Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0528.000 1998-2000 tv,w ci- William G. Davis Stephen K. Yamashiro ~ Managing Drector Mayor , Henry Cho ~~,~,M'~~`x Deputy Managing Director ft~nuiTfg of ~ttfuttii 25 Aupuni Street, Room 215 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720-4252 • (808) 961-8211 Fax (808) 961-6553 KONA: 75-5706 Kuakini Highway, Suite 103 • Kailua-Kona, Hawaii 96790 (808)329-5226 • Fax (806)326-5663 November 1, 1999 Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council ~ County of Hawaii o 25 Aupuni Street ~ _17 Hilo, HI 96720 rv~ Dear Chairman Arakaki and Members: ~ cn v Change of Zone Application (REZ 99-020) ~ cn Applicant: John Tanaka = Request: A-20a to A-Sa Tax Map Key: 5-4-002:014 Change of Zone Application (REZ 99-010) County Council Initiated (Akana Trust) Request: RS-10 to CN-20 Tax Map Key: 2-2-25:24 As required by Chapter 4, Sec. 5-4.3(C), Hawaii County Charter, transmitted herewith for the County Council's consideration and action are the Planning Commission's letters and enclosures regarding the above-referenced requests. Sincerely, Stephen K. ~ r~nashiro Mayor L101599.MAY Enclosures 5'z 8 cc: Planning Department Comm. No• 13, ~ 1 N51e No. Z N G~K f~ Ref, To: PG Bar. Hate ~ 319, C~ Stephen K Yamaehim ...~c ~~OI Na'M ~IIlt2tf~1 II~ tC~1TtiTt PLANNING COMMISSION 25 Aupuni S/mt, Room 109 • Hilo, Hawaii %72P9252 (808) %1-8288 • Pa: (e0B) %1-9615 ~NOV ~ + ~09~ Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council County of Hawaii 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Chairman Arakaki and Members: Change of Zone Application (REZ 99-020) Applicant: John Tanaka Request: A-20a to A-Sa Tax Map Key: 5-4-002:014 The Planning Commission, after a duly held public heazing on October 15, 1999, voted to recommend for your approval the proposed legislative bill to change the district classification for approximately 27.286 acres of land from Agricultural (A-20a) [o Agricultural (A-Sa). The property is located on the north side of Kynnersley Road approximately one mile south of its intersection with Akoni-Pule Highway, Puehuehu, North Kohala, Hawaii. The Commission concurs with the following Planning Director's reasons for recommending favorable consideration of the change of zone: In order to consider an area for any type of zoning designation, the applicable goals, policies and standards of the General Plan must be adequately addressed. It is only through such a comprehensive policy analysis approach that evaluations and decisions can be made to better time and stage developments to achieve quality growth determined by the General Plan and related planning documents. The implications of these evaluations and decisions must also be considered as they may have an impact on other similar areas in the County. Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 2 The proposed Change of Zone from an Agricultural (A-20a) to Agricultural (A-Sa) zoned district would conform to the following goals, policies and standards of the Land Use and Agriculture Elements of the General Plan: o Designate and allocate land uses in appropriate proportions and mix and in keeping with the social, cultural and physical environments of the County. o Protect and encourage the intensive utilization of the County's limited prime agricultural lands. o The County shall encourage the development and maintenance of communities meeting the needs of its residents in balance with the physical and social environment. o Zoning requests shall be reviewed with respect to General Plan designation, district goals, regional plans, Slate Land Use District, compatibility with adjacent zoned uses, availability of public services and utilities, access, and public need. o The compatibility of agricultural and non-agricultural uses should be carefully reviewed and where appropriate, buffers required. o Rural-style residential-agricultural developments, such as new small-scale rural communities or extensions of existing rural communities, shall be encouraged in appropriate locations. o The county shall encourage the development and maintenance of communities meeting the needs of its residents in balance with the physical and social environment. o Agricultural land shall be used as one form of open space or green belt. While the potential for agricultural uses may exist, the project site soils aze classified as Kohala Series (KhA) and Ainakea Series (AaD). The Kohala series consists of well-drained silty clays that formed in material from basic igneous rock influenced by volcanic ash. In a representative profile the surface layer is very dark grayish-brown and dark-brown silty clay about 14 inches thick. The subsoil is about 25 inches thick and consists of dark-brown to dark yellowish-brown silty clay loam and silty clay. Permeability is moderately rapid, runoff is slow to medium, with 0 to 3 Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 3 percent slopes. The erosion hazard is slight to moderate. This soil is used mostly for irrigated sugarcane. Small areas aze used for pasture, orchards, and truck crops. The Ainakea series consists of 3 to 12 percent slopes, except that it is moderately steep. Included in mapping are about 90 acres of cinder cones about 1 mile south of Hawi. These cinder cones have a slope of 50 to 90 percent. Their surface layer is like that of the Ainakea soil but underlain by cinders at a depth of 10 to 20 inches. Runoff is medium and the erosion hazard is moderate. This soil is used for sugar cane and macadamia nuts and as homesites. Soils within the subject property have been classified as "C" (Fair) for agricultural productivity by the Land Study Bureau's Detailed Land Classification System. Finally, soils within the subject property are classified as Prime by the ALISH system. The requested Agricultural (A-Sa) zoning will encourage agricultural activities or the presentation of the lands within the proposed subdivision in a manner consistent with the "Intensive Agriculture" designation by the General Plan LUPAG Map. This designation refers to lands that are capable of supporting sugar, orchard, diversified agriculture and floriculture uses. The Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) Map component of the General Plan is a representation of the document's goals, policies, standards and courses of action to guide the coordinated growth and development of the County. It reflects a graphic depiction of the physical relationships among the various land uses. The LUPAG Map establishes the basic urban and non-urban land use pattern for areas within the County. The requested zone change conforms to the LUPAG Map, which designates the area for Intensive Agriculture. The property has been cleared and used historically for sugar cane production. The applicant's proposal to subdivide the subject property into three parcels is consistent with the land use designation. The lot sizes will provide opportunities for residents who wish to pursue limited agricultural activities, but are not able to commit to the financial or labor demands placed on them by the larger 20-acre pazcels. The primary reason for this request is to subdivide the subject property into three (3) lots. The lands are proposed to be used for the cultivation of ornamentals and citrus trees. Therefore, the reclassification of this 27.286 acre parcel from Agricultural-20 acre (A-20a) zoned district to Agricultural (A-Sa) will not be detrimental to the area. The requested change of zone would be in conformance with the intent and purpose of the State Land Use Law. A condition of this approval recommendation will require the applicants to comply with the requirements of the State Land Use Law and the Zoning Code. Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 4 The property has no severe topographic or geologic problems which cannot be properly rectified or which would render the land unusable for the proposed agricultural use. Surrounding land uses include single-family residences and a number of vacant lots. There are single-family residences and vacant lands within the adjoining Kynnersley housing tract zoned RS-15. To the west are parcels within the State Land Use Agricultural District and zoned A-Sa and A-3a. The A-3a zoned parcels lie within the Kaauhuhu Homestead area. Lands to the north are zoned A-20. There are no known historic, archaeological or cultural features on the site and no rare, threatened, or endangered species of either flora or fauna. Water for the proposed project can be made available from an existing 6-inch waterline that fronts the subject property. All other essential utilities and services can or will be made available to the subject development. All access improvements shall comply with the Department of Public Works requirements. A condition of approval is being included to ensure that these infrastructural improvements are installed. Based on the foregoing, the approval of the Change of Zone request from an Agricultural (A-20a) to Agricultural (A-Sa) zoned district would result in an appropriate land use pattern that will further benefit the general public. For your favorable consideration, an amendment to Section 25-8-8, the Upolu-Kaauhuhu Homesteads Zone Map, of the County Zoning Code is transmitted. We are enclosing a copy of the application and a copy of the staff background for your information. Sincerely, . t~ Leonard S. Tanaka, Chairman Planning Commission LTanak02.PC Enclosures cc: Mr. Sidney Fuke Mr. John Tanaka Department of Public Works Department of Water Supply Department of Land & Natural Resources Kazu Hayashida, Director/DOT-Highways, Honolulu PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAII HEARING TRANSCRIPT October 15, 1999 A regularly advertised hearing on the application of JOHN S. TANAKA was called to order at 9:09 a.m. in the County Building, Councilroom-Room 201, 25 Aupuni Street, Hilo, Hawaii, with Chairman Leonard Tanaka presiding. PRESENT: Leonard Tanaka ABSENT & EXCUSED: Lin McIntosh Richard Baker, Jr. Florence Kubota Geraldine Giffin Mildred Mosher James Souza Grant Togashi Virginia Goldstein, Planning Director Alice Kawaha, Staff Planner Phyllis Fujimoto, Staff Planner Susan Gagorik, Staff Planner Fred Giannini, Deputy Corporation Counsel Kelly Gomes representing the Department of Public Works Bruce McClure representing Department of Water Supply And approximately 9 people from the public in attendance. TANAKA: Good morning, everyone. The meeting of the Hawaii County Planning commission will now come to order. We thank you all for being here. The first agenda item is the application by John S. Tanaka. This is an application for a change of zone by changing the district classification from Agricultural A-20(a) to Agricultural A-5(a) for approximately 27.286 acres of land. The property is located on the north side of Kynnersley Road, approximately one mile south of its intersection with Akoni-Pule Highway, Puuhuehue, North Kohala, Hawaii. Before we begin, Commissioner Togashi had brought up the question if I was related to the Applicant. There is no relation. Thank you. Okay. Ms. Fujimoto, would you give us an overview of the application. FUJIMOTO: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Taking a look at this location map, this is the Akoni-Pule Highway, and this is Kynnersley Road. The subject property is located on Kynnersley Road, and is shown here with this green dot. It's zoned Ag-20. Surrounding properties are zoned Ag-20 and RS-15. Looking over to the site plan here, the Applicant is requesting the change of zone to subdivide the property into three lots. And the Planning Director is recommending that a favorable recommendation be forwarded to the County Council on this request. TANAKA: Thank you. Commissioners, any questions? Commissioner Togashi. TOGASHI: Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman, I have just one question. Would you happen to know who owns and maintains the ditch, the Kohala Ditch? FUJIMOTO: No, I don't. GIANNINI Chalon, I would think. TOGASHI: Chalon? GOLDSTEIN: Chalon. TANAKA: Weil have maybe the Applicant or its representative concur on that. Okay. Any further questions, Commissioners? If not, we'd like to call the Applicant or its representative to come forward. And is there anyone else in the public that would like to testify on this agenda item? At this time, I'd like to recognize in the audience we have Councilwoman Bobby Jean Leithead-Todd. Thank you for being here. Okay, would you begin with your Let me swear you in first. Do you affirm or sweaz to tell the truth on this matter now before the Hawaii County Planning Commission? FUKE: I do. TANAKA: Okay. Thank you. FUKE: Mr. Chairman, my name is Sidney Fuke; I'm a planning consultant. I'm here assisting the owner and applicant of the property, Mr. John Tanaka, who is also seated here today. Mr. Tanaka and I have had a chance to review the Staff's proposed background, excuse me, proposed conditions as well as the background report; and Mr. Tanaka concurs with all of the proposed conditions. Relative to the question that Mr. Togashi had asked, the