Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0141.004 1980-1984 . . e.,'!......:''''';;;;::::::::. ,w411 r 21j‘s_Afr.,;, PLANNING DEPARTMENT :•::::::,:::::,•:.--4, ,•„.::::;:.:::::::, .,:,.::::::::::::,:•:•. •:.. ..:::::i::::::::,:: „1:::::::::::::::::::.::,:::, ::. .:•,,,,:.,..: 25 AUPUNI STREET • HILO, HAWAII 96720 HERBERT T.MATAYOSHI Mayor COUNTY OF SIDNEY M.FUKE HAWAII Director DUANE KANUHA Deputy Director June 9 , 1981 Honorable Takashi Domingo Member , County Council 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Councilman Domingo: Draft Waimea Design Plan Per your request, the following reflects a summary of the concerns/issues raised at your committee 's "page-by-page" public workshop held in Waimea on Saturday, May 30 , 1981. I have also included my recommendation for each of those concerns/issues for your information and appropriate action. Section I - INVENTORY 1 . Section 1 .3 . 1 Land Tenure There was a question raised regarding the accuracy of the draft Plan 's historical reference to the original "Waimea Homesteads" subdivision as consisting of approximately 2 .3 acre lots . Analysis and Recommendation This subdivision is situated generally in the vicinity of the Waimea Park . A cursory look at the Tax Map for Zone 6 , Section 5 would clearly show that most of those lots do consist of 2 .3 acres . As such , I would recommend the retention of the entire section as originally drafted. Section 2 - URBAN DESIGN ANALYSIS 2 . Section 2 .2 Issues There were two points involving this section. The first dealt with the "accuracy" of the issues ; and the second, the need to elaborate on the evolution and modification of those issues . /4/4 Comm. No. , File No. C TYie ifr) Ref. To: PC. JUN 1 7 198r RE0ErVLED "di JLJi 10 Ail 12 12 Honorable Takashi Domingo Page 2 June 9 , 1981 Analysis and Recommendation In developing this draft plan, the assistance of the Waimea-Kawaihae Community Association was sought by both the Planning Department and its consultants. The Association, through one of its committee, identified what it felt were the major urban design issues. Thus , this section reflects an accurate summary of the planning process used in developing the draft Plan. These issues are issues identified by the Planning and Urban Design Committee of the Association and not necessarily by the general public at any of the County Council 's meetings and hearings on the draft Plan. Thus , while there may not be a public consensus on those issues at this point, the statements are an accurate historical depiction of the planning process. As such , I recommend that that section be retained in its entirety. However , I would further recommend that the following paragraph be added to reflect additional public concerns and inputs. "During the various public hearings and meetings conducted by the County Council on the draft Plan, additional planning and design issues were brought up. These included: 1. The need for an urban design plan. 2 . The accuracy of the term "paniolo" to describe the design character of Waimea. 3 . The need for additional setback and height restrictions. 4 . The role of the community in implementing the Plan. " 3 . Section 2 .8 Architectural Character The validity of the term "Paniolo" to describe the prevalent and proposed architectural theme for Waimea was raised. The specific concern was that "Paniolo" may have a spanish derivation - possibly, espanol - and is not genuinely "Hawaiian. " Thus, it should not be used. Honorable Takashi Domingo Page 3 June 9 , 1981 Analysis and Recommendation The historical reference may be true. The Hawaiian Dictionary of Mary Pukui and Samuel Elbert, defines "Paniolo" as Cowboy. While the term may not be originally Hawaiian, it has become part of the Hawaiian vocabulary and is recognized as such in the Hawaiian dictionary. It also has an historical association with cowboys and ranching. As such , I would recommend that the term be retained. 4 . Section 2 .12 Historic Sites The Alice and John Spencer House was questioned as having any historic value. Analysis and Recommendation The draft Plan does not establish the historic significance or non-significance of the Spencer House. It merely points out that it "may have historic value. " (emphasis added) Further research would be needed before its significance can be ascertained. However , because of the objection of the property owner and the questionable historic value of the house at this point, I recommend its exclusion. Should further research prove its historic value, appropriate protective measures can still be taken then. Section 3 - URBAN DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 5 . I would recommend that the term "RECOMMENDATION" be replaced by the term PLAN. When and if adopted, the recommendation will no longer be recommendation and instead be the official guiding land use and design principles for Waimea. Additional editorial changes to that effect would have to be made throughout the Plan. 6 . Section 3 .2 .2 Procedures There were two basic concerns regarding this section. The first dealt with the appropriateness of having single-family residential and agricultural structures covered by the Plan. The role of the community in the review of developments was the second issue. Analysis and Recommendation The principal objectives of the Plan were to provide overall directions for existing and future land uses and to establish design guidelines/principles for major urban developments . As such , I would recommend that the Plan be reworded to reflect the exclusion of single family residential and agricultural structures from the