Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutREP PC 071 05/01/2006 2004-2006 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON PLANNING DATE: May 1, 2006 Re: Comm. No. 763Bi11 No. 247 PLACE: Council Chambers TIME: 10:00 a.m. Council Chair and Members Hawaii County Council Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Your Committee on Planning, to which was referred Bill No. 247, reports as follows: Bill No. 247, transmitted via Communication No. 763 from Mayor Hany Kim, dated March 13, 2006, presents a Change of Zone Request by Dennis D. Smith at Kaloko, North Kona, Hawaii , TMK: (3) 7-3- 24:8. Bill No. 247 seeks to amend Section 25-8-2 (North and South Kona District Zone Map), Article 8, Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawaii County Code 1983 (2005 Edition), by changing the District Classification of approximately 21.992 acres of land, from Agricultural (A-20a) to Family Agricultural (FA-3a). Communication No. 763 reports that the Hawaii County Planning Commission, as required by Chapter 4, Sec. 6-4.3(C), Hawaii County Charter, considered the above request and, afrer a duly held public hearing on February 24, 2006, voted to recommend approval of the Change of Zone request. The Commission concurred with the Planning Director's reasons for a favorable recommendation for approval of this matter. Communication No. 763 transmits the following findings and recommendations: l . The subject property is located on the northeast corner of Kaloko Drive and Hao Street in the Kaloko Mauka Subdivision at approximately the 2,200-foot elevation. Lands to the north/northeast are zoned FA-3a and lands to the west, east and southeast are zoned A-3a. Surrounding properties are in low- density residential uses surrounded by pasture and forest lands. Bishop Estate (ands of Kaupulehu abut the property to the north at the 3,500 to 5,400-ft elevations. 2. The applicant intends to subdivide the subject parcel into seven (7) lots of approximately three acres in size to be used as residential/agricultural lots. The applicant proposes to construct a dwelling on one of the lots, which is estimated to cost approximately $400,000.00. 3. Proposed access to the property is from Kaloko Drive, a 22-foot wide paved roadway with grass shoulders within an 80-foot right-of--way. The Department of Public Works states that direct vehicular access to individual lots shall not be from Kaloko Drive. Kaloko Drive intersects with Mamalahoa Highway less than two miles below the subject property. 4. The Department of Transportation previously expressed concerns about numerous rezonings in the Kaloko Mauka Subdivision and the cumulative impacts of these zone changes on the Mamalahoa Highway and Kaloko Drive intersection. The DOT has stated that the intersection of Mamalahoa Highway and Kaloko Drive must be improved due to additional traffic and activity on the roads and recommended the following: 1) illuminate the intersection at night; 2) channelize turning movements at the intersection; and 3) provide other safety improvements. PC REPORT NO. 71 Communication 763 Bill 247 Page 2 of 5 5. Water can be made available from an existing 8-inch waterline on Kaloko Drive. The Department of Water Supply considers the Kaloko Mauka Water System a separate system from other systems in Kona and consists of transmission and distribution lines, pump stations and seven reservoirs that extend to the 5,106-fr elevation. The reservoir has a capacity of 500,000 gallons. All other essential utilities and services are or will be made available to the site. 6. Vegetative cover is a mixture of native and non-native species and the proposed development has the potential to alter the mixture of plant life. However, low density of the proposed development and conditions applied to previous rezonings will assure continuation of habitat for existing Wildlife consists of turkeys, hawks, Chinese pheasants and other forest birds. 7. The Office of State Planning's five-year State Land Use Boundary Review, Water Resources Research Center recommends that the high rainfall and fog-drip area mauka of the 2,000-foot elevation be redesignated into the Conservation District for protection as a watershed recharge area. The Kona Watershed, which provides for the recharge of aquifers that supply most of Kona's drinking water, includes those lands located within Kaloko Mauka Subdivision above the 1,900-foot elevation and includes the subject property. 8. Although the property is located within the water recharge area, a condition of approval will be included to retain 67% of the forest cover on the site to preserve the watershed qualities and watershed area. Applicant is proposes to address potential adverse visual impacts clearing of the property for individual home sites and agricultural uses may have on the existing upland forest character, as follows: • a 60-foot wide "forest reserve easement" for buffer purposes along the existing roadway; • a 30-foot "forest reserve easement" along all lot lines not covered by the 60-foot easement; • a 60-foot wide structural setback along the existing roadways in lieu of the required 30-foot setback along the property's public street frontage to provide an additional buffer; • at least 67% of the lot area to be retained in forest. 