HomeMy WebLinkAboutREP PC 104 07/31/2006 2004-2006 REPORT OF THE
COMMITTEE ON PLANNING
DATE: July 31, 2006/August 1, 2006 Re: Comm. No. 964 /Bill No. 309
PLACE: Council Chambers
TIME: 1:00 p.m./1:30 p.m.
Council Chair and Members
Hawaii County Council
Hilo, Hawaii 96720
Your Committee on Planning, to which was referred Bill No. 309, reports as follows:
Bill No. 309, transmitted via Communication No. 964 from Mayor Harry Kim, dated June 19, 2006,
presents proposed amendments to the text, policies, courses of action, Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide
(LUPAG) Map, and Facilities Map of the Hawaii County General Plan.
Bill No. 309 outlines General Plan Interim Amendments as follows:
• Planning Director's Proposed Changes to the Land Use Pattem Allocation Guide (LUPAG) Map
(February 24, 2006, Revised June 7, 2006), Maps "A-1"through "G-1"; and
• Planning Director's Proposed Changes to General Plan Facilities Map (February 24, 2006)
relating to:
i) Public Facilities (Protective Services & Health and Sanitation);
ii) Transportation (Roadways);
iii) Land Use; and
iv) Plan Implementation.
Communication No. 964 reports that the Hawaii County Planning Commission, as required by Chapter 4,
Sec. 6-4.3(C), Hawaii County Charter, considered the above request at its meetings on May 5 and May
26, 2006. The Commission voted to send a favorable recommendation to the County Council on the
Planning Director's General Plan Interim Amendments, with the exception of the proposed F-2 map
change which received an unfavorable recommendation by a vote of 6-0. The Commission also did not
have the required number of votes to support proposed map change A-1 that received a 3-3 vote.
Unanimous votes were cast for all other proposed amendments.
By letter dated March 30, 2006 to the Chair and Members of the Planning Commission, Planning Director
Chris Yuen informed the Commission that the proposed deletion of the following "Course of Action" for
Transportation in South Kohala, sec. 13.2.5.6.2(8), aroused a great deal of public interest:
"To relieve traffic congestion through Waimea town, implement construction of (a) Parker
Ranch's connector road from Kamamalu Street to Mamalahoa Highway; and (b) the County's
extension of this road, between Mamalahoa Highway and Kawaihae Road in the vicinity of the
Waimea solid waste transfer station."
The Director noted the above "course of action" was new in the 2005 General Plan and grew out of
Ordinances that rezoned Parker Ranch land to allow commercial and residential development and
required Pazker Ranch to build the lateral connector road, triggered by phases of its development. Due to
public concern and a pending traffic circulation study by Parsons Brinkerhoff, the Planning Director
PC REPORT NO. 104
Communication No. 964
Bill 309
Page 2 of 15
asked that the Planning Commission defer action on this proposed amendment until receipt of the
preliminary study findings. The Director notes that if the study reaffirms the basic concept of the type of
connector road called for in the Ranch's rezoning ordinances, the Director will withdraw the proposed
General Plan Amendment.
At the July 31, 2006 Planning Committee meeting, public testimony was received from the following:
Hilo Council Chambers: Charles Flaherty (opposed to LUPAG Map change "E-2" and "E-4");
Bob Ely, representing the Orchidland Community Association (opposed to LUPAG Map change
"A-1" and "A-2"); Glenn Pressel, Orchidland Community resident (opposed to commercial
development in their community); Brenda Ford (opposed to LUPAG Map change "F-2"); Dore
Dokos-Loeweathal (opposed to LUPAG Map change "F-2"); David Tomas (in support of
LUPAG Map change "E-4"); Tim Lui-Kwan, Esq. representing Captain Cook Ranch, LLC (will
state his position at the time LUPAG Map change "F-2" is called); William J. Paris (stated he was
present to observe); Riul Vidgen; and Phillip Abadilla, President of the Ainaloa Community
Association (not in support of LUPAG Map change for Puna "A-1).
Kona Council Office: Marnie Herkes (opposed to proposed deletion of "15.3 Annual Report");
Janice Palma-Glennie (opposed to LUPAG Map changes "E-2", "E-4" and "F-2"); and Debbie
Datkowitz (opposed to LUPAG Map change "E-4").
Following public testimony, the Committee unanimously voted to bifurcate the interim amendments and
vote on each proposed amendment separately. (Ayes: Hoffmann, Holschuh, Ikeda, Isbell, Jacobson,
Pilago, Safazik. Absent: Arakaki, Higa).
Planning Director Chris Yuen gave a brief presentation noting the great deal of work done subsequent to
the 2005 General Plan amendments. The Director stated that Zoning and General Plan Amendments are
two separate things, clarifying that zoning would still apply even if a General Plan designation is different
and that further development consistent with the General Plan would still require Council action and
approval.
