HomeMy WebLinkAboutREP PC 051 01/19/2006 2004-2006 REPORT OF THE
COMMITTEE ON PLANNING
DATE: January 19, 2006 Re: Comm. No. 615/Bill No. 198
PLACE: Councilroom
TIME: 1:30 p.m.
Council Chair and Members
Hawaii County Council
Hilo, Hawaii 96720
Your Committee on Planning, to which was referred Bill No. 198, reports as follows:
Bill No. 198, transmitted via Communication No. 615 from Mayor Harry Kim, dated
December 14, 2005, presents a Change of Zone request by The Newton Family Limited
Partnership, at Kukuau ls`, South Hilo, Hawaii, TMK: 2-4-8:por. 33.
Bill No. l98 seeks to amend Section 25-8-32 (South Hilo 'Lone Map), Article 8,
Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawaii County Code, by changing the District Classification
of approximately 885.40 acre s of land from Unzoned to Agricultural - 80 acres (A-80a).
Communication No. 615 reports that the Hawaii County Planning Commission, as required by
the Hawaii County Charter, Chapter 4, Section 6-4.3(C), considered this rezoning request and
accompanying Bill No. 198 on December ]4, 2005. The Commission concurred with the
Planning Director's favorable recommendation on this matter. The Planning Director's findings
and recommendations, transmitted via Communication No. 615, can be summarized as follows:
1. 'I~he applicants, members of the Newton family, are the owners of the property. The
applicants are requesting a Change of Zone far 885.40 acres of land from the Unzoned
district to the Agricultural - 80 acres (A-80a) District in order to subdivide the property
into eight smaller lots. ranging between 80-153 acres in size. Five of the proposed lots will
remain in the Newton lamily, and the other three tuts are proposed for sale at market
value.
2. The 885.40-acre parcel of land is part of a larger 1,645.82-acre parcel. The subject 885.40-
acre portion of the property was re-designated from the State Land Use Conservation
District to the Agricultural District on November 16, 2001, in order to allow the proposed
subdivision. "The remaining 760.42-acre portion of the property remains in the
Conservation district.
3. The property is located in Upper Kaumana, approximately 3,000 feet southwest of the Hilo
Country Club Estates Subdivision, in South Hilo.
4. Access to the subject parcel is proposed from Wilder Road. a paved County road with a
24-foot pavement width. An access road to the property will need to be constructed from
PC REPORT' NO. 51
Communication 615
Bill 198
Page 2
Wilder Road along an existing 40-foot wide easement. HELCO and another private
landowner have given preliminary consent to allow the applicant to cross their propetties
along this easement, to gain access to the project site. The proposed subdivision access
road will be required to conform to County Subdivision Code roadway standazds.
5. State Land Use Commission Docket No. A99-729 which reclassified the 885.40 acres
from the Conservation to the Agricultural District, lists 23 conditions of approval,
including a 20-year restriction on further subdivision of the proposed eight lots. Condition
H of the proposed Bill No. 198 prohibits construction of a second dwelling unit and
condiminium property regimes on each of the eight lots.
6. The County Department of Water Supply, in a letter dated October 3, 2005, states that
current "water is limited to a maximum of seven lots. or units, of water at a maximum of
4,200 per day," and that the applicant will be required to connect to the County DWS
system along Wilder Road. The applicant responding via letter dated November 2, 2005
that "the eighth lot in the Newton subdivision would require possible off-site
improvements or modification of water usage by the subdivision." The applicant stated
that they will work with DWS during the subdivision review process to "determine the
needs for obtaining water allocation approval for the last lot."
7. According to Commwrication No. 615, the approval of this Change of Gone request from
the Unzoned to Che Agricultural - 80 acres (A-80a) zoned district would result in an
appropriate land use pattern that will further beneftt the public based on the following:
The proposed change of zone is located in an area designated in the General Plan as
Extensive Agriculture, with "poor" and "very poor" soils. The applicant is proposing
small-scale agricultural activities within the proposed subdivision, possibly including
grazing, orchards, and/or small vegetable gardens or plant nurseries. Significant flora
and fauna occur primarily in the portion of the parcel remaining within the
Conservation District. The applicant will be required to preserve the one kipuka in the
project area, by leaving "intact large stands of native forest trees and clusters of native
vegetation."
• Wastewater will be disposed of by individual wastewater disposal systems approved by
the Department of Health. Water commitments are available for seven of the eight
proposed lots (reference No. 6 above). All other essential services and utilities are
available to the project site.
• The Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Map (FIRM) identifies
the site as "X" or outside the flood plain.
6. Requisite of the Planning Director's favorable recommendation for the Change of Lone
request are 16 conditions contained in Bill No. 198 that outline specific requirements for
PC REPORT NO. 51
Communication 615
Bill 198
Page 3
the proposed project. Condition C requires the applicant to submit the required water
commitment payments for seven lots within 90 days of the effective date of the rezoning
ordinance. Condition G requires the applicant to design, purchase, and install street lights
and traffic control devices as required by the Department of Public Works.
