Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutREP PC 039 07/24/2007 2006-2008 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON PLANNING DATE: July 24, 2007 Re: Comm. No. 508/Bill No. 125 PLACE: Sheraton Keauhou Bay Resort and Spa 78-128 Ehukai Street Kailua-Kona, Hawaii TIME: 1:00 p.m. Council Chair and Members Hawaii County Council Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Your Committee on Planning, to which was referred Bill No. 125, reports as follows: Bill No. 125, transmitted via Communication No. 508 from Mayor Harry Kim, dated June 21, 2007, presents an amendment to Change of Zone Ordinance No. 93-101 requesting amendment to Condition "B" (Plan Approval) and Condition "J" (Annual Report), by DR BRIAN and RAMONA SAKAMOTO. Ordinance No. 93-101 reclassified lands from Office Commercial - 20,000 Squaze Feet (CO-20) to General Commercial - 20,000 Square Feet (CG-20) at Waiakea, South Hilo, Hawaii, covered by Tax Map Key 2-2-021:007 (formerly 2-2-021:007 and 046). The property is located along the north side of Lanihuli Street, approximately 256 feet east of the Lanihuli Street - Kinoole Street intersection, at Waiakea, South Hilo, Hawaii, TMK: 2-2-21:007 (parcel 46 consolidated with parcel 7). Applicants aze requesting a 1-yeaz extension of time to comply with Condition "B" and Condition "J" of Change of Zone Ordinance No. 93-101 which states: "B. Final Plan Approval for the proposed commercial building and related improvements shall be secured from the Planning Director within one year from the effective date of the change of zone ordinance. To assure adequate time for plan approval review and in accordance with Chapter 25-244 (Zoning Code), plans shall be submitted a minimum of forty-five (45) days prior to the date for which plan approval must be secured. Plans shall include a landscaping buffer along the project site's common boundaries with adjoining properties for the purpose of mitigating any potential adverse noise and visual impacts." "J. Annual progress report shall be submitted to the Planning Director prior to the anniversary date of this ordinance. The report shall include, but not be limited to, the status of the development and to what extent the conditions of approval are complied with. This condition shall remain in effect until all of the conditions of the approval have been complied with and the Planning Director acknowledges that further reports aze not required." PC Report No. 39 Communication 508 Bill 125 Page 2 of 4 Applicants purchased the subject property in 2003 with intentions of constructing a new building for dental office and/or retail uses that would consist of a 1,624 squaze foot one-story dental office and three (3) 1,008 square foot areas for office/retail uses within an approximately 3,400 squaze foot structure. Upon submitting Plan Approval plans to the Department of Planning applicants were informed the previous applicant had not complied with Condition "C" in completing construction within three years from issuance of Final Plan Approval. Applicants are therefore requesting a 1-year time extension to Condition "B" (secure Final Plan Approval) to allow them time to re-submit plans for plan approval. If the time extension for Condition "B" is approved, applicants can then meet the requirements of Condition "C" and complete construction within three (3) years from the date of issuance of the new Final Plan Approval. The Planning Director recommended favorably on this request based on the following: • The non-performance is the result of conditions that could not have been foreseen or aze beyond the control of the applicant, successors or assigns, and are not the result of their fault or negligence. • Granting of the time extension would not be contrary to the General Plan nor the original reasons for granting the Change of Zone. At the July 24, 2007 Planning Committee meeting, there were no statements presented from the public presented. Committee Chair Pilago outlined a brief chronology of rezoning applications relating to the property beginning with a zone change from RS-10 to CO-20 in 1985 and a zone change in 1993 from CO-20 to CG-20 and noted that applicant's request for an extension is to comply with Conditions of rezoning contained in Ordinance No. 93-101. Applicant Dr. Ramona Sakamoto was present via video conference at the Hilo Council Room and presented a brief update of their request and also noted their compliance with a request of the Department of Public Works to address disposal of dental material. Council Member Ford expressed concerns regarding inadequate parking and the fact that there was no provision relating to pazking included in the ordinance, especially since this is a