HomeMy WebLinkAboutREP PC 099 10/07/2008 2006-2008 REPORT OF THE
COMMITTEE ON PLANNING
DATE: October 7, 2008 Re: Comm. 1320/Bill 321
PLACE: Council Chambers
Ben Franklin Building, 2 "d Floor
333 Kilauea Avenue
Hilo, Hawaii
TIME: 3:00 p.m.
Council Chair and Members
Hawaii County Council
Hilo, Hawaii 96720
Bill 321, transmitted via Communication 1320 from Mayor Harry Kim, dated July 2, 2008,
presents a Change of Zone Request by FREDITAS UDANI at Waiakea, South Hilo, Hawaii,
TMK: 2 -2- 025:011.
Bill 321 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, as Amended), by changing the District
Classification from Single Family Residential — 10,000 square feet (RS -10) to General
Commercial — 10,000 square feet (CG -10) at Waiakea, South Hilo, Hawaii.
Communication 1320 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 June 6, 2008.
The Commission concurred with the Planning Director's reasons for recommending a favorable
consideration of this matter. Communication No. 1320 transmits the following findings and
recommendations:
1. The subject property is a fully developed parcel located on the southwest corner of
Lanikaula Street and Kilauea Avenue. There is an approximately 50 -year old,
2,276- square foot single - family dwelling and a cottage on the site.
2. Applicant's request for a change of zone from RS -10 to CG -10 is to relocate an insurance
office to the subject property and be more readily accessible and convenient for her
clients residing in the immediate and surrounding areas.
3. Applicant proposes to convert an existing structure into an office for her insurance
business at a cost of approximately $50,000 and have two employees.
4. Access to the subject property is from Lanikaula Street, a County roadway with a
pavement width of approximately 20 feet within a 60 -foot right -of -way. The subject
property also fronts Kilauea Avenue and the City of Hilo Zone Map designates a 10 -foot
wide future road widening setback along the property's Kilauea Avenue frontage to an
80 -foot right -of -way.
PC Report No. 99
Communication 1320
Bill 321
Page 2 of 6
5. County water is available to the site.
6. All essential utilities and services are available to the site. Police services are available at
the main station on Kapiolani Street, and fire services are available at the Hilo Central
fire Station on Kinoole Street.
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 the
General Plan Economic and Land Use elements.
• The Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide ( LUPAG) Map component of the General
Plan designates the project area as High Density Urban, which includes General
Commercial, multiple - family residential and related services and the General
Commercial zoning request conforms to the LUPAG map for this area.
• The State Land Use designation for the subject property is Urban and "unclassified"
by the Land Study Bureau's Productivity Rating. Although the 1975 Hilo
Community Development Plan designates the area as RM -4, land uses in the
immediate area include a mix of residential and commercial uses.
• There are various commercial establishments on Kilauea Avenue just north of the
project site and the proposed Change of Zone compliments existing land uses in the
area and provides for an orderly development of the area.
• The Change of Zone request is not contrary to Chapter 205A, Hawaii Revised
Statutes relating to Coastal Zone Management as the subject property is not located in
the Special Management Area.
• There is no record of a designated public access to the shoreline or mountain areas
that traverses the property and it is not anticipated that the proposed request will have
any adverse impact on cultural or historical resources in the area.
• The subject property is located within Zone "X," areas determined to be outside the
500 -year flood plain.
At the July 22, 2008 Planning Committee meeting, no public testimony was received on this
matter. Planning Committee Chair Pilago noted that the proposed change of zone application did
receive favorable recommendations from both the Planning Commission and the Planning
Director. Applicant Freditas Udani and her spokesperson, Ray Line was present at the Hilo
Councilroom via videoconference:
Mr. Line stated that applicant did not agree with the condition requiring she provide an entire
sidewalk with curb and gutters because all she wants to do is convert a cottage into an office for
her insurance business. Brad Kurokawa, representative from the Planning Department stated that
although he was not involved with deliberations regarding this change of zone request, in terms
of responding to Mr. Line's question, he explained that the Planning Department looks at the
long term result of the zone change as General Commercial (CG) and therefore even though the
PC Report No. 99
Communication 1320
Bill 321
Page 3 of 6
actual use is an office cottage, in the long term and in the event of a sale, zoning remains general
commercial and therefore the Department expects that level of improvements.
