Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-09-30 TPUBLIC LEEWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAI‘I HEARING TRANSCRIPT SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 HUALLAI The following are statements from the public regarding the applications of PARTNERS OF KONA, LLC (SLU 10-27/REZ 10-127), BRIAN R. COOK DEVELOPMENT, INC. (SLU 10-29/REZ 10-129), JKS PARTNERS, LP (SLU 10-28/REZ 10-128) at 9:42 a.m. in the King Kamehameha's Kona Beach Hotel, Ballroom I, 75-5660 Palani Road, Kailua-Kona, Hawai‘i, with Chairman Frederic Housel presiding. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Frederic Housel, Brandi Beaudet, Geraldine Giffin, Wayne Iokepa, Richard Nelson and Lani Bowman (from 9:43 a.m.) ABSENT AND EXCUSED: Thomas Hickcox STAFF PRESENT: Brandon Gonzalez (Deputy Corporation Counsel), BJ Leithead Todd (Planning Director), Daryn Arai (Planning Program Manager), Jeff Darrow (Staff Planner), Maija Cottle (Staff Planner), Deanne Bugado (Planner, West Hawai‘i Division) and Kiran Emler (Department of Public Works) And approximately 200 people from the public in attendance. APPLICANT: HUALLAI PARTNERS OF KONA, LLC (SLU 10-27/REZ 10-127) Applications for a State Land Use Boundary Amendment from Agricultural to Urban and a Change of Zone from Agricultural 5-acres (A-5a) to Single-Family Residential 10,000 square feet (RS-10) for approximately 14.968 acres of land. The property is located southwest of the intersection of nd Kahului-Hienaloli Road and Huallai Road, north of the Sugar Cane Lane Subdivision, Kahului 2, North Kona, Hawai‘i, TMK: 7-5-17: 43. APPLICANT: BRIAN R. COOK DEVELOPMENT, INC. (SLU 10-29/REZ 10-129) Applications for a State Land Use Boundary Amendment from Agricultural to Urban and a Change of Zone from Agricultural 5-acres (A-5a) to Single-Family Residential 7,500 square feet (RS-7.5) for approximately 14.707 acres of land. The property is located adjacent to and north of Pualani nd Estates Subdivision and mauka of Hawaii Belt Road, Kahului 2, North Kona, Hawai‘i, TMK: 7-5- 17: 41. APPLICANT: JKS PARTNERS, LP (SLU 10-28/REZ 10-128) Applications for a State Land Use Boundary Amendment from Agricultural to Urban and a Change of Zone from Agricultural 5-acres (A-5a) to Single-Family Residential 7,500 square feet (RS-7.5) for approximately 14.682 acres of land. The property is located adjacent to and north of Pualani nd Estates Subdivision and mauka of Hawaii Belt Road, Kahului 2, North Kona, Hawai‘i, TMK: 7-5- 17: 40. HOUSEL: If you don’t have the agenda, the applicant No. 2, Item No. 2, is Brian R. Cook Development, Incorporated and that’s an application for a State Land Use boundary amendment and rezoning, a change of zone, and Item No. 3, the applicant is JKS Partners, LP and that is also an 1 EXHIBIT B application for a State Land Use boundary amendment and a change of zone from Ag-5 to Single- Family Residential. We are going to have the staff presentation after the public testimony. So when I call you name, please come forward and have a seat at the table. The first four will be, since we have four chairs, Cindy Coats, Lauren Burgett, and Cindy Coats is speaking – here comes Commissioner Bowman – George Error and Mark Van Pernis. I guess we have one more chair. Could Joel Cooperson please come forward? Could I ask you to use the microphone? And please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Hawai‘i County Planning Commission? TESTIFIERS: I do. Yes. HOUSEL: Thank you. I guess starting with, on the right -. COATS: I’ll be speaking for myself, Cindy Coats, as well as Lauren Burgett. HOUSEL: Okay. Could you give your name and address, please? COATS: Cindy Coats -. HOUSEL: Please use the microphone. COATS: Cindy Coats, 75-631 Hua Ai Street, Kailua-Kona, 96740. HOUSEL: Thank you. Which agenda item are you testifying on? COATS: Huallai Partners of Kona, the first item on the agenda. HOUSEL: Okay, please do. COATS: Hello, my name is Cindy Coats. As a long time resident of Kailua-Kona and a homeowner in the Kona Orchards subdivision, I have seen many changes over the years, some good some bad, and more often than not these changes are accompanied by “How did that happen?” This Commission is where that happens. This is where the fate of Kailua-Kona is decided, the direction it will take, what will happen to our open spaces, and how Kona will work for future generations. My biggest problem with the proposed rezoning of the parcels in question is simply why? Why would we take a precious parcel of Ag land, located in what many books on Hawai‘i consider to be the most scenic drive in West Hawai‘i, rezone it to a dense urban subdivision? There must have been a compelling reason it was zoned Ag in the first place. And as long as there are 