaoa toward
Lanikaula Street, my feeling is that if somebody wants to come in and rezone one of those lots
for a townhouse, a small apartment building, that sort of use, that that's compatible with the
neighborhood; but I would not encourage it for Commercial. And the General Plan Amendment
basically says that. So that is my picture of how to be more refined from just saying Medium
Density Urban.
As far as this application here, certainly, you know, Kekuanaoa Street, as far as the residential
component to it, I have to say, to me, it's not going to be a great residential area in the coming
years. I mean, it's just a really busy street that naturally channels people from the airport area,
from Kanoelehua into the rest of urban Hilo. Upper part of Kekuanaoa not too far from this you
have the Department of Water Supply building, you have Leo's Rubbish, then at the top of
Kekuanaoa you have Hilo Motors. And I just don't think it's a It's a street where I think it's
inevitable to transition to more of a Commercial use.
As far as, again, Big Island Candies, one of the things that probably made it palatable as a
rezoning in '97-98 was that years ago there was a business there called Orchids of Hawaii.
Actually I had my second job there. And they did tour business, they had tour busses going in
there. That was what they did, they sold flowers to the tourists off of busses. After that closed it
was Paradise Plants, not as busy but still a commercial business. So it was something that had
evolved within the neighborhood.
ALAMEDA: Commissioner Siracusa?
SIRACUSA: Yes, question for the Director. If this whole proposal, this proposed
rezoning is going to wait on the General Plan Amendment, how is that going to affect the
timeline?
YUEN: Well, it just wouldn't come into effect unless and until the General Plan
came into effect. And-.
SIRACUSA: So the clock wouldn't start ticking until the General Plan Amendment had
passed?
YUEN: It just wouldn't take effect; and so in a way it doesn't really matter which
passes first. But just in a timeline of trying to move this along, and we had the application and
we didn't want to move it to We had a negative recommendation before we, while we had the
General Pan Amendment pending, but before the actual decision had been made to forward it.
We had workshops on the General Plan Amendment but there's not a final decision to forward
this on, so we had to go through that, and now we have forwarded it on. So the timeline on the
General Plan The General Plan Interim Amendments may get acted upon at different
22
timeframes. This is kind of what I expect, not so much from the Commission but at the Council.
Some of them, I think, are going to be relatively easy. I think this one is not going to be that
hard for the Council to approve. There are some that may be controversial. Because they're
interim amendments and they're stand-alones, they're not like the comprehensive review which
is more of a package. So I wouldn't have a problem with the Council acting separately on the
various amendments.
SIRACUSA: So we have no notion at this point which one of these things, the General
Plan Amendment or this change of zone request, would come before the Council first?
YUEN: Well, if you act on, it's almost bound to get up to the Council before the
General Plan Amendments do.
ALAMEDA: Thank you. Commissioner Graham, I know you had a question earlier. Is
it directed to the Director or Mr. Tsukazaki?
GRAHAM: To Mr. Tsukazaki first but perhaps to the Director also.
ALAMEDA: Okay, go ahead.
GRAHAM: I was kind of following up in my thoughts on Commissioner Salavea's
comments about, you know, what future intensification of development could take place. And it
seems to me looking at that park area that you spoke of that you, like on Kekuanaoa, I also feel
like it's like a public amenity to have a green open space park area there and all. And so, you
know, I feel like that would be an asset to the application to have that somehow set into what
we're doing. So I'm wondering, I would presume that the Planning Director can probably come
up with an appropriate zoning designation where it could be used for the intention you have and
not be turned into some commercial/industrial development in the future. So I'm wondering if
he was able to do that, come up with a different zoning than the CG-20 you have here which
would permit you to use it as a park, is that okay with you?
TSUKAZAKI: Just a moment.
ALAMEDA: Mr. Director?
YUEN: Well, I'm going to jump in before he answers.
ALAMEDA: Sure.
YUEN: Before you answer, let me jump in?
TSUKAZAKI: Go ahead, please.
YUEN: We've had this kind of discussion a lot. And because, you know,
sometimes somebody does have say like a mortgage company, they're asking for a CN zoning,
there are a lot of different things that can be in the CN zoning. The site, the project itself does
not look particularly offensive; but the potential ones do. All right? And so that has led the
Commission at times to make very site specific conditions or recommend very site specific
23
conditions. It is always tempting to do that. 1, on this one, I would recommend against it; and I
would say to the Commission if you're not comfortable with rezoning this to some kind of, to
just saying it's a Commercial rezoning, don't rezone it. If they didn't have a particular proposal,
all right, and it was Medium Density Urban and they just wanted CN zoning, I would favorably
recommend it, based on this is the kind of site that this is within the town. It is on, as I've talked
about it, a busy street, it's a logical place for a Commercial zone. We would have site specific
conditions like the sidewalk, like the access from the side; and we would recommend in favor.
