Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/11/2011 FINANCE/PARKS AND RECREATION/PUBLIC WORKS PROGRAMS COMMITTEE Committee MeetingMINUTES FINANCE /PARKS & RECREATION / PUBLIC WORKS PROGRAMS COMMITTEE May 11, 2011 A meeting of the Finance /Parks & Recreation /Public Works Programs Committee of the Council of the County of Kauai, State of Hawaii, was called to order by Councilmember Tim Bynum, Chair, at the Council Chambers, 3371-A Wilcox Road, Lihu'e, Kauai, on Wednesday, May 11, 2011, at 9:51 a.m., after which the following members answered the call of the roll: Honorable Tim Bynum Honorable KipuKai Kuali`i Honorable Nadine K. Nakamura Honorable Mel Rapozo Honorable JoAnn A. Yukimura Honorable Dickie Chang, Ex-Officio Member Honorable Jay Furfaro, Ex-Officio Member Minutes of the April 27, 2011 Finance/Parks & Recreation/Public Works Programs Committee Meeting Upon motion duly `made by Councilmember Rapozo, seconded by Councilmember Yukimura, and unanimously carried, the Minutes of the April 27, 2011 Finance /Parks & Recreation /Public Works Programs Committee Meeting was approved. The Committee proceeded on its agenda items as shown in the following Committee Report which is incorporated herein by reference, and as follows: CR-FPP 2011-03 on FPP 2011-02 Communication (05/02/2011) .from Councilmember Yukimura, requesting agenda time for Deb Hubsmith, Director of the National Safe Routes to School (SRTS) partnership, to provide a briefing on the Safe Routes to School Program. (Received for the record.) C 2011-75 Communication (02/10/2011) from Council Chair Furfaro, requesting the Administration's presence to provide the Council with an update on the Kapaia Swinging Bridge Project. (This item was deferred.) Mr. Bynum: The administration is present, I assume. So the way I'm going to handle this is have the administration make any presentation that they would like, questions and answers from Councilmembers, and then take testimony from the public. 1 There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Mr. Bynum:. Mr. Dill, thanks for coming here. Do you have a presentation? LARRY DILL, County Engineer: Yes. Good morning, Larry Dill, County Engineer. We have passed out for you a couple of items stapled together. One is the updated letter report from the consultant, Kai Hawaii, the structural engineer that did the original preliminary engineering, as well as the construction drawings for the Kapaia swinging bridge. The second page is a spreadsheet. What we have done with the spreadsheet is we were looking at ways so we could save some costs on the construction of the actual bridge itself. So you can see there's a column there, original amount, which is the amount directly out of the report supplied by the consultant. The second column reflects our efforts to reduce some costs, (inaudible) to try and drive this cost...this project down to make it feasible for us. If I can mention, in the letter of May 2, so a pretty recent letter we just .got back from the consultant, we had asked the consultant a few specific questions on the report we received from him and looked for ways to shave costs, and there were three specific items. He had originally proposed additional foundation work, and also that the main suspension cables be replaced, and all the vertical hangers, the metal hangers, be replaced. We questioned those three items and asked him to sharpen him pencil, and he came back and said that we can delete the need for new foundation, so the existing abutments and foundations and piers are okay to use. All the vertical metal brackets are okay to reuse, so cut that cost out. But he wanted to replace the suspension, the main suspension cables. So that cost stays in in our scope of work. So on the spreadsheet, excuse me, again, this is just for the bridge itself now. The original cost he had in his report was about $2.76 million. You can see all the various line items that go to make up that number. We removed several of the items, which got us down to $1.66 million, as you see down towards the bottom right. And then, we understand that the original bridge based on our in-house crew that I have in the past several years ago done some minor repair work to the bridge, replacing of rotten timbers, etc., they used Douglas fir or typical construction wood, but they did indicate that the original wood that the bridge was made out of from their time out there in the field was redwood. We made a preliminary inquiry to the state Historic Preservation Division and without committing to it, they did indicate that their preference would be to use redwood in its reconstruction, since it is an historic structure. We did a quick rough estimate and estimate that approximately a cost of $400,000 would have to be added to the timber cost estimate, if we use redwood instead of Douglas fir. And also, you see the last line item is the environmental assessment cost, another estimate. So our present understanding of the cost to rebuild the bridge, again, this is the bridge itself, is $2.1 million. 2 What that would leave us with is a bridge, and I think we're all aware that this bridge, it sits on private property, and there is no access to it either side, no dedicated public access. So it's not accessible to the public right now by any official means, by any legal means. And so to do a $2.1 million project would leave us with a good bridge, but not legally accessible by the public. So that would be, I think, the minimum requirement we would have to do to this bridge-adding access to each side of the bridge, or even one side of the bridge would of course add costs to the project. So that is what we wanted to present before you today. Mr. Bynum: Thank you. Questions from Councilmembers? Councilmember Rapozo? Mr. Rapozo: Larry, are you aware of any opportunities that the county may have to secure federal funding or any other sources of funding for the restoration of this bridge? Mr. Dill: Not at the moment. We have got our grant writer now looking for options to do that, so I don't have a response to that. But we're looking into that. Mr. Rapozo: And this is bridge replacement and you are not talking the ADA requirements? Mr. Dill: Actually, if you take a look at line item 12, you can see we eliminated the 65-foot extension...the note on the far right there. That extension was necessary to make that bridge ADA compliant, so that is the main ADA issue here was related to the grades on the bridge, the slopes of the ramps. So we have eliminated that portion of it. But the reality is... so that gets us down from on that line item from $295,000 to $117,000. So that was a savings of not necessarily going for ADA compliance on the bridge. Mr. Rapozo: Okay, so $2.1 right now is where we're at if we want to proceed? Mr. Dill: Correct. If we want to proceed, but with the understanding that we would have no legal access to the bridge for the public. And the administration, our recommendation is we don't proceed unless we have legal access, which of course is going to include significantly more cost, including either land acquisition or easements plus improvements, which we have costs for that, they are in the preliminary engineering report. We really focused on attacking, if you .will, the cost of the bridge, because we felt this was the primary place that we need to look to make this project a reality by trying to reduce the cost of the bridge itself. 3 Mr. Rapozo: Right, but you said you're not moving forward unless we get the other component, right, the legal access? Mr. Dill: Correct. Mr. Rapozo: So what is that number? Mr. Dill: The legal access...well the total original cost was about $4 million in the preliminary engineering reports. So we saved about $600,000 for this bridge that you see, so the balance would be $3.4 million. Three point four and three point five. Mr. Rapozo: To make it this a legally accessible bridge? Mr. Dill: Correct. That would be legal access from both sides now. Mr. Rapozo: Right. Mr. Bynum: Any other questions? Council Chair Furfaro? Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you. I'm not a member of this committee, but this in fact was my communique. First of all, thank you very much for going back and getting this number sharpened for us. Mr. Dill, last night in our budget deliberation, this council body moved to replenish the funds that were used from this line item in the CIP to get it back to a base of $240,000. You are aware of that? Okay. And the second thing is, is it typically, and I just want to focus on this proposal from the engineering study, I believe in my work, in my relationships with other engineering firms and so forth, these contingency fees and management fees seem to be rather high to me. I think even when you and I worked together in another life, a contingency fee of 10 or 15% was considered reasonable and fair. This proposal here is showing the 25% contingency. Is there more wiggle room in these two numbers for managing the project as well as contingency? Mr. Dill: I would agree with you over that line item. I left that in there because the consultant's projected contingency are percentage Line items, but I would agree with you that we could maybe knock those down some amount. Council Chair Furfaro: Okay. Mr. Dill: But those two line items, if you cut them in half, would save what? $300,000. Council Chair Furfaro: Yes. 4 Mr. Dill: 5o that would get us down to $1.8 or something like that. Council Chair Furfaro: Yeah, that would bring the $2,1 down to $1.8. Thank you for at least that consideration. And perhaps, you and your very professional staff can have another look at that for us, maybe in