HomeMy WebLinkAboutpcminutes6-26-12 KAUAI PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
June 26, 2012
The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the County of Kauai was called to order by
Chair, Jan Kimura at 9:05 a.m., at the Lihu`e Civic Center, Mo`ikeha Building, in meeting room
2A-2B. The following Commissioners were present:
Mr. Jan Kimura
Mr. Herman Texeira
Mr. Hartwell Blake
Mr. Wayne Katayama
Mr. Caven Raco
Ms. Camilla Matsumoto
Discussion of the meeting, in effect, ensued:
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
Mr. Dahilig: Commissioner Katayama, Commissioner Matsumoto, Commission Texeira,
Commission Raco, Commissioner Blake, Chair Kimura, we have quorum Mr. Chair.
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
On motion made by Herman Texeira and seconded by Hartwell Blake, to approve
the agenda,motion carried unanimously by voice vote.
MINUTES of the meetings) of the Planniny-Commission
1. Meeting of April 24,2412
2. Meeting of May 8,2012
On motion made by Camilla Matsumoto and seconded by Herman Texeira, to
approve meeting minutes, motion carried unanimously by voice vote.
RECEIPT OF ITEMS FOR THE RECORD
On motion made by Herman Texeira and seconded by Camilla Matsumoto,to
receive items for the record, motion carried unanimously by voice vote.
HEARINGS AND PUBLIC COMMENT Individuals may orally testify on items on this
ap,enda during the Public Comment Period. Please call the Planning Department prior to
the meeting or notify Commission staff at the meeting site. Testimony may also be
accepted when the agenda item is taken up by the Commission at the discretion of the
Chair. Testifiers shall limit their testimony so three 0) minutes, but may be extended
longer at the discretion of the Chair. Written testimony is also accepted. An original and
twelve 12 copies of written testimony can be hand delivered to the Planning Department
or submitted to Commission Staff at the meeting site.
Chair: Does anyone want to speak on any agenda item?
Mr. Dahilig: Open the first item.
1. Continued Agency Hearing (NONE)
2. New Agency Hearing:
JUL 2 4 2012
Class IV Zoning Permit Z-IV-2012-15 to allow commercial development on a ,parcel
within Kilauea Town that is greater than one(1) acre in size, situated at the Hookui Road/Kolo
Road intersection, fintlher identified as Tax Map Key 5-2-009-:008, and containing a total area of
1.74 acres =Michael M. Dyer Revocable Trust. f Postponed 4/24/12,12ostponed 5/8/12
scheduled for 6/12/12 but moved to 6/26/12 due to lack of quorum.]
Director's Report Supplement No. 2 pertaining to this matter.
Chair: Anybody in the public want to speak on this agenda item? We are not asking for
the applicant to come up yet this is just public testimony. Seeing none, can I have a motion to
close the public hearing?
Mr. Texeira: So moved.
Mr. Blake: Second.
Chair: Any discussion, seeing none all in favor say aye,motion carried.
On motion made by Herman Texeira and seconded by Hartwell Blake,to close the
public hearing,motion carried unanimously by voice vote.
Special Management Area Use Permit SMA(U)-2012-04 to allow a lateral expansion to
the existing Kekaha Landfill (KLF)to include three additional cells, involving a parcel located
along the makai side of Kaumuali`i Highway approx.. 1.3 miles west of Kekaha Town further
identified as Tax Map Kev(4) 1-2-002:001 (Portion), 009, and containing g total project area of
98 acres=County ofKaua`i,Department ofPublic Works.
Director's Report pertaining to this matter.
Chair: Does anyone in the public want to speak on this agenda item? Seeing none can I
have a motion to close public hearing?
Mr. Texeira: So moved.
Ms. Matsumoto: Second.
Chair: Any discussion, seeing none all in favor say aye, opposed,motion carried.
On motion made by Herman Texeira and seconded by Camilla Matsumoto, to close
the public hearing, motion carried unanimously by voice vote.
Class IV-Zoning mt Z-IV-2012-17 and Variance Permit V-2012-08 to deviate from
the requirements noted in Section 8-3.6(a)of the Kauai County Code(1987)relating to the
maximum pole length of a flag lot, involving a 3-lot subdivision of a parcel located along Pune`e
in Omao, Wrox. 1,500 ft. south of its intersection with Kaumuali`i Highway further identified
as Tax Map Key 2-7-006:006, 129 and containing a total area of 3316 acres,=Kenneth Souza
Jr./Kenneth A. Souza Trust.
Director's Report pertaining to this matter.
Chair: Does anybody in the public want to speak on this agenda item?
Mr. Dahilig: Mr. Chair, I just want to add into the record we received a written testimony
from Richard and Julie Havaland on this particular application in support.
Chair: Seeing none what does the Commission want to do?
Mr. Texeira: Mr. Chair motion to close the public hearing.
Ms. Matsumoto: Second.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
2
Chair: Any discussion, seeing none all in favor say aye, opposed, motion carried.
On motion made by Herman Texeira and seconded by Camilla Matsumoto, to close
the public hearing,motion carried unanimously by voice vote.
Class IV Zoning Permit Z-IV-2012-18, Special Permit SP-2012-38 and Use Permit U-
2012-14 tooperate a sporting clay facility, similar to clay pieon shooting, on property in the
vicinity of the Electric Power Plant, along the western side of Ma`alo Road further
identified as Tax Man Key 3-8-002:002 (Portion), affecting a total area of 12 acres of 12 acres=
Beniamin &Andrealee Ellsworth (�dba Kauai Eco Sporting Clays,LLQ
Director's Report pertaining to this matter.