So rather than put a condition on that's very site specific, I would not recommend it in this
instance; and I would say let's just go ahead with the Commercial zoning.
I think that the reality of what's going on here, I mean if I read their own minds for them, they
don't have good visibility from Kekuanaoa right now, which is something that a business wants,
and that for them to have some relatively open site line from Kekuanaoa is in their interest. But I
would not, you know, I would not recommend us putting on a highly site specific condition to try
to limit them to having a landscaped area on Kekuanaoa Street in this rezoning.
ALAMEDA: Commissioner Graham, follow-up?
GRAHAM: Yeah, I think we're talking about the same thing but maybe we're starting
from a little bit different place. I'm not talking about site specific condition. My understanding
is that park part is one specific parcel. So without any conditions is there not a more appropriate
zoning designation for that parcel that provides that kind of open space for it, and guarantees that
it will remain in something akin to that in the future? No condition, just ask to change the
application to a different rezoning designation for that specific parcel.
ALAMEDA: Mr. Director?
YUEN: Open.
GRAHAM: Okay.
YUEN: Yeah, I mean, again I'm not recommending it. I don't think that, I
wouldn't recommend that as a zone. But just to give you a technical answer, Open, an open
landscaped area can be done in an Open zone; and very little else, but, yes, you can do it in an
Open zone.
ALAMEDA: Commissioner Graham.
GRAHAM: Then I guess I could pass that on to Mr. Tsukazaki since he has got all this
background.
ALAMEDA: Mr. Tsukazaki?
TSUKAZAKL Yes. Again, what the applicant proposed there was to have an aesthetic
frontage to its project, okay, and to incorporate landscaping, to continue the landscaping that
they have which is aesthetically pleasing in the frontage of the existing operation and to continue
the landscaping theme around to Kekuanaoa. I also said and our application does say that it's
envisioned as a possible, you know, rest area for people who are buying products within the
24
operation to be able to have some place to go to just sit because there's no resting area, no
seating, no restaurant, no coffee shop, nothing. And it's not to have a coffee shop operation up
there, it's to provide some shelter in a very well landscaped environment. So that's what's
envisioned; and I just spoke with Mr. Ikawa and he said that's all that's intended there. The
Commerical use, if that concept that we're proposing was to be implemented, I don't know if
from Mr. Yuen's standpoint we'd be able to have, you know, customers of the existing retail
facility be using that area if it were just an Open area. I don't know, you know, at that point
there looks to be some relationship between that area and the operation, the business operation
that's going on. So, in a way, it's kind of an accessory use. But again, you know, there's no
intention to do that. And beyond that, you know, again, there's no intention to be removing
those dwellings in the near future. The first step is to address the area of most need, and then to
transition into that landscaping when they can afford to do so.
ALAMEDA: Commissioner Graham, follow-up?
GRAHAM: Well, I think I hear you clearly on all that. If the timing is a problem
where making it Open now has some kind of difficulty with the existing dwellings then certainly
this particular parcel could be rezoned at a later date if there's nothing you plan to do in the near
future. And as far as you're concerned about it being an accessory use where folks who are there
in your main facility are coming over to drink coffee and all, certainly as you and I know the
resort areas in South Kohala that were planned with their golf courses and their open areas and
all, they sure zoned them open here and there; and that's certainly intended for the hotel guests
and others to be able to use those facilities. So I don't think there's any legal problem doing that.
ALAMEDA: You're asking for a follow-up, Commissioner Graham?
GRAHAM: If he wishes, that's all.
ALAMEDA: Okay?
TSUKAZAKL I really don't have any response to that.
ALAMEDA: All right. Very well, I know Commissioner Iwashita wanted to voice
something, or did it pass?
IWASHITA: Oh
ALAMEDA: How about Commissioner Siracusa?
SIRACUSA: No.
ALAMEDA: Okay.
IWASHITA: Oh, I'm sorry. Can I
ALAMEDA: Go head.
25
IWASHITA: I wanted to, thank you. Sorry for being misunderstood. Can I make my
comments from the podium?
ALAMEDA: Sure, you may approach the podium.
IWASHITA: Thank you.
The reason I wanted to come up here was to use the map of the House Lots and how, I guess,
view Thank you, Norman, what is this?
HAYASHI: It's a pointer.
