Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-02-05 TTAIS WINDWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAI‘I HEARING TRANSCRIPT FEBRUARY 5, 2010 VINCENT T.C. TAI (REZ 09-114) A regularly advertised hearing on the application of was called to order at 12:05 p.m. in the County of Hawaii, Aupuni Center Conference Room, 101 Pauahi Street, Hilo, Hawai‘i, with Chairman Rell Woodward presiding. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Rell Woodward, Dean Au, Takashi Domingo, Andrew Iwashita, Zendo Kern, and Wallace Ishibashi. STAFF PRESENT: Brandon Gonzalez (Deputy Corporation Counsel), BJ Leithead Todd (Planning Director), Norman Hayashi (Planning Program Manager), Daryn Arai (Planning Program Manager), Phyllis Fujimoto (Staff Planner), Jeff Darrow (Staff Planner), Maija Cottle (Staff Planner), and Kelly Gomes (Staff to the Department of Public Works). And approximately 8 people from the public in attendance. APPLICANT: VINCENT T.C. TAI (REZ 09-114) of Zone from a Single-Family Residential – 7,500 square feet (RS-7.5) to a Multiple-Family Residential – 2,500 square feet (RM-2.5) district for approximately 3.292 acres of land. The property is located at the end of Hualalai Street, west of the Hualalai Street – Hale Nani Street intersection, Waiakea, South Hilo, Hawaii, TMK: 2-4-28:9. WOODWARD: We’ll get started on the next item. I doubt we’re going to finish it before we break at 12:30 but we will at least get started on Agenda Item No. 7. Applicant is Vincent Tai, change of zone. Okay, you got this one too, Maija? COTTLE: Yes. WOODWARD: Okay. COTTLE: Okay, this application is a change of zone request from Single Family Residential 7,500 square feet to Multiple Family Residential 2,500 square feet; and the applicant is Vincent Tai. The subject property is located in the South Hilo district. And just to orient the Commissioners, Kukuau Street runs on the top of the slide here. Kapiolani Street runs in a north-south direction here. The police headquarters are located in this brown area. And you also may be familiar with the Boscetti application that was recently taken up by the Planning Commission, those properties are located here to the north of the subject property which is outlined in red here. Most of the area is currently zoned Single Family Residential 7,500 square feet. You can also see the dark brown area which is zoned RM-1 and the light brown area here is zoned RD-3.75. The General Plan designation for the property is Medium Density Urban, which is shown in the orange, and the area in red is High Density Urban. And this is an aerial photo of 1 EXHIBIT C the property. You can see there’s a current dwelling on the site which the applicant is proposing to demolish if the request is approved. There are also several single family residential dwellings located around the property; and you can see St. Joseph’s School here, the police headquarters. And this area below Hale Nani Street is mostly Multiple Family Residential. The applicants are proposing to construct approximately 57 to 62 town house units. They will be two-story attached units. He is also proposing common recreation play areas, landscaping and parking. And this is a site plan showing the preliminary plans of the applicant. You can see the property comes off of Hualalai Street here; and it kind of deadends at to this point onto the property. And then you can see Hale Nani Street turns off of Hualalai Street here. So the applicant is proposing a private driveway off of Hualalai Street, which is a County road. You can see the proposed units are in gray, and actually the proposed units are in brown; and the parking stalls are in gray; and the common areas are green. The Planning Department is recommending that a favorable recommendation be forwarded to the Council for this request. And I’d also like to add we have received several letters from the neighbors on Hale Nani Street. These letters actually came in when Mr. Tai submitted a previous application that he withdrew. They also came in at the same time as the Boscetti application. We didn’t initially include these in your background report because some of the letters, it wasn’t clear whether they were relevant to Mr. Tai’s application. Since then the neighbors have contacted the Planning Department and asked that these letters be included in the st application. And you also should have received a letter from Mr. Tai dated February 1 responding to two of those letters, as well as two additional letters dated February 4th from surrounding property owners, Charlene Nishida and Evelyn Paiva, as well as a response from Mr. Tai dated February 4th. Are there any questions? WOODWARD: Okay. Questions for staff? Commissioner Domingo. DOMINGO: Is the property zoned Low Density? Is it Low Density? COTTLE: The property is in the Medium Density Urban area. DOMINGO: What would that permit, it’s mixed among use? COTTLE: That would permit up to 35 units per acre. So just doing a rough calculation, that’s over 100, it would permit over a 100 units for this particular property. It’s a little over 3 acres in size. DOMINGO: Okay. WOODWARD: Any other questions? No. All right, if we could have the applicants come up. Okay, sir, hi. If I could swear you in. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth today before the Windward Planning Commission? TAI: I do. 2 EXHIBIT C WOODWARD: Okay, if you’ll speak into the microphone, give us your name and address and then you may begin. TAI: My name is Vincent Tai. The address is 2184 Round Top Drive in Honolulu, 96822. I’m the owner of the property, and I’m also the architect. I believe the Director’s report adequately address almost all the concerns. I just wanted to add a couple of statements that, little more on a personal basis. First of all, as Maija was saying, some of the letters that came in from the neighbors were addressed to both Mr. Boscetti’s project and also my previous application which was being withdrawn. So seems like some mix-up, okay? Now I’ve nothing negative to say about Mr. Boscetti’s project, okay? Any project that is done appropriately within all zoning regulations and fits the goals of the County, executed well, would be a nice project. I’m simply saying that my project and Mr. Boscetti’s project are very different, completely different. Okay? So it cannot be put on the same level. My project, a 4-story project, is not an apartment-type building. It’s, basically it’s a town home, or town houses. And this is something I want to talk about. This is, as far as I know, town homes or town houses are not common in Hilo. As far as I know there are none in existence. If, I was told just before the meeting that perhaps there’s just one small project called Pacific Heights? LEITHEAD TODD: Pacific Heights mauka of this is town houses. TAI: Right. I was going to talk about that, yeah. But I was just made known about it, which I didn’t know. But I was told it’s a smaller project, a 12-, 13-, 15-units maybe? I haven’t seen it so I cannot say. But what I’m saying is -. LEITHEAD TODD: It’s larger. TAI: Well, maybe, okay. But it’s rare. Okay? Seems to me like town homes and town houses is a good compromise between a single family, detached single family home, and a condo. So- called condo is, you know, strato units, you know, the units that’s up in the air that belongs to you. Okay? Now I’m speaking from personal experience, people my age particularly in the sixties, in the seventies and even some in the late fifties would consider us an empty nester. You know, the kids move out, and they move back from the suburban home, bigger homes, closer to town centers. And most of them, most of the products available in other places they would be like town homes and condos. Now this is actually my personal experience because I have rented to some friends who moved to condos from a bigger home, they usually have a garden front and back, and they found it very restrictive because they had things they wanted to do. They’re still active. They want to, you know, plant some vegetables and trees, and condos won’t allow them to do that. Okay? And they want to do that, hang their own drapeseven, you know, a lot of restrictions when you live in condos. So they moved back to so-called town homes or town houses. Now town homes is called homes in town, okay. So actually in big cities they’re called row houses, okay -.Like San Francisco and New York and Boston they’re 25 feet, 30 feet wide, maybe 100, 130 feet long. The only difference between so-called single family homes that we’re used to is these are attached and not detached. Okay? 3 EXHIBIT C Now just for older folks who are retired, and this is also a building product or building type that’s very suitable for young couples, younger people who just, you know, started working and couldn’t afford to spend the money on a single family home, and besides they’re busy. They really don’t have time to care for the gardens and taking care of the front yard and so on. So a town home actually is a very good product for, in terms of the profiles for the residents, okay? And this is something I wanted to try to distinguish between my project and Mr. Boschetti’s. You know, it’s just two different types, not just in terms of scale or size, but also the profile of the residents is very, very different. Now town homes in most likelihood they are occupied by owners, and not just like apartment building you rent out, okay? I’m not saying they cannot be rented out but most likely. And town house projects actually started to get very popular, I’m talking about in a suburban area, not just in central, big cities now. Gee, after World War II a lot of houses being built in suburban areas. And then in the sixties or so, in fact the time that I started my business, a lot of the town homes and also called garden, garden apartments actually. But they’re all similar. What they have is that they have their own backyards; it’s very important, but not big, big enough for them to do something. And then you don’t have to care about the front, basically, because the road and the swimming pool, the public areas, the common areas are normally managed and taken care of by an association. They don’t have to worry about it. So this type of development is -, they’re just everywhere. So I want to make sure that the neighbors, you know, surrounding this neighborhood who have concern know that this actually is real similar to their own house, except that they are closer to each other and they have the same profile in terms of people who are living in there. Now I understand the concern where everytime you have a change, okay, people would be concerned about noise, about traffic, and perhaps other things too, but that they’ve been adequately addressed in the Director’s report. Now in terms of, and also the other one is the value of