Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 1028.000 2012-2014 Y os p .c y `. Walter K.M.Lau • `� �i�i Managing Director William P.Kenoi •: ` '� '1:• Mayor __ Randall M.Kurohara -writ os M''.` Deputy Managing Director County of Hawaii Office of the Mayor 25 Aupuni Street,Suite 2603 • Hilo,Hawai`i 96720 • (808)961-8211 • Fax(808)961-6553 KONA: 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Hwy.,Bldg.C • Kailua-Kona,Hawai`i 96740 (808)323-4444 • Fax(808)323-4440 August 28, 2014 N �r J Yoshimoto, Council Chair 3 _, and Members of the County Council County of Hawai`i 25 Aupuni Street `O Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Chairman Yoshimoto and Members: SUBJECT: Planning Director Initiated Amendment to Chapter 25 (Zoning Code), Article 2, Division 7, Section 25-2-71 (Applicability-Plan Approval Required), Section 15-2-17 (Reserved), Section 25-2-76 (Action of Plan Approval Application), Section 25-2-77 (Review Criteria and Conditions of Approval), and Article 6, Division 1, Section 25-6-3 (Application for P.U.D. Permit, Requirements), Section 25-6-7 (Reserved), and Section 25-6-10 (Criteria for Granting a PUD Permit) of the Hawai`i County Code 1983 (2005 Edition, as Amended) As required by Chapter 7, Sec. 6-7.5 (a), Hawaii County Charter, transmitted herewith for the County Council's consideration and action are the Windward and Leeward Planning Commissions' letters and enclosures regarding the above-referenced request. Sincerely, �--William P. Kenoi Mayor Enclosures cc: Planning Department MTranscouncilpudpermits <Z1‘ g•VO Comm. No. 1° Ref.To: pc, County of Hawai`i is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer. Ref. Date ShI 5 2014 r �t7 fLYi County of Hawaii WINDWARD PLANNING COMMISSION Aupuni Center • 101 Pauahi Street,Suite 3 • Hilo,Hawaii 96720 Phone(808)961-8288 • Fax(808)961-8742 JUL 2 2 2014 J Yoshimoto, Council Chair and Members of the County Council County of Hawai`i 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Chairman Yoshimoto and Council Members: Planning Director Initiated Amendment to Chapter 25 (Zoning Code), Article 2, Division 7, Section 25-2-71 (Applicability-Plan Approval Required), Section 15-2-17 (Reserved), Section 25-2-76 (Action of Plan Approval Application), Section 25-2-77 (Review Criteria and Conditions of Approval), and Article 6, Division 1, Section 25-6-3 (Application for P.U.D. Permit, Requirements), Section 25-6-7 (Reserved), and Section 25-6-10 (Criteria for Granting a PUD Permit) of the Hawai`i County Code 1983 (2005 Edition, as Amended) The Windward Planning Commission, at its duly held public hearing on July 3, 2014, considered the above-referenced request initiated by the Planning Director for amendments to Chapter 25, Articles 2 and 6 of the Hawai`i County Code 1983 (2005 Edition, as amended),relating to the review of development projects proposed within a special district. These amendments would create a process within the Zoning Code that requires the Planning Director to review and consult with a local design review committee for certain land use permit applications situated within a special district to promote consistency with applicable adopted design guidelines and/or standards. The Commission voted to forward a favorable recommendation to the County Council on the request. Hawai`i County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer J Yoshimoto, Council Chair and Members of the County Council Page 2 The draft bill is attached for your favorable consideration. We have also enclosed a copy of the Planning Director's Background and Recommendation, Powerpoint presentation and transcript of the hearing for your information. Sincerely, 1 Myles Miyasato, alairman Windward Planning Commission Lpdini ti atedchapter25 specialdistrictdesignreviewwpc Enclosures cc: Planning Department - Kona /cs ,,.,.,. County of Hawaii LEEWARD PLANNING COMMISSION Aupuni Center • 101 Pauahi Street,Suite 3 • Hilo,Hawai`i 96720 Phone(808)961-8288 • Fax(808)961-8742 AUG 2 7 2014 J Yoshimoto, Council Chair and Members of the County Council County of Hawai`i 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Chairman Yoshimoto and Council Members: Planning Director Initiated Amendment to Chapter 25 (Zoning Code), Article 2, Division 7, Section 25-2-71 (Applicability-Plan Approval Required), Section 15-2-17 (Reserved), Section 25-2-76 (Action of Plan Approval Application), Section 25-2-77 (Review Criteria and Conditions of Approval), and Article 6, Division 1, Section 25-6-3 (Application for P.U.D. Permit, Requirements), Section 25-6-7 (Reserved), and Section 25-6-10 (Criteria for Granting a PUD Permit) of the Hawai`i County Code 1983 (2005 Edition, as Amended) The Leeward Planning Commission, at its duly held public hearing on July 17, 2014, considered the above-referenced request initiated by the Planning Director for amendments to Chapter 25, Articles 2 and 6 of the Hawai`i County Code 1983 (2005 Edition, as amended), relating to the review of development projects proposed within a special district. These amendments would create a process within the Zoning Code that requires the Planning Director to review and consult with a local design review committee for certain land use permit applications situated within a special district to promote consistency with applicable adopted design guidelines and/or standards. The Commission voted to forward a favorable recommendation to the County Council on the request. Hawai`i County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer J Yoshimoto, Council Chair and Members of the County Council Page 2 Council is advised that there exists a slight difference between the proposed ordinance relating to review of development projects within a special district approved by the Windward Planning Commission (WPC) and the Leeward Planning Commission (LPC). One hour before being considered by the Windward Planning Commission it came to the attention of the Planning Department that additional exclusionary language was necessary to avoid the potential for inadvertently impacting the status of the Kailua Village Design Commission, which is the only special district with adopted design guidelines currently established under Article 7, Chapter 25, HCC. While the necessary amending language presented to and accepted by the WPC for Section 25-2-71(h), the additional similar amending language to Section 25-6-7(a) that was presented to and accepted by LPC was not presented to the WPC. Given that the WPC approved the amending language to Section 25-2-71(h) and the basis for the amendment as stated above, we respectfully request that the Council accept the favorable recommendations of both the WPC and LPC for the version approved by the LPC. The draft bill is attached for your favorable consideration. We have also enclosed a copy of the Planning Director's Background and Recommendation, Powerpoint presentation and transcript of the hearing for your information. Sincerely, Brandi K. Beaudet, Chairman Leeward Planning Commission Lpdinitiatedchapter25specialdistrictdesignreviewlpc Enclosures cc: Planning Department - Kona BRPDInitChap25 SpecDistProj Review051914.doc-6/20/2014 COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT BACKGROUND AND RECOMMENDATION INITIATOR: PLANNING DIRECTOR AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 25,ARTICLE 2,DIVISION 7 AND ARTICLE 6, DIVISION 1 OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983 (2005 EDITION,AS AMENDED), RELATING TO THE REVIEW OF DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS PROPOSED WITHIN A SPECIAL DISTRICT. The Planning Director has initiated the following amendments to Chapter 25, Article 2, Division 7 "Plan Approval" and Article 6, Division 1 "Planned Unit Development(P.U.D.)"of the Hawai`i County Code 1893 (2005 Edition, as amended)relating to the review of Plan Approval and P.U.D. applications within a special district where design guidelines and/or standards have been adopted by the Council. BACKGROUND 1974—Kailua Village Special District and Urban Design Review Commission: The Kailua Village Special District and Urban Design Review Commission were established by Ordinance No. 628 in 1974. This advisory commission was created to assist the planning department in the development and preparation of the Kailua Village Design Plan and to define the Kailua Village Special District. This fourteen member commission was appointed by the Mayor and approved by the Council. 1976—Kailua Village Design Plan: Ordinance No. 217 was adopted in June 1976 and was intended to provide further clarification of the General Plan policies as they pertained to the Kailua Village area, and to establish a more detailed program for implementation of the General Plan. 1987—Kailua Village Design Commission: Ordinance No. 87-18, adopted in February 1987, amended Chapter 25,Article 24, HCC changing the Kailua Village Special District and Urban Design Commission to the Kailua Village Design Commission. The commission membership was reduced from fourteen to nine,but still being appointed by the Mayor and approved by the Council. Section 25-7-4(b), HCC, states that"(t)he design commission shall provide an architectural and design review if applications requiring plan approval by the director. The design review commission's review and recommendations to the director shall be completed within thirty days from the date of the design commission's receipt of the plans requiring plan 1 Re: Comm. 1028 (Bill 283) approval." However, no allowances were made within Division 7—Plan Approval for adjustment to the requirement under Section 25-2-76(d)that "(t)he director shall render a decision to either approve or deny a plan approval application, other than for an agricultural tourism facility, within thirty days after acceptance of the application. If the director fails to render a decision within the thirty-day period, the application shall be considered approved without further certification by the director. " 1986—Waimea Design Plan: The Waimea Design Plan was adopted by Resolution No. 214-86 in October 1986 and provides recommendations and guidelines to: 1. Insure the preservation of Waimea's ranch and agricultural heritage in the face of growth and change; 2. Reinforce the traditional roll of Waimea town as the regional support and service center for ranching and intensive agricultural activities; 3. Encourage the present trend towards the establishment of Waimea as the home base for various educational, cultural, medical, and scientific organizations. Implementation of the Waimea Design Plan included the "(o)ngoing review by the County and community of projects proposed by either the public or private sector, which are affected by the plan. " Since the adoption of the Waimea Design Plan an informal process for requesting and accepting community review of projects affected by the plan has been carried out on a generally consistent and mutually satisfactory basis. However, for emerging local community plans where design guidelines and/or standards are an important element there exists a strong desire for more secure assurances that an opportunity for local review of projects will be provided. 