some dialogue. I guess we will probably pursue the idea of maybe looking for other moneys, but I do think if the community is set up for a possible 501(C)(3) as a non-profit organization, we can assist them with any grant funding, we can help with design items, it is possible that we could have some collaboration here. May I turn the focus to Mr. Trask at this moment? Do you mind if I... Mr. Bynum: Please. Council Chair Furfaro: Mr. Trask, can you share with us a little bit about these issues dealing with access, as well as easements? Have we had discussions with individual landowners to arrive at some of these projected costs? How do we get to this other estimate about negotiating on public access or a public easement? MAUNA KEA TRASK, Deputy County Attorney: Deputy County Attorney Mauna Kea Trask for the record. What we have done so far is we have been speaking with both Curtis Motoyama, who is the facility access director of the facility access department within the department of communications access bureau, DCAB, who deals with the ADA issues. I have been speaking with him about usability and accessibility and where he stands on this issue. He is of the opinion that although there are exceptions under the federal guidelines for disability access, he would prefer that there would be not only public access, not only should there be public access, but it should be ADA accessible. We've also...but there's no commitment made in those conversations. There was nothing put in writing. It was just talking over the phone, because that's how he felt most comfortable. And there's also caveats where... There may be other options as far as accessibility, however, that would involve going through his supervisors and possibly up to the federal government to look at other options. So the way it was communicated, it may not have been pie in the sky, but it was something relative like that. And within the study that was completed by Kai Hawaii, there is a section on...it's under sign improvements, this is Appendix D, including land acquisition. The sums are there. On the Laukini Road west, it comes out to... Mr. Rapozo: Can we get a copy of that study? Mr. Dill: You have a copy. That was provided in a previous meeting as a confidential... Mr. Rapozo: I never got it. It must be hiding somewhere. 5 Council Chair Furfaro: I will ask the staff to make copies of that. I'm sure we have it on file from our previous meetings. But at this point, could you make note for Councilmember Kuali'i, as well as Councilmember Rapozo. Please continue. Mr. Trask: Then so we... and it identifies amounts, various amounts both for property acquisitions, as well as installing, for instance, handicap pavement markers, handicap parking signs, and accessible aisles, et cetera. And where it really comes down to is the land acquisition itself. We haven't entered into negotiations as far as purchasing. Council Chair Furfaro: Excuse me, she just wants to confirm she has the same piece. Please continue. Mr. Trask: I think that once it was determined after public works went through the cost estimates for the bridge and tried to tear it down, we didn't go into further discussion regarding land acquisition, because administration felt that the bridge repairs itself were cost prohibitive, given the facts and circumstances. Of course there are options available. There is rights of entry, which we acquired in order to conduct the study. However, given that this... the Laukini Road access side of the bridge, it really goes through a large property that's been CPR'd into a bunch of different owners, and people have fractional interests on the easement. And of course the legal concern is that we could get a right of entry at no cost, however, what happens in the future if someone else purchases a CPR lot and they do not want to allow the county access? You know? And we would also have to get...if we would do an ROW, of course our office's position is that the county be fully indemnified and defended in case there is any kind type of a accident or injury. So we felt that in order to do this, the most realistic and the best way to ensure access to the bridge now and in perpetuity would be through acquisition, and we can do that for a public purpose, but it requires just compensation. I don't think we have any kind of prescriptive easement rights, or anything like that, given that access to this bridge has always been permissible. So we're just looking at the climate right now. Council Chair Furfaro: Okay, well thank you for answering my questions. I'm anon-voting member of this committee. I urged us to put the money back in as a replenishment, because I want to make sure that we have an opportunity to exhaust all possibilities before we get to this point. Obviously, I worked on the historic recreation of the Moana Surfrider, for example, and we got exemptions on certain features that were of historical value, but it took us a long time to make those points. I also think that we find ourselves being able to pursue not it becoming a county project, but even looking at it becoming a community project with some possibility of acquiring other grants through the community. And you've answered my questions for today, and I thank Mr. Bynum for giving me some time in his committee and putting my communication on the agenda today. Thank you 6 very much Mr. Trask and Mr. Dill. I'm going to turn it back to the committee chair. Thank you. Mr. Bynum: Councilmember Kuali`i. Aloha and mahalo. My question is for Mr. Dill. So I do appreciate this more detailed information and the work that it took to get this done. At the bottom of the spreadsheet you have, and I might have missed it at the very beginning, $400,000 for...use redwood instead of Douglas fir. So is that in conjunction with line item no. 10, which has new timber deck in place complete $456,960? So you are saying if that was a different wood, would it then go up to $856,960? Mr. Dill: Yes, all the line items that are numbered in the spreadsheet are based on Douglas fir, a typical common construction material. The consultant based his costs on that material. But our understanding is the original bridge was redwood, so if indeed we're required to go to redwood, then this would be an additional cost on top of what is already in those line items. Mr. Kuali`i: Right, but it doesn't have to be redwood, it could be... Mr. Dill: Well, the state historic preservation division has indicated they would prefer redwood. So I'm not able to speak to it further than that. Mr. Kuali`i: We're the state of Hawaii, we're not necessarily California and the redwoods... I mean forget that. So of that $456,960, how much is materials and how much is... is there any labor in there that's actually putting in the bridge? Mr. Dill: Yes. Actually if you look at the line items... anything that says "timber," so line item 9, 10 and 12, I think make up all of your timber costs, and the labor cost is imbedded in that. Mr. Kuali`i: I'm curious as to the material cost and if there was a way that we could avoid that material cost by having the materials donated by our local agri-forestry industry? Lumber industry. Mr. Dill: I believe, going by memory, I believe that we had our staff estimate the materials cost, and if we use redwood, I believe the number was $800,000 just for the redwood materials. But I would have to confirm that. Mr. Kuali`i: Just one last point is that the important part about getting this detailed information is for us and for the community to know what the challenges are, so that we all together have the opportunity to meet those challenges and to make this work. I don't want to give up, that's for sure. Thank you. 7 Mr. Bynum: Councilmember Nakamura. Ms. Nakamura: Hi. Good morning. I wanted to ask a few questions. One, does the neighborhood want public access from both sides? Do they want that in their neighborhood? Mr. Dill: I know there are members of the neighborhood here, so I would ask that you direct that question to them. Ms. Nakamura: I was just wondering if we were moving on any of those assumptions. Mr. Trask: In speaking with the, I guess, the community association or the Save Kapaia Bridge Foundation, they're very passionate about this bridge project; they want to see this happen. If that includes public access, I believe they are fine with it. They have never stated that they don't people to access the bridge. I mean this is their passion project. They have been working on for almost...over four or five years right now. So we understand that in order to see this bridge, if it includes public access, I think they would be onboard. But again, they are here. Ms. Nakamura: Okay, we can address that question. And what is the current... Right now it's not being used because of the disrepair. And in the past, what has been the usage like and what is the projected usage of this bridge? Mr. Trask: Well, I guess.. How far in the past? Ms. Nakamura: I guess when it was functional. Mr. Trask: Okay. I guess from around the early to mid-'40s, this bridge was built in order to provide the people who live in that community, I believe it was a sugarcane camp at the time, or perhaps pineapple, I'm not sure, but they used it to access the other side of the stream to go to church. And it was a footbridge. And I think up in until 2006 was when public works finally said it's in too much disrepair at this point, we're going to close it off, and that's really when it started. Given the historical nature of the bridge, we believe that, you know, like the chair said, there are exceptions in order to avoid ADA or any other kind of alterations that would affect the historical character that are available and they're highly probable that we would get them. However, as an attorney, I'm not going to make any guarantees. But it would most likely be given a historic nature, continue to be used as a footbridge. Ms. Nakamura: Just a comment on the preliminary cost estimate that you handed out, that under the "environmental assessment," I'm not sure what type of specialized studies would be needed there, but it seems like a high number. 