Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0283.003 2000-2002 Harry Kim Dixie Kaetsu ' : ~ Mayor Managing Director ~a ~a ~ Peter T. Y®uug 'fro°o~'~aa'd Deputy Managing Director ~f I~~~i. 1. t4.,,i ~ ~ ~ ii 25 Aupuni Street, Room 215 Hilo,l3~waii 96720-4252 • (808) 96I-8211 • F-~ 08.) 96.1-6553 KONA: 75-5706 Kuakini Highway, Suite 103 • Kailua-Kona, Hawaii ~~~fiG-' (808) 329-5226 • Fax (808) 326-5663 March 1, 2002 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: ~ 1~1 -.pris i ; < . ~ 1 %1r~1:~1. C` {~s-.ter ~ g € I aping Code) of the Hawaii County / ~.f <s ry .>'.s~..l~~£e~, ~f ~f.t~l-~~ .t~ ~ t E in l~iorth bona Commercial Zone State Land Use Boundary Amendment Application (SLU 01-010) Request: Agricultural to Urban Change of Zone Application (REZ 01-021) Request: Agricultural (A-Sa) and Single Family Residential (RS-10) to Single Family Residential (RS-20) Applicant: David S. DeLuz Sr. Enterprise Profit Sharing Plan Tax Map Key: 7-3-5:95 and Portions of 31 and 85 State Land Use Boundary Amendment Application (SLU 01-011) Request: Agricultural to Urban Change of Zone Application (REZ 01-022) Request: A-Sato RS-20 Applicant: Ellen M. Garver Tax Map Kev~ 7-3-5.30 As required by Chapter 4, Sec. 6-4.3(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, , ~ ;,L~~',ti'~ ' - ~ ti~ /7~ W~YIj, No. Harry Kim j~le No. Mayor Ref. fio: Enclosures ~ 1 2002 cc: Planning Department ~Af. Date Harry Kim ~J~$v:o: M~'~ Mnyor s , She ~ ~A •ieMA M~s~O.~` OE~MN~ ~f iii ~LAN1~"ING CO1I~YISSION 25 Aupuni Street, Room 109 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720-4252 (808)961-8288 • Fax (808)961-8742 March 1, 2002 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: County Council Initiated Proposed Bill No. 81 to Amend Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawaii County Code, As Amended, Relating to Hag t Liz~~s in North Kona Commercial Zone (CG) Districts The Planning Commission at its duly held public hearing on February 1, 2002, voted four votes ayes and three noes for a favorable recommendation on proposed Bill No. 81 to amend Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawaii County Code, as amended, relating to height limits. However, the Commission decided to forward an unfavorable recommendation because the 120 days in which the Commission had to provide comments has lapsed. We have enclosed a copy of the hearing transcript and Background Report for your information. Sincerely, 3.'/ _ . Geraldine M. Giffin, Chairman Planning Commission lcouncilhtlimits cc: Planning Department -Kona BCounci lhei ghtlimit00nka-1 /28/02 COUNTY OF IIAVVAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT ~ACI~GROUND REPORT COUNTY COUNCIL INITIATED PROPOSER AlO~IENDIVIENT TO CIFIAPTER 25 (ZONING CODE), HAWAII COUNTY CODE, RELATING TO IIEIGJEIT LIMITS IN NOIaTII KONA COMMERCIAL ZONE (CGZ DISTRICTS The County Council has submitted proposed Bill No. 81 amending Chapter 25, Section 25-5-113 of the Zoning Code, relating to height limits in North Kona Commercial Zone (CG) Districts. The proposed bill seeks to decrease the height limit in CG zoned properties in North Kona from ninety feet (90) to forty-five (45) feet. 1. The following are the proposed amendments to Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawaii County Code, relating to Section 25-5-113, Article 1, relative height limits in CG zoned properties (See Exhibit A}. Material to be repealed is bracketed. New material is underlined. (a) The height limit in the CG district shall be forty-five feet, except in those areas designated in [subsections subsection (b)land (c)] below. (b) The height limit in the City of Hilo shall be one hundred twenty feet. [(c) The height limit in those areas in the North Kona district designated as high density urban on the general plan land use pattern allocation guide (LUPAG) map shall be ninety feet.] 2. The proposed changes to Section 25-5-113 of the Hawaii County Code will reduce the height limit for CG zoned properties in North Kona so that it matches the height limit for CG zoned properties throughout the rest of the island, except for the City of Hilo. This change in height limit only occurs on CG zoned land in North Kona designated High Density Urban on the LUPAG map. Current zoning designations and maximum heights within areas designated High Density Urban at location "A" and "B" (See Exhibbit C) are as follows: Location A General Industrial (MG) 50 feet or up to a 100 feet if authorized by the director General Commercial (CG) 90 feet (45 feet if this bill is adopted) 1 ~ ~ c'.. Open (O) none except as specified as a condition or approval of any permit or Plan approval. Height limits of surrounding districts will be used as a guide. Agriculture (A) 35 feet for dwellings and 45 feet for all other structures Location ~ Resort-Hotel (V) 90 feet at Keauhou Bay and Kahaluu Bay 3. Should Bill 81 be adopted, all existing structures in North Kona on lands zoned CG and situated within the LUPAG High Density Urban designation that are taller than 45 feet shall become non-conforming. At this point and time, the Planning Department is aware of only one office building (49 feet) that would become non-conforming due to this change in code. This office building is located mauka of Safeway on TMK 7-5-4: 19. As a consequence ofbecoming anon-conforming structure, any future improvements on this property would have to conform to the maximum height limit of 45 feet. Repair and maintenance of the structure would be permitted however, should the building be destroyed in excess of 50% of its replacement value, then the destroyed portion of the structure must be built to current standards within one year form the date of its destruction. 4. Although these structures are not affected by this ordinance the following examples of existing structures in North Kona taller than 45 feet are provided to give some idea of the scale of structures discussed by the ordinance. An additional list of existing structures taller than 45 feet in North Kona has been compiled and included as Exhibit S. King Kamehameha Hotel (64.5 feet): The hotel was built before the Zoning Code was adopted. Consequentially the structure is currently non-conforming. In addition, the zoning for the hotel is resort and the maximum height allowed is 45 feet except at Kahaluu and Keauhou Bay where a 90 foot maximum is allowed. Kona Alii Condominiums (74 feet) and Kailua Village Condominiums (81 feet): Both condominium structures were built in 1970 under an older Zoning Code (Ordinance No. 63). "Kailua-Kona and Keauhou Bay, severn(7) stories but not higher than ninety (90) feet". In 1973, the adoption of the comprehensive Zoning Code (Chapter 8, Hawaii County Code) dropped the max height to 45 feet. 2 5. The areas in North Kona to be affected by the proposed amendments are shown in Exhibit C. Relevant Back Ground Information 6. August 14, 2001: Bill No. 81 introduced by the Planning Committee of the Hawaii County Council. 7. September 11, 2001: Bill No. 81 is forwarded to the Planning Department and Planning Commission for review and consideration. 8. December 4, 2001: Kailua Village Design Commission recommends to Planning Commission and County Council the approval of Bill No. 81. AGENCIES' COMMENTS 9. Kailua Village Design Commission (Letter to Councilwoman Bobby Jean Leithead- Todd dated December 7, 2001) "The Kailua Village Design Commission, at its meeting of December 4, 2001, voted to recommend to the Planning Commission and the County Council the approval of Bill No. 81. Relating to height limits within the North Kona Commercial (CG) zoned district." 10. Police Department (Memorandum dated November 1, 2001) "Staff has reviewed the above-referenced amendment and supports to amend the `High Sensity (sic) Urban' height limits from 90 feet to 45 feet. We feel that the Police and Fire Departments will be better able to deal with public safety need in lower rise buildings as opposed to high rise buildings. In addition to public safety needs, any high rise construction has the potential of creating larger problems with our existing traffic woes. For any further questions or comments, please call Captain John Dawrs of our Kona District at 326-421 l." AGENCIES - NO COMMENTS OR OBJECTIONS 11. Department of Public Works-Engineering Division, Fire Department. AGENCIES - NO RESPONSE 12. Civil Defense, Department of Parks and Recreation, Real Property Tax Office, Department of Land and Natural Resources -Land Division, Department of Health, Department of Agriculture, and Natural Soil Conservation Service, Department of Public Works -Engineering Division, Department of Water Supply, Police Department, Fire Department, Office of Housing and Community Development, Department of Land and 3 Natural Resources, Historic Preservation Division, Department of Transportation, State Land Use Commission, Department of Business, Economic Development & Tourism PUBLIC COMMENT 13. No comments were received from the general public on the proposed amendments. 4 Y,~~~Yl6F h,,thJ+.