Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-03-07 THOKUKANO1 PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAI`I HEARING TRANSCRIPT March 7, 2003 A regularly advertised public hearing on the application of HKKANO RANCH, INC. (REZ 02-029) was called to order at 9:29 a.m. in the King Kamehameha's Kona Beach Hotel, Ballroom IV, 75-5660 Palani Road, North Kona, Hawai`i, with Vice Chairperson Hannah Springer presiding. PRESENT:Hannah SpringerABSENT & EXCUSED: Fred Galdones Jeffrey McCallEarl Fujikawa Geraldine M. GiffinFlorence Kubota Aurelio Mina, Jr. Francis Smith Bill P. Thibadeau Ivan Torigoe, Deputy Corporation Counsel Christopher J. Yuen, Planning Director Norman Hayashi, Staff Planner Phyllis Fujimoto, Staff Planner Daryn Arai, Staff Planner Norren Kato, Staff Planner Kiran Emler representing Department of Public Works And approximately 25 people from the public in attendance. HKKANO RANCH, INC. (REZ 02-029) Î Application for a Change APPLICANT: of Zone by changing the district classification from Single Family Residential (RS-15) and Agricultural (A-1a) to Village Commercial (CV-10) for approximately 5.595 acres of land. The property is located at the northeast corner of Mmalahoa Highway-Konawaena School Road intersection, bordering a portion of the Konawaena High School site, st Kalukalu 1, South Kona, Hawai`i, TMK: 8-1-2:Portion of 40. SPRINGER:Members, we are now on Agenda Item 2. The Applicant is for a Change Hkkano Ranch, Inc. The item is Rezoning 02-029. It is an application of Zone by changing the district classification from Single Family Residential (RS-15) to Agricultural (A-1a), sorry, and Agricultural (A-1a) to Village Commercial (CV-10) for approximately 5.595 acres of land. The property is located at the northeast corner of Mmalahoa Highway and Konawaena School Road intersection, bordering a portion of st the Konawaena High School site, Kalukalu 1, South Kona, Hawai`i, Tax Map Key: 8-1-2:Portion of 40. GIFFIN:Madam Chair? 1 EXHIBIT A SPRINGER:Yes. GIFFIN:I think before the County and our Staff presents background material, I would like to request a recess to review the material regarding this agenda item that was just presented to me last night. And, also, there were also many correspondences that were handed to us this morning. SPRINGER:Thank you, Commissioner Giffin. A number of materials have been passed out to us this morning, as well as some of us only receiving the materials last night. What is your pleasure, Commission Giffin, in terms of ti GIFFIN:I would say at least 15 minutes because I received the Ba Report and the Recommendation last night, and I'd like to review that. SPRINGER:Thank you. With that in mind, the Hawai`i County Plann Commission will be in recess for 15 minutes, resuming at 9:50, nine-five-zero. RECESSEDThe Chairman called a short recess at 9:31 a.m. RECONVENEDThe meeting reconvened at 9:50 a.m. SPRINGER:I'd like to call the Hawai`i County Planning Commission back to order at this time. We're discussing Agenda Item 2, and we're ready for the Staff presentation. Daryn? ARAI:Thank you very much. Looking, directing your attention to the location map, this black line here is the Mmalahoa Highway. In this direction toward Kailua and to your right heading down toward Ka`u. This black line heading mauka- makai is Hale Ki`i Street, which is, leads to basically the Hokuli`a development. The project site is located on the mauka side of the Mmalahoa Highway, just north of its intersection with Konawaena School Road, which leads to Konawaena School, High School, which is in this vicinity here. Other points of reference include Konawaena Elementary School located on the makai side of the highway in this location. The project site, as indicated by this yellow color, is designated RS-15. The pink colors you see in the immediate vicinity are reflective of Village Commercial types of zoning. Looking at the site plan, Mmalahoa Highway on the bottom, Konawaena School Road on the right side of the project site, which is outlined here in blue, and comprises an area of approximately 5.595 acres. The project site is just a portion of a much larger parcel consisting of roughly 1,400 acres that is part of the larger 12,000-acre Hkkano Ranch. The Applicant's request is for a change of zone from RS-15 and A Commercial-10,000 square feet in order to support the establishment of a visitor center 2 complex on the subject property which will be in support of eco-tourism activities the Applicant wishes to establish on the larger Hkkano Ranch properties. Specific improvements include the renovation of the existing ranch house into a visitor center, I think it was a 1,300 square foot expansion to that ranch house, indicated here in pink; a proposed greenhouse, also indicated here in pink, right next to the visitor center; as well as supplemental uses of other structures on the property, including a work shed, some other storage sheds on the property, as well. The Applicant is considering either the renovation of, the demolition of the, I think that was a horse tack shed, yes, that's located up here on the mauka side of the property. Access to the project site will be provided off of the Mmalahoa Highway in this location here, as well as off of Konawaena School Road in approximately the location I'm pointing at. Maybe I need to mention, too, why the Applicant has submitted this request today. The project site currently maintains an Urban District classification by the State Land Use Commission. The Applicant's purpose, again, is to establish a visitor center. However, with the current Residential zoning, a visitor center is not per provisions do not allow the establishment of a visitor center, and they can't apply for a special permit because it's State Land Use Urban. So they're so option is to change the project site to Commercial. So keep in mind, this is a Commercial change of zone request. It is not for a specific use like how one would consider a special permit or a use permit. The Planning Director is recommending favorable consideration of this request subject to conditions. We do have concerns regarding, we are in support of the visitor center concept as well as the proposed change of zone. But we do have additional concerns regarding further uses of the property as may be permitted should the change of zone to Commercial be established. For example, Commercial zoning may allow for multiple family residential developments, stores, gas stations, and other type of uses in which those impacts have not been fully, been comprehensively addresse recommending that as part of this favorable recommendation there are conditions that would attempt to alleviate those concerns. Looking at your Recommendation report, at the conditions of approval attached thereto, we have a proposed Condition E, as in Edward, which states that should development of the project site not constitute a visitor center that is substantially similar to representations made within the change of zone application, a revised traffic impact analysis report for the proposed development shall be prepared a and approval by the Department of Public Works. And that report here, would consider highest and best use of the property as determined by the Planning Director. Again, that is to ensure that if they change their mind and do something else with the property, as permitted by the Commercial zoning, we have the ability to reassess those traffic impacts. 3 In addition, regarding the water issue, there is adequate water to support the proposed visitor center, but maybe not enough to support additional uses in the future. That's why we have included a Condition F, as in Frank; which, likewise, if they do something beyond the visitor center, we have the ability to reassess water demands. Other conditions of approval will require the Applicant to control access from the highway into the project site to right in, right out only, as well as providing a left turn lane on Konawaena School Road, as well as curb, gutter, sidewalk improvements along its entire frontage with both roadways, as is typical of all change of, commercial changes of zone. At this -. Oh, and we've also included a Condition L, as in Larry, which would limit residential units to no more than 16 units within the five and a half acre project site. th We have received correspondences, recent correspondences dated M from th Charles W. Coup, we, also a letter dated March 6 from SSFM, the Applicant's representatives, testimony submitted by Michael J. Matsukawa on behalf of the Hayashi family; and I believe that is it as far as correspondences. And all of these correspondences have been distributed to you. I stand ready to answer any questions. SPRINGER:Commissioners, any questions for Staff at this time? GIFFIN:No, thank you. SPRINGER:I have a question, Daryn. Just so that I'm clear, I'm looking at the Change of Zone application, and I'm looking at Figure 1.2. GIFFIN:Wait. Hang on. SPRINGER:Daryn, it appears as though the site which is subject of this application is not contiguous with the rest of the ranch. And is that, the rest of the ranch that's indicated by Lot 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, etcetera? ARAI:The entire ranch, yes. SPRINGER:And then is access from the subject property into the rest of the ranch, is that what we see coming up by Lot 2 on this Figure 1.2? ARAI:I would defer to the Applicant's representative -. SPRINGER:Okay. ARAI:To clarify. SPRINGER:Okay. Thank you. 4 ARAI:Sorry. But I do know that there appears to be a driveway, I mean, well, at least what appears to be some form of a path or something leading up in this direction. But whether it provides access to the rest of the ranch, I do not know. SPRINGER:Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioners? All right. At this time, will the Applicant or their representative come forward, please. And, also, now, will the Applicant or their representative, and all those who signed up to testify or wishing to testify, please stand so that I may swear you all in at this time. Those who have signed up to testify are Charles Coup, Lunakanawai Hauanio, Michael Matsukawa, Domingo Nazara, Sr., and Stanley Kunimoto. If anybody else would like to testify -. KUNITOMO:Correction, it's Kunitomo. SPRINGER:Stanley Kunitomo. KUNITOMO:Thank you. SPRINGER:I'm sorry. Thank you. If anybody else would like to t can sign up at this time. Will you please raise your right hands. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Hawai`i County Planning Commission? TSUKAZAKI:I do. HARLOW:I do. TESTIFIERS:I do. SPRINGER:Thank you. Please be seated. At this time, we'd like to begin with the Applicants. Could you please state, for the record, your name, your resident address, starting with Mr. Tsukazaki. TSUKAZAKI:Thank you and good morning. SPRINGER:Good morning. TSUKAZAKI:My name is Ben Tsukazaki. I represent the Applicant. With me today is Pam Harlow from SSFM. My residential address is 142 Kapa`a Street, Hilo, Hawai`i. Thank you. SPRINGER:Thank you. And ma'am? HARLOW:Hi, my name is Pam Harlow, as Mr. Tsukazaki indicated, and I am with SSFM. My resident address is 73-1186 Mmalahoa Highway, No. A, Kailua-Kona 96740. 5 SPRINGER:Thank you. Did you receive the Planning Department's Background Report and Recommendation? TSUKAZAKI:Yes, we have. SPRINGER:And do you have any comments to make at this time or a presentation? TSUKAZAKI:What we would like to do is present a very short PowerPoint presentation. It, Staff has presented a lot of the basic information involved in this application. We'd like to highlight it; but also give you and the public that's attending this morning some visual understanding of the property and the infrastructure in that area. So if we may proceed with that. SPRINGER:Please proceed. TSUKAZAKI:Thank you. Ms. Harlow is our designated PowerPoint person this morning. SPRINGER:Mr. Tsukazaki, will we have a copy of this, a hard copy record at some point? TSUKAZAKI:We can produce hard copy, yes, for you. We don't have available right now, but yes. SPRINGER:We'd appreciate that. TSUKAZAKI:We can furnish that. SPRINGER:If you could get that to us. TSUKAZAKI:Sure. SPRINGER:Thank you. HARLOW:Much of the information contained in the PowerPoint prese is information that has already been shared with you by Staff and is contained, of course, in the application itself. As indicated in your Background Report, or in the application, Hkkano Ranch was originally known as Greenwell Ranch, as it was established by Henry Greenwell in approximately 1874. Tom Pace and his family purchased the ranch Hkkano Ranch in 1987. Today, the ranch consists of approximately the project site itself is a 5.6 acre portion of one of the lots that is part of the larger ranch property. 6 The project location is shown here on this USGS map in the area in that blue outline on the corner of Mmalahoa Highway and Konawaena School Road. This is the State Land Use Commission boundary map for the area, and the entire project site is within the Urban District, as indicated here. In the area above, as Staff had pointed out earlier, we have the Agricultural District, which runs right to here. So that property boundary defines the boundary between the Urban and the Ag District. This is the project site superimposed on the, both the existing Land Use Plan Allocation Guide map from the General Plan as well as the proposed LUPAG map. In both instances, the project site is located in an area designated for Medium Density development. The County zoning, of course, is Single Family Residential-15, as already indicated by Staff, with a very small portion of the property in the Agricultural-1 acre district. Surrounding uses consist of Kona Community Hospital and Kealakek which are approximately 3,000 feet away to the north, numerous retail businesses to the north, a few to the south, the Greenwell Farms complex, which includes the Kalukalu Meat building, the Kona Historical Society Museum, which is the old Greenwell Store, and then, of course, east of the project site Konawaena High and Middle Schools, and a few churches and cemeteries in the area and a few single family residences. These are some photos of the surrounding areas, to give you a general flavor of the uses. This is the commercial area to the north of the project site. This is a photo on the left of the Kona Historical Society Museum, and on the right the Greenwell Farms complex. Across from the project site, there's a single family residence. This is part of the J. B. Greenwell Trust; and you have a letter from us responding to Mr. Greenwell's concerns in your information. On the east side, the mauka side of Mmalahoa and immediately north of the property site, or the project site, is the University of the Nations Peace Church. On the west side of Mmalahoa, across from the project site, is the Central Kona Union Church cemetery. And this is a shot of a retail establishment on the southwest side of the project area. What we're looking at here is the intersection of Mmalahoa Highway and Konawaena School Road. This is the Christ Church Episcopal and cemetery located south of the project site along Konawaena School Road. And this is the single family dwelling which belongs to the Hayashi family, located immediately east of the project site along Konawaena School Road. 7 This is a view taken from the easternmost boundary of the property, looking up Konawaena School Road towards the high school and middle school. And I'm sorry, this isn't, doesn't translate very well; it's kind of washed out. Well, this, the existing site conditions, this is the same map taken from Figure 1.2 in the application, if you can reference that, or excuse me, not 1.2, 2.1. GIFFIN:Hang on. Okay. HARLOW:So I'll point out the general area of the improvements, or excuse me, the existing structures. As Staff indicated previously, the ranch house and garage area are down here in the corner. And right here is the gated entrance for the Mmalahoa Highway entrance to the property. Here is a wooden corral, which we have a photo of in the presentation; and back here is where the barn shop space is and the sheds around the rear property line. This is the existing ranch house, which is approximately 2,700 square feet; and it's currently used for the ranch office and operational activities. It supports a wide range of activities on the ranch. This is the existing barn and shop area, which is approximately 3,200 square feet; and it's used as cold meat storage, and for various ranch related activities. This is a shot on the left of some of the sheds on the property behind the barn. So, in other words, back here near the rear property line and to the right is a shot of the wooden corral. These are photos of the landscaping and the general character of the property. As you can see, there are numerous mature and very large mango trees on the property. All of these are going to be retained by the Applicant and incorporated into the establishment of the visitor center and the related uses on the property. There are some llamas up here, a donkey and a horse. And the existing site conditions, as Staff had indicated in the report, consist of the entrance along Mmalahoa Highway, which is approximately 270 feet north of the intersection of Mmalahoa Highway and Konawaena School Road. And this is a photo on the right, taken from the property, looking west towards Mmalahoa Highway. These photos are an existing entrance that is located close to the existing ranch house and garage, approximately 150 feet east of the intersection. This is not going to be used by the Applicant for access. It is an existing entrance, but it is not going to be used for the purpose of the visitor center. This is the driveway that's located up here, along the property boundary line, that will be used as the entrance to the property. It's located approximately 520 feet east of the intersection. 