25,000-plus approved lots sitting empty, that haven’t been developed, not to mention the hundreds and hundreds of homes on the market, as well as proposed subdivisions of at least a thousand -. (The lights went out.) HOUSEL: Here we are. Sorry about that. 2 EXHIBIT B COATS: I wanted a little drama with my testimony. Anyway, the lots haven’t been developed, not to mention hundreds and hundreds of homes on the market, as well as proposed subdivisions of at least a thousand homes north of Kona, I don’t see a compelling reason to change the zoning at this time. We simply do not need developers destroying what little open space we have left to make room for lots that will sit empty, bulldozing the natural habitat, displacing wildlife and forever scarring the land for some future use that may or may not happen. I’m still unclear as to how this development fits into the Kailua-Kona master plan. The area in question is in the middle of -. (The lights went out.) HOUSEL: Oops. Sorry about the interruption. VAN PERNIS: Could I ask the Planning Department to put up a map or picture, so we can refer to it in our testimony? Thank you. DARROW: How’s that? VAN PERNIS: Thank you. COATS: Okay. Are we good? HOUSEL: Yeah, so please continue. COATS: The area in question is in the middle of an established Ag area where cows graze across the street from Tutu’s nursery, where you have to slow down for the chickens crossing the road, where weekend rodeos are held, and every couple of days a phantom white pueo will cross your path on the way up Huallai Road. As the Chair of the Kailua Village Design Commission, I realize the value of public testimony in these matters, and this is why I’m coming forward. I also understand that each one of these projects that’s on the agenda today are contingent on each other. So that’s kind of unclear to me as far as the access goes. And I didn’t know until this morning when I read in West Hawai‘i Today that they are also seeking to connect all of this with new access onto Huallai Road. And anybody who has gone up Huallai Road knows it’s unimproved and can’t handle a single other car. Thank you very much for your time. HOUSEL: Thank you. You can remain seated until we -. Would you like to proceed with your testimony? ERROR: I’m ready. HOUSEL: Would you state your name and address, please? ERROR: Aloha. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you this morning. My name is George Error, and I am a resident and homeowner at Kona Orchards, which is mauka of this proposed project. Our homeowners association has submitted to your Planning Director and to each of you a letter dated September 15, indicating our opposition to this proposal. Hopefully -. HOUSEL: Could you tell me which item you are testifying on? ERROR: No. 1. 3 EXHIBIT B HOUSEL: Okay. ERROR: However, we are aware that Items 2 and 3 are similar in nature, and coincidentally have similar ownership. So in respect to your request to keep this to three minutes, I’m going to say that we are concerned about density, minute 1, minute 2 will be about density, and minute 3 will be about density. This project at 10,000 square feet, actually when you look at the detail of it, shows that 20 percent of the lots are less than that amount, ranging from 7,700 to 9,000 square feet. These lots are in contrast to all of the mauka development from this project that range from 1.5-acre up to 3 acres. As we’ve said in our letter to you, this is inconsistent to have this spot zoning in this area. Density No. 2 is that this is really not a 14-acre project; this is a 60-acre project. We have four parcels that are involved, and they range all in, coincidentally, about 15 acres a piece. Now, maybe that’s a coincidence, but the fact that they have some common ownership indicates to me that maybe they are not a coincidence. We are talking really of having 200 sites in this 60-acre portion, bringing population of 800 to probably 1,000 people, and that is density question No. 2. The third point of density is that when the adjacent subdivision, Pualani Estates, was established, we were provided with a mauka-makai connector called Puapua‘anui Road, which has helped the density of, or the congestion of the traffic along Huallai Road immeasurably. Also, that project provided a very nice park for the residents and other amenities that this particular 60 acres fails to address. There is another issue here that they make no contribution to infrastructure. Flooding is a serious issue there. At times of the year when we have heavy rain in the Hlualoa vicinity, we have heavy runoff and Huallai Road has to be closed more than once in the time that we have lived here. So these three projects provide no reference to drainage or flood control, to the traffic adding