8 Mr. Trask: Our understanding is that came from the consultant, and as you are aware, when you go through... Any time government money is spent on a project, it possibly triggers environmental assessment and/or impact statement, and anything that affects a historical property. So in this case we're looking at two triggers which would do it and they tend to be expensive documents. Given that that is what the consultant estimated, that is what we're going by. They do this regularly. Ms. Nakamura: Just having done some environment assessments, I think it's a little high. Mr. Trask: Okay. Ms. Nakamura: Unless there is a specialized historical property process separate from the EA process, then maybe that might work. But then that should be broken out. Mr. Trask: I understand. Mr. Bynum: Councilmember Rapozo? Mr. Rapozo: So Mauna Kea, aside from you talking on the phone with DCAB, have we even tried to apply for an exception? Mr. Trask: Well, what they wanted to see was the construction plans, and if I can cite 103-50. 103-50b states all state and county agencies subject to this section, which is building design to consider needs of persons with disabilities, shall seek advice and recommendation from the disability and communication access board on any construction plans prior to commencing with construction. So DCAB really wanted to look at the plans; and we haven't created those plans, we haven't- expended the money to prepare those plans yet, and so they are remiss to comment on them. Mr. Rapozo: But as far as the exception... You're talking about getting approval on the plans, an the project, but if we're seeking an exception, it's obviously pre-construction, because you want to know what you can build before you get your plans. The form that I saw, the exception form, had nothing... no reference to any plans. And if we haven't done that, that is fine. Mr. Trask: We haven't submitted the historic preservation statement, as far as.... I think you have seen this one? Yes. We haven't submitted this yet. Mr. Rapozo: Are you guys planning to do that? 9 Mr. Trask: Given what the administration has said, I think admin has made it clear that their position is (inaudible). Mr. Rapozo: The admin has not made it clear to us, so I'm asking, because we don't know. I'm hearing today, I guess, that the administration has made a decision not to proceed. Mr. Kuali`i: Until they get legal access. Mr. Dill: Our recommendation is the way things stand, we do not recommend proceeding, because of the price of the project. Mr. Rapozo: Well, then again, that is news to me. I did not go to the last meeting and I apologize. The preferred use of redwood, that is not a required use. We could still proceed with Douglas fir. Mr. Trask: No. What we did was recently SHPD, there was a new...I think her name was Angie Westphal, or Wessenhal, she's the new architectural head of SHPD. She was just appointed a few weeks ago. And I spoke with her on the phone, and she actually replied to me via email stating that if our understanding was that it was originally constructed out of redwood, then they would prefer obviously that the repairs be made out of redwood. However, she said, without making any commitments there are options where you can pick and choose, maybe redwood here, non-redwood there, and/or depending on the integrity of any structural beams or any kind of wooden materials, if there is a possibility that you could do a mix, you know, epoxy, some kind of resin to reinforce it, but again, dealing with these agencies, we're not getting any hard commitments, and so it's difficult to answer these questions, you know, yes or no, which I know that's what everyone wants to hear. Mr. Rapozo: Well, I think we're not getting hard commitments is because I don't think we're giving them a commitment that we're interested in proceeding. I think that's why. Mr. Trask: We haven't told them that we weren't interest in proceeding. We were asking them their advice and counsel. They always want to say, well show us the plans, we want to look at something hard versus on the phone. Mr. Rapozo: I mean that's kind of like a yes or no. Can we use redwood...I mean Douglas fir. We prefer you would use the redwood, that doesn't tell me you have to. What I'm saying is we could even cut the cost down even further. Mr. Trask: We have to go through the whole process...the historical review process. 10 Mr. Rapozo: And then I guess the other two questions, you know, the... At the Kealia bathroom, the bike path that goes down, we got an exception on that, you know, the pathway that went down to the beach access. What was the grounds for that exemption? Mr. Trask: I don't know. Mr. Rapozo: Does anybody know? I just curious that... So we can. It's been done in the county. And the other... as far as the access issues, you talk about the ROES and the easements, you know, this Council has approved several easements, or rights of entry, for fractional ownership properties. It's done. And I guess what I'm hearing is... I keep hearing reasons why we cannot move forward, and it's concerning. Because this is not just a bridge. I'm just going make that. comment right now. It's not a bridge...just a bridge. There is a significant value to this project, significant, to many people, to many cultures, and I think that's what sets this project apart as just repairing a bridge. It's not just a bridge. I reference the USS Missouri and USS Arizona on Oahu. Those bridges aren't...I mean those ships aren't functional. They're done. They've been decommissioned and they're done, but they served such a value to this state, that in fact the government felt that we should preserve it. And that is kind of similar, except this one we can actually use. We can use. So I understand. I guess I'm disappointed, especially after we put the money in last night, and I guess the community, we'll hear from them, but I'm with Mr. Kuali`i. We won't give up. If it's the community that has to do it, then the community will do it, I guess. It's kind of disturbing though. I'm very disappointed, because this was a priority project many, many years ago under Mayor Baptiste, and we'll see what the community has to say. Thank you. Mr. Bynum: Councilmember Furfaro. Council Chair Furfaro: Council Vice-Chair, I just wanted to make a comment on the historical part. Mr. Trask, thank you very much, but I have had a little experience with this in restorations as it deals with units that are perceived as historical accommodations and so forth. I want you to know it was the action of the council last night replenishing that fund by demonstrating our intent that we would like to pursue all options. I mean, that is why we voted to replenish the money. So it sounds like I should probably pursue the question with the mayor's office as to why we couldn't at least submit the draft questions on the historical value of the bridge, which hasn't really gone forward to get us to the next question of what's next? And I guarantee, if we pursue the "what's next" question on the historical value of the bridge, they're going to want it as authentic as possible. And so it won't give us much of a choice on the Douglas fir or redwood or so forth. If they say to you, if you're pursuing it as a historical reconstruction, not a renovation, a restoration, then they are not going to make that exception for us. I can tell you right now. If the old planks were redwood, and we're offering Douglas fir now, they are going to ask to pursue the authenticity of the bridge if we moved towards the 11 historical value. But we're not able to raise the questions, because we haven't necessarily submitted those questions as the next step. And that is what I'm saying. I mean we need to exhaust all the alternatives on this concept of a historic value, and on the flipside, I want to make sure we all understand. If we're pursuing the... I mean even as we did the county building just recently, I mean they took photos of the crown molding, you now, that was there, and they said we had to, you know, reconstruct the cove base and so forth to its authentic condition if we want to pursue getting this exception. But we... Mr. Chair, I'm just going to write the mayor and ask if we just can't submit those questions, so that we can probe a little deeper. But at the same time, if we probe deeper, I'm almost certain the response to the type of material to be used has to be as authentic as possible. So I appreciate you sharing that with us. Mr. Trask: And I think too, just to remind everybody, like you know, Nadine, if at a certain point when you spend money on a project like this, even though the decision may be, you know... if we continue down this road and we start spending money on construction plans and taking the next steps, at some point we may have to, even though we're just doing soft costs, we may have to also spend money on the environmental assessment and/or an EIS, because those soft costs will add up, and pretty soon it becomes, you know, if we hit a threshold and then we have to do that. So I just want everyone to be cognizant of the fact that if we proceed this historical avenue, which is if we get the direction to do it, we'll