Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-03-05 HearingTranscript - Moaniala Holdings LLC REZ 738 WINDWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAI‘I HEARING TRANSCRIPT MARCH 5, 2015 MOANIALA HOLDINGS, LLC (Amend A regularly advertised hearing on the application of REZ 738) was called to order at 9:03 a.m. in the County of Hawai‘i Aupuni Center Conference Room, 101 Pauahi Street, Hilo, Hawai‘i with Vice Chair Raylene Moses presiding. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Raylene Moses, Charles Heaukulani, Gregory Henkel, Donald Ikeda, and Stephen Ono. ABSENT & EXCUSED: Myles Miyasato. ALSO PRESENT: Duane Kanuha (Planning Director), Danny Patel (Deputy Corporation Counsel for the Windward Planning Commission), William Brilhante (Assistant Corporation Counsel for the Planning Director), Daryn Arai (Planning Program Manager), Jeff Darrow (Staff Planner), Maija Jackson (Staff Planner), and Sarah Hata-Finley (Commission Secretary). And approximately 14 people from the public in attendance. APPLICANT: MOANIALA HOLDINGS, LLC (formerly HILO HILLSIDE CORP) (Amend REZ 738) Request for amendments to Conditions B (water commitment payment), C (time extension to secure Final Subdivision Approval for remaining phases and deletion of a construction bond to construct the Kupulau Street extension), D (construction of Kawailani Street and Kupulau Street extensions), and H (fair share credits for road improvements) of Change of Zone Ordinance 08 115, which amended Ordinance 93 36, which rezoned approximately 170 acres from Agricultural-20 acre (A-20a), Agricultural-10 acres (A-10a), and Agricultural-3 acres (A-3a) to Residential and Agricultural-1 acre (RA-1a). The property is located along the south side of the Puainako Street Extension, southwest of the Sunrise Estates Subdivision, Increment I, Kūkūau st 1, South Hilo, Hawai‘i, TMK 2-4-082:001-56, 58-61 (formerly 2-4-008: por. 014 and 026). MOSES: The first item on the agenda is the application for Moaniala Holdings, LLC. Staff? JACKSON: Thank you, Chair Moses. Good morning everyone. The first item on the agenda is a request to amend Change of Zone Ordinance 08 115. The Applicant is Moaniala Holdings, LLC, formerly known as Hilo Hillside Corporation. The Applicant is requesting to amend four conditions of the zoning ordinance. The subject property is located in the South Hilo District. You can see the property on the slide outlined in black here in the middle. Just to orient the Commission, this white, thick line that runs through the top of the property is the Puainako Street Extension. And then, let’s see, this 1 EXHIBIT A road here is the Komohana Street, and then the Mohouli Extension is located here. Then, you have the Sunrise Estates Subdivision between Mohouli and Puainako Street. The subject property is, as you can see, one phase of the development has been completed and there’s two areas of the property that remain undeveloped. The property is currently zoned Residential and Agricultural – 1 acre, so minimum lot size of one acre, and that is similar to the lot sizes of the Sunrise Estates Subdivision to the north. Surrounding land is also zoned Agricultural – 1 acre, and then, in the blue to the west and south is Agricultural – 10 acres. And then you can see the Kaūmana area subdivisions at the top of the slide and then the Waiākea subdivisions off to the east. This is a General Plan map for the area. The entire property is designated Rural which is kind of the brown color, and that’s also similar to Sunrise Estates. And then you see the blue off to the east is the University zoning. That’s undeveloped State land that’s used for University purposes. And then the light yellow color is Low Density Urban which is consistent with your small lot residential subdivisions. This is a road system map from the General Plan, and I am going to be talking about two roadways, future roadways, on the property, and so I just kind of wanted to give the Commission an idea of where those are located. This is the Kupulau Street Extension. Currently, Kupulau Street ends right here. It doesn’t go any further north than here. And, the General Plan designates that roadway as a future major collector road. And, right now, right-of-way has not been set aside in this area here or on the subject property, but right-of-way has been set aside when the Sunrise Estates development went in, so this is a large road lot for that purpose. The other roadway that’s called for in the City of Hilo Zone Map is the Kawailani Street Extension that runs through the property. Kawailani Street currently ends, I believe, right about here. And, so the plan calls for it to be extended up to Puainako Street, and actually even through, make some kind of connection to Edita towards Kaumana Drive. This is the State Land Use Boundary Map for the area. You can see the entire property is in the Agricultural District, and then the surrounding Urban areas are shown in pink. And this is an aerial photo. It’s a little bit dark, but you can see the beginning stages of the first phase of development. This