Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-03-03 Hearing Transcript - Francis & Martha Rodillas REZ 16-200 WINDWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAI‘I HEARING TRANSCRIPT MARCH 3, 2016 FRANCIS H. AND MARTHA A. A regularly advertised hearing on the application of RODILLAS (REZ 16-200) was called to order at 9:40 a.m. in the County of Hawai‘i Aupuni Center Conference Room, 101 Pauahi Street, Hilo, Hawai‘i with Chairman Charles Heaukulani presiding. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Charles Heaukulani, Donn Dela Cruz, Gregory Henkel, Donald Ikeda, Myles Miyasato, and Raylene Moses. ALSO PRESENT: Duane Kanuha (Planning Director), William Brilhante (Assistant Corporation Counsel), Danny Patel (Deputy Corporation Counsel for the Windward Planning Commission), Daryn Arai (Planning Program Manager), Jeff Darrow (Staff Planner), Christian Kay (Staff Planner), and Sarah Hata-Finley (Commission Secretary). And approximately 10 people from the public in attendance. APPLICANTS: FRANCIS H. AND MARTHA A. RODILLAS (REZ 16-200) Application for a Change of Zone from a Family Agricultural–2 acres (FA-2a) to a Family Agricultural–1 acre (FA-1a) zoning district for 2.724 acres of land. The property is located along the northeast side of ‘Ākala Road, approximately 320 feet from the ‘Ākala Road – Kaūmana Drive intersection, Ponahawai, South Hilo, Hawai‘i, TMK: 2-5-040:042. HEAUKULANI: We’re going to move to number three on the agenda, Applicants Francis H. and Martha A. Rodillas. That’s REZ 16-200, and Jeff, if you could bring us up to speed on this one, please. DARROW: Sure, thank you, Mr. Chairman. If I can direct your attention to our presentation. As mentioned, our next Applicant is Francis H. and Martha A. Rodillas. They’re requesting a Change of Zone. The area of the subject application is within the South Hilo District. More specifically, we’re looking in the Kaūmana area. The subject property is identified with a black outline, and this would be off Kaūmana Road and ʽĀkala Road. We’ll zoom in a little closer here. We have the subject property identified with a black line, black outline. Again, this is on ʽĀkala Road. You’ll notice that there are different colors of, on the map that represent the different colors of zoning. The majority of the map is identified with a light blue that is represented \[sic\] of Agricultural – 3 acres. The darker blue and the little darker shade of blue both represent Family Agricultural. The lower portions are Family Agricultural – 1 acre, and the subject application is Family 1 EXHIBIT C Agricultural – 2 acres. We have some residential running along the roadway, and the lighter green on the bottom represents Agricultural – 1 acre. This is our State Land Use Boundary Map for the area. A majority of the area is represented by Agricultural State Land Use Boundary Amendment zoning. The pink, again, represents Urban along the main roadway in the area. This is our General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide Map. The subject property is identified as Important Agricultural land. The yellow represents Low Density Urban, and we have a little bit of Rural on the bottom portion of the map. Here is our aerial photo of the area. Again, for reference, we have ʽĀkala Road running in a north-south direction. The subject property is identified with a red outline, and currently, there is a single family dwelling that is constructed on the property. The Applicants are requesting a Change of Zone from Family Agricultural – 2 acres to a Family Agricultural – 1 acre zoning district for 2.724 acres of land. The reason for the request is to allow the Applicants to subdivide the property into one—two 1+-acre parcels that will then be conveyed to their family members. This is the Applicants’ proposed subdivision that was submitted with the application. It identifies the subject property, and then identifies the proposed two lots that will be subdivided if approved. Here are some site photos. This is looking mauka on ʽĀkala Road with the subject property on the right. This is the lower portion of the property, and this is a little higher up with the existing single family dwelling. You can see that there is drainage improvements that are done along the roadway. This is looking makai with, again, the subject property on the left side with the existing single family dwelling and ʽĀkala Road. It’s a little further down. The Planning Director is recommending that the Planning Commission send a favorable recommendation to the Hawaiʽi County Council for this Change of Zone application. Since the Background and Recommendation was distributed to the Commission, we have received one letter from the Department of Water Supply which has been handed out to the Commission, and it speaks to the water commitment that has been paid for the subject application. With that, that concludes our presentation. Thank you. HEAUKULANI: Thank you, Jeff. Commissioners, any questions for staff? None. Could the Applicants please come forward? Good morning. RODILLAS, M.: Good morning. 