Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutREP PC 073 05/16/2006 2004-2006 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON PLANNING DATE: May 16, 2006 Re: C'omm~~No. 687Bi11 No. 224 PLACE: Council Chambers 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. 224, transmitted via Communication No. 687 from Mayor Harry Kim, dated February 3, 2006, presents a Change of Zone request by HILUHILU DEVELOPMENT, LLC for property located northeast of the Kona International Airport at Keahole, between Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway and Makalei Estates Subdivision, Kau, North Kona, Hawaii , covered by TMK: 7-2-5:1. Your Committee reports as follows: Bill No. 224 seeks to amend Section 25-8-3 (North Kona Zone Map), Article 8, Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawaii County Code 1983 (2005 Edition), by changing the District Classification from Agricultural (A-3a) and Open, to Project District (PD), for approximately 725.2 acres of land. Communication No. 687 reports the Hawaii County Planning Commission considered this rezoning request and accompanying Bill No. 224 on January 20, 2006 as required by the Hawaii County Charter, Chapter 4, Section 6-4.3(C). The Commission concurred with the Planning Director's favorable recommendation on this matter. The Planning Director's favorable recommendation transmitted with Communication No. 687 can be summarized as follows: 1. The Applicant is requesting a Change of Zone Open (O) and Agricultural 3 acres (A-3a) to Project District for a master planned community ("Palamanui") with mixed uses. The proposed development will include the following: approximately 590 single-family residential units; approximately 255 multiple-family residential units; commercial spaces for medical, office, retail, classrooms and health-related issues; active and passive parks (including a 65-acre dry forest preserve) and a minimum of 100 affordable housing units on-site. The Project is to be developed in three phases over aten-year period at a cost of in excess of $300 million dollars. 2. The State Land Use Commission approved the redesignation of the property from Conservation and Agricultural districts to the Urban district. (Docket No. A03-744 dated May 19, 2005). A Project District (PD) development intends to provide for flexible, creative planning approach rather than specific land use designations. This planning approach would establish continuity in land uses and designs while providing a comprehensive network of infrastrnctural facilities and systems. 3. Existing Ordinance No. 93 45 (effective May 12, 1993) reclassified approximately 727.8 acres from the Unplanned (U) to the Agricultural (A-3a) district. This Ordinance amended the district classification of the subject area zoned A-3a (450.323 acres) as well as the current site of the Makalei Estates Subdivision. Due to the Project District request, applicable amendments to the Conditions of Ordinance No. 93 45 relating to the Project District area are being considered. 4. A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was entered into on November 21, 2002 between the University of Hawaii to consult and discuss joint development opportunities with Applicant PC REPORT NO. 73 Communication 687 Bi11224 Page 2 of 12 providing critical infrastructure for the University of Hawai`i's development. The MOU was amended on April l6, 2004 that incorporated understandings reached relating to potable water, roadway, wastewater treatment and similar infrastructure issues. The MOU also discussed concepts of a University Village and in the initial stage the University will lease space from Hiluhilu and the Hawaii CC/iJH Center will relocate from its current campus in Kealakekua. 5. The main project access road to the property will be from a new roadway intersection on Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway and shall connect with Makalei Drive at the eastern (mauka) end. The Applicant shall construct the following roads to access other properties and the regional road system: • Road "1" -Main Access Road • Road " 2" -Mid-Level Road (from the main project access road to Kaiminani Drive • Road " 3" - A north/south collector road at approximately the 600-ft. elevation (designed as a future collector road connecting Highway 190 with the main project access road and Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway. Applicant shall participate in the cost of constructing a road from the north end of Road " 3" to Highway 190 (Road "4') if another private developer is required to participate in building Road "4" as a condition of land use approvals. If Road "4" is constructed with public funds, Applicant's share shall be one-third (1/3`d) of the entire cost. • Road "5" - A road to connect south to the future extension of Holoholo Street -Nana Street. • In addition, an 800-foot setback from Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway will be established to maintain the viewplane and open space character of the Highway Corridor. 