HomeMy WebLinkAboutORD 1976-217 (1976-1980) Planning Commission 4-27-1976 letter re PreDraft Kailua Village •
f.:::;::`4: ;
":--J== PLANNING DEPARTMENT
<< •
•• •• 26 AUPUNI STREET • HILO, HAWAII 98720 HERBERT T. MATAYOSIII
• Mayor
COUNTY OF RAYMOND H. SUEPUJI
HAWAII Director
•
April 27, 1976
•
Chairman Robert M. Yamada
and Members of the County Council
County of Hawaii
Hilo, Hawaii
•
Re: Kailua Village Design Plan
The Planning Commission , after duly held public hearings on April 1
and 22 , 1976 , and a public workshop on February 25 , 1976 , voted to
recommend for your approval the draft of the Kailua Village Design
Plan and the amendments reflected in the consultant ' s March 11, 1976
letter based on the following:
1. From a planning process and legal perspective , this Plan satis-
fies many requirements. These include the County General Plan,
the State legislative mandate (Act 119 , SLH 1973) ,. and the re-
quirements of the recently established Kailua Village Special
District Commission.
The Kailua Village Design Plan is a direct outgrowth of the
County General Plan which was adopted in 1971. The Design Plan
is based on the goals, policies , standards , and courses of action
which have been set forth in the General Plan. The purpose of
the Design Plan is to further clarify the General Plan policies
and to establish a more detailed program for implementing the
General Plan within the Kailua Village area. It should show
current and proposed public and private capital improvements
and services, existing and proposed zoning and any other infor-
mation which would assist the Planning Department, Planning
Commission, County Council, and other governmental agencies in
implementing the Hawaii County General Plan.
• Furthermore, the 1973 State Legislature passed Act 119 that
required all counties to undertake urban• design plans . To be
included in the design plans are the general consideration of
land use, pedestrian and vehicular circulation, public and pri-
vate community facilities , historic sites, significant natural
land and water features and views and vistas, and basic concepts
of environmental character.
•
COMM. NO. _..__ !-Aq/._....
T. wont 1
•
•
•
•
Chairman Robert M. Yamada
and Members of the County Council •
Page 2 •
April 27 , 1976
In 1974, the Council adopted Ordinance 628 , creating the Kailua
Village Special District Commission. One of the requirements
of this Commission was to identify a theme for the village of
Kailua which would enable the Commission and the Planning
• Department to provide a better architectural and design direc-
tions for Kailua. Consultants for this Plan worked very closely
with this Commission and collectively established a theme with
appropriate implementative measures.
As such, the ultimate adoption of this Plan would fulfill a
myriad of legal requirements , including the General Plan, Act
119, and the Kailua Village Special District Commission.
2. From the Plan ' s substantive aspects, we are in agreement with
its basic proposal of encouraging a village type atmosphere as
a means of strengthening the resort/residential functions of
Kailua. One of the goals of the General Plan is to create an
economically viable resort destination area in Kailua. As a
means of achieving this goal , one of the General Plan' s '.and use
elements calls for the development and implementation
pedestrian mall. This Plan supports this concept and plops
it further with specific, detailed implementing mechal
Thus, this design plan would be a means of implementing the
goals and objectives of the General Plan.
3. Additionally, the Planning Commission is in support of this
Plan as it provides for a process which is quite flexible,
while providing a fairly firm planning and implementing direc-
tion for the village of Kailua. It provides for a system
wherein the entire plan does not ride on a single element, the
rejection of which would sink everything else. It also pro-
vides a phasing program which allows for certain design elements
to be initially developed as a model for the community in order
to gain further acceptance or rejection of later phases. Thus ,
the design plan ' s flexible approach provides for a variety of
alternatives to the community now and in the future as the
Plan gets further implemented.
This sort of flexibility is necessary in any planning process to
insure a system which can respond to the variable nature of peo-
ple' s values and attitudes. Additionally, unanticipated opportu-
nities as well as unintended consequences of certain action pro-
grams may necessitate some readjustments of certain programs ,
standards, and policies of this Plan.
