Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0458.000 2002-2004 ASV Ol.ry~ 400.•- ~.b~ liarrc Kim ~ Uieir Fac~su 9dnl nr 1lnnac~n^ l~: rci m~ ~~~:rPy,~ ~ Pclcr 1.. IlcnJricks ~r. oi'H~~ ll,yain Vnne,¢ur~Nu r~~mr COUNTY O1~ HAWAII 25 Aupuni Street, Boom 2U Ililo, Ilaaau 06720-.352 (808)961-8211 Fax (808)9GI -6519 k ONA 75-5706 Kuakini Hlghw,p, Suite 101 Kuilua-Kona, Howai'i 96740 (808)329-5226 • I-u, 1808)326-SGGZ December 3Q, 2003 Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council County of Hawaii @ 25 Aupuni Street IIilo, HI 96720 O(7 ~ ~ Cn ~ ' Z i' Dear Chairman Arakaki and Members: ~ -o Change of Zone Application (REZ 03-025) 3 - Applicant: Lehua Lani, LLC = rv Request: A-Sato RS-7.15 ' Tax Map Key: 7-5-20:71 and 72 State Land Use Boundary Amendment Application (SLiJ 03-010) Request: Agricultural to Urban Change of Zone Application (REZ 03-024) Request: A-la to CV-10 Applicant: Verizon Hawaii, Inc. Tax Map Key: 7-4-8:20 State Land Use Boundary Amendment Application (SLU 03-011) Request: Agricultural to Urban Change of Zone Application (REZ 03-026) Request A-Sato RS-15 Applicant: Uluwehi Properties, LLC Tax Map Key: 7-5-17:21 Change of Zone Application (REZ 02-016) Applicant: Thomas A. Tuso Request: Agricultural (A-Sa) to Family Agricultural (FA-3a) Tax Map Kev: 7-5-12:38 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. incerely, Harry Ktm fjp, Mayor ~ . ~ 1 ~ l Ref. Ta Enclosures Ref. Date ~A~- ec: Planning Department 4a,NtY~a1 M,w 1 Harry Kim ~ 1Lr~' •E E. Mayor si ~ ? 1j1 Os:H';N~ County of Hawaii PLANNING COMMISSION 101 Pauahi SVeet, Suite 3 Hilo, Hawaii 96720-3043 (808)961-8288 Fax(808)961-8742 December 30, 2003 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 02-016) Applicant: Thomas A. Tuso Request: Agricultural (A-Sa) to Family Agricultural (FA-3a) Tax Man Kev: 7-5-12:38 The Planning Commission, after a duly held public hearing on December 4, 2003, voted to recommend for your approval the proposed legislative bill to change the disttict classification for approximately 8.773 acres of land from the Agricultural 5-acre (A-Sa) to a Family Agricultural FA-3a) district. The property is located approximately 720 feet west (makai) of Mamalahoa Highway in the vicinity of the former Ferrari Kona Coffee Plantation Store, Puaa 2"d, North Kona, 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-Sa) to Family Agricultural (FA-3a) zoned district would conform to the following goals, policies and standards of the Land Use and Agriculture Elements of the General Plan: • 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 lands. • 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, compatibility with adjacent zoned uses, availability of public services and utilities, access, and public need. • The compatibility of agricultural and non-agricultural uses should be carefully reviewed and where appropriate, buffers 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. 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 azea for Orchazds. The General Plan defines Orchards as "Those agricultural lands which though rocky in character and content support productive macadamia nuts, papayas, citrus, and Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 3 other similar agricultural products." The property is presently an abandoned coffee farm. The applicant would like to bring the coffee farm back into production and sell the other lot to a person with similar interests. The applicant's proposal to subdivide the subject property into two parcels of approximately 5 and 3 acres in size is consistent with the land use designation. The lot sizes will provide opportunities for the applicant to pursue agricultural activities, but is not able to commit to the financial or labor demands placed on them by the existing 8-acre parcel. Therefore, the requested zone change is determined to be consistent with the Genera] Plan Designation and LUPAG Map for this area of North Kona. The Kona Regional Plan, adopted by the Planning Commission by Resolution in 1984, recommends the project area for agricultural uses with a minimum lot size of five- acres (A-Sa). However, the applicant believes that "Although the requested FA-3a zoning may not be numerically consistent with this designation, the proposed uses should not be violative of the agricultural objective." As the perpetuation of agricultural uses is the goal of this application and proposed two-lot subdivision, the request would be generally consistent with other land use documents for this area of North Kona. The primary reason for this request is to subdivide the subject property into two (2) lots. One parcel will be retained by the applicant as his homesite and the other parcel will be sold with the hopes that the existing coffee orchard wil] be restored and maintained. Therefore, the reclassification of this 8.773-acre parcel from Agricultural- 5 acre (A-Sa) zoned district to Family Agricultural (FA-3a) will not be detrimental to the agricultural character of the area. The applicant has agreed to a restriction that will limit each proposed property to no more than one farm dwelling, further protecting the agricultural character of the subject property and surrounding area. Such a restriction, including a restriction prohibiting establishing a condominium property regime within the project site, will be incorporated as a condition of this favorable recommendation. The requested change of zone would therefore be in conformance with the intent and purpose of the State Land Use Law. Soils within the subject property are classified as Kainaliu Extremely Stony Silty Clay Loam (KEC) and Honuaulu Extremely Stony Silty Clay Loam (HVD). Kainaliu extremely stony silty clay loam has 12 to 20 percent slopes. The surface layer is very dark brown extremely stony silty clay loam, about 10 inches thick. It is underlain by fragmental A'a lava. Permeability is rapid, runoff is slow and the erosion hazard is slight. The soil is used for coffee, macadamia nuts and pasture. Honuaulu extremely stony silty clay loam has 12 to 20 percent slopes. Stones cover 3-15 percent of the surface. In a representative profile, the surface layer is stony silty clay loam about 9 inches thick. It is underlain by fragmented A'a lava. Permeability is rapid. Runoff is slow, and the erosion Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 4 hazard is slight. This soil is used mostly for coffee and pasture. 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 is unclassified by the ALISH system. Based on the aforementioned information, the requested change zone will not have any significant adverse impact on the agricultural resources of the County. Lands surrounding the subject property aze zoned Agricultural (A-Sa and la). The subject parcel is located on the southwestern slope of Hualalai and is approximately three miles from the ocean. The parcel is gently sloping, ranging from an elevation of 1,100 feet to 1,300 feet above mean sea level. The parcel is irregular in shape. It resembles an exaggerated flag lot with its "pole" or mauka portion over 150 feet wide. The subject property currently acquires its access over an access easement that runs along the parcel adjacent to the south of the subject pazcel. This 16-foot wide road and utility easement runs mauka along the northern edge of the adjacent parcel to Mamalahoa Highway. Within this easement is a 10-foot wide paved access road that extends to Mamalahoa Highway. The applicant has also identified a 25-foot wide access easement located on the subject property and running parallel to the existing 16-foot wide easement to the Mamalahoa Highway. Side by side, these easements provide for a total easement width of 41 feet. The current 10-foot wide driveway access intersects with Mamalahoa Highway at nearly a 45-degree angle. The applicant has agreed to improve this intersection and make it closer to 90 degrees. He has also agreed to build this intersection to County dedicable standards. A condition shall be included that will require this intersection to comply with County dedicable standards. These improvements to the project's access driveway intersection with the Mamalahoa Highway will address the concerns that have been expressed to the Planning Commission from surrounding neighbors. The applicant is also willing to improve the pavement width within both easements to 20 feet along its entire property frontage leading back to the Mamalahoa Highway. A condition of approval is included with this favorable recommendation to require the eventually dedication of that portion of the 25-foot access easement and an extra 5 (five) feet for future road widening that resides on the subject property. This requirement is being made in anticipation that adjoining parcels could eventually request a similaz type of zoning and pursue a similar type of agricultural lot development, upon which time the Planning Department will coordinate the development of these access easements into a standard agricultural roadway with a pavement width of 20 feet within a 50-foot wide right-of--way. Eventually, the County hopes to have aCounty-maintained, agricultural-standard roadway servicing the subject property and lots in the immediate Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 5 area. These recommended improvements within the existing access easements will provide an access the subject property and surrounding lots that is consistent with County-dedicable standards (20-foot wide pavement within a 50-foot wide right-of--way). The applicant previously identified a 25-foot wide access easement that is located on the subject property and runs parallel to the existing 16-foot wide easement to the Mamalahoa Highway. The applicant learned later that he does not have access rights to the 25-foot from the subject property to the Mamalahoa Highway and therefore, the improvements required within the 25-foot easement in the previous recommendation cannot be accomplished. Based on this new information, we will be adding a new condition that states "in conjunction with the subdivision approval process, the applicant shall construct (I)an 8- footpaved road within the existing 25-foot wide easement on the subject property between the eastern boundaries of the proposed lots; and (2) a minimum 14-foot wide paved road between the Mamalahoa Highway and the eastern boundary of the subject parcel; provided, however, that in the area where the 14-foot wide paved road intersects with the Mamalahoa Highway, the slope or grade of the road shall be reasonably level to allow for sufficient sight distance for a vehicle when entering the Highway from the private road. The 14-foot wide paved road maybe within the existing 16-foot wide right- of--way easement or outside of it to accommodate the sight distance and related requirements of this condition. In that event, proof of the added right-of--way easement shall be submitted prior to or in conjunction with the submittal of construction plans for the review and approval of the Depaztment of Public Works." This wording will replace the wording in Condition F (6). This will improve the access easement and will provide better conditions to access Mamalahoa Highway from this private road. The site is currently vacant of any structures. It was formerly cleared and planted in coffee. There are no known historic, archaeological or cultural features on the site and no raze, threatened, or endangered species of either flora or fauna. According to the applicant, the proposed project is not anticipated to have any potential adverse impact upon the practice of any cultural or native gathering right. The subject property is not along or near the shoreline. As such, gathering of marine life and coastal access is not an issue. The applicant is unaware of any gathering of plants by native Hawaiians in the recent past. However, the site has been used for coffee in the past. It would appear unlikely that the site would serve such purpose today. Legitimate gathering claims are made by native Hawaiians, the applicant intends to respect and honor such claims and Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 6 provide the needed access within the site. Therefore, no impact to endangered species, historic and archeological sites, and cultural practices is anticipated. Wastewater generated by the proposed use will be disposed of via a wastewater treatment system approved by the State Department of Health. There is an 8-inch waterline fronting the Mamalahoa Highway. Water can be made available to the 2-lot subdivision from this water line. As the project site is serviced by access and utility easement and does not directly abut the highway, an "out- of-bounds" agreement with the Department of Water Supply may have to be executed. The Department of Water Supply has stated that the applicant should secure the required water commitment as soon as possible. A condition requiring the immediate acquisition of the water commitment and compliance with the Department of Water Supply shall be included in the conditions of approval. All other essential utilities and services can or will be made available to the subject development. A condition of approval is being included to ensure that these infrastructural improvements aze installed. The nearest police station is located at Kealakehe, approximately six miles from the project site. There is a fire station at the intersection of Palani Road and the Queen Kaahumanu Highway, less than 5 miles from the project site. The Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) indicate that the area is located in Zone "X", azeas determined to be outside of the 500-year flood plain. While there are no indication of significant surface flow, the Department of Public Works has commented that "All development generated runoff shall be disposed of on-site and shall not be directed towazd any adjacent properties." As such, the applicant will be required to comply with all applicable County guidelines for runoff generated by development. Based on the foregoing, the Change of Zone request from an Agricultural-5 acres (A-Sa) to Family Agricultural-3 acres (FA-3a) 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 25-8-3 (North Kona Zone Map), of the County Zoning Code is transmitted. Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 7 We are enclosing copies of the staff Background and Planning Director's Recommendation for your information. Sincerely, f Fred Galdones, Chairman Planning Commission Ltuso02PC Enclosures cc: Mr. Sidney Fuke Mr. Thomas Tuso Department of Public Works Department of Water Supply Planning Department -Kona Department of Land & Natural Resources-HPD/Kona Rodney Haraga, Director/DOT-Highways, Honolulu BTusoREL.jwd l 126!03 COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT BACKGROUND REPORT THOMAS A. TUSO CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (REZ 02-016) THOMAS A. TUSO has submitted an application for a Change of Zone by changing the district classification from Agricultural (A-Sa) to Family Agricultural (FA-3a) for approximately 8.773 acres of land. The property is located approximately 720 feet west (makai) of Mamalahoa Highway, in the vicinity of the former Ferrari Kona Coffee Plantation Store, Pua`a 2nd, North Kona, Hawaii, TMK: 7-5-12:38. GENERAL INFORMATION L Land Ownership: Thomas A. Tuso is the fee owner of the property. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 2. Request: The applicant is requesting a Change of Zone by changing the district classification from Agricultural (A-Sa) to Family Agricultural (FA-3a) for approximately 8.773 acres of land. 3. Objectives: The applicant intends to subdivide the project site into 2 lots. One lot is to be approximately 5 acres and the other is to be approximately 3 acres. 4. Other Project Details: The applicant intends to construct his home on the lazger 5-acre lot. The other lot would be sold to prospective buyers since the applicant has concluded that the entire 8-acre pazcel is too lazge for him to maintain. The applicant hopes that the buyers of the smaller 3-acre lot to be created would improve the existing coffee orchazd. Note that the applicant has agreed to a limit of no more than one farm dwelling per proposed lot. 5. Project Timetable: The applicant hopes to secure the approval of this Change of Zone request as soon as possible and begin the subdivision process immediately thereafter. Tentative plans call for having the land subdivided by early to mid 2003. The estimated cost of improvements, if any, would be less than $30,000 for possibly a new water service lateral and improvements to the driveway access. C - r-{ S ~ C i3 i 11 14~ PC 6. Supportive Information: See Exhibit A -Applications for County Rezoning (A-Sa to FA-3a), Thomas A. Tuso dated August 2002. STATE AND COUNTY PLANS 7. SLU: Agricultural. 8. GP Consistency: Agriculture and Land Use elements goals, policies and courses of action. 9. GP LUPAG Map: Orchard. This designation refers to: "Those agricultural lands which though rocky in character and content support productive macadamia nuts, papaya, citrus and other similaz agricultural products." 10. Keahole to Kailua (KtoK) Developmeut Plan: The subject parcel is outside the area covered by the development plan. 11. Kona Regional Plan: The Kona Regional Plan, adopted by the Plaruung Commission by Resolution in 1984, recommends the project azea for agricultural uses at a density of five acre units (A-5). The applicant believes that "Although the requested FA-3a zoning may not be numerically consistent with this designatton, the proposed uses should not be violative of the agricultural objective." 12. County Zoning: The subject property is zoned Agricultural-5 acres (A-Sa). 13. SMA: The subject property is not situated within the Special Management Area. The nearest coastline is situated in excess of 3 miles makai of the subject property. 14. Coastal Zone Management, HRS Chapter 205A: According to the applicant, "it is concluded that the requested improvements would be consistent with the objectives, policies and guidelines of the Coastal Zone Management Policies, as outlined in Chapter 205-A-23, HRS and Planning Commission Rule No, 9 relating to Special Management Area. " DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTIES AND SURROUNDING AREA 15. Subject Property: The subject parcel is located on the southwestern slope of Hualalal and is approximately three miles from the ocean. The parcel is gently sloping, ranging from an elevation of 1,100 feet to ],300 feet above mean sea level. The parcel is irregulaz in shape. It resembles an exaggerated flag lot with a pole over 150 feet wide on the -2- mauka side. There is an existing road and utility easement rnnning mauka along the southern edge of the property. The Applicant believes that this access easement is wide enough to provide adequate access to the proposed 2-lot subdivision. The site is currently vacant of any structures. It was formerly cleared and planted in coffee. However, it is overgrown with mid level shrubbery, including pesky vines. 16. Surrounding Zoning/Land Uses: The subject property is situated in an azea located about three quarters of a mile mauka of the Kailua View Estates Subdivision and about .06 miles makai of the Mamalahoa highway in the Puaa 2"d ahupuaa. The Kailua View Estates subdivision is situated within the State Land Use Urban District and is primarily zoned Single Family Residential (RS-15) by the County. This subdivision is primarily composed of single family homes. Other lands immediately adjacent to the parcel are zoned Agriculture (A-Sa and A-la). Please refer to Exhibit A for location map. 17. U.S.D.A. Soil Type: Sofls within the subject property aze classified as KEC and HVD. KEC is Kainaliu extremely stony silty clay loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes. The surface layer is very dazk brown extremely stony silty clay loam, about 10 inches thick. It is underlain by fragmental Aa lava. Permeability is rapid, runoff is slow and the erosion hazazd is slight. The soil is used for coffee, macadamia nuts and pasture. HVD is Honuaulu extremely stony sflty clay loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes. Stones cover 3-15 percent of the surface. In a representative profile, the surface layer is stony silty clay loam about 9 inches thick. It is underlain by fragmented Aa lava. Permeability is rapid. Runoff is slow, and the erosion hazard is slight. This soil is used mostly for coffee and pasture. 18. Land Study Bureau Soil Rating: SoIls within the property are classified as "C" or "Fau" for agricultural productivity. 19. Agricultural Lands of Importance to the State of Hawaii (ALISH) System: Soils within the subject property are not classified on the ALISH map. 20. FIRM: According to FIRM, the subject site is designated Zone "X", an azea determined to be outside of the 500-year flood plain. 21. Flora/Fauna Resources: The site has already been cleared in the past and used as a coffee farm. A visual inspection of the site confirmed the presence of abandoned coffee -3- trees. A few monkey pod and african tulip trees were observed on the property. In addition, the undergrowth consisted of patches of lantana, Christmas berry, and pesky ivy gourd. 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, it may be possible to find the Hawaiian hawk and/or owl on the property. However, the current cleazed and rural nature of the pazcel and surrounding area would make it less likely to find endangered animal life in the area. 22. Archaeological Resources: Due to past grading, grubbing and coffee operations on the subject pazcel, impact to any azcheological features is unlikely. If in the event any unanticipated azcheological features or sites are uncovered, work will cease and the appropriate governmental agencies shall be notified. 23. Cultural or Native Gathering Rights: According to the applicant, the proposed project is not anticipated to have any potential adverse impact upon the practice of any cultural or native gathering right. The subject property is not along or neaz the shoreline. As such, gathering of marine life and coastal access is not an issue. The applicant is unaware of any gathering of plants by native Hawaiians in the recent past. However, the site has been used for coffee in the past. It would appeaz unlikely that the site would serve such purpose today. Legitimate gathering claims aze made by native Hawaiians, the applicant intends to respect and honor such claims and provide the needed access within the site. 24. Public Access: According to the applicant, the project site does not provide public access to coastal or mountain areas. PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES 25. Access: Access to the subject property is provided by the Mamalahoa Highway, a County-maintained roadway with a pavement width of 22 feet within a 30-foot wide right- of-way. An existing 10-foot wide driveway connects to the Mamalahoa Highway at about a 45-degree angle then proceeds down to the subject property within a 16-foot wide access easement located on adjoining parcels to the south of the project site. 26. Additional access information: In a letter to the Planning Director dated November 19, 2002 (Exhibit E), the applicant indicated that there is also a 25-foot wide access easement -4- that parallels the 16-foot wide easement to the Mamalahoa Highway. The applicant has submitted documents to demonstrate the applicant's access rights over these two access easements. The applicant has agreed to provide an 8 to 10-foot wide paved lane within the 25-foot wide access easement from the subject property to the Mamalahoa Highway (Exhibit I). When combined with the existing 10-foot wide lane in the adjoining 16-foot wide easement, a total of 18 to 20 feet of pavement will be provided. The applicant has also agreed to provide improvements to the intersection of these access easements and the Mamalahoa Highway to improve ingress and egress that will be consistent with County standards for such intersections. 27. Water: There is an 8-inch waterline fronting the Mamalahoa Highway and is approximately 400 feet from the eastern boundary of the subject pazcel. Water can be made available to the 2-lot subdivision from this line. As the site is serviced by an access and utility easement and does not abut the highway, an "out-of-bounds" agreement with the Department of Water Supply may have to be executed. The applicant will comply with the requirement of Department of Water Supply and will work to find a technical solution to this issue during the subdivision process. In addition, the Department of Water Supply has requested the immediate acquisition of the water commitment for the future subdivision. Please see Exhibit D. 28. Wastewater: There is no municipal sewer system in the area. The applicant proposes to dispose of sewage via individual wastewater treatment (septic or cesspool) systems approved by the State Department of Health. 29. Other Essential Utilities and Services: Electrical, cable, and telephone services aze available to the site. The nearest police station is located at Kealakehe, approximately six miles from the project site. There is a fire station at the intersection of Palani Road and the Queen Kaahumanu Highway, less than 5 miles from the project site. -5- AGENCIES' COMMENTS 30. Kona Soil and Water Conservation District: (October 17, 2002 Letter) "This parcel is located north of the Waiaha Drainage channel. Care should be exercised to protect the site as there may be localized runoffgenerated during land clearing activities. There may also be small, w~mapped, localized channels in the area that only carry water during heavy rainfall events. Erosion and sediment control measures should be reviewed before land clearing activities are undertaken." 31. Department of Transportation: (September 5, 2002 Letter) "The proposed action will not impact our State transportation facilities." 32. Department of Health: (September 5, 2002 Memorandum) "The Health Department found no environmental health concerns with regulatory implications in the submittals." 