6. All utilities and services are available to the site. Police services are available from the Kealakehe Station and fire services are available from the closest fire station located near the comer of Palani Road and Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway. The County is also planning a Kalaoa Fire Station that will be closer to the subject property. 7. The Applicant, with the Department of Water Supply (DWS) and other major landowners in the area will participate in the improvement to the DWS infrastructure to provide potable water for the project and other potential projects in the Kona area. Pursuant to a Water Agreement dated June I5, 1999, it provides 343 equivalent units of water at a maximum of 600 gallons per day. Forty-one units have already been granted for Phases I and II of the Hiluhilu development. Remaining units of water will be available upon completion of outfitting Well No. 2 and providing necessary appurtenance between Well No. 2 and DWS's Puukala Tank and a water system on the property. 8. A Biological Reconnaissance completed in October, 2003 recommended that mitigation measures include: preservation of the entire Lowland Dry Forest fragment and development of a sound forest management plan; tree cutting or grubbing carried out from September through May to avoid potential take of Hoary Bats during breeding season; and potential take of nesting Hawaiian Hawks if grubbing or tree cutting in forested area outside of the proposed Dry Forest Preserve, occurs during Hawaiian Hawk breeding season from March through October. 9. A Cultural hnpact Assessment completed on December 11, 2003 noted important cultural resources on site included certain habitation and agricultural features, petroglyphs and trail segments, lava tube cave habitation features and caves of water collection practices, a significant regenerating lama forest, and land forms and view planes of geographic features important in that PC REPORT NO. 73 Communication 687 Bill 224 Page 3 of 12 portion of the Kekaha region. No traditional and customary Native Hawaiian rights were found to be exercised on the property, however, applicant agrees with consultants' suggestion that the resources should be protected and managed. 10. A June 2003 Archaeological Inventory Survey noted that of the 83 archaeological sites recorded, 12 were recommended for preservation, 30 recommended for data recovery and no further work recommended for the remaining 41 sites. Twenty-two (22) of the eighty-three (83) sites (as well as the 65-acre dryland native forest) were proposed for preservation. 11. The Department of Land and Natural Resources, Historic Preservation Division's letter dated April 5, 2004 states there are no known or recorded burials in the proposed Petition area. It states that of the 83 sites in the project area, all but two were assessed as significant under Criterion D, and four sites assessed significant under Criterion E for their religious/ceremonial association and twelve sites will be preserved. Applicant will develop and implement a Preservation and Data Recovery Plan and that the Data Recovery Plan will be submitted to the Departrnent of Land and Natural Resources Historic Preservation Division for review and approval. 12. According to The Planning Director's findings and recommendations, the Change of Zone request from Open (O) and Agricultural 3 acres (A-3a) to a Project District (PD would result in an appropriate land use pattern that would further benefit the public based on the following: • The proposed rezoning conforms to the Land Use, Single Family and Multi Family Residential and commercial sub elements, and Housing goals, policies, and standards of the General Plan and is consistent with the Economic element of the General Plan. • The requested change of zone to Project District conforms to the LUPAG Map designation for the area. The requested change of zone to a CG-10 district conforms to the LUPAG Map, which designates the subject property as an Urban Expansion Area. Such designation allows for a mix of high density, medium density and low density urban developments, industrial and/or open designation in areas where new settlements are desired, but a specific pattern and mix use have not yet been determined. • Lands surrounding the subject property is bordered by Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway on the west, Makalei Estates (zoned A-3a) to the east, vacant lands to the north (owned by the State of Hawaii) zoned A-Sa and vacant lands to the south (owned by the State of Hawai `i) zoned A-Sa that is proposed for developing the University of Hawaii Center of West Hawaii . • The approval of the Change of Zone Request is not contrary to the provisions of Chapter 205A, Hawaii Revised Statutes. The property is not situated within the Special Management Area and is located mauka of Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway, is not an oceanfront property and will not be impacted by coastal hazard and beach erosion. • The subject property is classified Zone "X", areas determined to be outside the 500-year flood plain. The soil types consist of Punaluu (extremely rocky peat), Kaimu (extremely stony peat) and Pahoehoe lava flows. The Kaimu soil is not suitable for cultivation. The middle portion of the property consists of the Punaluu series and the lower area proximate to Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway consists of Pahoehoe and A`a lava flows. PC REPORT NO. 73 Communication 687 Bill 224 Page 4 of 12 Requisite of the Planning Director's favorable recommendation for the Change of Zone request are forty- six (46) conditions contained in Bill No. 224 that outline specific requirements for the proposed development. These relate to access, infrastructure, road construction, a University Inn and Conference Center, compliance with Conditions of approval of [he State Land Use Commission Decision and Order dated May 19, 2005 (Docket No. A03-744) and Water Agreement dated June 15, 1999, among others. At the March 21, 2006 meeting of the Committee on Planning a presentation was given by applicant Guido Giacometti outlining road infrastructure and summarizing the proposal involving the University campus and applicant's understanding with the University of Hawaii Board of Regents. Planning Director Yuen explained that recommendation for approval is based upon forty-six (46) imposed conditions and the several roads applicant proposes to construct. Mr. Giacometti stated the main access road would connect to Makalei Drive and that Makalei residents were previously notified that this would be the case. Director Yuen stated that if a northerly access road is built with public funds then applicant will contribute to construction costs. Director Yuen said applicant will provide various pipeline and other facilities for the North Kona water system that will connect to wells in the area and that connection to several intermediate reservoirs and lines will reduce demand for water by the airport and NELHA. Applicant stated the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the University states that Hiluhilu would provide space within its development project that would allow the University to move its Kealakekua campus facility to applicant's site or a site adjacent to applicant's property. Applicant noted that the programs, recommendations and requirements proposed by Planning Commission are conditions the applicant is willing to accept. Chancellor Rockne Freitas explained that the Board of Regents of UH signed off on anon-binding MOU that expires next month and he has been working diligently to extend the agreement. Applicant would assist the University with infrastructure needs and provide adequate space within its development to facilitate relocation of the Kealakekua campus. He indicated there is a great need for a university in west Hawaii as the Kealakekua facility is antiquated and cramped. The Chancellor that that if the project at this site did not proceed, the university's emphasis would probably shift to other sites. However, because the Hiluhilu site was approved by the Board of Regents, this location is the primary focus of the university's attention. Mr. Giacometti stated the MOU between applicant and the University is anon-binding agreement that provides for lease of space to the University. The lease could be extended for longer lease periods with the university having to build some of its own infrastructure, but that applicant would be happy to house the university as long as it needed the space. Chancellor Freitas stated the proposed facilities to be leased from applicants can accommodate about 600 students initially, but that could easily grow to 1,500 between the first and five-year period and that growth may still occur while the university is located on applicant's property. Testimony was received from several members of the public ranging from opposition to the proposal due to inadequate infrastructure to support of the proposal with conditions and those who support the project in its entirety. Members of the public who gave testimony were: Dave Holzman - Do not use university as justification for project unless it's guaranteed that the Governor supports it and the Board of Regents pass the budget for construction of facilities on state property. PC REPORT NO. 73 Communication 687 Bi11224 Page 5 of 12 • Jerry Schnyer: Supports proposal for its proposed contributions, but objects if Makalei Drive is used as the mauka/makai road. Will support applicant's proposal if mauka/makai road goes to the north. • Bob and Pat Aeder (support) • Jeff Satcher (oppose) • Hawaii Island Economic Development Board (support) • Josephine Keliipio (oppose) • Lany Johnson, Makalei Estates President (Applicant not addressed 4,000 cazs per day accessing Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway creating funnel effect and existing problems with street light coordination. • Paul Tobin (oppose) • Keith King (oppose) • Mr. Wilkins - of 13,000 existing water commitments, over 10,000 aze held in Kona which is equivalent to six (6) full-capacity wells that have not yet been drilled. In support of project but drill more wells and fix broken pumps before proceeding with development. • Roger Holding -Kona Community Development Plan is in progress; review suggestions for community planning. • Eric Von Platen, Kona Kohala Chamber of Commerce (support.) • Cazol & David Kwiat -oppose development if a safe mauka/makai connector road is not constructed. • Marian Wilkins -Don't make a decision until unanswered