2005—County of Hawaii General Plan: Establishing a means through which local communities are able to participate in permit application review process and to provide comments and recommendations to the approving authorities serves to help fulfill the following in the General Plan: 1) Sec. 1.1 Purpose of the General Plan • Identify the visions, values, and priorities important to the people of the County; • Improve the physical environment of the County as a setting for human activities; to make it more functional, beautiful, healthful, interesting, and efficient; • Facilitate the democratic determination of community policies concerning the utilization of its natural, man-made and human resources; and -2- • Effect political and technical coordination in community improvement and development. 2) Sec. 2.2 Economic Goals (a) Provide residents with opportunities to improve their quality of life through economic development that enhances the County's natural and social environments. 3) Sec. 2.3 Economic Policies (a) Encourage the development of the visitor industry that is in harmony with the social,physical, and economic goals of the residents of the County. (o) Promote a distinctive identity for the island of Hawaii to enable government, business and travel industries to promote the County of Hawaii as an entity unique within the State of Hawaii. 4) Sec. 14.3.3 Land Use Policies (a) Urban renewal, rehabilitation, and/or redevelopment programs shall be undertaken in cooperation with communities, businesses and government agencies. j) The development of commercial facilities should be designed to fit into the locale with minimal intrusion while providing the desired services. Appropriate infrastructure and design concerns shall be incorporated into the review of such developments. 2008—Puna Community Development Plan: In September 2008, the Puna Community Development Plan (PCDP)was adopted by Ordinance No. 08-116 and subsequently amended in November 2010 (Ord. 10-104), June 2011 (Ord. 11-51, 11-52 & 11-53) and December 2011 (Ord. 11-117 & 11-118). Sections 2.1.3a.2) and 5.2.3, PCDP, identify Pahoa Town as one of four Puna communities to be designated as a Special Design District with detailed planning, design standards and review procedures. Within the growth management chapter of the PCDP, Section 3.1.3b.1) Pahoa is also identified as one of three locations for designation as a Regional Town Center. Section 5.2.1 —Zoning Designations, PCDP, states: "The regional town center plan should be prepared through an inclusive community based process that involves major stakeholders, including landowners, community representatives, and public agencies. " 2011-2014: Commencing in November 2011, a grass roots effort began to emerge in Pahoa for the purpose of creating a growth management master plan that residents hoped could establish controls on how and where growth within the village should occur and to ensure that any new -3- development or redevelopment would be consistent with the character and sense of place that residents and visitors alike had come to identify with being unique to Pahoa. With minimal support from the county a Pahoa Plan Steering Committee was organized and secured recognition from the Puna CDP Action Committee as a formal subcommittee tasked with creating a regional town center master plan for Pahoa that would include design guidelines for all development within an identified design district. The Pahoa Village Design Guidelines being submitted to the Hawai❑i County Council for adoption by resolution, the two bills proposing amendments to Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) and one bill proposing to amend Chapter 3 (Sign Code) having been drafted primarily through the efforts of the Pahoa Plan Steering Committee and extensively vetted within the Pahoa community, Planning Department and Department of Public Works constitute the first phase in the development of a comprehensive master plan for Pahoa. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS The proposed amendments are intended to establish the requirement for the review of development projects within a special district where design guidelines and/or standards have been adopted that require Plan Approval or a P.U.D.permit to be reviewed against the adopted design guidelines and/or standards, and provides a process that includes an opportunity for local community review and comment. Upon the adoption of a new special district with design guidelines and/or standards adopted by the Council, a local design review committee will be established in accordance with the provisions of each special district ordinance. These amendments are intended to establish a uniform process for the review of projects being proposed within special districts with adopted design guidelines and/or standards that will be helpful in minimizing the potential for an overly complex and cumbersome review process as additional local communities seek to establish guidelines and/or standards to preserve their unique character and sense of place. The following amendments are proposed(material to be added is underscored with material to be deleted bracketed and struck out): Relating to the Exception of the Exemption of Single-Family Dwellings Subject to Plan Approval: Section 25-2-71. Applicability; plan approval required. (a) Plan approval shall be required prior to the construction or installation of any new structure or development or any addition to an existing structure or development in -4- all districts except in the RS, RA, FA, A and IA districts, and except for the construction of one single-family dwelling and any accessory buildings per lot1 unless required elsewhere in this chapter. Reason for change: This additional language provides for the potential inclusion of design review of single-family dwellings and accessory buildings through the Plan Approval application process within special districts with adopted design guidelines and/or standards that apply to single-family dwellings and accessory buildings. Relating to Plan Approval Application Requirements: Section 25-2-71. Applicability; plan approval required. (h) Plan approval shall be required prior to the construction or installation of any new structure or development, any enlargement of an existing structure or development, or alterations to the exterior appearance of any existing structure or development in any special district established under this chapter for which design guidelines and/or standards have been adopted and as prescribed by the applicable special district requirements. Reason for changes: The addition of this subsection is necessary to make Plan Approval a requirement prior to any new construction or renovation project within a special district with adopted design guidelines and/or standards. Relating to Special Requirements for Plan Approval Applications and Processing: Section 25-2-73. [ReserveiL] Plan approval application and processing requirements for special districts with design guidelines and/or standards. (a) In addition to the application requirements for plan approval contained in section 25-2-72, an application for plan approval for the construction, installation, enlargement, or alteration to the exterior appearance of a building or structure that is subject to design guidelines and/or standards adopted by the council for any special district established under article 7 of this chapter shall include: (1) Complete and accurate exterior elevations of all facades, drawn at a scale adequate to show clearly the appearance of all proposed buildings and structures; (2) A description of exterior siding, roofing, and finish materials; (3) Exterior door and window specifications; (4) Description, location, and renderings for any exterior signage; -5- (5) A streetscape rendering of the project site and adjacent properties suitable for evaluating the immediate spatial relationships. Photographic images may be substituted provided those images are adequate to serve the same purpose; (6) Other descriptive information as the director finds necessary to determine consistency of the proposed project with the design guidelines and/or standards adopted for the special district in which the project building site is located. (b) Within five days of acceptance of an application for plan approval the director shall provide the respective design review committee with a copy of the application and plans along with a request for their review and comments on the consistency of the project with the adopted design guidelines and/or standards. (c) The written recommendations and plans stamped"Reviewed