Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutREP PC 030 05/15/2007 2006-2008 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON PLANNING DATE: May 15, 2007 Re: Comm. No. 376/Bill No. 96 PLACE: Councilroom Ben Franklin Building 333 K7auea Avenue, 2"" Floor Hilo, Hawaii TIME: 1:45 p.m. Council Chair and Members Hawaii County Council Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Your Committee on Planning, to which was referred Bill No. 96, reports as follows: Bill No. 96, transmitted via Communication No. 376 from Mayor Harry Kim, dated April 23, 2007, presents a Change of Zone Request by ASSOCIATION OF APARTMENT OWNERS OF PUNAHELE PROFESSIONAL BUILDING, at Punahoa 2"d, South Hilo, Hawaii, TMK: 2-3-035:018. Bill No. 96 seeks to amend Section 25-8-33 (City of Hilo Zone Map), Article 8, Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawaii County Code 1983 (2005 Edition), by changing the District Classification from Single Family Residential - 7,500 square feet (RS-7.5) to Neighborhood Commercial - 10,000 square feet (CN-10). Communication No. 376 reports that the Hawaii County Planning Commission, as required by Chapter 4, Sec. 6-4.3(C), Hawaii County Charter, considered the above request on April 5, 2007. The Commission concurred with the Planning Director's reasons for recommending favorable consideration of this change of zone. Communication No. 376 transmits the following findings and recommendations: 1. The subject property is located at 49 Punahele Street approximately 200 feet east of the Komohana Street and Punahele Street intersection and across from the Hawaii Community Correctional Facility, Punahoa 2"°, South Hilo, Hawaii. 2. Applicants are requesting a change of zone from RS-7.5 to CN-10 to develop an uncovered, paved pazking lot to provide 20 additional employee parking spaces to service the adjoining Punahele Professional Building and intend to consolidate the subject property with the adjoining Punahele Professional Building lot (Parce142), which is zoned CN-10. 3. The applicant is requesting the change of zone to address the need for additional pazking for approximately thirty-one (31) employees of Punahele Professional Building who presently have to find on-street parking a considerable distance away from the facility. PC Report No. 30 Communication 376 Bill 96 Page 2 of 5 The Punahele Professional Building currently has 95 off-street parking stalls which include 61 regular stalls, 28 compact stalls and 6 handicap stalls. 4. Access to the property is currently from Punahele Street, however, applicant proposes to consolidate the property with the adjoining Punahele Professional Building lot and close access from Punahele Street. Upon completion of consolidation, the parking lot will be accessed from Puuhonu Place, a 50-foot wide paved County road with curbs, gutters and sidewalks. 5. The project site is located within close proximity to schools, commercial areas, employment centers and public safety centers. Surrounding lands are in a mix of commercial, agricultural and single-family residential uses. Adjacent properties to the east and west of the project are zoned RS-7.5 consisting ofsingle-family dwellings. South of the project is bordered by the Punahele Professional Building and is zoned CN- 10. Directly north across Punahele Street is the Hawaii Community Correctional Facility which is zoned RS-7.5. 6. County water and County sewer are available to the property but are not needed for the proposed use of a parking lot. Electrical and telephone services are also available and police and fire services are located less than one mile from the site. 7. The Planning Director recommended favorably on this request based on the following: • The change of zone request conforms to the goals, policies and standards of Land Use (Commercial) and Economic Elements of the General Plan. • The Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) Map designates the property and the immediately surrounding area as Medium Density Urban which may allow neighborhood commercial uses, including office and retail uses. Therefore, the requested Neighborhood Commercial zoning is consistent with the Medium Density Urban designation. • The Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) indicates that the project area is located in Zone "X," areas determined to be outside of the 500-yeaz flood plain. • The Change of Zone request is not contrary to Chapter 205A, Hawaii Revised Statutes relating to Coastal Zone Management as the project area is not located in the Special Management Area and will not be impacted by coastal hazard and beach erosion. • An archaeological assessment of the property was conducted in July of 2006 which concluded that no archaeological resources were identified as the entire project area is currently a gravel parking lot. A February 20, 2007 letter from the State Department of Land and Natural Resources-State Historic Preservation Division states that it finds PC Report No. 30 Communication 376 Bi1196 Page 3 of 5 the report acceptable and that no historic properties will be affected by the proposed development. • Requisite of the Planning Director's favorable recommendation for the change of zone request, are thirteen (13) conditions contained in Bill No. 96 which outline specific requirements for the proposed project. The conditions include provisions that restrict use of the property to an employee pazking lot only and that there shall be no access from Punahele Street (except for emergencies). At the May 15, 2007 Planning Committee meeting there were approximately 20 members of the public at the Hilo Council Chambers who provided oral testimony. Testifying in support of Bill 96 were: Craig Shikuma, M.D., Alice Chin, Scott Grosskrevtz, M.D., Alan Takase, M.D., Cathi Niel, Sean Matsumura, Deborah Laga, Tina Benevides, Barbara Engle, Marianne Saragosa and Melinda Walker. Nancy Cabral introduced herself as the manager of the condominium association and stated that a lot of the concerns expressed can be satisfied with the conditions of the proposed application. Ms. Cabral read written testimony in support of the application for change of zone from the following persons: John Uohara, M.D., Wayne Leong, DDS, Pete's Belly Bustazs and Gerald Lau, M.D. Testifying in opposition to Bill 96 were: Marjorie Gushiken, Kapuaokalani Andrade, Vianne Reis and Cheryl Reis. Council Member Ikeda stated he is quite familiar and very informed of the problems and issues and was hoping at one time for a resolution. He noted that applicant was in violation of a lot of the conditions they had agreed to and disregarded the fact that the residential zoned property could not be used for commercial purposes. He stated he hoped that the owners could come to an agreement with their neighbors and what bothered him the most was the disrespect shown to resident neighbors. Mr. Ikeda said he felt that as physicians, the owners should have more compassion towards their neighbors and the fact that the applicant had not complied with previously imposed conditions he could not support this application. Council Member Emily Naeole noted that all the neighbors aze not in favor of this application and said that it was "our kuleana" as council members is to protect the safety of our people of this island. Ms. Naeole stated it upsets her when things get shoved down people's throats and because a medical facility is applying for the change of zone, then it should consider the health and safety of its neighbors. Diana Van De Car appeared as the attorney for applicant in place of Sandra Song, Esq. who was unable to attend due to medical reasons. Ms. Van De Car stated that concerns expressed by Mr. Ikeda are valid, however he has not had the benefit of hearing from physicians who would have PC Report No. 30 Communication 376 Bill 96 Page 4 of 5 appeared to testify, but were unable to do so because these doctors and their staff are very stressed and busy. Ms. Van De Car noted that the subject property is vacant and that the people who park there are not patients of Punahele Professional Building or its employees but aze people who are not authorized to park there. Council Member Yagong stated he's trying to make sense out of the fact that while applicant states 31 of its current employees aze forced to park off-street, adding 20 more parking spaces for its employees will still result with an 11-stall parking stall deficit and therefore 20 additional parking spaces will not add more patient pazking. Mr. Yagong also stated that at first glance the application seemed to make sense and appeared an easy thing to accomplish. However, hestated that when he reviewed information from the past he was very bothered because there appeazed to be a very big disregard to rules and to following conditions of rezoning. He noted conditions should be satisfied and followed by applicant as a matter of fact and should not have to wait until a complaint is filed. Council Chair Pete Hoffmann's concern was whether the complex, as designed, had exceeded its capacity as it relates to pazking and the nature of commercial enterprises and impacts of businesses having changed, now draws a much larger crowd demanding greater pazking. Director Yuen stated there is one classification with some guidelines relating to different types of commercial uses but that from an administrative point of view there is no specifics relating to this situation to determine what happened. Mr. Yuen could not say whether the Department did not review the plans properly, but said it most likely had the number of pazking stalls called for in the code. Mr. Yuen stated that because of the type of activity taking place at Punahele, there isn't enough parking stalls. Mr. Hoffmann stated he would support Mr. Ikeda's position and strongly recommended a further attempt at resolution among the neighbors and applicant. Mr. Ikeda stated that he had a meeting last week with Dr. Takase, Ms. Nancy Cabral and Ms. Cheryl Reis however, their positions are quite far apart. Council Member Bob Jacobson stated that considering the knowledge of the people who own the subject property they should have known better and should have followed the law. Mr. Jacobson noted there seems to be a lot of assumptions already in place with regard to this application and it bothered him a great deal. Mr. Jacobson stated he could not see how the rezoning would resolve some of the complaints. Council Member Brenda Ford noted that for a building size of approximately 25,000 square feet of rentable space she estimated that the current code requirement is approximately 1 stall for every 400 square feet, noting that a building of this size would require approximately 60 parking spaces. Mr. Yuen noted that the national parking standards for medical buildings have not been looked into. Council Member Stacy Higa stated that he won't be supporting the rezoning because where the Gushiken and Reis residences are located, it's all residential. Mr. Higa said even if he wanted to help the doctors and provide more parking, it could be a parking lot today but later on, who knows what it could end up being. Mr. Higa stated he sympathizes with the people who use the Punahele facility but he does not want another entrance on Punahele Street. Mr. Higa inquired PC Report No. 30 Communication 376 Bi1196 Page 5 of 5 whether there was a way to condition the use of the vacant lot to ten parking stalls as a test through a conditional use permit and not a rezoning application. Director Yuen stated a Use Permit only allows certain things in a residential area and cannot be utilized to permit a parking lot. The only mechanism is to apply for rezoning and condition the rezoning on limiting the number of pazking stalls to ten. Mr. Higa encouraged compromise between the residents and the applicants. Council Bob Jacobson stated it was clear in his mind that doctors aze not leaving Punahele Professional Building simply because of poor parking. Mr. Jacobson stated that the use of the property as a parking lot has been tested and the neighbors don't want it. Additionally, he noted that twenty more stalls will not resolve the pazking problem. Council Member Yoshimoto stated that in light of Ms. Reis's disclosure of her pending medical procedure and her request to continue this matter until she recovers and is able to attend, he wants to guazantee Ms. Reis's ability to attend. Council Member Ikeda will take care of coordinating the schedule to assure that Ms. Reis can be available at the council meeting. A motion to approve this measure was unanimously denied. Pursuant to Council Rules, 5 aye votes are needed to pass a measure. Therefore, your Committee on Planning forwards Bill No. 96 to the Council with a negative recommendation. and nrES NOES A&E Ex Respectfully submitted, FORD X HIGA X COMIvIITTEE ON PL NG HOFFMANN X r II~DA X / JACOBSON X NAEOLE X K. ANGEL PII,A ,CHAIR PILAGO X YAGONG X PC REPORT NO. 30 YosHIHtoTO X ADOPTED: OCT 0 3 2001