IWASHITA: Oh, for the record. You know, we all agree that House Lots is an area in
transition. I think that term applies to this whole island right now. But, specifically, and you all
know my views about how this whole area is being dealt with. And what I, and I don't espouse
to have any kind of vision, you know, for really how this ought to turn out. But when comments
are made or suggestions are made that Kekuanaoa Street is a busy street and we need to deal with
it, and I think there's sort of an assumption that it's just going to get wider and we'll put street
lights and all that kind of thing in the future, and so commercial development should go around it
I really think that those kinds of issues should be dealt with in the Community Development
Plan. And that, you know, the consideration about, Council has talked about it, we've talked
about it, how this community I mean, this is a large enough area where with the Medium
Density zoning that, or General Plan designation, that, you know, the community can be
developed in a way where people can walk, hopefully, to their schools and there would be
commercial development that will allow the people to live in the area and work in the area, as
one fortunate employee of Mr. Ikawa can do now, you know. And that really should be the
perspective in terms of how this area is developed. Big Island Candies is a very successful
company and it's really great; and, you know, the expansion of it is something that I hope they
can do and make more money and pay more taxes to our government.
Our job as Commissioners on the Planning Commission, I think, is really the bigger picture; and
that, you know, this map represents what we have today, in terms of how Kekuanaoa Street is
going to be developed, how the businesses, assuming that that's what's going to happen along
the street, are going to be there, whether people are going to be able to walk there, whether
there's going to be on-street parking, sort of maybe a thought that doesn't enter in most people's
mind for a street like this. But, to, to me, that's not outside the realm of what's possible in this
area. And we have in the future a vision or, you know, that Kekuanaoa becomes a pedestrian
friendly kind of road with medians, on-street parking, businesses along both sides of it where
people can walk from their apartments and townhouses, you know, to patronize those; and then
they also have, you know, we have set public parking areas for people to come from outside, you
know, to patronize those businesses. Then I really think that that's a different vision, not vision,
I said I don't have one, I better not use that word, a different way in which this House Lots area
can be developed and, you know, Big Island Candies, hopefully, go along with it, and grow as a
business in doing so.
What really concerns me about how we're going about this right now is that basically the
General Plan designation is improper for the zoning we're considering; and we're doing
essentially the cart before the horse. You know, the zoning should be changed first, we ought to
26
consider it with all the ramifications. The big picture, zoning is the big picture. If we say okay
we can do this specific use and we approve this, right, then it's like the zoning is almost a done-
deal. Because if you don't do it then you're contradicting yourself, you know, and all of that is
going to come up to us. But the considerations are not all the same. The condition I would put
on this would be as long as the Community Development Plan, as amended, allows for this
project, fine, do it, right, but do the Community Development Plan first. We have the legal
authority to do that; it just needs to be done. And I understand that under present Department
resources you really, you know, can't do it. The Department can't do it, but maybe there's other
ways to do it. And that is my comment. If the applicant wants to respond to it, I'd be happy to
hear.
ALAMEDA: All right, Mr. Tsukazaki, you're free to respond, or you don't need to
respond. It's up to you.
TSUKAZAKI: I think I understand the point being made. And, you know, without
knowing whether the Community Development Plan will be amended, you know, in the near
future, it's really difficult for me to say anything.
ALAMEDA: Okay. Thank you. And it also sounds like little bit we're going to kind of
our discussion, too. So I wanted to ask if there's any other questions for the applicants or Mr.
Tsukazaki that we could ask them at this time before we ask him to be seated. We do have a
testifier. Seeing none, you may be seated. Thank you. Will David Kimo Frankel please come
forward. By the way, good middle name. I like that name.
FRANKEL: Good morning.
ALAMEDA: Good morning. Let me swear you in. Will you please raise your right
hand.
FRANKEL: All right.
ALAMEDA: Okay. This is just protocol. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth now
before the Hawaii County Planning Commission?
FRANKEL: Sure.
ALAMEDA: All right. Could you please state your name and address for the record.
FRANKEL: My name is David Frankel. I live on Laukapu Street; but that's the
Laukapu Street in Volcano, not the one down here.
ALAMEDA: Okay.
FRANKEL: I don't really have any interest in this particular proposal, although my son
would like to see as much Big Island Candy as possible. But I do want to point out something
that I think that Ivan needs to look at, and based on comments on both what Chris and Norman
made that I don't think accurately reflect the law. And that is there is a Hawaii Supreme Court
27
case from 1969 that's called Dalton versus City and County of Honolulu, the citation is 51
Hawaii 400, in that case the Court emphasized the importance of long-range comprehensive
planning. In that case the Honolulu Charter prohibited zoning changes unless the change
conformed to the General Plan, just as Hawaii County Charter does. The Court held that this
provision "puts teeth into the requirement that the General Plan be long-range by providing a test
for courts to use in reviewing zoning ordinances." The Court went on to say "To allow the City
to amend the General Plan and then adopt the zoning ordinance contrary to the unamended
General Plan is to allow the City to accomplish by two ordinances exactly what the Charter
sought to prohibit." In other words, if an applicant comes before you and wants to make a
change to the General Plan and change to the zoning at the same time to conform, essentially
conform the General Plan to the applicant's desires, there is a strong, there's a problem with that.
