Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-01-16 Leeward Exh A (REZ 19-236) LEEWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAII HEARING TRANSCRIPT JANUARY 16, 2020 A regularly advertised hearing on the application of JEAN K. CAMPBELL TRUST AND JEFFREY S. CLAPP TRUST (REZ 19-000236) was called to order at 9:37 a.m. in the West Hawaii Civic Center, Community Center, Building G, 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Highway, Kailua-Kona, Hawaii, with Chairman Keith F. Unger presiding. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Keith F. Unger, Nancy Carr Smith, Perry Kealoha, Max Newberg, Michael Vitousek and Faith "Faye" Yates ALSO PRESENT: Malia Hall, Esq. (Counsel for the Commission), Michael Yee (Planning Director), Jeff Darrow (Planning Program Manager), Christian Kay (Planner), Alex Roy (Planner) and Noriko Sauer(Commission Secretary) And six people from the public in attendance. APPLICANT: JEAN K. CAMPBELL TRUST AND JEFFREY S. CLAPP TRUST (REZ 19-000236) Application for a Change of Zone from an Agricultural-20 acres (A-20a) to Agricultural-5 acres (A-5a) zoning district for 21.296 acres of land. The subject property is located at 73-1915 Kaloko Drive, about 700 feet north of the most mauka intersection of Hao Street and Kaloko Drive, Kaloko Mauka Subdivision, North Kona, Hawaii, TMK: (3) 7-3-025:002. UNGER: Helu `ekahi ka papahana, first agenda item, Applicant Jean K. Campbell Trust and Jeffrey S. Clapp Trust, REZ 19-000236, application for a Change of Zone from an Agricultural- 20 acres, A-20a, to Agricultural-5 acres, A-5a, zoning district for 21.296 acres of land. The subject property is located at 73-1915 Kaloko Drive, about 700 feet north of the most mauka intersection of Hao Street and Kaloko Drive, Kaloko Mauka Subdivision, North Kona, Hawaii, TMK(3) 7-3-025:Parcel 002. And we'll start with the presentation form the Planning Department. KAY: Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good morning, Members of the Leeward Planning Commission. Happy New Year. It's great to see you all. If I can turn your attention to the screen. As the Chair said, this is an application for a Change of Zone. The subject 21.296-acre parcel is located in the North Kona District of Hawaii Island, more specifically, in the Kaloko Mauka Subdivision, and it's here outlined in red. For reference, we've got Kaloko Drive running generally north-south through the slide, and the Belt Highway here running generally north-south through the slide. The applicant is requesting a Change of Zone form Agricultural-20 acres to Agricultural-5 acres zoning designation, to subdivide the 21.296-acre property into four parcels consisting of a 1 EXHIBIT A minimum of five acres each for estate planning purposes. There are currently no homes on the subject property. County Zoning for the subject property is Agricultural-20 acres. The other surrounding zonings are also Agricultural ranging from three acres to ten acres as indicated in the various colors of green and blue. The State Land Use designation for the subject property and much of the surrounding area is Agricultural as indicated in green and some Conservation in the upper left-hand corner as indicated in the blue color. The General Plan designation for the subject property and much of the surrounding area is Important Agricultural Lands, and, again, Conservation consistent with the State Land Use indicated in the aqua color. And this is a Kona CDP Map, and what we've got here is the outpour extent of the Kona Urban Area indicated in this red line. So this is a rezone outside of the Kona Urban Area. According to the Kona CDP, there are certain reasons that we would approve a rezone: One would be consistent in a number of lots to convey to family members, and the other would be to introduce conservation measures, which our conditions of this recommendation, so that's part of the Director's favorable recommendation. Here is an aerial photograph of the subject property, again, outlined in red. We've got Kaloko Drive running north-south through the slide. As you can see, there are no buildings on the property. It's heavily vegetated. Much of the surrounding area, you see dwellings, but the remainder of the parcels are generally vegetated as well. So there are conditions in many of the surrounding rezones that require buffers, as well as 80 percent of the lots to be covered, to remain in forests, and so we have similar conditions in this recommendation as well. Here is the applicant's proposed site plan. We've got Kaloko Drive running diagonally through the slide. Again, this is for a four-lot subdivision. So this is the proposed layout. Department of Public Works required that there only be a single driveway access to Kaloko Drive, and so that's consistent with what's being proposed. It's also a condition of approval. Here is a photo of the subject property from Kaloko Drive. As you can see, again, heavily vegetated and forested, and some views of Kaloko Drive. On the upper left, looking makai, with the subject property on the right-hand side, and Kaloko Drive, looking mauka, with the subject property on the left-hand side. The Planning Director is recommending forwarding a favorable recommendation to the County Council for the requested rezone. With that, I'm happy to answer any questions that Commission may have. UNGER: Thank you. Commissioners, do you have any questions of the Planning Department? 