Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-07-08 TDULLUM WINDWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAIÒI HEARING TRANSCRIPT JULY 8, 2010 STEPHANIE DULLUM (REZ-10-121) A regularly advertised hearing on the application of was called to order at 10:52 a.m. in the County of HawaiÒi, Aupuni Center Conference Room, 101 Pauahi Street, Hilo, HawaiÒi, with Chairman Rell Woodward presiding. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Rell Woodward, Dean Au, Takashi Domingo, Zendo Kern, and Wallace Ishibashi. STAFF PRESENT: Brandon Gonzalez (Deputy Corporation Counsel), Warren Lee (Director of Public Works), BJ Leithead Todd (Planning Director), Daryn Arai (Planning Program Manager), Jeff Darrow (Staff Planner) and Maija Cottle (Staff Pl And no one from the public in attendance. ABSENT AND EXCUSED: Stephen Ono APPLICANT: STEPHANIE DULLUM (REZ-10-121) Change of Zone from an Agricultural 40-acre (A-40a) to an Agricultural 10-acre (A-10a) district for 71.178 acres of land. The property is located along the makai (north) side of the HawaiÒi Belt Road near the 44-mile marker, approximately 0.5 mile east of the entrance to Camp Honokaia (Boy Scout Camp), Kawela, Hmkua, HawaiÒi, TMK: 4-6-011: 039. WOODWARD: Okay, the second and final item on the agenda is application from Stephanie Dullum for a Change of Zone from an Ag-40a to an Ag-10a for 71 plus acres of land on the makai side of the HawaiÒi Belt Road near the 44-mile marker, near the Boy Scout Camp in Hmkua. Jeff? DARROW: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good morning, Members of the Planning Commission. If I could direct your attention to the presentation on the wall. Our second applicant is Stephanie Dullum. They are requesting a change of zone. The actual property is located in the Hmkua District of HawaiÒi. More specifically weÓre looking at approximately two miles east of the Honokaa area. The property is identified with a black outline and it borders along the HawaiÒi Belt Road. If youÓll notice the different colors weÓre looking at, the darker blue color is signifying Agricultural 40-acre zoning. The lighter green is signifying Agricultural 5 acres; and the darker green is signifying Open zoning. This is a closer shot of the zoning map. Again, we have the subject property identified in a black outline. We have Open zoning to the east, which is mainly plant have smaller Agricultural lots to the west with similar zoning, Agricultural 40 acres to the north and to the south. 1 EXHIBIT B This is an aerial photo. Again, youÓll see the property identified with a red outline. YouÓll see the smaller Agricultural lots to the west and the eucalyptus to the east. This is the General Plan designation of the area. Again, we have the black outline of the subject property. A majority of the surrounding area is Important Agricultural land and you have Conservation just to the west with the eucalyptus trees. YouÓll notice the Honokaa area is identified as Low Density Urban and Medium Density Urban. The applicant is requesting a change of zone from Agricultural 40-acre to Agricultural 10-acre for 71.178 acres to subdivide the property into six lots ranging from approximately 10 to 15 acres in size. The reason for the request is to provide lots for the respective family members of the landowners while keeping the land for pastoral and equestrian use. This is the submitted site plan from the applicant. On the lowe HawaiÒi Belt Road; and youÓll see the identified six lots for the proposed subdivision. There is the proposed road lot that will be coming into the property. At this time, the Department of Transportation has given a, permitted access on the west side of the property. The applicant is in discussion with the Department of Transportation to relocate the access to the middle of the property. This is a unique application in the sense that it is proposing a private water system versus a County water system. In the Zoning Code under Section 25-2-46 it states that a change of zone application shall not be granted unless: (1) the department of water supply has determined that it can meet the water requirements of the project and issue water commitments using its existing th system. In the comment letter from the Department of Water Supply dated April 14, which is your Exhibit 3, they had confirmed that there is one existing water meter for the property. No. (2), it says that you can also do specific improvements to the existing public water system, or construct a private water system equivalent to the requirements of the department of water supply to meet the water needs of the project and conditions of zoning delay occupancy until the necessary