Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0126.000 2004-2006 JNYY Oi Nqw 4~'' w ,1~lyf. Harry Kim Christopher J. Yuen Mayor Oirccmr G~:Nr-!~ Roy R. Takemoto Deputy Dircclor Cnulxxrf~r of ~ttfirtttt PLANNING DEPARTMENT 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 IIilo, Hawaii 96720-3043 (808) 961-8288 Fax (808) 961-8742 February 18, 2005 Mr. Sidney M. Fuke Planning Consultant 100 Pauahi Street, Suite 212 Hilo, HI 96720 ` Dear Mr. Fuke: SUBJECT: Nou-Significant Zone Change Application No. 04-03 (NZC 04-03) Project: Mauna Loa Village Phase I Applicant: Greater Pacific, LP Landowner: B.P. Bishop Estate Trust, Kamehameha Schools Tax Maa Key:7-8-010:095, 058, 069, and 096 This is in response to your Non-significant Zoning Change Application that was received on January 24, 2005 with supplemental information submitted on February 2, 2005. The subject application has been reviewed in accordance with Section 25-2-45 of Chapter 25, Hawaii County Code, and is determined to be complete. Your request is to change the zoning of the Village Commercial (CV-10) portion of Lot 3-A-1 to Multi-Family Residential (RM-2) so as to eliminate the multiple zoning designations affecting Lot 3-A-1. The multiple zoning affecting Lot 3-A-1 resulted from the recently approved consolidation of Lots 2-A, 3-A and 4-A and resubdivision into Lots 2-A-1, 3-A-1 and 4-A-1. The CV portion of the subject property was rezoned by the County Council by Change of Zone Ordinance 96-50 (REZ 819), effective May 2, 1996. According to Section 25-2-45 of the Zoning Code regarding Non-Significant Zoning Changes, the Planning Director may administratively grant non-significant zoning changes that must comply with the designations for the property set forth in the general plan and any development plan adopted by ordinance, and must either: 1. Not result in a net increase in the density allowed in the zoning district(s) containing the affected area; or Hawaii County is an equal oppor[unity provider and employer Comm. No. ~ 2~0 Ref. To: Ref. Uo~~ 2~~5 Mr. Sidney M. Fuke Planning Consultant Page 2 February 18, 2005 2. Be the lesser of a five percent or one acre increase or decrease in the area of any zoning district(s). Upon review of this request, we have determined that: 1. The allowed density in the CV district is one rentable or dwelling unit per 1,250 square feet of land azea. The RM-2 district requires not less than 2,000 square feet or land area for each rentable or dwelling unit. Therefore, the proposed zoning change will not result in a net increase in the density allowed in the zoning districts containing the affected area. 2. The project site is situated within an area designated for "Medium Density Urban" and "Open" uses by the General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (I,17PAG) map. Therefore, the area under review is in compliance with the designations set forth in the General Plan. 3. The area of the CV-10 zoning district contained within Lot 3-A-1 will decrease in size by 11,960 square feet or 100% and by 5.4% of the CV-10 zoned area of the parent Lot 2-A. Based on the fact that the proposed zoning change meets the requirements of §25-2- 45(a)(1) ofthe Zoning Code, the requested non-significant zoning change is hereby approved. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact Larry Brown or Esther Imamura of this office at 961-8288. Sincerely, _ i ~ CHRISTOPHER J~~YUEN Planning Director LMB:mad P \WP W M60\Larry\NZC\04-03GreaterPacific.doc cc w/appl: 'Hawaii County Council rinance Department, Real Property Tax Division West Hawaii Planning Office Mr. Gilbert Bailado REZ 819 Long Range Planning Division NONSIGNIFICANT ZONING CHANGE A~'~Y1I'I ~ ~ 1 COUNTY OF HAWAII , PLANNING DEPARTMENT APPLICANT: Greater Pacific, LP APPLdCANTSSIGNATURE: DATE: Sept. 17,2004 APPLICANTS ADDRESS: Grosvenor Cen[er, Makai Tower, Suite 1875 733 Bishop Street Honolulu, HI 96813 APPLICANT'S PHONE (Bus.) (808) 550-0ll0 (Res.) (Eax) (808) 550-0112 APPLICANTS AGENT: Sidney M. Fuke, Planning Consultant AGENT'S ADDRESS: 100 Pauahi Street, Suite 212 Hilo, HI 96720 AGENTS PHONE: (Bus.) 969-152? (Res.) (Fax) 969-7996 LANDOWNER: Kamehameha School LANDOWNER'S SIGNATURE: ~ LANDOWNERS ADDRESS: 567 S. King Street Hooolulu, HI 96813 TAX MAP KEY: ~ -$-10: portion 95 REQUEST: Cy-1o TO 1RM-2 (Existing Zoning) Proposed Zoning) SIZE OF AFFECTED AREA(S): 8,314 square feet (See Additional Instructions on Next Sheet) p:wpwiu60~normU'oldcr~Yorm,uzc (3-9-00) NONSIGNIFICANT ZONING CHANGE REQUEST (CV-10 to RM-2) GREATER PACIFIC, LP Keauhou 2nd, North Kona, Hawaii, TMK: (3) 7-8-10: portion 95 1. GENERAL BACKGROUND At its meeting of August 13, 1986, the Planning Commission approved SMA Permit No. 243 to allow the development of a 405-unit condominium project called Mauna Loa Village and related improvements on the subject properties, subject to a number of conditions. One of the conditions required the first phase of this project be initiated and completed within a stipulated period of time. As the first phase was not completed in accordance with the stipulated time, the applicant requested and was granted a 5-year time extension by the Planning Commission on September 3, 2004. II. PROJECT LOCATION The area of the requested non-significant zone change is within the Mauna Loa Village project. This project site, consisting of 39.209 acres, fronts the south side of Kaleiopapa Road and borders the 2"d through 8th fairways of the Kona Country Club Makai course in Keauhou-Kona. Kaleiopapa Road leads to the soon to be opened Sheraton Keauhou Bay Resort and Spa (formerly Kona Surd and Keauhou Bay. (Figure 1). III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION When the project was originally permitted, the subject site consisted of two (2) parcels (58 and 69). The entire 38+ acre area was then zoned RM-2. This area was subsequently subdivided into four (4) parcels. Parcel 58, consisting of 11.568 acres, is now the site of the existing condominium complex. The tennis complex and related improvements are situated on Parce195, which consists of 5.717 acres. This 5.717 acre was rezoned CV- 10 in 1996. Parcel 69, consisting of 5 acres, and a small portion of parcel 96 were part of the original first phase. The bulk of parcel 96, consisting of 17+ acres, is the second phase of this project. The tax map identifying these parcels is found in Figure 2. To complete the undeveloped portion Phase I (parcel 69 and a portion of 96), the applicant is proposing to construct 41 single-family residential dwelling units instead of additional 87 condominium units. The single-family 1 e A ~ PA~ GE 53 j B KEA Oli C - PUU OA ~ KAHAI. 'Y7 Ei9i'SeePage51 _ - inn Ala See Page 501 n~zz s Pm.A~ _ Ho om `tee X~f X ! al~~ P4 - - - G Dom .C~e _l. ..r_.- _ 1 _ _ ~ b` m .6 ()CC II pTl ~9~P 19 q PahoeFoe e Yt _ '7-~3 Y Iq ~ch3rk R KYPa' ~y' C!oLeal 2 nrrzn - Cx K aM°g Sam vein i~ %eouXOU - - WlareS o C (you ~ (/la Wfi to SandsBCAPnrk 4 oa 7 . ~ a?P, - 8'3an&J 5 - ~ rou8htypaved _ a pne Ifen ~ g. Whin Scads s~ _ gol'o N cY_.. pp o.._B b.Ert____- _ _ _ - _ 7 _ _.~lr j; y O P ~ r0 mac _ ~ ,~,ay°olele e ~ ? o m r yT'~ - 4 T ~ 5 -x G 4 - w qI' m 59 r ~n ! N I fLL s'( R a---~ m n ! .k mm .,,gym. tx.,~ eta, „"sXah luuRreef $ m meb - ~ ~ KAHALti'U ,Q ' r ~ dt Yr.. 3 3 _ 9 - K -"W - . O 1 mm a*ss~ x~ u r ~ - 'u+ Deb 4 o- 2 '.TfrKafruP. ~i- T. I Mygoloa ~ d ~ XahWuu ,G s rm, rw ;Beh_$ar&~yr `e ~ ~ 'fp` i m Sbd ~ ~ r r sm e~ ~ a. Asron jt~~~ 3 ~,±,..y ~"'c'~v~ each Ru. e o„e~ ReoukEst - Y w~~d 3 " fix. m s9'E: a~ eati ~e-bsen ~ iz m m v w 1 ~ ,_"s ac" etc[ub ~ e a w _ fir' . - Im„ ~ a Y ~~eau~bn- -~Q~-~_ ~ ~ p Y 45 . Sfiapying r ~ql ~~i4~ r 5N' t Cn Pllas- ~ yV ~ ~h.'