by"with the date and signature of the chair of the respective design review committee affixed shall be submitted to the director within twenty-five calendar days of receipt by the design review committee of the director's request for design review. (d) Except as otherwise provided in this section, the director shall withhold rendering a decision on a plan approval application until having received the written recommendations and stamped and signed plans from the chair of the respective design review committee for the application. (e) By written request to the director,the chair of the respective design review committee may request an extension of time to complete the design review and to submit the recommendations of the design review committee, which the director may grant only with the written approval of the applicant for plan approval. (f) In the event that no design review committee is established, or if the design review committee, for whatever reason, fails to respond within the time limit prescribed in subsection(b), the director shall provide design review against the relevant design guidelines and/or standards as adopted by the council and waive the requirements under subsection (c). Reason for changes: Part(a) of this section provides for additional information and plan details to be required as part of a complete Plan Approval application that are necessary to properly review the project against the applicable adopted design guidelines and/or standards. Parts (b)through (f) describe the -6- minimal protocols and application processing requirements necessary to provide a reasonable opportunity for local community review of applications for consistency with the applicable design guidelines and/or standards and to ensure that local community design review and submittal of recommendations to the director occurs within the regulatory time frame established under Section 25-2-76(d). It further provides that the director shall make the final decision as to whether a project is consistent with the applicable design guidelines and/or standards and that review of projects subject to design guidelines and/or standards shall be conducted even if no local design review committee is established or able to respond within the required timeline. Relating to Action on Plan Approval Appliations: Section 25-2-76. Action on plan approval application. (d) The director shall render a decision to either approve or deny a plan approval application, other than for an agricultural tourism facility[;] or any special district with adopted design guidelines and/or standards,within thirty days after acceptance of the application. If the director fails to render a decision within the thirty-day period, the application shall be considered approved without further certification by the director. For an agricultural tourism facility, the department shall conduct a site inspection prior to issuing plan approval within sixty days after acceptance of the application. If the director fails to render a decision within the sixty-day period,the application shall be considered approved without further certification by the director. For any plan approval application within a special district with adopted design guidelines and/or standards, the director shall render a decision to either approve or deny the plan approval application within forty-five days after acceptance of the application. If the director fails to render a decision within the forty-five-day period, the application shall be considered approved without further certification by the director. Reason for changes: Additional application processing time will be necessary to allow for local community design review to occur and be considered by planning staff. These amendments change the processing time for Plan Approval applications that are subject to design review from 30 days to 45 days from the time the application is accepted as a complete application. -7- Relating to the Review Criteria on Plan Approval Applications: Section 25-2-77. Review criteria and conditions of approval. (7) Within reasonable limits, any natural and man-made features of community value are preserved; [and] (8) Dust,noise, and odor impacts are mitigated[:]; and (9) Compliance with any design guidelines or standards adopted by the council. Reason for changes: Part(9) is added to ensure that any project within a special district subject to design guidelines and/or standards is consistent with those guidelines and/or standards prior to being granted approval of the application for Plan Approval. Relating to the Appliation Requirements for a P.U.D. Permit: Section 25-6-3. Application for P.U.D. permit; requirements An application for a P.U.D. permit shall be on a form prescribed for this purpose by the director and shall be accompanied by: (2) A written description of the proposed project, including the following information: (E) An analysis of the relationship of the proposed development to the general plan[:], any adopted community development plan, other adopted master plan, and adopted design guidelines and/or standards affecting the project area. Reason for changes: The change to part(2)(E) clarifies that an application for a P.U.D. must include an analysis of the proposed project against the any adopted CDP, other adopted master plan and adopted design guidelines and/or standards affecting the project site. Relating to Special Requirements for P.U.D. Applications and Processing: Section 25-6-7. [Resented]P.U.D. permit application and processing requirements for special districts with design guidelines and/or standards. (a) In addition to the application requirements for a P.U.D. contained in section 25-6-3, an application for a P.U.D. in any special district established under article 7 of this chapter for which design guidelines or standards have been adopted by the council shall include: -8- (1) Complete and accurate exterior elevations of all facades, drawn at a scale adequate to show clearly the appearance of all proposed buildings and structures; (2) A description of exterior siding, roofing, and finish materials; (3) Exterior door and window specifications; (4) Description, location, and renderings for any exterior signage; (5) A streetscape rendering of the project site and adjacent properties suitable for evaluating the immediate spatial relationships. Photographic images may be substituted provided those images are adequate to serve the same purpose; (6) Other descriptive information as the director finds necessary to determine consistency of the proposed project with the design guidelines and/or standards adopted for the special district in which the project building site is located. ('b) The P.U.D. application and plans shall be subject to review and comment by the design review committee established under the respective special district section under article 7 for consistency with the adopted design guidelines and/or standards. (c) The director shall, within five days of acceptance of a P.U.D. application,provide the respective design review committee with a copy of the application and plans • along with a request for their review and comments on the consistency of the project with the adopted design guidelines and/or standards. (d) The written recommendations and plans stamped"Reviewed by"with the date and signature of the chair of the respective design review committee affixed shall be submitted to the director within twenty-five calendar days of receipt by the design review committee of the final plans for any partial or full approval of a P.U.D. application as provided in section 25-6-6(c) or(d) above. (e) Except as otherwise provided in this section, the director shall withhold rendering a decision on any partial or full approval of a P.U.D. application until having received the written recommendations and stamped and signed plans from the chair of the respective design review committee for the application. (f) By written request to the director, the chair of the respective design review committee may request an extension of time to complete the design review and to -9- submit the recommendations of the design review committee, which the director may grant only with the written approval of the applicant for P.U.D. (g) In the event that no design review committee is established, or if the design review committee, for whatever reason, fails to respond within the time limit prescribed in subsection(d), the director shall provide design review against the relevant design guidelines and/or standards as adopted by the council and waive the requirements under subsection (b). Reason for Changes: Part (a) of this section is provides for additional information and plan details to be required as part of a complete P.U.D. application that are necessary to properly review the project against the applicable adopted design guidelines and/or standards. Parts (b) through (g)provide for the applicability of review of the P.U.D. application and plans for consistency with any applicable design guidelines and/or standards and describe the minimal protocols and application processing requirements necessary to provide a reasonable opportunity for local community review of applications for consistency with the applicable design guidelines and/or standards and to ensure that the local community design review committee recommendations are submitted to the director within the regulatory time frame established under Section 25-6-6. It further provides that the director shall make the final decision as to whether a project is consistent with the applicable design guidelines and/or standards and that review of projects subject to design guidelines and/or standards shall be conducted even if no local design review committee is established or able to respond within the required timeline. Relating to Criteria for Granting a P.U.D. Permit: Section 25-6-10. Criteria for granting a P.U.D. permit. A P.U.D. permit may be granted by the director upon finding that: (b) The proposed development substantially conforms to the general plan[.