do it, that's fine. But it may entail spending more money on environmental assessment and spending a bunch of money and a decision still hasn't been made. Council Chair Furfaro: Well your feedback is very much appreciated. But that risk lies with this body. That's not the risk that lies across the street. That risk lies with this body. If we start spending money and we've exceeded a point or we have exhausted all options and we spent that money, well, the voters will decide if Jay Furfaro is coming back to the council based on that assumption. But not to be given the chance to pursue that, and on the other side, I just want to say I appreciate your work and so forth, but you represent this body, too. And I am the administrator of this body and if I need to communicate to the mayor to ask the next question, I would hope I would have the support from the group here. So that we can make reasonable decisions about the type of risk we're faced with versus not having the answer. I mean, the EIS statement about the number that is there, it seems a little high, but we also have to recognize there is a different standard if you are crossing water. There is a whole federal trigger on streams and rivers, so that number could be real. But we are saying right now that we replenished the funds, unanimously. We want to pursue this, but we want to be given an opportunity to have an understanding what the consequences are, and without sending the query about the historical value, I'm not sure we clearly can define the risks that we take on spending more money or the option to pursue grants, along with the community. You know, people made the wrong decision when they don't have enough information. And I think you can agree with that. You would know in court you would never ask a question that you don't already know the answer. 12 Mr. Trask: That is true. Council Chair Furfaro: But we're not being given the chance to really have all the moving parts, so that we can get to yes, we can do it, very truthfully, honestly say to the community we've exhausted all options. But to do that, we need to have all of the information. So I will take this upon myself to write the mayor and Mr. Castillo. I appreciate all of your work and say, hey, we want to see the next series of answers to this question before we can make a fair and reasonable decision to communicate to the community. So please, gentlemen, I appreciate all of your work, but we are just probing for more facts. Mr. Bynum, I thank you very much for letting me speak in your committee. Mr. Bynum: Councilmember Yukimura? Ms. Yukimura: Thank you both for pursuing this study. I think it has a lot of important information that we would need in order to proceed. The administration's decision is not to, but the council can, if it so chooses, put money in here and ask the administration to proceed. On the question of access up to the bridge from the Kapaia side versus the Catholic Church side, you talk about acquisition. Is there not a lesser possibility of easement, rather than in-fee? Mr. Dill: Absolutely. The numbers that are in the report, in order to have some basis for the numbers are based on land acquisitions. The consultant identified the areas in order to provide a proper roadway for access and then based on assessment values, just prorated those amounts in order to apply a dollar figure. I absolutely concur that if the decision is to move forward, then we'll discuss all options for getting access rights, short of acquisition, easements, rights of entries, whatever, perhaps some community members who want to make this project a reality will recognize that and help offset a lot of those costs. As I said earlier, we're focusing our attention., primarily. on the bridge itself, because we realize to make this project happen, we're going to have to drive down the cost of the bridge. But if that tends to look like it's more favorable, absolutely we'll look at all options there. Ms. Yukimura: And yes, and perhaps there are some people who are willing to dedicate land in order to make the project possible. But I don't know indemnification, if it's going to be a public access way, we may have to take liability on that? Right? Mr. Trask: As far as the ROE option... Ms. Yukimura: Can you speak into the mic, Mauna Kea. 13 Mr. Trask: If we were to enter into right of entry arrangement or relationship, then liability would... But if we did acquire, then yes, it would be our... Ms. Yukimura: Right. Right of entry would be for temporary access to construct or whatever, but if it's along-term project...I mean if it's to be an actual public pathway, then you would take on the... Mr. Trask: It would be just like any other pathway (inaudible). Ms. Yukimura: Yeah. Okay. I think the community asked, but...they asked for records on how much we spent on other swinging and foot bridges. We have never gotten that information, have we? Mr. Dill: I'm sorry if that request was made. I don't recall that request, and we have not done that. We can do that. Ms. Yukimura: Yes. Okay, I think we do want to send afollow-up question about that. I see that the scope of the project properly starts from Kuhio highway and then goes back to Kuhi`o Highway. And so part of it is the acquisition of land along the road that goes to the Catholic Chuxch, and then also along Laukini Road, which goes to the back of the Hongwanji, right? Now is this whole length supposed to be accessible by like wheelchair? Mr. Trask: Accessibility, under the guidelines, there's grades, materials, as well as widths. So I'm not trying to be evasive, but as far as accessibility via wheelchair, we would just request...we would go according to the standards. Ms. Yukimura: You would go according to the... Could you speak into the mic? Mr. Trask: We would go according to the standards within the guidelines. And so that may include accessibility by wheelchair, but I'm not so versed in this. I don't know if I eve will be, that's why DCAB will work with us and guide us along the way. Ms. Yukimura: So one way to approach this is to create our vision, our community vision, our community/county vision for it and say that we think in some instances wheelchairs may not, like, for example, it's not reasonable to ask that the Na Pali trail be accessible by wheelchair, right? So...I mean there are certain things that we by...or are not accessible to my 90-year-old dad, no matter which way, even though he walks. We all learn to abide by the limitations of age and disabilities and so forth. I mean when we're young and vigorous, we're so privileged to be able to make these really long hikes and as we grow older, you know, instead of making those hikes we do other things. So our vision could 14 possibly be foot traffic and we could work to put forth that vision and say DCAB this is what we want and we...for these reasons, and then make our case. Mr. Trask: I want to make it clear to the body that we have identified which exceptions we would seek. Ms. Yukimura: Okay, that is good. Mr. Trask: We have looked at and specifically they would be ADA ag exceptions 2...let's see, what would this be? 202.5, which regards alterations to qualified historical building, which is the bridge itself. Exceptions 202.4, dealing with elements or spaces altered in circulation path to... Ms. Yukimura: I'm sorry, you have to read into the mic. Mr. Trask: This is for the record. I can pass this out to you later. I'm sorry. On point, in regards to your statement, 206, accessible routes, exception to. If the communication is made and administration wants us to actually seek these and do that, we can do that. Ms. Yukimura: Right. Okay, okay. So we need to follow-up to get those exceptions from Mr. Trask. I think based on this information and on the I think the desire of a lot of us to continue to push to make this project reality, we need to look at the various...I mean like we started here around the table and with you, ways to maybe bring down the costs, clarify the vision, and then maybe convince the administration to move forward with the council finding some moneys, checking out alternative and supplementary grants and other possibilities, and see if we can come up with a feasible project. But I think the information you have gotten really gives us a launching point, because without a costing of at least the major factors, we wouldn't be able to cut or add or figure out what kind of goal or end in mind we want to have. Thank you. Mr. Bynum: Councilmember Rapozo? Mr. Rapozo: Thank you. Mauna Kea, who is the point of contact at DCAB? Mr. Trask: Curtis Motoyama. That's the gentleman I've been speaking with, and he's real helpful. He's a nice guy. Mr. Rapozo: Curtis Motoyama. Okay, I don't have any more questions. Mr. Bynum: Okay. I have a couple of questions. How much funds have been expended thus far on these studies and various things we've done, ballpark? 