Chair: Does anyone in the public want to speak on this agenda item? Seeing none...
Mr. Texeira: Mr. Chair, motion to close public hearing.
Ms. Matsumoto: Second.
Chair: Any discussion, seeing none all in favor say aye, opposed,motion carried.
On motion made by Herman Texeira and seconded by Camilla Matsumoto,to close
the public hearing, motion carried unanimously by voice vote.
Continue Public Hearing (NONE)
New Public Hearing (NONE)
All public testimony pursuant to HRS 92
Mr. Dahilig: Mr. Chair, we have three individuals signed up to testify on agenda item
L.1 relating to Kilauea Ventures however before I read the names I would like to read into the
record the testimony that we have received on this application. We have received application in
support from Scott Nimroff, we have received an application in support from Landon Williams,
we received an application in support from, sorry not an application a letter, in support from
Justin Terpeny,we have also received a letter in support from Matthew Malchiodi, a letter in
support from Edwin Garces, a letter in support from Justin Beach, a letter in support from Billy
Williams. We have received a letter in support from the Contractor's Association of Kauai, we
have also received a letter in support from Kauai Chamber of Commerce, we have also received
a letter concerned about the by-pass road and the timing of construction from Donna Apelado
Shumaker, received a letter in support from Shio Construction and Conrad Morishigi That is all
the written testimony that I have on this agenda item. With your permission I will read the
names of the speakers that have signed up on this agenda item, first one is Mary Capwell
followed by David Dinner followed by Jenai Yoshii.
Ms. Matt'Capwell: Good morning everyone my name is Mary Capwell, I live at 4031
Kahilimakai Street in Kilauea. I am here to talk with you this morning about the Kilauea
Lighthouse Village and I will make three brief points. First of all the Kilauea Town Plan
developed in 2005 earmarked this area as a commercial core for the town. The village has
variety of wonderful businesses right now but it lacks the town center feeling of Hanalei or
Koloa and that is something that my friends and my neighbors and I very much want. We
believe that placing a shopping center in that area with all of the good work that has been done is
going to do more than just build a shopping center but create a town center that we really don't
have. Kilauea Lighthouse Village will invigorate and galvanize the town center bringing new
businesses to compliment what is already there and bringing much needed customers to those
existing businesses and the new ones as well. The variety of spaces available will attract
professionals and offices as well as provide some much needed rentals for our residents.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
3
My second point, the site is commercially zoned and includes sufficient acreage to allow
the center as designed and presented. The design concept developed by the Hunt team will be in
keeping with the historic feel and the identity of our town. The plans show attractive plantation
style multi-use buildings which will be appropriate in their surroundings and appropriate
landscaping will really beautify the area. The Hunt team has utilized green design and LEED
building criteria to make the structures and the surroundings environmentally friendly. Plans are
in place which will address traffic and we will rely on our County of Kauai to help us to
improve access and flow to and from Lighthouse Village.
The third point, I did some research on the Hunt Company, they are a company of high
integrity and have a history of success,they support diverse local charities and organizations like
the Nature Conservancies and similar organizations,rotary clubs, American Heart Association,
Habitat for Humanity and even Boys and Girls Clubs. The Hunt Company representatives are
working closely with local people who have already demonstrated their good will and expertise
when it comes to protecting and preserving Kaua`i's character while moving forward at the same
time. Kauai, specifically Kilauea will benefit from the Hunt Company presence, for these
reasons I strongly support this project and I ask you to please approve the Kilauea Lighthouse
Village, thank you.
Mr. Dahiliz: David Dinner followed by Jenai Yoshii.
Mr. David Dinner: Good morning. I have testimony from two other people as well as
myself, may I read those? It was just very difficult for some people to get off work today to
come here.
Chair: What is the difference in the three testimonies that you have?
Mr. Dinner: One is a personal testimony from a woman I don't know, it was given to me
by Tom Pickett who is the communications committee head.
Chair: We will just have staff run copies of it and we will just distribute it out.
Mr. Dinner: I have copies of it and I have handed them in. I think if it is okay I would
like to read Scott Mijares's.
Chair: You can read Scott's or you have read yours, one or the other.
Mr. Dinner: I will read mine since I wrote it. (Letter on file)
Mr. Blake: The application states that the purpose, of course there is a profit motive in
everything otherwise it would be not on this earth,but as I read this application the purpose is to
provide the public,the Kilauea public specifically, with an option to going into Hanalei, Lihue,
or Kapa`a. Why do you say that it is going to be so disruptive present day businesses in Kilauea?
Mr. Dinner: The reason I say that is because we have two small grocery stores there
now, we have a pharmacy and a few other small businesses scattered throughout the town. The
object of the General Plan was to bring those into that area,none of those businesses are coming
into that area as far as I know.
Mr. Blake: Into what area?
Mr. Dinner: Into the new shopping center area. They all have to stay where they are,
they either own their buildings. The medical building owns its building they can't move into that
space. And they will be in direct competition with people who take that space, they will lose
their business because of that. Those two grocery stores will be out of business in my opinion or
at least impacted very strongly. It would be so much simpler for Foodland to run...Foodland is
the main concern,people don't like to drive to Princeville for food. It would be so much easier
for somebody to run a shuttle from Princeville to Foodland than it would be to build a 40,000
square foot shopping center. That just seems like such overkill. There are a few elderly people,
quite a few maybe elderly people in Kilauea who find it a hardship to get to Princeville but it
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
4
would be a lot easier to get them there than to build a shopping center to compensate for that in
my opinion.
