Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-05-05 Hearing Transcript - James Ishii REZ 16-204WINDWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAII HEARING TRANSCRIPT MAY 5, 2016 A regularly advertised hearing on the application of JAMES ISHII (REZ 16-204) was called to order at 9:26 a.m. in the County of Hawaii Aupuni Center Conference Room, 101 Pauahi Street, Hilo, Hawaii with Chairman Charles Heaukulani presiding. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Charles Heaukulani, Gregory Henkel, Donald Ikeda, Myles Miyasato, and Raylene Moses. ABSENT & EXCUSED: Donn Dela Cruz. ALSO PRESENT: Duane Kanuha (Planning Director), 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 11 members from the public in attendance. APPLICANT: JAMES ISHII (REZ 16-204) Application for a Change of Zone from a Single -Family Residential -10,000 square feet (RS -10) to a Neighborhood Commercial -10,000 square feet (CN -10) zoning district for approximately 58,500 square feet of land. The subject properties are located on the west side of Manono Street, approximately 500 feet north of Waiakea House Lots, Waiakea, South Hilo, Hawaii, TMK: 2-2- 027:038, 039, and 058. HEAUKULANL All right, we're going to move to the third item on our agenda. The Applicant is James Ishii, REZ 16-204. KAY: Thanks again, Mr. Chair. You get a double dose of me today. Again, this is an application for a rezone. Applicant James Ishii. Again, the subject three parcels are located in the South Hilo District of Hawaii Island; more specifically, in the Waiakea Houselots area of South Hilo. For reference, we've got Manono Street running north -south through the slide. We've got Lanikaula Street running east -west and Leilani Street, again, running east -west for your reference. Zooming in a little bit closer, again, we've got the three subject parcels here. Currently zoned for Residential —10,000 square feet as indicated in yellow. Other zonings in the area include Neighborhood Commercial —10,000 square feet which is similar to what the Applicant is asking EXHIBIT C for. This was rezoned back in 2005. And, then again Industrial -Commercial Mixed Use here indicated in purple. The State Land Use Boundary Map designates the subject parcels and surrounding area as Urban as indicated in pink. And, the General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide Map designates the subject parcels in Medium Density Urban, which would allow for this type of Neighborhood Commercial use. To the west is some High Density Urban indicated in red, and, to the northeast is indicated as Industrial in gray. Again, here are some photographs of the area. Here are the three subject parcels outlined in red on the left hand side. The top parcel here is currently vacant. It's a little bit different from the aerial photo in that it has been cleared and graveled. The two parcels to the south are that this middle parcel has two existing single-family dwellings that would be demolished in order to, as part of the proposed development. And, the bottom parcel, again, has an additional single-family dwelling that would be demolished. This is, again, Manono Street running north -south through the slide. This is zoomed in a little bit closer so you can see the three structures a little bit better. There are three existing driveways off of Manono Street that the Applicant is proposing to use as part of their development. The Applicant is requesting a Change of Zone from Single -Family Residential – 10,000 square feet to Neighborhood Commercial – 10,000 square feet for 58,500 square feet of land. The Applicant is requesting this Change of Zone in order to develop a 14,000 -square foot steel frame commercial building to be used as office space. Here is the Applicant's submitted site plan with Manono Street running toward the top of the slide east -west. It's just showing where, the general location of where the 14,000 -square foot building would be and associated parking in front. Again, not shown here on the site plan, but there are driveway accesses for each parcel off of the, off of Manono Street. Here's a view of Parcel 38. This is the kind of the first parcel. Again, like I said, it's been cleared and graveled. You can see the next parcel, the two single-family dwellings on the next parcel that will be removed as part of this proposed development. A view of Parcel 39 from Manono Street. Again, just showing the existing dwellings, and you can see the site of the third, the dwelling on the third parcel, and the reason I put that in there now is because it's very difficult to see from the front because of all the foliage that's in front of the house. Again, I just wanted to point out—and here, sorry here are some views of Manono Street looking south. The subject parcels are on the right hand side and, again, Manono Street looking north. The subject parcels are on the left-hand side. I wanted to point out very recently through the County's Manono Street Improvement Project, they've gotten full roadway improvements along the frontage of the subject parcels, including widening; curb, gutter sidewalks; drainage improvements; and the like. So, there aren't any conditions requiring that of the Applicant since they were already improved recently. 