Kohala Ditch is owned by the Chalon Corporation; it used to be owned by Kohala Corporation. There is an easement that bisects the property and so, as you can see, you know, on the subject property. The idea behind the proposed subdivision is to enable the Applicant to have a reasonable sized azea, you know, -2- because the entire 27-acre property is a little too large for his, his own personal long-term agricultural intention and to, also, capitalize on the presence of the ditch for its agricultural activities. TANAKA: Commissioners, any questions? Commissioner Mosher. MOSHER: Will Mr. Tanaka be permitted to construct a bridge over the Kohala Ditch in order to get to both sides of his one lot, the bigger 15-acre parcel? FUKE: I have not seen the specific language of the deed itself, but I suspect that he would be allowed to get access to both sides by, you know, constructing a bridge. But, if anything, the bridge would be more for, it would be non-vehicular in oriented MOSHER: Okay. So it wouldn't make part of it landlocked, I mean, you know FUKE: No, it wouldn't. MOSHER: Other than access FUKE: Correct, yeah. MOSHER: To the highway? MOSHER: It would not be landlocked, no. MOSHER: Okay. TANAKA: Commissioner Togashi. TOGASHI: Let me try another question. I'm not sure if you can answer this. But, anyway, would you happen to know if the, you know, these flood zone designations, do they take into account nearby ditches, as far as the ratings that are assigned? FUKE: I'm not really sure because, you know, the flood zones are, the maps that's developed by the Corps of Engineers, I guess, with the input of probably the Department of Public Works and other governmental agencies Maybe that question can be directed to Mr. Gomes, I think, so You know, he may have some response to that. TOGASHI: Okay. TANAKA: Commissioner Giffin. -3- GIFFIN: Mr. Fuke, there was some question or there was some discussion about the entering the FUKE: Correct. GIFFIN: Easements to the property. Could you show me what you, initially, the three proposals were and then what we finally have agreed to? FUKE: Actually, the way the, what the Police Department and Public Works were commenting on was just the layout as contained in the background report and shown over here. The Police Department was concerned about like possibly having one entryway or access serving this lot over here. Another one would have this access possibly coming around in this corner here, because this lot would be configured like as such, the larger lot. GIFFIN: Yeah. FUKE: And the third one, of course, would be this Lot No. 1, which would be someplace around here. So what the Police Department was saying was that, you know, along this stretch of the road and given the curvature [hat, having, you know, three accesses, you know, might be a little bit hazardous. And so we were saying that, well, you know, we recognize the situation but there is a dilemma that, of course, you know, the property is bisected by the ditch so it provides some amount of constraints. So there is, well, there is a possibility for having maybe two of the lots be a consolidated access. GIFFIN: Oh. FUKE: To have like a requirement all three lots to be serviced by one access would be rather difficult. GIFFIN: Yeah. FUKE: So as your Staffs condition notes that the subdivision would still have to be subject to the review and approval of the Public Works Department so they will look at it a little bit more critically, you know, in terms of how the access would be situated. TANAKA: Commissioner Mosher. MOSHER: Who owns Lot H, which is that one small pazcel there? FUKE: I don't know. It's not owned by Mr. Tanaka. MOSHER: It's not owned -4- FUKE: Yeah. MOSHER: Is there a residence or structure on there now? FUKE: Mr. Tanaka confirmed that it's vacant right now. MOSHER: It's just a vacant lot. FUKE: Correct. MOSHER: So anyone who owns that would also be looking for access onto the highway FUKE: Correct. They would have MOSHER: When they build. FUKE: One legal access, correct. The other thing to consider is that, you know, this is not like a three small lot subdivision. You know, there, it's a sizable area. So, you know, it stretches over a thousand feet, you know, from one point to MOSHER: The frontage. FUKE: Another so But having the access, you know, right around the corner could be, you know, problematic so MOSHER: Sight. FUKE: The, yeah, because of sight distance concern. And so the Public Works Department will have stipulate where the exact access points will be allowed. TANAKA: Mr. Fuke, on that piece of property that is not owned by the Tanakas, is that a utility easement that is shown there, that little block that is FUKE: No, these would be two separate lots of record. TANAKA: I see. FUKE: Yeah. TANAKA: Okay. FUKE: One is consisting of about an acre, and the other one is -5- J. TANAKA: There's a very large water tank over here, so I would imagine this would be part of the Water Supply, a very large water tank here. FUKE: Mr. Tanaka indicated that, you know, there is like a water tank in that area. Possibly it could be a water tank site. TANAKA: Okay. Department of Water Supply easement possibly. Okay. Okay, Commissioners? Commissioner Souza. SOUZA: Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to remind the Commissioners, and Mr. Fuke correct me if I'm wrong, that while we're talking about three lots now on Kynnersley Road, once we give the zoning, the owner has the opportunity to divide whenever he wants. So I don't think we should be looking, keep on discussing three lots; I think we should discuss the maximum that the zoning would produce. FUKE: Correct. We acknowledge that, you know, with the five-acre zoning, that two of the lots would be, you know, five or six acres in size. The balance, which would be retained by Mr. Tanaka, would be about a little more than 15 acres. So it is possible, as Mr. Souza pointed out, that in the future, the 15-acre property could possibly be further subdivided into three lots. Now, if you look at the configuration of this 15-acre area, however, it would have to be configured in a way where the, probably all of, the other two lots that could possibly be created by this 15-acre lot would have to share a common driveway, you know, just given the way that the lot is being configured now. But I think, you know, Mr. Souza's point is well taken that, you know, you have to look at the maximum development potential, you know, of the property given the requested zoning; and I think this is what Public Works would be looking at in terms of determining where your access points would be allowed. TANAKA: Also, I'd like to just make one comment along those lines, too. As I look at the background report and the properties that surround the proposed, well, the applicant's parcel, there was a large residential, residentially zoned area, it looks like, just mauka of that property. Was that correct, Mr. Fuke? FUKE: That is correct. TANAKA: So although he is coming in for Ag-5 zoning, there could be, I'm not saying it would pass, but there could be a potential for that property to go into even RS zoning because of the adjoining properties being or having that designation. I'm not giving him any lead to that, but just looking at the general area. Okay. Any further MOSHER: I have another -6- SOUZA: I MOSHER: Question. TANAKA: Okay, Ms. Mosher first. MOSHER: Why was the configuration done this way and not use Kohala Ditch as the boundary so that the two five-acre plus lots would be on one side of the ditch and his property on the other side? Because it appears that the Kohala Ditch is a natural boundary; it's like a river and a gulch. FUKE: It is understandable, however, that Mr. Tanaka's plan is to, you know, keep the larger area, which would encompass all of that area that the ditch falls within; and he kind of wants to utilize both sides of the ditch because it provides not only like an agricultural resource but also like a visual amenity, as well. TANAKA: Commissioner Souza. SOUZA: I didn't understand what you said. What did you say about Tell me again. TANAKA: If you look at the Exhibit A, actually it's in the recommendation, you know, and You know, Commissioners, as we look at these applications, we look at the surrounding areas, we look at what kind of uses are being put into place for the land. And I understand what you're saying that he had, he could increase the density, Commissioner Souza, from not only three lots to, but possibly five lots, that's correct. So I know your concern is density, therefore, traffic, so forth. But also if you look on the north side of Kynnersley Road, the property that adjoins his is all RS-15. So, in my mind, as a planner, as I'm looking at this, a person could have come into this Commission and ask for a change of zone to possibly RS-I5, also. I'm not saying that it would pass. SOUZA: Yeah. TANAKA: You know what Imean SOUZA: Yeah. But on the other hand TANAKA: So take that into consideration, also, when you're looking at this. SOUZA: But on the other hand, other side of that argument, if you look at, if I remember what Phyllis said, that this is the, there's no other five-acre, we're starting to create we are beginning to create five-acre area lots. We're starting a precedent in that way -7- to five-acre lots. And, also, as I see it, the land use maps say that area should be for intensive agriculture. The Kohala Development Plan, which was developed in 1986, mind you, that's 14 years ago, and sometimes I wonder about these plans because it says the CDP encourages more intensive use of North Kohala's agricultural resources through the subdivision of selected agricultural lands into smaller and more manageable parcels. My question, this thing is so broad, what are the, what are selected lands and what is smaller parcels that can be manageable and profitable? Big question. TANAKA: Yeah, I think that's not for us to answer but for FUKE: Well, I can maybe perhaps like clarify two things. One is that, you know, in looking in my files and, you know, in specific reference I guess to maybe Commissioner Giffin's comment about what was the small lot, it is, in fact, like a water, Department of Water Supply tank site, according to the survey map that I'm looking at. In response to Commissioner Souza's comment, you know, there is a land use concept map that was, that accompanies the so-called, the draft North Kohala Community Development Plan, and in that land use concept map, that map suggested that in this general area, the Kaauhuhu Homestead area, that should be considered for at least like three- to five-acre lot size because it's kind of close to town and can provide some residential/agricultural purposes. So there is a map that goes along with the narrative that you had just read. So we are making the argument that the five-acre zoning would be consistent with that draft plan, although it was prepared a number of years ago and things have considerably changed, you know, over time. But if you are, that's the only, I guess, more specific plan that's available, aside from the General Plan; and so we're using that as a reference point, as well. GOLDSTEIN: If I may? TANAKA: Okay. Director Goldstein. GOLDSTEIN: But also to note that that Kohala Plan was never adopted. It's not an official plan, in that sense. SOUZA: It's not an official plan? GOLDSTEIN: It's never been adopted by, either by resolution or even an ordinance, either by, I believe, the Commission or the County Council. SOUZA: So it's just a GOLDSTEIN: It's a reference. -8- SOUZA: Community plan. GOLDSTEIN: It's a reference, yes. SOUZA: Thank you. TANAKA: Commissioner Mosher. MOSHER: I just want to clarify my own thinking. We're here just to recommend a rezoning, not to determine how the lots are to be subdivided. So if it gets up to Virginia's position and they don't see the configuration as being correct or proper, it's at that point that you could do a different configuration of the parcels, parcel? FUKE: That's correct. That's correct because MOSHER: Okay. FUKE: The Subdivision Code would have like minimum area requirements. MOSHER: Okay. Setbacks. FUKE: Setback, the width, minimum area width. MOSHER: Okay. FUKE: Yeah. MOSHER: Back on track. Thank you. TANAKA: And this is also a recommendation to County Council, yeah. MOSHER: That's what I said, so it's on the record. TANAKA: Any further questions, Commissioners? Commissioner Togashi. TOGASHI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm still hung up on the ditch thing. Anyway, I noticed in Exhibit J, Mr. Fuke, you mentioned that in a letter to Director Goldstein that you do not feel that there are any drainage considerations; however, it does state that in the development of respective parcels, however, there could be. In that event, respective property owners will be responsible for complying with the appropriate grading and grubbing requirements and so forth, yeah. I guess my concern is, I mean, and that's why I was asking about who owns and maintains the ditch. I mean, should this ditch -9- FUKE: Overflow. TOGASHI: Yeah, plug up or somehow, you know, it overflows