Mr. Blake: So the very real possibility of increasing the traffic on Kuhi`o Highway
offsets in your opinion the possibility of increasing or excuse me of adversely impacting
competition.
Mr. Dinner: I'm sorry would you say that again please?
Mr. Blake: The impact of adding more traffic to Kuhi`o Highway in your opinion offsets
the potential impact to competition within the town.
Mr. Dinner: The impact on competition in the town is going to be fierce. I think all of
the businesses that are now present in town will go out of business. That is my assessment. I
think as well this shopping center is going to bring everything, all the traffic right into the center
of town in a very bad way. When they do build the by-pass it will be not a by-pass road it will
bring all the traffic right to the center of town on that road.
Mr. Blake: What I don't understand is if I don't live in Kilauea why would I be going to
Kilauea to shop?
Mr. Dinner: If the shopping center is designed to accommodate only Kilauea then it
doesn't have to be 40,000 square feet, that was the whole issue. If the developers would make a
smaller shopping center I think it would be acceptable to everyone but his is massive, this is
aimed at gathering the people who are going to the Lighthouse, they get one hundred thousand
people a year at the Lighthouse. This is aimed at pulling them into that area in my opinion so
that they will have to stop at the shopping center because the road goes right there. So if it
doesn't do that then the shopping center is going to fail and if the shopping center fails then we
have this huge development that is empty. Then we have trinket stores and tourist stops for the
Lighthouse. What I see is the step by step prospects area not...you can't anticipate them and it
could be very detrimental to the town in my view.
Mr. Blake: Thank you.
Mr. Dinner: I really do want to say that I respect the developers; I think they have done a
really good job of bringing this to the community and they are gentlemen, they have been very
good. But the project is too big for the town in my opinion and I think all of the letters I brought
and many of the people I have talked to,many people just could not be here today. As you know
this hearing has been delayed over and over and made it very difficult for people in businesses to
plan to come here so that is why there aren't many people here today. Thank you so much for
listening.
Chair: Jenai Yoshii.
Ms. Jenai Yoshi: Good morning, my name is Jenai Yoshii and I am testifying on behalf
of myself and my husband Richard Yoshii. We live at 4470 Pukalani Place in Kilauea. I am
here in support of Hunt Company's development project for the Kilauea Lighthouse Village.
Just to touch on a recent testimony, the majority of Kilauea residents that I know can't afford to
shop at the current grocery stores that are in Kilauea and opt to go to Princeville or to go to
Kapa`a or Lihue as well as myself. My husband and his family built the Kilauea house that we
live in right now thirty three years ago and are the owners and operators of Yoshii Farms in
Moloa'a which they established in 1975. Two years ago my husband and I made the decision to
move our family back to Kilauea from Honolulu for many reasons but one of those being that
Kilauea is the ideal community in which to raise a family.
We believe that Kilauea Lighthouse Village will complement our community by
providing residents with a common gathering place and convenience to do daily business such as
shopping and banking without commuting outside of town to Princeville, Kapa`a, or Lihue.
Kilauea Lighthouse Village's.architecture will recognize and integrate-iiiceiy with our
community's historic character and will boost locally owned retailers and create local jobs and
Planning Conunission Minutes
June 26,2012
5
also will have environmentally friendly design. I think the LEED aspect is very important. We
do appreciate Hunt Company's willingness to talk and work with the community to ensure that
our thoughts were heard and reflected in their project. They have been meeting with the
community for over a year and a half now and the team has hosted community workshops,
attended the Neighborhood Association meetings, met one on one with us as well as other
residents, Kilauea Seniors and other organizations to ensure that we were aware of their plans
and updates.
Specifically this has resulted in Hunt designing buildings and parking lots in areas to
reduce noise to neighbors,providing a community meeting space,most importantly ensuring that
there will be on-site security and more. We along with many of our fellow Kilauea residents are
confident that Hunt will continue to develop the Kilauea Lighthouse Village responsibly and
with genuine care and respect for Kilauea and its people. Kilauea Lighthouse Village is located
on commercially zoned property that Kauai County and the Kilauea Neighborhood Association
has allocated for growth and we encourage you to approve Kilauea Lighthouse Village's permits,
thank you.
Mr. Dahilig: Mr. Chair that is all I have signed up, you may want to enquire whether
others want to testify at this point.
Chair: Anybody else in the public want to testify on this agenda item?
Mr. Jerry Nishek: My name is Jerry Nishek with Kauai Nursery and Landscaping.
(Read written testimony on file)
Ms. Debbie Sandon: Hi,my name is Debbie Sandon and I own the Employee Leasing
Company of Hawaii which runs out of Kilauea as well as my sister has the Kilauea Town Market
and Deli and I own two pieces of property in Kilauea, 2274 Kolo Road and 4671 Halelani. I
wasn't planning on talking today so hold on, the traffic on Kuhi`o Highway,my question about
there being less traffic on Kuhi`o Highway if people are having to stay in Kilauea is this, if they
hope to have a grocery store and a hardware store there that will basically take the place of
having to go to Princeville then a lot of the people from the other side of Princeville are going to
be coming our direction especially for the hardware store. So all the traffic that used to go from
Kilauea to Princeville is now going to be going from Hanalei and further all the way to Kilauea
so I don't see how less traffic on Kuhi`o Highway is really going to happen. That doesn't really
make any sense to me.
