Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0045.006 2010-2012 William P. Kenoi BJ Leithead Todd . cP,••, � y6i � �+ Director Mayor n .,t. �i Margaret K. Masunaga +r ' : + + O '�`� Deputy Planning Director County of Hawaii PLANNING DEPARTMENT Aupuni Center • 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 • Hilo, Hawai`i 96720 Phone (808) 961 -8288 • Fax (808) 961 -8742 May 24, 2011 __. The Honorable Dominic Yagong, Chairman and Members of the Hawai`i County Council County of Hawai'i 25 Aupuni Street _ Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Chairman Yagong and Council Members: SUBJECT: State Land Use Boundary Amendment Application (SLU 10- 000027) Request: Agricultural to Urban (Bill 327) Change of Zone Application (REZ 10- 000127) Request: A -5a to RS -10 (Bill 328) Applicant: Hualalai Partners of Kona, LLC Tax Map Key: (3) 7- 5- 17:43; Puapua'a 1st, North Kona District, Hawai'i This will respond to the issues raised by Councilperson Brenda Ford at the Planning Committee meeting held on March 15, 2011 regarding the above - referenced applications related to Council Bill Nos. 327 and 328. 1. The Project is in compliance with the Kona Community Development Plan (Ordinance No. 08 -131) ( "Kona CDP ") a. Infll Development - Under Policy LU -2.8 (Development Outside of Transit - Oriented Development (TODs), but within the Urban Area), the proposed rezoning is considered an infill development. The Project is a small scale development under 20 acres, and will serve to connect the pre- existing single family residential developments at Pualani Estates, Sugar Cane Lane, Heights at Hualalai and the proposed Alaneo Subdivisions. Additionally, Policy LU -2.8, Section 2.b.ii. states "Rezonings that promote infill are encouraged." The Project is located within the State Land Use Agricultural District flanked between two Urban District areas. The Project is also surrounded by single - family residential development that maintain a district classification ranging from RS -7.5 to RS -20. Hawai`i County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer CgNra Ila, 4 4 Mt To, PC __ 11x1 Dale MAY 2 5. nit - I The Honorable Dominic Yagong, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 2 May 24, 2011 Furthermore, the term " Infill" is defined on page 7 -2 of the Kona CDP as "Land development within the general boundaries of existing urban /suburban areas that were previously left undeveloped." Not only is the Project located entirely within the General Plan LUPAG Urban Expansion area and the Kona Urban Area slated for development by the Kona CDP, it is also within close proximity to existing urban/suburban developments and projects. b. Transit Oriented Development ( "TOD ") /Transit Neighborhood Development ( "TND ") Village - The Project is located entirely outside of any TOD. The closest TOD to this area is the Kahului-Puapua'a Village Neighborhood anchored by the major transit corridor makai of Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway. The Project does not meet the minimum 20 acre land area requirement to qualify as a TND. There is no legal authority that would allow me to characterize this Project as being over 20 acres, as there is no common ownership of this parcel and any neighboring parcels. c. "Greenbelt" Concept - Greenbelts are a component of a TOD /TND. Under Policy LU- 2.2, a greenbelt should surround and define the outer edge of the secondary area surrounding a higher density urban core. As this Project is located entirely outside of any TOD and does not meet the minimum 20 acre land area to qualify for a TND, there is no greenbelt requirement. Nevertheless, the Project concept does incorporate undeveloped open areas comprised of a proposed drainage mitigation area along the Project's mauka boundary abutting Hienaloli and Hualalai Roads. d. "Greenfield" Concept - The Kona CDP's glossary definition of "greenfield" is "an area that is undeveloped or used for agriculture. Refers only to undeveloped open space within the Kona Urban Area between TODs, TNDs and infill ". While the Project is located entirely within the Kona Urban area of the Kona CDP, it qualifies as an infill development and is therefore, by definition, not a greenfield area. The Project is also consistent with the General Plan LUPAG Urban Expansion designation for urban development. e. The Project is consistent with the General Plan LUPAG Urban Expansion Area designation - On February 8, 2010, the Applicant requested an interpretation of the General Plan LUPAG designation for the Project. As noted in my February 25, 2010 response letter to the Applicant (attached) and according to the Kona CDP's official map metadata, the Kona Urban Area boundary