Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMar 14 2017 Subdivision Minutes LAKAUA‘I PLANNING COMMISSION SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE MEETING March 14, 2017 The subdivision committee meeting of the Planning Commission of the County of Kaua‘i was called to order at 8:30 a.m., at the Līhu‘e Civic Center, Mo‘ikeha Building, in meeting room 2A- 2B. The following Commissioners were present: Mr. Roy Ho Mr. Sean Mahoney Ms. Donna Apisa` The following staff members were present: Planning Department – Chance Bukoski, Dale Cua, Leslie Takasaki; Office of the County Attorney – Deputy County Attorney Jodi Higuchi Sayegusa; Office of Boards and Commissions – Commission Support Clerk Lani Agoot Discussion of the meeting, in effect, ensued: CALL TO ORDER Chair Ho called the meeting to order at 8:30 a.m. ROLL CALL Mr. Bukoski: Chair Ho Chair Ho: Here. Mr. Bukoski: Commissioner Mahoney. Mr. Mahoney: Here. Mr. Bukoski: Commissioner Apisa. Ms. Ahuna: Here. Mr. Bukoski: Three present. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Chair Ho: Mr. Clerk we have an agenda change please, could you address that. Mr. Bukoski: We are going to proceed with Subdivision Extension Request S-2016-14, Helen Martin, TMK (4) 2-4-02:03 &16. 2 Chair Ho: I need an approval of the agenda please. Mr. Mahoney: Chair, move to approve the adjusted agenda. Ms. Apisa: Second. Chair Ho: All those in favor. (Unanimous voice vote) Motion carried 3:0. MINUTES of the meeting (s) of the Subdivision Committee Meeting minutes of February 14, 2017 Chair Ho: I need a motion to receive the minutes of the subdivision committee meeting of February 14th please. Ms. Apisa: So moved. Mr. Mahoney: Second. Chair Ho: All those in favor. (Unanimous voice vote) Motion carried 3:0. RECEIP OF ITEMS FOR THE RECORD (NONE) HEARINGS AND PUBLIC COMMENT GENERAL BUSINESS MATTERS (NONE) UNFINISHED BUSINESS (NONE) NEW BUSINESS Subdivision Extension Request Subdivision Application No. S-2016-14 (Helen Martin) Proposed 3-lot subdivision TMK: (4) 2-4-02:03 & 16, Kalaheo, Kauai. Subdivision Report pertaining to this matter. Staff Planner Chance Bukoski read the subdivision report into the record. (On file) Chair Ho: Sir? Mr. Michael Scarbo: My name is Michael Scarbo. I am an attorney and represent the Martins. I am here if you folks have any questions to supplement what has already been provided. Mr. Mahoney: From the planner's report it says the applicant is working diligently and trying and I understand all that. How long of an extension do you think it is going to need? 3 Mr. Scarbo: Right now the request is for a year but to be very frank there were 2 big issues which was the quiet title action that needed to be addressed to resolve some issues. That has been resolved. Right now they are getting the cesspool signed off on, the preliminary title report was ordered a month ago but there was a problem with it and so that has been addressed as well and we are currently working on the ag. plan and the CC& R's. Those are the 2 things so realistically speaking within the course of the next 2 months really everything should be resolved but just out of an abundance of caution for the 1 year request. Staff Planner read the department's recommendation into the record. (On file) Ms. Apisa: I move that we accept the Planning Department's recommendation and approve the extension. Mr. Mahoney: Second. Chair Ho: It has been moved and seconded all those in favor. (Unanimous voice vote) Motion carried 3:0. Tentative Subdivision Map Approval Subdivision Application No. S-2017-4 (D.R. Horton-Schuler Homes, LLC) Proposed 2-lot subdivision TMK: (4) 3-7-003:020, Hanamulu, Kauai. Subdivision Report pertaining to this matter. Staff Planner read the subdivision report into the record. (On file) Chair Ho: Is there someone from D.R. Horton Schuler? Mr. Clyde Kodani: Good morning, for the record Clyde Kodani, authorized agent for the applicants. I have no objections to staff's recommendation and I am here just to answer any questions the Commissioners may have. Chair Ho: Any questions Commissioners? This property, are you going to give access to the school to have pick-up on that parcel? Mr. Kodani: That is my understanding right now. Let me take a step back, this application shows the owner as D.R. Horton Schuler Homes. A little history on this, the overall parcel, 60 acres, was owned by, I will call it for all intents and purposes, Grove Farm. Grove Farm then sold the 60 acre parcel to D.R. Horton with the understanding that 6 acres reverts back to Grove Farm. The Kohea Loa Subdivision, R-6 subdivision right next door, was developed by Horton and now this parcel, lot 5, is the parcel that has to be reverted back to Grove Farm. In the overall Lihue/Hanamulu Master Plan there was an agreement that the 6 acre parcel, lot 5, is going to be further subdivided of which 3 acres were to be given or to be turned over to the Department of Education, King K School, for whatever plans they had. And at that time there was conversation 4 about wanting to use that back area more as a drop-off area because the current drop-off area along Hanamulu Road creates traffic congestion and a lot of queuing effect so they wanted to reroute the traffic for the kid's pick-up and drop-off. Subsequent discussions, I am not sure where DOE is with it because I thought I heard that they wanted to perhaps maybe add classrooms or whatever. As we go along we will be engaged with DOE as to what their plans are but