Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB July 12 2011 minutes KAUAI PLANNING COMMISSION SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE MEETING July 12, 2011 The regular meeting of the Planning Commission Subdivision Committee was called to order by Chair Jan Kimura, at 8:30 a.m. at the Lihue Civic Center, Mo'ikeha Building, in Meeting Room 2A-213. The following Committee members were present: Ms. Camilla Matsumoto Mr. Jan Kimura Mr. Hartwell Blake Discussion of the meeting, in effect, ensued: APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA On motion made by Camilla Matsumoto and seconded by Jan Kimura,to approve the agenda, motion carried unanimously by voice vote. MINUTES—MEETING OF APRIL 26, 2011 and May 24, 2011 On motion made by Camilla Matsumoto and seconded by Jan Kimura,to approve meeting minutes of 4/26/11 and 5/24/11, motion carried unanimously by voice vote. GENERAL BUSINESS MATTERS Transmittal of Agriculture Master Plan, pursuant to Condition No. Le of the Tentative Approval Letter dated June 23, 2010, relating to 3-lot boundary adjustment within the Agriculture (A) & Open (0) zoning districts, Subdivision Application No. S-2010-08, Tax Map Key: (4) 2-5-001:001, 009 & 010, Lawa`i=Enrico Santielli Jr. Trust/Scott F. Schweiker Trust/Rozer M. &Judy Peckenpauzh. Staff Planner Dale Cua: Just a little bit of background in regards to item A.1, it is a subdivision application for a 3-lot boundary adjustment. Basically it is a proposal to redefine the boundaries between 3 existing properties for a property in Lawa`i on the mauka side Kaumuali`i Highway. Because the property is situated within the State Land Use Agriculture District and the County zoning is Ag. and Open it was imposed a requirement that they prepare an Ag. Master Plan to demonstrate compliance with Chapter 205 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes. I have quoted the condition as part of the report here and basically the requirement, the condition requires the applicant to submit an Ag. Master Plan for the Subdivision Committee's review and acceptance unless you have any questions, related questions, the applicant is here to answer them. Subdivision Committee Minutes July 12,2011 1 Mr. Blake: Just a simple question, on the map that depicts the agricultural plan for the (inaudible) subdivision I can locate avocados, what I think are the bromeliads which are at the top of the map. Unidentified Speaker: That is correct. Mr. Blake: The mangos, but I don't see where the bananas are. Mr. Roger Peckenpaugh: My name is Roger Peckenpaugh. The bananas fall mostly on lot 203(A) approximately in the middle right, I would say the lower right corner along the highway. Mr. Blake: Where the mangos are? Mr. Peckenpaugh: Correct, in that area there, there is a small valley there that would be suitable for that. Mr. Blake: Just out of curiosity how many bananas are you going to have? Mr. Peckenpqp& It is approximately 75 clumps or mats. Mr. Blake: Thank you. Chair: Any other questions? What does the Commission want to do? Ms. Matsumoto: Move to accept the Agriculture Master Plan, Tax Map Key 2-5- 001:001, 009 & 010, Princeville. Staff: There should be a correction, it should be Lawa`i. Mr. Blake: Second. Chair: All in favor, so moved. On motion made by Camilla Matsumoto and seconded by Hartwell Blake, to accept Agriculture Master Plan, motion carried unanimously by voice vote. COMMUNICATIONS There were no communications. UNFINISHED BUSINESS There was no unfinished business. Subdivision Committee Minutes July 12,2011 2 NEW BUSINESS Tentative Subdivision Action: 5-2011-19 =Halale`a Investment Company LLC/Patricia Wilcox Sheehan, 4-lot Consolidation , TMK: 5-5-10:66, 68, 69, 81, Hanalei, Kauai. Staff. Thank you Mr. Chair. What you have before you is a proposal to consolidate four existing lots into a single lot. As noted in the subdivision report the property is split zoned, the front portion of the property is the area that is within the Commercial zoning district, the remaining are that is adjacent to the Commercial area is all within the Open zoning district. The subdivision map has been routed to the various reviewing agencies for their review and comment. Their conditions have been incorporated into the subdivision report, as a result the department is recommending tentative subdivision approval of this application. Chair: I might be blind but where is lot 69? Here it is, okay. Mr. Blake: Where is lot 81? Staff. The property that we know as parcel 81 and tax map key is actually lot 128 that is on the map. Mr. Blake: I had another question. It says that the intent of the proposal is to provide a buildable area for each of the lots. Staff. Just buildable area for the lot. The word each should be taken out. Mr. Blake: And we are consolidating these four lots. Staff. Four lots into one. Mr. Blake: So you need buildable for one lot or you need four building envelopes? Staff: Maybe we could address that particular question to the applicant just to identify the intentions with the consolidation. The applicant is here. Chair: I have another question. We have all the agency comments already? I don't see the DOT checked off here. Staff. DOT, that is why I put a requirement as condition Lb that they go ahead and resolve with DOT whether a reserve or an area for dedication be dedicated to the State Highways Division. Chair: Any questions for the applicant? Mr. Blake: Did you hear my question? Subdivision Committee Minutes July 12,2011 3 Mr. Keola Sheehan: Yes, I am Keola Sheehan for the applicant and I have Brian Hennessey from engineering who is our Civil Engineering consultant. With regards to your question as to the purpose is basically what we are trying to do or will be coming before you again is for redevelopment of the commercial portion which is about a little over a half acre right along the highway. When we first sat down to sort of come up with a plan as to the best way to do it, in meeting with the Planning Department it was through a project