And there's another case where the Court talked about the importance of the County doing a very
comprehensive review when it does these amendments, and that's the Hall versus City and
County, that's 56 Hawaii 121. So I just want to let you know about that. Thanks.
ALAMEDA: Okay. Very good, thank you for your testimony. I appreciate it, Mr.
Frankel. I appreciate your bringing your son as well. It's good to see the next generation.
Well, we are in discussion time. Commissioner Graham?
GRAHAM: Could I ask Mr. Frankel a question?
ALAMEDA: Mr. Frankel, will you please come back to the seat. Commissioner
Graham.
GRAHAM: From what I heard, from my initial understanding of what has transpired at
this place and from what I've heard from Director Yuen before, the situation you're talking about
essentially making a General Plan Amendment along with a zoning change in order to
accommodate a specific thing like this, that was already done in the past. And I feel like what
the Planning Director is saying because of a slight modification, I don't know how slight, but
because of some modification in how the applicant wants to expand, conform his facility the
Planning Director is willing to make similar modifications to the General Plan and the Zoning
Code. So to me that's not quite, it's certainly not as heavy as an intrusion in the process as was
initially done back in 1997 or '98. And I wondered if you have any comments on that with
regard to the legal ramifications?
FRANKEL: Well, it's clear to me that this County has acted lawlessly in the past and
has made changes and approved projects that are inconsistent with the County Code and State
law.
Regardless of that, it seems to me you need to have your attorney look your, your Corporation
Counsel with whom I will have many disagreements, but you should have, in due diligence, you
should have your Corp. Counsel look at this case and assess whether what is being proposed here
is really any factually different from what happened in the Dalton case. That's all I'm
GRAHAM: All right. Thank you.
28
ALAMEDA: Thank you. Hold on, Mr. Frankel, we may have other questions for you.
Fellow Commissioners, seems like Mr. Frankel has some expertise in this area. You have any
other questions for him while he's here? Seeing none, you may be seated. Thanks again. Mr.
Iwashita?
IWASHTTA: Restatement of the facts in Dalton?
FRANKEL: I don't have it in front of me but I believe it was no, I can't. I don't
have it in front of me. I'm going to confuse it with another case.
IWASHITA: Thank you.
ALAMEDA: Thank you. All right, seeing none, you may be seated. Thanks again. I
appreciate your time. Fellow Commissioners, now we are in the discussion phase. You could
make a motion and have a discussion, or if you need a little bit more clarification as well
SIRACUSA: Can we have a five-minute recess?
ALAMEDA: Wait, wait, hold on. Commissioner, I mean, Mr. Hayashi.
HAYASHI: It was brought to my attention that regarding the future road widening
strip, Kekuanaoa has a right-of-way width of 40 feet and is proposed to be increased to a 60-foot
right-of-way. So on that basis we're also recommending that Condition E include a 10-foot wide
future road widening strip along Kekuanaoa Street frontage.
Just for the Commissioners' information, the properties to the west of this section of Kekuanaoa
Street there is already a 10-foot wide strip added to the existing right-of-way.
ALAMEDA: Okay. All right. Hearing that, there was a request for a 5-minute recess. I
will grant that at this time and we can proceed in five minutes.
RECESSED The meeting recessed at 12:03 a.m.
RECONVENED The meeting reconvened at 12:10 a.m.
ALAMEDA: Hawaii County Planning Commission now return to order. All right. A
testifier has left but I did forget to ask Mr. Tsukazaki if he wanted to just respond to the
testifier's comments. I forgot to give you the opportunity.
TSUKAZAKI: I'm aware of the cases that he mentioned. And I believe that unless an
ordinance, you know, if the zoning ordinance is not effective because there's no General Plan
Amendment that has been adopted, I think that might be outside of that case. But in any event,
if, you know, and when this matter gets to the County Council, you know, I'm sure they will
weigh that issue.
ALAMEDA: Okay. Thank you for your response. Also, Fellow Commissioners, just to
let you know, we will be losing Commissioner Siracusa at 2 o'clock and Commissioner Salavea
at 3
29
SIRACUSA: No, 1:30.
ALAMEDA: Oh, 1:30. So, and also Commissioner Graham and 3:00'ish, so I'm fixing
to just go ahead and push it through and suspend lunch. So if you guys don't mind, if there isn't
any objections, I'd like to do that.
Also, I'd like to just thank you for addressing me first prior to speaking. I was told it makes
really good for the transcribing, for the minutes. Sometimes they don't know who's talking. So
when I say Commissioner Graham or Commissioner Siracusa, it gives them a little break in the
transcribing. So Sharon is happy with that. All right.