dental facility potentially capable of generating high volumes of traffic. Ms. Ford acknowledged the area is in fact transitioning from residential into commercial but she was also concerned that if there are inadequate parking stalls at the facility then people will pazk on the street and consume space used by residents of the community. Ms. Ford's final concern was that the request being considered is the result of yet another rezoning allowed to go on indefinitely without follow-up. She stated if the Planning Department imposes a condition that requires an annual report, then the department should have some mechanism to follow-up when reports aze not submitted timely. PC Report No. 39 Communication 508 Bill 125 Page 3 of 4 Committee Chair Pilago also made note of the absence of pazking requirements in this application and stated that better communication efforts with Planning Department should be taken to examine these kinds of issues. Dr. Sakamoto had no comments regazding the parking issue and Mr. Pilago advised applicant that contact with the Planning Department will be made to resolve the matter in a mutually beneficial manner. Council Member Jacobson expressed concern about the extent of applicant's due diligence efforts at the time they purchased the subject property and the issue of parking requirements not being addressed. Mr. Jacobson stated that in its current form, absent definitive parking requirements, he is unable to support the request. Council Member Donald Ikeda stated he had no problem with the area turning from residential to commercial and that points raised by Ms. Ford and Mr. Jacobson regarding pazking were correct, however, he recommended that the committee move this matter forwazd and obtain a recommendation from Planning Director Yuen. Council Chair Hoffmann concurred with pazking concerns previously expressed but disagreed that these details should be determined at the time of final subdivision approval. Mr. Hoffmann noted that pazking issues should be addressed as part of rezoning and noted that while there is no need to delay this matter, he certainly would not approve applicant's request until he hears from the Planning Director. Mr. Hoffmann explained that applicant's request partly concerns attempts to involve the Council in considering applications currently being decided at subdivision level and seeing that part of the code changed. Mr. Hoffmann concluded by stating he agreed with Mr. Ikeda and believed the matter can move forwazd without postponement, but noted he would not vote in Council until he hears from the Planning Department. Council Member Ford expressed another concern regarding deletion of the old Condition "J" relating to an annual progress report which includes a provision that conditions of approval remain in effect until fully complied with. In addition, Ms. Ford stated if this matter has to wait until Director Yuen returns from his vacation could someone from the Council be designated to write an amendment based on what the Council, as a group, determines what the number of pazking spaces would be. Committee Chair Pilago noted there is an agreement to move this forward and, as Committee Chair, he takes responsibility for crafting an amendment regarding parking and to communicate with the Planning Department to determine a fair number of parking spaces as the Code and Ordinance apply. Council Member Jacobson stated he preferred to work the details out in Committee and would not be able to vote for this until he sees that the amendments are made. Council Member Ikeda stated the reason he feels this matter can move forward is that there aze two more hearings at the Council level at which postponement can be requested to allow for the return of Director Yuen and obtain his input. PC Report No. 39 Communication 508 Bill 125 Page 4 of 4 Mr. Pilago noted his reluctance to granting extensions but stated that in this situation there is need for courtesy to the applicants because they were not fully informed that certain conditions of rezoning had not been met. Mr. Pilago stated that in the past parking was not viewed as an important issue as it is today and therefore he will compromise and allow applicant the courtesy of moving the matter out of committee, conditioned as Ms. Ford recommended, upon his prepazing an amendment to ensure fair parking provisions as it relates to the code. Your Committee on Planning is in accord with the purpose and intent of Bill No. 125 and recommends it pass first reading. and AYES NOES A&E EX Respectfiilly submitted, FORD X HIGA X COIdMITTEE ON PLANNING HOFFMANN X IICEDA X JACOBSON X NAEOLE X K. ANGEL PIL GO, CHAIR PII.AGO X YAGONG X PC REPORT NO. 39 YosTmKOTO x AnoPTEn: SEP 0 6 ~N~