their homes which I wanted to address a little bit. Maybe I should do that first. There’s one letter from one of the neighbors who is an appraiser, you know, and has claimed that, you know, from his experience when you have a mixture of housing then their housing value would go down. Okay? I agree and disagree because this kind of answers this yes or no, depending on what kind of mix. There are good mixes and there are bad mixes. Now I’m going to cite two extreme examples just for demonstration only. If this project couldn’t be built a high rise, let’s say six, seven stories or more, public housing project right next to all these single family homes, then I would say yes, perhaps it would affect the single family home value next to it. Now another extreme is our famous Mr. Trump builds a Trump Tower there. Okay? A 20-story building and the two- bedroom units all cost a million dollars and up, now that increases the value of all the single family homes surrounding it. Right? Of course, these are two extreme examples, okay? Now, but for town homes they’re affordable in a sense because the lot is smaller and the buildings are smaller, the structure, the living area. Now in terms of the value of these town homes is we’re going to be dictated by the current building cost, the land value, and all the soft costs that add up. That would be the cost of the value of these, the new town homes. Now on a per square foot basis because these are smaller homes, it’s going to be substantially higher than all the comparable single family homes surrounding it. The old ones, most of them are very old, by the way. So from my experience when you have a new project, a nicely executed project and when you do an appraisal using, you know, comparable values, it will actually affect upward the surrounding buildings because the cost per square foot of living area will be higher. It has to be higher because it’s newly built, right? So like I said, no, I do agree with the neighbors’s concern 4 EXHIBIT C that a mixed, variety types of development, residential development, may lower the value. But in this case actually they would increase the value. Now in terms of traffic and noise, I did make a mistake in one of my letters to the neighbors because now I’m trying to compare, you know, what are the actual hypothetical impact in terms of, you know, the number of people living in this puzzle now under current zoning versus the one I’m trying to get approval on. I was trying to compare, if it’s point, now current zoning is RS-7.5. So in theory, okay all this is in theory, if you, the property with 3.29 acres can support let’s say 19 single family lots, okay. And I was trying to give an example that these lots, you know, if they’re allowed ohana units, you know, and you basically have two buildings on each lot. But later on I was told that I was wrong because in order to build an ohana unit the lot needs to be 10,000 square foot each. So I did another calculation. But it turned out the two are very similar because these are all hypothetical calculations anyway. Based on 10,000 square foot lots this property in theory can support fourteen 10,000-square foot lots. But then in theory, you know, on a 10,000-square foot lot people can build a bigger house than a 7,500 square foot lot, right? So my, okay, you know, I’m trying to show that now let’s assume it’s a 10,000-square foot lot and you have 14 lots and each lot you can accommodate two separate structures, one is the main house and you have an ohana unit. Right? Now how big these single family homes ought to be, 3-bedrooms, 4-bedrooms, 5-bedroom, we don’t know. But, and also the ohana units too, because the number of bedrooms are not being dictated by the Planning Code. What I’m saying is the Planning Codes have no provision limiting the number of bedrooms. So what I’m saying is let’s say if each lot you can build two single family houses and each one has three or four bedrooms, when you add all these up and multiply it by the number of lots compared to the number of bedrooms that I’m proposing, they are more or less equal. Okay? The, it means the number of bedrooms, which can be interpreted the number of people living in that particular unit, is more or less equal; and if any difference, it’s really negligible. Okay? So I want to make clear that I did correct my calculation to, instead of assuming this as 7,500 square foot lots, assuming it would be 10,000 square foot lots. The proposal that I had submitted will contain 47 town homes, and any additional units being allowed under that particular zoning I intend to build affordable units in accordance with the County standards. Now, okay, you know, now these so-called affordable units will be lower rent, and some resident may be concerned that I don’t want low cost housing in my area, you know. But I think we all know that we have the responsibility to do that; and I agree that the city should have that or the county should have that, their alternatives; and I intend to comply with that. So I intend to allocate all of these, either 10 or 15 units will be under the so-called affordable units, affordable inclusive requirement. Now, in fact, the placement of these units that you can see is right behind the smaller of lots on Hale Nani Street. If I’m correct, and correct me if I’m not right, those are Section 8 projects. So that means that I’ll also design to accommodate residents, rent, or