aerial photo is about two years old now. There are some houses that are already on the properties in this location here. So, the Applicant is requesting to amend four of the zoning conditions of Ordinance 08 115—08 115 amended the original zoning ordinance which was adopted in 1993, and that changed the zoning for the entire one hundred and seventy acres development from various agricultural zonings to Residential and Agricultural – 1 acre. At the time the Applicant had proposed to develop I think a hundred and forty lot subdivision. So, now the Applicant is requesting four amendments, and I just want to run through each one individually. Amendment to Condition B, this is with regards to changing the timing of when 2 EXHIBIT A the Applicant would pay the water commitment for the remaining two phases of the development. Currently, the ordinance reads within one hundred and eighty days after the effective date of the amended ordinance. That’s our typical language that we include, and this development cannot proceed without water. And, the Department of Water Supply cannot issue water commitments to them until the Pi‛ihonua-Kūkūau Transmission Line project is completed in order to convey more water to this property. So, they’re requesting to delay payment of water commitment fees until after completion of that transmission line project. Department of Water Supply did comment, and that is in your Recommendation Report. They’re asking that the developer start paying water commitment fees after they’ve executed the contract for the construction of the transmission line project. So, in this case, the Director’s recommending kind of a favorable for this condition, but with a little modification as Department of Water Supply requested. Condition C, the Applicant’s requesting a time extension to secure Final Subdivision Approval for the remaining phases. Currently, the condition reads that they were supposed to have completed Final Subdivision Approval, I believe, by 2005, which has lapsed, so now they’re requesting to push that to, within five years of completion of that transmission line project or ten years from the date of this amended ordinance, whichever occurs first. And then, they’re also requesting to delete the construction bond requirement for the Kupulau Street Extension. Just going back to Condition C, I know that this is a little out of order, but I’m just going to go with the Director’s Recommendation and let you know what that is as I address each condition. So, for Condition C, the Director has been consistent with the request of the Applicant, so that would delete the construction bond and require Final Subdivision Approval within five years of completion of the water system. Condition D, the Applicant’s requesting a variety of amendments regarding construction of Kawailani Street and Kupulau Street. Those are the two extensions that I mentioned. And, the Director for that one, basically the developer has recognized that the cost of constructing a bridge over the drainage easement—let me show you where that is. There’s a drainage easement that runs right along Puainako Street, just, just to the south of Puainako Street through the development. So, the developer had to construct basically two bridges over drainageways in order to do the first phase. One was here at the entrance, and one was located here over this large drainage easement. In order to complete Phase 2, the way the ordinance reads now, the developer is required to extend Kupulau Street, build the street to County dedicable standards through their property from Puainako Street to the southern property boundary which would include building a bridge over that drainage easement. The cost of the bridge is estimated to be quite high, at least, I believe it was two million to three million dollars. So, the Applicant is requesting to amend the condition to build the street except for the bridge over the drainage easement. So, for that, the Director is also agreeing with that request for the reasons stated in the Recommendation basically being that it was thought at the time that the, there would be funding for construction of Kupulau Street back in 2008. That funding has not appeared. The State 3 EXHIBIT A hasn’t granted the funding, so the cost of building a bridge, putting that entire cost on one developer is not, not proportional, it’s not reasonable for the scale of their development. So, the Applicant, the condition reads that the Applicant would still build those two roadways except for the bridge, the Kawailani Street Extension and Kupulau Street Extension. And, then going on to Condition H—Condition H, the Applicant requested fair share fee offsets which we, we typically include in rezones whenever an applicant constructs roadway improvements or provides land for parks, we usually grant a fair share offset. So, in this case, the Applicant requested some changes to that condition and the Planning Department is recommending again favorable with a little bit of modification, and that basically being that if the developer constructs those two