While the Commission is in agreement with the basic concepts of
the draft plan, we do have some reservations over a few recommended
implementative measures. Accordingly, we respectfully recommend
that the draft plan be adopted with the following changes :
•
•
•
•
•
•
Chairman Robert M. Yamada
and Members of the County Council
Page 3
April 27, 1976
1. That the proposed revisions contained in the consultant' s
March 11, 1976 letter to the Planning Director be accepted with
the following changes :
a. In Item B-4, the consultant has suggested a minimum 20-foot
wide planting strip within private properties fronting the
80-foot right-of-way of Kuakini Highway. We submit that
•
while this is a noble objective, the size of the properties
fronting the Highway, particularly between Palani and
Hualalai Roads, is relatively small . Thus , the additional
provision for a planting strip may pose some measure of
developmental problems. As an alternative, however, we
would recommend that a minimum of 10-foot clear space for
landscaping be provided. This would then enable the pro-
perty owner to provide parking beyond the 10-foot land-
scaped area.
b. In Item B-9 , we are in general agreement with the consul-
tant that the Chief..Engineer should retain administrative
authority over sign permits with a mandatory review pro-
vision on the part of the Kailua Design Commission and
the Planning Director. However, we further recommend that
the draft sign ordinance prepared by the Kailua Commission,
and as attached hereto, with the exception of the proposed
delegation of administrative authority to the Kailua Com-
mission, be considered as the first working draft towards
the implementation of that section of the Plan relating to
revisions of the present sign ordinance.
c. In Item B-10, relating to mandatory underground wiring, we
recommend that it be amended to reflect the following con-
cerns :
(1) That underground wiring be conducted as funds to imple-
ment them become available; and
(2) That consideration for underground wiring be given in
• the following order of priorities : Alii Drive between
Palani and Hualalai Roads; Palani Road; Hualalai Road;
Kuakini Highway between Palani and Hualalai Roads.
Should funds for those roads become available in a
different order, however, this should not preempt the
installation of the underground wiring at that time.
•
d. In Item C, relating to the specific timing of the phasing
of improvements; we recommend that a more positive state-
ment towards its deletion be reflected in the Plan. While
we are aware of the need to have a definitive implementation
• •
•Chairman Robert M. Yamada
and Members of the County Council
Page 4
April 27 , 1976 •
•
timetable, we are equally mindful of the uncertainties
of funding sources, be they from the State, County or Fed-
eral Governments or any sort of private/public partnership.
However, it is important to know and understand which
sources of activities need to be conducted and implemented
prior to moving on to another phase. Accordingly, we are
supportive of a sequential phasing, but with no reference
to a mandatory implementation time schedule.
2. That the old I:ailua School site be considered as the first alter-
nate for the proposed park and library/meeting hall complex,
should the Plan' s proposed location behind Mokuaikaua Church be
unfeasible due to cost or other constraints . The Plan recommends
that a land exchange be negotiated between the properties in the
back of the Church and the State-owned former Kailua School site.
A land exchange may pose some problems as the lands behind the
Church are under three (3) different owners . Furthermore , the
old Kailua School site is much larger than the proposed site in
the Plan. The old school property is 2+ acres in size as com-
pared to 1/2 acres for the other location. Thus , there would be
a basis for such a consideration.
3. That a sliver of the proposed residential area adjacent to the
proposed commercial area north of Kuakini Highway and makai of
the Queen Kaahumanu extension be designated as medium density
land use area. The reason for this recommendation is that it is
uncertain at this point in time what the local and tourist com-
mercial demands for the Kona region would be . By leaving it at
a medium density area , that area could go into either residential
or commercial use as the need arises. In a sense, this sliver
of an area would be sort of a transitional or flexible land use
zone between the residential and commercial uses .
4. That the second suggestion on page 8 to rezone the area mauka of
the Kuakini Highway between Palani Road and Oni Oni Street to
Resort 1. 5 or RM 2 . 0 be amended to read as follows : "Consider
resort rezoning, where appropriate, in the area generally mauka
of the Kona Hilton Hotel above and adjacent to Kuakini Highway,
moving north towards Palani Road. Low density multi-family
residential rezoning may be considered in the area adjacent to
Kuakini Highway, southward from the considered resort zones to
Oni Oni Street. " We submit that to create a strong resort desti-
nation area, a greater amount of resort use concentration should_
be made available. The draft Plan' s suggestion of considering
resort uses up to Oni3Oni Street would create a strip resort/
residential development which may work to the economic detriment
of the Kailua Village core. However, supportive, higher density
•
•
Chairman Robert M. Yamada •
and Members of the County Council
Page 5
April 27, 1976
residential uses up till Oni Oni Street would be appropriate
as the demand arises and in concert with the balanced development
of the Kailua Village core.
