2004-09-03 Planning Commission Minutes

Home

The applicant, Mitsugi Komo, and his representative, Sidney Fuke, stated the staffs background report and recommendation, as amended, were acceptable. He amplified that the reasons for wanting the rezoning was to provide family care. Commissioner Graham commented that whenever there is a rezoning of Ag land he thinks about setting a precedence, the value of Ag land, and safety, noting that Mamalahoa Highway was a very steep and dangerous highway. He said even though he did not question the applicants intention, he was not comfortable for the Commission to say one situation is more needed than another, and that he was also not comfortable from an agricultural use policy point of view. In response to Commissioner Grahams inquiry, Mr. Yuen pointed out that they were dealing with a property that someone has gone through the effort of making a farm on and has presented a clear family reason why the division of the property would not be detrimentaltothefurtheragriculturaluseoftheproperty.Mr.Fukesaidthatthesite already has two dwellings on the property and a proposed condition would restrict each of the property to have one dwelling each; the density or infrastructure impact remains the same; the only difference between the existing situation and the proposed situation is that the property would be able to be subdivided and conveyed. Mr. Fuke added that because the children come from an agricultural background he thought there would be a greater opportunity to maintain this thriving farm, which the applicant would like to see continued. Commissioner Graham pointed out that if the only change was to say the lot would be able to be subdivided, he would give an example out in North Kohala where a thriving piece of agricultural land with the purpose of leaving the land for the children was sold to third parties within a few years after the rezoning took place. In response to Commissioner McCalls inquiries, Mr. Fuke noted that there is an existing dwelling on the property to the south, and a second dwelling used as a coffee shed that will be demolished is on the property to the north. He added that proposed Condition G would restrict an additional farm dwelling, or in the case of a residential zoned property an ohana dwelling. There was no one from the public wishing to testify on this agenda item. It was moved by Commissioner Fujikawa and seconded by Commissioner Springer to send a favorable recommendation to the County Council as recommended by the Planning Director, with the proposed amendments to Conditions B and H. A roll call vote was taken and motion carried with six ayes (Fujikawa, Springer, Alameda, Mcall, Smith and Galdones), one no (Graham), and two absent and excused (Siracusa and Thibadeau). 5