roadways except for the bridge, they receive offsets from their fair share for that cost. And, if for some reason, during the upcoming General Plan Amendment, if it’s decided that either of those extensions are no longer desirable for regional roadway, then we would release the developer from that obligation, but they would still have to pay their fair share assessment. So, I think that kind of in a nutshell describes the request. This is the site plan showing the entire development. You see Phase 1 here which is already completed. This is the, this is Kūkūau Street entering their property, and then Phase 2, what is shown as Phase—I’m sorry, Phase 2 is over here. So, that has not been developed yet, and that shows a roadway providing access to each lot as well as the future Kawailani Street Extension here. And then, Phase 3 shows again this roadway here providing access to each lot, and then the Kupulau Street Extension in this area here. So, the drainage easement that requires a bridge is located just south of Puainako Street in this location. These are some photos of the site. This is standing at the corner of Puainako Street and the project access on Kūkūau Street, looking towards Hilo. And then this is looking up Puainako Street, and this is looking into the project site. You can see the entry sign, Hilo Hillside. And then this is a picture of that drainage easement area that would require a bridge to connect Puainako Street to the development. As I had mentioned before, the Planning Director, Director’s recommending a favorable recommendation with modifications to the Applicant’s request. And, I do want to call your attention to one item that the Applicant provided to us this morning. It’s a, about four maps, and I believe the Applicant’s going to discuss that. Are there any questions? MOSES: Commissioners, any question of staff? Okay, will the Applicant or their representative please come forward and be seated at the table in front of the Commissioners? FUKE: Good morning. 4 EXHIBIT A MOSES: Good morning. 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? FUKE: Yes, I do, Ma‛am. MOSES: Thank you. You may begin your presentation or testimony by first stating your name and place of residence, and speaking directly into the microphone. FUKE: Thank you very much Madam Chair. My name is Sidney Fuke. I’m a planning consultant, and I’m here assisting with the processing of these amendments. I’d like to acknowledge the presence of the owner/developer. His name is James Pappas, as well as his associate, James Lee. They’re seated over there. So, if you have questions that I cannot answer, then I’ll direct it to them. I’d like to first acknowledge that you know, your staff’s presentation is excellent as always, and I really gotta compliment Maija cause you know it’s, it’s somewhat like of a complicated you know request, but she understood the request very well and you know came forward with recommendations and modified some of the proposed conditions that, to which the Applicant has reviewed all of them and has found them to be acceptable. I’d like to just kind of touch very briefly on some of the items that you know she mentioned, and, and to expand just a few others just for purpose of, purposes of clarification. The project is called Hilo Hillside and it’s a 143 one-acre lot subdivision. They completed the first phase which is like consisting of 56 lots. Phases 2 and 3 are still kind of pending. You know, the reason they’re pending is for couple of reasons. One is that the zoning condition required performance by “x” period of time, and obviously that time expired, and secondly, although the water system is all already in place, the Water Department has said that until this Kūkūau- Pi‛ihonua Transmission system, which is indirectly related to the project is, is completed, that additional water coming through the system would not be available, so that’s, that project is already funded and it’s, they’re going through the environmental assessment process and hopefully within the next three to five years, the project would be completed at which time the subsequent phases can be completed. I passed out you know the map and it, all of which I think I’ve included with the exception of the first one. The first map is really, when the property was rezoned back in 1993, you know way back when, the Puainako Street Extension was not completed, but it was projected to be the Sunrise Estates Increment No. 2, so this is the map that was produced as part of the traffic impact study prepared in conjunction with that application. The idea was that they were going to have like access through the existing Sunrise Ridge Subdivision through Kūkūau Street and eventually getting, getting to over here. So, there, the owners then, the current owners acquired the property in the early 2000’s. So after they acquired the property, what happened was that then the County started to actively pursue the construction of the Puainako Street Extension, and so, that created a lot of delay because you know the Puainako Street Extension, a portion of