I am also concerned about the fact that when I asked at one of the meetings about them
using local construction workers the answer was that they were going to use as many local
subcontractors as economically feasible, I believe,was the answer I got. And that sounds like no
to me. So they are going to build it and I am questioning how many local people are really going
to get jobs from it. I walk on that road with my son who has a severe handicap two or three
times a day and it is scary the way that it is. There really aren't sidewalks on Kilauea Road they
are like this high because they keep doing is building up the road. Those aren't sidewalks. That
is where all of our kids walk to school. I am really worried about that. Also I happen to know
that most of the businesses in Kilauea are barely getting by as it is, restaurants, stores,my sister's
store so I don't see how we need another shopping center in there that perhaps isn't planned well
enough for the community as it is right now. We are a bedroom community. We always have
been. Almost everybody in our community goes to another town to work every day which is
why we use their big grocery stores and keep our town small.
Chair: Anybody else want to speak on this agenda item?
Ms. Maile Brian: Good morning,my name is Maile Brian. I am the president of the
Contractor's Association of Kauai and I actually was here not to speak on that behalf with that
hat on but more so that I was born and raised on the North Shore. After hearing the previous
comment I would like to say that the Hunt Company has committed and has worked closely with
the association to ensure local contractors will be put to work on this project and that is
something that was very important to us. Also, after college I moved home,my first job was at
the Kong Lung Center and those of you who are very familiar with the site it is kind of a hodge
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
6
podge of buildings especially across the street. This is the first time I have seen a developer
actually come to the table and engage the community and is sincere,has been giving back to the
community as well. I personally really like the plan. I believe Kilauea has already outgrown its
self many years ago and this would encompass a safe environment to turn it into what it should
be, truly a walk-able community.
As far as the other stores being hurt economically I think that...well from personal
experience I don't shop at the Kilauea Market, I can't afford to, so Menehune Mart is fine,we all
stop there for lunch. I think competition is good and I think those people who live there and go
to these businesses will continue to do so. So I ask on behalf of myself as a Kauai resident that
you approve this application and I really think that it will truly turn Kilauea into an even better
place with the intent of it being for the residents. We finally have a developer that really truly
cares about the community and comes to the table and not coming in with let's build a strip mall
in Kilauea Town, thank you.
Chair: Anyone else want to speak on this agenda item?
Mr. Rgy Ellis: Aloha Commissioners,my name is Ray Ellis, operations manager of
Kauai Lumber and HPM Building Supply. I am here to support the application for Hunt
Company Ventures out in Kilauea. HPM has been working on the Big Island, Kona side, with
the Hunt Company for the past six years and we know them to be respectable and honorable
business people who live up to their commitments to the community. Kilauea Lighthouse
Village project is consistent with the Kauai General Plan,North Shore Development Plan,the
Kilauea Town Core Plan, the North Shore Development PIan, and our community's vision for
Kilauea commercial area. It will provide much needed retail business, community resources, and
employment opportunities for local residents. Again, we encourage you to support this project
out in Kilauea. I also have a testimony, a letter from our current president and CEO of HPM
Building Supply and I have some copies here I can forward to you,mahalo.
Mr. Bill Hay: My name is Bill Hay. I wasn't planning on speaking just as this lady who
went ahead of me wasn't either. I either own or manage the partnerships that own the 140 acres
that is just to the west of the proposed shopping center called the Kilauea Plateau. During the
planning process my wife and I had offered to donate the land for both the by-pass road and for
the North Shore(inaudible) which would transverse our property and go down to the access of
Secret Beach. I have come to know the Hunt Group, I think they are honorable guys and I
support the project completely. At the same time I was a little sad that some of the other things
you wanted to do like the by-pass road haven't paralleled or developed at the same rate because I
do believe that as good as this project will be it will be a lot better when that by-pass road is
installed, thank you.
Chair. Anyone else wants to speak on this agenda item, seeing none, consent calendar.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Status Reports (NONE)
2. Director's Reports for Project(s) Scheduled for Agency Hearing on 6/26/12
Class IV Zoning Permit Z-IV-2012-17 and Variance Permit V-2012-08 to deviate from
the requirements noted in Section 8-3.6(al of the Kauai County Code(1987)relatin tg o the
maximum,pole length of a flag lot,involving a 3-lot subdivision of a parcel located along Pune`e
in Omao, approx.. 1,500 ft. south of its intersection with Kaumuali`i Highway further identified
as Tax Map Key 2-7-006:006, 129 and containing;a total area of 3.16 acres =Kenneth Souza
Jr./Kenneth A. Souza Trust. [Schedule for 6/12/12 but moved to 6/26/12 due to lack of
uorum.
Director's Report pertaining to this matter.
Class IV Zoning Permit Z-IV-2012-18 S ecial Permit SP-2012-38 and Use Permit U-
2012-14 tooperate a§Vorting clay facilitL similar to c1gy pigeon shooting, on property located in
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
7
the vicinity of the Kapaia Electric Power Plant, along the western side of Ma`alo Road,further
identified as Tax Map Key 3-8-002:002 (Portion), affecting a total area of 12 acres=Benjamin
Andrealee Ellsworth Oba Kauai Eco Snorting Clays,_ LLC(KEOSC). f Scheduled for 6/12/12
but moved to 6/26/12 due to lack of quorum.]
Director's Report pertaining to this matter.
