Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0060.001 2000-2002 g Pi ~~195 \i BENJAMIN J. CAYETANO Jf ' S covERNOR ~g I RAYNARD L. SOON ~ vK CHAIRMAN STATE OF HAWAII - ~ _ ~ HAWAIIAN HOMES COMM1115SION ~ 3~@ _ 0' ~'0~4PJ~b19~. JOBIE M. K. M. YAMAGUCHI DEPUTY TO THE CHAIRMAN STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF HAWAIIAN HOME LANDS EAST HAWAII DISTRICT OFFICE 160 BAKER AVENUE HILO, HAWAII 96720 Telephone: (808)974-4250 Fax: (808)974-4255 Apri13, 2001 ~ . fora ~un4y Counctl i='I-~ Bobbie Jean Leithead-Todd Chair, Committee on Planning Hawaii County Council 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Chair Leithead-Todd: Subject: Rezoning Request, Matsuno Enterprises, Limited Waiakea, Hilo, TMK: (3) 2-2-040:014 & 069 Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to submit testimony regarding the above referenced rezoning request. The above subject parcels are directly adjacent to the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL), Waiakea Residential Subdivision. The subdivision consists of approximately 240 single-family homes. The planning consultant for the Matsuno Enterprises project, Mr. Sidney Fuke, has provide the DHHL with the preliminary plans and has given us the opportunity to provide input of our concerns. Our concerns and/or mitigation recommendations are as follows: 1. Appropriate buffer area between the project site and our residences to mitigate the noise and dust during construction and after project completion. 2. Additional traffic impacts to the Puainako/Pilipaa Street intersection. 3. Additional traffic impacts into our residential area as patrons of the project use Pilipaa Street to get back to Kanoelehua Highway, via Kahaopea Street. 4. Traffic improvement mitigation at the Puainako/Pilipaa Street intersection (i.e. traffic light, roundabout) as a condition to any development. 5. Developer negotiates with the State of Hawaii for ingress and egress from Kanoelehua Highway. 6. Supplementary ingress and egress from south of the project site through Awapuhi Street. ~o.l Comm. No. File No. , - Pr~~~a~t 10 ~ Ref, fios f. A,PR 3 ~ Bobbie Jean Leithead-Todd, Chair Hawaii County Committee on Planning Apri13, 2001 Page 2 Thank you again for the opportunity to testify on this project. Aloha Edward J dra e, District Supervisor East Hawaii District Office Xc: Linda Chinn, HHL Land Management Branch Manager Sidney Fuke, Planning Consultant JoAnn L.K. Veincent 30 Pilipa`a Street Hilo, HI 96720 03 `Apelila 2001 To Members of The County Council, My name is JoAnn Veincent and I reside at 30 Pilipa`a Street, Pana`ewa, Hawaiian Homelands. I appear before you regarding rezoning of TMK 2-2-40: 14 & 69 belonging to Matsuno Enterprises. I am not anti-development. I realize that the proposed project for said property will generate added tax revenues to the county. However, there are some concerns I have that I hope will be taken into considersation before you grant the rezoning request. i -There are two (2) parcels involved. in this request. One parcel, the one closest to Pu`ainak® Avenue is in the flood zone. I have lived on this present address since April, 1966 and have experienced heavy rains and some flooding. However, the November, 2000 flooding was the worst I`ve ever seen -very frightening. The applicant`s property was flooded to the "max°. The entire property was filled with water looked like Leleiwi Beach. We were up from approximately 1:00 A.M. watching the situation get worst. The current of the flow was so strong there were all kinds of debris floating by -lumber, chicken coops, gas tanks, etc. The water was so high, it was approximately 1/2 foot before it would have flows `into our property. We were blessed that the rain eased up by day break. After the water subsided, we had not only all kinds of `opala but also dead chickens. We were informed that there is a 30 foot wide drainage easement between the project site and houselots along Pilipa`a St. As we have experienced in the November flooding this buffer zone wasn`t sufficient. Mother Nature has no regards for bounds but we do. We can alleviate future problems with better developmental plans. I hope the drainage easement can be increased at least to a maximum of 200 feet. The applicant, I am sure, is aware of the flooding problem as his rental dwelling was badly flooded. His tenants' automobiles were submerged in water. i - As we all know, traffic at Pu`ainak®, approaching Prince Kuhio is heavy. The outbound traffic from the project will have to be either right into Kanoelehua or right into Pu`ainako. Pilipa`a Street runs into Pu`ainako and making a left from Pilipa`a St. is very difficult at times. Because we live there, we know what days and hours to attempt making left turns. When traffic is too busy, we do 1 of 2 things: We either make a right on Pu`ainako and turn around in Prince Kuhio or we drive back to blocks to page 2 County Council April 03, 2001 Ohuohu St. and make the left here because the bulk of the traffic turns into Prince Kuhio. This was brought to the attention of the developer. 