15 Mr. Dill: Approximately $120,000. Mr. Bynum: So I want to kind of summarize what I heard today over the last few meetings and make sure I have got it right. We have got the study that has a total cost of over $4 million to actually make it a functional pedestrian path from one end to the other: If we focused just on the bridge, the estimate from the consultant was $2.75, you've looked at that, about how to cut costs and came up with a figure up $2.135. During the discussion today we talked about if we use Douglas fir, if we cut some of these contingencies, if we squeezed it down even more, $1.8, 1.6 to reconstruct the bridge. And then, if we proceeded with that, say at $1.6, the most optimistic figure, there is no legal access to either side. So pragmatically you would have to get access to at least one side or what is the point, right? So when I look at the original plan, it shows a parking area. Which makes sense too, if it's a historical structure, people are going to drive to it and want to park. That parking area is on land we would have to acquire? Mr. Dill: Correct. Mr. Bynum: So based on all of this discussion, the administration's recommendation is to not proceed? Mr. Dill: That is correct. Mr. Bynum: Okay. So I just wanted to... So my overall summary of where we have come to is accurate. So just straight talk, I said a few feet meetings ago let's get to a point of yes or no, because I think obviously we owe that to the community, we're going to proceed or not. Councilmembers are going to pursue other questions here, but push comes to shove, we replenished the fund last night in budget, but it's the administration's call whether, how, and if to spend those funds. If the recommendation stands from the administration to not proceed, I would think we're not going to get any initiative from the administration to put more money in, and then it's going to fall back eventually on the council of whether a member is going to put forward a proposition to come up with the 2.4 or 2.4 or 2.6 million, so...but I think, speaking for myself, I want to see us as quickly as possible come to a straightforward answer to the community yes or no, and just take the heat or take the glory or whatever it is. But that's the way I see it at this point. I assume we'll be back here again, because some members said hey we want you to look at this and this. I assume that those things you can do in-house, the kind of questions that you were asked, but that's also realistically a cost too-your time, your staff's time, our county attorney's time to follow up on those answers. So that's where I'm at with this. Any other? Councilmember Kuali`i. Mr. Kuali`i: So Chair Furfaro is not in the room now, and I just want to make this statement to clarify what he said he would be willing to do for us. And I think while Chair Bynum you're trying to clarify that it's an absolute no by 16 the mayor at this point, what I heard them say earlier was they wouldn't move forward until the legal access issues were addressed, because that is a complete stopper. So they are not interested in putting any more effort until it looks like that can be resolved. And so if the council and the community and if others want to put the energy behind that, the door is still open and... or maybe it isn't, but I want to let the chair do that communication with the mayor and have it clear from the mayor so we know where we're at. We have all this information; it's great. But now we need the clearest, perhaps written answer to the chair on where we're at and how we can move forward. Thank you. Mr. Bynum: Councilmember Yukimura. Ms. Yukimura: Yes. If the...this project is to serve basically as a pedestrian footpath, do we really need a parking lot? Mr. Trask: You know, this is where we get into... Ms. Yukimura: Is it a requirement of historic preservation? Mr. Trask: No, it's an ADA requirement. We're dealing with historic preservation as well as ADA. Ms. Yukimura: Yes. Mr. Trask: And if it's going to be a pedestrian footpath, I think that would contemplate it going...how it was, you go down one side, you come out the other side. But what we're looking at is the most cost-effective, if we were to proceed with this would be just the Laukini side and make it accessible there down and back. And so...but I think in order to address Councilmember Kuali`i's statement, we had a public meeting last week and I believe that the mayor made it clear that the bridge itself, the cost of the bridge makes it prohibitive to move any further regarding public access. So it wasn't that the public access question is holding up the bridge. I think we told the community or the community was told that it was the two... approximately $2 million for the bridge itself, and anything above and beyond that would be too much. Ms. Yukimura: Okay. Well, as I mentioned, we spent half a million dollars for a causeway right down the stream, you know, which basically served three people. So, and I think if this could become an effective footpath, it would serve a really important purpose. You take your life into your hand if you try to walk or bike up the regular bridge OF Kuhi`o Highway. And that bridge...that swinging bridge was created because it was like the logical way for people to get by foot across the stream, and back and forth between Hanama`ulu and Lihu`e. So if it can still serve that purpose, it seems to me $2 million is not too much. But let's work on seeing... and a parking lot doesn't make sense if it's just a walking way. So maybe we can cut that cost out. 17 So I would like to, I mean, obviously, I think the council by putting moneys in the budget line item wants to keep this project alive for further look. And I think thanks to the study and your good work, we have a lot of good data from which to work. And I think we'll try to proceed that way. Mr. Bynum: Any other questions? Mr. Rapozo: I do have one. Mr. Bynum: Councilmember Rapozo? Mr. Rapozo: Do you believe... Do you think that Mr. Motoyama would be available to come to council meeting? Mr. Trask: I have no idea. Mr. Rapozo: I'm going to be asking for a deferral for a month and that we can get the ADA, because by Mr. Trask's own admission, he is not an expert in ADA, and we're asking him to answer ADA questions, which really is not his expertise. Mr. Trask: We also have Christina Pilkington; she's our ADA coordinator. Mr. Rapozo: Yes, but I would much rather have DCAB here; that would be my request anyway, to defer it for a month and have DCAB here in a month to give us a complete briefing of what we can and cannot do. Ms. Yukimura: Okay, until the county is clear about its vision, it's kind of hard for DCAB to answer, but it won't hurt to have them. Mr. Rapozo: Well, your question on the parking lot, that's a good question. That's just one questions that can't be answered today. So there are a few. Mr. Bynum: I recognize the county attorney. Mr. Castillo: Committee Chair, County Attorney Al Castillo for the record. On the question of inviting someone to come over, one of the things that we will do is for Councilmember Rapozo is to determine whether or not this particular person will be able to speak on behalf of the organization that he represents. So the thing about is what would be nice is I could discuss with the Councilmember later on as to exactly what questions that you would like to ask, so that we can pass on those questions to Mr. Motoyama and have an indication from 18 him on whether or not he would be able to appear and speak on behalf of the agency that he represents. I just wanted to make that clear. Mr. Rapozo: Thank you for the offer. I will be contacting Mr. Motoyama myself as well, and it's not really for myself, it's for the public to hear, but we'll definitely work on that. Thank you. Mr. Bynum: Any other questions for the administration? If not, thank you very much. I will call the meeting back to order for the moment. Any discussion along council members before we proceed to public testimony? The meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Mr. Bynum: I just want to answer one question from the best of my memory that Councilmember Rapozo posed about the exception for the Kealia access to the multi-use path. My memory is the exception was because of the steepness of the grade and that there was an alternative access point that was ADA compliant. Any other discussion before we take public testimony? If not, anyone in the audience who would like to speak on this matter, now is the opportunity. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. NINA MONASEVITCH: Aloha, Nina Monasevitch, I'm the President of the Kapaia Hillside CPR Association, and I live in that neighborhood. First of all, thank you for voting to re-establish the funds last night. Really appreciate that and thank you all for your really good questions and concerns, particularly to the Chair, who I don't know where he went. Just a couple of notes I was taking as the meeting is going, yes JoAnn, I did ask at two separate meetings, March 31 and May 5) of the mayor and administration what the costs for the other bridges around the island are. I have notes that I asked that question, so I'm not sure why it wasn't answered. Look forward to those answers, because these numbers. do seem quite high to me, as well. It seems kind of inflated is the word that I would use. But worth it. And so the writing that I have in support of the bridge is I believe repairing the bridge has practical community, cultural, tourist, economic and esthetic values. There are historical, practical, and community benefits to repair and maintain the Kapaia swinging bridge. Many people in the Lihu`e and Hanama`ulu area walk to work, business, hospital, and shopping. Currently pedestrians have to cross the Hanama`ulu stream via the highway bridge, which is potentially dangerous. There is no pedestrian way and vehicles speed regularly. Believe me, I hear them. As gas prices continue to rise, more and more people will walk if they are allowed a safe alternative to driving. Arguably, the bridge should be repaired for this reason alone; however, there are other important reasons to repair and maintain the bridge. I have worked in the hotel, restaurant, and retail industry on Kauai beginning in 1978. I have heard literally hundreds of times from visitors how special Kauai is for her exceptional beauty and especially for her rural nature. We