~ ' ~ : r~ rtc: (808 961-5261 _,.:,tuime~x6~r ~ z:+~ FAX: (808) 969--3291 ~ ~E•oF•µa~ ~'OI11~~TY C~nUI~iCI~, County ojHawaii Hawaii County F~uilding fltti?1;?1Z .~fl'P°f -iilo, Hawaii _9h72U September 11, 2001 C TO: Chris Yuen Planning Director FR: Bobby Jean Leithead-Todd Planning Committee Chair ~ ` RE: Bill 81 Relating to height Limits in North Kona Commercial Zone (CG) Districts At the August 14, 2001 Planning Committee meeting, Bill No. 81, relating to height limits in the North Kona Commercial Zone districts, surfaced. Per the County Code, all Council initiated bills must be referred to the Planning Department and Planning Commission for review and consideration; therefore, per the recommendation of the Planning Committee, Bill No. 81 is being referred to you for your comments and recommendation. The bill was originally drafted to quell some difference of opinions regarding the height limit; however, it is now the intent of the Committee members to solicit the opinion of the public before any final decisions are rendered. For your information, enclosed are: 1. The transcript from the August 14, 2001 Planning Committee meeting 2. Communication No. 283 3. Bill No. 81 Please feel free to call me at 961-826 ] if you have any questions. encl. BOBBY JEAN LEITI-iEAD-TODD ~a~~~~-- _ Phone: 961-8261 Councilmember ~ FAX: 961-8912 ~•~.pP OFFICE OF THE COUNTY COUNCIL County of FOawaii Hawaii County Building 1S Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawaii 96720 August 1, 2001 lOiIEMOI~Ni'ITM TO: Council Chair James Y. Arakaki And Members Of The I-iawai`i County Council FROM: Bobby Jean Leithead-Todd, Council Member .i~j~ j RE: Bill Relating to I-Ieight Lirnit in North Kona Commercial Zone (CG) Attached for consideration is a bill that reduces the ninety-foot height limit to forty-five feet in the North Kona commercial zone. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 961-8261. Thank you. Attachment 6?~~ =~o Nay d ~ ~'ile N®. ~ ~'U~' ~fe fiot AUG ~ 1 2001 _.~~n :'r,' vF ti.ti~v . C®LTN°I°I' O~ W-I`-.:~:: ~~'A.'T' O~ I~?.W~`I -f, ~;r Q~Ir.n,f .M'. SILL NO. 81 O~IN~.NC~ NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 25 (ZONING CODE) OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983 (1995 EDITION), AS AMENDED, RELATING TO HEIGHT LIMITS IN NORTI-I KONA COMMERCIAL ZONE (CG} DISTRICTS. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII: SECTION 1. Purpose. The purpose of this bill is to decrease the height limit in CG zoned properties in North Kona from ninety feet to forty-five feet. SECTION 2. Chapter 25, Article 5, Section 25-5-113 of the Hawaii County Code is amended to read as follows: "(a) The height limit in the CG district shall be forty-five feet, except in those areas designated in [subsections] subsection (b) [and (c)] below. (b) The height limit in the City of Hilo shall be one hundred twenty feet. [(c) The height Iimit in those areas in the North Kona district designated as high density urban on the general plan land use pattern allocation guide (LUPAG) map shall be ninety feet.]" SECTION 3. Material to be repealed is bracketed. New material is underscored. In printing this ordinance, the brackets and bracketed material need not be included. SECTION Severability. If any provision of this ordinance, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance, is held invalid, the invalidity does not affect other provisions or applications of the ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end, the provisions of this ordinance are severable. SECTION 5. This ordinance shall take effect upon its approval. INTRODUCED Y: f O CIL MEMBER, COUNTY OF HAWAII Hilo, Hawaii Date of Introduction: Date of 1 ~ Reading: Date 2nd Reading: Efi'ective Date: ~ R I~t'IC~a _ . ;j i. + ~ r.~l.l.'1 l~ ~.ti'~~~~ Comm. 283: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 25 (ZONING CODE) (Bill 81) OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983 (1995 EDITION), AS AMENDED, RELATING TO HEIGHT LIMITS IN NORTI-I KONA COMMERCIAL ZONE (CG) DISTRICTS From Planning Committee Chair Bobby Jean Leithead-Todd, dated August 1, 2001, transmitting a bill that reduces the ninety-foot height limit to forty-five feet in the North Kona commercial zone. CHR. LEITHEAD-TODD: Just before anyone says or makes any motions, I would note that since this is a proposed amendment to the Zoning Code initiating from the Council, that the appropriate motion, if people want to move on this measure, would be to refer it to the Planning Commission. MR. TYLER: Madam Chair, I so move. MR. YAGONG: Second. CHR. LEITHEAD-TODD: Moved and seconded. Any discussion? MR. TYLER: Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. I would also want to note for the record that two communications have been circulated today, in ,connection with Bill 81 in this proposal. The first is dated August the 7t~', to you, Madam Chair, from Mr. John Ray, from the Hawaii Leeward Planning Conference "SEE COMM. And the second one is dated August the 14`h, today, addressed to me-the subject is the `-`HEIGHT OF SPECIFIC STRUCTURES WITHIN KAILUA VILLAGE", from the Planning Director, Mr. Christopher Yuen. (SEE COMM. I had spoken with the Planning Department, in particular, Mr. Daryn Arai, in charge of the Kona Office, to ask him to provide me with information about existing or already approved structures-specific ones in the Kailua azea, which would be the subject-the area of which is the subject of this bill. And, as you can see from their transmittal, there's the current Office Complex on Henry Street as part of Crossroads, which is 49 feet; the Kona Alii Condominiums approved in '74 with a provision the structure does not exceed a maximum height of 90-it's buildout now, it has been for some years; Kailua Village Condominiums, on the makai side of Kuakini behind the Catholic Church, 81 feet. These two have been around for quite some time also. Kona Islander Inn, 41 feet; Kuakini Villas, which was proposed, 43 feet; Hualalai Regency, the assisted living facility on Hualalai Road, 36 feet; and the Hotel King Kam-excuse me, King Kamehameha's Kona Beach Hotel, which has also been around for awhile, 64.5 feet. And I wanted to acknowledge this and also thank the-thank Mr. Arai, thank the staff and Mr. Yuen, for providing this information. And, I think, Madam Chair, that not only is it consistent with our Code but it makes a lot of sense to send this to the Planning Commission so this can be heard in Kona, so that everyone can weigh in on this. Thank you. CHR. LEITHEAD-TODD: Ms. Pisicchio. MS. PISICCHIO: That answered my question. Thank you. CHR. LEITHEAD-TODD: Okay. Mr. Tyler, did you want to address anything else on this bill? MR. TYLER: Well, if I may just say in general, Madam Chair, I want to thank you for taking the initiative to bring this forward in light of our discussions concerning some recent rezonings in the North Kona, in particular, Kailua area. I think this makes a lot of sense. It's very consistent with what we have there now. The buildings that exceed that, pretty much, the ones that exceeded by a lot-as we can see, are not 90 feet by any stretch of the imagination. More importantly, these were done many, many years ago and as a result of it, the 45-foot height limit was put in and how it got changed to 90-feet for the High Density areas is unknown to me. But I will be doing some more research to be sure that the various bases are covered. And, as we discussed this morning in the Public Works Committee, I think it makes a lot of sense-excuse me-the Finance Committee, with respect to the bus fares. I think it makes a lot of sense for the public to have an opportunity to testify on this, so I strongly support referring this to the Planning Commission. And I thank you for your initiative. CHR. LEITHEAD-TODD: Mr. Yagong. MR. YAGONG: Thank you, Madam Chair. Just for the viewing publics' information, could you give a scenario of what the steps that will take place, should this pass-this motion pass-go back to the Planning Commission. Where does it go from there and when does it come back up ' to the Council? CHR. LEITHEAD-TODD: Okay. As required by our County Code, if the Council or Members of the Council wish to introduce an amendment to the Zoning Code, the procedure is, is that we have to refer it to the Planning Department and Planning Commission-for them to review it and take it out for public hearing first. They then would send their recommendation on the bill up to the County Council. It would then, come back to my Committee whereupon we would have-in order to pass it, you would have to have at least one reading in Committee and two readings at the Council. That's if you decide that you want to have this bill heard. The other options are, obviously, if there were a motion to file, then that would end this measure here. It would not prevent the Planning Department from initiating a bill to address this. And I should note that I have no feelings one way or another on whether this is a good bill or a bad bill. I did this in response to what I thought I heard coming from the two representatives of the Kona area, that they felt 90 feet was too high and that a 45-foot height limit, which is the normal height limit in Commercial zones was more appropriate. So, I had the bill drafted so that there would be an opportunity to comment on it. . end this is, basically, because I believe that it's inappropriate to estab~ .sh different height limits for similarly situated and similarly zoned prof ~ty. So, in other words, some property shouldn't have a 90-foot hey .