Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0652.008 2008-2010Murashige, Laura COMM. G.52. Ca *FEB 2 fR(l 9 3 To: counciltestimony @ co.hawaii.hi.us . GLER,-; From: David Panoff [panoff @prodigy.net] Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 9:29 AM Page 1 of 2 p1 Courvat. COUM V I Cc: dikeda @co.hawaii.hi.us; lyoshimoto @co.hawaii.hi.us, donishi @co.hawaii.hi us, genriques @co.hawaii hi us; bford @co.hawaii.hi.us; kgreenwell @co.hawaii.hi us; phoffmann @co.hawaii.hi.us, enaeole @co hawaii hi us; ncabral @daylum.com; breathingpump @msn corn; Jesse Crawford, JArmstrong @hawaiitribune- herald.com, Barbara Engle; amsjbush @dcsi.net, 'David Hudson'; 'Rachel Fordyce'; gerlinde @hawaii edu; gheetan @hawaii.edu; apapanerobert@msn.com, Nancy C; dyagong @co.hawaii.hi.us Subject: Testimony - Bill 184 - Opposed Attachments: Testimony Opposing Bill 184 - Part 2.doc; Boschetti001 pdf; Boschetti PDF Testimony re: Bill 184 from David Panoff — President Pacific Heights Homeowners Association: Aloha County Council — In the two weeks that have passed since this zoning change was first proposed. nothing has changed our opinion that it is ill- advised. There was a question concerning how we obtained our information, so I've included in the attachments some excerpts from materials we received directly from the developer's attorney. These documents, if studied carefully, support our objections rather than dispel them. 1. Pedestrian Safety — The Kukuau Street egress, which will be in use with the opening of the first of the two increments, is unsafe for pedestrians. It is a 19 foot right of way with a pavement width of 15 to 17 feet (noted in the traffic survey excerpt attached.) That leaves only 24 inches for safe pedestrian travel, including children walking to school, aligned with a roadway that accumulates significant amounts of water, occasionally floods, and upon which cars are often forced to swerve. Cars now must slow down appreciably if pedestrians are on both sides of the roadway. 2. Traffic — the survey (portions reproduced in the attached) states clearly that it assumes there will be no other development in the area for the next 5 years! It also assumes only a 2% (two percent) increase in traffic over the next 20 years!!!! Surely you know that another development for 47 homes has just been approved by the planning commission for the adjacent property. Plus the upcoming housing of emergency service vehicles on Kapiolani Street is imminent. The traffic survey is flawed and should not be taken at face value. It also does not include the impact at the intersection of Kukuau and Komohana. Because the Kukuau Street will be utilized primarily at first, the additional traffic at Komohana will be significant. 3. Size — why is the zoning for 145 units being requested if the developer has only "conceptual plans" for 100. He admits parking space is inadequate for 100 and will ultimately limit the size of the development. Why does the council leave it to another agency (Public Works) to limit the size of the development per regulation; why not use common sense now and see that that land area is inadequate for the proposed zoning change. 4. Children — there is still no place for children to play on the property. They will be playing either on Kukuau Street, in traffic, or on adjoining private property. The financial contribution the developer will be making to the County coffers for this development, (which historically has been difficult to collect, and not due until project completion.) will not cover the costs of traffic signals, road improvements, and possible litigation when injuries occur and the County is Comm. No Ref. To: 2/2/2010 Ref. Date EB t 010 found culpable. Page 2 of 2 To make this development acceptable, the following changes should be adopted: 1. Lower density - RM 3 to 4 2. Developer should fund 2 traffic signals: Kukuau and Kapiolani and Kukuau and Komohana 3. Sidewalk improvements on KUKUAU (Kapiolani already has sidewalks) and a barrier to separate it from the vehicular traffic. 4. In internal walkway on the property that will permit pedestrians to avoid the use of Kukuau for makai foot traffic. 