Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-03-17 Leeward Exh C - Bergin LEEWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAI‘I HEARING TRANSCRIPT MARCH 17, 2011 WILLIAM C. AND PATRICIA C. BERGIN A regularly advertised hearing on the application of (SPP 11-113) was called to order at 10:08 a.m. in the King Kamehameha's Kona Beach Hotel, Ballroom I, 75-5660 Palani Road, Kailua-Kona, Hawai‘i, with Chair Geraldine Giffin presiding. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Geraldine Giffin, Brandi Beaudet, Lani Bowman, Thomas Hickcox, Frederic Housel, Wayne Iokepa and Richard Nelson STAFF PRESENT: Julie Mecklenburg (Deputy Corporation Counsel), Margaret Masunaga (Deputy Planning Director), Daryn Arai (Planning Program Manager), Jeff Darrow (Staff Planner) and Maija Cottle (Staff Planner) And no one from the public in attendance. APPLICANT: WILLIAM C. AND PATRICIA C. BERGIN (SPP 11-113) Application for a Special Permit to allow the establishment of a kennel and small animal veterinary facility on approximately 1 acre of land situated within a larger 11-acre parcel located within the State Land Use Agricultural District. The property is located subdivision along the northwest (makai) side of Pu‘u Huluhulu Road, approximately 2,200 feet , Lllo, South Kohala, Hawai‘i, Tax Map Key 6-6-005: portion of 013. GIFFIN:Moving right along to Agenda Item No. 2. This is a Special Permit request by William C. Bergin and Patricia C. Bergin for the allowing of the establishment of a kennel and small animal veterinary facility. Maija? COTTLE: Thank you, Madam Chair. Okay, this next application is located in the South Kohala District in the town of Waimea, actually in the is located just west of Pu‘u Huluhulu Road that runs in a kind of northeast-southwest direction here. The property is zoned Agricultural 5 acres, as well as all of the surrounding properties. The General Plan designation is Important Agricultural Land that’s shown in the light green, and all of the surrounding properties are also in the same designation. And the South Kohala Community Development Plan shows the property, also in the see maintained as an agricultural area. And the applicant is requesting to allow the establishment of a kennel and asmall animal veterinary facility on approximately a one-acre portion of an eleven-acre parcel. Specifically, they want to convert an existing 1,500-square foot building into a vet care facility for small animals like cats and dogs; this would be adjacent to the applicant’s residence. And then, they want to also construct a new 2,000-square foot kennel for the small animals to be boarded in overnight if required; this would be constructed next to the existing equine vet facility. And until they come up with the funding to construct the kennel building, they want to use the one of the bays within the existing equine vet center for the kennel purposes. And I’ll show you where those areas are here. This is a 1 EXHIBIT C large view of the property. You can see they have a lot of existing agriculture going on on the property; they have some orchards here, they have a horse arena here and here, more fruit trees in the front of the yard. And then this is a close-up view of what they are proposing. You see the road here, Pu‘u Huluhulu Road, on the right side of the slide, and the proposed kennel building, the 2,000-square foot kennel building, would be in this area here, just near the driveway. This is the existing equine vet facility and this is the facility that they are proposing to use one of the bays of until they can construct the kennel. And then, the animal, the small animal vet facility would be located in this area here. And their existing residence is in this general area here. This is a view of the driveway off of Pu‘u Huluhulu Road; you are looking northeast towards Waimea Town. You can see the driveway here and the existing equine vet facility is here. This is a close-up view of the equine vet facility, and off in the distance there, you can see what they are proposing to use as a small animal vet facility. The Department is recommending approval of the applicant’s request. I also want to bring your attention to a few new letters we’ve received. We have a letter from Thomas Yamamoto –that’s a th letter of support, dated March 5. We also have a comment letter from the Department of Water th Supply dated February 28, as well as a letter from the applicant’s representative, Sidney Fuke, rd dated March 3. And then, the Department has also issued replacement pages for the background report; you’ll notice your original background report was missing Page 2, so we just reissued the report with the Page 2 included. And I’m also requesting that the Commission consider adding a new condition in light of the