to Huallai Road, and to any recreation. We look to you, Commissioners, for planning, and we look to these developers for scheming, and we hope that there will be a difference. Thank you. HOUSEL: Thank you. Cindy, I’m sorry, I forgot, are you going to testify for Lauren Burgett? COATS: I am, for Lauren Burgett. HOUSEL: Okay. Please go ahead. COATS: Since Lauren Burgett is not here and cannot be sworn in, her letter that I will submit to you all, which I think she has also emailed but we just want to make sure it’s on the books, just to express her concern as a Kona Orchards homeowner. HOUSEL: Would you like to summarize that letter? COATS: It’s a very short letter, if I can read it. HOUSEL: Yeah, please do. COATS: Okay. “My name is Lauren Burgett DiRienzo. I am a property owner in the Kona Orchards subdivision on Huallai Road, near the parcel proposed for rezoning and development by Huallai Partners of Kona, LLC. I am writing to voice my concern and my opposition to both the rezoning and the proposed development, as described in the letter sent to me by Huallai Partners of Kona, LLC. 4 EXHIBIT B “Over 40 years ago, my parents bought our property on Huallai Road because they wanted to live away from the city and in the natural beauty of this majestic mountainside. They did not want to live in Honolulu or in Hilo, or in any other high density area. They wanted to live here, above the town of Kona and surrounded by the natural beauty of the Huallai area. They built a house that blended in with the landscape and they left the big trees and natural landscape. “What is being proposed here runs counter to everything they loved, and I love, about Kona. This development will not blend in with the surroundings – it will destroy them. It is not an environmentally friendly development, and in fact, it is anti-environment. It will destroy the natural vegetation and, with it, important wildlife and bird habitats, and replace it with a flat landscape of asphalt, concrete, high density houses, and motor vehicles. “In the past several years, we have seen large tracts of our Huallai mountainside scraped clean of its vegetation, flattened, and bulldozed into pads that stay vacant and unoccupied for years. Given the many other possible locations for this type of development, there is not a justifiable reason to rezone this particular tract of Ag land and place a high-density development in this location. This development will forever rob our local community of needed open space and natural habitat. This Ag land, with its ranches, old growth trees and vegetation, is symbolic of the Kona hillside and is the reason many of us have chosen to live here. “This development is not something we as a community want. It does not enhance the neighborhood. It will take away the very environment that is the reason we all love this area. Once this land is developed in this manner, another piece of the natural beauty of the Huallai mountainside will be forever lost. Once gone, it cannot be recovered.” HOUSEL: Thank you very much. COATS: And I will submit this to staff, so -. HOUSEL: Yes, please do. Thank you. If you can give that to the staff, that’ll be great. Mark, would you like to proceed? VAN PERNIS: Yes. I’m Mark Van Pernis. I’m an attorney here on behalf of the Heights at Huallai Homeowners Association. I have a little bit of a problem with the fact that the staff is not presenting its position or its information on Parcel 42, as well as Parcel 43; it’s difficult to testify in response to what the, in not knowing what the recommendations or position of the staff is. So we are somewhat in the dark, and I think that’s a disadvantage. HOUSEL: If you would like to testify on the first item. You will have the privilege to testify on the other items also. VAN PERNIS: Well, for expediency sake, I’ll try to limit my testimony to three minutes, but I did intend to testify on both Parcels 42 and 43, first and second items – so perhaps if I can run over a little bit. HOUSEL: Okay. If you’d like to, yes, thank you. 5 EXHIBIT B VAN PERNIS: First of all, Parcels 42 and 43, that’s surrounded in black, that’s the A-5 and below it the RS-10 in yellow. Those are both controlled by the same – (receiving a laser pointer from staff), okay, thank you. That is Parcel 42. This is Parcel 43. Together they are approximately 30 acres. They are owned and controlled by the same entity, or same person, that person being somebody from the mainland, of course – Lee Barrett, who is doing business under Brendan Lee, LLC. So to comply with the State and County requirements, this should be, those two parcels should be submitted as a single 30-acre application. Parcel 42 is alleging that they can take access through Parcel 43 and vice versa, so being developed