5. A playground on the property for children. In similar size developments, precedent exists for requiring the builder to provide such facilities. With these modifications, we can support this development. Please don't consider this project without thinking of the upcoming one on the adjacent property. We are a residential neighborhood and can't support a massive set of apartment building projects in our midst without significantly impacting our quality of life. Plus, the plans don't take into consideration safety, particularly for children. Please refer to the attached documents as they contain information from the developer that supports our opposition. 2/2/2010 Testimony re: Bill 184 from David Panoff — President Pacific Heights Homeowners Association: Aloha County Council — In the two weeks that have passed since this zoning change was first proposed, nothing has changed our opinion that it is ill- advised. There was a question concerning how we obtained our information, so I've included in the attachments some excerpts from materials we received directly from the developer's attorney. These documents, if studied carefully, support our objections rather than dispel them. 1. Pedestrian Safety — The Kukuau Street egress, which will be in use with the opening of the first of the two increments, is unsafe for pedestrians. It is a 19 foot right of way with a pavement width of 15 to 17 feet (noted in the traffic survey excerpt attached.) That leaves only 24 inches for safe pedestrian travel, including children walking to school, aligned with a roadway that accumulates significant amounts of water, occasionally floods, and upon which cars are often forced to swerve. Cars now must slow down appreciably if pedestrians are on both sides of the roadway. 2. Traffic — the survey (portions reproduced in the attached) states clearly that it assumes there will be no other development in the area for the next 5 years! It also assumes only a 2% (two percent) increase in traffic over the next 20 years!!!! Surely you know that another development for 47 homes has just been approved by the planning commission for the adjacent property. Plus the upcoming housing of emergency service vehicles on Kapiolani Street is imminent. The traffic survey is flawed and should not be taken at face value. It also does not include the impact at the intersection of Kukuau and Komohana. Because the Kukuau Street will be utilized primarily at first, the additional traffic at Komohana will be significant. 3. Size — why is the zoning for 145 units being requested if the developer has only "conceptual plans' for 100. He admits parking space is inadequate for 100 and will ultimately limit the size of the development. Why does the council leave it to another agency (Public Works) to limit the size of the development per regulation; why not use common sense now and see that that land area is inadequate for the proposed zoning change. 4. Children — there is still no place for children to play on the property. They will be playing either on Kukuau Street, in traffic, or on adjoining private property. The financial contribution the developer will be making to the County coffers for this development, (which historically has been difficult to collect, and not due until project completion,) will not cover the costs of traffic signals, road improvements, and possible litigation when injuries occur and the County is found culpable. To make this development acceptable, the following changes should be adopted: 1. Lower density - RM 3 to 4 2 Developer should fund 2 traffic signals: Kukuau and Kapiolani and Kukuau and Komohana 3. Sidewalk improvements on KUKUAU (Kapiolani already has sidewalks) and a barrier to separate it from the vehicular traffic. 4. In internal walkway on the property that will permit pedestrians to avoid the use of Kukuau for makai foot traffic. 