Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-01-03 THUALALAI PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAI`I HEARING TRANSCRIPT August 1, 2003 A regularly advertised public hearing on the application of HUALALAI VISTAS, LLC (REZ 03-013) was called to order at 9:08 a.m. in the Ohana Keauhou Beach Resort, Kahaluu Ballroom, 78-6740 Alii Drive, Keauhou, North Kona, Hawai Fred Galdones presiding. PRESENT:Fred Galdones Earl Fujikawa Bill Graham Florence Kubota Jeffrey McCall Aurelio C. Mina, Jr. Francis Smith Hannah Springer Bill Thibadeau Ivan Torigoe, Deputy Corporation Counsel Christopher J. Yuen, Planning Director Norman Hayashi, Staff Planner Daryn Arai, Staff Planner Phyllis Fujimoto, Staff Planner Jeff Darrow, Staff Planner Kiran Emler representing Department of Public Works And approximately 35 people from the public in attendance APPLICANT: HUALALAI VISTAS, LLC (REZ 03-013) Change of Zone for 53+ acres of land from an Agricultural 3-acre Agricultural 1-acre (FA-1a) district. The property is located along the west (makai) side of State Highway 190 (Hawaii Belt Road), adjacent to and south of the Kona Hills Estates Subdivision, Kohanaiki, North Kona, Hawaii, TMK: 7-3-7:27 and 50. GALDONES:Commissioners, members of the public, weÓll be addressing Agenda Item No. 2. The Applicant is Hualalai Vistas, LLC (REZ 0 Change of Zone for 53+ acres of land from an Agricultural 3-acre Agricultural 1-acre (FA-1a) district. Jeff? DARROW:Thank you, Chairman. Good morning, members of the Planning Commission. May I draw your attention to the location map. The red dot identified on the location map is the area in question. Looking at this white line here traveling north to south, this is Mamalahoa Highway. This way towards the north, this way towards the 1 south. And, again, the area that weÓre looking at for this application is identified by a red dot. If I may draw your attention to the site map. Again, this is the east side of the property, Mamalahoa Highway traveling north and south; and then down on the west side of the property, we have Kohanaiki Road traveling north and south. This application is for Applicant Hualalai Vistas, LLC. TheyÓre requesting a Change of Zone from Ag-3, Agricultural 3-acres to Family Agricultural 1-acre. It is located on the makai side of Mamalahoa Highway. This request is to subsequently subdivide the properties into 47 one-acre family agricultural lots. Are there any questions? GALDONES:Commissioners, any questions of Jeff? KUBOTA:Mr. Chairman? GALDONES:Commissioner Kubota? KUBOTA:Jeff, would you point out some landmarks for me so I can get myself logistically located? DARROW:Sure. This area here is Kaloko Mauka. You might be fami with that. There has been a lot of activity in that area. We have Church of God Road located here near the proposed project. This is the Kona Hills Estates Subdivision and right over in this area we have Kaiminani Drive. KUBOTA:Okay, I know where I am. DARROW:Okay. Great. GALDONES:Commissioners, any further question of Jeff? If none, could we have the Applicant or his representative step forward? Please raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Hawaii County Planning Commission? TESTIFIERS:I do. GALDONES:Please state your name and your residence address? MOOERS:My name is Gregory Mooers. My address is P.O. Box 1101, Kamuela 96743. GALDONES:Mr. Mooers, have you received a copy of the Background and the Change of Zone application, along with the amended changes of approval? MOOERS:Yes, I have. 2 GALDONES:Any comments? MOOERS:The Applicant is somewhat concerned about the revision that was made. The implication seems to be made here that Kohanaiki Road is going to be improved to a greater extent and be used as part of the regional roadway network. The ApplicantÓs concern and, frankly, I probably received between 15 and 20 calls from the community, they were unanimous in their opinion that they did not want to see a connection to Kohanaiki Road. I guess my concern would be is if you look at the Background Report or my application, at the area maps, specifically the tax map that appears, youÓll notice that, this would be Exhibit C, location and vicinity maps. YouÓll notice the second the Kohanaiki Road is depicted on the bottom at that property. YouÓll notice immediately to the south of the subject property, there are a great many lots. And the existence of those lots, as far as IÓm concerned, would preclude the ability of the County to widen that road beyond its present situation. And, so, I guess that would be my concern is that the condition seems to imply that thatÓs going to be a roadway thatÓs going to be used as a part of the regional roadway network. The Applicant does not, never intended for that to be the case and is not aware that that would be possible. I think that thereÓd be members of the public here today that will probably want to testify on their beliefs as far as how that road ought to be, you know, developed If the Commission decides that they want us to provide a road widening setback, we can certainly do that. But I just want to make sure that everyone in the public knows that that was not our intention, because IÓve made that clear to the people that have spoken to me that it was not our intention to use Kohanaiki Road as part of the access to and from this project. GALDONES:Jeff, the concern that or the objection that was raised by Mr. Mooers, is there someone that will be able to address why it was amended to that -? DARROW:Sure. Mr. Chairman, looking at the site map, correction, location map, in the current General Plan, we do have Kohaniki Road identified as a connector road, IÓm sorry, a collector road. In the amended General Plan, proposed amendment, this is not the case. In the matter of the future road widening setback, weÓre not looking at it from a regional network standpoint, weÓre looking at it from a local network. The reason for the 20-foot wide future widening setback is to allow for slope easement and also for realignment of this road, in the possibility that we can provide connectivity in the area to other roads that are in this area. We want to be able to look at the area and provide relief in regards to these lots that are here, for mauka-makai relief as far as connectivity, as well as north-south relief. So we are not looking -. Because of the fact that there is a 20-foot wide setback, itÓs not, you know, itÓs not there to become a collector road and to be a 65-foot or 60-foot wide road but just to allow for the issues that weÓre going to have when we have to deal with realignment of the road as well as slope easements. 3 GALDONES:Thank you. Commissioners, any further questions? Commissioner Graham? GRAHAM:Greg, when I was thinking about this one when it first ca one concern I had was sort of a long-term regional concern that the Mamalahoa Highway, even though it probably does not have the traffic issues we have on Queen K right now because of the slope there and everything, it seems to me itÓs unlikely to become a better road in the future. So especially with Saddle Road realignment going through and maybe thereÓd be more traffic from Hilo side wanting to come to Kona, it looks like kind of a longer term, doesnÓt look too good for that road. So I was kind of running in my head that at some point in the future the County would probably want some other way to deal with traffic that has been generated from new housing activity. And, so, maybe just the extra setback kind of gives them a little room to maneuver in the long run, although itÓs not any requirement on you that you improve that road. That was my reading of it. MOOERS:Are you talking about Kohanaiki Road or Mamalahoa Highway GRAHAM:Well, I was talking about Mamalahoa Highway becoming a problem in the long term and that the widening of a setback area on Kohanaiki Road gives the County more flexibility in the long term to try to build other collector roads that would take some of the stress off that highway. MOOERS:Yeah. I guess, IÓll make my, IÓll try to make my position clear. WeÓre not opposed to providing the 20 feet. I think what I need to make clear is the representation weÓve made in our applications and the representations IÓve made to people from the community who have spoken to us is that that was not our intent to use Kohanaiki Road for ingress or egress to the project. Our intention was to build an intersection on Mamalahoa Highway that will meet with the approval of Department of Transportation. In all likelihood itÓll be a channelized intersection. WeÓve had conversations with neighboring landowners about providing access over to Church of God Road and even to the properties to the north, so that some of those substandard intersections can be closed. And they would be able to use this intersection to try to improve the safety onto and off of Mamalahoa Highway. If the Commission and ultimately the Council makes a determination that they would lik widening setback, the Applicant doesnÓt oppose it. I just have to be consistent in saying that that was not our intention. GRAHAM:Thank you. Jeff, but if IÓm reading it correctly, the County is not intending that they use Hualalai Road for their access to this subdivision at all, is it? DARROW:You mean Kohanaiki Road? GRAHAM:The Kohanaiki Road, yes. DARROW:ItÓs more to provide relief to the area in regards to a connectivity, for this area here to be able to have some relief so that they can have an option. Instead 4 of having to go all the way out to Kona Heavens, go up to Hinalani and then out to Mamalahoa, thereÓs an area that they can be able to access Mamalahoa Highway and bring relief in that area. GRAHAM:ThatÓs what I understand, which is no implication that this particular project needs to make any use of that road at all. Correct? DARROW:Yeah. If you look at the Condition G, the first, prior to the revision, we had placed that the roads would be built to, constructed to County-dedicable standards and that they would be dedicated to the County. So, from that point, we were looking at the roads not to be private but to be open. GALDONES:Commissioner Graham? GRAHAM:Yeah, I understand. But I havenÓt looked at Condition G carefully before, which suggest that they should have their mauka-makai road connect to Kohanaiki Road. So, I guess, thatÓs the issue. GALDONES:Thank you. YUEN:I have a question. GALDONES:Mr. Yuen? YUEN:We had the Kabumoto rezoning a month ago and there was a possibility you mentioned of getting that connected to this subdivision road so that they could use a better intersection. Looking at this application, though, thereÓs one piece of property in between theirs. WhatÓs that status of, between theirs and the subdivision, whatÓs the status of that? MOOERS:We believe weÓve identified the property owner and weÓve made numerous attempts to contact that property owner; and weÓve been unsuccessful. In fact, IÓve recently asked Councilman Tyler if he would try to make contact. IÓm fearful that the property owner whoÓs residing, at this point, I think, in Germany, if he gets repeated calls from a consultant or other private property owners, he might question our motives. I felt that it would be better if somebody from the County representing, in effect, the communityÓs interest would contact them and explain what weÓre trying to do. But we are still making that attempt to try to contact this landowner to see if we could, in fact, have a roadway connected. If youÓll look at the site plan, we have included a road to the south, the upper reaches of the project, that was intended to pass through that property over to Church of God Road. If that were done, then we would have the ability or the County would have the ability to close that intersection and have the traffic ingress and egress onto Mamahaloa Highway from this intersection; and that is our intent. YUEN:Okay. Thank you. 5 GALDONES:Commissioners, are there any further questions or any further discussion? If not, there are five individuals from the public who would like to testify. So, Mr. Mooers, if you could relinquish the chair for them, please? I would like to call -. We should have enough chairs for those individuals who have signed up. Judith Perino, Stephen Martin, Frank Goodale, Clint Marantz and Gary Stirling. Could you please come forward to the table? Could you all please raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Hawaii County Planning Commission? TESTIFIERS:I do. GALDONES:Sir, would you like to begin. State your name and your residence address and you may begin your testimony. Please use the microp you folks recorded? Thank you. MARANTZ:Good morning. IÓm Clint Marantz, owner of the property located at 73-4464 Kohanaiki Road, here to testify against the request for a change in zoning from Ag-3 to Ag-1, the property under discussion. In my 82 years of living an active life, IÓve come to the realization that there is no such thing as evil people. What needs to be understood is what motivates good people to do what they do. ThereÓs no such thing as the good guys and the bad guys. IÓd like to discuss my reasons for opposing this zone change. I used the apple as an analogy for describing our planet. If the apple was sliced into four pieces, three pieces