8 And these are shots of the existing roadways, Mmalahoa Highway fronting the property, and this is the intersection of Mmalahoa Highway running left to right and Konawaena School Road in the background. The proposed improvements, as Staff had indicated, consist of expanding, renovating and using the existing ranch house as a visitor center. I believe that Staff indicated that the expansion would be up to 1,500 feet. In the application, it's 1,300 feet. So it would be expanded to a square footage no greater than 4,000 square feet. The barn and other structures will be renovated for accessory uses. A new greenhouse will be constructed. And the existing access driveways will be paved and improved and parking lots constructed. This is Figure 2.2 from the application, the proposed improvements, which includes the 1,300 square foot addition to the visitor center, the greenhouse, the employee parking lot, the visitor parking lot, and the driveways providing the interior circulation for the project. The visitor center will consist of a visitor orientation and lobby area, registration for activities, a small retail and gift shop, staff and administrative office space, restroom facilities, and storage space. The barn and shop will be used as a craft shop, a demonstration area, and a rain shelter for visitors, while other existing structures may be relocated or demolished, that includes the sheds that are along the rear of the project site. And a petting zoo is envisioned to be located in the area where the wooden corral is now, so it'll be well away from any existing residences. The parking improvements will include a 50-stall visitor parking and, of course, ADA compliant stalls, and a 12-stall employee parking lot. The access and circulation will include right in and right out only movements from the Mmalahoa Highway access driveway and use of the easternmost driveway from Konawaena School Road. Again, the parking lots will be connected with paved roadways approximately 24 feet wide for travel and shoulders. And that concludes the informational portion of the PowerPoint presentation, and we are able to address specific concerns that the Commissioners may have at this time. SPRINGER:Commissioners, any questions for the Applicant at this time? I have a question. Regarding Figure -, the question that I had earlier on Figure 1.2, what I'm wondering is if the visitor center is a destination in itself, or will there be additional traffic from there to the rest of the ranch using public roadways? TSUKAZAKI:I can speak to that. I think we've alluded to the types of eco- tourism, well, not the types but the fact that the Applicant intends to use the visitor center area as a, you know, check-in or staging area for eco-tourism activities that happen on the mauka part of the ranch. That, the question you asked earlier on the map that the Staff had up there, it indicated a road going up through the northeast portion of the property, that historically has been used for access to the other parts of the ranch. And it has been looked at as being at least one of the ways to get people up to the places where they will 9 be doing trail rides, or hikes, or what have you. So at this point, you know, we intend to take people up that way. There may need to be some site improve improvements for that kind of roadway. There isn't anything at this point that's being proposed where we'll be taking people up through other means. I should also add, though, that up Konawaena School Road there's another access to the mauka part of the ranch, and so there's more than one way to get up to the upper areas. Since I have the floor, now may I also make a couple of other co SPRINGER:Yes, Mr. Tsukazaki. TSUKAZAKI:Well, you know, I wanted to also acknowledge that I think one of the reasons why the Staff has sent you the Background Report, etcetera, so late is because I think they were waiting for us to resolve a couple of issues with other County agencies. We have been in communication with Water Supply over the last we regarding their initial concerns. We've met with Public Works, etcetera. And, unfortunately, a lot of our correspondence, which reflected that issues had been resolved with those agencies, they were not provided to the Planning Department until earlier this week; and so we are partly the reason for those documents getting to you late. We've had a couple of comments from, I've received a couple comments from one neighboring property owner, Bryson Greenwell; and he had some questions and concerns about whether this proposed visitor center would increase the risk of damages from flooding or drainage problems. And he seemed to have a good understanding of historically how those drainage patterns ran even prior to the school building built, actually, you know. So we have made contact with him, Ms. Harlow did. We reached an agreement with him where we -, he was happy to know that we woul concerns on the record. We've sent him a letter. I believe we' the record just to indicate that his concerns are on the record at this point. I also received a call from Bill Paris. And in my notice to the property owners regarding the property, we made a mistake in describing the project site to be within the ahupua`a of Hkkano, and Bill called and gave me an earful about how that was w told him that I would state for the record today that, yeah, in fact, this site is in a land strd division called Kalukalu 1 through 3; and we looked at that last night. The Planning Department's Background Report, other portions of our application, the draft bill that is submitted and has been submitted to you, all contain the right description. It's just my notice to property owners was in error. So that's another correction we wanted to make for the record. There are conditions that have been proposed to you. We have some revisions that we'd like to recommend there. Should we hold off on that until there has been an opportunity for public testimony and further discussion, or would you like me to circulate that to you at this point? SPRINGER:If we could receive those now, Mr. Tsukazaki, please. 10 TSUKAZAKI:I would be happy to explain the reasons for these proposed revisions. So if you want me to go into that, please let me kno SPRINGER:Commissioners, have you had a chance to quickly review this information, and are you ready to hear Mr. Tsukazaki's comments? GIFFIN:Yes. KUBOTA:Sure. SPRINGER:Yes, please, Mr. Tsukazaki. TSUKAZAKI:Thank you. The first condition is E, and this relates to Staff's noting for you that the -, what has been analyzed and presented in the application is really based upon this particular project concept, the visitor center, and the relatively low level of improvements that will be made to the site. This condition looks at one of those kinds of potential impacts that are assessed in an application like this, dealing with a traffic impact analysis report. And the condition that has been proposed by the Department would require that if the, if there are other commercial uses proposed on this site at some time in the future, then there would have to be another TIAR or a revised traffic impact analysis report done. The problem we have is with the -, we don't have any problem with the concept, you know, that's fine. But the last sentence contains language indicating that the revised TIAR shall consider the highest and best use that's being proposed. We've looked at that. We do not believe, you know, it's, we don't believe it's specific enough to be enforceable. There's no definition in the Code for highest and best use in this kind of context. And so our proposed language is to say that if there are other uses proposed on this property in the future, then a revised TIAR will be done, will need to be done to address the potential traffic impacts from various proposed uses. It appears to be logical. And, but really, you know, the bottom line is that highest and best use, it's a very vague term at this point. G relates to improvements in the flood zones. And our recommendation is that last sentence of that condition be amended to delete the specific description of improvements that would be allowed and just use a more generic language, which indicates that no new improvements shall be allowed except for those which may be allowed pursuant to Chapter 27, which is the flood control chapter for the County, as well as any applicable regs, at whatever point in time that is. So that was the intent there. For Condition I, dealing with traffic improvements, the scenario here again is -. Well, there are two things that are addressed here. In the existing third sentence, it states that a left turn lane shall be installed at the project site, access driveway on Konawaena School Road. We, in our communications to Public Works, we do not believe that that's warranted at all, given the low level of traffic that's projected for this type of project. So 11 from an engineering point of view, there is no basis to require a left-hand storage lane at this point. So we'd like that to be deleted. The second part of this is that, again, if there are future uses proposed down the line, and which may very well generate significant, significantly more traffic, then as we covered before in Condition E, there would need to be a revised traffic impact assessed, I mean, traffic impact analysis report. And so our proposal is that in the event that revised TIAR is prepared for any additional commercial uses that may be proposed in the future, the Applicant shall also provide any traffic improvements that may be deemed necessary from, by the Department of Public Works and as warranted by the revised traffic impact analysis report, subject to a schedule that may be approved by the Planning Director and Public Works. So basically what we're saying there, if there's the future, additional uses, there'd be a further traffic study. If that traffic study indicates that traffic improvements are required, Public Works gets to decide what those would be, you know, what are the most necessary improvements, and can requ Applicant would be required to construct those improvements in a schedule that is approved by both the Planning Director and Public Works. Okay, so that's the thrust of that one. The last condition is J, and this deals with a specific improvement along the Mmalahoa Highway and Konawaena School Road. This is the curb, gutter, sidewalk improvement, specifically. And all we would ask there is that, again, that language be substituted