33. Police Department: (September 16, 2002 Memorandum) "Staff has reviewed the above-referenced application and does not believe the request will negatively impact police services or traffic in the area." 34. Department of Public Works: (See Exhibit B -November 14, 2002 Memorandum) 35. Fire Department: (See Exhibit C -September 18, 2002 Memorandum) 36. Department of Water Supply: (See Exhibit D -September 22, 2002 Memorandum) AGENCIES - NO RESPONSE OR NO COMMENT 37. State Land Use Commission, Department of Agriculture, Department of Environmental Management, Real Property Tax Division, State Department of Land and Natural Resources -Engineering Branch, Division of Forestry and Wildlife, Commission on Water Resource Management, Division of State Parks, Division of Aquatic Resources, Hawaii District Land Office. -6- PUBLIC COMMENTS 38. Letter from Mr. Jack Okayama (November 12, 2002 Letter) -See Exhibit E 39. Letter from Mr. Keola Childs (November 20, 2002) -See Exhibit F 40. Letter from Philip and Clare Wilson (November 22, 2002) -See Exhibit G APPLICANTS RESPONSE TO AGENCY AND COMMUNITY COMMENTS 41. Response to comments made by Department of Public Works and Fire Department. (October 9, 2002 Letter) -See Exhibit H 42. Response to comments made by Mr. Jack Okayama (November 19, 2002 Letter) - See Exhibit I 43. Response to comments made by Mr. Keola Childs (November 20, 2002 Letter) - See Exhibit J 42. Response to revised comments of Department of Public Works (November 22, 2002 Letter) -See Exhibit K 43. Letter acknowledging discussion with the Planning Department (November 26, 2002) - See Exhibit L -7- i i APPLICATION FOR COUNTY REZONING (A-Sa TO FA-3a) THOMAS A. TUSO Puaa 2na, North Kona, Hawai i TMK: (3) 7-5-12: 38 Prepared For: Thomas A. Tuso Prepared By: Sidney M. Fuke, Planning Consultant August 2002 E~H91~1T - ~~~I~~E ~F ,~®1~F APPLICA~'~~l~I - COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT~~~~;~ ~+~~r, 12 PI"1 4 0'i e or le ibl ~ ~ J (Typ g y print the requested information) APPLICANT: Thomas A. Tuso CO~Jh~i-iY Gr I',4`~.`~.'f~~.lt ds,:. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE: DATE: b ~ anon ADDRESS: nMA-i1.~y~5 75-1027 Henry Street Kailua-Kona, HI 96740 LIST APPLICANT'S INTEREST IF NOT OWNER: LIST PRINCIPAL(S) INCLUDING NAMES OF MAIN OFFICERS: PHONE:(Bus.) 334-9701 (Res.) (970) 230-1581 (Fax) LANDOWNER(S): Thomas A. Tuso LANDOWNER SIGNATURE(S): r DATE: ~ ~I ~u0~- (May be by Ietter) LANDOWNER(S) ADDRESS: Same as above REQUEST: A-5a TO FA-3a (Existing zoning) (Proposed Zoning) TAX MAP KEY: 7-5-12 • 38 STREET ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: SIZE OF PROPERTY OR AFFECTED AREA(S) TO BE REZONED: 8.773 acres AGENT: s; a„P v rr Fuka ADDRESS: 100 Pauahi Street, Suite 21Z Hilo, HI 96720 TELEPHONE:(Bus.) 969=~-~97 (Res.) 961 -69n9 (Fax) 969-7996 Please indicate to whom original correspondence and copies should be sent. ORIGINAL: Sidney Fuke COPIES: Thomas Tuso (See Instructions on Reverse Side) ATTACHMENT Agricultural Rezoning PLANNING DEPARTMENT COUNTY OF HAWAII APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF 20NE 1. If your request is approved, do you intend to subdivide the subject Yes land in accordance with the approved change of zone? 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 b. Into what lot sizes? 3 and 5 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? one home If yes, please answer the following questions: On how many of those lots? 1 At what approximate price range? House $150,000 Lot - isn n00 Total C~ 00 Approximately how long, after approval of the subdivision, would the first house be available for occupancy? 1 year If you intend to subdivide, please submita 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? b. Sell or lease the land to someone who has tentative plans? c. Se11 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? By providing an additional lot on the market, particularly for someone insterested in doing some coffee farming, it would help - in a small way - the housing inventory. 4. Are there any buildings on the subject area? No 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? " 'v-~- If so, please list the kinds of products grown and on how many square feet or acres of land per product. Coffee trees (abandoned) - 5+ acres 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? Y25 What kinds of commodity? Coffee 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? 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. 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? N o If so, please describe the problem. 8. Do youthink that the roads leading to the subject area needs improvements? Yes. The driveway access will be improved by the Zf so, what kind?applicant. Is the road adequate for the proposed traffic volume or load? Yes 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 X c. Sewer d. Drainage X -3- Yes No e. Police Protection X f. Fire Protection X g. Recreational Facilities X h. Public Utilities i. Other X For those checked "yes," please elaborate what type or kinds of improvements and/or assistance are needed. Signature: _ V ~~~i-a~ _ Address: p~,,~p I ~S fienQ~~/~~'~ _~11.w`pko.~4 _96~~ Telephone: UyO~ 3y' ~dl ( I" O',3 Q-~SU ~ 1'~ Date: ~ ~0~- _[i_ COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT COUNTY REZONING REQUEST (A-5a to FA-3a) THOMAS A. TUSO PUAA 2nd, NORTH KONG, HAWAII TAX MAP KEY: (3) 7-5-12: 38 I. INTRODUCTION The applicant, Thomas A. Tuso, is requesting to rezone an 8.773-acre parcel from Agriculture (A-5a) to Family-Agriculture (FA-3} district in Puaa 2nd, North Kona, Hawaii. (See Figure 1) The property is located on the makai or west side of the Mamalahoa Highway, approximately 1 mile north of the town of Holualoa. If approved, the applicant intends to subdivide the 8.773-acre parcel into two (2) lots, consisting of 3+ acres and 5+ acres. The applicant plan to construct his home on the larger lot, while the other lot would be sold to someone who wishes to improve the existing coffee orchard. II. PROJECT LOCATION The subject area is located immediately on the makai side of the Mamalahoa Highway, approximately 1 mile north of the town of Holualoa. It is located immediately makai of the former Ferrari Kona Coffee Plantation store. Other landmarks in this area include the Kona Mauka Estates (Doutor Coffee) farm, the Keopu Cemetery, and Hualalai Memorial Park about 1 mile to the north and the Holualoa Catholic Church Cemetery about 1,000 feet to the south. The subject lot does not directly front the Mamalahoa Highway. It is serviced by a 16-foot wide road and utility easement. (See Figure 2) III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. Project Concept and Components The applicant recently purchased the lot with the intention of constructing his home and improving the existing coffee orchard. However, the property is too large for him to maintain. As a result, he would like to subdivide the property into two lots, keeping the larger 1 I~ t'h"JJtGI LVI.AIIVN j I•' ~ o~' OKAA KAMUF1i I ~,I " KAW4/XGE ~ xs.~aoa x ~ am - `f ` : o 19o',E ~ 0Pj - tali - ~ Nl~o _ i\\\lb\l~' "c ' ~ I ~al K uu. .~~anm utn ilrvu In:ugnlUimllttmttu`,~ KA/LuA B<Y PiiLANI .1LT. ~ - _ 'o,. 'f.a- - ca.~s. - ,..P~aosis . z••.- - PAH04 ~~dR - Lei: dw VOLCANOS iAwe~glC ' I ~5~•'••-+Q ~ NATIONAL ,r.An N4 _ ~5. PARK 5 T_K.~2 J ' T ~;y ~ KAIGP tuLill~n. s • PLNALA aw m ~OA2 A 4r.r-R MM ,•;•j ~ = ~ NOT TO SCALE tti+ \ L r _ • r _ P soutr Pr. z ti..+-tea ' _ _p } '•~r ~*.yy. P. tom' i _ .n' - _ y` _ M ...r6 ` 3 ~ Subject Site ' •.w n ~ ' HOWA~L6i4 ~ .•ay si_•i _ 1V1M1 1, ax:r.w? }~li•fe• y-, r ~I ~ ~ Applican#: Thomas A. Tuso f . p (l1UU~ IWRIIUIIIAlId1~;IP(i I ta~xl~~~.<<II~ Request: A-Sa to FA-3a ° * r~°•~°~ ~,~•~a Tag Map Key: 7-5-12: 38 z~.. x.l~sl:e~ 0 • 1 a< r•ua~ldat' - ~ 4~a - 11 - I b _ 9 ~KaIN aLJtf ~ - - t _ i 'j~ - Tjj Figure 1. ~_"Na.« KONA COAST ~ ~~~~~14 c AREA ILL _ ~ 1 ~ ] ~E„ I. / ~ N A L O L / ' PLAT ....r, n 230 1, 01' .cn..~ ~°wa oa ~ ?n /E , ~ E I ~ s` y~z:n,,..,1.. e.reo e. n</e. e] as e.ooz... L C ai ,o.,. _ .o.e,,. 16~~ O sep 5.oeeA. - n.e~,._.nd. - I e•~r-ir _ .,.ys I9 cr./a_/n... °e. "»:..t" 9 Yom' ' rer~ Y Y Z "A.. Ba ~ , a GRANT g..,,£ / / ~ 963 e ~a a /K. -.a: - . r~ _ / F~_ w PP I l- ePr ti.:~ w~:ia s~ c...,. mrB Ac.. s.. P <F.....s,....:. rew. ~T~OnwaN En£ vLlbile Ca.cf9Aa) 0 IS i °Q I I lw..ae . i i n ,rf I I l a,o.~y~ / {~-.u.--,.. r a>4-, - 'r. s.. ~ I ze ~ ocn. _ ~ - OTI ]9~r6 l ^ ~ tee4 C,./da .~M`4~ M°r k 3 LS A © \ ~ 14 - ral '1'a JO Iz. S°°ae %c ..:J. r l ~j s° N ~~NT G I06~ es'r O ~ . ~ O ~ 5<IOi.n ~,.g .~k"ate Our G R A ~ ``Y".r B~ 39 6.zo A°.. o ~ ~ M1 b 53 ~ /osro wc. r]±~.. t ns . -~l l 5 :51 , ''0 \ ::y 50 ~ t i. la>w kP3i Ac ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ y .`"oa 60 59 SB 5]~ 56~ i O 29______ ` Gl 9c_. e.._ ~ O O} O• ~ 11 ~ L... _ ~°pu` ~ ~i u.rs r e_.... Jw.d-.° Narsa 6 v! mkh %c ~ ; _ G9 n..,.. .'vim \ ` c M9 _ i 50,,..r-e. ~ ro-ou w n ac ~ 63 V 6~ 6iw ~ LIJ. c CT ~ pplY C =2 s.,.w r.,v,.r.r y P~°'k 61 v 62 " , O 66 - - E ~ y y APP /G6G /B.9]B /ICS J 53 a...n _ 1 e 4~ v. ur - ~ ~t x R...r ,I~V ~r ~'iik.IN -n .rr m © \rr i. O =1 ]4] arena McJN- a ~ ..r,..... s . IIII:. `~--6:fe+,r `66'~ \ ee ® Ld>s• ~ •r 1'/r /c \ vafw sl '1'nXw •w 10 ` 69 - c ~L - A..- < U: ~m._~r ~o r,..".,. ~ I1 Ju4"°'.°]2 iI M = o w. ~ie~]] E, `~r ~r a N ~ _ PLAT /6 ;s u,.e' i°~f'"•~'_CJ A / A y .4 ~ ,.,r ~ ^^'A Ye/~f'srgaMJ. ?nlPU h0 - AU/~gUKEAe 1YORTrY KONA, /fA<Y,4// anr.~,vice SHEET T 5 I _ SUB?FCT T~ L'fi.4l~gi F' C4NfA1NING ..ULE_ lin.= (5+ acre area) and selling the other lot to someone who would also like to farm the property. Although an additional farm dwelling permit could technically be applied for, the applicant believes that a conventional 2-lot subdivision would be more appropriate. This would make financing of the proposed dwelling and any loans associated with the coffee orchard less cumbersome as well as provide some measure of conveyance flexibility in the future. (See Figure 3) The applicant further believes that while the coffee industry is supported by large-scale, commercial farms, the smaller, family- owned farms make a significant contribution to the industry. There are quite a number of families in this area raising coffee on less than 5 acres of land, mostly for supplemental income. It is understood that the subdivision plan submitted herein may change prior to receipt of final subdivision approval to accommodate County subdivision requirements and appropriate conditions of approval. B. Project Timetable and Cost The applicant hopes to secure the necessary County rezoning approval as soon as possible and begin the subdivision process immediately thereafter. Tentatively, plans call for having the land subdivided by early to mid 2003. The estimated cost of improvements, if any, would be less than $30,000 for possibly a new water service lateral and improvements to the driveway access. IV. INSTITUTIONAL CONSIDERATIONS A. State Land Use The subject area is designated Agriculture. Based on the size of the requested area, no State Land Use Commission action is required. The County of Hawaii can process the rezoning request. 2 _ - = C-42 (DROA) SURVEY MAP 3 ~ - 3 _ _ - _ OF LOT 4 ° - _ - - Lor 6-A BE W~ A PORTION, 0= v~ - - - - = CsRANT 982 TO NAIPUUJAILUNA ° ~ nmss'3D~ ~ = - p ~ /~3o se' o k AT PUAA 2ND, NORTH KONA ~ ISLAND OF HAWAII, HAWAII I D.y smrx R°°k wmlz I I Fou d Pipes ~ ~ Tax Map Key lard Division): 1-5-12: 38 251'61'30 43113 _ 2° FL Siae SeIC°ek Dry Slock Rock woll o ry -61' to Easterly SIOe W°II II Notes. n 1 a°¢c IP Aztmulhs and CDOrdlnutes are referreG to Government ~0 ~1 "Pr4 NI -0.3' m weztny Sib¢ wan Survey UI° pul°tion Stollon "KAHELN' p \ _ I LOT 5 Tne I w¢6 : wml mprnvemen is shown hereon were lomted by r 'oal l 9pe p2 m EO,I=eY W°II su vey on the ground performetl Jul 30- se= ^~I Y nuyusc 1 31 ~]9 l° west<r1Y Wire Fence ~ W°II FI Dry Stack Rock W°II 1° \Q1 4 ¢ a -25 to westerly 6iEe W°II 4 4 Proposed Lot 4-A E°°leay 6iee w°° a a s of n m c I A1? (5+ acres) I o R°~e em c _ " 40' ,e2 e' FDllnd P'Ipe ° 261 "46']4" Se }I).63' 4° 264'3!'}0'"S° 458'°8 Ie1^ Found Pipe _re cwm.n;.. 14636 ~ ~ V ° \U' ~ `-~1oi~b 20 FI Sitle Selhack WPe ~^b„fi` u Dry 5locx R°c4 Woll Lph1 m W¢!I ~ u u u V E°zterlY S1ee wOII LOT A 000 n OS 1 8.13 ACreS _ _ _ 33 - TMK ]-5-12' 29 'l2 to EosterlY 51e< W°II ° cl 1 v - Proposed Lot 4B uF°°nd Pi°e v 9 l° E°slerlY S,ee W¢:1 ; i° + (3.7 acres) ' v _ _ _ _ _ l~~rly 5,ee W°Il 20 FL SEe 5<fbock 25-FT. IG4JT-OF-WAY 6 n I q( _ _ Qy y$ BS'41' °r s~ Fock W°II / _ _ _ _ _ _ D Dry Slac4 Rack Wolf _ _ YO ~ ~ N P Found - Q°l` _ - I ~mso 4 IPe I _ _ _ _ _ 1 en a']D" - v Set PI e 5.6)9 >5 N I ~ - _ _ _ ~o.3aa m E < o% EASEMENT 9- FOR ROADWAY 4ND ~ c ~ I I v; ; UTILITY PURPOSES (16- - "L 7 _ - FT. WIDEJ E:v i 3° i3 /G. - LOT BC yG/ GT - - - o~: - - Mc,y~ ~ _ _ APP. 1666 - ~ - << ~2 UQ _ _ _ ~ LICENSED m - - PROFESSIONAL ro o n n r_ i` LAND SURVEYOR CN o NP. 9030 y GRAPHIC SCALE "I''4jI, Nsa 0 fi0 12° ]00 i _1 c90 I iN15 WORK wq5 PREPARED BY ME { y~ OR VNDER MY SUPERVISION I\I~M SURVEYS ( IN FEET ) I~e~{"ILI~_ 75-rj768 IVI i incn = ~zo rc. akelina Plcce DnTe a~3u_~°i KoiIUO-Kona, Hawaii 96740 Phone (808) 32fi-463J F°x (eDB) 334-0098 B. County General Plan The County General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) map designates the most of the site Orchard. This designation refers to "Those agricultural lands which though rocky in character and content support productive macadamia nuts, papaya, citrus and other similar agricultural products." Based on the requested Fatuity-Agriculture (FA-3a) designation, the project would be consistent with the General Plan and no amendments would be required. C. Draft Kona Regional Plan This plan attempts to further define the General Plan and serves as a guide for decision-makers. fn 1984, it was adopted by the Planning Commission. The County Council has not, however, adopted it. The Land Use Concept map of this plan identifies the A-5a designation for this area. This designation suggests agricultural uses, with lots no smaller than 5-acre. Although the requested FA-3a zoning may not be numerically consistent with this designation, the proposed uses should not be violative of the agricultural objective. D. County 2oning The County zoning of the subject property is Agriculture (A-5a). Properties immediately to the north and south are also similarly zoned. However, properties immediately mauka of the Mamalahoa Highway in this area are zoned A-7a. There was a property on the mauka side of the Mamalahoa Highway located about 2,000 feet north of the subject property that was recently rezoned FA-2a (Ord. 99-77, Applicant -Lewis Altenburg). If approved, the site would be subdivided in a manner meeting with both the Zoning and Subdivision Codes. Further, all uses and standards consistent with the requested FA-3a zone would be adhered to. E. Relationship to SMA Objectives and Policies The site is not located within the County Special Management Area 3 (SMA): As.such, no SMA Use Permit would be required. However, as the entire;island falls within the State Coastal Zone Management- (CZM) Area; aome discussion of the request's relationship to the CZM Program follows. The-site is. not adjacent to the ocean. It is more than three (3) miles from the shoreline. As such, the proposed action should not have any . , adverse irr~rpects onahe area's coastal recreational and marine resources nor have. any impacts on beach protection. The likelit,.ood of this improvement having any impacts to the area's historic resources is remote. As the site was previously cleared, it would notappear that there are any archaeological features within the area of fhe•,proposed improvements. Should there be any inadvertent fiinds during construction of the project, work will stop until clearances arereceived:from the appropriate County and State agencies. -The proposed.action-will invplve the construction of improvements in a non-urban-setting. Accordingly, there is a potential visual impact to the area's.scenic and open space resources. However, the project would invalve.the construction of a farm dwelling on each of the .:respective lots: Purther;ahe site is not visible from the Mamalahoa Highway anekthus any visual impact to the near or off shore waters as well as to slopes of Hualalai Mountain would be minimal. Relative •to the: 6oastal ecosystems, impacts should be negligible, if • -at all; as the site is located well over Three (3) miles from the ocean. iVotwithstariding the distance, the nature of the project -agricultural - and the- construction of only two private wastewater systems- are such - that potential coastal ecosystem impacts would usually not be found. The proposed action wiH result in creating the potential for agricultural farm lots in this area. This should thus provide additional dpportunities for #arming. In so doing, the project could aid the agricultural economy and the overall economic use of this site and the area in general. Because. of its- distance from the shoreline, the site should not be subject to coastal hazards. 4 Relative to the managing development objective, this function is more applicable to the "authority" or approving agencies. However, it is noted that the request would operate and be constructed within the scope of the Zoning Code. The subject site would be zoned FA-3a, and the requested use and designlparameters (parking, height, setback, etc.) would be consistent with said zoning. In that regard, the project would be consistent with this policy. Finally, in terms of the public participation objective, this is generally a public agency function. This is achieved through the Marine and Coastal Zone Management Advisory Group (MACZMAG) and the public hearing process required pursuant to the Planning Commission's Rules and County Council's meetings on this application. Notices of this application will be sent by the applicant to surrounding property owners of the submittal of the application, and again, prior to the public hearing. Based on the foregoing, it is concluded that the requested improvements would be consistent with the objectives, policies and guidelines of the Coastal Zone Management Policies, as outlined in Chapter 205-A-23, HRS and Planning Commission Rule No. 9 relating to Special Management Area. F. Other Permitting Requirements As noted earlier, other permits would still be required. These would be of the "ministerial" variety, such as Subdivision Approval, possible Underground Injection Control (UIC) permit, and the like. V. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS A. General Description The subject parcel is located on the southwestern slope of Hualalai, approximately three (3) miles from the ocean. The parcel is gently sloping, ranging from an elevation of 1,100 feet to 1,300 feet above mean sea level. The mean annual rainfall in this area ranges between 60 and 75 inches. The wetter months tend to occur between March through September. The mean annual temperature is about seventy-five (75) degrees Fahrenheit, with the warmer months during the summer. 5 Because the site is situated on the leeward side of the island, winds tend to be light and variable. Slight easterly winds occur during the day, while westerly or mountain winds are prevalent during the evenings. The subject parcel is irregular in shape. It resembles an exaggerated "flag lot", with the pole (albeit 150+ feet wide) located on the mauka side. There is an existing 16-foot wide road and utility easement running along the southern edge of the property. There is an existing 10-foot wide pavement within this easement. The easement width should be sufficient for this 2-lot subdivision. The site is vacant of any structures. It was formerly cleared and planted in coffee. However, it is presently overgrown with mid-level shrubbery, including the pesky vines. B. Soils and Topography The topography of the site slopes slightly in a mauka (east) to makai (west) direction. There is a gradual 10 to 15 percent slope running mauka-makai. The US Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey Report classifies the soil to be of the Napoopoo-Pawaina complex (259E). The Napoopoo soil has a surface layer of 0 to 12 inches of black, cobbly silt loam. The Pawaina soil's surface layer is 0 to 3 inches of black, silt loam. Permeability is rapid, runoff is slow, and the erosion hazard slight for this soil type. The subsoil is neutral to mildly alkaline. This type of soil is typically used for orchard crops and grazing. The Land Study Bureau Overall Master Productivity Rating for the subject area is essentially Class "C" or fair (C52). This suggests the site has fair productivity potential for agricultural crops. It is of the Honuaulu soil series, with moderately deep to deep soil. The soil texture is moderately fine, the color is dark brown, and the parent material is volcanic ash. It is well drained and, because it is rocky with frequent outcrops of pahoehoe, is not suited for machine tillability. This type of soil is typical of the coffee belt. The State of Hawaii's Agricultural Lands of Importance to the State of Hawaii (ALISH) maps classify this site as being either "Unique 6 Agricultural Land" or "Other". Due to the scale of the map, it is difficult to discern the exact designation. C. Natural Hazards 1. Drainage The US Corps of Engineers' Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) designates most of the project site to be located in Zone X, areas outside the 500-year flood plain. 2. Tsunami Hazard As the site is located over three (3) 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 (l)SGS) classifies the area as Lava Flow Hazard Zone 4, on a scale of ascending risk 9 to 1. The populated area of Kailua-Kona also falls in this category, while the City of Hilo is classified Zone 3. There is very little that can be done to mitigate this situation and reflects an ongoing threat to all residents and businesses in these areas. The entire island of Hawaii falls within Earthquake Zone 4, 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. D. Flora/Fauna Although there were no professional surveys conducted of the floral or faunal resources of the site, the applicants do not believe that rare or endangered floral or faunal resources are likely to be found within the subject site. The site has already been cleared in the past and used as a coffee farm. A visual inspection of the site confirmed the presence of abandoned coffee trees. A few monkey pod trees (Samanea saman) AfricanTulip (Spathodea campanulata) trees were observed. The undergrowth consisted of patches of lantana (Lantana camas), Christmas Berry (Schinus terebeinthifoiius, and the pesky ivy gourd (Cocinia grandis). 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 /'o) and the Hawaiian Owl (Pueo). Further, the cleared and rural nature of the surrounding area would make it less likely to find endangered animal life in the area. E. Historic/Cultural/Archaeological Resources As the site has been cleared and used as a coffee farm in the past, no commissioned archaeological survey of the site was made. The former clearing makes it less likely to find any archaeological features on the site. Nonetheless, during the course of improving the site, should any unanticipated archaeological features or sites be uncovered, work will cease and the applicant will immediately notify the Planning Department. G. Valued Cultural Resources In view of the recent Hawaii State Supreme Court's "PASH" and "Ka Pa'akai O Ka'Aina decisions, the issue relative to native Hawaiian gathering and fishing rights must be addressed. Specifically, there must be a discussion of the cultural, historical, and natural resources and associated tradition and customary practices of this site. In this situation, the subject site is not adjacent and/or proximate to the shoreline. As such, gathering of marine life and coastal access is not an issue. . It is not known whether the subject or immediate surrounding area was used in the recent past for the gathering of plants by native Hawaiians. However, as the site has been used for coffee in the past, it would appear unlikely that the site would serve such purpose today. In the unlikely event that legitimate gathering claims are made by native Hawaiians, the applicant intends to respect and honor such claims and provide the needed access within the site. 8 Based on the above, it does not appear that the project would have any potential adverse impact relative to the cultural and historical resources of the area. li. Water and Coastal Resources The subject site is located well over three (3) miles from the coastline. As such, coastal impacts resulting from discharge of wastewater systems from the site should not be significant. Further, being a non- coastal property, no coastal access will be affected. Wastewater from the project will be serviced by sewer system meeting with the approval and requirements of the State Department of Health. This will either be a cesspool, septic tank or related system. I. Noise, Air Quality. and Dust The Mamalahoa Highway will serve as the main access to this project. 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. There may, however, be short-term noise impacts associated with the construction of the infrastructure (such as water service lateral and driveway access improvements) 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 ug ality impacts. The only discernible air quality impact could 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 standards 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, like construction noise wilt have to comply with the State Department of Health's regulations. 