<< limit and some property have a ~5 and another piece of property have 35. If you're going to do this, I believe that you should be consistent. 1 have no problem, personally, with 90-feet. It's just that, if this is what tiie current view of the representatives in Kona and, possibly, the population in Kona, is that I thought it was worth introducing it and letting us have some public input on it. MR. YAGONG: Thant: you. CHR. LEITHEAD-TODD: Mr. Yagong? MR. YAGONG: Yeah, thank you. And I know Mr. Tyler stance on this and I support him with that. Maybe I should ask-if I could, ask the other representative from Kona and how she feels about the bill, whether it should be passed-the motion should be passed? If you don't mind answering? MS. PISICCHIO: I, mainly, wanted to make a correction on the Chairwoman's representation of why she felt the need to bring this forward. It wasn't because I was representing that I thought the 90-foot was across the board, too high. It was that I thought that, in the form of an ordinance an applicant should have the benefit of putting a limitation within a particular recl~aest, if they wanted. I thought that that process should be something that we could respect by approving. And also, in one of the cases, that there was a specific reason where it was an application that would have resulted in a building, on top of a hill, overlooking town that that particular case justified a specific limit because of its specific; location and that the-that was the second Luilding request that came fortzvard. That they had requested a limit and it was very appropriate to the location because of the topography of the area. So, to say that my feeling is that, across the board, I felt that 90-feet was too high. I don't necessarily hold that view. CHR. LEITI-IEAD-TODD: Thank you, Ms. Pisicchio. ~fS. PISICCI-IIO: But, it's not my district. CHR. LEITHEAD-TG~DD: If there is no further discussion, the motion on the floor is to=---Mr. ~'agong. *~.YAGONG: Thank you. Because I want to---I think putting through tb~, public process is important. I think it's good. We have people have an opportunity to express their feelings on it. Usually when something like this happens is because it's initiated, maybe, by community concern-g--whether planes-plane views or what have you. This is, sort of, being an initiative-initiated through the discussions that took place here at the Council. So, I'm-that's why I wanted to get the feel from Ms. Pisicchio; whether or not she's gonna-well, support. `Cause I certainly support Curtis in what he wants to do. I would have- I'd be in a quandary if-you might feel differently, as far as sending this issue back to the Planning Commission. So, I guess I want really want to have a good feel as far as where you're gonna go with this because Irepresent---I respect both of your views. CI-IR. LEITHEAD-TOI1D: Ms. Pisicchio. MS. PISICCI-IIO: I have a little bit of mixed feelings that I'm very anxious to put this out to the community in Kona to get their input. Because, as I mentioned to Mr. Tyler yesterday, I think, maybe possibly there are situations where a higher building might be appropriate. And so, I really don't know, really, at this point. So I'm very anxiaus for help with diversity-the community come out so we can get their feedback on it. I can see that the idea would be attractive On one hand, even Mr. Ray's statement that maybe we should consider the density issue of urban infill. Maybe-and I had no idea how buildings were, so it's really useful how high they were, so I was really happy that this came forward, actually, measuring buildings. I didn't have the foggiest idea what a 40-foot building or 90-foot building was. So, right now, I'm still in the education stage to this issue and it'll be very good to go before the Planning Commission in Kona to hear what people have to say. And, it's a part of regional planning that we're gonna be getting into more and more as time goes on. And I think it's a good process. CHR. LEITHEAD-TODD: Mr. Tyler. MR. TYLER: Thank you, Madam Chair, for the opportunity to speak again. I appreciate the comments of all of our colleagues. I think, certainly, what I've heard over the years and, most recently, in light of our discussions concerning two proposals-one of which has passed the other one, which, as I think ~s on Final Reading tomorrow-is a strong desire on the part of my constituents to have height limitations. And 40-I think all of us thought it was 4~-feet and we didn't realize that it was 90 feet because it fell into this High Density LUPAG situation. And then, clearly, as I've pointed out there are no examples of any buildings that high. Most of them are around the ~5-foot or less height. So, that's the reason I hope that this proposal, this idea, will have an opportunity to be heard: by the public and have them comment however they wish to comment. I suspect there'll be strong support for it. I won't prejudge it until we hear from the public. Thank you. CHR. LEITHEAD-TODD: Okay. The motion on the floor is to refer Bill 81 to the Planning Department and Planning Commission for appropriate action. The motion was carried by the following vote: In Favor: Committee Members Tyler, Arakaki, Chung, Elarionoff, Jacobson, Pisicchio, Safarik, Yagong, and Chair Leithead-Todd Opposed: None Absent ~ Excused: None CHR. LEITHEAD-TODD: The motion is carried. This will be referred down to the Planning Crs.-emission. MR. TYLER: Thank you, Madam Chair. CHR. LEITHEAD-TODD: Ms. Pisicchio? MS. PISICCHIO: I know-this might be slightly out of order. Would this----something go before the Kailua Village Design Commission as well? Does Mr. Tyler know? MR. TYLER: May I respond, Madam Chair? CHR. LEITHEAD-TODD: Go ahead, Mr. Tyler. MR. TYLER: The Kailua Village Design Commission makes recommendations to the Planning Commission and the Council on any proposed changes, physical changes, so that would be specific applications. I did speak with some members of the Commission just last week, and they all seem to feel this was something that was very important for the entire area. And, so I'm sure they'll come out. Whether they come out as a group or individually-I don't know. But I do know they want to sit down and talk about the whole situation. MS. PISICCHIO: I was just wondering if it would formally end up on their agenda. That's what I wanted to know. MR. TYLER: I don't think so, because it's not proposing aphysical-a specific, physical change-and that's what the Zoning Code Ordinance addresses, I think. Thank you. MS. PISICCHIO: Thank you. MR. TYLER: You're welcome. CHR. LEITHEAD-TODD: Okay. Ms. Jacobson. MS. JACOBSON: Yeah, this isn't exactly before us now but I thought it could be a subject of confusion, maybe-Planning Department might want to look at. They use-we're deleting the part about North Kona, but Section "b." where it talks about Hilo, just refers to the City of Hilo. And maybe a more geographic definition, since we don't have incorporated cities and it's---oh, what are the boundaries and that sort of this. But that's for another time---- CHR. LEITHEAD-TODD: Well, that's for another bill. `Cause we're kind of bound by the title of this bill, which specifically relates to height limits in North Kona. MS. JACOBSON: Right. CHR. LEITHEAD-TODD: Thank you. We now move to "Unfinished Business". Communisation 221, Bill 61. +sv,~: Harry Kim cP:~ ~ Christopher J. Yuen .4doyor I•~ Director -Roy R. Takemoto . +;.