Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-07-02 Planning Commission Minutes PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAII MINUTES JULY 2, 2004 The Planning Commission met for a site inspection at 9:00 a.m. and in regular session at 10:03 a.m. in the County Building, Councilroom - Room 201, 25 Aupuni Street, Hilo, Hawaii, with Second Vice-Chairman Hannah Springer presiding. PRESENT:Hannah Springer ABSENT & EXCUSED: Fred Galdones C. Kimo AlamedaEarl Fujikawa Bill GrahamBill Thibadeau Jeffrey McCall Francis Smith Ivan Torigoe, Deputy Corporation Counsel Christopher J. Yuen, Planning Director Norman Hayashi, Planning Program Manager PhyllisFujimoto,StaffPlanner(From10:03a.m.) Jeff Darrow, Staff Planner Kelly Gomes representing Ex-officio Member Bruce McClure ORD. NO. 92-92The Commission met for a site inspection at 9:00 a.m. DJSM, LLCwith approximately 8 people from the public in attendance. WAIAKEA, SOUTH HILO Site visitation of DJSM, LLC's property located along the east side of Kilauea Avenue, across from Tyke's Laundromat, Waiakea, South Hilo, Hawaii, TMK: 2-2-28:29 The Commissioners met on the subject property at the end of the gravel roadway. The petitioner€s representative, William Moore, Dr. Allan Takase and Yen Wen Fong, were in attendance. The Chairman introduced the Commissioners and staff to members of the public and explained that public discussion will take place at the public hearing, which will be conducted in the Councilroom. Mr. Hayashi explained the purpose of the site inspection was for the Commission to view the site and have an orientation of the subject and surrounding properties. He noted that the concerns of the neighbors were flooding to surrounding lands and the size of the proposedbuilding.Heexplainedthattheapplicantoriginallycameinforamendmentsto Conditions C and F and has subsequently withdrew the request to amend Condition F. 1 Mr. Moore oriented the Commission and members of the public the subject and surrounding properties on Flood Study prepared for Dr. Alan Takase and also indicated the locations of the various flood designations. The Commission then proceeded to the sidewalk on KilaueaAvenue to view the makai property line. Mr. Moore pointed out the location of the two 24-inch culverts on Kilauea Avenue designed to handle runoff in the area; and he pointed out that the flood waters run into the Mormon Church property, and then to a portion of DJSM€s property. In response to the Chair€s inquiry, Mr. Gomes explained that the County maintains the culverts within the County right-of-way, and the Mormon Church and DJSM are responsible to maintain the drainage way within its own properties. The Commission then walked along the drainage way on the Mormon Church€s property andthenstoppedtolookattheareawherethedrainagewayentersintoDJSM€sproperty, which was indicated by Robin Black. Ms. Black expressed drainage concerns for the area residents if the base level elevation is raised, noting currently most of the waters seep into the ground of DJSM€s property. Eric Ishihara pointed out that this subject area was of particular concern because it will be raised 3 feet and covered with the building structure and parking area, and the waters would run off to surrounding properties. The Commission then walked to the boundary opposite Kilauea Avenue where Ms. Black pointed out the location of the surrounding neighbors who were present for the site inspection, the Kojiro family, Ishihara family, Aguiar family and Black family. Mr. Moore again indicated the locations of the floodways in the area on the Flood Study for Dr. Alan Takase, and Ms. Black noted the extent of damage to neighboring properties in the last 100-year flood.‚ The site inspection concluded at 9:29 a.m. RECESSEDThe Chair recessed the meeting at 9:29 a.m. RECONVENED The meeting reconvened at 10:03 a.m. in the County Building, Councilroom - Room 201. ORD. NO. 92-91The Commission took this item up at 10:03 a.m. with DJSM, LLCapproximately 20 people from the public in attendance. WAIAKEA, SOUTH HILO APPLICANT:DJSM,LLC(ORD.NO.92-91) Continued hearing on the request for an amendment to Condition C (Time in which to secureFinalPlanApproval)ofChangeofZoneOrdinanceNo.92-91,whichrezoned approximately 47,680 square feet of land from a Single Family Residential ƒ 10,000 squarefoot(RS-10)toaGeneralCommercialƒ10,000squarefoot(CG-10)district.The 2 property is located along the east side of Kilauea Avenue, across from Tyke's Laundromat, Waiakea, South Hilo, Hawaii, TMK: 2-2-28:29. (SEE EXHIBIT A) RECESSEDThe Chair called a recess at 11:53 a.m. RECONVENEDThe meeting reconvened at 12 noon. SPP 04-005The Commission took this item up at 12 noon with WORLD BOTANICAL approximately 8 people from the public in attendance. GARDENS, INC. KAMEE, NORTH HILO APPLICANT: WORLD BOTANICAL GARDENS, INC. (SPP 04-005) Continued hearing on the request for a Special Permit toallow the construction of a visitor center, parking lot and related improvements on approximately 154,010 square feet (3.53 acres) of land situated within the State Land Use Agricultural District. The site is part of the existing World Botanical Gardens situated on the north side of Leopolino Road between Highway 19 and the Old Mamalahoa Highway, Kamaee, North Hilo, Hawaii, TMK: 3-1-1: portion of 15. Mr. Hayashi oriented the Commission and public of the subject and surrounding properties on the location map and site plan, summarized the request, and noted the Planning Director recommended approval of the application, with revisions to the recommendation and conditions. He noted that Wendy and Jeff Haun submitted a letter in opposition to the application, and pointed out that the Hauns did not receive a surroundingpropertyownernotificationoftoday€shearingsincetheyarelocatedover 750 feet from the subject property, noting they fortunately saw the notice in the newspaper. In response to Commissioner Graham€s inqury, Mr. Hayashi said the Department felt a TIAR was not necessary at the present time, but prior to reaching a 1200 visitor count, the applicant would have to submit a TIAR before receiving final plan approval, and at that time there may be certain improvements that the applicant would have to construct before a certificate of occupancy is issued. He clarified that the applicant would not come before the Commission again as it would be an administrative action. The applicant€s representatives, Sherrill and Neil Erickson and Walter Wagner, were in attendance. Sherrill Erickson said the recommendations appear acceptable to her clients. Neil Erickson stated the applicant is fully prepared to do whatever the Traffic Impact Analysis recommends. 3 Wendy Haun read and submitted into the record a letter on behalf of herself, her husband, and 10 landowners in the area opposing the application for various reasons. She pointed out that their subdivision directly across the road has 16 lots, and only 5 of the lot owners were notified of today€s hearing. In response to the Chair€s request for comments regarding page 4 of the Department€s recommendation that The lands upon which the proposed use is sought is unsuited for the uses permitted in the district,‚ Mr. Yuen said theDepartment should probably not have said it as the land is suited for farming. He said the applicant did not meet this criteria, but it was not necessary that all the criteria be met in granting the permit. He said, however, that the Department would still say that the request meets the overall criteria of being an usual and reasonable use in the agricultural district. Mr.WalterWagnerexplainedthatthefacilitywasopenedtothepubliconJuly4,1995 and plans for the visitors center were in place but no funding was available until recently, noting they advised everybody who came to the property of the plans. He said approximately 3 to 4 years ago across from the Highway a 70-acre agriculture parcel of land was rezoned for a subdivision where many, not all, of the signatures that were submitted were from individuals who purchased these lots in the last few years. Commissioner Graham questioned the comment on page 3 of the recommendation that increase in traffic is expected to be minimal as it is estimated that visitors to the site will be the same visitors to Akaka Falls,‚ as Akaka Falls is in a different location. Mr. Wagner explained that approximately half of the tourist traffic that flows down the Belt Highway towards Volcano turns off to the Honomu turnoff to Akaka Falls, and a very small percentage of those same persons also go to the Botanical Gardens; therefore, they do not anticipate increasing the tourist traffic going down the highway as a tourist would just make two stops instead of one stop on the way to the Volcano. Mr. Wagner said currently 3 percent (40 cars) of the tourist flow that is going down the highway turns off to visit their botanical garden, they anticipate that will jump to 6 percent (80 cars) upon completion of the visitors center, and eventually perhaps 20 years from now it might go to the 1200 per day, which is currently how many people turn off to go to Akaka Falls. Director Yuen clarified for the record that there never was a rezoning across the street but that they were existing lots and the County did approve a change in how those lots were reconfigured. Mr. Wagner apologized for his error in his comment but noted he was offered to purchase the entire 70 acres if he had the money, which he did not have. Ms. Haun noted that the signatures in the petition were not only from a few people in the subdivision but from people on the old Mamalahoa Highway that are even a mile away up to Ninole who feel there are already too many tourists driving on a very narrow dangerous road. She added she did not have had time to contact other lot owners in the area, noting some of them do not live in Hawaii. 4 In response to Commissioner Smith€s inquiry, Mr. Erickson said they would be happy to entertain the idea of large tour buses if they are able to accommodate them on site, and not on the Mamalahoa Highway. Commissioner McCall said there was some indication that Leopolino Road was inadequate, and questioned if it was possible to bring that road up to County standards. Director Yuen said what the Department would be looking for in the traffic impact analysis report is a statement by the engineer as to adequacy of the sight distance, primarily for cars turning out; and if it turns out the sight distance is unsafe and there is not anything the applicant can do, the Department would say the applicant cannot do the project. Director Yuen added that although he did not think the TIAR would recommend improvements to the roadway like turn lanes, certainly at some level like if the visitor count went