9 J. Scenic and Visual Considerations In the Natural Beauty element of the General Plan, there are sites or areas listed as being a scenic resource. The subject site is not listed as a scenic site. However, there were a few examples cited in the Kona area. The most notable is the backdrop of the Hualalai Mountain. The proposed development would not have any visual impacts on this mountain and other listed scenic resources in the area. The site is located more on the lower end of Hualalai Mountain, and the normal residential height should not interfere with the view of Hualalai. VI. SOCIAL AND RELATED CONSIDERATIONS A. Sun'oundinu Land Uses The land use in this area is generally rural in nature. There are some small family-type coffee farms on properties mauka and to the immediate north and south of subject site. Those properties are zoned (under the pre 1996 Zoning Code) A-1a and A-5a. Properties located generally makai of the site are zoned A-7a. The village of Holualoa is located about a mile to the south, where there are urban type of uses. There are some cemeteries within a mile of the subject site, such as the Hualalai Memorial Park and Keopu Cemetery to the north, and the Catholic Church Cemetery to the south. In some ways, from amauka-makai perspective, the subject site is "sandwiched" between A-1a zonings, with the north and south areas zoned A-5a. Given the existing and zoned conditions, the proposed development would not be incongruous with the emerging rural-residential pattern of this area. B. Economic Impacts The requested zoning would have some measure of economic impact, as it would enhance the potential for the subject site to be more intensively utilized as a coffee farm. to Further, there will be some small short-term construction activity. And this could help with the area's economy. O. Acaricutturallmgaets As noted earlier, the site has not been intensively used agriculturally recently. Given the surrounding agricultural uses and the abandoned coffee orchard, however, its potential to be more intensively used exists. Allowing the applicant to subdivide the property into two lots would not diminish the site's agricultural potential. It would actually enhance it. The site would be more manageable from a size standpoint (3 versus 8 acres). The applicant's proposal would thus help foster the agricultural objectives by making available good-sized agricultural coffee lots. VII. INFRASTRUCTURAL CONSIDERATIONS A. Road Immediate access to the project would be via an existing 16-foot wide road and utility easement. This easement has a 10-foot wide paved section that extends to the Mamalahoa Highway. The access, however, intersects at the Mamalahoa Highway at nearly a 45-degree angle. As such, the applicant intends to improve this intersection to make it closer to 90 degrees. The Mamalahoa Highway has a right of way of forty (40) to fifty (50) feet in this area. The pavement width ranges between eighteen (18) feet to twenty (20) feet. There is adequate sight distance in the area of the existing access, and will be further improved with the planned access improvements by the applicant. B. Water There is an 8-inch County water line fronting the Mamalahoa Highway. Water can be made available for this 2-lot subdivision from this line. As the site is serviced by an access (easement) from the Mamalahoa Highway, it does not technically abut the Highway. As such, an "out-of-bounds agreement with the Department of Water Supply may have to be executed. 11 In conjunction with the subdivision process, the applicant intends to work closely with the Department of Water Supply and find a technical solution to this issue. O. Wastewater There is no County wastewater system in this area. 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 applicant and/or respective landowner in conjunction with the issuance of a building permit for a 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 FA-3a zoning, the potential for uses with toxic or related chemical waste would be minimal, if at all. It should be noted that the applicant intends to retain most of the vegetation on the site and use if for composting for his farm. Thus, waste from this project would be pretty much limited to the equivalent of two (2) homes. E. Other Government Services As this area is already part of the North Kona urban area, it is already being serviced. No extension of government services would be required. The nearest fire station is located in Kailua and Keauhou Mauka, less than five (5) miles from the site. The Police Station is located at Kealakehe, approximately six (6) miles from the subject site In this area, elementary schools are available at Holualoa and Kealakehe. Middle and High Schools would be available at Kealakehe, approximately four (4) miles away or Konawaena, approximately five (5) miles away. County parks are available in Kailua, Keauhou, and Kealakehe. As such, the project should not result in the extension of any government services. Further, the required public facilities are located reasonably proximate to the subject site. 12 F. Other Utilities All other utilities such as telephone, cable, and electrical services are available to the site. VIII. IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE ANALYSIS A. Relationship Between Local Short-Term Uses of Environment and Maintenance and Enhancement of Long-Term Productivity If the request were denied, the short-term use of the site would probably continue in low level agriculture or lay fallow. The applicant may eventually construct one dwelling on the site and may elect to do limited agricultural activity on a portion of the site. Given the rural (A-7a) character of the makai and some of the mauka properties, there may be pressures for the subject property to be similarly urbanized or used as a large-lot gentleman estate. And from an agricultural perspective, a residential subdivision may not be the most feasible use of the site. From along-term productivity standpoint, then, the proposed 2-lot subdivision would provide a heightened level of possibility in having the land used for more intensive agricultural activity. B. Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources The subject site is already disturbed. As such, the project should not result in an irreversible commitment of natural or archaeological resources. The soil on the parcel has been classified "C" or fair by the Land Study Bureau, representing fair agricultural potential. This is evidenced by the abandoned coffee orchard on the site. It is thus maintained that the creation of the 2-lot subdivision should foster and enhance, instead of remove this land from its more intensive future agricultural potential. C. Mitigative Measures The applicant intends to make improvements, if necessary, to be consistent with the subdivision process. And if construction is 13 required, contractors will be obligated to comply with appropriate State noise and air quality standards. Should unanticipated archaeological finds be discovered in conjunction with any further development of the site, work will stop {as is required by the State and County) and clearance secured before work is resumed. There is no existing drainageway on the property. Any and all required grading or grubbing work will be done in conjunction with the required permits and/or SCS Agricultural Plan. This is to assure that the development of this site does not adversely affect the drainage of the surrounding areas. Finally, there will be no person or businesses to be dislocated by this project. D. Alternatives to the Proposed Project 1. No Project Under the status quo alternative, the site will continue to remain in its fallow state. The site could also be sold to one who may be interested in farming the site. However, it would be equally possible to have the land sold at market price to a "gentleman farmer." Given the present mixture of land uses and lot sizes in this area and proximity to urban areas, the site may not be utilized to its fullest agricultural potential. 2. Alternative Density Under this alternative, the applicants could seek a more intensive zoning, such as FA-1a or RA-.5a zoning. All of these zoning categories would arguably be consistent with the adjoining A-1a zoning on the makai side of the subject site. Such an approach, however, may not be compatible with the policy of trying to foster more family-oriented type of agricultural activities, such as truck crops or coffee farming in this area. 14 3. Evaluation of Alternatives The project's impacts to the area's social and physical infrastructure would not appear to be pronounced. Certain mitigative measures will be taken to address any possible impacts associated by the development of this 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 appear that none of the alternatives would be more prudent and beneficial than the requested FA-3a 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 Orchard. This designation allows the requested FA-3a zoning without a General Plan amendment. B. General Plan Polices The requested zoning would be consistent with the goals, policies, and standards of the General Plan document. For one, it may provide limited short-term economic opportunities largely through the construction of any improvements required for the subdivision. More importantly, however, longer-term opportunities would be created largely in the form of small-scale truck crops or coffee farms. In so doing, the resultant project should 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 of wind patterns. 15 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 vehicular transmission, 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 prepared 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 carefully placed to minimize their noise impacts to adjoining properties. Further, it is unlikely that this site would be used as a coffee 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 not appear to have historic sites. It has already been extensively cleared and actively cultivated into a farm. Nonetheless, work will ceasa if unanticipated archaeological remains are discovered while continuing its farming operations. Work will resume only after proper clearances from the State and/or County have been received. Being under cultivation, the prospects of the site serving as a habitat for rare or endangered plant or animal life appear remote. As the FA-3a 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 area's natural beauty. In this situation, the project has been used in a manner where it blends with the existing terrain. 16 As the project site is more than three (3) 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 cesspools or septic system or other acceptable form of wastewater system, impacts to the coastal water will be minimized. 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 will be improved by the applicant. Schools and other public facilities are also located proximate to the site, most of them being less than five (5) miles away. Finally, in terms of the Land Use and Agricultural elements, the pertinent goals, policies, and standards 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, compatibility with adjacent zoned uses, availability of public services and utilities, access, and public need The compatibility of agricultural and non-agricultural uses should be carefully reviewed and where appropriate, buffers 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 17 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 of the foregoing goals and policies, it is noted that the requested zoning would be consistent with the Orchard designation of the LUPAG map. It would also be generally compatible with the surrounding area. There are A-1a zoned properties proximate to the subject site. There is also a FA-2a zoning about 1 mile to the north of the subject site. Although the soil of the site is classified "C" or fair, it does have agricultural potential, as evidenced by the abandoned coffee orchard on the site. This request should thus encourage more intensive agricultural activities on the site. This lot size would be conducive for not only the applicant but make another lot available to one who wishes to improve another portion of the abandoned coffee orchard. 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 A-5a. Should the FA-3a zoning be approved, the requirements of the zoning and subdivision codes would be complied, including use and related development standards. D. State Land Use Agricultural Standards As the requested lots will be more than 1-acre, the request would not in principle violate the minimum lot size standards of the State Land Use law. All of the applicable use guidelines of said law would be adhered to. 18 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS COUNTY OF HAWAII HILO, HAWAII DATE: November 14, 2002 Memorandum TO Christopher J. Yuen, Planning Director Planning Department FROM Galen M. Kuba, Division Chief ~ Engineering Division SUBJECT Change of Zone Application (REZ 02-016 ) Applicant: Thomas A. Tuso Location: Puaa 2n°, N. Kona, HI TMK: 3 /TMK: 7-5-012:038 We have reviewed the subject application and the following revised comments supercede the previous comments dated September 27, 2002. 1 All development generated runoff shall be disposed of on-site and shall not be directed toward any adjacent properties. 2. All earthwork and grading shall conform to Chapter 10, Erosion and Sediment Control, of the Hawaii County Code. 4. Mamalahoa Highway, the County road serving the subject property, is a secondary arterial road. It has an 18-20-ft. wide pavement within a variable right-of--way width (approximately 30-ft. wide in the vicinity of the proposed project). It is substandard based on width, alignment and roadside hazard clearances. 5. Access to Mamalahoa Highway, including the provision of adequate sight distances, and an approach grade allowing for future widening, shall meet with the approval of DPW. All sight distances shall meet the requirements of the Hawaii Statewide Uniform Design Manual or the AASHTO Standards. No portion of any entry gate shall less than 40 feet from the County right-of--way. 6. The applicant proposes a 10-foot wide access road over a 16-foot wide easement. The proposed access would not conform to the Subdivision Code for private roads serving agricultural lots of 3 acres or more. Should there be ariy questions concerning this matter, please feel free to contact Kiran Emler of our Kona Engineering Division office at 327-3530. KE _ copy: ENG-HiLO1KvNA i J~~± ar NSWq'i ','-17 r : % ~ 1'i'~• Darryl J. Oliveira Ha!lyKlm~" f"~~ 4 (•1~ FieeCRieJ PM~~'lhll(-, I l/ ~:;',...;~P Desmond K. Wert' ~ ~ 1 U; , J;'~ , of M Deputy Fire Chief CGJf~IY rj,= r,,; ~ NT ' ~DtiYCtp Df ~~~t~t`I FIRE DEPARTMENT 25 Aupuni Street Suite 103 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 (808) 961-8297 • Fax (808) 961-8296 September 18, 2002 TO CHRISTOPHER J. YUEN, PLANNING DIRECTOR FROM DARRYL OLIVEIRA, FIRE CHIEF SUBJECT: CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (REZ 02-016) APPLICANT: THOMAS A. TUSO REQUEST: AGRICULTURAL (A-5a) TO FAMILY AGRICULTURAL (FA-3a) TAX MAP KEY: 7-5-012:038 Fire apparatus access roads shall be in accordance with UFC Section 10.207: "Fire Apparatus Access Roads "Sec. 10.207. (a) General. Fire apparatus access roads shall be provided and maintained in accordance with the provisions of this section. "(b) Where Required. Fire apparatus access roads shall be required for every building hereafter constructed when any portion of an exterior wall of the first story is located more than 150 feet from fire department vehicle access as measured by an unobstructed route around the exterior of the building. "EXCEPTIONS: 1. When buildings are completely protected with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system, the provisions of this section may be modified. "2. When access roadways cannot be installed due to topography, waterways, nonnegotiable grades or other similar conditions, the chief may require additional fire protection as specified in Section 10.301 (b). - _ :~;'i~'r.. yaPUCOo P ?r. S < X 9~ B ~ 1 T ''C" ~RE1~ Christopher J. Yuen, Planning Director Page 2 September 18, 2002 "3. When there are not more than two Group R, Division 3 or Group M Occupancies, the requirements of this section may be modified, provided, in the opinion of the chief, fire-fighting or rescue operations would not be impaired. "More than one fire apparatus road may be required when it is determined by the chief that access by a single road may be impaired by vehicle congestion, condition of terrain, climatic conditions or other factors that could limit access. "For high-piled combustible storage, see Section 81.109. "(c) Width. The unobstructed width of a fire apparatus access road shall meet the requirements of the appropriate county jurisdiction. "(d) Vertical Clearance. Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. "EXCEPTION: Upon approval vertical clearance may be reduced, provided such reduction does not impair access by fire apparatus and approved signs are installed and maintained indicating the established vertical clearance. "(e) Permissible Modifications. Vertical clearances or widths required by this section may be increased when, in the opinion of the chief, vertical clearances or widths are not adequate to provide fire apparatus access. "(f) Surface. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus and shall be provided with a surface so as to provide all-weather driving capabilities." (20 tons) "(g) Turning Radius. The turning radius of a fire apparatus access road shall be as approved by the chief." (45 feet) "(h) Turnarounds. All dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with approved provisions for the turning around of fire apparatus. "(i) Bridges. When a bridge is required to be used as access under this section, it shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the applicable sections of the Building Code and using designed live loading sufficient to carry the imposed loads of fire apparatus. Christopher J. Yuen, Planning Director Page 3 September 18, 2002 "(j) Grade. The gradient for a fire apparatus access road shall not exceed the maximum approved by the chief." (15%) "(k) Obstrueti®n. The required width of any fire apparatus access road shall not be obstructed in any manner, including parking of vehicles. Minimum required widths and clearances established under this section shall be maintained at all times. "(I) Signs. When required by the fire chief, approved signs or other approved notices shall be provided and maintained for fire apparatus access roads to identify such roads and prohibit the obstruction thereof or both." Water supply shall be in accordance with UFC Section 10.301: "(c) Water Supply. An approved water supply capable of supplying required fire flow for fire protection shall be provided to all premises upon which buildings or portions of buildings are hereafter constructed, in ar.:,ordance with the respective county water requirements. There shall be provided, when required by the chief, on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow. "Water supply may consist of reservoirs, pressure tanks, elevated tanks, water mains or other fixed systems capable of providing the required fire flow. "The location, number and type of fire hydrants connected to a water supply capable of delivering the required fire flow shall be protected as set forth by the respective county water requirements. All hydrants shall be accessible to the fire department apparatus by roadways meeting the requirements of Section 10.207." AR L OLIVEIRA Fire Chief RK:Ik 11/25/2aF)2 10:12 1808°'~" "=5; DEPT OF WATER SUPP~ " PAGE 13'~ OW'4 et w4rt~ro'+`~ I; ;0 17~PAR7MENT OF' WATER SUPPLY COUNTY OF HAWAII 345 KEKUANAOA STREET, SUITE 20 HILO, HAWAII 96720 • ' ~~~W XIwP(t'a,~` TELEPHONE (aDa) 981-6050 FA%(8OB) 961-8657 November 22, 2002 TO: Mr. Christopher J. Yuen, Planning Director Planning Department FROM: Milton D. Pavan, Manager SUBJlC'I': CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (REZ 02-016) REQUEST: AGRICULTURAL (A-SA) TO FAMILY AGI2ICUL'I'UItJr (FA-3A) ' APPLICANT -THOMAS A. TUSO TAX MAP KEY 7-,5-OI2:038 We have reviewed the subject Change of Lone application and have the following comments. • Water can he made available from an existing R-inch waterline in North Kona 13e1t Road, which is approximately 400 feet from the eastern boundary aFthe subjec4 parcel. The subject parcel does not have water set vice with the Department. Current water availability conditions, which are subject to change, for this area of the North Kona water system are such that one unit of water is available for each of the lots. Por the applicant's information, each unit of water is equivalent and limited to a maximum daily use of 600 gallons per day. Pursuant to the Department's Wa1w~ Con:mitmenr Gurdedrnes Policy, a copy of which is heing forwarded to the applicant, a water comminnent may he issued. F3ased on the one additional lot that is requested in the proposed change of zone application, the required water commitment deposit is $150.00. Remittance of $150,00 from the applicant is requested, as soon as possible, sn 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 will submit our comments and requirements for 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: ' L Construct necessary improvements, which shall include, but not he limited to, the following: a. off-site improvements of approximately 400 feet of4-inch waterline tram the eastern boundary of the subject parcel to the existing 8~inch waterline in the Nortlt Kona Belt Road; and i ~~E~~ [71^Gl2~'J /JNpla, N(?:f~... ~ SC f7 I B 1 T ° D" 11/25/2002 10:12 1E089F'^F5i DEPT CF IJATER SUPPI`~ PAGE 03 Mr. Christopher J. Yuen, Ptanning Director 1'a.ge 2 November 22, 2002 h. service laterals that will accommodate n 5/8-inch meter to each lot. Submit construction plans prepared by a professional engineer, registered in the State of Hawaii. 2. Remit the prevailing facilities charge and capital assessment fee, which are subject to change, of 85,790.00. The determination nfthis amount is shown below. This is due and payable upon completion of the construction of the water system improvements and prior to final subdivision approval being granted. • Hacilities Charge • One 1" service at $940.00 each $ 940.00 One additional service at $4,350.00 each +4,350.00 Subtotal $ 5,290.00 Capital Assessment Tee One additional service at $SOU.00 each 500.00 Total (Subject to Change) $ 5,790.00 3. Submit the appropriate documents, properly prepared and executed, to convey the water system improvements and necessary easements to the Water Board ofthc County of Hawaii. A registered land surveyor shall stamp and certify the metes and bomtds description within the conveyance documents. Conveyance of the improvements and easements are required prior to water services being granted. 4. Comply with all other applicable policies and requirements of the Department's Rules and RegtOations. Noncompliance may be cause for voiding this water commitment, at which time availability will be subject to change in accordance with prevailing water system conditions, policies, and Rules and Regulations. Should there be any questions, please call our Water Resources and Ptanning Branch at 961-8070, extension 1. incei ly yours, t m to avao, 1'.B. t Man ger BCMsco copy - (w/enc.) Mr. Thomas A. Tuso (w/o ettc.) Mr. Sidney Fuke November 12, 2002 ,,,,u z3 County Planning Commission P~ j2 53 County of Hawaii 1''l_ra,' ~l'JiP cup rrr;'~ ; ~ ,,~niT RE: Thomas A. Tuso County Rezoning Request (A-Sa to . 3a), TMK:7 5 012'6'i3'8 F If the request to subdivide said property is approved, some concerns need to be addressed, as they will have negative impacts around the surrounding area. Traffic, road construction, flooding, and twenty-five feet right of way are some of the concerns. There is a sixteen feet right of way easement shown on Land Court application 1666, Map one. Which is not wide enough to handle heavy volume of vehicle traffic without encroaching into other properties and causing damages. Due to the limited width of the easement, two vehicles going in opposite direction of one another would pose a problem which means one of the vehicle would have to drive out of the sixteen fee easement into someone's property to let the other vehicle through. Traffic will be in danger as vehicles enter or exit Mamalahoa highway due to the width of the easement. Traffic on Mamalahoa highway will have to stop and wait in order to let vehicle enter the highway from this sixteen feet easement. Currently, there is a good fifteen to sixteen feet drop from Mamalahoa highway to a sixteen feet easement. If this drop is filled for vehicles to enter and exit the highway, heavy construction needs to be done and this would drastically alter the environment as well as create an area for potential accidents. Also, if this easement is filled it will create a gutter like effect and flooding will occur during heavy rain. Water will run from Mamalahoa highway to properties below. After reviewing the survey map, dated August 30, 2001 by Kevin McMillen, atwenty- five feet right of way appears to run through TMK 7-5-12-29. This right of way doesn't appear in any documents which were last recorded on January 4, 1979, Liber 13397, PG. 261. This right of way is a major concern to alI parties involved and should be addressed before approval is granted to subdivide property, TMK 7-5-012-038. One major concern of granting approval to rezone only one property in the North Kona Belt Road area from County-Agricultural to Family-Agricultural is the effect that it will have on other property owners. If other property owners who live in the North Kona Belt Road area decide to rezone their property, there will be major impact on the environment and traffic. Therefore, better planning need to be made before rezoning only one property. ' ~ ~'i~~ ~ " C~.!1~3.~~ Jack Okayama ~ ~ L~ From: Keola Chiltls 888-874-7A08 T¢PlatmioR Comp^''~ion Dale:ll/20102 Time~4:0'38 PM Page4 ofq KEOLA CHILDS P.O. Box 2294 KAILUA-Kohn, HI 96745-2294 PH: 808-895-2764 • FAX: TOLL Fxse 888-874-7808 kchilds@westhawaii.net 'g~~ ~~f aa.I ~ . FZEC~~ ~'i~y~ November2Q 2002 ter}tINB' 0~ ~°fYZ'~i i'LANPFi9f~ ~ak~~. Mr Chris Yuen, Director and Ms. Geraldine Giffm, Chairperson, Hawaii County Planning Conunission Planning Department 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, HI 96720 RE: Change of Zone Request: Thomas A. Tuso; TMK 7-5-12:038 Pua'a, North Kona Dear Director Yuen, Chairperson Giffin and Commissioners: As a neighboring property owner, I would like to express conditional support for the above referenced change of zone application, wherein the applicant proposes to utilize our existing easement roadway as part of the improvements it will be required to construct prior to subdivision of the subject property. These conditions are: L Construct a proper, two-lane driveway connection with Mamalahoa Hwy., designed to allow farm trailers and long wheeibase trucks safe ingress and egress. A 69KV power pole, a telephone pole and a fu•e hydrant will have to be relocated and retaining walls constructed to support the connection zone above existing Bade. 2. Two-lane easement roadway improvements (which may include the existing single- lane roadway) to the point where users of the applicant's makai (furthest down the roadway) subdivision lot connect their paved or unpaved driveway. A divided two- lane design, with the existing rock boundary wall preserved within a medial strip between the two lanes, is preferred for drainage control and aesthetics. 