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND USE PATTERN ALLOCATION GUIDE MAP
"A-I" Rural to Medium Density Urban (Ainaloa Blvd. -PUNA)
"A-2" Rural to Medium Density Urban (Orchidland Dr. -PUNA)
Director Yuen stated Ainaloa and Orchidland aze rapidly growing areas that should need some
commercial areas and that the CDP for the Puna District is attempting to determine where these
areas should be. Director Yuen noted it would be fine if the Council deferred these amendments
until the Puna CDP is complete. Council Member Safazik recommended postponement of "A-1"
and "A-2", especially in light of public testimony. Council Members Arakaki and Jacobson
supported postponement until CDP process is completed and Committee Chair Pilago supported
postponement to preserve the integrity of the CDP process.
The Committee unanimously voted to postpone the proposed amendment to LUPAG Map "A-1"
and "A-2" until the Puna CDP process determines the particular effort for the area. (Ayes:
Arakaki, Higa, Hoffmann, Holschuh, Ikeda, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago, Safazik).
PC REPORT NO. 104
Communication No. 964
Bill 309
Page 3 of 15
Following the Committee's discussion and action on the LUPAG Map amendments, the earlier
postponement of "A-1" and "A-2" was questioned as there would be no mechanism or method by
which the two postponed items could be brought back to the floor once Bill 309 moved to
Council. Council Member Safazik concurred with Council Member Arakaki that to resolve this
matter "A-1" and "A-2"should be voted down and brought back at the appropriate time.
Therefore, the Committee unanimously approved a motion to reconsider. (Ayes: Arakaki, Higa,
Hoffmann, Holschuh, Ikeda, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago, Safazik)
A motion to approve amendment to LUPAG Map "A-1"and "A-2" failed. (Ayes: Isbell. Noes:
Arakaki, Higa, Hoffmann, Holschuh, Ikeda, Jacobson, Pilago, Safarik).
"B-1" Rural to Low Density Urban (near Kaumana Drive - HILO)
The Committee unanimously approved the proposed amendment to LUPAG Map "B-1". (Ayes:
Arakaki, Higa, Hoffmann, Holschuh, Ikeda, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago, Safazik.)
"B-2" Rural to Medium Density Urban (near Sunrise Estates)
Council Member Ikeda stated this is a very bad flood area and the whole neighborhood is against
the proposed change and therefore should remain Rural. Director Yuen noted this was actually a
Map error and would have been medium density anyway.
The Committee approved a motion to postpone. (Ayes: Isbell, Hoffmann, Pilago, Safarik,
Holschuh, Arakaki. Noes: Jacobson, Ikeda, Higa).
The Committee then approved a motion to reconsider postponement. (Ayes: Higa, Holschuh,
Ikeda, Isbell, Jacobson, Safazik. Noes: Arakaki, Pilago, Hoffmann).
The motion to postpone failed. (Ayes: Arakaki. Noes: Higa, Hoffmann, Holschuh, Ikeda, Isbell,
Jacobson, Pilago, Safarik)
A motion to approve LUPAG Map change "B-2" failed. (Ayes: Arakaki. Noes: Higa, Hoffmann,
Holschuh, Ikeda, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago, Safarik.)
"B-3" Low Density Urban to Important Ag. Lands (Wainaku Area)
Council Member Ikeda stated he would like to see the area kept in its present designation
as this is the next growth area where people are moving to. Mr. Ikeda also knew of a developer
who has plans for affordable housing and that was the reason he wants it left in Low Density
Urban. Despite Mr. Ikeda's position, Council Member Jacobson supports the change due to its
important ag and watershed location.
A motion to approve LUPAG Map change "B-3" failed. (Ayes: Jacobson. Noes: Arakaki, Higa,
Hoffmann, Holschuh, Ikeda, Isbell, Pilago, Sazazik).
PC REPORT NO. 104
Communication No. 964
Bill 309
Page 4 of 15
The following items were taken out of sequence to accommodate members of the public who have been
waiting for these amendments to be called.
"F-2" Important Ag. Lands to Rural (Hokulia/Keopuka/KealakekuaAreri)
Director Yuen noted the great public opposition to this amendment, and explained it was not
proposed because of or for any future development, but to conform to current applications and
permits already approved. Council Vice Chair Isbell wanted to insure that development in the
area was kept at a 2-acre minimum and suggested imposing restrictive covenants to prohibit
subdividing lots into less than 2 acre pazcels. She suggested that she would prepare appropriate
language and bring before the next Council meeting.