-], any adopted community development plan, other adopted master plan, or adopted design guidelines and/or standards affecting the project area. Reason for Changes: Part(b) is amended clarifies that an application for a P.U.D.must include an analysis of the proposed project against the any adopted CDP, other adopted master plan and adopted design guidelines and/or standards affecting the project site. -10- COMMENTS FROM THE GENERAL PUBLIC Public meetings were held in Pahoa on March 5, 2013 and August 21, 2013 during which the draft Pahoa Village Design Guidelines and proposed amendments to Chapter 25 creating the Pahoa Village district and providing for the review of projects within the Pahoa Village district against the design guidelines were explained. A separate special meeting of the Pahoa Regional Town Center Plan Subcommittee("Subcommittee")was held on June 12, 2013 to which all Pahoa merchants were personally invited to participate in a discussion on proposed design guidelines and code changes and to respond to any questions or concerns. While no written comments or suggestions were received from the general public during or after these sessions, some of the input received was helpful in tweaking of the draft documents. Community reaction to the proposed design guidelines and implementing ordinances has been overwhelmingly positive, including the voluntary compliance with the design guidelines by the developers of two new commercial projects within the designated Pahoa Village Design district area. Drafts of the design guidelines and proposed amendments to Chapters 3 (Sign Code) and 25 (Zoning Code) were sent to DPW Director, Warren Lee and Planning Department Program Managers in Hilo and Kona for review and comment on the original drafts in July 2013. Some adjustments were made based on the comments received and revised drafts were approved by the Subcommittee and the Puna CDP Action Committee in November 2013. Final adjustments based on input from Deputy Corporation Counsel and the Planning Director addressed several technical inconsistencies and issues with establishing and recognizing local design review committees without making any substantive changes to the functional provisions or intent of the amendments. The Subcommittee was briefed on and approved the final technical adjustments at their meeting on May 19, 2014. RECOMMENDATION In light of the above,the Planning Director recommends that the Leeward and Windward Planning Commissions send a favorable recommendation to the County Council for the proposed amendments to Chapter 25 of the County of Hawaii Code relating to the review of Plan Approval and P.U.D. applications within a special district where design guidelines and/or standards have been adopted by the Council, as provided by the attached bill. -11- j, 0 N MIMM) Ca t/1 O MA 0 V j ., V J U CD I a V s- > cn •— a) U 121 alleml. .■im 11 C 0 0 SINEn • aA OD cn V'1 •V •� o., a) a) .to 0 r) 0 '- W •i a) a) a) N CO fw CO Q co 5 5 5 ,.... ,,. , .. ... .: •..... Co Co .d'10 0 0 0 j co s = 'co Ica Ica BCD M d- ...- ,• • „,,,,,,,•_.-...„,„,,...,..„..,..,.. ,,,, ..,. _,, ...„,,,,,_,,, , ••■•••••••• • •III■ MC C • an:•••■ a) c .......- 0 oa = :, +-a -0 1.... co mu 73 a. ci) .., • ...--„ a)4 , S.... a) 0- 0 0 0 V) •.......,' .I ) 7:3 + a' C (1) "1-J V) :,•- C CO CU En> C c •.,.: CD -1-J ., a) o %aco E cn E •Nam= a) a) (13 •maims% - . -2 S.- -1-+ O inia) • •..... •— c • I En= a) •.■ •=NM •••■Il -■-•■■•■ co a) (13 -0 CT D 7.-ir —0-- Cl. CU :. .., 4--/ 73 0 -1--) %.1.,/ • 4 -- E -:, •ammo C C 1.4. SI N■ Lin taD (I) O . .j L■ •— = C . ..., •_ 0 co •0 D Q.) co _ -0 0 .: u u u ci... cu c 73 CU 0 •_.... to c ,,:.. cu •_ co c 2 c 0 0_ 0 -0 a) V +a 111.,1 ) CO V) CO •._ co c 0 CO = •_ (3) a) s._, a) s_. u U 7 _ t . _ •77., cr. e) •_ ,.„ scu o_ D E a E si. cu = 0 w < < < < < -0; :,- ,. ,;,....., • • • 0 ;''' '',•.,.,. -...,...- ., , ��--� a) .c O 'v L � O N a) E N O D L O > N .cn � O L = • L -+ > v -C (o N O .- U N X x L •— a) O co U a) p +-' co QQ� O W -a a) c a Q, L Q t/) (P1 CU c ca _C L CU >. L 4- +-) -0 ca = (D O 0 '= O 0 +-) c N a) c� v) 'i +-+ U = s CU O.L_ tiO 4-1 (1) CD C (f) 2 -0 0 "I-) C .= L- CD aO .Ocn � -a _o 0 Q E _ ogl), E2c = rocuT_a = •�-� Culp v) = - 2 .- rrl -0 rt, .47; L- ,a) ..4.7) -9.„, v) -0 a) M 0 C chi) }' •— �, L N co x CD 03 c6 N NY L a) CD C 'N ate+ E >< 2 -- mc .4-z 03 L7 5 (1) E -In a) tL3 c 0.073 - T0_ cn ca CU O 0 co V E p •U +-+— L 0 > co O _c .4-) u b.0 a) 0 a) a) (1) U Q. •i c -0 c/) a ^ c > ° a >>1E 0 5 , .So p CU L Q. C -0 .– ca cn = 0 -0 0 CO ca > ca _C CU cn L E J 0 ID . c 'E a) 1 ._ C� -E-' a) > cn CN 0- (Y). "-a 0_ _C - ' C 4-' C • LO 0 C a) CD U co Q) 1-i) V •- V 0 ( Iro 0 (/) Lt) CO -0 C 7iFj GU co C w Q. v) O 4) E c •_ _ 0 ., +-, • -. C a) cn L.- 4-1 a) 4-, •— u- -0 O O 0 ,_ +.) co E C V Z3 • _C Q ...+7• O Q � _C MO - � 0 -0 1E3 • C 7 .MO >> .j a) C Cu Z3 Q O a) cn s) co N •O _, . . _c a.) -0 _C -2 o c --) -R; .(/) -o 0_ _ cc u _ „,._ 4_, a) t (0 0 (13TD_ M w 04-) C r0 s_ r. 4.-J i_E v) co U co a) c, -0 cn +-) a) p V 4- to a) p CU N 4.- p au .... .� O 0 `D s U o_ s >. > -0 -N 0 Q CU 25 : ' 0-c4--)V 0 .an) .V 4� • to -0 1 4-J TD_ o E ..—% 414 - w V) Z O Q c6 � a •. +a +� cu O 0 ca •U _ au o a u V) a) EUL) -0 •—( co ca U 4- c O in .w E '5 = ° o = 'E a)b13 tio 4) a ca. C 0_ o ca a U N E cn ,_ v) -0 O C� X U qip " V 5 CU G) CU cu D t. . cu a� a) °' a) > au CU a) CO ,�,., Q 7 . O +-) 0 0 > 5 1E > — s Ego - u L) L _C U LO U CO U U Cl. O Q co a, o a • • • • U 14 % jo tir (.4..",.. co 44/air veNiasia, 4 L_ , �•.—__1'1/1 .4,,,,i—wiirpitif ft n 1 td0 "••••,c\ IllgtirlotLeArgi - C ; ii C lallr -Allhir/Wirilin 1 co CL \ + *fir,wmaxx i � w 41/*115, Ike • •,,--x ' ' 1:4A..*';,.:111 . At 4 11 o + `���• ., . u B c „ CAA �► v) _r v/ \*_ 4-- •vtiot . r ' o 1 / v o 4)''a) * .6 mg .4) i ii, 4. v tx, 4.. . a \ CD 11,!,•4 0 0 0 g > t M a CD O $ 0- s s a W e o 3 c t Mau a w glia w R ice. lei: a1 :;191iwr 4 1 us r / 4.c.;','' -'.,',,,,,-,,r .... , -......,...mok. ,.. ' . ..,, . ..,.., 4i v� _ • C, = y - A tillL r' -6- i ,+ r_ L f f 13. Um N • >: V > E.. - �� A , r L v q 1 I _.- 0 V! . ' . E 1:3 . 12.1„;.,1,1, .�kY' • pI et` ! nr 1 i m • ".. . '‘'' 1111,r1 ha* 1.• ''''i . 'i • ‘ , ,-.4 - . _ ..vr .. ‘ . f 'J -mac . s ..,L , :„.., . .., r V 1111- .' .1 -:„. „ , ,r, ,.,,,:i., ,....,.„., ,,,.,:,,,,,,,,,„...,,,,,..:_ .. .. ....., . ,r i '� ::44 4 i M.,r''''':' .. '.. (NI \ ::;:,,,:f 4, 'r,'ItIlli, r'.7'.:.',..t.i,,'',':' ' , ., ,..., .41,. :' ''''',, '' 1 $■• -:.4,:,,f,':::.,, 1 4 : -41'1',',,,, 0■'.. Nii a•4;11•** ;;;Allirillig./1"killr:'..."'"".."'"--- a I 3• y . i t ■ - .4 . • P�s° i t ii.. "S`r � ''' ! t -. :tr - „> f Y..* K rays r, '-. .. , ...-�..y f I , + N .: .� rr y R " . . . ,��� S l r -.. r,4 t.r.r s...w r•t.• o , pp N o (NI N r-i L d4 4 ii,;„, cu ''' ,.`.,'' '-''';' 'ir I Ati ' %_, P. 1'.'' 1' ! tur.) „4i -... s 4r t W s } `y j � R ,0,4. %,,,,,,,,,,,,;1„ 44 4.Se 1 .,. t p ri'TiF 1i ' M 4)b,0 tiNi aA .E . t c .,t d a) , � ate N t 0 0 . o oo t. Cif '' 1' 1 LU i Crl ',.. CY). \ ,' : yes .c Z;i1 NINIIIIIINSIMY almINNOMMEN <C ..�..� MIII----- -, ;r 1 1111.11111111111. w rr�� io/ T rolliilminlarr$' iii ANINIIIIIIIIIb +riles ___ .rr r a A all t 1111111/111111.11. '' r 011011111111111111 • IIINIONar 111111111111111111 ' Elj - r1111111111•r irr�� • r -•01+1 . K 11111k it. .q. a *AM t� ,4440 . 4k)if ,4 „,, , , .... , . f.', .,.'7f. ..•_;".1.0 . 1:- , ',,0 r- 1 ' i .. 1 / i ' i ..", . 1 i 1 ..mop il.plp ' LH all) — —4 . '?. Li 1- LIM lir •g ' 1 I I, ats-a Aft;_tii, 1 , / .. , , , ..... . c.„) ...„ kx, ir.: , I . it.. CU $.,,,:;„ . _ -, . .„. .. t . ,„ ----, ,--- - • •--',-,' ''' -: ''''''.1 ,..'- -.,., gemi. .........- .17-",:-.4 •"'s' 4:""114 .....,, •mos . . .. , ..,„,,, . '-'. ., ...r.-=#.i:....' ''':, .'..'. ill . INCo ;:z-r-1—....: • . ... or; , . • i 1° . ''' I ' u 1,.. ..„....... , . •...,:„.„,.... . --1 .=-------. .„-•,, „----...,, ,,, , .,„, .........„, ........... ...„...„ . Jo 1ININIAIIII MINNIIININME ■' ! +., a) ...:, -,, . , ,,.,,,, ...: ,,,, to ,.,- .,,,_ . CO / „..: SWINMNIIIIN i; ,.,,,,,,, o..............: I ' aillIMINO !! 4,,,, NIIIIMMIN .j" =NM / _He, III 1■ .,' 11011111NIII ■ •','''-.i' I'',.•':.'., ..,, ... .. ,--- /i i-••i.,•_ ,'-•'•'-.'.,,„......,_'„,,Z,,..A;,...I,., „...„..,. _,. .`. ' , MO0 // , MO= . .o' r ' �t ,, .1\11, }, i 1 \,, \,. 1 N AfMi14i� \ ,,. t , +I+ � r Ng\'1/2, ' ' \ \ ' ' '''''''' . - d , ,' V: \ \ \\i. \1/2\ \\'.:",,-,,, : ... ':.; - \ \ \. '. \ '', \ \ \ .., ,:.'„, ', I.. ::;■,...> : . 1 \\ 4\ -\ ' ►� \ 1 k 4 \` V. IS' - 0 .- ,„- ''., . ; itj e, A. `;rc 4 S. s. /9f l f s ., 4it Y --c.ir ' - .' , ), „ 4: 111E ■ yy r e �"t vat: � yV 3 z.r A t y,.. +NFfitviYR s fer i t.A nyweAi� itlit,,.a f is Itilimp rt ` . ,_. , _ i• 4 r''''‘'''''' d-` .-:,: -::-.1,1.- ,,,,„' -':•'::. '-It...., a .'--.'"'.-''''''.--iebira:cf'1,•. .:, I t P.' - Y 5 4 4. i* ,[ ¢ 1,4F r : 4"0 . F.A«ir _ 9 ... I. :+ • * � iii ii ¢ *'mss'" ` t' ` 0 ,,,,•. . 1,,,,,,- t.,;.' - •-,------4- -. --7-t; E _,,.,.„,. a I.:O f ,. , .............9 Ca _ " 0 i• w.�a0 ' . w .s J IMIC rgi II ra j-M' 6 1.a . V 'I£'4p h s* §n . ' � uR�A� !� I fin. ,� aw " m' t,4, a ¢ , 1 ,• ,pe+.µ. Ot, i ,r,ii:-.', '''•.'''Y. .y,n" I t eB''p t,f , y. } y z ? ..........i �'y. �F N'4 ,ee yy e. 'Fr• i.3" L cif ,,,,. .,.....„,,,,,,,,,::..-„,'; :.,.. " - Yy '''''':'#'1'.:::1:'::1'. Y..f� w M1 � fig: L�y 2 &t, yy T,',.--,k -,,,,,,m, _a, r , . .„.... • _ . .., .,. . , . A .1,- 1 #p i ,49 , si..„;.-40 ..;, , , ,,,,, ...Jr.,-f-,-.- 1 i "-',.,;,.-''.'',`;',.'''''