3. Director's Reports for Project(s) Scheduled for Agency Hearing on 7/10/12,
Class 1V Zoning Permit Z-N-2012-20 Special Permit SP-202-39 and Use Permit U-
2012-16 to allow various site improvements to the National Tropical Botanical Gardens(NTBG)
including the conversion of an existing tool shed into a Snack Shop construction of a Comfort
Station, Gardener's&Heav Equipment Storage Facilities, Pedestrian&Vehicular Bridges, and
trail &walkway enhancements on a parcel situated approx.. 4,500 ft. south of the Lawai
Highlands Estate Subdivison in Lawai, also referred to as the McBnLde Garden,further identified
as Tax Mgp Key 2-6-003:052 and affecting a total area of a rox.. 5 acres=National T ical
Botanical Garden.
Director's Report pertaining. h this matter.
Class 1V Zoning Permit Z-1V-2012-19 and Use Permit U-2012-15 to allow establishment
of an alternative home school facility on a parcel located in.Lawaii, Kauai along the northern
side of Koloa Road,situated near the Koloa Road/Lawai Loa Road intersection finther
identified as Tax Map Key 2-6-003:055 and containing .35 acres=Kevin and Angela Kum
Director's Report pertaining to this matter.
4. Shoreline Setback Activity Determination
Shoreline Setback Commission Review SSCR-2012-12 for a shoreline setback
determination, Tax Map Key(4)2-6-007:013,Poi`pu, Kauai for acceptance by the Commission
=Maxine Votaw.
Director's Report pertaining to this matter.
Shoreline Setback Commission Review SSCR-2012-13 for a shoreline setback
determination,Tax Map Key(4) 4-3-008:001, Waipouli,Kauai for acceptance by the
Commission= Wainouli Beach Resort,LLC(Palms Hawaii Architecture,Authorized Agent),
Director's Report pertaining to this matter.
Shoreline Setback Commission Review SSCR-2012-14 for a shoreline setback
determination, Tax Map Key(4) 4-3-009:001,Wailua, Kaua`i,for acceptance by the
Commission=Stephanie Skow.
Director's Report pertaining to this matter.
Shoreline Setback Commission Review SSCR-2012-15 for a shoreline setback
determination, Tax Map Key(4)4-5-002:023,Kapa`a, Kauai. for acce tp ance by the
Commission= County ofKaua`i,Department ofPuhlic Works
Director's Report pertaining to this matter.
Chair: Do any of the Commissioners want to move any of the consent calendar items,
two or more Commissioners? We are going to take a five minute recess.
Commission recessed at 9:45 a.m.
Meeting called back to order at 10:05 a.m.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
8
Mr. Dahilig: Mr. Chair,just to clarify for the Commissioners that items two and three,
usually the procedural requirement that a director's report be given before the public hearing but
in this case what we have had is a unique circumstance because of the Commission's quorum
issue at the last meeting that these reports were made available well in advance. But we have to
go through the process of doing that acceptance so that is what we are doing, it is item's two and
three are not for action rather they are for acceptance. And same as item number four which is
for acceptance again and mainly it is a product of public testimony of requirements under the
code and not for any type of action.
Chair: But we are still taking action on those items.
Mr. Dahilig: Later on in the agenda.
Chair: Any Commissioners want to move any of the consent calendar items? Seeing
none...
Mr. Raco: Motion to approve consent agenda.
Ms. Matsumoto: Second.
Chair: Any discussion, seeing none all in favor say aye, opposed, motion carried.
On motion made by Caven Raco and seconded by Camilla Matsumoto,to approve
consent calendar, motion carried unanimously by voice vote.
Mr. Raco: Chair, if I may I would like to revise the agenda, move items H, the executive
session, and item L, unfinished business, PDU-2012-1, Use Permit U-2012-7, and Variance
Permit V-2012-5 and Class IV Zoning Permit Z-IV-2012-7 to right before the announcements.
Ms. Matsumoto: Second.
Chair: Any discussion, seeing none all in favor say aye, opposed, motion carried.
On motion made by Caven Raco and seconded by Camilla Matsumoto, to revise
order of agenda as stated, motion carried unanimously by voice vote.
Chair: Does everyone understand that? Items H and L will be at the end of this meeting.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
1. Subdivision Subdivision Action matters listed in the Subdivision Committee
Agenda(attached).
Mr. Texeira: Mr. Chair there were three items on the subdivision agenda and two of
them required tentative subdivision action, one is 5-2012-12, Jean E. Nadatani and this was a 2-
lot subdivision in Lawaii, Kauai and it was approved 2-0. The second item is 5-2012-14,
Wailua Ranch, TMK 4-4-8:05, this is located in Wailua Homesteads and this was approved 3-0.
The third item which required final subdivision action is 5-2012-03, James M. Keahi
Trust/Randall W.Yates Trust, TMK 1-6-2:74 and this is located in Waimea, Kauai. This is for
a 2-lot subdivision and this was approved 3-0. Mr. Chair,that concludes my subdivision report.
Chair: Do you have any questions for the Subdivision Committee chair? Can I have a
motion please?
Mr. Raco: Motion to approve.
Ms. Matsumoto: Second.
Chair: Any discussion, seeing none all in favor say aye, opposed, motion carried.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
9
On motion made by Caven Raco and seconded by Camilla Matsumoto, to approve
Subdivision Committee report, motion carried unanimously by voice vote.
NEW BUSINESS
Class IV Zoning Permit Z-IV-2012-15 to allow commercial development on a parcel
within Kilauea Town that is greater than one(1) acre in size, situated at the Hookui Road/Kolo
Road intersection, further identified as Tax Map Key 5-2-009-:008, and containing a total area of
1.74 acres =Michael M. Dyer Revocable Trust. LPostponed 4/24/12,postRoned 5/8/12,
scheduled for 6/12/12 but moved to 6/26/12 due to lack of quorum.]