to allow the schedule for when those improvements will be installed, to have that schedule be subject to the approval of the Planning Director and Public Works. I think as you have seen in many situations, you know, sometimes curb, gutters, and sidewalks can be put in, but they are, they lead to nowhere. And so it can become a really, an additional cost that's put up upfront which does not improve the public health and safety and sometimes really can create a problem depending on the financial circumstances. In this particular situation, the curb, gutter, and sidewalk improvements exist on the corner of the Mmalahoa and the Konawaena School Road, on this property or adjacent to this property. Those improvements extend a bit from the intersection. But as you get above this property on Konawaena School Road, on the same side of the property, there are no curb, gutters, and sidewalks. There's a sidewalk on the south side of Konawaena School Road. So there is a way for people to, students to walk back and forth to the school on a sidewalk. Also, along the highway, you know, on the mauka side of the Mmalahoa Highway, there are currently no curbs, gutters, and sidewalks. And all we're saying is rather than require all of those improvements on the Applicant's property to be put in before he can actually occupy the visitor center, why not subject that to further discussion with the Planning Department and Public Works as to a schedule on when those improvements can be put in or should be put in. In many situations, improvements can be bonded so that they, so there's an assurance, a financial assurance, that they get put in at a certain time. And we'd like to leave that discretion to the Planning Director and Public Works as to how much is needed up front versus how much can be constructed later. 12 SPRINGER:Thank you, Mr. Tsukazaki. Director Yuen, do you have a comments on the proposed amendments offered by the Applicant? YUEN:Well, dealing with the traffic improvements first, Public W sent a memo asking for these road improvements, and then you fol March 4, 2003, which said ÐWe confirm that the Applicant shall comply with the requirements for roadway improvements as stated in the DPW memorandum.Ñ Now you don't want to do them? TSUKAZAKI:Yeah. I think our intent was what, you know, Public W talked about other improvements, such as we talked about the right-turn in, right-turn out improvements along the highway. If, and perhaps we should have been clear. Are you talking about the left-hand turn lane on Konawaena School Road? Is that what we're talking about, or we're talking about curbs, gutters, and sidewalks? YUEN:Well, they sent a memo, a January 30, 2003, memo -. TSUKAZAKI:Right. YUEN:Which listed all of these improvements. TSUKAZAKI:Right. YUEN:And then you sent a memo March 4, 2003, saying without any qualification. I'm sorry, you did qualify that, that you didn't believe that the left-hand storage lane is necessary. But you did say that you will comply with the requirements for roadway improvements as stated in the DPW memorandum. GIFFIN:Could you please state the letter again, Mr. Yuen, that you're referring to? YUEN:In the Background Report on Page 11, there is a reference to the DPW memo. GIFFIN:Yeah. YUEN:It's not -. The memo is not itself attached, I think, to t Background. GIFFIN:Okay. Okay. YUEN:And then Exhibit E. GIFFIN:Yeah. 13 YUEN:Is a response to -. GIFFIN:Right. YUEN:Department of Public Works. TSUKAZAKI:Yeah. We agree that there, I haven't found any requirement, maybe that's what you were just trying to clarify for me, about the left-hand storage land, the left-hand turn lane -. YUEN:Well -. TSUKAZAKI:About those comments. Yeah. YUEN:January 30, DPW says, and I'm looking at Page 13 of the Background Report where it says Traffic -. TSUKAZAKI:Correct. YUEN:It says, No. 3, near the bottom of the page, it says, "Prov a left turn lane, Konawaena School Road could serve a properly located and designed entry to the property." So I take that as their -. TSUKAZAKI:Okay, we -. YUEN:Desire for a left turn lane on Konawaena School Road. TSUKAZAKI:Okay. Let's try to clarify this. When you go into cu sidewalks, which is a, our letter says and we say today, yes, we are agreeable to putting those in, okay. So all we've asked in our proposed revisions in the condition is that that be something that's constructed according to a schedule that's approved by the Planning Director and the Department of Public Works. So we're not saying we don't want to do curb, gutter, and sidewalks, it's just the timing of them. As to the -. YUEN:So you mean that you might open and within a year or two ha the curbs, gutters, and sidewalks in, something like that? TSUKAZAKI:Yeah, it would be subject to something that you and th Department of Public Works will feel comfortable approving. YUEN:Okay. TSUKAZAKI:So now with regard to the traffic improvements and what I said earlier about the left hand storage lane, I -, we haven't located any document yet within which we've, you know, clearly objected to having to construct that at this point. But we do not feel a left-hand storage lane on Konawaena School Road is warranted. 14 th I'm sorry, the March 4 response to that, this week's response -. YUEN:Yeah. TSUKAZAKI:Contains a statement from our side indicating we do not believe that that left hand storage lane is warranted. YUEN:Yes, I see that. As far as the Department's comments on the traffic improvements, we'll wait to the end of public testimony to give that. I do want to comment on why we would oppose a change to G, the f improvements within the flood zones. Chapter 27 is the flood co Hawai`i County. It applies not just at the, it applies to properties that are already zoned. It applies at the building permit stage, it applies at the subdivision stage. It's taken from a national law. It's basically a copy of a standard national law that the County has to put in place in order to qualify for flood insurance. It's tied in with, there's a national, and state approach to this. The law itself is written to apply to communities that, where there's already zoning in place, and in other words, it applies to lots that are already zoned residential or already zoned commercial. And so the approach taken by the federal government is that you restrict, you don't prohibit building on the lots. You simply, you require that the lots be, that if construction occurs on the property, that it be built up from the floodway, like on stilts, for example, with breakaway construction allowed. So our, if you take Chapter 27, if you were in an existing commercial zone, have -, we have commercial zones that are in floodways. What it does then is say that new construction has to be built up. The reason for the federal government taking this approach, one of the reasons, is that you're dealing with properties that already had land use entitlements, they already -, they're zoned to do certain things. And then you get into these constitutional taking issues, if you then pass a law that says you can't build in the floodway anymore -. As a matter of philosophy, though, if we're talking about taking a piece of property that has one zoning and moving to a zoning that allows greater construction, greater use, our approach is that, to not allow construction in the floodway. Rather than rezone this property and allow them to build commercial buildings in the floodway -, that it could be elevated above the floodway is better. Because you have the control at the zoning stage to restrict construction within the flood zones as a tradeoff for allowing greater development outside the flood zones. So that's the reason for taking this approach and not just simply saying that we should follow Chapter 27 and allow anything that can be built pursuant to Chapter 27 to be put in the floodway. SPRINGER:Mr. Tsukazaki. 15 TSUKAZAKI:Again, we believe that Chapter 27, as the Planning Director indicated, you know, is really a very comprehensive approach taken by the federal government, and it right now is, provides a clear legal basis for determinations to be made as to what can be allowed within certain flood zones and what design requirements may apply for certain structures within subzones. I'm not, you know, sure at this point that, I mean I understand what the Planning Director was just explaining as to be some kind of policy or objective here, I'm just not sure that there's any legal basis for it. YUEN:Well, there certainly is a legal basis not to rezone property within a flood zone for a higher use. The County can make that decision. our recommendation to the Planning Commission and the Council would be not to rezone on property within the flood zone. If you do, if you rezone it as part of a larger zoning to restrict the construction that then occurs within the flood zone. Chapter 27 was written to apply to property that was already zoned so that people already have an entitlement to use that area for building. So in that situation, you have the allowance for building and people build up. But as a matter of what we should be doing, we should be trying to keep people from putting expensive structures in the flood zones. SPRINGER:Thank you, Mr. Yuen. Commissioner Giffin. GIFFIN:Madam Chair, I have a question of Mr. Tsukazaki. Listeni both comments from Mr. Yuen and from you, I'm inclined to agree I just have a question of you, Mr. Tsukazaki. Hearing what the Director has said, are you then amenable to the condition as proposed, or are you still insisting on an amendment? TSUKAZAKI:No. If -, I think we've proposed language that we think is more appropriate. If the Planning Commission chooses not to adopt it, we would agree to comply with whatever conditions the Commission and the County Council should -. GIFFIN:Thank you. TSUKAZAKI:Impose. GIFFIN:Thank you. SPRINGER:Thank you, Commissioner Giffin. Other Members of the Commission, any questions or comments to the Applicant or the Director? At this time, I'd like to go through the list of public testifiers, starting with Mr. Charles Coup and followed by Lunakanawai Hauanio. GIFFIN:Madam Chair, may I ask how many public testifiers have signed up? SPRINGER:We have seven at this time, and we can bring more chairs to the table. 