would represent the earthÓs bodies of water. One piece would represent land. If the remaining piece was sliced in half, again, one piece would represent the land on earth that is inhospitable for farming. That leaves one-eighth of the apple representing land that is used to live on and to grow food. Three-quarters of the remaining one-eighth of the apple would represent soils too poor to produce food or land covered by cityÓs roads and buildings. The remaining piece, one-fourth of the one-eighth of the apple represents the portion of the earth whose food can grow. The peel of that piece represents the thin layer of earth that is used for the production of food. Every year the U.S. loses over a million acres of farm land and we are rapi growing food. More than 75 percent of American fruit, vegetables and dairy products are produced on urban-edged farms that are threatened by sprawling d I lived in Honolulu for 23 years and saw what happened to Honolulu, and decided to move to the Big Island. Here on the Big Island, the future of agriculture is also at risk. What has motivated us to move in this direction? Profit. Now, thereÓs nothing wrong in profit. What has made America as great as it is today is because of the profit motive. But, today, we ask, at what price? Some argue that it helps to pay the taxes needed for running the government. However, recent study made it clear that the cost of government to provide community services for residential uses is $1.15 for every dollar of taxes collected. On the other hand, the cost of services to rural farming areas is 36 cents for every dollar collected in taxes. Promoting small family farming as a sustainable lifestyle 6 can develop and enhance our community. Therefore, I urge you not to approve the change of zoning of this property under discussion. Thank you. GALDONES:Thank you, Mr. Marantz. Commissioners, any questions of Mr. Marantz? Hearing none, sir. MARTIN:My name is Stephen Martin. IÓm a 30-year resident of Kona and I have a coffee farm makai of this proposed development. Before I speak, IÓd like to have something clarified. I donÓt understand what the one-acre family zoning or the one-acre family ag land is. Is that a new category, I mean, compared to Ag-3? I believe itÓs public knowledge that anything less than three acres is not really an ag farm. I donÓt understand that classification. YUEN:The main difference between the zoning thatÓs requested and the zoning now, under the zoning now, you can subdivide to three-acre lots. Under the zoning requested, you can subdivide to one-acre lots. As far as the term ÐFamily Agriculture,Ñ that was a new term in the 1996 Zoning Code. MARTIN:That was a new term? YUEN:Yes. So, and the County of Hawaii in the agricultural district, if the land is, if the landowner wants to rezone it to make lots less than five acres in size, they have to go to this Family Agriculture term. MARTIN:But itÓs not a commercial, considered a commercial ag lot when itÓs classified Family Ag. IÓm trying to, the Family 1-Ags that I see like Kona Hills, which are pretty much gated, upper end, is that what weÓre talking about? This is a gated one-acre affluent subdivision, if I can use that term? YUEN:I think thatÓs the goal of the subdivider to sell the lots for whatever they can get for them; and that would probably translate to being an expensive lot. One of our proposed conditions, though, is that the County could take over the main connector roads at no charge at some time if the County requested that in the future, as far as the gating of it. Maybe, while I have you, can I just ask you what is your tax map key so that we can get an idea of where you live. Do you know? MARTIN:I might have that information but I donÓt have it myself, somebody else might have it. Tax map key is, weÓre just directly makai of this project; and I donÓt have the tax map key. I have a couple of objections to this. One is calling it Family Ag. I think thatÓs a misnomer. I think itÓs a gated affluent subdivision, and thereÓs nothing wrong with that. Again, I agree with Clint here that the proper motive is what weÓre talking about. If I was a developer, I would be trying to rezone any property I had for the highest density. 7 However, it is zoned Ag-3 and, as Clint said, weÓre losing a lot of ag land. Everybody thatÓs here in Kona knows that weÓre constantly being urbanized, ag land is being urbanized. So, I have a problem with doing that. I have a smal farms around me, macadamia nut farms, coffee farms, that type of thing and IÓd like to see the area stay the same. Since the developer bought the property zoned Ag-3, I donÓt think itÓs unreasonable to request that it stays Ag-3. And in between, actually, I think green belts and ag land in between the gated subdivision is a nice compromise. But my biggest concern with the subdivision, besides talking about Kohanaiki Road, which is the access of that, thatÓs a big concern of mine, is the traffic. I donÓt know where you folks live and stuff but if you use Palani Road, I would request all of you to use it between 7 and 9 in the morning and 3 and 5 in the afternoon. ItÓs totally unreasonable. ItÓs unsafe, the intersection at Hinalani. Which would bring another point, if the developer was to put in a signal there, I would be more susceptive to this. But it is just a life and death situation as it stands now. And IÓd like to show you a couple of poster boards just to give you a visual, I think, of what IÓm talking about as far as traffic goes, if thatÓs acceptable. This is not professional graphics here, this is just me sitting home doing this. This is the existing subdivision, each number represents three acres and with 53 acres you can get 16 3-acre lots out of this. These two blocks indicate infrastructure roads and that type of thing. If each one of these three acres has one house, these two lines represent, thatÓs two cars per house. ThatÓs 32 cars thatÓs going to be up on Palani Road. If they have a second house, an ohana or farm dwelling, then we can add this to makes 64 cars. And then these five cars represents service, just cable and that type thing. So we have a potential of existing now with 70 cars per day going out on Palani Road. ThereÓs another subdivision just south of Creative Day School. And I believe its, I donÓt know how many lots are there and I donÓt know how big they are, but itÓs 15 to 18 lots. So, again, using the same math, youÓve got two cars, you got another 30-40 cars there, add those 30-40 cars. And that subdivision is already in, the roads are in, that has been approve and stuff. So with this existing and that subdivision, youÓve got over 100 cars per day on Palani. And I believe itÓs public knowledge that Palani is 30 years outdated from the amount of traffic thatÓs there. So this is the existing subdivision. If this subdivision is granted here, again, you got 52 acres, forty 1-acre lots, and this represents five acres of infrastructure. One, two, three, four, five lines here is one house. You figure two cars per house, thatÓs 94 cars; and then with the service vehicles, thatÓs 100 cars per day coming out of there. I havenÓt read the CC&RÓs of this subdivision so I donÓt if they permit farm dwellings or ohana. If they do put a farm dwelling or ohana in Kona, we call those rentals, then that adds another 100 cars per day. So you have a potential of 200 cars on Palani Road. 8 Now, again, if you drive this road, that is just insane. You canÓt even make a left-hand turn off Hinalani now with the existing traffic. If the CC&RÓs say, like Makalei Estates, that you canÓt do an ohana or a farm dwelling, what the standard procedure here is in affluent houses, the houses are raised up, the renter goes below the house; and on the plans, it always says rec room or whatever, rec room with a wet bar. You go by there, six months later and stuff, and it is a mother-in-law unit or rental with a kitchen and a bathroom. So now this is kind of Mickey Mouse, I give you that; but you see the kind of numbers that weÓre talking about. And to be fair with the community who have to drive these roads every day, and IÓm talking about working people that have to be at work on time, it is an incredible imposition to do that to the community. So we know that development is not going to stop, weÓre not trying to stop this development. WeÓre trying to get a win-win situation for everybody thatÓs not just on Kohanaiki Road but the community at-large. And it would seem to me that if they stayed with their present zoning of Ag-3, that would help alleviate the traffic. WeÓre still going to get a 100 cars no matter what, which is incredible, but that wouldnÓt be as bad as this many. It would keep the land in ag land which is what the farme would also be, in my opinion, a step in the right direction for the Planning Commission, too, for future development. WeÓre not going to get the infrastructure. We keep talking about infrastructure. It hasnÓt happened for 30 years and itÓs not going to happen if the StateÓs bankrupt. We donÓt have the money for these roads. So compromise between development and the existing community; and I traffic alone should weigh heavily in your decision whether to permit this place to be rezoned or not. And thatÓs it. GALDONES:Thank you, Mr. Martin. Commissioners, any question of Mr. Martin? Commissioner Graham? GRAHAM:I might just pass a question relating to what he said to Jeff. I noticed on the Background Report, the County Department of Public Works just refers to the State Department of Transportation as being responsible for Mamalahoa Highway; and we didnÓt get any response from the State Department of Transportation. So we donÓt have anything direct to deal with his concern about that traffic, yes? DARROW:ThatÓs correct, Commissioner. We had, we had formally requested, you know, comments for this project; and they said that it was on the way. So, hopefully, weÓll be getting it soon. MARTIN:Before this project is approved or not approved, who, again, IÓm just educating me, who is responsible for something like the traffic flow and the signal? Are these, is this information, do you folks get that information before you make a decision? Or, again, from a citizenÓs standpoint, it really doesnÓt matter who does the infrastructure, whether itÓs the developer, the County or if itÓs partnership between the 9 two? But not to get any of it, where is that coming, where does the infrastructure question come in? GRAHAM:Probably, weÓll let the Planning Director respond to that more easily. YUEN:We like to, weÓve been having a problem getting recommendat from the State Department of Transportation in time for these hearings. So we have a generic condition that says that youÓll improve the intersection to their standards which, as the consultant said, will probably be a channelized intersection for this project. MARTIN:Channelized means a left-hand turn? YUEN:Yes, for this project, so there would be a good intersection that would handle this project. It would not improve the situation on Palani. ThatÓs a longer term and something beyond what we would expect an individual developer to do. MARTIN:So thereÓs no contingent plan to work with the County on future -? Basically, what I am asking if it is rezoning, we get the traffic, itÓs just like all the rest of the project, we just, thatÓs the people that use that road every day, thatÓs just what they have to accept? YUEN:It is a difficult situation. The County is much more actively building roads in Kona but not Palani at the moment. Right now the County has the Alii Parkway project which is underway but, and which is by far the largest road project the County has ever done. But Palani, although on the books, is farther back. I havenÓt seen any real improvements to Palani. MARTIN:So itÓs safe to say that with this development, this is only one development, like the Creative Day School is another one, that weÓre really not going to get, no matter what is done in this meeting, weÓre not going to get any traffic relief in the foreseeable future, except for a left-hand turn lane? YUEN:I canÓt promise anything on Palani, no. MARTIN:Any more questions? GALDONES:Commissioners, any further questions? Thank you, Mr. Martin. MARTIN:Mahalo. GALDONES:Okay. PERINO:Thank you for letting me address you this morning. My na Judith Perino. I am Steve and ClintÓs neighbor. We are directly below the bottom end of 10 this project on Kohanaiki Road. My address is 73-4492 Kohanaiki; and IÓve been here for 27 years. Firstly, IÓd like to acknowledge my complete agreement with the Steve and Clint this morning to oppose the rezoning of this 53-acre parcel that weÓre referring to as Hualalai Vistas. Most of us who make North Kona our homes specifically chose this area because of its rural ambience within close proximity to schools, services and employment opportunities. Those of us who specifically reside along Kohanaiki Road have brought in the electrical power, the County water, maintained and paved our only access road, at our own expense, because the County has always claimed that the road was Ðonly on paperÑ and not really theirs, or the StateÓs, or anybodyÓs responsibility. Never mind that there are 30-plus homes or small farms along the last quarter mile of Koha Collectively, we provided these services for our homes, at our own expense, so that we could maintain with reasonable comfort the quality of rural life that the Kohanaiki area affords us all. Obviously, the use of land affects us all and the only thing liked less than urban sprawl is density! North Kona does not need 47 more ÐMcMansionsÑ and hardscapes. We need homes for working families. We do not want farmland churned into subdivisions, or the landscape degraded by visual and environmental pollution, such as street lights and more pavement. I strongly urge the Commission to reject this request of zoning changed to Ag-1. The build-out on 47 one-acre lots, the infrastructure, street lights, the noise and air pollution will be going on for years and years to come and completely destroy the quality of life that the residents adjacent to this proposed development now enjoy. In the process, one of the few remaining Ag green belts makai of Mamala lost forever. According to the ÐRole and DutiesÑ heading of the Planning Department Annual Report, as stated on the Hawaii County website, ÐThe Planning Department is to develop comprehensive long-range plans to guide future growth in a manner that balances public and private rights.