°p`° Deputy Director Pg P96s•spdde ~~t ~ ~~ii P1f~~lYl®tING l0;EP~7'MENT 25 Aupuni $Ya~~t, Ronan 109 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720-4252 (808):961-8288 Fax (808)961-8742 August 14, 2001 TO: Councilman Curtis J. Tyler FROM: Christopher J. Yuen, Planning Director SUBJECT: Heights of Specific Structures within Kailua Village In response to your telephone request of August 13, 2001 regarding the heights of specific structures within Kailua Village, the fo€lowing list is provided based on Plan Approvals issued by the Planning Department: 1. Office Complex currently under construction along north side of Henry Street and mauka of Safeway (TMK: 7-5-04: 19) - 49 feet 2. Kona Alii Condominiums located on makai side of Kuakini Highway, south of Hualalai Road (TMK: 7-5-08: 2) ®Approved at 74 feet with a provision that structure does not exceed a maximum height of 90-feet. 3. Kailua Village Condominiums located on makai side of Kuakini Highway, south of Hualalai Road (TMK: 7-5-08: 16) -approved at 81 feet (7 stories) 4. Kona Islander Inn located on makai side of Kuakini Highway, south of Hualalai Road (TMK: 7-5-08: 3) -approved at 41 feet (3 stories) S. Kuakini Villas, a proposed 59 unit condominium complex located on mauka side of Kuakini Highway at the intersection of Hualalai Road - 43 feet 6. Hualalai Regency, 129-unit assisted living facility located along the north side of Hualalai Road (TMK: 7-5-10: 13 & 15) - 36 feet 7. King Kamehameha Hotel, located at Palani Road-Alii Drive TMK: (7-5-06: 20) - approved at 64.5 feet (6 stories) Councilman Curtis J. Tyler August 14, 2001 Page 2 The maximum permitted height of a structure within Kailua Village may range from 35 feet to 100 feet, based on zoning designation, :For example, structures on parcels in Kailua Village zoned Single Family Residential (RS) rr Multiple Family Residential (RM) may have a maximum permitted height of 35 feet and 45 feet, respectively. Structures on parcels zoned General Commercial (CG) may have a maximum permitted height of 90 feet, provided that these parcels are situated within areas designated for high Density Urban uses by the General Plan. Finally, structures on parcels zoned General Industrial (MG) may be permitted to a maximum height of 100 feet, provided that I #ind this height functionally necessary. We could find no reference in the honing Code. or other ordinances that define the maximum height of structures within Kailua Village by stories. We hope that we have responded adequately to your questions. If not, please contact Daryn Arai of our West Hawaii Office. . DSA: P:\wpwin60\dsa\2001 \MTyIerKKheighf0l .doc c: West Hawaii Office ~ ~ # AA • ~ ~ h ~)n~ ~Sa 4 < i .k M 3j.. ~1 hS ti ~ a. yk__:~,. . c s~ . IeTortta Kon~~ } ::::.:<::r''~ I3istrict L~n~s f . 'A'AA A w x~. ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ` + y 1 ~ ~ 6 ~ y ~ i ...gyn.. i...u.aum.-..r.......~wwwvrm Locations A and ii arc areas designated `'~€igh density" by the current General Plan LL~'AG rnap. ~ r4rr # + ~ ~ 1 f t y ~ x t t -f ~ Z Pa~aYEP it®c~ ~ ~ (~€38L~1 ~i;3e'd~18.81~1cBn31 ~'ie~' •~~---a-~ . iS. Close up ofLocation A {Y IIi~I~ I3ensity Urban f:~; is ire ~ - . :r~•~~. ~t~~a~~ `:IEgh~ra~r s Kamehalncha III Road ?s: , ,~:3h r.: . f Keauhou ~ f . 1 e U of Location ~ C os p . high Density Urhall < J~ f IS 111 . t'CI z, S 4 . r ~ .•.•ir ; ~ se's' .-...-ss^`"`~'" '3<?' ?>[:>'s? > :::;::.....:f i 1 RCouncil heigtlimit00nk-1 /28/02 CGUNT~' (.IP I-IAWAII PLANNING DEPAIITl~NT CI~IVIIVILNDATION COUI~TTY COUNCIL INITIATED PISOPOSED All~IENDINT TO CII_~PTEI2 25 (ZONING CODE), IIAV6VAII COUIoTTY CODE, RELATING TO IIEIGIIT LIMITS IN NOI~TII KONG COldII~I1~,RC`IAL ZONE dCG) I~ISTICTS The Planning Director is recommending that favorable consideration be given. to the proposed amendments to Chapter 25, Zoning Code, of the County of Ilawaii relating to Section 25-5-113. The intent of the amendments is to decrease the height limit in General Commercial (CG)- zoned properties in North Kona from ninety (90) feet to forty-five(45) feet. Favorable consideration is recommended based on the following analysis. The Master Plan for Kailua-Kona (Master Plan), adopted by resolution in 1996, is to be the "document to guide development and to assist community focus on implementation, objectives, alternatives, and planning concepts." One of the goals of the Master Plan is "To maintain and enhance the character identified as `The Kona Way of Life. To maintain the "Kona Way of Life" the Master Plan establishes several planning concepts. ®ne of the concepts includes a village image. The village image concept sought to limit the "scale of building". The scale suggested is "Two stories, possibly three if stepped back adequately." To maintain this village image and scale, the Master Plan seeks to: • Maintain low scale structure with height limits. • Provide community design guidelines. • Provide for Village entries: and other landscape features. The authors of the Master Plan clearly reflected a preference for two to three story structures. Therefore aforty-five (45) foot height limit would fall in conformance with the recommendation of the Master Plan. In addition, at its December 24, 2001 meeting, the Kailua Village Design Commission voted to favorably recommend adoption of this bill. However, as a consequence of reducing the maximum height, those structures that currently exceed 45 feet will become non_conforming. Any future improvements on these properties would have to conform to the maximum limit of 45 feet. Based on these findings and the recommendation of the Kailua Village Design Commission9 the Planning Director recommends forwarding this bill to the County Council with a favorable recommendation. -2- . ~r;, r ^r t ~ ~ILI,1~C3. 81 ~Il®ITCE leTO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 25 (ZONING CODE) OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983 (1995 EDITION), AS A,I~NDED, RELATING TO HEIGHT LIMITS IN NORTH ICONA COM1iiIERCIAL ZONE (CG) DISTRICTS. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII: SECTION 1. Purpose. The purpose cif this bill is to decrease the height limit in CG zoned properties in North Kona from ninety feet to forty-five feet. SECTION 2. Chapter 25, Article 5, Section 25-5-113 of the Hawaii County Code is amended to read as follows: "(a) The height limit in the CG district shall be forty-five feet, except in those areas designated in [subsections] subsectiarf (b) [and (c)] below. (b) The height Iamrt ia~ the City oI°Halo shall be one hundred twenty feet. [(c) 'I~e height limit in those areas in the North Kona district designated as high density urban on the genera! plan land use pattern allocation guide (LUPAG) map shall be ninetgr feet.]" SECTION 3. Material to be repealed is bracketed. New material is underscored. In printing this ordinance, the hrackets and bracketed material need not. be included. SECTION 4. Severabilaty. If any provision of this ordinance, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance, is held invalid, the invalidity does not affect other provisions or applications of the ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end, the provisions of this ordinance are severable. SECTION 5. This ordinance shall take effect upon its approval. INTRODUCED Y: O ~CIL MEMBER, COUNTY OF HAWAII Hilo, Hawaii Date of Introduction: Date of 1 S` Reading: Date 2~d Reading: Effective Date: 283 t~r~t PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAII HEARING TRANSCRIPT FEBRUARY 1, 2002 A regularly advertised hearing on the AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 25 RELATING TO HEIGHT LIMITS IN NORTH KONA COMMERCIAL ZONED DISTRICTS was called to order at 4:21 p.m. in the the Ohwna Keauhou Beach Resort, Kahalu`u Ballroom, 78-6740 Ali`i Drive, North Kona, Hawaii, with Chairperson Geraldine Giffin presiding. PRESENT: Geraldine M. Giffin ABSENT & EXCUSED: Aurelio Mina, Jr. Earl Fujikawa Mildred Mosher Florence Kubota Fred Galdones Francis Smith Hannah Springer Grant Togashi Ivan Torigoe, Deputy Corporation Counsel Christopher Yuen, Planning Director Alice Kawaha, Staff Planner Susan Gagorik, Staff Planner Daryn Arai, Staff Planner Norren Kato, Staff Planner And approximately 4 people from the public in attendance. COUNTY COUNCIL, INITIATED -Proposed Bi1181 to amend Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawaii County Code, as amended, relating to height limits in North Kona Commercial Zone (CG) districts. GIFFIN: Commissioners, we're on Agenda Item No.10. This is a County Council initiated proposed Bill No. 81 to amend Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawaii County Code, as amended, relating to height limits in North Kona Commercial Zone (CG) districts. KATO: Thank you, Madam Chair. This change, this Bill 81 submitted by the County Council for comment to this Planning Commission makes several changes to Chapter 25, Section 25-5-113, Article 1 relative to height limits in generally commercial zoned land, Basically, the changes are as shown in your Background Report. In subsection A, they wish to delete "subsections" and replace that word with "subsection" and remove that portion that says "and (c)." In addition to that, they would also like to remove all of subsection (c). The effect of this removal from the County Code would: basically mean that all lands zoned CG and also designated high density in the County General Plan would effectively go from a maximum 1 _ . height of 90 feet down to 45 feet. And I should also note that the areas being. affected by this change are shown in Exhibit C at the end of your Background Report. GIFFIN: Commissioners, do you have any questions of Norren? Commissioner Fuj ikawa. FUJIKAWA: Presently it's at 95 feet you were saying? GIFFIN: Ninety. KATO: Ninety feet. FUJIKAWA: Ninety feet? KATO: Yes. FUJIKAWA: And is it already a lot of buildings at 90? KATO: Currently there is only one building that will be called nonconforming should this bill take effect. That building is the new office building right above, I believe it's Safeway, you know, behind Subway and Mana's