jointly as one. They are seeking the same zoning. On Parcel 43, A-5, they are seeking 10,000-square foot zoning. There are no 10,000- square foot lots anywhere in the vicinity or anywhere along Huallai Road. Let me point out, Huallai Road is -. Look at all the road frontage they have. Just right here where the RS-20 is, The Heights at Huallai, with 16 lots they built a channelized intersection to Huallai, and paid for it with 16 lots. These 30 acres have 145 or more lots; they can certainly do a channelized intersection to Huallai as well. Now, there are no RS-10 lots anywhere along Huallai Road, as I indicated, and the adjoining property is RS-15 and RS-20, the closest lots. To approve RS-10 is to depreciate those lots. And you have duty to the public, not to the developer, to make the areas compatible. Other testifiers talked about spot zoning 10,000-square foot lots – that’s what it is when you go 10,000 up in A-5. The smaller lots are down in Pualani down below along Queen K where there is a channelized intersection and there is a double-lane signalized, public parks, roads gutter, sidewalks. This is a totally different development, and it’s unfair, I think, dishonest to say that Parcel 43 has nearby small lots and then refer to Pualani. It’s up in the agricultural area. Now, when Pualani and Huallai was developed, it was required to have a through road from Kuakini and a channelized intersection up at Huallai. There is no reason why this development shouldn’t have the same thing. Although we all know, let’s be honest, that this 60-acre piece is submitted as a separate development, would require compliance with various laws and regulations, State Land Use, etc., and instead, they broke it down to less than 15 acres each, even deeded away some of A-5 to make sure it’s less than 15 acres, so they can come to you and avoid the State Land Use situation; but we all know this is being developed as a single entity. They’ll all be in interconnections. Also, we should point out in regards to the roads that they are saying that they are going to use. See the roads here, these roads up here, these are private roads. There has been no demonstration of any right to use these private roads – I know they say I have two minutes left, but as I said, I’m trying to cover both applications with one testimony – they don’t have any rights to use those roads, and that says they should not be granted any approval until they establish what those rights are. And the fact that Parcel 43 is going to supposedly take access down through Parcel 42 into the adjoining subdivision shows that they are being developed at least as one 30-acre parcel. I don’t think it’s correct for them to attach themselves to someone else’s infrastructure without any contribution, particularly when those, some of the infrastructure is private. They have not demonstrated rights to it. Until they show you those demonstrated rights, I think they should be denied the application, unless they are going to have access all the way up through Huallai as recommended by the Department of Public Works. I think this entire situation should be rejected and the applicant reapply as a 30-acre or 60-acre parcel. I think that the Department of Public Works’ recommendations, if it’s going to be, if there’s going to be any kind of a rule, it must be followed. And most importantly I think that Parcel 43 needs to be 20,000-square foot lots – too late for Parcel 42, which I’m mostly testifying about – but Parcel 43 should be 20,000-square foot lots, and should not depreciate the adjoining subdivisions, 6 EXHIBIT B the adjoining lots, with 10,000-square foot so on. As I said, there’s no 10,000-square foot lots anywhere along Huallai Road. So this is spot zoning. If I have to, I’ll answer any questions. I also sent two letters. I’m informed that the set 1 is not received or not in the record, but it’s attached to written testimony. And I would ask you to read the second letter. It’s response to Mr. Lim’s response to my letter, and it shows that Mr. Lim is making some valuable admissions in his response to my letter, which corroborates some of our positions. Thank you. HOUSEL: Thank you, Mr. Van Pernis. I’d like to ask for a short recess. The hotel is going to open up these doors. It’s going to be a little noisy, so we’re going to take a five-minute recess, so they can open those doors. And hopefully we have room for everybody that’s standing to please sit down. VAN PERNIS: Perhaps my second letter could be reviewed during that time. HOUSEL: Actually, we’re going to take a break because there’s been a lot of correspondence that the Commissioners just received this morning, and so after the public testimony we will take a break to review all that. We will do that. Thank