Ñ I respectfully ask this Commission to adhere to this policy by keeping the designation for the Hualalai Vistas subdivision Ag-3. Thank you very much. GALDONES:Thank you, Ms. Perino. Commissioners, any questions of Ms. Perino? Thank you. Sir? We have two other testifiers, Frank Goodale and Gary Stirling. STIRLING:My name is Gary Stirling. 11 GALDONES:Could you use the mike, please, Mr. Stirling. Thank yo you state your name and your residence address? STIRLING:Gary Stirling. I live in Kohanaiki in the subdivision, Lot 53 is the lot that IÓm on. Most of the issues that I want to bring up have already been discussed. So IÓll just go over some of the things that IÓm most concerned with; and the traffic is probably the worst. I arrived here in Ó74. For many years I never really cared. It seemed like the whole system here was politically corrupt and everything ran out of Hilo and nobody really cared about Kona. Plus, it didnÓt bother me. But in the last couple of years the lifestyle was changed so dramatically here. It seems like planning, thereÓs no planning, so it seems like. So it seems like itÓs irresponsible for the Commission to go ahead and grant this when thereÓs not, the traffic on Palani, as Steve mentioned, is terrible. That intersection is dangerous. IÓve witnessed accidents myself. IÓd be lucky enough not to be killed on that place. My wife has been in an accident, I see accidents every week there, itÓs totally out of control. And to add, all these more traffic without first fixing the traffic problem is irresponsible of everybody here on this board. You know, when we get the traffic fixed, fine, let them have one-acre lots. I still donÓt like, IÓd rather have the three acres and preserve ag land every chance and opportunity we get. If it does go to one acres, so be it. But itÓs irresponsible without fixing the traffic problem first to go ahead and grant this permission knowing that itÓs going to even, somebody will end up dead from your decision right here. Right now, if you go out there, all the semi-trucks going back-and-forth, thatÓs the main artery coming down. ThereÓs an intersection where they go up-and-down, Hinalani or go down Palani. The traffic is terrible, itÓs terrible everywhere. But it doesnÓt make any sense to go ahead and grant more traffic thatÓs going to, itÓs going to hit, somebody is going to die because of this. So just out of responsible planning instead of no planning -. If it goes to one acres, fine, but it shouldnÓt be allowed until the traffic problem has been addressed and somebody is going to take care of this, the traffic first. ItÓs not right to go ahead and do this and say, okay, well, sometime, you know, after ten people die, weÓll get a signal up there to prevent this. You know, you guys are the Planning Commission, you know, like you have to plan ahead. DoesnÓt seem like anybody has been planning ahead here for anything forever. I donÓt know whether, you know, show of hands, probably everybody here is from Hilo and donÓt really care whatÓs going on Òcause youÓre not in the traffic. I go to Hilo and now they got great roads in Hilo. I donÓt want to live there though, I want to live here. IÓd like to have great roads here just like you guys have in the Hilo side. But itÓs irresponsible to go ahead and grant this without first addressing the problem with the traffic. ThatÓs all IÓve got to say. GALDONES:Thank you, Mr. Stirling. Just for your information, Mr. Stirling, weÓre not all from Hilo. WeÓre throughout this island. We represent different districts. STIRLING:Okay. GALDONES:Commissioners, any question of Mr. Stirling? Commissioner Kubota? 12 KUBOTA:Mr. Stirling, I hate to be categorized as an irresponsibl Commissioner. I grant you that the traffic problem that you mentioned on Palani, all the Commissioners here have been, as far as weÓve been sitting on the Commission, been aware of it. And we have consciously asked our departments to look into it and bring update to improvements, but heretofore nothing has come about. Now, I would like to have our Planning Director respond to Mr. StirlingÓs characterization of the planning as well as the CommissionersÓ responsibilities. Short of putting a moratorium on all further developments, I donÓt know how else we can do that; and I donÓt want it to be on my shoulders entirely. GALDONES:Mr. Yuen? YUEN:Sure. This is really an overall question on the island and not just in this particular location. My question is if you keep this area and they develop it at 3-acre lots, then what happens? If we want to look at the ultimate big picture, thereÓs no ultimate control on the number of people who moved to the island or the number of people who moved to Kona. Simply, there are still vacant properties for people to move to. And the question is where theyÓre going to move to. If you have an actual, if you actually have a moratorium on the creation of new building sites, the law of supply and demand means that the building sites that presently exist will be bid up in price. And what will then happen is that thereÓs a ripple effect and the people who donÓt have money have to move farther and farther away from the places that they work. For example, and, ultimately, the ultimate place for people to live becomes Ocean View and they drive maybe 40 miles to where they work instead of 10 miles to where t Now this proposed subdivision, I will not make any pretenses, is affordable housing subdivision. ItÓs, thereÓll be Level 1, three of the lots will be more expensive than the one-acre lots that they propose to make; but thereÓll still not be anything that people would consider affordable. But we really donÓt have, we donÓt have a situation or the luxury of saying that simply by not creating more building sites we have fewer people or we have less traffic. The control that we have in planning is primarily over where people go and not the ultimate level of development on this side of the island. Getting to the more specific issues, the only, I have a question how much a moratorium on rezoning in the Kalaoa area, the area along Mamalahoa above Palani, would change the traffic situation on Palani. There are a lot of people that use Palani and a lot of people, a lot of itÓs a cross-island traffic, a lot of its people coming, a lot of it is people using Palani as an artery, rather than just people coming into subdivisions on the road. Certainly, Palani needs improvement. I think we circulated to the Commission about a year-and-a-half ago a list of road projects in Kailua-Kona that included improvements to Palani. The major improvement, the actual, the biggest problem with Palani is it has got bad alignment. Ultimately, it has 13 got to be realigned. ThatÓs a huge project and that is not funded. There are small projects that the County is moving toward on Palani, including realignment of the Kealakaa intersection where thereÓs a, near where thereÓs a pedestrian bridge and the traffic goes into the school. But as far as there being a major project on Palani, no, thatÓs not funded and not in the cards. GALDONES:Commmissioner Kubota? KUBOTA:So weÓre back at where we started. ThereÓs no solution and, yet, as you said, thereÓs no control by placing a moratorium on further changes. It would not alleviate the problems on Palani is what youÓre saying; and this project certainly adds to it but is something that has got to be done. Is that what youÓre saying? YUEN:ThatÓs a lot of it. Let me talk about some other big picture issues. You have to, you canÓt look at these things, I mean, really, you have to look at the big picture and not an isolation. There is no question in my mind that the overall level of growth and development is a major threat to the quality of life on the island. ThatÓs, there are changes that were made in the proposed, in the County General Plan, in reducing the ultimate density along certain coastal locations, oceanfront locations. Some of the resort changes that I proposed in the General Plan that, are meant to address that, one of the drivers of road, of the overall growth on the island. I mean, you have to start at, you have to start where at, if youÓre talking about this problem, one of the things that creates a problem is the economic driver of some of this growth. And so by changing some of these sites to residential sites rather than resort sites, that is meant to deal with some of these issues. The second thing that we need to do is to have places that people can live in that are closer to where they work so they donÓt commute, so they donÓt have to commute as far. We, both the Planning Department and the Planning Commission have supported a number of rezonings in the immediate Kailua-Kona area to much higher densities for condominium zonings that will hopefully provide places for people to live near where they live so they donÓt live in Honokaa and drive to Kona, over 40 miles of road, and come down Palani to get to where they work or use other long stretches of highway. The County needs to get more active in the affordable housing realm. The County has 270 acres of land in Waikoloa that were granted to it to develop affordable housing. That has been inactive for about 10 years. We are letting out a request for proposals to update a Master Plan to try to see whether we can get affordable housing put into that area, because it is a logical area for people to live and work in the South Kohala resorts. By trying to get this started, again, weÓre trying to get people to, weÓre trying to get the places where people can live closer to their work so that they donÓt have to commute over the inadequate road network that we have on the island. So these are some of the big picture things that weÓre trying to do. ItÓs not going to be just a matter of fixing roads. I attended a session, you have to have land use planning that lets, again, that letÓs, that creates a land use pattern where people donÓt have to commute 14 as much, where theyÓre closer to where they work or closer to where, or closer to where they shop, or allow shopping to be closer to their homes. I attended a lecture sometime ago by the head of planning for the National Association of Governors and he said something a little scary. He says once you have traffic congestion you always have it, and you never build your way out of it. We building and we do have to do some improvements because of safety concerns, and thereÓs just no way, and itÓs extremely expensive. WeÓve fallen behind in Kona and to catch up, itÓs unfortunately if you look at the cost of things, the cost of Alii Parkway for roughly three miles is something like $40 million. ItÓs extremely expensive to do this. And weÓre going to be catching up for awhile. But you must not, youÓre not just going to build your way out of it by building better roads. We have to do these things in improving the land use pattern to make this, to try to fix this problem. But itÓs not a problem that is created or fixed on a level of a single subdivision. GALDONES:Commissioner Kubota? KUBOTA:My final, my final statement. So, in other words, after explanation, and donÓt think I do not understand that long-range planning and looking at the big picture is very, very important, as you pointed out. However, we have this problem on Palani Street that has been haunting us for years. Do we, as Commissioners, go on with business as usual because the changes arenÓt, road fixing is not the primary thing that is going to change the congestion or the danger on the road? Or, the next question that I have is, is it physically, financially possible to fix Palani Road to ease the congestion? Is there a plan in somebodyÓs mind within our State, whether itÓd be County or Department of Transportation, to put more mauka-makai arterials in Kona to alleviate the problem at Palani? I mean, yeah, I donÓt know the answers to it. I mean, weÓve been chasing a pipeÓs dream, I think. Because IÓve been on this Commission now for 4-1/2 years and the problem has been Palani. And they keep, as