Korean Kitchen. That building is approximately 49 feet. So it wo9ald became nonconforming by ~ feet. But that is the only building that we're aware of that would become nonconforming. FUJIKAWA: Nonconforming? KATO: Yes. FUJIKAWA: Well, that's the situation here in Kona, land is scarce. And as you well know, we can.'t spread out, we've got to go up. GIFFIN: Any other comments? KUBOTA: Madam Chair? GIFFIN: Commissioner Kubota. KUBOTA: We received communication from Mr. John Ray GIFFIN: Yes. KUBOTA: President of Hawaii Leeward Planning Conference in opposition to this proposed Bill No. 81. GIFFIN: Yes. 2 KUBOTA: And he says that this "reduces the number of economical lease able square footage that can be built on a given lot." He says that "this is a `back-door' down-zoning move that will affect all holders of commercial property on the Big Island." And he's recommending that we postpone discussion until they can comprehensively address this issue through the General Plan. update and future Community Development Plans. Now I wondered what the take of the Planning Director was on this. GIFFIN: Mr. Yuen? YUEN: I don't know why he said that it affects all property, commercial property owners because it only affects owners of CG zoned property within the high density area in Kailua-Kona-and Keauhou. It does affect those owners, it does reduce the final height limit and it may reduce the number of units that they can put on the property in the long run, yes. And we recommend approval based on statements made in the submittal and on, particularly on the master plan for Kailua-Kona which was passed in '96. GIFFIN: Commissioner Springer? SPRINGER: Also on page 3 under the Section entitled "AGENCIES' COMMENTS" we have the Kailua Village Design Commission recommending approval. And, also, -the Police Department and their comments draw our attention to matters of public safety; and that's the, they show that both the Police and Fire Departments will be better able to deal with public safety needs in lower-rise buildings, etc. GIFFIN: Any other comments? Norren, how many floors is 45 feet? KATO: Approximately four stories, Ma'am. GIFFIN: And so 90 is eight? KATO: Yes. A similar structure, we do have some examples of already existing structures inside of the background report, such as King Kam Hotel and Kona Alii Condos. And so that should give you some idea of the scales of which a 90-foot structure should look, resemble. GIFFIN: Commissioner Kubota? KUBOTA: The establishments that you just named, the couple, are 90 feet? KATO: No. King Kam Hotel is currently 61.5 feet, and Kona Alii Condos is '74 feet. So a 90-foot structure would be 16 feet taller than Kona Alii Condominium. KUBOTA: But we're talking about 45, bringing it down to 45. 3 KATO: That is correct. KUBOTA: So tell me, give me an example of a 45-foot building. KATO: That would be something very, very close would be that office that is currently behind or right above Safeway. KUBOTA: I can't visualize it. KAWAHA: Henry Street. KUBOTA: Henry Street. KATO: Oh, it's at the very beginning. Where Henry Street intersects with Palani, there is a brand new office building right at that inter near that intersection, and that building is approximately 49 feet. KUBOTA: Madam Chair? GIFFIN: Commissioner Kubota. KUBOTA: I was reading through the transcripts of the Council Committee meeting and I noticed where Nancy Pissichio GIFFIN: Where are you? KLTBOTA: What GIFFIN: Where are you? KiTBOTA: I'm on page GIFFIN: I know there's no page KUBOTA: There are no page numbers but GIFFIN: No. Where are you? KUBOTA: It's one, two, three, fourth page I think it is, at the bottom. GIFFIN: I have a little bit? KLTBOTA: "I have a little bit of mixed feelings that I'm very anxious to put this out to the community in Kona to get their input. Because, as I mentioned to Mr. Tyler yesterday, I think, maybe possibly there are situations where a higher building might be appropriate." If we 4 _ have an ordinance that says X15 feet no higher, will there be exceptions made in instances where deemed necessary? KATO: If a developer should change to want to build a taller structure, they have the option of coming before us with avariance KUBOTA: A variance? KATO: For a variance to the Code requirement restricting them to ~5 fit. So there are avenues open to people who want to exceed the ~5 feet. I might also mention that the rest of the County, with the exception of downtown Hilo, is 45 feet. KUBOTA: I read that. KATO: Yes, so that would pretty much just bring that particular exemption, take that particular exemption out of the Code. FUJIKAWA: Chairwoman? GIFFIN: Commissioner Fujikawa. FUJIKAWA: First of all, the question is this hotel here is how many stories? GIFFIN: More than four. KATO: Which hotel? FUJIKAWA: The one we're at now. KATO: We could go right into the lobby real fast. FUJIKAWA: Anyway, it's about seven. If you bring back the Kona Inn hotel, the reason why they're no longer in business: is they could not compete against the other hotel industry because they were lengthwise, ~~:Thereas the new hotels came up. With labor involvement to walk from: one end to the other took tine, whereas you could go straight up. That's the reason why they're no longer in the hotel business. And, again, the other reason why I look at into the building that goes up is because of the land being scarce and expenses. GIFFIN: Any other questions of Norren? Commissioner Togashi, and then after him Commissioner Galdones. TOGASHI; You mentioned, h?orren, that any height variances are taken before us. Who is us? Is it to the Planning Director, Planning Commission, height variances? KATO: They are made to the Planning Director and the Director s TOGASI~I: So it's an administrative prerogative to_grant a variance, is that correct? KATO: Yes. GIFFIN: So a height variance is different from a sign variance? Cause a sign variance comes before us. ARAI: Right, that's correct. A sign variance is the only variance, well, in addition to a shoreline setback variance I should add, that the Commission has the authority to make a GIFFIN: So a height variance would simply go to the Director, and then lgoard of Appeals, and then Court, not us? ARAI: That is correct. It's similar to like when somebody comes in for a variance from the side yard setback. GIFFIN: Right, right. ARAI: That's all administratively decided upon. GIFFIN: Okay. Commissioner Galdones. GALDONES: Thank you, Madar_7 Chair. The Kailua Village Design Commission, is it my understanding that they support the ordinance or the change here? KATO: That is correct. GALDONES: Would you know the make-up of that Committee? KATO: I don't exactly know what you mean by what is the make-up of that Committee or Commission. GALDONES: Do they represent a, or allow a wide range of the community to participate to give input? KATO: The Kailua Village Design Commission regularly holds meetings twice a month; at which time anything t1~at needy to be brought before them is regularly agendized, much like what occurs here at the Planning Commission. And the public is more than weic€~me to come and offer testimony to anything that is before them. And so just like you that are chosen from the community and they're placed on this Commission to review design guidelines and designs of various projects. GIFFIN: Commissioner Fujikawa, is there a wide divergence of people on that Commission? 6 FUJIK.AWA: I used to be a Kailua Village Design Commissioner and they just do a recommendation as toward the Planning Commission. As far as the guidelines, they just abide by all the guidelines of the sign, the height, they get involved with color scheme, those things, very minor. GIFFIN: Mr. Galdones. GALDONES: Madam Chair, the concern I have is Hawaii Leeward Planning Conference, on their letter here they chose a large number of companies or corporations, if you may. GIFFIN: Yes, that's what they are. GALDONES: That they represent and participate in this Hawaii Leeward Planning Conference; and it seems like they are not in support of the recommendation from the Kailua Village Design Commission. GIFFIN: Correct. GALDONES: And so that is the reason why I was wondering if the Kailua Village Design Cormr:ission did give opportunity for the public at large to state their opinion. I have some problem supporting the recommendation because of Hawaii Leeward Planning Conference's position in this matter. GIFFIN: Perhaps we can work out some sort of wording on even a continuation; but that remains to be seen because that kind of though process and subsequent motion must come from this body. And I have just been informed, if there is no more discussion here at this level of staff, there is a member of the public who- would like to testify. Is there any more comment, question of staff? Mr. Arai? ARAI: I just want to quickly clarify that the Kailua Village Design Commission does not speak on behalf of all of North and South Kona. It does make recommendation on certain activities and improvements within specified limits. And those limits basically include Kona Bay Estates, all of the Kona Industrial area, about 300 feet mauka of the Queen K Highway GIFFIN: The Ace Hardware? AR.AI: Ace Hardware, right, extending down including the Walmart and Borders Book Store area and then following the I-~.ighway all the way to basically the Kona Hillcrest Subdivision in the vicinity of Lunapulc Koad and then back into town. So it's just a defined area which they have certain recommendations. So I just want to make that GIFFIN: Excuse me, Lei FUJIKAWA: It will be below Walmart, below the highway. ARAI: Below the highway only as it passes Henry Street. From Henry Street-and Makalapua commercial area, it's about 300 feet on the mauka side. That is why Walmart, Borders Book Store is in the KVDC area, but the Safeway and whatever is not. GIFFIN: Any other questions of staff? Hearing none, Leimana DeMat DEMATE: Dentate. GIFFIN: Dentate. Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Hawaii County Planning Commission? DEMATE: I do. GIFFIN: Please state your name and resident address. DEMATE: My name is Leimana Dentate. My address is PO Box 4511, Kailua-Kona, 96745. GIFFIN: Please begin your testimony. DEMATE: Thank you, Chairwoman. Thank you for the opportunity to come up here and testify. I'd just like to address Commissioner Fujikawa's response to the Kailua Villagc Design Commission. I served as the Chairman of this Commission for two years and I would like to just clarify that while the Village Commission does only handle in the Kailua Village proper, it is comprised of a broad spectrum of community members. Their main, they do address issues besides the sign variances, height variances and color schemes, shoreline setbacks, one example of that is the Waiaha Bay which was handled only a few years ago, historical and cultuxal resources, the perpetuation of the ambiance of the Kailua Village itself. And of the nine members, most of them, although there is development that is represented on that board, there is a large scope. They do render recommendations to the Planning Commission and take it very seriously. Most of, when I was chairing it the trend was to try and protect the village proper as much as possible from future and further over development. And it's true while Kona Inn could not compete with the other hotels, it was more, we were, in our studies it showed it was because of the development of the hotels in South Kohala. So as, personally, I support the Planning Director's proposal on this ordinance. Speaking as a past member of the Kailua Village Design Commission and a past Chairman, it looks to us, well, to me it's going in the right direction. I just wanted to clarify what the make- up of the Design Commission was. Thank you. GIFFIN: Thank you very much. And I do believe that that was Mr. Galdones' question early on; and it was never answered. DEMATE: My mistake, thank. you. 8 GIFFIN: Any other, wait, just a minute. Are there any other questions of the public testifier? Hearing none, thank you. So what is the desire of this Commission? Would you like to, do I hear a motion to approve, do I hear a motion to continue, what is it? FUJIKAWA: Could we have a motion to continue so we could think about it? GIFFIN: You can have whatever you want, Mr. Fujikawa. What is your desire? FUJIKAWA: I guess it's Chapter 25, right? GIFFIN: Yeah. FUJIKAWA: I make a motion to continue Chapter 25 GIFFIN: Oh. FUJIKAWA: Is that what it is? GIFFIN: I need to interrupt you. We have just received another request for someone to testify on this agenda item. RaeJean Gossett, will you please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth ors this matter now before the Hawaii County Planning Commission? GOSSETT: Yes, I do. GIFFIN: Please state your name and resident address. GOSSETT: My name is RaeJean Gossett and I reside at 75-226 Malulani Gardens in Kailua-Kona 96740. GIFFIN: Thank you. Your testimony? GOSSETT: We have been coming here since 1970 t these islands. We are from the San Francisco Bay area, have watched our rural area become very densely populated and decided that we did not want to spend our retirement years in that busy high density area any longer. We've checked out all four of the islands and were really between Maui and this island, and chose this island because of its diversity, also because of the Kailua town itself has remained basically the same. The feeling is very lxomey, warm, friendly feeling. We enjoyed that. We bought our house in '97 in Malulani Gardens. We were one of the first people to buy in there. From our lanai every day we see the whales down here in Kailua-Kona swimming, frolicking around, the other activities that we see and do enjoy. We bought the house because of its location, being able to see the ocean and the activities. And I do not feel that property in Kona is that densely populated that we need another Waikiki or San Francisco. No, there does not need to be 90-foot buildings. It's cutting off my view, I get to look at a building. I'm sure you're 9 aware of all of the history of Waikiki and what has happened with it, each building .going higher than the other one trying to get the better of the view. Supposedly we're not going to do this. Now I'm hearing that, yes, I want to do this, they're saying. This gentleman is saying that property is scarce in Kona and very high. I disagree with that statement. There's a lot of property to buy. And I have only been here, living here permanently since August, and I can drive through here and find all kinds of property to put hotels, condominiums, etc. I do not believe they belong in the town of Kailua. That is not what people come here to see, is high-rise buildings; and that I object to a 90-foot. I'm in agreement with the 45-foot. In the Bay area we also had a view. And the house below us that was supposed to go in, they're restricted to 35 feet; and that is in the San Francisco Bay area. So I would think that the 45 feet is most ample. Thank you. GIFFIN: Hang on one minute, Mrs. Gossett. Any questions or comments of the public testifier? TOGASHI: Maybe staff or Norren you could show Ms. Gossett which areas this bill will address. It's really not whole Kailua proper but only selected areas which are zoned commercial, general commercial. So it's just a very small, few, few areas. GOSSETT: I see that. You're talking about right here? TOGASHI: Madam Chair? GIFFIN: Mr. Arai. ARAI: While we're waiting for them to go over the locations, let me clarify that currently there are only certain selected areas within the high density urban designation that's currently zoned CG that would be affected by this bill. Also bear in mind that at any point in time another landowner could come in and rezone lands within the high density urban area to CG. So it's correct in that the bill will affect certain select areas now; but bear in mind that henceforth CG zoned lands will always be limited to 45 feet should the amendment be adopted. GIFFTN: In the interim, while Norren is dealing with Mrs. Gossett, Corporation Counsel has something to say. TORIGOE: Thank you, Madam Chairman. This is another timing issue that under the Zoning Code when we have aCouncil-initiated amendment the Commission has 120 days to act on it from the time that it is transmitted to the Council. After the 120-day review period the Council may proceed to act on the amendment as it deems appropriate. Also, it says that if the Commission fails to act on the amendment within 120 days then such an action shall be considered as an unfavorable recommendation by the Commission. I have been advised by staff that the 120 -days apparently has expired on this matter. So, you know, at this point then the Code seems that this should be considered an unfavorable recommendation by the Commission. If you want to express, nevertheless, your feelings on this, io I would recommend-you do so today. Because at this point the Council appears to be in a period where they can do whatever, you know, do as they deem appropriate. So if you want to say something about this, I recommend that you do it today. GIFFIN: And that no action would mean deny, a negative, right? TORIGOE: Correct. In fact, at this point in time because no action has been taken according to the ordinance it says that such inaction shall be considered as an unfavorable recommendation. So, at this point, it's advisory in any case, mind you. So if you want to make your feelings known, I'd say do it today. YUEN: You know, this maybe not, may not be mandatory. You know there's this mandatory versus directory language as to whether it's an absolute that this goes up. I would, in view of this though I would prefer I think the Commission should take a vote on this today. We're having this hearing in Kona, I think the issues are before the Commission. You, I think you understand the issues. We've, and I'm concerned about the timeframe and would like the Commission to, rather than us say that, gee, we didn't act on it in time so we're just going to send it up to you without a recommendation, the