2 EXHIBIT C HEAUKULANI: Good morning. RODILLAS, F.: Good morning. HEAUKULANI: Could I get you both to raise your right hands, please? And, do you both swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Planning Commission? RODILLAS, M.: Yes, I do. RODILLAS, F.: Yes. HEAUKULANI: All right, please state your names, tell us where you reside, and let us know what’s on your mind. RODILLAS, F.: Go ahead. RODILLAS, M.: Good morning. My name is Martha Rodillas. HEAUKULANI: Good morning. RODILLAS, M.: And, I am the Co-Applicant, along with my husband, Francis, and we’re here to ask your approval for our rezoning application, but before I move on, I’d just like the record to reflect that I do work with Danny Patel at the Corporation Counsel’s office— HEAUKULANI: —We’re not going to hold that against you, though. RODILLAS, M.: Thank you. And, I am officially on vacation, and I have been—I have not allowed to see any of the files that Danny may have regarding our case, so there is, just wanted to let you know about that. HEAUKULANI: Thank you very much. Appreciate it. RODILLAS, M.: Okay, thanks. RODILLAS, F.: Good morning. My name is Francis Rodillas. I am also Co-Applicant with my wife, Martha. HEAUKULANI: Good morning, sir. Do either of you have additional information you want to share with us? RODILLAS, M.: Not really, but I just have a question ‘cause I’m not too familiar and maybe you can, you know, just answer my question. I had a question about the 15-foot setback. Does this body here have the authority to either recommend that or, you know, put it in or take it out? ‘Cause I notice that, that was listed—what condition was that? Let me see. As Condition D— was it Condition D? 3 EXHIBIT C RODILLAS, F.: Condition D. RODILLAS, M.: Yeah, Condition D says that the final subdivision map shall include the 15-foot future road widening. Does this body here have the authority to either leave that in or take that out or do we discuss that at the Council level? HEAUKULANI: Jeff? DARROW: The Planning Commission can make a recommendation, but the final authority comes from the County Council. In regards to this, it’s our understanding that with the previous rezoning that occurred, that was a requirement and a part of the subdivision that occurred, the 15- foot future road widening setback was already placed upon that subdivision. Correct? Which is already identified on the current subdivision map for this property. So, we’re just asking that it be, with this new subdivision that occurs, that it remains. RODILLAS, M.: Okay, ‘cause I don’t, maybe I’m looking at the wrong document, but Ordinance 13-38 does not include the 15-foot setback which is the property right next door. DARROW: Okay, that, I think was your— RODILLAS, M.: —I’m confused— DARROW: —your family. RODILLAS, M.: Yeah. DARROW: But, for yours, the first one, zero seven, let’s see which— RODILLAS, M.: —Yeah, it was included and then— DARROW: —Right— RODILLAS, M.: —when they subdivided, they took it out. So now, are we putting it back in again? DARROW: No, when they subdivided the lower property, they, I think they asked to take it out. RODILLAS, M.: Okay. DARROW: So, again, I guess that could be a consideration at this time— RODILLAS, M.: —Okay— DARROW: —to take it out for the upper one. 4 EXHIBIT C RODILLAS, M.: Yeah, that, that’s—that’s what we’d like to ask. Okay. RODILLAS, F.: Yeah, we also are aware that the property directly across was also subdivided in the near, near past, and they were also allowed to take that 15-foot out, and I think it has to do a lot with the, the road itself. I mean, the road extends probably a 1,000 feet past our property as County roadway, runs into a private roadway that runs into a dead end. And, for future development of that road, our property probably being the last property there that would qualify for this request of zoning, I just don’t see any future widening of this road to accommodate the, the amount of people that would be living on this road, and the fact that it’s not a roadway that runs completely through to Waiānuenue, would be a thoroughfare for everybody to use. It’s a road that services just the people there, and ʽĀkōlea Road which is directly above us, does provide this thoroughfare to go to Waiānuenue. And, I think if anything would happen in the future, it would be improvement of ʽĀkōlea Road, and not ʽĀkala Road. HEAUKULANI: Anything else, Jeff? DARROW: No, a— RODILLAS, F.: —I guess that at this level we’re just asking that you would give us a favorable recommendation that this 15-foot, 15,000-square foot \[sic\], 15-foot setback be removed from the final application and subdivision, and then we would also, again, point out that the two subdivisions that were done directly across us and directly makai of us were already granted this request. And, it kind of seems foolish to leave us there because then that would make the road run zig zag I guess, you want to say if they ever did that or they would then have to take back what they already gave other people. I just don’t see this road being widened in the, in the future. HEAUKULANI: Okay, let me just make sure