2 EXHIBIT A CARR SMITH: Yes, I have a couple of questions about the conditions, please. KAY: Okay. CARR SMITH: Condition F, like Frank, it reads that"Restrictive covenants in the deeds of all the proposed lots within the subject property shall give notice that the terms of the zoning ordinance prohibit the construction of a second dwelling unit and CPR [condominium property regimes] on each lot." My question is the next statement, "This restriction may be removed by amendment of this ordinance by the County Council." So I'm trying to understand why that would be put in there, if it can be removed. KAY: So, this is a standard condition language that we put in for most of our Agricultural rezonings, and because this is just a recommendation to the County Council, they have the ability to remove it, or if the applicant wished to amend it, should the ordinance be approved with this condition in place, they have the opportunity to do so. Again, it's just a standard language that we use. CARR SMITH: Okay, thank youI'm sorry I don't remember that. I had one more, M, like Mary, having to do with regional impacts, so, obviously, the Kaloko Drive at Mamalahoa is a tough spot there. And it's said in here that Department of Transportation is not willing to pay for any improvements in that. So I was just wondering, it says, "shall be in the form of cash and/or in-kind services approved by the County Council and shall be applied to improving the Kaloko Drive/Mamalahoa Highway intersection." I'm just curious. Is there like a special fund for that when people's fair share comes in for that area, or how is that handled? KAY: Yes, my understanding is that there is a separate fund that, the fund specifically for this intersection, these intersections where improvements are put into, once the fair share is paid. I believe we are up to about 650,000 dollars in the fund, and that's, you know, something that we are still, still working on how to best apply those funds to make those improvements. So we are working with the State, working with Public Works, and trying to work that out. CARR SMITH: Thank you. That's all I have. KAY: Okay. UNGER: Any other questions? Commissioner Vitousek. VITOUSEK: Yes, sir. Questions regarding the historic preservation review. So, I see in the information that the parcel is within the boundaries of the Kona Field System, but that there has been no archaeological inventory survey done to date. I see in the Page 6 of the Recommendation that"the Planning Director recommends a condition requiring an archaeological reconnaissance survey for the property to identify resources and to implement mitigation if[resources are] found...." I just point out that the historic preservation review process is a six-step process, beginning with identification and ending with verification of completion of detail mitigation measures. And the review process isn't over until either there is 3 EXHIBIT A no historic properties present, or detail mitigation plan has been verified to be completed. And in this case, we are being given this information and asked to make a decision, or a recommendation rather, when the inventory hasn't been completed. There's been no identification of whether there are historic properties present in the area. And, to me, I just don't feel like we are in the position where we have enough information to adequately consider the effect of the project on historic properties. KAY: Would you like me to respond to that, or is it just a statement? VITOUSEK: No, I mean, basically, what I, my recommendation would be that an archaeological field inspection be completed. That would provide information on whether or not there are historic properties present. And then once that information is available, we can make a decision on whether there are sites that this project might affect or not. That would be my recommendation. KAY: Okay, so, a field inspection as opposed to a reconnaissance survey? VITOUSEK: Yeah, I mean, reconnaissance survey, there is no language in the Hawaii Administrative Rules regarding a reconnaissance survey; there is either an archaeological inventory survey or an archaeological assessment. But, an archaeological field inspection is just an opportunity for the applicant to provide additional information on whether or not historic properties are present that would aid them in getting a determination of no historic properties affected, which would end the historic preservation review process and allow us to complete the review of this project. KAY: So, there is a time in component as well; in Condition K, we have prior to final subdivision approval, some type of archaeological survey, inspection, what have you, is required and should be approved by SHPD. This is [inaudible]but we talked about this before we came to the meeting, so I'm leading the witness; it's my understanding that your thought process is this should be done prior to the Commission considering whether or not to forward this to the Council. VITOUSEK: That's, my