2012-07-19 Leeward Exh B - Bill No. 255

Home

whole reason driving this proposal. There are concurrency requirements. There are concerns that were raised back in 2008 regarding drainage concerns of the area. The Planning Director is therefore offering this proposed amendment to Condition E beyond what was represented in Bill 255, which basically is saying if the property is used only for a visitor education center and a biweekly farmers’ market, the applicant does not have to improve the unnamed County road and provide improvements to the Māmalahoa Highway intersection, as well as dealing with the drainage improvements that will normally be required of any other Commercial zone property. And what it says also is that should the center decide at some point in time in the future to allow uses beyond the visitor center and biweekly farmers’ market, then all the normal infrastructure improvements required of any other Commercial zone property on the island will be triggered, and that includes curb, gutter, sidewalk improvements, improve pavement surface, drainage improvements, striping, maybe even utility relocation; those things will be triggered, should they go beyond the visitor center and biweekly farmers’ market use. So the Director is recommending favorable recommendation of Bill 255, provided that your recommendation also includes the revision to Condition E as indicated on the screen. And I’ll leave this language up on the screen for your referral. So with that, I stand ready -. I’m sorry. We’ve received quite a few public testimonies in response to this proposed amendment. All of these testimonies have, copies of which have been provided to the Commission. We also received one just at today’s hearing from Virginia Isbell, and that has also been distributed to you. So with that, I stand ready to answer any questions that you may have. BOWMAN: Thank you. Commissioners, any questions of staff? BEAUDET: One question. BOWMAN: Yes. BEAUDET: The requirement for the sidewalk, curb and gutter down the lane is both sides of the lane or just the property side? ARAI: The way the condition currently reads, it will require curb, gutter and sidewalks on both sides, I’m sorry, on one side along the southeast frontage of the subject property – I need to correct the statement. And the one thing that I did fail to mention is that the County Code also requires that whenever there is an amendment to an existing change of zone ordinance, as that is occurring here, that the concurrency requirements of the Zoning Code kicks in. So with that, we want to introduce a proposed new Condition F, as in Frank. And if you give me a moment, I will distribute the proposed language to you – one moment. And this language is language that you will frequently see in change of zone applications, I mean, I’m sorry, or amendments, that come before you. And I would like to read it for you; new Condition F, as in Frank, would read, “Should the applicants, successors or assigns develop a land use which the Planning Department, in consultation with the Department of Public Works, determines will generate over 50 peak hour trips, a Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) shall be submitted for review and approval by the Department of Public Works prior to Final Plan Approval. The applicants shall implement, when required by the Department of Public Works, at no cost to the County, any transportation system improvements that may be deemed necessary by the Department 3 EXHIBIT B