Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-05-05 THui-o-mana PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAII HEARING TRANSCRIPT MAY 5, 2006 HUI O MANA, LLC (SPP 06- A regularly advertised hearing on the application filed by 000024) was called to order at 3:34 p.m. in the County Building, Councilroom - Room 201, 25 Aupuni Street, Hilo, Hawaii with Chairman C. Kimo Alameda presiding. PRESENT:C. Kimo AlamedaABSENT & EXCUSED: Jeffrey McCall Fred GaldonesRodney Watanabe Bill GrahamRene€ Siracusa Andrew Iwashita AllenSalavea IvanTorigoe,DeputyCorporationCounsel Christopher J. Yuen, Planning Director Norman Hayashi, Planning Program Manager Phyllis Fujimoto, Staff Planner Jeff Darrow, Staff Planner APPLICANT: HUI O MANA, LLC (SPP 06-000024) Special Permit to allow the establishment of a Health and Wellness Retreat Facility on a 3.167- acre area situated within the State Land Use Agricultural District. The area involved is located between Waikaalulu Road and Kalopa Gulch, approximately 4 miles mauka of State Highway 19 (40-mile marker), Kaapahu, Hamakua, Hawaii, Tax Map Key: 4-4-13: portion of 10. ALAMEDA:We are on Item No. 7, Applicant HUI O MANA, LLC (SPP 06-000024). Staff? DARROW:Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Are we all here? Okay. If I may direct the attention of the Planning Commissioners to the location map. The area of this application is within the Hamakua District of Hawaii. More specifically, this is near Kalopa or Kaapahu. This, just for reference, this white line running in a east-west direction is our Hawaii Belt Road. We€re going to be looking in this particular area. We would access approximately near the 40- mile marker. Many of you may be familiar with the Kalopa State Park entrance road. As far as through my site inspection to the property, that€s the access that we had used to come up to the property. But it€s my understanding that there are alternative accesses from the highway. But from Hilo way that would be the access that someone would use if they were coming to this area. It is located approximately 4 miles mauka from the Hawaii Belt Road. I€m not going to go into great detail on access getting up there, but basically the property is located where this red dot is, off of Waikaalulu Road. And this is identified in this particular area. There are other roads that you use to access all the way down to the Highway. Most of them or actually all of those on the way down are paved. You have two-lane roads. In certain areas you€re going to have, the roads are going to narrow to one lane. Most of it is paved up till about this portion here, County maintained and paved. From this portion here up to Pohakealani Street, which is a paper road that€s identified in this white line here, this is no longer County maintained, yet it€s considered a 1EXHIBIT D road in limbo, but more recently considered now County owned. We€ll go into detail more about that, but that is how you access to the property. If I can direct your attention to the location map, the Applicants Hui O Mana, LLC are requesting a Special Permit to establish a Health and Wellness Retreat Facility on a 3.16-acreor a 24.091 acre property. This is the property identified in blue. The portion that is identified by metes and bounds is the special permitarea on the property. The Applicants at the time of submitting the special permit did submit written metes and bounds in both written form and map form for the location of the retreat facility. The Applicants propose to operate a retreat facility that will have programs that will focus on programs having to do with health, lifestyles and nutrition with meditation, with yoga, a process called rolfing which I€ve come to learn is a deep tissue structural body work, sounds painful, and other types of health promoting body work. The Applicants are proposing to have a maximum ofupto24guestsatanygiventime. Identifyingthestructuresontheproperty,theseareexistingstructures.Wehaveamain building. At this time, there are 11 bedrooms, 5 bathrooms. There€s also a connected round room. This will be used for a private yoga studio, as well as for classes and for meeting space. There€s a cabin that will be utilized mainly for staff housing. It€s a one-bedroom, one-bathroom facility, and also a barn utility building. That€s mainly for vehicles and farm equipment, as well as housing the solar photo voltaic system and the water filtration system. Okay, back to access. The concern, we€ve received quite a number of letters this morning from surrounding property owners. One of the main concerns is the access. What we€ve done in our conditions, if I can draw your attention to the conditions -. Condition No. 5, we€re asking that the Applicant be solely responsible for the maintenance for where the County-maintained area ends, which is in this particular location, which is approximately a half a mile from the