5. A playground on the property for children. In similar size developments, precedent exists for requiring the builder to provide such facilities. With these modifications, we can support this development. Please don't consider this project without thinking of the upcoming one on the adjacent property. We are a residential neighborhood and can't support a massive set of apartment building projects in our midst without significantly impacting our quality of life. Plus, the plans don't take into consideration safety, particularly for children. Below are some excerpts from the developer's materials — please note the flawed assumptions in the traffic survey: I. Study Area The Project is surrounded by a mix of single - family (RS -7.5 and RS -10) and multiple - family residential (RM -I) uses, which includes Hualalai and Mohuli ubdivis ons, and general commercial (CG-7,5) uses, which ' d Center. ' ere are cuen y no o er developments being proposed for this, Mg rr area. Since tra "ic rom t is . eve op - - - cou . ave • mpac on a a Kapiolani Street, Kukuau Street and Ponahawai Street are considered in this report. Page 1 of 12 Pursuant to Section 25 -2-46 (Concurrency Requirements), Hawaii County Code, a traffic impact analysis report (TIAR) is required for submittal with a Change of Zone action that can generate 50 or more per hour trips. The TIAR shall include projections for future traffic growth in traffic, for a minimum of five- ten- and twenty- years, and include other approved or proposed development that is expected to impact the Project area, with reasonable build -out assumptions. Based on the current recession and economic conditions, we can only assume that future development within the area of the Project over the next five years will be limited, and thus the Project will have a minimal impact on the traffic conditions in the general area. TMKs Current Zoning Current Density Proposed Zoning Maximum Density 2- 4- 025 RS -7 5 22 lots RM -l.5 110 units 165,693 sq ft 2-4- 025.080 RS -7 5 3 lots RM -I 5 18 units 28,084 sq. ft 2- 4- 025:053 RS -7.5 / RM -1 I lot / 17 units RM -1.5 l7 units 26,197 sq. ft. TOTAL 26 lots / 17 1111115 145 units I. Physical Characteristics Kapiolani Street is a two -lane County roadway running north and south, having a pavement width of 28 feet within a 40 -foot right -of -way, improved with curb, gutter 1 and sidewalk. . -, treet is a Coun road w, I ,- i• - west and east, having a pavement wt I t • 15 to 17 feet within a 19 -foot right -of -way, improved with asphalt sidewalk berm. a speed limit for these streets is 25 mph. The intersection of Kapiolani Street and Ponahawai Street is a signalized intersection located one - quarter 7 Page 2 of 12 *********************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** The proposed rezoning will allow for the development of a maximum density of 145 multiple - family units. The Project proposes 100 multiple- family units which is approximately 31% less than would be allowed under the proposed RM -1.5 zoning designation for Parcels 48, 53, and 80. I \ P'IYIE.T VMnY4ISIPT Dear Mr. Panoff: TMKs: (3) 2 -4 -025: 50, 52 and 93 CARLSMITH BALL LLP A LIMITED LIABILITY LAW PARTNERSHIP 121 WAIANUENUE AVENUE HILO, HI 96721 -0686 TELEPHONE 808.935.6644 FAx 808.935.7975 WW W.CARLSMITH COM E -MAIL SLIM ®CARLSMITH COM January 14, 2010 David Panoff President, Pacific Heights Homeowners' Association c/o 519 Kukuau Street, Apt. A -102 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Re: Change of Zone Application (REZ 09- 000103) Applicant: Giampaolo "Paul" Boschetti Request: RS -7.5 and RM -1 to RM -1.5 Tax Map Key Nos.: (3) 2 -4- 25:48, 53 and 80 This firm represents Applicant Giampaolo "Paul" Boschetti in the above - referenced Change of Zone Application. This letter is in response to your January 6, 2010 e -mail comments regarding the proposed Project to the Hawaii County Council, and your January 9, 2010 meeting with Greg Gadd, Mr. Boschetti's local representative. Project Concept: We understand that Mr. Gadd provided you with a copy of the conceptual Project Site Plan, The development of the Project is conceptual and the final number and configuration of the residential units built will be dependent upon market conditions. Flooding: A portion of the Property is located within a known inundation area (major depression ponding), and designated Zone "X" (unmapped). To address the drainage issues in this area, the