Director's Report Supplement No. 2 pertaining to this matter.
Staff Planner Jodi Galinato: The applicant is proposing to convert a portion of the former
Kauai Pacific School facility to commercial retail use including a health food grocery store,
convert a former fruit stand to a restaurant, designate future office/retail use and add one mobile
food vender site. The additions will incorporate the wood plantation style design and colors that
currently exist. The roofing will also be metal with wood accent. This application replaces the
previous Class IV permit for the school and the fruit stand which expired and those permits are
being withdrawn. I don't know in light of the agenda if you want me to read the whole report
since you have had for a little while. I have gone over the recommendations with the applicant
and incorporated the agency comments for you.
Chair: You don't have to read it I think everyone here has read it.
Mr. Dahilig: Commissioners,just for clarification for ease of reading what we have done
is we have actually taken the last few pages of the Commission report and actually integrated all
the agency comments as conditions as we typically do. So what has happened is we have reports
that are incorporated by reference but for reading purposes what is highlighted in these additional
pages is really what has been incorporated by reference in the staff report.
Chair: Is the applicant here?
Mr. Ron Agor: Good morning Commissioners, nice to see you all here today. I have
with me Mike Dyer, the owner of the property and I am here to answer any questions you may
have.
Chair: Any questions for the applicant? I have a question. I drove past that property
yesterday and I noticed some construction work going on in the parking lot. Why is there
construction going on before the permit has been issued?
Mr. Mike Dyer: The parking lot doesn't require a permit.
Chair: It doesn't?
Mr. Dyer: No it does not.
Chair: Is that correct?
Mr. Jung: Jodi, do you know if the original permit had a parking lot requirement?
Staff. I believe they had a requirement to pave the parking in the past and they are going
to phase the parking on paving it if I am not mistaken.
Chair: So that wasn't part of this application?
Mr. Dyer: That is correct. I went to the building division with a list of things that we
needed to do,parking lot was one and was told it did not require a permit. We did a reroofing of
an existing building and did not require a permit. My new tenant and I agreed that I would put a
loading dock on the side of an existing building, that required a permit and that is one of the
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
10
reasons we are here. The second was my tenant is applying for demolition permit and a
commercial kitchen inside the building that they are leasing,that does require a permit so two
permits triggered this Class IV Zoning permit.
Mr. Texeira: My question is do you plan to incorporate tour buses as part of your traffic
flow into your development?
Mr. Dyer: No Mr:Texeira, we don't have enough room in our parking lot, only for
conventional passenger vehicles.
Mr. Texeira: My second question is should additional parking space be required in the
future would you have enough space, do you have sufficient space to accommodate future
parking if deemed necessary by the Planning Director?
Mr. Dyer: Yes I believe so.
Chair: Any more questions for the applicant?
Mr. Dahilig: Just to clarify for the record Mr. Agor just that you have read the proposed
conditions and that you have no objections to the conditions that are proposed.
Mr. Agor: Yes we are in concurrence with the report.
Chair: I have one question,have you guys talked to KNA and how do they feel about
this project?
Mr. Agor: I am surprised you didn't get a letter from them. Yes we had a meeting with
them and it appeared favorable at that time. This was about maybe a month and a half ago, we
did a presentation to the KNA.
Mr. Texeira: Not necessarily to the applicant but we see two commercial developments
proposed in Kilauea on different ends of the town,how does one impact the other iii terms of
traffic flow? Has there been any communication with the other applicant?
Chair: Personally I don't think they really...one is in the outskirts of Kilauea by the main
highway and the other on is in the main town of Kilauea so I don't think they would enact with
one another. The only thing I can see is Healthy Hut was one of the tenants in that rock building
there, the stone building, that they will be moving if this application is pass, will be moving to
your structure,right?
Mr. Agor: Yes and I would like to pass on this information. The owner of Healthy Hut
wrote a letter in favor of the other project.
Mr. Texeira: Has the Kilauea Neighborhood Association, KNA, had any discussions
with both of these projects?
Chair: I just asked and they said yes. I know for the Hunt Group they have spoken to
KNA. I haven't been there but I know they have.
Mr. Texeira: Commissioner,because we do look at cumulative impacts as a consequence
of our permit evaluations and in discussions with the planner this is an entirely separate and
different location and we do not feel based on the comments that have come back from the three
sixty that we have done which included both the State Department of Transportation as well as
the County Department of Public Works Engineering Division, they have not raised any red flags
from the standpoint of impacts with respect to this project.
Chair: What does the Commission want to do?
Mr. Raco: Chair,motion to approve Class IV Zoning Permit Z-IV-2012-15.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 2b,2012
11
Mr. KatUama: Second.
Chair: Any discussion?
Mr. Texeira: Before we have the final vote on this item the planner should give us a
conclusion and the conditions. When do we discuss the conditions set forth in this prior to
approval?
Chair: We can have the conditions read right now.
Staff: I can read them.
Mr. Raco: Did they change? It hasn't changed.
Chair: It hasn't changed.
Mr. Texeira: But we need to approve the conditions, everything.
Mr. Raco: I have read the application and the conditions haven't changed, right Mike?
Mr. Dahilig: We have not had any changes based on the conditions.
Staff. We just incorporated them all together for you.
Mr. Texeira: So we can assume the conditions will be part of the approval then, right?
Mr. Raco: It is part of the Director's report.
Chair: Are you satisfied with that answer?
Mr. Texeira: Yes.