Tim Lui-Kwan, attorney representing Captain Cook Ranch, LLC explained that the Rural and
Important Ag. Lands designations were not in existence in1987 at the time the SMA Permit was
granted. The RA 2-Acre zoning falls within the property zoning and does not fit into a higher
zone change. Mr. Lui-Kwan stated he believed this amendment provides consistency between
zoning and planning policies and noted he did suggest language that would restrict future
rezoning as long as it is in the Rural designation.
Director Yuen advised that Ms. Isbell's concerns could be addressed via a "course of action"
change and that amendments to the General Plan reflect reality and a category that fits best.
Council Member Jacobson stated he will not support the change. Council Member Doc Holschuh
noted not much sense changing designation to Rural since it already has 2-acre zoning. Mr. Lui-
Kwan stated he prefers the Rural designation because it avoids future controversy.
Committee Chair Pilago noted petition letters and the Planning Commission's 6-0 vote
recommending deletion of proposed amendment "F-2".
A motion to amend LUPAG Map change "F-2" was approved. (Ayes: Arakaki, Higa, Ikeda,
Isbell, Holschuh, Safarik. Noes: Jacobson, Hoffmann, Pilago).
"E-2" Resort, Medium Density Urban, Low Density Urban and Open to Open, Low Density Urban
and Urban Expansion (Kohanaiki/Kealakehe/Honokohau)
Director Yuen explained that this amendment eliminates the 1989 LUPAG map and the 2003
SMA Use Permit pushed project back, away from the shoreline. The County administration
opposed development along the shoreline and since the developer needed an SMA permit the
County could support, development was moved back from the shoreline. The current General
Plan shows a resort azea and other uses along the shoreline. Director Yuen explained the
amendment takes out Resort designation and shows an open area along the shoreline which is part
of the SMA Permit and is meant to conform to the current 2003 SMA Use Permit. He stated the
current General Plan calls for dramatically more development than what is being proposed by
LUPAG Map change "E-2".
Committee Chair Pilago confirmed that by voting yes to this amendment it will eliminate the
Resort designation in the current General Plan and take away all coastal development except in
the location of the Beach Club facility and get rid of the 1989 LUPAG map designation.
PC REPORT NO. 104
Communication No. 964
Bill 309
Page 5 of 15
The Committee unanimously approved the proposed amendment to LUPAG Map "E-2". (Ayes:
Arakaki, Higa, Hoffmann, Holschuh, Ikeda, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago, Safarik).
"E-4" Open to Urban Expansion (Kohanaiki/Kealakehe/Honokohau)
Committee Chair Pilago spoke against proposal as it was premature since an application has not
been brought before the council. He urged members to vote no. Council Member Jacobson
concurred. Director Yuen raised the issue of the Council-initiated resolution that included a
Resort component and noted at this time the curcent Urban designation conforms to DHHL while
the rest is Open. The amendment would allow some urban uses around the harbor (dry stack
storage, hazbor improvements, commercial azeas, restaurants, retail outlets, souveniers, fishing
geaz, etc.), and that the difference between this amendment and the Council initiated Resolution is
this amendment does not include a Resort designation. Mr. Yuen noted that all commercial
activity currently operating at the harbor have been operating in an area designated Open.
Director Yuen explained that Urban designation is different from Resort. He noted that a resort
would be a major economic growth generator because additional hotel rooms create a multiplier
effect requiring additional employees who need social amenities for the workforce, while not
increasing the flow of money into the community. In response to Committee Vice Chair
Hoffmann's question why the Director feels Urban designation would not affect quality of life
issues, Mr. Yuen stated that it is at rezoning that impacts are addressed and conditions imposed
relating to infrastructure contributions. Mr. Hoffmann stated he believes postponing or deferring
this matter as was done earlier for Map Change "A-1" and "A-2", until the Kona CDP is
completed, would be consistent.
The Committee approved the proposed amendment to LUPAG Map change "E-4". (Ayes:
Arakaki, Higa, Holschuh, Ikeda, Isbell, Safazik. Noes: Hoffmann, Jacobson, Pilago).
"E-6" Extensive Ag. and Orchards to Important Ag. Lands (Keauhou -Hokulia Area)
"E-7" Orchards and Important Ag. Lands to Extensive Ag. (Keauhou -Hokulia Area)
"E-8" Important Ag. Lands to Extensive Ag.
In answer to Committee Chair Pilago's question why the coffee belt azea was changed from the
700-foot elevation to the 1,000-ft elevation, Director Yuen stated that this area needed something
done because the current General Plan zig-zags with no consistency between one azea and
another. Mr. Yuen stated based on public testimony, coffee is usually not farmed at this elevation
because it was found not successful. Chair Pilago urged a no vote to preserve the Important Ag
Lands inventory and also to be consistent with the Farm Bureau recommendation and the
Resolution establishing the 700-foot elevation.