Commission should send a recommendation pro or con what it thinks about this amendment. GIFFIN: Did everyone understand that? Commissioner Springer. SPRINGER: Madam Chair, in light of the unanimous approval by the citizen-elected County Council where discussion ofthis-matter was held in the public hearing and this matter is now before the Hawaii County Planning Commission, at a duly noticed public hearing, and also in light of the testimony by the Hawaii County Fire Department regarding matters of p=ablic safety affecting both it and the Hawaii County Police Department, I move for approval of proposed Biil No. 81 to amend Chapter 25 of the Zoning Code of the Hawaii County Code, as amended, relating to height limits in North Kona Commercial Zone districts. SMITH: Second. GIFFIN: It has been moved by Commissioner Springer and seconded by Commissioner Smith that a favorable consideration be given to the proposed amendments to Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawaii County, County of Hawaii relating to Section 25-5-113. Discussion? Commissioner Fujikawa. FUJIKAWA: I guess my concern was in the future in the event a private firm is going to build a hospital for us here in Kona. Now if that's the case can they come over and ask for a variance in height? KATO: Yes. FUJIKAWA: That's for the good of the community. ll KATO: They can request a variance to the height; and per the administrative review at the time it would be decided whether or not to grant that variance. But that avenue is still open to just that situation you just described. GIFFIN: Any other discussion? Commissioner Galdones. GALDONES: Thank you, Madam Chair. I would have to vote against the motion. I don't feel comfortable supporting the recommendation. Last night as I had read the material before us, I was prepared to vote for this. But having received this last-minute letter from John Itay representing Hawaii Leeward Planning Conference, I feel a little uncomfortable in giving it a favorable recommendation. It raises some questions that I don't see it in anywhere that's being addressed in the materials that were handed over to us. It may have been addressed at the Commission meeting that they had for Kailua Village, but it doesn't reflect anywhere in the materials that we are reading and need to make I feel like an outsider telling the Village what they need, what they have to do. To make a real firm, I have some discomfort in that. So I would be voting against the motion. GIFFIN: Commissioner Togashi. TOGASHI: Norren, can you provide us with examples of, Commissioner Fujikawa mentioned a hospital. What other types of buildings are permitted within the General? Would you happen to have a general list of GIFFIN: But they're not permitted TOGASHI: Permitted in the General Commercial District? KATO: Just a minute, please. TOGASHI: I thought Commissioner Fujikawa made a very good point that, you know, if a hospital is permitted in this zoning, CV zoning, frankly, personally, I don't think it's, the Planning Director should be given the prerogative of granting the variance for a hospital. To me, something is not right about that. And, perhaps, maybe this, it's better to limit the height, is not a best way to do it. And like Commissioner Galdones, you know, to me it's a good idea, yeah. And I salute the spirit of Commissioner Springer's motion that it is a good idea that You know, Commissioner Fujikawa really brought up a good point that, you know, sometimes the buildings, you know, there are buildings that benefit the whole community. And I'm not sure if the Planning Director should have the power to grant variance, height variances at a whim, yeah. So in that respect maybe this reduction in the height is perhaps not the best way to do it and perhaps the bill should remain as it is. KATO: To answer your question, some examples of permitted uses in the CG district, adult day care homes, amusement and recreation facilities, art galleries and museums, art studies, to skip over a few, broadcasting stations, car washing, catering, cemeteries, convenience stores, day care centers, equipment sales and rental yards, family and child care homes, group 12 . living facilities, financial institutions, hotels, hospitals, light manufacturing, processing and packaging, medical clinics, mortuaries, offices, personal services, photography studies, restaurants, things of that nature. GIFFIN: Commissioner Togashi. TOGASHI: I think Commissioner Fujikawa put on a very good example, and that's a hospital. And I don't think it, I don't think the Planning Director should be the one to grant administratively aheight variance. It should And, for that reason, I would be supportive of Commissioners Galdones and Fujikawa and, but I will admire the spirit of or the intent of this bill. I think in the long run it is a good attempt at addressing heights, visual impacts; but I'm not sure this is the correct way of doing that. GIFFIN: Commissioner Springer. SPRINGER: In the event that you've, following with our example of a hospital, is the matter of height the only reason, is that the only aspect that would require scrutiny either administratively or by the public sector? If a hospital were going to be, come up in a CG designated area, is there a trigger for public hearing other than the variance, which is handled administratively in this case? GIFFIN: Mr. Yuen? YUEN: If it's a public hospital and there are public funds you have an environmental, an impact statement or environmental assessment, etc., etc. If it's a private hospital, let's leave aside all kinds of Department of Health regulations. There's the health, financing agency, etc., etc. On the land use side, a private hospital would only need plan approval. And because it's listed as a permitted use, then it will come in for plan approval, he would look at a And in plan approval we could look at traffic impacts, landscaping, a number of things. But it is the basic idea behind the Zoning Code, the permitted uses you get to do them. So the review would be limited to more technical issues like that. So, yes, in a CG you can just do a hospital. From the County's standpoint, it will have this plan approval and that would be the major, from the land use side that would be the major thing that, you know, would have to happen. SPRINGER: Madam Chair? GIFFIN: Commissioner Springer. SPRINGER: So there would be nothing to trigger a requirement for public comment? GIFFIN: Well, the EIS. YUEN: Just, if it were a public hospital, there would be this EIS. On a private hospital, no. The property would be zoned, and they would simply come forward with their 13 plans to the Department and then they would, there's no public hearing_or comment on a plan approval. GIFFIN: Commissioner Springer? SPRINGER: If we consider the example of the recent hospital in Waimea, the North Hawaii Community Hospital, I imagine that in the foreseeable future we wouldn't be having a sort of hospital development like you see in urban Oahu. And there would be a number of additional changes to Zoning Codes precluding that. With regard to the Hawaii Leeward Planning Conference's correspondence, it seems as though they're discussing both reducing economical leasable space and at the same time querying an increase in traffic flow. Presuming that this measure is passed, that seems to be sort of nonsequitur, to me. But thank you, Mr. Director, for your comments. GIFFIN: And I do believe the hospital in Waimea is private, yeah? SPRINGER: Yes. GIFFIN: Yeah. Commissioner Fujikawa? FUJIKAWA: I wanted to, young lady out there, you're saying you're from the Bay area. So am I. I did a study with doctors' hospital in Pinow, and that's all they could go, one floor; and they could not expand any more. The area is growing and they're behind. Marriott Hospital in Oakland fortunately is going up; and that's all they could go, the height wise. With that came along Kaiser, you know, and other hospitals. But here in Kona, I know what you meant, I think you were referring to the waterfront area,. no there are no hospitals down there, keep it down in the Industrial area. I think that's the, by talking to a few developers for the hospital, when I say pencil it out they're going by the total amount of units, rooms, they justify building a hospital here. And this is the reason why I'm very supportive for a hospital here being that I live in Kona, too. Thank you. GIFFIN: Thank you. Darya, I think you have something you want to say, huh? ARAI: If I could make three, oh, about three comments; and I'll try to be brief. Excuse me. There's discussion about public hearings. True, plan approval, it doesn't trigger public hearings. But I should note that should these improvements be situated within the Kailua Village Design District, then we will bring this matter before the Kailua Village Design Commission who will then conduct a public hearing. So there could be opportunities for public review. Second, there's mention about John Ray's letter; and in it he talks about how this bill could have an effect of downzoning. The zoning is to General Commercial. You can still do all the things the General Commercial District allows. This bill is simply restricting the height. So how height sometimes affects use, I mean, it depends, maybe the size of the use, maybe; but the use still remains. 