questions and loose ends are resolved. • Vivian Landrnm - (support) • Janice Palma-Glennie (request deferral to public hearing) • Jonathan Morgan (oppose) • Robert Wazd -realistic needs have to be addressed regarding roadways; supports grade separation. • Roger Duer -concerned about road going through Makalei Estates. • Cory Harden (oppose) • Dan Olson -main concern is water and whether new wells will be pumping from drinking water aquifer. If so, will diminish supply to the point of becoming more salty. • Lionel Kutner (support) • Marjorie Erway (defer/postpone for a few years) • Lillian Fox - no development until infrastructure is adequate • Jim Sogi - (oppose) • Kirk Stafferson (support) • Steve & Candice Raymond -support construction of an appropriate mauka/makai connector, not to use Makalei Drive as the connector. • Dave (last name unknown) -crazy to do a project of this magnitude while Community Development Plan is being developed; traffic; should have a public hearing. • Lei Kihoi-Dunn (oppose) call for public hearing • Mr. Dider -would vote in favor 100% if had commitment from the governor regarding UH. • Curtis Tyler - Mauka/makai road very important; more important to have connection than worry about grade percentage. Request to schedule at least one public hearing. • Susan Aronson -supports Hiluhilu site for college. Following public testimony, this matter was postponed for public hearing to be scheduled in Kona as soon as staff establishes an available date. Council Member James Arakaki voted against postponement. PC REPORT NO. 73 Communication 687 Bill 224 Page 6 of 12 A public hearing was held on April 26, 2006 at the Kealakehe High School Cafeteria at 6:00 p.m. A presentation describing the project was given by applicant Guido Giacometti, and Michael Reihm, chief architect. Rockne Freitas, chancellor, provided an update as to the status of negotiations with applicant. The Chancellor noted that the MOU was renewed twice and although there is no formal agreement between the university and applicant, they are engaged in ongoing discussions. Members of the public that provided testimon were: • Joel Gimpel -Kona Traffic Safety Committee (oppose) Urged to proceed slowly with this application. • Lawrence Johnson (oppose) Put on hold until north connector road completed. • Jerry Schneyer(oppose) • Andrew Archibald (oppose) • Earl Gaspar, lot owner in Makalei Estates (support) • Harold Murata (neither supports or opposes) • Rick Vidgen (support) • Lonnie (last name unknown) -delay until CDP finalized; delay until UH decides location of college and funding; deny application until appropriate mauka/makai connector route established; defer until determination is made regarding connection with Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway. • Steve Snyder (oppose) • Terry Dunlap (support) • Frank Lajinis (no comment) • Ken Mylar (support) willing to meet with parties to offer north/south connector through his property. • Steve Herbert -provided comments regarding attributes of project. • Curtis Tyler -provisionally supports project • Lionel Kutner (supports) • Dan Olson -would support if applicant aligns mauka/makai road with airport intersection and questioned whether 200 affordable units will support 1,841 jobs. Mr. Giacometti stated that number of jobs included other jobs relating to the University. As for noise from the proposed motor sports project, an informal study was done but he doesn't have final answers. Council Vice Chair Virginia Isbell wants to see a noise study done and Mr. Giacometti stated their EIS included airport construction noise and a buffer with Highway 19 is being proposed. • Jake Jacobs (oppose) • Ross Fulmer (support) • Janice Palma-Glennie (oppose) • Walter Kunitake (support) • Marjorie Erway -urges delay until CDP complete and adopted by Ordinance. • Mr. Archibald -noted developer's adjustments regarding water plant, connector roads and university. • Josephine Keliipio - (oppose) • Mrs. Reihm - (support) • Andrew Tamasese (support) • Bill Brooks -supports council continue working with the developer • Sally Ruyn -public schools (elementary school unit lacking) • Sheryl King - (neither support or oppose) PC REPORT N0.73 Communication 687 Bi11224 Page 7 of 12 Written testimonies were received from the following people: • Roger Kloepping, CHP (support -with 5 conditions) • Ginger Thomas (oppose) provide infrastructure first • Michael Galvin (oppose) • Dustin Mayer-Leialoha (support) • Peggy Kelley (support) • Bob & Pat Aeder (support) • Stephen Lopez (conditionally oppose) • Lei Kihoi-Dunne (support -with conditions) • David & Tammi Whitbeck (support) • Donna & Chester Leialoha (support) • Olena Mayer-Leialoha (support) • Chris Jett (support) • Peter Hain (support if university is built) • Vanessa Roberg (support) • Kirk Stephenson (support) • Elizabeth Cole (support with conditions) • Wayne & Debra Newman (support) • Denny Coffman (support) • Carol & David Kwait (support with conditions) • Ian Hamar (support) • Ross Fulmer (support) • Pete Petersen (support) • Allen & Anne Abaya (oppose) • Libby McNamara (neither support or oppose) Mr. Giacometti explained that Road #4 runs through state land and