Mr. William Paris, a member of the Farm Bureau stated that historically, a number of farmers did
try to farm at the 700-foot elevation and below and they went flat broke during drought season.
Mr. Pazis stated unless you bring water down to that level, subdivide your property into 5-acre
parcel and provide roads, it is impossible to successfully farm at that level. Director Yuen stated
a lot of farmers in the area and at that elevation failed at farming cotton, coffee,
PC REPORT NO. 104
Communication No. 964
Bi11309
Page 6 of IS
citrus and other crops. However, in the South Kona azeas coffee is grown successfully at a lower
elevations but not in this area.
The Committee approved the proposed amendment to LUPAG Map change to "E-6", "E-7" and
"E-8". (Ayes: Arakaki, Higa, Ilceda, Hoffmann, Holchuh, Safarik. Noes: Pilago, Jacobson,
Isbell)
"B-4" Industrial to Important Ag. Lands (Pepeekeo Area)
Council Member Holschuh asked whether this proposed change would preclude the Pepeekeo
Mill from starting up again. Director Yuen stated that this amendment would not preclude the
mill from starting up again, however, it does limit and decrease the Industrial designation to a
smaller area.
The Committee unanimously approved the proposed amendment to LUPAG Map "B-4". (Ayes:
Arakaki, Higa, Hoffmann, Holschuh, Ikeda, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago, Safazik).
"B-5" Industrial to Medium Density Urban (Waiakea Houselots)
Council Member Ikeda initially stated the proposed amendment conflicts with the Mochida
application but later stated there was no conflict.
Council Chair Higa state he would like to see Industrial to Medium Density Urban also apply to
Lanikaula to preserve the integrity of the neighborhood. As to the proposed "B-5" change, he
stated he had no problem as it is.
The Committee unanimously approved the proposed amendment to LUPAG Map "B-5".
(Arakaki, Higa, Hoffmann, Holschuh, Ikeda, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago, Safazik).
"B-6" Medium Density Urban to High Density Urban (Waiakea Houselots)
Council Chair Higa stated he completely supports this proposed amendment for Big Island
Candies and Director Yuen noted that the change would make it consistent for Big Island Candies
to have a portion of its manufacturing facility along Kekuanaoa where it is currently not in High
Density Urban.
The Committee unanimously approved the proposed amendment to LUPAG Map "B-6".
(Arakaki, Higa, Hoffmann, Holschuh, Ikeda, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago, Safarik).
"C-1" Important Ag. Lands to Rural (Paauhau Area)
The Committee unanimously approved the proposed amendment to LUPAG Map "C-1".
(Arakaki, Higa, Hoffmann, Holschuh, Ikeda, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago, Safazik).
"D-1" Important Ag. Lands to Rural (Malin Ridge)
The Committee unanimously approved the proposed amendment to LUPAG Map "D-1".
(Arakaki, Higa, Hoffmann, Holschuh, Ikeda, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago, Safazik).
PC REPORT NO. 104
Communication No. 964
Bi11309
Page 7 of 15
"E-1" Urban Expansion to Conservation (Makalei Area)
Committee Chair Pilago noted that the rationale for the proposed change is clear and concise and
urged support.
Council Chair Higa wanted to make certain that none of the proposed area being amended is
located on Lynch's property. If it was, Mr. Higa stated he would not support the change because
it would demonstrate bad faith to have earlier negotiated with Lynch and Hiluhilu and thereafter
take their Urban designated land and place it into Conservation.
Planning Director Yuen stated the area being proposed for amendment does not include any of
the Lynch properties and as for Palaznanui/Hiluhilu, the portion within Hiluhilu was recognized
as Conservation.
The Committee unanimously approved the proposed amendment to LUPAG Map "E-1".
(Arakaki, Higa, Hoffmann, Holschuh, Ikeda, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago, Safazik).
"E-3" Urban Expansion to Conservation (Kohanaiki/Kealakehe/Honokohau)
Committee Chair Pilago notes the importance of placing dryland forest azeas into Conservation.
Director Yuen confirmed this was not the same parcel that the County received from TSA.
The Committee unanimously approved the proposed amendment to LUPAG Map "E-3".
(Arakaki, Higa, Hoffmann, Holschuh, Ikeda, Isbell, Jawbson, Pilago, Safazik).
"E-5" Open to Urban Expansion (Kohanaiki/KealakehelHonokohau)
Council Vice Chair Isbell confirmed this amendment applies to land that was part of an Executive
Order and supports the amendment since a regional park, as well as many other options, could be
done in an Urban designated area.