and it goes onto the surrounding property And yet we have no, none of the conditions of approval cover any drainage issues and, nor a drainage study, for that matter. So what would your response to that be? FUKE: Initially, well, you know, I don't know the history of the ditch in terms of like whether it has ever overflowed in this particular area, and who has that obligation to maintain the ditch to minimize the potential for any overflow. But notwithstanding, you know, that comment, I think that when the property is being, when the application is filed for a subdivision, the Department of Public Works will probably require some sort of a drainage statement or a drainage plan that addresses all of the drainage implications associated with the development of the property. If they don't require it at that time, in conjunction with the improvement, you know, of the land, whether it's through a grading or a grubbing permit, there has to be some accompanying drainage plan that addresses all of the drainage implications associated with the proposed activity. If there is not, if the Public Works Department does not require a grading or grubbing permit, what happens is that the Applicant, before they do that, would have to have an approved Soil Conservation Service agricultural plan permit, pretty much like what the Department of Agriculture was mentioning, before the grading or grubbing can occur. TOGASHI: But this drainage plan is different from a drainage study FUKE: That is TOGASHI: Yeah? FUKE: That is correct. TOGASHI: It is less stringent, I guess, yeah. FUKE: Well, it would have to discuss like how your, you know, how your proposed water flow is going to be on the site, you know, with all of your proposed improvements. I know you're getting back, really, to the specific issue of like what happens if the ditch is, ditch TOGASHI: Plug up, right. FUKE: Overflows. yeah, or plugs? I really can't answer that question TOGASHI: Right. -10- FUKE: Directly. TOGASHI: Right. Right. And I guess still with all this and maybe, Director Goldstein, you still don't feel that maybe a study, other than a plan, maybe, would be perhaps more of a thorough coverage or GOLDSTEIN: Well, I think one of the, the thing is that when Public Works reviewed this application, I'm sure they looked at the drainage issues because that's part of their responsibility. And, in a sense, I also agree with Mr. Fuke. Whether or not this particular change of zone carries a condition relating to drainage, nevertheless, a couple of other points in the overall permitting process would require some sort of drainage study and/or mitigation measures, that's, and that's through a separate portion of the County Code. So, you know, unless there's really serious kinds of drainage issues which TOGASHI: I see. GOLDSTEIN: I don't see here, I think we might be better off not TOGASHI: Putting it GOLDSTEIN: Adding on. TOGASHI: As a condition? GOLDSTEIN: Yeah. TOGASHI: Okay. No, I guess, you know, I've seen on previous or other applications GOLDSTEIN: Yes, we have TOGASHI: You know, quite often a GOLDSTEIN: And usually TOGASHI: Drainage, right. GOLDSTEIN: Usually that comes with there are known, you know, real flooding problems and/or Public Works has identified some of those concerns. TOGASHI: Okay. TANAKA: So we would have known by now if there -11- TOGASHI: I see. TANAKA: Had been any problems in the area with the ditch. TOGASHI: Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. TANAKA: Okay. Commissioner Souza. SOUZA: Mr. Fuke, on the, in the application, Applicant's application, I have, it says, "Do you intend to build houses on newly created lots?" It says, "None on the five-acre lot, one on the acre lot. " Is there an acre lot in all of this? TOGASHI: I think it should say 15 maybe, yeah. GIFFIN: Fifteen. FUKE: Fifteen, it's an error. GIFFIN: It's a typo. FUKE: Thank you very much. SOUZA: Okay. And the other question, No. 6, "Was your request to allow for the creation of smaller agricultural lots? Yes. If so, did your plan include the following considerations? Commodity to be produced? Yes. What kinds of commodity? Truck crop and ornamental plants." Nothing said. Then it says, "Suitability for the proposed lot size for that commodity? Yes." But what is the commodity? FUKE: Well, he's looking at like doing truck crops and ornamental plants. I mean, you know, maybe it seems like it was the same TANAKA: That's his answer, right there. FUKE: Yeah, that's the answer, the truck crop TANAKA: That's the answer. FUKE: And ornamental plants. SOUZA: But it doesn't state on how many acres or for the whole thing? He's going to build a house. Is the rest going to be See, my mind, remember, I'm saying that in my, the back of my mind, this is suitable for intensive agriculture. And if you look at the comments from the Department of Ag, it's scary. -12- FUKE: In what sense, yeah? SOUZA: You know, that we break up these lands and get away into gentleman farms instead. The whole state, we always preach agriculture, keep the agricultural land in agriculture. And it's scary, you know, that we're breaking up these farm lands and not knowing whether it be just gentleman farms with two horses and, or what. FUKE: But part of the thing is like when you have like large lots, you know, 20, 25 or 30 acre lots, it becomes less economically feasible for the smaller farmers, you know, to get access to it. Because, you know, we're increasingly moving towards small scale agriculture, you know, rather than corporate size, you know, when you used to have like the sugar operations or macadamia operations, the real large corporate agricultural activities. But if you look, farmer's market, wherever, you know, you find people who are doing active agricultural, you know, activities on three to five acres in size. You know, that becomes a little bit more manageable for families. So what you're saying, what we are saying here is that, you know, by having this 20-acre, you know, if you leave it in 27-acre parcel, as it is right now, based on the existing zoning, the potential for it to be actively used for agriculture would be very minimal. By having it a little bit smaller size, more reasonable size, which is consistent with existing and even draft plans in that area, it would provide the opportunity for families or others who need only about three to five acres to get engaged in agricultural activities. SOUZA: I agree with you. If we follow the recommendations of the Department of Agriculture, then I certainly agree with you. But if we don't, then I cannot agree with you because, you know, it just be in name, ative-acre agricultural lot. FUKE: See, as far as like what Department of Agriculture it's really like, I think, the Commission's and the County Council's ultimate decision. You know, like on all agricultural rezoning requests in the past, what the Department has recommended and what the Commission has accepted, as well as the Council, is a condition that's contained in your proposed Condition B, that the applicants, etcetera, comply with the requirements of Chapter 205 relating to the State Agricultural District. MOSHER: Right. FUKE: I mean, you know, it's basically saying that you have, whatever you do on the property, you have to be agriculturally related; and so that is the way that you indirectly address the Department of Agriculture's recommendation. If that is not the position and you would wish to have a little bit more stringent type of recommendation pursuant to what Department of Ag is suggesting, then, you know, those would be the conditions. But I think this is like would have to be a major policy decision on the part of the Commission as well as the County Council. -13- TANAKA: Commissioner Mosher. MOSHER: I have one question of Virginia. When an agricultural subdivision is approved or during the process of approval with you folks, is it at that time that you set aside a quarter acre as a home site, or do they have to come in when they get a building permit and then, at that time, determine where the home site is going to be? GOLDSTEIN: We wouldn't determine where the home site would be, but we would review requirements for the Ag, the agricultural requirements at the time of building permit. MOSHER: Building permit. GOLDSTEIN: Yeah. MOSHER: Okay. TANAKA: Okay. Commissioners, I guess, I offer my comments on the discussion between Mr. Fuke and Commissioner Souza. You know, a lot of these lands are intended for intensive agriculture. And as we look at the map, again, Exhibit A, there is a mixture of uses in that area, everything from RS-15, well, not everything, but two designations, RS-15 all the way to Ag-20. And I think what we need to be mindful of is to look at how the land is being utilized. Sure, I think [he people that are into farming, the fazmers would love to have 20 acres or whatever, but can they really afford to do it, you know? So we can say, well, it's intended for Intensive Ag, it should remain Agricultural-20. But who's going to be using the land? Is the land going to be fully utilized? It might stay in that zoning for our lifetime GIFFIN: Yeah. TANAKA: You know, and not be affordable to these people that want to do something economically with the land. Commissioner Giffin. GIFFIN: And adding to that, if we look at the background report, the past practice of the use of that land was cattle grazing. I mean, two horses? I don't think so. TANAKA: So, you know, it's a dynamic planning process that we look at, so what was originally intended, you know, 30, 50 years ago, and what are the needs today. Commissioner Souza. SOUZA: Commissioner Giffin said cattle grazing most recently; but as I recall reading, originally, sugar cane. GIFFIN: Yeah. -14- SOUZA: So, you know, it's good land. GIFFIN: Oh, I'm not denying that. SOUZA: Yeah. GIFFIN: I'm just SOUZA: It's good land. GIFFIN: Saying that after, subsequent to the use of SOUZA: Yeah. GIFFIN: It being used for sugar. SOUZA: Yeah. And I GIFFIN: That it was pasture. SOUZA: I agree with everything Commissioner Tanaka said, except, remember, I come from a rural community, agriculture. Where I live is zoned 10-Agriculture, and I see 10-acres agricultural land being bought up, a house put up with two horses, and nothing done with the Ag land. And [his concerns me, because we talk so much about maintaining agriculture presence in this County, but we're letting it slip away. Now, again, like I agreed with Mr. Fuke, I agree with Mr. Tanaka that we should cut up the land, but then we should make some provision that the guy buying the land do some serious farming, not a gentleman farm. That's my only I'm for the subdivision, but I'd like to see something where there would be some assurances that some farming, real farming, real farming would be done with the land. TANAKA: I think, also, that would require some policy revisions and clarifications. Because Mr., Commissioner Souza, you brought up the question about what would dictate enough land to make it suitable for what you might call intensive agriculture? Is it one-acre, three-acre, five-acres, ten acres, you know? Like yourself, my family is raised in the country, too, and they come from Honokaa, Kukuihaele and Waipio Valley. And I have a cousin who, although he wishes to have five acres of land in Waipio to lease for taro, he cannot afford it. So he is doing the best that he can with, I think he has like 1.5 acres or so; you know, so that kind of allowance should be observed, too, yeah. But to come up with something to dictate that even the agreement, I don't think we even have an agricultural agreement in place, do we, as to what is agricultural use on the property? -15- GOLDSTEIN: Right now, there are no adopted standazds that would suggest or even say what a minimum lot size would be for, for example, for what kinds of crops and so And that's, I think, the real difficulty with agriculture in the first place -What exactly is a minimum lot size that would sustain various kinds of agricultural activities? But right now we don't have that. TANAKA: So perhaps the process would be to initiate something, to have the Department look into it, along with the County Council, to maybe further define. And we could, since we have a Councilwoman here, we can maybe request her opinion, her comments. But go ahead, Commissioner Souza. SOUZA: If I may ask another follow-up question with our Planning Director, what are your, what are the legal effects or what right would the Commission have in carrying out any one of the _recottimendations that the Department of Agriculture suggests? BAKER: That's what I was going to say, put it under B. In line with Mr. Souza's question, that's what I was going to speak on, is that I think we could probably put that as a condition under B, with B to say that at least a soil conservation requirement could be met on that land as a condition of part of that, in that Because B covers Chapter 205, yeah, and if we could add that as a part of B. Is that proper? GOLDSTEIN: Let me, we have In trying to get a handle on the agricultural use of land and, in particular, there is a section in our Subdivision Code that relates to agricultural subdivisions. Likewise, when someone comes in for a second dwelling on agricultural lands, there are requirements that they come in with an agricultural farm dwelling agreement. And in the agricultural subdivision provisions of the Subdivision Code, we do ask that a soil conservation plan be submitted. Now, we have also had further discussions with the Soil Conservation Service. And, in some respects, they have been reluctant to really apply it to the smaller areas; and they would prefer that when they look at these plans, particularly for drainage kinds of concerns, also, that they want to look at the overall area rather than small parcels. I don't think that that really gets to your question, whether those things would actually assure the intent and the actual use, you know, in terms of putting on a condition of approval. TANAKA: Let me call up Councilwoman Leithead-Todd. Is there anyone else that would like to testify on this agenda item? Okay, if I could swear you in first. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Hawaii County Planning Commission? LEITHEAD-TODD: Yes, I do. TANAKA: Thank you. Name and address for the record, please. -16- LEITHEAD-TODD: Okay. Name is Bobby Leithead-Todd, and I reside at 118 Lukia Place in Hilo. When Commissioner Souza was discussing this issue, I think one of the recommendations to the Council might be that we should be looking at our Tax Code in terms of the types of benefits that we give to agriculturally zoned land. And one thought on pasture might be that you can't get a pasture designation for lot sizes smaller than a certain acreage because your pasture designation allows you to, what happens is Real Property assesses the land as if it's worth only $200 an acre. So if you have 10 acres, and he has it, have it designated as pasture, on our tax records, we look at that as if it's only worth, 10 acres, $200, $2,000. Two thousand dollars at, what is it, $10 an acre, your tax bill is 20 bucks a year; and you may have paid a lot of money for that land. So by putting it in pasture, you get the cheapest rate because, and so you run a cow on it, run one horse on it, and you get to have your nice house, and you pay almost no taxes. The other problem, frankly, is the Homeowner's classification, which is at $4.45. What we saw with some of the upscale homes in the Kohala area is by moving from Ag into the Homeowner's class on a 10-acre lot with a million dollar home, the tax bill was cut by $3,000; and there was absolutely no incentive to do any agriculture on the land because they were able to move into the Homeowner's class. It was, in fact, much cheaper by moving into that classification. So one though[ is you may want to give people the benefit for their house in the Homeowner's classification but you may want to limit the amount of acreage. You may want to not allow the pasture designation. But that's primary a Tax Code thing. Because what I'm looking at is it's really difficult to write language that requires someone to actually put the land into agricultural use. So the way you can try and deal with that is by creating a tax incentive to actually do Ag; and one of those things is you have to remove the tax incentive to put your land into agriculture, I mean into pasture, because of that $200 an acre value that we put on it. And that's, I think, all over the Island; it's not just in your area, Commissioner Souza. I've seen it up in other areas where somebody puts one horse, and there's no real agriculture going on. The other thing is that possibly in order to get an agricultural designation and the tax advantages, maybe there has to be some kind of proof of agricultural activity, General Excise Tax license or something, in order to get the break, because you want to help the farmer who's actually farming. Because if he has to pay taxes based on the value of the land, you know that in many areas of this Island it will really cut into any profits that they've been making; and what you're going to end up with is people who have to have a job in a hotel to basically pay their bills and pay their mortgage, and they're only going to do Ag on the side as a hobby; and after a while, it becomes real difficult for people to do both things. The other question is, is whether in certain areas, under the Zoning or Subdivision Code, you want to have a minimum lot size in certain types of agricultural designations or in certain areas of the Island. Possibly through General Plan, which we're going through right now, and -17- which is going to land on your dcsks first, is you may want to carve out certain areas of the Island where you say that we shouldn't have lots smaller than 20 acres, 40 acres, 10 acres, in terms of what you think is the best to preserve that land for agriculture. And so I suspect early next year you'll be getting that General Plan in front of you and will have an opportunity to make some recommendations to that before it reaches the Council. TANAKA: Thank you. Commissioners, any questions for Councilwoman? Okay. Thank you very much for your comments. Regarding the Tax Code, I think this is something that maybe the Department can maybe work with County Council in initiating something. I think the comments on the General Plan amendment are well taken, not only for agricultural usage but other areas that will come up later on in the agenda, urban designations and so forth. Okay. But we'll have Staff and the Director look into those reconunendations. Is there anyone else that would like to testify on this agenda item? Or, Commissioner Mosher, do you have another question? MOSHER: No, I was going to close the public hearing. TANAKA: Okay. You have the floor. MOSHER: I move to close the public hearing. BAKER: Second. TANAKA: Moved and seconded to close the public hearing. All those in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONERS: Aye. TANAKA: Any opposed? Okay. Commissioner Mosher. MOSHER: I move that we send a favorable recommendation of this Change of Zone Application from Ag-20 to Ag-5 to the County Council, and that's Zone Application 99-020, with the attached recommendations. BAKER: Second. MOSHER: Or attached conditions. TANAKA: Okay. We have a motion by Commissioner Mosher, a second by Commissioner Baker, that we send a favorable recommendation to the County Council for the Change of Zone Application REZ 99-020 for John Tanaka, with the reasons and conditions as attached. Any discussions? Commissioner Souza. -18- SOUZA: Mr. Chairman, there's good arguments on both sides of the issue, really. I am concerned about, again, that this will, because like what you said, the land is expensive, the five-acre lot. A truly farmer, one that really wants to farm, may not be able to afford it, so what does it become? It becomes a gentleman farm. I raised the issue, and I'm really happy this morning on the discussion, we had it on the issue, and the direction the discussion is taking us into. I will vote for the motion with my concerns but, again, I feel very gratified that with the concerns mentioned this morning that maybe, you know, we can look at the concerns I brought up. Thank you. TANAKA: Thank you, Commissioner Souza. Okay. Roll call. FUJIMOTO: Commissioner Mosher? MOSHER: Aye. FUJIMOTO: Commissioner Baker? BAKER: Aye. FUJIMOTO: Commissioner Giffin? GIFFIN: Aye. FUJIMOTO: Commissioner Souza? SOUZA: Aye. FUJIMOTO: Commissioner Togashi? TOGASHI: Aye. FUJIMOTO: Mr. Chairman? TANAKA: Aye. FUJIMOTO: Mr. Chairman, there are six ayes; the motion carried. TANAKA: Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Fuke, we will notify you in writing of today's results, and Mr. Tanaka. FUKE: Thank you very much. I share Commissioner Souza's comments that it was a very lively and informative discussion. -19- TANAKA: Thank you. The discussion ended at 9:50 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon M. Nomura, Secretary -20- BTanakOLemm-IO/1/99 COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT BACKGROUND REPORT JOHN TANAKA CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (REZ 99-020) JOHN TANAKA has submitted an application for a Change of Zone by changing the district classification from Agricultural (A-20a) to Agricultural (A-Sa) for approximately 27.286 acres of land. The property is located on the north side of Kynnersley Road approximately one mile south of its intersection with Akoni-Pule Highway, Puehuehu, North Kohala, Hawaii, Tax Map Key: 5-4-2:14. G A INFO ATION 1. Land Ownership: John S. Tanaka and Amy Y. Tanaka are the fee owners of the subject property. PROPO ED D . ..OPMENT 2. Request: The applicants are proposing to change the district classification from Agricultural (A-20a) to Agricultural (A-Sa) for approximately 27.286 acres of land. 3. Objectives: "The property is presently devoid of any active agricultural activity. It was formerly used for sugar cultivation, and in recent past, portions of the property have been used for cattle grazing. 4. "The applicant intends to subdivide the property into three lots. Two (2) of the lots would be 5 + acre in size and sold to persons interested in using the land for some agricultural purposes. The balance of the property would be retained by the applicant. 5. "The applicant intends to have portions of the site cultivated into ornamental and citrus trees and also plans to build a residence on the site. In the future, the applicant may further subdivide the property consistent with the A-Sa zoning. 6. "Given the site's soil characteristic, the applicant believes the property can be put into a more productive agricultural use with 5+ acre lots than the existing 27+ acres. The smaller lot size would make it more affordable to potential farmers, particularly for those interested in doing supplemental agricultural activities. Further, the applicant has access to water from the Kohala Ditch, and this provides a reliable source of agricultural water." 7. Supportive Information: The applicant has submitted the following in support of the request: (See Exhibit A -Change of Zone Application). STATE AND COUNTY PLANS 8. SLU: Agricultural. 9. Hawaii State Plan Consistency: Economy, Socio-Cultural Advancement (Housing) objectives and policies. 10. General Plan Consistency: Economic, Agricultural, Housing and Land Use Elements goals, policies and courses of action for North Kohala. 11. GP LUPAG MAP: Intensive Agriculture. This designation refers to lands that are capable of supporting sugar, orchard, diversified agriculture and floriculture uses. 12. County Zoning: Agricultural (A-20a). 13. SMA: The property is not situated within the Special Management Area (SMA). 14. North Kohala Community Development Plan: The North Kohala Community ~ Development Plan (CDP) adopted in 1986 designates the area for agricultural activity. The CDP encourages more intensive use of North Kohala's agricultural resources through the subdivision of selected agricultural lands into smaller and more manageable parcels. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AND SURROUNDIN(' ARFA4 15. Subject Property: The subject property is an approximately 27.286 acre irregular shaped lot with an 8 to 12 percent slope. The area receives approximately 50 to 90 inches of rainfall annually. The elevation of the site is 1,000 feet above mean sea level. The site is vacant of any structures and was formerly used for sugar cultivation. The Kohala Ditch bisects the property in a east to west direction. 16. Subdivision No. 6909: The subject property was part of a consolidation/resubdivision action which secured final subdivision approval on December 2, 1997. TMK: 5-4-02:2 & 6 and TMK: 5-4-11:82 & 113 with a total of 320 acres were -2- subdivided into 8 lots varying in sizes from approximately 21-32 acres with one 143- acre parcel. 17. U.S. Soil Survey: The soils within the project area are classified by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, of the Kohala Series (KhA) and Ainakea Series (AaD). The Kohala series consists of well-drained silty clays that formed in material from basic igneous rock influenced by volcanic ash. In a representative profile the surface layer is very dark grayish-brown and dark-brown silty clay about 14 inches thick. The subsoil is about 25 inches thick and consists of dark- brown to dark yellowish-brown silty clay loam and silty clay. Permeability is moderately rapid, runoff is slow to medium, with 0 to 3 percent slopes. The erosion hazard is slight to moderate. This soil is used mostly for irrigated sugarcane. Small areas are used for pasture, orchards, and truck crops. The Ainakea series consists of 3 to 12 percent slopes, except that it is moderately steep. Included in mapping are about 90 acres of cinder cones about 1 mile south of Hawi. These cinder cones have a slope of 50 to 90 percent. Their surface layer is like that of the Ainakea soil but underlain by cinders at a depth of 10 to 20 inches. Runoff is medium and the erosion hazazd is moderate. This soil is used for sugar cane and macadamia nuts and as homesites. 18. FIRM: Zone X, area determined to be outside the 500-year flood plain. 