line traces the LUPAG boundaries so that Urban designations (i.e. urban expansion area, low density urban, industrial) are within the Kona Urban Area and Rural designations (i.e. important agricultural land) are outside of the Kona Urban Area. Therefore, the Project is consistent with the General Plan LUPAG designation of Urban Expansion Area. f. The Project is consistent with the Kona CDP Kona Urban Area - In the same February 8, 2010 letter from the Applicant, the Applicant also requested an interpretation of the Kona CDP - Kona Urban Area for the Project. Also noted within my February 25, 2010 response letter to the Applicant (attached) and according to the Kona CDP's official map metadata, the Project is determined to be entirely within the Kona Urban Area. The Honorable Dominic Yagong, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 3 May 24, 2011 In regards to this Project, even if there was a conflict between the General Plan LUPAG Urban Expansion area and the Kona CDP - Kona Urban Area, the General Plan/LUPAG would control. According to Section 46 -4 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes and Section 3- 15 (General Plan) of the Hawaii County Charter, any zoning ordinance shall be enacted within the framework of the General Plan. Section 15.1 of the County General Plan confirms the primacy of the General Plan over the Kona CDP, and states the following: "If there is a direct conflict between the Community Development Plan and the General Plan, the General Plan shall be controlling." g. Connectivity - Over the last 2 years, in compliance with Policy TRAN -2.1 (Connectivity Standards) and Policy LU -2.8, Section 2.b.ii, relating to Infill, the Applicant has worked with the DPW in the design of the Project's roadways to include stubouts to ensure future connectivity to the adjacent parcels including Sugar Cane Lane, the Heights at Hualalai, and the proposed Alaneo development. h. Consultation with the Kona Design Center - On July 12, 2010 the Applicant consulted with the Kona Design Center to confirm the Project's compliance with the Kona CDP. 2. State Land Use Commission ( "LUC ") a. Less than 15 -Acre Rule - As the Project area is 14.968 acres, the County of Hawaii is the only governing entity under Section 206 -3.1 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes that can reclassify land that is less than 15 acres in size. b. LUC Letter of September 3, 2010 - The Planning Department received the LUC letter dated September 3, 2010 after providing our Background and Recommendation Reports ( "Report") for both the SLU and REZ applications to the Leeward Planning Commission ( "Leeward PC "). All comment letters received by the Planning Department prior to submittal of the Report were included within the submittal packet to the Leeward PC. As noted under Item No. 36, Page 6 of the Planning Department's Background Report under "Agencies and Organizations - No Responses ", no response was provided by the LUC at the time the Background Report was provided to the Leeward PC. However, copies of the LUC letter were provided to all of the Leeward PC members prior to its hearing on the subject applications. To address the LUC's comment inquiring whether ownership of this Property and the adjoining parcels are truly separate, we have reconfirmed there is no common ownership of the parcels in question. The law as it currently stands prohibits one applicant from subdividing a Property into parcels less than 15 acres and then subsequently developing each parcel in phases. There is nothing in the law to prohibit the owner of a single parcel, of less than 15 acres in size, from requesting land reclassification as an independent applicant. In this case, where the land is under 15 acres in size, only the County has the legal authority to reclassify the State land use district boundary. The Honorable Dominic Yagong, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 4 May 24, 2011 3. Infrastructure Improvements a. Traffic - The Applicant's traffic engineer is currently working on a supplemental Traffic Impact Analysis Report to address the traffic impact at the intersection of Puapua`anui Street and Paulehia Street, and preliminary indications are that no adverse traffic impacts are expected. b. Drainage - Over the past 2 years, the Applicant has diligently worked with the DPW in addressing the drainage issues in the area. The Applicant's civil engineer will be submitting a 4th revision of the Drainage Report in April to address DPW's latest comments. Although the Project is located outside of any flood drainage ways, the Applicant has voluntarily agreed as part of the rezoning of the Property to address offsite flows from the lands mauka of