Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-01-05 Hearing Transcript - Rhodes Moore LLC USE 16-065WINDWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAII HEARING TRANSCRIPT JANUARY 5, 2017 A regularly advertised hearing on the application of RHODES MOORE, LLC (USE 16-065) was called to order at 9:43 a.m. in the County of Hawaii Aupuni Center Conference Room, 101 Pauahi Street, Hilo, Hawaii with Chairman Gregory Henkel presiding. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Joseph Clarkson, Donn Dela Cruz, Gregory Henkel, Donald Ikeda, and Myles Miyasato. ABSENT & EXCUSED: Raylene Moses. ALSO PRESENT: Daryn Arai (Deputy Planning Director), Malia Ho (Deputy Corporation Counsel for the Windward Planning Commission), Kelly Gomes (representing the Department of Public Works), Jeff Darrow (Planning Program Manager), Maija Jackson (Staff Planner), Christian Kay (Staff Planner), and Sarah Hata-Finley (Commission Secretary). And 13 members from the public in attendance. APPLICANT: RHODES MOORE, LLC (USE 16-065) Application for a Use Permit to allow the establishment of a 120 -bed assisted living facility and related uses on 6.22 acres of land situated within the Neighborhood Commercial (CN -7.5) zoning district. The property is located on the southeast side of the intersection of Kanoelehua Avenue (State Highway 11) and East Kahaopea Street, Waiakea Homestead House Lots, South Hilo, Hawaii, TMK: 2-2-044:032, 035 and 037. HENKEL: Is everybody good to go for the next agenda item? Okay, we'll move onto the USE 16-065. And, Maija will again present. JACKSON: Okay, this is going to be a very brief presentation. Again, the Applicant is Rhodes Moore, LLC. They're requesting a Use Permit to develop an assisted living facility on the subject property. And, the property is in the same location as the last item on the agenda. It actually consists of three of the four lots that we discussed, and they're outlined in black on the slide. Currently zoned Neighborhood Commercial. Again, the General Plan designation for the property is Low Density Urban which allows residential density up to six units per acre. And, an aerial view of the property. The proposed assisted living facility would be located generally in this location here. So, the Applicant is requesting to establish a 120 -bed assisted living facility and related uses on about six acres of land in a Neighborhood Commercial District. The assisted living facility would be three stories high and approximately 81,000 square feet in size. It will provide 24-hour living accommodations in a home -like environment and offer support and assistance for the resident's daily living needs and activities. 10V1111.11 1.1 The project will be constructed in two phases. The first phase will include 88 beds and then a second phase will include about 32 beds. Again, this is the site plan of the proposed facility. Access would be across from Awapuhi Street off of Kahaopea, and there would be a loop driveway. The first phase of the facility would be in this location here, and then the second phase, 32 beds, would be located over in this area here. This is a drawing showing the proposed elevations of the structure, and I believe the top drawing perspective would be if you were on the highway looking towards the property. This is the main entrance drop-off area, and then you can see the rest of the structure here. And, then this perspective on the bottom is looking more towards the intersection. So, again, you have a drop- off area on this side and then the units over to the right side. And, we discussed the traffic improvements so I won't go through that again. The Planning Director is recommending approval with conditions. And, again, we provided a yellow revision sheet for revisions, revision of Condition 4 and a new Condition 6. Condition 4 relates to rewording the condition we had originally proposed to allow the Applicant to consolidate the properties and resubdivide them so that they can do both the assisted living facility and other commercial development. New Condition No. 6 that we're proposing is to ensure that there is an alternative access in situations where the access onto Kahaopea may not be available due to flooding or other situations. And, that concludes my presentation. HENKEL: Thank you. Any questions from the Commission for Maija? CLARKSON: Yeah, I do. HENKEL: I'm sorry, Joe. CLARKSON: Do you have a map that superimposes the proposed developments with the floodway? JACKSON: No, I don't have that. HENKEL: Any other questions? Thank you. Will the developer and their representative come forward again? Would you raise your