Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0943.000 2008-2010 c:-?:).'"1,727,, N,1,. William T. Takaba William P. Kenoi ; •: n.� •,t i. Managing Director Mayor 11! , " . Wally Lau 4rE' of ' N r Deputy Managing Director County of Hawaii 25 Aupuni Street • Hilo, Hawai`i 96720 • (808) 961 -8211 • Fax (808) 961 -6553 KONA: 75 -5722 Hanama Place, Suite 102 • Kailua -Kona, Hawai'i 96740 (808) 327-3602 • Fax (808) 326 -5663 ;,') c. , August 12, 2010 "� 0` • Honorable J Yoshimoto, Chairman and Members of the County Council County of Hawai`i ... 25 Aupuni Street -v.,, Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Chairman Yoshimoto and Members: Change of Zone Application (REZ 10- 000124) Applicant: MEN Real Estate Investment, Inc. Request: RS -15 to CN -20 Tax Map Key: 8 -1 -25:11 As required by Chapter 4, Sec. 6- 4.3(C), Hawai`i County Charter, transmitted herewith for the County Council's consideration and action are the Leeward Planning Commission's letter and enclosures regarding the above - referenced request. Sincerely, fit, r William P. K'-noi Mayor Y Enclosures cc: Planning Department fis;Ii 300? Coma No, "! q3 Ref. To: PC-- Date SEP 0 8 2010 .jam, v \ J County of Hawai `i LEEWARD PLANNING COMMISSION Aupuni Center • 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Phone (808) 961 -8288 • Fax (808) 961 -8742 August 11, 2010 The Honorable J Yoshimoto, Chairman and Members of the County Council County of Hawaii 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Chairman Yoshimoto and Council Members: Change of Zone Application (REZ 10- 000124) Applicant: MEN Real Estate Investment, Inc. Request: RS -15 to CN -20 Tax Map Key: 8 -1 -25:11 The Leeward Planning Commission, after a duly held public hearing on July 23, 2010, voted to recommend for your approval the proposed legislative bill for a Change of Zone from Single - Family Residential — 15,000 square feet (RS -15) to a Neighborhood Commercial — 20,000 square feet (CN -20) district for 3.67 acres of land. The property is located adjacent to and south of the Kona Community Hospital, Haleki `i, South Kona, Hawai `i. The Commission concurs with the following Planning Director's reasons for recommending favorable consideration of the request: The applicant requests a Change of Zone from RS -15 to CN -20 to construct a medical office complex. Proposed improvements include five (5) three -story structures, each approximately 12,000 square feet in size and not exceeding 30 feet in height. The ground floor will be designated for parking. The project will be developed in two (2) phases, with the initial phase consisting of two (2) buildings. Upon build out, there will be approximately 60,000 square feet of office space in five (5) structures. . 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 Hawai `i County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer . ' The Honorable J Yoshimoto, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 2 General Plan and related planning documents. The implications of these evaluations and decisions must be also considered as they may have an impact on similar areas in the County. The Change of Zone request from RS -15 to CN -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. 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 request conforms to the goals, policies and standards of the General Plan in that the proposed development will be developed in an area adequately served by necessary services such as water, utilities and transportation systems. The proposed project conforms to the Commercial Development goal which states "provide commercial developments that complement the overall pattern of transportation and land usage within the island's regions, communities, and neighborhoods." 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 Low and Medium Density Urban, which allows ancillary community and public uses, village, neighborhood and convenience -type commercial uses, as well as single and multiple family residential uses. The project area under consideration is consistent with the urban form established for this section of the North Kona District as depicted on the LUPAG Map. The State Land Use designation for the property is Urban. The property is designated "E" or "Very Poor" by the Land Study Bureau's Productivity Rating. The Kona Community Development Plan designates this area as Rural Transit Oriented Development (TOD). Policy LU-3. 1, Redevelopment of Rural Towns as TODs/TNDs states that "the rural towns along Mamalahoa Highway (in the South Kona district) consisting of Holualoa, Honalo, Kainaliu, Kealakekua, and Captain Cook, are encouraged to be redeveloped as TODs/TNDs (Transit Oriented Development/Traditional Neighborhood Development)." The subject property falls within the Urban Core • The Honorable J Yoshimoto, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 3 component of the TOD/TND, and is consistent with the Neighborhood Village sub - designation under the Urban Core. Neighborhood Village Core Areas are defined as areas that "are intended for predominantly residential, public /civic uses, or small -scale neighborhood- oriented commercial uses." The property is a vacant, approximately 3.67 -acre rectangular shaped parcel located adjacent to the Kona Community Hospital to the south. The property slopes in a mauka/makai orientation, with an average grade of approximately 10%. The mauka elevation is approximately 1,700 feet, while the makai section is at the 1,600 -foot elevation. The land uses in the area are a mix of agricultural, residential and commercial uses. The Kona Community Hospital is located adjacent to the property to the north and zoned RS- 15 /A -5a. Properties mauka of the site are zoned A -5a. Commercial zoned properties are located approximately 500 feet from the site, fronting Highway 11. The proposed request from a Single Family Residential (RS -15) to Neighborhood Commercial (CN -20) zoned district will conform to the goals, policies and standards of the Economic and Land Use Elements of the General Plan. The applicant's objective recognizes the growing demand for medical needs for this area of North and South Kona. The applicant hopes that the development of the medical complex would greatly reduce the commuting time for doctors as well as for patients, and provide greater efficiency of services to those seeking medical assistance. The property is in an ideal location, adjacent to the Kona Community Hospital. The proposed medical complex would support the doctors who may otherwise have to drive back and forth from their offices to the hospital. Thus, the proximity of the subject property to the hospital will help to reduce traffic congestion on Highway 11. The proposed change of zone request would be consistent with the Land Use and the Commercial Elements of the General Plan. The Land Use Element provides the primary basis for direct control and guidance of publicly and privately owned resources. It is also intended to be used as a policy guide for the coordinated growth and development of all sectors of the County. It sets forth goals, policies, standards and courses of action to accommodate growth without congestion, to designate and preserve the lands needed for residential use, commercial and visitor services, industry, agriculture and open space, and to coordinate these uses with the County's service and circulation systems. The overall Land Use goals, policies and standards are set forth to physically plan the lands in the County in the best interest of the island's residents. The proposed development would be consistent with the Commercial element of the General Plan by maximizing convenience to users of the medical complex, and providing a commercial development that complements the overall pattern of The Honorable J Yoshimoto, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 4 transportation and land usage within the surrounding area. The project site is located in an area adequately served by necessary services such as water, utilities, sewers and transportation systems. The property has 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. No professional surveys were conducted of the site, due to the history of extensive disturbance. The property was grubbed in 2009. By letter dated May 27, 2010, the Department of Land and Natural Resources Historic Preservation Division (DLNR -HPD) stated that no historic properties will be affected as previous grubbing /grading has altered the land and HPD previously reviewed the subject parcel and determined no historic properties were present. As the project site is located within an urban environment close to commercial and residential uses and previously used as a dwelling site, no professional flora/fauna surveys were conducted. The applicant believes that there are no rare or endangered floral or faunal resources within or proximate to the project site. The request would not unreasonably burden the public agencies to provide roads and streets, water, drainage, police and fire protection. Access to the project site is from a 30 -foot wide easement off Haukapila Street, a private cul -de -sac over which the State of Hawai `i has a perpetual access easement to the Kona Community Hospital on TMK: 7 -9 -10: 81. The applicant has provided a Grant of Roadway and Utility Easement for access to the subject parcel. According to the Department of Public Works, Haukapila Street has an approximate 20 -foot wide pavement with 4 -foot sidewalk (on one side) all within an approximate 30 -foot right -of -way, and intersects with Highway 11. There is a stop sign at the intersection of Haukapila Street and Highway 11. The southbound approach of Highway 11 has a dedicated left -turn lane into Haukapila Street. The applicant has included a Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) as Appendix G in the application. The TIAR analyzed the section of Mamalahoa Highway (Highway 11) between Haukapila Street and Haleki`i Street and concluded that the Haukapila Street stop sign on Highway 11 is currently operating at LOS F in both peak periods due to the high volume of traffic on the highway. The opening of the Mamalahoa Bypass may significantly reduce traffic volume on Highway 11; however, unacceptable levels of service would eventually return as the traffic on the highway increases and recall the need The Honorable J Yoshimoto, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 5 for mitigation. Traffic lights are recommended in the future to mitigate traffic at the intersection of Haukapila Street and Highway 11. However, the need for a traffic light is dependent on the opening of the Mamalahoa Bypass. The Highway 11/ Haleki`i Street intersection is currently operating at acceptable levels of service and is forecast to continue operating at acceptable levels of service until 2030 with no additional mitigating measures. In summary, the study concluded that "the proposed medical office complex project would not have an adverse traffic impact at the two study intersections with the recommended mitigation measures." In a letter dated June 2, 2010 the applicant has stated their willingness to defer occupancy of the proposed project until completion of traffic lights at the intersection of the Mamalahoa Highway and Haukapila Street. A condition of approval will be included to reflect this understanding, consistent with concurrency requirements. In a memo dated June 28, 2010, the Department of Public Works has stated that the information in the TIAR (Appendix G in the application) is inconsistent with data in the application and requests further corrections. DPW has indicated in the memo that additional comments on the TZAR would be forthcoming; however, as of this writing, the Planning Department has received no other comments besides those iterated in the June 28, 2010 memo. All utilities and services are available to the site. According to the Department of Water Supply, County water is available to the project site from a 12 -inch waterline along an existing road and utility easement within TMK: 7 -9 -10: 81 (Kona Community Hospital) approximately 320 feet from the subject property. County water for up to 4,200 gpd (7 units) can be made available for this project. Electricity and telephone services, as well as County fire, police and emergency medical services, are available to the property. The Kona Community Hospital is adjacent to the property to the north. The project will develop its own wastewater system meeting with the approval of the Department of Health. Solid waste will be disposed of by commercial handlers. The request is not contrary to Chapter 205A, Hawaii Revised Statues, relating to Coastal Zone Management. The project site is not proximate to the shoreline and not located in the SMA. There is no record of a designated public access to the shoreline or mountain areas that traverses the site. According to the applicant, no valued cultural, historical or natural resources exist on the property 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. The Honorable J Yoshimoto, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 6 The proposed request will not have a significant adverse impact to traditional and customary Hawaiian Rights. In view of the Hawai`i State Supreme Court's "PASH" and "Ka Pa'akai 0 Ka'Aina" decisions, the issue relative to native Hawaiian gathering and fishing rights must be addressed in terms of the cultural, historical, and natural resources and the associated traditional and customary practices of the site: Investigation of valued resources: As the project site is located within an urban environment close to commercial and residential uses and was previously used as a dwelling site, no professional archaeological or flora/fauna surveys were conducted. The Department of Land and Natural Resources Historic Preservation Division (DLNR -HPD) has stated that no historic properties will be affected as previous grubbing /grading has altered the land and HPD previously reviewed the subject parcel and determined no historic properties were present. • The valuable cultural, historical, and natural resources found in the rezoning area: No formal archaeological reconnaissance survey, oral history of kama`aina accounts of the area, historical survey of documentary records, or botanical study was included in the application. The applicant has received archaeological clearance from the DLNR -HPD, as the property was reviewed previously and grubbed in 2009. A condition of the change of zone will require that the applicant cease work and notify the SHPD should any unanticipated archaeological features or sites be uncovered during the course of development. • Possible adverse effect or impairment of valued resources: The applicant believes that the project will not negatively impact existing flora and fauna on the parcel, as the property was previously used as a dwelling site. Native plants may be destroyed by ground alteration. There is no evidence that the flora in the area are particularly desired or used for cultural practices. The property is not adjacent and /or proximate to the shoreline. As such, gathering of marine life, fishing and coastal access is not an issue. • Feasible actions to protect native Hawaiian rights: As stated by the applicant, no gathering is taking place on the site. Thus, to the extent to which traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights are exercised, the proposed action will not affect traditional Hawaiian rights; therefore, no action is necessary to protect these rights. Based on the above findings, approval of this change of zone request from a ti The Honorable J Yoshimoto, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 7 Single Family Residential (RS -15) to a Neighborhood Commercial (CN -20) zoned district would result in an appropriate land use pattern that will further benefit the general public. For your favorable consideration, an amendment to Section 25 -8 -4 (South Kona Zone Map), of the County Zoning Code is transmitted. We are enclosing copies of the staff Background, Planning Director's Recommendation, and transcript of the hearing for your information. Sincerely, 04 , Frederic Housel, Chairman Leeward Planning Commission Lmenrealestaterez 10- 0001241wpc2 Enclosures cc: Mr. Sidney Fuke Mr. Walter Yim Department of Public Works Department of Water Supply Department of Land & Natural Resources -HPD DOT - Highways, Honolulu Amy Self, Esq., Corporation Counsel BMENREZ.doc- 7/8/10 COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT BACKGROUND REPORT MEN REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT, INC CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (REZ 10 -124) MEN REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT, INC. has submitted an application for a Change of Zone from Single - Family Residential 15,000 square feet (RS -15) to Neighborhood Commercial 20,000 square feet (CN -20) for approximately 3.67 acres of land. The property is located on adjacent to and south of the Kona Community Hospital, mauka of the Hawai`i Belt Highway, in the vicinity of Halekii Street, Halekii, South Kona, Hawaii, TMK: 8 -1 -25: 11. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 1. Request/Project Description: Change of Zone from RS -15 to CN -20 to construct a medical office complex. Proposed improvements include five (5) three -story structures, each approximately 12,000 square feet in size and not exceeding 30 feet in height. The ground floor will be designated for parking. The project will be developed in two (2) phases, with the initial phase consisting of two (2) buildings. Upon build out, there will be approximately 60,000 square feet of office space in five (5) structures. (Planning Department Exhibit 1 Change of Zone application) 2. Reasons for the Request: The proposed facility is intended to provide office space for the doctors who provide services to the Kona Community Hospital. The applicant states that this project will greatly reduce commuting time for both patients and doctors who must frequently travel between their offices and the hospital. 3. Timetable /Cost: The initial phase is scheduled for completion within two years of the approval of the request, with the second phase to be completed two years thereafter, subject to water availability. The total cost of the project is estimated at approximately $13 million. 4. Landowner: MEN Real Estate Investment, Inc. OTHER INFORMATION 5. Proposed CN zoning: -1- ATTACHMENT: COMM. 943 BILL 300 • Height limit - 40 feet • Setback - front, 15 feet; side yards, 8 feet • Landscaping - required on all front yards; side yard requires a screening hedge not less than forty-two inches in height, within five feet of the property line, except for necessary drives and walkways • Plan approval required 6. Prior rezonings on the property: • Ordinance No. 323 - effective November 23, 1977, for a change of zone from RS- 15 to CN -10 • Resolution No. 128 - effective July 6, 1977, for access and utility easements to the property • Ordinance No. 89 133 - effective October 17, 1989, for a one year time extension to commence construction • Ordinance No. 91 2 - effective January 11, 1991, at the request of the applicant/landowner, repeal of Ordinance No. 323 to revert the property back to the RS -15 zoned district STATE AND COUNTY PLANS 7. State Land Use Designation: Urban. 8. General Plan LUPAG Map: Low Density Urban and Medium Density Urban. 9. County Zoning: RS -15. 10. Kona Community Development Plan (KCDP): Rural Town TOD. Policy LU -3.1, Redevelopment of Rural Towns as TODs /TNDs states that "the rural towns along Mamalahoa Highway (in the South Kona district) consisting of Holualoa, Honalo, Kainaliu, Kealakekua, and Captain Cook, are encouraged to be redeveloped as TODs /TNDs (Transit Oriented Development/Traditional Neighborhood Development)." The subject property falls within the Urban Core component of the TOD /TND, and is consistent with the Neighborhood Village sub - designation under the Urban Core. Neighborhood Village Core Areas are defined as areas that "are intended for predominantly residential, public /civic uses, or small -scale neighborhood - oriented -2- commercial uses." DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA 11. Subject Property: The property is a vacant, approximately 3.67 -acre rectangular shaped parcel located adjacent to the Kona Community Hospital to the south. The property slopes in a mauka/makai orientation, with an average grade of approximately 10 %. The mauka elevation is approximately 1,700 feet, while the makai section is at the 1,600 -foot elevation. 12. Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses: The land uses in the area are a mix of agricultural, residential and commercial uses, and zoned RS -15. The Kona Community Hospital is located adjacent to the north and zoned RS- 15 /A -5a. Properties mauka of the site are zoned A -5a. Commercial zoned properties are located approximately 500 feet makai of the site, fronting Highway 11. 13. U.S.D.A. Soil Type: Kona Soil Series, which consists of well - drained, thin organic soils over pahoehoe lava bedrock. Permeability is rapid, runoff is medium, and the erosion hazard is slight. This soil is primarily used for pasture and watershed purposes. 14. Land Study Bureau's Productivity Rating: "E" or "Very Poor ". 15. Noise Impacts: Existing ambient noise includes mostly vehicular traffic. 16. Air Quality: The proposed project will not directly impact air quality in the area. Fugitive dust during construction can be mitigated by compliance with the regulations of the Department of Health. 17. FIRM: Zone "X ", an area outside of the 500 -year flood plain. 18. Coastal Hazards: The property is not an oceanfront parcel, and will not affect, or be affected by shoreline processes. 19. Recreational Resources: The proposed development will not reduce the size of the coastline or other areas used for public recreational uses. 20. Scenic Resources: As the project site is located mauka of Highway 11, visual impacts to the coastal areas should not be impacted. The applicant states that the proposed structures will be less than 30 feet in height. 21. Flora/Fauna: As the project site is located within an urban environment close to -3- commercial and residential uses and the property was previously used as a dwelling site, no professional surveys were conducted. The applicant believes that there are no rare or endangered floral or faunal resources within or proximate to the project site. 22. Archaeological/Historical Resources: No professional surveys were conducted of the site, due to the history of extensive disturbance. The property was grubbed in 2009. By letter dated May 27, 2010, the Department of Land and Natural Resources Historic Preservation Division (DLNR -HPD) stated that no historic properties will be affected as previous grubbing/grading has altered the land and HPD previously reviewed the subject parcel and determined no historic properties were present. 23. 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. 24. Public Access: There is no record of a designated public access to the shoreline or mountain areas that traverses the property. 25. Traffic: The applicant has included a Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) as Appendix G in the application. The TIAR analyzed the section of Mamalahoa Highway (Highway 11) between Haukapila Street and Halekii Street and concluded that the Haukapila Street stop sign on Highway 11 is currently operating at LOS F in both peak periods due to the high volume of traffic on the highway. The opening of the Mamalahoa Bypass may significantly reduce traffic volume on Highway 11; however, unacceptable levels of service would eventually return as the traffic on the highway increases and recall the need for mitigation. Traffic lights are recommended in the future to mitigate traffic at the intersection of Haukapila Street and Highway 11. However, the need for a traffic light is dependent on the opening of the Mamalahoa Bypass. The Highway 11/ Halekii Street intersection is currently operating at acceptable levels of service and is forecast to continue operating at acceptable levels of service until 2030 with no additional mitigating measures. In summary, the study concluded that "the proposed medical office complex project would not have an adverse traffic impact at the two study intersections with the recommended mitigation measures." In a letter dated June 2, 2010 the applicant has -4- stated their willingness to defer occupancy of the proposed project until completion of traffic lights at the intersection of the Mamalahoa Highway and Haukapila Street. Per memo dated June 28, 2010, the Department of Public Works has stated that the information in the TIAR (Appendix G in the application) is inconsistent with data in the application, and requests further corrections. PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES 26. Access: Access to the project site is from a 30 -foot wide easement off Haukapila Street, a private cul -de -sac over which the State of Hawai`i has a perpetual access easement to the Kona Community Hospital on TMK: 7 -9 -10: 81. The applicant has provided a Grant of Roadway and Utility Easement for access to the subject parcel. According to the Department of Public Works, Haukapila Street has an approximate 20 -foot wide pavement with 4 -foot sidewalk (on one side) all within an approximate 30 -foot right -of- way, and intersects with Highway 11. There is a stop sign at the intersection of Haukapila Street and Highway 11. The southbound approach of Highway 11 has a dedicated left -turn lane into Haukapila Street. 27. Water: According to the Department of Water Supply, County water is available to the project site from a 12 -inch waterline along an existing road and utility easement within TMK: 7 -9 -10: 81 (Kona Community Hospital) approximately 320 feet from the subject property. County water for up to 4,200 gpd (7 units) can be made available for this project. 28. Wastewater: The proposed project will develop its own wastewater system meeting with the approval of the Department of Health. 29. Solid Waste: Solid waste will be handled by commercial haulers. 30. Essential Utilities and Services: Electricity and telephone services are available to the project site. County fire, police and emergency medical services are available to the property. The Kona Community Hospital is located adjacent to the property to the north. AGENCIES' AND ORGANIZATIONS' COMMENTS 31. Department of Public Works: P.D. Exhibit 2 - June 28, 2010 memo 32. Department of Water Supply: P.D. Exhibit 3 - May 25, 2010 memo -5- 33. Police Department: P.D. Exhibit 4 - May 13, 2010 memo 34. Fire Department: P.D. Exhibit 5 - May 5, 2010 memo 35. Department of Environmental Management: P.D. Exhibit 6 - May 7, 2010 memo 36. Department of Health: P.D. Exhibit 7 - April 28, 2010 memo 37. DLNR Historic Preservation Division: P.D. Exhibit 8 - May 27, 2010 letter AGENCIES - NO COMMENTS OR OBJECTIONS 38. DLNR Land Division AGENCIES - NO RESPONSE 39. Department of Transportation, Kona Traffic Safety Committee RESPONSE TO AGENCIES' COMMENTS 40. P.D. Exhibit 9 - May 26, 2010, June 2, 2010 and July 6, 2010 letters PUBLIC COMMENTS 41. None as of this writing. -6- s'71' II?: 2 APPLICATION FOR COUNTY REZONING (RS-15 to CN-20) MEN REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT, INC. HALEKII, SOUTH KONA, HAWAII TMK: (3) 8-1-025: 011 Prepared For: MEN REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT, INC. Prepared By: Sidney M. Fuke, Planning Consultant April 2010 Planning Dept. Exhibit / CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT (Type or legibly print the requested information) APPLICANT: MEN Real Estate Investment, Inc. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE:] ad, • , Frt'r 1crent DATE: April 5, 2010 ADDRESS: c/o Walter Yim 1314 South King Street, Suite 1156 Honolulu, Hawai`i 96814 LIST APPLICANT'S INTEREST IF NOT OWNER: LIST PRINCIPAL(S) INCLUDING NAMES OF MAIN OFFICERS: Michael Kramer — President Wesley Sugai, M.D. — Secretary, Walter P. Yim, Sr., Treasurer. PHONE:(Bus.) (808) 589 -2233 (Fax) 808 589 -2255 (Res) 808 225 -5092_ LANDOWNER(S): MEN Real Estate Investment, Inc. LANDOWNER SIGNATURE(S): / ' t i- Pres 'otCc , f DATE: April 4, 2010 • (May be by letter) LANDOWNER(S) ADDRESS: c/o Walter Yim 1314 South King Street, Suite 1156 Honolulu, HI 96814 REQUEST: RS —15 TO CN -20 (Existing zoning) (Proposed Zoning) TAX MAP KEY: 8 -1 -025: 011 STREET ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 81 -1034 Haukapila Street, Kealakekua, HI 96750 SIZE OF PROPERTY OR AFFECTED AREA(S) TO BE REZONED: 3.67 +/- acres AGENT: Sidney M. Fuke, Planning Consultant ADDRESS: 100 Pauahi Street, Suite 212, Hilo, Hawai`i 96720 TELEPHONE:(Bus.) (808) 969 -1522 (Res.) (Fax) (808) 969 -7996 Please indicate to whom original correspondence and copies should be sent. ORIGINAL: Sidney M. Fuke COPIES: Walter Yim 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 I 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 nave 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? Yes e. other (please state) 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. Construct a medically - related office building. See Envirornmental Report for detailed response. 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. -2- 5. Have you performed any study which discusses the environmental impacts your request would nave on the surrounding area and /or the County? Yes If so, please elaborate on your findings in the space provided below. Please refer to attached planning and environmental report 6. Are there any buildings on the subject area? No If so, what kind? What do you intend to do with those buildings if your request is approved? 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? -3- 8 . 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 needs improvement? Yes If so, what kind? Some improvements at the Haukapila Street/Mamalahoa Highway intersection Is the road adequate for the proposed traffic volume or load? Yes 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 X e. Police Protection X f. Fire Protection X g. Recreational Facilities X h. Recreational Facilities i. -4- 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. No. The property has been used as a dwelling and recently graded. Signature: -- Xi 41 rdvw, Address: c/o 1314 S. King St., Ste 1156 Hn196814 Telephone: (808) 589-2233 Date: April 5, 2010 -5- 6338A/50A P. D. 5/84 COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT APPLICATION COUNTY REZONING REQUEST (RS15 to CN -20) MEN REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT, INC. HALEKI'I SOUTH KONA, HAWAII TAX MAP KEY: (3) 8 -1 -025: 011 I. INTRODUCTION The applicant, MEN Real Estate Investment, Inc., proposes to develop a medical office called Haleki'i Plaza on a 3.671 acre parcel located proximate to the Kona Community Hospital. As such, the applicant is requesting the rezoning of the subject site from Single- family Residential (RS -15) to Neighborhood Commercial (CN -20). The subject site is located adjacent to and south of the Kona Community Hospital. As will be noted below, it was ironically once rezoned into the CN -10 district for a medical complex and subsequently, at the current landowner's request, rezoned back to the original RS -15 district. II. PROJECT LOCATION The subject property, consisting of 3.671 acres, is located on the mauka side of the Hawaii Belt Highway, in the vicinity of Haleki'i Street in South Kona. It is situated on the border of the South and North Kona Districts within the land division of Haleki'i, South Kona, TMK: 8 -1 -025: 011. More specifically, the site is located adjacent to and south of the Kona Community Hospital. (Figure 1) Access is via an existing 30 -foot wide easement over TMK: 7 -9 -010: 081(formerly TMK: 7 -9 -013: 015). (Figures 2 and 3). This easement branches off of Haukapila Street. Haukapila Street serves as the principal access to the Kona Community Hospital and other public uses housed within the former hospital site, including the courts. III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. Property Land Use History Ordinance No. 323, which became effective on November 23, 1977, resulted in the rezoning of the subject property into the CN -10 district. (Appendix A) At that time, the then applicant, Kona Medical Associates ( "KMA "), proposed to construct an out - patient medical facility to support what was then referred to as the Kona Hospital. (Please note that with the enactment of a State law creating the Hawaii Health System Corporation in the early 1990's, the name of the facility was changed to Kona Community Hospital.) 1 a PROJECT ® LOCATION NORTH Kea\ao \o Rd ,Haaka \\O St KONA HOSPITAL Q Halekii St - H Kea \gala Rd 3 „ roe o i S`. Akokou PI . OR c o�- ∎Loo. ., Al fo Kee Nani Kupuna PI <Z-. a, TO o Hoko N St _c € •SUbdiv ° c A l slpn e `'� Q . �e R` ee S Kahapi\i. Loop Q • 0 i 1 eke_ e a o o Hale Ke ., K ua PI A L P .. o 0 Q P\ . m g a a a � 0 1 VICINITY MAP s g NOT TO SCALE STATE OF HAWAII o N t` A �, MOLOKAI pp � `, o a � wve d sine-,•-•7; N � C�J4. IAHN °a ' 4, ,�� \ 44,/,-. WVgOUWE / 1' ;;,.., 7 10,....%) � I t ', 1 , . J t 1 r fl i , f X / /NI • , y v� 1 PROJECT � 1-2 -tt r�� . ��"y ,r � LOCATION I�ii' i ; .w. l r l,(t: 1, ' .,_ [ oeno 0 \�l tN"^�� PACIFIC 1 OCBAN 3 ISLAND OF HAWAII PONT KA LA MTH 1 LOCATION MAP ; STUDY INTERSECTIONS NOT TO SCALE ...... Figure 1 ii A LOCATION MAP 0� TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT HALEKII PLAZA MARCH 201 0 DAVIES PACIFIC CTR STE 1900 • 841 BISHOP ST, HONOLULU, HAWAII 96813 to c N M u = s d i ails: LL I W 4 M�u � H W \ g . o /Th 0 \ \ 2-17-2.- :� ,.Sy ° ss = ' s s ' Yap: p o \ z c A 4 O K o ao V. t ` IL IS \ r� co o o ® .\ , ` �4 rl / u R iu 1 ( ' 1 li VI J 1 "..t" ''S h 1 ® \. \` \\ U SUBJECT PARCEL O Y \ ` < -: N `�< l Y / EXISTING EASEMENT, t 0 "I $ 1 • � u • F K 1 I. "7 r � \ �I s 1It 'te t E 2 ,r 1 t� u Dq �� nJ' 3 f Cb 1 !. �_ n © ° ?o I gill a t ° 1 C e ` ft e 0 a 3 + 1 i . �i , o i a. O ` a C Q = 1 a i ar5 ' Z 4 j .7 : ti 1 Broil 1738 :: . 2 R 2 N. //YMyp 0: 4 M'"I.N Y 6o A' `� lr]d 0 e,r 11 Sac o • • 1 Y,, 1.._ k. WW1 MIN ,v /vn L seu ca siy llM IµL tl W FIGURE 2 -- o!...■ . ----.....,,,........7. , • tz,' 4 I 2 ,,,-x al 141 . u t .7 I 1 VII 1 I ZIP I i 4 t i . . -.....----------........., ' 4 i t.,', j. ' • l / ' d • i k I 1 '• n' a. i O....4 ....------•--- :. 2. ,. •,.: ■.1 I ‘I. t; 4 11 3 .• -4, ,,, 1 ...)- -, / / • " 1 :........ I & ' 1 .01. l0 . r it! ‘ 0 .-. < -. - - 0 ,, I s.-.... 2 , 1 \ - ..„,,,,' ...- ( . _• .. I ..,-- - • j o j . 4 4 1 L l i '', ..1., :•. . .0 I '41 0 i \ 4 1 ‘41, i r , ,1 :t • 4 . ' 4 '.'...., e 1 I 0 ; ..., 4 \ .• I I I ... i \ L--- / -; 1 '1! •• : , --_ - _ - 4 1 ‘ ' ' ' " 4 ',', / I IO 11;i1 1 1:4 '.` 4 ' t - 4 i \ i ,. . F (iv e.-c: Its .. ..c. , •':,.j II „ 1 ,s (s) V, - ' sk N 1, -ft( -.V. .3 : -., . )..._\ • ' ts ',I . 13I.' It ., ., i4-1 Z "•; 1 fi z •Ws, 1 ri . 11°' ,k3 . 1 '41 7.4, . Di =11:II:III: l'I'l +.1p I 1-..7 I 1 I I 1 I ! I I 1- - . :',\ k •-,--- '" @ , ,, - , ,1 L . . SUBJECT SITE \\. : V, k 0, , - t / 1 1 Easement 1 . 1 ......, : • g 1 ti- AV`,...-R_Npt. - • g , t 1 il ------ - 41 1.1 ,1 ....,...,•••• 'Ik• ® '.' e aC,.. . , • 1... : I M * .i ( I I .111\ . I , tr3 , -----.. ff• 1-.. • -=-11' z ® 7• ® - .. 1 ; ..., . .• 1. al } , :: I 1 '4 '4 I "4 . • \ il ' li 41 ..- p2.') 1 k 7 4 z . 35. !. 1 I 4 i ; '" i ,.. :: zr1 ,s_ l • s ( " 4 - :I it. o4 I 0 .4 0 t 4 0 • ... , .:: 8 ite y t) z ,, - i i 'r 1 -t :, :i . N 4.34 474 4 /4 C,• Ili • 4 4* ',f, ii ,. lir : ,, a .0 • 44. . 1...A 1 . Orr . it) li i \ _ -, 0 - 1 i . -... .P. I • "G 1 ,.. ff 4 -• -- • —-- .11 , c,.. I . / / 941 I S . ,,,,..-. 0 ,,, . 4, .: I• \ 1.81. I I .° ° '6 • I : 1 $ .1,. , ....7. i,.1 II / , ,,,• Ai , - s. „ , t , , . n , zit:'i.: -;", rd lI -4 '' 'A• \ 1 I i ' . `t 1 I S. 1 I 1 9 0 ,. . 1 ., 21/ e-I‘ . 4 ® 1°X. f . 'S E 1* . lk ' VI 21 la . i , o • A A ..... .... ,.. e '.f 8 ' ( , 'I " ,-4”#. + •0';:+ 11. .,.....„-... . .- . " If k 1 4, 10 ©Y - . '; .. 3 ' 0 4i) . 1 fAse_--,--- rr - r ---- ' r % J 4 n 1.1 4 i2I) '4 ,, 13' el.'r ---- , t 7 • It --------. FL A r ,/ / , t 1 %4 I 0 .,;..iLA ig , 5.•,. ! VII ' - PlAWAII . / ....J u., I --.......______ el 1 7:43171!:'-:-*7----.: : 77--1-.. •,-,.....,4A,4-t: li 40 f i 4 1 • i I 1 0, L i k ; ,e..„..,,ol e 4 '-• I . .j . I. 'i's t iq: i• 1 .* ' - 4•11- t r:1 - If gl- N".'*ax 1 iiii . a I . .1 . .. , N -0 I ; , /'''' • 1 : ,11 Z ti 1 1' ■1 . - t 1 4 /-- d 1 .. „'. ', O 3 1 -, a C...1 1 1.1 * 1 14 i PI 1 " V i ". • 1 ...„; it .1 - 014 :••- 2 . \ , s • ' • A oit7 • 102 I 44 L ' +—...,.... .I. (AIM/ f 91 II V C V In. V k) a YOW 2139 1104 V :I ..r•V.T.X •.-L ---. Z:1 ' PI 7-'I 4 Al AI :I a no - -,,r•;,;i4 0., 1 .. ' • • o.."'F.t."..4 4., !,;4 --;:05 PAW .....r 7177.. .11'121 • V:Siil : ...-4. ": . " .: a t-2, ?. 7 - ! _, - ::,...--- , , k..../ pm - ,, .. ,, g ,,,, .../e•-■•.1 : . . +. I . - '.. :: !. : ' .; -•:.- 4. ' . Z . . . .-;:: 2, - 2 , - .• 1, .., , ... ' :". . . .^ ,, .,- gt ... E:e • .-..g5:-. _ - -, L-i• i. ,= A . ,!;-; ,•:. " -,.. .' 