renters with lower income. So I don’t think people should really object too much, you know, if the affordable and low cost housing is being constructed in this particular parcel, and then it’s basically adjacent to the Section 8 projects.I think I’m speaking enough here. WOODWARD: Okay, thank you. You have received the Director’s recommendations and conditions. Those are satisfactory to you? 5 EXHIBIT C TAI: Yes, it is. WOODWARD: Okay, do we have questions? Commissioner Kern. KERN: I had a question. Are you going to build these or are you going to sell the land? TAI: I’m not sure, but I wanted to at least build the -. I’ll put it this way, I’m 66 years old. Okay? If it was 20 years ago I would have no question, I’d just do it all myself. But now I think . I’ll be looking for a partnerI don’t want to handle the whole project by myself, because I have other things going on too. I would definitely, if I can, keep the affordable rental units. I want to develop that. KERN: And what’s your timeframe? TAI: I, that’s the question I ask myself, too. As soon as the environment is right in terms of economic environment, the market environment, financing environment. I don’t intend to sit on it. You know, if I’m sitting on the piece of land it’ll cost me money too. KERN: Okay, my other question is if you do develop it and it looks like this, are you going to have an association? TAI: Most likely, most likely. I can’t tell -. Because this is going to the CP house (phonetic), you know, these are all not subdivisions. So I would think that there will be a home owners association that would take care of all the common areas. KERN: Thank you very much. WOODWARD: Okay. Any other questions? Okay, you may be seated. Thank you. We have one member of the public signed up to testify. We’ll get that testimony before we break for lunch. Mr. Roy Toma? Okay, sir, if I could swear you in. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth today before the Windward Planning Commission? TOMA: I do. WOODWARD: Okay, if you’ll speak into the microphone and give us your name -. TOMA: My name is Roy Toma and I live on 44 Hale Nani Street. I have in the back of me my wife Ann and Mr. Tiogangco who lives on the end of Hualalai. We are concerned, as you can see by the letters that our homeowners, wrote that Mr. Tai here wants to rezone RS-7.5 to 2.5. We are concerned because of, one, traffic, noise, privacy, trespassing. He in his letter dated to our members in our community dated January 21, 2010, it says the current RS-7.5 would allow in theory up to 19 lots for every 7.5 square foot land area. And it says it allows one main dwelling plus a second ohana housing, which he corrected; and that was what I was going to bring up. In his letter it says that he was going to develop 47 bedroom count 6 EXHIBIT C and the density with the single family dwellings plus an ohana would be equal amount. But that is wrong. You build 19 homes times 1.5, average household has 1.5 cars, that’s 29 cars. You times that by two cars per household comes to 38 cars. You build 62 new dwellings at 1.5 that comes to 93 cars. You times that by 2 that’s 124 cars. Now he has made allowance for just 72 spaces for parking. Where are the other people going to park their cars? St. Joseph, the kids need the parking. The special unit, that nun’s cottage, their staff needs parking. So, and on Hale Nani Street the roads are too narrow to park any cars overnight. So that’s a dilemma. Plus, and if you’ll notice on this map, there’s only one way in, one way out. How are we going to get out of Hale Nani to Hualalai? Then what about privacy? We don’t have any. Is he going to build a wall to protect us from outsiders? Currently we have a, knock on wood, great crime prevention place. And we have noises once in a while because of parties but we tolerate that. But now you get 62 more dwellings that’s allowed, party going on or whatever, you know, that we cannot control. And that’s my concerns, and so is the rest of the members in our community. I thank you. WOODWARD: Okay, thank you. Any questions for Mr. Toma? DOMINGO: Yeah, Mr. Chairman WOODWARD: Commissioner Domingo. DOMINGO: Mr. Toma, you have any flooding conditions in that level property? TOMA: At the moment, no. When I first bought the property yes, we did have. And if you’ll notice, Mr. Domingo, in the front of the Police Department it’s always, always flooded there. But according to Mr. Tai they’re going to build drywells. DOMINGO: Does the County have a drainage basin over there? TOMA: They have, we are on sewer line. DOMINGO: Okay. But a drainage basin to catch all the water -? TOMA: Only in front of St. Joseph, the sidewalk. We don’t have any sidewalks in our subdivision. DOMINGO: Oh, so the County doesn’t have any such thing over there? TOMA: None. DOMINGO: Thank you. WOODWARD: All right. Any other questions? Okay, well, let’s take a recess for lunch and then we will get back to this at the end. 7 EXHIBIT C RECESSED The Chair recessed the meeting at this time, 12:40 p.m. RECONVENED The meeting reconvened at 2:00 p.m. WOODWARD: Okay, will the Windward Planning Commission please come back to order. We are on Agenda Item No. 7. We have heard from the Planning Department, from the applicant, and from the one public testifier. So we’re at the point to consider a motion if somebody is of such mind. IWASHITA: Mr. Chair? WOODWARD: Yes, Commissioner Iwashita. IWASHITA: On Item