into land commonly called Makalei golf course land or the Lynch property. Hiluhilu would build Road 3 and then contribute to completion of Road 4 in the amount of $8 million. Mr. Giacometti said this idea requires cooperation of the Lynch group but understands that Lynch is not ready with development plans for its property. It would cost approximately $15 million to complete the entire 17,000 lineal feet of Road #4. Responding to Council Vice Chair Isbell's question regazding water sources, Mr. Giacometti stated the project will use water from wells described in Condition C. He said the agreement for water has been in place for some time and refer to two wells drilled and cased at two corners of the Makalei Estates located below Mamalahoa Highway. The well on the south side will add significantly to water availability and the second well will supply water for the North Kona system. The two wells were drilled and developed by the prior owner of applicant's property. Committee Vice Chair Hoffmann raised issue regarding the need for grade separation and whether applicant has created plans to provide an underpass. The applicant stated they looked at this and at a price tag of $15 million which would be quite possible as long as it coincides with DOT and systems designed to interconnect and be in sync with safety measures. PC REPORT NO. 73 Communication 687 Bill 224 Page 8 of 12 At the May 16, 2006 meeting of the Committee on Planning public testimony in Hilo was received from Mr. Mark McGuffy representing the Hawaii Island Economic Development Boazd, in support of Bill 224. Public testimony presented in Kona from Ann Kirn (in support), Charles Padrido (in opposition and no occupancy until road completed), Lawrence Johnson (in opposition, noting if application approved, threat of public litigation), Janice Palma-Glennie (in opposition), and Curtis Tyler (in support). There were no testifiers at the Waimea Council office. Following a recess, Chair Pilago stated the record reflects that at the last Planning Committee meeting Bi11224 was postponed to a public hearing and not tabled. The Committee Chair noted that due to comments from Kona relating to public litigation, Corporation Counsel is being called. The Chair also noted that Council Member Gary Safarik is excused. Council Vice Chair Isbell stated three concerns: 1) Agreement between Board of Regents and Palamanui is non-binding and confirmation that the LTH campus is not intended to be built on Kealakehe property; 2) mauka road needs clarification; and 3) a signal at the intersection on Queen Ka'ahumanu would be a terrible mistake and should be an interchange of some type. Tom Yamamoto of the Lynch group clarified that the Lynch property is the former Huehue lands and their group has been looking at a project mauka of Mamalahoa Highway and on the makai side in the vicinity of the Palamanui project. Mr. Yamamoto said that it was during discussions of the mauka/makai road to Mamalahoa Highway that it was brought to their attention the Makalei road was not adequate. Mr. Yamamoto said the Lynch group feels the connection to Mamalahoa Highway could be made and has a tentative road alignment that may work. Mr. Giacometti said Road 4 passes through state property, adjoins to the Lynch Group lands and ends up at the intersection of the Makalei Golf Course. This alignment has been discussed with Lynch and the Planning Director and applicant agrees to build a portion of Road 4 located on applicant's property. Mr. Giacometti stated if Lynch develops their property, applicant would build their portion of the road as well as fifty percent of the road located on state lands. If Lynch does not develop and participate, applicant agrees to build one-third of the entire Road 4 with government funding covering the remaining 2/3rds. Mr. Giacometti stated a Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) was done with reviews, revisions and discussions with the State Highway division and Public Works. The DOT's response and recommentdation is that the best and least disruptive north south traffic arrangement for Queen Ka'ahumanu is not a fourth access at existing intersection, but to build a new three-way intersection at the Palamanui intersection a mile north. He understands that the Airports Division has a conceptual plan for a grade separation about''/z mile north but it's conceptual with no timetable. However Mr. Giacometti understands a new master plan may be available within a year. PC REPORT NO. 73 Communication 687 Bill 224 Page 9 of 12 Committee Chair Pilago noted the need for written communication and commitment from the Department of Transportation. Chair Pilago confirmed with Mr. Yamamoto that the Lynch group would be responsible for 100% of expenses to construct Road 4 within Lynch's property, provided Lynch has some form of development on their property. Mr. Giacometti also acknowledged that applicant is obligated for 100% of the expense to construct the portion of Road 4 located within their property (referred to as Road 3 in their application) and both Palamanui and Lynch agrees to be obligated for 50% of the cost to construction the portion of Road 4 located on state land. Mr. Yamamoto