right hands? Do you affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Planning Commission? YEH: I do. DEWALD: Yes. HENKEL: Okay, thank you. State your name, speak into the microphone, and proceed. EXHIBIT B 2 YEH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission again. My name is Tom Yeh and with me is John DeWald, principal of the Applicant Rhodes Moore, LLC. One of the things that I did want to comment on was the reference to the 6.22 acres. When we came in for the Use Permit application, the way the properties were configured is the total amount of acreage is about 6.22 acres that this Use Permit applies to but in practicality, the actual footprint for the assisted living facility will be less than that, and then we'll probably carve out the commercial segment of the property as a part of the consolidation/resubdivision process, but that's all we have to add at this point. HENKEL: Thank you. And, Commissioner Clarkson, Daryn pointed out to me Page 3, there is a topographical illustration that shows the floodway. You canoh, you've got it. CLARKSON: Yeah. HENKEL: I hope that clears it up for you. Any questions for the? IKEDA: Yes, I'd like to ask Mr. Yeh. HENKEL: Go ahead. IKEDA: Tom, you guys offered Mr. Doi and Ms. Salazar easement on your guys' roadway? YEH: Yes. IKEDA: I know because that, when I looked at Graphic Images, that was one of the conditions that I remember we put on that they were given access. YEH: Yeah, and unfortunately our discussions haven't been able to proceed beyond that proposal at this point. IKEDA: My main concern was that they had an access to get out of their property. YEH: Certainly. And, you know, I mean even if they were to try to get an access over their existing easement now, it's just not a good location for a variety of reasons, and so, we did want to provide that to them, and it's still on the table. Thank you. HENKEL: Any other questions? Thank you. Oh, I'm sorry. CLARKSON: I'm sorry, I do. HENKEL: Commissioner Clarkson. EXHIBIT B 3 CLARKSON: The reason I was asking for the super—you know, the map, it appears to me and I'm still trying to clarify that the proposed wastewater treatment facility, the proposed constructed wetland or aerated lagoon secondary treatment is in the floodway. YEH: And maybe our engineer can explain that, but let me CLARKSON: —Okay, okay. YEH: —Let me, let me do that as best as I can, and Yen, if I'm incorrect, let me know. Basically, what the concept is, you know, you have an existing floodway in a certain location now. To accommodate that facility and its related improvements, what happens is there's going to be some redesign of the floodway in those locations to accommodate the facility with some adjustment here and there, and then what happens is that the water then proceeds out off of the property as it is now but internally on the property, there will be some adjustments to deal with those issues that you described. From the wastewater facility perspective, that's not going to go into the stream itself. It will be through injection wells, the wastewater. So, it's not going to affect the stream itself. CLARKSON: Well, II saw the injection wells, but YEH: —And, it's not in the flood zone. CLARKSON: I just DOI (from audience): It's (inaudible) the flood zone. CLARKSON: Okay, if maybe I could just get a little clarification on how that, how that sewage treatment will be protected from flood waters. YEH: Right, and then we do have Yen Wen Fang here who is an engineer from Engineering Partners that can help better describe. HENKEL: Can I swear you in please? Raise your right hand. Do you affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Planning Commission? FANG: I do. HENKEL: Okay, please state your name and proceed. FANG: My name is Yen Wen Fang. I'm with Engineering Partners in Hilo. The way we located the wastewater treatment plant on site is in a location that is graded out that's above the floodplain so it's, it used to be in a floodplain, but it's no longer in the floodplain. That, I believe, you have a, you have a map showing where it is. That area, it was the, it was partially in the floodplain before, but after we do the improvement, it's completely outside of floodplain. In EXHIBIT B 4 fact, it's probably ten feet higher than the flood level, and any discharge will be away from the floodplain. You know, will keep it as far away as possible from, from the floodplain. DEWALD: And, maybe I can add just one, a little bit different clarification on the floodplain stuff One of the challenges we've had with the project is that when we first started working on the designs, the FEMA map was