19. Land Study Bureau Soil Rating: The Land Study Bureau's overall master productivity rating for agricultural use is Class "C" or Fair. 20. ALISH: The property is classified according to the State Departrnent of Agriculture's Agricultural Lands of Importance to the State of Hawaii (ALISH) system as "Prime". 21. Flora/Fauna Resources: According to the applicants' environmental report, the site has already been cleared in the past and the area has been used actively for sugar cultivation. Although no professional surveys were conducted, the site is dominated by alien species. These include grass with occasional patches of Lantana and Christmas Berry. Mango and guava trees were also observed. No native fauna was observed on the site. The site is not known to be a habitat for any rare or endangered animal life. However, it would be possible to find the Hawaiian Hawk and Hawaiian Owl at this -3- elevation. 22. Archaeological Resources: According to the applicants' environmental report, the site was previously cleared. No professional survey was conducted. However, the proposed action will not have any effect on significant historic sites. Nevertheless, a condition will be included to require the notification of the Department of Land Natural Resources-Historic Preservation Division should any archaeological sites be encountered during the course of development. 23. Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses: There are single-family residences and vacant lands within the adjoining Kynnersley housing tract zoned RS-15. To the west are parcels within the State Land Use Agricultural District zoned A-Sa and A-3a. The A- 3a zoned parcels lie within the Kaauhuhu Homestead area. Lands to the north are zoned A-20a. P I ILITI AND RVI E 24. Access: Access to the subject property is via Kynnersley Road, a County road with a 18 to 20-foot wide pavement within a 50-foot right-of--way. The applicant intends to have all three lots access directly from Kynnersley Road. 25. Water: According to the Department of Water Supply, water can be made available from an existing 6-inch waterline along Kynnersley Road fronting the property. However, the proposed subdivision would require the applicant to extend the existing 6-inch waterline to a point north of the common boundary of Lot 2 and Lot H, a distance of approximately 1,200 feet. The applicant has agreed to make the required waterline and related improvements in conjunction with the subdivision approval process. 26. Wastewater: There is no municipal sewer system in the area. The applicants would be required to dispose wastewater into a septic tank system. 27. Utilities: Electrical service is available to the property from Hawaii Electric Light Co. Inc., and telephone service is available from GTE Hawaiian Tel. -4- AGENCIES' COMMENTS 28. Real Property Tax Office (August 9, 1999 Memo): "There are no rollback tax consequences. "Status of real property taxes: Current -real property taxes are paid through 6/30/99." 29. Department of Land and Natural Resources -Land Division (August 30, 1999 Letter): "The Department of Land and Natural Resources has no comment to offer on the subject matter." 30. Department of Health (August 11, 1999 Memo): "The Health Department found no environmental health concerns with regulatory implications in the submittals." 31. Police Department: (See Exhibit B -August 13, 1999 Memo) 32. Department of Public Works: (See Exhibit C -September 14, 1999 and October 6, 1999 Memos) 33. Department of Land and Natural Resources -Historic Preservation Division: (See Exhibit D -September 7, 1999 Letter) 34. Department of Water Supply: (See Exhibit E -September 16, 1999 Memo) Applicants Response: (See Exhibit F -September 22, 1999 Letter) 35. Department of Agriculture: (See Exhibit G -September 29, 1999 Memo) 36. Land Use Commission: (See Exhibit H -August 16, 1999 Letter) 37. Applicants' Response to State Land Use Commission, Department of Health and Police Department: (See Exhibit I -September 3, 1999 Letter) 38. Applicants' Response to State DLNR -Land Division, DLNR -Historic Preservation Division and Department of Public Works: (See Exhibit J - September 16, 1999 Letter) -s- AGENCIES - NO COMMENTS 39. Fire Department, Department of Land and Natural Resources -Land Management, Department of Transportation -Hilo and Honolulu, Natural Resources Soil Conservation Service. PUBLIC COMMENTS 40. The Department has not received any objections from the general public or adjacent landowners on the subject request. -6- CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT (Type or legibly print the requested information) APPLICANT.: John Tanaka APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE a-f~.~-~-- DATE: ~ I5 ADDRESS: 68-1050 auna LaniFPoint Drive, E204 Kohala Coast, Hawaii 96743 LIST APPLICANT'S INTEREST IF NOT OWNER: LIST PRINCIPAL(S) INCLUDING NAMES OF MAIN OFFICERS: PHONE:(Bus.) (Res.) 885-5666 (p~)'$ JN' S~( LANDOWNER(S): John S. Tana~~ka//h~and'''-~A]my Tanaka .i' LANDOWNER SIGNATURE(S):_17t-~?'ns.l~7~; ~ /s LANDOWNER(S) ADDRESS: Same as iabove REQUEST: A-20a TO A-5a (Existing zoning) 5 -4- 2 • ~ (Lot. F) (Proposed Zoning) TAX MAP KEY: Q STREET,ADDRESS OF PROPERTY:_~~I.~(! .ru r ~~JLL~~i1A"~ SIZE OF PROPERTY OR AFFECTED AREA(S) TO BE REZONED: 27.286 acres AGENT: Sidney M. Fuke 100 Pauahi Street, Suite 212 ADDRESS: Hilo, HI 96720 TELEPHONE:(Bus.) 969-1522 (ReS) 961-6909 (Fax) 969-7996 Please indicate to whom original correspondence and copies should be sent. Sidney Fuke John Tanaka ORIGINAL: COPIES: ~x~ai~st (See Instructions verse Side) ATTACHMENT Agricultural Rezoning PLANNING DEPART'~NT COUNTY OF HAWAII APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONE 1. If your request is approved, do you intend to subdivide the subject land in accordance with the approved change of zone? Yes If yes, please answer the rest of question 1 and then to question 3. a. How many acres of the requested area do you intend to subdivide? All 5+ acres an b. Into what lot sizes? 15 a c. If your request is approved, approximately how long after the date of approval do you expect to submit your subdivision plans to the Planning Department for preliminary approval? Immediately d. Do you intend to build houses on the newly created lots? None on the 5+ acre lot If ves, please answer the following questions: one on the On how many of those lots? acre lot At what approximate price range? House $250,000 Lot Total Approximately how long, after approval of the subdivision, 1 year would the first house be available for occupancy? If you intend to subdivide, please submit a preliminary schematic subdivision plan together with your change of zone application form. 2. If you have no firm plans of subdividing the subject area, do you intend to: a. Sell or lease the land to someone who has firm plans? - li. Sell or lease the land to someone who has tentative plans? c. Sell or lease the land to someone who has no plans? d. Keep it? e. Other (please state) P.D. 2 5/84 f. If you intend to do either a, b, c, please elaborate on the kind of plans the other party has. Please, also, include in your answer approximately how soon after approval of your rezoning do you expect to transfer the subject land to another party. 3. Do you think that your request and your further plans for the land will alleviate the local housing situation? Yes How? providing additional farm lots - with: the capacity to have a dwelling on the lots - increases the overall supply. 4. Are there any buildings on the subject area? ~2_ If so, what kind? What do you intend to do with those buildings if your request is approved? 5. Is the subject land currently being used for any agricultural activity? Nn If so, please list the kinds of products grown and on how many square feet or acres of land per product. t'he property, however, has been used intermittently for cattle Qrazing. 6. Was your request to allow for the creation of smaller agricultural lots? Yes If so, did your plan include the following considerations? a. Commodity to be produced? Yes What kinds of commodity? Truck crop and ornamental plants b. Suitablility of the proposed lot-size for that commodity? Yes c. Sufficient farm size to allow reasonable chance of success in Yes commercial agriculture? -2- d. Agricultural leases or other forms of assurance that potential buyers or leases would put the subject area into some form of agricultural use? No Please state the proposed type of arrangement. Please submit your agricultural plans for the subject area and present evidence of consideration of the above requirements together with your request for a change of zone. Please refer to Planning and Environmental Report. If you do not intend to subdivide the subject land for some sort of agricultural purpose, please state your other reasons. 7. To your knowledge, has there been any flooding and/or drainage problem on the subject area? No If so, please describe the problem. 8. Do you think that the roads leading to the subject area needs improvements? No If so, what kind? Yes Is the road adequate for the proposed traffic volume or load? 9. What sort of governmental assistance and/or improvements do you feel will be needed in the subject area when developed? Yes No a. Schools x b. Roads x c. Sewer x d. Drainage x -3- Yes fto ' X e. Police Protection f. Fire Protection X g. Recreational Facilities X h. Public Utilities X i. Other For those checked "yes," please elaborate what type or kinds of improvements and/or assistance are needed. Signature: ~F / Address: 68-1050 Mauna Lani Point Drive, E204 Kohala Coast, HI 96743 Telephone: 885-5666 Date: July 15, 1999 -4- COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT FOR COUNTY REZONING REQUEST (A-20a to A-Sa) PUEHUEHU, NORTH KOHALA, HAWAII TAX MAP KEY: (3) 5-4-02: ~i~ Prepared For: John S. Tanaka Prepared By: Sidney M. Fuke, Planning Consultant July 1999 COUNTY ENVIItONMENTAL REPORT COUNTY REZONING REQUEST (A-20a to A-Sa) JOHN S. TANAKA ` PUEHUEHU, NORTH KOHALA, HAWAII TAX MAP KEY: (3) 5-4-02:!!6 /y~ I. INTRODUCTION The applicant, John S. Tanaka, is requesting to rezone a 27.286 acre pazcel from Agriculture (A-20a) to Agriculture (5-a). The subject property is located on the north side of Kynnersley Road in North Kohala. (See Figure I) If approved, the applicant intends to subdivide the 27.286 acre parcel into initially three (3) lots, two lots consisting of 5+ acres and the remaining one, 15+ acres. The applicant intends to keep the 15+ acre lot and build his residence on it. He may, depending on his estate planning needs, further subdivide said azea into 5+ acre lots. The other two lots would be sold to persons interested in using the property for small scale agricultural pursuits. II. PROJECT LOCATION The subject azea is located on the north side of Kynnersley Road, approximately one (1) mile mauka of the Kynnersley Road and Hawi-Niuli Road (Highway 270) intersection. The Kynnersley Road residential tract is located immediately adjacent and makai of the subject pazcel. (See Figure I) A section of the Kohala Ditch system bisects the subject property. III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. Project Concept and Components The property is presently devoid of any active agricultural activity. It was formerly used for sugaz cultivation, and in recent past, portions of the property have been used for cattle grazing. The applicant intends to subdivide the property into three lots. Two (2) of the lots would be 5+ acre in size and sold to persons interested in using the land for some agricultural purposes. The balance of the property would be retained by the applicant. (See Figure 2) 1 F G H PROJECT LOCATION i " ; ,~__.U2aa Mill I, \YMEL< 'OYa6 ^ ~ 1 1 .rawauuc `Yr i i a+. I ~ , , i i r P _.._.._.._.._.._,___.._.._.._.._.._.._..r.._.. E ! ~ ! i i p ~ `.~^i^, ` 1 i r ~ / 1 ~ ! ` r ! i I I I ''le'i , r ~ ~ ! i i ` ~ ! r~ i r quo _.._.._.._.._._.._._.i_.._.._._.._d..,..__r.._.r.._.._.._.._.._.. i._.._.._.._..-._.._..___.. ' ~ ! r i warcva 'uun i I e Y i I' "~il' j . 3 I i ~ gl' \ r i ~ I ..Im. _„I vaculos r--- i KOHALA I >1RV°xu ~ I 1 HIDH °FI vKaruu ~ I ! AND c I ~ I M 590 ~ I ELEMENTAR 2° i Q p I I vaw~a IPUIa i N jj I I j I _..__7_ NOT TO SCALE i ~ i ! ~ I m??o i~ ~ % i i • ! I~' (HAWI € ~ , p ~ Y i SEE ~i ID I ` I `4 ~ I DETAIL P i f i o ~ 4 P z .BELOW _..1.. _.._..!.a.._..__'_.. . c.._.._.._. salrrl v- G x i [t _ N i i ~ ~ qy Y~ !N 6 ! c i ° i W rn i ~ i m I ~c ' _ __j I u I _.r.._. ._,a.. y.._.._ _..y. _ y_.. ! _...Q i r C Z i I ! w m i a j v~ i W y 7 7 1 d 1 N 1 i 7 'a C 1 p! I 8 1 I I y I i 1 i I ! ~ ! y I 1 1 . p..4. Haar I_.._.._.. _..1.._.._ na. ._..1._. .._..t 1 I._.._.. y j y I i a ° 1 . i e " i i ALIUI ~ i j i RIDGE, ~ o PROJECT LOCATION dd i Ka IN $ i ad i $ i d i i ~ ; f d + i ; I i I dl " ! i d: u I I i a i I. L. ! q I 1 6 I D / ! ! ! I y I ~ 'b . e a ! i I _ i. a ~ i ! e°e ! Keawe IW SC ` i i ; _ I I KOHALA i. . ~ MISSION m x ; ~ t SCHOOL HOMESTEADS I ° £ Keswe Iki Wy. ! ~ ; m i ,I , I Akoni Pule Hwy. rL, I ° ~ i I 12]0 Itl S j`^ . '____._.._..Q _ I 2]p i amekana PI. I ! I 1 i .._..i. i_ J it _ Kamakana Cir. - m L_, _ - o . . PDainananl Pi. i b; ~ I f7MW~ Pa' ~ ~ Pualnananl SL ~`m i = o' I I 2 z £ ~ ' I _ ° - a , m 3 0 - - 1250 ! a ~ ~,a 3 FIGURE 'i I SEE NDEX A C D E H E S 'Li 09 ~NI L ~71tl09 ~ b _~i O~b ~ ~ 2~4j 4,1 Yl e~tl o a i ~Q / £ roof ~ ~ o3a 6 8 .