HomeMy WebLinkAboutREP PC 021 05/17/2005 2004-2006 REPORT OF THF,
COMMITTF~ ON PLANNING
D.1 I~I~:: Mai 17. 2005 Rc: Comm. No. 243Bi11 No. 94
PI.ACI~:: Council Chambers
~I~IMI?: 1:35 p.nt.
Council Chair and Members
I lawai i Counh~ Council
I lilu_ I la~~ai'i 96720
ti'our Committee on Planning, to which was reicrred Communication No. 243 and Bill No. 9-l.
u~ansmitled by Minor I tarry Kim, dated April 19, 200$, regarding a State Land Use Boundm~v
~mcndmcnt rcyucst by .lohanna Leaird/Kamehameha School, at Kalalau, South Kilo.
I la~~ai'i. I~MK: "?-(,8:portion of 22 and 2-6-9:portion of R reports as follows:
Bill No. 94 seeks to change the State Land Use DisU'ict Boundaries Map. f1-66, by changing the
Uislrict Classi lication of approximately 1.771 square feet of land from Urban to Agricuhural and
20.ORd syuarc Icct of land from Agricultural to Urban.
the boundary amendment request is a land exchange between the applicants to relocate
hamchamcha School's existing casement across Leaird's property to allow Kamehameha School
to build a new access road to its 1.553-acre agricultural property.
Communication No. 2d3 reports the Hawaii County Planning Commission, as required by the
I la~uii'i Counl~ Charter, Chapter d, Section 6-43(C). considered the above request and
aaompaming Bill No. 95 on April I, 2005. The Commission concurred with the Planning
Dircctor~s favorable rccommenda~ion on this matter. Communication No. 243. in synopsis.
reports the Planning Dircctor~s findings as the following:
L I'he approval of the rcclassilication fi~om the State Land Use Agricultural to the
l irban District for 20,ORd syuarc feel of land will not be violative of Section'_05-
(~hapter 205_ I Iawai'i Rey iced Statutes.
I~hc approval of the State Land Use Boundary Amendment From Agricultural to
the I Irban District complements the State Land Use District Regulations and is
supportive of the State of 1 lawai'i Plan and the General Plan based on the
following:
3. ~fhc reclassification action will not be inconsistent wiU~ the Hawaii Land Use
Commission Kules. as the subject property conforms to expressed standards as it
is surrounded by existing Urban designated lands.
d. ~fhc rcclassilication action will not be inconsistent with the Hawaii State Plan as
the action complements the goals, objectives and/or policies articulated in the plan
h} providing future employment opportunities and improved living standards and
stimulating the development and expansion of economic activities.
P(' KI?PORl~ NO. ? I
Conununiadion ?~13
Rill 9d
P'lec
hhc reclassification action will not be inconsistent with the County General Plan
as the request amlurms to the F;conomic and Land Use goals and policies of the
Plan and also confiirms to the General Plan Land t use Pattern Allocation (iuidc
(I.l iPnG) Map which designates the area as Medium Density Urban.
6. hhc Stoic of I lawai'i nLISFI Map classilies the suhjccl properly as llnclassilied.
~I~hc Land Ilse Study Bureau's Overall Master Productivity Rating for the soils in
the area is or "Very Poor'. While the potential for agricultural uses may
csist, the soil conditions within the site and surrounding area would preclude
such. It is also not currently being used for active agricultural purposes.
~I~hercibre, the reclassification of this 20,084 square feet of land from the
ngriculhual Io the t lrban designation will not be detrimental to the reduction of
Ibis area from the agricullur:d land inventory in the County of Hawaii.
Ms. ,lohanna I caird stated that the purpose of her zoning request is to build a hed and breakfast
tix the disabled, ~+hich will be the lirsl of its kind in the State.
During discussion, Rob Kosehill, representative of Kamchameha Schools, stated that the existing
roadway casement owned by Kamchameha Schools is going through the middle of Ms. Leaird's
properly, which would not allow her to go tbrward with her construction. In exchange lur the
existing rlsemenL this bill would enable Ms. I,caird to give Kamchameha Schools a portion of
one side of her properh~ Ii~r use as its roadway casemcnt.
Your Committee concurs wish the Planning Commission and the Planning Director's favorable
rcannmcndalion lin~ approval of the State Land Boundary amendment.
Your Committee on Planning is in accord with the intent and purpose of Rill No. 94 and
reconu»ends it pass Iirst reading.
~mc
- -
_ ~~i~ ~~~c_~ ~~i _r;> Respectfull} submitted,
~K ~h 11hI X ' _
' nu.~ x COMMI"I"'I'E{:S?N PI.nNNI ,
noF~r~nlnvn x
nolscnl~n x ~C.ar-.:.~
IhF:D:~ X
IaKF,I.I. x K. angel Pila c Co-Cho"r
F~c'oKSOn~ x r s,
- - I c c I loffmann, Co-(`hair
_
PC REPORT NO. 21
nlx~rreD: JUK~1 20~~
_ _