Well, that brings us to a discussion. Any thoughts? Or would somebody would like to make a
motion and then discussion
SALAVEA: Mr. Chairman?
ALAMEDA: Go ahead, Commissioner Salavea.
SALAVEA: I move that we enter into the discussion mode regarding this issue, or this
application
ALAMEDA: Okay. Sure. Okay, Commissioner Graham, a little discussion? There's
no motion made yet so we're still in the discussion phase. Commissioner Graham?
GRAHAM: I might say that my general feeling is I'm generally supportive of what
they're doing. But I'm concerned about a number of things. And probably the biggest concern
is the timing concern of doing this before the General Plan comes about. And, I don't know, I
wish that, you know, some of the Commissioners like Commissioner Springer we haven't heard
from before if she had any comments on how she felt about processing a zoning code change
which is contingent upon a later General Plan that would make it fit. It seems worrisome to me.
We often process things together like, maybe in our Ouli applications down in South Kohala
where we'll have a State Land Use Amendment and Zoning Code at the same time. But they
have a cart before the horse in this situation and it's worrisome to me. So I invite other
comments.
ALAMEDA: Thank you. Okay. Commissioner Springer, I heard your name, Would
you like to comment on that?
SPRINGER: I concur with what Commissioner Graham said. I too am in general favor
with the application. I do have some concerns about the timing of it. But aside from those
concerns I'm not disinclined from voting in favor of it.
ALAMEDA: Thank you. And, again, this is a recommendation that we're making to the
County Council, so they'll have the final say on this. But I suppose they do take our vote into
the matter. Commissioner Siracusa, any thoughts?
30
SIRACUSA: Well, yeah, very, very similar concerns, you know, and there are a few
other concerns I have as well. 1 would really prefer, and I don't know if this can be done, to see
the whole thing go back to the drawing board and resurface again a while down the road when
more of these issues are settled and dealt with.
ALAMEDA: All right, Commissioner Iwashita?
IWASHITA: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
ALAMEDA: Sure.
IWASHITA: Must be something to do with my background, but I really would want to
have our Corp. Counsel brief us on the two decisions that was brought up, that were brought up
by Mr. Frankel and, cause it sounds to me his recitation of the principles that are applicable
mirror my general concerns about the process and also my overall view of how and what the
Planning Commission is supposed to be doing in this process. And I for one definitely, I don't
want to come close to the line that apparently has been drawn in the Dalton case and the other
case cited by Mr. Frankel. So assuming that both cases are still good law, then I would want to
know that, and what the decisions hold, and some of the facts, and if the facts are similar in any
way, you know, to the facts before us, and so what weight if any we should put on those cases.
ALAMEDA: Point well taken. Thank you, Commissioner Iwashita. Commissioner
Siracusa.
SIRACUSA: Yes. Bearing this in mind, I'm wondering if instead of us working on a
motion to either approve or deny the permit we should consider tabling to allow time for Corp.
Counsel to come back to us with a legal opinion and possibly the applicant come back to us with
some, you know, more, some proposals to address some of the concerns.
ALAMEDA: Okay. Mr. Director?
YUEN: Yeah. Let me make a suggestion on the timing aspect of this because we
get into another timeframe, which is the applicant's ability to move this up to the Council. And
what I would suggest, if the Commission is inclined to approve this on the merits of the
rezoning, that the Commission send it up to the Council. We will definitely have Corp. Counsel
give us a formal opinion as to whether this, or the zoning action should be held at Council until
the General Plan Amendment is adopted. And if Corp. Counsel says that, then that's what we
follow. And the reason for this is that the application was submitted and I believe that we're, the
applicant has a right to send this up to the Council after 90 days. And that will run out before our
next meeting, is that correct, before our next Hilo meeting, right? Is that correct, Mr. Hayashi?
HAYASHI: Well, the application was forwarded to the Commission I believe the first
week in January. So 90 days will take it to April.
YUEN: When is our April meeting in Hilo?
HAYASHI: It's on April 7'h.
31
YUEN: And it was January 3rd I think you said that it was in front of the
Commission. Yeah. So, I mean, if the applicant wants to go and get it to Council, they can go
with a negative recommendation. If we defer today, for example I mean that part is up to the
applicant. I would rather have a recommendation from the Commission and send it up to the
Council and have them deal with the legal issue. The Council does not have a timeframe when
they get a zoning amendment. You know, they can hold it. And, again, if Corp. Counsel says,
no, don't pass this until the General Plan is passed then they should hold it.
ALAMEDA: Commissioner Siracusa, follow-up?
SIRACUSA: So are you then saying that the motion should be worded provisionally?