7' f• M;....;=:.. -.,.. ,-- t-C.'i. l' • - ' - '-,,:' : - - - .? ]..' f::. - ,,, = ' 7 .7, '•.... F,', ,'. ' •;. . - : ''''. - . • ' .'" • itt '....!,.', ::.. ' • i .3 It should be noted that the access and utility easement to the subject site (see Figures 2 and 3) was secured from the County of Hawai'i on July 6, 1977 via Resolution Number 128. (Appendix B) After a series of time extensions granted by the Planning Director for the start of construction of the facility, KMA requested an amendment to Ordinance No. 323 to allow for additional time to commence construction. The 1 -year extension request, which was approved by the County Council as Ordinance No. 89 -133, became effective on October 17, 1989. (Appendix C) The subject property was then acquired by the current owner, MEN Real Estate Investment, Inc. ( "MEN ") in 1990. Shortly thereafter, because of the impending commencement deadline and other factors, MEN requested to have the CN -10 zoning repealed and the former RS -15 zoning restored. (Appendix D) This request was accommodated with the passage of Ordinance No. 91 2, which became effective on January 11, 1991. (Appendix E) B. Project Concept and Components The applicant is now proposing to develop the site into a medical office complex. The proposed facility is intended to provide office space for many of the doctors that provide services to the Kona Community Hospital. In so doing, this would greatly reduce commuting time of not only patients but their physicians who must frequently travel between their offices and the hospital. As such, this facility would be supportive of the Kona Community Hospital activities; yet, it would not be a facility requiring a Certificate of Need, unlike what was conditioned in the original rezoning ordinance. As proposed, to address potable water limitation and demand, the project would be developed with multiple structures instead of one (1) or two (2) large structures. Tentatively, the medical center is proposed to have five (5) structures, with each consisting of approximately 12,000 square feet of office space. The project would be developed in two (2) phases, with the initial phase consisting of two (2) buildings. Upon build out, there would be approximately 60,000 square feet of office space housed in five (5) structures. (See Figure 4) These structures are proposed to be three (3) stories in height, not exceeding thirty (30) feet. (See Figure 5) The ground floor would be set aside for parking, including the required handicapped stalls. (See Figure 6) As noted on the site plan (Figure 4), the project will have 2 F: P 1 > -2C )9 \I ulerii = 1u<u \`_- . . . . , I , \ Id A - 3i1e PI > _s., S. 4 /2005 11:'0:5' AM, ' ' .. . , Ii C i II „' -�� r ' rBwO' Isr Sl . e 1 � 1 I 1 °� D D �1 E �j (� ,, y i I $ � 0 3 $O�o�oo o g I C �.0 - C C c .' c I 1 l I ' L I� 1 ° ,00'00° 4 � o c cc 1 1 ii li U[ ;� je rk I o0 ro 4An ° & - i a h O c. c is • i Dp I 24.0' — Il = m r e D� 14 .1 . n i g � B.a'I 'I 9 8 ' I _ � Cr(P) � 3 i ;I g n g c 1 0 i \ 0 I : 0 11 ila I :_.. -. 24.0' � 11 : a I c>C C C C :C it \ \ .1 -±1 I :••• .• • M - 1 / ` tl s r • .a r `' 4Aoa' O 's . ? is a m $ 7 as W ► li z f'• N d I " b o a LOADING o�A4„° P I , . 1 o I e O !kk 1, °�� 0 ' Mob, 0 0 4 08° S 3 OgJ0 a , 1. a D. A £ o ? o //��-- 0 1V06, p� n,, &e vo 'N 1 / R -; ��' 11 ON ° SOW 0 � i flfli (1�O il � j \ � , °'o4AP' E % 1' o I /11 OtT030 II / os ....?: . ,M'cbd ,mvp 24.0' l a 1 ` di. I g I �. II, H . o 1i. I • 1 x T1 N r - -0 i 1 a te -.I 24.0' r En- O 2 o 70 1 DO tnp mA D ., . ., 0 11 1 n p000l x g l ._.. .. 1 - C - -I m W O O xi C 0 1 D 90Dm�m > 0 N m o m o e o • I\ m D m m x is V Cb N bl l� / q S II ::'1 �� 0 �� _ fi -p O - j; _ _ 'rte[ $ D o Z o o m ar A o __ a n 0 <7 x= O N N N N N ° 0 0 _-- . D� DDDD D !' �� - m m.5 N o* o -_�_ R� 11 0000 O , I - -_- -i M o fT D C ( a y N N a D(Dal C &54o4@ ORnog4a®Mi} Uu ALIT T.M.K.(S) 8 -1 -025:011 HALEE III BUILDING ARCHITECTS Halekl1. South Kona FIGURE ARCHITECTS • PLANNERS • ENGINEERS Hanall •aor+s aau. = /PAX E aoo '0t v«uo : e P •,P•cpch_2CJ9 \I ul,ii =Ia %u \S \Gld A.dI1y, 2/1 11:7.7:16 IX ':1 0 ,, ,,,., �1 .., u s I1 z 1111111111111 ',Ijilh l l , 1 h' 111 o m 11111 1,1 11,:1,;1;, I- 1 111111111111 Il „ : ,, . . ;tl;C; L [ 1 1 1 1 1 1l 1 141 < 1 1 1 1 111111111 1f1,1,1,1,1; 1, I lilt 111 I I I ' 100100011 T, !+ 11 11111 0 11111111111 _ MI • 1 i i,1,1,1 , l I, ■ ■ II 1'I .I 111111 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 7127 - 7 _ I l'' 11rrr 111111, ! [1111:11:1!:1!:11:11;o11111;1. a I'I , ,I I I ; I 1, I r {' / ' I i l III'1'1'II ; I'1' , I 1 III11 I I I I E I' I' 1 1' 1;1' 1' 1' 11111 I ■ I 1 II 1 11 d111 1111 1! r I Iltlllllllllll I '1�, r1 -I 11 111'1'11111 / It 1 !1111 i 1111111111111 A k tt ,111111 I I'I l 01 1 11 Iil rte _/ c ' • V 11111k11 11'111 l'111'II1,, •'�1 Nn nlh ld� I �1, , a1 �du 1111. _I •_.• ': '; I'; Ij1 ,I;'rll;ll l;l';h;l lllr ;i.r 1, nd� ,landId� d111nln,nlnlnd1dlntl - - - -- �dli I I I I I I I I II,I I I I I IP�I I igEil _ _ ( ;1 Inh41;nlnlnllrl�ll l,nN,1111 �nlnhllnli• •nnl•1n1 1.11.11 I.1 `: il,;l ,;l,;l ;l , lal„ I ;1,;1,;1,;1;1;I;1;l;l,;l :1,:11r,lyj, P'1 1�' d 0001 0d1 ;I•'II,:I ;I �: �'i 1'1 ;; II f11 _ - -- - -- ! h ,,I,,11111111 il 1 I ' �Id V4 dlii IliiillI ,iJ a i I :111 I',I' 1 I' 1 1' 1' 1 1 1 1' I' 1';1 "I'', 1111111 _ 9 II �IIII .111111111111111111111 [ 1 1'; 1 1 IIII 1' 1' 1 1 1' I P I' 1'•1' 1 nd , :10.10141 , 11010,10 , 40t; 1 111111, I I ";1 'III'llil,l'l 11111 :I : J 1 PI I I I Iilii I, 'IJ 111 1 I il' 111llillllllllllll111I. .I I I U 1 1 111, ' i_iitil 1 ; 11 1 I ;1 ; fi II 11 11 I'JI I,i 11111111 11;1 1 I 91111111 11111.1 11,1 d� , 1 IIII 111111 , 1; 1 . , 1 1 11 1 1 1 '.1111 1'I 11 ,n,r11uI .111 '' __ n 1 1 ' hl i'Il 1 1 1. a i l' 11 ;1 f ai l lj;lj ll I L i l, 1 I ' 11 . 11' 1 1 1��1, ' Id I 11 1 14 1411 II I'll I II I II 1111' l 1 1 1 I 1 ; 111111111111 1 1L'�'' 1'111 ; _ I li It 111' I' ' ' I I I' 1 1 11 ,1' I I I II' 111' I' I';I,, IIIIIIIIIIII1' 1 1 1 1 i l i I,I I II I I I I ■1■1■1U1I1■1I! _.__ I I 1 " ; III 1 1 11111 IIII 111 .1 11111II11x1111g1;1 1 i i ll ; 1 1. 1 1 i 1 ililiI / 1'I ��i�iMilil I_ 1 , ' ;I1; •Lj 1,1.1L111 M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ' I i 11;1 1;:1;1 1: V 1'11 i t � iij111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ■ 1 1 1 1 1 1■ 1 ;i ?u I ll , 1 li'1• I l i i jili ,,, 1 1 11 ■ 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 ■111111111111111 1 1 , 1 11 1' "' C'n,11,1,,1 1 1 I I 111 I I 111111 I I■ 1 I I i i i i ■ 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 III i 11' !1, 111'11lIIIJII &,illlll 1111111 1 , !L :,:1,:I;'.:; :,:,, I' :I :III,: :1 1 1 1 ■ 1 1 1 1 1 1 111 s , 11ro:1li iill'llii '1 11111i1i111!11111111 !111 1 ■11�1! 1E11 1° 11 "' I r l l l l l I'a 1 1 1 1 l; I'. ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ •I I,'1I 0 11 I 11111111111 1111111111111 1 1111111111 1111'1'1 I'I CI', 11111 11 �I1111111 1 111 1111 I' I' I' 1 1 1.111' 111' I' 1 11,11 II 1 1�1�1�1�1�11 _ , !!iliiiL ? 1 ; '1 ,I1 11111 fI0I 11.11h 11;1'III'1 11 - 1101.1 iI �I,I ,I,I ; 11;1 i1 .1 ,I ,I ,I �I i1il • I fl 1 1 1 1' I'I 1 ;1'I , "P1 1 1 1 1 ' 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 'P 1 1 I' 111II '111 1 'I 111 111114 I ' j , 1 ' 11 ' 1 1 1 1 1' '.. 1 1111 1 1 I '. � rllrll'IIiIh1111 d 11111111litlll I I II1 111'1 I III I'1'I11 la 1 it 111 ; 1 1 I 1 1 111 611'�Il 1 1 I '. 1 iii . ILI II III111111111111 It . .1 I I' I I' 1 1 1 I 1 1,1 11 I' 1 I I' :::: i I it I I1I'I 11 111111 I I I IIV I1 ;P111'I 11111'l111'1'1'lljlll' 1 I l 1 I I' 11V1 1111111111a 111111111111' 1111111111411111 1 1 jl'I l ll i 1 1, 1, 1 I'I l�,l'I I�.LII I'I'I!p' E • I 411 r11 1111 1 !j111 I'I 1 II I'I'll I'I 1111111 IIII I, _ _ I'I :III I11 11 'LFI!I;I' 1 11111111111111 III 1 'I 1 1 ' 1 11 1. 1 I ' ! uI J _ 1� � J '= ti ■ � / ' 1 1 1 - _ ,I 1'11 1111111 i i 1 I i i W E b " � � J 11: I 1 1 1 1y 1 1 1 1, i 1 1 4 1 I ;1 1 ;1 1p 11 ' 11111111111111 1 ru11u11';1111 I' IW!d41,1, i; J 1,1111.11 ;.�1,1h14e 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ; ;!iilii 1111111111111 1 lo i l' iii l' d 1I 31 w®[@ G3ofD C5 gfle]40 DIEw ®g4I1i ®W4 fJYK@o ALI'I T.M.K,(3)8 -I -035011 HALEKII BUILDING ARCHITECTS Halo kll, South Kona ARCHITECTS L PANNHRS • ENGINEERS Hama FIGURE 5 :aoxa a.n .a.:„,-Ptga"iwo as. A- Y--fxw e . -wns P: .F u:ect _ ^CJ+ \I u I,ii =1,u \S- e -L - \GU F.al,y, a /4: 2009 11:43:19 tr/ ":1 60' -0" y 8' -0" 1 -0" 24' -0" y 18. -0" i / 1 \ 'w_ I N ' I P 1 o t i A _ . F oirmioa I __ 41i1 . 1.110104 4. 4 .. ^ 0 1 I \ O --I. & O N 0 Z O 0 -1 m r O 11 O 1 . A Z m o m /� o N A ,, W C n n 0 C 0 o 0 O C C Z Z i t • '' '."' fi_. e Ei I---- W INIFIIIIP :: cn M ,, t m M C n? I 1 " s O m • V O Ia I®t3tl QOe I g3a.R® oupw0F31S tmcgun ['ma, flo© ALI'I T.M.K. (3) 8 -I -025:011 1iA1 II BUILDING ARC HITECTS Halokll, `..oath Karts ARCHITECTS • PLANNERS • ENQINEERS Harvaf1 FIGURE 6 two hundred ten (210) parking spaces, which would include seven (7) handicapped accessible stalls. The principal access from the Mamalahoa Highway (Highway 11) would be initially from Haukapila Street, and then continue along a 30- foot easement that would be fully improved with a 20 -foot wide pavement. C. Project Timetable and Cost The applicant intends to secure the balance of the required permits and begin making the appropriate improvements immediately upon securing all development permits. Hopefully, this can be done by the middle part of next year, with completion of the initial phase within two (2) years of the approval of the zoning change. The second phase could be completed within 2 years of the initial phase, subject to water availability. The applicant estimates the cost of the entire project to exceed $13 million. The initial phase, because of the high off -site infrastructural improvements, is estimated to cost $9 million. :IVANSTITUTIONAL CONSIDERATIONS A. State Land Use The subject property is designated Urban. As such, no State Land Use boundary amendment is required to accommodate the proposed CN -20 zoning request. B. County General Plan The County General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) map designates the site Medium Density. As such, a General Plan amendment to the LUPAG map would not be required. Relative to the Medium Density designation, the General Plan allows consideration for "Village and neighborhood commercial and residential and related functions (3 -story commercial; residential - up to 35 units per acre." The requested zoning and planned uses would be consistent with the uses envisioned within the Medium Density area. C. Kona Community Development Plan ( "CDP ") Relative to the Kona CDP, Section 15.1 of the County General Plan called for the development and eventual County Council adoption of 3 Community Development Plans. The General Plan states that the CDP "will translate the broad General Plan statements to specific actions as they apply to specific geographical areas." The General Plan also notes that should the CDP require a General Plan amendment, it could be considered concurrent with the adoption of the CDP. However, "If there is a direct conflict between the Community Development Plan and the General Plan, the General Plan shall be controlling." Pursuant to the above, the Kona CDP was developed and adopted by the County Council during the latter part of the year 2008. The CDP identified its vision to be "A more sustainable Kona characterized by a deep respect for the culture and the environment...." In terms of guiding urban and rural developments, one of the adopted principles called for developments in rural areas (such as the subject area) are directed to existing rural towns and villages. The subject property falls within the Rural Transit - Oriented Developments (TOD) outlined in Kona Land Use Map of the CDP. D. County Zoning The County zoning of the requested area is Single Family Residential (RS -15). If the Neighborhood Commercial (CN -20) request were approved, all related land use and development codes such as Plan Approval, parking, landscaping, fire, ADA, and the like would be complied with by the applicant. E. Other Permitting Considerations The site is not located within the County Special Management Area (SMA). As such, no SMA Use Permit would be required. However, as noted earlier, other construction- related permits would still be required. These would be of the "ministerial" variety, such as Plan Approval, grading permit, building permit, Department of Health clearances, and the like. V. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS A. General Description The 3.67+ acre parcel is generally rectangular in shape. Its width ranges between 291 to 296 feet. Its width varies from 548 to 613 feet. The land slopes in an easterly to westerly (mauka to makai) with an average grade difference of approximately 10 %. The mauka elevation 4 is about 1,700 feet, while the makai section is about 1,600 feet. The site is vacant of any structures. . B. Climate, Soil and Topography Being on the leeward side of the island and located southwest of Hualalai volcano, the project site is generally sunny in the mornings with occasional afternoon clouds. The rainy season is usually during the summer, with wetter periods from November to January. The average annual rainfall is approximately 30 inches, with pan evaporation estimated at 55 inches per year. The mean annual temperature is approximately 75 degrees. Because the site is situated on the leeward side of the island, winds tend to be light and variable. Slight easterly winds occur during the day, while westerly or mountain winds are prevalent during the evenings. According to the US Department of Agricultural Soil Conservation Service, the land is classified to be part of the Kona Soil series. This series consists of well- drained, thin organic soils over pahoehoe lava bedrock. "In a representative profile, the surface layer is about 5 inches thick and slightly acid. Permeability is rapid in the soil, and water moves rapidly through the cracks of the lava. Runoff is medium, and the erosion hazard is slight. This soil is primarily used for pasture and watershed purposes." According to this author's interpretation of the Land Study Bureau Overall Master Productivity Rating map, this site is classified "E -302" or Very Poor. It is of the Almost Bare Pahoehoe soil series. This series is characterized by properties with little or no soil material and brown to nearly black Pahoehoe. It is well drained and unsuited for machine tillability. Under the Agricultural Lands of Importance to the State of Hawaii (ALISH) classification system, it appears that the site is classified as "Other." C. Natural Hazards 1. Drainage The Federal Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) identifies the subject area to be within Zone X (areas outside of 500 -year flood). As there will be an added level of impervious surface resulting from the proposed development, there may be an 5 issue relating to potential increased run -off. In that event, drywell(s) or similar type of accommodations will be implemented, subject to the review and approval of the Department of Public Works and State Department of Health via the Underground Injection Control (UIC) permit process. With the proposed on -site drainage improvements, all potential drainage and /or flooding issues could be reasonably addressed and mitigated. 2. Tsunami Hazard Given its elevation (1,600 ±) and distance from the nearest shoreline (3± miles), it is located outside of the Civil Defense's Tsunami Evacuation Zone. Thus, there should be little or no threat from high waves. 3. Volcanic and Earthquake Hazards The United States Geological Survey (USGS) classifies the subject site as Lava Flow Hazard Zone 3, on a scale of ascending risk, 9 to 1. This designation applies to much of northern portion of the South Kona District. This would be comparable to the City of Hilo. Areas further south within the South Kona District falls within Zone 2. There is very little that can be done to protect structures and improvements on the site from lava flows. Relative to protection of life, however, this would be achieved through the evacuation routes and warning systems provided by the County Civil Defense agency. Such notices will be prominently placed within office building. The entire island of Hawaii falls within Earthquake Zone 4, according to the County Building Code. As such, all structures built on the site will have to meet with the more restrictive seismic hazard structural requirements of the Building Code. D. Fauna Resources Although there was no professional survey conducted of the faunal resources of the site, the applicant does not believe that rare or endangered faunal resources are likely to be found within or proximate to the subject site. This is due to the already developed state of the subject area and its immediate surrounding area. 6 Nonetheless, due to the semi - developed state of this area, the faunal resources should be somewhat typical of other developed areas. One may thus find bird species such as the Spotted Dove, Japanese White - eye, House Finch, Common Myna, and the like. Domestic animals such as cats and dogs, and other animals like rats and mongoose are also common. None of these are endangered animals. As such, it is unlikely that the development of this property would cause any adverse faunal impacts. E. Flora Resources As with the description of the site's faunal resources, no professional botanical survey was done of the subject area. In historical times, the site was used residentially. The area has been recently graded, and there is no discernible vegetation on the site. Accordingly, there should be no adverse floral impacts. F. Historic /Cultural /Archaeological Resources Likewise, no commissioned archaeological survey of the site was made. The entire property was grubbed in the early 2009. The grubbing permit, with sign off from the State DLNR - Historic Preservation Division, was issued on December 3, 2008. A copy of this grubbing permit (091985) is found in Appendix F. The recent clearing makes it Tess likely to find any archaeological features on the site. Nonetheless, during the course of improving the site, should any unanticipated archaeological features or sites be uncovered, work will cease and the applicant will immediately notify the Planning Department. G. Valued Cultural Resources The recent Hawaii State Supreme Court's "PASH" and "Ka Pa'akai 0 Ka'Aina" decisions require decision - makers to consider a project's impact to native Hawaiian gathering and fishing rights. Specifically, there must be a discussion of the cultural, historical, and natural resources and associated traditional and customary practices of this site and the impact of this project to these resources and practices. In this situation, the subject site is not adjacent and /or proximate to the shoreline. As such, fishing and coastal access is not an issue. Furthermore, there are no known endemic or threatened plants on the site. The applicants note that since owning this property for over 20 years, they have not observed any native Hawaiians gathering plants • within or proximate to the subject site. As such, it would appear very unlikely that the site would serve such purpose today and /or in the recent past. Nonetheless, if legitimate claims are made, the applicants will make the appropriate access accommodations. Based on the above, it does not appear that the project would have any potential adverse impacts relating to native Hawaiian cultural and historical resources and /or practices. II. Water and Coastal Resources The subject site is located over three (3) miles from the coastline. As such, coastal impacts resulting from discharge of drainage systems from the site should not be significant. Being a non - coastal property, no coastal access will be affected. The proposed development will develop its own wastewater system meeting with the approval of the State Department of Health. The standards and guidelines of the State now provide greater protection of the groundwater and coastal resources in this area. Further as noted earlier, prior to the installation or use of any drywells on the site to address on -site drainage concerns, the appropriate UIC permit from the State will be taken. At that time, impacts to water and coastal resources will be carefully examined. I. Noise, Air Quality, and Dust The existing background ambient noise level in this area is wind, foliage, birds, and the like. However, the significant manmade noise is influenced by the traffic associated along both the Mamalahoa Highway (Highway 11). With the traffic, the noise level is relatively high, averaging more than 55 Ldn. Although the site is buffered from the highway by intervening properties, to further mitigate noise impact, the applicant plans to install appropriate landscaping along the makai frontage of the property and to the sides. There will also be short-term noise impacts during the construction phase. To mitigate this impact, the development of this project — particularly the site work - will be limited to daylight hours and on weekdays. Contractors will also be required to comply with 8 established State Department of Health guidelines and standards relating to noise and emission controls. The proposed development should not generate any direct air quality impacts. As the project itself is not expected to have uses that generate adverse air pollutants, the only discernible air quality impact would be associated with vehicular traffic to and from the site. While the added traffic will have an impact to the ambient air quality, the impact should not be significant. This is due in part to the higher EPA standards for vehicular air emissions and the prevailing tradewinds. All of the required parking area within the project site will be paved with an all- weather, dust free surface. Landscaping will also be required as part of the Plan Approval requirement. As such, with the exception of minimal construction dust in the beginning, long term dust generated by the project should be insignificant. J. Scenic and Visual Considerations In the Natural Beauty element of the General Plan, there are sites or areas listed as scenic resources. The subject site is not listed as a scenic site. However, the views of the coast and Hualalai Mountain are indirectly referenced. From a viewplane perspective, the subject site is situated between mauka of the Highway. As such, it would not have any public visual impacts to the coastal areas. Relative to Hualalai Mountain, the project site is situated to its side, and thus should not impede any of the public views of the Mountain from the highway. Notwithstanding those circumstances, the proposed structures will be less than 30 feet tall, less than the existing Zoning Code's 35 -foot height requirement for the Single- family Residential zone. Then, too, added mitigation could be achieved through the extensive landscaping planned for this area. As such, while the structures will be somewhat visible, their visual impact should not be overly pronounced. VI. SOCIAL AND RELATED CONSIDERATIONS A. Surrounding Land Uses The surrounding land uses in this area are a mixture of low to moderately dense residential, agricultural, and commercial uses. There are residential subdivisions located generally makai of the subject property. There are also some commercial uses fronting the Highway and within 500 feet of the subject property. As noted earlier, 9 the Kona Community Hospital and other public facilities abut the project site's northerly boundary. There are also agricultural uses generally north and south of the subject site. These uses, however, are not adjacent to the site. The requested zoning would thus be consistent with the evolving mixture of commercial and residential land use pattern in this area. Nonetheless, because of there are some residential developments proximate to the subject area, mitigative measures will be taken. These measures deal principally with landscaping, lighting, and access. B. Economic Impacts The requested zoning would have some measure of economic impact, as it would provide short -term employment opportunities for those in the construction and related industries. When completed, there would be additional employment. New workers would be needed to staff the various office uses. Tentatively, it is anticipated that at least 50 full -time equivalent jobs would be generated by this project. A commercial rezoning would also increase the tax revenues to the County. However, there could be some real property tax consequences for the nearby agriculturally zoned properties. As the assessed valuation of the subject property rises due to the higher commercial use, there could be some fallout to neighboring properties. However, landowner who is intent on keeping its property for residential or agricultural uses would have the option of dedicating its land for residential or agricultural uses. C. Agricultural Impacts The subject site has not been used for commercial agricultural purposes for over 30 years. Although there are some agricultural uses within 1,000 feet of the subject property, the immediate surrounding area consists more of a mixture of commercial and residential uses. Further, the soil classification system of the Land Study Bureau designates the site as Class E or "Very Poor ". While it does have agricultural potential, it is not unique from an agricultural resource perspective. Thus, its removal from potential agricultural use should not compromise the agricultural objectives of the County. 10 Given the above, the agricultural impacts resulting from this rezoning should be negligible, if at all. VII. INFRASTRUCTURE CONSIDERATIONS A. Road and Traffic The immediate access to the site is from a 30 -foot wide easement off of Haukapila Street. Haukapila Street has a right -of -way of at least 50 feet with a 20+ foot wide pavement. Haukapila Street eventually intersects with Highway 11. There is a stop sign at Haukapila Street where it intersects with Highway 11. The southbound approach of Highway 11 has a dedicated left-turn lane into Haukapila Street. A traffic impact analysis report (TIAR) was prepared for this project and is found in its entirety in Appendix G. The study examined particularly the intersections of Haleki'i Street and Haukapila Street. The study noted that the signalized Haleki'i Street intersection currently operates at Level of Service ( "LOS ") B in the AM and PM peak periods. "The intersection would remain at level of service B or better for future scenarios with no traffic control changes at the Haukapila Street intersection. " The study concluded that this intersection "would not require mitigation in the future, with or without the proposed project." Relative to the stop -sign controlled Haukapila Street intersection, however, the study noted that it is currently operating at LOS "F" in both the AM and PM peak periods. It predicts that with completion of the by -pass in 2015, the LOS should decrease to "D" and "E" for the AM and PM peak, respectively. This, however, is predicted to worsen to LOS E and F, respectively by 2020. The study noted that a "feasible mitigating measure would be to install a traffic signal at the Haukapila Street intersection." The study concluded that "the proposed medical office complex project would not have an adverse traffic impact at the two study intersections with the recommended mitigation measures." B. Water According to discussions with staff at the Department of Water Supply ( "DWS "), county water for up to seven (7) units or 4,200 gallons per day ( "gpd') could be made available for this project. It is with this understanding that the applicant is proposing to develop the project in phases, with the initial phase consisting of two (2) office buildings with 11 approximately 24,000 gross square feet. The applicant intends to submit an engineering study to the DWS to justify water use and conservation measures to maintain the allocable cap of 4,200 gpd prior to receipt of Final Plan Approval. The applicant would defer further development of the project, pending availability of adequate County water. C. Wastewater As there is no municipal sewer line in this area, the applicant intends to construct its own private wastewater system on the site. The standards and specifications of the State Department of Health would be met for this system. D. Solid Waste Solid waste will be handled by commercial haulers who will dispose of the refuse at the county landfill at Pu'uanahulu. During the course of preparing the land for this project, the applicant intends to retain as much of the material on the property. This should thus minimize disposal at approved disposal sites. This and other waste reduction methods will be reflected in the required solid waste management plan to help address this situation. E. Other Government Services As this area is already part of an urban area, it already has access to a number of services. All of the required police, fire, and related services are available. Police protective services are provided from the stations at Captain Cook, less than two (2) miles from the subject area in South Kona. The Fire Station, where emergency medical and paramedical services are also provided, is also located next to the Police station in Captain Cook. . The Kona Community Hospital is located adjacent to the site. This facility is one of five (5) licensed hospitals on the island. As this project is a commercial one, it should have little or no direct impacts to schools, parks, and other related facilities. As the project may indirectly generate a school demand, it should be noted that the site is proximate to Konawaena High School and Konawaena Elementary Schools. There are also public parks in Captain Cook and others within a 3 -mile radius. 12 Thus, no extension of government services would be required, and existing facilities should be sufficient to accommodate the demand expected from this project F. Other Utilities All other utilities such as telephone and electrical services are available to the site. VIII. IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE ANALYSIS A. Relationship Between Local Short-Term Uses of Environment and Maintenance and Enhancement of Long-Term Productivity The short-term use of the site would probably be the same as the current use, which is "de facto" open space. This will continue until the full improvements are made, which will hopefully be before the middle part of next year. This project should not result in any significantly adverse short or long- term impacts that cannot be properly mitigated. There will be direct and indirect economic benefits resulting from the construction and implementation of this project. There will be construction jobs created in the short -term and at least 50 full -time equivalent positions created. Relatedly, the project will generate increased tax revenues that can supplement the State and County's fiscal resources. Because of its location, this project will provide a service that can be made reasonably accessible to the immediate neighborhoods, as well as to the Hospital. The required infrastructure - if needed - will be implemented by the applicant to mitigate potential impacts of this project. B. Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources The area of the requested rezoning has already been extensively disturbed. As such, the commitment of natural or other resources (such as botanical and avifauna!) would not appear to be significant. However, if there are inadvertent finds, they will be treated pursuant to acceptable practices and policies of the State. C. Mitigative Measures The applicant intends to provide any required off and on -site infrastructure in conjunction with the development of this project. 13 • These will include on -site drainage system, landscaping, water, and wastewater improvements. All of these will be done in conjunction with the permitting and permit implementation phases of this project. Off - site traffic - related improvements at the Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway extension will also be provided. These will consist of traffic lights at the intersection of Highway 11 and Haukapila Street. If any inadvertent cultural or archaeological discoveries are made during any phase of this project, the Planning Department and State Historic Preservation Division will be notified and appropriate mitigation will be taken before work is resumed. Landscaping will also be incorporated within the project site, as well as along the boundaries adjacent to residential properties. The landscaping would be consistent with the Planning Department's landscaping rules. D. Alternatives to the Proposed Project 1. No Project Under the status quo alternative, the site would remain in its de facto present vacant, cleared use. Under this scenario, the site would not be utilized to its highest and best use, as envisioned by the General Plan and the commercial growth of the general area. 2. Development Based on Existing RS -15a Zoning Under this alternative, the area of the requested zoning may still not be utilized in a manner that helps the broader community. The site would probably be subdivided into six (6) lots. While residential Tots would still be useful, their use would preclude uses that would be supportive of the area's medical facility. 3. Residential Rezoning Another option could be to utilize this site for a residential project. While that would still be consistent with the General LUPAG's map Medium Density designation, this option may not be really desirable from a noise perspective, given its proximity to the Highway. 14 4. Evaluation of Alternatives Leaving the property in its current state would not maximize the use of the land. The land could be subdivided for residential uses, but their use would preclude supportive medically - related uses. There would also be diminished tax revenues and fewer services to the public. While alternative residential densities are possible, those uses may not be really desirable, given its proximity to the Highway. Neither of the above alternatives could deliver some relief to the traffic condition as would the requested commercial project. The proposed project would make improvements at the Highway intersection. Then, too, the use would provide needed medically - related office uses proximate to the Hospital. In that regard, the project in totality would be consistent with the land use objectives sought to be accomplished by the County General Plan LUPAG map. In view of the aforementioned, it would appear that none of the alternatives would be more prudent and beneficial than the requested CN -20 zoning alternative. IX. REGULATORY ANALYSIS - County and State Land Use Policies A. General Plan LUPAG Map The General Plan provides for the long -range comprehensive development of the island of Hawaii. It provides direction for balanced growth in the County. The LUPAG map designates the site Medium Density, a designation that allows the requested CN -20 zoning. Accordingly, this request would not be inconsistent with the LUPAG map. B. General Plan Policies The requested zoning would be consistent with the goals, policies, and standards of the Economic and Land Use Elements of the General Plan. Specifically, the more pertinent ones follow: Economic Element Goals 15 • Provide residents with opportunities to improve their quality of life. • Economic development and improvement shall be in balance with the physical and social environments of the island of Hawaii. • The County of Hawaii shall strive for diversity and stability in its economic system. • The County shall provide an economic environment which allows new, expanded, or improved economic opportunities that are compatible with the County's natural and social environment. Policies • The County shall provide an economic environment which allows new, expanded, or improved economic opportunities that are compatible with the County's natural and social environment. • The County shall strive for an economic climate which provides its residents an opportunity for choice of occupation. • The County shall strive for diversification of its economy by strengthening existing industries and attracting new endeavors. • The County shall encourage the development of a visitor industry which is consistent with the social, physical, and economic goals of the residents of the County. Land Use Element (Commercial) Goals • Provide for commercial developments that maximize convenience to its users. • Provide commercial developments that complement the overall pattern of transportation and land usage within the island's regions, communities, and neighborhoods. 16 Policies • 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. • Distribution of commercial areas shall be such as to best meet the demands of neighborhood, community and regional needs. • The development of commercial facilities should be designed to fit into the locale with minimum intrusion while providing the desired services. Appropriate infrastructure and design controls shall be incorporated into the review of such developments Standards • Commercial developments shall be located in areas adequately served by transportation, utilities, and amenities. Commercial developments shall provide for adequate internal circulation amongst commercial facilities in the area. • Off - street parking and loading facilities shall be provided. • Commercial development shall maintain or improve the quality of the present environment through the consideration of visual, access, landscaping, and other design elements in their development. • Preference shall be given to commercial lands with a reasonably level topography. Discussion If approved, the project would provide needed services to this region. Its location is ideal to service not only the surrounding commercial and residential uses in this area, but more particularly the medical and other public offices in this area. Relatedly, all required infrastructures are there or, if not, will be provided by the applicant without taxing government's servicing ability. 