Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-10-06 Hearing Transcript - Robert & Carol Oshiro REZ 16-208WINDWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAII HEARING TRANSCRIPT OCTOBER 6, 2016 A regularly advertised hearing on the application of ROBERT & CAROL OSHIRO (REZ 16- 208) was called to order at 9:17 a.m. in the County of Hawaii Aupuni Center Conference Room, 101 Pauahi Street, Hilo, Hawaii with Chairman Gregory Henkel presiding. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Gregory Henkel, Joseph Clarkson, Donald Ikeda, Myles Miyasato, and Raylene Moses. ABSENT & EXCUSED: Donn Dela Cruz. ALSO PRESENT: Duane Kanuha (Planning Director), Molly Stebbins (Corporation Counsel for the Windward Planning Commission), William Brilhante (Assistant Corporation Counsel for the Planning Director), Malia Ho (Deputy Corporation Counsel), Jeff Darrow (Staff Planner), Maija Jackson (Staff Planner), Christian Kay (Staff Planner), and Sarah Hata-Finley (Commission Secretary). And 12 members from the public in attendance. APPLICANTS: ROBERT S. AND CAROL OSHIRO (REZ 16-208) Application for a Change of Zone from a Single -Family Residential -10,000 square foot (RS -10) to a Neighborhood Commercial -10,000 square foot (CN -10) zoning district for approximately one (1) acre of land. The subject parcel is located on the east (makai) side of Kilauea Avenue, approximately 180 feet north of its intersection with East Kahaopea Street, Waiakea Homestead Houselots, Waiakea, South Hilo, Hawaii TMK: 2-2-040:004. HENKEL: Okay, moving right along. The next is REZ 16-208, Robert S. and Carol Oshiro for a Change of Zone. Christian, I believe, is going to be doing the presentation again. KAY: Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. We're going to be sticking around in the same parcel. Again, just for your reference, the subject 1 -acre parcel outlined here in red is located in the Waiakea Homestead Houselots area of South Hilo. Just again, for reference, we've got Kilauea Avenue running generally north -south on the slide and Kahaopea Street running east -west. In the general vicinity, this is adjacent to the west of the Puainako Town Center commercial area, and we'll zoom in here a little bit closer to the subject parcel again—this time outlined in black. Kilauea Avenue running north -south; Kahaopea running east -west. The subject parcel is currently zoned Residential –10,000 square feet as well as a significant amount of the parcels across Kilauea Avenue and Kahaopea. Again, adjacent to the east is at Puainako Town Center, and the zoning is Neighborhood Commercial –10,000 square feet as indicated in the pink color. EXHIBIT C The State Land Use Boundary designation for the subject parcel and surrounding area is Urban, and the General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide Map designation for the subject parcel is Medium Density Urban as indicated in orange. The High Density Urban is indicated in red, and that's again consistent with that Puainako Town Center area. And, in yellow, we've got a designation of Low Density Urban also in the vicinity. Here are two aerial photographs of the subject parcel. On the left, we've got the subject parcel outlined in red. You can see some of the surrounding uses again—the Puainako Town Center. Adjacent to the south is a parking lot, and then there's some residential use on the north of the parcel, and the majority of the use on the block is of the commercial nature. On the right zooming in, we've got the subject parcel again outlined in red. Kilauea Avenue running north -south through the slide. In the vicinity of the subject parcel, Kilauea is a three - lane road. We've got on the parcel four existing dwellings generally here toward Kilauea and then toward the back, a second, a third, and a fourth. The other structure here is a garage structure. The Applicant is proposing to demolish the dwelling closest to the street to accommodate a restaurant use. So, the Applicant is requesting a Change of Zone from Single Family Residential –10,000 square foot zoning to Neighborhood Commercial – 10,000 square foot for a one -acre parcel in order to accommodate a 2,280 -square foot restaurant. Here's the Applicant's site plan that was submitted with the application. Again, Kilauea Avenue running north -south. Again, just showing what we talked a little bit about before the existing dwellings here. It doesn't show the existing dwelling but shows that the existing dwelling would be removed to make way for the restaurant generally located here. Access would be off of Kilauea Avenue, and parking would be generally toward the northwest portion of the parcel. Parking would come in here—cars would come in here and then turn around and exit back out onto Kilauea. Moving forward, we have site photos of the subject parcel. Little difficult to catch the entire parcel where I was standing, so I apologize for that but we have one -two -three of the existing dwellings showing on the parcel. This is the dwelling that is going to be demolished in order to accommodate the proposed restaurant. Access again would be off of Kilauea here into the driveway, and parking would be on either side. And, here's just some views of the subject parcel. Again, Kilauea Avenue looking north. This is more toward Hilo Town with the subject parcel on the right-hand side. And, then this is Kilauea Avenue looking south. Again, here's the subject parcel