Department of Water Supply’s letter; they are requesting that the applicants submit water usage calculations for the proposed uses and -. GIFFIN: Maija, can you hang on for just a minute? COTTLE: Sure. GIFFIN: So you are suggesting that there would be a new condition, so we should be looking at Pages 6 and 7 in the recommendation? COTTLE: Yeah, I would say, on Pages 6 and 7, I think it would be appropriate to add the water condition as Condition 2 and then renumber the Conditions after that. GIFFIN: Okay. Do you have the wording for the new condition? COTTLE: Yeah, let me -. We can use something similar to what we did for the last application. GIFFIN: Okay, if you’ll just read it -. COTTLE: Sure. GIFFIN: To give us, you know, the gist of it. COTTLE: Sure. “Within six months from the effective date of the permit, the applicant shall submit estimated maximum daily water usage calculations prepared by a licensed engineer to the Department of Water Supply. As directed by the Department of Water Supply, the applicant shall either install an additional or larger water meter.” GIFFIN: Okay. Have you informed the applicant’s consultant? 2 EXHIBIT C COTTLE: Yes. GIFFIN: Okay, good. Commissioners, any questions of Maija? HOUSEL: Yeah, Maija -. GIFFIN: Commissioner Housel. HOUSEL: What’s the current zoning of the property? COTTLE: It’s Agricultural 5 acres. HOUSEL: Ag-5? COTTLE: Yes. HOUSEL: Is the equine building and veterinary, is that a permitted use? COTTLE: It is. It’s a permitted use in the State Land Use district with the Agricultural County zoning. HOUSEL: Okay, but a kennel wouldn’t be a permitted -. COTTLE: A kennel isn’t because it’s for domesticated animals; so the State Land Use Law requires a special permit to kennel domesticated animals. HOUSEL: I see. Okay, thank you. GIFFIN: Any other questions, Commissioners? Okay, hearing none, will the applicant and/or the representative please come forward? So one applicant and one representative. Could you please raise your right hands? Thank you. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Leeward Hawai‘i County Planning Commission? FUKE: Yes, I do. BERGIN: Yes. GIFFIN: Sid, beginning with you, would you please give us your name and your address? FUKE: Sure. Madam Chair and Members of the Commission, my name is Sidney Fuke. I’m a planning consultant. I’m here assisting the applicants, Dr. Billy Bergin and his wife, Patricia. GIFFIN: Thank you. Billy? BERGIN: William C. Bergin. My address is 66-1520 Pu‘u Huluhulu Road, Kamuela, Hawai‘i 96743. GIFFIN: Thank you. Sid, shall we begin with you? 3 EXHIBIT C FUKE: Sure. I forgot to also notice that my address is 100 Pauahi Street, Suite 212, Hilo, Hawai‘i. GIFFIN: Thank you. FUKE: Yes. As far as the reason why Dr. Bergin is here, as you probably all know, he is a veterinarian and historian icon, you know, in the Island of Hawai‘i. But he is a practicing veterinarian and his son also practices with him and,as the staff indicated, they have a large animal, primarily horses and cattle, veterinary facility, which is permitted on their property. What they want to do is to be able to have a small animal facility – dogs, cats, you know, other forms of pets. But unfortunately, that form of veterinary care is not allowed within the Agricultural District and,as a result,a special permit was required. And in conjunction with providing care for smaller animals, it became necessary to have kennel facilities, and so that’s the associated request. The one clarification I’d like to make to the staff’s report, and this is really like my error because it was kind of initially pointed out in the application, that the dwelling adjacent to the building that they wish to have converted into the small animal vet facility is now being occupied by one of the applicant’s employees, and they live further in the back. So in a sense, this property, although it consists of what, you know, eleven acres, is almost like an extended form of a home occupation because they live on the property. As far as the other, you know, the proposed condition recommended by the staff, I just had a discussion with the applicants and the applicants actually are already starting the study, so it should not be an issue. GIFFIN: No problem. FUKE: Yes. I’d like to also, I guess, just clarify for the sake of the applicants, as well as the staff. Within the Agricultural zone, as you go through the plan approval, there is a provision that allows the Planning Director to waive a paved parking requirement within the Agricultural district. And the question I have is whether – Iknow that there is a plan approval requirement for it based on Condition 2 – whether there would be consideration for allowing some of the parking, the required parking, to be not paved as long as it’s not, as