17 Further, while the site has some on -site developmental constraints, they are not insurmountable. The site is designated "X" on the FIRM map, and as such flood issues are generally nonexistent or one that can be accommodated through normal county requirements. There are also no known archaeological or cultural features on the property that would be adversely impacted. If there are inadvertent archaeological features found on the site, work will stop and the State DLNR and County Planning Department will be consulted before further activities occur within the affected area. Although there may be a potential for some endemic birds to visit this area, the development of this site would not remove a critical habitat. Then, too, there are alternative areas that would be more suitable for any habitats. Finally, all structures will be built to comply with the Zoning Code standards, such as parking, setback, height, landscaping, and so forth. C. Kona Community Development Plan ( "CDP ") Pursuant to the County General Plan, the Kona CDP was developed and adopted by the County Council during the latter part of the year 2008. The CDP identified its vision to be "A more sustainable Kona characterized by a deep respect for the culture and the environment...." In terms of guiding urban and rural developments, one of the adopted principles called for developments in rural areas (such as the subject area) are directed to existing rural towns and villages. The subject property falls within the Rural Transit - Oriented Developments (TOD) outlined in Kona Land Use Map of the CDP. Pursuant to that vision, several principles were identified. These principles and their relationship to the proposed rezoning follow. a. Protect Kona's natural resources and culture. The subject site does not have any critical natural resources, having been partially developed in the past. The site is designated "X" on the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Flood Insurance Rate Map. This is areas outside of the 100 -year storm. Appropriate on -site mitigation to accommodate project - generated drainage will be addressed and implemented during the building permit and construction phases of this project. Furthermore, there are no known archaeological features or botanical resources on the subject site. 18 b. Provide connectivity and transportation choices. This project will require the installation of traffic control system at the Highway. As such, when developed, it would improve access to and from major public facilities like the hospital and courts. Because of its location, however, it would not be in a position to provide connectivity. Nevertheless, its proximity to the Kona Community Hospital could encourage more pedestrian activity between the hospital and the medical offices within the project site. c. Provide housing choices. This principle is not directly applicable, as this rezoning is not intended to be a housing project. Indirectly, however, by providing land use that would complement existing and future residential uses in this area, it could help achieve this objective by fostering housing choices from a vocational perspective. d. Provide recreation opportunities. Again, this project is not a recreational one per se. Nevertheless, this sit is not a critical resource for recreational opportunities, as it is not a coastal property nor identified in the CPD as an area necessary for future recreational purposes. e. Direct future growth pattems toward compact villages, preserving Kona's rural, diverse and historical character. The location of this site is proximate and somewhat within the core of Kealakekua. As such, the proposed project would be consistent with this principle. f. Provide infrastructure and essential facilities consistent with growth. The applicant would be providing the necessary infrastructure to support this project. These include wastewater system, water system, and possibly some improvements to the intersection of the Highway with Haukapila Street. g. Encourage a diverse and vibrant economy emphasizing agriculture and sustainable economies. The Land Study Bureau has classified the soil as "E" (E302) or poor. This designation suggests that the site does not have a high potential for agricultural productivity. Given this classification and location of the 19 site (i.e., proximate to and /or within the Kealakekua Village core and other urban uses), the subject area should not practically lend itself to agricultural activities. Nevertheless, the proposed urban use should help reduce pressures for urbanizing better agricultural lands outside of the urban or rural core. h. Promote effective governance. This principle is not applicable. D. Zoning If the request were approved, the site would be developed into a neighborhood commercial office, with an emphasis on medical offices. All structures and improvements would be developed consistent with the Zoning Code. No variances from the Code are anticipated. E. Hawaii State Plan Chapter 226, Hawaii Revised Statutes, outlines the long -range goals and policies of the Hawaii State Plan. Said Plan is intended to serve as a guide for the growth and future Tong -range development of the State. Pursuant to said requirement, a discussion of the pertinent policies and goals and the project's relationship follows: Goals • A strong, viable economy characterized by stability, diversity, and growth that enables the fulfillment of the needs and expectations of Hawaii's present and future generations • A desired physical environment characterized by beauty, cleanliness, quiet, stable and natural systems, and uniqueness that enhances the mental and physical well -being of the people • Physical, social and economic well -being for individuals and families that nourishes a sense of community responsibility and caring of participation in family life. Discussion The proposed office complex would achieve these goals. It would provide both direct and indirect employment opportunities for current and future residents of the island; contribute to the island's overall tax base and hence, increase both State and County revenues; and complement and 20 support other economic uses — particularly the hospital and other public offices in the area — and, in turn, contribute to the stability, diversity, and growth of local and regional economies. This employment opportunity would come without adversely affecting the environment. There is no known wildlife or plant life listed as either endangered or threatened on the subject site. Then, too, there are no known archaeological or cultural features on the site. If there are inadvertent finds, appropriate mitigative protocols will be taken. Impacts to the surrounding areas would also not be significantly adverse. All required infrastructures will be in place by the applicant prior to occupancy of any portion of the project. These include traffic improvements, and the wastewater and water system. Furthermore, the provision and /or retention of natural landscaped buffers around the perimeter of and selected portions within the project site would also help mitigate any adverse visual and noise impacts to neighboring residential or agricultural properties. F. Hawaii Coastal Zone Management Program The objectives of the Hawaii Coastal Zone Management (CZM) Program are outlined in Chapter 205a, Hawaii Revised Statutes. The principal goal is to assure the protection and maintenance of the State's coastal resources. Although the entire State falls within the CZM area, the permitting process is geared for those areas proximate to the coast and identified by the County as the Special Management Area. Nonetheless, a general review of a project's consistency to the CZM policies - regardless of its location - must still be made. In that regard, please note the following: • The proposed project will not have any substantial adverse environmental or ecological effect. (Please refer to discussions in Chapters V, VI, and VII). Any effect that may result will be minimized to the extent practicable and will be clearly outweighed by public interest. • The proposed development would be consistent with the objectives of the CZM program. Specifically: • there would be no impact to the area's recreational resources. This is not a shoreline property; 21 • there are no known historical or cultural features on the property. • the project will not affect any scenic and open space resources; • the coastal ecosystem will not be impacted; • there will be more employment opportunities, and hence furthering the economic uses of the site; • the site is more than three (3) miles from the shoreline, and thus there would be no coastal hazard or beach erosion or marine resource impacts; and • public participation will be achieved through the hearings on this request. • The proposed development is consistent with the County General Plan, Kona Community Development Plan, and other appropriate regulatory tools, such as the Zoning Code. 22 :li C: Y %:I���J Vii.. , • BILL NO. 351 • COUNTY OF HAWAII - STATE OF HAWAII ORDINANCE NO. 323 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 7.03 THE SOUTH KONA ZONE MAP OF CHAPTER 8 '(ZONING CODE), ARTICLE 2, HAWAII COUNTY CODE, AS AMENDED, BY CHANGING THE DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS -15) TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (CN -10) AT HALEKII, SOUTH KONA, HAWAII, COVERED BY TAX MAP KEY: 8- 1- 01:25, 27 AND PORTIONS OF 13 & 15. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII: SECTION 1. Section 7.03 of Chapter 8 (Zoning Code), Article 2, Hawaii County Code, as amended, is hereby further amended by adding thereto the following subsection: • "7.03( ). The district classification of the following area situated at Halekii, South Kona, Hawaii, shall be Neighbor- hood Commercial (CN -10): Beginning at the southeast corner of this parcel of land, being also the southwest corner of Lot "A" (portion of L.C. Aw.387, Part 4, Section 2 to the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions),- the coordinates of said point of beginning referred to Government Survey Triangulation Station "PUU OHAU" being 2373,56 feet North and 12341.73 feet East and running by azimuths measured clockwise from True South: 1.' 94 0 33' 30" 156.86 feet along the remainder of a portion of L.C. Aw. 387, Part 4, Section 2 to the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions; 2. 99 30' 45,00 feet along Lot 14 (portion of L.C. Aw.387, Part 4, Section 2 to the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions); 3. 95 28' 95.79 feet along same; 4. 90 19' 30" 17.60 feet along same; 5, 84 05' 30" 298.35 feet along the remainder of a portion of L.C. Aw. 387, Part 4, Section 2 to the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign. Missions; 6. 181 00' 291.51 feet along Lot 1 (portion of L.C. Aw.387, Part 4, Section 2 to the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions); 7. 272 55' 19.66 feet along Kona Hospital Site; • APPENDIX A 8. 266 55' 52.00 feet along Kona Hospital Site; 9. 274 26' 39.00 feet along Kona Hospital Site; 10. 269 02' 169.00 feet along Kona Hospital Site; 11. 265 '15' 42.00 feet along Kona Hospital Site; 12. 272 00' 105.00 feet along Kona Hospital Site; 13. 270 25' 54.87 feet along Kona Hospital Site; 14. 270 24' 30" 66.44 feet along Kona Hospital Site; 15. 348 44' 296.15 feet along Lot "A" (portion of L.C. Aw.387, Part 4, Section.2 to the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions) to the point of beginning and containing an area of 3.671 Acres. "All as outlined in red on the map attached hereto, marked Exhibit 'A' and by reference made a part hereof." SECTION 2. Section 1 of this ordinance shall take effect forthwith upon the conditions that (A) construction'of the proposed facility commence within one (1) year from the effective date of the change of zone and be completed within two (2) years thereafter; (B) prior to construction, in accordance with Chapter 323, Hawaii Revised Statutes, as amended, the petitioner shall obtain a Certificate of Need from the appropriate State agency; (C) the rules, regulations and requirements of the State Department of Health and the Department of Water Supply shall be complied with; and (D) all other applicable rules and regulations, including the Plan Approval proces shall be complied with. Should any of the foregoing conditions not be met, rezoning of the area to its. original zoning designation may be initiated. SECTION 3. In the event that any portion of this ordinance is declared invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other parts of this ordinance. - 2 - SECTION 4. This ordinance shall take effect upon its approval. INTRODUCED BY: COUNCILMAN, C NTY F HAWAII Hilo, Hawaii Date of Introduction: November 2, 1977 Date of Adoption: November 16, 1977 Effective Date: November 23, 1977 - 3 - ....- . . ,.------------ ......,. _. ...•- C:, ...,.3 ■ . . . . ,. __,,,.- --- q --------- -.--------------------- ..----- t-...1 ' .. 44- . . • • t Ft ------ • 7 .. 7 . 1 . • II IV • ) J '.) Q , _.•-• S I--. .- PAN/1 1 L_: 1 CD -a--' 1 - I A, L. (le. S H) 0 .. Oil 1.-.1 - - H 1E3 C> T.1-1C>c!),LD I ....,.. c.::. INA - a- 1.0 1, (C N - I c)) -----_ / ". = .7 I . -- __. • g 1111111-OMR , . • NC, 4"! rco `,..,-.-11-7.1,.1- • (:,.,?•%-','----'-'--( f \ l' i''' F.° .__, p•-. A \ '-'- 1 i ------ - / r-4 0 Ten 1 - \ -7-• ' --1 Z.% //'../:,:• ... .. ... i 1 . •• /:.- _------ ----- HAL_ 1<1 .57: ,' , • ,',// • / , "" '. .,,, 1 . v-- ,..... -- I '',' .,./.:,.// , • ,, . • 't‘2 ° -- -- ' .' '/ ' •// - . ' A:1r < • i ' ..••• "v"- ---- -... --- 1 ?* • ,,.-••• --- --'-' ---• "". •-• I i I r -------../ , t . .. .. ,., ..-.r.: ■ 5 . . -/ ------v--"-.--.." . I 12. 5 •■ 0 ---....... \ iiFQw.fi- I k q L as, < -J ' ' 1 ._.. . , ..•,,, -71-1, _. , • , . , ,..,..,.._,•,.. NAL.. I Cit-eAre0 I. ( I - - , C. • . -:-. ,,,,..,e .... -.. . __,---- ,., , „....,0 • , . . MIN i , , • .. PI . 1 ------- 1 ■ .-..--- ,4-----%'"------'-- , . • \ 1 / . is i•-.-4 c:2 e- . ,... , . ' S ______- , ::: , Te-- L. -G,°■.1-- IDGGCIM I F 0 /4 11111111111.111111.1 CHAP GG . 4 \ .-----"-- . I 'AIM L. ND M ENT TC) TH E ZON111*-43 CODE- ::.. I 1 NC - T - C) .. ar C I C> N - 7. C:3 - 1 - 1-1 a u I c:. NIP, Z 0 NJ -=- NA At° +0 F I-1 A. t=' -- 1 - e_ 3 ( Z.CD N - I N GC.ND --) , i. te. I L_ -- - e. , HAWAII -. c.:: , U N -- A...., A.,N.-1 1 rJ --- r:), 13. C 1 ,r-1 G IN - 1 I - 1 c ID I.S (C.I c C j i C/=.71 I CD IV F re:)t../i ... 1 N4 f:Dt--- NITS i=.1-- (1 - 1 Mc l'-4 -.=- 1 "1 1:. I C>4 P nc>fvu\-1=-re 1.'=.1--- (C t - I C)) AT I L. 1 I , (. u - I - I-1 r‹.43r.---4,4=\. , 1--1,.=Nvy /) Off is-t_tE3L_Ic 1--ta/are..11--4 = AU 0. aS, ID • to..... -e - cq A'NFI'' iCeD`..4......_ : C7 fr:T. I 1 C: E N) c L..."..1 NJ 1N4 tD -a riNte. NJ - r CI-- OT= 1 "..›,.. P.4....1 K.12.7 - I - c4 , i....?., a7 •+ is.'car. CF re, Et. iz; =? r t.›< hi I 0 I - 1 - ..^.. • County- of awan—State of Hawaii Re.solution Teo. 128 WHEREAS, pursuant t6 Chapter 2, Article 9, Hawaii County Code, the Hawaii County Council may dispose of real property by granting an easement for particular purposes, subject to reverter to County upon termination or abandonment of the specific purpose for which it was granted; and WHEREAS, the property situated near the border of North and South Kona approximately 1,000 feet East of the Hawaii Belt Road, known as the Kona Hospital Lot, Tax Map Key 7- 9- 13 -15, is owned by the Department of Health, State of Hawaii, but has been transferred to the County of Hawaii by Executive Orders 1842 and 2486; and WHEREAS, Chisato Hayashi and James E. Mitchell, doing business as Kona Medical Associates, a general partnership whose principal place of business is at Kainaliu, Hawaii, have applied for a grant of a non - exclusive roadway and utility easement through, under and across the land described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof (hereinafter described as "easement area ") and delineated by the shaded area in Exhibit B attached hereto and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, the Director of the State Department of Health has approved the request for the aforementioned grant of easement; and WHEREAS, the appraised values of easement 1 and easement 2, both described in Exhibit A, are $4,287.00 and $1.00, respectively; and WHEREAS, Kona Medical Associates desires to acquire the easement area for the purpose of developing a medical center; and - APPENDIX B kgi) WHEREAS, the County Council finds that a medical center in the vicinity of the Kona Hospital Lot will tend to provide improved ' medical services, thus positively contributing to the public health and welfare of the people living in the Kona area, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII that it the Finance Director of the "County of Hawaii or his authorized representative to dispose of the easement areas pursuant to Chapter 2, Article 9 of the Hawaii County Code. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Finance Director sell the easement areas at a price not less than the upset price which - includes the appraisal value, appraisal cost and cost of publication ' of public notice. • BE IT- FINALLY RESOLVED that the Clerk of the County of Hawaii send copies of this resolution to the Honorable Herbert T. Matayoshi, Mayor of the County of Hawaii; Mr. Stanley Nakamae,'Finance Director of the County of Hawaii; and Mr. Edward Harada, Chief Engineer of the County of Hawaii. Dated at Hilo, Hawaii, this 6th day of July , 1977. • INTRODUCED BY: AZZ .OUNCIL MEMBE ., COUNTY OF HAWAII ROLL CALL VOTE COUNTY COUNCIL - AYES NOES A/E County of Hawaii Dahlberg X Hilo, Hawaii Domingo X hereby certify that the foregoing RESOLUTION wo, by the vote indicated to FOJIi X Iht hereof adopted by the COUNCIL of the County of Hawaii on • Garcia X • Kawahara July 6, 1977 Lai X Sameshlma X r: Yamashiro X Chr.Tajirl X GASP ` HARVEY AJIRI Reference: __........__.... ' CLERK CHAIRMAN 6 PRESIDING OFFICER M.E. No.. ...... _...._ ... .... ........_...... .. 128 RESOLUTION NO . . ... .. .... ... ... .. PUBLIC NOTICE Pursuant to Chapter 2, Article 9, Hawaii County Code, public notice is hereby give.:., of a public auction to dispose of certain real property by grant of easement. TIME: PLACE: Main Entrance of County Building, 25 Aupuni Street, Hilo, Hawaii. DESCRIPTION OF REAL PROPERTY: 30 -foot wide road easement and access easement on Kona Hospital Lot, TMK: 7- 9- 13 -15. UPSET PRICE: The maps showing the metes and bounds description and the classification of the land are kept in the Office of the Finance Director and are available for inspection at all reasonable hours. STANLEY NAKAMAE Finance Director County of Hawaii • D E 0 R 1 P T I 0 N Easement "1" Revised • Being a 30-foot wide Road Easement over and across Grant 173 to J. Paters at Kanaueue 2nd.. North Kona, Hawaii Beginning at a point at the northwest corner of this easement, the coordinates of which referred to.Government Survey Triangulation Station "PUU OHA.U" being 3,221.75 feet North and 11,658.86 feet East and running by azimuths measured clockwise from true South: Along remainder of Grant 173 to J. Peters for the following sixteen (1E courses: 1. 255 58' 31.40 feet; Thence on a curve to the right with a radius of 145.00 feet; the azimut and distance cf the chord beinge 2. 289 29' 160.13 feet; Thence on a curare to the left with a radius of 135.00 feet, the azimuth and distance of the chord beings 3. 309 22' 30" 6;1.60 feet; 4. 295 45' 33.57 feet; Thence on a curve to the right with a radius of 63.00 feet, the azimutl and distance of the chord beings 5. 3 �9 30' 70.00 feet; 6. 3 ° 1 5' 146.64 feet; Thence on a curve to the left with a radius of 97.50 feet, the azimuth and distance of the chord beings 7. 310 15' 155.73 feet; 8. 347 15' 30.00 feet; • Thence on a.curve to the right with a radius of 127.50 feet. the azimut and distance of the chord being: 9. 130 15' 293.65 feet; 0. . 183 15'. /46.64 feet; Thence on a curve to the left with a radius of 33.00 feet, the azimuth and distance of the chord being: 1. 149 30' 36.67 feet; - • 12. 115 45' S3.57 feet; • Thence on a curve to the right with a radius of 165.00 feet, the azimuth and distance of the chord beings 13. 129 22' 30" 77.74 feet; Thence on a curve to the left with a radius of 115.00 feet, the azimuth and distance of the chord beings 14. 109 29' 127.00 feet; 15. 75 58' 35.52 feet; 16. 173 47' 30.28 feet along Easement "3" to the point of beginning and containing an area of 22,553 square feet or 0.518 Acre. • JOHN D. WEEKS Registered Surveyor- Engineer #502ES DATED: April 20, /977 > J `s / REGISTERED'• °- ` I n 'PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER No. 502E -5 An • • • • • { E XWB T t ' D E S C R I P T I • O N Easement "2" - Being a 30 -foot wide Road Easement over and across Grant 173 to 3. Peters at Kanaueue 2nd., North Kona, Hawaii Beginning at a point at the northwest corner of this easement, the coordinates of which referred to Government Survey Triangulation Station "P.IJU OHAU" being 2,767.93 feet North and 12, 070.50 feet East, and running by azimuths measured clockwise from true South: Along the southerly side of road Easement 1 on a curve to the left with a radius of 127.50 feet, the azimuth and distance of the chord being" 1. 268 00' 46.36 feet; • Thence along remainder of Grant 173 to J. Peters on a curve to the left with a radius of 10.00 feet, the azimuth and distance of the chord being 2. 37 4 5' 43" 12.79 feet; 3. 358 00' 87.35 feet; along remainder of Grant 173 to J. Peters; 4.. 92 00 30.07 feet along stonewall, along R. P. 1670, L. C. Aw. 387 to American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions at Halekii; • 5. 178 00' 85.24 feet along remainder of Grant 173 to J. Peters; Thence along remainder of Grant 173 to 3. Peters on a curve to the left with a radius of 10.00 feet, the azimuth and distance of the chord being 6 13B 14' 17" 12.79 feet to the point of beginning and containing an area of 2858 square feet. JOHN D. WEEKS Registered Surveyor - Engineer #502E DATED e. April 20, 1977 /REGISTERED J' /PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER No 502E -S, • "1 " 1BIT A w : fi=t im6 , „ il•r/r, ..• . • r - ,...., • ' s. ., 1 ,, t . . , . . ,..-.... , . A . . . - rOC) Nit r.r..,c._ tz...1c.4-...c) GC,,F...C_M. trLty - . 1 ° :....17 r.....1. : ,-...a, t..,•_.. t: . '1-- ,,•,.” ''' . . 1 . _-....._ . . . , - I • ‘ • 1 . '.:a7---1:\'',.;,,... . : ,, . . .-:. • • : --'----f... '••, • ; :•;_N. , ,,, / i , ---:-....--- . ••‘..X.,, I / ...--- , ,,,,. ...., ,_ . / ',/ .„,..-- .„.• • .. ''• . --....... • ''% % ., . ....• • I ,....• .-.-- . 00.-••• . \ \ i ... .- 1 \\'\.. N ..• _ . . r , , . . •-,,. \ • . /,,------, ' - '. , - , / \ • , , . .,,. , / f - • '. •, ,., .• • \-- . -.; , ..a, . \ ': . .i.• • ". . / I- / -4- • •z'• 11 , h./ c. ... . (Z c>,... — r-•- ..._ ..,.,.„,, • / ' 1 4, -4, / / , s 4 ) • / • -!'' • / i: : •Si i - i---- rs - --,__: ..___....., ) 1 i •• , ; •.• 7 .. , ..... s 1 ..... ...... I C.) I , , 1 • , • , 1 i . • • f: i .. u f • ;..- . . , . ':' • I Il •• I o : : 1 4. • ..._. -.,.. 1 1 • r.-- .1 ‘'.! • ..- • J ...' r • / 1 r I "' • • i.-- .. `) 1 - i • 1 • • 1 ,-: i• I --.............. • 1 ' ''.V ...:,. • ". -:, • ..? .: '::"\JI ■ . . . .. / . , .: .. . \\ • . . : 4 /1, • .4 1 \ ' .- ' .., ":,ri• ......- ...,, . .... A . --*:', • --...... 0 ' • ...•••_, i • 1--00•,_ . ' -..,, • - 14 , 1,1-_, - h `- r."::• t:. 0 • '.. -:.C....\I . • . - 4 r • . - - / .: .4 ... .. • ..• ............, ••••,,,,,..... ' 1 • .. - ' -... ,...'_._ ; - /....,.„..... , i .; / ( '... - . 1 / • .- , r -,- .• • 1 4.. • -...... ---. I , . ....- - • ... ' - ,, „ . . . • - - . EXHIBIT B _..,_ . . . . . . . . . , VV ...-f•-•••:....-.:::...,--r,,.:.;,....„ ....__ : '..•--ibv. .:-,.,,,,vt. . , - — . . . . ., . .. • • :4; 0' `4 ; :-.:, • I,; . :: . • -.2 - ..,-W.,•.. -- •7 • 'Aft COUNTY OF HAWAII �. TATE OF HAWAII Bill No. 118 (Draft 2) ORDINANCE NO. SS 123 • AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 25 -88 (SOUTH KONA DISTRICT ZONE MAP), ARTICLE 3, CHAPTER 25 (ZONING CODE) OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE, RELATING TO THE MODIFICATION OF CONDITION A OF ORDINANCE - NO. 323 WHICH RECLASSIFIED CERTAIN LANDS FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS -15) TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (CN -10) AT HALEKII, SOUTH KONA, HAWAII, COVERED BY TAX MAP KEY: 8 -1 -01:25 (FORMERLY 8 -1 -1:25, 27 AND PORTIONS OF 13 AND 15). BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII: SECTION 1. Ordinance No. 323 is amended as follows: - 'SECTION 2. Section 1 of this ordinance shall take effect forthwith upon the conditions that (A) construction of the proposed - facility commence within one (11 year from the effective date of [the change of zone] this amendment and be completed within two (2) years thereafter; (B) prior to construction, in accordance with Chapter 323, Hawaii Revised Statutes, as amended, the petitioner shall obtain a Certificate of Need from the appropriate State agency; (C) the rules, regulations and requirements of the State Department of Health and the Department of Water Supply shall be complied with; and (D) all other applicable rules and regulations, including the Plan Approval process shall be complied with. Should any of the foregoing conditions not be met, rezoning of the area to its original zoning designation shall be initiated.' SECTION 2. Material to be deleted is bracketed. New material is underscored. APPENDIX C \ ;^ ^ � 1 \ SECTION 3. T his ordinance Shall take e upon its )l 11 approval. ) ! INTRODUCED BY: : ( ,1 �)' . : �� COU CIL MEM CoPNTY OF HAWAII / � 2 3 Hilo, Hawaii 1 ; 1, Date of Introduction: august 16, 9999 Date of 1st Reading: august 16, 1989 Date of. and Reading: October 4, 1989 Effective Date: October 17, 1989 Y - ct It . + . w k } C- k 2 k : r ,- 04\ 4 2 \ -Z- MEN REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT, INC. 510 PIIKOI STREET, SUITE 208 HONOLULU, HAWAII 96814 Repeal of Change Zone Ordinance No. 323 Tax Map Key: 8 -1 -01: 25 Reasons for Request: • The subject property was purchased with the intent of subdividing it into residential lots. • It was our understanding at the time we purchased the property that the Commercial CN -10 zoning designation would expire in October of 1990. • We also fully realized that we could not complete a commercial project within the time frame provided by the subject Ordinance. • Due to the requirement of a Certificate of Need, we understood that the intent of the zoning was provided specifically for medical purposes. • Complicated further by the fact that we have only seven (7) water units available for the project. This alone would not readily allow for a viable commercial project. • Keeping in mind that the CN -10 zoning would expire in October, we began the residential subdivision process but was advised by Department of Public Works that a residential subdivision was not possible without changing the CN -10 zoning, even though this zoning was due to expire under the provisions of Ordinance No. 323. • We thereafter explored several possibilities of commercial development and arrived at the same conclusions previously mentioned; the limited time, the requirement of the Certificate of Need, and the inadequacy of water which all together would render the project unfeasible. • Thereafter, we were informed by the Planning Department that the original RS -15 zoning would not be automatically restored in October of 1990; that we would have to initiate some action. This is why I'm here today. • What we are asking for here is to be allowed to return to the original zoning designation of RS- 15 for the aforementioned reasons as well as allowing our zoning to be consistent with the underlying zoning of the surrounding properties. • Gentlemen, I therefore respectfully request for the repeal of Ordinance 323. Thank you very much. Submitted by: MEN REAL ESTA I'E INVESTMENT, INC. By Norman Chang Its President 1 APPENDIX D , COUNTY OF HAWAII STATE OF HAWAII RILL NO. 374 1 ORDINANCE NO. 91 2 AN ORDINANCE REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 323, AND AMENDED BY ORDINANCE NO. 89 133, WHICH AMENDED SECTION 7.03, CURRENTLY SECTION 25 -88, THE SOUTH KONA ZONE MAP, ARTICLE 2, CHAPTER 8, CURRENTLY ARTICLE 3, CHAPTER 25 (ZONING CODE) OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983, AS AMENDED, AND CHANGED THE DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS -15) TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (CN -10) AT HALEKII, SOUTH KONA, HAWAII, COVERED BY TAX MAP KEY 8 -1 -01:25 (FORMERLY 8 -1- 01:25, 27 AND PORTIONS OF 13 AND 15). UPON THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 323, AS AMENDED, THE PROPERTY SHALL.BE.DESIGNATED BY THE DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS -15). BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII: SECTION 1. Ordinance No. 323 and amended by Ordinance No. 89 133, which amended Section 7.03, currently Section 25 -88, the South Kona Zone Map, Article 2, Chapter 8, currently Article 3, Chapter 25, (Zoning Code) of the Hawaii County Code as amended is hereby repealed in its entirety. . [SECTION 1. Section 7.03 of Chapter 8 (Zoning Code), Article 2, Hawaii County Code, as amended, is hereby further amended by adding thereto the following subsection: "7.03( ). The district classification of the following area situated at Halekii, South Kona, Hawaii, shall be Neighborhood Commercial (CN -10): Beginning at the southeast corner of this parcel of land, being also the southwest corner of Lot "A" (portion of L.C. Aw. 387, Part 4, Section 2 to the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions), the coordinates of said point of beginning referred to Government Survey Triangulation Station "PUU OHAU" being 2373.56 feet North and 12341.73 feet East and running by azimuths measured clockwise from True South: APPENDIX E 1. 94° 33' 30" 156.86 feet along the remainder of a portion of L.C. Aw. 387, Part 4, Section 2 to the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions; 2. 99 30' 45.00 feet along Lot 14 (portion of L.C. Aw. 387, Part 4, Section 2 to the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions); 3. 95° 28' 95.79 feet along same; 4. 90° 19' 30" 17.60 feet along same; 5. 84° 05' 30" 298.35 feet along the remainder of a portion of L.C. Aw. 387, Part 4, Section 2 to the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions; 6. 181° 00' 291.51 feet along Lot 1 (portion of L.C. Aw. 387, Part 4, Section 2 to the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions); 7. 272° 55' 19.66 feet along Kona Hospital Site; 8. 266° 55' 52.00 feet along Kona Hospital Site; 9. 274° 26' 39.00 feet along Kona Hospital Site; 10. 269° 02' 169.00 feet along Kona Hospital Site; 11. 265° 15' 42.00 feet along. Kona Hospital Site; 12. 272° 00' 105.00 feet along Kona Hospital Site; 13. 270° 25' 54.87 feet along Kona Hospital Site; -2- 14. 270° 24' 30" 66.44 feet along Kona Hospital Site; 15. 348° 44' 296.15 feet along Lot "A" (portion of L.C. Aw. 387 Part 4, Section 2 to the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions) to the point of beginning and containing an area of 3.671 Acres. "All as outlined in red on the map attached hereto, marked Exhibit 'A' and by reference made a part hereof." SECTION 2. Section 1 of this ordinance shall take effect forthwith upon the conditions that (A) construction of the proposed facility commence within one (1) year from the effective date of this amendment and be completed within two (2) years thereafter; (B) prior to construction, in accordance with Chapter 323, Hawaii Revised Statutes, as amended, the petitioner shall obtain a Certificate of Need from the appropriate State agency; (C) the rules, regulations and requirements of the State Department of Health and the Department of Water Supply shall be complied with; and (D) all other applicable rules and regulations including the Plan Approval process shall be complied with. Should any of the foregoing conditions not be met, rezoning of the area to its original zoning designation may be initiated.] -3- SECTION 2. The property shall be reclassified back to its original Single Family Residential (RS -15) zoned district as shown on the map attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A" and by reference made a part hereof. SECTION 3. Material to be repealed is bracketed. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall take effect upon its approval. INTRODUCED BY: • COyNCIL MEMBER, COUN OF HAWAII Hilo, Hawaii Date of Introduction: December 19, 1990 Date of 1st Reading: December 19, 1990 Date of 2nd Reading: January 3 1991 Effective Date: January 11, 1991 -4- . . \ \ A ! . . \\________________ • +' NoRTH r- SCALE = 1.... d 0 aa\�� A 54 . \ A.-5q i� 1' i AI'. , I \ A -So i A 5,, , N 1 /1 , 341 -73 E - "Puu O NA Li .C. �1 RS - 1S R - 1 � ' IS A -S o 11 r75 cOMM> =R1AL (r4-10) TO SIN GLE FAMILY RESIc•h! T 1AL (R5 -15) I r \ Rs - 1s • \T^. a AREA = -G ACRES • A -So \ ` - F'S�IS \ I' 15 • \\ \ \\ 1010 \ rrs - ls b 1 II DC IS . / na n , 11 ?o ANr7A H I G yyV A D 1 �. l o I r A P 'A i. cv o -10 r—'–' J i & v � V i c 0 A-So _ �� .� _ ,o l`, "-SD Y RS -10 1 W m.,-7._ 5 @ L �' -lo Z. R -10 U Q 0 11 ® A -5 o A -5o 5 10 Q . 1 A - So i 0 v - ? -S GV - 7 -S A TO THE ZONING CODE RL.pEAL OR ORDINANCE NO. 32B AND AMENDED BY ORDINANCE NO. B4> -133, Wt AMENDED SECTION 703, Cu>?fZNTLY SECTION 2 -g6, THE SOUTH KoNA ZONE MAP, ARTICLE 2, CHAPTER 8, CURRENTLY ARTICLE a, CHAPTER 25 ('ZON- ING CODE) OF THE t1AWAl1 CoUNT7' CODE, AS AMENDED, PJDED, AND CHAN THE t71STRICT CLAS51FICATION FROM S I N GLE F AMILY RESIDENTIAL (1Q9 -15) TC NEIHgOter-tOOD COMMERCIAL (cr► - tO) AT HALEKII, 50UT KONA, HA)"/Alt- UPON THE REPEAL OF on17 NO 33, A5 ANIENDI=D HY oFZC71NANCE No. 8 -13, THE SU13.�ECi PROPERTY' SHALL BE L7EStGNATED BY THE p1STRC - 7 - GLASSIFIGATION OF 5INGLE FAMILY RCSIDENTt, L (RS - 15). pR BY : p LANN1 P R.T7 'N CO.uNTY c71= 1- 1A)^?")) T7-.-1K : B -1 -o1 =�5 - ocT 29, I o EXHIBIT tie f " • County of Hawaii . . 1 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Oat 98 _ , . ;RUBBING PERMIT NO. .. Fee: $ -- -Oe) • • owner: .0Z / gag &5"9176 1/P eAddress: RP. e 2 2 ? . • Phone 2 -I� `3330 �a-064 . 4r/ 99825 ;ivil Eng. / Surveyor: kd/r.H ,-t(�'f /L"Address: 75 4 + LtA i 4,7 /1 Phone: . 22 - d License No.: 26 — C.. ;ontractor: / - -1'1 -e Address: .$ , .R° 2 . 7a 'Y Phone: .03 ; License No.: ffcN 2.8 - - 'Ac,/u '' .. '' ;Act' Q ocation: R7- -/423 )4/4.d4/4 Tax Map Key: (3) ' 1+ 0.2 ^^C/ el ii rr, . ' _ 6 i . : . . 97. Parcel Area (acres): 47 Area Grubbed (acres): •• '474 - istimated Starting Date: / -2/G/o� Estimated Comi ltion Date: _ 7sl r /c . _ (minimum 2 working days after after date) lemarks: • - Fir Yvk. • Phone: 981 -•2979 Fax: 981 -5207 • 0 STATE DLNR - HISTORIC PRESERVATION DIVISION Approved: yY, nom) r.."•ocoe.e. r'1 - Received 8y: Date: . n (� $ O$ I t NIIa t Date: ,, i --/ J , ‘ „e, Listed on the Hawaii or National Register of Historic Places 0 Yes o No 0 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Appmved: Received By: d 7 Date: //. IV. off P Date: / ;, ® DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Approved for Permit Issuance: Received ay4 fra "-- Date: NC 0 2 7IMB (•e3. / 1 - Date; j p 65 • hereby certify that all work as requested above wilt ;conform to Chapter 10 of the Hawaii County Code, AC NG AS LE, •. °, G NT IN )caner: j � BEHAIF OF THE OWNERS Date: /P - 23- -O/ teturn to the Department of Public Works, Engineering Division, upon completion of work. ;edification accepted by: Date: (DPW inspector / engineer) • - • runbing.wpd (11 /0 t) RIP.t}P RO _ APPENDIX F Halekii Plaza TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT HALEKII PLAZA South Kona, Island of Hawaii, Hawaii Traffic Impact Analysis Report TMK: (3)8 -1 -25: 011 April 2010 g. LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER * N0. 3893 —C "fP' I I, N Expiration Date: April 30, 2012 This work was prepared by me or under my direct supervision. g zy -�r B AP/2 2 610 Signature Date AECOM Pacific, I . AECOM AECOM PACIFIC, INC. PAGE i 60102230.00300 April 2010 Halekii Plaza TZAR APPENDIX G Halekii Plaza TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT Table of Contents SECTION PAGE Engineer's Stamp and Signature Table of Contents List of Figures List of Tables Project Description 1 Existing Conditions 2 Existing Roadways 2 Traffic Volumes 3 Proposed Roadway Improvements 4 Traffic Forecasts 5 Ambient Traffic Forecast 5 Project Generated Traffic 7 Total with Project Forecast 7 Level of Service Analysis 8 Conclusions 13 References Figures Tables Appendices Appendix A: Traffic Turning Movement Counts Appendix B: Intersection Level of Service (LOS) Calculations With Existing Traffic Controls Appendix C: Intersection Level of Service (LOS) Calculations With Both Intersections Signalized AECOM PACIFIC, INC. PAGE ii 60102230.00300 March 2010 Halekii Plaza TIAR Halekii Plaza TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT List of Figures FIGURE NUMBER TITLE Figure 1 Location Map Figure 2 Site Plan Figure 3 Existing Hour Traffic Volumes - 2010 Figure 4 Daily Traffic Volumes on Mamalahoa Highway South of Kuakini Highway and Old Mamalahoa Road Figure 5 Hourly Traffic Volumes on Mamalahoa Highway South of Kuakini Highway Figure 6 Ambient Traffic Forecast — 2015 Without Bypass Highway Figure 6A Ambient Traffic Forecast — 2015 With Bypass Highway Figure 7 Ambient Traffic Forecast — 2020 Figure 8 Ambient Traffic Forecast — 2030 Figure 9 Project Generated Traffic Forecast — 2015 Figure 10 Project Generated Traffic Forecast — 2020 Figure 11 Project Generated Traffic Forecast — 2030 Figure 12 Total with Project Traffic Forecast — 2015 Without Bypass Highway Figure 12A Total with Project Traffic Forecast — 2015 With Bypass Highway Figure 13 Total with Project Traffic Forecast — 2020 Figure 14 Total with Project Traffic Forecast — 2030 List of Tables TABLE NUMBER TITLE Table 1 Hokulia Trip Generation and Distribution Analysis Table 2 Project Trip Generation and Distribution Analysis Table 3 Level of Service Analysis With Existing Traffic Controls Table 4 Level of Service Analysis With Both Intersections Signalized AECOM PACIFIC, INC. PAGE iii 60102230.00300 March 2010 Halekii Plaza TIAR Halekii Plaza TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT for the HALEKII PLAZA A medical office complex is being proposed in South Kona, Hawaii, adjacent to the Kona Community Hospital. This report documents a study that was conducted to identify the traffic impacts of the proposed project and to recommend any mitigating measures. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Halekii Plaza, a medical office complex, is being proposed in South Kona, Hawaii. The project site is on a 3.671± acre parcel identified as TMK (3)8 -1 -25: 011, which is located south of the Kona Community Hospital, as shown on Figure 1. The parcel is currently zoned RS -15 and is proposed to be converted to CV -10. There are currently no improvements on the property. The proposed project would include 5 buildings of about 10,000 square feet each for a total of 50,000 square feet. The proposed layout of the completed project is shown on Figure 2. The schedule for occupancy is for two buildings to be occupied by 2015, and one building added every five years thereafter so that three buildings would be occupied by 2020, and five buildings by 2030. Each building would have 10 offices of 1,000 square feet each, with an average of 3 employees per office. The proposed schedule of building area and employees is summarized below: YEAR BUILDING AREA (sf) EMPLOYEES 2015 20,000 60 2020 30,000 90 2025 40,000 120 2030 50,000 150 AECOM PACIFIC, INC. PAGE 1 60147751.00300 March 2010 Halekii Plaza TIAR • • Halekii Plaza TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT An internal driveway would provide access to Haukapila Street across from the Kona Community Hospital. The study forecast years included 2015, 2020 and 2030, to comply with the five, ten and 20 -year forecasting requirement of the concurrency ordinance. Local access to the proposed project site would be via Haukapila Street from Highway 11, Mamalahoa Highway. The project location in relation to the South Kona roadway network is shown on Figure 1. The study area is identified as the section of Mamalahoa Highway between Haukapila Street and Halekii Street. These two study intersections are identified on Figure 1. The proposed project is expected to be desirable (popular) with physicians who visit their patients at the Kona Community Hospital before beginning their medical office practice for the day. They would be able to drive to their office and park their car, walk to the hospital and visit their patients, and then walk back to their office. They would not have an additional vehicle trip from the hospital to their office and would reduce the number of vehicular trips on Mamalahoa Highway. EXISTING CONDITIONS A survey of existing roadway and traffic conditions was made in March 2010. Existing Roadways Kuakini Highway and Mamalahoa Highway are the main north -south roadways on the Kona Coast in the study area and are referred to as the Hawaii Belt Road. It is primarily a two -lane arterial with left turn lanes at selected intersections. Mamalahoa Highway begins from the south of Hawaii island as Highway 11 and continues north until it intersects Kuakini Highway near the town of Honalo, where the Mamalahoa Highway takes on a mauka alignment as the Old Mamalahoa Highway (Highway 180). The Kuakini Highway continues north as Highway 11 to the town of Kailua. The section of AECOM PACIFIC, INC. PAGE 2 60147751.00300 March 2010 Halekii Plaza TIAR Halekii Plaza TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT Mamalahoa Highway between Honalo and Napoopoo Road, which includes the study area, is under the jurisdiction of the County of Hawaii. Halekii Street is a two -lane mauka -makai connector roadway between Mamalahoa Highway and the Kona Scenic subdivision, and the newer Hokuli'a subdivision still under development. The roadway also has a post office, commercial and government land uses at its mauka terminal. The intersection with Mamalahoa Highway is fully channelized and controlled by a traffic signal. Haukapila Street is a two -lane mauka -makai roadway between Mamalahoa Highway and the Kona Community Hospital. The single lane approach of Haukapila Street to Mamalahoa Highway is stop sign controlled and serves both left and right turns. The southbound approach of Mamalahoa Highway has a separate left turn lane while the opposite approach has a merging lane for outbound left turns from Haukapila Street. Traffic Volumes Traffic turning movement counts were taken at the two study intersections on Tuesday and Thursday, February 16 and 18, 2010, to determine existing traffic conditions. Traffic counts were taken during the morning peak period (6:30 -9:00 AM) and the afternoon peak period (3:00 -5:30 PM). Traffic turning movement counts require a traffic surveyor to observe traffic flow and record the movements of each vehicle crossing the intersection as through or turning movements by 15 minute intervals. The worksheets for these traffic counts are included in Appendix A. The current traffic volumes for the morning and afternoon peak hours are shown on the Figure 3, "Existing Traffic Counts — 2010," with volumes rounded to the nearest five vehicles per hour (vph). Long traffic queues sporadically form in both directions and both peak periods due to the heavy traffic volumes on Mamalahoa Highway. The current traffic operations at the two study intersections are discussed in the Level of Service Analysis section of this report. AECOM PACIFIC, INC. PAGE 3 60147751.00300 March 2010 Halekii Plaza TIAR Halekii Plaza TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT The State of Hawaii Department of Transportation (SDOT) used to take traffic counts every two years at selected roadway sections on Hawaii. One of these count stations was on Mamalahoa Highway just south of its intersection with Kuakini Highway in Honalo, about two miles north of the study area. Daily traffic volumes from the old program were available for the eight year period from 1996 to 2004. Traffic data from the new counting program were available for 2006 and 2008, providing a traffic trend over a twelve year period. Figure 4 graphically shows the historical trend of daily two - way traffic for the twelve year period. Daily two -way traffic volumes increased to their highest levels in 2000 and then declined following the September 11, 2001, incident. Traffic volumes rebounded in 2004 and then went on a decline through 2006 and 2008. There was an overall growth of 4.1% in the twelve year period from 1996 to 2008 compared to the overall growth of 14.5% in the eight year period from 1996 to 2004. The State DOT data also includes hourly traffic volumes in both directions of travel on Mamalahoa Highway. Figure 5 shows the pattern of hourly traffic volumes on the highway in 2008. Northbound traffic peaks sharply in the morning peak and plateaus during the afternoon. Southbound traffic has a smaller peak in the morning and then builds up to an afternoon peak that is only slightly higher than the northbound traffic. PROPOSED ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS The FY 2008 -2011 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), (Approved Revision #8 effective August 11, 2009), does not show any roadway projects that would affect traffic patterns in the study area. However, the STIP does not include the Mamalahoa Highway Bypass Road which would be build by private interests as part of the Hokuli'a development. Completion of highway from Alii Highway in Keauhou to Napoopoo Road would have a significant traffic impact on Mamalahoa Highway. Three previous studies have estimated that the new bypass highway could divert up to half of the traffic from the current roadway. AECOM PACIFIC, INC. PAGE 4 60147751.00300 March 2010 Halekii Plaza TIAR Halekii Plaza TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT The completion date for the new highway is uncertain due to several lawsuits against the developer's project and new highway. The highway is bonded so that it is expected to be completed. The best estimates for the completion of the highway are from five to ten years. For this reason two sets of forecasts were developed for the first forecast year 2015, with and without the bypass highway. TRAFFIC FORECASTS The proposed project would be developed over a 20 year period to 2030. During this period, ambient traffic on the area roadways can be expected to increase due to regional growth and new projects in the area. For this project, traffic on the local highway is expected to decrease with the advent of the new bypass highway. The traffic that would be generated from the proposed project was added to the ambient traffic forecast to obtain the total with project traffic forecast. Ambient Traffic Forecast Ambient traffic on the study roadways can be expected to increase due to regional growth and new projects in the area. Traffic volumes on Mamalahoa Highway have been decreasing in recent years as shown on Figure 4 due to the economic downturn. The current long range highway plan for Hawaii County does not include traffic forecasts. In lieu of official traffic forecasts, the peak hour traffic volumes on Highway 11 were assumed to increase in proportion to the regional population growth. The existing traffic volumes for 2010 shown on Figure 3 were expanded is proportion to the growth in the forecast population for the South Kona District as found in the County of Hawaii General Plan (February 2005). The district level population forecasts were available only to 2020 with the South Kona district forecast to experience an annual growth rate of 2.5% to 2020. This growth rate was extended to 2030 and the 2030 population forecast extrapolated as shown on the following table. The population forecast for the South Kona District and the ratio of the forecast year population to the year 2010 population is summarized in the table below: Ratio Year South Kona 20xx/2010 Population Growth Rate AECOM PACIFIC, INC. PAGE 5 60147751.00300 March 2010 Halekii Plaza TIAR Halekii Plaza TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT Forecast 2010 11,414 1.000 2015 12,681 1.111 2020 14,092 1.235 2030 17,400* 1.524* *Interpolated from Growth Rate Source: County of Hawaii General Plan (February 2005) The existing peak hour traffic volumes on Figure 3 were increased by 11.1% to obtain the background traffic for 2015, by 23.5% to obtain the background traffic for 2020, and by 52.4% to obtain the background traffic for 2030. The volumes turning into and from the Haukapila Street intersection were increased by only half the above growth rates. The existing land uses on that street, including the hospital, are expected to experience slower growth rates than the general population. The only new project planned in the area is the Hokuli'a development. This project would include 660 single family homes on large lots, a golf course whose membership would be limited to buyers of the lots, and the Mamalahoa Bypass Highway from Keauhou to Napoopoo. The golf course has been constructed and is fully staffed. It would not generate a large volume of external trips since most of its players would come from within the project. The residential component of the project was assumed to develop at a rate of 33 per year so that all 660 units would be completed by 2030. The following number of units in each planning year is summarized below: Year Residential Units 2010 Negligible 2015 165 2020 330 2030 660 The traditional three -step process of trip generation, trip distribution, and trip assignment was used to forecast future traffic that would be generated by the residential component. The Institute of Transportation Engineers' Trip Generation (Seventh AECOM PACIFIC, INC. PAGE 6 60147751.00300 March 2010 Halekii Plaza TZAR Halekii Plaza TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT Edition, 2003) report has trip generation equations and rates to calculate the number of morning and afternoon peak hour trips that would be generated by various land uses. The Trip Generation report also provides the percentage of inbound and outbound trips for each land use in each peak hour. The number of generated trips was divided into inbound and outbound trips based on the information from the report, as shown on Table 1. The Hokulia generated trips were then distributed by direction of travel to and from the project site. The distribution of trips were based from the distribution factors provided in the 1995 Traffic Impact Analysis Report for the project then known as the Villages of Hokukano, and the subsequent 1997 traffic report for the bypass highway. To account for the uncertain timetable when the bypass highway would be built, two sets of distribution factors are shown for 2015, the first without the highway and the second with the highway. The bypass highway was assumed to be present in the 2020 and 2030 forecasts. The majority of trips generated by Hokulia are not expected to use Mamalahoa Highway once the bypass highway is built. The highway is expected to divert half of the through trips from. Mamalahoa Highway, reducing the traffic volumes on the highway significantly. The ambient traffic assignments for the background traffic and the Hokulia generated traffic (including diversion to the new bypass highway) are shown on Figure 6 for 2015 without the bypass highway, Figure 6A for 2015 with the bypass highway, Figure 7 for 2020, and Figure 8 for 2030. The operations for the ambient forecast conditions at the two study intersections are discussed in the Level of Service Analysis section of this report. Project Generated Traffic The traditional three -step process of trip generation, trip distribution, and trip assignment was used to forecast the future traffic which would be generated by the proposed project. The trip generation step forecasts the number of new trips that would be produced in each of the two study periods. The trip distribution step allocates these AECOM PACIFIC, INC. PAGE 7 60147751.00300 March 2010 Halekii Plaza TIAR Halekii Plaza TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT new trips by direction of travel. Finally, the trip assignment step assigns the trips to the specific turning movements at the study intersections. The trip generation and distribution analyses for the three study years are summarized on Table 2. The trip generation step forecasts the volume of vehicle trips that would be generated by the proposed project during the morning and afternoon peak periods. The Trip Generation report has trip generation rates for medical /dental office building (LU 720) based on the number of employees to calculate the number of morning and afternoon peak hour trips generated. The report also shows the percentage of inbound and outbound trips in each peak hour. The trip generation rates and the percentage of inbound and outbound trips are shown on Table 2. The trip generation rates indicate that the proposed medical office complex would generate twice as many trips during the PM peak hour than the AM peak hour. The proposed project would generate 64 PM peak hour trips in 2015 and increase to 95 trips in 2030. The project generated trips were then distributed by four major direction of travel (including internal trips) to and from the project site. The percentages of trips in each direction are based on the current turning movements and are shown on Table 2. Four separate sets of directional factors were derived for morning and afternoon peak hours, and inbound and outbound trips. The traffic assignments of these proposed project generated trips in each peak hour are shown on Figure 9 for 2015, Figure 10 for 2020, and Figure 11 for 2030. Total With Project Forecast The additional project generated traffic volumes from Figures 9 to 11 were added to their respective ambient traffic forecast volumes from Figures 6 to 8 to obtain the total with project traffic forecasts shown on Figure 12 for 2015 without the bypass highway, Figure 12A for 2015 with the bypass highway, Figure 13 for 2020, and Figure 14 for 2030. The traffic operations for the total with project traffic forecast conditions at the AECOM PACIFIC, INC. PAGE 8 60147751.00300 March 2010 Halekii Plaza TIAR Halekii Plaza TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT two study intersections are discussed in the Level of Service Analysis section of this report. LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS The concept of level of service is used to quantify the quality of traffic flow on roadway facilities. The Transportation Research Board (TRB) has developed procedures to calculate level of service value(s) by measuring traffic volumes against the capacities of different types of roadway facilities. Their Highway Capacity Manual 2000 (HCM2000) describes the various procedures developed for freeways, highways, signalized and unsignalized intersections, etc. The study intersection at Haukapila Street is currently an unsignalized intersection with stop sign control on the Haukapila Street approach. The study intersection at Halekii Street is traffic signal controlled. Table 3 summarizes the level of service analysis with the current traffic control. Table 4 summarizes the level of service analysis with both intersections controlled by traffic signals as a mitigation measure. Table 3 shows the 2010 existing, 2015 ambient and total with project forecasts without bypass highway, 2015 ambient and total with project forecasts with bypass highway, 2020 ambient and total with project forecast with bypass highway, and 2030 ambient and total with project forecasts with bypass highway, placed side by side for each of the two (AM and PM) study periods. The traffic operation statistics of level of service (LOS) and delay (DEL) are shown for each column. This format facilitates a comparison of levels of service for the different forecast scenarios and can give an indication of the traffic impacts of ambient traffic growth and the proposed project. Table 4 does not include the 2015 ambient and total with project forecasts with bypass highway since mitigating measures are not required for these scenarios. The traffic operations statistics for unsignalized intersections were generated by the Highway Capacity Analysis Program (HCAP). The traffic operation statistics for signalized intersections were calculated with the Synchro 7 software program that AECOM PACIFIC, INC. PAGE 9 60147751.00300 March 2010 Halekii Plaza TIAR Halekii Plaza TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT simulates and optimizes traffic signal timings in a roadway network. The level of service calculation worksheets are included in Appendix B. The procedure used for analyzing unsignalized intersections calculates vehicle delays and levels of service based on the distribution of gaps in traffic on the major street and driver judgment in selecting gaps through which to execute turns. For two -way stop intersections where only the minor street traffic is controlled by a stop sign, levels of service are calculated for the critical turning movements including outbound movements from the stop - controlled approach and left turns from the main road to the minor road. The procedure does not calculate an overall intersection level of service. The HCM 2000 defines the relationship between level of service and delay (in seconds /vehicle) for unsignalized intersections as shown in the following table. UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE LEVEL OF DELAY SERVICE (SecondsNehicle) A < 10.0 B 10.1 to 15.0 C 15.1 to 25.0 p 25.1 to 35.0 E 35.1 to 50.0 F > 50.1 Levels of service A to D are considered acceptable for unsignalized intersections. Level of service F (with average delays longer than 50 seconds) is considered undesirable for unsignalized intersections and would indicate the possible need for mitigation. AECOM PACIFIC, INC. PAGE 10 60147751.00300 March 2010 Halekii Plaza TIAR Halekii Plaza TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT The methodology for analyzing signalized intersections calculates the levels of service for individual movements, approaches, and the intersection as a whole based on the average stopped delay per vehicle. The results range from level of service A (best with average delays Tess than ten seconds) to F (worst with average delays longer than 80 seconds), as described in the following table. LEVEL OF CONTROL DELAY PER SERVICE VEHICLE (SecondsNehicle) A < 10.0 B 10.1 to 20.0 C 20.1 to 35.0 D 35.1 to 55.0 E 55.1 to 80.0 F > 80.1 The County of Hawaii considers levels of service A to D as acceptable for signalized intersections, with levels of service E and F indicating the need for mitigating measures. For signalized intersections, the major streets can be designed to have a higher level of service than the side streets or turning lanes Table 3 shows that the traffic signal controlled Halekii Street intersection is currently at level of service B in both peak periods, indicating acceptable conditions. The intersection would remain at level of service B or better for future scenarios with no traffic control changes at the Haukapila Street intersection. The intersection is forecast to improve to level of service A during the AM peak hour in 2015 and 2020 for with the bypass highway scenarios, since the through traffic volumes are forecast to decrease significantly. This analysis indicates that this study intersection would not require mitigation in the future, with or without the proposed project. The stop sign controlled Haukapila Street approach is currently operating at level of service F in both peak hours primarily due the high traffic volumes on Mamalahoa Highway. It is forecast to remain at level at level of service F in 2015 if the bypass AECOM PACIFIC, INC. PAGE 11 60147751.00300 March 2010 Halekii Plaza TIAR • Halekii Plaza TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT highway is not built. The approach is forecast to improve to acceptable level of service D in 2015 for both ambient and total with project forecasts if the bypass highway is built. The approach is forecast to operate at levels of service D and E for the 2020 ambient AM and PM forecasts. Both levels of service would worsen one level to E and F, respectively, with the proposed project. The approach would operate at level of service F in 2030 in both peak hours, with and without the proposed project. The above analysis indicates that mitigating measures are currently needed but would not be required in 2015 if the bypass highway is built. Mitigating measures would be required at future dates if the bypass highway were not built by 2015, with or without the proposed project. The completion of the bypass highway would be a major mitigating measure in the region in the short term. It would reduce the through volumes on Mamalahoa Highway, which is currently over capacity, by half. But the increase in ambient traffic volumes on Mamalahoa Highway would eventually cause the stop sign controlled approach on Haukapila Street to return to level of service F. Widening the Haukapila Street approach would not provide adequate mitigation in that the left turn movement would still be at level of service F. A feasible mitigating measure would be to install a traffic signal at the Haukapila Street intersection. Due to the very close distance between this proposed traffic signal and the existing traffic signal at Halekii Street, the two traffic signals would have to be interconnected and their traffic signal timing plans coordinated. Table 4 summarizes the traffic operations at the two intersections with the above conditions. The Halekii Street traffic signal may not necessarily operate the same as an isolated traffic signalized intersection (as shown on Table 3) since it would be operating at a different cycle length and traffic flows would be different. The results for 2015 on Table 4 assume that the bypass highway would not be built. Both intersections are forecast to operate at level of service B in both peak periods for the ambient forecast conditions. The level of service in the PM peak would increase to AECOM PACIFIC, INC. PAGE 12 60147751.00300 March 2010 Halekii Plaza TIAR Halekii Plaza TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT C with the proposed project. The scenario for 2015 with bypass highway was not analyzed for two traffic signals since the results on Table 3 indicated that mitigating measures would not be required. Traffic operations during the 2020 AM peak period would improve to level of service A at both intersections since through traffic volumes on Mamalahoa Highway are expected to decrease with the bypass highway built. The PM peak hour level of service would remain at level of service B for both intersections for ambient and total with project forecasts. Intersection level of service during the 2030 AM peak hour would be B at Halekii Street and A at Haukapila Street for the ambient forecast. It would remain at level of service B at Halekii Street with the project but would change from A to B at Haukapila Street, which is considered acceptable. During the 2030 PM peak hour, the intersection levels of service would be B at both intersections for both ambient and total with project forecasts. The above analysis indicates that installing traffic signals at the Haukapila Street intersection would adequately mitigate unacceptable traffic conditions with the stop sign control. The installation could be delayed beyond 2015 if the bypass highway is built before then. CONCLUSIONS The Haukapila Street stop sign controlled approach to Mamalahoa Highway is currently operating at level of service F in both peak periods due to the high volumes of traffic on the highway. The opening of the bypass highway would reduce traffic volumes on Mamalahoa Highway significantly and permit acceptable levels of service on Haukapila Street for awhile. Unacceptable levels of service would eventually return as traffic volumes on Mamalahoa Highway increase and recall the need for mitigation. Installing traffic signals at the Haukapila Street intersection would return acceptable levels of AECOM PACIFIC, INC. PAGE 13 60147751.00300 March 2010 Halekii Plaza TIAR • Halekii Plaza TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT service in the future. The timing of the traffic signals is dependent upon the opening of the bypass highway, whose development schedule is uncertain at this time. If the bypass highway is opened at about the same time as the proposed project, then the installation of traffic signals could be delayed for several years until warranted. If the bypass highway is opened after the proposed project, a decision would have to be made whether to implement the traffic signals when the medical office buildings are occupied or wait until after the bypass highway is completed, enduring the unacceptable traffic conditions for several years until the traffic signals are warranted. The Mamalahoa Highway /Halekii street intersection is currently operating at acceptable levels of service and is forecast to continue operating at acceptable levels of service to 2030 with no additional mitigating measures. The proposed medical office complex project would not have an adverse traffic impact at the two study intersections with the recommended mitigation measures. AECOM PACIFIC, INC. PAGE 14 60147751.00300 March 2010 Halekii Plaza TZAR Halekii Plaza TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT References 1. Trip Generation Report, Seventh Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2003. 2. FY 2008 -2011 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program, (Approved Revision #8 effective August 11, 2009) 3. County of Hawaii General Plan (amended Feb. 2005), Table 2.2. 4. Traffic Impact Study, Villages of Hokukano, North and South Kona, Hawaii, Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade and Douglas, Inc., 1995 5. A Traffic Analysis for an Environmental Impact Statement for the New Highway, North and South Kona, Hawaii, M &E Pacific, Inc., 1997 6. Kahului to Keauhou Parkway Traffic Analysis Report, Julian Ng, Inc., 2000 7. Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2000 Edition. 8. Highway Capacity Analysis Program, Version 1, Catalina Engineering, Inc., 2000. 9. Synchro Studio 7, Trafficware, Ltd. AECOM PACIFIC, INC. PAGE Ref -1 60102230.00300 -- September 2009 Greenhouse Specialists p Expansion TIAR . 3 s PROJECT t s LOCATION NORTH Kealao10 R ; \10 S t _ KONA HOSPITAL d o Halekii St Keo R �,. S� o �) , / Akakou PI (td cwt ° � No\e St c _ Loos � ° o oa °r K Nam Kupuna PI Er T O Ho • o N St o S SUbd ¢ e c - e S Kohap Ii l_pop r Q\ 0 a v Hole K ek e P\ a Kolo.u PI �J, s 0 n. h Kaeo PI 1 s o_ 3 VICINITY MAP g NOT TO SCALE STATE OF HAWAII N o ..,.., i # (5 T S N MOLOKAI 1 _, %� ° °o O� $ /)111 d . � YMA ,7 : ' .l 1 • j am % s PROJECT 1 .v•\-.. . wi. S Eta LOCATION � _ KonaWae 9 i PACIFIC '\ _ ` ww<nu OCEAN Z ISLAND OF HAWAII VA IAE LOCATION MAP v STUDY INTERSECTIONS Figure 1 LOCATION MAP A �0� ION TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT HALEKII PLAZA DAVIES PACIFIC CTR, STE 1900 • 841 BISHOP ST, HONOLULU, HAWAII 96813 MARCH 2010 l r � ! N Z ° .�^` Q N cu / (C 2 . i ,9_,,,,,,_„- a. ec= ° ° W 11 2 L - `��� µ�'��� 0 0 'T AS- I LL. 1 � 2)J 2 _ --- • °15 . z 1---,.-- l (.- U ! a y o __e_.., , __.__ , ' 1.1 s l I �^ _ „' ,0'6Z V E 1 ._....._ . .. ., • 1 of, i 1 i 5 J V 1 N J t I-- 1 i „9,2 e vi s , ! — g I r' W .l 3 t A e Fc � ��tt�pO \ 11 2 _ $ ° iip We g -s 1111 1 51 1� /� a a 2 ovi ONlQVO1 W .-- V 1 g," 0 s u) I:1) 1 , ---,,, 0 ■ • o � U n ® /"� 3 "IP 1 IL • y- rS' � ° I � v 1 5 a is a� l � 0 9 ° 147a° J as — > J f 1 i N i V i i I • • ..... s • o•Z I. C 1 - -- -- —. S 1 U a I1 1 J I . -� . V _ 1 x 1, ! F (d�.l) N _ 888 i t1 �O! \ V I I ; ! ( I . f I I I goz ■ 0 1 a i.3 a a l a' o / __// 1 ,pa S • e li q ! B ' IV >' as -w \ a f doh t� �(�o I 0 _,.9151 0 . - �-" -- '- z i q — O rn wale 0 OIOL '6l teen :MVO Rea .. 6G6UW 0 me 'a Wql 311Od1 is/1 6.P ...Mama \wee \Ib -W OO/ \WO o !°LPN l5W 109 \.ql \e.eeM.Pe...J \^WV \100d111W. \\ 3RAHll3/ura Northbound Southbound TO KAILUA TO KAU —0 ' 0 0 CO CO t 80 4- 855 '- 880 r 70 95 1 Mamalahoa Highway 600 r' 715 -' 110 1 0 0 Haukapila Street Halekii Street A. AM PEAK HOUR 0 in t 30 535 +- 835 r 35 25 1 Mamalahoa Highway 605 -' -, r' 785 -• 95 1 0 O Haukapila Street Halekii Street B. PM PEAK HOUR EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES - 2010 FIGURE 3 CO K # ,� 0 O T - / / .�. l I 0 E. L■ S Se a • t b •�, rt ;:. . Q Q k R` n d Q W f . � N a {t : a Y 0 - y . '- r - 4 'K 3 ' $L4,- ua N „ ' , 4 b + * R 1 k 2 0 ^ r 4 .' C Q p Q N „ 1 - . . ma x-. r , - N )- C 441. CI ( O G r. �q 4 S r,� t� Z a LL. Z o J o Z � T H IL Y J ai H T k � i t r r y 0 >_ A ° O V co } G O 1 '3, k r y s c g;� Q. v= Q (3) J O _ I M1� MO(00)N N 0 D I-� p- 10 (0 = O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 >_ Q y , Co r r- .- t.-- O pp O pip CO, O O O O O O O O O O O O O N -i Q to O to O to O to O to O to O Q < N 0 0 O Cr) CO CO I` Co CO to to co C6 I- N rx Z Q =rnrn w � - O rnrno00 00 o S3wnion > - N- NN NN Nfn m o p a O. 9 _. 4 �, _ C7 p ° s = E `L d 2,0 0. O -o LL. o Q Gli = H 6-pp c (/) ` t Q p - C7 , , _ _.. _ , s , , , .... , _ ,--, ,-.. , ,,„ : -.,,, , .„,, z gi _ o aw — bop. O � -6, C7 i.p - Op. J LL. G 6' a - O < ` i `! b pp. Z O �r'd y On W 0 0 0 CO 0 0 0 0 0 o s' E o 0 0°0 0 0 d' O M N O .�n oy�sa��iyan > U 0 LL. 0� O ' 0)LC)rnrnoNrn L5 a r a0 M N O ' - N 00 I� a0 r d) Lt) i. = (u O O O O- I- Z m co c ca (p ��� OO�- � O(0 (00) a00) _ J U N CO CO d M d DO N- �t 00 Co 1- � a E 7 N toto a ��tf)�� (O (p O LL O O 2 2 2 0 � Q¢¢ ¢¢¢¢¢ ° -a". a ai E _ X0 000 00 00 00 00 00 0 co m =00 00o 0 0O000000 - , LO CO l - 00 O) O N r N co t() (0 (� Q (1) fA O r r- Northbound Southbound ~— TO KAILUA TO KAU —0 ' Lf) CO CO t 80 950 4- 1035 r 80 100 1 Mamalahoa Highway 6 -■ F-, r+ 815 -* 145 Z o in 0 • Haukapila Street Halekii Street A. AM PEAK HOUR o t 30 4- 595 4- 970 r 50 25 1 Mamalahoa Highway 670 r4 950 180 1 o in 4- N N Haukapila Street Halekii Street B. PM PEAK HOUR AMBIENT TRAFFIC FORECAST - 2015 WITHOUT BYPASS HIGHWAY FIGURE 6 Northbound Southbound " — TO KAILUA TO KAU —� If) L() CO CO t 80 475 � L4 490 r 75 100 S Mamalahoa Highway 335 -' 4-1 r' 400 -' 125 Z o 0 Haukapila Street Halekii Street A. AM PEAK HOUR in o °' t 30 295 �► 465 r 40 25 J Mamalahoa Highway 335 ' 440 -' 105 Z t o N N Haukapila Street Halekii Street B. PM PEAK HOUR AMBIENT TRAFFIC FORECAST - 2015 WITH BYPASS HIGHWAY FIGURE 6A Northbound Southbound TO KAILUA TO KAU - I P ' LO In CO CO t 85 4- 525 � L-► 4- 545 f 85 105 1 Mamalahoa Highway 370 - 4 4- r+ 445 -4 140 1 In In CO Haukapila Street Halekii Street A. AM PEAK HOUR 0 to t 30 4-- 330 520 r 50 30 1 Mamalahoa Highway 370 -4 41 r' 490 -' 125 1 0 in d- CO N Haukapila Street Halekii Street B. PM PEAK HOUR AMBIENT TRAFFIC FORECAST - 2020 FIGURE 7 Northbound Southbound TO KAILUA TO KAU - I I " 0 0 `1- 71- t 100 f- 650 L+ 675 r 110 120 .1 Mamalahoa Highway 455 -' 4-1 r' 550 175 Z o Lo Haukapila Street Halekii Street A. AM PEAK HOUR 0 0 t 35 4- 405 L. 4- 640 r 60 30 .1 Mamalahoa Highway 460 ti r' 615 - 155 z oo 0 Haukapila Street Halekii Street B. PM PEAK HOUR AMBIENT TRAFFIC FORECAST - 2030 FIGURE 8 Northbound Southbound ~— TO KAILUA TO KAU —� CO 00 t 11 4- 10 L-. 13 1 Mamalahoa Highway 3 -1 ±, Haukapila Street Halekii Street A. AM PEAK HOUR 2 t 9 8 4J L 7 1 Mamalahoa Highway 10 -' ' 1 Z Haukapila Street Halekii Street B. PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT GENERATED TRAFFIC FORECAST - 2015 FIGURE 9 Northbound Southbound TO KAILUA TO KAU —� tr) En t 16 14 J L 20 ? Mamalahoa Highway 4 -414-1 1 Z fV Haukapila Street Halekii Street A. AM PEAK HOUR al t 14 12 L 11 ? Mamalahoa Highway 15 -' ti 2 N Haukapila Street Halekii Street B. PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT GENERATED TRAFFIC FORECAST - 2020 FIGURE 10 Northbound Southbound TO KAILUA TO KAU -r 00 00 t 27 24 1J L 33 ? Mamalahoa Highway 7 ti 1 - 1 co Haukapila Street Halekii Street A. AM PEAK HOUR N 00 N t 14 20 L 18 J Mamalahoa Highway 24 - 1 4-- 3 1 m Haukapila Street Halekii Street B. PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT GENERATED TRAFFIC FORECAST - 2030 FIGURE 11 Northbound Southbound F— TO KAILUA TO KAU —� LO 00 CO t 95 '-- 960 1035 r 80 115 J Mamalahoa Highway 670 -' r' 815 145 Z 00 0o Haukapila Street Halekii Street A. AM PEAK HOUR 'n o 1 00 t 40 600 '- 970 r 50 35 J Mamalahoa Highway 680 950 -i 180 i in En N N Haukapila Street Halekii Street B. PM PEAK HOUR TOTAL WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC FORECAST - 2015 WITHOUT BYPASS HIGHWAY FIGURE 12 Northbound Southbound F— TO KAILUA TO KAU —0 " L0 &) CO `Y) t 95 ∎ - 485 +' `-■ 4- 490 r 75 115 S Mamalahoa Highway 335 41 r+ 400 - 125 1 [ O N Haukapila Street Halekii Street A. AM PEAK HOUR `0 0 00 t 40 •- 305 `+ 465 r 40 35 J Mamalahoa Highway 345 -+ h r+ 440 110 1 'n 0 N N Haukapila Street Halekii Street B. PM PEAK HOUR TOTAL WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC FORECAST - 2015 WITH BYPASS HIGHWAY FIGURE 12A Northbound Southbound 4 TO KAILUA TO KAU _i 0 0 ` t 105 *- 540 545 r 85 125 ? Mamalahoa Highway 375 -* 445 -; 140 Z 0 r Haukapila Street Halekii Street A. AM PEAK HOUR 'n 0 °' t 45 340 4-' 1 -* 4- 520 r 50 40 ? Mamalahoa Highway 385 -' '-i r' 490 125 Z 0 m N N Haukapila Street Halekii Street B. PM PEAK HOUR TOTAL WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC FORECAST - 2020 FIGURE 13 Northbound Southbound F— TO KAILUA TO KAU —� 0 0 'n t 125 4-- 675 4' 675 r 110 155 ? Mamalahoa Highway 465 -' r 550 — 175 1 to in Haukapila Street Halekii Street A. AM PEAK HOUR Ln , t 50 ■ 425 �► 640 r 60 50 1 Mamalahoa Highway 485 - i h 615 160 1 0 0 CO N Haukapila Street Halekii Street B. PM PEAK HOUR TOTAL WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC FORECAST - 2030 FIGURE 14 C ~ C C o CO o O 8 ° CO ,, N.. O O O CO O CO O M CD N O ti _ N CV N N N '. N E. r N a `' L. a) C C c o O o O o N 8g.. o o C) ' \ O CO >, O O >,= ti ti a= ti ti >+ 1 ti N - (-Ni CO N CO U) m In m co as m as as CO cu cri O '5 CL '> CL > CL •> CL O c h' O C) c 2 M N c) O O 'Co M _= •t __c 2.c 2-C Q 0 0 CO 0 0 N 0 0 N O O Cu = Ccn t c4Y c C) Y Z CO \ O) N N N ai c Cr) c*" d O \Oo N. E o 1` E o O N E o Id) N E o u") N _c g CO CO _a as Cu Cu O as O O a; O Ti O O O O C6 O O CO — D '> Z Y '> Z Y '> Z Y '> Z Y m 2 co o c CO CO CO N O CO r-- c W 1° Q Q Q Q H 1a F- F- F-- F- U / et, C O C O C Cr) C O CI {�L. O . L co -47... • L D ' O • L a o .L co r Z ~ a 2 i a) :r a a) ) a) a) a a) +_ a) �• W Z G L C •X L C •X L C •X — II Q < a) a) C a) 0 0) 0) 0 a) a) m - mo d o o Q Z d. O O) d- c co c I— X X X X 0) a) 0) a) o co C) C) ° N M co CO coN co W rn 0 rn 0 m N Z _ c N _ c N W L ) � • .-, .L O a O O a) O a) O N a N N a) N a) a D Co 0 co D ct, 0 ti - _ co CV 0 N -U) d. co co Q E1— E � , n E E tr) J m o 0 O O = O = O a �, - -a >. .- -0 >, N- v >, • Z O E E + °r = E + 'E + °r E + O - E as m ca d is -- m ca Z 0li X a u X II u- X au- X la t; 1` E. ti E. o o o Z C c O c) _C O c0 C O c0 C O W u c5 11 11 U) (A 11 11 61) '65 II 11 NU) 11 11 0 1 O F— F— u) O F F— co as o F— F— 0 F— F— c ms s _ r Lf) a e N ±+ C'7 0 Q I N . 