YUEN: No. I think that the Commission should, again, you know, if the
Commission is basically in support of the rezoning, you have to make that decision. But if
you're basically supporting the rezoning and you're concerned about the timing, I would say just
pass it and send it to Council; and we will have Corp. Counsel look at this before Council has the
hearings on it. And I have to assume that the Council will follow whatever Corp. Counsel's
recommendation is as far as timing of action on this. As a practical matter, it doesn't matter, it
shouldn't matter that much to the applicant because the General Plan has to go through before
the zoning can take effect anyway.
ALAMEDA: Commissioner Siracusa.
SIRACUSA: You know, that's what I'm saying is that, you're saying that if we make a
motion to approve then would we be saying in the motion that this approval is contingent upon
the passage of the General Plan Amendment, or provided that Corp. Counsel finds this action
legal, or something along those lines.
YUEN: The condition already says the zoning is not effective until the General
Plan is amended. We felt that that was enough to meet the requirement that the zoning be
consistent with the General Plan. I'm certainly willing to have Corp. Counsel take a look at it
and advise us as to whether that works. And if it doesn't work, then Council should hold the
rezoning until they act on the General Plan Amendment.
ALAMEDA: Yes, Commissioner Iwashita.
1WASHITA: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just on the skeletal representation of the Holding
and Dalton, the facts of this case which are, one, we have zoning, we have Medium Density
General Plan designation which does not allow a General Commercial zoning within that area.
On the face of that it's clear we cannot approve this, neither can the Council. The question then
raised by the condition being placed in this proposal that says, well, we'll approve it subject to,
basically, as a condition precedent the General Plan being amended so that the zoning can
conform seems to walk right into the Holding as represented of the Dalton case. You are doing a
zoning change not in conformance with zoning, and then you're changing the zoning specifically
to meet this zoning change, you're changing the General Plan specifically to meet this zoning
change. You know, and that's why I for one cannot agree to go forward with this. And, I, you
know, I would vote to deny it actually just based on that skeletal understanding of the Dalton
case and how we're supposed to proceed. You know, so my, what I would prefer is, I guess in
32
this procedural posture, that the application be denied just based on what appears to be, clearly,
you know, in conflict with the Dalton decision and the ruling in that case, or taking into
consideration the fact of the condition precedent and that if there's going to be a change to the
General Plan, then let's process that; and then if that's approved then the application can be
refilled. But that's the way it's supposed to be done, and to say that we can try and, you know,
what we're talking about is trying to figure out how to get away, and, you know
I for one have contributed a lot to the profitability of Big Island Candies and I was sincere in
saying earlier that, you know, I wish the company more and more success, even though that
probably means I'm going to put on 10 pounds in the next couple of years if that's the case. But
in terms of what we have to do and the practices we have to follow and the procedures we need
to take care of in accordance with the law and the Supreme Court decisions, you know, I really
cannot support going down this road the way we're going down; and we need to do it in the right
way.
ALAMEDA: All Right. Commissioner Salavea had this hand up; and then we'll go on
the left side. Mr. Salavea.
SALAVEA: Thank you, Mr. Chair. In terms of getting information from the applicant
about the proposed expansion or the uses for the rezoning of the parcels and hearing what
Director Yuen had on his vision of the area and how he saw development occurring there, I am
satisfied on the face of the application that I have not any major opposition to the application
itself. However, the issue raised by Mr. Frankel regarding the legality of the action that we're
taking, I wouldn't feel comfortable passing, even provisionally passing, or putting forth a
favorable recommendation to the County Council, only because I don't think we have a strong
enough or, we don't have an opinion as of yet from Corp. Counsel. And until that issue is
clarified for me I wouldn't feel comfortable even provisionally putting forth a favorable
recommendation.
ALAMEDA: Commissioners, I'm kind of feeling the energy that the motion could go
either way. If the motion goes to deny the recommendation made by the Department, just keep
in mind that we would have to state some clear reasons for that. Commissioner Siracusa.
SIRACUSA: We'll, in terms of expediting this, and we do want to move thing along
today and we don't have a motion on the floor yet and, of course, if somebody makes a motion at
this point, no matter what the motion is, we can continue discussion. So just to, based on that I
will make the motion that the rezoning be denied, that an unfavorable recommendation be passed
up to the Council; and then let's take it from there and see how this moves along.
ALAMEDA: Let me check with Corp. Counsel. Will we need specific reasons for that,
or could we start with it then and continue to the second and move forward?
TORIGOE: Well, it would be preferable if there were specific reasons stated along the
way. And along the way, of course, in discussion you can elaborate on those. But basically you
want to make sure that the Council gets a record of the reasons why this is happening.
ALAMEDA: Okay. Commissioner Siracusa?
33
SIRACUSA: I can give some reasons. I can just say based on the concerns that have
already been raised not only about the legality but about impacts to the community and
ALAMEDA: Okay. There's a motion on the floor to deny this recommendation. Is
there a second?