-'1.;-..'i "1" . ::1""I' .,' '. ' a *, 1 i s �� + �. - ile h a t LEEWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAII HEARING TRANSCRIPT JULY 17, 2014 A regularly advertised hearing on the PLANNING DIRECTOR INITIATED AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 25 OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE,RELATING TO REVIEW OF CERTAIN LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATIONS WITHIN A SPECIAL DISTRICT was called to order at 09:35 a.m. in the West Hawaii Civic Center, Community Center, Building G, 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Highway, Kailua-Kona, Hawaii, with Chair Brandi Beaudet presiding. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Brandi Beaudet, Collin Kaholo, Barbara Nobriga and Thomas Whittemore ABSENT AND EXCUSED: Thomas Hickcox ALSO PRESENT: Bobby Command (Deputy Planning Director),Margaret Masunaga(Deputy Corporation Counsel), Larry Brown (Planner) and Noriko Sauer(Commission Secretary) And two people from the public in attendance. INITIATOR: PLANNING DIRECTOR An ordinance amending Chapter 25 (Zoning Code), Article 2, Division 7, Section 25-2-71 (Applicability-Plan Approval required), Section 25-2-73 (Reserved), Section 25-2-76 (Action of Plan Approval application), Section 25-2-77 (Review Criteria and conditions of approval); and Article 6,Division 1, Section 25-6-3 (Application for P.U.D. permit requirements), Section 25-6-7 (Reserved), and Section 25-6-10(Criteria for granting a P.U.D. permit) of the Hawaii County Code 1983 (2005 Edition, as amended). These amendments would create a process within the Zoning Code that requires the Planning Director to review and consult with a local design review committee for certain land use permit applications situated within a special district to promote consistency with applicable adopted design guidelines and/or standards. BEAUDET: First agenda item today, initiator Planning Director,the Planning Director has initiated the following amendments to Chapter 25, Article 2,Division 7 "Plan Approval" and Article 6, Division 1 "Planned Unit Development"of the Hawaii County Code 1893, relating to the review of Plan Approval and P.U.D. applications within a special district where design guidelines and/or standards have been adopted by the Council. COMMAND: And,Mr. Chairman, I'd just like to point out that that's probably"1983,"rather than "1893." BEAUDET: Ah, okay. COMMAND: I guess it's a typo. BEAUDET: And just joining us is Margaret Masunaga, Deputy Corporation Counsel. Thank you. Staff? 1 Re: Comm. 1028 (Bill 283) BROWN: Good morning, Chair Beaudet and Members of the Leeward Planning Commission. Good morning, my name is Larry Brown. I work in the Long Range Division of the Hilo office in the Planning Department. And before you today we have a piece of legislation that's being introduced as part of an overall package for the Pahoa Village Design District. The four pieces of legislation are shown on the slide, part of this very brief PowerPoint presentation we have for you. The four pieces are the one before you today, the, what we call, the Design District Plan Review ordinance; the other three pieces include the Pahoa Village Design District ordinance, and the third one is the Pahoa Village Design Guidelines,being adopted by resolution, and the fourth one is the Pahoa Village Signs ordinance. And we'll talk a little bit more about each one of those as we proceed. So the Design District Review ordinance, the primary features, as you can see hopefully at least on the top part of the screen,requires review of development projects within special districts against adopted design guidelines and/or standards. So what that's saying is is that any special district created under the Zoning Code, Article 7, for which there are also adopted design guidelines or standards, would be subject to the review processes outlined in this ordinance. It also amends application requirements for Plan Approval and Planned Unit Development applications for projects that are within those design districts, and also subject to the design guidelines or standards. It also amends processing requirements for Plan Approval and P.U.D. applications, mainly providing a process or means by which local community design review boards can be established and provide, have an opportunity to review and comment to the Planning Director on individual applications subject to the design review. It also articulates process for review by local design review committees, which is what I just said. We noticed in our presentation to the Windward Commission that we did have an error that needed to be corrected; it was the intent of this ordinance to not have any impact or affect on the Kailua- Kona Village Design Commission. And so we had to add some language to Section (h) of 25, Part (h) of 25-2-71, at the bottom in red, which specifies that this process is not applicable to any special district having adopted design guidelines and/or standards established under this chapter prior to the adoption of this sub-section. And we made similar language changes to 25-6-7, Part(a), regarding Planned Unit Development applications. The Windward Planning Commission approved the first one, but this was a last minute error that we noticed, and this correction was not presented to them; but it is being presented to you, and this is the form in which we hope to present it to the Council, with an explanation as to why there is a difference. The other piece of legislation,the second one in our package, four-piece package,if you will, is the Pahoa Village Design District ordinance, and what this does is actually creates a new special district under Article 7 of Chapter 25, called the Pahoa Village Design District. It also provides exemption from off-street parking requirements for special properties within the old village core, acknowledges adoption and applicability of architectural design guidelines for the Pahoa Village Design District. And it also provides for recognition of community based local review of development projects in the Pahoa Village Design District. And one thing I would add to this is that the entities in Pahoa, which are essentially community associations that have recently formed or have been in operation for quite some time, are being encouraged to draft and approve operating guidelines and procedures for their local design review board that can be approved and presented to the Action, approved by the Action Committee for the Puna CDP, and to the Planning Director and 2 his selection or his valuation whether this group is appropriate for doing design review for the community. This gives you an idea of the area that these design guidelines would be impacting. This is Pahoa Village. The old village core is right down here. The new development is all going on out here,the Malama Marketplace, the Woodland Center where the new Longs is, and commercial development is also being occurring right here and is under construction right now. Rezoning was recently approved for a little over nine acres here for the Bryson Kuwahara shopping center project that's going in. And the purple line is the design district. So these design guidelines and the processes articulated in the ordinance would apply only to properties within this area. The red line out here, looking at it from the bigger picture perspective, is the Pahoa Regional Town Center master planning area. This is, so these design guidelines and establishing this design district is a piece of this bigger master plan that we are initiating for Pahoa Town to provide standards for growth,Pahoa sees for growth, and infrastructure development concurrency, financing, all those good things. The Pahoa Village Design Guidelines,those are passed from the Council's Planning Committee with a favorable recommendation for adoption by resolution on June 3rd of this year. They will be on the full Council's agenda tomorrow for a first and probably final reading when we expect them to pass that; so the design guidelines are expected to be adopted tomorrow by resolution by the Council. They provide architectural, they are primarily architectural in nature, but do include some guidelines for layout, development layout, the siting instructions where parking ought to be and things like that, within the guidelines themselves. The guidelines are voluntary in the sense that you don't have to incorporate all of the design elements that are proposed in the design guidelines, but you have to come up with a project that basically incorporates enough of them that the project fits within the immediate surroundings. So the idea was to create, or to preserve, the architectural history, if you will, of Pahoa, which dates back more than a hundred years, and to not only protect what's already there but to preserve that sense of place and identity for the future to create a brand, if you will, for Pahoa, which hopes to be able to do more than just serve as a nice place to go have dinner. The signs ordinance, the fourth piece of our legislation will be, is an amendment to Chapter 3 of the County Code, which is known as a sign code, establishing a Pahoa Signs District under the Chapter, that includes some special signage regulations that would be applicable to Pahoa only. And that would, we propose to send that on to Council, along with this ordinance that you are looking at today, as well as the Pahoa Village Design District ordinance, as three pieces going in concurrently. This is to give you an idea of where Pahoa's responsibility is,or what its role is, as a regional town center. You can see Pahoa here, the village, and what you are looking at is an aerial; there is Cape Kumukahi, and this is coming back towards Hilo,this is heading out towards Kalapana. These numbers represent the number of lots in the subdivisions, not outside of the subdivisions but within the subdivisions, that are within the projected service area of Pahoa as a regional town center. So 23,000 lots, best estimates right now is that maybe a third are developed; the rest are vacant lots, so all you've got to do is go get a building permit and build your house. And so we are looking at an existing