you. RECESSED The Chair called a recess at 10:02 a.m. RECONVENED The meeting reconvened at 10:22 a.m. HOUSEL: Will the Leeward Planning Commission come back to order. Sorry about the delay but, wow, we’ve got a big crowd here, so I’m glad we -. Still don’t have enough seats, but we’ll try to keep moving here and keep, hopefully not be too long. Sorry about the delay. Mr. Van Pernis, have you concluded your testimony? Would you like any more -? VAN PERNIS: I would just like to say one more thing: Perhaps if the applicants, the applicant’s attorney and the Planning Director lived in Kona, they would realize the damage that this high density is going to be doing in this area, and the traffic on Huallai, the problems that it would create. Any traffic study that refers just to Kuakini, and not to substandard Huallai, is not valid. HOUSEL: Thank you, sir. Mr. Cooperson, would you like to state your name and address, please? COOPERSON: My name is Joel Cooperson. I live at 75-407 Puapua‘anui Street and that’s Heights at Huallai. I’m the president of Heights at Huallai, the Association. I’m a 41-year resident of Kona. My wife and I have taught in Kona in the public schools for a total of 71 years. We feel we are members of the community. I wanted to discuss how appalled I am that the developer who owns about 30 acres -. And this is for the Huallai Partnership; it would be Items 1 and 2. And I don’t know if you can see, this is all Huallai Road right here and they have all this frontage here and over here and that continues on, yet they’re planning to come through here and down below; so in other words they are planning on doing their development without paying for any infrastructure whatsoever. With our subdivision, we’ve got 27 lots, we are a small subdivision, RS-20, and we’ve channelized Huallai Road, we paid for the improvements along with our neighbor – Lot 22 has joined us and paid for the 7 EXHIBIT B improvements. They are dead set against having this development come through their property, dead set, and we are, too. Department of Public Works wanted them to channelize Huallai Road and use that as an access. My understanding is that – I don’t know about today, I mean I haven’t gone through the paper today – but previously my understanding was that that wasn’t part of their game plan. I’m going to try to keep this as short as possible. My understanding also was that they were going to be creating somewhere in the neighborhood of about 145 lots, which translates out to be about 300 cars. And as residents of Kona, I think you can understand. You can check this out: If you were to drive in bumper-to-bumper traffic 5:00 from, say, Palani Road and Queen K out to Costco, it’s bumper-to-bumper coming in, you would be hard pressed to see about 300 cars. That’s a lot of cars that are going to be funneling out of that area. Our contention is for them to do the right thing. I taught seventh graders for 31 years, and I’ve got a well defined concept of what’s fair. This isn’t fair. I believe that they need to, No. 1, downscale it to meet with the community’s needs. I don’t think 10,000 or smaller lots, 10,000-square foot, meets the community’s needs; I think it meets, and not paying for infrastructure pays, I think it meets kind of a maybe a greed level but nothing that really adds to the community. My feeling is that if they want to be good neighbors, they should spend the money to do the necessary infrastructure, they should hire locally, improving the roads. And then I think we could treat them on an equal level. Mahalo. HOUSEL: Thank you, sir. You can take your seats in the audience, if they are still there. I want to remind everybody: If there is anyone who would like to testify, please sign up at the staff table here. I’d like to call the next people to come forward and testify: Virginia Tormey, Barbara -. Is that Mussey? Hussey? HUSSEY: Hussey. HOUSEL: Hussey, okay, please come forward. And Mike Matsukawa. Could you please raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth now before the Planning Commission today on this matter? TESTIFIERS: I do. HOUSEL: Thank you. If you could please use the microphone. And we’ll start with you. State your name and address, please. TORMEY: Aloha. My name is Virginia Tormey and I live at 75-683 Hua‘ai. That’s in the Kona Orchards subdivision. I am a neighbor of George Error who spoke earlier, and I -. HOUSEL: Excuse me. Could I ask you, which item would you like to testify on? TORMEY: I’m sorry, No. 1, Huallai Partners. HOUSEL: Okay, thank you. TORMEY: And although I don’t have anything really technical to add to what’s been said, I wanted to speak just to plead with you as planners to take into account the amount of opposition that is very serious in our community