Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-02-21 Leeward Exh A (AMEND REZ 983) LEEWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAI‘I HEARING TRANSCRIPT FEBRUARY 21, 2019 A regularly advertised hearing on the application of ELLEN GARVER KOIZUMI (REZ 983) was called to order at 9:34 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, Perry Kealoha, Sonny Shimaoka and Michael Vitousek ABSENT AND EXCUSED: Faye Yates ALSO PRESENT: Malia Hall, Esq. (Counsel for the Commission), Michael Yee (Planning Director), Jeff Darrow (Planning Program Manager), Christian Kay (Planner), Jessica Andrews (Planner) and Noriko Sauer (Commission Secretary) And approximately twelve people from the public in attendance. APPLICANT: ELLEN GARVER KOIZUMI (REZ 983) Application for time extension to Condition D (Final Subdivision Approval) of Change of Zone Ordinance No. 12 156, which amended Change of Zone Ordinance No. 02 64, which reclassified approximately 40,282 square feet of land from an Agricultural-5 acre (A-5a) to a Single-Family Residential-20,000 square feet (RS-20) zoning district in 2005. The subject property is located at 73-4270 Hawaiāmalahoa ʻi Belt Road, along the west (makai) side of Hawaiʻi Belt Road (M Highway), adjacent to and south of the Kona Coastview Subdivision at the end of Leimomi Street, Kalaoa 4th, North Kona, Hawaiʻi, Tax Map Key: (3) 7-3-005:030. UNGER: Agenda No. 1, Applicant Ellen Garver Koizumi, REZ 983, application for time extension to Condition D, Final Subdivision Approval, in Change of Zone Ordinance No. 12 156, which amended Change of Zone Ordinance No. 02 64, which reclassified approximately 40.282 acres – actually, that is incorrect – which rezoned 3.129 acres of land from an Agricultural-5 acre, A-5a, to a Single-Family Residential-20,000 square feet, RS-20, zoning district in 2005. The subject property is located at 73-4270 Hawaiʻi Belt Road, along the west, makai, side of Hawaiʻi Belt Road, Māmalahoa Highway, adjacent to and south of the Kona Coastview Subdivision at the end of th Leimomi Street, Kalaoa 4, North Kona, Hawaiʻi, TMK (3) 7-3-005:Parcel 030. Planning Department, your presentation, please. DARROW: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission. I’d like to take this opportunity to welcome our new staff planner. Her name is Jessica Andrews, and this will be her first presentation. She is not new to the County; she actually was working with the Department of Public Works before transferring to our division, which she has 1 EXHIBIT A brought a lot of wisdom in a whole different area that’s been extremely helpful in our application reviews. But I’d like you to welcome Jessica Andrews. Thank you. ANDREWS: Hi, thank you. So I’m here to present the amendment to Change of Zone Ordinance No. 12 156 for Ellen Garver Koizumi. Subject property is shown – let me see if I can get this to work here – is shown aligned in red. It’s located makai of Hawai‘i Belt Road about 1,100 feet north of Ka‘iminani Drive, south of the Kona Coastview Subdivision. The applicant is requesting a five-year extension of time to comply with Condition D, Final Subdivision Approval, of Change of Zone Ordinance No. 12 156, which amended Change of Zone Ordinance No. 02 64, which reclassified approximately 3.129 acres of land from the A-5a district to the RS-20 zoning district, to allow the development of a six-lot subdivision. So, a little background on Condition D: The Change of Zone Ordinance No. 02 64 was originally approved on May 10, 2002; Change of Zone Ordinance No. 12 156 was approved on December 14, 2012, to allow a five-year time extension until December 14, 2017, to comply with Condition D; Condition D states, “Final Subdivision Approval of the proposed subdivision shall be secured from the Planning Director within five years from the effective date of this ordinance”; the applicant has received several Tentative Subdivision Approvals, most recently on March 9, 2016; the applicant requests a five-year time extension to secure Final Subdivision Approval. The County zoning map shows here the property again outlined in red. It’s zoned RS-20, as is many of the surrounding properties. Directly adjacent to the subject property is A-5a zoning. General Plan LUPAG designates this property as Low Density Urban. The State Land Use designation is Urban. The Kona