Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-04-10 Leeward Exh A (REZ 17-217) LEEWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAI‘I HEARING TRANSCRIPT APRIL 10, 2017 A regularly advertised hearing on the application of PETER A. IN, M.D. (REZ 17-000217) was called to order at 9:32 a.m. in the West Hawai‘i Civic Center, Community Center, Building G, 74-5044 Ane Keohokālole Highway, Kailua-Kona, Hawai‘i, with Chairman Keith F. Unger presiding. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Keith F. Unger, Nancy Carr Smith, Scott Church, Collin Kaholo, Perry Kealoha, Barbara Nobriga and Sonny Shimaoka ALSO PRESENT: Malia Ho (Counsel for the Commission), Michael Yee (Planning Director), Daryn Arai (Deputy Planning Director), Jeff Darrow (Planning Program Manager), Maija Jackson (Planner), Shancy Watanabe (Planner), Sarah Hata-Finley (Windward Planning Commission Secretary) and Noriko Sauer (Leeward Planning Commission Secretary) And four people from the public in attendance. APPLICANT: PETER A. IN, M.D. (REZ 17-000217) Application for a Change of Zone from an Agricultural-5 acre (A-5a) to a Family Agricultural-2 acre (FA-2a) zoning district for approximately 5.001 acres of land. The parcel is located at 64-730 st Waikelehua Place, Puʻukapu Homesteads, 1 Series, Waimea, South Kohala, Hawai‘i, TMK: 6-4-001:152. UNGER: First order of business, Number 1 on the agenda, Applicant Peter A. In, M.D., REZ 17-000217, application for a Change of Zone from an Agricultural-5a, A-5a, to a Family Agricultural-2 acre, FA-2A, zoning district for approximately 5.001 acres of land. The parcel is st located at 64-730 Waikelehua Place, Pu‘ukapu Homesteads, 1 Series, Waimea, South Kohala, Hawai‘i. TMK 6-4-1: parcel 152. Mr. Darrow, are you going to give the presentation? DARROW: Yes. UNGER: Okay, please proceed. DARROW: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning, Members of the Planning Commission. If I can direct your attention to our first presentation. As mentioned, our applicant is Peter A. In, M.D. and he is requesting a Change of Zone. The area of the subject application is in Waimea within the South Kohala District of Hawai‘i. More specifically, we are looking where the black dot is outlined. This map identifies the different County zonings in the area; the green and blue represent Agricultural, the yellow represents Residential, and the purple represents Commercial type zoning, and the light pink. So this is just to the east of Waimea center, which is located just to the left of the subject application. 1 EXHIBIT A This is a zoomed-in map of our application area. Again, this is, the colors represent the different zonings in the area; the light green represents Agricultural-5 acres, the yellow represents Single-Family Residential, and the purple and pink represent Commercial type zoning. This is our State Land Use Boundary Map. The pink represents Urban and the green represents Agricultural, which includes the subject property. This is our General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide Map of the area. You can see the orange representing the Medium Density Urban uses, which is more in line with commercial, the yellow representing the Low Density Urban uses, which is reflective of residential, single-family residential, and the white up above is Extensive Agriculture. This is our South Kohala Community Development Plan Waimea Town Conceptual Map. The subject property is just in this area to the right of the Waimea Town Center. It’s just on the edge of the residential fringe. The applicant is requesting a Change of Zone from Agricultural 5-acre to Family Agricultural 2-acre for 5.001 acres of land to subdivide the property into two parcels, one that is approximately three acres in size and one that is approximately two acres in size. The property was previously approved as a Condominium Property Regime, or CPR, with two units, which is called Cloud 9 Farm. The applicant currently owns a three-acre portion of the property, Unit 1, and Robin and Shinji Inaba own the remaining two-acre portion, Unit 2. The owners of each CPR unit wish to have their own title to their respective properties with a separate tax map key. If approved, the property will be subdivided into two separate lots, consisting of the same areas that were approved under the CPR. This is the submitted site plan from the applicants, which shows the access point from Waikelehua Place, which comes off the main highway. Unit 1, or the three-acre parcel, owned by the applicant is the parcel to the right, and the second two-acre parcel, or portion, is just to the left. Currently there is a dwelling on each of these units. Additionally, on the right hand corner of the applicant’s property there is an identified cemetery. This is an aerial