2007-05-24 TWAIKOLOAMAUKA - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Residential-Agricultural 1-acre zoning; the green represents the Open zoning for the golf course that was proposed within the Waikoloa Highlands Golf Estates Subdivision. The applicant in this case, Waikoloa Mauka, LLC, is requesting an amendment to Conditions of Change of Zone Ordinance 05-157, more specifically, an amendment to Condition B which requires the applicant to construct intersection improvements at the intersection of Pua Melia and Waikoloa Road prior to final subdivision approval. The applicant has been in discussion with the community, and the option of a roundabout has been also requested to be an option for these intersection improvements. And so that’s mainly the request on the amendment for Condition B. Condition C is requesting an amendment to allow a second access onto Waikoloa Road; at this time it only allows for one access. The applicant is requesting an additional access on the mauka portion of the subdivision because of the fact that mainly the entire subdivision would be limited to these accesses on the lower portion of the subdivision. The applicant is also, just for your information, is proposing to do this subdivision in two increments. Phase One, which is identified in this location, and Phase Two; Phase One consisting of approximately 149 lots, Phase Two with an additional 249 lots. Lastly, the applicant is also proposing again in conjunction with working with the community to be able to incorporate the construction cost for a proposed multi-purpose community center as being part of the fair share requirements; that the construction of this facility would be placed on fair share requirements, so that they would be able to utilize those construction costs for that requirement. The Planning Director is recommending that the Planning Commission send a favorable recommendation to the Hawaii County Council for these particular conditions. Since these conditions did come to the Planning Commission, there have been amendments proposed to Conditions B and C, and those have been passed out. They should be identified with a yellow sheet. And mainly that’s in response to concerns brought up by the Department of Public Works in their memo dated May 8, 2007. Additionally the applicant has responded to that, and these conditions are basically in response to the applicant’s response to the Department of Public Works’ concerns. Are there any questions? SIRACUSA: Yes. GRAHAM: Commissioner Siracusa? SIRACUSA: So first the Planning Director issued a set of revised conditions, and then the developer issued their own in response. And what is the Director’s response to the developer’s response to the Director’s response? DARROW: That would be this yellow sheet that you see here. This yellow sheet is from the Planning Department. SIRACUSA: This one? DARROW: Correct. SIRACUSA: Oh, I thought this one was from the Department. EXHIBIT C 2