HomeMy WebLinkAboutREP PC 081 04/08/2008 2006-2008
REPORT OF THE
COMMITTEE ON PLANNING
DATE: April 8, 2008 Re: Comm. 1113/Bill 274
PLACE: Councilroom
Ben Franklin Building
333 Kilauea Avenue, 2"d Floor
Hilo, Hawai` i
TIME: 10:00 a.m.
Council Chair and Members
Hawaii County Council
Hilo, Hawaii 96720
Your Committee on Planning, to which was referred Bill 274, reports as follows:
Bill 274, transmitted via Communication 1113 from Mayor Harry Kim, dated March 18,
2008, presents an amendment to Change of Zone Ordinance No. 95-55 (Condition B) by
NANI MAU, INC., which rezoned 37.247 acres of land from an Agricultural 10-acres
(A-10-a) to an Agricultural 1-acre (A-la) zoned district and 4.502 acres from an
Agricultural 3-acres (A-3a) to an Agricultural 1-acre (A-la) zoned district.
The project site is located at the Nani Mau Gardens, bordered by Railroad Avenue,
Makalika Street, Awa Street, and the Flood Control Channel, Panaewa Farm Lots,
Waiakea, South Hilo, Hawaii, TMK: 2-2-48:93 and portion of 13.
Applicant submitted a five-year time extension request to comply with Condition B
(secure Final Subdivision Approval) of Change of Zone Ordinance No. 95-55, from
April 26, 2005 until April 26, 2010. Applicant is also requesting to delete the portion of
Condition B limiting the maximum number of lots to 22, however, Planning Director
Yuen is recommending that the lot limit be increased to 25 rather than deleting the limit.
The Planning Commission concurred with the Planning Director's reasons for
recommending favorable consideration of the request and Communication 1113 transmits
the following findings:
Change of Zone Ordinance No. 95-55 was approved April 26, 1995 and included
a 9-hole pitch and putt golf course approved under Use Permit No. 126.
Condition B required that Final Subdivision Approval be secured within five (5)
years from the effective date of the ordinance and also limited the number of lots
not to exceed twenty-two (22). Also, it required that on Final Subdivision
Approval the area encumbered by the 9-hole pitch and putt golf course be rezoned
into the Open District by the Planning Director.
PC Report No. 81
Communication 1113
Bill 274
Page 2 of 4
Tentative Subdivision Approval was received on December 17, 2003, but was not
able to secure Final Subdivision Approval by the deadline of April 26, 2005.
Delays in receiving approval for construction plans prevented applicant from
meeting the deadline set forth in Condition B and applicant is requesting a
five-year extension to comply. The Planning Commission approved a request to
nullify Use Permit No. 126 and applicant is no longer pursuing the 9-hole golf
course. As noted in Communication 1113, applicant has consistently been
working towards compliance with the conditions for the change of zone and its
non-performance is the result of conditions that could not have been foreseen and
were beyond control of the applicant.
Approval of this request would not be contrary to the General Plan or the original
reasons for granting the Change of Zone. In addition, since this request was
originally approved, there have not been any significant changes to the General
Plan that would affect the project.
At the April 8, 2008 Planning Committee meeting, Director Yuen presented a brief
summary of applicant's request explaining that this was a time extension primarily for a
rezoning that was granted some time ago, and the Department was basically in favor of
an extension. Mr. Yuen said there was also a request to modify part of Condition B that
limits the subdivision to a total of 22 lots, and that both the Planning Department and the
Planning Commission were in favor of applicant's request for increasing the total number
of lots to 25.
Committee Chair Pilago presented a brief chronology of the change of zone request and
Mr. Fujiyama confirmed that in discussions with the Planning Director, an agreement had
been reached regarding the April 26, 2008 administrative extension of time, and that this
request was to correct an oversight or error. Mr. Fujiyama explained that the rezoning
was granted in 1973 before they acquired the property and that it was already rezoned
Agricultural 1-acre when they purchased the property and started the subdivision
planning approval process at the end of 1999. Mr. Yuen added that although the project
started in 1973, this particular zoning only goes back to 1995.
Councilmember Higa recused himself from voting on this matter because Mr. Fujiyama
is a known supporter of his. However, Mr. Higa did request to participate in discussions
since the project is located within his Council District. Mr. Higa said that Mr. Jacobson's
comments have some validity, but there needs to be an understanding on a case by case
basis, of the process that has been going on regarding the extension. Planning Director
Yuen explained that the typical wording of an ordinance is that an applicant shall obtain
final subdivision approval within five years and if they don't and the five years run out,
the Department will generally grant a one-time administrative time extension and that
gives the application 10 years. Any extension after that would be brought to the Council
for approval. Mr. Higa said there has been a lot of other rezonings in the general area and
that this proposal is consistent with those rezonings as well as consistent with the Low
Density Urban designation of the General Plan.
PC Report No. 81
Communication 1113
Bill 274
Page 3 of 4
Chair Pilago clarified that on December 2007 there is a letter from the applicant to the
Director requesting a two-year extension and that in January 2008 the Planning Director
advised applicant that applicant's request would only extend the time to April 26, 2007.
Therefore, the Director recommended that applicant be allowed a five-year time
extension from April 26, 2005, when the original time lapsed.
Councilmember Ford's concern was whether the applicant had been consistent in
supplying the Department with annual reports and status updates. Director Yuen stated
that this ordinance does not require annual reports and that currently, annual reports are
only required of large projects such as Hualalai Resort and that to require annual reports
of a typical project such as this would just add another layer of paperwork. In response to
Ms. Ford's other concern that this application has been in existence since 1973, Director
Yuen said there may have been confusion from the write-up of this proposal because they
listed a lot of things located within Nani Mau Gardens as well as things connected with it
that do date back to 1973.
Councilmember Jacobson expressed concern about Mr. Lim's complaint of the Council's
lack of consistency and that of the need to hold applicants accountable to what they
agreed to in their rezonings. Mr. Jacobson said he would be voting against this proposal
because of what appears to be a frequency of requests for extension resulting from
applicants who are not taking the rules seriously.
Councilmember Yagong stated that his focus was on the application which is consistent
with the County General Plan in terms of placement of the project. He explained the
proposal does not involve property located in areas associated with traffic mitigation
issues or in an area where views, vistas and quality of life issues are at risk. Instead,
Mr. Yagong noted, this proposal is about building a small subdivision in an area in Hilo
that would provide housing opportunities for residents and those who work in Hilo or out
in Puna. Mr. Yagong said he sees an applicant who is actually trying to address a
housing market of people who may earn too much to qualify for affordable housing yet
not enough to qualify to purchase a home and that in these tough economic times,
someone willing to invest and provide housing opportunities to support continued
economic growth on the side of the island that really needs it and this Council should
applaud and support the proposal.
PC Report No. 81
Communication 1113
Bill 274
Page 4 of 4
Your Committee on Planning is in accord with the purpose and intent of Bill 274 and
recommends it pass first reading.
and
AYES NOES A&E EX Respectfully submitted,
FORD X
HIGA X CONMTTEE ON PLANNING
HOFFMANN X
IIMDA X
JACOBSON X
NAEOLE X K. ANGEL PILA , CHAIR
PILAGO X
YAGONG X PC REPORT NO.. t~ 81
YOSHIMOTO X ADOPTED: APR 2 2 2nna