~.._. r ~t R~ ' KF.Ajf~~U U Mabl°n. Bay ~ 9yla~ S w'~ Ca rJe ~3: ~ y r Ese ~ Kon° ° d'a a Xa°1°°a m ~ o `v~I ur+ry"m+ewarer xea+`1jpLL aah°~ . sm .Kona i 'kala ~ 4 ~ ~ +Tn,nr. a 1'e°leP° z- ~ ka/tea ~ ~ 4 '6 ~ ~ .d~ z P yY, ~ .S b\ b~O i ~ ~ F c q ~~`~a ~s.~la°°t 9 Meaux ~ec~~a ` ~ ~"lg * ~ ~'~'i; ~ ~ ~ ~ K°j0 0~ vwa 'Ka,e c°vnhr Guc y l ~ h5~",,I'~~~ ° ° r a ~ O ~ Golf Course r ~ ~ ~ Y w ymhkctu~l ~a°„ S^*-d''~ x 13 'r xx.-aav'~,~ MSsY ~ Sp oCC $ ~ *x i ~ ~x..~'~'~="~ Ehukal i 6s n 3`,~~'~`. t ,.,i'r~orut Surf~leso r. 'If i r ~ ~ i r~ "e s ~/e/ 5 ~ 5 v ~ oPapa~ ,f ~~`r~e~L~ a ~ ~a^uYU ~ ~ PW LOA ~ ~~han , 1 ~ ~'IT~S' v • Pun. hele ' xenuhne x°,,, ~ ~ ~ Goljcowse ~rmnL. , _ . ~ _ _ - ~ . Kuamoo Battle Warners - heYceleke Buri 1 Grou.rd 1 MILE - _ _ - - ...Bay.. - ~ FIGURE 1 ~ ©Copyright 1999, Odyssey Publishing, LLC - _ _ C. ~ D iS See Page S>I F A ~ B 1 I ~ I _ . ~ 9 ~e 2 0. Gacl. i ~ 6 ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ l - ~ ~B-1 1 ~Na t J Q- ~ ^ _ ~ ~ p ( l O n I 30 ~j t <<,1 z , a- - p77D ~+T (~T~/. ,r~~l' JV/Jf~l~l JlLE ~:c ;&T 47 s. .,a~~ - r /B-6a _ 1 / r ~ f~ u3~~ 2 .r. 1 ~ ~ -LC,Yf~c~ce- ~iF. 'i''.i'F'T. - '70L RNy r. J:q~y, ~ ~ ~ 3.T/Z.le cti•~ ~ _ '\O ~ .~^~4~'°" 1~'` `V ~,,o.,,~ ~o}c /~/lla/.r avnzG~by B P~,irhoy EsYaf \t' y6 ~y 1 ~,~o c~.d~K. Ln/csS OiYCri.-ifs no{ci. e ~ qqpp y u 0- '21)YY Ac. n i ~ + r"1 SX ~.n :,,res'-~..c.>? U.~,e. -3c.2:. ?5ec -z.M/c _ 6 t., ~ Frcd r r.-i r'r+rra Yu..~-c.r.,c / c7 I 3?R HoTcc ° o Q' ,d Kd.4 30 0. i3 Ac. QYo bGQ : lG, l4 /3 S d 3b 34 5° c..~... rscr - o: z p! ° I ~ ~ ~ - THIiiD D11/FS;J ti_I ZONE SEG- PLAT ~ 7 g ear 6'=5 ~ `i L l 7I Go./.,~fy of H~x~/. 1 .Y L t. 6>.-~ v~c~.-.s~.-:-"c..,-t= ~c/ins ;,-r'[~'~~'~~~- CONTAINfFIC P~.R GELS residential project, called Mauna Loa Gardens, would also be subdivided into 5,000+ square foot sized lots. (Figure 3) IV. NATURE OF REQUEST The development of the 41-lot Mauna Loa Gardens subdivision, however, will require the removal of several tennis courts (Figure 4) located on the adjoining CV-10 zoned parcel (TMK: 7-8-10: 95). This 12,018 square foot area has been consolidated with the undeveloped portion of Phase I (TMK: 7-8-10: 69 and portion of 96) which consists of 8.622 acres. (Figure 5) The applicant is requesting that the 12,018 square foot area be rezoned from CV-10 to RM-2 and consolidated with the balance of Phase I. Please note that final subdivision (No. 7897) approval of this consolidation was approved on January 3, 2005. V. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS A. Site Characteristics The subject site is located along the westerly slopes of Hualalai. The subject area is at approximately the 30-foot elevation. The affected area (being an improved tennis court) is level. The average temperature varies between 72-80 degrees with higher periods during the summer. The annual rainfall in the vicinity is about 20 inches. B. Soils The Land Studv Bureau overall master productivity rating for the site is "E" (E-319). This refers to soils of very poor potential for agricultural productivity. The soil series is bare a'a lands with no soil material. It is excessively drained. The site is not classified under the State's Agricultural Land of Imaortance to the State of Hawai i (ALSIH) system. C. Floral and Faunal Considerations Given the development of the area surrounding the subject area, as well as the fact that the subject area has already been fully improved, 2 s ~ i. o tae ti 6` p ~ ~ "ate ~ jjj m ~ 's a~ ti` 3 t '~~4i ~ C ^ ' E 3 ! j w ~ . ~ i i ~ ~ i i i i i i i i i i I / ~ j~ I / I ~ I ~ I I I I r I ~ / ~ I 1 I / ~ / 1 I 1 I ~ 1, I 1 ~ i ~ ~ _ ~ ~ i ~ - - _--i / , ~ , , ~ ~ i i ~ ~ < i _ ~ ' ~ ~ i \ O ~ ~ ~ ,/i'. ~ \ ` s `1 o ~ p ` /C rs ~ ~^Y V / d` ~ / C~~~ \ ? ? O Q O Jl g w ~ F h ~I m° / N a ~R ~ / l ry~^ a~ ~ i~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ~ i ~ ~ i~ ~ ~ ti~ k- - _ _ o US ii oo ~ EASEXENT 1 o Far Acceee i ~ ~ ~ ^e I ~ " ~ •/2. 