site photo of the property. Again, for reference we have Waikelehua Place. We have the subject property outlined in red, and, again, we show the two dwellings as well as the accessory structures on each of the properties. The cemetery area is right in the lower portion of the map. These are some site photos. This is from the highway; Waikelehua Place will be on your left; it has a dedicated left-turn lane that comes in to the road. This is on Waikelehua Place looking mauka, or makai. And this is at the end of the cul-de-sac where access to the properties is access through an easement. This is the applicant’s home, as well as accessory structures. And this is the upper home, as well as accessory structures. The Planning Director is recommending that the Planning Commission send a favorable recommendation with conditions to the Hawai‘i County Council. 2 EXHIBIT A Since the application has been submitted to the Planning Commission we have received one comment letter from the Department of Health, which has been distributed to the applicant, I mean to the Commission, as well as to the applicant. The applicant originally requested within their Change of Zone application to be able to have a second dwelling on each lot, if approved. Our standard procedure is normally we put in a condition that restricts a second dwelling whether it be an ‘ohana or an additional farm dwelling on each newly rezoned lot. That’s just been our standard condition, and the reason why we do that is because the process that we are doing at this time is increasing density in itself. To be able to further allow additional dwellings on the property would just further increase density in the area. In looking at this particular application and in speaking with staff, this, depending on the Leeward Planning Commission, the Planning Commission staff can make an adjustment on this by making sure that, if the Commission is amenable to the change, that any additional dwelling that’s created on the lot be able to be connected to County water, because that’s one of our key issues; a lot of times these second dwellings are approved through a variance to be allowed through catchment or whatever the means. But in this case if something in that line were approved, we could be amenable to that along with the Commission. One of the other considerations that we would put in is that no variance would be granted to allow for a variation from the water requirements in the Subdivision Code. With that, that concludes our presentation. Are there any questions? UNGER: Thank you. Commissioners, any questions for Mr. Darrow? CARR SMITH: Yes. UNGER: Commissioner Carr Smith? CARR SMITH: Are there two water meters or one currently? DARROW: Currently, both, both dwellings are connected to meters, so — CARR SMITH: Separate meters. DARROW: Yes, separate meters. There was one concern from the Water Department and that is that the meter be located in front of each respective lot once it’s subdivided. And so that’s a condition that’s been added within the conditions. CARR SMITH: One more thing. I thought that I had read in here that one of the conditions was to not allow further additional structures. DARROW: Correct. So that would be the condition that, if the Leeward Planning Commission were amenable to the applicant’s request, we would remove Condition J and consider new language regarding any second dwelling approved on a property would need to be connected to a County water meter. And we can draft up language in regards to that. CARR SMITH: Okay, thank you. 3 EXHIBIT A DARROW: Thank you. UNGER: Are there, is there more water units available? Should the Commission say it’s okay for a second dwelling, is there four units available, water units? Is that even an issue at this point? DARROW: We didn’t specifically ask, but I believe that there are because this area is in Low Density Urban, and so — UNGER: Water is available. DARROW: Yeah, there should be enough water units available. UNGER: Okay. And just to clarify and make sure I have the correct understanding, so when you are, the proposal right now is to give a favorable recommendation to the subdivision but not a second dwelling via an additional CPR or an ‘ohana permit or a farm dwelling permit. So by nature of the zoning that sits there right now there is no, there is no CPR ability anyways because that’s no longer available; ‘ohana is not an issue because it’s zoned Ag. So really all we are saying is, not a second ag dwelling on these parcels. DARROW: Correct. UNGER: Okay. DARROW: For them to be able to be approved for an additional farm dwelling is the similar process that they did originally to get the second dwelling on his property. So they would have to do that again. UNGER: Right. Correct. Carr Smith. CARR SMITH: I have more