population in excess of 20,000 people depending on this village or travel all the way to Hilo for access to goods and services. So if you, even right here in Hawaiian Beaches, Hawaiian Shores, and Hawaiian Parks, 3,900 lots, Nanawale Estates,4,300 lots, this is just a portion of Orchidland, Ainaloa and Hawaiian Paradise Park, 9,600 lots. So it's quite a large area that this has to, there are no other real commercial centers in this part of the island; the next closest one is in 3 Orchidland roughly six miles from Pahoa towards Hilo where there is a small general store, a Blaine's restaurant, and a gas station and Mini Mart. This is the fun part,just some graphics to show you what kind of architectural features in Pahoa the community wants to preserve and see perpetuated as the development continues to occur in the village. The, I don't know if anybody has ever been here, but the Akebono Theater has been there for quite a long time; it's right next door to Luquin's Mexican Restaurant—the best Mexican restaurant on the island. This is the main street of Pahoa Town, one side of it. From a different angle. What's unique about this, and not necessarily just Pahoa because this occurs elsewhere on the island, but notice that the buildings share similar features, canopies over the sidewalk. The buildings don't all look like they were built at the same time by the same builder, developer, whatever; they have an individual character all their own, and this is a big part of what the people really want to preserve and see perpetuated. This is the conceptual renderings that were recently done by Bryson Kuwahara for his big nine plus- acre commercial project out on the Hilo end of town, which was originally the kind of structure that I just mentioned; it was your typical building, one or two-story buildings,that look like a metal barn, more or less, with no real character to them. And he has voluntarily agreed to work with the Pahoa Steering Committee and comply with these design guidelines. And so this is the revision to his conceptual plan that he has come out with, and you can see how it very much resembles what exists in downtown Pahoa now. There is another view of part of the development that he is putting in, which will include the first real supermarket in southeast Puna. So, anyway, that's my presentation. If you have any questions? BEAUDET: Thank you for the presentation. Commissioners, any questions of staff? WHITTEMORE: You know, I was just curious, the review commission for Pahoa, the advisory commission, are they appointed by the Mayor also, or is this -? BROWN: No,the way it's structured to be set up is that once design guidelines have been adopted, and the special district is created, design district,then the Director is supposed to go to the Action Committee for the Community Development Plan, in which the community is situated, and ask for their recommendations as to who should be serving as the design review committee for the local community. And the community itself will select who is going to sit on their review board, and they will manage it. It will not be a County agency, and they will be serviced and supported by the local associations or groups that agree to take on the responsibility. So, no, they won't be appointed. It will not be the same as the KVDC. WHITTEMORE: Okay, I had one other question. I'm assuming that this correspondence,there is a correspondence of June 12th; it was from Myles Miyasato, or was directed to, excuse me, from Charles Maas. Is, and I assume that Charles is sort of leading the charge with the Pahoa community advisory group, or-? BROWN: Charlie Maas is the member of the Pahoa Steering Committee, who served as principle author of the design guidelines. WHITTEMORE: Okay. So this document I assume is their draft of the guidelines that they want to follow? 4 BROWN: Yes, I have the copy with me here, if you would like to -. WHITTEMORE: I just wanted to get some clarification on one of the items that was in here. This is on Page 5 -. BROWN: I'm not sure what you are referring to. Is that-. Okay, I think I have it now. WHITTEMORE: On Page 5, it's under the, actually it starts on Page 4, the Historic, Cultural, and Scenic Resources. No. d. under 2.1.2. Objectives, is, it says, "Adopt `kanaka' building code standards ...." Can you describe for me what that is and what the application would be, and how that fits with, I support it certainly but I'm just curious how it fits in with building codes and, you know, for insurance liability issues and things like that? BROWN: Yeah, that's something that would have to be worked out, you know, in the process of deciding what those kanaka building code standards actually are, and how they would fit in to the existing building code. So definitely a process that we'd have to go through to come up with those. WHITTEMORE: So their intent is to conform with County building codes, but still be able to have the ability because, I'm just, I'm looking at the application, because it sounds like this applies to residential and commercial and everything. BROWN: In Pahoa it does, yes, it does, yeah. WHITTEMORE: In Pahoa, right, yeah, and if it's not the building codes, there could be insurance liability issues and things like that, structural-. BROWN: Yeah,the idea here is to have an alternative to the existing code that people could utilize in the Pahoa Design District. WHITTEMORE: Okay. BEAUDET: Just as a follow-up to the exchange, who would sheriff that? I mean, once the revised building codes were adopted, who would oversee that? Would that be the Building Department? Is that something that's managed through a sub-committee? I mean, has that been thought through and discussed? BROWN: Well, like I said, the process hasn't really started on that. But I think it's obvious at least to me that if the building code is actually amended to adopt alternative standards, then, yes,they would be administered by the Building Division. COMMAND: And, Brandi, I think part of this is, what the agenda item is about is to require Plan Approval for, well, I mean we are talking about P.U.D.s and -. Well, no, let me ask you this now, within the district, the special district, would there be Plan Approval for single-family residences? BROWN: In Pahoa, yes. 5 COMMAND: Right. Okay, so that's where you would probably get the regulation or at least some sort of oversight on whatever the kanaka code will be. BEAUDET: But these amendments are not speaking specific to the kanaka code. BROWN: No, no. BEAUDET: This is just a dialogue, right? BROWN: Right. BEAUDET: Any more questions or comments by the Commissioners? There has been one person who has signed up to testify. Jojo Tanimoto,could I please ask you to step forward? Please raise your right hand. TANIMOTO: Well, actually, I want to retrieve my request to speak,because I think the agenda took a left turn,because if you read the agenda, it doesn't say anything about Pahoa, yeah? So now that I understand this thing is talking about Pahoa, I-. BEAUDET: It, yeah, it is speaking of Pahoa, but of other communities around the Island of Hawaii,too, so Kailua-Kona is mentioned in the background report, so it does -. TANIMOTO: Well, I don't have the background report, so when I read the agenda, it says an amendment to the chapter and the section, and so now I'm sitting here and listening to the presentation, it took a left turn. So I had the same question that Mr. Command did after I heard the presentation. But I came because it's amending the section, the chapter and the section, and ag tourism actually will hit my district in South Kohala, so I had a question according to the way it's written. But now I understand it took a left turn, I want to retrieve my public testimony, because otherwise it no make sense, I have nothing to say about Pahoa. So thank you. BEAUDET: Okay, we can remove your name from the list. Thank you. There being no more testimony,before I seek a motion from the Commissioners, any other thoughts or comments before we conclude this matter? COMMAND: Yes,Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to address real quickly what may be part of Jojo's concern is that this could possibly affect you, but at this time it doesn't; if a special district is proposed for South Kohala wherever there is that you are concerned about, then it would directly affect you, right? But at this point I understand what you are saying, it has nothing to, it's not your kuleana,right, so I understand totally. TANIMOTO: Right, yeah, thank you. BEAUDET: With that, I'd like to ask for a motion from the Commissioners. NOBRIGA: I so move (inaudible). BEAUDET: Can you speak into the mike? 6 NOBRIGA: Is it on? Where is our number here? BEAUDET: On Page 11 of the background is the recommendation. NOBRIGA: Regarding the amendments to Chapter 25 of the Hawai`i County Code relating to the review of Plan Approval and P.U.D. applications within a special district, I make a motion that we approve of this, favorable recommendation. WHITTEMORE: Second. BROWN: Clarification that that's with the amendments also proposed by the Director? NOBRIGA: Uh huh, yeah. BEAUDET: It has been moved by Commissioner Nobriga and seconded by Commissioner Whittemore. Before, any discussion or comments? Thank you. Staff will restate the motion. BROWN: The motion was to accept the proposed legislation with amendments from the Director to the Hawaii County Council, with a favorable recommendation. Commissioner Nobriga? NOBRIGA: Aye. BROWN: Chairman Whittemore, or Commissioner Whittemore? WHITTEMORE: Aye. BROWN: Commissioner Kaholo? KAHOLO: Aye. BROWN: And Chairman Beaudet? BEAUDET: Aye. BROWN: Motion passes,four ayes. The discussion ended at 10:00 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Noriko Sauer, Secretary Leeward Planning Commission 7 WINDWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAI`I HEARING TRANSCRIPT JULY 3, 2014 A regularly advertised hearing on the (1) Planning Director Initiated Amendment to Chapter 25 of the Hawaii County Code 1983 (2005 Edition, As Amended) (Review of Development Projects Within a Special District) and (2) Planning Director Initiated Amendment to Chapter 25, of the Hawaii County Code 1983 (2005 Edition,As Amended) (Pahoa Village Design District) was called to order at 12:38 p.m. in the County of Hawai`i, Aupuni Center Conference Room, 101 Pauahi Street, Hilo, Hawai`i with Chairman Myles Miyasato presiding. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Myles Miyasato, Charles Heaukulani, Gregory Henkel, Raylene Moses, and Stephen Ono. ALSO PRESENT: Duane Kanuha(Planning Director), Margaret Masunaga(Deputy Corporation Counsel for the Windward Planning Commission), Daryn Arai (Planning Program Manager), Jeff Darrow (Staff Planner), Maija Cottle (Staff Planner), Larry Brown (Staff Planner- Long Range Division), Sarah Hata-Finley(Secretary), Kim Tanaka(Secretary), and Melissa Dacayanan(Planning Commission Support Technician). And approximately 2 people from the public in attendance. Note: The Commission heard Item Nos. 7 and 8 together. INITIATOR: PLANNING DIRECTOR An ordinance amending Chapter 25 (Zoning Code), Article 2, Division 7, Section 25-2-71 (Applicability-Plan Approval required), Section 25-2-73 (Reserved), Section 25-2-76 (Action of Plan Approval application), Section 25-2-77 (Review Criteria and conditions of approval); and Article 6, Division 1, Section 25-6-3 (Application for P.U.D. permit requirements), Section 25-6- 7 (Reserved), and Section 25-6-10(Criteria for granting a P.U.D. permit) of the Hawai`i County Code 1983 (2005 Edition, as amended). These amendments would create a process within the Zoning Code that requires the Planning Director to review and consult with a local design review committee for certain land use permit applications situated within a special district to promote consistency with applicable adopted design guidelines and/or standards. (Item No. 7.) INITIATOR: PLANNING DIRECTOR An ordinance amending Chapter 25 (Zoning Code), Article 3, Section 25-3-2 (Designation of Special Districts); Article 4, Division 5, Section 25-4-59.2 (Exceptions to Off-Street Parking & Loading Requirements); and Article 7 (Special District Regulations) of the Hawaii County Code 1983 (2005 Edition, as amended), relating to the establishment of a special district to be known as the Pahoa Village Design ("PVD") District that includes a process for community review of project applications and plans, and to provide distinct requirements for Off-Street Parking and Loading in the PVD district. (Item No. 8.) 1 Re: Com. 1028 (Bill 283) BROWN: Good afternoon. MIYASATO: Item No. 7 on the agenda, Planning Director ordinance amending Chapter 25. Go ahead. BROWN: Good afternoon, Commissioner Miyasato and Commissioners. My name is Larry Brown. I'm a planner in the Long Range Division of the Planning Department, and I'm here to present to you the two pieces of legislation being introduced to provide a process for community review of design guidelines for special districts that have design guidelines that have been or standards that have been adopted by the County Council either by resolution or by ordinance. You have two agenda items here that I'm going to be talking about within this one presentation cause they're directly tied to each other, and that's Item 7 and 8 or your agenda. The two pieces of legislation before you today are number one and number two in red,the design district plan review ordinance and the Pahoa Village Design District ordinance, and they're part of an overall package that includes two other pieces that will not be coming before the Planning Commission. And the number three is the Pahoa Village Design Guidelines which are being introduced to the Council for adoption by resolution, and we'll talk a little bit more about those in a minute. The Pahoa Village signs ordinance which is an amendment to Chapter 3, the Sign Code, is going to be introduced concurrent with these ordinances to the Council once they pass out of the Commission. The Windward Commission hears both items one and two. The Leeward Commission will only hear item no. 1 as it may have impacts island-wide. It worked--cool. So, the first one is the design review ordinance. I've just highlighted some of the features—the primary features—of this ordinance indicating that it will require review of development projects within any special district where adopted design guidelines or standards have been adopted by the County Council. It also amends application requirements for Plan Approval and for Planned Unit Development projects that will provide the additional information necessary to do design review because normal plans that are submitted don't necessarily include the kinds of architectural drawings or color or building material type information that would typically be required under those Plan Approval or PUD permit applications. It also amends a process for requirements for Plan Approval and PUD applications that provide for a means of local community review and comment on proposed projects. And this is something that's really important to the local communities where new development is occurring. They want to make sure that it fits in to their community, and so this is a means to give them a voice in that whole process. And, it also, well that's actually going in to explain what number— the last bullet item was all about. Now, we do have, we found a glitch in the amend—in the proposed ordinance, and if you go to Section 25-2-71(h) which is a new section being proposed for this section of the Zoning Code, the intent was to not impact any existing special districts. There are only three others. One is the Kailua Village District, Special District; the Downtown Hilo Special District, and the third one is the University Special District. So, the Pahoa would be the fourth one. 2 Kailua-Kona does have design guidelines that were adopted within the context of a master plan that was adopted by resolution in 1996. And, they have a design commission,that's actually a County-appointed and service commission that we did not want to impact,have any effect on the process being proposed for Pahoa, and other communities that might follow later on, would not provide for a County-appointed and serviced, if you will, or managed commission. So,we had to add the language in red to make it clear that this does not have any impact on any existing special districts with adopted design guidelines that were in existence prior to the adoption of this subsection so that we're proposing as an amendment to the overall ordinance package being presented to you. The second ordinance has to do with the Pahoa Village Design District ordinance which is to create Pahoa Design District under Article 7 of Chapter 25. Right now, it's being proposed as strictly a design district, and that it would provide, it does provide for some exemptions to off- street parking requirements for specific properties within Pahoa, the existing Pahoa old town village area where the lots are so small, and most of them are already built out, that there's just no way to put parking there. We have contingency plans in our overall Pahoa master planning effort to provide for public parking, so that, that amendment was put in there for that. That would allow them to get through the Plan Approval process if they will want to redevelop or one of the vacant lots wanted to get developed. It also acknowledges adoption and applicability of architectural design guidelines for the Pahoa Village Design District, which as I mentioned earlier,have already been submitted to the Council, and as a matter of fact, were unanimously approved with a favorable recommendation by the Planning Committee on Tuesday, so it's going to the full Council, probably for their next hearing in Kailua-Kona. And, lastly, it provides for recognition of community based local review of development projects in the PVD. The, as I mentioned earlier, so this is where the process is defined on how these community review committees might be formed and recognized by the Planning Director and then how they will be, interact with the Planning Department in the design review process. This is a map of Pahoa, and with a little—yep, oh there,well I saw a red light someplace—I lost it. If you can see the red line surrounding the greater areas labeled the Pahoa planned area,that's the area that our master plan is proposed to provide a master, well a master plan, a strategic master plan for that area, and that's not really what we're here about today. It's the—what are you pushing—oh, okay—it doesn't like me—hey, there it is, okay! I love technology. Ask my boss if I text—no. Forget this. The purple line,the purple line is actually the, is the design district that this ordinance adopts, and it's described in the ordinance in text, and these are the properties where, that would be impacted by the design guidelines. This is a, to give you a— why am I seeing that text on there—oh, this is the design guidelines, I'm sorry, that the background picture is supposed to be more washed out and so you can actually read the text—it looked good on my computer. That's fine. Oh, anyway, I can't even read that. The architectural design guidelines—they not only provide standard, not even standards,but they provide some guidance as to what kind of architectural features are being recommended for 3 developers to incorporate in their projects. No specific minimum number of the architectural features are required. It's just that they need to end up with a final product that fits in its environment. It does also include some guidelines for project layout on the site. In other words, they'd like to see the parking not between the street in the building wherever possible,but to have it behind or off to the