Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-08-02 Windward Transcript Council CDH PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAI‘I HEARING TRANSCRIPT AUGUST 2, 2012 A regularly advertised hearing on the COUNTY COUNCIL BILL 250 AMENDING CHAPTER 25, ARTICLE 7, DIVISION 2 OF THE HAWAI‘I COUNTY CODE 1983 (2005 EDITION, AS AMENDED) TO INCREASE RESIDENTIAL DENSITY, INCLUDING PARKING REQUIREMENTS, WITHIN THE DOWTOWN HILO COMMERCIAL DISTRICT was called to order at 11:55 a.m. in the County of Hawai‘i, Aupuni Center Conference Room, 101 Pauahi Street, Hilo, Hawai‘i, with Chairman Zendo Kern presiding. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Zendo Kern, Dean Au, Ronald Gonzales, Wallace Ishibashi, Stephen Ono and Raylene Moses STAFF PRESENT: Ivan Torigoe (Deputy Corporation Counsel), B. J. Leithead Todd (Planning Director), Daryn Arai (Planning Program Manager), Phyllis Fujimoto (Staff Planner), Maija Cottle (Staff Planner), Jeff Darrow (Staff Planner), and Sharon Nomura (Secretary) And three people from the public in attendance. INITIATOR: COUNTY COUNCIL Bill No. 250 amending Chapter 25, Article 7, Division 2 of the Hawai‘i County Code 1983 (2005 Edition, as amended), to increase residential density, including parking requirements, within CDH, Downtown Hilo Commercial District. KERN: Okay, No. 7, Initiator: County Council, Bill No. 250 amending Chapter 25, Article 7, Division 2 of the Hawai‘i County Code 1983 (2005 Edition, as amended), to increase residential density, including parking requirements, within the CDH, Downtown Hilo Commercial District. Daryn, will you be doing the presentation on this? ARAI: Yes. Kern: Whenever you’re ready. ARAI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The County Council referred to the Planning Commission Bill No.250 which would amend the Downtown Hilo Commercial Zoned District section of the Zoning Code to allow for an increase in density, or permitted density, within the Downtown Hilo District, as well as specifying some parking requirements. Now without going into detail about what the bill is trying to accomplish, when the Bill first came down to us, upon looking at it we realized that what the bill was attempting to accomplish failed to consider other sections of the Zoning Code that -. You know, I believe the best way of representing this is the Zoning Code is made up of many different parts. When you touch one part of the Zoning Code it affects another part. So you can’t just touch one section and ignore the rest, because then you create a conflict between sections of the Zoning Code. 1 EXHIBIT C In this particular instance it was focused more on the parking requirements. They were trying to specify a certain amount of parking per residential unit when Downtown Hilo currently has no parking requirement. But what happened is they failed to look at amending another section of the Code which still said no parking required in Downtown Hilo. So for people like us, the planners, as well as anyone who has to adhere to the Code, when you look at the two sections of the Code, there will be a conflict. We did meet with Councilperson Ikeda who introduced the bill, and he understood what we were pointing out. And he was more than willing to work with our office to craft a proper bill, and he will then at that point reintroduce it. The reason this is coming back, coming before you, even knowing what we know, is because once the Council referred it down to the Planning Commission, there was no way for the Council to sort of pull it back. Once it goes, it goes. And at that point, the Planning Department is also compelled to recommend either approval or denial. There’s no in between, which is why you’ll see in the recommendation that we are recommending an unfavorable recommendation, but without prejudice. It’s not like we’re passing judgment on the proposal at this time. It’s simply because we’re going to look forward to the resubmittal of a bill that is properly constructed. So with that I stand ready to answer any questions that you have. KERN: Any questions for staff? Commissioner Ono. ONO: Is this a focus on the residential areas primarily, this parking problem, or is this -? Because I notice they’re looking at the units being 500 square-foot. And so I’m kind of wondering as to where is the emphasis, industrial areas, or restaurants, or what? ARAI: The bill is only focused for the area designated Downtown Hilo Commercial by the Zoning Code, and that area is bordered by Kapiolani Street, and I think Ponahawai and Wailuku, so basically the old section of town, Downtown Hilo. Because of the way Downtown Hilo is designed, meaning the structures are all front loaded right up against the street, there’s really no parking. Everybody has to park on the street. Many years ago the Council introduced or designated a special zoning classification, Downtown Hilo Commercial. And it’s sort of like trying to accommodate the way Downtown Hilo evolved over a time. Residences above your commercial uses, sort of like a mixed use commercial district, no parking, no setbacks, because there’s nothing, you know, no way for you to fit things on the property. So it was a special zoning district classification. But one thing it did was place a limit on the maximum density, residential density, permitted in Downtown Hilo, which is basically 1,000 square feet of land area per unit. The proposed bill was attempting to double the density up to 500 square feet of land area per unit. That is consistent with your General Plan, which designates Downtown Hilo for High Density Urban, as well as modifying the parking requirements. Because right now you could put a residential use; like an apartment complex, in Downtown Hilo, but no parking is required, no on-site parking is required. The bill was attempting to at least require one stall per unit. ONO: My next question, if you don’t mind. KERN: Go ahead. ONO: I’m kind of wondering in terms of today’s society one parking per unit is kind of not realistic, yeah? ARAI: Well, it depends on the locale. If you situate residential uses above commercial uses and in an area that has a mix of uses the assumption is that you become less vehicle dependent. Things are more within walking distance; and that’s part of the concept. So people who have no desire to have a car and want to be situated in close proximity to support services and uses would, could find Downtown Hilo attractive. 