065 50. 1 ~ a~ ,yp~~.pQ a l~ ` ~ ` g0, ; 2z5. ~ ` , a~'. ' P' ° ~ ~ 217.52'30' f22. 68 ,Z~.9° ~ ry / / \N ' \ o N ~ -pt~ £e m 0 C• ° ti° 1 a5at°2° f a4 , / 1 W ` ~~r^ Scr~` \ ~ ~ x~n9 w ~ _l.wo~Y el eo. ~ n 00. N `i~'G \ a h s' ~ ~ m . ~ „ m ° ~ 1 o ~f C~~r T m • o / o T o ~ ~ ,~i W o• is ~ 2 ~ ~g5 6 0 0 ~D' i t T'j~ . • to ' G~Jf ' 21° ,en~\ t^^~~' 9Z0 ~p0 `oUr` „9 m 0 1° 9 ° Bg 0.~ . ~0 0 ~J\ ~ 0 0 `TS. .a , 1. 0 `so. / 966 9° SO / r / PROPOSED LOT ! - A (EXCLUSION ) 5.113 ACRES EXISTING RM-3:5 TO V-2.5 ZONING m ~ PROPOSED. LOT 2~A 34.096 ACRES R. P- 7844, L C. Aw. EXISTING RM-3.5 70NING FIGURE 4 ~9 61' p t ' &p = n o T 3' : a s W c ° f 3 ~ .Sa~' W o o - _3ii r ~ Z y o t~. \j N R U %i ~ i~5 \ j p ~Li k O 1I }5 5~Y{E W 2 > c 3 ~A ~'(69~ 3 P V' 3 'i ~ 2 e~°~~~ ~p~~a vl e 8 T h V m i ° l 'V z U Z O ~i ~ N 4 ~ ~ 0 Z $ ~ ~ O ~ b ' O ~ y 4 / rl v~ r4 I i i (I ;~a ~ ; „ ~1 k I I X 1 'J ' ' ' / h ~ ~ t ~ s i - - i i f': ~ ~ - ~ , ~ ?z / i ~ t_ ~ _ ~ ~ 'j~ '~"i A ~ ~ ~ ~ _ - ~ ~ ~ _ " ~ A' ~ X ~ ~~l a~ ~ ~ f f i 3 \ - ~ j d ~ `v A v a / f I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ o~, , ~ ~ , e , \ . j ~ i - ~ ~ SJ zd x ~ c [ J~ a ~ ~`~A ~ t ~ ~ as i -as I so t 1 ~ ! I ! ~ i! ~ la !1 i ~ ~e ~ ~ qiq ~ to E jj(( f ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ W°~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ \ it is unlikely that there would be any significant, if any, faunal resources of the subject site. The floral resources are non-existent, as the site has already been improved. D. Archaeological and Cultural Imalications As the area of the proposed rezoning has been fully improved, it is unlikely that there are any archaeological resources. The affected area has not been used for gathering of native plants by native Hawaiians. Further, there is no trail in the affected area. E. Drainage The subject site is designated "X", area outside of the 500 year storm, on the Federal Flood Insurance Rate map. Appropriate drainage systems in conjunction with the subdivision process for the proposed 41-lot PUD subdivision will be implemented. The requested area will be a part of the applicant's landscaped area. F. Volcanic and Earthquake Hazards The USGS 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, except to rely upon the County's Civil Defense system and respond accordingly. The entire island of Hawaii falls within Earthquake Zone 4, according to the Building Code. As such, appropriate structural requirements have been taken and approved in conjunction with the building permit process to address this potential seismic hazard. However, no structures are planned within the subject area. VI. INFRASTRUCTURE CONSIDERATIONS Essentially, all infrastructure requirements have been considered in conjunction with the issuance of the SMA and amended SMA permits. These include road, water, wastewater, and other utilities. Generally, access will be from Kaleiopapa Street, which is a County road with a 60-foot wide right-of-way. This Street also serves as access to the Sheraton Keauhou Kona Resort and Spa (formerly Kona Surf) and Keauhou Bay. 3 County water is available for the entire project. The required water commitments for the undeveloped units have already been secured. Furthermore, as no dwelling or uses will occur because of this rezoning action, there should be no water impact. Like the water and road impacts, the wastewater impact should be negative. There is an existing sewer line that services the overall project site. No additional solid waste is anticipated by this action. Likewise, the utility and service impacts should