long as, you know, you don’t have any standing water or things like that. It’s partially cost consideration and partially related to just retaining the overall ambiance of the property. GIFFIN: In regards to your first comment regarding the other dwelling, I think that that was stated in the background report somewhere – I remember reading it. What was your second? FUKE: The second one was more just having it clarified by the staff that, you know, since the Planning Director is in the position to waive the all-weather paved parking requirement within the Ag District as you go through the plan approval process, we would like to make a, I guess, a public request right now that all of the parking will be provided on-site, however, they may not necessarily be paved, although the property has considerable paved area, but -. GIFFIN: Right. Is there a condition that’s already stated to that effect? And if not, I’d like to ask Margaret to comment on that. FUKE: Well, Condition 2 essentially calls for the submittal of a final plan approval, and the plan-. 4 EXHIBIT C GIFFIN: Right, right, the old Condition 2, right? FUKE: Yeah, and the plan should identify all existing and/or proposed structures, paved driveway access and parking stalls associated with the proposed development; so it doesn’t state whether you need to have the parking stalls paved. But I’m just kind of pointing out that the Code allows the Director to waive it. And so hopefully, you know, go into asituation that we can get some acknowledgement that all of the required parking need not necessarily be paved. GIFFIN: Okay. Margaret? MASUNAGA: Yeah, I have no objection to that. Now, in terms of the, if it’s going to be not paved, would it be like on a grassy area where you would allow the parking to take place? FUKE: Yes, correct, as long as you have like non-standing water for example. MASUNAGA: Yeah. So as long as it’ll be safe for somebody to park on the grass or wherever it is, if it’s cinder or what have you, that when they get out of the car and they go to the facilities, they won’t have to go through puddles or -. FUKE: Exactly. Yes. And you still would have the minimum width requirement, the depth requirement for parking stalls, backup, so on and so forth. It’s just the question about the pavement. MASUNAGA: Okay. GIFFIN: Maija, in the old Condition 2, which is what I think Sidney is referring to and which Margaret commented on, would you like to add wording to that effect? Yeah, on Page 6. COTTLE: So you are looking at the new Condition 2. GIFFIN: No. COTTLE: There is only one Condition 2. GIFFIN: Well, I think what Sid and Margaret and I are speaking of is the old one that was already printed as No. 2. The new one is on the water, right? COTTLE: Oh, I see what you are saying, okay. GIFFIN: Okay. So this would be the new Condition No. 3, if I’m correct. COTTLE: Yeah. So what we would like to do then is just confirm what type of treatment the applicants would like to use whether it be gravel or grass. FUKE: Graveled or grassed, yeah? COTTLE: Gravel or grass. 5 EXHIBIT C FUKE: Yes, as long as, you know, there can be reasonable assurance that there would be no standing water or apuddle like that, yes. COTTLE: So we could remove the word “paved” from Condition 2 -. MASUNAGA: But the driveway is going to be paved, though. FUKE: Yeah, the driveway is already paved, yeah. GIFFIN: So “paved” is -. MASUNAGA: Yeah, so that one is correct, actually. GIFFIN: Leave “paved driveway access” -. COTTLE: Leave “paved driveway access,” and gravel or grass parking stalls. FUKE:I guess, well, Madam Chair, I don’t really think that an amendment to the condition is necessary as long as there is a, you know, public understanding that, you know, that’s the intent and this is the way that the project has been approved or– I’m sorry, I don’t want to jump the gun – the project has been considered. MASUNAGA: So actually, the way it’s stated now is fine, but the staff needs to understand that some of the parking stalls – you are not talking about all of them, right? FUKE: We are not talking about all of the parking stalls; we’re talking about some of the parking stalls may, being in the area, may not necessarily be paved. GIFFIN: Maija, are you clear on that? BEAUDET: I’ve got acomment. GIFFIN: I’m sorry. Commissioner Beaudet. BEAUDET: The matter should be given its consideration in the plan approval, because in the plan approval you have a map including infrastructure, buildings and things like that, also with identification for adequate parking. So the matter can be mitigated during the plan approval process; it doesn’t have to be commented on here. And I think that’s what Mr. Fuke is trying to communicate to us as well. MASUNAGA: Unless you prefer -. GIFFIN: That’s what I’m asking. Is this something that the Department is comfortable with? COTTLE: The only reason why we would prefer to put it in writing is because when another planner comes and looks at the conditions when they are looking at the plan approval, they want to be able to look at the condition and not have to interpret it and have it be spelled out pretty clearly. MASUNAGA: Okay, that’s probably better for -. 