•
5. That the third suggestion on page 8 be amended by replacing the
terms "maximum" and "RM-3" with "minimum" and "RM-5 . " The over-
all density of no greater than eight (8 ) units per acre as stated
in the draft Plan comes out to the RM-5 density.
6. That on page 9, the reference to the prohibition of off-street
parking from the front setback be clarified. Presently, the zon-
ing code does not allow direct access parking, contrary to the
representations made in the draft Plan. The standard requirement
is for a planting strip on the front and then the parking area
to begin.
7. That a No. 6 be added on page 13 to include a bikeway system
along Alii Drive between Hualalai Road and the Kona Hilton Hotel.
8. That the words "should be prohibited" in the second paragraph of
page 21 be deleted and the words "should be avoided as much as
possible. " be added.
That we submit there may be instances where a tree may have
to be removed in order to fulfill certain public and/or private
improvements . The proposed change would provide the flexibility
necessary to accommodate this sort of concern. It should also be
noted that the County is required by State Law to come forth with
an Arborist Council with appropriate rules and regulations . This
Council ' s concerns invariably will encompass the ones raised herein.
9. That item 11-d of page 32 relating to "steel and glass" be deleted.
This provision provides that steel and glass would be excluded
from the list of acceptable material for buildings fronting the
public rights-of-way. We contend that this would prohibit construc-
tion of windows on the front of any building and as such would be
an unreasonable constraint of material.
10. That the last sentence in the first paragraph on page 38 be
changed to read as follows: "To facilitate this coordination
and to permit County ownership, control and maintenance of off-
street parking, government funds, special assessment or improve-
ment district, or other means should be sought for the purchase
of the vacant properties in the main block. "
11. That the second approach regarding the building material and color
guide implementation procedure be accepted. This approach would
require the Kailua Design Commission to adopt the building and
color guide as part of its "Rules and Procedures , " and the Plan-
ning Director would use the "Plan Approval" process as a means
of implementing this section.
i s •
•
Chairman Robert M. Yamada
and Members of the County Council
Page 6
April 27 , 1976
12. That the reference to street and directional signs on page 30 be
slightly modified to reflect the following concerns:
a. gradual phasing out of signs to conform to the stated
material and color objectives . The ultimate plan is a
pedestrian-oriented one ; during the interim, however,
vehicular use will still be pronounced. As such, adequate
visual measures for proper vehicular and pedestrian safety
must be taken; and
b. in addition to the subdued, earthy colors , the possibi-
lities of using symbols or logos should be investigated.
13. That the proposed Kailua Elementary School site on Figure 1 be
deleted. It is our understanding that the State Department of
Education is currently making such a study; as such, it would be
somewhat premature at this point to specifically earmark an area.
14. That editorial changes to reflect the recommended changes to
be made throughout the Plan. The kinds of changes which would
be necessary would include references to the alternative method
of funding for the parking/mall concept. Additionally, changes
to reflect the identification of various properties -- be they
for historical sites, parking, etc. , be identified by Tax Map
Key.
We also transmit for your information a copy of the draft design
plan and a copy of the Kailua Special District and Urban Design
Review Commission' s recommendations and the consultant ' s letter
of March 11 , 1976 . Additionally, a draft of the ordinance is
attached for your convenience.
Please be informed that we have elected to defer printing of
the final plan pending County Council action. The final plan
will reflect all of the changes approved by the Council.
Should you have further questions , please do not hesitate to
• contact the Planning Department.
Your vorable consideration on the plan is appreciated. •
Leon K. SterUjg7, Jr. APPROVED:
Chairman, Planning Commission
NIi/S F: s k �� A
�G Z
Enclosures " HERBERT T. MATAYOSIT MAYOR