the Project and over the County owned Hualalai Road. The Applicant is proposing to retain up to 50% of the existing offsite flows to mitigate the drainage /flooding issues in the area. This Project would significantly reduce existing offsite flows and would constitute an improvement to flood control efforts in this area. c. Roadways - Over the past 2 years, the Project's roadways have been developed with the DPW, to include stubouts for future connectivity to adjacent parcels, a proposed County dedicable north -south connector road constructed to "Minor Street" dedicable standards to allow future connection to Hualalai Road, and improvements to Hualalai Road along the Property's frontage. Should you have any questions regarding the above, please do not hesitate to contact this office at 961-8288. Sincerely, ‘f BJ LEITHEAD TODD Planning Director DSA:rl P: /wpwin60/dsa/201 1 /LHualalaiPartnersREZ 10- 27KonaCDP .doc Enclosures. cc: Hawaii County Council Members Hualalai Partners of Kona, LLC Planning Department - West Hawai `i Division CHAPTER 4 GOALS, OBJECTIVES, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS LAND USE Policy LU -2.6: TOD /TND Public Infrastructure and Facilities. To encourage the development of TODs and TNDs, public financing sources shall pay 100% for: • Major proposed trunk transit route, • A transit station (or transit station component if the transit station is part of a private mixed - use project) within the Urban Core , • A major park or plaza within the urban core. In the preparation of the master plan, the applicant shall coordinate the input of appropriate agencies to identify sites and financing of appropriate public facilities such as schools, libraries, and post offices, with respective financial commitments between public and private sources documented in the master plan. The County water allocation and capital improvement policies in Section 4.6: Public Facilities, Infrastructure and Services, Policy PUB -4.1 shall further support the development of the TODs. Action LU -2.6a: Negotiate the respective cost - sharing of the appropriate public facilities (DC, applicants, on- going). Action LU -2.6b: Program funding of major transit routes, transit stations, and major parks within urban core in coordination with proposed TOD build -out (PD, Fin., on- going). Policy LU -2.7: Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND) Floating Zone Established. Where as the locations of TODs are conceptually determined by the Official Kona Land Use Map, the locations of TNDs are proposed by applicants outside of the TODs within the Kona Urban Area (UA). Because of the need to review the specific suitability at the time of proposal, TND floating zones shall not have the rebuttable presumption of a TOD; otherwise, rezoning procedures shall be the same as a TOD Project District. Policy LU -2.8: Development Outside Transit - Oriented Developments (TODs), but within the Kona Urban Area. Development outside the TODs, but within the Kona UA, may occur as follows: 1. Existing Zoning a. TND Overlay. Any project greater than 20 acres on land zoned Single- family residential (RS), Multiple residential (RM), Residential - Commercial Mixed Use (RCX), General Commercial (CG), Village Commercial (CV), or Neighborhood Commercial (CN), shall be permitted to develop as a neighborhood TND following the procedures for a PUD and the Village Design Guidelines. b. Non -TND Projects. Any project may be developed in accordance with the existing zoning, subject to the following requirements: i. Parks (see Policy PUB -6.2.) ii. Affordable Housing. Resale restrictions on affordable units built in compliance with HCC Chapter 11 (see Policy HSG -5.2). KONA CDP 4 -45 CHAPTER 4 GOALS, OBJECTIVES, LAND USE POLICIES, AND ACTIONS iii. Street Standards. Connectivity standards (see Policy TRAN -2.1), street standards (see Policy TRAN -3.1), and traffic calming standards (see Policy TRAN -3.7). iv. Wastewater. Priority sewer area (see Policy PUB -4.4). v. Concurrency. The requirements of Hawaii County Code Section 25 -2 -46 and Policy TRAN -6.1. vi. Sensitive Resources. Survey of potential sensitive resources (see Policy ENV -1.5). 