16 GIFFIN:Good. And may I ask when they are through for a short re SPRINGER:Thank you, Commissioner Giffin. GIFFIN:Thank you. SPRINGER:Staff, how many chairs will the table accommodate there bring at least two more? Thank you. In that case, Mr. Coupe, Mr. Hauanio, Mr. Matsukawa, Mr. Nazara, and we'll take Mr. Kunitomo, Mr. Amun Greenwell following these gentlemen. I'll go in the order that you signed up. Starting with you, Mr. Coup, could you please state your name, resident address, and speak directly into the microphone. COUP:Thank you very much. Good morning. SPRINGER:Good morning. COUP:Madam Chair and Members of the Commission, my name is Charles Coup and my residence is 1715 Hihilo Place, Honolulu, Hawai`i 96821. My wife and I are in the process of renovating our home in Kealakekua. We probably will be moving within the next six to nine months to Kona perman we have a concern with the proposed application. I have submitted written testimony. But I won't go and read it summarize what, some of what I said in there. Basically, we have no objection to the concept of a proposed visitor center and a greenhouse. What concerns us most is for someone to propose a use of this size and yet turn around and try and zone a property of 5.5 acres for it. Obviously, I think a use of this size could probably be done on one acre. And there are a myriad of conditions or concerns that should be addressed by the Commission and ultimately by the County Council relative to some of the things that were discussed this morning: Traffic impact on Mmalahoa Highway and various considerations that should come out of it as a result of it, the environmental concerns, noise pollution, air pollution, etcetera, the infrastructure that would be affected by the development. Just on a rough estimate, without knowing what the grades are at the site, I estimate you could do at least 40,000 to 50,000 square feet, probably more, of GLA retail, office use, and some 25 or so residential units. So somebody would have to take a hard look at what impact this would have on the various infrastructures that would be required for this kind of a development. And I guess, ultimately, what we're asking is why would you rezone 5.5 acres of land to commercial for a use that doesn't really require that? Once that zoning is in place, I think it's going to be very difficult for the County of Hawaii to ignore the fact that that zoning is in place and not allow an increase in density at a later time. It seems to me that either that use that's proposed should be done on a special permit basis, and I understand that that's not allowed, but to me, that would be the logical way of doing it since it seems to 17 be a temporary type of use, or, you know, the zoning should be done on the basis of just the land area that's needed to accommodate this particular type of use. There are too many serious considerations that have to be addressed with this proposed zoning to grant an upzoning so automatically. I understand it's in the Urban design district; but nevertheless, there still has to be some concerns addressed. And I think once you increase the zoning on that site, it's going to be very difficult for this Commission or the County Council to reject future applications along that line. So, basically, I think it should be taken a look at on a special permit basis. But if not, the very worst scenario, it should be extremely conditioned with a requirement for additional public hearings if they ever come back for additional developmen that they would try to do that at some future date. Thank you v SPRINGER:Thank you, Mr. Coup. And as you know, the Hawai`i County Planning Commission is making a recommendation to the County Council, and there will be opportunity for additional review and comment at that time. COUPE:Thank you. SPRINGER:Thank you. Now we'll hear from Mr. Hauanio, followed b Mr. Matsukawa. HAUANIO:Aloha, Ms. Chair, Aloha Commission Members. I'm Lunakanawai Hauanio, P.O. Box 871, Captain Cook 96704. I was wondering if I could utilize this map a little bit. Thanks, Daryn. Commissioners, if you guys can recall the point, PowerPoint presentation. What caught my attention was they identified Konawaena High School, and then the middle school is going to come into this area, yeah, they're constructing them now, but we get here, also. They have the Hawaiian Immersion Program up there. Okay? Then what I neva notice was, where is the elementary school? I presentation. The elementary school is -. Daryn, you can help me? Okay. So the elementary school is some place around here, okay. So you got traffic for this school, this school. Now our Hawaiian kids, we get the Hawaiian Home Lands, majority of the Hawaiians, they all stay down, what do you call, Kealakehe side. So they got to commute, come up. Some by bus, most of them cars because, I don they get traffic, what you call, transportation kind of issues. But you got the Konawaena Elementary School right here. And I was wondering why they never identify the traffic impact that's going into this area, as well. Okay? I don't know with this intersection, but it's a nightmare. This bugga is awesome. We're trying to get buses to go in and out of this place, plus high school kids. I don't know if you guys get high school kids, heavy on the pedal, low silhouettes, okay. That's a problem. Why? Because they fly on that road. They're flying. 18 So I'm looking at this map and I'm telling you, oh, okay, you gu you guys, that's one visitor center. So what, you guys going to get buses or what? I don't see the parking for the buses. You know, that's one concern. B know, volume, volume make money. Okay? So I'm looking at this wow. Okay, where the buses going in? You have cars coming from Kailua, going into this roadway for go to the school. Oh, the mean the traffic, 12, 30 cars, 50 cars, 120 cars, long. Worse than 'da kine, what you call, highways. Any more impact into this O`ahu intersection, you guys killing us. Trying to even get from this side coming over, mean action. Most of our people who work in the hotels and stuff, they're all south, they're all down Hawaiian Ocean View. You know, Ho`okena School, we get traffic going almost all the way back to Ho`okena School from this intersection. So I don't know what the thinking is about mitigating traffic in this area. It's mean. So you're going to put more commercial stuffs, right on. But you're already killing us. Maybe you guys can think about these guys, maybe they hire their own policeman so they ca Every morning we're grumbling, every afternoon we're grumbling. police already? Because this traffic light ain't working. It's killing us. So anyway, that's one. I was up at, having breakfast at McDonalds, it's my favorite pla far from over there. Up there, normally in the mornings, you have all of these farmers, they all come get their coffee in the morning, they all talk story and what not. And they was looking in today's newspaper, and they was wondering, hey, what the heck going on? Oh, how come these haoles, they can go inside and then, you know, us, we got to suffer about somebody. Agriculture, they're going to change the agriculture kind stuff. Oh, our taxes going to go up again. I mean all of these kinds of talk start to happen, yeah. So I stay listening to them grumbling, and I say what are you guys talking about? So they was reading, they showed me the paper. So I said, well, I don't know. I come over here, and I going to go look. And I look. Oh, it's only applying to that area. But then good buddy over here, Charlie, he said some interesting words, Ð over here, everybody else open doors.