2004-06-04 Planning Commission Minutes

Home

The applicant’s representative, Sidney Fuke, noted that the applicant, currently enroute to Hilo from Honolulu, was in agreement with the Planning Department’s background report and recommendation. Mr. Fuke pointed out that the property is owned by the State and the applicant has secured a 30-year lease from the State, subject to the application being approved. In response to Commissioner Graham’s inquiry, Harry Yada of State DLNR, Land Division, said the project is exempt from an Environmental Assessment based on the fact that it is consistent with the prior uses, and it’s basically a redevelopment of a simple use. There was no one from the public wishing to testify on this agenda item. Commissioner Graham said although he did not have any real concern on any particular environmental situation, he was uncomfortable about the legal ramifications of not requiring an Environmental Assessment under Chapter 343, noting he felt not requiring an environmental assessment falls into a narrow sliver of exemption. Mr. Yuen said the agency that would make a determination of whether an Environmental Assessment is required or not is the State DLNR; and they determined this proposal does not involve a change in use sufficient to require an environmental assessment. He gave examples of a strict rule where an Environmental Assessment would be required if an owner wanted to change a commercial property from a warehouse to an auto parts storage area or a person leasing State Agricultural land for farming purposes wanting to change the type of crops grown on the property. He said, therefore, the State DLNR has taken a typical view that once commercial or industrial uses are established on a piece of property that similar types of commercial or industrial uses would not constitute a change in use. Mr. Hayashi clarified that as the gas station is still in existence, it is not covered under this particular application. Mr. Yuen said as far as the SMA, it is up to the Planning Department to decide whether an SMA Permit is necessary, whether something is grandfathered, whether it does not even constitute a change in use and then will now need an SMA. He stated for this particular application, the use was established many years prior to the enactment of the SMA law, and the County is dealing with something different and requiring an SMA Major Permit. Upon Commissioner Graham’s inquiry, Mr. Yuen clarified that under Chapter 343 if there was a change in use, say, Ag use to a commercial use, DLNR would require an EA, whether they have to come in for any kind of county permits or not. It was moved by Commissioner Springer and seconded by Commissioner McCall that the application be approved based on and incorporating the Planning Director’s 2