In response to Mr. Pilago's question if Ms. Udani feels that the conditions of approval should not
apply to her application, Mr. Line stated that applicant is requesting that the condition requiring
construction of curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements be waived due to the cost of making
those improvements which was estimated to be approximately $300,000. Mr. Line stated
Ms. Udani felt this was very excessive for a small home business that would generate no more
than one or two clients at a time.
Councilmember Yagong noted that if the change of zone to commercial is granted, it will add a
tremendous amount of value to the property should the property be sold and that it was very rare
that a commercial rezone be granted without having proper infrastructure in place, regardless of
how many clients a business expects to serve.
Councilmember Jacobson noted that although he trusts that applicant will only conduct the kind
of business she describes today, there have situations in the past of applicants applying for one
purpose and after rezoning is obtained, finds that a better deal was to sell the property to a buyer
with a completely different project in mind. Mr. Jacobson stated his concern regarding parking
and that it was going to create an enormous mess for people trying to get to any of the businesses
in the area, and if the area is turned into another strip mall like it is across the street, then a few
parking spaces are inadequate.
Mr. Kurokawa stated that the department continues to look at parking issues and is familiar with
the parking situation across the street near Subway. However, Mr. Kurokawa noted that the
larger picture is as they continue to look at these types of rezoning they also look at a variety of
different parking solutions and possibly promote the idea of shared parking.
Councilmember Higa stated he supports the applicant's proposal to use the existing cottage to
meet clients at home because it maintains a residential aspect. Mr. Higa suggested looking into
the Special Use permit process instead of rezoning and encouraged the applicant to deliberate
further with the Planning Department to resolve this matter mutually agreeable to all parties.
Councilmember Pilago encouraged applicant to begin negotiations and work through an
amicable and comfortable outcome. He then recommended postponing this matter to the
August 12, 2008 Planning Committee meeting, which recommendation was approved.
At the August 12, 2008 Committee on Planning meeting Director Yuen and applicant were
present. Director Yuen stated that he did meet with Ms. Udani to discuss what could be done
with respect to the Conditions for approval. Mr. Yuen explained that applicant's request has a
very limited goal which is to use her home as an office. However, he stated that this is one of the
busiest corners in Hilo and therefore the Department of Public Works considers the commercial
aspect as a whole and since there are various other uses allowable under a commercial zone,
certain improvements are generally required. Mr. Yuen stated they discussed a more limited list
of improvements, but that in all conscience, even with limited rezoning, the Department would
PC Report No. 99
Communication 1320
Bill 321
Page 4 of 6
still recommend some improvements to that corner which would not range in the hundreds of
thousands but more likely in the tens of thousands. Mr. Yuen said there isn't any point in
passing the rezoning with full improvements, however, noted the option for a home occupation
that would work for applicant, but would not permit applicant to erect a sign on her property to
announce her business. Mr. Yuen stated that his recommendation would be for Ms. Udani to go
ahead with what she wants to do through a home occupation which would not require street
improvement.
Committee Chair Pilago inquired whether Ms. Udani understood what Director Yuen was
recommending; Ms. Udani did agree that she would like additional time to discuss her options
with respect to her application for change of zone. Planning Director agreed to a postponement
to the next Committee on Planning meeting.
Councilmember Yagong stated that he supports the postponement and stated he would be very
happy to assist Ms. Udani and sit in with her during discussions with the Planning Director to
explain the process and assure that she understands what is being proposed. Applicant was
agreeable and this matter was postponed to the August 26, 2008 Committee on Planning
meeting.
At the August 26, 2008 Committee on Planning meeting, Councilmember Yagong stated he had
an opportunity to meet with applicant and the Planning Director Yuen. Director Yuen explained
applicant's desire to operate a simple insurance home business requires her to apply for a
commercial zoning, however, applicant doesn't believe she should have to make some of the
changes and incur a lot of expense. Mr. Yuen said he would be willing to consider modifying
some of the conditions and would have further discussions with the Department of Public Works
and hoped to present a modified bill at the next Planning meeting on September 23, 2008. A
motion to postpone this matter to the September 23, 2008 Planning meeting was approved.