a certain thing. During the design, the project, FEMA updated their map to a new map. Both maps do not correctly identify some of the floodplain areas. In other words, some of the areas that are low that are actually in the floodplain were outside of the floodplain, and some areas like this area are actually high and out of the actual floodplain but indicated on the FEMA map. Part of the CLOMR process that we're going through is to correct the map so it's appropriate as well as provides some adjustments to the floodplain to make all this work. HENKEL: Thank you. Any other questions? You may be seated. Mr. Doi, we'll give you three minutes if you'll like to sign up to testify? Okay, yeah, raise your right hand. Do you swear or avow to tell the truth on this matter before the Planning Commission? DOI: Yeah. HENKEL: Proceed. You have three minutes, please. DOI: This area where these guys talking about, Roland wen bring the old hospital, when they broke the hospital and he wen dump `em over there. But, he went dump `em all in the floodplain illegally and nobody when do nothing, too, and that is actually floodplain where these guys like make all that stuff But, he telling now not in floodplain. Maybe stay high now but that's all rubble from the old hospital that was dumped and still there yet. But, to me, that was dumped illegally and the leach from that hospital, maybe get pollutant inside `cause lead or whatever. Nobody check. Still there yet. That going drip in the waterway and going down, naturally go down toward Hawaiian Home Housing, the leach, you know from whatever going drain in the ground. That's why somebody gotta check to, from that old hospital that stay dumped over there, I know that get rebar and cement that they neva separate and even exposed in the ground sticking out of the ground. I wen show that to the County guy came last time and still nobody still do nothing yet to. So, hopefully, you guys can look at that `cause I was thinking before you guys approve any of these building permits, you guys should go back and make sure they take all the rubbish outta the flood zone first and check up on this hospital, and make sure they comply with all that, then issue this permits for they move on to their new project after they clean up all their old shit that they did. And, not just oh, forget about the past, and just fast forward and let them go on with what they like do now. But, I have no say in that. That is all up to you folks. So, that's all I have to say. Thank you. Have a nice day. HENKEL: Thank you, Mr. Doi. And, you do have a say in it. We've given you an opportunity to present your point of view, so thank you. DOI (from audience): I been there 50 years, you know? EXHIBIT B 5 HENKEL: Okay. Is there anybody else that would like to sign up for public testimony? If not, we could look for a motion to close the public testimony. Oh, I'm sorry, Mr. Yeh? You would like to respond, I think? YEH: Briefly, briefly. Yeah, when the current owner did get their grading permits for the fill that's thereI just want to make that clear—there's been no determination of violation. When the Applicant came in and did their due diligence, they also did a phase one environmental assessment which came out clean. And, so, I understand that there may be some suspicions about issues, but from our perspective, there are none. Thank you. HENKEL: Thank you. Now, is there a motion to close public testimony? LEE (from audience): I would like to sign up. HENKEL: Okay, sir. What's your name, please? LEE: Is this on? Oh, okay, hi. I'm Bobby Lee. Retired ex -State Highways IKEDA: Swear him in? HENKEL: All right hang on, hang on. HO: Hold on. You gotta get sworn in first. LEE: Excuse me. HENKEL: Please raise your right hand, Mr. Lee. LEE: Sure. HENKEL: Do you swear to tell the truth on this matter before the Planning Commission? LEE: Yes, I do. HENKEL: Okay, thank you. You have three minutes. State your name again and proceed. LEE: Okay, I'm Bobby Lee. Retired State civil engineer, retired land surveyor. I know Russell very good because I live at Hilo Lani Subdivision. I'm your back neighbor. And, it bothers me to hear that you folks are put in this odd position because there's things that has to be done, to me, that hasn't been done. And, one of them is resubdivision. To get a business complex, to get an elderly complex, to get a flood zone, you need to get subdivisions of both different pieces so you can apply your, your approval or disapproval on that pieces. How you gonna do a business after the residential, residents for seniors? I agree with residents for seniors. It's good. I have my mother at