entrance to the Applicant€s property. We€re asking them to regravel that particular area and maintain that portion of the roadway. Condition No. 3, this will be a new condition that we€re going to be placing in these types of retreat facility-type permits that come in. We€re trying to prevent these types of facilities turning into an overnight accommodation without being associated to some sort of program offered within the retreat facility. We don€t want to see this turned into an overnight hostel, or a large inn, or B&B, or something to that extent. Condition 3 states that the project shall be operated as a retreat facility and that all overnight guests shall be enrolled in a program, class, or other activity operated at the retreat facility. Condition No. 6 requires the Applicant to utilize a van shuttle service to help minimize the impacts along Waikaalulu Road. Lastly, Condition No. 10, this is a unique condition. The Applicants are going to be required to create a conservation agricultural easement for the remaining 24 plus acres of the property so that these remaining acreages will be kept in either Agricultural or Conservation uses. Two questions that have been brought up in reference to this. It€s (1) can additional dwellings be constructed in this area? Within the condition it says that additional farm dwellings may be constructed as long as they comply with Planning Department€s Rule 13, which has to do with 2EXHIBIT D additional farm dwellings. Additionally, aquestion is whether or not this area can be subdivided. Currently the parcel is zoned Ag-5. If the Applicants were able to meet the Subdivision Code in regards to subdivision it appears that they may be able to subdivide the property in the future. The conservation agricultural easement will be associated with the property that is connected to the special permit. The Planning Director is recommending that the Planning Commission approve this request. Are there any questions? ALAMEDA:Commissioners? Commissioner Graham. GRAHAM:I have a couple of questions about the conditions you were just referring to, Jeff. One is like the shuttle van, and we have Condition 6 that say shall utilize a shuttle van to assist and bring in guests, and shall refer to the availability of the shuttle van service within advertising.I€mjustkindofquestioninglikehowisthisgoingtoturnoutovertheyearsinreal life so maybe the average person who comes to the retreat facility may, let€s say maybe they fly in from Oahu, they€re going to rent a car and they€ll probably spend a couple of days running around the island, and they€ll go spend five days up at the retreat facility or something. So it€s certainly a lot easier for them just to drive their car up, I guess. So I€m just, you know, I€m just kind of skeptical of putting in something that paper-wise sounds nice to us like we€re trying to really address the problems of the roads; but, in effect, it€s just sort of, you know, a nice gesture and maybe it becomes a bit of a humbug for them in some way. Anyway I have a concern about that and I€m sure you guys have thought about it. And do you have any considerations that you can let me know about how you think this might, in fact, truly prove useful? DARROW:If I can just, in the beginning when we were looking at this, we were considering requiring the Applicant to just bring up the guests within the shuttle van service; but that€s very difficult to monitor. And, obviously, as you were mentioning it€s very, most of these people will probably be utilizing this facility as part of a larger vacation or something and might already have a rental car at that point. So it would be futile to try to enforce that type of condition. Instead, the Planning Director recommended that the Applicants do purchase a shuttle van or utilize a shuttle van service and that they offer it within their advertising so at least that option is available. If there are large groups that are coming up, this shuttle van service can be utilized to bring up large groups of people, rather than having several cars come up at that time. It€s just a means of trying to somehow deal with the problem in a small manner. GRAHAM:Thank you. And one other question is on the maintenance of the portion of the road, maybe the Planning Director is better to address this. But the fact that the Applicant maybe agrees when he takes this permit, if he gets this permit, to maintain that portion of the road, I€m thinking of kind of a legal sense if some visitor has some problem on that road or something and a legal issues arises even though the Applicant has said he€s going to maintain the road, I€m sure the County could easily be a party in the litigation as well. And I don€t know, I guess what I€m really asking that be, concise is more like how much legal responsibility does this remove from the County? YUEN:Well, it probably doesn€t remove a lot of legal