3. Grassed, unpaved shoulders, water diversion charmels and sedimenUwater collection basins in lieu of the standard drywells and paved swales which are ugly, destructive and unreliable over the long term. This would be via administrative variance in the subdivision process, in recognition of unique access conditions of steep terrain, lack of access options, and drainage control sensitivities of great importance in these climate, topography and soil conditions. 4. Protection or cooperative relocation of existing surface-laid water lines serving existing households using the easement roadway today. 5. Prohibition of second (farrn or otherwise) dwellings on the subdivided lots, for both traffic limitation and agriculhlral resource preservation. . ;,,'i EXHIBIT - From: Keola Childs 888-674-7808 To'. Planning Cor ~n Da[e: ll/20/02 Time'a'~""8 PM Page3 ofd Thomas A Tuso COZ Request - TNtK 7-5-12' 03S Page 2 of 4 BACKGROUND I own and reside on a 10.5 acre parcel makai of the subject property. As a corporate principal at the time, I constructed the sole existing access road (single lane concrete construction) to my parcel from Mamalahoa Hwy. in 1979, as an extension of the asphalt driveway serving the Harada family homes close to the Highway. My corporate entity paid the full cost of the concrete extension, and one-half the cost of paving the upper (Harada family) section. Over time, other neighboring property owners began using this single lane easetnent road, built homes and developed farms. I have personally maintained this ] 0 foot wide easement road over the past 23 years with neighborly assistance from other road users. This easement road, within a sixteen (16) foot right-of--way width, is being claimed as an access easement to the subject applicant's properly as well; he has designated it on his subdivision plan map as "Easement 3". By deed, atwenty-five (25) foot wide access easement to/from Mamalahoa Hwy. exists over and along the south boundary of the applicant's property and the parcels above and below his, including mine. This is shown on the applicant's plan map as " 25 Ft. Right-of-Way." This easement was never improved or used as such, visibly or to the knowledge of any ofthe earlier residents ofthis immediate area whom I've queried. Besides the Hazada families at the upper (Highway) end ofthis easement road, there are currently four households which use this roadway on a daily basis, plus the owner and field workers for an eight acre coffee farm (total of six households plus afarm-only operation connecting to Mamalahoa Hwy.)- There are minimal accommodations for vehicles to pull offthe road onto grass/dirt shoulder pockets (which are technically outside of the 16-foot easement width) in a several widely-separated areas to allow opposing traffic to pass. We have managed to make this work for ourselves and our guests with patience, goodwill and neighborly spirit. WHY THESE REQUESTED CONDITIONS OF ZONING I am very concemed about adding more traffic to this single lane corridor for three principal reasons: (1) lack of turnouts on a steep road and uneven shoulder, (2) surface laid water lines serving all four households alongside the pavement which lines are prone to damage by increased visitor traffic; and (3) hazardous highway access to and from the northbound direction. I am also concerned about pavement rainwater runoff control via conventional Swale and drywell systems, which I find to be unreliable in these physical conditions. As I have no objection to a neighborhood density of one dwelling per three acres, I have no objection to the zoning change in and of itself. However, I would object to an action that would allow subdivision of the subject parcel without providing a safe, nearly perpendicular intersection at Mamalahoa Hwy. having two driveway lanes (one in and one out) in the intersection approach zone, and two-way traffic flow improvements to both lots, water line protection, and sensitive drainage improvements that don't mar the landscape and create greater hazards as do those currently required per the subdivision code. From: Keola Childs 888-874-7808 Tu'. Plmming COr 'bri Dute IIY20/02 Time: a'~T~8 PM Page 2 of4 Thomas A Taso COZ Request-TMK 75-12~ 038 Page 3 of 4 Intersection improvements: Because farm animal trailers, concrete trucks, and other long wheelbase trucks go in and out of this driveway from time to time, it is crucial that the intersection curve return, shoulders and paved transition curves be wide enough to accommodate these vehicles. Swinging across the total combined lane width is certainly acceptable to accomplish this; the point is that any replacement driveway improvements made by the applicant must accommodate these long wheelbase vehicles without danger of running off or overtaxing retaining walls or embankments. The requirements of fire truck access may well suffice as a standard. Two-lane easement roadway: Irrespective of highway intersection improvements, the existing pavement must be either (a) widened to allow a series of safely-sized turnouts (e.g., every two hundred feet) with additional drainage controls due to the added pavement, (b) widened to create another lane for a total width of sixteen (16) paved feet plus rolled, grassed shoulders, or (c) paralleled with an separate paved single lane, with each ofthe two lanes being "one way" in the opposite directions along both sides of the existing ahupua'a boundary rock wall. There may be (depending on an engineer's analysis) several benefits from the two separate lane design option, besides assured traffic capacity: aesthetic retention ofthe existing ahupua'a boundary wall as a "medial strip" between the two lanes and the landscaping option it would allow, less earthwork and difficulty in matching the uneven grade of the existing concrete road section, and better water runoff control due to divided pavement and greater soil/grass shoulder area per square foot of added pavement. Of course, the separate lane design would merge into the existing single- lane roadway below the furthest makai driveway connection for the applicant's subdivided parcels, and the medial wall/strip would be breached for dwelling egress. Sensitive drainage control improvements: To minimize the need to construct notoriously unreliable drywell systems to control pavement generated/altered runoff in rainy, steep mauka areas, I would strongly support roadway widening design options that minimize the width and surface azea of pavement. Grass shoulders, as much as possible, are the surest means to control excessive runoff as well as diversion basins or channels out from the pavement shoulder. As these environmentally sensitive and functional measures are not sanctioned by the subdivision code (as allowable designs in the proposed zone district), I would ask that any approved change of zone allow the applicant and the County latitude in creating the right road and drainage design, whether through variance or otherwise. In other words, set the required flood control objective, but not the design profile or components so that these needs can be met with a variance if appropriate and acceptable to the Public Works and Planning Departments. Because occasionally heavy rains in this area can cause severe erosion along these steep road shoulders (it took me years to figure out how to effectively control it along the existing roadway shoulder, with measures I've identified above), I would oppose any zoning that mandated the code- specified fifty foot right of way, graded out in a broad swath. For safety and reasonable functionality reasons, I would also oppose any zoning that did not provide for highway intersection or two-lane improvements within the range of options I've presented above. Otherwise, the proposed density appears to be in keeping with the character ofthe area. ' Fro-n: Keala Childs 868-874-7808 To: Planning Cor ~on Date_ 11/20/02 Time: ^'oT48 PM Page I of4 Thomas A Tuso COZ Request - TMK 7-S_ 1 ~ n3R Page 4 of 4 Prolilbition of second dwellings on subdivided lots: In keeping with the agricultural focus of this coffee belt area and as set forth in the Kona Regional Plan, and in particular recognizing substandard conditions along Mamalahoa Hwy. and in accessing the various parcels served by the proposed private easement roadway, second farm dwellings on the subdivided parcels should be prohibited. Specific justification can include the applicant's effecting subdivision by means of variance or planned unit development pennit. It would be wrong to allow four dwellings (via second farm dwelling permits) on these eight acres, particularly in light of the special factors I've identified. Sincerely, Keola Childs cc: Sidney Fuke Philip 8 Clare Wilson Post Office Box 528 75-5648D Mamalahoa Hwy IS~v i?!~~; Holualoa, HI 96725 - PH: 8081322-7094 philea huahua.com ~.u ; ,;~,ti`, , November 22, 2002 Chris Yuen Director and Chairperson, Hawaii County Planning Commission Planning Department 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hi 96720 Re: Change of Zone Request: by Thomas A. Tuso: TMK 7-5-12::038 Pua'a ,North Kona LOCATION We own and operate a macadamia nut and coffee farm on 10.5 acres makai of the subject property. The access to our property is from Mamalahoa Highway along a one lane easement road which borders the entire length of the southern boundary of the subject property. We are at the makai end of the easement road approximately 0.5 mile from Mamalahoa Highway. CONCERN All of the property surrounding the subject parcel is zoned for agriculture. Our prime concern is to support the effort to have the corridor along Mamalahoa Highway from Palani Junction through Holualoa and Keauhou mauka remain in agriculture and sustain the working farms along this historic corridor. Agriculture 5 zoning most closely supports this goal. Agriculture 3 should only be granted with detailed business plans supporting bona fide agriculture activity and incorporated into the zoning reclassification. NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED In relation to the subject parcel, the 16 foot wide, one lane easement road provides access to 4 households and a 14 acre coffee/macadamia nut farm makai and 3 households mauka. The easement road access at the Mamalahoa Hwy is restricted to ingress from the north bound direction only and egress in the south bound direction only due to the extreme angle of intersection. Improving the substandard access to and from Mamalahoa Highway and providing proper turnouts along the easement road for oncoming vehicles must be a condition of the requested zoning change. ~~~I~~~ rc~ gage ? Our adjacent mauka property owner, Keola Childs, has submitted written comments on the subject rezoning including a detailed suggestion for road improvements benefiting all road users. From his suggestions, good planning specifications can be derived improving public safety, upgrading access and maintaining agricultural zoning integrity. PROBLEMS TO BE AVOIDED Dividing the 8+ acres into two smaller parcels and allowing 2 residences per parcel will burden the easement road beyond its capacity. This change in zoning will also place pressure on the area's agricultural character and encumber efforts to preserve a rural quality of life along the historic Mamalahoa Highway. POSITION We are unable to support the rezoning request without the following conditions: 1. Improvements to the access road as described in detail by Mr. Keola Childs. 2. Restricting residences to one only per subdivided parcel. Sincerely, ilip L. Wilson III Clare Hachmuth Wilson ~IC~II@yCU~C2, Planning Consultant s____o~ 100 Pau2hi Street, Suite 212 • Hilo, Hawaii 96'20 • ^rlanning • Variance Telephone: (808) 969-1522 • Fax: (808) 969-7996 ,`y%1' L~r r 1 • Subdivision • Lantl Us 0 ~ • Environmental Report: X10 October 9, 2002 L~Ci,^~ J ; ~'%`-."i~;^; t Oi= `'~1l ~r En~T Mr. Christopher Yuen, Director n`~ Planning Department COUNTY OF HAWAII 101 Pauahi Street Milo, HI 96720 Dear Mr. Yuen: Subject: Rezoning Request -Thomas A. Tuso TMK: 7-5-012: 038 Thank you for providing me with agency comments to date regarding the subject matter. In response to those comments, please note the following: Fire Department The requirements of the Fire Department regarding access and adequacy of fire protective water will be required as part of the subdivision review process. In that regard, adequate access and fire protective measures will be provided prior to final subdivision approval of the project. Department of Public Works Relative to drainaee, these requirements will be complied with during the subdivision review and approval process. In the event there is any development of the subject site, all associated runoff will be disposed off on-site. Likewise, in the event a drywell is needed, the appropriate UIC permit will be secured. Prior to construction activity on the site, the respective property owner will secure the appropriate grading and/or grubbing permit. Finally, the applicant intends to improve the existing access leading to the subject site. Understandably, as the applicant's access is via an existing access easement, the latitude of improvements at the Mamalahoa Highway is somewhat limited. Nonetheless, the applicant will make the optimum level of improvements within this easement that, when completed, will improve the sight distance for all users of this road. It is the applicant's understanding that Section 23-88 of the Subdivision Code provides for private, non-dedicable streets serving less than 8 lots with a 20-foot wide right-of--way for residential or agricultural lots zoned for 3 acres or less, which is the requested zoning in this case (FA-3a). F~~'~0~ tr~u Mr. Christopher Yuen October 9, 2002 Page 2 We trust that the foregoing adequately addressed the comments to date. If not or if there are more, please feel free to contact this office. Thank you very much. ~incerel~ S~DN~Y IVI~~UKE Planning Consultant Copy -Fire Department Department of Public Works Mr. Tom Tuso w/ enclosures ~IG~Pg@~I~Uit@, Planning Consultant 100 Pauahi Street, Suite 212 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 • Planning • Vananca • Zonii Telephone: (808) 969-1522 • Fax: (808) 969-7996 ~ Subdivision • Land Use pe Environmental Reports November 19, 200~Z ~l 2 U f', ° 1- Mr. Christopher Yuen, Director CJU ' r ~ ' Planning Department COiJNTY OF HAWAi'I 101 Pauahi Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Mr. Yuen: Subject: Thomas A. Tuso (REZ 02-016) TMK: 7-5-012: 016 Thank you for providing me with a copy of Mr. Jack Okayama's letter of November 12, 2002 to you regarding the subject application. In response to Mr. Okayama's letter, we would like to note the following: a. There is a 25-foot wide easement on the applicant's property that leads to the Mamalahoa Highway. There is also a parallel 16-foot wide easement adjacent to the 25-foot wide easement. The applicant has acces> rigl!ts over both of these easements. Please find enclosed a copy of the applicant's deeds, which attest to this fact. b. The applicant intends to improve upon either or both these easements, pursuant to the road improvement requirements of the Subdivision Code, for his 2-lot subdivision. Tentatively, this will involve the construction of another lane from the applicant's proposed subdivision to the Mamalahoa Highway. c. True, there is a significant grade difference between the Highway and the easement. That is why the "unofficial" access has been via a hairpin driveway, making it impossible if not very difficult for southbound traffic to enter the subdivision. The applicant intends to relocate this access to its legal and rightful position. As this improvement would benefit not only the applicant but also other lot owners who share and use this road and easement, the applicant has no objections to working out alternative solutions and sharing the cost with any willing lot owner(s). d. The Subdivision Code requires that before any improvements to the road can be made, construction plans must be prepared and approved by the County Department of Public Works. The plans must also address drainage along the entire length of the required improvements. As such, the drainage issue raised by Mr. Okayama will be addressed by the applicant's engineer. Mr. Christopher Yuen November 19, 2002 Page 2 e. The applicant also wishes to emphasize that current regulations allow the possible construction of an additional farm dwelling on the 8+ acre site. Thus, without the requested rezoning and subdivision, the applicant could possibly have 2 dwellings on the site. In this situation, with the rezoning and subdivision, the applicant has agreed to restrict the number of dwellings to one per lot. As such, with or without this rezoning, the net effective density of the parcel would conceivably be the same. f Finally, all rezoning request must be justified on a case by case basis. The applicant believes that a credible case -consistent with prevailing planning and regulatory documents - to support the rezoning has been made. The applicant further believes that a "moratorium" to halt all rezoning, subdivision, and building activity in this area, as intimated by Mr. Okayama, should not be addressed in conjunction with a single application such as this. It should be addressed in a broader context and ultimately decided upon by the County Council. Should you have further comments or questions on this application, please feel free to direct them to me. Thank you very much. ${ncerely, f j S~I~IEY M. FUKE~"` Planning Consultant Copy - Mr. Tom Tuso w/ enclosure WARRANTY DEED KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: f ~ That Y. GEORGE GONG and SYLVIA K. GONC~Trust6e of the Gong Fanally Trust dated December 30, 1986 ofwhich a Short Form Trust Agreement recorded in Liber 20760 at Page 767, with powers to sell, mortgage, (ease, etc., both of whose mailing address is 708 Bicknell Road, Los Gatos, CA 95030, hereinafter called the "Grantor", for and in consideration of the sum of TEN AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration to the Grantorpaid by 7730MAS A. TUtSO, a(n) Jc In~~ man, whose mailing address is P. O. Box 2550, Frisco, CO 80443, hereinafter called the "Grantee", the receipt whereofis hereb;~ acknowledged, in connection with an exchange by the Grantee under Section 1031 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, do hereby grant, bargaia, sell and convey unto the Grantee ail of that certain real property designated on the tax maps of the Third Taxation Division, State of Hawaii, as Tax Map Key 7-5-012:038, more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof; subject to the encumbrances noted therein. TOGETHER WPI'H ALL: and singular the buildings, improvements, rights, tenements, hereditaments, easements, privileges and appurtenances thereunto belonging or appertaining or held and enjoyed in connection therewith. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same unto the Grantee, as his sole and separate ! property; his hairs; personal representati-ves-and assigns, in fee simple forever. AND THE SAID GRANTOR does hereby covenant with the Grantee that the Grantor is lawfully seised in fee simple of said granted premises and that the said premises are free and clear ofall encumbrances except as aforesaid, and except for assessments forreal property taxes. And the said Grantor titrther covenants and agrees that the Grantorhas good right to sell and convey the said 1 premises in the manner aforesaid; that the Grantor will WARRANT AND DEFEND the same unto the Grantee against the lawful claims and demands of all persons, except as aforesaid. The parties hereto agree that this instrument may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall bP deemed an original, and said counterparts shall together constitute one and the same agreement, binding all ofthe parties hereto, notwithstanding all ofthe parties are not signatory to the original or the same counterparts. For all purposes, including without limitation, recordation, filing and delivery of this instrument, duplicate unexecuted and unaclrnowledged pages of the counterparts may be discarded and the remaining pages assembled as one document. IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED that the terms "Grantor" and "Grantee", as and when used hereinabove or hereinbelow shall mean and include the masculine or feminine, the singular or plural number, individuals, associations, trustees, corporations or partnerships, and their and each of their respective successors in interest, heirs, executors, personal representatives, administrators and pemutted assigns, according to the context thereof, and that if these presents shall be signed by two or more grantors, or by two or more grantees, all covenants of such parties shall be and for all purposes deemed to be their joint and several covenants. 1N WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has executed these presents nn this ~V _~2~~ day of 2001. 1rl 1"1 ~fU2G.t rY1,7 Y. EORGE ONG, Trustee of the Gong Family A PPROVED AS TO FORM Trust dated December 30, 1986 ftROOKS TOM PORTER @ OUn10UrT, LLP SYL K. GONG, 'I'rus a of t e Gong Family Trust dated December 30, 1986 i EXHIBIT A All ofthat certain parcel ofland (being portion ofthe land(s) described in and covered by Royal Patent Grant Number 482 to Naipuwailani) situate, lying and being at Puaa 2"d, District ofNorth Kona, Islan~ and County of Hawaii, State ofHawaii, being LOT 4 and thus bounded and described: / Beginning at a point at the southwest comer of this parcel ofland on the north side of Land Court Application 1666 the coordinates of which referred to Government Survey Triangulation Station "KAIIELO" 5,679.75 feet north and 10,3 82.87 feet east and running by azimuths measured clockwise from true South: ] 161 ° 09' 533.33 Feet along remainder ofGrant 982 to Naipuwailuna to a pipe; 2. 261° 41' 30" 431.23 feet along remainderofGrant982toNaipuwailunatoa pipe; 3. 274° 55' 30" 30.64 feet alongremainderofGrant982toNaipuwailunatoa pipe; 4 34g° 46' 302.60 feet alongremainderofGrant982toNaipuwailunatoa pipe; g. 261 ° 46' 30" 317.63 feet along remainder ofGrant 982 to Naipuwailuna to a pipe; 6. 260° 34' 30" 108.26 feetalongremainderofGrant982toNaipuwailunatoa pipe; 7 258° 08' 167.33 feet along remainder ofGrant 982 to Naipuwailuna to a pipe; 8. 35.1° 5T 152.70 teetalongremainderofGrant982toNaipuwai]unatoa pipe and passing over a pipe in concrete at 2.59 feet; 9. 348° 34' 131.2 feet along remainderofGrant982toNaipuwailunatoa pipe and passing over a pipe in concrete at 125.81 feet; Page 1 of 2 ~ > • 10. 83° 1R' 30" 276.51 feet along north sideofEasement3(16footroadwayas shown on Land Court Application 1666 map I) to a pipe; 1 1. SS° 41' 703.60 feet along northsideofEasement3 (16 foot roadway as shown on Land Court Application 1666 map 1) to the point ofbeginning wntaining an areaof8.773 acres more f or less. TOGETHER WITH an easement to be used in common with all others, forutility and roadway purposes overand across that certain 16 foot wide easement as shown on maps 1 and 2 ofLand Court Application No.1666. Being the premises acquired by Warranty Deed dated Apri121, 1987, and recorded in the Bureau of Conveyances of the State of Hawaii in Liber 20760 at Page 771. SUBJECT HOWEVER TO: i . Reservation in favor of the State of Hawaii of all mineral and metallic mines. 2 A RIGHT OF WAY (25 feet wide), from the Makai Half rifRoyal Patent Grant Number 982 to NAIPUWAILUNA to the upper Government Road over and across the Mauka Halfofsaid Grant 982, said right ofway being situate on the south side ofsaidMaukaportion and being the same right ofway establishedbyaDecreemadeandenteredonOctober27, 1986 by the Circuit Court of the First Judicial Circuit, Territory ofHawau, in those certainproceedings docketed before such Courts as Equity No. 891 and entitled "J. W. H, T. KIHE, et al. vs. AHOI" END OF F,XHIBIT A Page 2 of 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) SS. COUNTY OF ~A?rt/:rYl_ Clrfxi7 ) On ~S-~ ~7~ , 2001, before me JlErvn,~/ /lfirrs,~ r I i Notary Public, personally appeazed Y. GEORGE GONG, Trustee ofthe Gong Family Trust dated December 30,1986, proved to me on the basis ofsatisfactory evidence to be the person whose nameis subscribed to the within instrunent and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his capacity, and that byhis signature on the instrument, the person or the entity upon behalf ofwhich the person acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. SUNDAY MITCHELL ` _ Comm[aton N 77$5185 C& ~ ~ ~ j~~ Notay Public - Caiffamlo t L' ` "~Lii~~Ce=i d' "'."C/e= (~~?21 CwNro Casty County Mycam,.t~sNa~as,2nw 'Signature of Notary ~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss. COUNTY OF ~sin/i74-CGF1Crt ) On this •:~y~ day of_~ t~f~ .2001, before me ~u~di9)/ ~''12/ r/c LL ,Notary Public, personally appeared SYLVTA K. GONG, Trustee of the Gong FamilyTrustdatedDecember30,1986,^-^~-^"••'~~^ proved tomeonthe basis ofsatisfactory evidence to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that she executed the same in her capacity, and that by her signature nn the instn~rrrent, the person or the entity upon behalf ofwhich the person acted, executed the instrument. WITNESSmyhand and official-seal. SUNDAY MRCHt3L ~ G.