to this proposal. I know that today there are many people 8 EXHIBIT B here seated who are not going to speak, and there are many more who weren’t able to come today. My husband is here. I know for sure I speak for him and several of our neighbors who weren’t able to come today. So, I just want to lend my voice to the opposition along the vein of how we cherish our community, how we want to see Kona grow. We want to see Kona grow, but we want to see Kona grow in a really planned way – a way that preserves the nature of our communities and the spot that we all really love very dearly. And I know that this particular proposal, I believe, is not well planned, and we rely on you to make sure that something that does get built in this area is well planned. So, I thank you very much for your time. HOUSEL: Thank you. Could you please state your name and address, please? HUSSEY: Absolutely. My name is Barbara Hussey. I live at 75-6112 Haku Mele Street in Pualani Estates. I am on the Pualani Estates Association Board, and so -. I don’t see other members here, they may be here. But my issue and what I would like to speak to is about Puapua‘anui. Puapua‘anui currently is a freeway, up and down the street continually, and something that we have worked on for a while; speed limit is 25, most people go 45 to 50 miles an hour on Puapua‘anui. I was just aghast when I was reading this morning in the paper that this is going to be one of the main roads that’s going to connect all of this new development. And I’m thinking, oh my goodness, we have no speed bumps, we have no way to control the traffic that’s already on the road. Some of those individuals actually don’t even live in Pualani Estates. But it is indeed, and I just want to reiterate again, that it’s very much a freeway already and that, I think, really, really needs to be addressed before anything happens up in the far end of Puapua‘anui. Thank you so much. HOUSEL: Thank you. MATSUKAWA: My name is Mike Matsukawa. My address is 75-5751 Kuakini Highway, Kailua- Kona. I own a property mauka on Huallai Road, and I’m here speaking for myself. I submitted some written testimony earlier. It was late but it took me four or five days to write, so that I could crystallize my thoughts as best as I could. What you see happening right now is a reflection of why the Community Development Plan came to be in the first instance. It was an effort to gather the community thoughts and feelings about everything that’s been said, where and how you locate future growth – it’s not stopping growth but where do you direct growth. This is the core of the CDP ordinance Principle No. 5: “Direct future growth patterns toward compact villages ….” as defined in the CDP ordinance. Those villages capture what the people have testified here this morning, and I’m sure others have written. Somehow find the balance to create landowners’ desire to develop their properties, provide housing, but at the same time in a rational manner where you have a walkable communities, open spaces preserved, address traffic impacts, all in a rational method. And so, my testimony is that I don’t think the applicants have given the CDP process a chance. It’s a process, you know. Other communities with dense populations on the east coast who have used the concept of Transit-Oriented Development or TND’s or what we call these compact villages with a floating zone, they do encourage landowners, planners to get together and try to make it work, because it reflects the best interest of the community. What is happening with these applications, all three, which I’m speaking to, is it seems like not much an effort has been made to really go through the process, and then to give up real quick, and go back to conventional zoning and find a way to just do it the same old way, because maybe it’s too hard or too impractical to do a compact village design, because there would be fractured landowners, two, three, four parcels, not under one individual’s ownership. But that’s the whole collaborative process underlying Principle No. 5. Thank you. 9 EXHIBIT B HOUSEL: Thank you, Mr. Matsukawa. You can be seated. Is there anyone else who would like to testify on either Items 1, 2 or 3? Thank you very much for your testimony. As I mentioned before, there is a lot of new literature that, information that the Commissioners have received just this morning, and so I’d like to take a – what do you need, 15 minutes – to take a 15-minute break to finish reviewing all the new documentation. So I have currently 10:30, so we will restart at 10:45. Is that okay? Thank you very much. The statements from the public ended at 10:34 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Noriko Sauer, Secretary Leeward Planning Commission 10 EXHIBIT B