Director Yuen stated there was a reason for placing the azea into Open at the time of the 2001
draft General Plan, and because the Open designation is now not feasible, the change is being
made to Urban rather than locking it into Open. Mr. Yuen stated any proposal the County
considers would probably require a change to the Executive Order. As far as whether the
proposed change jeopardizes the Executive Order, Director Yuen stated that the State could do
housing without County approval, however, the basic idea for the change was to provide various
options that currently do not exist in the current designation.
Committee Vice Chair Hoffmann noted that uses Ms. Isbell spoke of is clearly allowable within
the Open designation and because the Director is saying there are no firm plans for the area at this
time, he did not see a need for the amendment to Urban and felt it should be left in Open.
Council Chair Higa stated the commercial component is very critical for apublic/private
partnership with a commercial venture to allow a regional park to exist. Director Yuen stated the
pitch for Urban Expansion was that the Master Plan for the Kealakehe area did include a golf
course and residential village. However, if the golf course is not going to happen, the county may
PC REPORT NO. 104
Communication No. 964
Bill 309
Page S of 15
want to redesign the area and not want to be tied to the plan. Leaving it in Open designation
locks the county to a certain configuration.
The Committee approved the proposed amendment to LUPAG Map change "E-5". (Ayes:
Arakaki, Higa, Hoffmann, Holschuh, Ikeda, Isbell, Safarik. Noes: Jacobson, Pilago).
"F-1" Extensive Ag. and Orchards to Conservation (Hokulia/Keopuka/Kealakekua Areas)
The Committee unanimously approved the proposed amendment to LUPAG Map "F-1".
(Arakaki, Higa, Hoffmann, Holschuh, Ikeda, Isbell, Jawbson, Pilago, Safazik).
"G-1" Extensive Ag. to Conservation (National Park Service Land)
The Committee unanimously approved the proposed amendment to LUPAG Map "G-1".
(Arakaki, Higa, Hoffmann, Holschuh, Ikeda, Isbell, Jawbson, Pilago, Safazik).
A motion to recess the Planning Committee meeting to August 1, 2006 at 1:30 p.m. following the
regularly scheduled County Counci? meeting was approved. (Ayes: 8. Noes: 1)
At the August 1, 2006 continued meeting of the Planning Committee, discussion began with the Public
Facilities section of the proposed Interim General Plan Amendments.
PUBLIC FACILITIES -Protective Services
10.3.1. Introduction And Analysis (Fire and Emergency Medical Services)
Council Member Safazik noted there was a County fire station that's not on this particular map.
Planning Committee Chair Pilago expressed appreciation for inclusion of the Kalaoa Mauka Fire
Station.
The Committee unanimously approved the proposed amendment to Public Facilities 10.3.1.
(Ayes: Higa, Hoffmann, Ikeda, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago, Safarik. Absent: Arakaki, Holschuh).
The Committee unanimously approved a Motion to Reconsider Public Facilities 10.3.1. (Ayes:
Arakaki, Higa, Hoffmann, Ikeda, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago, Safarik. Absent: Holschuh).
Council Vice Chair Isbell notes she had a letter stating there aze 23 Volunteer Fire Stations but
when counted, the numbers did not add up and wanted corrections made. Director Yuen stated
the General Plan is only a snapshot in time and said if information is not shown, that does not
mean it does not exist and must be updated to be considered valid.
Council Chair Higa expressed concern regarding continually adding and deleting information and
felt that language should be included to signify that information provided is for reference only
and subject to change. Director Yuen understood the point but stated all it means is that the
County currently has these facilities, not that it must keep these facilities open.
PC REPORT NO. 104
Communication No. 964
Bill 309
Page 9 of 15
Council Vice Chair Isbell referred to the general language of 10.3.2 and that just to say there will
be an appropriate number of facilities would make a lot of sense.
A motion to amend 10.3.1 by deleting the word "Analysis" and replacing it with the word
"Description" was approved and should read as follows: "10.3.1 Introduction and [Analysts)
Description:" (Ayes: Arakaki, Higa, Hoffmann, Isbell, Pilago. Noes: Jacobson. Absent: Ikeda,
Holschuh, Safarik).
The Committee unanimously approved 10.3.1, Fire and Emergency Medical Services, as
amended. (Ayes: Arakaki, Higa, Hoffmann, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago. Absent: Safarik, flceda,
Holschuh).
10.3.2. Policies
Following discussion, the Committee unanimously approved a motion to amend 10.3.2 Policies
(i) by deleting the words "funding oF' after the word "Maintain" so that it would read as follows:
"Maintain (fuirding-efJ an appropriate number and type of emergency helicopters, including
appropriate aero medical capabilities" (Ayes: Arakaki, Higa, Hoffmann, Ikeda, Isbell,
Jacobson, Pilago, Safarik. Absent: Holschuh).