have all heard how many visitors prefer Kauai to Maui, Oahu, or the 19 Big Island, because of her rural, quiet nature. Visitors and residents alike have expressed deep concern that Kauai is losing her unique, pristine, rural character. This is a fact we are all witnessing. This historic bridge in this beautiful rural valley in the heart of Lihu`e is something that adds incalculable value, not only as an historic viewing destination, it also adds a balance to the esthetic valley and rural preservation of our island. As you know, Kapaia Valley was once the business center of the island. There is much history here. The window into this past deserves to be preserved. The swinging bridge is part of that history and deserves to be repaired for all to enjoy Kaua`i's history. I ask that you do what is right for our island, our local communities, and for our visitors, who as you know make a huge impact on our economy. I ask for your support in repairing the Kapaia bridge; .restore the funding that was transferred, thank you, and find additional funding for this worthy cause. Keep the rural nature of Lihu`e corridor in this area in this space intact. Overdoing the improvements is costly and does not serve the Lihu`e community in the long run. For instance, the widened streets of 30 feet and the parking issues and just overdoing it I don't' think is going to fit in with this rural nature, which I'm talking about, and could cut the cost significantly. I think that all of you will ultimately celebrate the repair of this historic bridge. It will be a point of pride in your actions and service to the community and for the future of our special island. And to support some of the comments were made by the council earlier to the administration about working together, I just would like to quote Mayor Baptiste's campaign logo which is, "together we can." Mahalo. Mr. Bynum: Hold on a second. Any questions? Councilmember Chang. Mr. Chang: Thank you, Nina, for being here and thank you to the community. I'm just going to repeat some questions that Councilmember Nakamura and Yukimura had asked. I don't want to speak on their behalf, but has the community embraced the fact that if we can get the public access, if we can get the official and legal access, has the community embraced the fact there may be quite a bit of traffic within the neighborhood area? Ms. Monasevitch: Foot traffic or car traffic? Mr. Chang: The second question I was going to ask is whether you think parking lots were be needed, if you can? So there will be probably a combination of both. Ms. Monasevitch: Well, that is a good question. I have thought about additional people in the air. area. I personally don't have any problem with lots of foot traffic, because that is how it was in the past. Like JoAnn said, I believe it was JoAnn, I don't really see the logic in having a parking lot or having cars drive down there. It kind of doesn't really make sense, because it's a footpath, and it's mainly going to be a pedestrian right of way. So that might be a better question for 20 residents who's lived down there longer than I have; I have been there six years. So I know some of the people have been there generations. They might better answer that. But I'm fine with more traffic. The island and the community is for everyone. I'm not trying to live in my own bubble. I want to share the wealth of the island. Mr. Chang: Thank you. I wanted to comment. You mentioned the bridge, and the bridge is, you know, so many people use the Waimea swinging bridge that is historical when they go to the Menehune Ditch. Of course the Hanapepe swinging bridge, art nights, Friday nights, or what have you, and many long time people probably remember the Keapana Valley, the Keapana bridge. I have looked at the bridge several times from both directions, and the one benefit that I see is that as popular as the Immaculate Conception Church is on Sunday worships, celebrations of life, weddings perhaps, it's difficult to take a left turn or take a right turn during that traffic, and I always envision people going down memory lane and while you wait to clear out, people can do memory lane there on the bridge. So that is what I see as a beautiful benefit as far as the historic basis is concerned. And in addition to the council last night refunding the money, the $136,000, I believe, last night on one of the line items, one of the things that we agreed upon was to get a lobbyist in Washington, D.C. So I will make sure amongst the other things that we're trying to pursue and study, that there may be potential ways of getting preservation for historic, in this case, bridges and what have you. So perhaps as the council chair recommended, hopefully we can restore it back to what it was historically built with, in terms of redwood or what have you, and the trestles or the cables and all of that. So I will certainly make a note for that, because I think you can hear the intentions of the council is that we're not here to give up. We want to try to see what we can do for the community, because some of your members were here when we were talking about safe roads and complete streets and the fact of being able to walk much more safely around the community. So I will make sure that I make an intent to certainly talk to people that know that business, you know, in terms of the lobbying there at Washington, D.C. So thank you, Nina, for your testimony. You talked about Kapaia being historic, and just as a little trivia, I'm not sure if a lot of people know, but we all know in hear the world famous name Hilo Hattie, or Hilo Hattie Fashions, the original Hilo Hattie Fashions, believe it or not, actually was founded in Kapaia 1963. Thank you. Mr. Bynum: Other questions for Nina? If not, I just want to say I'm not going to ask you to answer these questions right now, because that is not fair, right? But if I were to ask... You know, some of the questions that came up, was it's a private road that gets to the one side, the plans call for land acquisition, the question was raised of whether... and we have experience with doing these pedestrian paths on Kauai, and sometimes we acquire that land through gifts, and sometimes we acquire it through acquisition where we pay fair market value. So I don't expect you to answer these questions, but that is one of the questions I've heard posed here, would the community members be willing to gift the land if it helped to facilitate this? I agree that parking wouldn't necessarily be required if it was an operational transportation route from point a to point b, but if it's a 21 historical thing, I'm pretty certain from my knowledge that it would be required that people with disabilities would have a place to park and view it, even if they couldn't go over it. So those are the kind of questions that would be significant changes in the costs is acquiring that access. You know? Is the land gifted? Is it not? You know? So I don't expect answers to those questions, but I just wanted to pose that. Ms. Monasevitch: Okay, thank you. We'll discuss that with our community meeting, because that is a good question. And then in regards to the second part about the ADA and the parking, all of us in the valley and those of us in support of this really would like to see the bridge repaired as-is. We really would like to get around the ADA exemptions, and like I said in my testimony, overdoing it is going to kind of ruin it. So let's focus on restoring it as it was, keeping Kauai unique, and functional and safe and legal, you know? I understand there's lots of hoops to jump through as far as safety and that kind of thing, but it can be done, like Mel brought up with the ships on Oahu, and the old Moana, and various other places all around the world, I'm sure, where you have an historic anything that deserves to be preserved in its original state as much as possible. So I personally and my husband had to go to work and I know most of us in our group, we want to see it .restored without the ADA, just as a historic, as it is, safe and functional without ADA access or expanding the roads, so that would be the goal. Mr. Bynum: This is an issue I have been knowledgeable about for many years, and those are complex, legal issues. I know Councilmember Rapozo is going to pursue that. We're going to send questions and we're going to keep asking those questions, but there could be people out there that are seeing this and saying, hey, but I'm restricted to use of a wheelchair, I want an alternative route too, and that's what the ADA... So there are complex issues, but I certainly understand the sentiment. Any other questions for Nina? If not, thank you very much for being here today. Is there anyone else in the audience who would like to speak on this matter? Mr. Mickens? RANDY FRANCISCO: Randy Francisco, Kauai Chamber of Commerce. Wow. I can't believe I'm here a second time. I'm confounded by the fact that we're having this discussion, mainly because I came out of UH Manoa's historic preservation program. My other hobby is in conservation biology, and one of my first assignments was to bring 12 classmates to Kauai to meet Barbara Robeson and learn about the good work on the north shore regarding historic preservation, architectural landscape, and blah blab blah. And the difficulty I have is about priorities and values. I want to acknowledge first this group of individuals who have put the time and energy into crafting this vision, because I think the bottom line is exactly that. Is our bottom line for the short-term or long-term? Yesterday's conversation, the discussion was about social justice. Today it's about cultural and