The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCOM 0624.001 2010-2012 Gmail-Galan change-of-zone application testimony 4/3/12 2:45 PM NA Galan change-of-zone application testimony Tiffany Edwards Hunt <tiffanyedwardshunt @gmail.com> Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 12:45 PM To: counciltestimony @co.hawaii.hi.us, dyagong @co.hawaii.hi.us Cc: Tiffany Edwards Hunt <newswoman @mac.com> Tiffany Edwards Hunt P.O. Box 557 Kurtistown, HI 96760 (808) 968-6439 newswoman @mac.com Testimony to the Hawaii County Council Planning Committee Change of Zone Application REZ11-145, Karen and Adrian Galan April 3, 2012 Member of the Hawaii County Council Planning Committee: Please consider this testimony for myself, Tiffany Edwards Hunt, and my husband, Jeff Hunt, owner of Jeff Hunt Surfboards LLC. Jeff Hunt Surfboards LLC is located on the parcel adjoining the parcels at issue in the change of zone application before you. The application seeks to change parcels totaling 17,994 square feet from family residential (RS-10) to village commercial (CV 7.5)for the purpose of developing the property into five detached two-story bungalows to be used for retail and overnight visitors accommodations. We are opposed to this application for a number of reasons, including the traffic to be created by this proposed development, the lack of adequate parking proposed and the potential fire protection problem that this proposed development would create with the size of the water lines to the property. We are also concerned that the applicant couple will not develop the property as proposed and will merely sell the property once the property is zoned village commercial. There will be no control over the development in that case. Without adequately addressing these concerns, the applicant cannot demonstrate that the public necessity and convenience and general welfare require this proposed zoning amendment. (Please note the standard set forth in Section 25-2-40 that must be followed in approving zoning amendments: "This chapter may be amended by changing the boundaries of the districts or by changing any other provision in this chapter whenever the public necessity and convenience and the general welfare require such amendment, and when such amendment would be consistent with the goals, policies and standards of the general plan.") Parking for the proposed development is inadequate. The applicant couple has proposed 18 parking spaces for the development and claim these spaces exceed the requirements of the Zoning Code. The applicant couple claim there will be at least two employees (1 or 2 full time and 1 part-time) for each of the shops, which means that at least eight of the eighteen total spaces will be used by employees. The project proposes six resort units, which would need at least one parking space per unit, or six parking spaces. That means a total of four parking spaces for customers of the retail shops. We believe that is not reasonable or realistic, and it is certainly not in compliance with the Zoning Code. Substantially more parking spaces should be required for this project. The applicant couple has failed to provide the County of Hawaii with adequate information about traffic impacts. The change of zone application is deficient for the fact that it does not include a traffic impact assessment report (TIAR) prepared by a traffic engineer, offering the County of Hawaii information on what kind of traffic improvements should be COMM. No. to . •• https://mail.google.com/mail/7ui=2&ik=d2448fcb64&view=pt&search=sent&th=1367a620f6fdd7cd Ref. To: to/ pc Page 1 of 3 Ref. Date APR 0 3 2012 Gmail-Galan change-of-zone application testimony 4/3/12 2:45 PM required. The applicant couple claims that the project will generate less than 50 peak hour vehicle trips and therefore shouldn't require a TIAR. The application itself suggests there will be at least 28 trips by the employees and guests coming and going from the parcel — and this is assuming that they come and go only once a day. Are there really going to be less than 11 patrons of the four retail shops and the resort units per day? If that is the case, this will not be a viable project for Pahoa. Adequate water pressure for fire protection purposes is not available. The Department of Water Supply has indicated in comments to this application that the existing water line fronting this property provides a theoretical fire flow of less than 1,600 gallons of water per minute through the existing 8-inch line. The minimum required flow is 2,000 gallons per minute. as the adjoining property owners, we are concerned about inadequate fire protection for a development proposing multiple retail shops and resort units. The applicant may not be developing the property as proposed. We urge you to see the attached Hawaii Real Estate Multiple Listing Service (MLS) regarding the parcels at issue. Note the fact that the MLS listing states: "Great opportunity to start your Business in the heart of Pahoa Town... Seller is currently going thru the re-zoning process and expected re-zoning to be within the next 6 months... from 3/10/2011..." Based on the MLS listing alone we believe the applicant couple will actually abandon this project and some unknown project will finally be developed on these parcels. The Zoning Code allows for 48 different types of businesses in the CV district. We believe some of the uses would be offensive, and we are not only owners of small retail business in Pahoa but vested in and active in the Pahoa community. I am the past president of Mainstreet Pahoa Association and a current board member. The applicant couple filed a rezoning application in February 2011 without stating any proposed plan of development and in the course of a sales agreement with a party. The applicant couple's original application indicated that they were proposing to sell the property to an "�i buyer." The applicant couple ultimately withdrew the vaguely written application and refiled r rho W the application that is before you n September 2011, claiming the parcels will not be sold in the Planning Department's questionnaire. As of Nov. 30, 2011 the MLS listing showed the applicants were trying to sell the property. In the past, a condition was included in zoning amendments to ensure that the proposal submitted to the County of Hawaii for consideration was the development actually built. No such condition is included. Pahoa Village merchants and residents have been working very hard against a stereotype for being the center of drugs and crime. We are currently working on the development of the "Pahoa Plan,"which is part of regional town center development planning according to the Puna Commnity Development Plan. We have serious concerns about this application and its potential for running contrary to what will be spelled out in the Pahoa Plan. We believe this application would be setting a dangerous precedent for development in Pahoa, in Puna and islandwide. This application calls attention to the need for legislation stating that any parcel that is sold within a certain time period of being rezoned should revert back to the original zoning. Without such a protection from real estate speculation we further erode the quality of life in Hawaii County. We beg of the Hawaii County Council to look out for the general welfare of Pahoa and Puna and reject this application. Tiffany Edwards Hunt Tiffany Edwards Communications (808) 938-8592 newswoman @mac.com https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=d2448fcb64&view=pt&search=sent&th=1367a620f6fdd7cd Page 2 of 3 attachment 404x542 pixels 4/3/12 2:45 PM Y�tMAN S .��. �z_ n ti https://mail-attachment.googleusercontent.com/attachment/?ui=2&ik...Es&sadet=1333500341504&sads=ltFYkQaGYoS8tLSc2Ky5HLAfXzO&sadssc=1 Page 3of y