Regency. Now, it's Legacy, and it costs me $11,400 a month. Now, listen, $11,400 a month. Soon, we, and me, we're gonna have more relatives in there that we kind of EXHIBIT B 6 like last minute forced to put them in there if they don't have Medicare. Thank you. So, what I'm saying here is the easements for Russell has to be considered. What Russell says has to be listened to. Take all that into consideration, Mr. Developer and your counsel, and things will move along. Being a resident, I get affected too, because I got a lot of trees blocking my way and vegetation. That's all going to go. The people living in the senior center, it's gonna see my backyard. Right now, I've got privacy. So, it affects everybody in a neighborhood. Kahaopea Street needs improvement. I cannot see the County trying to put money up later in trying to fix it. It's not gonna happen. And, you're still gonna hear grumbles the Council approved. It's not gonna work. There has to be good conversation from the developer and the agencies involved to come up with a good, clean, honest plan. And, I'm going to end here to put some thought. Think about it. Think about all involved in this whole situation, and come up with a good plan, `cause right now I don't see any subdivision of the easements where everything is going to be settled. Yes, they might allow a right turn, right turn in, right turn out `cause I worked for State Highways, but there is a bus stop there also. And the bus stops on the highway `cause they don't go in the grass on the shoulder. It could be a conversation of the County, State, and the right turn in, right turn out. There has to be everybody thinking bigger. Okay? The flood control will be improved as soon as they develop the flood control at the golf course when the County has the money from the Federal, all that water is going to go to the flood control under the 4 -Mile Bridge. That's the reason that bridge has a 4 - mile flood control system. When that water goes in there, all the water coming down Kawailani is going to be cut off Right, Russell? That water comes from the golf course. It's going to be cut off. Now, how do we take care flood problems? We need to get the monies to put this flood control system working. Then we can develop. Everybody can develop their land. Not for us. For our families. Thank you. HENKEL: Thank you, Mr. Lee. DOI: (from audience): (inaudible, clapping) HENKEL: Is there anybody else that would like to testify or any response? Okay, I'll look for a motion now to close public testimony. MIYASATO: I make a motion to close public testimony. CLARKSON: Second. HENKEL: It's been moved by Commissioner Miyasato and seconded by Commissioner Clarkson to close public testimony. All in favor say aye. COMMISSIONERS: Aye. HENKEL: Opposed? Public testimony is closed. We can now look for a motion for action and discussion on the agenda item. EXHIBIT B 7 MIYASATO: Chair, I'll make a motion. I move that the application for the Use Permit Docket No. 16-065 be approved based on the Planning Director's findings, recommendations, and proposed conditions which shall be adopted. IKEDA: Second. HO: Myles, are you adopting also the revisions they made? MIYASATO: Also, with the revisions. HENKEL: Okay, and there is a second? IKEDA: I second. HENKEL: It's been moved by Commissioner Miyasato and seconded by Commissioner Ikeda. Could you reread the motion and do a roll call vote, Maija? JACKSON: Okay, the motion is to approve Use Permit 16-065 as recommended by the Planning Director with the revised conditions. Commissioner CLARKSON: No, I HENKEL: I'm sorry, Maija. Was there any discussion on this motion? CLARKSON: No. HENKEL: Okay. CLARKSON: I'd like to discuss the motion a little bit. HENKEL: Thank you, Mr. Clarkson. CLARKSON: I don't know where my proposed amendment to the conditions would go, but I'm concerned that we would issue a Use Permit when the access to the property during times of flooding is completely cut off And, I would like to propose that the permit be conditional on providing access to the property that is not subject to flooding, either off of Kanoelehua as has been talked about before or by redoing the intersection so that it's protected from flooding by a large culvert or some other such thing. I think that having a large number of elderly people in a facility such as this that would be isolated from emergency care would be too dangerous. I also have one other suggestion. HENKEL: Go ahead. 