The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutREP PC 104 07/06/2000 1998-2000 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON PLANNING DATE: July 6, 2000 Re: C-135Bi11 No. 41 PLACE: Councilroom TIME: 2:36 p.m. Chair and Members Hawaii County Council I-lilo, Hawaii 96720 Your Committee on Planning, to which was referred Bill No. 41, transmitted by Mayor Stephen K. Yamashiro per Communication No. 135, dated January 30, 1997, regarding the change of zone request by Dorothy Souza, at Kaao Homesteads, Hamakua, Hawaii, TMK: 4-5-03:24 and 124, reports as follows: Bill No. 41 amends Section 25-8-17 (Haina-Honokaa-Kukuihaele Zone Map), Article 8, Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawaii County Code by changing the district classification for approximately 13.6736 acres of land from an Agricultural (A-Sa) to an Agricultural (A-2a) zoned district. In 1994, the applicant requested a change of zone to A-la. The Planning Commission submitted an unfavorable recommendation to the Council because the applicant's request would not have been in compliance with the goals, policies and standards of the Land Use Element of the General Plan, and there was not sufficient potable water to support the subdivision. The applicant withdrew the request on October 8, 1996, and reapplied again on October 1Q 1996, for the A-2a zoning in order to convey the individual lots to her five children for residential and/or agricultural purposes. Bill No. 41 first surfaced on February 18, 1997, and Bill No. 41, Draft 2, was circulated. No action was taken on this measure at this time. On June 3, 1997, Bill No. 41 and Bill No. 41, Draft 2, were again agendized, but because of questions regarding the roll back taxes on the agriculture dedication placed on the subject property, it was deferred at the client's request. Bill No. 83, Draft 3 (Ordinance No. 00-48), which was approved by the Council on May 3, 2000, and effective May 17, 2000, exempted "roll back taxes on agricultural dedicated lands when the authorized government agency changes the land use classification to urban or rural districts or when lots of less than 5 acres are created..." and so the applicant requested to have Bill No. 41 agendized again. The bill was then agendized on June 20, 2000, only to be deferred until today's meeting because the applicant's son, Clifford, was not present at the meeting. The applicant has since passed on, so Clifford Souza is now speaking on behalf of his mother, the original applicant. PC-104 PC-]04 Page 2 July 6, 2000 The subject properties are owned by the applicant and are located on the mauka side (southeast corner) of the Mamalahoa Highway at its intersection with Loke Street. Parcel 124 consists of .43 acres and Parcel 24 consists of 13.24 acres, which has been determined to have two legal lots. The Council adopted Ordinance No. 93-25, which amended the State Land Use District from Urban to Rural on April 7, 1993. In August 1993, a Petition to Dedicate Land for Agricultural Use was submitted by the applicant, to the Real Property Tax Division, in compliance with Condition B and the 13.24 acres would be used for cattle pasture. At today's meeting, Committee Member Dominic Yagong asked that Conditions G and K be deleted. Condition G relates to the construction of the 20-foot wide pavement and Condition K relates to fair share contributions. Your Committee agreed to eliminate Condition G because the applicant said it would be too costly to do the improvements, which included the removal of trees. Condition K will be removed because A-2 properties are not assessed the impact fees. Committee Member Julie Jacobson wanted to know how many people will be using the road and was told only two families own property there, so the usage would not be substantial Instead of deleting the entire Condition G, Your Chair suggested that only the first sentence of Condition G be removed, but the applicant could not agree to it because he said he would have to consult with the rest of his family first. He also stated that from his previous discussions with them, he's not sure they would be in agreement if they had to give up ] 0 feet of their property to widen the road. Yet, when questioned by Committee Member James Arakaki if the applicant expects the County to improve the road, the applicant first responded that maybe the County would "gravel the road..., but we're not asking them to pave it or anything like that", then later stated "At this time, we don't see the County coming in and improving the road". Mr. Arakaki then asked him, "You don't anticipate anything then?" and Mc Souza responded, "Because I don't think we even going build up there." Your Committee then voted to delete Condition G in its entirety. Your Chair noted that there is a spelling error on Page 1 for the name "Paauhau" and that it will be corrected in the upcoming draft. Your Chair also stated that "this bill has been very difficult for" her because of the precedent that is being set. She wanted to clarify that although she is voting for this change of zone request, which deals with prime agricultural lands less than 5 acres, she would normally strive to preserve agricultural lands in 5 acres or more, because when the acreage is less than 5 acres, the agricultural lands are being used for residential lands. She also believes "that rezoning should not be used as a mechanism for estate planning purposes. Rezoning and planning should be based on the use of the land what's an appropriate use for the area." PC-104 PC -104 Page 3 July 6, 2000 The applicant then questioned the inclusion of Condition F in Draft 2 which prohibits the construction of an ohana or second dwelling because he mentioned that he had been told by the Planning Department that second dwellings could be constructed on the subject parcel. Committee Member Yagong then stated that we should just vote on this measure and move it up to Council to prevent it from being held up in Committee any further. Your Chair then mentioned that she would look into the "removal of Condition `F' provided there is some kind of language that says you cannot CPR and convey separate title..." to prevent the development of a 10 -lot subdivision. She also mentioned that the availability of water to the area only allows the construction of three homes. Your Committee concurs with the Planning Commission and the Planning Director for recommending a favorable consideration for the change of zone request. Your Committee on Planning is in accord with the intent and purpose of Bill No. 41, Draft 2, as amended to Draft 3, and recommends it pass first reading. AYES NOES A &E EX LEITHEAD -TODD X TYLER X CHUNG. X _ Respectfully submitted ELARIONOFF X COMMITTEE 0 PLANN PISICCHIO X .0 � � ��1/ PISICCHIO X / /� SMITH X : OB:Y J • N L ITHEAD - TODD, CHAIR YAGONG X ARAKAKI E.O.M. PC REPORT NO. 104 � ADOPTED: JAN 2 4 201