The Committee unanimously approved 10.3.2 Policies (i), as amended. (Ayes: Arakaki, Higa,
Hoffmann, Ikeda, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago, Safarik. Absent: Holschuh).
10.5.1 Introduction And Analysis, Hospitals and Related Facilities
Council Chair Higa again suggested deleting the word "Analysis" and replacing it with the word
"Description" so that it would read as follows: "10.5.1 Introduction And [Analysis) Description,
Hospitals and Related Facilities:"
A motion to amend 10.5.1 by deleting the word "Analysis" and replacing it with the word
"Description" was approved. (Ayes: Arakaki, Higa, Hoffmann, Ikeda, Isbell, Pilago, Safarik.
Noes: Jacobson. Absent: Holschuh).
The Committee unanimously approved 10.5.1, as amended. (Ayes: Arakaki, Higa, Hoffmann,
Ikeda, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago, Safarik. Absent: Holschuh).
TRANSPORTATION - Roadways
Director Yuen explained that in most instances, the facilities Road Maps include revisions that added or
rerouted roads, and some that may also contain text changes. As for recommended "courses of action,"
the recommendations were basically text changes relating to roads already on the map. Director Yuen
gave a power point presentation outlining existing roads (Road Map A-1 through A-7).
ROADS - MAP A (page 27)
Lengthy discussions took place among Committee members relating to, among other things,
whether or not a recently approved Ordinance changing Makalei Drive from a collector road to a
minor road could be reflected as an amendment to Road Map A.
PC REPORT NO. 104
Communication No. 964
Bill 309
Page 10 of 15
Council Chair Higa's concem was that due to the recent downgrading by Ordinance of Makalei
Drive, Map A is wrong. Mr. Higa's position was that the law was changed at the time the
Ordinance was passed and feels an amendment to Map A to reflect that Makalei Drive as a Minor
Road is in order, similar to the way a fire station was added.
Director Yuen stated this kind of amendment is very different from that of adding a fire station to
a list of facilities and that although the Council can amend the General Plan, there is a process for
bringing forth amendments to the General Plan. Director Yuen stated that from his standpoint of
what happens on Makalei Drive after Road 4 is built, it doesn't matter if Makalei Drive is called a
minor or collector road.
Mr. Yuen stated the Council can clearly reject the proposed interim amendment, however, if it
wanted to add an entirely new road it should be a separate interim amendment and not done at
this time. He said the facilities map is part of the General Plan that shows a set of roads and
either the Council or the Planning Director may initiate changes through the public heazing
process. Likewise, if the Council deletes a road, that has to go through the process as well, it just
doesn't appear as part of an amendment.
Council Member Arakaki states that what the General Plan did was give the Planning Director the
authority to delay changes to the General Plan, because if the Council initiated amendments, it
has to go through the Planning Director and then the Planning Commission and almost never
change anything.
Director Yuen stated the previous General Plan had an interim amendment process which
provided that Council-initiated amendments go to the Planning Director and the Planning
Commission, the timeline being set by the Ordinance. Mr. Yuen stated that certainly within the
limits of the Charter the Council can change the timeline for the process ofcouncil-initiated
amendments. However, the question would be to what extent the change would become an
amendment that has to go through the process.
Calling upon Corporation Counsel Lincoln Ashida, Director Yuen conveyed the general question
whether the Council can further amend proposed interim amendments to the General Plan and
specifically, treatment in the General Plan Interim Amendments of Makalei Drive which was
recently designated a Minor Road by Ordinance. Mr. Higa added that his main concem is to
show the Makalei Drive Minor Road on Road Map A and whether that could be accomplished by
a motion to amend Road Map A, or would the proposed amendment constitute aCouncil-initiated
interim amendment to the General Plan requiring review by the Planning Commission and
Planning Director.
Responding to Council Member Arakaki's question of the legislative authority of this body to
change these things, Corporation Counsel Ashida responded that the Council has the authority,
but the process is what's being discussed here. Mr. Ashida stated every proposed change needs to
be examined individually to determine if it is so far from the General Plan that it has to go back to
the Planning Commission. Mr. Ashida noted that the process was established by this Council in
the General Plan which is part of the Ordinance, and that is the process the Council is whetted to.
However, Mr. Ashida stated there is a certain amount of leeway the Council does enjoy.
Communication No. 964
Bill 309
Page 11 of 15
Council Member Arakaki stated these interim amendments were sent up by the Planning
Commission and if this body is not satisfied with the process, it should change the process -case
closed.
The Committee unanimously approved Roads -Map A, with the exception of a portion of
University Drive to the Mamalahoa Highway which Director Yuen stated would be noted on Map
A. (Ayes: Hoffmann, Holschuh, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago, Safarik. Absent: Higa, Ikeda, Arakaki).