10V1111.11 1.1 CLARKSON: I'm still concerned about the access for the existing residents. I haven't—you know, I hate to make the permit conditional on that being resolved because otherwise that gives the, the owner of the resident [sic], you know, veto power over the entire project. On the other hand, the proposals for modifying the intersection basically make their existing access unusable. I don't know how that's gonna be resolved, but I think it should be resolved somehow before the project gets too far along. HENKEL: Thank you. You know, I'm under the impression that for the facility, they're not going to open it until they have that alternative access, but I do share your concerns about the, the residents being blocked during the construction time. Mr. Yeh? YEH: Yeah, Commissioner Clarkson, one of the revised conditions that Planning did suggest in that handout was to add this new Condition 6 which provides that prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy for the assisted living facility, the Applicant shall provide an alternative access for emergency access to the facility when the primary access driveway is not accessible. Yeah, so that should take care of that issue which is really appropriate that you raised that. Right, and then there's actually an alternate access which they can also deal with which is to the south of the property. But, with respect to the driveway easement itself, that will remain a legally accessible driveway. I mean, that's something that we can't mess with because it is something that they have an entitlement to in terms of the easement for their, for the existing easement. It's not there right now, but they will have that entitlement, and as staff indicated, Public Works will need to accommodate that in some form or fashion. And, they will always be able to use, if they want to, the access that we have off of Kahaopea, so we think that, that issue is resolvable one way or another without holding us hostage to something that you're talking about. HENKEL: Thank you. Does that answer some of your concerns? CLARKSON: Well, I apologize for not reading the yellow paper before I brought up that issue. Is it—going back to the residential access, is it possible that the commercial area could be moved slightly east so that the existing, though now legal, could be made into a legal access, and they could just continue to use what they're using now? DEWALD: A couple—two, two points on that one is that we can look to see if we can accommodate that in terms of, the reason is those places, the issue is that right at the corner, we could put a little loop in to get them, bring them further down. So, it would have to be approved by the Department of Public Works. We would have to grant them additional easement area on that area. We can look at that. A third alternative we offer them also is to the south, there's a small portion of the property that's part of the project. If you can put the site plan up. If you see to the south, that little strip, there's a, the dead end of that street there is also a potential access option that we have explored that we could make available to them. EXHIBIT B 9 So, we have three options trying to accommodate it with the current easement or with some changes that easement, them accepting to use our driveway and, and planned access as well as whatever emergency access we have or an option to the south. The south would take some work because there is a channel that goes through there that we would need to put a little, we'd put a culvert on. CLARKSON: I have one more concern. I noticed that the perimeter of the main building, it's surrounded by parking and access roads, and there appears to be no landscaping designed into the project to separate the project from the neighbor to the south and the subdivision across the way to the east. I'm new here, but I've seen landscaping requirements to kind of buffer the visual impact of commercial buildings in our activities in the six months I've been on the Commission. I wonder if that would beoh, tell me, Maija, that it's in there already. JACKSON: It is in there. Do you, do you want me to describe the landscaping that would be required? CLARKSON: I actually would because— JACKSON: Yeah, it's not really shown on the plan. CLARKSON: Okay. JACKSON: So, the landscaping rule, the Planning Department landscaping rule requires that they install buffer yard landscaping around the perimeter of the property, and that would be from the ground to three feet high, completely solid, opaque. And, then from three feet high up to 20 feet, it would be intermittent landscaping. So, you could see through it from 3 feet to 20 feet. There would also be landscaping required for any parking areas so all along the perimeter of the road where it's not up against a property