Mr. Stirling said, and I sympathize with the people in the community, because it always comes up. Every time we have development in Kona, it affects Palani. Palani is the road that is highlighted in my mind and it will be forever until such time as some relief is here. And I donÓt know what to do is, I guess, where IÓm coming YUEN:Some specifics -. I donÓt like to pass the buck but the Hinalani- Mamalahoa intersection is State and I donÓt know what theyÓre planning. Okay, Palani is County. One thing we should do as a Department or Commission is not have additional, we should not rezone to allow more lots that enter off of Palani. ThatÓs important. And it sounds very automatic but there was a rezoning about four years ago that, as just that, just below the ÐSÑ curve. As far as another mauka-makai, itÓs in the CountyÓs plans. We have, thereÓs a developer that, itÓs something that is, would be, have to be in conjunction with a truly major development; and even then itÓs quite unlikely that the developer can carry it on their own. But when we have developers come in with major pieces of property between Kaahumanu and Mamalahoa, this is something that weÓre working on 15 GALDONES:Commissioners, any further questions or any further comments? MARTIN:IÓd like to -. GALDONES:Mr. Martin, before I allow you to do that again, I have another speaker who has not spoken yet. Mr. Goodale? GOODALE:My name is Frank Goodale. I live at 73-4503 Kohanaiki R approximately three lots away from the proposed subdivision. Given the nature of the discussion here -. And I have submitted my full comments to you there, so you have those and you can look through those. IÓll address them out of order since the topic is veered towards the last of my comments. First, and in addressing the issue of the overall road structure up in there and its ability to continue to support subdivisions of properties up in this area, I appreciate Florence KubotaÓs concerns on Palani and the concerns expressed by other people here. I think what weÓre seeing right now is that concern is now extending beyond Palani and does get up into the State intersection at Hinalani. In fact, that is becoming an intersection and the defining point of the triangle for accessing the entire Kona commercial areas. And what weÓre seeing is is the traffic, making that critical decision of where to go at that intersection currently. And what seems to be broken in here, and I donÓt think itÓs anybodyÓs here fault because youÓre not charged and I keep on hearing people defer to weÓre waiting for what the State is going to do. That process is whatÓs broken. We canÓt wait for what the State thinks is best for us. You, the Planning Director, we the County, we the people here at this table need to take it upon ourselves to determine what is best for this area. We cannot continue to defer on this issue. And we need lots, we need these lots, we need a lot of lots in here because the prices have gone up, 60 percent in the last two years. Building lots are no longer affordable or potentially even findable in the Kona area for local people who need to build houses. We need those lots, we need them desperately. However, we cannot continue to produce them if we do not have the infrastructure there to produce them. It was suggested by someone here that weÓre going to need to be getting into affordable housing in this area. I would counter that, specifically, stay out of affordable housing, work on the roads. We need the roads, we need the infrastructure. The private developer will take care of those houses. They certainly have in Hilo where you have gone ahead and put in a sufficient number of roadways in improvement of infrastructure. It has kept the property values lower there; and the private developer has been able to go in there and provide housing at reasonable cost to the local citizens. We wish the same to happen here in Kona. 16 To get to a few of my other concerns on this, I note on a technical nature the mailing and the application cites this as a request to zone to FA-2A, not FA-1A. I presume thatÓs a technicality that was in the heading that was sent us to us, since the rest of it seems to be addressed to FA-1A. I donÓt know what that does technically to the whole place, but that should be addressed appropriately. The local area where we reside is a very fire-prone area; and one of the things that the residents are requesting for that area is fire hydrants to be part of this. We were precluded many years ago from having adequate water supplies when the Kona Heavens subdivision, as approved, as implemented, failed to have the alignment addressed adequately and did not line up with the existing road infrastructure. It appears to be a case similar to what had happened with Henry Street. Somebody j were left without County water. The County water we have stretches through private lines over miles of land, private and public. We need water down there and we need it for fire. ThatÓs a very dangerous area. We all watched as the fires went roaring down below, prayed that the Fire Department and the dozers got in front of it, which they did. If it had gone a little bit further, if the breezes had been worse, we would have had a major loss of property up in there. We need fire hydrants along that road. Kona Hills, which had built a rock wall across the end of this road, precludes now the Fire Department from using the fire hydrants in Kona Hills, their fire hydrants to come into our area. So one of the things that we are requesting is that, that you ask the developer to provide fire hydrants on Kohanaiki Road, both fronting the property and on the major intersection that runs mauka-makai, so that they can drag hoses down the hill to the most critical areas where itÓs needed to fight fire in that area. Kohanaiki Road right now exists, Kohanaiki Road right now has a sign in front of it. On it, that says, ÐEnd of County Road,Ñ is precisely what it says. And so I presume that the road that youÓre asking to access is not a County road. Is that correct? GALDONES:Mr. Yuen? YUEN:Where is the end? GOODALE:The sign is about, IÓd say, probably about a third of a mile from the top of Kohanaiki Road. ItÓs not, itÓs actually on the upper section above Hamiha and that is where the sign is. And every time we have gone in to ask for cooperation in there, and when people, by your actions have people, have come through with other subdivision proposals, you have always deferred to the State as the controlling authority on this roadway. I believe those are matters on record. YUEN:This is probably a good time, and for the Commissioners as we all talked about roads in limbo, weÓve heard of roads in limbo, let me define a road in limbo. A road in limbo is a government road that the State and responsibility for or jurisdiction for. And I start by saying itÓs a road, itÓs a government road, itÓs a road that is clearly a government road. There are roads that weÓre not sure whether theyÓre private or government, but there are also many roads that are definitely 17 government roads, including roads in old territorial homesteads. ItÓs my understanding that the Kohanaiki Road is a government road. Over the years the County and State have disputed the responsibility for the roads in limbo. ItÓs my belief that the roads in limbo that, unfortunately, that the way the laws work is that they are County responsibility. The County is developing a program to try to take care of these roads. ItÓs a major, major responsibility because there are hundreds of miles of these roads and most of them are extremely substandard and donÓt even have an adequate right-of-way to be improved. So thatÓs a major problem. But, you know, this is a long answer to the Commission talked about or heard about roads in limbo a lot, I thought it was a decent time to talk about this and explain this. GOODALE:Does that mean that they will remove the ÐEnd of County RoadÑ sign on that road and begin to maintain that or is it going to continue to be the end of County road? YUEN:There are two issues here. One is, is the County, ultimately, is it under the CountyÓs jurisdiction? And the answer to that is going to be yes. And the second question, what is the County going to do about maintaining the roads? I canÓt say that the result of this is going to be the County is going to maintain, actively maintain, more roads than it currently does. As to whether the sign like that will be removed, I canÓt really comment on that. GOODALE:The sign denotes its ownership and youÓre saying that you do, at this point, claim ownership but not responsibility for maintaining? Is that what youÓre saying? YUEN:These roads are under, itÓs my view that these roads are under County jurisdiction. Whether, that does not mean that the County has to actively maintain all roads that are under its jurisdiction. These include outright paper roads. GOODALE:Okay, so that sign you would say would be incorrect to be there because it disclaims ownership of that road, or -? YUEN:And I havenÓt studied the area specifically. But if this road is, as I think it is, a homestead road, a government road, then the road would be under County jurisdiction. GOODALE:Okay. Thank you. The road that exists there, to continue on, I wanted to clarify that, first, the road as it exists there is a very narrow road, itÓs a one-lane road. ItÓs a road that we commonly have to back up when we pass another car, and there are pull-outs on this road. There are steep grades in some areas on both sides of the road and there is a fairly high density in a certain, in certain areas of that road of, say, 15,000 square foot lots. In different sections, it does not lend itself to a through way. We did have a significant problem a while back before Kona Hills put the rock wall across the roadway with motorcycles and cars transiting that, and that has since ceased. WeÓre pleased with that and weÓd like it to remain that way; and weÓd like to prevent that from 18 happening again in the future. Not only is the roadway narrow, it is also winding and the visibility is exceptionally limited. Therefore, we would ask and require that, for our support, is that all access to this road be permanently prohibit were ever to be zoned to Ag-1. It simply cannot support that and it would require taking of land, condemnation, to be able to make it support that. We w subdivision be only required to have its access at the top, that itÓd be prohibited from accessing the lower road in there. I also have one other comment in regards to and that I have addressed in my letter to you, and that is in regards to the infrastructure developments on the local area and the impact. I do believe that is the responsibility of the County, the light that should be up at Hinalani should be the responsibility of the County. Now it maybe you can con the State into paying for it, thatÓs fine with me. But itÓs your planning, itÓs your, itÓs the way you want to see that community develop. You know that there have been two deaths within the last year at that intersection and there will be more, not to mention the frequent accidents on a regular occurrence in there. And I believe thatÓs pretty much all I have to say here. I appreciate your coming to Kona to address these concerns that we have and I hope we can work through something on this. Thank you. GALDONES:Thank you, Mr. Goodale. Commissioners, any questions of Mr. Goodale? Commissioner McCall? MCCALL:Yeah, just a couple of comments and questions. The Depar of Water Supply has requested that fire hydrants be put in every 600 feet in the subdivision. I would assume that does not include Kohanaiki Road, but perhaps something could be put fairly close. But I see somewhat of a, you were asking that the subdivision put in fire hydrants for your use on Kohanaiki Road. At the same time, it seems like you use Kohanaiki Road, which seems somewhat unfair. GOODALE:I would say that the use of fire hydrants is for the communityÓs benefit, including the subdivisionÓs benefit. Fires travel over area, they get started in one place and they transit elsewhere. ItÓs for the protection of everyone in this area that weÓre asking for this. It may also be that if the County feels somewhat responsible in cutting us off from water in the first place that they should also contribute. I would have no objection to that as well. GALDONES:Commissioner Fujikawa? FUJIKAWA:I have a question for the staff. Top of Hinalani Road, isnÓt that a State highway or the County -? HAYASHI:Hinalani Road, this is the road youÓre referring to, correct? 