6 EXHIBIT C BEAUDET: Can we just say “paved driveway access and adequate, safe parking stalls” or something like that then? COTTLE: Something like that, so that there is no standing water or -. We can work with the wording; there is actually some wording in the Zoning Code for a provision for other types of parking that’s not paved, so we can add that language in here. GIFFIN: Good. Mr. Fuke, are you comfortable with that? FUKE: Yes. GIFFIN: Okay, so just to be clear, we are speaking of the new Condition No. 3, correct? FUKE: That is correct. I understand the proposed Condition 2 relates to the water. GIFFIN: Correct. FUKE: Correct, yes. GIFFIN: Okay. I’ll wait for them to be through. I think we need to take a minute here just to give the Department a chance to iron this out. Would you like us to go into a recess? COTTLE: Could we have about a five-minute break? GIFFIN: Uh huh. COTTLE: Thank you. GIFFIN: Commissioners, we are going to take a five-minute recess. Thank you. RECESSED The Chair called a recess at 10:24 a.m. RECONVENED The meeting reconvened at 10:35 a.m. GIFFIN: I’d like to call our meeting back to order. Maija, would you like to continue? COTTLE: Thank you, Madam Chair. I think, if it’s okay with the Commission, what we would like to do is be able to craft a condition that leaves some flexibility for the applicant to either do, you know, grass, cinder, gravel – some treatment that would eliminate mud, standing water. So would that be all right with the Commission? GIFFIN: Commissioners, any comment? NELSON: Sounds good. GIFFIN: Sounds good – I guess there is no objection, Maija. So if I am not mistaken, we have the old Condition No. 1, a new Condition No. 2, and then we renumbered the subsequent Conditions to include all of Conditions 7 now. 7 EXHIBIT C COTTLE: I think we would just modify Condition 2. MASUNAGA: Okay. Wait, 3. GIFFIN: Three. COTTLE: So we would modify Condition 2, as stated, to provide flexibility in the type of parking stall treatment. GIFFIN: Correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought the new Condition 2 was going to be in reference to the water. COTTLE: I’m sorry. Thank you. Yes. GIFFIN: Okay, so then the condition we were speaking of and you were working on is the new Condition 3 -. COTTLE: Three, correct. GIFFIN: And then we would renumber all of the subsequent Conditions -. COTTLE: That’s correct. Thank you. GIFFIN: Including the new Condition No. 7. COTTLE: Yes. GIFFIN: Okay. Commissioners, are you all there? Okay. Any questions of the applicant? And, Mr. Fuke, did you want to add anything in terms of this new agreement? FUKE: No, I think it’s pretty much covered. Thank you very much. GIFFIN: You’re welcome very much. Commissioner Housel, did you want to add anything? HOUSEL: I had one question. Talking about the paving on the driveway, typically how many vehicles come in to the veterinary hospital during a typical day? BERGIN: I would say that in the last two years the vehicles in a given day would be six or seven, and of that, six of the seven would be horse people coming with trailers or vans, and the small animal would, I think, because it’s primarily a horse hospital, continue to be a minimal amount of that. HOUSEL: Well, from the photo it looks you’ve got quite a large area for parking, so parking is not a problem, right? BERGIN: You know, that’s really correct. As you look along the steel building and coming toward this galvanized gate that would be to the far left, that area is all paved. And the purpose of that pavement, even though it continues over to the next building which would become the small animal, 8 EXHIBIT C is that that’s an area that’s probably about 80 by 80, and you notice it’s somewhat flat with a slight grade. In the examination of horses for lameness, you have to have a very even plane; you can’t have pebbles – anything that would alter the horse’s gait in order to diagnose the lameness. So that was the primary purpose of that. But it’s been a tremendous enhancement in terms of parking and dust control. So that’s been a big issue. And across the way you can see my white pickup parked in the distance; that would be kind of the nature of the small animal parking location. HOUSEL: Now, the building that you see in the distance, what is that? BERGIN: The far end of it is storage that’s what looks like a small additional house, and that would be