question. I’m not that familiar with Family Agriculture zoning. Is there anything unusual in that zoning that we should know about? DARROW: It allows, the main thing is, it allows for smaller lots. Right now our Zoning Code for the State Land Use Agricultural, I mean for the County Agricultural, the minimum lot size is five acres. For Family Agriculture it’s one acre. So you’ll see requests come in from Agricultural, like this, Agricultural 5 acres, instead of coming to Agricultural 2 acres they are coming in for Family Agricultural 2 acres. When you look at the permitted uses side by side, there are little less, as far as agricultural uses, they are little less impactful than Agricultural zoning, like, large stock production on a larger scale, those types of things. But it does allow quite similar uses as the Agricultural district. CARR SMITH: Thank you. UNGER: Thank you. Any other questions? Thank you. DARROW: Thank you. 4 EXHIBIT A UNGER: Would the applicant come forward, please? IN: Mr. Chairman — UNGER: Please, excuse me, please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth before the Planning Commission? IN: I do. UNGER: Please state your name and your area of residence. IN: My name is — UNGER: Please use the mike — IN: Thank you. UNGER: — it’s not only so we can hear but also for minutes. IN: Is this on? Yes — UNGER: You are on. IN: My name is Dr. Peter In. My residence is 66-1279 Ahuli Circle, Kamuela, Hawai‘i. I’ve been a resident of the island for, and practicing here in the community, for over 40 years. Just recently retired. And thank you, Mr. Unger, Director Yee, Commissioners, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for the opportunity to present my application for rezoning. Unfortunately, Mr. Fuke, my planning consultant, was unable to be here today. He is much more experienced in these matters than I am. But to give you some background history, I purchased this former Parker Ranch property back in 2000 with the Inabas. We both couldn’t afford such a wonderful piece of property, but our realtor proposed that we apply for a CPR and that’s what we did. And because of the CPR we were able to do, purchase this property and build on it. Cloud 9 Farm was conceived as my part of the property, the three acres, was built as an equestrian center, and we built a, the original dwelling was a caretaker’s cottage. It’s a two-bedroom cottage with an adjoining garage, carport, and a three-stall barn, a very small office and some stalls, a half-acre riding arena. And it functioned as an equestrian center putting on gymkhanas, horseshows for the community for about five years. And then my spouse decided she wanted to go back to the mainland, not mainland but to England, and since that time it’s been just used as pasture, grazing; we’ve had some horses there. As I face retirement, I decided that I really wanted to live on the farm and develop that as agriculture and do sustainable agriculture that’s the new movement. I’ve always wanted to live off the land and to develop a property for a sustainable agriculture. But the problem is as a CPR neither of us are able to develop the property any further. Well, since the application for rezoning the Inabas have put the house, their house, their part of the CPR on the market, they’ve moved to South Korea and, you know, they intend to sell their share of the property. And, so to my knowledge they have no objection to the restrictions on the property. 5 EXHIBIT A I’m in agreement with all the different restrictions except for restriction J, which is the prohibition of an additional farmhouse dwelling. We were able to basically get their – I wonder if we can put back on the slide showing the, is that possible, the housing, the area that, the property? DARROW: Right there? IN: Yeah, that’s fine. So what you can see here is, this is my three-acre portion, this is the caretaker’s cottage, the three-stall barn. And this is their, they applied for an additional farmhouse dwelling and they built a couple years after I built – oh, I see, red button, oh, yeah \[A laser pointer was handed to Dr. In.