be negative. VII. NONSIGNIFICANT ZONING CRITERIA Pursuant to Section 25-2-45 of the Zoning Code and Rule 8 of the Planning Department's Rules of Practice and Procedure, nonsignificant zoning changes may be processed administratively by the Planning Director. This can be done only if the requested area meets one of two size-related criteria and conforms to the County General Plan. A. Size Requirement Relative to the size-related criterion, the Code provides that a request can be considered if the requested designations will (1) not result in a net increase in the density allowed in the zoning district(s) containing the affected area; or (2) be the lesser of a five percent or one acre increase or decrease in the area of any zoning district. The CV zone allows multiple-family residence at a density of one unit for every 1,250 square feet, which is denser than the zoning (RM-2) of the receiving area of one unit for every 2,000 square feet. Thus, the request would result in an overall reduction in the potential density of the project and respective affected areas. Nonetheless, it would technically still allow more units within the receiving parcel. Then, too, there is no comparable area that is being rezoned CV-10 and the claim for an even density exchange cannot be made. As such, this request would not necessarily fulfill this criterion. However, it would be consistent with the other criterion. In this situation, the receiving area (TMK: 7-8-10: 69 and portion of 96) is zoned RM-2 and consists of 8.536 acres. With the additional 12,018 square foot area, the total area of the receiving area would be 8.622 acres. 4 The 12,018 square foot area is less than one acre and less than 5% (about 2+%) of the total receiving area (Parcels 69 and portion of 96) of 8.536 acres. At the same time, it will result in a loss of less than one acre and 5% of the giving parcel (Parcel 95). The 12,018 square foot area represents a loss of about 3+% of the 5.717-acre parcel (Parcel 95). Thus, it is maintained that the request meets the size-related criterion for non-significant zone change as outlined in the Zoning Code and the Department's Rules. The applicant also notes that notwithstanding the above, the effect of this zone change is to allow a development that is LESS dense than what was originally allowed by the SMA for Phase I (87condominium units versus 41 single-family residential units.) B. Planninsa Policy Requirement The other major criterion requires compliance with the County General Plan and development plan designations of the property. In this case, the County General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) map designates the subject area for Medium Density. The site is also classified Urban by the State Land Use Commission. The requested RM-2 zoning of this 12,018-square foot area would conform to these designations. The proposed addition would not necessarily increase the use of the receiving parcel. The use would still be RM-2. As such, this project would implement the broader land use objectives sought by the General Plan LUPAG map. The requested zoning would be consistent with the goals, policies, and standards of the General Plan document. While the rezoning of the requested area would not have any significant impact per se, it would allow for the tasteful development of the 41-unit project. As such, in looking at the 41-unit project, it would provide limited short-term economic opportunities largely through the construction of any improvements required for the residential development. Relatedly, longer-term opportunities could be created largely in the form of maintenance of the private roads/landscaping within the project and the creation of a stable community. In so doing, the resultant project should add sustained revenues to the County and State coffers. 