Chair: So we will go ahead with the vote, all in favor say aye, opposed,motion carried.
On motion made by Caven Raco and seconded by Wayne Katayama, to approve Z-
IV-2012-15, motion carried unanimously by voice vote.
Special Management Area Use Permit SMA(U)-2012-04,to allow a lateral expansion to
the existing Kekaha Landfill (KLF)to include three additional cells, involving a parcel located
along the makai side of the Kaumuali`i Highway, approx.. 1.3 miles west of Kekaha Town,
further identified as Tax Map Key(4) 1-2-002:001 (Portion), 009, and containing a total project
area of 98 acres = County ofKaua`i,Department of Public Works.
Director's Report pertaining to this matter.
Staff Planner Dale Cua: At this point I will just summarize the project description. As
far as the property it a little over a mile west of Kekaha Town at the existing landfill, tax map
key of the property is 1-2-002:001, 009. The land area is 98 acres and as noted it an existing
landfill site. What is being proposed is the applicant is proposing a lateral expansion of the
existing Kekaha Landfill site to include three additional cells, these cells occur within two
distinct refuse fill areas identified as phase one and phase two which is identified in their
application.
Just a little bit of background on the landfill facility,phase one began operations in 1953
and continued until operations ceased in October of 1993 phase two operations occurred after the
closure of phase one. Phase two is a permitted municipal solid waste landfill for disposal of
nonhazardous solid waste. The permit for the phase two (inaudible) which is comprised of thirty
two acres is subdivided into fourteen waste disposable cells. In that phase two there is an
existing office, scale house and maintenance shop. The agency comments have been attached
into the staff report and at this point that concludes the staff findings.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
12
Chair: Any questions for the planner?
Ms. Matsumoto: Can you describe the interfacing with recycling efforts on Kauai?
Staff. Actually I would like the applicant to go through their presentation.
Mr. Blake: What is the straight line distance from the ocean to the edge of the...?
Staff As noted in the petition it is a little over a quarter of a mile away.
Mr. Blake: In 81, Iniki, did the water go past that or encroach upon what is now the
landfill or did it go past it?
Staff: Maybe I will have Public Works answer that question for you.
Mr. Blake: Is Public Works in the audience?
Chair: We will call them up, any more questions for the planner?
Mr. Blake: My last one that you might want to direct to Public Works too is if we have
another tsunami like the 81 one tsunami and it goes a quarter of a mile inland what is it going to
encounter there,just dirt or is it going to uncover all kinds of trash and debris?
Staff I think that would be best suited for Public Works to address your concerns.
Chair: Is the applicant here? Do you have any questions with the staff report?
Unidentified Speaker: No.
Chair: Any questions for the applicant?
Ms. Matsumoto. We have those questions that we posed earlier about the recycling, the
interfacing of recycling efforts on Kauai with the proposed landfill.
Mr.: The new landfill expansion doesn't introduce any new recycling efforts but those
are ongoing with the Department of Public Works.
Chair: Can you say your names please?
Mr. Frank Cioffi: I am Frank Cioffi with ACOM, project manager, design engineer.
Julie Zimmerman is our permitting task manager and then Donald Fujimoto from the Department
of Public Works.
Mr. Cioffi: The expansion of the Kekaha Landfill its self doesn't involve any new
recycling efforts but the County has a number of efforts that are ongoing and the more successful
they are the longer this would last. I hope that answers the question.
Mr. Dahilig: Donald, you may want to weigh in on your diversion program.
Mr. Fujimoto: What really is the question?
Ms. Matsumoto: I think recycling is very important and I think it interfaces with this
project so I just wanted to get an idea of if there are any conversations going on or what are some
future plans are because once that area is filled what do you do with all of that, is there a plan to
move it forward?
Mr. Fujimoto: It is a very complex problem however we do recognize that air space is
very valuable. We initiating and implementing a lot of different diversion projects ranging all
the way from recycling to initiating new ordinances to actually promote additional diversion and
recycling efforts. I think the easiest and the best because this is so huge that rather than trying to
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
13
respond to this right now we can submit to you an update of all our diversion plans and efforts.
There are two ways of looking at this, upstream and downstream. Upstream is before it gets to
the landfill and then downstream is once it is ready to be land filled. And we are also taking a lot
of initiatives recently to incorporate new equipment to ensure that our compaction efforts are
maximized. And we are even looking at other issues,just recently we were at Council discussing
shredding operations.
Ms. Matsumoto: How about sorting, do you do any sorting?
Mr. Fujimoto: Again we are looking into that. Speaking about that, I am scheduled to go
to Hilo on Thursday to look at their pre-sorts station and to look at the feasibility of their
operations as far as those kinds of issues.
Mr. Blake: I might have missed this but if nothing happens on the rest of the island how
long is this projected to last?
Mr. Cioffi: This expansion is projected to last 3.8 years at the current rate.
Mr. Katayama: In your proposal you list twelve years and there are three cells that you
have identified, how does that compute with...I guess looking at it from a high level is this
expansion that you are asking approval for, is it twelve years?
Mr. Fujimoto: Let me clarify that. I think what you are looking at is an EA which
reflects all three cells. Cell one is a project that we already have undertaken and again the EA is
already published, it has already been completed. Cell one did not require an SMA it is outside
the SMA zone so we proceeded with design, we permitted and we constructed. Currently we are
in cell one which its project life is 3.4 year I believe,the initial projected life. Cell two which is
where this permit is, cell two is between phase one and phase two,phase one is outside of the
SMA but phase two is within the SMA. So because it is within the SMA we are required to get
this SMA permit, to get the permits to be able to complete design and then construct the cell. So
that is projected to be about another 3.2 years, I believe, and cell three which is actually over cell
one was projected to have about 5.6 years and that is the total of the twelve years that you are
looking at. However cell three,we are hoping that we don't have to go there because that is a
very—it is not cost effective and we are looking at other options to keep our costs down.