development process because of the way the lots are, lot lines run for these four particular TMK's, they are sort of long and thin. And in order to plan for the most esthetically pleasing development without having to cross and be subject to lot lines, etc., we were going to move forward with a project development. After completing the traffic study, flora and fauna study, archeological study, wetland study and all of that there was sort of a last minute interpretation as to the amount of density that would be allowed and lot coverage which took us below the threshold to meet that project development process. So the strategy was to then go ahead and consolidate all four parcels in to one, and create one large parcel and sort of utilize all of the lot coverage and move it basically to the commercial portion and the parking that is going to be required. And basically what we are going to end up with is about two acres of development and 21 acres of open space all in the back including all of the areas that consist of most of the area of TMK 81 which has two fish ponds, awais, waterways, all sorts of stuff on it. So all will be well outside of the proposed redevelopment area so that is the reason we are moving forward with the consolidation process. Chair: What is going to happen with the taro wagon and the shave ice wagon? Mr. Sheehan: Hopefully they are going to be put into a new structure. Basically we are going to try and put a building along the front there and get everybody out of their little temporary wagons and into something that is a more permanent structure. And like I say this is just part one, we will be before you again with the actual project redevelopment plan once we get all the conditions of the consolidation figured out. This is just sort of part A I guess. Mr. Blake: So if you are able to come up with a development plan for the commercial portion how many of the four permitted residences for want of a better word would be taken by the commercial portion? Mr. Sheehan: We haven't done the final calculation but basically what we are proposing is as you can see back in lot A, follow all the way back, there is an existing dwelling and a storage, it would basically to rebuild the existing, I think what we are going to be proposing is the existing dwelling and one additional so two total one of which exists out the four. And when we had first started this the density we came up with was 16 single family residents and I think we allotted 2,500 square feet a piece and we were going to use that lot coverage in the commercial. Most of it is going to get eaten up with the parking requirement basically. That is where we are going to be burning up allowable lot coverage so two single family residents at the end of the day, one existing and one additional. Mr. Blake: And those two are here right now? Subdivision Committee Minutes July 12,2011 4 Mr. Sheehan: One is a dwelling and one is a storage. They would be pulled back a little bit further away from the river actually, more up the asphalt driveway as you see it on the map, would be the location of the storage. Been getting wet lately,November got a little bit wet a couple years ago. That is the plan and Brian can answer any technical questions I guess, that is what he is here for. If I can address a couple of the conditions, is that possible? Chair: Sure. Mr. Sheehan: One would be under the Planning Department, Le, it would be our intent in the future to although one ingress and egress or one in and out is fine we would like the right to relocate it because it may not be where it currently exists. Staff. I think the most appropriate way to address it is at the time the project is actually developed but what we could do is coordinate the egress/ingress point at the time that second phase of their development plan comes in. The intent is to allow access onto Kuhi`o Highway and limit it just to one single area. At the present time it is where it is right now but at such time you come in with plans to further develop the property we can actually coordinate at that point in time. Chair: Is that acceptable to you guys? Mr. Sheehan: Yes that is fine. Chair: You can work out with them? Mr. Sheehan: Yes, sounds good. Staff. Between us and actually DOT. Chair: Any more questions for the applicant? Ms. Matsumoto: Are there other conditions? Mr. Sheehan: No. The other was the Historic Preservation comment of a skeletal remain being found under the project area. That is a new one to me, I was not aware of that but there is definitely a lot of surrounding properties where some have been found so maybe they are misconstruing where it is. But I just wanted to add the comment that we have already prepared an archeological inventory survey which didn't show a skull right under the proposed area. We haven't submitted it to DLNR yet because the project was changing as apposed to it was done under the P.D. format, project development format and now that we are doing the consolidation we were going to wait until we saw all your conditions and then put the proper project site on it and submit it to DLNR. But just to let you know that we have already completed wetland, flora and fauna, archeological inventory, traffic, and I think that is it, five of them. Chair: I guess it's acceptable to the department, I see him nodding his head. Subdivision Committee Minutes July 12,2011 5 Staff. Just so the Commission knows these requirements of the subdivision needs to be addressed prior to the final subdivision approval anyway so there are assurances. Chair: Any more questions? Mr. Blake: With respect to conditions of tentative approval page 2, fifth paragraph, which says "All existing and proposed easements shall be identified in the deed descriptions of the affected lots and shown on the final subdivision map." In the past, we are all aware of easements that existed and everyone agrees existed but since the County did not formally claim the easement for want of a better word, at final subdivision approval they just kind of