CDP identifies the property as situated within the Kona Urban Area. It’s part of Concurrency Zone B on the Kona CDP Official Concurrency Map. Again, the property is here outlined in red. This is the most recent subdivision, revised, subdivision map. This was submitted on November 13, 2017, by the applicant. The map shows the proposed layout for a six-lot subdivision – you can see the lots lining up here – with access from Hawai‘i Belt Road here and then access from Leimomi Street here. Currently, this is an easement that would be extended. Also shown are three existing house structures on the property – one here and two here. The aerial photograph, it’s pretty self-explanatory, again, you can see the three structures there at the top end, the mauka end of the property. This site photograph shows a view across the subject property, looking south from Leimomi Street. This gate is the, is one side of the property and you are looking across the short transverse section of the property here. 2 EXHIBIT A This is the entry onto Leimomi Street from Ahikawa Street, again looking south. Ahikawa Street looking mauka, Leimomi Street is on the right. And Ahikawa Street looking makai, Leimomi Street is on the left. The Planning Director’s recommendation is to forward a favorable recommendation to the County Council for an amendment to Change of Zone Ordinance No. 12 156. That’s the recommendation. Oh, yes, the corrections, I’ll address those now. There are a couple of housekeeping corrections that I need to address. The first is there is the heading on the background and recommendation documents, reference the original ordinance, and the heading whereas it currently states Ordinance No. 02 64, it should read, “Amendment to Condition D (Subdivision Approval) Change of Zone Ordinance No. 12-156” as shown on the slide. It should, it’s supposed to refer to the amended ordinance, or the new ordinance, sorry. And then the agenda, the agenda stated 40,000 square feet site size whereas it’s actually 3.129 acres – that was just a typo misprint. The correction was made in the background document, but just to clear up any confusion because it was included in the agenda heading. Thank you. UNGER: Mahalo. Commissioners, are there any questions for the Planning Department? \[None.\] Is the, the applicant can come forward at this time? Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth before the Planning Commission? MOOERS: I do. UNGER: Please state your name and area of residence. MOOERS: My name is Greg Mooers. I’m a planning consultant for the applicant. I’m from Kamuela, Hawai‘i. UNGER: Thank you. You can proceed with your presentation. MOOERS: I’ve reviewed the background report, recommendation with the applicant, and we have no recommended changes. We concur with the Planning Director’s recommendation. Just as a point of emphasis of the applicant, Ms. Koizumi has had serious health issues as has her husband, and this is what prevented her from moving ahead. Her children have finally taken the position that they can assist, and this is what resulted in multiple subdivision application. She was trying to find a subdivision that she might be able to afford because the extension of Leimomi Street is going to be an expansive endeavor. And so at one point she submitted a two-lot subdivision, but now it’s gone to the six-lot subdivision because she is going to try to recover some of the expenses of extending this County roadway through the project. UNGER: Thank you. Commissioners, any question of the applicant? 3 EXHIBIT A CARR SMITH: I was just curious; I saw a for-sale sign on the property. Is the intent to subdivide and sell or— MOOERS: I believe that she is, the family is looking to sell the property. Her husband has been in the hospital for quite some time and she’s been in and out, so I think – they are not developers – I think this is more of estate planning at this point. CARR SMITH: Thank you. UNGER: No other questions? Thank you. You may be seated. I didn’t – I’m going to go ahead and open up the meeting for public testimony – I don’t see anybody signed up. Is there anybody in the room that would like to testify on this agenda item? Seeing no members of the public wanting to testify, I need a motion to close public testimony. VITOUSEK: Move. KEALOHA: Second. UNGER: Motion by Commissioner Vitousek, second by Commissioner Kealoha. All in favor? COMMISSIONERS: Aye. UNGER: Opposed? \[None.