improvements are actually constructed. In that comment letter Department of Water Supply states that if they were to construct improvements to the existing public water system, it would be approximately $1.2 million. If they were to construct the improvements required by DWS to meet their requirements for a public/private system it would be approximately $2.2 million. The applicant is requesting to construct a private water system, that is it has elements of a private water system, that would be required by Department of Water Supply, but it wonÓt meet their high standards. The Department of Water Supply requires two wells on-site, one well and one backup well. And they also require a 100,000-gallon concrete water tank that is to be located off-site at an elevation of 100 feet above any portion of the exting property. So that makes it very difficult for applicants to be able to meet that requirement, additionally, to be able to put in the transmission lines to the respective lots. The applicant is proposing to put in two wells, so they have the well and the backup well, as well as well as a 15,000-gallon storage tank for each well, as well as the transmission lines. Rather 2 EXHIBIT B than having the off-site storage tank, theyÓre proposing to have the on-site storage tanks with t pump system bringing the water to the respective lots. And so this is, in a sense, a test application that the Planning Director has been wanting to bring this matter to the attention of the Commission and to the Council to be able to see if there are any possible options for allowing change of zones in this particular situation with a private water system that doesnÓt meet the high standards of Department of Water Supply. Here are some site photos of the property. This is looking west on Mmalahoa. The actual subject property is on the left side of the map. So this would be looking towards Honokaa. This is looking towards Waimea. And, again, the subject property is on the right side of the map. And then this is just an overview of the subject property. The Planning DepartmentÓs recommendation is that the Planning Commission send a favorable recommendation for this application. Are there any questions? WOODWARD: Questions for staff? I have a question, and I probably will ask Mr. Fuke this. If youÓre not going to go with the Department of WaterÓs standards, why go half way? Because the point is theyÓre asking you to spend another $2.2 million for things that are ridiculous, to be honest with you, and absolutely arbitrary in this sort of situation. Department of Water Supply requires a redundant well. That has only been a requirement even for public systems in the last four years. And the only reason they require it has nothing to do with water quality, safety, or anything else. The reason they put that into effect was the Department of Water Supply in a situation where they are responsible for supplying water doesnÓt want to have to truck in water if thereÓs a failure of a well. Well, theyÓre already said theyÓre not going to be supplying water. Why should they pay, thatÓs a very expensive insurance to have another well thatÓs sitting there doing nothing. So why go half way if you canÓt meet the DepartmentÓs standards? They also have a ridiculous, for a private situation like this, 100,000-gallon concrete tank I happen to know cost $700,000 to $800,000. The Department of Water SupplyÓs standards are what the Director says they are. ThereÓs no more rationale to it than that, believe me. And the Department of Water Supply in this County is the only one that mandates concrete tanks. Every other County, Kauai, Honolulu, Maui, all accept glass-lined steel tanks. Also, you have to have malleable iron pipe. PVC is out. And all of these things are crazy and have nothing to do with supplying five lots with water. The other things, and there was an error in your things, Mr. Fuke. It says 42 gallons per minute is 15,000 gallons a day. ItÓs not. ItÓs actually 60,480 gallons a day. YouÓve got what you need. YouÓve already got what you need. So why go half way? YouÓre not going to meet the Department of Water SupplyÓs standards. The redundant well doesnÓt have anything to do with the safety standards from the Department of Health. So thatÓs my question, is why was there a recommendation to go half way? LEITHEAD TODD: This was in part because, you know, the applicant offered to try and build something that they thought that they could afford which would take care of the number of lots. But, you know, recognize that if you were trying to build it to, you know, 100,000 gallons and the kind of stuff that the DWS would normally have, that thereÓs no way you can do it. And it 