2. Rezoning a. TND. Any project greater than 20 acres within the Kona UA may apply for the TND Floating Zone. b. Conventional Rezoning. Rezoning to other than TND, is subject to the following guidelines: i. Consistency with LUPAG. Refer to Policy LU -1.3. ii. Infill. Rezonings that promote infill are encouraged. The concept of infill is to connect two or more pre- existing developments. Infill is usually associated with small scale developments of 20 acres or less that have been leapfrogged by the surrounding or adjacent developments. Infill rezonings should be conditioned to ensure connectivity to the surrounding developments and, where applicable, to provide mixed -use opportunities to make the area more walkable. iii. "Greenfields" Rezoning. Rezoning anywhere within the Kona UA, whether within or outside a TOD area designated on Figure 4 -7 Official Kona Land Use Map, that is not a TOD, TND, or infill shall require an amendment to the Kona CDP that triggers HRS Chapter 343 Environmental Review Process. c. State Land Use. Where a rezoning application meets the above criteria, the County shall support a State Land Use Urban Boundary amendment for lands within the County Urban Expansion Area. Action LU -2.8a: Amends Chapter 25 Zoning Code to create a TND overlay zone for existing zoned lands within the specified residential and commercial zoning districts (Enacted by plan). Action LU -2.8b: Review subdivision and plan approval applications pursuant to requirements for parks, housing, street standards, wastewater, and concurrency (PD, on- going). Action LU -2.8c: Review conventional rezoning applications pursuant to Policy LU -2.8 (1)(b) (PD, on- going). Objective LU -3: Rural Area Growth Management. To preserve the rural character of the existing rural towns, the agricultural lifestyle, and the open landscape. 4 -46 KONA CDP CHAPTER 7 GLOSSARY Goal — A goal is a desired outcome expressed in simple terms. It should describe the desired end state. Greenbelt or Greenway — Areas of largely undeveloped, wild, agricultural land surrounding or neighboring urban areas. Greenfield — An area that is undeveloped or used for agriculture. Refers only to undeveloped open space within the Kona Urban Area between TODs, TNDs and infill. Important Agricultural Lands — LUPAG designation for lands with better potential for sustained high agricultural yields because of soil type, climate, topography, or other factors. Important agricultural lands were determined by including the following lands: • Lands identified as "Intensive Agriculture" on the 1989 General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide Maps. • Lands identified in the Agricultural Lands of Importance to the State of Hawaii (ALISH) classification system as "Prime" or "Unique." • Lands classified by the Land Study Bureau's Soil Survey Report as Class B "Good" soils. There are no Class A lands on the Island of Hawaii. • Lands classified as at least "fair" for two or more crops, on an irrigated basis, by the U.S.D.A. Natural Resource Conservation Service's study for suitability for various crops. • In North and South Kona, the "coffee belt," a continuous band defined by elevation, according to input from farmers. • State agricultural parks. Infill —Land development within the general boundaries of existing urban /suburban areas that were previously left undeveloped. Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) — The County of Hawaii General Plan LUPAG Map indicates the general location of various land uses in relation to each other. Makai — towards the sea. Mauka — inland, upland, towards the mountain. Mixed Use — A land use pattern that integrates compatible residential, commercial, industrial, office, institutional, or other land uses. Neighborhood Village — A village intended for residential, public /civic uses, or small scale neighborhood oriented commercial uses. The commercial uses are of a small scale and are intended to serve the needs of the village residents. Objective — An objective is a desired endpoint that leads toward accomplishing a goal. 72 KONA CDP Infill TND: a Village Unit type within an Urbanized, Greyfield, or Brownfield area based on a Standard Pedestrian Shed and consisting of T -3, T4, and /or T -5 Zones. An Infill TND is permitted By Right (with PUD approval) in the Urban Area outside of TODs with existing urban zoning and is regulated by Article 4. See Section 4.2.2. (Var: neighborhood.) Inn: a Lodging type, owner - occupied, offering 9 to 12 bedrooms, permitted to serve breakfast in the mornings to guests. See Table 7. Layer: a range of depth of a Lot within which certain elements are permitted. See Table 14. Lightwell: A Private Frontage type that is a below -grade entrance or recess designed to allow light into basements. See Table 4. (Syn: light court.) Linear Pedestrian Shed: A Pedestrian Shed that is elongated along an important Mixed Use Corridor such as a main street. A Linear Pedestrian Shed extends approximately 1/4 mile from each side of the Corridor for the length of its Mixed Use portion. The resulting area is shaped like a lozenge. It may be used to structure a TND, RCD, Infill TND, or Infill RCD. (Syn: elongated pedestrian shed.) Liner Building: a building specifically designed to mask