Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutREP PC 044 2022/01/18 (2020-2022) REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON PLANNING DATE: January 18, 2022 Re: Comm. No. 572/Bill No. 106 PLACE: Council Chambers Kona, Hawai i TIME: 1:30 p.m. Council Chair and Members Hawaii County Council Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Your Committee on Planning, to which was referred Bill No. 106, reports as follows: Bill No. 106, submitted by Mayor Mitchell D. Roth via Communication 572, dated December 21, 2021, amends Section 25-8-23 (Volcano —Mt. View Zone Map), Article 8, Chapter 25 (Zoning) of the Hawaii County Code 1983 (2016 Edition, As Amended), by changing the District Classification from Single-Family Residential, 20,000 Square Feet(RS-20)to Village Commercial, 10,000 Square Feet (CV-10) At `Ola`a Summer Lots, Puna, Hawaii, covered by Tax Map Key 1-9-004:051, with an area of approximately 0.838 acre. The applicant is Raja Daggula. The Windward Planning Commission forwards its favorable recommendation for this change of zone, which would allow the applicant to construct a three-unit short-term vacation rental complex consisting of three one-story single-family dwellings and a six-stall parking area. The property is located on the north side of Old Volcano Road, approximately 335 feet west intersecting with Wright Road in Puna. Planning consultants Daryn Arai and Sidney Fuke appeared before Your Committee in the Kona Council Chambers to represent the applicant; applicants Raja Daggula and Shalini Kapoor were present via Zoom. Mr. Arai explained the circumstances of the application: The Windward Planning Commission accepted the positive recommendation from Planning Director Kern. The application is consistent and compliant with the General Plan, Puna Community Development Plan, the Volcano Village Long Range Plan, and Short Term Vacation Rental (STVR) laws. Mr. Fuke explained that the Volcano Community Association (VCA) was against the application for several reasons: Potential environmental effects on native birds and native `6hi`a trees, potential noise and traffic from it being for a short-term vacation rental, which the VCA argued brings no community benefit. He further explained that the applicant revised the project multiple times to address the concerns brought up by the VCA and neighbors; however, despite the revisions to accommodate concerns, the project's opponents refused to continue dialogue due to it being a STVR. Mr. Daggula explained that they have dreamed of moving to Hawai`i, and that this allows them to move here and generate income, with the addition of Ms. Kapoor providing "naturopathic therapy." Mr. Daggula explained that he has revised his project plans three times after hearing the community's concerns, and that he would like for the project to be approved in the right way and is committed to working with the community. PC Report No.: 44 PC-44 Page 2 January 18,2022 Committee Member Maile David asked if the current Residential zoning would allow for a vacation rental. Planning Director Zendo Kern, present via Zoom, explained that the current Residential zoning allows the applicants to still build an `ohana dwelling unit and use it as a vacation rental. Ms. David explained that the VCA is against the amount of STVRs in Volcano, and that the `ohi`a forests are worth protecting due to Rapid `Ohi`a Death and deforestation. Mr. Arai responded that the applicant has reduced the footprint of the proposed structures to accommodate the `ohi`a trees. Ms. David asked if the STVR would be hosted or unhosted, and if the zoning classification affects that. Mr. Arai responded that it will be a hosted STVR. Committee Chair Ashley Kierkiewicz clarified that the rezone request is to add capacity, and if it were not approved then the applicants can still build two STVR units; Mr. Arai agreed and noted that securing Village Commercial zoning would allow it to be an unhosted STVR, but the applicants do not intend for that. Mr. Fuke emphasized that the VCA was not against the Village Commercial zoning, but specifically the STVR; however, the rezone process gives the community and County more control over project design through conditions. Committee Member Sue Lee Loy noted that an STVR would not produce as much noise and traffic compared to other potential Village Commercial activities that could be done on the property and acknowledged that the applicant has made changes to mitigate concerns. She also stated that the community would also be getting naturopathic health services if Ms. Kapoor were to work on the property. Committee Member Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder asked Director Kern if the lot could be subdivided into three lots should the rezone be approved. Director Kern responded that it could be subdivided after the rezone approval, but the department would need to review the property to make a determination as to what is possible. Mr. Fuke noted that Condition D would make the applicant appear before Council again if there is significant departure from the intended plan. Committee Member Holeka Inaba asked about the Fair Share Agreement, to which Mr. Fuke responded that the applicant has agreed to pay $15,000 per residential unit. Committee Member Heather Kimball asked for clarification of the proposed plan, to which Mr. Arai responded that original structures were rectangular, but the applicant redesigned them into an octangular "tree-house styled" structure to reduce the footprint. Ms. Kimball asked if the applicants had a tight timeline for completing the project, and suggested Your Committee take more time to deliberate on the matter. Ms. David asked if there were more opportunities for community input following approval of this request. Mr. Arai responded that the next step is final plan approval by Planning Department, but that the community can be apprised of project progress. Ms. David responded that she supports the matter moving forward, but she would like for the applicant to continue engaging the community and the VCA. Chair Kierkiewicz suggested Ms. David broker the conversations since the VCA has declined to continue dialogue. Director Kern noted that the VCA and community were specifically against the STVR, but not the Village Commercial rezone. He cautioned Your Committee against infringing upon land use policy, noting that this rezone is consistent with all regional plans and STVR laws. PC Report No.: 44 PC-44 Page 2 January 18,2022 Committee Member Tim Richards voiced his support for the rezone request and explained that this matter falls in line with responsible growth that is planned with sensitivity to the neighbors' concerns. He noted that this type of community engagement is typically expected for a large development, but that the applicants have done more than enough to accommodate concerns. Chair Kierkiewicz voiced her support, noting that the same request was made and granted by the Council two years ago for the Kilauea Lodge, which was two properties away. She noted it made sense to support keeping Village Commercial activities together and in areas specified within County and community plans. She recognized the applicant's numerous plan revisions based on community feedback. The vote was then taken on the motion to move this measure to Council with a favorable recommendation and passed with 8 "ayes." Your Committee on Planning is in accord with the purpose and intent of Bill No. 106, and recommends its passage on first reading. js AYES NOES ABS EX Respectfully submitted, CHUNG X DAVID X COMMITTEE ON PLANNING INABA X KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER X KIERKIEWICZ X KIMBALL X LEE LOY X ASHLEY L. KIERKIEWICZ, CHAIR RICHARDS X PC REPORT NP,: 44 VILLEGAS X ADOPTED: 8 0 9 2022