historic heritage for our future. And I am internalizing this discussion in myself, because I was faced with that, having been involved in 22 Sheraton Moana project and a number of Downtown Honolulu projects and here I am speaking on this, something I never thought I would, but it's one of those, where it was destiny and I'm here. And I would say to these great community people first, we need to be pragmatic. Please have a business plan. Because the idea is great, but it's the after fact, because one of the dilemmas with Historic Foundation of Hawaii was we got the plan after the fact. It's best to have a plan in alignment with the plan that is being executed. Because I would say, are you planning to have educational programs? Because that's part of what this is all about, not about only fixing abridge, investing money. It's about cultural, heritage, and historic preservation, because if you don't have one, then I suggest we work with you to help you develop one. Also, to contact small business development center into the development of a plan. And I think in this budget crisis we really need to demonstrate what I said yesterday about .leveraging our assets, our resources, not just our intellectual capacity, but get real. We need to get with government to apply for grants, because I would like to see a ratio of not 100% from this county government, but something that is diminished, because your kuleana as Councilmembers is to say, government can't be everything to everybody. And so I said it. Because you're challenged with do we assist the people who don't have the food, or do we build more smart growth projects? I would say to Get Fit earlier, maybe we could build or have some preschool projects, if not already existing at the Hongwanji and Immaculate Conception to put some money into the bridge. I just want to make those comments, because when we really need to ask you to step it up, this is one of those moments. And I say this simply because leadership is also about our stewardship. I'm a confounded simply because as people know, I'm a Hanapepe guy. We just celebrated the opening and centennial of the good old Hanapepe bridge, which is used tremendously, especially when one of those bridges is closed. And I had the honor of showing my nephews, one of whom is graduating next month in social entrepreneurship and sustainability, about what the Hanapepe swinging bridge is all about. I would say create a partnership with the business community, because Hanapepe town has embraced it as part of their cultural and heritage tourism.. I think the long-term view is, great idea, are you prepared for all the visitors? Not just the residents, because I think we really want to see this happen and be successful. I guess the challenges are values and priorities-are we investing for now or the future? Is it social justice, crime prevention, economic development, or our social responsibility of historic preservation for the future? So I would say that is about education. That is my education hat. Mr. Bynum: Thank you. Any questions for Mr. Francisco? If not, thank you for your testimony. Anyone else in the audience who would like to speak to this? Mr. Mickens. GLENN MICKENS: Thank you, Tim. For the record, Glenn Mickens. First, I want to say that I'm not against this project, but I'm a little confused about some of it and I have a few questions. First, is this private land that the bridge was built on? 23 Mr. Bynum: Yes. Mr. Mickens: If it is, was it built by private enterprise? Ms. Yukimura: It was built by the county, I believe. Oh, it was... Board of supervisors was county. Government. Mr. Mickens: The government did, okay. So the government did build it, but it's on private property, so they had to have a entry, private entry, etc. Okay. Since it wasn't government-built, but now we're going to try and... or it was government-built, and since we're going to try and rebuild it at this stage in the game, why is the county the one to do the building? Ms. Yukimura: Because we're looking at a public accessway. But Glenn, you need to just give your testimony. Mr. Mickens: Okay. If it's for use by the public and has an absolute need for their use, then why do we not push forward and go ahead and rebuild it? In other words is it ahigh-priority project? And I have heard the numbers kicked around and the mayor, obviously, is balking at it, simply because he is saying that the money isn't there. But if it's a...the community needs it or...I mean if it's ahigh-priority project and enough people are going to use it, and Tim, you bring up about the ADA part of the thing or bicycles. I don't know how a bicycle is going to go across a swinging bridge. I would have trouble just walking across the bridge, but biking across is something that I think is a little scary. But anyway, these are basically my questions, because, again, if it was private property, a private bridge, which you clued me in that it isn't, then I would say, hey, it's up to the people that built it and want to use the bridge to go ahead and rebuild the thing and not get the county into it. But at this stage of the game, if the county in fact does own the bridge, or the state or the government, whatever, then I'd say that hey we should either go ahead and rebuild it, but if the funds are not there, not. Thank you, Tim. Mr. Bynum: Thank you for your testimony. Anyone else? Ken? KEN TAYLOR: Chair and members of council, my name is Ken Taylor. First, I want to say that I appreciate you putting the money back in the budget for this item. I think the mayor made a real bad call in suggesting that he drop this project at this time. I want to thank the representative from the community for her testimony and Randy for his. I think they both made extremely good points. What confuses me at times is a few weeks ago, we adopted a resolution for complete streets, which has a lot of different elements to it. I see this as one of those elements. So on one hand we're saying yes, we agree to the complete streets process, but then the mayor turns around and this, as I recall, the resolution for complete streets came from his office. Then he turns around and tells these folks last week that he is not going to move forward with this project. That is really 24 sending a: mixed message to the community as to what are we standing for? What is the purpose of adopting a complete streets process and then turn around and say, well, here is an opportunity to benefit the complete streets process, as well as the historic preservation of a cultural issue that can be restored and benefit, and would be beneficial for the community from the standpoint of another attraction for our tourist industry, which we spend a lot of money on getting people to come here, and yet we take an item like this that to me should beano brainer, but for some reason or another, the administration has drugged their heels on this thing for a number of years, and now they basically take and say no, we're not going to go forward with it. That's really, really troubling. So I do appreciate that you folks put the money back into it, I appreciate a lot of the questions that were asked today of county staff. And I hope that we can get back on track with this project and move it forward, and I think we would all be better off for having that happen. Thank you. Mr. Bynum: Thank you. Anyone else who would like to speak? LARAINE MORIGUCHI: Aloha Councilmembers. My name is Laraine Moriguchi, I'm a director of the Kapaia Foundation. The Kapaia Foundation members are joined by mutual consent for the common non-profit purposes of preserving, recording, and maintaining the history of Kapaia Valley, of restoring the natural habitat of Kapaia valley and stream, providing educational programs for children and. adults in the state of Hawaii. Our immediate task is to assist the county of Kauai in assuring that the historic Kapaia swinging bridge is repaired and maintained. This is my testimony...our testimony from the Kapaia Foundation. The feasibility report for the Kapaia swinging bridge is complete, leaving more questions than answers. The study and design work, which was ordered as a non-bid contract award to a Honolulu engineering firm, Kai Hawaii, cost taxpayers a total of $136,000. The administration stands by the report. But the public feels the report contains many flaws and grossly inflated cost estimates. The public would like an opportunity to discuss the feasibility study with county officials. We would like to ask questions, get answers, offer suggestions, and find solutions. The feasibility study should be accepted as a starting point to plan for the repair of the Kapaia swinging bridge, rather than as a way to justify abandoning the project. For over four years our county administration has spent countless hours trying to figure out how to repair or not to repair the Kapaia swinging bridge. The people of Kauai have waited with extreme patience, trusting the administration's leadership, promises, and expertise. It is now clear that the county of Kauai is not capable of accomplishing this mission without help from the people they serve? We acknowledge that repairing the Kapaia swinging bridge is not a simple task. Therein lies the challenge for county council, administration and the people of Kauai. We commend and thank you Mayor Carvalho and our county council for moving this project to its starting point. Now is not the time to give up. We're not engineers, lawyers, or administrators. We're just common citizens, who love our island. If we can all work together with a positive attitude, we can make this happen. Thank you Councilmembers for keeping this item on the budget. 