belief is that the project that's being reviewed right now is the Change of Zone, which is a land use entitlement, which is defined as a project under the Administrative Rules, so I believe that this should be done as part of this project, and we should have that information as people who are making recommendations on this project, which is the Change of Zone. KAY: So, you'll have an opportunity later on when you consider to vote whether or not to amend the condition or VITOUSEK: Yeah. KAY: Yeah. 4 EXHIBIT A LINGER: Yeah, that's what I was thinking. We could, we certainly can address that when the applicant comes up, but also in a motion to modify conditions, if that's the direction we want to head, yeah. And then,just a reminder, Leeward Planning Commission makes a recommendation to the County Council for their final decision; we are just a recommending board in this, in this case. KAY: Thank you. LINGER: Any other questions? [None.] Thank you. Would the applicant come up, please? KERN: Good morning, Mr. Chair, Members of the Leeward Planning Commission. LINGER: Good morning. Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth before the Planning Commission? KERN: Yes. CAMPBELL: Yes. LINGER: Thank you. Please state your name and your area of residence. KERN: I'm Zendo Kern, planning consultant, I live on the east side. This is Jean Campbell. She'll introduce herself. CAMPBELL: I'm Jean Campbell and I live in Kailua on Oahu. LINGER: Aloha. Before you begin your presentation, for the record, did you get a chance to review the recommendation from the Planning Department, and did you get a chance to review the conditions that were associated with that, and do you agree with those conditions? CAMPBELL: Yes. UNGER: Okay, great. CAMPBELL: Yes to both. UNGER: Great,thank you. KERN: Thank you for your asking us today. I guess we'll get into the conversation about the condition and the archaeological stuff in just a minute. I'd just like to provide Ms. Campbell an opportunity just to talk briefly about the project and her wishes. CMAPBELL: Okay. Aloha kakahiaka. Thank you, Chair and Commissioners and staff for giving us the opportunity to appear in front of you and to present our project. As you know, this is a 20-acre property. It's very forested, quite beautiful,just up the hill from here. I purchased it with the anticipation that I would hopefully be able to change the zoning and subdivide such that 5 EXHIBIT A my brother and my brothers and sisters-in-law can all have what we are sort of hoping to be kind of a family compound, for lack of a better word. That's our hope that we can, you know, eventually have our full homes there. We, yeah, that's, I mean, that's really what we are hoping to do with the property. None of us currently live on the Big Island right now, but we are all, we were all born and raised on Oahu, and hoping to return. Some of them are on the mainland, most of us still on Oahu, hoping to return home, and then relocate over here to a quieter and more reasonable lifestyle, along with an awful lot of our friends from growing up who are over here as well. So, yeah, that's, that's really what we are, what we are looking for. I appreciate all the conditions that the Commission, or the Planning Department, has recommended. I think they are all good ideas. We are, and Zendo can address this further, but I don't have any objection whatsoever. We've already reached out to an archaeological consultant, and we are happy to do the field inspection. Zendo can talk to you about how best to do the timing of that, but I, I don't have any issue, I think that's something that we should be doing anyway. We are planning to keep the forest in place to the extent possible. That's what's magic about up there is the forest. It's like being far away but being really close at the same time because you are only ten minutes from everything. So, and I'm, we are, we are both here happy to answer any questions you have. LINGER: Great, mahalo. KERN: Yeah, so, the condition with the archaeologist, we did talk about that a little bit. We actually, surprisingly, we reached out, and began the conversation with the archaeologist this morning prior to even showing up here. So I think it comes down to two, two things: One is the timing issue, and then one would be amending the condition that's in there right now because right now it calls for a recon, archaeological reconnaissance, approved by SHPD. So, if we go for the field inspection and there is nothing there, then clearly that condition should be removed. If there is something there, then that would move into an AIS, and there is no problem with that. I think the rest of the process after that is relatively smooth, except for SHPD actually making a response and doing something in a reasonable time frame. So, we are happy to do that. So I think it's really, I think it's a timing issue whether or not we have to do a field inspection now and continue this hearing and come back with it, or if we can push it forward to Council and have it done prior to Council as a basically almost an internal condition. From our side, we prefer to keep it moving towards, moving towards Council, but, you know, we are, we are open to working with