stated that portion of Road 4 located on Lynch property is estimated to be about 8,000 feet which translates to a cost of $8-$10 million plus $5 million for the portion located on state land. He noted it's a big chunk of change to do roadway. Mr. Yamamoto said they are currently in the planning stages of finding ways to do this and that although there is no firm commitment, Lynch is studying what can be done and feels it is possible. Mr. Yamamoto noted Lynch could not afford to do road without developing their property and if their development did not go through, Road 4 would have to be government funded. He said as faz as the roadway is concerned, Road 4 can go through Lynch's property no matter who builds it. Vice Chair Hoffmann confirmed with applicant that there is no golf course and a different structure regarding layout. Mr. Giacometti stated eliminating the golf course does not change the fundamental residential, commercial and other use mixes. In response to Mr. Hoffman's suggestion that applicant develop a larger park, Mr. Giacometti stated the 15-acre pazk was based on discussions with Department of Pazks and Recreation, however, since the golf course was eliminated, applicant is agreeable to revising their documents and adding more land to the 15- acre park. With regard to the DOE fair share assessment, Mr. Hoffmann confirmed that it if there was any cash contributions as the result of the fair share requirement, this would be reserved for use at the Kealakehe complex of schools and applicant would have no objection to adding this as one of the terms of the agreement for this particular ordinance. Mr. Giacometti stated applicant has no objection in applying the DOE fair share contributions to the Kealakehe schools and indicated approximately $2 million would be reserved for the Kealakehe schools. Vice Chair Hoffmann confirmed applicant's recent letter to Chancellor Freitas indicating applicant's willingness to build a 20,000 square foot building on the University owned 500-acre site immediately adjacent to Palamanui. Mr. Giacometti is agreeable to including this as a condition of development and stated that the design and details of what that building would be used for have not been worked out, but the concept is that it will be built in a fashion to allow the move from the current UH facilities in Kealakekua to this site. As to Road 4, Vice Chair Hoffmann asked whether a community facilities district and partnership between applicant, the Lynch group and the County would be a reasonable solution or viable approach to make the road happen now as the development is being constructed. Mr. Giacometti said it is a good possibility but has concerns about the assessed areas as the road will PC REPORT NO. 73 Communication 687 Bill 224 Page l0 of 12 have substantial benefit to a wide range of citizens of the west side. Mr. Giacometti believes that while community funding districts may work in specific instances in confined communities where confined communities are principal beneficiaries, this situation would be harder to define. However, he stated if there is appropriate districting, it may work. Committee Chair Pilago noted the DOE fair share amount is approximately $2,633,222.00 that will go into a designated account reserve for use in the existing school complex for Kealakehe. Mr. Giacometti stated the draft agreement was prepared by the Department of Education's facilities branch and noted that discussions with DOE have incorporated the provisions of this agreement. Mr. Giacometti stated he also envisions the development of a DOE facility on Palamanui land for use by the Department of Education. Council Member Jacobson confirmed that applicant would not be charging the University rent for the 20,000 square foot building it will construct on University land. Mr. Giacometti stated they are continuing to operate under the non-binding MOU for planning purposes and submitted in writing a binding offer by Hiluhilu to build the infrastructure and the 20,000 square foot facilities on university property and the of;=site infrastructure. The non-binding reference is only to the MOU. As for a timetable, he hopes to be in construction and have the facilities for the university open in the fall of 2008. He is also willing to build the mauka/makai road during the first increment of construction. As for Road 4, he has no timetable for that but Road 1 (up to Makalei Drive) would be an obligation that Hiluhilu would build first and complete within a year to 18 months. Council Chair Higa asked if applicant would be agreeable to a turn turn-key facility suitable to university standards and Mr. Giacometti stated they would provide a facility that the university could move their equipment into. Mr. Giacometti confirmed that applicant will build the same kind of facilities on the adjacent university property as it had planned to build on applicant's property. Guy Lam said they would build a facility mutually beneficial to both parties. Mr. Lam stated if the facility would be to service a student capacity of 3,000 there would be no problem with power, water and sewer and is certainly planning to work with the parties in putting a privatization plan