25 Let's not let the $136,000 spent for the Kapaia swinging bridge, repair, design, and feasibility study discourage us. Believe and trust in the people you serve when we say that together we can. It's not our original phrase, but we like it, claim it, and believe it. We challenge our leaders to do the same. Thank you. Mr. Bynum: Thank you, Mrs. Moriguchi. Any questions for Mrs. Moriguchi? Councilmember Nakamura? Ms. Nakamura: Thank you for being here today. I have a question, because after listening to all of this today, I am thinking that what is really need as a next step is a community-based vision and a strategic plan for moving forward. I don't hear a lot of clarity about... and this is from people around this, as well as in the audience, about what is the ideal level of use of this bridge? If we're going to restore it, spend $2 million to restore the actual structure, how much will it be shared by people outside the community? Will it connect to other pedestrian or bike paths that are planned in the larger community? If it is going to be shared, when we go to Hanapepe swinging bridge, we use the parking lot right in front to get to to the bridge and to show our visitors what it's like to experience going across the bridge. That parking is important. Is it tied to our larger vision as an island about do we want to promote our swinging bridges to the visitors who come here as something very special and unique about Hawai`i... Kauai? The way I'm thinking about it is that we need to bring everybody together on the same page about these issues, to get clarity, and to make compromises about what will work best moving forward, and only then can we take any next steps to design what we want, but it must be based on some common vision that we share. So that is my thinking. And my question is do you think that the surrounding community, the Kapaia Foundation, would be willing to engage in that type of discussion? Ms. Moriguchi: Definitely, we would. Mr. Bynum: Thank you. Any other questions? JoAnn? Ms. Yukimura: Not a question, but just follow on to what Councilmember Nakamura said. I think a clear vision that we all share would be really good and then with can go even to DCAB and say, okay, how do you get exceptions around this. It just occurred to me that tying in all the pieces, like the Catholic church, actually, that is parking for visitors, if the Catholic church is okay with that, and if visitors just want to come see the bridge, like they do the Hanapepe swinging bridge, that is where they could park, conceivably. Then if it's fixed, even in bon dance time people could use the Catholic church parking for bon dance. I mean it's like... So pulling together all those pieces, the existing business community in Kapaia...I mean the hospital, and then further up Hanama`ulu, you really do see that the bridge was a connector of communities. Playing on that, you could really develop a wonderful vision that includes daily pedestrian access, but also this piece about visitors, and work it into a cohesive idea. I think that is what 26 Mr. Francisco was talking about in a plan. Maybe there are exciting things to do together. Ms. Moriguchi: Right. There is so much potential and that is what is so exciting about it. Just got to think out of the box. Ms. Yukimura: Right. Ms. Yukimura: Don't get stuck in there. Ms. Yukimura: Thank you. Ms. Moriguchi: Thank you. Mr. Bynum: So we're at 12:30... Thank you very much for your testimony.: I'm sorry, if we're going to go much more than a couple of minutes, we're go to have to break? Mr. Kuali`i: Just a quick statement. Thank you so much for your testimony and please thank all the rest of the members of the Kapaia Foundation. I noticed by the map that your property, your personal property, is one of the closest properties to the area where the bridge would be. And I think Councilmember Chang had asked earlier about, to Nina about, how would you feel about the additional traffic right in front of your personal property? Whether it be foot traffic or even maybe some auto traffic, because of a potential parking lot? Ms. Moriguchi: This answer is just mine, my personal answer. If that is what it takes to get the bridge fixed, great, whatever takes, I will consider . Mr. Kuali`i: Thank you. Mahalo. Mr. Bynum: Thank you very much. We need to break for lunch. I don't see anyone else in the audience that wants to speak. Mr. Chang: We have a young lady that wanted to testify. Mr. Bynum: We have adrop-dead five-minute deadline. You have three of those. MIA GOO: Good afternoon Councilmembers. My name is Mia Goo. And Kapaia swinging bridge, it was a big part of my childhood. I grew up playing and fishing on the bridge. So it means a lot to me. I just have a copy of the public testimony that was distributed to you guys in March of this year. I just wanted to read it, just for public awareness. For the past four and a half years our community has been working diligently in preparation for the Kapaia swinging bridge to be repaired. Shortly after the bridge was closed in September 2006, we 27 gathered a petition of more than 300 signatures calling for the immediate repair of the Kapaia swinging bridge. We sat in council chambers for hours waiting to support and offer testimony for repairing the historic bridge. We met with Mayor Carvalho and his staff numerous times throughout the years to discuss matters related to the Kapaia swinging bridge. We created and maintained a website, savekapaiaswingingbridge.Com, where announcements, news, photos, and stories are posted. We are doing extensive research on the history of Kapaia, recording facts and family histories for future reference. We successfully put the Kapaia swinging bridge on the Hawaii Register of historic places. We participated in the 2010 county of Kauai public access open space survey. Recently we formally organized the Kapaia Foundation, whose purpose is to preserve and promote the rich history of Kapaia valley. The Kapaia swinging bridge is the centerpiece of Kapaia Foundation's vision for our community. We cordially invite you Councilmembers, as well as every person in our community, to join Kapaia Foundation. We will continue working until the Kapaia swinging bridge is repaired. Furthermore, once repaired, Kapaia Foundation will support the maintenance and preservation of the Kapaia swinging bridge, as well as all of. Kapaia valley. Thank you very much. Mr. Bynum: Thank you very much. No questions? Anyone else? I am going to call the meeting back to order. We had a lot of discussion. Is there anything else before we entertain a motion? Councilmember Rapozo. Mr. Rapozo: Thank you. As I stated earlier, I will be making a motion to defer for a month, and hopefully in that month, we can have an opportunity to have some dialogue with DCAB. It would be my request that we get them here in a month, so that we can have the questions answered on the floor, so the public can actually have the benefit of hearing it. I just want to say that, you know, in life you have few opportunities that come and go and you don't have an opportunity after that. This is one of them, because if we lose the bridge, we cannot rebuild it. It's not going to be the same. This is an opportunity for us, that I think we need to grab on to. Mr. Chang mentioned the lobbyist that he will be communicating with. In addition to that, we belong to a national association of counties that provide free technical assistance for us. I will be communicating with them as well, in the hopes that they can provide us some kind of assistance, as well as even suggestions for grants and funding opportunities. I regret to say that I haven't gone there yet. I should have done that a long time ago, but I was under the impression this project was moving, so we'll work on that as soon as possible. Then in closing, what this has done is brought some awareness to the community. Hopefully there is someone out there with either money or expertise in building bridges or restoring bridges. The economy is tight right now, but I think if we keep our vision focused and I think Mr. Francisco made a pretty impressive testimony that this is a significant asset that we need to restore and preserve. There are no options and I think we got to exhaust all of our means and with that, Mr. Chair, after the discussion is done I will be asking for a motion to defer. 28 Mr.Bynum: Any other discussion? Council chair? Council Chair Furfaro: I just want to confirm my commitment as a non-committee member to be writing to both the county attorney's office and the mayor about clarity in the next step on the historical recording process for the bridge. So I'll copy your committee. Mr. Bynum: Okay, anyone else? Mr. Rapozo, did you want to make a motion to defer until June 8? Upon motion duly made by Councilmember Rapozo, seconded by Mr. Kuali`i, and unanimously carried, C 2011-75 was deferred until June 8, 2011, and that a request be made for Mr. Motoyama from DCAB to be present at the meeting. There being no objections, this meeting was recessed at 12:37 p.m. The meeting was called back to order at 4:32 p.m., and proceeded as follows: CR-FPP 2011-04 on Bill No. 2406 - A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 23, ARTICLE 3, SECTION 23-3.2 OF THE KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, RELATING TO PEDDLERS AND CONCESSIONAIRES (Approved) There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:13 p.m espe tfully submitted, r Aida Okasaki Legislative Services Aide APPROVED at the Committee Meeting on May 25, 2011: *. TIM B NUM Chair, Finance/Parks & Recreation/Public~Works Programs Committee 29