County of Hawaii, Department of Public Works recently acquired several privately owned parcels or portions of parcels for easements associated with the existing unlined drainage way and detention basins to mitigate the runoff from the Mohouli Subdivision) In particular, within the Project, the County created drainage easements within Parcel 80 (Easement 254, as shown on Map 106, Land Court Application 1205) and Parcel 48 (Easement 253, as shown on Map 105, Land Court Application 1205), and the Grant of Easements in favor of the County of Hawaii was filed in Office of the Assistant Registrar of the Land Court of the State of Hawaii on January 5, 2010 as Land Court Document No. 3929195. Within the drainage easements, the Applicant proposes an open space grassed drainage area. Access to Project: A Traffic Impact Analysis Report ( "TIAR ") was prepared by Witcher Engineering, dated July, 2009. The TIAR analyzed the development of the Project and its impact on traffic along Kapiolani Street and Kukuau Street, as well as the impact upon the unsignalized intersection of Kapiolani Street and Kukuau Street, and the signalized intersection HONOLULU KAPOLH HILO KONA MAUI GUAM SAIPAN LOS ANGELES WASHINGTON, D.C. TMKs Current Zoning Current Density Proposed Zoning Maximum Density 2- 4- 025:048 RS -7.5 22 lots RM-I.5 110 units 165,693 sq. ft. 2- 4- 025:080 RS -7.5 3 lots RM -1.5 18 units 28,084 sq. ft. 2- 4- 025:053 RS -7.5 / RM -1 I lot/ 17 units RM -I 5 17 units 26,197 sq ft. TOTAL 26 lots / 17 units 145 units David Panoff anuaty 14, 2010 Page 2 of Kapiolani Street and Ponahawai Street. The TIAR concluded that the proposed driveways at Kapiolani Street and Kukuau Street are at acceptable levels of service of "A" or "B" for all traffic movements during the AM Peak and PM Peak for a 20 -year forecast. Further, the TIAR concluded that the traffic level of service of "D" and "E" for certain traffic movements at the Kapiolani Street - Kukuau Street non - signalized intersection, and the Kapiolani Street- Ponahawai Street signalized intersection respectively, under the 20 -year forecast is caused not by the Project, but by the projected increase in background traffic in the area. In addition, for public safety reasons, the Applicant has agreed to limit access from the Project to Kapiolani Street as a "right -in, right- out ". Per your request, attached please find a copy of the TIAR. Current Zoning: The existing County zoning designations for the Property are Single Family Residential, minimum 7,500 square feet and Multiple - Family Residential, minimum 1,000 square feet (RIv1 -1) as follows: The proposed rezoning will allow for the development of a maximum density of 145 multiple - family units. The Project proposes 100 multiple- family units which is approximately 31% less than would be allowed under the proposed RM -1.5 zoning designation for Parcels 48, 53, and 80. Please feel free to contact me should you have any additional questions. Thank you for your consideration. SSL:KYL xc w /out enclosure: Client Greg Gadd Council Chair Yoshimoto Council Member Hoffmann Council Member Onishi Council Member Enriques Council Member Ford Council Member Greenwell Council Member Yagong Council Member Naeole Very truly yours, I TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS PROPOSED 100 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX NEAR INTERSECTION OF KAPIOLANI STREET & KUKUAU STREET HILO, HAWAII TMK (3)2- 4- 025:048, 053 & 080 1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 1. Purpose and Study Objectives The purpose of this report is to provide data showing how the development of a 100 - unit apartment project (Project)on the westerly side of Kapiolani Street and southerly of Kukuau Street will affect traffic along Kapiolani Street and Kukuau Street at the development. In addition, This report will analyze the impact upon the non - signalized intersection of Kapiolani Street and Kukuau Street and the signalized intersection of Kapiolani Street and Ponahawai Street. H. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 1. Site Location The Project is located in Kukuau 1st, Hilo, Hawaii southerly of Kukuau Street near the intersection of Kapiolani Street and Kukuau Street, and adjacent to and west from the Hawaii County Police Department Main Headquarters. The tax map keys involved are TMK (3)2-4-025:048, (3)2-4-025:053 and (3)2 -4- 025:080. Current planning is for a 100 -unit apartment complex with accessory swimming pool and pool house, onsite parking areas and landscaping. III. STUDY AREA CONDITIONS 1. Study Area The Project is surrounded by a mix of single - family (RS -7.5 and RS -10) and multiple - family residential (RM -1) uses, which includes Hualalai and Mohuli ubdivis'ons, and general commercial (CG -7.5) uses, which'. . Hilo Sho..ing ere are curren y no o er developments being proposed for this area. Center Since tra is rom t is • eve op co . ave . mpac on e a Kapiolani Street, Kukuau Street and Ponahawai Street are considered in this report. Page I of 12 2. Site Accessibility At this time, there are two access points to the Project site: (1) Kapiolani Street, a two -lane County roadway having a pavement width of 28 feet within a 40 -foot right - of -way onto Parcel 53, and (2) Kukuau Street, a two -lane County roadway having a pavement width of 15 to 17 feet within a 19 -foot right -of -way onto Parcel 80. 3. Land Use The Project site is currently vacant land and is situated in the State Land Use Urban district. Parcels 48 and 80 are zoned Single - Family Residential (RS -7.5), and Parcel 53 is zoned Single - Family Residential (RS -7.5) and Multiple - Family Residential (RM- I.5). 4. Compliance with Concurrency Requirements Pursuant to Section 25 -2-46 ( Concurrency Requirements), Hawaii County Code, a traffic impact analysis report (TIAR) is required for submittal with a Change of Zone action that can generate 50 or more per hour trips. The TIAR shall include projections for future traffic growth in traffic, for a minimum of five- ten- and twenty - years, and include other approved or proposed development that is expected to impact the Project area, with reasonable build -out assumptions. Based on the current recession and economic conditions, we can only assume that future development within the area of the Project over the next five years will be limited, and thus the Project will have a minimal impact on the traffic conditions in the general area. Economic trends in the past have indicated 10 ± years of growth followed by 10 ± years of economic downturn. The present state of the economy indicates that this downturn could be longer and more intense than those of the past with some slow growth towards the end. Thus, we project a limited number of developments to occur within the surrounding areas. A 2% growth factor will be used for this report. IV. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS 1. Physical Characteristics Kapiolani Street is a two -lane County roadway running north and south, having a pavement width of 28 feet within a 40 -foot right -of -way, improved with curb, gutter and sidewalk. . • , treet is a Coun roadw. r A_ i • . west and east, having a pavement wid I aif 15 to 17 feet within a 19 -foot ri ht -of -way, improved with asphalt sidewalk berm. er I'he speed limit for these streets is 25 mp . The intersection of Kapiolani Street and Ponahawai Street is a signalized intersection located one - quarter 7 Page 2 of 12 501059039 PFaER It O ROSCHE717 APARTMENTS SfTE PLAN � 6GVE „r. awe El ION li ,. Y P00. Mg1Y b14 L 04.04. 610 i9 0 PIFEEL 62 24061 SWIA 06447 00905 P 4!LL a6 510: 20056E Sft J&M 0I00 r CRMNLC£ 1 EAMON? SN010 1.95604 H1 BUILDING NIF%MI ZONING a. - I 6NKa 53 20.192 SW 061 50606 ECT A1.1 WHIM MILLI 7 - 9 IIIIP'Y IIII_OII YY I Eli Diion i 0 ro 0 00 0 0 A O BUILDING B - EXTERIOR ELEVATION - COURTYARD VIEW SCAll 3/37.1' 0 S -('a -C ee"I u EditNNOTES KLYNOTIES. • COMAIWO pw in% �� IILU.10 r 11111011 —'"l ' In I■E now 81 nuoo e II III 1 III a 1 2 our - onm 111101 IE e `V 1 i '1111 ilil a FAST EIEVAIYNI O 2 BUILDING A - EXIEWOR ELEVATION - COURTYARD VIEW KALE 3A2 r11 N 6T woon goon vii 'rust V. nms-, 1 l -f - NEST IEVADON O 'S BUILDING C- EXTERIOR ELEVATION - COURTYARD VIEW SCALE 3/37-1' Y11 DURRAM Med. Five NAN [Nan EXIT !DOR liEV00ONS AND YCDONS YALE N A3.1