3 EXHIBIT B was also working with the reality that but for the concurrency requirement on rezoning this is property that would qualify for a water variance to do water catchment, because they have enough rainfall in this area. But because itÓs a rezoning, concurrency kicked in. We were trying to be reasonable. And I think the applicant was trying to the best of their ability to try and comply. I heartily agree that for a private system thatÓs only going to be taking care of six lots having two wells and -. You know, the backup well doesnÓt make a whole lot of sense because itÓs like theyÓre only responsible for themselves. ItÓs not the general public. This isnÓt water that the County has to come truck in. ItÓs, you know, their kuleana. But they were willing to offer those, the two wells and the 15,000- gallon storage tank, so thatÓs why we put it in the condition. But I agree that some of the standards that you have from both the Department of Health as well as Department of Water Supply does not make sense for something thatÓs a six-lot subdivision. WOODWARD: Okay, thank you. Commissioner Domingo. And IÓll address this more when you guys come up. Commissioner Domingo, you had a question? DOMINGO: I was just going to say perhaps when Mr. Fuke and the applicant comes up, you know, we can ask them questions, such as that which you show concerns about. WOODWARD: Okay. All right. Mr. Fuke, if youÓd come up and -. And the applicant, are you with -? No? FUKE: Yes. WOODWARD: Okay. WOODWARD: YouÓre going to be doing the testifying? FUKE: Yes. WOODWARD: Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth today before the Windward Planning Commission? FUKE: Yes, I do, sir. WOODWARD: Okay, and if youÓll give us your name and address and then you may begin. FUKE: Okay. My name is Sidney Fuke. IÓm a planning consultant. IÓve been asked to assist the applicant on this particular project. Seated here is Bob Hogan; and BobÓs the, I guess, the better half or one of the halfs of Stephanie Dullum, the applicant. My business address is 100 Pauahi Street, Suite 212, Hilo, HawaiÒi. IÓd like to, before going on, however, IÓd like to just kind of note that the staffÓs background report and the recommendation, you know, are acceptable. IÓd like to note, however, that on page 1 of the sec there is a reference to Agricultural 20 acre, and I think that was a typographical error. It should be Agricultural 40 acre. ItÓs on the second line of the recommendation. 4 EXHIBIT B Mr. Chairman, IÓm very impressed with your knowledge about the water system. Were you on the Water Commission, by any chance? WOODWARD: I live in Ocean View. Does that explain it? WeÓve had a little dealing with the Department of Water Supply, not entirely favorable. FUKE: But your explanation is right on point. WeÓve had a number of meetings, not only with the Planning Director, but also with the Water Manager and his staff. And it is true, the Water DepartmentÓs standards are just one standard, itÓs all the Cadillac version. It doesnÓt, you know, provide accommodation for anything less than a Cadillac version Subdivision Code, for example, when you deal with the roadways, you know, you can have like a 50-foot wide right-of-way with a 20-foot wide pavement. If you have six or less lots then the roadway standards can be reduced as low as a 20-foot wide right-of-way with a 16-foot pavement, you know, so on and so forth. But the Water Departmen kind of subset standards. What we were trying to do was as best as we can to try to address the concurrency requirement while, you know, doing like a mini version, really, of whatever the Water DepartmentÓs standards were. And if the Water DepartmentÓs standard called for like two wells, we said, fine, weÓll do two wells. If the Water DepartmentÓs standard called for having a reservoir or a tank, then we said, fine, you know, weÓll do a tank for each of those wells. But we had to adjust it to make it consistent with whatever he was proposing. And just one correction, Madam Director, one of the six lots will be served by the County water system. So only five lots will be served by this private water system. So before he even applied for the rezoning, I told Mr. Hogan, youÓve got to actually try to see whether you can actually have a water system in the area, and not necessarily rely on mother nature to the catchment system because of the concurrency law. We have to try to see whether you can actually drill a well and see what the source is. So he drilled the well, and, you know, that report is made part and parcel of the application. And I donÓt know what the calculation is, Mr. Chairman, but I got the number from actually Kurt Inaba who is the, one