Ñ You know, that's spooky. I tell you why it's spooky. I think I went start 1988 with this crazy, I going call them Hawaiians, but most of the people they call them haoles. But it's this guy, C. J. Villa, and this other haole wahine is Nancy Pisicchio. They went kind of like grab me by my shirt and said, what, what you guys problem? This name, Hkkano, what is that? Well, it's one developer. Well, let them develop. Shit, we need jobs; no grum haole said? You know what, if you guys no get involved now, what happening up on the mainland is exactly what going happen over here in Hawai`i. There is no regulation to protect our environment. Now today we call them Oceanside 1250 or Hokuli`a. Okay, let me tell you what went happen at Hokuli`a. Now just mi 1989. I think 1989 is when Nancy guys went file the lawsuit. But I know we like break fast, but I sorry. This is very important. In the Hokuli`a case, after Nancy guys went do their lawsuit, one other lawsuit came in, and it was with the Kelly vs. Oceanside 1250. In 19 that particular case, you had people come down, did some reporting about archaeological sites, you know, graves and stuff. You had the archaeologists go and do a field inventory, then they create maps, they create the maps. But they were having problem throughout the case of identifying what or where the site is on the ground versus what was plotted on the map. Well, you look at this, on top that, if I'm not mistaken, that particular property right there where the old ranch house was, that used to be one school, also used to be one church. But before that it used to be one heiau, okay. The house there on top one heiau. And because missionaries, you know, they figure God protect them over the Hawaiian graves, no problem. But that's what you guys are looking at today, right there. So maybe there is no significance to this testimony, but anyway -. Yeah, they going kill us in the traffic or you going kill us out of existence in our identities as Hawaiian The other one is the electricity. Down south, we get brown-outs, black-outs. How many you guys get the kind computer? How many you guys experience, you gotta turn in your machine because Helco not going pay anymore, buy new one. Well, you know, we start building more and building more, and no more water, phew, mean action. I donÓt know if you guys go down Hookena Beach, you turn on the water. The water go like this, palata ta ta,ta, ta, pata, ta, ta. Holy smokes, what the heck going on? No more water pasture mean, spooky like that. All of this build-out coming up and we adequate resources. Not to mention the pollution, non-point source. Well, thatÓs a point source, yeah? ItÓs non-natural, yeah, itÓs made by man. So thatÓs a point source pollutant. So, anyway, drainage, mean action there. Over there the drainage, mean. Amazing they when decide to put the Konawaena Elementary School right down in that puka. I donÓt know, the civil engineers, you guys smart. I donÓt know, you going see what happens when we get one mean flood coming in that area. And if we do start to build over there, mean action with the traffic too, flood culmination. ThatÓs it for me, Ms. Chair. Thank you very much. SPRINGER:YouÓre welcome. Members, any questions for Mr. Hauanio? I have one. Mr. Hauanio, do you have a name for that heiau? HAUANIO:Yes. SPRINGER:Are you able to divulge it at this time? HAUANIO:No. SPRINGER:Thank you. Mr. Matsukawa, followed by Mr. Nazara. MATSUKAWA:Good morning. 20 COMMISSIONERS:Good morning. MATSUKAWA:Thank you, Members. Is this on? SPRINGER:Yes. MATSUKAWA:Thank you, Members of the Commission. My name is Mike Matsukawa, IÓm an attorney. My address is 75-5751 Kuakini Highway, Kailua, and IÓm here representing the Hayashi family. Cynthia Hayashi is seated to my right; and if you have questions of her, you may call on her. Essentially, the thrust of my testimony is in three areas. First is, itÓs hard to legislate good neighbor policy. The HayashiÓs first concern was in the years of being neighbors with Mr. Pace, theyÓve never really had a good neighborly policy in terms of dealing with the routine issues that inconvenience each of our lives, noise, stray animals, things like that. And it has carried over into this application because, you know, no one has ever knocked on their door and said, ÐMy name is so-and-so and we propose this project. How do you feel about it, especially if we put our entry road right along our common boundaries, when we have other available entryways that could, from an engineering standpoint, work? And when we put in our petting zoo, what do you think about peacocks or lamas? I know our peacocks have flown over into your yard in the past and youÓve had to chase them out. Do you think youÓd have any problems with a petting zoo?Ñ You know, these are the kinds of things the Commission really shouldnÓt look into legislating but itÓs part of the things we deal with in our daily community lives. So with that note, I think some of their concerns, obviously, are the nuisance impact issues, noise, dust, hours of operation. ThereÓs talk of a staging area. How early in the morning are they going to haul in their visitors and the tour vans from Kailua hotels, bang around, saddling up horses, getting people in order? Is it 6 a.m., 7 a.m.? And when are they coming down to unstage these big buses coming in? Some of these kinds of operational-type issues, I think could be addressed by the location of the entry road because itÓll naturally set some kind of a setback. The vegetation, the big trees, obviously, will lessen the noise. The other area of concern besides the operational issues, which arguably could be handled with an on-site phone contact person with immediate follow-up of complaints, is the issue addressed by Condition E, future issues that Mr. Coup also touched on. The same issue, you zone the area Village Commercial for whatÓs ther with that Village Commercial designation comes certain entitlements. So to what extent can new activity, new structures be added to the parcel in the future? Is the Condition E limiting the use to what is represented? And, so, if there is an additional use or change of use, their concern is will there be a review by either the Planning Director in which they can participate or would they have to come back for an amendment to the ordinance? Because I think thatÓs perhaps the greater issue that Mr. Coup and the HayashiÓs have 21 besides the operational issues that, here, you have a sizeable five-acre CV-10 parcel and to what degree will the build-out be allowed. Thank you. SPRINGER:Thank you, Mr. Matsukawa. Mr. Yuen? YUEN:To answer your last question as presently written, the Change of Zone will allow other uses. It would only trigger a review, fur circulation. And just for the question, I wasnÓt clear, are they the mauka neighbor or the -? MATSUKAWA:Yes, theyÓre immediately mauka where it jogs. YUEN:TheyÓre immediately mauka of -? MATSUKAWA:Right off the highway, Konawaena Road. YUEN:Oh, the big square lot, on the side there? GALDONES:On the Konawaena Road? YUEN:Konawaena Road, right there. Okay. All right. Thank you. MATSUKAWA:And the proposed entry comes along the common, the common boundary of the two parcels. SPRINGER:Anything else, Members, Director Yuen? Thank you, Mr. Matsukawa. WeÓll now hear from Mr. Nazara. NAZARA:Aloha, everybody. COMMISSIONERS:Aloha. NAZARA:My name is Domingo Nazara, Sr., and I live in Kealakekua Mauka, 96750, Kealakekua. Well, this is my first time before the Planning Commission so IÓm, as you can sense IÓm a little bit nervous. My heart is beating right now. So anyway, my concern, actually, IÓm not against progress. I mean, we need housing and we need things because, you know, itÓs necessary because the population getting bigger and bigger. But then my concern is about the taxes, the taxes that as you commercialize all farm lands pretty soon, you know, the taxes come higher and higher and higher cost of living; and at the end, in my opinion, the Hawaiians going lose their land. So my concern is, I want clarification about that portion right there. The bruddah here just told me, area, that the only place that they, the only portion thatÓs reasonable is that area, right there. But according to the information I got, the letter, it mentions the district. Now, to me, when you say district it means the whole thing, yeah, I mean, the whole -. Well, explain 22 to me that, I mean, you know what I mean? When they say district, according to the letter, I assume itÓs the whole thing, the whole, not just that. Can you clarify that for me? SPRINGER:Daryn, can you help Mr. Nazara with a map perhaps? ARAI:I can only confirm that it is only the project site consisting of 5.6 acres that will be rezoned from the Single Family Residential and Agricultural District into the Village Commercial-zoned district. So it doesnÓt mean the entire District of South Kona will be rezoned or anything like that. I think the district you make reference is just to the type of zoning district. So, anyway, be assured that that scope of todayÓs request is only this 5.6 acre site. NAZARA:Yeah. But, then, in the future, the rest, I mean, you know, thatÓs the precedent, right? In the future, as far as the taxes going to be concerned, you know, going skyrocket, right? Or, am I wrong? ARAI:No, we canÓt speak to that. ThatÓs just speculative, so, IÓm sorry. NAZARA:Yeah. Well, to me, itÓs obvious because, see, I live in used to live in Honolulu and, then, you know, as the population grow the tax go up and everything. So, I just want to know. I mean, I want clarification if that is so, if the whole thing is included. No? ARAI:No. NAZARA:No, okay. Thank you. SPRINGER:Thank you, Mr. Nazara. Are there any questions or comments for this member of the public? Thank you. At this time, IÓd like to call forward Mr. Kunitomo; Steve, I believe itÓs Amundson; and Lori Greenwell the audience at this time? Okay, thank you. Mr. Kunitomo, weÓl KUNITOMO:Thank you. Good morning. COMMISSIONERS:Good morning. KUNITOMO:My name is Stanley Kunitomo, my address P.O. Box 556, Captain Cook, Hawaii 96704. The reason IÓm here is because I have a property above and beyond Konawaena High School. I think as far as the traffic and everything else, everybody else covered pretty well already. And the thing that interested me was the Planning Director, or, somebody can help me on this. On this five-acre lot, there are driveways, buildings and whatnot. Are there any considerations for a drainage, water drainage? ThatÓs my biggest concern, a drywell or