2006-12-01 tnakamura - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

NISHIMURA: Yes. I’d like an opportunity address some of the concerns that were raised at the hearing in November; and if I may, I’d like to go up to the map. ALAMEDA: Sure. NISHIMURA: There has been a concern raised about precedent setting and what could happen to the area. I’d like to point out that this area outlined with the dash lines is already in the State Land Use Urban district. This is the subject property right here. The General Plan Low Density designation generally extends along Railroad Avenue and along the Volcano Highway; and I believe it terminates around Mamaki Street, which is around here. So this general area is all within in this General Plan Low Density Urban designation. The areas that you see to the south and to the east are all Agricultural designations on the General Plan. This is the State Agricultural park. These are Hawaiian Home Lands agricultural and residential leases. So the ability of these areas or these areas here to apply for the similar type of zoning or Urban designation would, they won’t have the same considerations because the General Plan designation, for one, is Important Agricultural Land and, secondly, you know, the proximity to the Urban district is not the same. All of these lots within the first phase of the Panaewa Residential Lot Subdivision were subdivided in 1957 by the State of Hawaii for Residential purposes. The second increment which includes my client’s property includes 25 lots here, it had the same description. It was for residential purposes. These people applied for State Land Use Urban designation in the late, I believe in 1966. They were initially denied, they appealed, and they won the appeal in a decision by the Third Circuit Court. And so I believe in 1969 or 1970 this area was put into the Urban district. So in terms of the character of the area and what has been established, I believe, you know, through the subdivision of the land by the State and its intended purpose, it was for residential use first. Because of its lot sizes ranging between 1.7 and 2.7 acres in size, there have been agricultural activities that have been conducted on those properties; but most I would describe them as supplemental agriculture and not the primary purpose of the property. I believe that the area is suitable for Urban and a higher density use. It does have all necessary infrastructure. It is served by County water. It has adequate roadways. And, like I said, the change for this property should not affect the State Agricultural Park lands or the other lands that are clearly intended for agricultural purposes. ALAMEDA: Questions, Fellow Commissioners? Commissioner Watanabe? WATANABE: Brian, would you reiterate what types of soils are on this subject property so we can get a better feel for whether we’re paving over prime Agricultural? NISHIMURA: The soils of the project area are classified as being of the Papai Series which consists of well-drained, thin, extremely stony organic soils over A’a lava. The Agricultural Subclass rating for this soil is VIIs, nonirrigated, which indicates soils have very EXHIBIT A 3