No. 7, Vincent T. C. Tai (REZ 09-114), change of zone from a Single- Family Residential – 7,500 square feet (RS-7.5) to a Multiple-Family Residential – 2,500 square feet (RM-2.5) district for approximately 3.292 acres of land tax map key 2-4-28:9, I move that the Planning Commission forward a favorable recommendation on the change of zone request to the County Council with, subject to the conditions set forth in the recommendation. KERN: Second. WOODWARD: All right, thank you. It has been moved and seconded. Do we have any discussion? Commissioner Iwashita. IWASHITA: I’d like to acknowledge a couple of things. First the work of the staff in preparing this in doing the fine job that they always do.And, also, I’d like to acknowledge the letters from the community regarding their concerns for the effects that the project will have on the community. In making the motion basically in my view as I said earlier in another matter, the ideal scenario for the development of Hilo and any urban center really is that we concentrate as much of the needs of the community in the Urban core; and this area obviously is part of the Urban core, the police station is right there, there are schools and all of that. So we do need, and it’s a well known fact, I gues,s and understated that, you know, on this island we have a housing shortage; and we do need more affordable housing. And this project comes with a representation and actually the requirement that’s part of the conditions for providing affordable housing. I think as a community we need to address all of these issues and in a role as Commissioner, that I’ll serve here for a short while more, I’d like to think that I am aware, and keep that awareness of the needs of the entire community in any of the matters that come before us. On the plus side for this project is, or are the following points:One, that it does provide a higher density of residential use which is necessary in order for the County to make best use of its infrastructure, the roads and so forth. And, two, in this location as the neighbors know it’s a very convenient location, you can walk to certain functions and access certain, you know, it’s possible to walk to Longs Drugs from where you live here. So, you know, those kinds of considerations to me are pluses. 8 EXHIBIT C There are other concerns about the increased density, and noise, and traffic, and so forth. In my mind the more that we focus on and provide for and develop higher density use, then the more there will be, the more public transit and those walkable kind of services will be available within the community. So, you know, part of the problem with Downtown Hilo is that basically we allowed the sprawl to happen out to Waiakea Uka, out, you know, all of these areas that we allowed sprawl to happen. And even in the, going way back to what we call substandard subdivisions out in Puna, if those kinds of approvals were not done and we focused on keeping the housing and meeting all those requirements within the urban core, then we’d be in a lot better position today than we are. So that is, from the policy perspective, in my mind it is rather clear that the pluses for this project far outweigh any perceivable or perceived detriments. Thank you. WOODWARD: Thank you, Commissioner Iwashita. Any further comments? Okay, seeing none -. Oh, Commissioner Domingo. DOMINGO: You know, I’ve weighed the possibilities in this application. And listening to the developer and presentation of his development scenario, I felt even more, I think, at this time convinced that it would be good for the overall development of that particular area. I understand that had he chosen to just build with the present zoning it could, it could result in a more higher density than what his development scenario indicates at this time. So in essence I think he’s trying to lighten the burden or the impact of the development in the area; and that’s why I would vote for this motion. WOODWARD: Okay, thank you. Any further? Commissioner Au. AU: I would also like to say a few things, it’s same like how Commissioner Iwashita and Commissioner Taka had said. You know, my kids go to St. Joe. Aand that area that is being proposed right now is just all bushes and you guys are kind of in the back, but I’m talking in regards especially to the Boscetti development; and I think it’s great. You know, sure the traffic is going to be bad from the overall development of the community in that area I think it’s good. It will bring more attraction in that area and, you know, I think it’s a good thing for the community. WOODWARD: Okay, thank you. Any further comments? PUBLIC: May I ask a question, what kind of attraction is going to be good for us? WOODWARD: We’re sort of in the middle of taking a vote so you’ll have to discuss that with the developer afterwards. Okay, Maija. COTTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Iwashita? IWASHITA: Yes. COTTLE: Commissioner Kern? KERN: Aye. 9 EXHIBIT C COTTLE: Commissioner Au? AU: Yes. COTTLE: Commissioner Domingo? DOMINGO: Aye. COTTLE: Commissioner Ishibashi? ISHIBASHI: Aye. COTTLE: And Mr. Chairman? WOODWARD: Aye. COTTLE: Okay, the motion passes six-zero. WOODWARD: Okay, thank you. A favorable recommendation will be sent to County Council on your behalf. The discussion ended at 2:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon M. Nomura, Secretary Windward Planning Commission 10 EXHIBIT C