on the left, and this is looking more toward Puna. The Planning Director is recommending that we forward a favorable recommendation to the County Council for Rezone 16-208. With that, I'd be happy to answer any questions that the Commission may have. 2 EXHIBIT C HENKEL: Thank you, Christian. Commissioners, are there any questions for staff? Okay, thank you. Would the CLARKSON: Actually, I do have a question. HENKEL: Okay, go ahead Mr. Clarkson. CLARKSON: I can't remember. Was there any restriction on turning coming out of this parcel? KAY: No, Public Works didn't have any restrictions on—like right in, right out, or anything like that given the three lanes there, and the middle turn lane, so, we didn't CLARKSON: —Well, I just noticed, though, in the photographs that there was no middle turn lane. It's, it's all crossed out there. KAY: The stripe here? CLARKSON: Yeah. KAY: Okay. Yeah, we didn't get any comment from Public Works restricting any access. CLARKSON: Thank you. KAY: Thank you. HENKEL: Any other questions of staff? KAY: Thank you. HENKEL: Will the Applicant or their representative please come forward? Hi again. Would you restate your name please for the record? NISHIMURA: Brian Nishimura. HENKEL: And, Mr. Nishimura, do you affirm or swear to tell the truth on this matter before the Planning Commission? NISHIMURA: Yes, I do. HENKEL: Okay, thank you. Proceed, please. NISHIMURA: I think the staff Background Report is, does cover the basics, and the Applicant is ready and willing to move forward with their project. In response to the Commissioner's question, there is in effect space there for the left -turn pocket. It's just, you know, it may be a matter of restriping because, in effect, there is three lanes there right now. 3 EXHIBIT C HENKEL: Okay, does any of the Commissioners have any questions for the Applicant? MIYASATO: Chair, I have a question. HENKEL: Yes. MIYASATO: Mr. Nishimura, have you had a chance or your client had a chance to review all the conditions, and are they all acceptable? NISHIMURA: Yes, they have. There is a concern about the roadway improvement requirements being required prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy because there are no other roadway widening or sidewalk improvements along that section of Kilauea Avenue. And, in fact, quite recently, the County Council allowed another applicant on the mauka side of Kilauea Avenue in the same block to defer those kinds of improvements until the County went in with a road widening project for the entire section of Kilauea Avenue so that the improvements could be done all at one time, and could be more efficiently managed. So, that's a concern, but you know, we understand Public Works' position, and they won't change their position regarding the recommendation that was made. So, you know, we'll see what happens with that. HENKEL: So, let me understand. Public Works doesn't have any opposition to the plan as it is, but they might have a long-range plan to improve that whole area of Kilauea Avenue? NISHIMURA: I'm not sure what their long-range plan is, but within the past year, like I said, the County Council allowed another property owner on Kilauea Avenue, who had a curb, gutter, sidewalk and road widening improvement condition on their rezoning, to defer those improvements, and in lieu of that to agree to pay their fair share of the cost of—the pro rata share of doing the improvements with the County of Hawaii. And, if—if that's possible, that's the option that my client would prefer to participate in. However, they realize that, you know, that may not be possible and so if required to do so, they are ready to make the improvements. HENKEL: Thank you. I think, I think we need to ask Corp. Counsel if—is it possible for us to add that condition that if, if it does happen in the future that the Applicant would pay a fair share. Is that appropriate, necessary? STEBBINS: I'm going to defer to the Planning Department. KAY: Thank you. Just to give you an idea, we were aware of the other condition language that the Council put in for the property across the street more toward the middle. When we make our conditions, we base them off of a number of things. Primarily, in this case, the commentary that we got from Public Works requiring curb, gutter, sidewalk improvements. 4 EXHIBIT C We also have in the Recommendation Report, there is in our General Plan a direction to widen and provide curb, gutter, and sidewalk improvements along Kilauea Avenue from Haihai Street to Ponahawai Street, so that's again kind of our purpose for putting those in with the understanding that the County Council has the authority to change or add a condition later on should they decide to do so. HENKEL: Okay, thank you. Mr. Clarkson? CLARKSON: I'm still somewhat confused about this whole thing. The Condition G requires the subdivision of ten feet. Dedication—it doesn't say who to dedicate to but presumably to the County, and then description of improvements. Isdo these improvements mean that for this, in front of the subject parcel, Kilauea will be improved to whatever its future improvement would look like? Are they going to basically widen Kilauea road? Put in sidewalk, curbs, and gutters? And so for however many hundred feet it is for this one acre parcel, Kilauea will be widened? KAY: If the improvements are done prior to occupancy, that's correct. NISHIMURA: And, I'd like to point out that it would