Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCommunication No. 2025-15 Babette Morrow Olson Trust Proposal 1 My thoughts on the proposed development on Highway 11 in Pahala. Babette Morrow The Action Committee members recently received a memo from John Cross and Brenda Iopepa-Moses explaining who their proposal meets the recommendations found in the Ka’ū CDP. I appreciate them providing this in advance of our Action Committee meeting. As Action Committee members, our responsibility is not to decide whether or not we like a project, but to evaluate whether or not a project complies with the goals and policies of the CDP and to make recommendations to the Planning Director and/or the Planning Commission. The Ka’ū CDP was developed over ten years of many many public meetings with the community, and we value the final adopted plan. In materials that I received when I first joined the Action Committee in 2022, it states : “The overarching role of an Action Committee is to be a proactive, community-based steward for the implementation of their respective CDP. The Action Committee will provide ongoing feedback, advocacy, and action to advance implementation of the CDP goals and objectives and acts in an advisory capacity to the Planning Director.” Input from the community regarding a proposed project is invaluable and must be taken into consideration in everything that we do, but we can’t forget our role as an Action Committee member. Land Use Map This area is currently designated as Important Agricultural Land and includes those identified in the ALISH classification system as prime or unique and in the Land Study Bureau’s soil study as Class B “good” soils. The development area is currently surrounded by a coffee farm and monkey pod trees. According to the applicant, the land is designated as ALISH poor and Land Study Bureau undesignated. In the definition section, there is this - - The location of Important Agricultural Lands should be verified by more detailed mapping when considering specific land use decisions. Comment: I would like to see this clarified. Preferred Settlement Patterns 3.3 Community Objectives. Objective 1: concentrate new commercial development in compact, walkable, mixed-use town/village centers. Comment: This proposed development is not located in the town center. It is on the highway, almost a mile from the existing town center, and is not safely walkable for potential local customers such as school children and kupuna. People walking from Pahala to the project would have to walk along the highway from Kamani Street. 2 Objective 2: Preserve prime and other viable agricultural lands. Comment: It appears that the surrounding land is viable for agricultural uses since coffee trees are currently being grown and cattle are being grazed. Will the development be limited to the current proposal of three acres? Objective 4: Protect, restore, and enhance Ka’ū’s unique cultural assets, including archeological and historic sites and historic buildings. Comment: Apparently there are no identified cultural assets on the site. Objective 12: Establish or expand retail, service, dining, and entertainment centers in rural villages and towns capable of supporting Ka’ū-appropriate growth. Comment: This development will expand services in an area currently lacking sufficient service, however it is not located in the town that it is supposed to serve. Land Use Policy Policy 1. Rehabilitate and develop within existing zoned urban areas already served by basic infrastructure, or close to such areas, instead of scattered development. Comment: The applicant has shown the State Land Use zoning but not current County zoning. Is it zoned urban? Is the existing 8” water main sufficient for this development? How will wastewater be handled? Policy 2. Concentrate commercial uses within and surrounding central core areas in Pāhala and do not allow strip or spot commercial development outside of the designated urban areas. Comment: The Land Use Policy Map for Pāhala shows that this development is adjacent to Low Density Urban. The Medium Density Urban sites are located in the current town core at the intersection of Kamani Street and Pikake Street, and at the area around Maile Street and Pikake Street. Changing the zoning at the project site would be considered spot zoning. Policy 3. Commercial facilities shall be developed in areas adequately served by necessary services, such as water, utilities, sewers, and transportation systems. Comment: discussed in Policy 1. Policy 4 is not applicable as it references industrial development. Policy 5 Is not applicable as it references resort areas. Policy 6 is not applicable as it references visitor accommodations. Policy 7 Future land use decisions shall be consistent with the land use policy map boundaries, designations, and policies herein (see figure 3, the land use policy map for Pāhala), unless the CDP and the General Plan are in direct conflict. Comment: The 3 proposed project would require a change in zoning from what is shown on the land use policy map. Policy 8 In the Low Density Urban (LDU) land use policy map category, changes of zone shall only be permitted to Single-family residential, Multiple-family residential, Residential, Residential-Commercial mixed use, or Open. Comment: The proposed change of zoning to Village Commercial would not comply with this policy. Policy 9 refers to infill capacity in areas designated Low Density Urban and therefore is not applicable. Policy 10 addresses recommendations from the Director of Planning to the Planning Commission for proposed zoning code amendments that would further the intent and ensure consistency with the objectives and policies of the Ka’ū CDP. Comment: the Action Committee would need to vote on recommendations that we are sending to the Director of Planning. Policy 11 addresses variances from the zoning or subdivision codes and is not applicable. Policy 12 addresses natural or cultural features to be preserved during subdivision. Comment: Any natural or cultural features should be addressed during the review of development plans, which comes later. Policy 13 addresses waivers to zoning and subdivision codes and is not applicable. Policy 14 discusses items to be considered during plan review and is not applicable. County Action Policy 15 and Policy 16 recommend that the General Plan land use maps be amended, if necessary, to conform with CDP land use policy map and to amend the General Plan table to reflect map amendments. Comment: Does the current proposed General Plan conform with the Ka’ū CDP land use policy map?