At the September 23, 2008 Mr. Yagong noted that Ms. Udam could not be present today and that
discussions are continuing between himself, Ms. Udani and the Planning Director but that a
meeting with the Department of Public Works is yet to be held.
Councilmember Jacobson noted that a proposed amendment presented by the Planning Director
deletes the condition requiring sidewalk construction and questioned why elimination of the
condition requiring sidewalks in a commercial area was acceptable to the Director. Director
Yuen noted that the sidewalk condition was deleted because a sidewalk already exists on
Lanikaula Street. Councilmember Yagong's motion to postpone this matter to the October 7,
2008 Planning Committee meeting was approved with concurrence by Director Yuen.
At the October 7, 2008 Planning Committee meeting Director Yuen explained that if Mrs. Udani
applied for an Special Use Permit, she still could not erect a business sign. Mr. Yuen also
explained that he would like to change his proposed amendment and require that a sidewalk be
constructed on Lanikaula Street, because there is no sidewalk located on Lanikaula, but that the
problem would be trying to install a sidewalk without relocating the utility pole.
PC Report No. 99
Communication 1320
Bill 321
Page 5 of 6
Councilmember Yagong stated that a site visit to the property revealed there is no sidewalk along
Lanikaula Street, and it is the Council who decides whether or not this sidewalk should be
required. Mr. Yagong explained that the sidewalk costing approximately $300,000 is a financial
burden on the applicant, would result in a sidewalk to nowhere and was an unreasonable request
upon Mrs. Udani. In addition, removal/relocation of utility pole(s) will cost applicant between
$50,000 and $100,000 which is totally unnecessary and burdensome.
Councilmember Jacobson expressed concern that because this is a rezoning request, the property
will be a commercial zoned parcel and that this was the only opportunity to require that curb,
gutter and sidewalks be installed. Commercial zoning gives applicant's property an incredible
amount of value while at the same time leaves public safety out the door if she's not required to
install sidewalks and the Council needs to protect the people who are going to use the area in the
future.
Councilmember Higa stated that the Home Occupation provision, except for the sign restriction,
would allow Mrs. Udani to conduct her business; and maybe a change to the Home Occupation
section of the Code that would allow displaying a business sign would be appropriate.
During discussions on whether or not to postpone this matter and allow Director Yuen to provide
a corrected amendment relating to requiring a sidewalk on Lanikaula Street, or move forward
with the Director's proposed amendment, Mr. Yuen stated he was not in favor of moving the bill
in a form which he did not support and preferred the Council withdraw his communication
transmitting the proposed amendment. Councilmember Yagong stated it is the Council's
purview whether or not to recommend and approve the Condition and felt the Council should
pass the Director's amendment and vote on the measure.
Councilmember Higa's concern was that if applicant is treated any differently than others who
have been required to comply with the condition to provide sidewalks, it would result in others
coming before the Council requesting the same consideration. Therefore, he would not be in
support of approving Director's proposed amendment. A motion to amend Bill 321 with the
Director's proposed amendment failed. Director Yuen stated he would be working on another
version of the bill and would provide it at the next meeting.
Your Committee concurs with the Planning Commission and the Planning Director's favorable
recommendation for approval of the Change of Zone request.
PC Report No. 99
Communication 1320 I ) O
Bill 321 \��
Page 6 of 6
Your Committee on Planning is in accord with the purpose and intent of Bill 321 and
recommends it pass first reading.
and
AYES NOES A E Ex Respectfully submitted,
FORD X
RIGA X COMMITTEE ON PL ING
HOFFMANN X
RCEDA X
JACOBSON X
NAEOLE X K. ANGEL PILA CHAIR
P11 AGO X
YAGONG X PC REPORT NO. 99
YOSRIMOTO x ADOPTED: AIIrl 1 9 2009