be the only parcel that has that improvement currently in that block between Kahaopea Street and Puainako Street. You know, and that, in my mind, it presents an issue of safety because, you know, you're gonna have a short section of the road that's wider than every place else. HENKEL: So, to clarify in my mind, you're asking us to amend Condition G toto defer that until the County widens the whole area or includes the whole area rather? NISHIMURA: That would be the Applicant's preference. And, again, you know, they are willing to pay their fair share, whatever the pro rata share is determined to be at the time that the County moves ahead with those improvements. HENKEL: Okay. CLARKSON: So, is this—is this a relatively new procedure? I mean, I'm aware of requiring setbacks. For example, there was a setback on the previous application from a prior activity so that no buildings or other improvements could encroach on an area that might be later condemned and—and by the County and made into a roadway surface. But, now, in this application, a condition is being made to actually improve the roadway to its final width rather than just allow for that possibility at a future date. KAY: That's correct, and this is consistent, again, with the Iida—with the other application that we heard before. We passed it out of this Planning Commission with that condition in place, and at Council, they decided to change it. We could at the—at the desire of the Commission come up with some language to try and send it up that way, but we're just again staying consistent with what we've done before. Again, based on what we heard, a commentary from Public Works and also given our requirements in our General Plan. 5 EXHIBIT C HENKEL: Mr. Ikeda? IKEDA: If I'm not mistaken, on the Iida property, didn't we deny the—we didn't approve it because of that one particular condition, and I believe the Director had put in the reason why we denied the, the rezone. KAY: Is that correct? Yeah? I believe this was yours? JACKSON: Yeah, when the Commission heard the Iida rezone, the Director and the Commission recommended an unfavorable recommendation, and then it went up to Council and there was some discussion of just modifying the condition to do some type of pro rata arrangement, and the Department worked with Council on fine tuning the language so that Public Works, Planning, and Council all agreed on this common language. In this particular case, Public Works didn't suggest that language. They didn't suggest using a pro rata share. They wanted—they recommended the improvements be in place prior to any commercial use on the property which has been consistent with past practice of Public Works and Planning for several years until the Iida situation. CLARKSON: Well, but the just the next previous case, the first parcel we talked about today, had simply a road widening strip subdivided and dedicated but with no requirements for improvements to be made. JACKSON: That's correct. So, for that case, that was similar to the Iida case, and the reason Public Works made that recommendation is because the right-of-way along Pahoa Village Road is very irregular and there's several encroachments and it's already a somewhat mish-mash situation for pedestrians. So, Public Works felt like it would be better not to widen and create more, you know, block widened areas with sidewalks and to do a comprehensive sidewalk improvement project it wants and then use that opportunity to determine the right-of-way that's needed. So, we just CLARKSON: —Well, my question would be, wouldn't that same reasoning exactly apply to this case? Here, we're gonna have a roadway with the pedestrian walkway suddenly move to the right, well, depending on which direction you're going, move ten feet one way, go one block, and then move ten feet the other way, creating as you said a mish-mash of road widths. JACKSON: Yes, that is what would happen. So, as you suggested, an alternative would be to use that pro rata language that we used in Mr. Ogasawara's rezone if the Commission would like to do that or another thing that could be done if the Applicants are agreeable to this is for Condition F [sic], instead of saying, "A ten foot wide future road widening strip... shall be subdivided and dedicated, at no cost to the County, prior to [the] issuance of a Certificate of 6 EXHIBIT C Occupancy," you could say something like "when requested by" or "when required by Department of Public Works." So, KANUHA: Mr. Chairman? HENKEL: Yes. KANUHA: There's actually two issues going on here, Joe. The—not this particular application—but the application that is being referenced as having the different condition from the Council. The issue there was whether or not commercial should keep expanding down along Kilauea. Okay, and that from a land use perspective, that was why the recommendation was for denial notwithstanding whatever improvements would have to be made either by the Department of Public Works on a comprehensive basis or on a case-by-case basis. In this situation, we are recommending approval because it's adjacent to a commercial area already. Okay? It's—and so, what has happened here is Public Works has, and we defer to their requirements or their recommendations, and for commercial properties, their standards are road widening to whatever the road widening, the right-of-way width will be, whether it's there or not, and then the actual improvements on