\] Motion carries. Commissioners, I would like to entertain a motion on this agenda item. SHIMAOKA: I move that a favorable recommendation be forwarded to the County Council on the request to amend Change of Zone Ordinance No. 02 64 \[sic\] based on the Planning Director’s recommendation, which shall be adopted. HALL: Sorry, real quick. The Zone Ordinance Number, they just said it’s 12 156, yeah. SHIMAOKA: Sorry, yeah, 12 56, 156, yeah, based on the Planning Director’s recommendation, which shall be adopted. CHURCH: Second. UNGER: We have a motion by Commissioner Shimaoka, second by Commissioner Church. The floor is open for discussion. CARR SMITH: I have a comment. UNGER: Yeah. CARR SMITH: I support the motion. I just continue to struggle with what is I think a procedural thing. I know we see a lot of conditions come before us that are long expired, and so 4 EXHIBIT A I’m not quite sure why that’s okay and there was not any repercussions for letting something lapse that long. That’s my comment. The condition expired December 2017, I think. So I don’t know how you guys deal with that. DARROW: This has been a, Commissioner Carr Smith, this has been a question that has, seems to have come to the forefront more recently; for years no one has ever questioned about it, but more recently the Council, as well as both Commissions, have been asking this question about time extensions. And if we look at it, as far as process and procedure, normally, you, the applicant comes in for a Change of Zone, and it’s normally for five years with one administrative time extension to allow for a period not to exceed what was originally granted. So, ultimately, it would be ten years. If they cannot do the project at that point, they come in. Sometimes depending on who’s doing it, if it’s sold, the new owner will not know the conditions of the ordinance, and that becomes an issue. If the applicant really isn’t, you know, keeping an eye on things, it’ll lapse, and a lot of times so even miss their administrative time extension. And then we get this, these situations where an applicant comes in several years, sometimes even longer – we had one recently that was from the 90’s that came in for a time extension – and they are asking to just refresh the conditions. And so the question is should we proceed with just looking at the application from a time extension point or should we void the original application and start again? And so that’s, it comes up to that question. And so we’ve been looking at that, as far as the Planning Department. When we look at a time extension, the conditions that we follow, or the criteria, is very similar to the criteria for the administrative, which is the result that allow the non-performance was a result that the applicant could not foresee or was not their fault, it was just, you know, a lot of times it’s the economy, that it continues to be consistent with the General Plan and the Zoning Code, as well as the original reasons. So in a sense we are looking at everything all over again like we would for the original. But again, it’s, it’s a question that we have to look at whether or not we want to get into a process where we may allow a Change of Zone to go for a period of time and then void it, and then after that they have to come back in and redo it, or if we continue to allow these time extensions. UNGER: Thanks, Jeff. We did run into this issue last, at the last hearing. And so I will be proposing we talk about it at the end of this meeting for additional discussion. I think that bears some further discussion. CARR SMITH: Thank you. UNGER: We have a motion on the table. If – any further discussion? Hea inoa. Roll call. ANDREWS: Roll call. Commissioner Shimaoka? SHIMAOKA: Aye. ANDREWS: Commissioner Church? CHURCH: Aye. ANDREWS: Commissioner Carr Smith? 5 EXHIBIT A CARR AMITH: Aye. ANDREWS: Commissioner Kealoha? KEALOHA: Aye. ANDREWS: Commissioner Vitousek? VITOUSEK: Aye. ANDREWS: And Chairman Unger? UNGER: Aye. ANDREWS: The motion passes— UNGER: Thank you. ANDREWS: —six to zero. UNGER: You’ll be notified of the results in writing. Thank you. The discussion ended at 9:52 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Noriko Sauer, Secretary Leeward Planning Commission 6 EXHIBIT A