0 • 3 N . N o CD\" o CO o N o 0 o M o N M 00 O III N O tI)�O L() T' N c N N c N N iji N N a) " c c c 0 0 8 0 ° '4' ° O ° O\ O .. O ° 0 = O O = O �t M 00 to (� CD I > p N ~ > ' 1 ti T N >, 1 N. N. ' N u) co N m U) m ca co w >� > ' > n > o_ CO a � O \r'( N o N \ M \�fi\f- u O O co O co O co O N— co J co p < tf�Y s((�Y U)Y sc Q Z E o (V d' ' 1 p ° d' \ N c6 O M m \ U) \ [` d M E o d' co E o .1- M Z O .c co I` co o cu m o c3 as O I ' > Z Y m o b ca 0 o m 0 (0 = '> Z '> Z '> Z m co N co N CO CO O I� O CO O co O r (p N- (-- c- r' CO N Ce Q- Q- Q Q a C O C ID C O C O CI E2 o _ _ 0 o c 0 o c co p = o) L- L L L J LLI a a 0 w a o aa. a) 0 a a -8 a a) ) a a) ) I Q — 0 N. `D t° cv ti ti co 0) mM `- rnM N g �Q1 c C N N N o Co o O c co e O W O O O O M M Z m 0 m e cm m ap W O a� O ` m O a� O `m N 0 N N N aa) G. 0 OD 0 CID re ,, CO � � �M CO � �M O 1'— co a O 0- O Cl) d L() L() Q . O I— . O H O �- O 1-- + J 'a'= X = Xa = Xrn = >,--(... g) .... Y z Qa J� m >, ` - c --- r- �' J � 02 J 0 E a) o -. IL o Q. LL o ��- '°� u �°� u E n 11 E 11 11 W 0 Ti.) _ .� 0 D) u 1 0 D) H v c . Z _ _ _ W co (/) F Imo- II (o (A ~ H II W U) ~ II co V) H F II O JJI— .O J Rs c) JJ1 cu JJ CC ja 1 .Q i .Q , . I CL .3 N N . 3 N . 3 . 3 N Ei I • J "4 03 C) r- Ul N c) Ul c) c - J O r O U1 J W c+7 t[) CO N M d CO O t� 0 - W O r 6 ° r N r r r r N r r r 0 A r A 0 1 • 0 m U mQmm mUm Qmm 0 u_m LL 03 Cr) J c) J O O O 07 01 N N O r 01 N CO O O r CO O 'V• N Z W M tt r CO N r..: rf CO O N.: O 6 N Z W f- O r- O CO W° r N r r (y r r r W° CO r 00 J m m Q N 2p mUmQmm mUmQmm � p u_m u_Q LL. Q J Q J J CO CA O N 4- co NI - O N U7 L() N- J r 0) M O • Z • Q O O 00 to 00 r r N O CO O CO Q Q co O ,-- O Q U aF-00 QmQQQm cUQQQC O W Q u_Q C) N J N J 0 F-J d 4,00 NO NI 1- N HJ x- h.. (O0) LL ZW 0 0 N 6r: c ' c C4 OO6)CO z M a) 6 g CB Q Q m Q Q Q CO CO U Q Q Q m Q 0 ° Q W Q �� _ f ^ J O V-- C`) O r- 'd' N C`7 O N 01 C') J U) U) V' I'- V co J W O6(�rf tir- r- 000OOrt JW ti O 6 Z U Q r r r r r I Q . ° N M co m O ° CO Q m Q Q Q co m m Q Q Q m m O ° ° Q ° Q X �~J OCON CD 01 rrONMN > (OM 6r- M W 6 W ° CA .- • -- '- O) 6 (0 0) � > W Q C ((0 0) CV --I H N 2 0 (N °Q °Q CO Q J Q m Q Q Q m m m Q Q Q m Q J J cr 00 (O v - CO N O O O (0 N (O J O LC) O N 1' U) fn J W 00 V O (O O c- (O 00 O CO r C7 (1) _i w O r ( O r r Q <° r 0) r CV r r N r r N Q ° n r n r m1-p mUmQmm mUmQmU mF- u.m LL 03 J Q I— J O r In d l() CO CO 00 ti � - O I-- J O r O O Z Lo W° M N O N .- N O r N W° w O ,-- o r oi Q U) u) I-- W � 0:100<003 mUmQm Ni ym u_ m u_ (� Q J N F - Q J >- Q � J 1 (/) C°. (0 O m r CD (O N- LC) C7 J Q n °o ao ° o `er re Z W vr - (v vvo Zw Q r r O - Q W r N r r r r CV r r r O - ° Q Y A r n r III Z; N R 8 QQ mUmQmm mU mQm m N X m O u_m u. ca LL W j Z W � _ 0 I-- = 0) = ) W Q V L E 3 (1) >- J N I = w a te ) a U f- ujil = a,, co a) ai co ai m m co m < 1- F' = 0 ° m °° m W o z (? J z m (0 m -' z m (n o z Z C� (n CO J z a W Z OC m OC m z 0 W p= w N Oat W W'E.s= Oaf w D a� ~ Q> w °( � c m (o oco ~ Q> J �Mcn ca = C) co W oO N =Y o 2 � s2 Y 217. 5 LS W cc O Q = Y � Ne (o (n = =3 =D Q U as J I- co Q ) co 15 N ()_ Z -] Q'Q Q 'EL N CC NC QQW a,; a� w �Y c (o Et 9Qw cum w cow w Q a zg E E °- " a � E E W r5 °- E °- E H C9 Q� �w03 (o m m co � � (a w Z < coco o($ 2 ? vo 2Q � _2 2 E_2 2 ? m2Q =2 a =2 TABLE 4 LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS WITH BOTH INTERSECTIONS SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION 2010 20 2020 2030 PEAK HR /APPROACH EXISTING AMBIENT TOTAL AMBIENT TOTAL AMBIENT TOTAL MOVEMENT LOS DEL LOS DEL LOS DEL LOS DEL LOS DEL LOS DEL LOS DEL AM PEAK HOUR MAMALAHOA HIGHWAY AT HALEKII STREET Intersection B 11.8 B 14.5 B 15.2 A 9.3 A 9.5 B 11.5 B 11.8 Halekii Street EB Left Turn C 24.4 E 56.7 E 59.1 C 31.5 C 31.6 D 43.9 D 44.0 Mamalahoa Hwy NB B 11.4 B 12.6 B 14.4 A 6.7 A 7.0 A 7.9 A 8.3 Left turn lane A 4.6 A 4.8 A 4.6 A 4.5 A 4.6 A 5.0 A 5.1 Through lane B 11.9 B 13.2 B 15.2 A 7.1 A 7.4 A 8.4 A 8.9 Mamalahoa Hwy SB through B 12.6 A 9.7 A 8.8 A 8.7 A 9.0 A 10.0 B 10.3 MAMALAHOA HIGHWAY AT HAUKAPILA STREET Intersection B 16.5 B 19.3 A 9.0 A 9.2 A 8.9 B 10.7 Haukapila St WB D 46.9 D 47.0 C 29.7 C 29.7 D 41.9 D 42.4 Mamalahoa Hwy NB C 21.4 C 26.2 B 10.6 B 11.0 A 9.7 B 11.9 Mamalahoa Hwy SB A 8.2 A 8.8 A 4.3 A 4.3 A 4.2 A 4.9 Left turn lane C 25.0 C 27.6 A 3.9 A 4.1 A 4.1 A 5.9 Through lane A 6.1 A 6.1 A 4.3 A 4.3 A 4.2 A 4.7 PM PEAK HOUR MAMALAHOA HIGHWAY AT HALEKII STREET Intersection B 14.1 B 12.1 B 12.2 B 12.8 B 11.6 B 12.8 B 12.6 Halekii Street EB Left Turn C 24.0 D 48.4 D 48.6 D 41.4 C 32.7 D 35.7 D 35.7 Mamalahoa Hwy NB B 10.4 A 8.3 A 8.7 A 8.4 A 7.6 A 8.9 A 9.1 Left turn lane A 5.6 A 5.4 A 5.5 A 5.3 A 5.9 A 6.8 A 6.8 Through lane B 10.7 A 8.5 A 8.9 A 8.7 A 7.8 A 9.2 A 9.4 Mamalahoa Hwy SB through B 18.5 A 8.6 A 8.5 B 13.1 A 9.0 B 10.0 A 9.5 MAMALAHOA HIGHWAY AT HAUKAPILA STREET Intersection B 17.3 C 21.3 B 11.9 B 13.5 B 12.6 B 16.0 Haukapila St WB D 47.3 D 51.7 D 37.8 C 32.3 C 30.6 C 32.7 Mamalahoa Hwy NB B 17.5 C 22.9 A 7.7 B 10.7 B 11.4 B 15.8 Mamalahoa Hwy SB B 12.1 B 13.4 A 6.8 A 8.2 A 8.7 A 9.9 Left turn lane A 4.7 A 6.5 A 4.4 A 5.4 A 4.9 A 6.0 Through lane B 12.3 B 13.6 A 7.0 A 8.4 A 8.9 B 10.2 o v- o o N o o Cr) oT LC) Lf) LC) LC) L0 LC) Tti TO T6 L L L a) o N o 0 o N o N (\; (1, o LC) CO co co LC) co cri > ._ > ._ > ._ a) a) N a) m o .. o Cr) o o 'd" o N o N co U) M M >- O Cr) NI" O CO Tr O M d' J t t t 0 03 Z ci ( CO U) Q o MoM 000LC) oMo C° �- N M CO O LN s'p O co O N' O LC) d' F- O - ca O N o N CO m Z Y Z Y Z Y LC) h- OO o co N. c / F2 N Cr) N .-- CO I-- O. O. 0 H F F- (NI 0 G- • o o c o c W Z 'F'L .f); 'C.--. C V *L C F. - Q a) w a) a) a.) 15 am) a Z QD a) a 0 N a 0 a) 0 r r o N c N 0) r-- 0) W CD a J ›al Z -I �L[) _1 co R Vic') W .. � N cm M �0) (O a) w a) 43 >, . a 0 0 0 0) 0 (1) W O. N Q. co E o I - Eu) M E 't W co o F- U- CL W0_ co 0- O o� o f Ln� w co � ,~ � O o 0) 0) CL z -° ZS - a a. p m m m 1 "" X X X W 0 LL 0 L M n 0 L M n Z Id o Ta o T3 o L L I . V I I I I U u u U I I I I ce 1 I 1 H co o 0 O N co Q N N N 0 r' Lo (B C 4) Y c` r^ 1- as W •> .� N N a) T o co CO O o d. J .c Q — 7 Z u) Z M O Z o d' 0 i D z Y m m Ce 07 CO N .Q- p 0 t- W Z - •� cm C Q 2 c CO • Z ao a� _ O c0 1-- c`) Q O �� 0 N N. -X W 0 N Z -1 N- W 0)N- 0 O a) N a >,_ C4 a I- E (0 m H w a LU o O Fi- O rn a O F- U) .� s � X W O o Z T W .2 11 11 13 H H 2 f- Lo 2' ac°\I J CO o) d' ti t) N M 10 CO O V' J 0.- O t0 -J W M t0 r (O N M 466r -J W O r r o) Q 0 r N r r r .-N.- r r 0 A r A (D 00 mUm Qmm mUmQmm 0 00 u_m LL CO M J M -J NH-I OM MMNN OrMNMO NF-J CO (:).v* '^ Z W () d r 6O N N: 466 I� 66 Z W N.:6 o) V+ w_ o .-N.- r r- r N e- ..-.- W p (O r CO J m m 2 mUmQmm mUmQmm 20 u.m u_Q N Q J Q J 1- J C 0 ) d' O N L0 t0 I- J 1 M O Z Q W 0)0) t, c0 ..- N o Qw 66 j ai O � F- U o 0 Q m Q Q Q m m U Q Q Q m c.00) W Q u Q O J N J V N H J d: LO W r N 00 N O O '4 1 N F- J r I� CO O LL Z W o)o)I-6(0 N,6066 Z W N o) La LL WO r r01 r WO co co g C73 1- Q� <M<<<03 mmQQQm QO pQ wQ f^ J O I M O I- •:I: N (M O N M M J LO LO '' ti V J W o)00r-4I�r ,66664 J W I-o) M0 Z ( Q p r r r r r Q p N M m - Q m Q Q Q m m m Q Q Q m m J X Z F - J C D O N M C D M r r O N M N j i. J (O M LO I- M WI Z W 0) (0 I- ' r` .- - 666 ( > Z w to o) 66 to W p r r r r r 10 W 0 N N J H' (`I20 0,(/) 0.‹ pQ CO Q J Q m Q Q Q m m m Q Q Q m Q J 00 (O r 00 N 000) 10 N (O J 01.0 ON U) 03 03 Q W 00 4 O COO ti CO 6 6 6 , M � J w O c,6 r Q F- 0 .-M.- N r .-N.- r N Q ~ 0 A r A 1 " in ›- r1-8 mUmQmm mUmQmU >' 1-0 u_m u_m J m O J m J < F- J o) r t0 c r I , - t 0 ( O O CO d r o) 0 F- J F- On- O O Q toW 0 F- , coN m N .- .- 1.0410 o A i x A W o2 o w moUQUm mUmQmU N2 CO W u_m u_m () (" Q-J M Q -J »< C7 J } ( 00 t t Co o) Co r O 'ct (O I- L0 (� J Q = J O co O M Z W r r r N V O 10 O 00 Z W Z Oqq' O O 0 J r N r r r r N r r r ° - p < Y A r A r ce o p Y r V) NR0 Z= mUmQmm mUmQmm N W 0 O= LLD u_m LL J O O Q C O C 0) w< V 0 0 J w Q o o ft < v W = F - F- s = w a) > UF_ � = aim a� a)m aim a� aim 0 f- f mm C m c m W . 0 w 1 - ( m mZ m am mZ mU O ZI Z oO O � �n J E m W p a� � = m= 0 a)= T= =mw N%0 m = 0 � = Q> W = c a) m o m = c o m o m =mw J� =cn o =U) o 0-..../..-, NQYo; .cNL Y °mot WW Q Ym Ymo W= JJQ oW mJF- m Q om mJF m 0= Z Q'Q.m r:C Y Q Q W N Y m m WW Y m m C Y O Q W m m W m m W Q Z2a L m E E a L a� E E ° g E a. 14 E ? a v�2Q = _2 2 I E_2 2 Q. D < a=2 TABLE 4 LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS WITH BOTH INTERSECTIONS SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION 2010 2015 20 20 PEAK HR/APPROACH EXISTING AMBIENT TOTAL AMBIENT TOTAL AMBIENT TOTAL MOVEMENT LOS DEL LOS DEL LOS DEL LOS DEL LOS DEL LOS DEL LOS DEL AM PEAK HOUR MAMALAHOA HIGHWAY AT HALEKII STREET Intersection B 11.8 B 14.5 B 15.2 A 9.3 A 9.5 B 11.5 B 11.8 Halekii Street EB Left Turn C 24.4 E 56.7 E 59.1 C 31.5 C 31.6 D 43.9 D 44.0 Mamalahoa Hwy NB B 11.4 B 12.6 B 14.4 A 6.7 A 7.0 A 7.9 A 8.3 Left turn Zane A 4.6 A 4.8 A 4.6 A 4.5 A 4.6 A 5.0 A 5.1 Through lane B 11.9 B 13.2 B 15.2 A 7.1 A 7.4 A 8.4 A 8.9 Mamalahoa Hwy SB through B 12.6 A 9.7 A 8.8 A 8.7 A 9.0 A 10.0 B 10.3 MAMALAHOA HIGHWAY AT HAUKAPILA STREET Intersection B 16.5 B 19.3 A 9.0 A 9.2 A 8.9 B 10.7 Haukapila St WB D 46.9 D 47.0 C 29.7 C 29.7 D 41.9 D 42.4 Mamalahoa Hwy NB C 21.4 C 26.2 B 10.6 B 11.0 A 9.7 B 11.9 Mamalahoa Hwy SB A 8.2 A 8.8 A 4.3 A 4.3 A 4.2 A 4.9 Left turn Zane C 25.0 C 27.6 A 3.9 A 4.1 A 4.1 A 5.9 Through lane A 6.1 A 6.1 A 4.3 A 4.3 A 4.2 A 4.7 PM PEAK HOUR MAMALAHOA HIGHWAY AT HALEKII STREET Intersection B 14.1 B 12.1 B 12.2 B 12.8 B 11.6 B 12.8 B 12.6 Halekii Street EB Left Turn C 24.0 D 48.4 D 48.6 D 41.4 C 32.7 D 35.7 D 35.7 Mamalahoa Hwy NB B 10.4 A 8.3 A 8.7 A 8.4 A 7.6 A 8.9 A 9.1 Left turn lane A 5.6 A 5.4 A 5.5 A 5.3 A 5.9 A 6.8 A 6.8 Through lane B 10.7 A 8.5 A 8.9 A 8.7 A 7.8 A 9.2 A 9.4 Mamalahoa Hwy SB through B 18.5 A 8.6 A 8.5 B 13.1 A 9.0 B 10.0 A 9.5 MAMALAHOA HIGHWAY AT HAUKAPILA STREET Intersection B 17.3 C 21.3 B 11.9 B 13.5 B 12.6 B 16.0 Haukapila St WB D 47.3 D 51.7 D 37.8 C 32.3 C 30.6 C 32.7 Mamalahoa Hwy NB B 17.5 C 22.9 A 7.7 B 10.7 B 11.4 B 15.8 Mamalahoa Hwy SB B 12.1 B 13.4 A 6.8 A 8.2 A 8.7 A 9.9 Left turn lane A 4.7 A 6.5 A 4.4 A 5.4 A 4.9 A 6.0 Through lane B 12.3 B 13.6 A 7.0 A 8.4 A 8.9 B 10.2 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS COUNTY OF HAWAII HILO, HAWAII DATE: June 28, 2010 Memorandum TO • B.J. Leithead -Todd, Planning Director Planning Department FROM • Galen M. Kuba, Division Chief Engineering Division V SUBJECT : Change of Zone Application (REZ 10- 000124) Applicant: MEN Real Estate Investment, Inc. Location: Halekii, South Kona, HI TMK: 3/ 8 -1 -25: 011 We reviewed the subject application and our comments are as follows: DRAINAGE 1. All development generated runoff shall be disposed of on -site and shall not be directed toward any adjacent properties. 2. The applicant shall be informed that if they include drywells in the subject development, an Underground Injection Control (UIC) permit may be required from the Department of Health, State of Hawaii. 3. A drainage study shall be prepared, and the recommended drainage system shall be constructed meeting with the approval of DPW. EARTHWORK 1. All earthwork and grading shall conform to Chapter 10, Erosion and Sediment Control, of the Hawaii County Code. 2. The applicant shall comply with Chapter 11 -55, Water Pollution Control, Hawaii Administrative Rules, Department of Health, which requires an NPDES permit for certain construction activity. Planning Dept. Exhibit t)-. Memorandum to PD- REZ -10- 000124 June 28, 2010 Page 2 of 3 ROADWAYS 1. Haukapila Street serving the subject property, is a private culdesac over which the State of Hawaii has a perpetual access easement to the Kona Community Hospital parcel TMK: 7 -9 -010: 081. It has an approximate 20 -ft. wide pavement with 4 -foot sidewalk (on one side) all within an approximate 30 -ft. right -of -way. The road would not meet current subdivision code standards for commercial access. 2. The County of Hawaii does not maintain Haukapila Street, however the operational adequacy should be considered. We recommend the Planning Director obtain comments from the agency having and accepting jurisdiction. 3. Other than the required Traffic Impact Analysis Report provided, the Planning Director should consider the consequences of increasing the current zoning density when there is no alternate access to the property provided by the existing road system. TRAFFIC We reviewed the Traffic Impact Analysis Report dated April 2010 and have the following comments. The comments are made based on assumed project timing as assumed in the TIAR and not the application (See Comment 1). Corrections should be provided by the applicant for applicable comments prior to drafting recommendations to the Planning Commission. 1. The project description is not consistent with the application. The application states 12k square feet per building for a total of 60k square feet. The TIAR assumes 50k square feet. That results in an underestimate of project generated traffic volumes. 2. The TZAR estimates the timing of completion over a period of 20 years whereas no such timing is specified in the application. 3. The TIAR assumes the Mamalahoa Bypass will be completed by 2020 and provides the analysis for both with and without the Bypass completion by 2015. 4. Table 2 is missing data for forecast years 2020 and 2030. 5. The TIAR indicates that the Haukapila Mamalahoa intersection currently has a deficient level of service. As we understand Hawaii County Code Section 25 -2- 46, relative to the conclusions of the TIAR, mitigation is required prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy of a 10k square foot portion of the subject development. For a 10k square foot portion to occupy by 2015, either 1) the Mamalahoa Highway Bypass must be completed and dedicated to the County or, a traffic signal must be installed at the intersection. For occupancy of any additional development, both suggested or assumed mitigation measures are Hawaii County is an equal Opportunity Provider and Employer Memorandum to PD- REZ- 10- 000124 June 28, 2010 Page 3 of 3 required (Bypass and signal) or an updated TIAR should be provided prior to Plan Approval. 5. Without completion of the Mamalahoa Highway Bypass, the TIAR indicates the intersection of Mamalahoa Highway with Halekii Street will have a deficient level of service by 2015. The only mitigation suggested by the TZAR is completion of the Mamalahoa Highway Bypass. We defer to the Planning Director's interpretation of HCC Section 25 -2 -46, Concurrency requirements, regarding requirement to mitigate a single deficient movement, when the overall intersection level of service is acceptable. If such mitigation is required, no 10k square foot portion of the proposed project may be occupied until the entire Mamalahoa Highway Bypass is completed and opened for public use. 6. We are expecting additional comments on the TIAR from our Traffic Division and will forward under a separate memo. Should there be any questions concerning this matter, please feel free to contact Kiran Emler of our Kona Engineering Division office at 327 -3530. KE copy: ENG -HILO /KONA Hawaii County is an equal Opportunity Provider and Employer NH �v E WAT5R og 11 0 ,... - SGA` • • L 119; ;9 • ` DEPARTMENT OF WATER SUPPLY • COUNTY OF HAWAI9 y 345 KEKUANAO`A STREET, SUITE 20 • HILO, HAWAII 96720 TELEPHONE (808) 961 -8050 • FAX (808) 961 -8657 May 25, 2010 TO Ms. BJ Leithead -Todd, Planning Director Planning Department FROM: Milton D. Pavao, Manager SUBJECT: CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (REZ 10- 000124) REQUEST: RS -15 TO CN -20 APPLICANT: MEN REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT, INC. TAX MAP KEY 8 -1- 025:011 We have reviewed the subject application and have the following comments and conditions. Water can be made available from an and 12 -inch waterline along an existing road and utility easement within Tax Map Key 7 -9- 010:081 (Kona Community Hospital site), approximately 320 feet from the subject parcel. The water availability conditions in the area, which are subject to change without notice, can provide up to a maximum of seven (7) units of water per pre- existing lot of record. Each unit of water is equal to an average daily usage of 400 gallons and a maximum daily usage of 600 gallons. The Department has no objection to the proposed application, subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to effecting a water commitment for the proposed medical office facility, the Department requests estimated maximum daily water usage calculations, prepared by a professional engineer licensed in the State of Hawai` i, for review and approval. The water usage calculations should include the total maximum daily water use in gallons per day and the estimated peak flow in gallons per minute (GPM). Upon approval of the water usage calculations, the Department will determine if water can be made available, the water commitment deposit due, and applicable prevailing facilities charges to be paid. 2. Construct necessary water system improvements, which shall include, but not be limited to the following: a. extension of approximately 320 linear feet of 12 -inch waterline to front the property, b. installation of an appropriately -sized service lateral; the size of which shall be determined by the Department and dependent on the water usage calculations provided per Item 1 above, c. installation of a reduced pressure type backflow prevention assembly within five (5) feet of the meter on private property. The installation of the backflow prevention assembly must be inspected and approved by our Department before water service can be activated, d. fire hydrants spaced no more than 300 feet apart, and Planning Dept. mAY Exhibit 3 1 RLY. ° . . W a t e r , Our 9 v t o s t Precious r e s o u r c e ... K a W a i A Kane .. . The Department of Water Supply is an Equal Opportunity provider and employer Ms. BJ Leithead -Todd, Planning Director Page 2 May 25, 2010 e. subject to other agencies' requirements to construct improvements within the road right -of -way fronting the property affected by the proposed development, the applicant shall be responsible for the relocation and adjustment of the Department's affected water system facilities, should they be necessary. Construction plans showing the above improvements and prepared by a licensed professional engineer, registered in the State of Hawaii, must be submitted for review and approval. 3. Submit the appropriate documents, properly prepared and executed, to convey the water system improvements and necessary easements to the Water Board of the County of Hawaii prior to final approval being granted. A registered land surveyor shall stamp and certify the metes and bounds description within the conveyance documents. However, prior to water meter services being granted to the development, the conveyance documents shall be accepted by the Water Board. 4. The Department will note that a portion of the property is situated at an elevation where our existing water system cannot provide adequate pressure. The property will need to be properly graded to ensure that any buildable area on the site is within the Department's pressure zone. Should there be any questions, please contact Mr. Finn McCall of our Water Resources and Planning Branch at 961 -8070, extension 255. 0 Sin - yours, 4 to i D. Pavao, P.E. C , ana;er FM:dfg copy — MEN Real Estate Investment, Inc. Sidney M. Fuke, Planning Consultant JM �Y os William P. Kenoi °••' • - w ' ,{dim `` + .,'. Harry S. Kubojiri Mayor • y pp , � , `� Police Chief . 4 . .. , . - Paul K. Ferreira Deputy Police Chief County of Hawaii POLICE DEPARTMENT 349 Kapi'olani Street • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 -3998 (808) 935 -3311 • Fax (808) 961 -2389 May 13, 2010 TO : BJ LEIT AD TODD PLANNING DIRECTOR FROM : HENR TAVARE. i -., ASSISTANT CHIEF, AREA II OPERATIONS SUBJECT: Change of Zone Ap9 ation (REZ 10- 000124) Applicant: MEN Real Estate Investment, Inc. Request: RS -15 to CN -20 Tax Map Key: 8 -1 -25:11 This responds to your request for comments on the above - referenced application. Currently, Haukapila Street is a two -lane road with a stop sign established at the intersection with Highway 11 /Mamalahoa Highway. The Kona Community Hospital Complex and the Kona Courthouse are located directly off this road and use it as their only ingress /egress. Both facilities are heavily visited, subsequently generating traffic. According to the TIAR supplied with the application, the intersection of Haukapila Street and Mamalahoa Highway already operates at an "F" level of service (which is the lowest rating) during peak periods due to high volume of traffic on the highway. It was noted that a traffic light was mentioned to be included at the Highway 11 and Haukapila Street intersection; however, it is not clear that the developer will be committed to paying for this mitigation measure or when it will be constructed. Much of the verbiage of the application was based on other future projects that are foreseen to possibly reduce the traffic congestion on Highway 11. It is strongly recommended a condition be added, contingent on approval of the rezoning request, that the developer be required to construct improvements to the intersection of Haukapila Street and Highway 11, to include a traffic light and turning lanes on both roadways. It should be mandated that the mitigating measures be completed prior to occupancy of the medical office complex. Allowing this development to proceed without improving the intersection from its current condition will negatively affect the motoring public and likely lead to increased traffic collisions in the area. Should you have any questions, please contact Captain Samuel Jelsma, Commander of the Kona District, at 326 -4646, extension 299. SJ Planning Dept. RS100363 Exhibit [t 1J // 9 SCAN , 0 "Hawai`i County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer ii • - = a � lL Of mo 4 1 ' 1 ' � William P. Kenoi Z Darryl J. Oliveira Mayor `F�.T✓:. ! • Fire Chief •° +► Glen P. I. Honda . - OF NP Deputy fire Chief QCountp of 49atuai'i HAWAII FIRE DEPARTMENT 25 Aupuni Street • Suite 2501 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 (808) 932-2900 • Fax (808) 932 -2928 May 5, 2010 TO: BJ LEITHEAD TODD, PLANNING DIRECTOR FROM: DARRYL OLIVEIRA, FIRE CHIEF • SUBJECT: CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (REZ 10- 000124) APPLICANT: MEN REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT, INC. REQUEST: RS -15 TO CN -20 TAX MAP KEY: 8- 1 -25 -11 In regards to the above - mentioned Special Permit application, the following shall be in accordance: • Fire apparatus access roads shall be in accordance with UFC Section 10.207: "Fire Apparatus Access Roads "Sec. 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). Planning Dept. 1 SCANNED 'ts, w Exhibit MAY 0 2 I L By 063b 4.., I' � _-/ Hawai'i County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer. (Ef BJ Leithead Todd May 5, 2010 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. "(f) 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. "(j) Grade. The gradient for a fire apparatus access road shall not exceed the maximum approved by the chief." (15 %) O BJ Leithead Todd May 5, 2010 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. ARR OLIVEIRA Fire Chief RP:lpc • / / . William P. Kenoi • •; �_ ��� :•�; LonoA. Tyson Mayor -_ .: Director • 4 4 st4 William T. Takaba OA . icel•t.. Ivan NUT-nape • Managing Director Deputy Director County of uitizzi`i DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 25 Aupuni Street • Hilo, Hawai' i 96720 (808) 961 -8083 • Fax (808) 961 -8086 http: / /co.Hawai'i.hi.us /directory/dir envmng.htm MEMORANDUM Date : *pi it 0; To : BJ LEITHEAD TODD, Planning Director From: LONO A. TYSON, Director Subject: Change of Zone Application (REZ 10- 000124) Applicant: MEN Real Estate Investment, Inc. Request: RS -15 to CN -20 TMK: 8 -1 -25:11 We have reviewed the subject application and offer the following recommendations: DEPARTMENT COMMENTS: ( � E(L • TO COM,"6-utz (,j Et ow WAS WATER COMMENTS: (Contact Wastewater Division for details.) ( No comments ( ) Require connection of existing and/or proposed structures to the public sewer in accordance with Section 21 -5 of the Hawai'i County Code. ( ) Require Council Resolution to approve sewer extension in accordance with Section 21 -26.1 of the Hawai' i County Code. Complete Sewer Extension Application. ( ) Require extension of the sewer system to service the proposed subdivision in accordance with Section 23 -85 of the Hawai' i County Code. ( ) Check or line out as applicable: [ ] If required by the Director of the Department of Environmental Management ( "Director of DEM "), [ ] applicant shall conduct a sewer study in accordance with the then applicable wastewater system design standards prior to approval to connect to the County sewer system. Applicant shall provide such sewer line or other facility improvements as the Director of DEM may reasonably require, which the sewer study may indicate are advisable for mitigation of impacts of the proposed project. Contact Wastewater Division Chief for details. ( ) Other: SOLID WASTE COMMENTS: (Contact Solid Waste Division for details.) ( ) No comments SCA 1' NE D+ Commercial operations, State and Federal agencies, religious entities and non - profit MAY" 0 2 organizations may not use transfer stations for disposal. By: 0 6 3 0 3 Aggregates and any other construction/demolition waste should be responsibly reused to its fullest extent. ()) Ample and equal room should be provided for rubbish and recycling. PI nning Dept. Green waste may be transported to the green waste sites located at the Kailua and Hilo transfer statio�s, or / other suitable diversion programs. Exhibit 6 County of Hawaii is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer. 12612 (..>( ) Construction and demolition waste is prohibited at all County Transfer Stations. (9� Submit Solid Waste Management Plan in accordance with attached guidelines. ( ) Existing Solid Waste Management Plan is to be tolIowed. Provide update to the department on current status. ( ) Other: cc: SWD, 12612 County of Hawai' i is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer. • Y OF k,,Y ., t �...'i 1 ,W ;. , Lono A. Tyson William P. Kenoi ti . �,., , Mayor -- - -'ss_ Director • ! r�r. + °.'i °. Ivan Torigoe • F °F M � Deputy Director • Choi of iif � .ia fl DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 25 Aupuni Street • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 (808) 961 -8083 Fax (808) 961 -8086 http://co.hawaii.hi.us/directory/dir_envmrahtm February 12, 2009 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN Guidelines INTENT AND PURPOSE This is to establish guidelines for reviewing solid waste management plans, for which special conditions are placed on developments. The solid waste management plan will be used to: (1) promotes and implement recycling and recycling programs, (2) predict the waste generated by the proposed development to anticipate the loading on County solid waste management facilities, and (3) predict the additional vehicular traffic being generated because of waste and recycling transfers. A qualified consultant shall prepare a suitable solid waste management plan for review by the Department of Environmental Management. REPORT The Solid Waste Management Plan will contain the following: 1. Description of the project and the potential waste it may be generating: i.e. analysis of anticipated waste volume and composition. This includes waste generated during the construction and operational or maintenance phases. Waste types shall include (but not be limited to): A. Organics (including food waste and green wastes); B. Construction and Demolition; C. Paper (including cardboard); D. Metal (including ferrous and non - ferrous metals); E. Plastic; F. Special (including ash, sludge, treated medical, bulky items, tires); G. Household Hazardous (including paint, vehicle fluids, oil, batteries); and H. Glass. 2. Indicate onsite source separation facilities by waste type; i.e. source separation bins of glass, metal, plastic, cardboard, aluminum, etc. Provide ample and equal space for rubbish and recycling. 3. Identification and location of the proposed waste reduction, waste re -use, recycling facility or disposal site and associated transportation methods for the various components of the development's waste management system, including the number of . County of Hawai`i is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer. Solid Waste Management Plan Guidelines Page 2 of 2 vehicle movements and associated routes that will be used to transport the waste and recycled materials. 4. The report will include identification of any impacts to County- operated waste management facilities, and the appropriate mitigation measures that will be implemented by the development to minimize these impacts. 5. Analysis will be based on the highest potential use or zoning of the development. REQUIREMENTS AND CONDITIONS 1. A solid waste management plan will be prepared for all commercial developments, as defined under the policies of the Department of Environmental Management, Solid Waste Division. 2. The Department of Environmental Management will require the developer to provide or resolve all recommendations and mitigation measures as outlined in the solid waste management plan; besides any conditions placed on the applicant herein. 3. A State of Hawaii licensed engineer will draft and certify in writing the solid waste management plan as complying with applicable Federal, State and County of Hawai'i solid waste laws, regulations, and administrative rules. Should you require additional information, please contact Michael Dworsky, P.E., Solid Waste Division Chief at 808 - 961 -8515. CONCUR: Y e4145.- 4. r Lono A. Tyson DIRECTOR County of Hawai'i is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer. LINDA LINGLE F'ti = CHIYOME L. FUKINO, M.D. GOVERNOR ose � � Director of Health ti i { STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH P.O. BOX 916 HILO, HAWAII 96721 -0916 MEMORANDUM DATE: April 28, 2010 TO: Bobby Jean Leithead Todd Planning Director, County of Hawaii FROM: Newton Inouye NY Acting District Environmental Health Program Chief SUBJECT: Change of Zone Application (REZ 10- 000124) Applicant: MEN Real Estate Investment, Inc. Request: RS -15 to CN -20 Tax Map Key: 8 -1 -25:11 The submittals for the subject development have been transmitted to our Environmental Management programs for their coordinated review and comments. Upon receipt of their reply, their comments will be forwarded to your office. Construction activities must comply with the provisions of Hawaii Administrative Rules,Chapter 11 -46, "Community Noise Control." 1. The contractor must obtain a noise permit if the noise levels from the construction activities are expected to exceed the allowable levels of the rules. 2. Construction equipment and on -site vehicles requiring an exhaust of gas or air must be equipped with mufflers. 3. The contractor must comply with the requirements pertaining to construction activities as specified in the rules and the conditions issued with the permit. Should there be any questions on this matter, please contact the Department of Health at Planning Dept. 933 -0917. Exhibit 7 WORD:REZ 10- 000124.my SC NN g 28 0 4 PLAV D LAURA 11.'11111;I.EN Q C ,, ('I IAIRPNRSON LINDA LINGLE S �4, BOARD DP IAND AND NATURAL RI SUUR(IS GOVERNOR OR IIAWAII l P 19 ••9: COMhOSSION ON WAFER RESOURCE MANA(EA rs f RLtiCI L1. 1'.'I'Sli,ll . } ` 161 r t l o` ty nd and N at o G k ; i l ll � 3. KING KA\VA 1ARA c�� ¶ Y 5 DEPUTY DIRECTOR.WA11:R ` ',-.. tit '� .• . 9 � a §:��` o �S 3 - '�': � AQUA l lc RESOURCES ` YC no, R U OCI AN R[CRI_E ION ce/ I4UNWATER IOFCON\IYA•EMA COMMISSION SCOMMISSION V WA CO LIANDS I:NI CONSI N AND ANO1 RC15 ITC,I ALEORCE M .V STATE OF HAWAII CDNtiCONSERVATION AP OINEE RR1ORCL' 1 Nrwrl:uwc FMB ICY AND WILDLIFE St ate ofHav+ DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES IIL +I>RICPRESERVATION KAI IODIA W E ISI.ANI I RESERVE COMM &SION I AND STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION DIVISION STA PARKS 601 KAMOKILA BOULEVARD, ROOM 555 KAPOI_E1, FIAWAII 96707 May 27, 2010 BJ Leithead Todd, Director LOG NO: 2010.0956 County of Hawaii Planning Department DOC NO: 1005MD36 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Archaeology Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Dear Ms. Leithead Todd: SUBJECT: Chapter 6E -42 Historic Preservation Review — Request for Comment on a Change of Zone Application (REZ) 10-000124) / li Halekiei Ahupua South Kona District, Island of Hawaii TMK: (3) 8 -1- 025:011 Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the aforementioned project, which we received on April 29 2010. We determine that no historic properties will be affected by this project because: ❑ Intensive cultivation has altered the land ❑ Residential development /urbanization has altered the land ® Previous grubbing/grading has altered the land ❑ An accepted archaeological inventory survey (AIS) found no historic properties ❑ SHPD previously reviewed this project and mitigation has been completed ® Other: SHPD previously reviewed the subject parcel and determined no historic properties are present (Log No. 2008.4043, Doc No. 0811MD29 and Log No. 2010.1767, Doc No. 1004MD20). In the event that historic resources, including human skeletal remains, cultural materials, lava tubes, and lava blisters/bubbles are identified during the construction activities, all work needs to cease in the immediate vicinity of the find, the find needs to be protected from additional disturbance, and the State Historic Preservation Division, Hawaii Island Section, needs to be contacted immediately at (808) 933- 7653. If you have questions about this letter please contact Morgan Davis at (808) 896 -0514 or via email to: morgan.e.davisa'ohawaii.gov. Aloha, J i _ Theresa K. Donham, Lead Archaeologist Hawaii Island Section State Historic Preservation Division I SCANNED Planning Dept. auh Exhibit 3'� "2J F „_ _ ,rS E° F •.H4 LAURA H THE C AtRYlRS LEN LINDA LINGLE 5 9 0 5 r° O��V1 o(1<SW) of I :� \R) TE R E R C M.V\A GCGi GOVERNOR OF HAWAII - t : COVIMISSIt1�f)u 1V,1TER RESOLRCEMhVAGE \1Eh - 1' I t 3 .a4?, 0 00d and Ndt` 4p �� oaaNpau� Nr STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES LAND DIVISION state ofatt POST OFFICE BOX 621 HONOLULU, HAWAII 96809 April 29, 2010 County of Hawaii Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street Suite 3 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Attention: Mr. Jeff Darrow Ladies and Gentlemen: Subject: Change of Zone Application (REZ 10- 000124) Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the subject matter. The Department of Land and Natural Resources' (DLNR) has no other comments to offer on the subject matter. Historic Preservation will be responding through a separate cover letter. Should you have any questions, please feel free to call our office at 587 -0433. Thank you. Sincerely, tom' UI Charlene Unoki Assistant Administrator SidneyFaake, Planning Consultant Aii70,11.1w 100 Pauahi Street, Suite 212 •Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Planning • Variance • Zoning Telephone: (808) 969 -1522 • Fax: (808) 969 -7996 '.,, ) •Subdivision •Land Use Permits E -mail: sidfuke @hawaiiantel.net Environmental Reports KAY as r- _s { : 214 May 26, 2010 Ms. BJ Leithead Todd, Director Planning Department COUNTY OF HAWAI'I 101 Pauahi Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Ms. Leithead Todd: Subject: MEN Real Estate Investment, Inc. (REZ 10 000124) This is in response to the Department of Water Supply's ( "DWS ") comments, dated May 25, 2010, regarding the subject matter. The applicant is aware of the water commitment limit in this area. As such, it will submit an estimated maximum daily water usage calculation prepared by a licensed engineer in the State of Hawaii to the DWS for review and approval prior to submittal of any plans for Plan Approval review. Based on this, the plans will be broken up into phases to address the water constraints. All of the associated water line improvements called for in the DWS' memo will be complied with. The improvements will be completed prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for any component of this project. We trust that this sufficiently addresses the comments of the DWS. If not or if there are other agency comments on this application, please feel free to direct them to me for review and response. Thank you very much. incerely, SIDNEY M. FUKE Planning Consultant Copy — MEN Real Estate Investment, Inc. w/ enclosure via email SCAN r Planning Dept. 0 367 Exhibit s SidneyFuke, Planning Consultant alo e' avisillaw 100 Pauahi Street, Suite 212 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 r f 4 #p i • r :r ,g ` � Telephone: (808) 969 -1522 • Fax: (808) 969 -7996 [ y , t • Planning •Variance •Zoning • Subdivision •Land Use Permits E -mail: sidfuke @hawaiiantel.net • Environmental Reports ` ' `_ N 3a Ail 9: 13 June 2, 2010 Ms. BJ Leithead Todd, Director Planning Department COUNTY OF HAWAI' I 101 Pauahi Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Ms. Leithead Todd: Subject: Rezoning Request: MEN Real Estate Investment, Inc. TMK: 8 -1 -025: 011 (REZ 10- 000124) Thank you very much for providing me with a copy of agency comments to date regarding the subject application. The Police Department's concern relative to the traffic conditions at the intersection of the Mamalahoa Highway and Haukapila Street is understandable. This concern is corroborated by the applicant's TIAR which concluded that a "feasible mitigating measure would be to install a traffic signal at the Haukapila Street intersection." Because of this existing condition, it would be fairest to utilize a cost - sharing approach in having the lights installed. Whether that can be accomplished remains to be seen. As such, the applicant is prepared to accept a rezoning condition that would defer occupancy of the proposed project until completion of these lights. The burden would thus fall upon the applicant to either fund and construct the lights on its own or try to get other participants to kokua. One way or another, the applicant understands and accepts that the project will not be occupied until the traffic lights and related improvements are completed. The requirements of the Fire Department relative to fire access, sprinklers, and related fire protective measures will be done during the building permit review process. It should be noted that the Fire Department is one of the agencies that must review and approve a building permit. Relative to the County Department of Environmental Management's comments, a Solid Waste Management Plan will be prepared for the review and approval of the DEM prior to or in conjunction with the building permit process. The Solid Waste Management Plan will reflect the project's intent to reuse and/or retain much of the waste on site so as to minimize impacts to the County's landfill. The State Department of Land Natural Resources - Historic Preservation Division determined that "no historic properties will be affected" by the project due to the previous alteration on the property. SCANNED §9 t / r i Ms. BJ Leithead Todd, Director June 2, 2010 Page 2 Relative to the State Department of Health's comments, the applicant will instruct its contractor to comply with the noise and air emission standards of the Department of Health during the construction phase of this project. As the project will be primarily for office use, noise and air emission should not be an issue. We trust that this sufficiently addresses agency comments to date on the subject application. If not or if there are other comments or questions on this application, please feel free to direct them to me for review and response. Thank you very much. Sincerely, i r t SIDN M. FUKE Planning Consultant Copy — MEN Real Estate Investment, Inc. w/ enclosure via email 4 jor SidneyFuke, Planning Consultant 100 Pauahi Street, Suite 212 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 • Planning • Variance • Zoning Telephone: (808) 969 -1522 • Fax (808) 969 -7996 • Subdivision • Land Use Permits E -mail: sdfuke @hawaiiantel.net • Environmental Reports July 6, 2010 Ms. BJ Leithead Todd, Director Planning Department COUNTY OF HAWAI' I 101 Pauahi. Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Ms. Leithead Todd: Subject: Rezoning Application — MEN Real Estate Investment, Inc. TMK: 8 -1 -025: 011 (REZ 10- 000120 Thank you for providing me with a copy of the Department of Public Works' comments regarding the subject application. In response to the comments, please note the following; Drainage 1. The applicant is aware that prevailing policy requires all on -site water generated by the project must be retained on the site. Furthermore, the entry and exit points of all drainage ways cannot be altered. In that light, the applicant will prepare and submit for the review and approval of the Department of Public Works a drainage plan reflecting those and any other drainage- related criteria. This plan will be submitted prior to or in conjunction with an application for any land disturbance permit or Plan Approval. 2. In implementing an approved drainage plan, there may be a need for drywells. In that event, the appropriate Underground Injection Control (UIC) and National Pollution. Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits from the State Department of Health will be secured. Earthwork As noted earlier, the applicant will prepare and submit for the review and approval of the Department of Public Works the land disturbance permit (grading and/or grubbing) as well as secure the required NPDES permit(s). These will be done prior to any land disturbance activity. Roadway The comments relating to roadway and traffic were discussed with the consulting traffic engineer. and its comments are reflected in our response. Ms. BJ Leithead Todd, Director July 6, 2010 Page 2 Haukapila Street currently serves as the only access to not only the subject parcel but other important regional public facilities, particularly a number of State offices and the Kona Community Hospital. This Street does not exit onto another improved government road. Notwithstanding this limitation, however, the proposed use would complement the existing public uses of this area — particularly the hospital - and, in so doing, could reduce the number of outside traffic corning into this area throughout the day. It is very unlikely that the hospital will be relocated or let alone a secondary road to service this area will be constructed in the very near future. In the meantime, supportive uses proximate to the hospital must be provided, and this project provides that opportunity to improve the healthcare system in West Hawai' i. We thus request that the absence of a secondary access not be used as a basis to frustrate the potential indirect expansion of medical or health services in this region. It should also be noted that the applicant is prepared to make improvements to the intersection of Haukapila Street and the Mamalahoa Highway. Such an improvement should facilitate ingress and egress vehicular movements for not only the proposed use but many of the existing public uses. Traffic Relative to the agency's comments on the technical aspects of the Traffic Impact Analysis Report ("TIAR"), a summary of the traffic consultant's email response to me follows. in the order of the agency's comments: 1. "While some minor changes to the project may have occurred during the preparation of the two documents (TIAR and Planning Report), the difference does not affect the trip generation and overall traffic analysis since the trip generation is based on the number of employees per building, which remains the same." 2. The project schedule in the TIAR was based on information provided by the applicant's architect, who is also its local representative. 3. The matter of the By-Pass' completion was discussed with the staff at DPW. In spite of the existing bond, the staff was not sure of a 2015 completion. It felt that a 2020 completion was more realistic. In order to consider the uncertainty for 2015, the TIAR analyzed year 2015 with and without the Bypass to identify the traffic impacts for both situations. The 2020 analysis assumed the Bypass would be in place." 4. Table 2 has data for forecast years 2020 and 2030. • • Ms. BJ Leithead Todd, Director July 6, 2010 Page 3 5. "The TIAR analyzed 2015 traffic conditions with and without the Bypass. It found that without the Bypass, some form of mitigation such as traffic signals would be required. With the Bypass, traffic volumes would decrease on Mamalahoa Highway such that mitigation would not be required. The gradual increase in ambient traffic on Mamalahoa Highway would eventually require some form of mitigation such as traffic signals by 2020. Due to the small volume of traffic that would be initially generated by the proposed project and the finding that traffic signal would not be required to about 2020, it was recommended that the initial project phase be implemented without mitigation. The partial opening of the Bypass from Keauhou to Halekii Drive would also mitigate traffic operations on Mamalahoa Highway at Haukapila Street." We trust that the above adequately responds to the DPW comments. If not or if there are further questions, please feel free to contact me. Thank you very much. Sincerely, SID EY M. FUKE Planning Consultant Copy - MEN Real Estates Investment, Inc. via email Warren Yamamoto, AECOM via email • RMENREZ.doc- 7/8/10 COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION MEN REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT, INC CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (REZ 10 -124) Upon careful review of the request, 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 comments from the Department of Transportation or the public, the Director reserves the right to modify and/or alter this position based upon additional information presented at the public hearing. This favorable recommendation is based on the following findings: The applicant requests a Change of Zone from RS -15 to CN -20 to construct a medical office complex. Proposed improvements include five (5) three -story structures, each approximately 12,000 square feet in size and not exceeding 30 feet in height. The ground floor will be designated for parking. The project will be developed in two (2) phases, with the initial phase consisting of two (2) buildings. Upon build out, there will be approximately 60,000 square feet of office space in five (5) structures. 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 be also considered as they may have an impact on similar areas in the County. The Change of Zone request from RS -15 to CN -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. 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. -1- The Land Use Element provides the primary basis for direct control and guidance of publicly and privately owned resources. The request conforms to the goals, policies and standards of the General Plan in that the proposed development will be developed in an area adequately served by necessary services such as water, utilities and transportation systems. The proposed project conforms to the Commercial Development goal which states "provide commercial developments that complement the overall pattern of transportation and land usage within the island's regions, communities, and neighborhoods." 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 Low and Medium Density Urban, which allows ancillary community and public uses, village, neighborhood and convenience -type commercial uses, as well as single and multiple family residential uses. The project area under consideration is consistent with the urban form established for this section of the North Kona District as depicted on the LUPAG Map. The State Land Use designation for the property is Urban. The property is designated "E" or "Very Poor" by the Land Study Bureau's Productivity Rating. The Kona Community Development Plan designates this area as Rural Transit Oriented Development (TOD). Policy LU - 3.1, Redevelopment of Rural Towns as TODs /TNDs states that "the rural towns along Mamalahoa Highway (in the South Kona district) consisting of Holualoa, Honalo, Kainaliu, Kealakekua, and Captain Cook, are encouraged to be redeveloped as TODs /TNDs (Transit Oriented Development/Traditional Neighborhood Development)." The subject property falls within the Urban Core component of the TOD /TND, and is consistent with the Neighborhood Village sub - designation under the Urban Core. Neighborhood Village Core Areas are defined as areas that "are intended for predominantly residential, public /civic uses, or small -scale neighborhood - oriented commercial uses." -2- The property is a vacant, approximately 3.67 -acre rectangular shaped parcel located adjacent to the Kona Community Hospital to the south. The property slopes in a mauka/makai orientation, with an average grade of approximately 10 %. The mauka elevation is approximately 1,700 feet, while the makai section is at the 1,600 -foot elevation. The land uses in the area are a mix of agricultural, residential and commercial uses. The Kona Community Hospital is located adjacent to the property to the north and zoned RS- 15 /A -5a. Properties mauka of the site are zoned A -5a. Commercial zoned properties are located approximately 500 feet from the site, fronting Highway 11. The proposed request from a Single Family Residential (RS -15) to Neighborhood Commercial (CN -20) zoned district will conform to the goals, policies and standards of the Economic and Land Use Elements of the General Plan. The applicant's objective recognizes the growing demand for medical needs for this area of North and South Kona. The applicant hopes that the development of the medical complex would greatly reduce the commuting time for doctors as well as for patients, and provide greater efficiency of services to those seeking medical assistance. The property is in an ideal location, adjacent to the Kona Community Hospital. The proposed medical complex would support the doctors who may otherwise have to drive back and forth from their offices to the hospital. Thus, the proximity of the subject property to the hospital will help to reduce traffic congestion on Highway 11. The proposed change of zone request would be consistent with the Land Use and the Commercial Elements of the General Plan. The Land Use Element provides the primary basis for direct control and guidance of publicly and privately owned resources. It is also intended to be used as a policy guide for the coordinated growth and development of all sectors of the County. It sets forth goals, policies, standards and courses of action to accommodate growth without congestion, to designate and preserve the lands needed for residential use, commercial and visitor services, industry, agriculture and open space, and to coordinate these uses with the County's service and circulation systems. The overall Land Use goals, policies and standards are set forth to physically plan the lands in the County in the best interest of the island's residents. The proposed development would be consistent with the Commercial element of the General Plan by maximizing convenience to users of the medical complex, and -3- providing a commercial development that complements the overall pattern of transportation and land usage within the surrounding area. The project site is located in an area adequately served by necessary services such as water, utilities, sewers and transportation systems. The property has 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. No professional surveys were conducted of the site, due to the history of extensive disturbance. The property was grubbed in 2009. By letter dated May 27, 2010, the Department of Land and Natural Resources Historic Preservation Division (DLNR -HPD) stated that no historic properties will be affected as previous grubbing/grading has altered the land and HPD previously reviewed the subject parcel and determined no historic properties were present. As the project site is located within an urban environment close to commercial and residential uses and previously used as a dwelling site, no professional flora/fauna surveys were conducted. The applicant believes that there are no rare or endangered floral or faunal resources within or proximate to the project site. The request would not unreasonably burden the public agencies to provide roads and streets, water, drainage, police and fire protection. Access to the project site is from a 30 -foot wide easement off Haukapila Street, a private cul -de -sac over which the State of Hawai`i has a perpetual access easement to the Kona Community Hospital on TMK: 7 -9 -10: 81. The applicant has provided a Grant of Roadway and Utility Easement for access to the subject parcel. According to the Department of Public Works, Haukapila Street has an approximate 20 -foot wide pavement with 4 -foot sidewalk (on one side) all within an approximate 30 -foot right -of -way, and intersects with Highway 11. There is a stop sign at the intersection of Haukapila Street and Highway 11. The southbound approach of Highway 11 has a dedicated left-turn lane into Haukapila Street. The applicant has included a Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) as Appendix -4- G in the application. The TIAR analyzed the section of Mamalahoa Highway (Highway 11) between Haukapila Street and Halekii Street and concluded that the Haukapila Street stop sign on Highway 11 is currently operating at LOS F in both peak periods due to the high volume of traffic on the highway. The opening of the Mamalahoa Bypass may significantly reduce traffic volume on Highway 11; however, unacceptable levels of service would eventually return as the traffic on the highway increases and recall the need for mitigation. Traffic lights are recommended in the future to mitigate traffic at the intersection of Haukapila Street and Highway 11. However, the need for a traffic light is dependent on the opening of the Mamalahoa Bypass. The Highway 11/ Halekii Street intersection is currently operating at acceptable levels of service and is forecast to continue operating at acceptable levels of service until 2030 with no additional mitigating measures. In summary, the study concluded that "the proposed medical office complex project would not have an adverse traffic impact at the two study intersections with the recommended mitigation measures." In a letter dated June 2, 2010 the applicant has stated their willingness to defer occupancy of the proposed project until completion of traffic lights at the intersection of the Mamalahoa Highway and Haukapila Street. A condition of approval will be included to reflect this understanding, consistent with concurrency requirements. In a memo dated June 28, 2010, the Department of Public Works has stated that the information in the TIAR (Appendix G in the application) is inconsistent with data in the application and requests further corrections. DPW has indicated in the memo that additional comments on the TIAR would be forthcoming; however, as of this writing, the Planning Department has received no other comments besides those iterated in the June 28, 2010 memo. All utilities and services are available to the site. According to the Department of Water Supply, County water is available to the project site from a 12 -inch waterline along an existing road and utility easement within TMK: 7 -9 -10: 81 (Kona Community Hospital) approximately 320 feet from the subject property. County water for up to 4,200 gpd (7 units) can be made available for this project. Electricity and telephone services, as well as County fire, police and emergency medical services, are available to the property. -5- The Kona Community Hospital is adjacent to the property to the north. The project will develop its own wastewater system meeting with the approval of the Department of Health. Solid waste will be disposed of by commercial handlers. The request is not contrary to Chapter 205A, Hawaii Revised Statues, relating to Coastal Zone Management. The project site is not proximate to the shoreline and not located in the SMA. There is no record of a designated public access to the shoreline or mountain areas that traverses the site. According to the applicant, no valued cultural, historical or natural resources exist on the property 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. The proposed request will not have a significant adverse impact to traditional and customary Hawaiian Rights. In view of the Hawaii State Supreme Court's "PASH" and "Ka Pa'akai 0 Ka'Aina" decisions, the issue relative to native Hawaiian gathering and fishing rights must be addressed in terms of the cultural, historical, and natural resources and the associated traditional and customary practices of the site: Investigation of valued resources: As the project site is located within an urban environment close to commercial and residential uses and was previously used as a dwelling site, no professional archaeological or flora/fauna surveys were conducted. The Department of Land and Natural Resources Historic Preservation Division (DLNR -HPD) has stated that no historic properties will be affected as previous grubbing/grading has altered the land and HPD previously reviewed the subject parcel and determined no historic properties were present. • The valuable cultural, historical, and natural resources found in the rezoning area: No formal archaeological reconnaissance survey, oral history of kama` aina accounts of the area, historical survey of documentary records, or botanical study was included in the application. The applicant has received archaeological clearance from the DLNR -HPD, as the property was reviewed previously and -6- grubbed in 2009. A condition of the change of zone will require that the applicant cease work and notify the SHPD should any unanticipated archaeological features or sites be uncovered during the course of development. • Possible adverse effect or impairment of valued resources: The applicant believes that the project will not negatively impact existing flora and fauna on the parcel, as the property was previously used as a dwelling site. Native plants may be destroyed by ground alteration. There is no evidence that the flora in the area are particularly desired or used for cultural practices. The property is not adjacent and /or proximate to the shoreline. As such, gathering of marine life, fishing and coastal access is not an issue. • Feasible actions to protect native Hawaiian rights: As stated by the applicant, no gathering is taking place on the site. Thus, to the extent to which traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights are exercised, the proposed action will not affect traditional Hawaiian rights; therefore, no action is necessary to protect these rights. Based on the above findings, approval of this change of zone request from a Single Family Residential (RS -15) to a Neighborhood Commercial (CN -20) zoned district would result in an appropriate land use pattern that will further benefit the general public. The accompanying draft bill to amend Section 25 -8 -4 (South Kona Zone Map), Article 8, 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. -7- COUNTY OF HAWAII STATE OF HAWAII BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. (PIn4 M 4,879 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 25 -8 -4 (SOUTH KONA 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 — 15,000 SQUARE FEET (RS -15) TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL — 20,000 SQUARE FEET (CN -20) AT HALEKII AND KANAUEUE, SOUTH KONA, HAWAII, COVERED BY TAX MAP KEY 8 -1- 025:011. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII: SECTION 1. Section 25 -8 -4, Article 8, Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawai`i County Code 1983 (2005 Edition), is amended to change the district classification of property described hereinafter as follows: The district classification of the following area situated at Haleki`i and Kanaueue, South Kona, Hawai`i, shall be Neighborhood Commercial — 20,000 square feet (CN -20): Beginning at the southeast corner of this parcel of land, being also the southwest corner of Lot "A" (portion of L.C. Aw. 387, Part 4, Section 2 to the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions), the coordinates of said point of beginning referred to Government Survey Triangulation Station "PUU OHAU" being 2373.56 feet North and 12341.73 feet East and running by azimuths measured clockwise from True South: 1. 94° 33' 30" 156.86 feet along the remainder of a portion of L.C. Aw. 387, Part 4, Section 2 to the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions; 2. 99° 30' 45.00 feet along Lot 14 (portion of L.C. Aw. 387, Part 4, Section 2 to the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions); 3. 95° 28' 95.79 feet along same; -1- 4. 90° 19' 30" 17.60 feet along same; 5. 84° 05' 30" 298.35 feet along the remainder of a portion of L.C. Aw. 387, Part 4, Section 2 to the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions; 6. 181° 00' 291.51 feet along Lot 1 (portion of L.C. Aw. 387, Part 4, Section 2 to the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions); 7. 272" 55' 19.66 feet along Kona Hospital Site; 8. 266° 55' 52.00 feet along Kona Hospital Site; 9. 274° 26' 39.00 feet along Kona Hospital Site; 10. 269° 02' 169.00 feet along Kona Hospital Site; 11. 265° 15' 42.00 feet along Kona Hospital Site; 12. 272° 00' 105.00 feet along Kona Hospital Site; 13. 270° 25' 54.87 feet along Kona Hospital Site; 14. 270° 24' 30" 66.44 feet along Kona Hospital Site; 15. 348° 44' 296.15 feet along Lot "A" (portion of L.C. Aw. 387, Part 4, Section 2 to the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions) to the point of beginning and containing an area of 3.671 Acres. All as shown on the map attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A" and by reference made a part hereof. SECTION 2. In accordance with Section 25 -2 -44, Hawai`i County Code 1983 (2005 Edition), the County Council finds the following conditions are: Necessary to prevent circumstances which may be adverse to the public health, safety and welfare; or (1) Reasonably conceived to fulfill needs directly emanating from the land use proposed with respect to: -2- (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 , Hawai`i Date of Introduction: Date of 1st Reading: Date of 2nd Reading: Effective Date: -3- CMENREZ.doc- 7/6/10 MEN REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT, INC. CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (REZ 10 -124) CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL A. The applicant(s), successors or assigns shall be responsible for complying with all of the stated conditions of approval. B. Prior to the issuance of a water commitment by the Department of Water Supply, the applicant shall submit the anticipated maximum daily water usage calculations as recommended by a registered engineer, and a water commitment deposit in accordance with the "Water Commitment Guidelines Policy" to the Department of Water Supply within 180 days from the effective date of this ordinance. C. Construction of the proposed development shall be completed within five (5) years from the effective date of this ordinance. Prior to construction, the applicant, successors or assigns shall secure Final Plan Approval for the proposed development from the Planning Director in accordance with Section 25 -2 -70, Chapter 25 (Zoning Code), Hawai`i County Code. Plans shall identify all existing and /or proposed structures, paved driveway access and parking stalls associated with the proposed development. Landscaping shall be indicated on the plans for the purpose of mitigating any adverse noise or visual impacts to adjacent properties in accordance with the requirements of Planning Department's Rule No. 17 (Landscaping Requirements) and Chapter 25 (Zoning Code), Hawaii County Code. D. Access to the subject property shall be from a 30 -foot wide easement from Haukapila Street, as identified in Document No. 77- 109267 by the Bureau of Conveyances. E. A traffic signal at the intersection of Mamalahoa Highway and Haukapila Street shall be completed, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed project. F. All development - generated runoff shall be disposed of on site and shall not be directed toward any adjacent properties. A drainage study shall be prepared by a licensed civil engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of Final Plan Approval. Any recommended drainage improvements, if required, shall be constructed meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works prior to receipt of a Certificate of Occupancy. G. The project shall install a wastewater system meeting with the approval of the Department of Health prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. H. A Solid Waste Management Plan shall be submitted to the Department of Environmental Management for review and approval prior to issuance of Final Plan Approval. If the applicant(s), successor(s), or assign(s) develops residential units on the subject property, the applicant(s) shall make its (their) fair share contribution to mitigate the potential regional impacts of the property with respect to parks and recreation, fire, police, solid waste disposal facilities and roads. The fair share contribution shall become due and payable prior to receipt of Final 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 combined value of $7,738.48 per multiple family residential unit ($12,059.55 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 unit) shall be allocated as follows: 1. $3,817.17 per multiple family residential unit ($5,815.33 per single family residential unit) to the County to support park and recreational improvements and facilities; 2. $120.64 per multiple family residential unit ($280.53 per single family residential unit) to the County to support police facilities; -2- 3. $371.11 per multiple family residential unit ($554.09 per single family residential unit) to the County to support fire facilities; 4. $165.40 per multiple family residential unit ($242.59 per single family residential unit) to the County to support solid waste facilities; and 5. $3,264.15 per multiple family residential unit ($5,167.02 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. J. Should the Council adopt a Unified Impact Fees Ordinance setting forth criteria for imposition of exactions or the assessment of impact fees, conditions included herein shall be credited towards the requirements of the Unified Impact Fees Ordinance. K. 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. L. 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 -HPD) shall be immediately notified. Subsequent work shall proceed upon an archaeological clearance from DLNR- HPD when it finds that sufficient mitigation measures have been taken. M. The applicant(s) shall comply with all applicable County, State and Federal laws, rules, regulations and requirements. -3- N. 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(s), 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 one year may be extended for up to one additional year). 5. If the applicant(s) 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 Director may initiate rezoning of the area to its original or more appropriate designation. -4- lip KM-4 Igo KM-4 RD R5- 5 N PvKPP1�P S� �A O� = s KEA CN -10 ' 1 , I A -5a R5 -15 I A -5a ' A -5a � CN -10 ' li • la R5 -15 L 5 -10 85-10 SINGLE-FAMILY 0 SQ.FT (RS 15) RESIDENTIAL - TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL - 20,000 SQ.FT (CN -20) 3.671 ACRES TOTAL R5 10 R5 -15 I CV -7.5 CV 7.5 R -15 HALEKII ST tailll A -5a CV -7.5 2, 373 . 56' N A 12, 341 . 73' E "PU'U OHAU" ir ammirfi itiVarais au. ale A -5a R5 -lp , V -10 \((c, `o ANI KUPUNA PL CV 10 Illio CV -10 85-1 , _ N .10_ Q j Z Q j r R515 5a CV- • Q I CV -10 , K5-15 2 I Feet 0 255 510 1,020 1,530 AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING CODE AMENDING SECTION 25 -8 -4 (SOUTH KONA 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 - 15,000 SQUARE FEET (RS -15) TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL - 20,000 SQUARE FEET (CN -20) AT HALEKI`I AND KANAUEUE, SOUTH KONA, HAWAII MAP PREPARED BY: COUNTY OF HAWAII, PLANNING DEPARTMENT TMK: (3)8 -1- 025:011 DATE: Apr. 20, 2010 EXHIBIT "A" MEN Real Estate Investment, Inc. Map 1295 LEEWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAII HEARING TRANSCRIPT JULY 23, 2010 A regularly advertised hearing on the application of MEN REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT, INC. (REZ 10 -124) was called to order at 9:45 a.m. in the King Kamehameha's Kona Beach Hotel, Ballroom I, 75 -5660 Palani Road, Kailua -Kona, Hawai`i, with Chairman Frederic Housel presiding. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Frederic Housel, Brandi Beaudet, Lani Bowman, Geraldine Giffin, Thomas Hickcox, Wayne Iokepa and Richard Nelson STAFF PRESENT: Brandon Gonzalez (Deputy Corporation Counsel), BJ Leithead Todd (Planning Director), Margaret Masunaga (Deputy Planning Director), Daryn Arai (Planning Program Manager), Jeff Darrow (Staff Planner), Maija Cottle (Staff Planner) and Kiran Emler (Department of Public Works) And approximately 25 people from the public in attendance. APPLICANT: MEN REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT, INC. (REZ 10 -124) Change of Zone from a Single - Family Residential- 15,000 square feet (RS -15) to a Neighborhood Commercial- 20,000 square feet (CN -20) district for 3.67 acres of land. The property is located adjacent to and south of the Kona Community Hospital, Haleki`i, South Kona, Hawai`i, TMK: 8 -1- 25:11. HOUSEL: The next item on the agenda is, applicant is MEN Real Estate Investment. This is a rezoning application, 10 -124, a Change of Zone from a Single - Family Residential 15,000 square feet (RS -15) to a Neighborhood Commercial 20,000 square feet (CN -20) district on 3.67 acres of land. The property is located adjacent to and south of the Kona Community Hospital, Haleki`i, South Kona, Hawai`i. Planner Darrow, would you like to give us a presentation on this? DARROW: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If I could direct your attention to our presentation on the wall. As you had mentioned, our next applicant is MEN Real Estate Investment, Inc. The applicant is requesting a Change of Zone. The location of our application is located in the right on the boundary of the South Kona and North Kona District boundary line, and it is located in the South Kona District. The actual boundary line is right here, so it's right on the border. This is in Kealakekua. Looking at the middle of the map, we have Mamalahoa Highway. Looking on the left side of the map, moving in a mauka, or east -west direction, mauka - makai, we have Haleki`i Street. And the property is identified in a black outline. The different colors on the map represent the different zonings in the area. The actual zoning for the property is identified with a darker yellow color, which is representing Single - Family Residential 15,000 square feet zoning. The light green zoning is representing Agricultural 5 Acres. And we have some different shades of pink, which represent Commercial zoning — CV representing Village Commercial. This is a little closer view. Again, we have Haleki`i Street moving in an east -west direction, and we have 1 the Hawaii Belt Road moving in a north -south direction, with the subject property identified with the black outline. Access to the property will be from Haukapila Street, which is identified in this area. As you'll notice, it's going to have, its access will be through an access easement, which will be in this general location. This shows a little bit better how the access will happen; it will come in through, you have the courthouse in this general location, the Kona Hospital, and the access will come in right in this general location. This is an aerial photo. Again, you have Mamalahoa Highway running in a north -south direction, Haukapila Street identified in this general location. And you have, access will be in this location at this point. The property is identified with a red outline. Currently it is vacant of structures. This is the Kona Community Development Plan for this particular area. The location of the application is identified in this area. You have Kealakekua in this general location. And this is, within this area that's identified with a blue outline, which within the Plan identifies as a Rural Town TOD, or Transient Oriented Development. The applicant is requesting a Change of Zone from Single - Family Residential 15,000 square feet to Neighborhood Commercial 20,000 square feet for approximately 3.67 acres of land. And this is to construct a medical office complex. The proposed improvements will include five three - story structures, each structure approximately 12,000 square feet in size, not exceeding 30 feet in height. The ground floor will be designated for parking. And the project will be developed in two phases with the initial phase consisting of two buildings. The reasons for the request: The proposed facility is intended to provide office space for the doctors who provide services to the Kona Community Hospital; the project will reduce commuting time for both patients and doctors who must frequently travel between their offices and the hospital. This is the site plan submitted by the applicant. We've made some additions to it, identifying the structures on the property with blue, and we've also added a red outline identifying the location of the access from the adjoining property to the north. This outline here only shows the subject property in this particular area. It shows the preliminary layout of where the structures will be, the internal circulation, as well as the parking areas and the proposed access from the property to the north. This is an elevation front view of the structures, again, identifying the bottom floor for parking and then the two upper floors for office space. These are some site photos of the location. This is on Hawaii Belt Road looking to the south; as you'll see, the sign here identifying the hospital, Haukapila is on the left, and we do have a left - turn lane designated for this particular area. This is looking north and, again, we have the sign identifying the hospital to take a right; Haukapila is identified in this general area. This is looking from Hawaii Belt Road up towards mauka, and this is Haukapila Street; so it gives you an idea of the width and condition of the roadway. You'll see that there is a sidewalk on the left side at the roadway. This is in the general location on Haukapila where the particular access will be; this is the sign that was placed for the proposed Change of Zone application. The Planning Director is recommending that the Planning Commission send a favorable recommendation with conditions to the Hawaii County Council. 