14 _ And then, thirdly, there are concerns about the Director issuing variances to the height limit should it be adopted. The Director does not issue variances wholesale. There are strong guidelines that must be followed in order for a variance to be issued. So if someone wants to get relief from, say, a 45-foot maximum height limit, they must provide overwhelming and compelling evidence on why they should be granted relief from a law that is imposed on everyone else. For example, the grounds for a variance reads, "There are special or unusual circumstances applying to the subject real property which exists either to a degree which deprives the owner or petitioner of substantial property rights that would otherwise be available or to a degree which obviously interferes with the best use or manner of development of the property." Another guideline is there are no other reasonable alternatives that would resolve the difficulty. And the last is that it would not be contrary to the General Plan and the Zoning Code. I~ow far, there are grounds for granting a variance. So it's not granted wholesale or not simply issued. I'm sorry, I'm KATO: Another thing that, oh, we do this by committee. GIFFIN: Yeah, I can see that. KATO: Another thing you should also keep in mind is look at the areas that are provided on the map. Those are the only areas being affected by this bill. Now Commissioner Fujikawa mentioned the hospital and then he said, no, not anywhere along the shoreline. You might want to take a look at whether this high density urban shall be in the LUPAG area and if you feel that any of those areas are appropriate for that purposed use. Now the areas are specifically, really very small compared to the relative size of Kailua, plus that really little tiny area right out here in Keauhou. So that's the only portion, those are the only portions of land being affected by this bill. The other thing I would, I need to remind, I feel I need to remind the Commissioners is that this particular, the areas that are being affected aren't really that big. It's not affecting the rest of the CV zoned lands. If they want to locate in another area, they have to come in for a height variance anyway. So I just wanted to make that particular distinction. GIFFIN: Thank you. FUJIKAWA: May Imake a GIFFIN: Commissioner Fujikawa. FUJIKAWA: Supposing we have a developer come in with a hospital. We can't just put it in any other area cause there's no sewer, there's no water. And not only that, if that's the case, why get a hospital if we can't get it in reach? Right now it takes about 30 minutes to get to the Kona hospital. We don't want to spend another 30 minutes going north. This is the reason why I hope that the hospitals will be built centrally located, with easy access. GIFFIN: Any other comments for, questions of Norren? 15 YUEN: Yeah, if I can just follow up on one comment. Yes, it does only affect the CG district. However, the height limits in the remainder of Kona would be four to five feet except there is a potential in the Industrial for going higher. However, a hospital would not be a permitted use in the Industrial. There, the Director can also allow taller buildings through the planned unit development process or the PUD up to 75 feet. That would still be true. A PUD is, in a way, you get a group of variances. So those are the possible, those will remain as the alternatives. Without a PUD it would be difficult to get a height variance. It would be difficult to get a height variance, I would say. It would probably be in connection with a design of a building that provided some other view corridors in exchange for a taller building. That often is what happens in a PUD when there is a height variance approved with a PLTD. GIFFIN: Commissioners, we are in a discussion phase of our motion which is on the floor. I might remind you though that it is for a favorable recommendation. Any other comments or questions? Hearing none, Norren? KATO: Commissioner Springer? SPRINGER: Yes. KATO: Commissioner Smith? SMITH: Yes. KATO: Commissioner Fujikawa? FUJIKAWA: No. KATO: Commissioner Galdones? GALDONES: Aye. KATO: Commissioner Kubota? KUBOTA: Aye. KATO: Commissioner Togashi? TOGASHI: No. KATO: Commissioner Giffin? 16 GIFFIN: Aye. KATO: Madam Chair, the motion passes, four ayes, three nayes. KUBOTA: It does not pass. GIFFIN: No. YUEN: Excuse me, it will go up as an unfavorable recommendation with a notation what the vote was. KATO: Oh, okay, it did not pass. GIFFIN: Yeah, yeah. KATO: I'm sorry, that is my mistake. GIFFIN: Yeah, it's confusing. TOGASHI: It's quite understandable. GIFFIN: Even we're very confused about that role, too; and we have a history with it. SPRINGER: Madam Chair? GIFFIN: Commissioner Springer. SPRINGER: Since we're discussing our confusion with the rules, is another motion necessary? GIFFIN: I'm going to refer to the Director. YUEN: I think not. Because if you vote the same way, it will be a, I presume it will be a motion to say it should be unfavorable and it would be three votes in favor and four votes against. We, you know, we'll send it to the Council. As a formal matter, it's an unfavorable recommendation because it did not get the five votes. In a cover letter it will say, you know, to be fair and accurate, that the Commission voted four votes in favor and three votes against, and that the result is that it's an unfavorable recommendation; and then they'll take it from there. GIFFIN: And the issue may be moot because the 120 days have elapsed. So I personally don't feel we should spend any more time on it since the time has lapsed. 1~ The discussion ended at 5:12 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~ 1 ~J'~ i'a_.,K_-(fry-.. Sharon M. Nomura, Secretary 18 AKINAKA& ASSOCIATES, LIMITED L'ORANGE & ASSOCIATES ASHFORD & WRISTON MACFARMS OF HAWAII BANK OF HAWAII MARYL GROUP, INC. BOBACREE MAUNAKEAPROPERTIES CADES SCHUTTE FLEMING & WRIGHT MAUNP.LANI SERVICE, INC. CENTRAL PACIFIC BANK !,1CCA~dDLESS RANCH CHALCC! INTERNATIONAL OF HI, INC. MENEHUNEDEVELOPMENT CLARK REALTY CORPORATION "dIOCERS ENTERPRISES EARL E. £3AKKEN OCEANSIDE 1250 EASLEYCORPORATION ~IAWAII LI*~WAFiD PLANNING CONFEFtENCI~ OKAHARA&ASSOCIATES FIRST HAWAIIAN BANK PARKER RANCH, IPdC. GREENWELL FARMS, INC. P.O. BOX 2159 •KAMUELA, HAWAII 96743-2159 POND HOLD RANCH GTE HAWAIIAN TEL i ~ i PUNA PLANTATION HI LTD., dba KTA HAWAII ELECTRIC LIGHT CO. - - I QUEEN LILIUOKALANI TRUST HAWAII LAND COMPANY REALTY INVESTMENT, LTD. HOLUALOA MANAGEMENT CORP. - RIEHM OWENSBY PLANNERS ARCHITECTS HUALALAI DEVELOPMENT COMPANY ~ ' ~ R.M. TOWILL CORPORATION KAHUA RANCH LIMITED SEA CLIFF DEVELOPMENT, LLC KAI HAWAII, INC. ~i . SSFM ENGINEERS, INC. KAMEHAIv1EHA INVESTMENT CORP. SUN CABLEVISIOPd KAMEHAlL9EHASCHOOLS BISHQPESTATE THE NATURE CONSERVANCY OF HAWAII KAUPULEHUDEVELOPMENTS January 3Oth, .200, THE QUEENEMMAFOUNDATION KEALAK'cKUA RANCH LIMITED WAIKOLOA LAND COMPANY KEALIA RANCH WAIMEA WATER SERVICES, INC. KEAUHOU KONACONSTRUCTION CORP. WB KUY<IO RESORT, LLC KIEWIT PACIFIC COMPANY WEST HAWAII CONCRETE KONATRANSPORTATION WIMBERLY ALLISON TONG 8 GOO LANIHAU PARTNERS, L. P. Mrs. Geraldine Giffin, Chairperson County of I°lawai's Planning Commission Department of Planning 25 Aupuni street I°lilo, HI 96720 lad: Proposed dill No. 81 to amend Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the I~lawaii County Code, as amended, relating to height limits in North Iona Commercial Zone (CG) districts Bear Chairperson Giffin and Commission IVlembers, I am John laay, President of the I~awaii Leeward Planning Conference, testifying in opposition to the Proposed 13-ill No. 81. We support the discussion of height limits, but believe this Bill is pre-mature and overly broad. North Iona is the major designated growth area for V9/est I~lawaii. We need to better understand the potential growth for this area and the infrastructure demands. As Kona continues to grow, will urban sprawl be desirable? ~ONhere will the parking be accommodated and hour will the increase in traffic be mitigated? Viie need to better understand the economic impacts. The proposed 45' height restriction effectively reduces the number of economical lease-able square footage that can be built ®n a given lot. In effect, this is a "back-door" dornon-zoning move that viii effect ail holders of commercial property on the dig Island. UE~e recommend the discussion be postponed until we can comprehensively address this issue through the General Plan update and future Community Development Plans. thank you for the opportunity to com€raent. With Aloha, J®hn I~ay President ~lawaii Leeward Planning Conference JBR/ls HAWAII LEEWARD PLANNING CONFERENCE P.O. BOX 2159 KAMUELA, HAWAII 96743-2159 PH. 1808) 885-9588 FAX (808) 885-9590