of the chief engineers at the Water Department. WOODWARD: Okay, I understand. FUKE: But he mentioned that, you know. Like the report that they had was like it can generate, that one well can generate 42 gallons per minute, which translates according to Kurt Inaba to 15,000 gallons per day. So if you look at -. WOODWARD: Actually that 15,000 is a six-hour interval. FUKE: Correct, yeah, at a six-hour -. WOODWARD: Which is 60,000 a day. FUKE: ThatÓs right. That was based on like a six-hour interval, so that came out to 15,000. So we just took a conservative amount. So 15,000 gallons per day, which translates to 3,000 gallons per day for each of these five lots. The Water Department requires only 600 gallons per day. So 5 EXHIBIT B his system would provide like five times more than what the Wate require. And as you, no, as staff had also accurately kind of pointed out that you have to have a reservoir, but that reservoir has to be like at least 100 feet difference in elevation from where youÓre going to serve. And the reason why is that they want to have it like all gravity fed. Bu heÓs saying, you know, the only way he can go do that is he has got to have the reservoir like off- site. He has got to buy properties, you know, to make that elevation requirement. So he said, no, IÓll put the reservoir on my property and IÓll eat the cost of having it pumped. And so thatÓs how he solved the problem about like having this additional reservoir. The other thing that the Water Department wanted, they said, like, fine, you know, itÓs a private system so we wonÓt review the plans, we wonÓt inspect it. You know, itÓs all, itÓs fine as far as we were concerned, I mean the Water Department was concerned. But they said that we really wouldnÓt mind getting all of the reports, you know, from that. You know, if, let us know how the well is going to be constructed, how your water system is going to be designed, so on and so forth. So as a condition we had suggested, and the staff had incorporated a condition that said the system has got to be designed by a professional engineer; and then during its construction period it also has to be inspected by the professional engineer. And then after everything is said and done, then a report gets filed with both the Water Department and the Planning Director. And part of the reason the Water Department wanted that is that they suspect that the water system is good over there. So there might be a time in the future that the Water Department might want to get control of that well. So if they do get control of that well, they need to know what things they need to do to make the appropriate adjustments. So there is still that possibility. So, but Mr. Hogan, the applicant, is willing to do all of that; and so there you go. ThatÓs how we addressed the -. WOODWARD: Okay. Well, like I say, itÓs a peculiar hybrid that you have chosen. And I can tell you this, you canÓt use that well because it has got a PVC bore. That doesnÓt fly with the Department of Water Supply. So the well doesnÓt even qualify. Of course, it took only two days to drill this well and it only went down 115 feet. They may be interested in finding out what the water system, the water table is like. I donÓt think they have any interest in your water system itself. And the other thing is, you know, I would rather see, to make this a clean situation , is you build what you need. And, you know, the Department of Water Supply has a bunch of rules and regulations that are designed for things that are not of any concern to you, such as this backup system. The only reason they have required a backup system now, and it has only been in the last four years theyÓve required that, is because if theyÓre responsible for supplying water they donÓt want to have to truck it in if thereÓs a failure of one well. Well, itÓs your well, you have 30,000 gallon tank. At 600 gallons a day for five lots youÓve got a 10-day supply there even if a pump craps out; and you can always get water trucked in. You know, I think drilling a second well is really expensive insurance. The thing about building it, a 100,000-gallon tank off-site just so you can use gravity flow, much cheaper to buy a few pumps. YouÓre right about that. You know, and so this is where government gets in the way. This is exactly opposite of, you know, Mr. Sumada who is trying to solve problems. Department of Water Supply is getting in your way and trying to create problems. 