right now my understanding is that it is supposed to be a drop-off area in the back. Chair Ho: This is going to entail a lot more than just a plan. Are you going to check with Public Works also to have that roadway certified for drive through traffic? You can't have somebody try to reverse is that roundabout area. Mr. Kodani: We would have to really engage ourselves and when I say "we", I mean the future consultants because I don't know whether we will be involved in the Department of Education's planning or design portion of it. The consultant would have to, if it is going to be a parking lot or drop-off area, comply with all rules and regulations as far as design and planning is concerned. Chair Ho: Thank you Clyde. If approval is granted the Commissioners would like to put in amendments or conditions of approval that you would touch base with the DOE and perhaps the Principal to give us some input on what they would like. I don't know if the community would be involved in this also. Mr. Mahoney: Chair, right now this is for tentative subdivision it is not a final approval, correct? Mr. Kodani: Correct. Mr. Mahoney: Before it is granted final approval it has to come up before us again and maybe some conditions could be introduced if it wasn't satisfactory to the Chair and the rest of the Commissioners. Mr. Cua: Generally speaking if you are looking to impose a condition that would be set prior to granting final subdivision approval then you would set the condition at this time. If you would want the applicant to provide the Commission or the department with whatever plans they have for proposed lot 5 (b), then this would be the time where you would impose that requirement. If there are specific details you want to know from the applicant this is the time where you would impose the requirement. Chair Ho: So our motion would carry the conditions we would like to have? Mr. Cua: Right, so if you are going to impose a condition this would be condition (g) but for clarification purposes maybe you would like to restate what you are asking of the applicant. Chair Ho: Any Commissioners want to weigh in on this? 5 Mr. Mahoney: At least part of the condition would be to clarify the exact use of the lots and not just maybe this or maybe that but what the exact use is of those lots. That would be part of mine and if somebody wanted to add to that motion. I think we could make a better decision. Mr. Kodani: Chair Ho and Commissioner Mahoney, with me I have Tod Ozaki and Shawn Shimabukuro from Grove Farm. They may give you a little bit more details as to what is going on as far as the agreement between Grove Farm and the Department of Education. Personally I have no objection to adding a clause about conferring and discussing this with the Department of Education. That being said maybe one or both of them can add a little bit more clarification and information. Ms. Shawn Shimabukuro: Good morning, Shawn Shimabukuro with Grove Farm which also is the affiliated company of Visionary LLC. Back in 2005 when we did sell the 6 acre parcel to D.R. Horton, again the 6 acre parcel was to revert back to Grove Farm after the large lot subdivision, and 3 acres is going to be dedicated to the Department of Education. We do have an agreement in place and we do need to touch base again with the people of the Department of Education as to what their current plans are. As Mr. Kodani mentioned it was supposed to be an alternate drop-off spot for the children. If their plans have changed we are not sure and we will definitely have that meeting with them. The other 3 acres of that 6 acre parcel was intended for a park and it has recently been approved to be contributed to the County for a future park and recreational center site. Ms. Apisa: That would be lot 5 (a)? Ms. Shimabukuro: Correct. Mr. Cua: Commissioners maybe I can chime in on this one. I will reiterate the discussion regarding this proposed condition, this new condition would be 1 (g) and the way I have written it down from the discussion you had, the condition would read "Prior to final subdivision approval the applicant shall provide a status on the proposed use of lot 5 (b) with the State Department of Education." Chair Ho: Is that amenable to you folks? Is that amenable to you folks? Ms. Shimabukuro: Yes. Ms. Apisa: Do we want to include 5 (a) also or is that set? Mr. Cua: I think with 5 (a) it sounds like they know what they are going to do with it. It is more the discussions with the school and what is the intended use of 5 (b) will be. Chair Ho: Can you read your motion please? 6 Mr. Mahoney: I started the motion, should I retract that? Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: That might be cleanest to retract and restate. Mr. Mahoney: I want to retract my former motion and hopefully I can make this other motion to include condition 1 (g) as stated by the planner and the verbiage he used for a status on lot 5 (b). Chair Ho: I take it the motion would be to approve as amended. Ms. Apisa: Second. Chair Ho: Motion made and seconded all those in favor. (Unanimous voice vote) Opposed? Motion carried 3:0. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Mahoney: Move to adjourn. Ms. Apisa: Second. Chair Ho: All those in favor. (Unanimous voice vote) Motion carried 3:0. Chair Ho adjourned the meeting at 8:49 a.m. Respectfully submitted by: Lani Agoot Commission Support Clerk ( ) Approved as circulated (add date of meeting approval) ( ) Approved as amended. See minutes of meeting.