ROADS - MAP B (page 28)
Planning Director Yuen noted that extension B-5 is Puapuaanui Street that goes by Pualani
Estates Subdivision and connects with Hualalai Road. The Director noted he will reflect on Map
B, that the B-5 extension is complete.
The Committee unanimously approved Roads -Map B. (Ayes: Hoffmann, Holschuh, Isbell,
Jacobson, Pilago, Safarik. Absent: Higa, Ikeda, Arakaki).
ROADS - MAP C (page 29)
The Committee unanimously approved Roads -Map C. (Ayes: Hoffmann, Holschuh, Isbell,
Jacobson, Pilago, Safarik. Absent: Higa, Ikeda, Arakaki).
ROADS - MAP D (page 30)
Planning Director Yuen stated no changes were made to Roads -Map D, except for
housekeeping to update legends.
ROADS - MAP E (page 31)
Planning Director Yuen stated no changes were made to Roads -Map D, except for
housekeeping to update legends.
ROADS - MAP F (page 32)
The Committee unanimously approved Roads -Map F. (Ayes: Hoffmann, Holschuh, Isbell,
Jacobson, Pilago, Safarik. Absent: Higa, Ikeda, Arakaki).
ROADS - MAP G (page 33)
Planning Director Yuen stated no changes were made to Roads -Map D, except for
housekeeping to update legends.
PC REPORT NO. 104
Communication No. 964
Bill 309
Page 12 of 15
ROADS - MAP H (page 34)
Planning Director Yuen stated no changes were made to Roads -Map D, except for
housekeeping to update legends.
PUNA, 13.2.5.1.2 Courses of Action.
Council Member Jacobson suggested that at the end of the sentence add "or modem round-a-
bouts." Director Yuen stated the addition is useful, as it indicates to the State that the County is
open to alternatives such asround-a-bouts. The amended course of action (c) to read as follows:
"Encourage the State to widen Highway 130 to jour lanes with a median and channe[ized
intersections or modern roundabouts."
A motion to amend PUNA, 13.2.5.1.2 Courses of Action (c) was unanimously approved. (Ayes:
Hoffmann, Holschuh, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago. Absent: Arakaki, Higa, Ikeda, Safazik).
The Committee unanimously approved PUNA 13.2.5.1.2 Courses of Action (c), as amended.
(Ayes: Hoffmann, Holschuh, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago. Absent: Arakaki, Higa, Ikeda, Safarik).
PUNA, 13.2.5.2.2 Courses of Action.
A. The proposed replacement course of action (c), set forth in Subpazagraph A, was
unanimously approved. (Ayes: Hoffmann, Holschuh, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago. Absent:
Arakaki, Higa, Ikeda Safazik).
B. The proposed deletion of courses of action (i) and (j), set forth in Subparagraph B, was
unanimously approved. (Ayes: Hoffmann, Holschuh, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago. Absent:
Arakaki, Higa, Ikeda, Safazik).
SOUTH KOHALA, 13.2.5.6.2 Courses of Action.
Committee Chair Pilago moved to amend the second sentence of course of action (i) by striking
the "or" from the word "and/or" to signify a strong dedicated commitment to the roadway.
Council Member Hoffmann stated that because the State's Kawaihae Bypass road is not
scheduled to be built until 2019, an access that goes down to Queen Kaahumanu is needed and
should not be a choice. Mr. Pilago also suggested a friendly amendment deleting the word "an".
The proposed amendment would read as follows:
and build a road connecting the northern end ofPanio[o Drive to the Oueen Kaahumanu
Highway to provide alternate access to Waiko[oa V![age
A motion to amend SOUTH KOI-IALA, 13.2.5.6.2 Courses of Action as above noted, was
unanimously approved. (Ayes: Hoffmann, Holschuh, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago. Absent: Arakaki,
Higa, Ikeda, Safazik).
PC REPORT NO. 104
COmmUnlcaUOn No. 964
Bill 309
Page 13 of 15
The Committee unanimously approved SOUTH KOHALA, 13.2.5.6.2 Courses of Action, as
amended. (Ayes: Hoffmann, Holschuh, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago. Absent: Arakaki, Higa, Ikeda
Safarik).
NORTH KONA, 13.2.5.72 Courses of Action.
A. Course of action (c), as set forth in Subparagraph A, was unanimously approved. (Ayes:
Hoffmann, Holschuh, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago. Absent: Arakaki, Higa, Ilceda, Safazik).
B. New courses of action (e), (f), (g), (h), (i), (j), (k), (I), (m), and (n), as set forth in
Subpazagraph B, was unanimously approved. (Ayes: Hoffmann, Holschuh, Isbell,
Jacobson, Pilago. Absent: Arakaki, Higa, Ikeda, Safazik).