6 EXHIBIT B And what I would like to see is you come up with a system that works that is certified by a licensed engineer that supplies the quality and the quantity of water that is necessary. And all these other things be damned, to be honest with you. ThatÓs the way I would approached it. Because it makes no sense for you to have to drill a second well. Like I say that is only, the Department of Water Supply does that only because they donÓt want to have to be responsible if thereÓs a failure of a well to haul in water. Well, theyÓre not going to be supplying you water anyway. And you can put your tank wherever you want it if you can pump the water out of it, you know. So that would be my suggestion. But, you know, I shou you did this, I guess. FUKE: You know, unfortunately I think members of the Council may not, certain members of the Council may not necessarily share your attitude, and this is an item that has to go before the County Council. So as much as possible we wanted to really have a system that was designed to be like a mini system of the Department of Water SupplyÓs standards so that, you know, we canÓt be unfairly accused by certain members of the Council that weÓre not trying to comply with concurrency and all that stuff. But I appreciate, I think Mr. Hogan appreciates very much your comments, Mr. Chairman. WOODWARD: Okay. Well, the other thing, you know, as far as, if it were up to me and you didnÓt have to get by the Department of Water SupplyÓs silly standards and you were looking just at the health and safety department, you know, I would say, you know, 24 is it; after that weÓre going to have to either improve or build another system. You know, rather than look at putting in what all they are going to require of you, I would say it would be better to limit it and to say if it does get to the point where weÓre looking at more than 24 people that we either have to improve the system, upgrade it to meet the health standards, or add another system. ThatÓs the way I would do it, but thatÓs just me. Okay, Commissioner Domingo. DOMINGO: I was just going to add, maybe you can draft a Ðbe damnedÑ clause then (jokingly). WOODWARD: All right. Yeah, I still have some -. Okay. And you h recommendation and you agree with the conditions. Is that correct? FUKE: Yes, correct. WOODWARD: Okay, very good. All right, I think youÓre -. LEITHEAD TODD: Rell? WOODWARD: Yes. LEITHEAD TODD: If you want to, you can propose amendments to just make it one well and one tank. WOODWARD: Okay. Well, let me ask Mr. Fuke, the Director just mentioned that we have the ability to change these conditions. And, if you would like us to, we can consider changing it to 7 EXHIBIT B one well and a 30,000 gallon tank, which would be satisfactory from every hydrologic standpoint. FUKE: IÓm sorry, I was just conferring with Mr. Hogan just for the record. And Mr. Hogan wants to have like two 15,000 storage gallon, two 15,000-gallon tanks, rather than one 30,000, but he would be receptive to having the potable well requirement be limited to one rather than two. WOODWARD: Okay, one potable well with a minimum of -. That would be 12,000 gallons instead of two at 6,000, right? This is condition D, under No. 1 capable of generating a minimum of 6,000 gallons per day. So it would be one capable of generating 12,000. FUKE: That would be fine. GONZALEZ: In subsection 2. WOODWARD: Yeah, in Subsection 2, a minimum 15,000 -. I would say minimum 30,000 gallon storage tank, and you could set it up as one tank, two tanks, I donÓt care, a minimum of 30,000 gallon storage capacity. How about that? What I was saying, and itÓs up to you if you want to wing it with this. But I would say with No. 2, a minimum storage tank capacity of 30,000 gallons. That would allow you to build one tank, two tanks, six tanks, anything that adds up to 30,000 gallons. FUKE: I think he still would prefer the minimum 15,000 storage t WOODWARD: Okay. So you just want a minimum of 15,000 gallons for each of the well, but it says each of the two wells. LEITHEAD TODD: To service the wells. FUKE: Yeah. WOODWARD: A minimum of two? FUKE: A minimum 15,000 storage tank to service -. LEITHEAD TODD: The one well. ZENDO: The well. WOODWARD: One well? FUKE: To service the well. 8 EXHIBIT B WOODWARD: The well, yeah, okay. Now 15,000 gallons still at the estimated 600, 600 is more than the Water SupplyÓs. TheyÓre talking 400. But if you go 600 gallons, thatÓs 3,000 gallons a day, thatÓs five days supply if the tank is full -. FUKE: Correct. WOODWARD: Even if your pump craps out. And itÓs much more likely your pump will fail than your well dries up. FUKE: Which is true. Just for your information, you know, having this condition relaxed a bit from the applicantÓs standpoint, you know, he still may elect to do a two-well system. So, but it doesnÓt preclude him from doing the two wells -. Woodward: Right. FUKE: And then two reservoirs and all