19 FUJIKAWA:Correct. HAYASHI:That is a County road. FUJIKAWA:Okay, now, on top, on the highway, is that a State -? HAYASHI:This portion here? FUJIKAWA:Yes. HAYASHI:That is the State highway, Highway 190. FUJIKAWA:Okay, so thatÓs the intersection that the people are referring to, I believe. GOODALE:Correct. FUJIKAWA:So thatÓs a State issue there. GOODALE:I would agree that, now I hear youÓre saying that it is, again, referring to a State issue like it doesnÓt concern us. It does concern us. We are the planning area, people for this area. The State doesnÓt know anything about this area and the danger. FUJIKAWA:This is why I was trying to say that we have to communicate with the State. GOODALE:Correct. FUJIKAWA:Okay, thatÓs our road tying into the State and we need the StateÓs assistance to, up above there. GOODALE:Correct. IÓd also point out that a light in that particular area would cause a platooning effect that would be beneficial not only for that intersection but also for another very dangerous noted intersection, the one at Palani and to Holualoa. And it would make that intersection easier to transit as well, not to mention the platooning effect that it would have all the way up to the Koloko intersection, which is also a problem intersection where deaths have occurred. GALDONES:Mr. Yuen? YUEN:I just want to try to understand the water situation. Where do you get your water, where do your waterlines come from? 20 GOODALE:A good many of our waterlines come from the Mamalahoa Highway down the mauka-makai road. YUEN:Down that Church of God Road, all those -? GOODALE:Down the Church of God Road. Another good -. YUEN:ThereÓs about 20 spaghetti lines going down there. GOODALE:Yes, and thereÓs another batch of them that cross over other private land and the mis-aligned section of, I believe itÓs Manu Mele, as it enters into that area; and thereÓs a bunch of spaghetti lines going out of there as well. But my major concern here is for danger in this area, coming up here; and thatÓs the primary reason I would ask that -. We all have water right now. We have water, itÓs not that much of an issue there. However, the fire danger down there is substantial and weÓve all make-shift things and pay the County and the Water Department sometimes twice to move water meters to closer locations, to better locations; but it is serious problem down there. YUEN:In looking at the map of the subdivision, it seems to me that it might be a possibility that the subdivision would have to take water, a waterline all the way down to Kohanaiki Road, essentially, to serve the subdivision, and that might be a way of replacing the spaghetti lines that go up to Mamalahoa. It would require construction of a waterline along Kohanaiki Road to serve the people there. I donÓt know if thatÓs a, of interest or people are satisfied with their present situation; but that would look like a possibility at least. GOODALE:I would presume that there would be people who would be interested and thereÓs still properties that have not been built on down there. I canÓt speak for people individually, but I would presume that most people would be interested in seeing or would avail themselves if the opportunity presents it. Again, I think the primary thing, though, is fire and the ability to have fire hydrants on that road, particularly being able to get down on the mauka-makai road and down to the bottom of that road with fire lines to fight at what would be coming up from the lower hills. YUEN:How do fire trucks get down there now? GOODALE:If we trim the trees, they can get down there. The road now. We have expended a considerable sum of money, personally, to pave that lower section of the road. It is not an incredible pavement job, but it meets our needs. If traffic were to be allowed on it, it would deteriorate quickly. And we would feel the need to be compensated for that if, in fact, even tractors coming down can damage that road quite easily. YUEN:YouÓre talking about the fire trucks that come down that Church of God Road? 21 GOODALE:No, they would come down Kohanaiki Road itself. But near the Church of God Road, the intersection where the two intersects, going down further which has also been paved now as well by us, that area in there is right in the middle of a pretty good, well-vegetated area. And thatÓs one of our more dangerous or vulnerable areas, right down in that area. YUEN:ThatÓs all I have. Thank you. GOODALE:I believe that borders maybe, what is it, the TSA -. PERINO:Used to be Y.O. Corporation. GOODALE:The Y.O. property, I believe. Y.O., or the TSA, canÓt remember, property. YUEN:Y.O. is immediately makai of this property. GOODALE:Right, the Y.O. property. Correct. GALDONES:Commissioner Fujikawa? FUJIKAWA:I have a question. Is it proper, can I invite Councilman Tyler to the stand on this issue? This is his district and IÓm pretty sure he has all the answers. GALDONES:I would like to hope he does, itÓll make it easier for all of us as Commissioners. Mr. Fujikawa, I have two other speakers who have signed up, so in due, in all due respect to them, IÓd like to have them heard first before Mr. Tyler comes up to speak. Commissioner Kubota? KUBOTA:Yes, Mr. GoodaleÓs concern for fire is appreciated. IÓm just wondering, staff, have we received any response from the Fire Department on their agency reports? I donÓt seem to have any -. DARROW:Yes, we do. IÓll get that to you. KUBOTA:Oh, have we received something? DARROW:Yes, it was my fault for not making comments, I mean, copies and get them out. IÓll get them to you. KUBOTA:Okay, thanks. GALDONES:Jeff, would you have any copies that you could circulate for the Commissioners to review? 22 DARROW:Sure. GALDONES:Thank you. Commissioners, any further questions of Mr. Goodale? Okay, Mr. Martin, I understand you wanted to speak again. If you have something new that you would like to add, I would allow you the liberty of speaking, but I would appreciate it if you could keep it short because I have two other speakers. MARTIN:Sure. I just wanted to just say mahalo to Florence and C the rest of you guys, just for acknowledging the frustration that weÓre going through done on Kohanaiki. And we keep kicking around these ideas of whoÓs responsible, State, County. It seems to me that we have to make a compromise here. compromise if weÓre not going to get the roads, and weÓre not going to. I think thatÓs pretty much understood. You canÓt keep high density development. It would just seem to me the compromise would be the Ag-3 would compensate the farm as well as the developer. The developer has every right to make a reasonable profit off this project. But the original deal was the three acre-thing, and I donÓt think people are complaining about that. We know development is going to continue. So if weÓre not going to get the infrastructure, it just seems to me common sense would just say that we have to kind of temper the development thatÓs going to go on in that area, or else we just keep digging this hole which Florence eloquently related that weÓve been dealing with this for years, and sheÓs been 4-1/2 years on the Commission. It has been way, it has been decades weÓve been talking this, but we still havenÓt done anything Òcause nobody is responsible. So, again, it seems to me a compromise would be a way to placate everyone. Thank you. GALDONES:Thank you for your comments. IÓd also like to make not have the privilege of having nine Commissioners, which is very seldom that we have all nine Commissioners together at the same table at the same time. GOODALE:Yeah, we appreciate that. PERINO:We appreviate that. GALDONES:So, thank you. Okay, gentleman and maÓam. If you woul back, I have two other speakers who have signed up. Mikahala Roy and Lunakahawai Haunaio. KUBOTA:Mr. Chairman, while weÓre waiting, may I use this time to the report from the Fire Department. ItÓs just a standard response that we got from the Fire Department that did not raise any red flags as far as extreme danger of fire, as raised by the speaker this morning. GALDONES:Have the Commissioners received the report? 23 KUBOTA:Well, it was just passed to -. We did not receive it in our mailing. However, there is no red flag raised by the Department of, the Fire Department as such to the dangers of fire. Thank you. GALDONES:So noted. Is there any further questions or discussion on the report from the Fire Department? Okay. Thank you. Could you raise your right hand, please? Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this subject matter now before the Hawaii County Planning Commission? TESTIFIERS:I do. GALDONES:Ms. Roy, would you like to begin? State your name and residence address, and you may begin your testimony. Thank you. ROY:Thank you. Aloha kako. Good morning, Members of the Planni Commission, Chairman Galdones, Planning Director Mr. Yuen. Members of the Commission, good morning. My name is Makahala Roy, I reside at present at Keei Uka. My address is P.O. Box 2388, Kealakekua. IÓd like to thank the residents that came forward to speak today because I, in alignment with much of their testimony, am against this application for the rezoning of this area to one acre ag lots. May I speak on the element of the effects of planning toward the cultural and identity aspect of Hawaii Island. These are areas that had been known traditionally for the agricultural value and I, as a resident, would like to see this continue as much as possible. I also thank Mr. Yuen for speaking on the obligation of the County to provide affordable housing. I would make every recommendation or encourage the CountyÓs continuation of acquiring properties and looking at building in means that make way the purchasing, for example, of properties such as weÓre talking about. As a steady participant in planning for roads in Kona, IÓve long been in support of kupuna testimony that have called for the development of more arterial roads. And, so, I do here say that that is very important and what I advocate, and that in the planning of road processes for KonaÓs future, that we take that seriously into account before approving large changes like this development would do and accomplish. I thank Mrs. Kubota for her comments; and I appreciate all of your taking into consideration this aspect that she speaks of, because it is a burden to endure deaths on roads here. And this is why in my heavy participation in the planning for North Kona, exactly the project for Alii Highway, proposed Alii Highway, etc., weÓve long advocated more arterial roads, and to please cease the approval for more building of high-cost housing here. Just cease doing that is the plea from the people and this is my plea today as a resident of Kona. Thank you. 24 GALDONES:Ms. Roy, you mentioned that you were involved in the community activity regarding the traffic problems and the roads. To what success have you folks accomplished anything? ROY:We participated actively with the Planning Department, Mr. R TakemotoÓs efforts, to have meetings in the community. Another gentleman from Oahu that headed the planning for the entire Kona, long-term regional planning, weÓve participated in these. WeÓve also supported the efforts of historian, Kepa Malley, as he has done oral histories. My father has provided, been one of the providers of history of these lands and how these very lands are affected by rains, for example, the flooding aspect, so that building, high density building is something that needs to be seriously, seriously considered. And in many ways right now, the activity of the uplands are not being safeguarded and protected enough. So may I also say that roads like Mamalahoa are we, Hilo, may go off on a bit of a tangent here. The areas of Hilo enjoy the meaning of their ahupuaÒa. I believe that has been recommended for Kona to the County and I think weÓre going to look forward to that, but we donÓt at this time have namings of each ahupuaÒa. These are absolutely essential as we go forward, but whatÓs also essential is the protecting of the lands themselves. They need to save agriculture, they need to protect the natural steady flow or cadence with nature of Kona. In the planning process, we need to bring forward more residents who are life-time residents, such as myself and others from Kona; and IÓm very glad that thereÓs representation on this Commission from people of lands who understand what IÓm saying. Did I answer the question, Chairman? GALDONES:In a round-about way. What IÓm trying to drive at beca concern that was raised by Commissioner Kubota is also shared by the rest of the Commissioners that we are placed, the Commissioners are placed in that situation of trying to balance the infrastructure with the development; and we have been discussing this many times in our meetings about the traffic problem. And I was just wondering if you folks, in working with Mr. Takemoto, if you folks have had some sense of direction or some kind of plan in addressing the traffic problem that we, ourselves, here have been addressing. If you folks have not, then I guess the Commissioners will have to look elsewhere to find how we can address that situation. ROY:We look forward to more work with this County. We cannot, w canÓt stop working with the County. I canÓt because this is important to plan. And right now thereÓs not enough success. IÓll tell you truthfully, thereÓs not enough success that I can tell you that some of these things have measurably been remedied or promised to be. GALDONES:Thank you for your participation in the community. Commissioners, any question of Ms. Roy? Otherwise, Mr. Hauanio? HAUANIO:Aloha, Commissioners. My name is Lunakanawai Hauanio from down the Hilo side. My father is from over here, Kalaoa. His name is Elena Kaumakakau ekai okekoa. HeÓs from the Palakiko o Kaumakakau eka Hey, Sgt. Mina, he was my kind Sargeant, aloha, Brah. I hate that guy. He used to give 25 me rash. I still feel Òem on my back. But I actually love the guy. He when train me good cause I -. Well, I still trying for learn how for polish my shoes, but thatÓs okay. There are several things that the Commissioners should take into consideration about the domino effect, okay. Today in our community we have this thing called MADD, thatÓs Mothers Against Drunk Driving, okay. They have an acronym, M-A-D-D, MADD, okay. They waive signs,ÑSay No To Drunk Driving,Ñ okay. Then we got this other group, they have, this group, community group is called Community Response t is ÐC-R-I,Ñ itÓs CRI, yeah. And they waive signs say ÐNo Hope In Dope,Ñ yeah. Okay, so maybe the community ought to think about on Palani Road, about this organization, maybe you guys should develop whatÓs called ÐNo Other Lives Lost.