C. Director Yuen stated that in order to be consistent with SOUTH KONA, 13.2.5.8.2
Courses of Action, he proposed a slight change to course of action (r). Mr. Yuen stated
that policies are meant to apply to the entire roadway however, in some instances roads
that do extend into both North and South Kona districts may have slightly different
policies. Therefore Director Yuen requested the following change to course of action (r)
to read as follows: "(r) Construct the Mama[ahoa Bypass Highway between Keauhou
and Captain Cook as a Scenic Corridor, with limited access and without commercial
development. "
A motion to amend proposed new course of action (r), was unanimously approved.
(Ayes: Hoffmann, Holschuh, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago. Absent: Arakaki, Higa, Ikeda,
Safarik).
The Committee unanimously approved NORTH KONA, 13.2.5.7.2. Course of Action (r),
as amended. (Ayes: Hoffmann, Holschuh, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago. Absent: Arakaki,
Higa, Ikeda, Safarik).
SOUTH KONA, 13.2.5.8.2 Courses of Action.
The proposed amendments to South Kona, 13.2.5.8.2 Courses of action were unanimously
approved. (Ayes: Hoffmann, Holschuh, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago. Absent: Arakaki, Higa, Ikeda,
Safarik).
LAND USE, Table 14-5. Urban, Rural, Industrial & Resort Areas by District.
Planning Director Yuen stated this proposed amendment is the text change that went along with
LUPAG Map A-1 (Ainaloa Blvd. -Puna) and LUPAG Map A-2 (Orchidland Dr. -Puna) that
were voted against at yesterday's Planning Committee meeting. He noted that Orchidland did not
need this kind of text change, however Ainaloa was something new and so it was included in this
table. Since Ainaloa is not on the map, it should not be included in Table 14-5 and therefore this
amendment should be voted down.
A motion to approve the proposed amendment to Land Use, Table 14-5, failed. (Noes:
Hoffmann, Holschuh, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago. Absent: Arakaki, Higa, Ikeda, Safazik).
PC REPORT NO. 104
Communication No. 964
Bill 309
Page 14 of 15
SOUTH HILO, 14.3.5.2.2 Courses of Action.
The proposed new course of action, South Hilo, 14.3.5.2.2 was unanimously approved. (Ayes:
Hoffmann, Holschuh, Isbell, Jacobson, Pilago. Absent: Arakaki, Higa, Ikeda, Safarik).
PLAN IMPLEMENTATION - 15.3 Annual Report
Director Yuen stated that at the time of the 2001 General Plan a report sounded like a good idea.
However, since 2001 the Planning Department has not yet prepared such a report. Mr. Yuen
agreed there should be something, but it would be helpful if it required less detail. His suggestion
would be more like an annual review of rezonings, permits, subdivisions, major CIP projects and
completed projects funded by the County throughout the year.
Committee Chair Pilago suggested including goals, objectives and policies and utilization of an
interagency committee initiative within this new proposal. Director Yuen stated he would work
something up for the first meeting of the Council and suggested either a pazallel Resolution or
Ordinance.
Council Vice Chair agreed that what Director Yuen mentioned is really what is needed because
we must look at total island and what's being done rather than requiring an annual report from the
Department but still allows for accountability. Ms. Isbell said she'd be voting yes to deleting the
requirement and Mr. Higa stated he could go along with that.
Committee Vice Chair Hoffmann stated the revised General Plan is moving in the right direction
and accountability is needed more than ever especially with the CDP process taking place. Mr.
Hoffmann stated between now and the next meeting he would try to sit down with Director Yuen
to discuss what kind of annual report is realistic and to tailor the report to hit major points. Mr.
Hoffmann said it is important that the annual report be imbedded into the General Plan because
the Ordinance makes it a very separate law. Therefore, the report should have the same effect as
the General Plan and must be stronger than a resolution.
A motion to approve Planning Director's proposal to eliminate 15.3 Annual Report failed.
(Ayes: Holschuh, Isbell, Pilago. Noes: Higa, Jacobson, Hoffmann. Absent: Arakaki, Ikeda,
Safarik).
PC REPORT NO. 104
Communication No. 964
Bill 309
Page 15 of 15
Your Committee on Planning is in accord with the intent and purpose of Bill No. 309, as amended to
Draft 2, and recommends it pass first reading.
and
AYES NOES A&E EX RaspectfllQy SUbmltted,
ARAKAKI X
HIGH X COMMITTEE ON PLANNING
HOFFMANN X
HOLSCHUH X
HOrDA X
ISBELL X
JACOBSON X K. ANGEL PIL ,CHAIR
PH.AGO X PC REPORT NO. 104
sAP,utI[c X ADOPTED: AUG 2 200