that I’m clear and the record is equally clear. You have received the Planning Director’s Background Report and Recommendations. RODILLAS, F.: Yes. HEAUKULANI: And, you are in agreement with all of the proposed recommendations except— RODILLAS, F.: —Yes. RODILLAS, M.: Except we are asking that Condition D be removed. HEAUKULANI: Condition? RODILLAS, M.: D. HEAUKULANI: D as in dog? 5 EXHIBIT C RODILLAS, M.: Yeah, which states final subdivision approval for the development shall be secured within five years—oh, I’m sorry, not that part, but the second sentence. The final subdivision map shall include the 15-foot future road widening along ʽĀkala Road. We’re just asking that the second sentence be removed. HEAUKULANI: Okay, so except for the second sentence in proposed Condition of Approval D as in dog, you’re—youʽre okay with everything else? RODILLAS, M.: Yes, that’s correct. RODILLAS, F.: Yes, and for information, we saw the requirements that are put forward by the Department of Water Supply, and we’re able to meet those requirements. HEAUKULANI: Fair enough. Daryn? ARAI: Just a brief statement just to provide proper context to all of this. As you may well be aware, when we craft, when the Planning Director crafts his recommendation on any particular matter, we try to do it and/or accomplish it in a manner consistent with plans, policies, and standards established by the County. In this particular area, ʽĀkala Road is 30 feet wide, the right-of-way. That is substandard. The minimum right-of-way for an agricultural roadway is 50 feet, five-zero, and ʽĀkala Road as currently designated on the General Plan and on the, I believe, the City of Hilo District Zone Map, as a collector road because it’s intended to connect—connect all the way up to—I just lost— DELA CRUZ: ʽĀkōlea. ARAI: ʽĀkōlea Road. No, I’m sorry, not ʽĀkōlea Road— RODILLAS, M.: Waiānuenue. ARAI: I just lost the name of the road that does the loop—I’m sorry, and I live in Hilo. Go figure. Anyway, but it is intended to be a collector street. A collector street by County standards is minimum 60 feet of width, six-zero. So, with these designations in place, we are compelled to apply the applicable standards whenever a Change of Zone request comes in, keeping in mind that the Applicant is requesting the privilege of a Change of Zone that will allow for further subdivision in this particular area. So, it is simply a recommendation based on the standards that we, as a department, are compelled to look at and apply, but ultimately because it now rests with the Planning Commission, ultimately with the final decision by the County Council, each body can make its own determination as to what they deem to be appropriate and in compliance with the rules and regulations for a Change of Zone. 6 EXHIBIT C HEAUKULANI: Thank you, Daryn. Commissioners, any questions for either the Applicants or staff? Hearing none, thank you. Again, we have no one from the public signed up to testify on this matter. Is there anyone here that would like to be heard on this matter on our agenda? Seeing none, Commissioners, I’ll take a motion to close the public testimony portion of this matter. MOSES: I make a motion to close public testimony. HEAUKULANI: Commissioner Moses, thank you. IKEDA: I’ll second. HEAUKULANI: I’m sorry, Commissioner Ikeda? We’ve got a motion to close public testimony by Commissioner Moses; a second by \[Commissioner\] Ikeda. Any discussion? None? All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONERS: Aye. HEAUKULANI: Opposed? None. The motion to close public testimony carries. Commissioners, I’d entertain a motion for action on this one. IKEDA: Mr. Chairman, I move that a favorable recommendation be forwarded to the County Council on the application for Change of Zone Docket No. REZ 16-200 based on the Planning Director’s recommendation, findings, and proposed conditions which shall be adopted. HEAUKULANI: Thank you, Commissioner Ikeda. DELA CRUZ: Second. HEAUKULANI: Second by Commissioner Dela Cruz. Thank you. Staff, if you would roll call the vote and restate the motion in the process. DARROW: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The motion before us is to send a favorable recommendation for the Change of Zone REZ 16-200 to the County Council as recommended by the Planning Director. With that, we’ll take the roll call. Commissioner Ikeda? IKEDA: Aye. DARROW: Commissioner Dela Cruz? DELA CRUZ: Aye. DARROW: Commissioner Henkel? 7 EXHIBIT C HENKEL: Aye. DARROW: Commissioner Miyasato? MIYASATO: Aye. DARROW: Commissioner Moses? MOSES: I’d like to—I would like to approve with the Applicants’ request to take out the second sentence in Condition D. PATEL: So, then you’re—that’s a no vote then you’re saying. MOSES: That’s a no vote if that’s the proposed— DARROW: And, Mr. Chairman. HEAUKULANI: Aye. DARROW: The motion passes five to one. HEAUKULANI: Thank you. You’ll be notified of the Commission’s decision in writing. The discussion ended at 9:57 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Sarah Y. Hata-Finley, Secretary Windward Planning Commission 8 EXHIBIT C