5 The project intends to be energy conscious through the use design features to take advantage of wind patterns. Maintaining and improving the quality of the environment is important to the success of this project. The General Plan identifies five (5) - -areas-of~ - -water-4ualityrsoa 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 disposed off in the County's system at Heeia Bay. This should be sufficient to address any potential groundwater or coastal water impacts. Being a residential project, it should not be a noisy one. Any noise- generating facility -such as air conditioners -would be carefully placed to minimize their noise impacts to adjoining properties. The project area is outside of any floodway. Nonetheless, a drainage system will be designed in a manner to protect the property as well as to minimize the volume of surtace runoff generated by this development. Relative to archaeological and cultural, Paul Rosendahl, Ph.D. of PHRI conducted a reconnaissance survey in 1979. In conjunction with the SMA time extension request, he revisited this. This revisit resulted in a determination of "No Historic Properties Affected" by the State Department of Land and Natural Resources -Historic Preservation Division (DLNR-HPD). It should be noted that in the initial survey, three sites were identified. Two (2) sites (petroglyph) were recommended for preservation with protective buffers of 20-25 feet. These sites are located between the tennis court and parking structures and have been preserved. The remaining site was a C-shaper shelter (temporary habitation), and no further work was recommended for that feature. In view of the recent Hawaii State Supreme Court's "PASH" and "Ka Pa'akai O Ka'Aina decisions, the cultural issue relative to native Hawaiian gathering and fishing rights must be addressed. In this situation, although the subject site is near the ocean, it does not front 6 the shoreline. There are no recorded trails through the site. As such, gathering of marine life and coastal access is not an issue. Being partially disturbed and within an urban environment, the prospects of the site serving as a habitat for rare or endangered plant or animal life appear remote. As this is a residential project, it will directly fulfill the objectives of the housing element. Specifically, these include goals, among others, which • Attain a diversity of socio-economic housing mix throughout the different parts of the County • Maintain a housing supply which allows a variety of choice • Improve and maintain the quality and affordability of the existing housing stock • Seek sufficient production of affordable rental and fee-simple housing in the County in a variety of sizes to satisfactorily accommodate the needs and desires of families and individuals The Plan also emphasizes that developments be mindful of an area's natural beauty. In this situation, the project will be developed in a manner where it blends with the existing terrain and enhances the natural environment through the introduction of landscaping. Although the project site is about 500 feet from the ocean, it is also separated by a golf course from the ocean. As such, some of the usual coastal resources concern would not be pronounced. There will be no interference with shoreline access. Then, too, by hooking up into the County's wastewater system, impacts to the coastal water should be minimized. Additionally, marine and groundwater impact studies were also prepared for the SMA time extension. Both studies concluded that the impacts would be negligible, if at all. There will be little impact to public facilities. The roadway and related system within the project site will be private. The water system will be developed in a manner meeting with the requirements of the