a parking lot or a Parking Structure from a Frontage. Live -Work: a Mixed Use unit consisting of a Commercial and Residential Function. The Commercial Function may be anywhere in the unit. It is intended to be occupied by a business operator who lives in the same structure that contains the Commercial activity or industry. See Work -Live. (Syn.: flexhouse.) Lodging: premises available for daily and weekly renting of bedrooms. See Table 7 and Table 9. Long Pedestrian Shed: a Pedestrian Shed that is an average 1/2 mile radius or 2640 feet, used when a transit stop (bus or rail) is present or proposed as the Common Destination. A Long Pedestrian Shed represents approximately a ten - minute walk at a leisurely pace. It is applied to structure an RCD Village Unit type. See Pedestrian Shed. Lot: a parcel of land accommodating a building or buildings of unified design. The size of a Lot is controlled by its width in order to determine the grain (i.e., fine grain or coarse grain) of the urban fabric. Lot Line: the boundary that legally and geometrically demarcates a Lot. Lot Width: the length of the Principal Frontage Line of a Lot. Main Civic Space: the primary outdoor gathering place for a community. The Main Civic Space is often, but not always, associated with an important Civic Building. Manufacturing: premises available for the creation, assemblage and /or repair of artifacts, using table- mounted electrical machinery or artisanal equipment, and including their Retail sale. Meeting Hall: a building available for gatherings, including conferences, that accommodates at least one room equivalent to a minimum of 10 square feet per projected dwelling unit within the Pedestrian Shed in which it is located. Mixed Use: multiple Functions within the same building through superimposition or adjacency, or in multiple buildings by adjacency, or at a proximity determined by Warrant. 31 (Village Design Guidelines Extension Line: a line prescribed at a certain level of a building for the major part of the width of a Facade, regulating the maximum height for an Encroachment by an ARCADE Frontage. See Table 5. Facade: the exterior wall of a building that is set along a Frontage Line. See Elevation. Forecourt: a Private Frontage wherein a portion of the Facade is close to the Frontage Line and the central portion is set back. See Table 4. Frontage: the area between a building Facade and the vehicular lanes, inclusive of its built and planted components. Frontage is divided into Private Frontage and Public Frontage. See Table 3A and Table 4. Frontage Line: a Lot line bordering a Public Frontage. Facades facing Frontage Lines define the public realm and are therefore more regulated than the Elevations facing other Lot Lines. See Table 14. Function: the use or uses accommodated by a building and its Lot, categorized as Restricted, Limited, or Open, according to the intensity of the use. See Table 7 and Table 9. Gallery: a Private Frontage conventional for Retail use wherein the Facade is aligned close to the Frontage Line with an attached cantilevered shed or lightweight colonnade overlapping the Sidewalk. See Table 4. Green: a Civic Space type for unstructured recreation, spatially defined by landscaping rather than building Frontages. See Table 10. Greenfield: an area that consists of open or wooded land or farmland that has not been previously developed. Greenway: an Open Space Corridor in largely natural conditions which may include trails for bicycles and pedestrians. Greyfield: an area previously used primarily as a parking lot. Shopping centers and shopping malls are typical Greyfield sites. (Variant: Grayfield.) Highway: a rural and suburban Thoroughfare of high vehicular speed and capacity. This type is allocated to the more rural TRANSECT ZONES (T -1, T -2, and T -3). Home Occupation: non - Retail Commercial enterprises. The work quarters should be invisible from the Frontage, located either within the house or in an Outbuilding. Permitted activities are defined by the Restricted Office category. See Table 7. House: an Edgeyard building type, usually a single - family dwelling on a large Lot, often shared with an ACCESSORY BUILDING in the back yard. (Syn: single.) Infill: noun - new development on land that had been previously developed, including most Greyfield and Brownfield sites and cleared land within Urbanized areas. verb- to develop such areas. Infill RCD: a Village Unit type within an Urbanized, Greyfield, or Brownfield area based on a Long or Linear Pedestrian Shed and consisting of T -4 and /or T -5 Zones. An Infill RCD is permitted BY RIGHT in the Kailua Village TOD and the Rural Towns TODs and is regulated by Article 4. See Section 4.2.3. (Var: downtown.) 30