IWASHITA: Second. And can I offer a friendly amendment?
ALAMEDA: Friendly amendment, okay, sure. Commissioner Iwashita.
IWASHITA: And a part of the reasons include that the General Plan designation of
Medium Density does not allow for
SALAVEA: Wait until Sharon gets the stuff on record. Sorry.
ALAMEDA: Commissioner Salavea?
SALAVEA: Sorry, the tape is being changed by Sharon. I'm not sure if what
Commissioner Iwashita is saying is going to get on record. If it's not
ALAMEDA: Okay. Let me check. Sharon, can we proceed?
NOMURA: Yes.
IWASHITA: It's okay?
NOMURA: Yes.
IWASHITA: Thank you.
ALAMEDA: Okay. Commissioner Iwashita?
IWASHITA: That the proposed zoning change does not conform to or is not allowed
under the current General Plan designation of Medium Density, that in order to properly conform
with our procedures in the normal course of what we should be doing that the General Plan
should be first amended to properly process this. And after that is done, then this rezoning can
be submitted.
ALAMEDA: Okay. Yes, Commissioner Siracusa?
SIRACUSA: I will accept that friendly amendment.
ALAMEDA: Thank you. Motion was made by Commissioner Siracusa, seconded by
Commissioner Iwashita. There's opportunity for discussion. Commissioner Springer?
SPRINGER: It looks as though Mr. Torigoe has brought back perhaps the decision or
the information regarding the cases cited by Mr. Frankel. I wonder if he has anything to share
with us.
34
ALAMEDA: All right. Thank you, Commissioner Springer. Mr. Torigoe?
TORIGOE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yeah, I just went to my office and got a copy
of the Dalton versus City and County of Honolulu case and I shared it with the Planning
Director. Haven't had a chance to review it yet, basically on its face it seems that it's dependent
on the specific provisions of the City and County Charter regarding how you do the amendment
process. So we'd have to take a closer look, I think, at our process, you know, here under our
Charter and the General Plan and zoning ordinances, or amended ordinances, and make that
analysis. I don't know if the Planning Director has any other comments at this point.
ALAMEDA: Mr. Director?
YUEN: Yeah. What we threw out in Dalton is, and Hall, is not what we're doing
here. All right? In Dalton they did a General Plan Amendment that was for a specific area like
what we would call an Interim General Plan Amendment, then they did the Rezoning
Amendment. Then the validity of the General Plan Amendment was challenged on the grounds
that it didn't follow the proper procedure for a General Plan Amendment. Then the Court threw
out the General Plan Amendment because of the improper procedure; and then following that, of
course, the Court then throws out the Rezoning Amendment. So it, as a basic proposition, a
rezoning has be consistent with the General Plan. Again, I was, maybe I'm too pragmatic now to
be a lawyer any more. But the reason I say that is I failed to be, maybe I don't look at these
things as technically, but I look at it, I say, well, the rezoning doesn't take effect until our
General Plan has been passed, so you pass the General Plan the rezoning takes effect. But, so
that's the way I look at it. And again I think that, the specific point, we should have Corp.
Counsel look at it before the Council takes up the amendment. But what specifically happened
in Dalton is not what we're doing.
ALAMEDA: Commissioner Iwashita
IWASHITA: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
ALAMEDA: Commissioner Graham and Commissioner McCall.
IWASHITA: Oh, sorry.
ALAMEDA: Go ahead. Go ahead, Commissioner Iwashita.
IWASHITA: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for the recitation of the facts in Dalton.
My residual concern is still that the General Plan does not conform to what's being proposed.
And knowing that the Department is inundated with lots of work and actually overworked, I'd
say that for the record, I think that we need to have at least one, well, there should be some
criteria in terms of accepting, you know, for processing these kinds of applications; and I don't
know if we need a different rule or whatever. But it seems to me if the proposed rezoning does
not conform to the General Plan, there should be an administrative, here, takes your papers back,
go get that General Plan amended, and then bring it back. Cause we're not, you know, the
Department has lots of other things to do, you know, to take care of, than to basically use its
35
resources to process an application that does not conform to the General Plan and do the whole
thing on the hopes that the General Plan will be amended.
The other concern I have is that we're really doing it backwards. What we've developed up to so
far is basically saying let's do this rezoning and then if we need to we'll change the General
Plan. On its face, that's really, I understand the point that, you know, once you change the
General Plan it's not spot zoning. But I humbly disagree with that. That if you go around
making zoning approval changes and then you go ahead and change the General Plan to conform
to the zoning, the zoning change, that, as a matter of fact, is a spot zoning act. There's no way to
plug You know, you've dictated what the result you want and the long-term goals, long-range
policies be damned, excuse my English.