2 EXHIBIT C The Planning Director is recommending to forward a favorable recommendation to the County Council for this project, and I'm happy to answer any questions that the Commission may have. HEAUKULANL Thank you, sir. Commissioners, anyone have questions for Christian? No? Okay, could I ask the Applicant or his representative to please come forward? Good morning. ESAKL Good morning. Oh, good morning. HEAUKULANL Thank you for using the microphone. Could you please raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Planning Commission? ESAKL Yes. HEAUKULANL Okay, and I'd like you to start off by stating your name, the area you reside in, and then you can proceed to tell us what is on your mind this morning. ESAKL My name is Amy Esaki, and I'm representing my brother, James Ishii. I reside on Kauai, but I'm formerly from Hilo, Hawaii, and we are asking that the Commission have a favorable recommendation for the Change of Zone request to be forwarded to the County Council. HEAUKULANL Did you have an opportunity or did—did you say your brother? ESAKL My brother, yes. HEAUKULANL Your brother. Did your brother have an opportunity to review the Background Reports and the Recommendations from the Planning Director? ESAKL Yes, he has. HEAUKULANL Is, are those acceptable to him? ESAKL Yes, he said it's acceptable. HEAUKULANL Including the conditions? ESAKL Yes. HEAUKULANL Very well. Commissioners, any questions? Hearing none, you can take your seat. That was relatively painless. ESAKL Thank you. Yes, thank you. 3 EXHIBIT C HEAUKULANL All right, we have three members of the public who have signed up to testify on this matter, so I would ask a Lou Rhoades, Gail Rhoades, and Buel McCoy to please come forward. Is there anyone else who wants to be heard on this matter this morning? Good morning. I would ask the three of you to please raise your right hand, and do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Planning Commission? TESTIFIERS: Yes. HEAUKULANL Very well. It doesn't matter to us in what order you go, but we would ask that you speak—you're doing a good job speaking clearly into the microphone, and limit your testimony to three minutes, please. RHOADES, L.: Hello all. HEAUKULANL And, please please state your name and where you're from right as you begin. RHOADES, L.: Thank you for hearing us. I am Lou Rhoades and live in Hilo on Manono Street, and we, Manono Street was residential when we bought our property, and it has stayed residential with one exception. It was on the map that was shown, and we testified at that hearing. Actually, we testified at the County Council, and in spite of our objection, they went ahead and changed the zoning, and the reason for the change they said was there was a pressing need for additional office space in Hilo. And, as they said in the presentation, that zoning was changed in 2005, and that house has not had any additional—has not had anything but residential tenants in it since that. It's changed hands but it's still just residential tenants. They haven't had—there hasn't appeared to be any need for that change in zoning because there hasn't been anybody in that house across the street from us that has, had anything other than residential tenants. I'm kind of getting off my script here, and I'm gonna back to it and read through it because otherwise I'll leave out things and forget things I meant to say. But, that's basically the point. I feel that the issue is really trust. When you buy in a neighborhood and it's zoned residential, you should be able to trust that it's going to stay residential unless there's a really compelling need to change the zoning, and in this case, as I just said, there really isn't a compelling need because they haven't been able to use that property for that purpose—either the people who originally asked for the zoning change or the second owner that has it now—they haven't found a tenant that's a commercial or any other kind other than a residential tenant in that building. So, my, my opinion, the important reason for zoning is that you can trust when you buy into a residential neighborhood, it will stay residential, unless there's a real compelling need for a change. If the zoning is changed without a compelling reason, the zoning doesn't mean anything. The zoning in the house across as you know has changed several years ago—okay, I already went over that part of it. 4 EXHIBIT C In my opinion, to change the zoning in any other lots in that neighborhood would be a mistake because the one that was already changed and the reason for it has already been negated, and to change the nature of the neighborhood without a compelling reason is just wrong, and to go—the house that was changed, they stipulated that they had to maintain the character and the appearance of the original house, which I think was a good thing, that they at least did that. Well, if they put in office buildings then that's gonna change the nature of the neighborhood further and it's kind of doubly wrong. I think it was wrong to make the change on the last house, and I think it would be even a bigger mistake to make this change on this house on these three lots. If the zoning is just changed whenever anybody wants to, it kind of means that people can't trust that their zoning means anything. It becomes meaningless. It's just changed because somebody feels like they want to change it. In my opinion, Manono Street is an excellent location for residential. We looked, 20 years ago we bought there, and we looked at several different properties, and this is centrally located in the middle of everything, and it's accessible to everything and fairly close distance, and it's just an excellent neighborhood for residents, and to change it doesn'tI don't like the idea of changing it. I think it's wrong to change it, and I think you're kind of cutting off your nose to spite your face if you do because, I mean, for so many different reasons. There's the fact that having residential areas in the center of things cuts down on commuting. It cuts down on time and so it's more efficient. So, it's good for the environment, less gas usage. We've got a housing crisis to where there's a lot of homelessness and itcutting down the number of residential lots available is, you know, making it harder, you know, increasing the problems of homelessness. It's, you know, environmentally, economically, there are a whole bunch of different reasons that just doesn't make sense to me to change zoning in this area. And, so I object to it, and I would like to see that not done. I don't see any really compelling reason to do it. I think that wraps up what I had to say. HEAUKULANL Thank you, sir. Ma'am? RHOADES, G.: Hi, good morning. HEAUKULANL Good morning. RHOADES, G.: My name is Gail Rhoades, spouse to Lou Rhoades. I live at 1045 Manono Street, which is one property over from where