9~e informed us that the traffic engineer of M. & Pacific Inc. acknowledged that "there will be understandable traffic conflicts with Pilipa`a Street"; however, the outbound traffic or exiting traffic from Pilipa`a St. should be in the A.M.s while the outbound traffic from the project site would generally be midday and the afternoon. He also stated that the project will generate some measure of traffic impact and has to work closely with the residents, County and State system on the matter to design an access system that minimizes impact to the broader community. I find that the traffic engineer`s conclusion on the outgoing and exiting traffic from Pilipa`a Street is not accurate. We live there, we experience this everyday. fibers is no time table on this -outgoing traffic occurs all hours of the day except for the early A.M.s and late P.M.s. I hope you will take these into consideration before making your decision. I thank you for allowing me to voice my mana`o. Sincerely, JOANN V~iNCENT Lehua M. Veincent 30 Pilipa`a Street Hilo, HI 96720 03 `Apelila 2001 To Members of the County Council, My name is Lehua M. Veincent. I am a teacher in the Cepartment of Education for the past 14 years. I have resided in Pana`ewa since April, 1966 as my family was one of the first "displaced° `ohana from Keaukaha during the extension of the airport strip and during the time when it was unquestionable to interfere or voice mana`o in island development. Knowing the problems with flooding to our area and the impact of such naturalistic phenomenon on our homes should such occur is a given. Knowing the mental anguish residents have to deal with inching their way through Pu`ainak® safely in order to make a left turn onto Pu`ainako Ave. from Pilipa`a Street is a given. 11Vhat is not an understandable given is the genealogical and historical aspects of Pana`ewa that have laid the foundation of the community of Pana`ewa for the benefit of others for many years! Success of the future lies within the understanding of our past. If it begins "PONO" it will end "POND", if it "PUPUKA° (ugly), it will end "PUPUKA°! I am still not convinced that the contractor nor the owner knows fully the genealogical and historical aspects of our community which is why I feel that the project is the way it is with us as I`m sure with other community members. To me it has been OK to take two long, unnecessary blocks around the Prince Kuhi® Plaza in order to avoid the death defying left turn onto Pu`ainak® from Pilipa`a Street. ~o me it has been OK to be awaken 2:OOam by cars racing on Pu`ainako towards Railroad Avenue wondering what the results of the screeching and crashing at the end was. To me it has been OK to watch unaesthetically as the landscape of our lands sacrifice themselves to non-existence as cement buries them as dead kin. However, to me, it is not OK to have my aging mother 1:OOam outside in a pancho worrying about the affects of rising water to her own house that her father had invested lovingly in since the 1960s. To me it is not OK to watch our own kupunas` lives of Pana`ewa at stake as they inch their way through traffic on Pu`ainako! page 2 County Council April 03, 2001 To me it is not OK worrying about how your family and personal property are, knowing "rift-rafts" not belonging to the community are roaming the corners of the Plaza and walking suspiciously, yet legally, along the parameters of the community. I hope you to take into consideration along with the economical, political, social, and aesthetical components -the genealogical and historical foundation from which success flourish! In Hawaiian traditional literature, Pana`ewa, the mo`o god, guarded the area, prohibiting people not of the area from passing. The battle of Hi`iaka sent by her sister Pele in search for I_ohi`au, with Pana'ewa proved to be a devastating battle for both but gaining passage and respect for Hi`iaka. May you yourselves gain Pana`ewa`s respect as you make this crossing. Me Ka Mahalo Mau! ~ . LEHUA M. VEINCENT Tuesday, April 3, 2001 Ms. Bobby Jean Leithead -Todd -Chairperson County Council Committee on Planning Milo, Hawaii 96720 RE: Matsuno Enterprises, Ltd. / RS-10 to CG20 ®ear Ms. Leithead-Todd and Council Members, A blanket approval of the Matsuno Enterprises, Ltd. project is a very irresponsible move for the following reasons: 1) As I have stated in my earlier written tes#irnony, there is a major flood problem on both parcels with the larger one having a very serious flood problem. Mr. Fuke is relying on out-dated, 1988 FEMA studies, which therefore must be updated due to the recent flooding in November 2000. 2) This rezoning affects two parcels and each parcel should therefore be analyzed separately. It is my understanding that the larger parcel is entirely located in the flood zone and should not even be considered for approval at this time. The smaller parcel however could be approved provided that the developer gain access to the project from the highway and not from Puainako Street. 3) The rezoning relies on a very faulty document called the General Plan that does not have a current Community Re-development Plan to address the more specific areas. It is my understanding that the General Plan is very "general" and it uses very "general" and ambiguous language. For example, in the Economic Element, it says that the project will "provide residents with opportunities to improve their quality of life:' This statement has so many different meanings. C7oes it mean that it will provide another place for folks to spend their money? Is this what improving the quality of life is about? As you can see, there are many ways in which developers can use this plan to confuse us and to benefit #hemselves. ~4) Common sense tells us that we should be planning for the long run and not for t short-run. The county might benefit from some added tax revenues and s rye ro wa improvements, but in the long-run, what will the real cost of this d ~ elo ment ' e to th county in terms of congestion and flooding??? .