the property. Waiakea House Lots is a good example. When you go a case-by-case basis in Waiakea House Lots, that condition to improve the property with curb, gutters, and sidewalks, what you have is you have projects that want to move ahead, go ahead and do the improvements, whereas other properties down the road, you know, don't have `em. So, on the Lida case, we looked at that in terms of a long-term expansion of commercial of high densI mean, medium density uses along, along Kilauea. And, at the same time, there's a General Plan designation for Kilauea as a, for a certain right-of-way width. And, it was on that basis that the Council sent that application back for reconsideration. And, on that basis, Public Works recommended that instead of a case-by-case improvements on a parcel -by -parcel basis, right? Curb, gutter, sidewalks. We came back with saying eventually, Kilauea Avenue would be improved to the full right-of-way and so their recommendation at that time was that projects that come in for commercial along Kilauea, okay, would be required the same type of improvements as this one is, but that would be done on a pro rata basis when the County went in and did the improvements rather than on a case-by-case basis. In this particular case, I'm assuming because it's already next to a commercial zoned area, their recommendation came out different. Okay, it's the same as Iida was when it came through the Commission the first time. So, that's why I'm saying. There's two different issues here. So, I think it's up to the Commission this time. You've got some indication of where the Council may be going with this, but for this particular application, all we have to go on is what Public Works has recommended to us for this specific application. Does that help? 7 EXHIBIT C NISHIMURA: If I may make one more comment, the Puainako Town Center rezoned the adjacent parcel to the Oshiro's between Kahaopea Street and the Oshiro's property, and that has a commercial zoning. But, they did not the County did not require them to do curb, gutter, sidewalk and road widening improvements up front. So, even though that parcel is zoned commercial and is utilized as a parking lot for commercial purposes, that portion, their frontage between Kahaopea Street and the Oshiro property remains unimproved. HENKEL: Are there any more questions of the Applicant? Now, you know, we have the option of when we get to the portion where we make a motion for action, we can amend the conditions to, you know, reflect what we want them to say, right? So—in the discussion, you know, what would accompany the motion, but if there's no more questions for the Applicant, then I would say thank you, Mr. Nishimura. KANUHA: I have one question for the Applicant. HENKEL: Sorry, go ahead, Director. KANUHA: So, Brian, are you saying that, are you asking the Commission to consider the same language for the Iida rezoning as it relates to road widening improvements on a pro rata basis? NISHIMURA: That would be the Applicant's preference. If the Commission is willing to consider it, we would like to make that request, yes. KANUHA: Do we have that language, Christian? KAY: Yes, sir, Mr. Director, we do. KANUHA: Okay. HENKEL: Thank you. I have nobody signed up for public testimony so I'll look for a motion to close public testimony. MIYASATO: I make a motion to close public testimony. HENKEL: Second? CLARKSON: Did you second? HENKEL: No, I'mI'm sorry. I'm looking for a second. CLARKSON: I second. EXHIBIT C HENKEL: All in favor? COMMISSIONERS: Aye. HENKEL: Opposed? Okay, public testimony is closed. So, I would look for a motion for action at this point. CLARKSON: I would like to hear the language that's being referred to. KAY: Okay, thank you. This is under Condition G of that ordinance. The Applicant shall provide their pro rata share for the construction of full improvements to the entire property frontage along Kilauea Avenue consisting of, but not limited to, pavement widening with curb or sorry—concrete curb, gutter, and sidewalk, drainage improvements, and any required utility relocation meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works. This pro rata share for roadway improvements specified in this condition shall be determined by the Department of Public Works and shall become due and payable to the County of Hawaii within six months from the date that formal notice is served upon the Applicant, its successors, or assigns by the Department of Public Works regarding a program for the installation of curb, gutter, and sidewalk improvements along the frontage of Kilauea Avenue in proximity to the subject property. HENKEL: Thank you, and I'm sorry, Mr. Nishimura, as the language, as you understand it, that would be okay with your client? NISHIMURA (from audience): Yes. HENKEL: Okay, then I'll look forward to a motion for action. CLARKSON: I'm sorry. I have one more question. HENKEL: Sure. CLARKSON: Was—was there a requirement for subdivision and dedication in addition to pro rata share or was there a setback or what, what about the land? KAY: Sure, the prior condition asked for a 10 -foot wide future road widening strip to be subdivided and dedicated to the County. HENKEL: Thank you, Christian. KAY: Thank you. HENKEL: Is there a motion for action? CLARKSON: Do we have to move for an amendment of the conditions first? Make a motion — 9 EXHIBIT C HENKEL: I think you would include in the motion the amendment