____..._~ ~ Commlsston / 1185485 ~ ~ x Narar rconc - Cailrortio ~ „~~u~~ 1/~ Corthv Costa County , Mvcbrrtin.E~nuvy5,~p1 ~~``Signature of Notary - SidneyFu~e, Planning Consultant i0D Pauahi Street, Suite 212 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 • Planning • Variance • Zorn Telephone: (808) 969-1522 • Fax: (808) 969-7996 • Subdivision • Land Use Pe • Environmental geports November 21, 2002 Mr. Christopher Yuen, Director " Planning Department '~2 fll1:V ~1 pS~. COUNTY OF HAWAII 101 Pauahi Street counTr a= aatv~n€a Hilo, HI 96720 PLANNtPJ;;; 6Ei'~', Dear Mr. Yuen: Subject: Rezoning Request (REZ OZ-016) -Thomas Tuso TMK: 7-5-012: 016 This is in response to Mr. Keola Childs' letter of November 20, 2002, to your office regarding the subject matter. I would like to note that the concerns raised by Mr. Childs' have been essentially addressed in my letter of November 19 to you. That letter was responding to a letter written by Mr. Jack Okayama. If you believe that additional comments from the applicant are warranted on this matter, please feel free to contact me. Thank you very much. incerely, SIDNE M. FUKE Planning Consultant Copy - Mr. Tom Tuso w/ enclosure (Mr. Keola Childs' letter) Mr. Keola Childs w/ enclosure (Nov. 19, 2002 letter) - t ~idneyFuE~e, Planning Consultant 100 Pauahi Street, Suite 212 • Hiio, Hawaii 96720 • Planning • Variance • Zonin Telephone: (808) 969-1522 • Fax: (SOB) 969-7996 • Subdivision • Land Use Per • Environmental Reports November 22, 2002 _ Mr. Christopher Yuen, Director ~~',+',~'.:~;,.~e Planning Department rp~yta~t COUNTY OF HAWAII ~i~`'~~, 101 Pauahi Street `tJ~ F Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Mr. Yuen: Subject: Rezoning Request (REZ 02-016) -Thomas Tuso TMK: 7-5-012: 038 This is in response to the Department of Public Works' revised comments regarding the subject application. Thank you for making it available to me. In response to said comments, please note that: a. The comments on drainage and grading have been addressed in my earlier letter; b. The improvements at the intersection of the private road and the Mamalahoa Highway will be done pursuant to the requirements of the Department of Public Works; c. In addition to an existing 16-foot wide easement, there is a parallel 25-foot access easement within the applicant's property and the property leading to the Mamalahoa Highway. As such, the right-of--way and/or planned improvements therein should be sufficient to accommodate the creation of another lot in this area. I trust that the responses adequately addressed the comments. If not or if there are more, please feel free to contact me. Thank you very much. ~ncerely^~U' V "~J SI M. FUKE Planning Consultant Copy -DPW Thomas A. Tuso w/ enclosure Ext~i~Ar ~K ~idney~uk~, Planning Consultant - 100 Pauahi Street, Suite 212 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 • Planning • Variance • Zoning Telephone: (808) 969-1522 • Fax: (808) 969-7996 • Subdivision • Lana Use Permi • Environmental Reports November 26, 2002 Mr. Christopher Yuen, Director Planning Department COUNTY OF HAWAII ~~U 26'rN~ ;~~1 101 Pauahi Street Hilo, HI 96720 Fti rna,,;i`;g Dear Mr. Yuen: Pln~~(YI'Ywr D~r''7'. Subject: Rezoning Request IREZ 02-0161 Thomas A. Tuso This is to confirm my discussion with your staff, Noren Kato, this date regarding the subject matter. Please be informed that the applicant, Mr. Tuso, stated the following to me this morning: a. He is planning to construct an 8-10 foot wide lane within the existing 25- foot wide right-of--way from the Mamalahoa Highway to his proposed subdivision. b. Having been involved with a number of developments, he confirmed that from a design and construction perspective, it is possible to have the improvements at the Mamalahoa Highway intersection conform to County Department of Public Works standards and/or requirements. He is also aware of the added cost of such an improvement and is prepared to make it. Should you have further questions on this matter, please feel free to contact me. Thank you very much. Sincerely, SI Y M. FU Planning Consultant Copy - Mr. Thomas A. Tuso ~XHI~IT L' BTuwREZ02-016.jwd 1126/03 COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT AMENDED BACKGROUND REPORT THOMAS A. TUSO CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION fREZ 02-016) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 1. August 12, 2002: Application for Change of Zone from Agricultural (A-Sa) to Family Agricultural (FA-3a) for approximately 8.773 acres of land was received by the Planning Department from Thomas A. Tuso. (Refer to Exhibit A - Background Report) 2. December 5, 2002: Planning Commission meeting held at the Outrigger Waikoloa Beach Hotel. Applicant's request for change of zone was heard by the Planning Commission and was deferred to allow the applicant an opportunity to provide the Planning Department with information and documentation regarding its access over an existing 25-foot easement to Mamalahoa Highway. (See Exhibit M -Hearing Transcript for December 5, 2002 Planning Commission Meeting) 3. February 7, 2003: Planning Commission meeting held at the Ohana Keauhou Beach Resort. Applicant had not received confirmation from the Title Company as to whether the applicant has the right to use the existing 25-foot easement to Mamalahoa Highway. Hearing was continued to allow more time for applicant to get needed information or to work with the adjoining neighbor (Harada) to see whether another easement can be secured rather than the exiting 25-foot easement. (See Exhibit N -Hearing Transcript for February 7, 2003 Planning Commission Meeting) 4. Additional Access Information: The access to the subject property is as represented in the original representation as stated in No. 25 of the Background Report. The access to the subject property is from Mamalahoa Highway, which is aCounty-maintained roadway with a pavement width of 22 feet within a 30-foot wide right-of--way. There is an existing 10-foot wide driveway that connects to I Mamalahoa Highway at about a 45-degree angle, then proceeds down to the subject property within a 16-foot wide access easement located on the adjoining parcels to the south of the project site. The applicant added that there was also a 25-foot wide access easement that parallels the ] 6-foot wide easement, which was added to the Background Report in No. 26. At both the December 5, 2002 and the February 7, 2003 meetings, the Planning deferred action regarding this request pending confirmation that the applicant has access over the 25-foot access, but the Title Company has not been able to confirm this information. ADDITIONAL RESPONSE LETTERS FROM THE APPLICANT 5. The applicant has submitted several additional response letters regarding the access issue. In the June 9, 2003 letter, the applicant proposes to conduct improvements based purely on the 16-foot wide easement from Mamalahoa Highway to his property and improvements to the additiona125-foot wide easement that is on his property. He has proposed the following: • Construct a 14-foot wide pavement within the existing 16-foot wide right-of- way between the main road (Mamalahoa Highway) and the subject site. This would be a distance of approximately 500 feet; • Construct an 8-foot wide pavement, north of the existing dry stack rock wall, within the 25-foot wide easement on his property up to the beginning of his 2"d ]ot. This would be a distance of approximately 700 feet. It would then merge with the existing 10-foot wide road within the 16-foot wide right-of- way. This new road would be used for makai bound traffic only. All mauka bound traffic would be limited to the 16-foot wide easement; and • Allow properties makai of the subject site to utilize the 25-foot wide easement and related improvements. When completed, there will be a 14-foot wide pavement extending neazly 500 feet between the Highway and the subject site, and a new 8-foot wide paved road stretching nearly 700 feet on the applicant's mauka lot. With the existing 10-foot wide pavement, the 700-foot section will have a paved width of 18 feet. • The applicant also added in the October 13, 2003 letter that there be a provision added that the private road's intersection with Mamalahoa Highway 2 be subject to review and approval of the Department of Public Works. The applicant has submitted a letter on November 25, 2003 with a drafted proposed condition. (See Exhibit O -Letters Dated Apri12, June 9, October 13 & November 25, 2003) 3 PLANNNG COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAII HEARING TRANSCRIPT December 5, 2002 A regularly advertised pubic hearing on THOMAS TUSO (REZ 02-016) was called to order at 9:02 a.m. in the Outrigger Waikoloa Beach, Lehua Ballroom, 69-275 Waikoloa Beach Drive, Waikoloa, South Kohala, Hawaii, with Chairperson Geraldine Giffin presiding. PRESENT: Geraldine M. Giffin ABSENT & EXCUSED: Hannah Springer Earl Fujikawa Fred Galdones Florence Kubota Jeffrey McCall Aurelio C. Mina, Jr. Francis Smith Grant Togashi Ivan Torigoe, Deputy Corporation Counsel Christopher J. Ytten, Planning Director Alice Kawaha, Staff Planner Daryn Arai, Staff Planner Debbie Chang, Staff Planner Esther Imamura, Staff Planner Susan Gagorik, Staff Planner Kiran Emler representing Department of Public Works Bruce McClure representing Department of Water Supply And approximately 12 people from the public in attendance. APPLICANT: THOMAS TUSO (REZ 02-016) -Application for a Change of Zone by changing the district classification from Agricultural (A-Sa) to Family Agricultural (FA-3a) for approximately 8.773 acres of land. The property is located approximately 720 feet west (makai) of Mamalahoa Highway, in the vicinity of the former Ferrari Kona Coffee Plantation Store, Pua'a 2"~, North Kona, Hawaii, TMK: 7-5-12:38. GIFFIN: Good morning. I'd like to call the meeting of the Hawaii County Planning Commission to order. Without any further de]ay, let's begin with Agenda Item No. 1, Commissioners. 1 B ~ ~ EXHIBIT A The Applicant is Thomas A. Tuso. The Application No. is REZ 02-016. This is an application for a Change of Zone by changing the district classification from Agricultural (A-Sa) to Family Agricultural (FA-3a) for approximately 8.773 acres of land. Daryn? ARAI: Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and good morning, Commissioners. GIFFIN: Good morning. ARAI: Looking at the location map here, this heavy black line is the Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway, with the ocean at the bottom of the map. This black line running to the southeast is Hualalai Road, which intersects with the Mamalahoa Highway, the Old Mamalahoa Highway, which also goes all the way back to Palani Junction. The project site is located on the makai side of the Mamalahoa Highway in the area indicated by this blue dot. For reference purposes, this yellow area here is Pualani Estates. In this vicinity is the Kona Vista Subdivision with Lako Street heading in the mauka-makai direction. Directing your attention to the site plan, the Mamalahoa Highway is in this vicinity here indicated by the double line. The project site is outlined here in blue, consisting of approximately 8.7 acres. Access to the property is provided by a 16-foot wide access and utility easement within which there's a 10-foot wide concrete driveway that provides access to the property. The Applicant has also indicated an existing 25-foot right-of-way on its property leading all the way back to the highway parallel to the existing 16-foot easement within which the Applicant is proposing another 8- to 10-foot wide driveway, paved driveway providing access to the Mamalahoa Highway. The Applicant is willing to provide that access improvement as well as improvements at its intersection with the highway. Right now it intersects the highway at a 45-degree angle, which makes it very difficult to turn into the property southbound. The Applicant's proposal or request before you today is to change the zoning of the property from its current Agricultural 5-acre zoning to a Family Agricultural 3-acre zoning that would allow the Applicant to subdivide the subject property into two lots with a minimum lot size of three acres. The current proposal is to subdivide the property in this configuration, with the mauka portion being about 3.7 acres, the makai side 5 acres, and this 5-acre parcel is the parcel the Applicant intends to maintain as his residence, with the mauka parcel to eventually be sold off. The Director has reviewed the request, finds it is consistent with the General Plan. Public facilities and utilities are available to the subject property. Therefore, the Director is recommending favorable consideration of this change of zone request subject to conditions that we have provided you today. GIFFIN: Commissioners, any questions of Daryn? FUJIKAWA: I do. 2 GIFFIN: Mr. Fujikawa. FUJIKAWA: Up above there along the right below the highway, where you have a 25-foot easement off Mamalahoa Highway to the property, whose property is that next to the highway? ARAI: Right here? I'm sorry. The actual owner I do not know. Maybe the Applicant's representative can clarify that. But this property is not owned by the Applicant, it is someone else's property. FUJIKAWA: So the 25-foot easement is within that property? ARAI: According to the maps and information we have, yes; and the 25-foot access easement is existing, it's already there. FUJIKAWA: It's already there. Okay. Thank you. GIFFIN: Any other questions of Daryn, Commissioners? Hearing none, will the Applicant's representative and the Applicant please come forward. Hang on, I need to find my papers. Sid, would you raise your right hand, please. FUKE: Sure. GIFFIN: Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Hawaii County Planning Commission? FUKE: Yes, I do. GIFFIN: Thank you. Sid, your FUKE: Okay. GIFFIN: Full name and your resident address. FUKE: Sure. Good morning, Madam Chair and Members of the Commission. My name is Sidney Fuke; I'm a planning consultant. My resident address is 1358C Mele Manu Street in Hilo. GIFFIN: Thank you. FUKE: The Applicant, Tom Tuso, has a detached retina, so he was unable to attend to today, and he's, I think, going through some kind of surgery, so he extends his regrets. 3 GIFFIN: But you have received a copy of the Background Report? FUKE: Yes. GIFFIN: And the Director's Recommendation? FUKE: That is true. GIFFIN: Great. FUKE: And I've also had a chance to discuss that with the Applicant. You know, for the most part, the proposed conditions as been circulated, you know, to the Commissioners by the Director are acceptable. There are a few changes that, you know, he would like to make. And these changes came about as a result of further discussions with the Staff and also the Planning Director, you know, through his Staff. Specifically, I think Daryn's report is accurate in terms of expressing what the Applicant's intentions are and his description of the existing right-of-way in that area. But, you know, just for the sake of helping provide some frame further framework, you know, to the proposed conditions, I'd like to kind of indicate, reiterate certain points. There is presently a 16-foot wide easement that's on the property's south, or if you look at the map, the big presentation map, the 16-foot wide easement falls on the right side of that map. Parallel to that 16-foot easement is a 25-foot wide easement that goes from the Mamalahoa Highway all the way down through this property as well as other properties below. How much further it goes beyond this property, I'm not really sure. So, essentially, what you have is a combined right-of-way with those two easements of 25 plus 16, or 41 feet wide easement. There is an existing concrete paved area on the existing 16-foot wide easement that doesn't necessarily follow or fall exactly within the center of that 16-foot wide easement. There is also like a wall, portions of a wall that serves as a dividing line between the 16-foot wide easement and the 25-foot wide easement, actually serves as a boundary description for the subject property. So what the Applicant intends to do is to construct another 8- to 10-foot wide paved roadway, you know, within the 25-foot wide roadway, easement, stretching from his property going all the way up to the Mamalahoa Highway. As Daryn had indicated, where the existing easements intersect with the Mamalahoa Highway, it intersects at a, almost like a 45-degree angle. So if you're traveling south, it's almost impossible to get into that driveway. If you're traveling You know, so pretty much like the only way you can get into the property is traveling north and then, you know, just coming into the driveway. It's a really hair-pin turn, particularly in that area. So what the Applicant intends to do is basically straighten it out and to have the, an improved access way at that intersection encompassing any portion within the 41-foot wide right-of-way, as deemed appropriate, you know, by the Department of Public Works. We didn't necessarily want to say that the improved driveway would fall within the 4 16-foot wide easement or the 25-foot wide easement, but any portion within the 41-foot easement. So as a result, the Staff and I were looking at different conditions, and I did have some proposed language that Ithink Daryn, was it passed out? Yeah. So the suggested language changes relates to Conditions 6, 7, and a new Condition 8. GIFFIN: Okay. If you wait just a minute. FUKE: Sure. GIFFIN: I think we're just getting it now. No, we're not. We are. Okay, hang on. Okay, go ahead. FUKE: So as far as the proposed conditions, you know, which was passed out by the Staff, the bracketed items would be deleted and the underscored would be new items. So, essentially, it would read, "As agreed to by the Applicant, a minimum 10-foot wide pavement shall be constructed within the 25-foot wide access between the access to the makai lot and the Mamalahoa Highway in a manner meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works prior to or in conjunction with the issuance of final subdivision approval. The entire 25-foot wide right-of-way and any improvements thereon shall, upon the County's request, be dedicated to the County at no cost. This restriction shall be incorporated in the deeds of all proposed lots." Just to give you further elaboration on that, it's my understanding in the discussions with the Staff that the Staff was, as part of the overall transportation network planning, thought that this may be a possible area for a connection, possible connection between the Mamalahoa Highway and properties further makai. And so in deference to that overall long-range planning, this concept of providing this right-of-way and possible dedication to the County came about and the Applicant is willing to accept such a potential dedication of this right-of--way and the improvements thereon to the County whenever the County wants it. The other condition is Condition No. 7, as amended. It would read, "As agreed to by the Applicant, using the entire width of the existing 25-foot and 16-foot wide easements, the intersection of the access roadway with the Mamalahoa Highway shall be constructed in a manner meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works prior to or in conjunction with the issuance of final subdivision approval." Again, this is just reiterating what I shared with you earlier that Public Works would need to really look at, from an engineering perspective, where exactly would be, this driveway would be best suited, you know, within this entire 41-foot wide easement area, you know, given the fact that you need to have some slope considerations and you do have the angle of the Mamalahoa Highway. So this gives the maximum flexibility to both the Applicant as well as the Public Works in making that determination. The new condition was, is Condition 8. As I mentioned earlier, there is that dry-stack wall that runs parallel to the property and actually between the two easements, and there may be some potential historic value. So, as a result, what we're suggesting, I guess based on the 5 discussion with the Staff, was this new Condition 8. And it basically reads, "Prior to making a breech of the existing dry-stack wall that may be necessary to accommodate a driveway access to any of the proposed lots, the Applicant and/or respective property owner shall consult with the State Department of Land and Natural Resources Historic Preservation Division and implement, if deemed necessary, appropriate mitigative measures." The concept of the access way in this area is that with this new 8- to 10-foot roadway, that would come down within the 25-foot easement. Basically that roadway would serve as a new access way traveling makai, you know, not only to service these two properties, I mean these two proposed lots, but also properties beyond that area. And then from the subject property going back to Mamalahoa Highway, they would continue to use the existing easement, the roadway within the 16-foot wide easement. But nonetheless, to get in and out of the property, there is going to be, of necessity, some breech, you know, to that existing wall, so, that serves as a boundary line. It may or may not have historic value, so this is why the Director is suggesting that we confer with the DLNR; and, you know, we have no objections to that. GIFFIN: Commissioners, do you have any questions? Mr. Fujikawa. FUJIKAWA: Mr. Fuke, who is the owner of the 16-foot easement? FUKE: Well, I don't know who the owner is. Well, I guess the respective property owners would own the fee, and then the easement just basically gives rights to all of the other properties adjoining this easement to gain access off, over it. If you look at the Staff's Background Report, there is a in the application, the environmental report that I prepared. GIFFIN: Yeah. FUKE: There is an overall tax map that's found on Page, I guess Page 2. And, you know, it shows where the subject site is and in relation to the existing 16-foot wide easement and the length of this easement. FUJIKAWA: So now the dry-stack wall, the rock wall, does that belong to which side of the property? FUKE: For the most part, the dry-stack wall is on the Applicant's property. Again, if you look at the proposed subdivision map that's contained in the application, where it shows, you know, it's a miniature version of whatever's on the presentation map. You can see the location of the dry-stack wall. And pretty much, the dry-stack wall is located on the Applicant's property, but generally between the, if you can squeeze an area, but it generally falls on the line between the 16-foot easement and the 25-foot wide easement. FUJIKAWA: So presently the 16-foot wide easement is being utilized? FUKE: Correct. 