it bisected the property. There was a lot of 5 EXHIBIT A engineering studies that were required and so the time required to complete the project in accordance with the original ordinance, lapsed, and so they had to go in for a time extension. So, when they went in for a time extension back in 2008, there were like in addition to having the extension granted, there were a number of additional conditions that were imposed by the County Council. Some of these conditions included like an affordable housing obligation because back in 1993, when the original ordinance was adopted, there was no specific requirement for affordable housing so, now they had affordable housing, so they, they tacked on an affordable housing. There was also the fair share obligation. And finally, the Council believed that funding was available as the staff had indicated for the Kupulau Street Extension, but that never materialized, but because the, of the anticipation of receipt of the funds then, the Council felt that you know the, that small section within the project area should, the Kupulau Street Extension should be completed you know by the Applicant. So, if you look at the second sheet, the second sheet basically shows like, and which is reflected in the staff’s presentation, you know where the subject property is, you know, it’s all shaded and yellow, and then where the extensions are, you can see the Puainako Street Extension, the one running mauka-makai or north, well up and down the page, and the other one is the Kupulau Street Extension, as well as the Kawailani Street Extension so both the Kawailani and the Kupulau Street Extension bisect only just a small portion of the subject property, and so it was kind of understandable back in 2008 when the Council considered the amendment to require the developer to construct at least that small portion of Kupulau Street Extension. At that time, the developer had agreed to do it because it was not really fully aware of the financial consequence behind making that commitment. As they then proceeded to construct the first phase and doing the bridge costs and then they realized like they can’t really handle it. You know, to, to be responsible for constructing not necessarily that small section of the Kupulau Street Extension on their property more so this commitment of having three, approximately three million dollars worth of, just to build a bridge over the property onto Puainako Street, you know the extension. So, notwithstanding that as we were discussing it with the staff and what, I’m sorry—the third, the third sheet which is also reflected in the, the staff’s presentation, kind of highlights you know the entire project, and then it shows you know in yellow where the Kawailani and the Kupulau Street Extensions are and that area shaded in orange is, are essentially properties that the owners have agreed to relinquish or purchase and set aside and dedicate to the County. One of the orange area is like, would make the Kupulau Street Extension feasible because it goes into the Sunrise Ridge Estates Subdivision. The other one, of course, is like another piece of property that the owner would have to acquire to make the possibility of having the Kūkūau Street Extension feasible. In discussions with the staff, you know, the whole issue related to whether, you know given, you know I think we’ve all have driven along the Puainako Street Extension so the whole idea was you know given the, the function of this Puainako Street Extension, whether you’d really want to have like another major intersection, you know crossing so close to each other. You know, Kūkūau Street is a major intersection and you know hopefully, that will make that connection, and you know then that, that’s already existing. And then to have like another extension, I mean another connection less than, about less than, I guess 6 EXHIBIT A 800 feet away, you know for the Kupulau Street Extension would make that, might be questionable. And, so I think that what the staff had indicated is that in conjunction with the General Plan update program right now, they’re evaluating the wisdom of maybe having two access points or maybe just consolidating that or having only a different access that would serve as original roadway that connects the upper Wāiākea Uka area to the Downtown Hilo and then to the Kaūmana area so that’s what’s being investigated. What the staff is proposing is, and which is acceptable to the Applicant, is that if they want to construct that portion of the Kawailani and Kupulau Street Extension now, then they can do that, but if on the other hand, you know this is, they can do that now, in spite of the fact that the decision hasn’t been made as far as where, whether they’re going to have any of these extensions or not. But, on the other hand, if they decide to wait, and the decision is made to maybe delete the Kupulau Street Extension as shown, then they would not have an obligation to construct. So that’s the way the staff’s condition is, is constructed right now, and the Applicant has no objections to that. One thing I