9. Conditions will be included to preserve the forest corridor along the roads of the Kaloko Mauka Subdivision as well as a recommendation for conditions to restrict the construction of a second dwelling and prepazation of a conservation plan for each subdivided lot, and a "fair share" contribution to mitigate any potential impacts. 10. The Planning Director recommended favorably on this request based on the following: • The Change of Zone request from Agricultura120-acre (A-20a) to the Family Agricultural 3-acre (FA-3a) district will conform to the goals, policies and standards of the General Plan Economic and Land Use elements. • The Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) Map of the General Plan designates the area as Important Agricultural Land (IAL), those lands with better potential for sustained high agricultural yields because of soil type, climate, topography, or other factors. The Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) designates the property as Zone "X", an area determined to be outside of the 500-year flood plain. • The Land Study Bureau's Detailed Land Classification system identifies soils on the property as "D" or "Poor" and "E" or "Very Poor" for agricultural activity. The Agricultural Lands in the PC REPORT NO.71 Communication 763 Bill 247 Page 3 of 5 State of Hawaii (ALISH) System classifies soils within the subject property as Other Important Agricultural Lands. These lands include lands other than Prime or Unique Agricultural Land that is also of statewide or local importance for agricultural use. • The Change of Zone request is not contrary to Chapter 205A, Hawaii Revised Statutes relating to Coastal Zone Management as the subject property is not located within the Special Management Area. The site is located approximately seven miles mauka of the shoreline and therefore, will not be impacted by coastal hazard and beach erosion. • There have been several archaeological studies conducted in the area. An archaeological investigation of the Kaloko ahupua`a was conducted in 1970 and 1971. In addition, the National Park Service published a report in 1991 titled "An Ahupua`a Study: The ]971 Archaeological Work at Kaloko Ahupua`a, North Kona." The study identified remains of an agricultural field system up to the 3,500-foot elevation. • With regard to valued cultural, historical and natural resources found in the rezoning area, in similar rezoning in the Kaloko Mauka Subdivision, the State Department of Land and Natural Resources Historic Preservation Division has stated that the likelihood of historic sites is extremely low due to elevation and terrain and no historic properties will be affected by this undertaking. Native plants may be destroyed by construction or ground alteration, however, there is no evidence that the flora in the area are particularly desired or used for cultural purposes. • Requisite of the Planning Director's favorable recommendation for the Change of Zone request, are fourteen Conditions contained in Bill No. 247 that are necessary to prevent circumstances that may be adverse to public health, safety and welfare as well as are reasonably conceived to fulfill the needs of the public. Condition F prohibits construction of a second dwelling unit and condominium property regimes on each lot, including Lot 1 and Condition G requires a Forest Management Plan that shall govern each lot for a period of fifty (50) years. At the May I, 2006 Committee on Planning meeting public testimony in Hilo was received from Mr. Joseph Fagundes who testified in support of this application for change of zone. At the Kona Council office, public testimony was presented by Joel Gimpel, representing the Kona Traffic and Safety Committee, in opposition to the proposed application. Council Member Bob Jacobson stated he can't favor breaking a 20-acre parcel into two lots, much less 7 within this forest area and based on his death by a thousand cuts argument, cannot support this measure. Council Member Ikeda introduced Draft 2 of Bill 247 but stated he also wanted to amend to a draft 3. Mr. Ikeda stated stated that Director Yuen wanted Draft 2 changed to reflect that a building permit to construct a residence will not be issued until improvements to the intersection at Mamalahoa Highway and Kaloko Drive are completed. The amendment would also reflect that if the intersection improvements were not completed within 24 months from the date the ordinance is adopted, the applicant shall be allowed to proceed with obtaining