Ñ NOLL, okay? Cause what happened in the MADD circumstance, and we got some attorneys inside here and they probably know what I talking about, but, okay, this mother, her baby when get make in one car accident, okay. And what they when do, they when, found out, oh, the driver, the one when caused the accident, when kill the baby, he was drinking at this bar, okay, and before he was at that bar he was drinking in this other bar, okay. Before he was at that bar, he was at another bar, okay. They call it domino effect, yeah. Okay, so, bear with me, okay. When people vote for Governor, for government people, now the government people they take on this thing call trust, yeah. The trust kind of like say, hey, you know what, I trust you, you guys going make the right decision to protect our lives. Shoots, right on. Okay, we get, what I was talking earlier about two lives died on Palani Road. Okay, domino effect, okay. See the developer, we the people, tell the government, okay, you got notice now, you got two lives lost on that road. So NOLL says government, wait, but before I ask, before I say that part, I need for clarification by the Planning Director. Can with all of the information in front of the Commissioners, just one question, can the Commission say no to an applicant? YUEN:This is a rezoning the County Council has the final say. The Commission can recommend denial. There are applications where the Commission can actually deny it and, on its own. HAUANIO: Okay. Mahalo. So, now, going back to the bar situati bruddah when drink. Okay, they when sue, yeah, the wahine sue, Òcause sheÓs mad, kill my baby, hey, you know what everybody knew. Okay, everybody had let Òum drink and you let Òem drive, they when kill somebody. O government know, this is the government, we know people going sa they cause any more deaths on Palani Road. Okay. All the devel too, theyÓre like the bars. Okay? We all telling Òem, hey, you like develop, shoot, bruddah, but I tell you what, you go develop that property and we find that car link up to your development, bruddah, we suing you. We suing, you know, just like lawsuit, all the State people get sued, all the County people get sued, everybody get sued. ThatÓs what the wahine did, mad, sue everybody, okay. To avoid all like that sue job, you know, maybe the Commissioners, you guys should just say, ÐNo,Ñ just like we saying, ÐNo on dope,Ñ no on the kind, what you call, ÐNo on Drugs.Ñ Hey, maybe Development,Ñ easy. County try, Bruddah. 26 Okay, I went on the internet about this traffic stuff. Hey, they got this thing called monorail or what you call that, they build Òem above the highways. Okay? So if you go build the houses, hey, right on, but no make garage, everybody walk. See, you got everybody walk to catch the monorail and go where they like. No make garage, yeah, cause that way -, make CC&Rs no get cars. Hey, solution. Okay? I know I no need come up here to try and grumble. But one solution is that, really, you guys also do this, why donÓt you guys approve Òem, okay, approve that project and say, you know what, you guys go talk to your financiers, whatever, we the County or we are the people, we say we approve Òem, but you guys start building, you guys going build when all of our infrastructures are in. You know, when the road problem pau, the sewage problem pau, the water problem pau, the fire problem pau, all the infrastruct Hey, you know what, put in your application we approve Òem all, but itÓs all subject until all of our infrastructures are in. HowÓs that idea, you guys? GALDONES:Thank you, Mr. Hauanio. Commissioners, any question of Mr. Hauanio? Ms. Roy, Mr. Hauanio, thank you very much. Are there anybody else in the public who wish to testify -. Oh, IÓm sorry, I have one more testifier. Mr. Tyler. Sorry, Mr. Tyler, your name was here, but I had overlooked that. TYLER:IÓm easy to forget, sir. GALDONES:Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this subjec before the County Planning Commission? TYLER:I do. GALDONES:Mr. Tyler, state your name and your residence address and you may begin your testimony. TYLER:Mr. Chairman, and members of the HawaiÒi County Planning Commission, Planning Director Yuen, good morning, my name is Curtis Tyler. I live at 73-4325 Laka Place in Kalaoa, or KalaÒoa as some people know it. I arrived without the benefit of hearing the testimony, the public testimony, except for the last two testifiers. I apologize for being late. I didnÓt realize you were going to take this item out of order. I had some other County Council business to attend to, so I donÓt have the benefit of that testimony. I do have the benefit of hearing more of the Commissioners as I was walking in suggesting that I had all the answers and you better call me up. And I want to hasten to say that I donÓt know anybody who has all the answers, and I do not. I appreciate the compliment but I donÓt -. So I may begin by asking, first of all, if any the Commissioners Mr. Chairman, if you would like me to just make a brief statement, I will; and then they can ask me questions. 27 CHAIRMAN:Commissioner Fujikawa? FUJIKAWA:Councilman Tyler, I think one of the big issues was on Palani Road. Can you address the present or the future of Palani Road? TYLER:Thank you, Commissioner Fujikawa. I wish I could give you a definitive answer. I am happy to report that thereÓs a survey crew out there this morning, and there was one yesterday afternoon when I came home. I believe that the County is moving forward with my long-requested public safety improvements. It has been standing in the CIP since 1997, previous administration took no action. Current administration, as I think I previously reported, has set aside approximately $2 million to do safety, road safety improvements on Palani which, as we all k At my suggestion and a suggestion of an engineer who was working on a nearby project, we were suggesting that the intersection of Kealakaa and Palani be realigned to align with Paliholo Street, which is the northern-most entry and exit into the Queen Liliuokalani Village. I think as everybody knows, the overpass, the supports for the overpass are so narrow, or so close together, that you couldnÓt widen the street enough to make for the left-turn pocket lanes that would be necessary to make that effective. So, it was suggested that, you know, we tried to not only remedy the dangerous situation at Kealakaa but also at Paliholo, which causes traffic to back up because of the left turns in and out of there in the morning and afternoon. So thatÓs one of the areas that the Department of Public Works is looking at. I recently had the opportunity to meet with the consultants after requesting for many, actually, years to talk to somebody about the ideas that the community had with respect to improving it. And there are a number of areas, I think, which wonÓt be of high cost to assist. But I agree with those who indicated that Palani is a real hazardous road. ItÓs a, as youÓve heard me say before on numerous occasions, itÓs a road that was constructed for horses and cattle and now as a major arterial road without much of an upgrade. And I would suggest that the Commission request information from the Department of Public Works regarding that project because thatÓs where it is. And, unfortunately, based on information IÓve been getting, the $2 million is, seems to be mo improvements to that intersection, mostly in terms of a traffic signal enhancement and relocation, realignment of it. Seems traffic signals are getting more expensive these days as we read about the ones out on the Queen K and Waikoloa area. I have been and continue to be appalled at the amount of money that this would be costing, because there are so many other things that need to be done. But perhaps it would be necessary in next yearÓs budget to augment the CIP funding for Palani Road. One of the problems, Commissioner Fujikawa and members of the Co the right-of-way is very narrow. And as I think everybody knows some of the homes along there are very old homes, people that have lived here all their lives; and I think it would, we really need to find an alternative route. And Kealakehe Parkway extension mauka up at least to Kealakaa, if not to the planned Palani Road mauka intersection with Highway 180, which is the Mamalahoa Highway to Honalo, is really needed. I see the 28 STIP meetings are being held in East Hawaii. I hope some of you who live over there will go over to Keaau, to Hilo, in the meetings coming up and please talk to them about including the Kealakehe Parkway project on the STIP list. It used to be there, itÓs no longer there. And I hope that theyÓll have meetings in Kona, I understand next month they might. So, thatÓs my long answer to a short question. Big problem. GALDONES:Mr. Fujikawa? FUJIKAWA:Yeah, the other concern was the top of Hinalani Road on the highway. ThatÓs a State highway. WhatÓs happening on the tie-in? Is there going to be a intersection light, street light? TYLER:At Hinalani and -? FUJIKAWA:The very top? TYLER:At Mamalahoa, Highway 190, I havenÓt heard anything of tha kind. ItÓs a substandard intersection especially as it relates to the left-turning lane makai. IÓve heard nothing of any discussion of a traffic signal there. IÓm hoping the next traffic signal that goes into Kona will be at Kaloko Drive and Mamalahoa Highway, which is Kaloko mauka. You folks have talked about that. FUJIKAWA:Right. TYLER:IÓm not aware of any signal there. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If there are no other questions, IÓd just like to say, for the record, that Mr. Mooers and Mr. Clever had met with me on at least one or two occasions regarding their proposal, this has been quite sometime ago. My concern always has been with respect to the Kalaoa area, Greater Kalaoa area, some are calling it, that mauka area, is that there be given serious consideration and attention to interconnectivity of roadways. Sounds to me like you may have heard some testimony regarding th heard the tail end of one testifier talking about Kohanaiki Road. One of the difficulties we have in this area is the fact that there are no County standard roadways from the properties to the south, except for the Church of God Road, which is not a County standard road. The Church of God Roadway has been disclaimed by this County for years. For the County to call this a road in limbo, and they wonÓt maintain it, and itÓs not a County road, is outrageous beyond any, any sensible belief; and IÓm trying to be conservative in my comments here. Mr. McClure has indicated that when the department brought forth a resolution trying to resolve some of these road in limbo situations, that he believes that the residents ought to get together and upgrade the roads at their own expense, and then the County will take them over. Mr. Torigoe may have some information on this, I think he may be somewhat familiar. people of the Church of God, that use the Church of God Road have already paid 29 thousands of dollars to pave a County-owned road, which the County refuses to maintain. So, anyway, and, furthermore, that intersection at, with Mamalahoa, Highway 190, which is a State-owned road, is a substandard, very poor sight distance roadway. Already weÓve had some deaths there, that mother who died and left orphan children. Very dangerous. So I talked to Mr. Mooers and Mr. Clever about finding a way, in conjunction with this project, to link the roadways together. ThereÓs a, letÓs see, one, two, three, four, four lots to the north which have an entry, itÓs a private road, entry onto Highway 190; and there are all the Kohanaiki Homestead lots, plus some makai, that currently use the Church of God Road. Both of these, although the latter has the worst, both of these donÓt have great sight distance. It appears to me in my, you know, non-technical, IÓm not an engineer, view of this, driving by there at least a couple times every day, that you should link these roadways together and have them come up through one intersection instead of having three intersections within a short distance of one another, when cars are going at such high speeds. And so I pursued this with Mr. Mooers and Mr. Clever. The intervening parcel, the Ag-3a parcel right immediately to the south is, would be, we would need to get access over there in order to connect to the Church of God Road to link up these. And my understanding is that after many months of searching, this individual has finally been found