2 Y Before I conclude the presentation, I'd like to make a change to one of our conditions, as well as to a portion of our Rec, and also bring to your attention that we have had several correspondence submitted to the Planning Department since this application was distributed to the Planning Commission. These have all been handed out to the Planning Commission. If we could look at the conditions, specifically we are looking at Condition E, currently Condition E reads, "A traffic signal at the intersection of Mamalahoa Highway and Haukapila Street shall be completed, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed project." The Planning Director is recommending that we add, that we make a change to this condition, and the change would read as follows: "A traffic signal at the intersection of Mamalahoa Highway and Haukapila Street, and construction of the Mamalahoa Bypass to the Napo`opo`o junction shall be completed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed project." The reason for this addition is within the Kona Community Development Plan under TRAN -6.1 Official Concurrency Map, it states that "Any rezoning in South Kona approved prior to the completion of the Mamalahoa Bypass Road shall restrict occupancy until this bypass project is completed." So this is added based on that statement within the Community Development Plan. Additionally, we would like to make one simple change to our Recommendation on Page 5, and this would be on the last sentence of the first paragraph on Page 5; so it's right in the middle of the page -. GIFFIN: Four? DARROW: I'm sorry? GIFFIN: Page 4? DARROW: Page 5, yeah. And what it will state -. Currently it says, "A condition of approval will be included to reflect this understanding, consistent with concurrency requirements." We would like to change the sentence to state, "A condition of approval will be included ensuring consistency with the concurrency requirements." So basically we are just stating that our conditions that we are adding are ensuring consistency with both the concurrency requirements within the Zoning Code, as well as within the Community Development Plan. With that, that concludes our presentation. Are there any questions? GIFFIN: Yes. Jeff, could you please go over the wording of the addition to Condition E, please? DARROW: Sure. Okay, this would be to Condition E? GIFFIN: Correct. DARROW: Okay, after "Haukapila Street" there would be a comma, and the following wordage would be added: "and construction of the Mamalahoa Bypass to Napo`opo`o junction." And then the rest would remain the same — we'd like to remove the comma that's right after 3 "completed" — "shall be completed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed project." Are there any other questions? HOUSEL: Any other questions from the Commissioners? BOWMAN: I have a question on the C, "Construction of the proposed development ...." That is the total development or Phase I? DARROW: That would be the complete development, Phases I and II. BOWMAN: Okay, thank you. HOUSEL: Mr. Darrow, I had a question regarding the Condition E, and it says a traffic signal is to be completed. Who will complete the traffic signal? DARROW: The condition doesn't specify who is to do the traffic signal, and the reasoning for that is that if the traffic signal is constructed, say, by the County or the State, then that would be that agency constructing that; if the applicant desires to receive certificate of occupancy at a sooner, at a time quicker than that construction may happen, then the applicant will need to make those improvements. HOUSEL: I see. Okay, thank you. Any other questions of staff? Okay. We'll proceed. We have five people signing up for testimony, so we have to keep moving here. Will the applicant and representative please come forward? Could you please use the microphone, and raise your right hand? I'll do this all together here. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Hawai`i County Planning Commission? FUKE: I do. SUGAI: I do. GHALAMFARSA: I do. HOUSEL: Thank you. We'll start on the right. Mr. Fuke, would you please state your name, your residence address, and then proceed. FUKE: Sure. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of this Commission. My name is Sidney Fuke. I'm a planning consultant. I've been retained by the applicant to assist them with the processing of this application. My business address is 100 Pauahi Street, Hilo, Hawai`i. SUGAI: My name is Wesley Sugai. I'm one of the local physicians here. My address, P. O. Box 669 Kealakekua. GHALAMFARSA: Good morning. My name is Ali Ghalamfarsa. I'm the architect for this application. My address is 77 -6306 Ali`i Drive, Kailua -Kona, Hawai`i. 4 HOUSEL: Thank you. Do you have a comment you'd like to make at this time? FUKE: Sure. Yeah, we'll be very brief this morning inasmuch as there are some public testimonies that we'd like an opportunity to respond to those testimonies at the end of the presentation. But very briefly, just to give you -. The staff's report is very comprehensive in terms of the location, the size of the property, what the developer's intensions are and so on and so forth. I just wanted to add several other items, which are covered in the submittal but was not necessarily expressed in today's presentation. Just for the Commissioners' and the public's information, the access easement to the site was conveyed to the former owners of the property way back in 1977, and the purpose of this access easement was largely to facilitate the development of some medical related type of use. The County Council ironically was the body that had to approve a resolution, and subsequently, subsequent to the approval of the resolution, then the former owners paid the appropriate price and they got that easement. The former owners of the property at that time was a group called Kona Medical Associates, and they had the property ironically zoned Commercial Neighborhood, which is what the current applicant is proposing to have, back in 1977. And like all of the zone change conditions, you have time restrictions in terms of when you have to start, when you have to complete, so on and so forth. After a series of extensions, they just couldn't do it in a timely fashion, and then they sold the property to the current applicant, which is MEN Real Estate Investment, and one of the partners is Dr. Sugai over here. And so when MEN Investment got the property, they realized they too couldn't fulfill the time constraint. So they said, well, you know, we give up and we'll have the property revert back to the Single - Family Residential zoning district. Then about a year and a half ago I was approached by Mr. Ghalamfarsa on behalf of the applicant to say they want to resurrect the project. And so rather than my explaining it, I think it's best to have Dr. Sugai explain the reason why they are coming back to this Commission and ultimately to the County Council for this project. SUGAI: Thanks, everyone. My involvement with this project was more from the hospital and the doctor's point of view. At this time we have a major shortage of physicians on the island and especially for hospital -based physicians here in Kona. I'm one of those hospital doctors and I know firsthand because right now I'm putting in probably about 80, 90 hours a week, on a short week. So we are looking at it from a physician's point of view. Right now we have a difficult time attracting doctors. If we are able to attract a doctor, however, the next problem is how to retain that doctor here. At the present time we don't have any office space that the hospital can point to. So, you know, the only thing we can do for a new applicant doctor is to give him cards of real estate agents to try and find him a doctor (sic) — that's a very discouraging process. And then a lot of the applicants who apply for Kona Hospital say, "I give up. I don't want this," and they leave. So we lose a lot of prospective doctors because we have no place to put them. And with this project, it was my intention to hopefully have enough office space so the hospital administrative, when they attract a doctor, will be able to point across the road and say, "This is where you can put your office and you can start practicing." The other important object was the location of this project. It was simply because a lot of doctors, like myself, when I get called for an emergency C- section and the baby is, you know, dying, I have to be up there as soon as possible and, you know, within three minutes, if I can't 5 get the baby started, the baby dies. So in other words, it's a time constraint. And right now, being down in Kailua -Kona, sometimes the traffic at 3:00 in the afternoon gets pretty tight. So in other words, the location and the -. DARROW: Dr. Sugai, he is asking if you can put -. HOUSEL: Yeah, please speak closer to the microphone. SUGAI: I'm sorry. I don't want to waste your time; if I'm running over, please tell me. But that's my main concern for getting involved with this project. I hope that we can alleviate some of the shortage that way. HOUSEL: Thank you. FUKE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I guess that gives you the reason why we are now before you. Now, I realize that based on the couple of letters that we received and additional letters we received this morning, that there are some concerns that the surrounding property owners have. And so we would like to, rather than second -guess what their concerns are, we'd like to have them restate them and be given an opportunity to respond. I think that some of the concerns, we can mitigate; others, you know, obviously we cannot. But we'll try our best, so -. HOUSEL: Okay, thank you. Commissioners, do you have any questions of the applicant? I just want to double -check you did receive all the background information regarding this project. FUKE: Yes. The staff's background report and the proposed recommendations were received by the applicant, and they found all of the conditions to be acceptable. We'd like to discuss a little bit more about the concurrency requirement, particularly in light of what Dr. Sugai had to say today. HOUSEL: And you are okay with the changes to the conditions at this time? FUKE: Well, as I mentioned earlier, we'd like to have some discussion on that in light of what Dr. Sugai mentioned today. HOUSEL: Commissioners, are you willing to hear our testifiers and then bring the applicant back? Is that acceptable? Thank you. This time I'd like to call people that would like to provide public testimony. Could you -. I guess we only have four chairs there and there are five people, so I'll call the first four people: Paul Hoist, Shelley Hoist, Deborah Nava and Gloria Woodwell. If you could possibly share the microphones. I need to swear you in. Could you please raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth before the Planning Commission today on this matter? TESTIFIERS: I do. HOUSEL: Thank you. I guess starting on my left here, could you state your name and address? 6 WOODWELL: My name is Gloria Woodwell, and my physical address is 81 -1025 A Kakou Place in Kealakekua at Keala Plantation Estates. HOUSEL: Thank you. NAVA: My name is Deborah Nava. My physical address is 81 -1001 A Kakou Place in Kealakekua in Keala Plantation Estates. S. HOIST: My name is Shelley Hoist, and I'm speaking for myself and also for my neighbor, Teri McGuire. Her address is 81 -1019 A Kakou Place, No. E2, Kealakekua, Hawai`i. My address is, physical, 81 -1016 Ohe Place, Kealakekua, Hawai`i. P. HOIST: Paul Hoist. My physical location address is 81 -1016 Ohe Place in Kealakekua. HOUSEL: I want to mention to you that we've got a tight schedule today, and if you could please limit your testimony to three minutes, we really appreciate that. Thank you. Ms. Woodwell, would you like to start first? WOODWELL: Yes. My main interest in coming here today is the lack of access for this facility that's being planned. The road, Haukapila Road, as you know, is the only access to the hospital. Now this provides access and egress to the Community Hospital, as well as the courthouse, as well as the residences on that main highway. It puts a burden on the road. The road is not big enough. The condition of the road at times had been not the ideal. There were questions about, for many, many years, there were questions about who would fix that road; would it be the County, would it be the State, would it be the hospital? So that's my primary concern — how that would impact the neighborhood. The second concern that I have, as testified by Dr. Sugai, yes, there is a shortage of doctors in this community; however, the shortage, I think, is not because there is a lack of buildings for them to occupy. I believe the primary reason for the shortage is the reimbursement; so that unless the reimbursement rates are addressed, having a building back there is not going to make a difference. Also, I'm kind of wondering what percentage of the doctors here now are in support of this plan. Then the other concern that I have is ultimately the plan for the hospital is to move downtown to the Honokohau area. I'm not sure how alive that plan is, but that is the final plan. So that would leave the existing Kona Community Hospital as, from what I understand, as a long -term facility or an emergency room for that part of the area. So that then, again, having this building would not really solve the dilemma that Doctor has presented with a lack of, so- called lack of space. So that's all I have to say. Having been a nurse there for 23 years or more, I have seen the evolution of that building, as well as all the negative impact that that road has had on the nurses and all the workers at the hospital. HOUSEL: Thank you. 7 NAVA: Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak to you today. I previously emailed a two -page letter that I believe you've all read. And I'll be very brief, but I do have some things I'd like to say. I'd like to touch on, my main subjects were the impact on the neighboring areas. This is not a wise project for a family neighborhood where we raise children. The entire area, as we saw up on the map earlier, is residential; if you noticed, it was all brown — I believe that's all residential, is it not? We would -. This particular area would be the only little spot in that large area that would be considered commercial. Also, I'm concerned about flooding both during and after construction. The trees, of course — Shelley was kind enough to give me a piece of this Lemon Eucalyptus — these trees have been here over 100 years. I think that we should care about some of the things in this area. These beautiful trees need to stay; they should not have to come down. Also, the wastewater treatment facility, I've got real problems with. The chemicals that are used in wastewater treatment disrupt endocrine function, which is, they are hormones basically. As you notice, we have a small child here from Keala Plantation. When he was a fetus, he was being raised in that area as a fetus and now is a baby. Do you want those kinds of chemicals get into your child? We certainly don't. Also, the use of Haukapila Street, which Gloria has so eloquently addressed. Just please remember this proposed project is a financial, for - profit commercial venture by real estate investors who stand to make a lot of money. I'm very surprised to hear that one of them is a local physician. They don't care about our residential neighborhood's quality of life; they don't care now, not during construction, and certainly not after construction. The infrastructure in this area cannot accommodate such a large project. Emergency vehicles transport sick and dying Kona residents to Kona Community on narrow Haukapila Street to receive vital, life - saving emergency services. Consider this, Members of the Planning board: You could be in that ambulance — or one of your loved ones. Also, I ask Dr. Sugai to remember the oath that he took: First, do no harm. Thank you. HOUSEL: Thank you. Like to proceed? S. HOIST: Hi, thank you. I appreciate the opportunity given to me this morning to speak. I'll be speaking for myself and then my neighbor, Teri McGuire. My name is Shelley Hoist. I'm a neighboring residential property owner. I'm actually directly makai of the subject property, closer to the highway than these other, than the proposed complex. I respectfully ask you to not approve this request for rezoning for many reasons including the ones you've already heard and were submitted earlier. But today I stand before you to speak for the trees. On the makai end of this subject property is a small grove of historic eucalyptus trees, able to be seen from many miles away and the home to the i`o, our previously endangered Hawaiian hawk. These trees, which we believe to be Lemon Eucalyptus trees — I've given you Exhibit 1 — are approximately 100 feet tall, with an estimated age of over 100 years, according to old time residents of the area and photographs that I've also shared with you. Photographs 1 and 2 are from the Kona Historical Society, circa 1915 and 1944, and show what appear to be these very trees. They've been a landmark in Kealakekua for decades. It's hard to believe that these beautiful trees will be cut down and ground up so we can have yet more commercial office space. 8 HOUSEL: Could I ask you to please summarize your written testimony? S. HOIST: Certainly. I realize that whether the property owners develop commercially or residentially, their plans haven't so far included saving the trees, but I'm hoping that we, the County and the community can encourage them to do so in the future. Whatever development is put in place, the trees should be considered worth saving and incorporated into the landscape. Perhaps, they would be an excellent buffer zone desperately needed by the neighboring residences. My hope was that they can be designated as exceptional trees by the County of Hawai`i. I understand that your, the County Code, Chapter 14, Article 10, 14 -16 (sic) gives a provision for this Planning Commission to be able to, you know, propose a development -. I won't read it to you obviously, if I'm running out of time. I haven't shared this testimony, though, so this is the first time you are hearing this. It says that you can request the advice from the arborist advisory committee concerning the trees within any proposed development prior to any grading or granting of final subdivision approval to assure that exceptional trees are retained and to prevent the unnecessary destruction of such trees during development. The lack of designation as an exceptional tree does not diminish the responsibility and the authority of the Planning Department to recommend trees to be incorporated into the development plan. The trees already meet many of these standards. They are very exceptional and they are very historical, as you can see. If I don't have time, I won't read the rest of the explanation from the Kona Historical Society about why these tress are very historical. Hopefully, you have enough information that I've already provided you. In summary, there are many reasons why this development should not be approved. These trees, these trees need to be saved. They are structural elements of our traditional landscape, which serve to remind and connect us to our history. Too much of the familiar Kona landscape is being discarded in favor of new developments. Please require that the trees be evaluated and saved. Thank you. HOUSEL: Thank you very much. By the way, I want to let you know all of the document you submitted will be part of the formal record. S. HOIST: Okay, great, thank you very much. I will now speak for my neighbor, Teri McGuire. "My name is Teri McGurie, and my home is located right next door to the proposed rezoning development -." HOUSEL: Excuse me. Did you submit that document? S. HOIST: Yes, I did. HOUSEL: Okay, thank you. S. HOIST: I won't read her address — you've already had that. "Since I am unable to attend this meeting, I wanted to make sure that my objections and concerns are heard. To start, I agree with the other neighbors who border the property that such a development would have a bad impact to a residential area like ours. My objections are simple: This should stay a residential zoning area 9 only; the added traffic would only increase accidents and noise pollution; the water treatment facility will have a malodorous impact on our neighborhood — it could cause any number of safety issues — that alone should hold this rezoning project; my lanai faces the development and with only a 20 -foot boundary between us, all kinds of problems come to mind — litter, noise, staring at 3 -story buildings 20 feet from my bedroom, flooding, historic trees up for removal, parking lot lights, exhaust fumes from cars, privacy, privacy, privacy; I was told only a hedge would separate us, which is unacceptable — that will not deter pedestrian traffic or a car driving through a hedge into my home. In short, I vote no, no, no on the rezoning from residential to commercial now and into the future. We are Kealakekua, not downtown Kailua. That's why we chose this location to enjoy tranquility, and a commercial area will threaten this way of life. Mahalo for listening and taking a serious ear to the surrounding neighbors and their concerns. Teri McGurie." HOUSEL: Thank you. P. HOIST: Hi, Paul Hoist here. I live in the property just makai of the property in question, and I have personal knowledge. And I have three basic areas of concern — flooding, the neighborhood and Haukapila Street. I have personal knowledge of the flooding in the area, as I was there during the November 2007 flood where approximately six inches of rain fell in four hours — that's 600,000 gallons of water in four hours. This flood forced design changes to our home and property. And even though this property and the surrounding properties are in Flood Zone X, I want to bring out that South Kona Fruit Stand in the Kealia area was also in Flood Zone X and it bore the brunt of that flood. Changes to the land above our neighborhood will change the flow of water and flooding. Asphalt and concrete cannot absorb water. Where does the water and sewage flow when the capacity of these dry wells is reached? What type of protection will be put in place prior to any earthwork being done? We are a residential area. We are zoned residential. What would the change be? We'll have more noise. We'll have more lights. We'll have more odors and dust in the day -to -day operations of a commercial development of this size. The application, which I've read, makes statements claiming that landscaping is important to mitigate commercial impacts on surrounding areas, yet the site plans have little or no landscaping buffer zones. Why are there loading zones located next to the residential properties and not next to the road or commercial property? How does the noise and odors of a wastewater facility fit into our neighborhood? Where will it be since it's nowhere on the site plan? How will this facility operate during flooding conditions? And, of course, the impact of the development on Haukapila Street. I read the Police, Fire, and Public Works Departments' reports. It's a private cul -de -sac. Who maintains this road since it's specifically stated that the County of Hawai`i does not? Where is the State of Hawai`i Department of Transportation input on the development? Somebody has to take responsibility for this road. The addition of any commercial property of 200 more additional parking stalls — it seems to me that might be as many as 400 more cars a day using Haukapila Street — will put tremendous stress on this already inadequate private road. The proposed traffic signal would 10 help the intersection; it does absolutely nothing for the road. Just think of tearing that road up when they put the waterlines in. In summary, I'm a neighbor, I'm for people making money, I'm for commerce; I just simply am against this specific rezoning, and I believe the best use of this property would be to remain zoned RS -15. Thank you. HOUSEL: Thank you, sir. Commissioners, do you have any questions of the testimony? Commissioner Giffin. GIFFIN: Good morning. Several of you in your written testimony have referred to the flooding as an issue and, aside from the last testifier, I just wanted more elaboration on that. Could you tell us more about what happened in November 2007? I think Mr. Hoist -. P. HOIST: Yes, I was there in November 2007. We were building the house. I've lived here in Kona 40 years, but I just built this house there. And during the construction phase was exactly when the rain happened. I think we all remember that rain; it was quite significant. And it literally was a waterfall coming down the hill wherever there was bulldozing going on. It wasn't -. During the construction phase, the retaining walls, the flood controls that we have them placed now, wasn't placed yet. But what I'm concerned with is during their construction phase -. GIFFIN: Meaning the applicant? P. HOIST: The applicant's construction phase. This is, somewhere they claim ten — I think it's more like 16 — percent grade going down. It's quite a drop. Where is all that water, as they excavate this property, where is all this water supposed to go? GIFFIN: Mr. Hoist, I think my question — and I'm sorry if I wasn't clear — was not about your personal property during the specific flood, but the property in question. What was the effect of the flood on the property? Do you recall that? P. HOIST: No, I don't. GIFFIN: Okay. And there was another person who mentioned it in the written testimony — Deborah Nava. NAVA: Yes, it was me. The flooding, I'm not aware of how that year's flooding affected the subject property, but I am quite aware of how it affected Paul and Shelley's property and our property. The water -. GIFFIN: In relationship, excuse me, in relationship to the subject property, where is your property? 11 • NAVA: My property is located -. Paul and Shelley are directly makai of the subject property, and my property is, I'm in Keala Plantation Estates, which is the subdivision directly south, and we are the first house in the subdivision, the very first one. HOUSEL: Could you maybe point your location on -? NAVA: Let's see, yeah, we are right there, okay? And what happened when all the water came down — oh, I'm sorry, we are right there, yeah, right there, because this is Paul and Shelley's cul- de -sac right here and this is the subject property, so we are right here — when all the water came down, sorry, not from the subject property yet, but certainly when it came down from the clearing, clear cutting in the construction on this property, the water ran along this boundary line right here, which is the boundary line between Paul and Shelley's property and Keala Plantation Estates. All the people who live in the Estates, well, we all have rock walls right here along this wall, almost all of us. My husband and I had built a substantially tall rock wall right here — it's probably, I wouldn't be surprised if it were maybe 20 -foot high from the base. We were concerned that it would become undermined. And in fact, when the water flooded, it started running all the way down. We thought we would lose our wall completely. Now, who was going to pay for that? We didn't want to have to get a new wall. We didn't want to have to ask our new neighbors to give us a new wall. I'm sure they would have worked with us. But just imagine, the impact of all of this -. This is almost four acres up here being constructed, clear cut graded. And then, of course, you are not leaving the trees, which are a buffer zone. So all the water is going to go down to the highway. It's a really steep decline onto Mamalahoa Highway. I wish that I had brought pictures so that you could see what the difference is in the levels. So my concern is, when Paul and Shelley were having their work done, all this water came out and it was trying to undermine our walls, which we were very concerned about — they were concerned. And also, all this water was going out into the highway, onto Mamalahoa Highway. So this was just one small, this was just one house they built. Just imagine, this large commercial project — it's going to be a nightmare, I tell you. And if you allow this to go forward and it causes a lot of damage, the County of Hawai`i will be sued, I'm sure, because the homeowners will not know where to go. So, you know, we don't want to do this, we want to be respectful, but -. HOUSEL: Thank you. NAVA: Yeah, you are very welcome. HOUSEL: Any other questions, Commissioners? GIFFIN: Mr. Chairman, I don't know if it's Ki that we should ask, but I would like to have some explanation about the ownership of the road. HOUSEL: Right. I'd like to have, after we finish the testimony, Mr. Emler come forward and talk to us a little bit. Thank you. GIFFIN: Okay, thank you. 12 S. HOIST: I just wanted to say, enjoy while you guys have got this really nifty map up here. You have people, we are right here, Paul and I are right here, you have neighbors today here in this room from all the way along this side. This is all residential on all this side. The lady I spoke for, her place is right here. So that's just to give you an idea of the close proximity. HOUSEL: Okay, thank you for your testimony. S. HOIST: Thank you. BOWMAN: Could you put the aerial map up, please? Just so, while we are waiting for the -. Thank you. HOUSEL: We have one more person to testify. Is this Kyla? NARIMASU: Kaila. HOUSEL: Kaila. Sorry. If you could come forward, please. Please have a seat. Did you have a question, Commissioner Bowman? BOWMAN: No. I just wanted to see the -. HOUSEL: Okay, you just wanted to see that. Would you like to dim the lights a little bit to see it a little better? Okay. NARIMASU: Hi. HOUSEL: Could you raise your right hand, please? Do you swear to tell the truth before the Planning Commission today on this matter? NARIMASU: Yes. HOUSEL: Thank you. Could you state your name and address, please? NARIMASU: My name is Kaila Narimasu. I live at 81 -1007 A Kakou Place in Kealakekua. HOUSEL: Are you a neighbor also? NARIMASU: Yes. My house is located in A Kakou Place in Keala Plantation Estates, and it is actually right next to Paul and Shelley Hoist's house. HOUSEL: Okay. Yeah, please go ahead. NARIMASU: My main concerns regarding this development is that — I am a stay -at -home mother and my son is 18 moths old, and my husband and I are considering having another child — and my concern is the noise pollution caused by this construction of the rock crushers, their trucks coming up and down the hill, the continuous beeping and dust that would cause stress and 13 also the air pollution that would come into my home while I'm at home with my children. In this area during the day, it can get quite hot, and if I were to close up my home to diminish the dust, my home would become like a closed -up car in a parking lot, and it becomes very hot and stuffy; if I were to open up my home to let the air flow in, all that dust and pollution would flow right through my home and into my children's lungs and mine. And if I were to get pregnant again, all of this noise pollution and air pollution would not be beneficial for me at that time, either. And I don't see how this will be beneficial in the sense that — my pediatrician is in a small little resident home directly adjacent to the bypass access road that would be going into this construction area — so I don't see how that would be beneficial for all these small children going to Dr. Herd's pediatric facility to have their first - week -old visits or other visits to the pediatrician, either wellness visits or visits when they are not feeling well, can be beneficial with this construction right next door to the pediatrics office. So those are my main concerns regarding this project. HOUSEL: Thank you. Commissioners, do you have any questions? BOWMAN: Is your home in this aerial? NARIMASU: My home is right above Deborah's home, so -. BOWMAN: Approximately -. NARIMASU: So, let me see if I can tell from this map. Where is the -. Okay. Is this the post office here? So if that's the post office — sorry, my hand is shaking, I don't know if this is very helpful — but my home is probably right up in here; so it is pretty much directly next to Paul and Shelley Hoist's home. BOWMAN: Okay, thank you. HOUSEL: Are there any other questions from the Commissioners? Thank you very much. I'd like to -. Is there anyone else who would like to provide testimony today? Could I please call Mr. Emler who can help us understand this a little better? Ki, I need to swear you in, if I can, please. If you would raise your right hand. Do you swear to tell the truth before the Planning Commission today? EMLER: I do. HOUSEL: Thank you. State your name and address. EMLER: My name is Kiran Emler. My address is -. Physical or mailing? GONZALEZ: Work address is fine. EMLER: Mailing? HOUSEL: Work address is fine. 14 EMLER: Work address, 75 -5760 Kuakini Highway, Suite 110, Kailua -Kona, Hawai`i. HOUSEL: Thank you. We had some question raised regarding Haukapila Road. Is that a private road? EMLER: Haukapila Street? HOUSEL: Yes, excuse me. EMLER: As far as the County is concerned, it would be a private road. On the makai portion where it goes across private properties, it's an easement road over private properties. And then the hospital owns the road over their property. And this particular parcel that we are discussing today has a non - exclusive easement over the hospital property access. So the makai portion of it is going over private properties to get to the hospital property, and from there within the hospital property there is a non - exclusive easement for the subject property there. HOUSEL: I see. So from the connection to Mamalahoa, it goes across private property at that point? EMLER: That's correct. HOUSEL: I see. And then it -. When does it -. Is any of the road on County property? EMLER: No. HOUSEL: No. EMLER: The County used to own the hospital property, but it was conveyed to the State. HOUSEL: Okay. Who maintains the street? EMLER: Well, that's a good question, because the County does not assume the maintenance responsibility for it — let's put it that way — formally. However, in the past there has been, because of the controversy that has happened over the roadway, the County has taken upon itself to do some maintenance on the road, but voluntarily and not because it was our legal responsibility. HOUSEL: I see. Does this road meet County standards? EMLER: Well, the standards that, I would think, you are referring to would be, say, a current Subdivision Code standard. If that is your question, the answer is no. It is an existing private road with existing commercial, industrial — commercial, I guess, the hospital would be considered a commercial use — being used for that purpose. As far as I know, there is no subdivision being proposed for this development. So it would be up to the members of the Planning Commission and the County Council to decide whether that road is adequate to serve 15 this need, or the Planning Director. Whoever is in the process of making the decision to rezone this property needs to take that into account as part of your decision. HOUSEL: If this application is approved by the County Council, one of the conditions of occupancy is to install a stoplight at that intersection. Are there any plans by the County to put that stoplight in? EMLER: Not that I'm aware of, no. HOUSEL: Not at this time, huh? EMLER: That's correct. HOUSEL: Commissioners? BOWMAN: Just a quick question. So when it goes over the private property, it is basically up to the private property owners to maintain the road, is that correct? The area that goes through the, the first easement through the private property. In general. EMLER: I'm not aware of what there might be as far as a maintenance agreement between the property owners and the hospital, the State hospital system. I'm not sure if there is such a maintenance agreement, and all I can tell you is the County is not legally responsible. BOWMAN: Thank you. HOUSEL: Commissioner Giffin. GIFFIN: Ki, does Public Works have any kind of criteria in terms of, you know, construction with that kind of slope, which I'm hearing from the surrounding property owners that exists for the subject property? EMLER: Criteria for construction -. GIFFIN: Construction, yeah, on a piece of property with that kind of slope, which obviously has some history of flooding. EMLER: Well, in a grading context, when you want to place fill on a property that is, I believe it's 20 percent or steeper, you have to key the fill slope in to the existing grade. Other than that, we do have maximum slopes for fill slopes and cut slopes. There isn't necessarily a maximum slope for, say, a parking lot in our grading ordinance; so there is no code or statute that governs that. Is there any other criteria you wanted to ask that question for, drainage or whatever? Okay. GIFFIN: Thank you. BOWMAN: I do have a question. In Public Works' memo, "A drainage study shall be prepared, and the recommended drainage system shall be constructed meeting with the approval of DPW," 16 that would probably take care of any flooding issues after the construction, right, but not during the construction? EMLER: Yeah, the requirement is for the developer to dispose of development generated runoff. So the runoff that's been described by the neighboring property owners, though, is runoff that is occurring now, and that runoff is not required to be disposed of as part of the development process because it is existing and the developer is not required to dispose of existing runoff; they are allowed to let that continue. BOWMAN: Thank you. HOUSEL: Any other questions of Mr. Emler? Thank you very much, Ki. I'd like to recall the applicants, please. GONZALEZ: Mr. Chair, while the applicant is coming back to the table, I've been asked by staff to make an announcement. Item No. 5 on the agenda — and this is for members of the public who have signed up to testify and are waiting — it was scheduled for 10:30 a.m. There is a request to withdraw the application, meaning that they are not going to ask for whatever it is they are asking in the application. But you still have the right to give public testimony on Item No. 5 because it is on the agenda; but if you are objecting to the project, you don't have to stick around, if you don't want to, because they are actually withdrawing the request, so the Commission will be deciding on accepting the withdrawal later today. Thank you. HOUSEL: Thank you, Counselor. Remind you, you are still under oath. Would you like to respond to some of the concerns? FUKE: Sure, thank you very much. And I think all three of us will respond in different areas of our so- called "knowledge." First of all, I'd like to respond to the area of the ownership. In the application that I had prepared and submitted, I don't know whether there have been some factual changes to that, but I had attached a resolution that was approved by the County back in 1977 — it's Resolution No. 128. And I'll just read a certain section. It reads that the easement is owned, the property "is owned by the Department of Health, State of Hawai`i, but has been transferred to the County of Hawai`i by Executive Orders 1842 and 2486." So unless there's been some nullification of that transfer, then I would assume that the County at this point in time will still retain jurisdiction; but I don't want to go down that road since I'm not an attorney and whatever, but this is the only thing I had. I know that there've been multiple concerns raised, and one of which dealt with whether there is an effective demand for such a facility and whether if you build, will the doctors come, so on and so forth, and on that I'd like to kind of defer that to Dr. Sugai. On the issue of the eucalyptus trees, the value, its ability to be retained, so on and so forth, I'd like to defer that portion to Mr. Ghalamfarsa who is the land planner and architect for this project. 