design and Honorable Takashi Domingo Page 4 June 9 , 1981 review process . At the same time, it should be expanded to reflect public projects such as roads, public buildings and so forth which may have significant land use and design impact to the community. The draft Plan acknowledges the need for community participation in the implementation of the Plan. This principle should be retained. However , to assure balanced input on a structured and regular basis , I would recommend that a structure be established to assure 1) the rights of non-Association members to participate in the design review process ; 2) balanced interests-geographical and special; and 3) a workable committee size. To those ends , I would recommend that this section be re-written as follows: "3 .2 .2 Procedures Urban Design review and approval procedures should be undertaken by the County Planning Department for public and private planning proposals , developmnt applications , and building permits for all but single-family detached residences, agricultural buildings , and permits for renovations . Consideration for expansion of existing buildings which may have a marked visual/design impact should be subject to review, as determined by the Planning Director . Review should be based on adopted urban design controls , goals , objectives , and guidelines of this Plan. Review of the architectural character of detached single family residential and agricultural structures and renovations would be desirable. However , because of their smaller scale (in the case of the single-family residences) ; the general location (away from the urban village core) of agricultural structures and uses ; and the degree of visual/design impact of renovations , a voluntary system of compliance would be more appropriate and reasonable. To aid in the review process , a broad-based local community association such as the Waimea-Kawaihae Community Association should be used. A committee of the Association should be developed and used to continually advise the Planning Department and other County agencies in implementing and/or recommending any amendments to this Plan. This committee should be a manageable size , as determined by the Association; but it should be of such size to reflect at least the following: Honorable Takashi Domingo Page 5 June 9 , 1981 1. One (1) resident each from the east, central, and west side of the Special Design District. 2 . One (1) each from the following business and/or special interests: a. Ranching b. Farming c. Real Estate d. Design (architecture , engineering, planning, etc. ) e. Hawaiian History f. Developer/Building Contractor g. Education h. Commercial (finance, retail, industrial, etc. ) i. Hawaiian Homesteaaer 3 . The majority of the members should be residents and property owners of Waimea. None of them, however , need be members of the Community Association. The Community Association should be used as a vehicle to solicit nominations to and conduct the election of this committee on an annual basis . The committee should hold meetings as needed, but in any event, provide its comments and recommendations to the County agencies and Planning Department within the time allotted by the requesting agency. Further , the affected developer and/or property owner whose project is being reviewed by the committee should be given a fair opportunity to appear , present, and defend its proposal to the committee. " 7 . Section 3 .3 .4 Design Regarding the Urban Design objectives , it is recommended that item 2 be amended by replacing the terms "To insure" with "To encourage. " In reviewing public testimonies on Honorable Takashi Domingo Page 6 June 9 , 1981 this item, it was felt that the term "insure" suggested an inflexible mandate , as opposed to a guideline . As such, the term "encourage" is more consistent with the guideline approach of this Plan. 8 . Section 3 .4 Land Use The public concern expressed on this section is similar to item no. 6 above. The Plan should be a guide and not an inflexible mandate. Analysis and Recommendation The Plan is intended to guide developments . As such, the use of specific numbers like eight (8) foot setback and twenty (20) foot height limit may tend to convey a feeling of inflexibility. Yet, there still are planning and design considerations that can be developed and used to fulfill the spirit of the Plan. In that light, it is recommended that subsection "2" read as follows : "2 . The following guidelines shall be applicable to all proposed developments , except detached single-family residences, agricultural buildings, and minor renovations within the Urban Design District (UDD) . a. Sideyard setbacks and the height of new structures and/or expansion of existing structures in commercial and industrial area shall take into account the surrounding property, existing private and public improvements , community characteristics, natural features , and the size of the parcel being developed. It is recognized that smaller parcels have less room for alternative site planning than larger parcels ; thus , some measure of "hardship" consideration for smaller parcels should be given. b. To the extent practicable , the location or siting of all structures and improvements should: 1. Not hinder existing and prospective traffic movements ; Honorable Takashi Domingo Page 7 June 9 , 1981 2 . Provide landscaping as called for in this Plan; and 3 . Within reasonable limits , preserve natural features (if any) of community value. c. Multi-family uses shall be discouraged from commercial zoning categories . d. Off-street parking and loading requirements should be provided