overseas in Europe. I havenÓt have a chance to talk to the person but perhaps Mr. Mooers or Mr. Clever has, to see about doing this. I note that the Department of Public Works, in looking at that most mauka or eastern stubout, wants it to be further makai, but thatÓs what that stubout would do. The other concern that I had was with respect to the Kohanaiki Road, which the County claims the State owns part of, and I donÓt believe the State owns any of it. I think itÓs now under the jurisdiction of the County. And for those of you who have driven on that road -. My recollection is that Alanui may have at one time gone all the way to Kiholo. And I believe, with some exception, one could actually go on through that and you would end up to all the way to Kiholo through Huehue. I see Commissioner Springer nodding her head and she would know if anybody knew. IÓve walked, more than most, 12 miles of it, unfortunately, uphill; that day was a very hot day. But, in any case, as your maps show, it appears to intersect into the, to Kona Hills; and actually when you go down there and look at it, the grade difference is quite different. As I think everybody knows, Kona Hills is right now a private road subdivision which is gated. The proposal before you today is to have this gated. I can imagine that some members of the community probably came forward suggesting, as has the Department of Public Works, that these roads be inter-connected and be public roads. Certainly that would assist with public safety and access; and the whole concept, as IÓm sure the Planning Director and certainly the Subdivision Code, calls for inter-connectivity of subdivisions. I was not here, as I said, to hear what the Applicant said. But thereÓs no question in my mind, ladies and gentlemen, that this area is going to be, is under and will continue to be under great pressure for urbanization, urban pressure, because the demand is exceeding the supply. YouÓve heard this, IÓm sure, many times from people 30 you. YouÓll be hearing it at every meeting you have from now on, IÓm sure. ItÓs desirable to live in this area, itÓs an elevation thatÓs cool. ItÓs, one of my concerns when youÓre looking at urbanization of areas that have been formerly in ag lands is what is the proximity to the place of work, how much additional infrastructure is going to need to be built to avoid urban sprawl? And to the extent that the Applicant is in a position to assist the County and, therefore, the taxpayers in providing for this, I think we should make every effort to do that. The County has said in the past that it does not build new roads; and the first new road in 35 years is Puainako Extension. I guess the next oneÓs going to be the Kahului-Keauhou Parkway Road. And, so, we know that the County is not in a position to continually build collector streets, arterials, and most arterials fall to the State. Nevertheless, I think the Chapter 23 requirements, that is the Subdivision Code requirements for inter-connectivity, continue to be thwarted. IÓm not suggesting these folks are thwarting it. But as you look around youÓll find that there is grade separation, literally difference between Alii Villas and and Kahakai. The roads come in like this. And so why did we even go through that exercise? And, yet, at the other end into Kuakini Makai, they put a drainage basin right where the road is supposed to connect for an emergency entry and exit. And, you, yourselves, issued the SMA permit with that requirement. Yet, if you look there, youÓll find a drainage basin and a drywell. So, and there may be some kind of contingencies, IÓm unaware of it, that necessitated that. But, like you, it is also my obligation to, as a public servant, to try to do all we can to bring, if development is going to happen and it is going to happen, that we should do the best we can to support those that are already in the community in a way thatÓs positive. And that is what I have tried to do with every single applicant that has come to me; and IÓve done that, in this particular case, with them. I havenÓt heard their comments with respect to or the DirectorÓs comments with respect to what the D Works said. But, in any case, I think each of us owes it to all of the people that we serve to insure that traffic, public health, safety and traffic, especially in that area, is mitigated to the best extent we can. And I -. Kohanaiki, the connection to Kohanaiki thatÓs shown on this map would be a great connection. But Kohanaiki, at that end, is so bad, itÓs in such bad shape you really need a 4-wheel drive to go there. And so I donÓt know what the residents down there who live in that proximity, I saw at least two of them here this morning, what they said to you about that connection and fire safety, etc., etc. But you need to keep that in mind, as I will when this comes to us. Tha to speak to you this morning, sir. GALDONES:Thank you, Mr. Tyler. Commissioners, any further quest Mr. Tyler? Thank you very much. TYLER:Thank you, sir. GALDONES:Commissioner Springer? SPRINGER:I donÓt have a question for Mr. Tyler but I wonder before we return to the ApplicantÓs presentation, if you could refresh my memory on the previous approval 31 in this vicinity, the one that we made last month, and the traffic requirements. And I understand from both Mr. Mooers and Mr. TylerÓs comments thereÓs thatÓs ongoing with the owner of that intermediate parcel, so -. GALDONES:Mr. Yuen? YUEN:The conditions were to improve one or the other intersections -. I donÓt remember the exact details but they were, it was going to be quite difficult for that applicant to go ahead and do that under the conditions that we had. So their hope was to piggy-back on the present rezoning and come out at this improved intersection that this rezoning would accomplish. GALDONES:Commissioner Springer? SPRINGER:But thereÓs still a parcel of property that separates the two applications? GALDONES:ThatÓs right. ThatÓs the gentleman in Germany that Mr. Mooers was referring to. SPRINGER:Thank you. GALDONES:Mr. Mooers? MOOERS:Yes, IÓd like to respond to some of the comments from the Commission and from the public. First, there were some referenc agricultural nature of the land and not wanting to lose the agricultural potential of the land. And IÓd simply point out that the Land Study Bureau classification for this land is mostly E, which is very poor, and part of it is D, which is poor I would call attention to page 2 of the Planning DepartmentÓs Recommendation, item 3, which says and I quote: ÐThe conversion from three acre to one acre lots will not sacrifice important agricultural resources. Almost all of the property is classified as ÐEÑ by the Land Study Bureau, the lowest rating. (A very small portion in the southeast corner is classified as ÐDÑ.) Rainfall is marginal. A primary objection to the rezoning of agricultural land to smaller lot sizes is that it may fragment t to be farmed commercially. This does not apply in this situation: neither the three acre lots possible under present zoning nor the proposed one acre lots would appear to be viable units for commercial farming in this area.Ñ There was a representation made with some graphics regarding additional units being created by lots, especially ohana units and mother-in-law quarters, etc. I would simply remind the Commission that the County Council has been uniform in the application of a condition that prevents any ohana, well, presently thereÓs no ohana in the ag district anyway, but no second dwellings, no additional dwellings, in the new subdivisions that they approved. 32 There was some concern raised about possible mother-in-law units. I think the present planning, the prior administration has pretty well sealed that off, by now asking for the Department of Water Supply to comment on all of these permits for ohana or extra units; and the fact that there are no additional water units available would preclude the fact that you could have that additional dwelling. So I donÓt believe that the dwellings beyond the proposed zoning would be allowed. There were several efforts and comments made about poor planning and that the planning should be carried out at this level, and the applicant certainly agrees with that. Any application before this board and also before the Council has to address institutional considerations. In effect, what do the County plans or the State plans have to say about the property, which is in question. ItÓs very consistent if you look at my application, starting with pages 4, 5, 6, 7. It refers to various plans related to this area, the General Plan, the County Zoning Code, K-to-K Plan. The proposed development is actually less dense, less dense than what is being proposed by all of these government plans. I donÓt think itÓs fair to characterize this development as a high density development. ItÓs a much lower density than has, than other rezonings below Mamalahoa Highway. Clearly, the plans from the State and the County both indicate that the lands makai of Mamalahoa Highway, from Keahole Airport to Kailua, are in the urban area, when, should be urbanized; and that is the projected use of these properties. So I think that the proposed application and the proposed development is consistent with proper planning for this area. Clearly, the Applicant is concerned about the infrastructure deficiencies as everyone else in this room is. The Applicant is attempting to resolve the issue that was raised by Councilman Tyler regarding the unsafe intersections by allowing connections to properties to the north and the south to utilize a common intersection. And this would be of benefit to the community and for those people who use those intersections. In addition, I would point out when we talk about impacts to regional roadway systems and water systems, etc., is that the Council also will apply an impact-related fee. That impact-related fee, depending upon what the Honolulu Consumer Price Index is at the time, in this case would be over $350,000, which is not a small sum. And I think it is not the ApplicantÓs option to determine how that money is spent, whether itÓd be spent on a signal at Hinalani and Mamalahoa Highway, or on fire improvements, whatever. But there are considerable sums that are generated. So I think that the proposed action does provide an opportunity there. I think thatÓs about all I have for responses, and weÓll entertain any questions the Commissioners will have. GALDONES:Commissioners, are there any further questions of Mr. Mooers? Commissioner Springer? SPRINGER:Thank you, Mr. Mooers. IÓm just thinking strategically. Sometimes you come in for a rezoning that includes also the Land Use CommissionÓs designation of rural. IÓm wondering why that strategy was not employed here? 33 MOOERS:That was one of the options we looked at. Initially, this property was owned by the same individual who did Kona Hills, Phase 1 and was the intent, was to keep the one-acre size to be consistent with those dwellings. Also because of the grade in the area, once you start getting much smaller than one acre, then you start getting into a lot of engineering turfs in building walls and that sort of thing, and it loses its effectiveness, the cost effectiveness. So thatÓs why we would like just to stay at this level. SPRINGER:Thank you. MOOERS:And one other thing is that the availability of water also is a determining factor. There were only 47 units of water available for this project. SPRINGER:Thank you. GALDONES:Commissioners, any further question? Thank you, Mr. Mooers. Commissioners, weÓll be heading into decision-making. But we ha for a couple of hours now, so, while you folks will clear your minds, I will be calling a short recess, if thereÓs no objection, before we go into decision-making. Okay. Chair calls for a five-minute recess. RECESSEDThe Chair called for a recess at 11:13 a.m. RECONVENEDThe meeting reconvened at 11:21 a.m. GALDONES:The Hawaii County Planning Commission is now back in order. Commissioners, you have heard testimony regarding the application of Hualalai Vistas, LLC. Commissioners, before we go into decision-making, considering the testimonies that have been presented to the Commissioners and the concerns that they have raised, I would like to have our Counsel, Mr. Torigoe, give us or inform us what the options are in dealing with this subject matter. TORIGOE:Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I refer you to your Planning Commission Rule 11-3(b), in Subsection 2, which says, ÐWithin ninety (90) days after receipt of the application from the Director, unless a longer period is agreed to by the applicant, the Commission shall transmit the proposed change of zone ordinance together with its recommendations thereon through the Mayor to the Council. The Commission shall recommend approval in whole or in part, with or without modifications, or rejection of such application. In the event that the Commission fails to act on the application within the ninety-day period, the application shall be considered an unfavorable recommendation by the Commission, and the application shall be transmitted through the Mayor to the Council with such recommendation.