building permits. Mr. Ikeda stated the amendment noted in Draft 3 would allow fees to be collected whereas, the previous amendment (Draft 2) fees could not be collected. It is Mr. Ikeda's understanding from discussions with Director Yuen that by allowing applicant the subdivision request but not allowing applicant to build, the County would be able collect the fees to make improvements to the Kaloko Drive intersection. PC REPORT NO. 71 Communication 763 Bill 247 Page 4 of 5 Committee Vice Chair Pete Hoffmann stated he was not objecting to the new Condition J but had a problem with the language in Draft 3 with respect to use of the word "may" instead of "shall". Mr. Hoffmann stated that "may" does not mean anything, whereas "shall" would require that something be done. Council Vice Chair Virginia Isbell stated the problem she has with use of the word "shall" is that the State may not agree with putting in a traffic signal there or agree with what the county plans to do. Use of the word "may" allows flexibility, but would obviously have to include what is acceptable with the State even though the state does not want to make the improvements on their own. Ms. Isbell said we need to be sure we don't include a "shall" that would require installation of a traffic signal if that's not the best thing for that particular road. Mr. Hoffmann questioned whether language would be acceptable if it stated that improvements shall include the following, but adding that the improvements would be subject to approval by the State Department of Transportation. Mr. Hoffmann believes that in this particular application as well as others before this, the state has already indicated what type of improvements should be made and that all that was being done was to restate what the Department of Transportation requires. Committee Chair Pilago interjected that no further amendments could be entertained and called for the question as to Draft 3. Director Yuen stated he did not want the word "shall" used because he did not believe that an engineering study (Warrant Study) has been conducted to determine if a signal light was justified at the Kaloko Drive/Mamalahoa Highway intersection. Mr. Hoffmann said he had problems with additional carving up of this property and the continuance of home building in what is supposed to be a watershed area and said if we were wrong before it does not mean that this wrong should be continued into the future. Greg Mooers, applicant's consultant was present along with applicant Dennis Smith. Mr. Mooers discussed the elements of the application, expressed his position that if not allowing further rezonings in the Kaloko Mauka Subdivision is the desire of the council and is necessary to protect the watershed area, then the standing Resolutions should be removed. Mr. Smith stated that for 25 years he wanted to buy property in Kaloko Mauka and with the assistance of his attorney, Joe Fagundes followed the law and did his due diligence with Mr. Moores and attorney Fagundes providing him guidance. Mr. Smith asked that the Council use the same statutes and resolutions in deciding this matter. Council Member Bob Jacobson informed Mr. Smith that there have been negative votes throughout the years for requests such as his. Mr. Smith stated that in his due diligence, the fact that there had been negative votes in the past was not brought to his attention. Council Vice Chair Virginia Isbell confirmed with Mr. Raymond that he understood that 67% of an entire lot area has to be retained in forest which meant that of the three acres one acre could be cleared but that two acres would have to be retained in forest. With respect to Ms. Isbell's inquiry whether monitoring of this requirement is being done, Director Yuen stated violators were cited in 2001/2002 but he is unaware if the Department has been up to the Kaloko Mauka area since receiving a complaint last year. Mr. Yuen PC REPORT NO. 71 Communication 763 Bill 247 Page 5 of 5 stated the department has been trying to monitor the situation, but that the only way the department could monitor compliance and enforcement would be through aerial photos. Committee Vice Chair Pete Hoffmann stated that Kaloko Mauka is now comprised of a bunch of polka- dotted forest areas in what supposed to be a watershed area and believes it's a crime. Mr. Hoffinan stated he could only suggest to Mr. Smith that in doing their due diligence, Mr. Fagundes should have been able to indicate to him that this should not have been done. Your Committee on Planning concurs with the Planning Commission 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. 247, as amended to Draft 3, and recommends it pass first reading. and Hues rvoss nee ex Respectfully submitted, ARAKAKI x HIGA x COMMITTEE ON P ANNING HOFFMANN x f~ HOLSCHUH x IKEDA x ~ [SHELL x K. ANGEL PILA ,CHAIR JACOBSON x PILACO x PC REPORT NO. 71 sAFARIK x MAY t 7 2006 ADOPTED: