Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutREP PC 020 01/22/2003 2002-2004REPOR"f OF "HIG COMMITTEE ON PLANNING DATE: .lanuary 22.2003 PLACE: Councilroom I IMI;: 2:1 R p.m. RL?: G60 (2000-2002)lBill No. 17 ('hair and Members Hawaii County Council Hilo. Hawaii 96720 Your Committee on Planning. to which was referred Bill No. 17. transmitted by Mayor Harry Kim per Communication No. 60. dated .lanuary 10, 2001, regarding the change of zone request by Matsuno Enterprises, Ltd. at Waiakca_ South Hilo, Hawaii.'fMK: 2 ?-40: 14 and 69. reports as follows: Bill No. U amends Section 25-K-3 3 (City of Hilo Zone Map). Article K. Chapter 25 (zoning ('ode) of the Hawaii County Code, by changing the district classification for approximately 6.64 acres of land from a Single Family Residential (RS-10) Co a General Commercial ICG-20) zoned district. fhe hexagonal-shaped subject property, owned in fee by the applicant. is located un the southeastern corner of the Puainako Street/Kanoelehua Avenue intersection, across (Puna side) the Prince Kuhio Plaza. Parcel 14 which consists of 3.K I ~ acres and parcel 69 which consists of 2.825 acres will be consolidated into one parcel for the proposed prc~jcct. l~hc majority ofthe site lies in a depression. An existing dwelling located on higher ground h} Puainako Street will he demolished. I~hc subject property is overgrown with non-native plants. The subject property is not situated within the Special Management Area. l he USDA Soil classification is OID. Olga extremely stony silty clay loam with rapid permeability ,slow runoff and slight erosion hazard which is used for sugarcane. 'fhe Land Study Bureau Soil Rating is Urban. "I~he AI.ISH classification is l?xisting Urban Development. fhe likelihood of any rare or endangered flora or fauna and historical or cultm'al lectures is remote because the site has been improved with a duelling. l~he site is also used for intermittent cattle or horse grazing. The Hilo Community Development Plan, adopted by Resolution in 1975 by the Planning Commission, recommended that the area he maintained as RS-10. According to the background inlormation provided by the Planning Commission. the applicant plans to develop a retail and office commercial complex which would tentatively consist of a restaurant(s). ot~ice space. and small retail shops. This project is intended to supplement the regional commercial goods and services that exist in this area. The proposed plans include the construction of three free-,landing buildings which would be less then 35 feet in height, and approximately 7.?80 square legit, 4000 syuarc leel and 31?00 syuarc feet in size. (br a combined Communication 60 Bill 17 Page 2 total of 42,480 square feet. According to the applicant, one or two of the structures may have to be elevated to accommodate the requirements of the "AI?" designation on the FIRM map. Parking and loading areas will also be provided on the site. Surrounding lands are zoned RS-10, CN-10.Open and CCi-20. There are residences to the cast (Hawaiian Home Lands) and south of the parcels, with Blockbuster Video and the PrinccKuhio Plaza (zoned CG-20) to the northeast across Puainako Street. and KTA Super Stores and Pizza 1~ut (zoned CN-10) across Kanoelehua Avenue to the vv~esl. The Hilo Kingdom Hall of Jehovah's Witness on TMK: 2-2-40:70 is located on Awapuhi Street to the cast of Parcel 69. The Planning Commission background information also states the State Land Use designation is l urban, and the General Plan LUPAG Map designation is High Density. Discussion regarding the LUPAG Map designation ensued at the original meeting on April 3.200E Committee Member Curtis Tyler adamantly stated that this parcel is specilically IocaLed in the Low Density area because Puainako Street is clearly defined on the map. He further stated. "How can you determine this property is in the High llcnsit~ area when the map clearly defines it as Low Density?° He also mentioned that the subject property lies directly in the Iloodwa}. which received major flooding damage in the November 2000 flood. l~he measure was then deferred by Your Committee so a Icgal opinion could he obtained from the Office ofthe Corporation Counsel regarding this matter. I~he Department of Public Works states the subject parcels lie within a designated Iloodvvay according to the Flood Insurance Ratc map (FIRM) by the Federal h:mergency Management Agency (FEMA), so construction shall meet with the requirements of Chapter 27, relating to Flood Control. Hawaii County Code. "the owner/developer shall obtain a FFMA Conditional better of Map Revision (CLOMR) prior to construction plan approval and a FF.MA Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy fbr any development within the subject properties. hhe Planning Commission states the proposed main access to the properties is from Puainako Street, a County Roadway identified as a primary arterial with a minimum width of 120 feet. According to the Department of Public Works. the driveway along Puainako Street will be limited to right-turn in and right-tw~n out tral~tic movements only. However. the State Department of'Transportation opposes a commercial driveway ii-om the subject properly to either Kanoelehua A~°enue or Puainako Street. as the driveway(s) would be too close to the congested intersection. The applicant's request is not compatible with the Department of lYansportation's plans for intersection improvements. According to the Department of 'transportation, the Count~~ Puainako Street I?xtenstion project will not include improvements at this intersection. ~I~hc Department anticipates that the Puainako Street h:xtension project may worsen traltic congestion at this intersection by directing new trallic to the area. 'to address the traflic bottleneck ut the Puainako StrccUKanoelehua Avenue intersection. the Department ol`I~ransportition has proposed Communication 60 [3ill 17 Page 3 to undertake Puainako Street Improvements, Kilauea Avcnuc to Kanoclchua Avcnuc. Phases 1 and Il. This project will likely require land acquisition tiom the subject parcels. A revised Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TZAR) submitted in response to comments trom the Department of Public Works and the Department of'fransportation concluded that with the mitigation measures proposed by the Department of Public Works (right-turn in, right-turn out at Puainako Street), the traffic should be satisfactory. Awapuhi Street, a private roadway which has a 16-ibot pavement within a 40-tixri right-of-way, ends at the southern portion of the site. phis Atiapuhi Street secondary access is not envisioned to serve the access needs or requirement of the project. but will be provided largely for the convenience of the residents along Awapuhi Street. According to the Department of Puhlic Works, Parcel 70 (site of the Hilo Kingdom 13x11 of Jehovah's Witness) would become landlocked should this request be approved. Howcecr, according to the applicant, access to Parcel 70 would be provided through this project b}' the extension of Awapuhi Strcct, if allowed by the private owners. l~here is no municipal sewer system in the area, so the applicant proposes several alternatives: I . Construct an on-site private treatment plant such as a septic system meeting with the approval of the Department of Health and Ucparunciu of Public Works 2. Extend the County's line at Makaala Street to the subject site 3. Hook up to the Prince Kuhio Shopping Plaza's private system All other essential utilities and services are or will be made available to the site. At the July 5, 2001 Committee meeting. the State Department o1`fransportation reiterated that they would adhere to their original comments that they oppose any commercial driveways on Kanoelehua Avenue and Puainako Strcct. "Chc reason was the same as it was earlier. Committee Member "hyler stated that the proposal to convert the suhject parcel to I ligh Density' was included in the list of proposed General Plan changes back in 1989, however, the request was never initiated as noted in the Planning Departments'fable of Disposition. Therelbre the subject parcel is still within the Low Density designation. l~he measure was deferred on .luly ~, Z001 until the Planning Department could provide documentation regarding the actual General Plan designation. At today"s meeting. BiII No. 17. Draft 3, which included the Ibllowing amendments was circulated and approved h.~ Your Committee: l . Condition D. Deletes the existing language and replaces it with: "All structures and their associated required parking shall be limited to those areas designated °X'~ on the Flood [nsurance Rate Map. Only surplus parking, landscaping, and utility and road improvements shall be allowed within those areas designated "Af:'~ on the Flood Insurance Rate Map.' Communication 60 BI~~ ~ ~ Page 4 2. Condition F. Amends the condition to say the development of the property shall be completed within five years from the effective date of the ordinancc_ and structures shall be no closer than sixty feet from the existing property line Ironting Puainako Street, and seventy feet along the eastern property line, and waste and trash bins nu closer than 100 feet. 3. Condition (i. Deletes the existing language and replaces it with: "Access to the subject site shall he limited to Kanoelehua Avenue. Puainako Street, and Awapuhi Street if allowed by the affected property owner(s). Access improvements from Kanoelehua Avenue shall meet with the approval of the State Department of'fransportation, while the Awapuhi Street access improvements shall meet with the approval of the Department of Public Works. The driveway access from Puainako Street shall be limited to right-turn in movements only. Said impro~ ements shall also include a deceleration lane, if deemed appropriate by the Department of Public Works, along the Puainako Street 1i~ontagc for the approach into the driveway with adequate sight distance for vehicles entering the subject properties." Committee Member Bob Jacobson stated that "its reap}• unwise to allow anything to happen in a flood zone like this.' l;ven the area that~s not in the flood zone "would have some problems if we see a Flood like we saw three years ago.' "t cannot imagine why we would want to put something like this there, other than just providing a special favor to somebody." "It's bad planning." Committee Member Dr. Holschuh stated that he has seen the "God-awful consequences of bad traffic planning in the 1?R -but it seems to me that this entrance off Kanoelehua is fairly dangerous...". Dr. Holschuh referred to a new communication from the DOT which retracted their previous stand about no access from Kanoelehua or Puainako SUCet: however, they also listed some conditions to go along with the access granted on Kanoelehua Avenue and Puainako Street. Committee Member Tyler stated that in addition to the tloodplain, there is a flood channel behind the property on Awapuhi Street, and the residents informed the Council that the subject property was completely under water during the November 2000 flood. Planning Director Chris Yuen added that Your Committee was referencing the 1988 hood map, which was not revised to reflect the hooding espcricnccd in November 2000. He then stated that the LUPAG map "shows the site to he low density.