to 1,000 visitors turn lanes very well might be warranted in that location, notingtheconditioniswordedinsuchawaythatthePlanningDirectorcanrequest additional work and improvements at that time if there is increase in the traffic or the County can deny the project. Commissioner Graham noted the dangerous situation of the project being in a high speed area with traffic backing up for people to turn left. He said former Planning Commission Chairman Mike Luce once expressed his desire of having things ironed out in public so the public could provide their comments, rather than passing it on to something in the future. In response to Commissioner Graham€s inquiry, Mr. Yuen said because it takes five votes for a motion to pass and since Commissioner Graham is indicating his is not inclined to vote in favor of the project unless he hears something different regarding traffic, his recommendation at the present time is to schedule this item for the next meeting to allow other Commissioners to vote on the matter, noting if neither side prevails at the next meeting that terminates the application. He added that another option would be to defer action until there is a traffic study conducted. Commissioner McCall said as a traffic impact analysis report would be required anyway, he did not see a problem with just deferring this matter until it is prepared. Commissioner Smith said he was not against the project but a traffic study would settle his apprehension about large buses, noting an alternate route going further up around the old road could be negotiated. Commissioner Alameda concurred with Commissioners McCall and Smith. Mr. Erickson said with the staff€s concurrence they decided not to prepare a traffic impact analysis report at this time because they were anticipating this project to grow over a long period of time, perhaps 20 years, and that they felt it would be better to agree to do it based on a yearly review of the project and make the changes as required, noting at any time their special permit can be revoked. He pointed out that the Hawaii Tropical 5 Botanical Gardens in Onomea sees about 200 visitors a day for up to 80 cars, including small buses, and the turn in that area is as difficult as theirs. He added that although the Police Department recommends routing traffic up around Leopolino Road and back down to the highway, there is a great concern about trying to improve the old Mamalahoa Highway and bringing tourist and traffic past neighbors further up the road. He pointed out that Richard Alderson and George Hirowatari, surrounding property owners, have no objections to their request. Commissioner Graham said although he understood the applicant€s decision, he would not want to permit something now that is going to be a problem ten years from now, and not knowing then who the Planning Director is going to be and if there would be problems arising. It was moved by Commissioner Graham and seconded by Commissioner McCall to continuethehearinguntilsuchtimeasatrafficimpactanalysisreportisprovidedtothe Commission. Commissioner Graham clarified that it would be acceptable to have a traffic impact report that is phased, and the applicants would operate with a limit on the permit, to which Mr. Yuen said this need not be made a part of the motion as they needed to work out the scope of what is expected with the applicant. A roll call vote was taken and motion carried with five ayes (Graham, McCall, Smith, Alameda, and Springer) and three absent and excused (Galdones, Fujikawa and Thibadeau). RECESSED The Chair called a recess at 12:41 p.m. RECONVENEDThe meeting reconvened at 2:10 p.m. SPP 04-009The Commission took this item up at 2:10 p.m. with ISHIMARU, LLCapproximately 8 people from the public in attendance. KAHILIPALI IKI, KA€U APPLICANT: ISHIMARU, LLC (SPP 04-009) Special Permit to allow the establishment of a quarry and related uses, including a crushing, concrete batching, and asphalt concrete plant on approximately 12 acres of land situated within the State Land Use Agricultural district. The property is located approximately 4,000 feet makai of the Hawaii Belt Highway (State Highway 11), in the vicinity of Naalehu Village, Kahilipali Iki, Ka'u, Hawaii, TMK: 9-5-7: portion of 29. (SEE EXHIBIT B) MINUTESThe Commission took up the following minutes at this time, 4:01 p.m. June 4, 2004 ƒ The Commission deferred approval of the minutes to a future meeting. 6 ADMINISTRATIVEThe Commission took up the following under MATTERSadministrative matters: Status of appeals filed on Planning Commission decisions - Corporation Counsel ƒ Mr. Torigoe had no report on this matter. ANNOUNCEMENTSThe following announcements were made: HCPO Conference - Mr. Hayashi announced that the advanced schedule for the HCPO Conference has been distributed to the Commission and request the Commissioners to submit their airline information to staff as soon as possible. Planning Commissioner ƒ Mr. Hayashi reported that the Mayor€s Executive Assistant has said the vacant Planning Commission position for Puna should be filled very shortly. ADJOURNMENTThere being no further business, the Chair declared the meeting adjourned at 4:03 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon M. Nomura, Secretary A T T E S T: Hannah K. Springer, Second Vice-Chairman Planning Commission HawaiiCountyisanEqualOpportunityProviderandEmployer 7