responsibility. It€s an area of road that although it€s probably a public road, this section -. I believe the only home, the only dwelling is this property owner€s dwelling, so we think it€s a reasonable condition to make them 3EXHIBIT D maintain it as a condition of having the specialpermit. But as far as the legal, I don€t think it changes it very much. GRAHAM:Thank you. ALAMEDA:Other Commissioners,questions for Mr. Darrow? DARROW:Just for clarification -. ALAMEDA:Sure. DARROW:There is one dwelling that I did observe on the property directly across from this property. So, but, these are larger properties and, you know, the dwellings are pretty far apart from each other. ALAMEDA:Okay. Seeing no further questions, will the Applicant or its representativespleasecomeforward.First,thankyouforyourpatience.Ittookusawhiletoget to this agenda item. I want to swear you in today. Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth now before the Hawaii County Planning Commission? LINDELOW:Yes. ROSE:I do. ALAMEDA:Thank you very much. Could you please state your name and address for the record. LINDELOW:John Lindelow, 2909A Lowrey Avenue, Honolulu, Hawaii. ALAMEDA:Okay. And, sir? ROSE:David Bernard Rose; and it€s PO Box 1534, Kapaau, Hawaii 96755. ALAMEDA:All right. Did you get a chance to look at the Department€s recommendations and all the conditions? ROSE:Yes. ALAMEDA:Do you have any concerns or comments regarding some of the conditions? ROSE:Actually we have some comments. ALAMEDA:Okay. Go ahead. ROSE:Okay. Well, first, just in general, I€d like to thank the Chair and the Members of the Planning Commission and the Planning Director, and especially the staff of the Planning Department cause they helped us a lot. I mean, I don€t do this very much, this is their first time and pretty much for me. So they gave us a lot of help. They were very thorough in 4EXHIBIT D putting this together with us. We cooperated with them and they raised concerns for us; and we addressed them one at a time very thoroughly. So I€m really grateful for that kind of help. We received these recommendations, a copy of them, and we€re in agreement with all of them. We discussed them again with the Planning Department and they all make sense to us, and we understand why they€re there; and so we€re happy to cooperate with those if we are approved. The one condition that we wanted to bring up as an exploration, we€re still willing to comply with it if that€s the way it goes. But we had one concern on a practical matter. It€s the paving of the parking lot. I think it€s in the fourth sentence down in number 3, Condition No. 3, the fourth sentence says The parking stalls shall be paved in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 25.‚ And the only concern about that is that the existing, it€s not a major issue for us but just as a point, the existing packed gravel parking lot has performed well and it drains well. And so we have a little concern that if we pave it it will create additional drainage issues that we€re willing to address, but we just thought we€d bring it up. Other than that, we€re fine. I do want to clarify one other thing that was brought up just now by Mr. Darrow that our neighbor,there€soneneighborthatlivesanywherenearthisproperty.Thesurrounding properties aren€t occupied at the time and State land is on two sides of the property, grazing land. And the one neighbor, we€ve had a couple of experiences with the community. We€re starting to get to know how the community feels. Of course today we€re being made aware that there are more people in the community that have concerns and are opposed to the project. So we€re really looking forward to hearing what those concerns are, working with them. But the two events that happened that did let us know that there were some concerns, our next door neighbor, or the next door neighbor to the property, Tim Cockle who lives there had some concerns and we€ve worked them out with him. And he called Dave, the man who is in charge of managing the property today, and said that he€s fine, he€s okay with everything that we€re doing. Cause he understands now the reality of what we€re actually planning to do. And that seems to be the case when we€ve been able to talk to people in the community and explain what we€re actually wanting to do, that it seems to make sense to people. And so the second event that happened like this was that in March there was a meeting of the Paauilo Mauka-Kalopa Community Association and we received a letter that went to the Planning Department from Dolores Ramos, who€s here today, outlining some of the concerns of the members of the Community Association who attended. And I don€t know if the people here today that are opposing the project attended. There are some potential 200 or 300 people that live in the area that could attend. And so we received the letter and I talked with Dolores, and we