2 EXHIBIT C ONO: Well, let me clarify while I’m looking at, or pursue what I’m looking at. Most units, couples, have two cars. So here you’re reducing from 1,000 to 500 and you’re only looking at one parking. I don’t think that’s realistic if, you know -. ARAI: Well, right now the way the Code stands is that you could put a residential unit in Downtown Hilo with no parking. So if -. ONO: Yeah, but if we’re making recommendations -? ARAI: Right -. ONO: Don’t you -? ARAI: Well, I think that’s why there are series of compromises in any bill. You try to strike a balance. In this particular case, because of the way the bill is constructed -. You’ll notice the recommendation is without prejudice. It’s because the Planning Director has not, sort of, vetted this whole thing through. When the new bill gets submitted, we’re going to distribute it to the affected agencies, we’re also going to ask the Downtown Hilo Association to comment on it and get their input, at which point the Director will offer its recommendation. KERN: Madam Director? LEITHEAD TODD: Yeah. I wanted to say that amongst the various CDPs and some of the community development efforts is the idea that you live, work, play especially in areas of higher density. So if you look at the Kona CDP, the idea is that you try to get people out of their cars. Downtown Hilo currently does not have a parking requirement for any of those buildings. It’s all on-street parking. There is one or two that have a few, you know, parking stalls off. And the vision of some of the people who are involved with Downtown Hilo is that if you’ve got commercial, residential, shopping opportunities, coupled with bus service so you have a bus stop in the area where you can go, that it lessens the need to have cars. Now that’s a long-range vision. There are people who live in Downtown Hilo who don’t have cars; and they can go to KTA, they can go to Sack N Save. If they want to go some place, they’ll take a cab, go to Mooheau get a bus ride. This proposed bill, you know, we’re still waiting for the next one, actually is imposing a parking requirement where there’s currently no parking requirement Downtown. And it was based to some extent looking at other urban areas like San Francisco, what was the requirement on the number of stalls. It may not reflect the way we currently live in our homes. You know, hey, I’ve got two cars my house, right? One time we had four. And so I think a lot of the bills that you see, both in Kona as well as in Hilo which are more urban, is this kind of vision that they’re trying to increase mass transit and decrease the use of vehicles. Whether that actually plays out or not, I don’t know. But that’s sort of the vision of where some people are going with the designs -- both for the, some, when we did -- on the Kona side we did the Kamakana Villages, the affordable housing project. And the people in Downtown Hilo, they actually want to attract a residential component. Whether this is the bill or not, we don’t know. But there is that goal of trying to revitalize Downtown Hilo by having a residential component so that people are there more than just 8 to 4 or 8 to 5. KERN: Thank you, Madam Director. Commissioner Au? AU: You know, I’m surprised that the Hilo Downtown Association didn’t respond. I know you said you’re going to give them a chance to respond later, but I’m surprised that they didn’t come and -. Or do you know where they stand on this? ARAI: The bill was never transmitted to them. And, because as soon as the bill came in, we saw that there were issues regarding the way the bill was constructed. So we didn’t bother to send it to them. We were 3 EXHIBIT C actually trying to get the Council to withdraw the bill instead of forcing us to come up with a recommendation and conducting a hearing on it. You know, we were just trying to take the shortest route. It was sort of like kind of getting late to the hearing date when we realized they couldn’t pull it back. So it kind of forced us to move forward. KERN: This appears to be a lot of housekeeping -- that it went in, and once it got submitted we were forced to take it up even though it was already realized that it needs some work -. ARAI: And -. KERN: Prior to coming here. ARAI: I forget the way the rules, your rules say, but there are certain situations that if we don’t act within 120 days it could be like a favorable recommendation. I don’t recall if this was the case, but we just don’t want an action by default. So -. KERN: Very good. Any other questions for staff? Seeing none, for the record, there is nobody from the public signed up to testify. So with that I’m willing to entertain a motion. Commissioner Au. AU: Mr. Chair, thank you. I move to send an unfavorable recommendation to the County Council regarding Bill No. 250 -. KERN: Is there a second? MOSES: Isn’t it without bias? KERN: Prejudice. MOSES: Prejudice, prejudice? AU: Without prejudice, an unfavorable recommendation. Thank you, Commissioner Moses. MOSES: Second. KERN: Very good. Any discussion? Seeing none, take the vote. ARAI: Commissioner Au? AU: Aye. ARAI: Commissioner Moses? MOSES: Aye. ARAI: Commissioner Gonzales? GONZALES: Aye. ARAI: Commissioner Ishibashi? ISHIBASHI: Aye. 4 EXHIBIT C ARAI: Commissioner Ono? ONO: Aye. ARAI: Mr. Chairman? KERN: Aye. ARAI: Mr. Chairman, motion carries with six aye votes. KERN: Very good. Respectfully submitted, Sharon M. Nomura, Secretary Windward Planning Commission 5 EXHIBIT C