the office buildings are proposed, and I'm just amazed that you would even consider putting three more office buildings in that neighborhood. On East Kawili, just north or east of the brewery, there's a brand new office building that was built two years ago, and it has not had a single occupant. It's all boarded up. It's an eyesore. And, as you know, driving around town, there are many buildings that are empty waiting for occupancy. I believe there is no need for three additional office buildings especially on Manono. The traffic is bad enough now. 5 EXHIBIT C I understand that Manono's an artery for commuting, but have you ever been out there at 6 or 6:30 in the morning. There are children out there. There are kids trying to get to school. Many college individuals throughout the day walking back and forth to school. Three office buildings would increase the traffic tremendously, and I believe it would just increase the risk for persons walking or riding their bike on that street. You just spent a lot of money revamping that portion of Manono to put in bike lanes and sidewalks, and to add three office buildings, and the additional traffic, would put everyone at risk. When we bought there, we bought with the idea that hopefully, we would be able to retire there because it's centrally located. I believe three office buildings that have the potential, great potential, for sitting empty will decrease our property value. The other issue I want to bring up is that there are many, many people in H.P.Hawaiian Paradise Park and Leilani Estates and Pahoa that would give anything to live in town. Dwellings for residential are few and far between in Hilo, Downtown, and they're not necessarily reasonably priced. I would prefer to see homes built on those lots. Two homes per lot. That would give six additional homes for people to relocate to centrally Hilo and closer to their jobs. As you know, the traffic is horrendous going to Pahoa and also in the morning coming to Hilo. There are many, many workers who travel that route, and they are besides themselves. They would love to live in Hilo. So, please, do not approve three additional office buildings that I don't believe at all are needed. Thank you. HEAUKULANL Thank you, Ma'am. Sir? MCCOY: Hi. My name is Buel McCoy. I own the property at 1046 Manono Street, these folks neighbor directly across the street, the property that's zoned C-10 [sic]. I bought it at about three years ago. At that time, I bought it from, I believe, he's a mortgage broker that as I understood had a mortgage office in there. I could be wrong. That's the way it was presented to me. I'm here to support the measure and the request on the part of Mr. Ishii. I've been on the Big Island for 46 years. I came here as a 19 year old kid. I'm 66 now. I've owned my own business for many years here. I've paid rent on commercial buildingsa fortune of rent over the years. I was a Goodyear dealer on the Big Island for 16 years. Finally, I have an opportunity to have a fee simple piece of property that's zoned commercial. I admit I haven't done anything with it. In the last three years, my plans changed. I previously had a bookstore which was going to go in there, and we sold the bookstore we had in Hilo and Kona. So, I haven't proceeded with that, but I really believe it's important that there is opportunities for people to own and develop commercial property in a reasonable price range as that is available on Manono or through rezoning. Otherwise, you have people that come to Hawaii or people that live here, and it's the same situation. You run across the same people that control almost all of the commercial property. I think it's wonderful that there is opportunities where small businessmen can buy into 6 EXHIBIT C an area which the County seems to be growing into commercial. Allow a guy to buy that and turn it into a reasonable commercial property and be able to prosper in this community. I am sorry that in some cases it may displease people that have lived there and, but I'm sorry, and that's growth in any community. Anyway, I really appreciate you folks considering the matter, and I wholeheartedly support Mr. Ishii's request. HEAUKULANL Thank you, sir. Commissioners, anyone have questions for these good folks? Hearing none, thank you. Is there anyone else who wants to be heard on this matter on our agenda? Seeing none, Commissioners, I would accept a motion to close public testimony. MOSES: I move to close public testimony. HEAUKULANL Thank you, Commissioner Moses. A second? IKEDA: I'll second it. HEAUKULANL Thank you, Commissioner Ikeda. Motion to close public testimony. All in favor signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONERS: Aye. HEAUKULANL Any opposition? None. Motion to close public testimony carries. Commissioners, is there a motion for action on this agenda item? IKEDA: Mr. Chairman, I'll make the motion. HEAUKULANL Thank you, Commissioner Ikeda. IKEDA: I move that a favorable recommendation be forwarded to the County Council on application for Change of Zone, Docket No. REZ 16-204, based on the Planning Director's recommendation, findings, and proposed conditions which shall be adopted. HEAUKULANL Thank you, sir. Do we have a second? MOSES: Second. HEAUKULANL Thank you, Commissioner Moses. Motion by Commissioner Ikeda; second by Commissioner Moses. Christian, if you could roll call the vote, please? KAY: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Commissioner Ikeda? IKEDA? Aye. KAY: Commissioner Moses? 7 EXHIBIT C MOSES: Aye. KAY: Commissioner Henkel? HENKEL: No. KAY: Commissioner Miyasato? MIYASATO: No. KAY: And Chair Heaukulani. HEAUKULANL Aye. KAY: Okay, we've got three aye votes and two no votes. Motion fails. HEAUKULANL Commissioners, we would consider other motions on this agenda item if you are so inclined. Hearing none, you will be notified of the Commission's decision in writing. Thank you. The discussion ended at 9:47 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Sarah Y. Hata-Finley, Secretary Windward Planning Commission 8 EXHIBIT C