something. As we all know, water flows downhill. And a very interesting point that the Planning this, I think it was either Federal thing, but there is a lot of flood zones here on this island. IÓm sure you know a lot in Hilo. But here in Kona we have flood 23 in the 50Ós was Kainaliu project and whatnot. All the way south, there is a lot of flood zones; and I think this is one of the flood zone areas, also. That is -. My concern is that is built right above Mmalahoa Highway and, at this time, thatÓs the only highway going from South Kona to North Kona until the Hokulia project is concerned, completed. So thatÓs one of the questions that I have as far as water and flood; and, as we all know, water flows downhill, and for future development, as eco-tourism something else but as long as they keep the upper portions, as long as the way it is by nature, it should be great. But if the Planning Commission can look into it, in other projects in this general area -. There were rivers that used to flow to the north of this project, right where the meat market is. The entrance to the Konawaena Elementary School used to also be river way, waterway. Five hundred yards south of that was the Kingsley project which was a Federal government aid project built in the 60Ós. This was a big water flood control ditch. So when the Planning Director brought up about water, this is why I think the Commission should all look at all developments and the flood zoned areas. WeÓve had it quite dry. This year is dry, two years ago it was kind of rainy. And I think this information can be picked up by the, through your Soil Conservation Districts. They have a pretty good record of all the flood zoned areas. ThatÓs all I have. Thank you. SPRINGER:Thank you. Members of the Commission, any comments or questions of the testifier? I would just offer, Mr. Kunitomo, we have two conditions that deal with it, flood control study of the project shall be prepared and also a drainage study for the project shall be prepared. Thank you. Ms. Greenwell? Ms. Greenwell, have you been sworn in? GREENWELL:No. SPRINGER:Okay. At this time, could you please raise your right hand and -. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Hawaii County Planning Commission? GREENWELL:I do. SPRINGER:Thank you. Please proceed. GREENWELL:Good morning. SPRINGER:Good morning. GREENWELL:I didnÓt plan on speaking but I just had a couple of questions. My name is Lori Greenwell, P.O. Box 122, Kealakekua. I live right below KingÓs Trail Rides, just south of Konawaena Elementary School. I do have a couple of questions when I was listening to the attorney; and he was talking about the entrance way or the way that they are planning on getting mauka. As far as I know, highway mauka now is right through the middle of the school. ThatÓs where the entrance 24 to the ranch is. He is correct, there is a way to get onto the property, Òcause it is connected. The property goes all the way from the ocean up to M the highway to Mauna Loa. But that area would have to have considerable reconstruction because itÓs kind of a hill. The only way we used to use it is on horseback and we used to go up through the school. I know that traffic has been addressed numerous times. Before we heard about this project, we were concerned about the traffic. It is stacked up all the way to Sakamoto for the kids coming to school because youÓre serving the three complexes of the elementary, the middle and the high schools. For the next year, the middle school is going to be expanding Òcause itÓs dealing with the sixth grade, the seventh grade and eighth grade coming from Hookena School, as well as Honaunau. So not only do we have a traffic congestion, now weÓre going to have a tremendous traffic congestion when we have the addition of the kids. My concern is not having that left-hand turn lane. When youÓre going up Konawaena as it is now, itÓs only two lanes. You canÓt get around cars that are trying to make that left- hand turn lane into HkkanoÓs property which is, you know, very rarely someone actually turns in there. But if you have an eco-tourism and thatÓs a staging area, I would assume that thereÓs going to be a lot more traffic. So if you consider eliminating that left- hand turn lane, it would have a dramatic effect on the traffic with our kids going in and out. My other concern that I heard is no sidewalks. There is a sidewalk on the KaÓu side of the house, of the existing house on that property. There is no sidewalk on the makai side of that property. It just says mauka of Mmalahoa. Right now, most of us parents do not allow our children to walk that short distance because of the da kids have a little problem with the heavy foot and their cars do zoom up and down that road, as well as the buses. My daughter very infrequently but sometimes needs to go to the school, to the house, just Kohala side of KingÓs Mansion. I will not allow her to walk on that very short amount of space because of the traffic. And itÓs just not safe, thereÓs no sidewalk there. There are very few cars coming out of the proposed entrance and exit of Hkkano now, just the people that are living up the mountain. But there have been people coming out of there, kids stepping off and stepping into the way of those few cars going in and out. So I would suggest we look at that as putting in a sidewalk later. I think itÓs a safety concern for our kids. As far as, I just had a question, as far as general cleanup of the area, the area where they say the shop is on, that has been a shop area for at least 40 to 50 years that I know of. ThatÓs where the family used for maintenance of all their diesel equipment. I had a question as to whether or not the gasoline and propane tanks, I mean, gasoline and diesel tanks have been removed. When we used to ranch the property, we Petroleum delivering diesel and gasoline. So I was concerned as to whether or not they 25 had been removed and whether or not thereÓs any plan for cleanup for that property before itÓs used for the general public as well as for petting zoos. We have animals, also. We have animal-assisted therapy programs concerned with the safety of the animals as well as the general public. SPRINGER:Thank you, Ms. Greenwell. Members of the Commission, any questions or comments for the testifier? No? Thank you. GREENWELL:Thank you. SPRINGER:YouÓre welcome. At this time, if the Applicant or thei representative could return to the table, please? Having arrived at the conclusion of public testimony, we did have a request from Commissioner Giffin to take a recess. Commissioner Giffin, what is your pleasure? How long? GIFFIN:Ten minutes. SPRINGER:A ten-minute recess and this will also allow staff to do, digest the information that has been presented both by the public and by the Applicant. So we will take a ten-minute recess and return at 11:30. GIFFIN:Thank you. RECESSEDThe Chair called a short recess at 11:20 a.m. RECONVENEDThe meeting reconvened at 11:30 a.m. SPRINGER:IÓll call this meeting of the Hawaii County Planning Commission back to order; and weÓre now in discussion of the application. Staff, do you have anything to report to us following the break? ARAI:Yes. IÓm sorry, one moment. I apologize. Thank you for w If the Commissioners could please refer to the recommendation report, the conditions of approval. WeÓd like to take an opportunity to introduce a new condition, as a new Condition K. GIFFIN:Sorry? ARAI:As a new Condition K as in kitchen. This condition reads: ÐShould subdivision of the 5.595-acre project site be contemplated, direct access from the proposed individual lots to the Mmalahoa Highway shall be prohibited.Ñ Again, the reason for the condition is because thereÓs continuous concern about the access connection to the highway and the level of service at this point of access. So should the 26 Applicant contemplate the subdivision of this parcel, which may be allowed by the Commercial zoning, we have approved down to like 7,500 square foot lots -. GIFFIN:Right. ARAI:We just want to make sure that those individual lots donÓt access the highway, that they gain access in another manner. GIFFIN:Madam Chair? SPRINGER:Commissioner Giffin. GIFFIN:May I please ask Daryn to re-read the proposed amended Condition K? SPRINGER:Of course. ARAI:ÐShould subdivision of the 5.595-acre project be contemplated, direct access from the proposed individual lots to the Mmalahoa Highway shall be prohibited.