6 FUJIKAWA: It's in use right now? FUKE: Correct. It services this property as well as properties further makai. FUJIKAWA: So your Applicant is thinking of tying in his 25-foot into the existing 16-foot, am I right? FUKE: From this property and moving mauka, correct. FUJIKAWA: Okay. And what did the County say about the hairpin turn situation up there, if you say it's pretty critical? We can ask the County. FUKE: I don't know if they directly addressed that. But from the Applicant's perspective, you know, I guess all of the residents or property owners in that area realized that it's noC really like the best of situations, and so the Applicant is already prepared to make that improvement. So I think the only the comment that the Public Works Department made was more in relation to when it, when you, where you intersect with the Mamalahoa Highway, you know, making sure that you have the best sight distance possible in that area. I mean but you're going to be pretty much limited by how wide that easement is, which is only a maximum of 41 feet. FUJIKAWA: That's the reason why you want the 16-foot, right? FUKE: At that portion, to be able to utilize the entire 41-feet to figure out like where your best touchdown point should be. FUJIKAWA: Okay. Thank you. GIFFIN: Commissioners, any other questions? Mr. Togashi. TOGASHI: Thank you, Madam Chair. I was curious as to why the three-acre density was chosen versus let's say atwo-acre density, given the fact that, you know, the mauka properties are an acre in size and that you mentioned about this Louis Altenberg's property being FA-2a. FUKE: Correct. TOGASHI: Is it primarily because of that roadway access that atwo-lot subdivision was chosen, the configuration of that access, roadway access? FUKE: Well, I think it's a combination of two factors. One is like precisely what you mentioned, Commissioner Togashi, because going with an Ag-2, excuse me, like an FA-2 type of subdivision, it would be possible to realize like about four lots in that area, and that may then trigger more of a roadway impact. And so the Applicant was relatively 7 concerned about that there may be more, the potential for a wider improvement road's, you know, requirement. The other one and perhaps was the more driving force was just the Applicant's desire to have space. So, and he wanted like about, you know, a three to five-acre area, and But he just felt eight acres was a little bit too large for him to, I guess, bring the farm up to like what it's, what it used to be in the years past. TOGASHI: I guess given his desire to have space, yeah, on the other hand, too, you know, had he requested maybe a two ag, two-acre ag, then and given the condition that there are, there's no second dwelling or CPRing, then that would have been perhaps maybe a long- term consideration rather than short-term, yeah. It's just a FUKE: Yeah. TOGASHI: Comment that I was very curious as to why three versus two. FUKE: Yeah. I think it was more just like the Applicant's preference at this point in time. GIFFIN: Commissioners, any other questions? Mrs. Kubota. KUBOTA: Mr. Fuke, Exhibit E, sent in by Mr. Okayama FUKE: Okay. KUBOTA: Second to the last paragraph, he refers to survey maps and question of the right-of-way has not been in record. FUKE: Correct. KUBOTA: Has that been clarified? I would assume that with your amendments to the conditions that that problem has been secured. FUKE: That is correct. So in my, you will note that in my response to that letter which I sent to the Planning Director, I did enclose a copy of the deed. And in that deed it KUBOTA: Oh, I missed that one. FUKE: It made clear that there was this, there is this 25-foot wide right-of-way. KUBOTA: Sorry, I missed that response. Thank you. 8 GIFFIN: Any other questions'? I have a question of the Director. Considering the proposed amendments to the conditions, Mr. Yuen, are you comfortable with your recommendation? YUEN: Yes. GIFFIN: Oh, good. Any other comments? Hearing none, there is a Mr. Alan Harada who has signed up to testify on this agenda item. Will you please come forward. Good morning. Will you raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Hawaii County Planning Commission? HARADA: I do. GIFFIN: Will you please state your name and your resident address, Mr. Harada. HARADA: My name is Alan Harada. Resident address is NOMURA: Please use the microphone. HARADA: Okay. Resident address is 75-5654 Mamalahoa Highway, in the District of Wai'aha, but the mailing is Holualoa. GIFFIN: Thank you. You c:ay begin your testimony. HARADA: First of all, I wanted to reiterate the fact that I don't oppose GIFFIN: Okay. HARADA: The change. The only thing that I'm questioning is the mentioning of this 16-foot access. GIFFIN: Yes. HARADA: Okay. And, you know, like it's part of the agreement but, you know, my mom is, she's 88 years old and she has a hard time to come this kind of place. GIFFIN: Sure. HARADA: Okay. According to her, when we initially bought the land, okay, the land we are on was owned by the Catholic Church. And if you look on the map below that, there is a property below our property, the Junichiro Harada's property. GIFFIN: Hang on. YUEN: We need to know 9 GIFFIN: Where that lot is. YUEN: Which is your property? FUKE: Actually, if I might I can help here. If you look at the report that I have prepared. GIFFIN: Yes. FUKE: It's found on Figure 2, there's a tax map. GIFFIN: Yes. FUKE: Yeah. Okay, what Mr. Harada is referring You know, Mr. Harada's property is GIFFIN: Next to Keola Childs. FUKE: Immediately to the south. GIFFIN: Oh, it's to the right? FUKE: Yeah. FUJIKAWA: Excuse me, I have a question. GIFFIN: Just one minute. I see, it's to the right. HARADA: Okay. Then after speaking with her this morning, because you know, this issue came up, and I got the letter late, it was open and I don't know what happened, okay, but I just got it, okay. Now, according to her, when we purchased this property, when we purchased this property from the Catholic Church, that 16-foot easement, that it was set aside as an easement but for the property owners on the left, you know, the one right below our place, because you look, it's landlocked, right. GIFFIN: Yeah. HARADA: Okay. That and the one below, that was what the easement was for. On the proposed area that they are talking about with Mr. Tuso's property, okay, that belonged to a family called McGuire, and they owned from, you know, all the way to the top. Because above the roadway, above Mamalahoa Highway, we also bought a 38-point-something acre property from McGuire at one time, and they had a 40-foot easement that was going up there. Okay, that was staked out, we staked it out and R. M. Towill did the work for us, okay. And so I'm questioning that, you know, was the research done enough for it to find this information 10 out where, you know, what was told to me, and I need some more time to research this myself to find the documents. Now in question about this bend in the road GIFFIN: Yes. HARADA: Okay, that bend in the road was an existing jeep trail, okay. Now my house is built down there, okay, down on that property, on okay. Now at that time, it would have cost me an additional $10,000 to fill that road up to come to the height of the acceptable slope and everything, okay. And since there was only my house on, my house on that property and our land, I just paved the existing road. Because if you look, there's a paved road that stops right by my house. Everything below that is concrete, okay. Now, it's a really, really weird situation because that property that Keola Childs owned, okay, there was really no access to that property on the 16-foot easement. His access was on the north side. Next to Nonaka property there's an access over there. That's where, if you look at the, if you research this, there's going to be a power line that follows that access and, you know, the County, I mean HELCO doesn't put any power lines anywhere except on easements, okay. So that's why I bent the road like that. Now, actually what I'm doing is that I'm being, well, our family is being nice people and letting these people use it because Keola came on his hands and knees and said, you know, can I please use this? And I said fine. So, you know, it's like what's happening is there's like the good neighbor policy get thrown out the door, you know. You know, I don't want any trouble with anybody and everything, but you know, I don't want, you know, I cannot see why, and I am questioning why that the document says that they're using that 16-foot roadway as part of the access. Now I know that I got to find a document that say that I did do my parents did do an agreement with the original owners, which is Dora and Hiroyuki Mori through the Kongs, who bought the property, because they were landlocked and they didn't have access, okay. Because this 25- foot easement actually surfaced not too long ago because I didn't know about it. So that when the surveyor was surveying the property below, then they said, oh, by the way, you know, there is this 25-foot easement, I want to let you know. And I said, "Oh, I didn't know that." And then now, after discussion with my mom, and she said, well, the Catholic Church owned this side, which we bought, and the McGuire family owned the other side, so that's why they had to provide their own easement access. So there's a lot of questions involved in this. And, you know, like I said, you know, I'm just trying to be a good neighbor. I don't want to oppose this whatsoever, but all I'm saying is that it kind of worries me the fact that if I needed approval to, you know, if, actually the access was given to the Kongs, assigned to the Kongs. I know I have a document that says that. And you know, like if there is a new owner involved, I think that they should have given us the courtesy to, so we could turn that over. You know, I'm going to be the new owner or we're going to, you know, or we're going to sell this property, would you approve this? You know, like I say, but I'm not trying to be a rotten neighbor. All I'm saying is that, you know, if I 11 te13, if I say something in good grace, I'm going to stand by what I say. Whether it's iegaliy wrong or not, I'm going to stand by what I say. But the thing that I, I don't like the idea is that, you know, like I say, I'm a good neighbor and I don't want legal stuff, you know, coming in the way of being a good neighbor because I can also be a rotten person, too, as well. So, you know, let's not, you know, that's what I want to clarify, and that's why we got in the road access because that road access is in our property and our property is title cleared property, is land court title cleared. Now according to my knowledge of land court title clear and talking to our attorney, that because, you know, about claiming easement, and I said nobody can claim easement to your property because it's title clear. So, you know, like I say, I'm just being a good neighbor about everything and it's kind of amazing that I see all of this. And many times I wish where people would have come talk to me. You know, I'm not going to be a stinker, but you know, come talk to me. I'm fine with that, you know. So GIFFIN: Thank you. HARADA: That's about it. GIFFIN: Mr. Fujikawa. FUJIKAWA: Mr. Harada, Mr. Childs resides which side of the easement right now, on the left or the right? HARADA: Well, if you look down in that blue, the sides right below that, see that subject site over there, right below is the Boranian's. And below that and to the right. FUJIKAWA: So you live on the right side? HARADA: Yeah, I live on the right side, he lives on the lefr side. FUJIKAWA: And so was that 25-foot easement meant for him? HARADA: I would say yes, because, you know, that was Like I said, if you look at that, really, that 16-foot easement, it stops right next to that said property, right below our property, or below that, see. But, you know, we've been everybody else lives on the right side, only that one area below that and, in essence, that Old Hualalai, that sugar mill road. FUJIKAWA: Okay. HARADA: That really wasn't considered anything so the property, the Catholic Church allowed told them that they could have access through that 16-foot easement from the top of Mamalahoa. FUJIKAWA: Okay. So I have a question with Daryn. 12 GIFFIN: Sure. Daryn, Mr. Fujikawa has a question of you, for you. FUJIKAWA: Oh, you're there, okay. On your Background Report, Item No. 26, the paragraph, the first paragraph, the Applicant has submitted documents to demonstrate the Applicant's access rights over these two access easements. You got the documents for the 16-foot? FUKE: Madam Chair, Ican you want me to explain? GIFFIN: Mr. Fuke. FUKE: Perhaps I can kind of like shed some light on it. And I've got to apologize to you, Alan. First of all, like, my brother is married to his sister, so we But, you know, for not sharing more of the information like with you, but then, you know, the letter did go out and But notwithstanding that then, you know, maybe either you or I could have contacted you or your sister, and I'm sorry about that. But in that letter that you're referring to, Commissioner Fujikawa, that's the November 19"' letter, that's found in your Exhibit I. Now in Exhibit I, what I did was attach a copy of the warranty deed. GIFFIN: Yeah. FUKE: Okay. In the warranty deed, you will find that the land was previously owned by this party by the name of George Gong and Sylvia Gong, which Alan referred to, which was then transferred to my client, Thomas Tuso. Now if you look at the deed itself, under Exhibit A of the deed, on the Page 2 of that. And I'll just read it, I guess, for the purpose of the audience, "Together with an easement to be used in common with all others for utility and roadway purposes over and across that certain 16-foot wide easement." So relative to the question that Mr. Harada had raised, if I'm looking and reading this deed correctly, this property already has access rights over that 16-foot wide easement. GIFFIN: Say that again? FUKE: This property GIFFIN: Yes. FUKE: Has access rights over this existing 16-foot wide easement, if this deed is correct; and I don't have any doubt that this deed GIFFIN: Right. 13 FUKE: is correct. GIFFIN: Right. FUKE: Now it goes on further, if you're looking at the same, you know, the document, subject however to a Item No. 2, it's aright-of--way of 25 feet. Now this 25 feet is a new right-of-way that's now on this property. The 16-foot wide easement that he's referring to is on the Harada's property. GIFFIN: Right. Right. FUKE: This 25-foot wide easement is on Tuso's property as well as the property mauka and the property makai. And maybe Mr. Harada was not aware of it, and it's very understandable because this, according to what I'm reading on this deed, it says it was a judicial decree that was made and entered on in October of 1986; so it's rather recent. YUEN: You know, I FUKE: The other thing that he mentioned YUEN: Could I could I FUKE: Sure. Okay. YUEN: Can we stick to this point for a minute? FUKE: Okay, sure. GIFFIN: Mr. Yuen. YUEN: Because I have a couple questions about this as I look at this. It's the deed says that Mr. Tuso's property is subject to aright-of--way 25 feet wide from the makai half of Royal Patent Grant No. 982 to Naipuwailuna. Okay, first of all, what property is the makai half of Royal Patent Grant No. 982? Is that Mr. Tuso's property or is that property makai of Mr. Tuso's property? FUKE: Mr. Yuen, I really don't know. All I would, I guess, just make reference to is just, you know, that whatever is contained in, you know, in the survey map. The survey map shows the 25-foot wide easement that's From the Mamalahoa Highway just stretches through this property and beyond. How far beyond I'm not really sure. YUEN: Yes, but I'm not sure that this gives your client the right to use that 25-foot right-of--way. ARAI: Can Imaybe if I can just direct your attention to Exhibit A, that is the tax map, a copy of a tax map that's within the application. And when you make reference to 14 Grant 982, and you can interpret it as you deem appropriate, but the lettering seems to go right through the properties mauka and makai of the project site, so I don't know if YUEN: Well, I'm looking at the first page of this deed, Exhibit A. Mr. Tuso's property is a portion of this Grant 982, so this is a much larger grant. My concern though in reading this is that what this demonstrates is that the makai half of Grant 982 has an easement over Mr. Tuso's property that runs up to the Mamalahoa Highway, but this does not demonstrate that Mr. Tuso has a right to use that easement. GIFFIN: It just acknowledges YUEN: He borders GIFFIN: That it's there. YUEN: Yes, he borders the easement. When a property is subject to an easement, that means that he has an easement on his property that's in favor of the lower property, makai property. Then this easement does go to the Mamalahoa, the Old Mamalahoa Highway. I'm but as I say, this does not demonstrate that Mr. You know, the question is who has the right to use this easement? And just because his property maybe subject to an easement over somebody else that now, because it's that portion that's on his property, he can use because he owns. And unless it's, because it's not stated as being an exclusive easement in favor of the other piece of property. But the other piece of property, but where it goes through TMK No. 29, the small parcel between Mamalahoa and Mr. Tuso You would have to show something that Mr. Tuso has a right to use the easement as it goes through that piece of property, and I don't see that here. FUKE: But it's like it's not clear, that's what you're saying? YUEN: Yes. It's not clear. From this documentation, I don't see that. I see in the paragraph above subject to, or two paragraphs above it, "TOGETHER WITH an easement to be used in common with all others, far" interior "roadway purposes over and across that 16 foot wide easement as shown on Maps 1 and 2 of Land Court Application No. 1666." GIFFIN: Then with that on the table, Mr. Yuen, what do you recommend? YUEN: I'm sorry, but I have to recommend deferring this until we can see whether he does have the legal right to use that easement. It should he, it would be, because this is land court property, it would have to be noted in the land court certificate of title for that Parcel No. 29, and he would have to show that there's an easement, but we need to know who is that easement in favor of. It may be in favor of this, with this parcel. But just from this deed, the normal, and I invite Mr. Torigoe to comment further on this, but the normal way of conveying this property, if he did have an easement over Parcel 29, if he did have a right to use that 25-foot wide casement, your deed would normally say together, like it says in here, together with an easement. It would say together with an easement fora 25-foot wide easement and a 16-foot wide easement. 15 GIFFIN: Instead ofjust the 16. Mr. Torigoe. TORIGOE: Yes, Madam Chair. I would agree with Mr. Yuen's comments. I think it should be clearer, it should be made clear whether the 25-foot easement in fact serves the subject property, and also probably a good idea to make sure, to go and check the Land Court App]ication 1666 to make sure that that 16-foot wide easement does what it's purported to do. YUEN: And [hate to recommend a deferral, but part of our conditions of approval assume that they have 40 feet to improve the intersection with the old Mamalahoa Highway. ARAI: If I could just GIFFIN: Mr. Arai. ARAI: Further comment. I spoke to Department of Public Works, as well, and the Applicant's proposed condition, this is something we will explore at the same time due to the deferral, but in order to provide the appropriate turning radiuses, there may be a need for maybe a wider, more easement than the 41 feet that is being proposed by the Applicant simply because the fuming radius may require a little bit more. So we may want to discuss that further to provide for that option should Department of Public Works deem it necessary. GIFFIN: What condition number are you looking at? ARAI: Oh, I'm sorry. That is the Applicant's proposed amended Condition No. 7. It says, "As agreed to by the Applicant, using the entire width of the existing 25-foot and 16-foot wide easements." That would be a total of 41 feet worth of easements. Now if the intersection of the highway, in order to get the proper turning radiuses requires just a little bit more in the way of easement width, then that is something that we want flexibility on asking for. GIFFIN: Sure. Sure. Sure. FUKE: Madam Chair? GIFFIN: Mr. Fuke. FUKE: I will defer to the Planning Director's analysis. I can understand that logic. And I think calling for a deferral, you know, inasmuch as a lot of the conditions are predicated upon the Applicant's ability GIFFIN: Right. FUKE: To utilize the 25-foot wide easement on the mauka property, I think that, you know, it's appropriate that this matter be continued. 16 Just the other point I wanted to make, what Mr. Harada is referring to is that, you know, what he did as an improvement is probably like an improvement that's not within the existing 16-foot wide easement, that's why they had a HARADA: Well, the improvement on the top, with that turn over there, that goes into our property. FUKE: Yeah. Because that was the existing jeep road. So people are kind of like illegally using his property to get down. But, again, to say the fact again is, you know, I want to be a good neighbor. I don't want to be a stinker, you know, because we all got to live there, you know. GIFFIN: I'm really g]ad the good neighbor showed up this morning. And Daryn, maybe you could have, get his phone number and any kind of discussion that you're having with the Applicant can also include Mr. Harada. ARAI: Absolutely. GIFFIN: All right. Do I hear a motion? KUBOTA: Madam Chair? GIFFIN: For a continuance? Mrs. Kubota. KUBOTA: Madam Chair, I move that Change of Zone Application REZ 02-016 be deferred. FUJIKAWA: I second. GIFFIN: Is there a date? Daryn, did you want us to put a date on that to ARAI: Prefer not to, given the legal things that may need to happen. GIFFIN: Okay. Don't you want any more pressure? ARAI: No. GIFFIN: It has been moved by Commissioner Kubota and seconded by Commissioner Fujikawa that the Application REZ 02-016 be deferred. Discussion? Hearing none, Daryn? ARAI: Commissioner Kubota? KUBOTA: Aye. ARAL Commissioner Fujikawa? 17 FUJIKAWA: Aye. ARAI: Commissioner Galdones? GALDONES: Aye. ARAI: Commissioner McCall? MCCALL: Aye. ARAI: Commissioner Mina? MINA: Aye. ARAI: Commissioner Smith? SMITH: Aye. ARAI: Commissioner Togashi? TOGASHI: Aye. ARAL Chairwoman Giffin? GIFFIN: Aye. ARAI: Madam Chairwoman, motion carries with eight aye votes. GIFFIN: Thank you. And thank you again, Mr. Harada and Mr. Fuke. FUKE: Yeah, thank you. The discussion ended at 9:57 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon M. Nomura, Secretary Planning Commission 18 PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAII MINUTES FEBRUARY 7, 2003 The Planning Commission met in regular session at 9:00 a.m. in the Ohana Keauhou Beach Resort, Kahalu`u Ballroom, 78-6740 Ali`i Drive, North Kona, Hawaii with Chairman Fred Galdones presiding. PRESENT: Fred Galdones ABSENT & EXCUSED: Geraldine M. Giffin Earl Fujikawa Jeffrey McCall Florence Kubota Aurelio Mina, Jr. Francis Smith Hannah Springer Grant Togashi Ivan Torigoe, Deputy Corporation Counsel Christopher J. Yuen, Planning Director Alice Kawaha, Staff Planner Daryn Arai, Staff Planner Norren Kato, Staff Planner Kiran Emler representing Department of Public Works (Left at 11:44 a.m.) Glenn Ahuna representing Department of Water Supply The Chair introduced the Commission and staff to members of the public. The Commission deferred Administrative Matters and approval of minutes until later on the agenda. CHANGE OF ZONE The Commission took this item up at 9:07 a.m. with THOMAS A. TUSO approximately 10 people from the public in attendance. PUA`A 2ND NORTH KONA APPLICANT: THOMAS A. TUSO (REZ 02-016) -Continued hearing on the application for a Change of Zone by changing the district classification from Agricultural (A-Sa) to Family Agricultural (FA-3a) for approximately 8.773 acres of land. The property is located approximately 720 feet west (makai) of Mamalahoa Highway, in the vicinity of the former Ferrari Kona Coffee Plantation Store, Pua`a 2nd, North Kona, Hawaii, TMK: 7-5-12:38. Mr. Arai gave some background information. He noted the Commission at the December 5`h meeting continued the hearing to allow the applicant an opportunity to EXH B!T provide the Planning Department with information and documentation regarding its access over an existing 25-foot easement to Mamalahoa Highway. He stated the Planning Department is recommending the hearing again be continued as the documents have not been provided to the Department as yet. The applicant's representative, Sidney Fuke, stated that to date they have not received any confirmation from the Title Company as to whether the applicant has the right to use the existing 25-foot easement to Mamalahoa Highway. He said in the event the applicant does not have that right, the applicant nonetheless is still prepared to work with the adjoining property owner (Harada) to the South to see whether another easement can be secured rather than the existing 25-foot easement. He said when all these matters come to a resolution they will inform the Planning Department and then hopefully this matter can be heard and reviewed by the Commission. There was no one from the public testifying on this agenda item. It was moved by Commissioner Kubota and seconded by Commissioner Fujikawa that the hearing be continued as requested. Motion was unanimously carried by a voice vote of all Commissioners in attendance. SPECIAL PERMIT The Commission took this item up at 9:14 a.m. with GLENN &MELITTA approximately 12 people from the public in attendance. HODSON KAPALAALAEA, NORTH KONA APPLICANTS: GLENN &MELITTA HODSON (SPP 02- 039) -Request to withdraw the application for a Special Permit to allow public tours of the existing Garden of Eden farm, and catered group events with up to 100 guests and 25 staff, and related parking area on approximately 5.001 acres of land in the State Land Use Agricultural District. The property is located at the end ofNohealani Street adjacent and east (mauka) of Keauhou Uka Subdivision and approximately 600 feet east of the Walua Road- Nohealani Street intersection, Kapalaalaea, North Kona, Hawaii, TMK: 7-7-7:29 and 78. Mr. Arai said that the Planning Commission ranted standing to various parties for a contested case proceeding at the December 6` hearing; and since then the applicant has submitted a January 7, 2003 letter requesting the withdrawal of the application from further consideration. The applicants, Glenn and Melitta Hodson, were in attendance. Mrs. Hodson read into the record her written testimony (SEE EXHIBIT A). She added that the small farmers, who pleaded with her to speak, would love to stay on their land and earn a living in additional ways other than just selling their fruits, noting it cost $4.75 to raise a pineapple and the profit margin is only $1. She said the farmers want so much to help keep the County green and plant things on their beautiful farm. 2 ,tY• 4^ J SidneyFuke, Planning Consultant 100 Pauahi Street, Suite 212 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 • Planning • Variance • Zoning Telephone: (808) 969-1522 • Fax: (808) 969-7996 • Subdivision • !and Use Pennns • Environmen!al Reports April 2, 2003 ~JO~ AFR 3 A(~ 8 52 ' FLn~[`INI~IG DE1=r~,rTPfLNT Mr. Christopher Yuen, Director CUUN ~Y CF "/1.'~`r;':I Planning Department COUNTY OF HAWAII 101 Pauahi Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Mr. Yuen: Subject: Rezoning Request (REZ 02-016) Tom A. Tuso TMK: 7-5-12: 38 As you are aware, at the applicant's request, the Planning Commission in December and again in February deferred this item. The deferrals were to give the applicant the opportunity to demonstrate whether the subject property has the right to utilize a 25-foot right-of--way between the subject property and the Mamalahoa Highway. The applicant has been researching this matter with the title company (Title Guazanty). To date, there has been a preliminary in-house determination that the subject property does have access rights over the 25-foot right-of--way. The applicant is waiting for a written confirmation of this matter from the title company's legal counsel, Ms. Lauren Hirano. Additionally, the applicant has engaged in discussions with the property owner to the south to see whether the existing 16-foot wide right-of--way could be widened. He is also talking with other property owners located makai of the subject property regarding this and other road-related matters. The applicant feels confident that there will be a resolution of this matter within the next 60 days, whether it is through the existing 25-foot easement or the widening of the 16-foot easement. In that regard, we respectfully request your continued deferral for another 60 days. We apologize for any inconvenience this matter may have caused you and the Commission and appreciate your continue understanding. Thank you very much. 'merely, S NEY . FUKE Planning Consultant Copy - Mr. Tom Tuso EXHIBIT SidneyFi ~Ke, Pi~~~~n~ con~uit~~r a..