~sAt `.seal ~Wly W °o°o~ ~}j H y a 3 zu~ U 9-9~10 Omni fe~ O'~O .ieb? ~ ~ 8 ar~ W ^'a. 4~ Q - I o~ ~ a J Vl .p' ~ A. l r '1 ' , 1` r ~ 'n ,e~rin• ~ 8 / ~ / A /y ~ / / i q~ i i ~ N / 8 .fie i i / ~ ~K / / Q` OQ / i ~ s• ~m i / 9B / / • 8 N N u ~ ~ ~ N Q r %Ayy~~- J\ mN N rF Cry s/' ^ of / / '8 ~ % / ~ / / / I / ~ I / / / ~ / ~ / ~ 8 i i r ~ i , i r w i ~ a i ~ ~ ~ `1 / i _m i i ~m ~ / ° ni I •1 ~ 1 s °s n e 1 „s,z ~ 1 g . s I I R•A z~ i I .0.'$S I e Q .ri.9 ~ / ` ie2j . o / 4 The applicant intends to have portions of the site cultivated into ornamental and citrus trees. He and his wife also intend to build a residence on it. In the future, the applicant may further subdivide the property consistent with the A-Sa zoning. Given the site's soil characteristic, the applicant believes the property can be put into a more productive agricuhural use with 5+ acre lots than the eadsting 27+ acres. The smaller lot size would make it more affordable to potential farmers, particularly for those interested in doing supplemental agricultural activities. Further, the applicant has access to water from the Kohala Ditch, and this provides a reliable source of agricultural water. It is understood that the subdivision plan submitted herein may change prior to receipt of final subdivision approval to accommodate County subdivision requirements, appropriate conditions of approval, and marketing demands. B. Protect Timetable and Cost The applicant hopes to secure the necessary County rezoning approvals as soon as possible and begin the subdivision and development process immediately thereafter. Tentatively, plans call for having the ]and subdivided in the first quarter of the yeaz 2000. Cleazing and planting would begin once subdivision plans aze finalized. The cost of the improvements (principally water line and driveway access) is estimated to be less than $30,000. IV. INSTITUTIONAL CONSIDERATIONS A. State Land Use The subject area is designated Agriculture. Based on the size of the requested azea, no State Land Use Commission action is required. The County of Hawaii can process the rezoning request. B. County General Plan The County General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) map designates the site Intensive Agriculture. This designation refers to lands that aze capable of supporting "sugar, orchard, diversified agriculture and floriculture" uses. 2 Based on the requested Agriculture 5-a zoning, the project would be consistent with the General Plan and no amendments would be required. ' C. Draft North Kohala Community Development Plan This draft plan, prepared in 1984, attempts to further define the General Plan and serves as a guide for decision-makers. The Land Use Concept map suggests that the general area, including the adjoining Kaauhuhu Homesteads area, be considered for A-Sa zoning. In its discussion of agricultural land use, the draft Plan recommends the encouragement of "more intensive use of North Kohala's agricultural resources through the subdivision of selected ag ]ands into smaller and more manageable pazcels. This intensive use azea should be located above and to the West of Hawaii and be designed in such a way to make maximum use of Kohala Ditch water and to preserve agriculturally productive soils." The subject pazcel is located in this azea As such, the requested zoning would be consistent with the draft Plan. D. Draft Northwest Hawaii Open Space and Community Development Plan This draft Plan, prepazed in November 1992 and, ]ike the draft North Kohala CDP, has not been adopted. Nonetheless, it does provide some measure of guidance to decision-makers. The ]and use concept map suggests that the subject azea is appropriate for Commercial Crops and Ornamentals. In that regazd, the requested zoning would beconsistent with that objective. E. County Zoning The County zoning of the subject and most of the adjoining properties is Agriculture (A-20a), which requires lots to have a minimum azea of20 acres. However, a portion of the subject property abuts the Kynnersley Road residential tract, which is zoned ItS-15. There aze also other properties further mauka and less than 1 mile away that aze zoned A-Sa and A-3a. Most ofthe A-3a zoning fall within the Kaauhuhu Homestead azea. If approved, the site would be subdivided in a manner meeting with both the Zoning and Subdivision Codes. Further, all uses and standazds consistent with the requested A-Sa zone would be adhered to. 3 F. Other Permitting Considerations The site is not located within the County Special Management Area (SMA). ' As such, no SMA Use Pemut would be required. However, as noted eazlier, other permits would still be required. These would be of the "ministerial" variety, such as Subdivision Approval, Underground Injection Control (L1IC) permit, and the like. V. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS A. General Description The elevation of the site is approximately one thousand (1,000) feet above mean sea level. The mean annual rainfall in this azea ranges between 50 and 90 inches. The wetter months tend to occur between October through April The mean annual temperature is about seventy five (75) degrees Fahrenheit, with the warmer months during the summer. Slight easterly winds occur during the day, while westerly or mountain winds are prevalent during the evenings. The entire parcel is generally trapezoidal in shape. With the exception of a 350 foot section, the entire property fronts Kynnersley Road. The site is vacant of any structures and was formerly used for sugaz cultivation. It is now used intermittently for cattle grazing. The Kohala Ditch bisects the property in a east to west direction. B. Soils and Topo¢raphy The topography of the site slopes slightly in a mauka (east) to makai (west) direction. There is a gradual 8 to 12 percent slope from the top of the property along Kynnersely Road. The Land Study Bureau Overall Master Productivity Rating for the subject area is Class "C" or fair (C-1). This suggests the site has fair productivity potential for agricultural crops. It is of the Ainakea and Niuln soil series, with moderately deep to deep soil. The soil texture is moderately fine, the color is dark brown, and the pazent material is volcanic ash. It is well drained, with nonstony to slightly nonstony character. It is suited for machine tillability. This type of soil is typical of this area and was historically used for sugaz cultivation. 4 The State of Hawaii's Aericultural Lands Of Importance to the State of Hawaii (ALISHI maps classify this site as "Prime." ' C. Natural Hazards 1. Drainage The US Corps of Engineers' Flood Insurance Rate Man (FIRM) designates the project site to be located in Zone X, azeas outside the 500-yeaz flood plain. 2. Tsunami Hazard As the site is located over 2 miles from the ocean, it is located outside of the Civil Defense's Tsunami Evacuation Zone. 3. Volcanic and Earthquake Hazards The United States Geological Survey (USGS) classifies the area as Lava Flow Hazard Zone 9, on a scale of ascending risk 9 to 1. This would be least hazazdous azea. The populated azea of Kailua-Kona falls in Zone 4, while the City of Hilo is classified Zone 3. The entire island of Hawaii falls within Earthquake Zone 3, according to the County Building Code. As such, certain structural requirements will be needed and taken during the building permit process to address this seismic hazard. It should be noted that in the 1997 edition ofthe Uniform Building Code, the International Conference of Building Officials has upgraded its seismic zonation of Hawaii County from Zone 3 to Zone 4. The County is contemplating adoption of this edition. D. Flora/Fauna Although there were no professional surveys conducted of the floral or faunal resources of the site, the applicant does not believe that raze or endangered floral or faunal resources are hlcely to be found within the subject site. The site has already been cleared and used actively for sugar cultivation and is dominated by alien species. Further, the site has been and continues to be used intermittently for cattle grazing. A visual inspection of the site, however, notes that the undergrowth overwhelmingly consists of grass, with 5 occasional patches of Lantana (Lantana Camara) and Christmas Berry (Schinus terebinthifolius. Mango and guava trees were also observed. Thus, floral impacts should be minimal. The site is not known to be a habitat for any rare or endangered animal life. Given its elevation, however, it would be possible to find the Hawaiian Hawk and Hawaiian Owl. E. HistoridArchaeoloEical Resources As the site was fonnerly cleazed, no cotntnissioned azchaeological survey of the site was made. The clearing would make it less hlcely to find any azchaeological features on the site. Nonetheless, during the course of developing the subdivision, should any unanticipated azchaeological features or sites be uncovered, work will cease and the applicant will immediately notify the Planniug Department. F. Water and Coastal Resources The subject site is located well over 2 miles from the coastline. As such, coastal impacts resuhing from dischazge of wastewater systems from the site should not be significant. Further, being anon-coastal property, no coastal access will be affected. The wastewater from the project will be serviced by sewer system meeting with the approval of the Department of Health. This system could be either cesspool or septic tank and will be constructed by the respective property owners at the time of issuance of a building permit for the proposed lots. G. Noise, Air Quality, and Dust Kynnersley Road will serve as the major thoroughfare in this area. This Road eventually intersects with the Hawi Road/Kohala Mountain Road junction (Highway 250) less than a mile mauka or southwest of the subject property. The other end of Kynnersley Road 'intersects with the Hawi-Niulii Road (Highway 270), approximately a mile from the subject property. The existing ambient traffic level in this area is quite low. As such, the corresponding noise level is quite low. With the completion of this project, the noise level is not anticipated to increase significantly. 6 There will, however, be short term noise impacts associated with the construction of the infrastructure for the proposed subdivision. Contractors will be required to comply with appropriate noise and related mitigation measures of the State Department of Health. The proposed development should not generate any direct air quality impacts. The only discermble air quality impact would be associated with the vehicular traffic to and from the site. While there will be an impact to the ambient air quality, the impact should not be significant as the project will increase the density by only one additional unit. Further, with higher EPA standazds for automobIle air emissions the air quality impact should thus hopefully not be significant. As such, with the exception of construction dust in the beginning, long term dust generated by the project should be minimal. Construction dust, however, hlce construction noise will have to comply with the State Depaztment of Health's regulations. H. Scenic and Visual Considerations In the Natural Beauty element ofthe General Plan, there are sites or areas listed as being a scenic resource. The subject site is not listed as a scenic site. In the North Kohala azea and relative to the subject azea, the most notable would be the "Coastline view plane from Kohala Mountain Road." The requested zoning would resuh in some farm dwellings that could provide some measure of obstruction to the offshore azea. However, given the size of the lots (5+ acres) and the distance from the shoreline, this obstruction would be quite minimal. VI. SOCIAL AND RELATED CONSIDERATIONS A. Surrounding Land Uses The land use in this azea is generally rural-agricultural. There aze some small family-type of cattle grazing farms or large lots used residentially. These properties range in size from 2 to 20 acres. The adjoining Kynnersley housing tract consists of lots averaging 15,000 squaze feet. Given the above, the proposed development would not be incongruous with the emerging rural-agricultural pattern. 