ALAMEDA: Thank you. Commissioner Graham and then Commissioner McCall.
GRAHAM: Yeah, I'm largely on the same page I think as Commissioner Iwashita. To
me it's not just the legal issue of whether we're legally violating something that may come back
to bite us. It's, I think as he said, maybe more clearly when he was over here talking, the
General Plan decision, the General Plan process doesn't involve the larger picture of what the
community wants over there, all that kind of stuff. And the zoning we're dealing with has to do
with a lot of real specific things that we've been also talking about today. So by the time the
General Plan gets heard and changed or not changed, there will be a lot more input for us to work
on when we deal with the specifics. So there's real value to having a General Plan heard first,
also, in my mind. So, yeah, I'd like to go forward with the recommendation, with the motion by
Commissioner Siracusa, and also, you know, make it clear that we're not expressing our
disapproval of the merits of the application but we would like to deal with the specific conditions
and other issues which we think may be possibly worked out at the appropriate time, and don't
try to deal with all them right now, and make it contingent upon a General Plan revision which
may not take place for five or seven years, for all we know, and in which case what we're doing
specifically may not be so relevant anyway. Thank you.
ALAMEDA: All right. Thank you for sharing. Thank you, Commissioner Graham.
Commissioner McCall.
MCCALL: Yeah, I guess, I'm speaking in favor of the zoning, and the
recommendation, and against the motion. My feelings are, number one, we are making a
recommendation to the Council. As far as the merits of the legal case, I think that's up to the
Council. We are not making the decision. We are making a recommendation based on what has
been presented to us under the public testimony, etc.
I believe that there is enough, the fact that in our recommendation, in the terms of it, it says that
it needs to wait until the County General Plan is amended. That seems sufficient to me; and I
think our duty to the applicant is to make a decision. If our decision is, you know I don't
think we should defer any decision. If the decision of the Commission is to deny it, then so be it.
But I think we need to make a decision on this.
ALAMEDA: Okay. Well, motion was made. Discussion took place. Any other
comments? Staff?
36
HAYASHI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is a motion for an unfavorable
recommendation to the County Council. With that I'll take the roll call. Commissioner
Siracusa?
SIRACUSA: Aye.
HAYASHI: Commissioner Iwashita?
IWASHITA: Aye.
HAYASHI: Commissioner McCall?
MCCALL: No.
HAYASHI: Commissioner Salavea?
SALAVEA: Aye.
HAYASHI: Commissioner Springer?
SPRINGER: Yes.
HAYASHI: Commissioner Graham?
GRAHAM: Aye.
HAYASHI: Chair Alameda?
ALAMEDA: No.
HAYASHI: Mr. Chair, motion carries. An unfavorable recommendation will be
forwarded to the County Council.
ALAMEDA: Thank you.
HAYASHI: The Planning Director's recommendation will also be forwarded to the
County Council.
TSUKAZAKI: Thank you.
ALAMEDA: Thank you, Mr. Tsukazaki and your Big Island Candies.
The discussion ended at 12:39 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
--K-~ , - 0....c~,~. V , VA - V~
Sharon M. Nomura, Secretary
37
Change of Zone Request (REZ 05-000023)
Applicant: Big Island Candies, Inc.
Proposed Condition Language
Condition E:
In order to address the potential impacts of the project, [T]the applicant shall provide [44il-l]
improvements to the project's frontage along Kekuanaoa Street and Laukapu Street which
may consist[] of, but not be limited to, pavement widening with concrete curb, gutter and
sidewalk, drainage improvements, and any required utility relocation, meeting with the
approval of the Department of Public Works. [Tbe]Anv improvements determined to be
necessary shall be located within the future road widening setback.
Condition F:
[Provide . Riin:...,.m- 20 c ^t ^^^ROF radius (...-epei4y lino) the interseetion of the 4:.ture
Street. ]Provide a 33-foot
corner radius (conforming to the back edge of the existing sidewalk) at the intersection of the
1
future road widening setback lines along Kekuanaoa Street and Hinano Street.
Condition H:
Install streetlights and traffic control devices as [reEtoired by] determined to be necessary
based on the applicant's updated Traffic Impact Analysis Report and consultation with the
Traffic Division, Department of Public Works. The applicant shall be responsible for the
design, purchase, and installation of any such devices deemed necessary.
av
1 tic' I u :et, ? =SL,f;
ATTACHMENT I
f -t
v
4
Rc'd ate mtg by AL
d Qt~~ Dist'd Read
FILE COPY
ATTACHMENT II
t .Z` ~4a v~ `e- a
+t
L .
4mw
w 1 ry S.E,;-~....
Pr
ar>
Y Yrv ;
X
t
X~
sY S
,
1.
l V Y Y Y ;Py~'i
mr.
i2
x,.
Sfi
1
k.