disappear. It disappeared legally but everybody knows it is still there and then it depends on the good graces of the property owner as to whether the public can continue to utilize it. What I am thinking about isn't to target this particular application but more globally I personally would like to see a policy, written policy, that failure to identify a presently existing or proposed easement at the time of final approval shall not preclude the later imposition of the same upon proof of the existence of that easement prior to subdivision action. So that we can go back and not get into these arguments about well you should have done it two years ago so tough because tough means the public suffers. The subdivision applicant derives a benefit from the subdivision of this property and the public could stand to lose on that and I think we should, I believe we should make sure that doesn't happen. Staff: Just for the record you are making reference to public easements, right, not necessarily drainage easements, access easements, utility easements. Mr. Blake: I am more concerned with the public because that is the one that is going to come back before us. Staff. I just wanted to get clarification. Mr. Blake: The private easements, they have an obligation to stay awake and make sure that their private interests are protected. Chair: Any more questions, what does the Commission want to do? Ms. Matsumoto: Move to approve tentative subdivision action for 5-2011-19, Halale`a Investment Company, LLC, Patricia Wilcox Sheehan, TMK: 5-5-010:066, 068, 069 & 081, Hanalei, Kauai. Mr. Blake: Second. Chair: All in favor... On motion made by Camilla Matsumoto and seconded by Hartwell Blake, to grant tentative subdivision approval for 5-2011-19, motion carried unanimously by voice vote. Subdivision Committee Minutes July 12,2011 6 Ms. Matsumoto: Is it okay to address what he just said about proposed changes? Dale, how do we make that, implement that? Staff. I will actually work it out with Hartwell and see if we can develop a policy as a result of his concerns. Ms. Matsumoto: Thank you. Tentative Subdivision Extension Request, S-2008-16,Melvin Soong/Clarence Soong, 2- lot Subdivision, TMK: 4-6-015:048, Kapa`a, Kauai. Staff. Thank you Mr. Chair. As noted in the staff report, this is the third extension request for this subdivision application. As noted in the background the proposal is a two lot subdivision for a property within the Kapa`a Houselots Subdivision. The application was granted tentative subdivision approval on March 25, 2008. At this time the applicant is still trying to resolve the requirements of the subdivision, more in particular the applicant is to resolve the infrastructure requirements particularly relating to the roadway as well as the domestic water requirements. The request has been routed to the various reviewing agencies and they have no objections to the extension request. We are recommending an extension to March 25, 2012 with the understanding that an updated status report shall be submitted to the department for further extension requests. The intent of the status report is just to basically update you folks as far as the progress being made with the subdivision. I know listening to past experiences with subdivisions involving water requirements sometimes can be challenging at times. Chair: Any questions for the planner? Mr. Blake: So this is a problem with the government agencies? Staff. I won't say necessarily the government agencies it is more just trying to find a compromise in resolving what are the required infrastructure requirements. In this case there are two challenges, one that this property is adjacent to an unimproved roadway that exists on the tax map key but physically it is not there. I think as noted on the subdivision map it is adjacent to Hauaala Road but Hauaala Road is say 30 to 40 feet below the existing grade of the property. And as far as the waterline improves it is quite substantial, quite lengthy. Mr. Blake: This is one of those where the Water Department is saying you have to have this kind of service that will cost a million bucks but tough. Chair: Is the applicant here? Mr. Max Graham: Good morning Subdivision Committee members, I am Max Graham representing the applicant Michael Soong. The Soong family has asked me to help them with this and so if we can get this last extension I will see if I can't resolve the remaining issues. The property actually borders on three roadways on three of its boundaries and there are some agreements we need to enter into with the Department of Public Works concerning non- Subdivision Committee Minutes July 12,2011 7 development of the vacant lot until Nunu Road which is the semi-improved road is completed. And I think the issue with the Department of Water which I will address is where to bring the waterline in, whether it should come, if you look at your map, whether it needs to be extended down the (inaudible) and then down Nunu Road in order to get to the new vacant lot or whether we can cut across the front lot there that already has the house on it. But I will address those issues and hopefully we will be ready well before the one year extension. Chair: Any questions for the applicant? Mr. Blake: So when is the next updated status report due? Staff. As conditioned it is 60 days prior to the expiration date so it would be somewhere around January 25, 2012. Mr. Blake: This coming year? Staff. January 25, 2012. Chair: Anymore questions? What does the Commission want to do? Ms. Matsumoto: Move to approve tentative subdivision extension request for 5-2008-16, Melvin Soong and Clarence Soong, TMK: 4-6-015:048, Kapa`a, Kauai. Mr. Blake: Second. Chair: All in favor say aye... On motion made by Camilla Matsumoto and seconded by Hartwell Blake, to grant tentative subdivision extension request, motion carried unanimously by voice vote. ADJOURNMENT This portion ended at 8:53 a.m. Respectfully Submitted. Lani Agoot Commission Support Clerk Subdivision Committee Minutes July 12,2011 8