\] – they built their additional farmhouse, and then this is a garage office. This is the half-acre riding arena. And it’s my intention to, you know, farm all this area here and build an additional probably a three-room, three-bedroom, or two-bedroom with an office, or a three-bedroom house, on this half-acre riding arena. It’s packed soil, well, cinder soil, and it’s really not suitable for farming, you know, unless I had, raise beds. But it’s perfect for a house site, and there is, you know, rooms for sewage system. Previous to this application I had hoped for creating a cottage neighborhood, and we put in an application for a PUD, and the neighbors didn’t like that. This changes, this zoning change really doesn’t change the nature of the property at all. It just gives, gets division from the CPR, does away with the CPR, and that’s our intention, and creates two separate entities, which hopefully would then allow me to apply for an additional farmhouse dwelling. So I’m asking for elimination of restriction J in the recommendation so that I could apply for an additional farmhouse dwelling that I would live in, and by being there it would be much, or feasible for me to, you know, take care of my property. The caretaker’s cottage is occupied, and has been occupied for a number of years, by a friend of mine for over 30 years now, who is an acupuncturist, and she takes care of my health. So she lives there and I really would not want to, you know, tell her to move because I want to live there. I would like to have the ability to, or her to continue to live there. It’s also, you know, I’m retiring, and really I’ll be looking at Social Security plus whatever I can generate from the farm, and so it’s important for me to be able to keep her on as a tenant there because that’s what I’ll be living on. So I ask for approval of this rezoning with the elimination of restriction J, which is the prohibition of additional farmhouse dwelling or ‘ohana. The County Code ordinances do allow for an additional farmhouse dwelling; that’s how the Inabas got their house, and I’d like to be able to have the similar ability to do so. So that’s my presentation. Thank you for your time. Any questions? UNGER: Thank you. Commissioners, any questions? SHIMAOKA: I just have one on, and maybe this is directed at County Planning, the conditions that you provided for the Inabas, do they apply here in this case when they did their additional dwelling? Regarding the CPR? DARROW: Correct. Any time that an applicant comes and submits an application for an additional farm dwelling, the same process will apply. SHIMAOKA: Okay. So could we say that Dr. In fits under the same conditions? DARROW: I’m sorry I missed that. SHIMAOKA: Dr. In, would he fit under the same conditions that you gave the Inabas? 6 EXHIBIT A DARROW: Well, in this particular case we are looking at one property, and so you had the original dwelling, which I believe was Mr. In’s, and then the Inabas came in for an additional farm dwelling. If the Change of Zone is approved, then this would be two separate parcels; each person, the Inabas as well as Mr. In, could come in for an additional farm dwelling agreement. So the Inabas’ additional farm dwelling would most likely be just the first farm dwelling at that point on that property. SHIMAOKA: Thank you. UNGER: Commissioner Church. CHURCH: Jeff, I’m still a little confused here. So J says that “Restrictive covenants in the deeds of all proposed lots shall give notice \[that the terms of the zoning ordinance\] prohibit the construction of a second dwelling …,” to give notice about second dwelling. So does that get altered then? DARROW: Well, we would, the request at this point is to remove Condition J. CHURCH: Okay. DARROW: And then the Planning Department would provide additional language, if the Commission is entertaining this change. If I can elaborate shortly, normally, as I mentioned, our standard condition is not to increase in density in these. In this particular situation we are looking at a larger agricultural property in an area that is located within the General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide Map of Low Density Urban. So it’s actually, long-term plan for this area is residential, to allow for higher density. So in this particular case we could see an allowance for this particular request. UNGER: Thank you. Commissioner Carr Smith. DARROW: I’m sorry, Mr. Chairman. CARR SMITH: So with the Family Agriculture, if this condition were not there, that zoning would allow for a second dwelling? DARROW: If this was not through a Change of Zone and it was currently zoned Family Agriculture, it would, an applicant could apply for an additional farm dwelling agreement. And just to clarify for the Commission, an additional farm dwelling agreement isn’t an automatic approval; there is a process that you go through to be approved for that, showing that the agricultural activity on the property generates the need for an additional dwelling. UNGER: Dr. In, are you familiar with that form and what — IN: Yes, I am. 7 EXHIBIT A UNGER: Have you decided what sort of intense agricultural operation you want to develop in order to qualify for your second dwelling? IN: Yes, I’m planning to take some workshops on starting a farm and starting an agri business. Basically my, my vision is to apply for some kind of a non-profit status so that I can do farming but have peoples from the community come for education, for health needs, and