My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2020-02-20 Leeward Exh D (AMEND REZ 2004-024 & AMEND REZ 2004-025)
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2020
>
2020-02-20 Leeward Exh D (AMEND REZ 2004-024 & AMEND REZ 2004-025)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/18/2020 5:45:00 PM
Creation date
6/18/2020 5:44:27 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
35
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
west and then one here to the east, and this is going to be a spine road that connects Kuakini to <br /> Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway. Also showing here are some archaeological sites that were <br /> identified in an archaeological inventory survey approved for the subject development. <br /> Here are some site photos. Such a large land area, difficult to get anything really of worth to <br /> take a photo of, these are just photos from Kuakini Highway looking toward Kailua-Kona, and <br /> here on the top right is a view of the intersection at the Kahakai Estates Subdivision. Bottom left <br /> is a view of Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway looking toward Kailua-Kona. This is at Puapua`anui <br /> Street with the subject property on the right, and here is a view looking the other direction with <br /> the subject property on the left hand side. <br /> The Planning Director is recommending an unfavorable recommendation be forwarded to the <br /> Hawaii County Council for both ordinances for the following reasons: 1) The proposed requests <br /> do not conform with the goals, objectives, and actions of the Kona Community Development <br /> Plan; 2) The proposed request does not conform to the goals, policies, and courses of action for <br /> the Land Use—Commercial Development& Land Use—Multiple-Family elements of the General <br /> Plan; 3) Previous segmentation of this area in securing planning entitlements was inconsistent <br /> with State Law; and, finally, the proposed request will not result in a more appropriate land use <br /> pattern that will further the public necessity and convenience and the general welfare. I'll go <br /> into a little bit more detail for each of these reasons. <br /> The first is non-conformance with the Kona Community Development Plan. The Kona <br /> Community Development Plan was adopted in 2008, about three years after the zoning for the <br /> subject properties was approved. As you know, when we look at amendments to ordinances or <br /> permits, we have to look at the existing plans of the time, so whereas prior, when they got their <br /> zoning, the CDP wasn't in place, it was now, so we looked at that in analyzing the request. The <br /> subject properties are situated within the middle of the Kahului-Puapua`a Village TOD, which, <br /> according to the Plan, are general locations for these areas but are then secured by Project <br /> District. Within the Kona Urban Area, compact, walkable, mixed-use village development is <br /> preferred in the TOD. This is something the Plan calls for that indicates that, that indicates an <br /> actual development preference for those transit-oriented developments that have a more dense <br /> walkable commercial core surrounded by a secondary more residential area and then a greenbelt <br /> area surrounding that. The CDP also identified a mechanism to achieve this preferred <br /> development pattern in the TOD, as it allows, as the Project District allows flexibility in uses and <br /> densities for, and all developed under a master plan. So, basically, under the existing single <br /> district zoning, Multiple-Family and Neighborhood Commercial, because of use requirements <br /> and density requirements and the like under those existing zonings, the preferred development <br /> pattern cannot be achieved through the existing single-district zoning. The applicant has <br /> suggested conditions of approval that could further the TOD concept, but the Director is not <br /> inclined to create a new development process through separate zoning ordinances in the area but <br /> prefers to use the existing community-vetted master planning process recommended in the CDP. <br /> The applicant has represented that a minimum 50-acre land area that's required for Project <br /> District cannot be met because each of these properties are under 15 acres. However, we believe <br /> they can be met by consolidating the surrounding properties that are under joined ownership or <br /> management, which is about 61 acres in the area. This is Planning Department Exhibit No. 4 just <br /> showing the ownership of the parcels in the area; this is a subdivision map that was, the <br /> 5 <br /> EXHIBIT D <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.