Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutREP PC 027 04/17/2007 2006-2008 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON PLANNING DATE: April 17, 2007 Re: Comm. No. 155/Bill No. 326 (2004-2006) PLACE: Councilroom Ben Franklin Building 333 Kilauea Avenue, 2"d Floor Hilo, Hawaii 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. 326, reports as follows: Bill No. 326, was transmitted via Communication No. 1030 from Council Member Stacy Higa, dated August 20, 2006. The Committee on Human Services and Economic Development approved Bill 326, and on September 20, 2006 the Council committed Bill 326 to the Planning Commission for review. Communication No. 155 from dated February 1, 2007 notes that the Planning Commission concurs with the Planning Director and his recommended changes to Bill 326. Communication No. 155 reports that the Planning Director agrees that a University District is warranted and recommends changes to permitted uses by adding other uses (e.g., student health clinics, university credit union, post office, fraternity and sorority houses and student and employee apartments and houses.) The Director also specifies an overall height limit of 60 feet, regardless of location, a minimum building site area of 10 acres, minimum yards for front and rear and for side, and a maximum of twenty percent (20%) of a University District's land area for commercial use. At the March 8, 2007 Planning Committee meeting, Communication No. 155 was filed. During discussions of Communication 1030, Bill 326, Planning Director Yuen explained that the recommended minimum for a University District as a whole is ten acres which would allow creation of smaller lots within the district to accommodate other facilities. Director Yuen explained the bill creates a University District category in the zoning code and is not a rezoning, since rezoning requires introduction of a bill. Council Member Higa noted that his idea behind introducing Bi11326 was to create a zoning district that encompassed a much larger area and allow future commercial uses around the University District that could be provided by the private sector. Mr. Higa said his Bill was meant to create an overlapping district to allow the private sector to establish businesses and provide services to the district later on down the road. PC Report No. 27 Communication 1030 Bill 326 (2004-2006) Page 2 of 4 Director Yuen noted that the Department's concept was different from that proposed by Mr. Higa and could not support his concept because it called for rezoning of a very lazge area. Mr. Yuen stated that if an entire neighborhood is rezoned, there is no opportunity for future zoning consideration and action as some future proposals may involve controversial issues and decision- making scrutiny. Council Member Brenda Ford expressed serious concerns about Bi11326 and felt that due to potential liability issues, most of the supporting facilities should be located off campus. Council Member Yagong noted that because two versions of the proposed Bill exist, he found it difficult to vote on the matter and was unclear as to what the Council was being asked to vote on. Director Yuen noted that Council Member Higa's proposal applies to a designated area whereas he proposes that it apply to an area where a university may already exist. Council Member Jacobson stated he never conceived that this proposed Bill would be a blanket rezoning of a large section of Hilo and suggested that Bill 326 be amended to reflect the amendments outlined in Communication 155. Council Member Higa expressed that he would like to obtain further clarification of the Planning Commission process and review the Commission minutes and bring forth a Draft 2. Mr. Higa moved to postpone this matter to allow him the time to work on a Draft 2. Council Chair Hoffmann recommended postponement and noted that despite his understanding of both sides, it was clear that everyone was not on the same wavelength. Council Member Yagong also noted it was reasonable to postpone, however, he requested that the draft amendment be very clear as to setting forth boundaries of the district. It was unanimously approved to postpone this matter to the April 17, 2007, Committee on Planning meeting. At the April 17, 2007 Planning Committee meeting, Council Member Higa stated that at the last meeting Director Yuen's Communication No. 155 which contained recommended changes to Bill No. 326 was inadvertently filed. Mr. Higa recalled there was some disconnect between the Director's communication and his version ofBi11326, but after further review, he found no problem with Mr. Yuen's amended version of Bill No. 326. Mr. Higa stated his idea was to get the University District designation on the books and further refined as the need azises. Mr. Higa confirmed that existing universities would not automatically become a district. Director Yuen noted that the proposed ordinance creates the zoning category, but in order to actually zone an area as a University District would require a rezoning application. Council Member Jacobson's concern related to who could actually apply for a University District. Director Yuen explained since the proposed ordinance does not prohibit someone from applying for a university zoning and securing a school later on, nor does it limit applications to schools. Mr. Yuen stated he saw nothing that would prohibit a person from applying for a PC Report No. 27 Communication 1030 Bi11326 (2004-2006) Page 3 of 4 university zoning without actually having a school in hand however, there is a 20% limit for commercial activity on the site, as well as Council oversight relating to said applications. Council Member Yagong expressed support for creating opportunities and options for universities however, his concern was the potential that a university zoning could be expanded. Mr. Yagong stated his understanding was that zoning would only apply to the site location of the university and not outside of the particular Tax Map Key. His concern was expansion outside of the campus area and, whether or not an owner of adjoining land could apply for a university district outside of an existing university district without the university being involved. Mr. Yuen stated that as worded in the proposed ordinance, once the 10-acre minimum university district is established, contiguous areas could be rezoned into the university district thereby expanding the boundaries. Council Member Brenda Ford stated she had the same concerns expressed at the previous meeting relating to losing 20% of the land to commercial use and stated she would not vote in favor of a campus that has the potential of using 20% of its campus for uses other than as a campus facility. Ms. Ford also said she is not willing to give up land in West Hawaii and noted if the proposed ordinance was approved, that it be restricted to the University of Hawaii in Hilo, as she had requested previously. Mr. Yuen noted that it basically boils down to the fact that the Council does have oversight regarding matters involving controversial applications and that the proposed ordinance, if passed, is really a zoning tool that provides more flexibility for a university. Mr. Yuen stated the proposed ordinance also resolves issues arising out of the US China Center relating to kinds of mixed uses, avoids spot zoning, creates flexibility and avoids recurring site-specific zoning decisions. Council Chair Hoffmann's concern was whether or not the Council could still be involved in the processing of subsequent applications when someone from the outside decides to build a theatre, recreational facility or bar within an already established university district. Mr. Yuen stated those applications would not come before the Council because once the overall university zoning is approved those activities would be permitted uses. Mr. Yuen stated there are still building permit and plan approval requirements, but if the university wanted to establish a bar on its campus, and it already had a university zoning, the proposed ordinance would allow it. Council Chair Hoffmann stated he doesn't anticipate that regents would be looking at establishing a string of local pubs, however, it does constrain when it involves privately owned property upon which a number of things can be done within this designation without any type of recourse. He felt taverns were not appropriate in the area and was happy that Mr. Higa indicated he would remove reference to taverns in his amendment. Council Member Higa stated he had no problem deleting reference to "taverns" from the proposed ordinance since the idea was to have a mix of businesses that support the university and its students. However, he noted he could go either way and would present both versions at first reading. PC Report No. 27 Communicalion 1030 Bi11326 (2004-2006) Page 4 of 4 Your Committee on Planning is in accord with the purpose and intent of Bill No. 326, as amended to Draft 2 (with amendments proposed in Communication No. 155), and recommends it pass first reading. and arES NOES n&E Ex Respectfiilly submitted, FORD X HIGA X COMIvIITTEE ON/P~LANNING HOFFMANN X ~ ` / /i r IICEDA X / JACOBSON X NAEOLE X K. ANGEL PILA , CHAIIt ~ ~ PILAGO X YAGONG X PC REPORT NO. 27 YosT~IOro x ADOPTED: MAY-O~ZDU7-