17 On the wastewater system, you know, we can understand the concern. The original plan was they were going to do like five or six buildings, and when you do a full build -out all at the same time, then perhaps you would need to have, like, a small package treatment plant. However, because of the constraints that they have in terms of the water limitation and possibly also by the demand, it would be very foolish for them, or not only foolish but probably inconceivable for them to develop the property in its entirety in one fell swoop. They are limited to only seven units of water, so at this point in time they will probably, if the project is approved as proposed, they will probably be able to build maybe one building and maybe at the most two buildings. Now, under that basis, based on the investigation that Mr. Ghalamfarsa has had with the State Department of Health, what would be appropriate would probably be separate aerobic systems, I mean, septic system for each of those structures, which would be somewhat comparable to many of the single- family residences in that area. And so that's kind of like the plan now in terms of how to address the wastewater system not to go over, like, one large or small wastewater treatment plant package system but a series of septic system that would service each of the proposed building. On the issue of the drainage, as Ki had explained and Commissioner Bowman had accurately pointed out to the Department of Public Works' comments, there is, you know, during the — maybe what wasn't stated and maybe Mr. Emler can clarify it — but during the construction phase, when you grade the property, there is a requirement that you have to come out with a grading permit, and during the grading permit process, you must address how, you must accommodate any potential impact resulting from the grading or the grubbing process. And whether that's done through the NPDES Permit or just a conventional review by the Department of Health, you know, I kind of like to defer that to Mr. Emler. But as far as the subsequent construction, you know, once you get beyond just the broad grading or the grubbing portion, then as part of the plan review process, there is a requirement that the developer submit a drainage plan for the review and approval of the Department of Public Works, and Planning, before they can actually submit the plans for building permit review. And you get through that phase, and then when you apply for your building permit, the building permit includes a drainage plan in terms of how the overall project's drainage is going to be handled. Now, in terms of the criteria how the plan and the study must address is, as I understand it in my very simple mind, is that the amount of water that enters the property and where it enters the property and where it exits the property cannot be altered. You cannot also increase the volume, neither can you increase the velocity of the water that goes through. All of the project - generated water has to be contained on the site, you know, through a system of drywells or retention basins, whatever the situation is. So if anything, the project, based on Public Works' requirement relative to drainage, will stand to improve the drainage rather than not improve the system. In terms of the access, the residents' concerns, like, for the most part, I think, as was pointed out, the adjoining property owners, they access to separate roads; I think one is called A Kakou Place and the other one is Ohe Place. So they don't necessarily get access from Haukapila Road, you know, but nevertheless they are adjoining property owners and their concerns relative to overall traffic is very germane. So in that regard I'd like to kind of just make some general comments. I think that, you know, when you look at the traffic I think we are all familiar with the Kona traffic situation — I think part of it might relate to the way Kona has developed, you know, developed in a sense that it's very lineal and then you have your major commercial activities 18 pretty much centered in the Kailua -Kona area. And so you have a lot of pass - through traffic coming in from South Kona moving to North Kona; it's no different than, like, in Waimea, you know, if you are in Waimea, there's a lot pass- through traffic. And so the idea behind this kind of view, I know it might seem a little bit inappropriate, is that you are trying to create communities so as to minimize people having to go down to Kailua and then coming back up the hill again, like Dr. Sugai had mentioned, to do their kind of business. So maybe it's not the ideal setting, because if you look at the map, it's kind of like you have all green and then all of a sudden you might have a magenta or like color there that will show Commercial, and so from purely land use map standpoint, it might be an inappropriate fit. But if you look at the existing uses in that area, given that this is really like medically oriented, and you have, you're not going to take away the hospital — the hospital is there. And there might be talks about trying to, you know, eventually having the hospital be relocated but, you know, I was a former member of the East Hawai`i Hawai`i Health Systems Corporation Board, and we used to interact a lot with West Hawai`i Board, and the prospects for having any new facility built, I mean, it's a goal but, you know, whether it's going to be achievable goal within the next 15 or 25 years, in my mind I think it's going to be, a very worthwhile goal, but somewhat unachievable at this point in time — I may be wrong, and maybe Dr. Sugai can speak to that. But if you make the argument that all of your commercial uses would have to be next to the highway, then you are compounding the existing problems that you have right now. If you travel north and south right now, a lot of the problems with traffic deal with, you have to stop because a guy wants to make a left turn, dealing only with the two -lane traffic. So what you're trying to do is bring the traffic off of the main road and create, like, a community. And I realize that, you know, you have to deal with the existing community center; the way it was developed — very lineal rather than concentric. The Police Department had recommended that Haukapila Street, you know, it should be mitigated right now; it should be mitigated through a system of traffic lights. And so the applicant is prepared to, if there is not going to be any other players around, then they have to do it — that's a condition; they are going to have to put in a traffic light, if there is no other players around. So with the traffic light, it will help out the existing situation that you have over there. You have a lot of public facilities, as you all know; you have not only the hospital, you have the court system over there, you have the other State agencies like the Department of Health all in that area. On the issue of the landscaping, Planning staff will acknowledge that you do have a requirement that is called Rule 22 (sic) where they have to come up with a little bit more detailed landscaping plan. What was submitted in conjunction with this application was very conceptual — it was not detailed. But specifically as it relates to the eucalyptus trees, I'd like to kind of defer that to Mr. Ghalamfarsa. HOUSEL: Thank you, Mr. Fuke. GHALAMFARSA: Thank you. Regarding the trees, I totally, totally agree with Mrs. Hoist. I'm a tree and nature lover. I think there will be some rule somehow that even in residential project that we can preserve all the trees. And these particularly I will, we will do, we'll get the input of the neighbors of what to do with the trees. I would like to propose that we do keep them. However, one thing that is very important is, always in any project, public safety and health is No. 1. And we've had concerns, written concerns and phone calls from other neighbors that this tree may fall over on their house — it's so tall. So if it's practical and it's not going to 19 pose any unsafe situation to the neighbors, I think it would be very nice to keep these trees. They are beautiful trees. And we'll get input of the neighbors on that. And regarding the, if I may add, regarding the drainage, what we do will actually improve the situation there. Whenever there is, for commercial projects there are a lot more stringent restrictions of grading during the project than there are for residentials. In fact, the example was given that when Mr. and Mrs. Hoist were doing their project, it did cause a flood. So in fact, there will be improvement when we do that site work. FUKE: Mr. Chairman, one more comment before I turn it over to Dr. Sugai. The other issue, I think, dealt with the construction nuisance issue, you know, we are very sensitive to that issue, because if I'm putting myself in the neighbors' place, you know, we don't want that to happen, too. So what the owners are prepared to accept are two conditions I'd like to just kind of share with the Commission at this point in time. The first one just deals with trying to involve the neighboring community in helping better plan this property, you know, on a detail basis, whether it's trying to site the location of buildings, trying to site any potential wastewater treatment system, these would be the septic system, where your parking is going to be, what kind of lighting it's going to be, you're going to have, whether there's going be any fencing with some sort of security between neighbors, you know, those kind of things. So what we would like to suggest in that regard is that, this proposed condition is that "Prior to submittal of plans for Plan Approval, the applicant, its successors or assigns shall secure the input of area residents and/or lot owners, particularly those within the Keala Plantation Estates, regarding the placement of all proposed structures, wastewater system, parking areas; landscaping plans; fence and /or barriers between the subject property and adjacent properties; drainage; and construction mitigation. A report of this meeting shall be submitted in conjunction with the Plan Approval application." So what this does is that, you know, the applicant might not agree with all of the suggestions, but it gives the Planning Director an opportunity, say, like, this is what the neighbors are saying, and the Director has the opportunity to, has the discretion, rather, to modify any plans that are submitted — that's one thing. The other one deals with the construction activity, and what we'd like to suggest is this following condition that "All construction activity involving the use of heavy equipment or machinery related to the development of the project and any structures thereon shall be prohibited on Sundays, provided further that no construction activity shall occur on any day before 7:00 a.m. and after 5:00 p.m." I know that this might not necessarily appease all; like I said, nobody wants to have bulldozing occurring at any point in time. But I think that if you look at the alternative, you know, the alternative has been like, well, let's just have, like, a residential subdivision; if you do a residential subdivision over there, you might be able to realize, like, nine to ten lots, you know, single - family residential lots, or given the water limitation, let's talk about seven, because right now they are limited only to seven, so if you have seven lots, then conceivably if you have a seven -lot subdivision, construction activity associated with that, and then you had the additional issue of each of those seven lots all being constructed upon, and without any controls. So what we are suggesting here is that we know for a fact that this project will be built in increments because of the water situation, they'll have to be built in increments, and then they will be subject to additional stipulation, which normally is not found for other, you know, normal subdividers or homeowners. 20 So on the question of the demand for it, I'll defer to Dr. Sugai. HOUSEL: Mr. Fuke, I had one question. One of the testifiers is concerned about the dust and noise control. How do you plan to manage that? FUKE: Well, as far as the dust and noise control, it's already, they have to address that by complying with the State Department of Health; the State Department of Health has regulations that govern noise and also govern dust control measure. So the contractors are obligated to fulfill that mandate. Now, if there are additional type of things that the neighbors would want to have, then this is where I think, like, during the plan review process where the developer would be, if this condition were accepted, would be obligated to meet with the community, then these can be faired out and hopefully additional mitigated measures can be taken. HOUSEL: Thank you. Commissioner Bowman. BOWMAN: I have a question before Dr. Sugai, if that's all right. Thank you, Mr. Fuke, because I think the public realizes that we are just the first step, and if we can address some of these now, you know, it'll be a lot easier when they get to the other side, yeah, the Council. There was a question, just real, it may be minor, but about loading, about the loading dock being abutting residential areas, and I noticed, when you were talking about including the neighbors, that that wasn't mentioned. So I just maybe suggest that that be a part of, which I'm sure it is. FUKE: That was part of, the loading requirement is part of the parking requirement, so when I mention parking -. The Zoning Code requires standard parking stalls, handicap parking stalls and also loading zone requirement, so it was generic. But your point is well taken. BOWMAN: Thank you. And one for the architect, because I'm not quite sure where the eucalyptus stand is in relationship to the roads. And I just have a minor question with whether eucalyptus roots -. Because I know we've had a lot of problems with our roadways and roots. And I think, you know, for those who want to save the trees, I appreciate it, but is it, is the stand of trees near where the access is going to go? GHALAMFARSA: No, it's not near the access. Mostly the south -west, there, in this area. BOWMAN: Okay, that's the trees. GHALAMFARSA: Yes. BOWMAN: Okay. Pardon my ignorance, but I just wanted to make sure that I address that. Thank you. HOUSEL: One question. What is the existing slope of the land right now? GHALAMFARSA: The average slope is between 16 to 18 percent. 21 HOUSEL: Sixteen to 18. GHALAMFARSA: Right. FUKE: So I stand corrected in my report. GHALAMFARSA: It is in the site plan — the topography shows that. And the maximum slope of the, just one of the roads that we propose is about 15 percent. In fact, since we submitted the application and received some concerns of the neighbors -. In fact, one of the concerns that was not talked about was the height. We have kept, the height is, like, three -story, 30 feet. And since then in the site plan — if you could, I'm sorry, please go to our site plan — we have, on the mauka side we have these two buildings and this is the high point of the property, the highest point here. So what we have done since then, since I received those letters from the neighbors, we have moved this building to this parking, and moved this building further makai, and then placed the parking on the mauka side of the property, because the slope is this way, so the height is considerably less than what we're proposing in this site plan. In fact, in one of the pictures that showed the access to, the easement access, you see the house that's built in this corner, it's almost, I can guess, about 20 feet high rock wall is way above the roofline of the proposed homes here. Again, I would like to say that the restriction and the permit process for construction, we all know, they are a lot more stringent, and residential I've seen some people building, like we just heard, like, 20 feet high rock walls. But in commercial cases it will be a lot more safer and, for the neighbors -. HOUSEL: Which two buildings do you plan to build first? GHALAMFARSA: The two on the mauka side — this one, which will be, now it is here, and this one, which is actually in this area. Another thing we've done is, in this zoning the setback, this is the setback line, if you notice there, we've added additional 15 feet to the building line from this property line to provide more landscape buffer. Now, this preliminary landscape buffer generally shows that we do meet more than the required 20 percent. This is the purpose of this plan, but this is not definitely the final landscape plan — mainly shows the area that is devoted to landscape, and there is a lot more than the minimum 20 percent. FUKE: Again, this is only conceptual, because if the condition were approved as we had suggested, then there may be further modifications based upon community input. HOUSEL: Dr. Sugai? SUGAI: Yeah, thank you. Where do I start? I initially took offence when I was accused of being a profiteer and not concerned about the residents. But then I had to take a step back because maybe they don't understand where I am coming from. I was born and raised in the territory of Hawai`i, at the Kealakekua Kona Hospital, which is now the courthouse. And I'm a third generation coffee farmer; my farm is actually right above this property, about 100 yards above. And I'm a Konawaena School graduate. Just to clarify that. 22 The other thing is, as far as the trees go, yeah, I really do want to save those trees because I do like the 'aim and I want to make sure that we preserve as much as we can. And for the other person, I don't know where she went, but -. PUBLIC: Her baby was crying. SUGAI: Oh, yeah, her doctor is Dr. Herd and he is located in a small little cottage, modified cottage, which is just at the entrance of this project. He is employed by Ali`i Health Care, which is a subsidiary of the hospital. And he will be probably moved into one of these buildings once the property is developed. And that's why it's important that we move on this project as soon as possible so we can alleviate the shortage of doctors. Again, we are looking for a partner for Dr. Herd, but in that small little cottage, which is I think only about 20 by 20, you cannot fit two people in there. He really needs a partner. In fact, we all need a partner over here. And some of the other reasons that we have a hard time attracting doctors, yes, is a reimbursement issue. For example, just my practice alone, I'm up to 80 percent Medicaid right now; Medicaid pays only about 50 cents on a dollar compared to HMSA. And, yeah, I'm hurting too, but, you know, that's the way it goes in medicine. So reimbursement is a major issue. However, I've been on the MEC, the Medical Executive Committee, which interviews and goes through all these applicants, for the last 23 years at Kona Hospital, so I've gone through literally dozens and dozens and dozens of doctors. But we can, for every ten we interview, or maybe 20 we interview, one decides to come here, and of that one that comes here, they often times last only a year or two because, again, of the difficulties of practicing medicine in Kailua -Kona because there is no place to really practice. And again, just the drive from my office down in Kailua in an emergency to try and get to the hospital, takes such a long time. Especially in the afternoon, it becomes really difficult to try and get anything done. I've lost patients because I couldn't get to the hospital on time — that's the worst thing. I've already told the Police that I would prefer a ticket at the hospital rather than losing a patient, you know, I told them before, "Give me a ticket, if you see me speeding." I mean it's that bad. And that's why if I -. In fact, just the other week, Dr. Herd was able to save a baby because he is located right across the street from the hospital; there was an emergency, he ran right over, saved the baby's life, and walked back to his office after he'd done his job. And that's exactly what these buildings should do; they should house the doctors where there is an emergency and we can get to our patients as quickly as possible. I think that's all I have to say. You know, I have to go to my office unfortunately — yeah, beat traffic. HOUSEL: Yeah, thank you, Dr. Sugai. SUGAI: I have to go. Thank you. FUKE: And so, on that note, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to just kind of now respond specifically to the proposed condition, I mean, you know, that the staff is suggesting. And I recognize the Kona CDP and the concurrency requirement, etc. So here you have a situation you're going to have to 23 try to balance off between healthcare providers and as well as, like, traffic. So if you hold fast to what the CDP is saying that no commercial activity, regardless of whatever is being proposed, you know, be considered for rezoning until the bypass is completed, we don't know when the bypass will be completed. So in the alternative, you know, if that's the case, then it amounts to, like, they don't have any plans, they can't proceed, they can't necessarily start working on the final design, start working on the construction financing, so on and so forth, you know, because the banks are going to be asking when is the road is going to be done, because you can't open it up, I mean, you know, it's that kind of issue. But on the other hand, for my healthcare perspective, as Dr. Sugai had indicated, there is obviously like death kind of practical demand for it. So what we would like to suggest, and this is really, like, subject to the Commission and ultimately the County Council, you know, to be able to balance it off by giving the applicant the opportunity to say, like, look, no earlier than three years you can get certificate of occupancy for any structure or building. At least it gives them time to start planning for it, start doing, get the financing, do the construction, and plan around that schedule, you know, rather than something that's totally open- ended. So if it's something that the Commission would like to entertain, then I would like to suggest a language upon Condition E that would read, "A traffic signal at the intersection of Mamalahoa Highway and Haukapila Street shall be completed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed project" — it will read at the end — "provided that in no event shall a Certificate of Occupancy for any structure be issued no earlier than three years from the effective date of this ordinance" — and just, essentially eliminating what the staff had originally proposed because of the CDP concurrency requirements, and just make that as a rider at the end of the proposed condition. But I'll leave that as an option to the Commission. HOUSEL: Commissioners? BOWMAN: I have a question. So the first phase is scheduled to take about how long, if, say, everything goes through? GHALAMFARSA: The construction phase for the first, it should not be more then nine months. BOWMAN: For the first two. GHALAMFARSA: Yes, yeah. They'll probably go faster than building your home, each one of them. In fact, when my client approached me in our first meeting, their constant concern and point was we've got to keep this feel residential, they're having a big hospital there, they have a courthouse there. So as far as I'm -. It's a lot more cost - effective for a medical center to have one big building; it probably cost 20 percent, on the average, to 25 percent less to one building. So this is a lot more costlier than a normal commercial development. But they are really, really sensitive. But these buildings are not depicting the final look of it. The reason is that it doesn't make economical sense to spend a lot of money in design and planning when you don't even have the zoning yet. BOWMAN: So nine months for the first phase, but occupancy wouldn't take place until they are all built, is that -? 24 GHALAMFARSA: No. FUKE: No, no occupancy until the traffic light is in, first of all, and secondly no occupancy at least for three years or after -. Even though Mr. Ghalamfarsa mentioned, like, it's a construction timetable, it may be nine to twelve months for example, the time needed leading up to that might take you about a year and a half, you know, to prepare the construction plans, have the interaction with the neighbors, you know, securing input, having those plans reviewed and approved by the government, etc. So, you know, when you introduce those kind of factors into it, you might be looking at about two to three years. BOWMAN: Okay, thank you. HOUSEL: So are you saying that, regarding the stoplight, that per this condition that if the County or State will not put this light in, that you would assume the responsibility for putting the stoplight in? FUKE: That is our obligation, correct; someone has to put it in, and if nobody steps up to the plate, then they'll have to do it. HOUSEL: Okay. Do you have the text of the other two conditions that you wanted to add? FUKE: Yes, I've provided that to the staff early this morning, yes. HOUSEL: Okay, staff has that, okay. Commissioner Giffin. GIFFIN: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to get some input from the Director regarding Mr. Fuke's last suggestion for Condition E. LEITHEAD TODD: If I understand Mr. Fuke's addition or proposed addition to Condition E, it basically modifies that so that not only is it contingent upon the traffic light but no sooner than three years; so it means that even if they were able to get the work done within two years, they still can't get a certificate of occupancy — it's three years. But I think that's assuming that he needs a certain amount of time to meet with neighbors, get input on landscaping, buffering, you know, the impact, giving the neighbors an opportunity to kind of see what the plans are. And I think three years that in all likelihood, given what I've seen of construction timetables here in Hawai`i, it's unlikely that they really would be up and running within three years. But for me the main thing is that it still requires that the traffic light be in place before they can get a certificate of occupancy. BOWMAN: I have a question maybe either you or Ki could answer. I know they talked about the close proximity of the other traffic light and — what's that word when you stagger them — is that potentially going to be a problem? Does anyone know? Ki, do you know if that is a problem? Because it was mentioned in the background about the close proximity of the other traffic light. 25 EMLER: The question is about the proximity of the Haukapila Street intersection with respect to the Haleki`i Street intersection on Mamalahoa Highway. I did take a look at the spacing and I believe it's about 570 feet center to center on the two intersections. We do have closer intersections, at least one of them right downtown here in Kailua Village. So it's been done. Is it a good idea? I don't like it. It's difficult to deal with because you have to do something to coordinate the signal timing. It makes it probably less efficient than having one, than having a further space — definitely makes it less efficient than having light space further out. How will the operation work and whether it will work, I need to leave that to the Traffic Division, which does the signal timing. And I tried to get input from them, and it didn't show up on time. So that's the best I can do on that question. All I can tell you is we do have such situations. I don't like it, though. BOWMAN: Thank you. HOUSEL: Okay, thank you. We do have one person who would like to provide testimony. So could you please remain seated, so you hear this, and if you have any response to it, you can do it then. Could I please ask Meg Greenwell to come forward? Hi, good morning. If you could use the microphone and raise your right hand. Do you swear to tell the truth before the Planning Commission today on this matter? GREENWELL: I do. HOUSEL: Could you state your name and address, please? GREENWELL: Meg Greenwell, 82 -6190A Napo`opo`o Road, Captain Cook. HOUSEL: Please go ahead. GREENWELL: I respect and appreciate the neighbors' testimony. I know that that would be a disruption in their neighborhood and their community. My main concern is Haukapila Road; it is substandard, it is narrow. It services the hospital, a school — there is a Waldorf school up at the top — the courts, the Health Department and the residences of that area. And it is, it's just a little neighborhood road; it is not going to handle a whole another development. If this development goes in, there has got to be some major, major improvements on that road because even with the traffic light, that's not going to do it. The impact on this road is just going to be too much. That's all I have to say. HOUSEL: Thank you. Commissioners, do you have any questions? GREENWELL: Thank you. HOUSEL: Thank you. Mr. Fuke, do you have a response to these concerns? FUKE: Not really, I mean, you know, it's, I would concur that Haukapila Road does not meet County dedicable standards. What the applicant is trying to do, I guess, is trying to, I guess, make - lemonade- out -of -a -lemon situation, you know, by helping out overall healthcare services 26 and also trying to help out an existing, you know, safety issue at Haukapila and Mamalahoa Highway through the installation of traffic lights, whether it's this developer or another entity, you know. I think notwithstanding Mr. Emler's concern about efficiency of having two traffic lights 500 feet away, but from a safety standpoint, even though you might have some prolonged waiting time, it is much safer. So all I can say is it will improve the situation. It's not ideal but, again, you have to balance off healthcare versus some of the traffic limitation. HOUSEL: Thank you. Commissioners, do you have any further questions? Mr. Darrow, so we are clear on these changes to the conditions, could you read them, please? DARROW: Sure. I'll begin with the added conditions requested by the applicant. There were two conditions that were submitted to the Planning Department. These would be identified as a new Condition D and a new Condition E. Condition D will state as follows: "Prior to submittal of plans for Plan Approval, the applicant, its successors or assigns shall secure the input of area residents and /or lot owners, particularly those within the Keala Plantation Estates, regarding the placement of all proposed structures, wastewater system, parking areas; landscaping plans; fence and/or barriers between the subject property and adjacent properties; drainage; and construction mitigation. A report of this meeting shall be submitted in conjunction with the Plan Approval application." The new Condition E will read as follows: "All construction activity involving the use of heavy equipment or machinery related to the development of the project and any structures thereon shall be prohibited on Sundays, provided further that no construction activity shall occur on any day before 7:00 a.m. and after 5:00 p.m." Regarding our new Condition G, which was formerly Condition E, we have two possible conditions. One proposed by the Planning Department, which would state, "A traffic signal at the intersection of Mamalahoa Highway and Haukapila Street, and the construction of the Mamalahoa Bypass to the Napo`opo`o junction shall be completed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed project." Or as proposed by the applicant, it would state: "A traffic signal at the intersection of Mamalahoa Highway and Haukapila Street, provided that" — and if you could, okay — "provided that in no event shall a Certificate of Occupancy for any" — oh, I'm sorry, I'm jumping the gun here — "A traffic signal at the intersection of Mamalahoa Highway and Haukapila Street shall be completed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed project, provided that in no event shall a Certificate of Occupancy for any portion of the project be issued within 3 years from the effective date of this ordinance." Is that correct, Sidney? FUKE: Yes. DARROW: Thank you. HOUSEL: Thank you, Mr. Darrow. I guess one thing, a bit of the housekeeping here. That's all the people that signed up to testify, so could we get a motion to close the public hearing? GIFFIN: I so move. IOKEPA: Second. 27 HOUSEL: Second, Mr. Iokepa. All in favor? COMMISSIONERS: Aye. HOUSEL: Opposed? Passed. Thank you. Do you have any comments? Would you like to make a motion? GIFFIN: No, I would like to make a motion. HOUSEL: Okay. GIFFIN: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion regarding this agenda item. But before I do, I just wanted to state that I feel that what the applicant has done in terms of the two additional conditions that they proposed regarding involving the neighborhood and the members of the surrounding property owners to this project, is commendable. My history on this body is long, and it's not always where the applicant is so willing to work with the surrounding neighborhood, especially when they have come out in force against this application. Knowing that this is just one step in the process of the applicant must go through, I'm going to move that a favorable recommendation for this Change of Zone application, REZ 10 -124, be forwarded to the County Council, along with the amendments to the conditions as suggested by our Director, including those that are the new D, Condition E as proposed by the applicant and which include the neighbors, a new Condition G — Mr. Darrow, did I forget anything else — and also, of course, the re- alphabetizing of the existing conditions as they remain. DARROW: Commissioner Giffin? GIFFIN: Yes. DARROW: At this time there are two options available for Condition G -. GIFFIN: Yeah, the existing and then the proposed? DARROW: There is the proposed from the Planning Department, and then there is the proposed from the applicant. GIFFIN: And it is the one from the applicant that I thought that I am proposing in my motion. DARROW: Okay, thank you. GIFFIN: Is there anything else, Mr. Darrow, that I should include in this motion? DARROW: I think that covers everything. Thank you. BOWMAN: I second. 28 HOUSEL: Second by Commissioner Bowman. Do you have any discussion? Mr. Darrow, would you like to take the vote? DARROW: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The motion before us is to send a favorable recommendation to the Hawai`i County Council for this application, with the added conditions as proposed by the applicant; these conditions include the new Condition D, the new Condition E and the new Condition G. With that, I'll take the roll call. Commissioner Giffin? GIFFIN: Aye. DARROW: Commissioner Bowman? BOWMAN: Aye. DARROW: Commissioner Beaudet? BEAUDET: Aye. DARROW: Commissioner Hickcox? HICKCOX: Aye. DARROW: Commissioner Iokepa? IOKEPA: Aye. DARROW: Commissioner Nelson? NELSON: Aye. DARROW: And Mr. Chairman? HOUSEL: Aye. DARROW: The motion passes, seven to zero. HOUSEL: Thank you, Mr. Darrow. Thank you, Mr. Fuke. FUKE: Thank you very much. HOUSEL: And you will receive the formal application and the approval in the mail, I'm sure. FUKE: Yes. As Commissioner Giffin had indicated, you know, we've still got a long road to haul, and we have a lot of meetings that need to be done with the community — this will be handled by Mr. Ghalamfarsa. But thank you very much for this comment and recommendation. 29 HOUSEL: Thank you very much. GHALAMFARSA: Thank you. The discussion ended at 11:25 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Noriko Sauer, Secretary Leeward Planning Commission 30