side so in all, a lot of this has to do with the need to be flexible with the project that's being proposed, the site that they have to work with that to end up with a finished product that doesn't result in a streetscape where you're walking down the sidewalk and to get to the building, you have to walk through a sea of parking stalls to get there. Again,my background, okay. The sign ordinance is, like I said, to be submitted concurrent with these two ordinances proposing amendments to Chapter 25. They're some specific signage restrictions that the community would like to see imposed in Pahoa that are not covered under the current Sign Code, and they're relatively minor, but if you don't have them there, then they're not enforceable. This is to give you an idea of what Pahoa's responsibility is as a regional town center. You can see, you can probably see where Pahoa is,they're pretty much in the middle foreground just above the yellow text, and the surrounding subdivisions that don't have any goods, services, commercial activity, at least not legal, to speak of. About two,roughly 2,300 lots, actually more than 2,300 lots, the existing population for that service area is already 20,000 people. With 23,000 lots,we're talking in excess of 60,000 people at buildout. And that's just from the existing lots. So,the 9,600 lots in the bottom left, for example,is kind of pointing towards half of Hawaiian Paradise Park, Ainaloa, a portion of Orchidland. If you look at the 910 lots and the 1,225 lots on the side, right side of the screen pointing down towards Kalapana Seaview Estates, Black Sands Subdivision, Kalapana area, the 2,200 lots is Leilani; 4,300 lots is Nanawale; 510 is Kapoho Vacationland; 3,900 lots is Hawaiian Beaches, Parks & Shores; 180 lots in Waa Waa; and the 68 is State Ag Lots just outside Pahoa Town. And that doesn't count the three hundred and fifty some odd lots within Pahoa itself. This is the kind of architecture. This is the place that the people in Pahoa want to preserve. Akebono Theatre--as I understand it,this building's more than a hundred years old. This is, if you haven't been to Downtown Pahoa,you need to come out and try a restaurant. They're really good. But,this is the kind of feel, the small town feel, that the people want to preserve. This,more examples—it's not in the best of condition, so there's gonna be a move to renovate and upgrade buildings that to make sure that it's done in a way that the feel and the character of the Village are retained. Something like having the design guidelines in a review process that ensures this,this history, this place is preserved as necessary. More examples—and this is something that we're very proud of in Pahoa. Not too long ago, this Commission and the County Council approved a rezoning request for the Bryson Kuwahara commercial project, and Mr. Kuwahara and his agents have worked with our Pahoa Steering Committee to alter their initial plans to conform to these design guidelines voluntarily. And this is some conceptual drawings that were just made available to us about a month or so ago showing how they've redesigned them, and you can see that this is, yeah, it's a shopping center, 4 • but it doesn't look like the typical shopping center. Those buildings don't all look like they were built out of the same mold. This, another example of what he's proposing, and so this will be setting the example for other developments in Pahoa. We already have another applicant who is applying for rezoning that has agreed to comply with the design guidelines voluntarily. Another developer that has already gotten his,well he's still in the process of getting his Building Permits to do a medical center just on the edge of town. He's voluntarily altered his plans already--his,his architectural plans to comply with the design guidelines. And that's all I have. MIYASATO: Okay, Commissioners, any questions? If not, we have Jon Olson. Could you please raise your right hand? Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Hawai`i County Planning Commission? OLSON: I do. MIYASATO: Please state your name and residence. OLSON: Jon Olson, 13-631 Leilani Avenue,Pahoa 96778. This is close to home. I'm finally here,only took 22 years. This started, and I'm speaking to the design district issues, with the formation of Pahoa Mainstreet that was created out of a Federal grant. We took the community input, we did the surveys. The one thing that everyone who commented on, on the process had to say was,preserve the Village. Mainstreet did another survey in 2000. The population had nearly doubled. Everybody said preserve the Village. We started again in 2010, did the surveys. The one thing that everybody agreed was however big the town became, preserve the Village. That covers it, doesn't it? That's what this does finally and it creates it as a function that government recognizes. Thank you. MIYASATO: Any questions, Commissioners? Commissioner Henkel. HENKEL: I'd like to disclose that I've known Jon for quite some time and that I recognize- OLSON: --That's risky,that's risky—I give you deniability- HENKEL: That it's his, it's his hard work and mana`o that has you know kept the lower Puna from you know becoming like a giant strip mall, and preserving what we have, and I think he does deserve a great deal of recognition and then thanks. OLSON: The secret is you keep saying it till they think it's their idea. MIYASATO: Thank you. ONO: Question. 5 MIYASATO: Commissioner Ono. ONO: You know when you want to maintain this kind of environment there,who pays for the maintenance,the upkeep? Is that the community at large or is the owner of the building? OLSON (from audience): The owners. ONO: The owners? Okay, and can the owners do interior wise or exterior wise do any changes—let's say, for example, those buildings there, as an example? OLSON: Yeah. ONO: They, if I, if I own that building but I wanted jalousies, I cannot put in the jalousie as a window replacement? OLSON: No. ONO: No. OLSON: But what happens behind the façade, that's up to you. ONO: Okay, so- OLSON: I mean, we're not going to try to tell you what kind of a business or— ONO: Oh, no, no, no—I guess, I have a situation on Kauai which is a relative of mine, and a building that's, it's considered a historical whatever- OLSON: Yeah. ONO: He cannot even insert outlets of jacks for the sockets for the whatever- OLSON: Oh, yeah, yeah,but this is all different then—you see,we didn't go for historic preservation. ONO: Now, so my question is, when you want to modify something that you're residing in or you're utilizing, do you need permission from somebody else to do that? OLSON: Other than the, other than the normal permitting process? ONO: Yes. OLSON: We will in terms of the visuals from the street looking in— ONO: --Okay, there is- 6 OLSON: --there is, there's gonna be a committee. ONO: Interior wise, you have no problem. OLSON: Interior wise, we didn't even look to try to do that— ONO: --I see- OLSON: That, that's something entirely different. ONO: Okay, well I guess for Pahoa I have a certain affinity to it because I taught there 30 years ago, and it's already changing- OLSON: --yeah— ONO: --from what I see and I guess as we, as I get older, I suppose, I do want to be nostalgic, but I'm just wondering in terms of the younger generation if the nostalgia is as deep as us old timers. OLSON: Well,having been there long enough to be into the, I guess,pretty close to the fourth generation, we surveyed the kids. We asked the kids at the high school. They like it just the way it is just like their parents and their grandparents so— ONO: Thank you. OLSON: Yeah. MIYASATO: Commissioners, any further discussion. We do have letters of support that were distributed. No further discussion now, I'll take a motion. HENKEL: I'd like to move that the Planning Commission submit a positive recommendation to the Council of ordinance amending Chapter 25, Article 2, Division 7, Section 25-2-71, Section 25-2-73, Section 25-2-76, Section 25-2-77 and Article 6, Division 1, Section 25-6-3, Section 25-6-7, Section 25-6-10 of the Hawai`i County Code 1983 (2005 Edition, as amended). MOSES: Second. MIYASATO: Moved by Commissioner Henkel and seconded by Commissioner Moses. Any discussion? ARAI: And I just want to confirm Commissioner Henkel and Commissioner Moses that the motion also includes the amended language to the draft bill as recommended by the Director? HENKEL: Correct. ARAI: Commissioner Moses? 7 MOSES: Yes. ARAI: Thank you very much. With that, I will call the roll. Commissioner Henkel? HENKEL: Aye. ARAI: Commissioner Moses? MOSES: Aye. ARAI: Commissioner Heaukulani? HEAUKULANI: Aye. ARAI: Commissioner Ono? ONO: Aye. ARAI: And Chairman Miyasato. MIYASATO: Aye. ARAI: Mr. Chairman,motion carries with five aye votes. The discussion on Item No. 7 ended at 1:01 p.m. MIYASATO: Item 8, Initiator Planning Director, an ordinance amendment Chapter 25. The previous presentation covered- ARAI: Yes. MIYASATO: It's okay. ARAI: Yes. MIYASATO: Commissioners, any discussion? If not, I'll take a motion. HENKEL: I'd like to move to submit a positive recommendation to the County Council of the ordinance amendment Chapter 25, Article 3, Section 25-3-2, Article 4, Division 5, Section 25-4- 59.2, and Article 7 of the Hawai`i County Code, 1983 (2005 Edition, as amended) to the—I guess that's it. MOSES: Second. 8 MIYASATO: Moved by Commissioner Henkel, seconded by Commissioner Moses. Any discussion? ARAI: Okay, I'll be calling the roll. Commissioner Henkel? HENKEL: Aye. ARAI: Commissioner Moses? MOSES: Aye. ARAI: Commissioner Heaukulani? HEAUKULANI: Aye. ARAI: Commissioner Ono? ONO: Aye. ARAI: And Mr. Chairman. MIYASATO: Aye. ARAI: Mr. Chairman,motion carries with five aye votes. The discussion on Item No. 8 ended at 1:03 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sarah Y. Hata-Finley, Secretary Windward Planning Commission 9