together. Mr. Lam confirmed they have no problem with raising the park from 15 acres to 20 acres. Mr. Higa stated a grade separation on Queen Ka'ahumanu is needed somewhere and wants a commitment that this happens. Mr. Higa also stated he would have no problem in voting to allocate money for such a grade separation. Mr. Higa wants to be sure the University gets built and confirmed with the applicant that they are committed to providing the university with a space either on applicant's property or on the 500-acre parcel. Applicant is willing to do their part and suggests Chair Higa draft the language. Council Member Arakaki confirmed the facility on the university site would be built to county standards and whether applicant builds a facility on their property or on the university property, the facility size will be the same and up to county standards. Mr. Giacometti stated water availability could support the minimum facility size of 20,000 square feet but it's difficult to commit to a number limit on university occupancy. PC REPORT NO. 73 Communication 687 Bi11224 Page 11 of 12 Council Chair Higa confirmed with Mr. Lam that market prices in the project would be in the range of $475,000 with some product close to a million dollars. Mr. Higa wants to see affordable housing built and applicant stated it does not wish to sell their affordable housing credits and agreed to a condition that no afford housing credits cannot be transferred. Council Member Jacobson talked about testimony regarding grade percentage of Makalei Drive which Director Yuen stated the maximum is 19 percent. Mr. Jacobson asked Deputy Corporation Counsel Amy Self about the liability questions raised and status of a bill in the legislature that would lower County liability. Ms. Self stated if the road was built according the standard, liability would be less. However, if there was a letter from the county describing something that is wrong with the road, that would actually put the county on notice. Ms. Self will research this issue and provide comments prior to the next council meeting. Mr. Jacobson requested staff to forward a copy of the written testimony to Deputy Self. Mr. Jacobson wants to know what would constitute notice especially since the council will have vote on this. Director Yuen stated the gist of the Supreme Court decision is the percentage of liability the county would be responsible for. Legislation was passed to prevent the counties from being responsible for the bulk of a judgment amount when there was a small percentage of fault. However, Director Yuen doesn't know what happened with the legislation and doesn't think it passed. He said there is potential liability for any public road and that Makalei Road was built to county dedicable standards as a minor street. Mr. Jacobson stated some Makalei residents stated the county could be sued if it allowed Makalei Drive is used as a connector road and wants Deputy Self to investigate these issues. Council Chair Higa stated he supports this application with the amendments discussed and will speak with applicant regarding the amendments. Vice Chair Hoffmann requested that he and Mr. Higa work with each other on proposed amendments. Mr. Higa stated he had no problem with that as long as there would be no sunshine law violation issues. Council Member Arakaki stated he generally agrees with what was said today and will vote in favor of this application. He also noted he doesn't want to jeopardize the chain of information between Mr. Higa and Mr. Hoffmann but is leary about members getting together to discuss issues and suggest they check with corporation counsel before proceeding with discussion. Committee Chair Pilago noted the committee needs to take into account Mr. Arakaki's comments relating to serial communications among members. However, he noted the need to establish a variety of conditions and have these firmly set because they are still nebulus issues and there needs to be some kind of reference point to firm up these conditions. Chair Pilago called a recess for a discussion with Corporation Counsel and upon resuming the meeting stated that the aspect of serial communication is between elected officials and that all members need to be cautious in how public business is conducted. Council Chair Higa said he spoke with Corporation Counsel Lincoln Ashida who advised that Mr. Higa and Mr. Hoffmann may discuss, however, he cautioned that it creates a negative perception because there is collaboration. Mr. Ashida suggested that each do their own amendments and bring it out in PC REPORT N0.73 Communication 687 Bi11224 Page 12 of 12 public on the floor in open discussions. Mr. Ashida also cautioned applicants who speak individually with a council member regarding amendments and thereafter discloses to another council member what was discussed. That would constitute a form of serial communication. 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. 224, and recommends it pass first reading. and AYES NOES A&E EX Respectfully submitted, ARAKAICI x HIGA x COMMITTEE ON PLANNING HOFFMANN x C~'~ HOLSCHUH x IKEDA x ISBELL x JACOBSON x K. ANGEL PIL O, CHAIR PILAGO x PC REPORT NO. 73 SAFARIK x ADOPTED: JUN Z ~ 2OOG