~______._____._~__--_ 100 Pauahi Street, Suite 212 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 -,•;?nJ +i11 • Planning • Variance •ZOning Telephone: (808) 969-1522 Fax: (808) 969 7996 ~ 'd rim ' • Subdivision • Land Use Permits ~ 'r~ • Envuonmenlal Reports June 9, 2003 f • ~ - Mr. Christopher Yuen, Director Planning Department COUNTY OF HAWAII 101 Pauahi Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Mr. Yuen: Subject: Rezoning Request (REZ 02-016) Tom A. Tuso TMK: 7-5-12: 38 As you are aware, the subject matter has been deferred by the Planning Commission since December 2002 to give the applicant the opportunity to demonstrate whether the subject property has the right to utilize a 25-foot wide right-of--way between the subject property and the Mamalahoa Highway. This 25-foot wide right-of--way also conti:~ues through the subject property. Unfortunately, although the applicant has had a number of discussions with the title company as well as the property owner to the south, nothing has been consummated at this time. There is also no telling how much longer it would take. As such, the applicant would like to proceed with the processing of his request based on what he is able to at this time. In that regard, the applicant's commitment to construct a 20-foot wide pavement to his property was predicated on the 25-foot wide easement. However, given the above circumstance, the applicant would like to suggest improvements based purely on the item within his control, which is the 16-foot wide easement from the Highway to his property and the additiona125-foot wide easement on his property. In that regazd, he would like to propose the following improvements and/or action: • Construct a 14-foot wide pavement within the existing 16-foot wide right-of- way between the main road (Mamalahoa Highway) and the subject site. This would be a distance of approximately 500 feet; • Construct an 8-foot wide pavement, north of the existing dry stack rock wall, within the 25-foot wide easement on his property up to the beginning of his 2°d lot. This would be a distance of approximately 700 feet. It would then merge with the existing 10-foot wide road within the 16-foot wide right-of- way. This new road would be used for makai bound traffic only. All mauka bound traffic would be limited to the 16-foot wide easement; and lY u` '~`'u.' ~1C 9 Mr. Christopher Yuen, Director June 9, 2003 Page 2 • Allow properties makai of the subject site to utilize the 25-foot wide easement and related improvements. A sketch of the proposed improvements is enclosed. The applicant believes that these improvements should he more than sufficient for his 2-lot subdivision, and will be able to accommodate emergency vehicles. When completed, there will be a 14-foot wide pavement extending nearly 500 feet between the Highway and the subject site, and a new 8-foot wide paved road stretching nearly 700 feet on the applicant's mauka lot. With the existing 10-foot wide pavement, the 700-foot section will have a paved width of 18 feet. The applicant thus respectfully requests your consideration in allowing this 2-lot rezoning and subdivision to proceed with the above improvements and to continue the processing of this application at your eazliest opportunity. Thank you very much. 'ncerel ~VVv~ SI~EY M. FUKE Planning Consultant Enclosure Copy - Mr. Tom Tuso w/ enclosure G-42 CDROAJ SURVEY MAP 3 3 3 ~ OF LOT 4 BEING A PORTION OF _ _ = LeT s-A _ GRANT 982 TO NAIPLIUJAILUNA ° _ nass'3o" ~ ~ AT ?UAA 2ND, NORTH KONA µ ~ 3064' Q 1 ~ ISLAND OF HAWAII, HAWAII w Tax Flap Key (3rd Division): 1-5-12. 3g cry 5m°k R°ck W°Im I I ~ ~F a ~d P.pes ~ 3D. 43,.23 ~ ~ - - ao sm° sem°c4 n°y ss,n°k data w°II o II Notes: v - fi r m E°=lens see w°u 4°ce IP Anmuths and Coerdinotes e e referred to Govcrnmenl -03' t° Wesleny See Wall Survey Triangulotlon Station "KAHF_LO" ~ NI LOT 5 The improvements shown hereon .re.e bccted by en tttuai . woJ ~ su vey en the ground partormed July 3c-August 15, 2001_ E0c „te Wuu o c ws,e - wry Fina ^I O~y 5!°ck Rock W°II = Q Q X25 to WeslerlY Sitle W°II a Q 3 Proposed Lot 4-All i o t° E°slenY sltl, W°II I m n m ~ 161 g' Found Fipe (5+ acres) i o R°se Rtl u o ° 4 14 31] 6]' 4 26031 30'2 250'00' u ' Found Plp~e 26,'afic30% ,x026 W,. Fe=H°+e-e,n vr.e F~+IR` I J. J - I I I m F~. sae samock Day s°ex R°~k w°u stl° w°u w - v°s~onv LOi 4 0 0' o _ TMK 7-5-12: 29 :re ` - ~ 8_ll3 Acres _ _ _ 3 T 1 1' ` E°, „,y 3tl~ V,°„ - - - Proposed Lot 4B ~I ~Fe°nd Plpe 'S ,1 3,tlt w°" ~ ~ ~ (3.7+ acres) m ~4~ g~ _ 1 s, ~e w°n ze rl. side szlt,ek 1s-Fr. e!GUi-OF-w4r m Q~ / G 1' I _~c2~`1Y-- - ~ _ '_a D Day St°ck Rock W°II { _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ u _ _ _ _ `k6 05"a l' Jr Stak R°ck W°II - -3~ pE ~l I ]c3 fi0' ~i 9]]030" )65 $el Pipe N I ~ I = ~-----~_~L4iwe,~ I~ R ~ - o' 3 ~ EA E-IENT 3 - FOR ROADWAY AND ~ I 03 3 - W ITY PURPOSES rlb-FT. WIDE) 3 S' i3 - ~ Widen from 10 to 14 feet ~ - - - LoT ~ yi, ~ - ~T - - ca o z cT - - aFP. - New 8-foot wide Road (makai on y) _ _ ~ Y~, LIIC NSE r- _e ~ - o b'm * PROFESSIONAL m LAND * o ~ SURVEYOR Na. 9040 'S%4jI U5h GRAPHIC SCALE fio so zko Aso I '"IS WeRk WAS PREP^REO 6Y MF KKM SURVEYS OR~UNDER AIY~~"SUPERVISON ( [N FELT) ~ G~/'t~ 75-5768 Makelina Place t min = t2o t~ - DnrE a~3o~,t~ol Kolluo-Kona, Hawaii 96740 Pn°ne (eoa) az5-ass Fc. (eoa) raa-case ~JI~I~!n~/~ijk~p~r,~-_..;i. ~:'nsl;tant ~ 100 Pauahi Street, Suite 212 • Hilo, Hawali 96720 • Planning • Vanance ~ Zoning Telephone: (808) 969-1522 • Fax: (808) 969-7996 ~ Subdivlslon • Land Use Permits v1~~+f ~ • Envrtonmen~al Repprts October 13, 20b3~ ~ ~ ~ rl'1 1 ~ r , r , , Mr. Christopher Yuen, Director ~ ` ` t' Planning Department -`eg COUNTY OF HAWAT'I 101 Pauahi Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Mr. Yuen: Subject: Rezoning Request (REZ 02-016) Tom A. Tuso TMK: 7-5-12: 38 This is to confirm that the applicant is willing to accept the roadway improvement requirements outlined in my June 9, 2003 letter to you, with the added proviso that the road's intersection at the Mamalahoa Highway would be subject to the review and approval of the Department of Public Works. In summary, the applicant believes that these improvements should be more than sufficient for his 2-lot subdivision. There will be a 14-foot wide pavement extending neazly 500 feet between the Highway and the subject site, and a new 8-foot wide paved road stretching neazly 700 feet on the applicant's mauka lot. With the existing 10-foot wide pavement, the 700-foot section will have a paved width of 18 feet. When completed, it will be able to accommodate emergency vehicles, a situation that is presently difficult to achieve today. The applicant thus respectfully requests your processing this matter and scheduling it for the review and consideration of the Planning Commission. Hopefully, you will he able to continue your favorable recommendation with the changes suggested herein. Thank you very much. incere~~ t SIDNEY M. FUKE Planning Consultant Copy - Mr. Tom Tuso T' SidneyFuke, Planning Consultant 100 Pauahi Street, Suiie 212 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 • Planning • Vanance • Zoning Telephone: (808) 969-1522 ° Fax: (808) 969-7996 • Subdivision • Lznd'Jse Perm;!; • Environmental Reports November 25, 2003 Mr. Christopher Yuen, Director Planning Department COUNTY OF HAWAII 101 Pauahi Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Mr. Yuen: Subject: Rezoning Request (REZ 02-016) Tom A. Tuso TMK: 7-5-12: 38 This is to confirm our discussion regazding the subject matter. I can appreciate the concern relative to the area where the private road intersects with the Mamalahoa Highway. As noted then, in addition to the other road improvements noted in my letter of J•~.ne 9, 2003 to you, the app&cant is prepared to make improvements to this area. The added improvement would include elevating the private road where it intersects with the Highway so that there would be sufficient sight distance for a vehicle when entering the Highway. To that end, I have drafted a proposed condition which accommodates all of the above for your convenience. We believe that with this added improvement, your concern has been addressed. If not, please let me know. Thank you very much for your and your staff s time on this matter. Sincerely r 1 St~I~~ M. PUKE Planning Consultant Enclosure Copy - Mr. Tom Tuso w/ enclosure THOMAS A. TUSO PROPOSED REZONING CONDITION Delete proposed condition 6 and replace with the following: "In conjunction with the subdivision approval process, the applicant shall const.^,:ct a) an 8-fact wide paved road within tape existing 25-foot ~=rde easement on the subject property between the eastern boundaries of the proposed lots; and b) a minimum 14-foot wide paved road between the Mamalahoa Highway and the eastern boundary of the subject parcel; provided, however, that in the area where the 14-foot wide paved road intersects with the Mamalahoa Highway, the slope or grade of the road shall be reasonably level to allow for sufficient sight distance for a vehicle when entering the Highway from the private road. The 14-foot wide paved road may be within the existing 16-foot wide right-of--way easement or outside of it to accommodate the sight distance and related requirements of this condition. In that event, proof of the added right-of--way shall be submitted prior to or in conjunction with the submittal of construction plans for the review and approval of the Department of Public Works. RTusoREZnk 2-1(/27/02 COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION THOMAS A. TUSO CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (12EZ 02-016) Upon careful review of the request, the Planning Director is recommending that a favorable recommendation of this Change of Zone application be forwarded to the County Council. This recommendation does not, however sanction the specific plans submitted with the application as they maybe subject to change given the specific code and regulatory requirements of the affected agencies. Since this recommendation is made without the benefit of public testimony, the Director reserves the right to modify and/or alter this position based upon additional information presented at the public hearing. This favorable recommendation is based on the following findings: in order to consider an area fnr any r;me 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. The proposed Change of Zone from an Agricultural (A-Sa) to Family Agricultural (FA-3a) zoned district would conform to the following goals, policies and standards of the Land Use and Agriculture Elements of the General Plan: • 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 lands. • The County shall encourage the development and maintenance of communities meeting the needs of its residents in balance with the physical and social environment. IiSY ii ~.1~) Pc • Zoning requests shall be reviewed with respect to General Plan designation, district goals, regional plans, State Land Use District, compatibility with adjacent zoned uses, availability of public services and utilities, access, and public need. • The compatibility of agricultural and non-agricultural uses should be carefully reviewed and where appropriate, buffers 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. 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 Orchards. The General Plan defines Orchards as "Those agricultural lands which though rocky in character and content support productive macadamia nuts, papayas, citrus, and other similar agricultural products." The property is presently an abandoned coffee farm. The applicant would like to bring the coffee farm back into production and sell the other lot to a person with similar interests. The applicant's proposal to subdivide the subject property into two parcels of approximately 5 and 3 acres in size is consistent with the land use designation. The lot sizes will provide opportunities for the applicant to pursue agricultural activities, but is not able to commit to the financial or labor demands placed on them by the existing 8-acre parcel. Therefore, the requested zone change is determined to be consistent with the General Plan Designation and LUPAG Map for this area of North Kona. -2- The Kona Regional Plan, adopted by the Planning Commission by Resolution in 1984, recommends the project area for agricultural uses with a minimum lot size of five- acres (A-Sa). However, the applicant believes that "Although the requested FA-3a zoning may not be numerically consistent with this designation, the proposed uses should not be violative of the agricultural objective." As the perpetuation of agricultural uses is the goal ofthis application and proposed two-lot subdivision, the request would be generally consistent with other land use documents for this area of North Kona. The primary reason for this request is to subdivide the subject property into two (2) lots. One parcel will be retained by the applicant as his homesite and the other parcel will be sold with the hopes that the existing coffee orchard will be restored and maintained. Therefore, the reclassification ofthis 8.773-acre parcel from Agricultural- 5 acre (A-Sa) zoned district to Family Agricultural (FA-3a) will not be detrimental to the agricultural character of the area. The applicant has agreed to a restriction that will limit each proposed property to no more than one farm dwelling, further protecting the agricultural character of the subject property and surrounding area. Such a restriction, including a restriction prohibiting establishing a condominium property regime within the project site, will be incorporated as a condition ofthis favorable recommendation. The requested change of zone would therefore be in conformance with the intent and purpose of the State Land Use Law. Soils within the subject property are classified as Kainaliu Extremely Stony Silty Clay Loam (KEC) and Honuaulu Extremely Stony Silty Clay Loam (HVD). Kainaliu extremely stony silty clay loam has 12 to 20 percent slopes. The surface layer is very dark brown extremely stony silty clay loam, about 10 inches thick. It is underlain by fragmental A'a lava. Permeability is rapid, runoff is slow and the erosion hazard is slight. The soil is used for coffee, macadamia nuts and pasture. Honuaulu extremely stony silty clay loam has 12 to 20 percent slopes. Stones cover 3-15 percent of the surface. In a representative profile, the surface layer is stony silty clay loam about 9 inches thick. It is underlain by fragmented A'a lava. Permeability is rapid. Runoff is slow, and the erosion hazard is slight. This soil is used mostly for coffee and pasture. Soils within the subject -3- 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 is unclassified by the ALISH system. Based on the aforementioned information, the requested change zone will not have any significant adverse impact on the agricultural resources of the County. Lands surrounding the subject property are zoned Agricultural (A-Sa and 1 a). The subject parcel is located on the southwestern slope ofHualalai and is approximately three miles from the ocean. The parcel is gently sloping, ranging from an elevation of 1,100 feet to 1,300 feet above mean sea level. The parcel is irregular in shape. It resembles an exaggerated flag lot with its "pole" or mauka portion over 150 feet wide. The subject property currently acquires its access over an access easement that runs along the parcel adjacent to the south of the subject parcel. This 16-foot wide road and utility easement runs mauka along the northern edge of the adjacent parcel to Mamalahoa Highway. Within this easement is a 10-foot wide paved access road that extends to Mamalahoa Highway. The applicant has also identified a 25-foot wide access easement located on the subject property and conning parallel to the existing 16-foot wide easement to the Mamalahoa Highway. Side by side, these easements provide for a total easement width of 41 feet. The current 10-foot wide driveway access intersects with Mamalahoa Highway at nearly a 45-degree angle. The applicant has agreed to improve this intersection and make it closer to 90 degrees. He has also agreed to build this intersection to County dedicable standards. A condition shall be included that wilt require this intersection to comply with County dedicable standards. These improvements to the project's access driveway intersection with the Mamalahoa Highway will address the concerns that have been expressed to the Planning Commission from surrounding neighbors. The applicant is also willing to improve the pavement width within both easements to 20 feet along its entire property frontage leading back to the Mamalahoa Highway. A condition of approval is included with this favorable recommendation to require the eventually dedication of that portion of the 25-foot access easement and an -4- extra 5 (five) feet for future road widening that resides on the subject property. This requirement is being made in anticipation that adjoining parcels could eventually request a similaz type of zoning and pursue a similar type of agricultural lot development, upon which time the Planning Department will coordinate the development of these access easements into a standard agricultural roadway with a pavement width of 20 feet within a 50-foot wide right-of--way. Eventually, the County hopes to have aCounty-maintained, agricultural-standard roadway servicing the subject property and lots in the immediate area. These recommended improvements within the existing access easements will provide an access the subject property and surrounding lots that is consistent with County-dedicable standards (20-foot wide pavement within a 50-foot wide right-of--way). The site is currently vacant of any structures. It was formerly cleazed and planted in coffee. There aze no known historic, archaeological or cultural features on the site and no rare, threatened, or endangered species of either flora or fauna. According to the applicant, the proposed project is not anticipated to have any potential adverse impact upon the practice of any cultural or native gathering right. The subject property is not along or near the shoreline. As such, gathering of marine life and coastal access is not an issue. The applicant is unaware of any gathering of plants by native Hawaiians in the recent past. However, the site has been used for coffee in the past. It would appear unlikely that the site would serve such purpose today. Legitimate gathering claims are made by native Hawaiians, the applicant intends to respect and honor such claims and provide the needed access within the site. Therefore, no impact to endangered species, historic and archeological sites, and cultural practices is anticipated. Wastewater generated by the proposed use will be disposed of via a wastewater treatment system approved by the State Department of Health. There is an 8-inch waterline fronting the Mamalahoa Highway. Water can be made available to the 2-lot subdivision from this water line. As the project site is serviced by access and utility easement and does not directly abut the highway, an "out- of-bounds" agreement with the Department of Water Supply may have to be executed. The Department of Water Supply has stated that the applicant should secure the required -5- water commitment as soon as possible. A condition requiring the immediate acquisition of the water commitment and compliance with the Department of Water Supply shall be included in the conditions of approval. All other essential utilities and services can or will be made available to the subject development. A condition of approval is being included to ensure that these infrastructural improvements are installed. The nearest police station is located at Kealakehe, approximately six miles from the project site. There is a fire station at the intersection of Palani Road and the Queen Kaahumanu Highway, less than 5 miles from the project site. The Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) indicate that the area is located in Zone "X", areas determined to be outside of the 500-year flood plain. While there are no indication of significant surface flow, the Department of Public Works has commented that "All development generated runoff shall be disposed of on-site and shall not be directed toward any adjacent properties." As such, the applicant will be required to comply with all applicable County guidelines for runoff generated by development. Based on the foregoing, the Change of Zone request from an Agricultural-5 acres (A-Sa) to Family Agricultural-3 acres (FA-3a) zoned district would result in an appropriate land use pattern that will further benefit the general public. The accompanying draft bill to amend Section 25-8-3 or Section 25-87 (North Kona Zone Map) is provided for your favorable consideration. Please note the proposed conditions of approval attached to the draft bill. -6- ~O~lroll Llg'~1d1~1 ~c~ ~.~11$i~~l•~~li$L@ ` SILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. (PLANNING DEPARTMENT ) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 25-8-3 (NORTH KONA ZONE MAP), ARTICLE 8, CHAPTER 25 (ZONING CODE) OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE, BY CHANGING THE DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FROM AGRICULTURAL (A-Sa) TO FAMILY AGRICULTURAL (FA-3a) AT PUAA 2ND, NORTH KONA, HAWAII, COVERED BY TAX MAP KEY 7-5-12:38. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII: SECTION 1. Section 25-8-3, Article 8, Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawaii County Code, is amended to change the district classification of property described hereinafter as follows: The district classification of the following area situated at Puaa 2id, North Kona, Hawaii, shall be Family Agricultural (FA-3a): Beginning at a point at the southwest comer of this parcel of land on the north side of Land Court Application 1666 the coordinates of which referred to Government Survey Triangulation Station "KAHELO" 5,679.75 feet north and 10,382.87 feet east and running by azimuths measured clockwise from true South: 1. 161° 09' 533.33 feet along remainder of Grant 982 to Naipuwailuna to a pipe; 2. 261° 41' 30" 431.23 feet along remainder of Grant 982 to Naipuwailuna to a pipe; 3. 274° 55' 30" 30.64 feet along remainder of Grant 982 to Naipuwailuna to a pipe; 4. 348° 46' 302.60 feet along remainder of Grant 982 to Naipuwailuna to a pipe; -1- 5. 261 ° 46' 30" 317.63 feet along remainder of Grant 982 to Naipuwailuna to a pipe; 6. 260° 34' 30" 108.26 feet along remainder of Grant 982 to Naipuwailuna to a pipe; 7. 258° 08' 167.38 feet along remainder of Grant 982 to Naipuwailuna to a pipe; 8. 351° 57' 152.70 feet along remainder of Grant 982 to Naipuwailuna to a pipe and passing over a pipe in concrete at 2.59 feet; 9. 348° 34' 131.42 feet along remainder of Grant 982 to Naipuwailuna to a pipe and passing over a pipe in concrete at 125.81 feet; 10. 83° 18' 30" 276.54 feet along north side ofEasement 3 (16 foot roadway as shown on Land Court Application 1666 map 1) to a pipe; 11. 85° 41' 703.60 feet along north side ofEasement 3 (16 foot roadway as shown on Land Court Application 1666 map 1) to the point of beginning containing an area of 8.773 acres more or less. All as shown on the map attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A" and by reference made a part hereof. SECTION 2. In accordance with Section 25-2-44, Hawaii County Code, the County Council finds the following conditions are: (1) Necessary to prevent circumstances which may be adverse to the public health, safety and welfare; or (2) Reasonably conceived to fulfill needs directly emanating from the land use proposed with respect to: (A) Protection of the public from the potentially deleterious effects of the proposed use, or -2- (B) Fulfillment of the need for public service demands created by the proposed use. SEE ATTACHED CONDITIONS SECTION 3. In the event that any portion of this ordinance is declared invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other parts of this ordinance. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall take effect upon its approval. INTRODUCED BY: COUNCIL MEMBER, COUNTY OF HAWAII Hawaii Date of Introduction: Date of I st Reading: Date of 2nd Reading: Effective Date: -3- N W r 2 ~ S x A-5a 0 Z A-5a A-sa D m A-5a ~0 AOa O - ~O ~ A-la AGRICULTURAL (A-5a) TO FAMILY AGRICULTURAL (FA-3a) Aaen = a.nsnues 1 A-5a A-7a ~ A-sa 9'ri,9 lyy0 99i C,y~~ I ~ i 5, 679.75 N 2. 7 E ~ "KAHELO"p i A-~ A-5a A~ ~ 1!1 A-Sa 0 500 1000 1500 2000 Feet AMENDMENT TO THE ZONI NG CODE AMENDING SECTION 25-8-3 (NORTH KONAZONE MAP) ARTICLE 8, CHAPTER 25 (ZONING CODE) OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE, BY CHANGING THE DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FROM AGRICULTURAL (A-5a) TO FAMILY AGRICULTURAL (FA-3a) AT PUAA 2nd, NORTH KONA, HAWAI I PREPARED BY: PLANNING DEPARTMENT COUNTY OF HAWAI I TMK :7-5-012:038 NOVEMBER 20, 2002 EXHIBIT "A" (TUSO:1075) CTusoREZnk 2-1 (/27/02 THOMAS A. TUSO CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (REZ 02-016) CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The applicant, its successors or assigns shall be responsible for complying with all of the stated conditions of approval. 2. The required water commitment payment shall be submitted to the Department of Water Supply in accordance with its "Water Commitment Guidelines Policy" within ninety (90) days from the effective date of this ordinance. 3. Final Subdivision Approval of the proposed subdivision shall be secured from the Planning Director within five (5) years from the effective date of this ordinance. 4. Plans submitted for subdivision review shall clearly indicate the location of both the 25-foot wide and 16-foot wide access easements that front the subject property and which provide access to the Mamalahoa Highway. 5. Restrictive covenants in the deeds of all the proposed lots within the subject property shall give notice that the terms of the zoning ordinance prohibit the construction of a second dwelling unit and condominium property regimes on each lot. This restriction maybe removed by amendment of this ordinance by the County Council. The owner of the property may also, in addition, impose private covenants restricting the number of dwellings. A copy of the proposed covenant(s) to be recorded with the Bureau of Conveyances shall be submitted to the Planning Director for review and approval prior to the issuance of Final Subdivision Approval. A copy of the recorded document shall be filed with the Planning Department upon its receipt from the Bureau of Conveyances. 6. As agreed to by the applicant, a minimum 20-foot wide pavement shall be constructed within the 25-foot wide and 16-foot wide access easements along the entire frontage with the subject property and extending to the Mamalahoa Highway in a manner meeting with the approval of the of the Department of Pubic Works, prior to the issuance of Final Subdivision Approval. This access road pavement shall be constructed to County-dedicable road standards. 7. As agreed to by the applicant, the intersection of the 20-foot wide access roadway with the Mamalahoa Highway shall be constructed to County dedicable standards prior to the issuance of Final Subdivision Approval. 8. A drainage study for the project site and related improvements shall be conducted by the applicant and approved by the Department of Public Works, prior to the submittal of plans for subdivision review. 9. Drainage improvements, if required, shall be constructed meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works, prior to the issuance of Final Subdivision Approval. 10. Should any remains of historic sites, such as rock walls, terraces, platforms, marine shell concentrations or human burials be encountered, work in the immediate area shall cease and the Department of Land and Natural Resources- Historic Preservation Division (DLNR-HPD) shall be immediately notified. Subsequent work shall proceed upon an archaeological clearance from the DLNR- HPD when it finds that sufficient mitigative measures have been taken. 11. Should the Council adopt a Unified Impact Fees Ordinance setting forth criteria for imposition of exactions or the assessment of impact fees, conditions included herein shall be credited towards the requirements of the Unified Impact Fees Ordinance. 12. The applicant shall comply with all applicable laws, rules, regulations and requirements of affected agencies for approval of the proposed subdivision within the subject property. 13. An initial extension of time for the performance of conditions within the ordinance maybe granted by the Planning Director upon the following circumstances: 1. The non-performance is the result of conditions that could not have been foreseen or are beyond the control of the applicant, its successors or assigns, and that are not the result of their fault or negligence. -2- 2. Granting of the time extension would not be contrary to the General Plan or Zoning Code. 3. Granting of the time extension would not be contrary to the original reasons for the granting of the change of zone. 4. The time extension granted shall be for a period not to exceed the period originally granted for performance (i.e., a condition to be performed within one year may be extended for up to one additional year). 5. If the applicant should require an additional extension of time, the Planning Director shall submit the applicant's request to the County Council for appropriate action. 14. Should any of the conditions not be met or substantially complied with in a timely fashion, the Director may initiate rezoning of the subject area to its original or more appropriate designation. -3- ar~~acz~ z-~ tmio>_ COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT AMENDED RECOMMENDATION THOMAS A. TUSO CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (12EZ 02-016) Upon cazeful review of the request, the Planning Director is recommending that a favorable recommendation of this Change of Zone application be forwarded to the County Council. This recommendation does not, however sanction the specific plans submitted with the application as they may be subject to change given the specific code and regulatory requirements of the affected agencies. Since this recommendation is made without the benefit of public testimony, the Director reserves the right to modify and/or alter this position based upon additional information presented at the public heazing. This favorable recommendation is based on the following findings: 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 similaz areas in the County. The proposed Change of Zone from an Agricultural (A-Sa) to Family Agricultural (FA-3a) zoned district would conform to the following goals, policies and standards of the Land Use and Agriculture Elements of the General Plan: • 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 lands. • 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, compatibility with adjacent zoned uses, availability ofpublic services and utilities, access, and public need. • The compatibility of agricultural and non-agricultural uses should be carefully reviewed and where appropriate, buffers 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. 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 ofthe 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 azeas within the County. The requested zone change conforms to the LUPAG Map, which designates the area for Orchards. The General Plan defines Orchards as "Those agricultural lands which though rocky in character and content support productive macadamia nuts, papayas, citrus, and other similar agricultural products." The property is presently an abandoned coffee farm. The applicant would like to bring the coffee farm back into production and sell the other lot to a person with similar interests. The applicant's proposal to subdivide the subject property into two parcels of approximately 5 and 3 acres in size is consistent with the land use designation. The lot sizes will provide opportunities for the applicant to pursue agricultural activities, but is not able to commit to the financial or labor demands placed on them by the existing 8-acre parcel. Therefore, the requested zone change is determined to be consistent with the General Plan Designation and LUPAG Map for this azea of North Kona. The Kona Regional Plan, adopted by the Planning Commission by Resolution in -2- 1984, recommends the project azea for agricultural uses with a minimum lot size of five- acres (A-Sa). However, the applicant believes that "Although the requested FA-3a zoning may not be numerically consistent with this designation, the proposed uses should not be violative of the agricultural objective." As the perpetuation of agricultural uses is the goal of this application and proposed two-lot subdivision, the request would be generally consistent with other land use documents for this area of North Kona. The primary reason for this request is to subdivide the subject property into two (2) lots. One pazcel will be retained by the applicant as his homesite and the other pazcel will be sold with the hopes that the existing coffee orchard will be restored and maintained. Therefore, the reclassification ofthis 8.773-acre parcel from Agricultural- 5 acre (A-Sa) zoned district to Family Agricultural (FA-3a) will not be detrimental to the agricultural character of the area. The applicant has agreed to a restriction that will limit each proposed property to no more than one farm dwelling, further protecting the agricultural character of the subject property and surrounding area. Such a restriction, including a restriction prohibiting establishing a condominium property regime within the project site, will be incorporated as a condition of this favorable recommendation. The requested change of zone would therefore be in conformance with the intent and purpose of the State Land Use Law. Soils within the subject property are classified as Kainaliu Extremely Stony Silty Clay Loam (KEC) and Honuaulu Extremely Stony Silty Clay Loam (HVD). Kainaliu extremely stony silty clay loam has 12 to 20 percent slopes. The surface layer is very dark brown extremely stony silty clay loam, about 10 inches thick. It is underlain by fragmental A'a lava. Permeability is rapid, runoff is slow and the erosion hazard is slight. The soil is used for coffee, macadamia nuts and pasture. Honuaulu extremely stony silty clay loam has 12 to 20 percent slopes. Stones cover 3-IS percent ofthe surface. In a representative profile, the surface layer is stony silty clay loam about 9 inches thick. It is underlain by fragmented A'a lava. Permeability is rapid. Runoff is slow, and the erosion hazard is slight. This soil is used mostly for coffee and pasture. Soils within the subject property have been classified as "C" (Fair) for agricultural productivity by the Land Study Bureau's -3- Detailed Land Classification System. Finally, soils within the subject property is unclassified by the ALISH system. Based on the aforementioned information, the requested change zone will not have any significant adverse impact on the agricultural resources of the County. Lands surrounding the subject property aze zoned Agricultural (A-Sa and 1 a). The subject parcel is located on the southwestern slope of Hualalai and is approximately three miles from the ocean. The parcel is gently sloping, ranging from an elevation of 1,100 feet to 1,300 feet above mean sea level. The parcel is irregulaz in shape. It resembles an exaggerated flag lot with its "pole" or mauka portion over 150 feet wide. The subject property currently acquires its access over an access easement that runs along the parcel adjacent to the south of the subject pazcel. This 16-foot wide road and utility easement runs mauka along the northern edge of the adjacent parcel to Mamalahoa Highway. Within this easement is a 10-foot wide paved access road that extends to Mamalahoa Highway. The applicant has also identified a 25-foot wide access easement located on the subject property and running pazallel to the existing 16-foot wide easement to the Mamalahoa Highway. Side by side, these easements provide for a total easement width of 41 feet. The current 10-foot wide driveway access intersects with Mamalahoa Highway at nearly a 45-degree angle. The applicant has agreed to improve this intersection and make it closer to 90 degrees. He has also agreed to build this intersection to County dedicable standards. A condition shall be included that will require this intersection to comply with County dedicable standazds. These improvements to the project's access driveway intersection with the Maznalahoa Highway will address the concerns that have been expressed to the Planning Commission from surrounding neighbors. The applicant is also willing to improve the pavement width within both easements to 20 feet along its entire property frontage leading back to the Mamalahoa Highway. A condition of approval is included with this favorable recommendation to require the eventually dedication of that portion of the 25-foot access easement and an extra 5 (five) feet for future road widening that resides on the subject property. This requirement is -4- being made in anticipation that adjoining pazcels could eventually request a similaz type of zoning and pursue a similar type of agricultural lot development, upon which time the Planning Department will coordinate the development of these access easements into a standard agricultural roadway with a pavement width of 20 feet within a 50-foot wide right-of--way. Eventually, the County hopes to have aCounty-maintained, agricultural- standard roadway servicing the subject property and lots in the immediate azea. These recommended improvements within the existing access easements will provide an access the subject property and sun•ounding lots that is consistent with County-dedicable standards (20-foot wide pavement within a 50-foot wide right-of--way). The applicant~reviously identified a 25-foot wide access easement that is located on the subject property and runs parallel to the existing 16-foot wide easement to the Mamalahoa Highwav. The applicant learned later that he does not have access ri hg is to the 25-foot from the subject property to the Mamalahoa Highway and therefore, the improvements required within the 25-foot easement in the previous recommendation cannot be accomplished. related improvements. Based on this new information, we will be adding a new condition that states "in conjunction with the subdivision approval process, the applicant shall construct (11 an 8- foot paved road within the existing 25-foot wide easement on the subject property between the eastern boundaries of the proposed lots; and (2) a minimum 14-foot wide paved road between the Mamalahoa Highway and the eastern boundary of the subject parcel- provided however that in the azea where the 14-foot wide paved road intersects with the Mamalahoa Highway the slope or grade of the road shall be reasonably level to allow for sufficient sight distance for a vehicle when entering the Highwav from the private road. The 14-foot wide~aved road may be within the existing 16-foot wide right- of-way easement or outside of it to accommodate the sight distance and related requirements of this condition. In that event proof of the added right-of--way easement shall be submitted prior to or in conjunction with the submittal of construction plans for the review and approval of the De~u-tment of Public Works." This wording wID replace the wordingin Condition F (6). This will improve the -5- access easement and will provide better conditions to access Mamalahoa Highway from this private road. The site is cun•ently vacant of any structures. It was formerly cleared and planted in coffee. There are no known historic, archaeological or cultural features on the site and no rare, threatened, or endangered species of either flora or fauna. According to the applicant, the proposed project is not anticipated to have any potential adverse impact upon the practice of any cultural or native gathering right. The subject property is not along or neaz the shoreline. As such, gathering of marine life and coastal access is not an issue. The applicant is unawaze of any gathering of plants by native Hawaiians in the recent past. However, the site has been used for coffee in the past. It would appeaz unlikely that the site would serve such purpose today. Legitimate gathering claims aze made by native Hawavans, the applicant intends to respect and honor such claims and provide the needed access within the site. Therefore, no impact to endangered species, historic and archeological sites, and cultural practices is anticipated. Wastewater generated by the proposed use will be disposed of via a wastewater treatment system approved by the State Department of Health. There is an 8-inch waterline fronting the Mamalahoa Highway. Water can be made available to the 2-lot subdivision from this water line. As the project site is serviced by access and utility easement and does not directly abut the highway, an "out-of-bounds" agreement with the Department of Water Supply may have to be executed. The Depaztment of Water Supply has stated that the applicant should secure the required water commitment as soon as possible. A condition requiring the immediate acquisition of the water commitment and compliance with the Department of Water Supply shall be included in the conditions of approval. All other essential utilities and services can or will be made available to the subject development. A condition of approval is being included to ensure that these infrastructural improvements are installed. The nearest police station is located at Kealakehe, approximately six miles from the project site. There is a fire station at the intersection of Palani Road and the Queen -6- Kaahumanu Highway, less than 5 miles from the project site. The Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) indicate that the area is located in Zone "X", areas determined to be outside of the 500-year flood plain. While there aze no indication of significant surface flow, the Department of Public Works has commented that "All development generated runoff shall be disposed of on-site and shall not be directed toward any adjacent properties." As such, the applicant will be required to comply with all applicable County guidelines for runoff generated by development. Based on the foregoing, the Change of Zone request from au Agricultural-5 acres (A-Sa) to Family Agricultural-3 acres (FA-3a) zoned district would result in an appropriate land use pattern that wIll further benefit the general public. The accompanying draft bill to amend Section 25-8-3 or Section 25-87 (North Kona Zone Map) is provided for your favorable consideration. Please note the proposed conditions of approval attached to the draft bill. -7- ~ 3 1L 1~1 ~~~r ~c I ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ ~~$~1 1.~~~ BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. (PLANNING DEPARTMENT ) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 25-8-3 (NORTH KONA ZONE MAP), ARTICLE 8, CHAPTER 25 (ZONING CODE) OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE, BY CHANGING THE DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FROM AGRICULTURAL (A-Sa) TO FAMILY AGRICULTURAL (FA-3a) AT PUAA 2ND, NORTH KONA, HAWAII, COVERED BY TAX MAP KEY 7-5-12:38. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII: SECTION 1. Section 25-8-3, Article 8, Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawaii County Code, is amended to change the district classification of property described hereinafter as follows: The district classification of the following area situated at Puaa 2id, North Kona, Hawaii, shall be Family Agricultural (FA-3a): Beginning at a point at the southwest comer of this parcel of land on the north side of Land Court Application 1666 the coordinates of which referred to Government Survey Triangulation Station "KAHELO" 5,679.75 feet north and 10,382.87 feet east and running by azimuths measured clockwise from true South: 1. 161° 09' 533.33 feet along remainder of Grant 982 to Naipuwailuna to a pipe; 2. 261° 41' 30" 431.23 feet along remainder of Grant 982 to Naipuwailuna to a pipe; 3. 274° 55' 30" 30.64 feet along remainder of Grant 982 to Naipuwailuna to a pipe; 4. 348° 46' 302.60 feet along remainder of Grant 982 to Naipuwailuna to a pipe; -1- 5. 261 ° 46' 30" 317.63 feet along remainder of Grant 982 to Naipuwailuna to a pipe; 6. 260° 34' 30" 108.26 feet along remainder of Grant 982 to Naipuwailuna to a pipe; 7. 258° 08' 167.38 feet along remainder of Grant 982 to Naipuwailuna to a pipe; 8. 351° 57' 152.70 feet along remainder of Grant 982 to Naipuwailuna to a pipe and passing over a pipe in concrete at 2.59 feet; 9. 348" 34' 131.42 feet along remainder of Grant 982 to Naipuwailuna to a pipe and passing over a pipe in concrete at 125.81 feet; 10. 83° IS' 30" 276.54 feet along north side of Easement 3 (16 foot roadway as shown on Land Court Application 1666 map 1) to a pipe; 11. 85° 41' 703.60 feet along north side of Easement 3 (16 foot roadway as shown on Land Court Application 1666 map 1) to the point of beginning containing an area of 8.773 acres more or less. All as shown on the map attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A" and by reference made a part hereof. SECTION 2. In accordance with Section 25-2-44, Hawaii County Code, the County Council finds the following conditions are: (1) Necessary to prevent circumstances which may be adverse to the public health, safety and welfare; or (2) Reasonably conceived to fulfil] needs directly emanating from the land use proposed with respect to: (A) Protection of the public from the potentially deleterious effects of the proposed use, or -2- (B) Fulfillment of the need for public service demands created by the proposed use. SEE ATTACHED CONDITIONS SECTION 3. In the event that any portion of this ordinance is declared invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other parts of this ordinance. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall take effect upon its approval. INTRODUCED BY: COUNCIL MEMBER, COUNTY OF HAWAII Hawaii Date of Introduction: Date of I st Reading: Date of 2nd Reading: Effective Date: -3- cr~~oaEZiwn z-i in6ros THOMAS A. TUSO CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (REZ 02-016) AMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL A.[1.] The applicant, its successors or assigns shall be responsible for complying with all of the stated conditions of approval. B.[2.] The required water commitment payment shall be submitted to the Department of Water Supply in accordance with its "Water Commitment Guidelines Policy" within ninety (90) days from the effective date of this ordinance. C. [3.] Final Subdivision Approval of the proposed subdivision shall be secured from the Planning Director within five (5) yeazs from the effective date of this ordinance. D.[4.] Plans submitted for subdivision review shall clearly indicate the location ofboth the 25-foot wide and 16-foot wide access easements that front the subject property and which provide access to the Mamalahoa Highway. E.[5.] Restrictive covenants in the deeds of all the proposed lots within the subject property shall give notice that the terms of the zoning ordinance prohibit the construction of a second dwelling unit and condominium property regimes on each lot. This restriction may be removed by amendment of this ordinance by the County Council. The owner of the property may also, in addition, impose private covenants restricting the number of dwellings. A copy of the proposed covenant(s) to be recorded with the Bureau of Conveyances shall be submitted to the Planning Director for review and approval prior to the issuance of Final Subdivision Approval. A copy of the recorded document shall be filed with the Planning Department upon its receipt from the Bureau of Conveyances. F.[6.] As agreed to by the applicant, ja minimum 20-foot wide pavement shall be constructed within the 25-foot wide and 16-foot wide access easements along the entire frontage with the subject property and extending to the Mamalahoa Highway in a manner meeting with the approval of the of the Department of Pubic Works, prior to the issuance of Final Subdivision Approval. This access road pavement shall be constructed to County-dedicable road standazds.] in conjunction with the subdivision approval process the applicant shall construct (1) an 8-foot paved road within the existing 25-foot wide easement on the subject property between the eastern boundaries of the proposed lots; and (2) a minimum 14-foot wide paved road between the Mamalahoa Highway and the eastern boundary of the subject parcel; provided, however, that in the area where the 14-foot wide paved road intersects with the Mamalahoa Highway, the slope or grade of the road shall be reasonably level to allow for sufficient sight distance for a vehicle when enterin tg he Highway from the private road. The 14-foot wide paved road maw within the existing 16-foot wide right-of--way easement or outside of it to accommodate the sight distance and related requirements of this condition. In that event proof of the added right-of--way easement shall be submitted prior to or in conjunction with the submittal of construction plans for the review and approval of the Department of Public Works. G.[7.] As agreed to by the applicant, the intersection ofthe 14-foot [20-foot] wide access roadway with the Mamalahoa Highway shall be constructed to County dedicable standards prior to the issuance of Final Subdivision Approval. H.[8.] A drainage study for the project site and related improvements shall be conducted by the applicant and approved by the Department of Public Works, prior to the submittal of plans for subdivision review. L[9.] Drainage improvements, if required, shall be constructed meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works, prior to the issuance of Final Subdivision Approval. J.[10.] Should any remains of historic sites, such as rock walls, terraces, platforms, marine shell concentrations or human burials be encountered, work in the immediate azea shall cease and the Department of Land and Natural Resources-Historic Preservation Division (DLNR-HPD) shall be immediately notified. Subsequent work shall proceed upon an archaeological clearance from the DLNR-HPD when it finds that sufficient mitigative measures have been taken. L.[11.] Should the Council adopt a Unified Impact Fees Ordinance setting forth criteria for imposition of exactions or the assessment of impact fees, conditions included -2- herein shall be credited towards the requirements of the Unified Impact Fees Ordinance. M.[12.]The applicant shall comply with all applicable laws, rules, regulations and requirements of affected agencies for approval of the proposed subdivision within the subject property. N.[13.]An initial extension of time for the performance of conditions within the ordinance may be granted by the Planning Director upon the following circumstances: 1. The non-performance is the result of conditions that could not have been foreseen or are beyond the control of the applicant, its successors or assigns, and that aze not the result oftheir fault or negligence. 2. Granting of the time extension would not be contrary to the General Plan or Zoning Code. 3. Granting of the time extension would not be contrayy to the original reasons for the granting of the change of zone. 4. The time extension granted shall be for a period not to exceed the period originally granted for performance (i.e., a condition to be performed within one yeaz may be extended for up to one additional yeaz). 5. If the applicant should require an additional extension of time, the Planning Director shall submit the applicant's request to the County Council for appropriate action. O.[14.]Should any of the conditions not be met or substantially complied with in a timely fashion, the Duector may initiate rezoning of the subject area to its original or more appropriate designation. -3- N W E Z i~~ S S 1 I A-59 - - - 0 A Sa - _ _ A 5a n A-Sa m ~1 A-fa O _ _ _ d A-1a AGRICULTURAL (A-5a) TO , - FAMILY AGRICULTURAL (FA-3a) ~ 1 AREA = 8.7)3 Pores - \ A-Sa 1 , - A-ta x x A-5a q/ZJ A-sa 9~yo q=Sj . a. . cy``9y - ~ i 5,679.75N ~ 7 32.7 i \ "KAHELO"~ \ A-5a ' A-Sa I - ~ R5a p 500 1000 1500 2000 Feet ~I~/IENDIVIENT TO THE ZONI NG CODE AMENDING SECTION 25-8-3 (NORTH KONA ZONE NIAP) ARTICLE 8, CHAPTER 25 (ZONING CODE) OF ThiE HAWAII COUNTY CODE, BY CHANGING THE DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FROM AGRICULTURAL (A-5a) TO FAMILY AGRICULTURAL (FA-3a) AT PUAA 2nd, NORTH KONA, HAWAI I PREPARED SY: PLANNING CEPARTMENT COUNTY OF HAWAII TMK :7-5-012.038 NOVEMBER 20, 2002 i=~CHIBIT "A'° (TUS0:1075)