Ñ GALDONES:Mr. Torigoe, does that also give the Commissioners the option to have a continuance on this subject matter pending more informati 34 TORIGOE:The matter can be continued. But as I noted, thereÓs a 90-day action timeframe, unless there is an agreement by the applicant to extend that timeframe. GALDONES:Jeff, do you know when that 90 days would be? Is it from today? th DARROW:Looking at the application, it was deemed complete on May 20, so I think weÓre well under the 90 days. GALDONES:If we have a continuance, will we be back in Kona befor th before August 20, before the 90 days are over? th HAYASHI:The next Kona meeting is September 11. GALDONES:Thank you. Commissioners, any question of Mr. Torigoe? Okay, Commissioners, the recommendation from the staff is that this be given a favorable recommendation and forwarded to the County Council. However, there are some other amendments that we need to consider. Jeff? DARROW:Thank you, Chairman. In consultation with the Department Public Works and the Planning Director, theyÓd like to make a minor amendment to Condition G, sentence No. 2. It reads as follows: ÐThe subdivision roads shall have at least one connection to the north to the adjoining subdivision, and a connection to the south that will allow access from properties on that side.Ñ TheyÓd like to make a minor amendment to read as follows: ÐThe subdivision roads shall have at least one connection to the properties to the north to the adjoining properties and at least one connection to the south that will allow access from the properties on that side, meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works.Ñ So we are adding the words Ðproperties to the adjoining subdivisionÑ and we are adding Ðat least oneÑ where it says Ðand a connection to the south,Ñ and then weÓre also adding in Ðmeeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works.Ñ GALDONES:Jeff, is that the only amendment that you have? DARROW:Yes. GALDONES:Jeff, it was stated by Mr. Goodale that some or maybe o publications had a typo possibly on it. It read A-2a. So can you make a note if that appears that it should have been A-3a, I believe it was. Because it was being changed from 3a to 1a, yeah? So 2 should not be appearing. So if that could also be taken care of -. DARROW:Okay. Do you have a page number that this is -? GALDONES:Mr. Mooers? 35 MOOERS:I think the 2a that Mr. Goodale was referring to was in my initial notice to, the first mailing on the notice to neighbors, the title said A-3a to FA-2a, even though in the document itself it referred to one acre. In the second mailing, that was corrected to one acre. But that error was on my mailing to the neighbors, not in the notification from the department. GALDONES:Thank you. Okay. Commissioners, having heard the amen and also having heard the ruling that was read by Mr. Torigoe, what is the wishes of the Commissioners? I understand we have been discussing this traffic problem for quite sometime now and we have been receiving a lot of public testimony in regards to addressing that problem; and we are putting quite a dilemma in trying to mitigate the improvements along with providing necessary infrastructure. And I believe some of you feel some discomfort in moving forward with this application because of that; and the Chair feels, the Chair feels the same sentiment that you folks have regarding the testimony that was presented regarding the traffic problem, especially out in this area. Commissioner Kubota? KUBOTA:IÓm trying to figure how to say how I feel. IÓm in a dilemma this morning. And itÓs not because of this application, and itÓs not because of the traffic problem per se because weÓve discussed this many, many, many tim because as we approve these applications that are perfectly sound and legitimate, we continue to compound the negative effects that now prevails on the infrastructure. And I feel as though, although we know the powers to be, other than setting a moratorium on all further developments along that highway or, and thatÓs not what I want to do either. I donÓt want to have a moratorium on further developments until su infrastructure is brought up to par because I know that is not m we donÓt start somewhere, somehow, and make our voices heard loudly enough, weÓre going to continue to perpetuate the hardships on the people that have to live around it. And so how do I play the role of a responsible Commissioner catering to and acknowledging that the developer is entitled to do what he wants to do because the criteria for changing of the zone is met fully and, yet, at the same time saying, ÐGee, I donÓt want you to do it because youÓre creating a hardship on the infrastructure that exists and the people that, the citizenry that live, that need to use it are being jeopardized. And we canÓt postpone this because if we postpone, itÓs not solving the situation. We donÓt have time for it anyway. So, in its stead, are there any people that want to say something, because IÓm going to make a motion otherwise. GALDONES:Further discussions? Commissioner Springer? SPRINGER:I have some comments to make whether or not theyÓre before or after the motion. At your pleasure, Mr. Chair? GALDONES:WeÓre on discussion right now, Commissioner Springer. SPRINGER:A moratorium or voting in denial of the application as if we were placing a moratorium on an application such as this might not solve the problem as it is 36 today but it would reduce compounding the problem. Each application that we approve, based on the merits of that single application may appear harmle may have a cumulative effect, which I think that is what Commissioner Kubota has been discussing with us, both at this time and previously in the meeting. The solution certainly doesnÓt rest on a single subdivision or rezoning, approving or denial, but in the aggregate, it does. ThatÓs my comment. GALDONES:Further comments from the Commissioners? Then the Chair would like to recommend, considering the discussion that is ongoing and the points that were brought out, that I would recommend to the Commissioners that an unfavorable recommendation be forward to the County Council; and the reasons stated would be going into the record that, the comments that was made by Commissioner Kubota. And itÓs not necessarily that we are entirely against it but the dilemma that we are faced with is quite troublesome. Commissioner Kubota? KUBOTA:Mr. Chairman, that was not my motion. That is not the motion that I intended, as surprising as it may sound to you. I feel that the Applicant and the application is a valid application in and of itself. Our staff did studies on it. Their Facts and Findings support that. The only hitch is the traffic problem. I would like to instead say in gist -. I would like to send a favorable recommendation to the County Council. Because theyÓre the final authority on this, weÓre not. WeÓre just intermediary, weÓre just making a recommendation to them. But we should highlight in red, red, red, red signals the difficulty that weÓre facing at this level because of the mi involved, mainly traffic. ThatÓs the gist that I wanted to send up to the Council. GALDONES:In not so many words, would you like to incorporate that into a motion? KUBOTA:Yes, I would. I move that the Change of Zone Application REZ 03-013, be sent to the County Council with a favorable recommendation, along with the Findings and the Recommendations submitted to us by our Plan with a correction on recommendation G, as in George, as stated by staff. Oh, along with, another along with, a P.S. to the County Council that they look at, they seriously look at the traffic, I guess itÓs called the problem, dilemma, that the approvals will cause on this particular problem. I donÓt know if I said it correctly but thatÓs what I mean. FUJIKAWA:I second. GALDONES:Okay, it has been moved by Commissioner Kubota and seconded by Commissioner Fujikawa that Change of Zone Application, REZ 03-013, be given a favorable recommendation for a Change of Zone and be forwarded t Council, along with the Findings and the Recommendations and the amendments to Item G, Condition Item G, and, also, with a note that the County Council seriously look at the traffic problem out in this area. Are there any further discussions? Commissioner Springer? 37 SPRINGER:Mr. Chair and fellow Commissioners, we know that, on occasion, I have voted in favor of applications with reservations; and those reservations were based on traffic conditions in the area for which the application is situated, in particular IÓm thinking of those along the Queen Kaahumanu Extension. But given the complexity of the traffic circumstances in this section between Kaiminani and against this. GALDONES:So noted. Commissioner Fujikawa? FUJIKAWA:On Commissioner KubotaÓs recommendation to the County Council, do we have to highlight the areas of problems on the st GALDONES:No, I guess we donÓt have to. I guess, we can do whatever we want here. But itÓs part of the motion that that subject matter be given a serious consideration because itÓs a subject matter that continually is brought up by the public for us to consider in approving any improvements out in that area that taxes the traffic infrastructure that we already have taxed here. FUJIKAWA:Maybe being that Commissioner Kubota made a motion, maybe she would like to highlight the areas of the problems, what street, Palani Road, etc. GALDONES:Commissioner Kubota, do you wish to amend your motion? KUBOTA:ItÓs not my intent to do that, Mr. Chairman. My intent is just to call attention to the Council people of whom we have the representative here that the traffic problem is a major concern and that hereafter we ought to really, really look at it. And because this is a Change of Zone that goes to the Council fo sending it off to them to deliberate. In the future, when we have our own decision- making, I think we ought to seriously look at it ourselves; and based on the reports that come in, we ought to decide accordingly. But in this particular case, I think enough has been said. GALDONES:Commissioner Fujikawa, are you satisfied? FUJIKAWA:I am. GALDONES:Okay. Commissioners, any further questions? Commissioner Graham? GRAHAM:IÓd just like to make a comment. Everybody has listened here so itÓs probably not of too much consequence what I say so much as how I vote. But I would like to at least share my feelings so that, IÓm also the newest one here on this group. I will take issue with the Planning Department from time-to-time and in todayÓs agenda there are items where I do wish to take some issue with the Planning Department. In the present situation, I feel like, as Commissioner Springer said, the traffic problem is 38 a sufficient problem to justify denying this application. On the other hand, I feel like the Planning Department and the Planning Department Chairman here knows this area a lot better than me and has been made very clearly where, by you folks, what the issues are. And I donÓt think the Planning Department is bringing a different perspective than the perspective I feel. So based on their much greater knowledge of the specifics and sharing the same concern, IÓm reluctant to challenge the Planning Depart without having either a different philosophy or different information. On the other hand, I also feel like, you know, Ms. Kubota, I have no doubt of Ms. KubotaÓs sincerity in her concern. But I do feel like that addendum to the positive recommendation is more of a window dressing than doing anything. So I feel like thereÓs a little pass-the-buck to that, so that sort of doesnÓt assuage my concerns. I guess thatÓs about all IÓve got to say, but I just want to share my feelings on this with you folks. GALDONES:Commissioner McCall? MCCALL:Yeah, IÓm obviously very troubled about this, also. I me that this, I think there are some, you know, the traffic problem is a major issue here. But, at the same time, I think the developer and the Planning Department have worked together, I think, fairly well on trying to alleviate not necessarily, I mean, they canÓt do anything about Palani Road, but as far as feeder roads and trying to help other people in the area, I think theyÓve been very cooperative. IÓm probably going to be voting, I will be voting in favor of this recommendation; but we really need to figure out some way to get Palani Road fixed up. I donÓt really feel itÓs our, you know, our jurisdiction to do so. But to the extent that anybody, everybody here in this room can do something to work on this, I think that we, you know, we personally need to. GALDONES:Thank you. Commissioners, any further discussion? There being none, Jeff? DARROW:Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Kubota? KUBOTA:Aye. DARROW:Commissioner Fujikawa? FUJIKAWA:Aye. DARROW:Commissioner Graham? GRAHAM:Aye. DARROW:Commissioner McCall? MCCALL:Aye. DARROW:Commissioner Mina? 39 MINA:Aye. DARROW:Commissioner Smith? SMITH:No. DARROW:Commissioner Springer? SPRINGER:No. DARROW:Commissioner Thibadeau? THIBADEAU:Aye. DARROW:And Chairman Galdones? GALDONES:Aye. DARROW:Mr. Chairman, the ayes have seven, the noes have two. GALDONES:Thank you, Jeff. Mr. Mooers, you will be informed in w todayÓs action. The discussion ended at 11:46 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon M. Nomura, Secretary 40