think like that should be made clear is that you know what the Applicant is, you know, based on the proposed condition is prepared to do is that number one, not to foreclose any, any future road options, regional road options in that area, so they’re willing to construct that portion of the, although if it’s undecided, that portion of the Kupulau-Kawailani Street Extensions within their property, acquire and dedicate to the County the portions that are outside of their property, one of which falls in the existing Sunrise Ridge Estate, I’m sorry, two of which fall within the Sunrise Ridge Estates, so they’re gonna acquire and dedicate those properties you know to the County. And then so what that does is that it creates the opportunity or gives the County the option for eventual connection if they decide to do that or not. Finally, I think like, what I’d like to kind of also point out was that when they came in for the extension back in 2008, as I mentioned earlier, they had an obligation now to provide an affordable housing requirement which was absent back in 1993 when the, when the ordinance was initially opposed [sic], approved. So, in trying to address the affordable housing obligation, they worked out an agreement with the County, and the agreement was struck in May of 2012 to constructed 43 affordable homes in the Kaūmana area. It’s a project called Kumulani Gardens that’s currently, they’re seeking the appropriate construction plans and subdivision approval for that. In relation to that Kumulani project, what they’re doing is, it’s not like a standard affordable housing project but they’re going to have a mix of affordable and non-affordable housing, so in conjunction with, with that overall concept, they’ve introduced a park, and they’re also going to provide curb, gutter, sidewalk, so it would not look like a standard affordable housing project but it’s gonna be more like a more, like a conventional project. So, the getting some measure of relief in constructing the, the bridge, what we call the Kupulau Extension bridge, a bridge that may not materialize or have any function, would enable the Applicant to make the affordable housing program much more feasible. 7 EXHIBIT A So, in a nutshell, that, that’s the overall concept, and it is somewhat complicated, and I appreciate the staff’s fully understanding and trying to make it as less complicated as possible. MOSES: Question, Mr. Fuke, for you and the Applicant. Did you receive the Planning Department’s Background Report and Recommendation? FUKE: Yes, I did, as well as the Applicant, and you know, we discussed the staff’s proposed and modified conditions and found them to be acceptable. MOSES: Okay, do you have any further comments to make at this time? FUKE: No, but I’m prepared to answer questions that the Commissioners may have. MOSES: Thank you. Commissioners, any questions of the representative or Applicant? Seeing, none, thank you. We will now proceed with public testimony, and there is none. I can accept any motion at this time, Commissioners. Commissioner Henkel. HENKEL: Yes, this Commission recently ruled that there’s not enough water and too much traffic impact in the general, in this general area of Hilo for a small charter school, and I, I think it’s unrealistic to expect that there is enough water and traffic for you know a 143 luxury homes, so I cannot support this development, and I move that an unfavorable recommendation be forwarded to the County Council on application for amendment REZ 738 for the aforestated reasons. MOSES: Any second? If there’s no second, the motion fails. Is there any other motion? IKEDA: Yes, I’ll make the motion. MOSES: Commissioner Ikeda. IKEDA: I move that the application to amend REZ 738 be approved based on the Planning Director’s recommendation with modification to Applicant’s request. MOSES: Any second? ONO: Second. MOSES: It was moved by Commissioner Ikeda and seconded by Commissioner Ono. Discussion? IKEDA: Yes, you know I’m very familiar with this because I was on the Council at that time, and in fact, some of the conditions, I put in, but you know at that time, one of the representatives guaranteed that we were gonna get funding for the road which never materialized, so you know, so I can understand the request for all of this amendments, so I support it at this time. 8 EXHIBIT A MOSES: Any other discussion? Motion for approval roll call vote needed, please? JACKSON: Thank you Chair Moses. So, the motion before you is to send a favorable recommendation to the County Council as recommended by the Planning Director. Commissioner Ikeda? IKEDA: Aye. JACKSON: Commissioner Ono. ONO: Aye. JACKSON: Commissioner Heaukulani? HEAUKULANI: Aye. JACKSON: Commissioner Henkel? HENKEL: No. JACKSON: And Chair Moses. MOSES: Aye. JACKSON: Okay, the motion passes four, zero—oh, four, one, I’m sorry. MOSES: You will be notified of the Commission’s decision in writing. Thank you. The discussion ended at 9:34 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Sarah Y. Hata-Finley, Secretary Windward Planning Commission 9 EXHIBIT A