predominantly saddlery and tack equipment that’s used by our family. On the far end toward our right, that is an office in which Dr. Brady Bergin conducts his computer and that kind of stuff, too. The middle is pretty much storage and warehousing. HOUSEL: Okay. The existing building that you want to convert from, I guess, a residential right now into the kennel, is there vehicle access to that? BERGIN: That would be -. Into a kennel, you say, not small animal? Because you would be looking at the small animal facility. HOUSEL: Oh, that’s the small animal. BERGIN: Yeah. But if we back up to the slide previous to this -. GIFFIN: By the entrance. BERGIN: You see where my white pickup is at? HOUSEL: Right. BERGIN: That there would be a bay in which, that would be the beginning of the kennel operation, and that’s kind of testing the waters in terms of insulation and sound abatement. HOUSEL: Okay, thank you. The thing that’s in the top that goes over the driveway, is that a pipe or, what is that? BERGIN: Yeah, that’s a pipe that would be the crossbar for -. This left side at gate is a 14-foot galvanized gate and real heavy-duty, and it has a counterpart that’s bent around the stonewall on the right, and when they come together, there is a lot of force and weight in swinging them open; so we wanted to really reinforce the cross member to support that. And the width of the gate is largely because of long trailers coming in, and they cut quite a pathway, so we wanted width area. HOUSEL: Right. Are there any signs for the veterinary facility? BERGIN: The sign would be, if we were looking at it from where the Chairperson is at over, she would be looking at a sign right next to the galvanized gate that says, “Aina Hou Animal Hospital” – that’s the name of the hospital. HOUSEL: I see, okay, good. Thank you very much. 9 EXHIBIT C GIFFIN: Commissioners, any other questions? BOWMAN: I have a couple. GIFFIN: Commissioner Bowman. BOWMAN: How close is your nearest neighbor? Residential -. BERGIN: The nearest neighbor is about 300 and – I think about – 75 feet, and that would be Mr. and Mrs. Kawasaki, and the next closest neighbor would be Tom Yamamoto and he would be, I think, probably about 500 or 600 feet. BOWMAN: Okay, thank you. Second question: Would the boarding only be for your patients? I guess that’s what you call them, yeah? BERGIN: Yeah. It would be, it’s really intended to be commercial. In the veterinary facility whatever is kept overnight is usually sick or hurt, so you don’t want to commingle them with people that are so to speak bringing their pet just to be kept and not treated. BOWMAN: Great. Okay, my two questions were answered. Thank you. GIFFIN: Any other questions of the applicant or his representative? Commissioners, I would like th to take note of a February 15 letter that was included in our background information from the Waimea Community Association, and in the third paragraph, the opening sentence is“The Committee recommends approval of this application ….” So I just wanted to put that in on the record. Okay? Any other comments? Hearing none, I’d like to hear a motion, please. Commissioner Housel. HOUSEL: Are there anyone to testify about this? GIFFIN: I didn’t get any pink slips from the staff, so I assume there is no one who signed up. COTTLE: There is none. GIFFIN: Thank you. Mr. Housel. HOUSEL: Yes, I’d like to make a motion that the Planning Commission today approve the application for a special permit for the establishment of a kennel and small animal veterinary facility, this is Special Permit, SPP 10(sic)-113, with the language of the amended conditions as stated by Maija and the one to be further rewritten byregarding the paving area. GIFFIN: Do I hear a second? NELSON: Second. GIFFIN: Okay. It’s been moved by Commissioner Housel and seconded by Commissioner Nelson that we approve the special permit application, SPP 11-00113, for the establishment of a kennel and 10 EXHIBIT C small animal veterinary facility, along with the conditions, the new Condition No. 2 and then the subsequent Conditions that follow. Any other comments?Discussion? Hearing none, Maija. COTTLE: Thank you, Madam Chair. Commissioner Housel? HOUSEL: Aye. COTTLE: Commissioner Nelson? NELSON: Aye. COTTLE: Commissioner Beaudet? BEAUDET: Aye. COTTLE: Commissioner Bowman? BOWMAN: Aye. COTTLE: Commissioner Hickcox? HICKCOX: Aye. COTTLE: Commissioner Iokepa? IOKEPA: Aye. COTTLE: And Madam Chair? GIFFIN: Aye. COTTLE: The motion to approve the special permit passes, seven-zero. FUKE: Thank you very, very much. GIFFIN: You’re welcome. BERGIN: Thank you very much. GIFFIN: You’re welcome. Congratulations. The discussion ended at 10:45 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Noriko Sauer, Secretary Leeward Planning Commission 11 EXHIBIT C