Jim Bell of Belt Collins Hawaii and Dr. George Newton were present. Mr. Bell gave a brief
presentation of the application as the Newton Family Partnership representative.
Council Member Holschuh inquired whether there will be impact fees assessed at this point in
time. Planning Director Chris Yuen stated it hasn't been council practice to put fair share
assessments on very large lots and he believes the cutoff is one or three acres. He said
it is definitely not assessed for an 80-acre lot in an agricultural subdivision. In answer to the
question if applicant would he allowed to have a 2"d farm dwelling despite Condition H
restricting a second residence or Condominium Property Regimes on the lots, Mr. Yuen stated
there is a process for having an additional farm dwelling or more than one lot.
Mr. Yuen said that for lots created by subdivisions within the State Land Use Agricultural
District after June 4, 1976, the law essentially grandfathers single family dwellings on older lots
like those created in Paradise Park or Ocean View. But in post 1976 subdivisions like Kohala
Estates and Kohala Ranch it provides people notice for the first farm dwelling and then anything
after that requires an application, a farm plan, and they also have to show the need for an
agricultural worker to get a 2"a or subsequent farm houses. That is something we approve or
sometimes deny and enter into agreement with the lot owner that they will in fact implement the
farm plan.
Council Member Jacobson asked if there will be affordable housing and that he is concerned that
8 lots aren't all that damaging, but these are pretty big lots and three are being sold. Is there any
way to limit some of the uses of these ]ands so we don't end up with 3 new residential
subdivisions up there? Mr. Yuen stated it would take a further rezoning to do anything other
than the 80-acre parcels. It"snot going tojust happen.
Council Member Hoffmann stated there is available water for 7 lots but we're subdividing into 8
lots and didn't think we go ahead and make 8 lots and thought the Planning Director regulations
states a lot could not be established without water. Mr. Yuen stated on a level of rezoning they
will sometimes rezone without existing water availability on the condition that applicant go and
get water availability. "I"hat's generally done in larger projects. In a situation where there is
really no prospect of developing more water he would recommend against it. As far as this
application, they have 7 commitments and potentially they can get 8 but they have to do
something with the Department of Water Supply to get the 8`h one. If they don't get the 8`h at the
subdivision level we will only subdivide 7 lots. They could apply for variance for 8`~ lot. [
would deny variance on this one because they are zoning into this situation here.
PC REPOR"f NO. 51
Communication 615
Bill 198
Page 4
Council Member Hoffmann said if there is a need that something else would have to be done
before he would agree, his concept would be, to make sure he has a clean application, is to stick
something in here that would indicate that for the 8`~ lot. He didn't need an answer and it's not
going to stop Mr. Hoffmann~s approval of this at the moment, but wants to make sure we're not
doing something or setting a precedent that we don't want down the line with some other
application.
Chairman Pilago stated he is not going to support the application because page 5, paragraph 2
explicitly states that water for 8 residential lots are not available for the subject change of zone
request at this time. Because of that and because of his strong belief in adequate infrastructure
for all developments, cannot support this application for rezoning at this time. Asked Planning
Director if it is time to look at applications such as these and begin considering levying fair share
and impact fee assessments.
Director Yuen said we don't get many rezonings for relatively large agricultural lots. Many of
the so-called agricultural subdivisions are really more residential than agricultural, the lots being
in the one to three acre range and he does not think we should collect fair share for those large
agricultural lots. He wouldn't change the practice at this point and doesn't think this is a point to
tweak a fair share system while we have the impact study going on.
Council Member Isbell said she will support this based upon the Planning Commission and
Planning Director's approval and recommendations and that the Director is fine with rezoning.
The proposal was to have 8 lots, they have 7 water commitments in hand and if they can get
another water commitment he's fine with letting them subdivide the 8 lots. If not, he will hold
them to 7 lots.
Council Member Ikeda stated the subdivision is in his district and he used to hunt in this area
when he was young. Most of surrounding areas are agricultural 20-acre and this is an A-80.
thinks it's more than fair and really supports this subdivision. If it was agricultural 1-acre he
would vote against it, but this is A-80 and thinks it's more than fair.
Council Member Holschuh stated he agrees with Ms. Isbell and Mr. Ikeda. If there ever was a
time to consider a variance this is probably it.
Mr. Bell noted both he and Dr. Newton would be out of town the first two weeks in February and
i C it this has to go before the Council in the first two weeks of February he respectfully asks that
it be delayed. Chaiman Pilago stated every effort will be made to accommodate.
PC REPORT NO. 51
Communication 615
Bill 198
Page 5
Your committee concurs with the Planning Commission's and the Planning Director's favorable
recommendation for approval of the Change of Zone request.
Your Committee on Planning is in accord with the intent and purpose of Bill No. 198 and
recommends it pass first reading.
and
Hues roes sae ex Respectfully submitted,
A RA KA KI
RICA _ X COMMITTEE PLANNING
HOFFMANN X ~ ~
HOLSCHUH _ • ~
IKEDA
ISBELL g K. Angel Pilaff, hair
JACOBSON X
PILACO X
SAFABIK
PC REPORT NO. 51
Aaoptea: FEB 0 ~7nns