you folks on whatever works, makes the most sense. And we are happy to answer any questions, and humbly ask for your support. LINGER: Great,thank you. Commissioners, any questions of the applicant? [None.] Great, thank you, you all may be seated. KERN: Thank you. CAMPBELL: Thank you very much. 6 EXHIBIT A UNGER: Just to confirm, we don't have anybody from members of the public to testify. If anybody is here to testify on this agenda item, now is your opportunity. For the record,then, nobody to testify, I need a motion to close public testimony. KEALOHA: So move. UNGER: We have a motion by Commissioner Kealoha. CARR SMITH: Second. UNGER: Second by Commissioner Carr Smith. All in favor? COMMISSIONERS: Aye. UNGER: Motion passes unanimously. Public hearing is closed for this agenda item. Commissioners, we need to discuss a motion. VITOUSEK: Would it, I mean, would it be possible to take real quick executive session to consult with our attorney? UNGER: Sure, we can do that. I'll go ahead and make that motion. I move that the Commission enter into executive session to consult with its attorney regarding questions and issues pertaining to the Commission's powers, duties, privileges and liabilities pursuant to HRS 92-5. Do I have a second? VITOUSEK: Second. UNGER: All in favor? COMMISSIONERS: Aye. UNGER: Opposed? [None.] Motion passes. If you would, could you please step outside of the room? We are going to go into executive session. We'll come and get you all when we are pau. Thank you. The room was cleared, and the Commission went into executive session at 9:57 a.m.for the purpose of consulting with its counsel regarding questions and issues pertaining to the Commission's powers, duties,privileges, immunities and liabilities,pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes 92-5. At 10:11 a.m. it was moved by Commissioner Vitousek and seconded by Commissioner Carr Smith that the Commission go out of executive session. A voice vote was taken, and the motion carried with all in favor. The hearing was reconvened at 10:12 a.m. UNGER: The hearing is back in session. We were at opening the floor to the Commissioners to entertain a motion. 7 EXHIBIT A VITOUSEK: Prior to making a motion, would it be possible to call the applicant up one more time? UNGER: Yes, certainly. Would the applicant please come forward? VITOUSEK: So, my question is whether you would be willing to withdraw, and then complete the archaeological field inspection, and then come back to us for consideration of, so we can consider the effects on historic properties? KERN: We would not be willing to withdraw. We'd be willing to continue. VITOUSEK: Sure, yeah. I'm not, I'm not sure on the language. If that works where you guys are able to come back another time. KERN: Yeah, I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, Ms. Campbell, but we are not, we are not overly attached to it one way or another. We are kind of, path with the least resistance, we are happy to make that work. VITOUSEK: So, if we could postpone, let's say, a month to give you guys time to go out there and conduct the archaeological field inspection, and then come back next time with the results of that, is that something that you'd be willing to do? KERN: We'll do that. So we'll postpone to the following Planning Commission meeting, yeah? VITOUSEK: Can I make a motion that we postpone this agenda item until the following meeting? UNGER: Yeah, you can. KERN: And UNGER: Oh, go ahead. KERN: just adding, can we then work on changing the language to that condition as well? VITOUSEK: Yes, yeah, I think that the condition will be amended as a result of the field inspection KERN: Perfect. VITOUSEK: so, we'll, we'll be saying that, if the field inspection comes back saying that there is no historic properties, we'll eliminate it; if it realizes we need to have an archaeological inventory survey, we'll reflect that. KERN: Perfect. 8 EXHIBIT A VITOUSEK: Thank you. KERN: All right, thank you guys. UNGER: So, we do need a motion? VITOUSEK: I've made the motion. UNGER: Oh, okay. VITOUSEK: Yeah. UNGER: So, we do—can you repeat it,please, I'm sorry VITOUSEK: I'd like to make a motion to postpone the current agenda item to the next available Leeward Planning Commission meeting to allow them the opportunity to prepare an archaeological field inspection of the subject property. UNGER: Second? Do we have a second? KEALOHA: I'll second. UNGER: Okay, so, motion by Commissioner Vitousek, second by Commissioner Kealoha. Floor is open for discussion. Hearing no discussion, roll call. KAY: Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. Commissioner Vitousek? VITOUSEK: Aye. KAY: Commissioner Kealoha? KEALOHA: Aye. KAY: Commissioner Carr Smith? CARR SMITH: Aye. KAY: Commissioner Newberg? NEWBERG: Aye. KAY: Commissioner Yates? YATES: Aye. 9 EXHIBIT A KAY: And Chair Unger? UNGER: Aye. KAY: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Motion carries, six-nothing. UNGER: Thank you, Applicant. You'll be notified in writing by the Leeward Planning Commission of the decision here today. Mahalo. The discussion ended at 10:16 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Noriko Sauer, Secretary Leeward Planning Commission 10 EXHIBIT A