had a good conversation. She asked questions; and, again, I just answered with what we€re actually doing and how the special permit, the main thing at that point was they didn€t understand how the special permit approval would protect the long-term quality of life in the community, would it open up for other people to get similar permits, would it be a precedent, would it make it easier. And when I explained that the special permit is actually a protection for the community, by holding the landowner accountable to specific conditions that are included in a legal and binding document that run with the land, that seemed to allay most of those concerns. So I guess that answers your questions, yeah. Thanks. ALAMEDA:All right. Thank you. 5EXHIBIT D 6EXHIBIT D 7EXHIBIT D 8EXHIBIT D 9EXHIBIT D 10EXHIBIT D 11EXHIBIT D 12EXHIBIT D 13EXHIBIT D 14EXHIBIT D 15EXHIBIT D 16EXHIBIT D 17EXHIBIT D 18EXHIBIT D 19EXHIBIT D 20EXHIBIT D 21EXHIBIT D 22EXHIBIT D 23EXHIBIT D ALAMEDA:All right, Fellow Commissioners, it€s our time to discuss, or we can make a motion and discuss. Commissioner Graham? GRAHAM:Basically, to me, an application like this could go either way, you know, vote up or vote down. We have rules for when special permits should be approved and we have criteria to address, and like we got seven different criteria here. It doesn€t say every one of them has got to be met. But, you know, some of them say the desired use shall not adversely affect surrounding properties. So if the surrounding property owners feel that it€s a problem with the roads and safety, then I have to take what they say more seriously than what I might think. Another condition is the land upon which the proposed use is sought is unsuited for the uses permitted within the district, and certainly Ag uses are permitted, but we do allow lots of special permits where there€s good Ag potential. So, again, you know, as far as the laws are concerned, I think we have ample justification to go either way. ButthethingthatbothersmeatthispointisIdon€tfeellikeIshouldvotetoapproveaspecial permit unless the surrounding community supports it; and in this case I don€t see that at this point. We have some testimony, some of which we got to today and all of which I have not read yet just because we didn€t have time today. But in order for me to support this it needs better support from the surrounding community than I see at this point. ALAMEDA:Other thoughts before we entertain a motion? Commissioner Iwashita. IWASHTIA:I generally concur with what Commissioner Graham has stated and I€m prepared to make a motion if the Chair wishes. ALAMEDA:I wish. IWASHITA:I move that the application for Special Permit Docket No. SPP 06-000024, Special Permit to allow the establishment of a Health and Wellness Retreat Facility on a 3.167- acre area situated on Tax Map Key: 4-4-13: portion of 10 be denied based upon the reasons stated by Commissioner Graham, as well as the fact that there is general community opposition to the proposal. ALAMEDA:Let me just check with counsel. I know when we make a recommendation or a motion to deny, our reasons would have to be stated. But I€m just wondering if those reasons are specific enough. Mr. Torigoe? TORIGOE:Thank you, Mr. Chair. I€m afraid I was out on a telephone call when Mr. Graham was speaking. But basically that€s a concern, is that because the recommendation from the Director was for an approval if there is a denial then we will have to try and spell out as specifically as possible the reasons why. So if the record is pretty clear on that, that€s fine. If you want to, you know, spell it out more specifically that will be helpful. IWASHITA:I can be more specific. The reasons include the traffic concerns expressed on the record in testimony presented for the body. There are residual concerns about meeting Department of Health regulations in compliance with the proposed operation -. SALAVEA:Liability. 24EXHIBIT D IWASHITA:And that the proposed use is not a reasonable use based upon the record presented before the body. ALAMEDA:Thank you, Commissioner Iwashita. Is there a second? GRAHAM:I€ll second. ALAMEDA:Motion made by Commissioner Iwashita to deny this application, seconded by Commissioner Graham. Discussion? Seeing none, staff? DARROW:Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Iwashita? IWASHITA:Yes. DARROW:Commissioner Graham? GRAHAM:Aye. DARROW:Commissioner Galdones? GALDONES:Aye. DARROW:Commissioner Salavea? SALAVEA:Aye. DARROW:And Mr. Chairman? ALAMEDA:Aye. DARROW:The motion passes to deny five to zero. ALAMEDA:Mr. Darrow, will this be presented before the body again or is it, that€s the action, right? DARROW:That€s the action. ALAMEDA:Okay, all right. You€ll be informed in writing of this decision. Thank you. Thank you for waiting. The discussion ended at 4:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon M. Nomura, Secretary 25EXHIBIT D