line, that would require landscaping. There are landscaping requirements for within the parking lots, and there are also landscaping requirements for any like generators or air conditioning units, garbage disposal areas, loading zones. There's additional landscaping for those areas as well. And, that is in Condition No. 5. CLARKSON: Thank you. JACKSON: You're welcome. CLARKSON: How would that, how would that landscaping requirement be affected by the easement, the driveway easement by the, along Kanoelehua. I mean, would there be any place for any landscaping along the main highway there? JACKSON: Well, I did talk to the Applicant, Mr. Yeh, this morning about, you know, I don't know the legality of whether they can place landscaping within an access and utility easement, so that's something that they'll have to consider. If it's not something they can do, then they would need to provide landscaping outside of the easement, so possibly move this building east a little EXHIBIT B 10 bit in order to accommodate that landscape, landscaping along the highway, and then they would have to provide landscaping CLARKSON: —Yeah, that's where— JACKSON: —Yeah, I'm not exactly sure how they would do that because of the easement, the driveway east. Yeah, that, this plan isn't being approved. You're approving the use today. The Applicant is aware that they will have to possibly redesign the plan to comply with the conditions and the Zoning Code and landscaping rule. CLARKSON: The plan isn't being approved, but the population or the number of rooms is? JACKSON: The density is. Correct. HENKEL: Thank you. Are there any other questions for the Applicant? Or comments addressing the permit? JACKSON: I also want to add that Kelly Gomes from Department of Public Works, Engineering, is here if the Commission has any questions related to the easement or access on Kahaopea. HENKEL: Are there any LEE (from audience): I have a comment if possible. HENKEL: I'm sorry. Public testimony has been closed. This would be questions from the Commission for Public Works. Then, any more discussion or a motion for action? HO: We have a motion for action. CLARKSON: I just do have one question. Is there, it was brought up that there, that there might potentially be a flood control project under Kahaopea. Is that not in the works? GOMES (from staff table): (inaudible) CLARKSON: Yes. HO: You have to come to the mic. HENKEL: Would you raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Planning Commission? GOMES: Yes. HENKEL: Okay, please state your name and EXHIBIT B 11 GOMES: Kelly Gomes from the Department of Public Works. CLARKSON: So, does Public Works have any flood control projects in this area in the planning stages? GOMES: There is a plan to divert the majority of the water coming down from the golf course which runs into this area, but it's unfunded. It's a very expensive project so it could happen but it just needs to be funded and it's, like I said, it's very expensive so, I don't know if it will ever happen. CLARKSON: But, nothing's planned GOMES: No. CLARKSON: In that area. GOMES: No. CLARKSON: Okay, thank you. HENKEL: And, if it were approved, there would, the impacts on the people living there would certainly come under consideration, right? GOMES: Yeah, it would erase all this flooding in this area because it would divert it from the golf course to the 4 -mile creek. HENKEL: Any more questions for Mr. Gomes? Okay, now, is there a motion on the table already? Has it been seconded? HO: Yes. HENKEL: Okay. Then, the motion by Commissioner Clarkson [sic] and seconded by Commissioner Ikeda. HO: It was made by Miyasato. HENKEL: Oh, I'm sorry. Motion by Commissioner Miyasato, seconded by Mr. Ikeda. IKEDA: No. HENKEL: Seconded by Mr. Clarkson [sic]. Everybody understand? CLARKSON: I didn't second. JACKSON: I show that it was seconded by Mr. Ikeda. EXHIBIT B 12 IKEDA: Oh, I did? HENKEL: Okay, I stand corrected. CLARKSON: I seconded the closing of the testimony. IKEDA: Oh. JACKSON: Mr. Chair, would you like me to take the roll? HENKEL: Yes. JACKSON: Okay. Okay, the motion is to approve the permit with, as recommended by the Director with, with the two revised conditions. Commissioner Miyasato? MIYASATO: Aye. JACKSON: Commissioner Clarkson? CLARKSON: Aye. JACKSON: Commissioner Ikeda? IKEDA: Aye. JACKSON: Commissioner Dela Cruz? DELA CRUZ: Aye. JACKSON: And Chair Henkel. HENKEL: Aye. JACKSON: Okay, the motion passes five, zero. YEH: Thank you. HENKEL: Thank you. The discussion ended at 10:18 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Sarah Y. Hata-Finley, Secretary Windward Planning Commission EXHIBIT B 13