Ñ SPRINGER:Anything else? GIFFIN:Proposed K? ARAI:Yeah. YUEN:On the conditions proposed by the Applicant, the revisions, the Department has no problem with E. GIFFIN:Excuse me, which one? YUEN:The language of E -. GIFFIN:As in Ernest? YUEN:Yeah, E as in Ernest. As stated earlier, we opposed G, the revision of G. We oppose their revision of I. We, and the Department of Public Works, urge a requirement of a left-turn lane; and we oppose the remaining change to I; and we oppose the proposed change to J. SPRINGER:So, Mr. Director, just for my clarification, youÓre all right with the recommended amendments to E as made by the Applicant, but with regard to G, I and J, you prefer that the original language be kept? YUEN:Yes. 27 SPRINGER:Thank you. YUEN:We want the left-turn lane and that the roadway improvements should accompany the opening, the Certificate of Occupancy for the project. SPRINGER:Members? Commissioner Giffin? GIFFIN:Madam Chair, may I ask the Director what is the basis for his opposition to the proposed revision J? YUEN:The improvement should be done when the project is opened. GIFFIN:Okay. SPRINGER:As it is now, the amended conditions include E, and a copy of that has been circulated, and the new Condition K, which has been read into the record by staff. Is that accurate? ARAI:Yes. SPRINGER:Members, is there any further discussion on this matter? Mr. Director? Applicant? TSUKAZAKI:Just a question regarding the new proposed Condition K. I donÓt know if I was able to get it all down. But is that, if there is a subdivision someday, the intent is to not allow traffic from any of the lots that are created to access the Mmalahoa Highway, you know, even for right-turn off purposes? ARAI:That is correct. SPRINGER:Mr. Tsukazaki, anything else? Members, anything else? GIFFIN:Madam Chair, I donÓt know if this is the time to bring it up and you can correct me if IÓm incorrect, but is this the time to discuss some of the issues that were raised by the public? SPRINGER:Yes, that would be fine. Thank you. GIFFIN:Okay. Then I have some questions regarding the feasibility of adding additional amendments to some of these proposed conditions as brought up by Mr. Coup. And I think, I donÓt know if it really was Mr. Matsukawa but that, thereÓll be an opportunity for more public hearings should there be any change in the intent of this application as presented to us now. Earlier, I did ask the Director if as your conditions are read there would be no chance for public input. And I felt that the request by the 28 public was well taken. And, again, Madam Chair, and perhaps, Daryn, is there any chance that we can include that? SPRINGER:Daryn or Mr. Director? YUEN:WhatÓs happening here is a lot like a number of applications we have where somebody is coming forward with a pretty specific project that in itself doesnÓt have a lot of problems. GIFFIN:Right. YUEN:But thereÓs no way of fitting it in without actually doing a rezoning that opens up other possibilities. GIFFIN:Absolutely. YUEN:I wish there was something. IÓm mulling over whether we co do something in the Zoning Code that would make people, that there would be an option of just applying for the set project that you have like a use permit or a special permit. GIFFIN:Right. YUEN:Because this is becoming, this is so common. And we, natur in the Department have to think ahead of the potentials once you rezone the property, what is allowed, and that is the way zoning works. It does not, typically, tie you into a specific project. At the same time, you wind up sometimes loadi requirements on an Applicant because thereÓs something that they really have no intention of doing it. As far as the idea of having a public hearing, let me think out loud a little bit. The issue that I see is, suppose you have a public hearing, what do you do after the public hearing? Who gets, if there is any point to it, does anybody get to say, no, you canÓt then do what the zoning would otherwise allow you do to after you have the public hearing? And if there isnÓt really any handle to having the public hearing, is there any point to having it? We do have an application here that is a, we are trying to look at the possibility of it being broader than this; and what we looked at primarily was traffic issues. If we had a public hearing, IÓm not sure what the outcome would be of that -. You know, you would have to think of who would have the power, then, to make modifications to the project as a result of the public hearing. IÓm not sure how to do that. GIFFIN:No, I think thatÓs well taken. I guess it would have to come back, then, to a body rather than sanctioned by the Director. Is that what youÓre saying? YUEN:Right. It would have to. Because, otherwise, I think that gives too much discretion to the Director to say to the Applicant, well, if you propose something in 29 the future, some other kind of commercial use is allowed by the zoning but the Director doesnÓt like it, the Director gets to say no. I think that would be too much power for the Director to have. GIFFIN:And, Madam Chair, if I may add just one more thing. IÓd reiterate what you said earlier quite correctly that this body, for this issue, will only be recommending to the Council, that the final decision will be made by the County Council; and, at that point, there will be opportunities for a public hearing. SPRINGER:Thank you, Commissioner Giffin. Other members of the Commission, any questions or comments of the Applicant or staff? I do have a couple. Mr. Tsukazaki, a couple of issues were raised by public testifiers in addition to those weÓve been discussing now. But, that includes the matter of the archaeology, and Mr. Hauanio described previous uses to the site that is presently occupied by the house; and, also, Ms. Greenwell brought up the issue of cleanup of diesel and petroleum that may have or that was used on site. Could you comment on these t TSUKAZAKI:As to the archaeological survey or historical survey, a walk-through of the site. There has been a report provided to the Applicant and I believe that the information has been transmitted to the State Historical Preservation Division. And they, we expect them to be issuing a letter indicating that, you know, they donÓt, they basically approve of the initial survey that was done. Now as far as a heiau, specifically, this is the first time, today, that weÓre hearing about that. And, so, it would be something that we would follow up on to try to identify the basis for that, and see where it is. SPRINGER:Thank you, Mr. Tsukazaki, because I just, on the record -. TSUKAZAKI:Excuse me, then on the -. Sorry, beg your pardon? SPRINGER:That is on the record now; and Mr. Hauanio also testified that subsequent to the heiau was a church and school, I believe, so -. TSUKAZAKI:Correct. SPRINGER:I didnÓt find that information in the Background Report, so thank you for that attention. And then the matter of the cleanup? TSUKAZAKI: Yes, you know, those facilities are on the mauka part of the property. And if those buildings, itÓs not clear right now whether those buildings would be rehabilitated and used in conjunction with the visitors center. ItÓs possible theyÓll be torn down. And if that area is transformed in that way, then you would need to go through the normal site evaluation as to any hazardous substances that may have been placed there years ago. At this point, that doesnÓt appear to be an area under the current plan where thereÓs going to be a lot of human assembly or, you know, activities. So there are no plans that weÓre aware of today as to how to treat that area. 30 SPRINGER:Thank you, Mr. Tsukazaki. Commissioners, are there any other questions or comments for the Applicant or staff? If not, do we have a motion? GIFFIN:Madam Chair? SPRINGER:Commissioner Giffin? GIFFIN:I think before I make my motion, IÓd like to just say an editorial comment, that I would like to commend the staff for and, you know, IÓve always been very tight-lipped about things like this in my past, but I do want to commend you for the depth of the conditions that were proposed. I felt that they were well thought out and certainly covered some of the concerns that I had when I was reading the application; and I commend you on that. Madam Chair, IÓd like to move that a favorable recommendation for the Change of Zone application (REZ 02-029) be forwarded to the County Council, along with the Background Report and the conditions as prepared and recommended by our Director, along with the amendment as proposed by the Applicant to Condition E, a new Condition K as proposed by the Department, and the subsequent re-alphabetizing of the remaining conditions. Daryn, have I covered everything? ARAI:Yes. SPRINGER:Is there a second? SMITH:Second. SPRINGER:Moved by Commissioner Giffin and seconded by Commissioner Smith. Is there any discussion? I have a comment to make. IÓll be voting in favor of this application but with reservations. The matter of traffic in Kona is of tremendous concern to all who use the highways. And the Director has spoken at length on this matter previously, so, I wonÓt belabor that point. But I do have reservations about making additional approvals, particularly of a commercial nature, along our already overtaxed roadway system. GIFFIN:Madam Chair? SPRINGER:Commissioner Giffin? GIFFIN:I, too, share your concerns about the traffic. And I think that thatÓs why I feel very comfortable about being in opposition to the ApplicantÓs suggested amendment to Condition I. I think, as one of the public testifiers, I think Ms. Greenwell suggested that, again, that road seems to be so congested, especially during school hours that certainly a left-turn lane would be advisable. 31 SPRINGER:Thank you, Commissioner Giffin. Additional discussion? If not, Daryn, can you take the roll call, please? ARAI:Yes, maÓam. Commissioner Giffin? GIFFIN:Aye. ARAI:Commissioner Smith? SMITH:Aye. ARAI:Commissioner McCall? MCCALL:Aye. ARAI:Commissioner Mina? MINA:Aye. ARAI:Commissioner Thibadeau? THIBADEAU:No. ARAI:ThatÓs a no, Commissioner? THIBADEAU:No. ARAI:Madam Chairwoman? SPRINGER:Yes, with reservations. ARAI:Madam Chairwoman, motion carries with five ayes, one no. SPRINGER:Thank you, Daryn. ARAI:YouÓre welcome. SPRINGER:Members, at this time, IÓd like us to -. Oh, IÓm sorry. To the Applicant, youÓll be notified in writing of this decision and, thank you, Mr. Tsukazaki. 32 The discussion ended at 11:52 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon M. Nomura, Secretary 33