this -. WOODWARD: Right, exactly. You know, but what IÓm trying to do is if weÓre going to be clean about this and weÓre going to say weÓre going to do what i Department of Water Supply, we ought to do really whatÓs necessary and not something in between and try and meet some of their standards when we canÓt meet others. And it says here, No. 3, ÐA water system pump, and related appurtenances, to service each of the proposed five (5) agricultural,Ñ okay, so thatÓs still the same. All right, so those are things to consider. Would you like to see us change the wording in those ways which we discussed? We basically would be changing -. FUKE: Conditions D.1 and D.2, right? WOODWARD: Yeah, Brandon, Mr. Gonzalez is going to read the suggested changes. GONZALEZ: Okay, I think, this is what I got. D.1 would read, ÐOne (1) potable well, capable of generating a minimum of 12,000 gallons per day. A report prepared by an engineer licensed in the State of Hawai`i attesting to the quality and capacity of the well shall be provided to the Planning Department in conjunction with the subdivision application.Ñ D.2, the proposed amendment would read, ÐA minimum 15,000-gallon storage tank to service the well; and,Ñ and then the rest remains the same. FUKE: ThatÓs what I had. WOODWARD: Okay. ThatÓs what youÓd like to do? FUKE: Correct. WOODWARD: Okay. Do we have any other discussion? DARROW: There is, there are items within the recommendation tha 9 EXHIBIT B proposal of two wells and the 30,000-gallon tank. Should that bamended as well? This would be on page number 6. WOODWARD: Okay, where about -? Oh, 15,000-gallon storage for each of two wells, okay. DARROW: ItÓs up at the top of the page, yeah. WOODWARD: Okay. I would say amend it to cross out anything after the Ð15,000-gallon reservoir storage tank.Ñ And then all the rest of it, and then instead cross out the rest until it gets to Ðinstead of theÈ100,000-gallon reservoir to be located offsite.Ñ DARROW: Will do, weÓll take care of that. WOODWARD: Okay. And then at the bottom of that same paragraph, ÐThe applic proposing to store water within two(2) - .Ñ LEITHEAD TODD: You have to amend page 5, too. GONZALEZ: Page 5. WOODWARD: Yeah, you have to amend page 5, too. GONZALEZ: IÓll state it, so you would amend the rest of the report to conform to the proposed changes. WOODWARD: Yeah, okay, fix it, in other words. There you go. DARROW: Also, if the Commission would like to see a change to the last sentence of D, which would state, ÐThe system at a minimum shall consist of the following:Ñ WOODWARD: Where are we? DARROW: The last, just before 1, D.1, the last sentence, we would add in the phrase Ðat a minimum.Ñ So, ÐThe system at a minimum shall consist of the following:Ñ WOODWARD: Okay, yeah, or ÐThe minimum requirement for the system,Ñ or, yeah, the way you said it is fine. ThatÓs better anyway. I like that better. GONZALEZ: ItÓs ÐconsistÑ instead of ÐconsistentÑ, right? DARROW: Right. WOODWARD: Okay. All right good. Now, anything further, Mr. Fuke? FUKE: No. Thank you very much. 10 EXHIBIT B WOODWARD: Okay. Do we have a, now that weÓve talked about all of this and not really had a motion, would somebody like to make one? KERN: No public -? GONZALEZ: No one from the public? WOODWARD: Oh, yes, by the way, thereÓs nobody from the public even here, not much less signed up to testify. Okay, Commissioner Kern. KERN: Regarding Applicant Stephanie Dullum, Applicant No. REZ 10-121, from an Agricultural 40-acre to an Agricultural 10-acre on 71.178 acres of land, TMK: 4-6-011: 039, I move that a favorable recommendation be sent to Council with the conditions and the changes to conditions that have been made. DOMINGO: Second. WOODWARD: All right. Do we have any discussion? Okay, seeing none, letÓs take a vote. Jeff? DARROW: Just for clarification, these changes would also include the changes to the recommendation, correct? KERN: Correct. WOODWARD: Correct, yes. DARROW: Okay, thank you. With that IÓll take the roll. Commissioner Kern? KERN: Aye. DARROW: Commissioner Domingo? DOMINGO: Aye. DARROW: Commissioner Au. AU: Aye. DARROW: Commissioner Ishibashi? ISHIBASHI: Aye. DARROW: And Mr. Chairman? WOODWARD: Aye. 11 EXHIBIT B DARROW: The motion passes five to zero. FUKE: Thank you very much. WOODWARD: Yes, sir. All right. A favorable recommendation will be sent to the County Council with the revised conditions. And I imagine they will probably send you a copy of the revisions that we have made and the fact that it is going to be sent with a favorable recommendation. So thank you. FUKE: Thank you all. The discussion ended at 11:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon M. Nomura, Secretary 12 EXHIBIT B