that you wish, and I think you could refer to it as read by the planner. CLARKSON: I move that a favorable recommendation be forwarded to the County Council on the application for Change of Zone, Docket No. REZ 16-208 based on the Planning Director's recommendation and filings as amended for Condition—F? MIYASATO: G. CLARKSON: G? KAY: G. CLARKSON: As amended for Conditionas, for Condition G with the language, the pro rata language that we just heard from the Planning Department staff HENKEL: Thank you. Is there a second to that motion? IKEDA: I'll second. KAY: If I may clarify just one thing, the Condition G that is in the proposed ordinance before you right now for Oshiro adds in that 10 -foot future widening strip subdivided and dedicated to the County prior to Certificate of Occupancy, and then it goes into the provision of those improvements. AreI don't want toI'm just wondering, we're not—we don't want to replace that, the provision or the requirement of the 10 -foot road widening strip to be dedicated, so are we just adding the contents of the language of Condition G after that? HENKEL: Right, instead of CLARKSON: —That was my intention, yeah HENKEL: instead of on occupancy it would be pro rata. KAY: Well the CLARKSON: —You know— KAY: Pardon me, the provision of that 10 -foot future road widening strip dedicated to the County, the language in this condition says prior to certificate of occupancy. The other language about doing the improvements is also prior to certificate of occupancy, but that's all on the same condition. CLARKSON: My intention in making the motion was that the subdivision and dedication language remain --only that the improvements be delayed until such time that Public Works 10 EXHIBIT C wants to do the improvements at which time the Applicant would make their pro rata contribution to the improvements. NISHIMURA: That's acceptable. HENKEL: Yes, Mr. Nishimura? NISHIMURA: That's agreeable. HENKEL: And that's how I understood it, the motion as well. KAY: Okay. HENKEL: Is there a second? IKEDA: I'll second. HENKEL: It's been moved by Commissioner Joseph and seconded by Mr.Clarkson, I'm sorry—and second by Mr. Ikeda. Any discussion? Then, we'll do a roll call vote. KAY: May we have one moment, please? DARROW: Sorry, Mr. Chairman. We just want to make sure we get this subdivision action correct. What's happening is we're, we're going off three different ordinances. It's my understanding that currently, the most recent ordinance condition that addresses this is the Ogasawara application. Public Works, rather than having the, the 10 -foot future road widening strip subdivided and dedicated to the County, before they ask for it, what that does is it puts the burden on the County to have to maintain that portion, so in this particular situation, it's prior to certificate of occupancy. In the Lida, it was within five years from the effective date. We'd like to make sure that we're consistent with the most recent, which would be upon request of the Department of Public Works, similar to the pro rata share. So, if we could make sure that language is consistent with the latest condition. HENKEL: Does that work for you, Mr. Clarkson? CLARKSON: Absolutely. HENKEL: And it was within six months of them demanding it, Public Works, right? DARROW: Correct. HENKEL: Okay. DARROW: Thank you. 11 EXHIBIT C HENKEL: And that's—and that's okay with the Applicant? So, is there any discussion on the motion? Do we need to reread the motion? KAY: Yeah, we can do that. So, we're approving this recommendation with the amendments to Condition G to indicate a 10 -foot future road widening strip along the property's Kilauea Avenue frontage shall be subdivided and dedicated at no cost to the County when required by the Department of Public Works. And then, we will add the condition language from the Lida ordinance which reads, "the applicant shall provide their pro rata share for the construction of full improvements to the entire property frontage along Kilauea Avenue consisting of, but not limited to, pavement widening with concrete curb, gutter, and sidewalk, drainage improvements, and any required utility relocation meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works. This pro rata share for roadway improvements specified in this condition shall be determined by the Department of Public Works and shall become due payable to the County of Hawaii within six months from the date that formal notice is served upon the applicant, its successors, or assigns by the Department of Public Works regarding a program for the installation of curb, gutter, and sidewalk improvements along the frontage of Kilauea Avenue in proximity to the subject property." HENKEL: Thank you. Would you do a roll call vote now? KAY: Thank you, Mr. Chair. HENKEL: Oh, I'm sorry, I'm sorry. Let's do discussion first. Is there any discussion? Okay, thanks. KAY: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Commissioner Clarkson? CLARKSON: Aye. KAY: Commissioner Ikeda? IKEDA: Aye. KAY: Commissioner Miyasato? MIYASATO: Aye. KAY: Commissioner Moses? MOSES: Aye. KAY: And Chair Henkel. HENKEL: Aye. 12 EXHIBIT C KAY: Thank you very much. Motion carries five, nothing. HENKEL: Thank you. You'll be notified of the Commissioner's findings in writing. The discussion ended at 9:51 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Sarah Y. Hata-Finley, Secretary Windward Planning Commission 13 EXHIBIT C