7 B. Economic Impacts The requested zoning would have some measure of economic impact, as it ` would make fee simple lots with family-type of agricultural activity possible. Collectively, small fazms can help support the agricultural industry. The availability of irrigation water through the Kohala Ditch also increases the 'agricultural potential of this site. Further, there will be some short-term construction activity. And this could help with the azea's economy. C. AgriculfuralImpacts Since the closure ofKohala Sugaz Company in 1971, this site has not been used for intensive agricultural activity. It has been used essentially for cattle grazing. While this use could continue, it may not be a productive use of the land given the County's goal to promote agricultural activities in this azea. The applicant's proposal would help foster agricultural objectives by making smaller lots available, which would be more conducive for family operations. VII. INFRASTRUCTURE CONSIDERATIONS A. Road Access to the project would be via Kynnersley Road. This County-owned road has aright-of--way of approximately forty (40) feet. The pavement width ranges between eighteen (18) to-twenty (20) or more feet. The frontage of the property is in excess of 1,400 feet. The applicant intends to have all three lots be serviced directly from Kynnersley Road. As the layout accompanying this application is only preliminary, it could be adjusted to address sight distance and related issues. B. Water There is an 8-inch County water line fronting Kynnersley Road. According to discussions with the staff at the Department of Water Supply, water for the proposed 3 lot subdivision would be available from this line. 8 C. Wastewater There is no County wastewater system in this azea. As such, a septic tank or cesspool system meeting with the approval of the Department of Health will be allowed. This will be done, by the respective lot owners at the time of actual construction of any farm dwelling. D. Solid Waste Solid waste will be handled through commercial haulers or the individual homeowners into authorized landfill sites or transfer stations.. With the requested A-Sa zoning, the potential for uses with tonic or related chemical waste would be minhnal, if at all. E. Other Government Services As this azea is already part ofthe North Kohala urban azea, it is already being serviced. No extension of government services would be required. The neazest police and fire stations aze located in Kapaau, approximately three (3) miles away. The Kohala High and Elementary schools aze located at Honomakau, less than two (2) miles from the subject site. County pazks aze available in Kapaau, Keokea and Hawi. As such, the project should not result in the extension of any government services: Further, the required public facilities aze located reasonably proximate to the subject site. F. Other Utilities All other utilities such as telephone and electrical services, aze available to the site. VIII. IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE ANALYSIS A. Relationship Between Local Short-Term Uses of Environment and Maintenance and Enhancement of Lone-Term Productivity If the requests were denied, the short term use of the site would probably be an undeveloped tract of land used for cattle grazing. The lot may eventually be used as alarge-lot gentleman estate. 9 Given the mixture of lot sizes and uses in this azea, the retention of the Agriculture (A-20a) zoning for this lot may not result in the best development of the site. Under those conditions, it may be more prudent from a land use perspective to more effectively utilize the project site by creating lots that may be more conducive for small-scale farms and/or other agricultural pursuits. B. Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources The subject site is ah~eady disturbed. As such, the project should not result in an irreversible commitment of natural or archaeological resources. As the soil on the pazcel has been classified "C" by the Land Study Bureau, it does have agricultural potential. The creation of the 3-lot subdivision should help foster instead of remove this land from its agricultural potential. C. Mitigative Measures The applicant intends to provide the required on-site infrastructure in conjunction with the subdivision process. Should unanticipated archaeological finds be discovered during the construction of the project, work w~71 stop (as is required by the State and County) and clearance secured before work will resume. As the site is presently vacant, no person or businesses would be dislocated. D. Alternatives to the Proposed Project 1. No Project Under this status quo alternative, the site will either remain in its present condition and continue to be used for less intensive cattle grazing. The site, however, may not be utilized to its fullest agricultural poternial given the present use and mixture of land uses and lot sizes in this azea. 2. Alternative Agricultural Density Under this alternative, the applicant could seek an A-la or residential zoning. While this could azguably be consistent with the adjoining residential•'subdivisionabng Kynnersley Road, it may not be 10 compatible with the policy of trying to foster more family-oriented types of agricultural activities, such as truck crops or ornamental fazming in this area. 3. Evaluation of Alternatives The project's impacts to the area's social and physical infrastructure would not appeaz to be pronounced. Certain mitigative measures will be taken to address any possible impacts associated with the development ofthis project. Further, the project would be consistent with the land use objectives sought to be accomplished by the County General Plan LUPAG map. In view of the aforementioned, it would appeaz that none of the alternatives would be more prudent and beneficial than the requested A-Sa alternative. IX. REGULATORY ANALYSIS A. General Plan LUPAG Map The General Plan provides for the long-range comprehensive development of the island of Hawaii It provides direction for balanced growth in the County. The LUPAG map designates the site Intensive Agriculture. This designation allows the requested A-Sa zoning without a General Plan amendment. B. General Plan Polices The requested zoning would be consistent with the goals, policies and standazds of the General Plan document. For one, it would provide short-term economic opportunities largely through the construction of the subdivision. Some longer-term opportunities could be created in the form ofsmall-scale truck crops or ornamental farms. In so doing the resultant project should also add revenues to the County and State coffers. The project intends to be energy conscious through the use and/or encouragement of solar energy and design features to take advantage ofwind patterns. 11 Maintaining and improving the quality of the environment is important to the success of this project. The General Plan identifies five (5) areas of environmental concerns -air pollution, water quality, soil pollution, solid waste disposal, and noise pollution. As proposed, the project would not be violative of any of those objectives. Aside from vehiculaz transm;~~ion, air pollution associated with the project should be negligible. All wastewater systems would be consistent with the requirement of the State Department of Health. This should be sufficient to address any potential groundwater or coastal water impacts. If required, a solid waste management plan could be prepazed and implemented. The project will also not be a noisy one, except as may be associated with the farming operations. Any noise-generating facility -such as air conditioners - would be cazefiilly placed to rriiniTn;~P their noise impacts. Further, it is unlikely that this site would be used as a processing plant, as it would be more economical to send the products elsewhere. The project area is outside of any floodway. Nonetheless, if required, a drainage system will be designed in a manner to protect the property as well as to minimize the volume of surface runoff generated by this development. The site does have historic sites. However, as it has been bulldozed, it would appeaz that any remaining sites would be of recent vintage - ie., sites associated with the cattle grazing ofthe site. Nonetheless, work will cease if unanticipated azchaeological remains are discovered during the construction of the project and work will resume only a$er proper cleazances from the _ State and/or County have been received. Being previously intensively used, the prospects of the site serving as a habitat for raze or endangered plant or animal life appeaz remote. As the A-Sa zoning would allow a residence, the project will indirectly fulfill the objectives of the housing element by creating an additional lot_ The Plan also emphasizes that developments be mindful of an azea's natural beauty. In this regazd, the project will be designed in a manner so as to have it blend as much as possible with the existing terrain. As the project site is more than two (2) miles from the ocean, the usual coastal resources concern is not pronounced. There will be no interference with shoreline access. Then, too, through the use of wastewater systems 12 meeting with the requirements of the State Department of Health, impacts to the coastal water will be m;n;m;~ed. There will be little impact to public facilities. The wastewater system will be private. The water system will be developed in a manner meeting with the requirements of the Department of Water Supply. Vehicular access to the site is already fiilly improved. Schools and other public facilities aze also located proximate to the site, most of them being less than five miles from the site. Finally, in terms of the Land Use and Agricultural elements, the pertinent goals, policies, and standazds of the General Plan note the following: • Designate and allocate land uses in appropriate proportions and mix and in keeping with the social, cultural and physical environments of the County • Protect and encourage the intensive utilization of the County's limited prime agricultural land • The County shall encourage the development and maintenance of communities meeting the needs of its residents in balance with the physical and social environment • Zoning requests shall be reviewed with respect to General Plan designation, district goals, regional plans, State Land Use District, compatrbility with adjacent zoned uses, availability of public services and utilities, access, and public need • The compatibility of agricultural and non-agricultural uses should be cazefully reviewed and where appropriate, bu$'ers required • Rural-style residential-agricultural developments, such as new small-scale rural communities or extensions of existing rural communities, shall be encouraged in appropriate locations • The county shall encourage the development and maintenance of communities meeting the needs of its residents in balance with the physical and social environment • Agricultural land shall be used as one form of open space or green belt. In view ofthe foregoing goals and policies, it is noted that the requested zoning would be consistent with the Intensive Agriculture designation of the 13 LUPAG map. It would also be generally comvatible with the surrounding area. There aze 2 and 20-acre sized lots less than 300 yards to the south. There are also residential sizes properties north of the site. The soil is classified "C" by the Land Study Bureau, reflecting some measure of agricultural value. It should thus encourage more intensive agricultural activities on the site. This lot size would be conducive to not only the applicant's needs but make other lots available to those who wish to pursue supplemental and more intensive agricultural activities. The property has no severe topographic or geologic problems that would render the land unusable for the proposed subdivision and activity. C. Zoning and Subdivision The designated zoning of the site is Ag-20a. Should the A-Sa zoning be approved, the requirements of the zoning and subdivision codes would be complied, including use and related development standazds. D. State Land Use A¢rieultural Standards As the requested azea will result in lots more than 5 acres, the request can be processed by the County. The requirements of the State Land Use guidelines for uses will be adhered to. 14 ~~w« N~4 Wayne G. Carvalho Stephen K. Yamashiro PnlaGuef Mayor , I_ ~ Jamea S. Correa r,. tiiR'or.wi'M~` ,~,n r,'. 'i .,:'.:I ~ Deputy Polio Chief ~II1tIt~}~? II~ ~Mf1l2itt' POLICE DEPARTMENT 349 Kapiolani Street ! Hilo, Hawaii 9672(43998 (808) 9353311 • Fax (808) %1-2782 August 13, 1999 TO VIRGINIA GOLD IN PLANNING DIRECTOR ~ % r _ FROM V1/E~f~t~~ ~A~A, ASSISTANT POLICE CHIEF, INVESTIGATNE OPERATIONS BUREAU SUBJECT : CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (REZ 99-020) APPLICANT: JOHN TANAKA REQUEST: A-20a TO A-5a TAX MAP KEY: 5-4002: 014 Staff has reviewed the above-referenced application and expressed concern of the applicant's plan for ingress and egress from the subdivision. Page 8, VII. INFRASTRUCTURE CONSIDERATIONS, A. Road, second paragraph, states: "The applicant intends to have all three lots be serviced directly from Kynnersley Road. As the layout accompanying this application is only preliminary it could be adjusted to address sight distance and related issues." In reviewing the map on page 1 b, staff feels that the applicant plans to service the proposed three-lot subdivision with three separate driveways onto Kynnersley Road. Kynnersley Road is one of two main connector roads from Route 250 into the North Kohafa community. It should be treated as a thoroughfare. Since the applicant's subdivision design is "only preliminary," we recommend as a condition of rezoning that the subdivision be designed so that ingress and egress is accomplished via a single entrance rather than three separate driveways. JD:Ik t,~ Lb ~ 5 zy. fxt~a~~~ DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS COUNTY OF HAWAII HILO, HAWAII DATE September 14, 1999 Memorandum To :Planning Director FROM Depa ment of Public Works Engineering Division r' SueJECr: Change of Zone Application (REZ 99-20) Applicant: John Tanaka Location: Puehuehu, North Kohala, HI - TMK: 5-4-02:14 - ~ We have reviewed the subject application and offer the following comments: 1. All development generated runoff shall be disposed of on site and shall not be directed toward any adjacent properties. 