° Mr. Tyler then confirmed with Sidney fuke. representative for the applicant, that the applicant is applying for a Gcncral Commercial zoning. He then asked Mr. Yuen if the General Commercial zoning is allowed in the Luw Density designation. to which Mr. Yuen replied "no.° Mr. Yuen Communication 60 Bill 17 Page 5 then stated that he will not "vote against the previous determinations of the Planning Directors that this was, although not mapped as such, it was part of the High Density area in the General Plan." Mr. Yuen also explained that if the subject parcel were to be subdivided now, the applicant would not be able to get subdivision approval within the floodway. Mr. 'Cyler then quoted the t'harter in saying, °No public improvement project or subdivision or zoning ordinance shall be initiated or adopted unless the same conforms to and implements the General Plan." He then reiterated that. "IPs impossible for us to approve this, I don't care how many conditions we have on iL because it violates the General Plan." Committee Member Aaron Chung argued that although the subject property lies directly in the flood plain, mitigating measures can be taken to remedy the situation so the applicant could develop a part of the lot. Director Chris Yuen then suggested that the following DO"f conditions be included in Bill No. 17 as a means, so if there were any modifications to them, the Council would have the final say: 1. that the direct access be a right-in/right-out design 2. that the direct access be located as far as possible to the Volcano side of the property 3. that the right-turn deceleration lane into Puainako Street tcom Kanoelehua Avenue be extended 4. that aright-turn deceleration lane on Kanoelehuea Avenue into the development he provided 5. that the Icft-turn from Puainako Street into the development be prohibited 6. that the development's Puainako access be right-in/right-out onl~~ 7. that the Puainako access be located as far as possible away from Kanoelehua Avenue 8. that the traffic controls, i.e. possible signs and pavement markings. on Kanoelehua Avenue be provided to prohibit traffic exiting the development from crossing Kanoelehua Avenue to head west on Puainako 9. that other engineering and design parameters he considered. He also suggested that the final three DO'f conditions he included: 1. Matsuno Enterprises will be subject to a fee for the enhanced value of the property due to the new Kanoelehua access 2. A Traffic Impact Analysis Report ("LIAR) for the development will be required. Should the I~IAK indicate that the development contributes to the need Ibr future improvements to the Puainako Street/Kanoelehua Avenue Intersection. Matsuno lnterprises will pay its fair share for the improvements 3. Matsuno Enterprises will be responsihle for the cost of all tral7ic control adjustments needed as a result of granting of the Kanoelehua access. Communication 60 E3ill 17 Page b Dr. Holschuh suggested that this measure be deterred until a lirm conuniUnent could be obtainec from somebody who could tell them what to do rather than just to vote "no" or not he sure if this is a legal zoning or not. The flooding situation can be mitigated. but the question that remains is will the Charter be violated. Member Chung stated that all he wants °to do is strike a balance'. "Only time will tell whether if s bad planning or whether there arc impacts.° Discussion ensued on the development of the propei1y within the "X° zone. The applicants plans to develop the parcel have since changed, and they no longer intend to develop the retail and office commercial complex with the parking stalls. New information provided suggest a car dealership will replace the commercial complex. Further discussion ensued. however due to the lateness of the hour. Member Aaron Chung mentioned that he would ~~ork together with Chris Yuen. Mr. Fake and staff to come up with a Draft 3. Although the Planning Commission recommended a favorable consideration tier the change of zone request, in their October 19. 2001 communication to the Planning Director, they recommended that he rc-evaluate the proposed B-13 General Plan amendment "as identified on S. Hilo-3 LUPAG Map. the proposed designation trom Low and Medium Density Urban to High Density Urban, in light of Ilooding concerns." Your Committee on Planning is in accord with the intent and purpose of E3ill No. 17. Draft 2, and recommends it pass first reading. nYl(S N(ll'.S A&I' IX I J?III IIAD-I~OI)D X I YI,IiR X 1RAK~R1 X CIIUh'G ti I(LARIONOPP x HOI,SCIIUII X .L1CUBtiON Rh:YNOI,Dti X SN'AIiIK x Respectfully submitted COMMIT'I'I?FG~N PLANNWG - - - -_ RO Y.IEANLI~:IfHEAD-I'ODU,CIIAIR PC RFP(~R f NO. 3U nDOrH~.o FEB 2 n ~nQ3