Department of Water Supply. All on-site improvements will be constructed by the applicant. Schools and other public facilities are 7 also located proximate to the site, most of them being less than 5 miles away. Finally, in terms of the Land Use element, 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 • 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 county shall encourage the development and maintenance of communities meeting the needs of its residents in balance with the physical and social environment In view of the foregoing goals and policies, it is noted that the requested zoning would be consistent with the Medium Density designation of the LUPAG map. It would also be comaatible with the surrounding area. There are multiple-family residential zonings on the adjoining properties, and resort, single and multiple-family residential zonings within 500 of the subject property. The soil of the site is classified "E" or very poor. While it does have some measure of agricultural potential, as evidenced by the existing vegetation on the site, the site does not have resource that is deemed to be critical from an agricultural perspective. Furthermore, this area is already been used as a tennis court. The property has no severe topographic or geologic problems that would render the land unusable for the proposed subdivision and activity. 8 ~ ~ s,xa~~ ~ ~ i V ~ ~ s,, ~ ~ \ h aa- s ~ y t i a ' ~ ~ 9 ~ ' ~ , ~ ~ ~ - i-`- ~ F 1 r ~ ys ~p ~ L V )y ~ ~ a 6 ~ T~ $ E4 \ W~ 1 - S~.\~ ~R r _ ~ ~ ~Y ~ fr~! ~t gg ~ ~ i.• t C ~ ~V ~ _ _ t" ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~d~ ~ ~ ~ - . i ~ ~ i ~ ~ e j 41 ;A R, 2~ ~ J r ( ~ ' % i 'j / j~ u ~ %i i i ~ c ~ 2 Z ' ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ N r ~ a r O Z 1 ~ n ~ I i o Y 2 Z h ~ `PF i, I ~ ~ ~ ' isx~t« , ~kt o o C ~ G) o' ' ~ b d ~ ~ ~ N ' i ~ ~ O ~ i . c-~ o ~ C ~ r~ ''„N ~ ~ o m A T 3 2 = c m ° l V o ~ #10141.8 PROPOSED CHANGE OF ZONE FROM CV-10 TO RM-2 PROPOSED CHANGE OF ZONING DESIGNATION FROM CV-10 TO RM-2 PORTION OF LOT 3-A-1 OF HOLUA AT KEAUHOU PHASE 1 Land situated approximately 1,150 feet Southerly of Kaleiopapa Street and on the Southerly boundary of Lot 2-A-1 at Keauhou 2nd, North Kona, Island and County of Hawaii, State of Hawaii. Being portions of: Lot 3-A-1 of Holua at Keauhou, Phase 1; and Royal Patent 7844, Land Commission Award 7715, Apana 12 to Lota Kamehameha. Beginning at the Northwesterly corner of this parcel of land, being also a point on the Southerly boundary of Lot 2-A-1, said point of beginning bearing 270° 10' 0.99 feet from the Southwesterly corner of Lot 2-A-1 and an angle point on the Northerly boundary of Lot 3-A-1, the coordinates of said-point of beginning referred to Government Survey Triangulation Station "KEAUHOU COAST" being 854.39 feet North and 1,091.10 feet East and running by azimuths measured clockwise from True South: Thence, for the next four (4) courses following along the remainder of Royal Patent 7844, Land Commission Award 7715, Apana 12 to Lota Kamehameha: 1. 270° 10' 184.00 feet along Lot 2-A-1 to a point; 2. 0° 10' 65.00 feet along the remainder of Lot 3-A-1 to a point; 3. 90° 10' 184.00 feet along the remainder of Lot 3-A-1 to a point; 4. 180° 10' 65.00 feet along the remainder of Lot 3-A-1 to the point of beginning ~~,~t,C T. YgM9s and containing an area of 11,960 Square Feet. LICENSED y WES THOMAS ASSOCIATES 'U PROFESSIONAL ~ ~//~y //~J~i./~~ LANO ~rl~/if l yF SURVEYOR No. aa3i Chrystal Thomas Yamasaki y 5P~ gl'1~AIl,v• Licensed Professional Land Surveyor State of Hawaii Certificate No. LS-4331 75-5749 Kalawa Street Kailua-Kona, Hawaii 96740-1817 TMK: 7-8-010: portion 069 (3rd Division) January 31, 2005 uioiai.s Page 1 of 1 WES THOMAS ASSOCIATES - Land Surveyors - 75-5749 Kalawa Street, Kailua-Kona, Hawaii 96740-1817