have small sustainable agriculture there whether it’s beds or fishponds or a closed system that can make use of composting, things like that. And, you know, previously when I was hoping to create a pocket neighborhood, we did apply and approach the Water Department, and they said that there was a possibility of having additional water meters, that there was access to County water. So water is not a problem. But my, the language in the County ordinance says that, you know, we would be submitting a plan of how we would envision the farm, yes. UNGER: Thank you. Any other questions? Thank you, Dr. In. IN: Thank you. UNGER: The hearing is now open for public testimony. Is there any members of the public here to testify on this matter? Seeing none, I would like a motion from the Commissioners to close this portion. SHIMAOKA: I motion that we close. NOBRIGA: Second. UNGER: We have a motion by Commissioner Shimaoka, second by Commissioner Nobriga. All in favor? COMMISSIONERS: Aye. UNGER: Oppose? \[None.\] Motion carries. Public hearing is closed. So, Commissioners, I’m looking for a motion on this agenda item. SHIMAOKA: I move that a favorable recommendation be forwarded to the County Council — NOBRIGA: I second. SHIMAOKA: — on the application for Change of Zone, Docket Number REZ 17-217, based on our Planning Director’s recommendation and findings, which shall be adopted. NOBRIGA: I second. UNGER: So we have a motion by Commissioner Shimaoka, second by Commissioner Nobriga. The floor is now open for discussion. 8 EXHIBIT A CARR SMITH: I just wanted to say that I support the concept of removing Condition J, allowing the applicant to be able to build his primary home there, subject to the Department of Health letter and any subsequent decisions by Planning Department. UNGER: Thank you. CHURCH: I was wondering whether the motion needs to cite the removal of conclusion — UNGER: It does — CHURCH: — recommendation J. UNGER: It doesn’t, right now as the motion sits it does not. SHIMAOKA: So we, do I add that condition? UNGER: If you want to add the condition, yes, that — SHIMAOKA: Yes, okay, I will restate the motion then. UNGER: Okay. SHIMAOKA: I move that a favorable recommendation, again, be forwarded to the County Council on the application for Change of Zone, Docket Number REZ 17-217, with the condition that will remove Item J, and based on the Planning Director’s recommendation and findings, which shall be adopted. UNGER: Do we have a second? CHURCH: I will second that. UNGER: So motion by Commissioner Shimaoka, second by Church. So, again, the floor is open for discussion. CHURCH: Okay, I would ask whether we need to further amend it to state that J will be substituted with language drafted according to guidelines given by the Planning Department. UNGER: That’s fine. Any further clarification is fine, so we can add that. DARROW: If I could interject — UNGER: Yeah. DARROW: — Mr. Chairman. We do have some language that we can present to the Commission. This would be language added at the end of Condition E. It would state, “Additional farm dwellings, if approved by the Planning Department, shall be serviced by 9 EXHIBIT A individual water meters as approved by the Department of Water Supply.” And that would be added in, substitute for the deletion of Condition J. Thank you. UNGER: Right, okay. Does that clarify your motion then? Okay. So that is the motion on the floor. Continuing discussion? Carr Smith. CARR SMITH: Mr. In, I support your application. I’m from Waimea as well, so I’m familiar with the property. Thank you. UNGER: I support the application also, and I think it is important to know that the Planning Department does, or the applicant still has to go through a process to, as Mr. Darrow pointed out, it’s not an automatic right to build a second home; the applicant has to show a viable agricultural farm in order to qualify for the second dwelling. So it’s in line with a lot of issues, including the Community Development Plan and the zoning in the area. So I also will be giving a favorable recommendation. Any other comments? Mr. Darrow, roll call, please. DARROW: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. With that, we’ll take the roll call. Commissioner Shimaoka? SHIMAOKA: Aye. DARROW: Commissioner Church? CHURCH: Aye. DARROW: Commissioner Carr Smith? CARR SMITH: Aye. DARROW: Commissioner Kaholo? KAHOLO: Aye. DARROW: Commissioner Kealoha? KEALOHA: Aye. DARROW: Commissioner Nobriga? NOBRIGA: Aye. DARROW: And Mr. Chairman? UNGER: Aye. DARROW: The motion passes, seven to zero. 10 EXHIBIT A UNGER: Thank you, Dr. In. You’ll be notified in writing by the Planning Commission. The discussion ended at 10:07 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Noriko Sauer, Secretary Leeward Planning Commission 11 EXHIBIT A