2. All grading and grubbing activities shall comply with Chapter 10 of the Hawaii County Code. 3. Roadway frontage equal to half the difference between 50' and the existing ROW width should be dedicated to the County per the General Plan. If you have any questions please contact Thomas Pack in our Kona office at 327-3530. TWP:sIs cc: Engineering -Hilo Engineering -Kona Planning -Kona E~~BIi ~m OCT-06-99 WED 02:35 PM Pl ing Dept Kona FAX:808 3273563 PAGE 1 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS couNrv o~ Hntrt~glp~f ~ p~ 2 55 HILO, HAWAII PLAh'tiri; GEPT. COt#~i•~c~dq,1~999 Memorandum TP :Planning Director C4j FROM :Department of Public Works Engineering Division SOaJECT: Change of Zone Application (REZ 99-20) Applicant: John Tanaka Location: Puehuehu, North Kohala, HI TMK: 5-4-02:14 Our surveyor has determined that the ROW width in the immediate vicinity of the subject parcel is 50'; therefore, please delete Comment #3 contained in our September 14, 1999 memo. If you have any questions, please contact Thomas Pack in our Kona office at 327-3530. TWP:sIs cc: Engineering -Hilo Engineering -Kona Planning -Kona Posl•iY Fax Note 7871 ~~o °~op? To S. JS ~ Fam GaDepL Co. Ptwne t Phone R FBx N Fax t 4 V BENJAMIN CAVETANO R • ls~ GOVERNOR Of NAWAII TNAOTMV L JONNi. CNAIRPB1sON 4 F BOARD OF LMlO µ0 NATUAAI RESOURCES T~(, aEPUnEs ~ ~..y M+~ JANET E. KAWELO STATE OF HAWAII AoVATIC RESOURCES BOATING ANp OCEAN RECREATION D'cPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES CONSEAVATON ANp RESOURCES ENFORCEMENT HISTORIC PRESERVATION DIVISION coNVEYANGIts FORESTAY µ0 VAIDUFE KlkuhihswA BuiMinO, Room 555 HISTORIC PRESERVATION 807 KanwkiL Boubvrd WND KpW.i, N.wy p970] STATE PARKS WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT September 7,1999 Ms. Virginia Goldstein, Director LOG N0:24048 Planning Department DOC N0:9909pm07 County of Hawaii 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawaii 96720 - Dear Ms. Goldstein: SUBJECT: Change of Zone Application (REZ 99-020) Applicant: John Tanaka -Request: A-20a to A-Sa Puehuehu, North Kohala,-Hawaii Island TMK: 5-4-02:14 This is in response to your Memorandum of August 5, 1999 with a request for a review . and comments on the subject application. We have no record of historic sites on the subject parcel. The application notes that the 27.286 acre parcel is old sugar cane cropland that has been used more recently for cattle pasture. Based on this history of previous land use we believe that it is unlikely that significant historic sites would be found at this location. We thus believe that the proposed use of this land will have "no effect" on significant historic sites. If you have any questions please contact Patrick McCoy (692-8029). Aloha, DON HIBBAItD, Administrator State Historic Preservation Division PM:lpf EXH181~ ,D' av, ; t?;~ _ r~rr~ I~ DEPARTMENT OF WATER SUPPLY COUNTY OF HAWAII o 6 'yi nr N, w~"V~+ 25 AU PUNI STREET HILO, HAWAII 98720 TELEPHONE (BOB) 961-9660 FAX (808) 981-8657 September 16. 1999 • T0: Planning Department FROM: Milton D. Pavao, Manager _ ; SUBJECT: CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION N0. 99-020 - APPLICANT - JOHN TANAKA TAX MAP KEY: 5-4-002:014 We have reviewed the subject application for the proposed change of zone and have the following comments. Water can be made available from an existing 6-inch waterline along Kynnersley Road fronting the property. However, as proposed: the subdivision of the subject parcel would require the applicant to extend the existing 6-inch waterline. at their expense, to a point north of the common boundary of Lot 2 and Lot H, a distance of approximately 1.200 feet. Pursuant to the Department's "Water Commitment Guidelines Policy," a copy of which is being forwarded to the applicant, a water commitment may be issued. Based on the two additional lots that are requested in the proposed change of zone application, the required water commitment deposit is 5300.00. Remittance of 5300.00 from the applicant is requested as soon as possible so that a water commitment may be formally issued. The commitment will be in writing with specific conditions and effective dates stated. Please keep in mind that this letter shall not be construed as a water commitment. In other words. unless a water commitment is officially effected. water availability is subject to change depending on the water situation. Upon the issuance of a formal water commitment, we shall submit our comments and requirements for tentative subdivision approval. For the applicant's information, should the subject change of zone be approved and a subdivision application executed. final approval will be subject to the following requirements: E~iB1Y UVater ~rin~d ~aro~r¢66... Planning Department Page 2 September 16, 1999 1. Construct necessary water system improvements, which shall include, but not be ' limited to: a. water mains capable of deliveNing water at adequate pressure and volume under both peak-flow and fire-flow conditions; minimum diameter of mains shall be 6 inches, and b. service laterals that will accommodate an appropriately sized meter to each lot. Submit installation plans prepared by a professional engineer, architect, or land surveyor, registered in the State of Hawaii, for review and approval. 2. Remit the prevailing facilities charge, which is subject to change, of 86,750.00. This is due and payable upon completion of the construction of the water system improvements and prior to final subdivision approval being granted. 3. Submit the appropriate documents, properly prepared and executed, to convey the water system improvements and necessary easements to the Water Commission of the County of Hawaii. A registered land surveyor shall stamp and certify the metes and bounds description within the conveyance documents. Prior to water meter services being granted to the development, or any of the lots within, the conveyance documents shall be accepted by the Water Commission and approved by Corporation Counsel. 4. Comply with all other applicable policies and requirements of the Department's Rules and Regulations. Noncompliance may be cause for voiding this water commitment, at which time availability will be subject to change in accordance with the prevailing water system conditions, policies, and Rules and Regulations. Should there be any questions. please call our Water Resources and Planning Branch at 961-8665. Milton D. Pavao, P.E. Manager BCM:gms copy - (w/att.) Mr. John Tanaka (w/o att.) Mr. Sidney Fuke UGT- 4-99 MOA 10:13 AM Pla• ~ng Dept Ailo FAX A0, 60° 961 8742 P. 1 SidneyFuke, Planning Consultant 100 Pauahl Streef, State 272 • Hilo, HawaB 96720 . per, yy~,~ Tplepharw: (808) 969.7522 • Fax: t808) 969-7998 .8~pa„gy,~.~ Ua pa,,,,~ • Fmiamanal pa0ay September 22, 1999 -0 Qur,~9 ~ M1:~ Ms. Virginia Goldstein, Director ~ ~ Planning Department COUNTY OF HAWAII - 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Ms. Goldstein: Subject: Rezoning Request (REZ 99-020) -John Tanaka Tax Map Kev: 5-4-02: 14 Thank you for sending me a copy of the Department of Water Supply's comments regarding the subject application. Based on my eazlier discussions with the staff at the Department of Water Supply, the applica:rt was made aware that the existing 6-inch water line would have to extended to assure proper services to all of the proposed lots. The applicant is prepared to make the required waterline and related improvements in conjunction with the subdivision approval process. Relative to payment of the water commitment deposit for the proposed three (3) lots, this will be paid within 90 days after, hopefiilly, the favorable disposition ofthc pendmg zone change application. We trust that the aforementioned adequately respond to the comment. If not or if there further questions on this matter, please feel free to contact roc. Thank you very much. 5IpCerely,~ SIDNEY M. FUKE Planning Consuhant cc Departmem of Water Supply Mr. John Ttmaka via FAX Mr. Tom Yamamoto via FAX i$ii op8511 . UU'1'- 4-yy MUN 1U~14 AM Ylan~ ~g Dept Hilo FAX K0. 8Op X61 8742 P. 2 O R y, R \RiR R 1 ~ 9ENJAMW J.CAYETANO ` 'fir _ Governor Clri\pp~,BwNd TAgridtlhn e .ro R/" ~ LE'rIr1A N. UYEff11NA Dep~y b tly . 3tete of Hewail . ~ IAailLygddnys: ~ . DEPARiMBNTOFAGRICULTURE ~ P.0.9oK?2t5o ~ " laze South Iang Street ~010'~'~"""'i9~'~ Horwlulu, Hawall 96814-2512 - ~ Fe~18o8)973•osf3 September 29, 1999 . . p"~ ~ ' ~a~ ~ . ~t~~. A . v To: Virginia Goldstein, Director ~ Hawaii County Planning Department ~ ~ ~ From: James J. Nakatani, Chairperson ~,~.~-~y-- ~Board of Agriculture Subject: Change of Zone Application (REZ 99-Z01 A-20a to A-5a John Tanaka TMK: 5-4-02: 14 North Kohala, Hawaii Area: approximately 27.28fi acres Lots to be created: 3 {two 5-acre, one 15-acre) Background 7 . The applicant seeks to subdivide the subject property into three lots. The largest proposed tot (15 acres) will be used by the applicant as a residence and may be further subdivided. 2, The applicant intends to have portions of the site cultivated in °ornamental and citrus trees." 3. The property was in sugar production and most recently, used for cattle grazing. 4. The applicant has access to water from the Kohala Ditch that runs through the property, yy~{~ ~M~B~~ r+ c' p y t5 a~ u~r- 4-yy Mun 1U~14 AM Ylan ~g Dept Hilo FAX ND, 80" X61 8742 P. 3 Ms. Virginia Goldstein ' September 29, 1999 Page -2- 5. The property adjoins the Kynnersley Road housing tract: The surrounding area is described as rural-agricultural with cattle grazing and "large lots _ used residehtially" (County Environmental Report (CERl, page 7, Section B. The application states that these proposed agricultural lets will result in the establishment of "...family-oriented types of agrieu~tural activities, wti.~•~ such as truck crops or ornamental farming..." (CER, pag'e~11,ySection r 7. The application states that if the rezoning request is denied, the site may be used as a large-lot gentlemen estate {CER, page 9, Section VIII.A.) and will not be utilized to its fullest agricultural potential (GER, page 10, Section D.1 Recommendation The Department of Agriculture does not oppose the applicant's rezoning request provided that the applicant agrees to provide for written assurances to the County's satisfaction that subdivision lot buyers would put the lots into some form of agricultural use (Application for Change in Zone, page 3, Item 6.d.). Such "assurances" could include a restrictive covenant that runs with the land requiring the lot owner to acquire or possess: 1. An approved conservation plan as issued by the local Soil and Water Conservation District; 2. Agricultural tax dedication status; or 3. Federal income tax Schedule F and the State General Excise Tax forms. SidneyFuke, Planning Consultant 100 Pauahi Street, Suite 212 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 • Pla~ming • Vamdnce • Zaneg Telephone: (808) 969-1622 • Fax: (808) 969-7996 • SubGivision • WM Use Pertnis • Fmiranmental Reports t~ ,~3 if September 3, 1999 Ms. Virginia Goldstein, Director Planning Department COUNTY OF HAWAII 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, HI 96720 Deaz Ms. Goldstein: Subject: Rezoning Request (REZ 99-020) - A-20a to A-Sa John Tanaka, TMK: 5-4-02: 14 This is in reference to comments received to date from the commenting agencies regarding the subject application. In response to these comments, please note the following: 1. As noted by the State Land Use Commissio - we acknowledge that the State Land Use District classification is Agricultural and not Agriculture. 2. The State Department of Health anted "no environmental health concerns with regulatory implications...." That is correct, as the respective homeowners will be responsible for constntcting their own wastewater system, which will hlcely be cesspool (given the proposed 5-acre lot size). 3. The Police Department's comment is understandable. However, as the Kohala Ditch bisects the property, it may be difficult to have all lots serviced by one access. The applicant, however, will look into the possibility of having a single access service two lots. This can be determined in conjunction with the subdivision review process by the Department of Public Works and the applicant's engineer. Should you have other questions or comments regarding this application, please feel free to contact me. mce ly, S Y M. FUI~ Planning Consultant cc Police Department Mr. John Tanaka Mr. Tom Yamamoto ~ ~ .c