in locations that are not visible from street and in a manner consistent with ready accessibility and visibility to police patrol. Parking in front of buildings should not be encouraged but site planning flexibility must be allowed through the use of landscaping and screening elements to minimize visual impacts of parking. " 9 . Section 3 .5 Circulation It was pointed out that Kahilu Road should not be extended to the proposed Lindsey Road extension, for it would not be of benefit to the Kuhio Village residents and that there would be traffic hazard problems around Kuhio Village. Analysis and Recommendation The principal ingress and egress to Waimea Village would still be Mamalahoa Highway. The proposed Kahilu Road extension would enable Kuhio Village residents greater and easier accessibility to both the proposed Waimea by-pass road (through a direct connection with Lindsey Road) and Waimea Village. The bulk of the traffic would appear to be "locally" generated. Any cross-traffic would not appear to be heavy, as the east or Hamakua end of Waimea is envisioned for agricultural uses . If the Hawaiian Homes Farmsteads Subdivision were converted into higher density residential use, then, increased traffic along Kahilu Road would be inevitable. However , that is a decision the Department of Hawaiian Homes Land would have to make, and this Plan does not reflect urbanization of that area. Thus , DHHL would play a major role in determining future land uses of that area, and in turn, the traffic pattern and volume. Honorable Takashi Domingo Page 8 June 9 , 1981 At the same time , the Kahilu Road extension would increase traffic circulation within the existing and proposed commercial/industrial area of Waimea. A complete loop system around the existing and proposed commercial area would be more efficient. Accordingly, it is recommended that a portion of the proposed Kahilu Road extension in the back of the existing and proposed commercial/residential area be retained. However , references to improving that portion between Mana Road and Kuhio Village, as well as Mana Road to the proposed Waimea By-Pass could be deleted. The latter area is not envisioned for intensive land uses which would require those roads to be considered major collectors . Thus , item 3 .5 (1) (c) should be deleted, while item 3 .5 (1) (f) should still be retained. Also , the Land Use Concept Map (Figure 3 .2) should be appropriately adjusted. 10 . Section 3 .6 .1 Design Theme Recommendations It was suggested that item 3 be rewritten by adding the word "encourage" such that it would read as follow: "3 . Encourage the construction of industrial buildings . . . " This is acceptable and consistent with the other recommendations. 11. Section 3 .6.3 Materials and Colors It was pointed out that some synthetically made material may look and feel identical to the "natural" material. Thus, those kinds of material should be considered acceptable. Analysis. and Recommendation I concur with the point. As such, I recommend that the word "Rock" on p. 17 be rewritten as follow: "Rock: Lava or other natural or artificially-constructed stones . " 12 . Section 3 .7 .1 Landscaping Concept It was suggested that items "lb" and "le" may be in conflict. Item "le" encourages the preservation of the view to the Kohala Mountains , whereas "1b" suggests extensive plantings along the Kawaihae Road between the Hawaii Preparatory Academy and Anna ' s Ranch. This would effectively block off the Kohala Mountain view. I concur , and thus recommend that item "lb" be deleted, and the other items appropriately redesignated. Honorable Takashi Domingo Page 9 June 9 , 1981 13 . Section 3 .8 .1 Type and Sign It is recommended that the ground sign for type 2 (residential area) , be equal to the size of wall signs in residential area. This would be a maximum of eight square feet. Thus, the ground sign for type 2 should be amended by replacing the term "maximum 20 square feet" with the term "maximum 8 square feet. " 14 . Section 3 .10 Overhead Utilities I concur with your staff 's May 18 memorandum to you regarding underground utilities . Thus , it should read "1. Where appropriate, encourage underground utilities for new developments . " It was also pointed out that item 3 .10 (4 ) relating to the relocation of regional overhead distribution lines should be deleted due to its infeasibility. I would recommend that that item be retained. While the possibility for implementing that item appears remote , it is still a worthy objective. There was also a general statement regarding exceptions for wind energy structures . It is felt that such structures will generally be constructed outside of the design district; and if within, usually within the agricultural or open areas . Also, if for some reason tney were to be constructed within the design area, considerations to surrounding property, traffic and other items found in Section 3 .4 would prevail. Accordingly, no additional statement in the Plan would be necessary. It has been this office 's and my pleasure in working with the general community, Community Association, and your Committee on this Plan. There were, understandably, many complex and controversial issues . By going through a thorough and healthy public discussion process , however , many issues were amicably worked out without sacrificing the Plan itself. This is a real credit to you, your Committee, and the community. Should you have any questions or need any assistance on this or any other planning matter , please do not hesitate to contact me. WPC' ly, 11�J S DNEY FUKE Planning Director SF:wkm/gs APPROVAL: (101,11119 /AO/ MAYOR