Mr. Katayama: Based on the current fill rate and based on the activation of a new site
how does this work or does it work?
Mr. Fujimoto: Right now we have got about 2.5 years left on cell one and that is based
on a much lower generation rate of refuse. The result of when these projections were done was
based on an average on the higher flows. So right now if we can, well again good news,bad
news, we were hoping that the economy will pick up but that means more refuse but if we stay
on this low rate this new cell should give us about 4.5 years verses the 3.2 years I believe.
Mr. Katayama: And so based on your overall plans to relocate is that enough time?
Mr. Fujimoto: We may have to come in; in fact we are already planning another
expansion,probably a vertical expansion.
Mr. Cioffi: And if I could just add to what he said, I think there is a little confusion in the
application in that the EA five years ago covered cells one, two and three, cell one is already in
operation and that didn't come before you because it is outside of the management area. Cell
two is the only one we are talking about with this application. We hope we don't have to go to a
cell three.
Mr. Dahilig: And Commissioner just for record purposes and also for clarification we
did re-review the environmental assessment that was adopted by the Department of Public
Works a few years ago and we have concurred with their assessment through a hard look process
that the EA is still valid for purposes of this application.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
14
Mr. Katayama: That is November, 2007?
Mr. Dahiliz That is correct.
Chair: Any more questions for the applicant?
Mr. Blake: You heard my last question about what happens if a tsunami hits the area,
does it just move dirt or is it going to uncover a lot of industrial waste?
Mr. Cioffi: I think the first part of your question is whether Iniki actually made it onto
the landfill, I don't believe it did.
Mr. Blake: So the water didn't go in that far?
Mr. Cioffi: And if it were to say if a bigger event happened, and we are outside of the
flood zones, we are outside of the tsunami inundation zone so we don't expect that to happen.
But is some catastrophic event would happen it would actually hit the existing phase one landfill
and not this cell two.
Chair: Any more questions? I have a quick one. On page three seven, Land Ownership
and Use, section(b), it says Hawaii National Guard. Is that right next to the shooting range
where this dump is going to go?
Mr. Cioffi: Exactly, that is makai of the existing phase one landfill and then this cell two
is mauka of the existing fill.
Chair: So that shooting range will not affect the dump or the dump affect the shooting
range at all.
Mr. Cioffi: It shouldn't, no.
Chair: Anymore questions?
Mr. Texeira: Just a continuation of what was discussed, cell three you said hopefully you
don't get into cell three because of the cost factors involved. What do you hope will happen so
that you won't have to go into cell three?
Mr. Fujimoto: Right now we are looking at a vertical expansion, another vertical that
goes over phase two which is again, it would save a lot of money because we already have the
liner in place. So we are hoping that would additional time to site the new landfill.
Mr. Texeira: So that would be a step before cell three then, you would go vertically
higher, you would go higher in cell two.
Mr. Fujimoto: Again the proposal and all of this we don't have the final say but right
now based all the information we have that is probably going to be our recommendation.
Chair: Any more questions, seeing none do we need to have the planner read any of the
conditions that has changed?
Mr. Dahilig- They are the same and Commissioners,just for record purposes you have
reviewed the conditions and you have no objections or concerns about them? I am asking the
applicant.
Mr. Cioffi: That is correct.
Chair: What does the Commission want to do?
Mr. Raco: Chair, motion to approve the Director's report, SMA(U)-2012-04 for the
County of Kauai Department of Public Works.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
15
Mr. Texeira: Second.
Chair: Any discussion, seeing none all in favor say aye, opposed,motion carried.
On motion made by Caven Raco and seconded by Herman Texeira,to approve
Director's Report, motion carried unanimously by voice vote.
Class IV Zoning Permit Z-IV-2012-17 and Variance Permit V-2012-08 to deviate from
the requirements noted in Section 8-3.6(a) of the Kauai Coup . Code (1987)relating to o the
maximum pole length of a flag lot,ot,involving a 3-lot subdivision of a parcel located along_Pune`e
in Omao, approx.. 1,500 ft. south of its intersection with Kaumuali`i Highway, further identified
as Tax Map Key 2-7-006:006 129 and containing a total area of 3.16 go-res=Kenneth Souza
Jr./Kenneth A. Souza Trust.
Director's Report pertaining to this agenda item.
Staff Planner Dale Cua: Thank you Mr. Chair. The property is located in Omao, it is
along the eastern side of Pune`e Road, it is approximately one quarter mile south of its
intersection with Kaumuali`i Highway. Tax map key affected parcels are 2-7-6,parcel 6 and
129,the total area is a little over three acres. A variance permit is required to deviate from
section 8-3.6 of the CZO relating the maximum pole length requirement of a flag lot. As noted
the proposal involves.consolidation to two existing lots and re-subdivision into a total of three
lots. The subdivision establishes one additional lot and as noted on the preliminary subdivision
map they pole section of flag lot, lot 30)3 will be approximately 266 feet in length. Access to
the property is along Pune`e Road which is a County roadway and has a current right-of-way
width of thirty feet. The current dwellings are served by their own driveway. The application
has been reviewed by the various agencies and conditions relating to the agency requirements
have been incorporated into the department's recommendation.
Chair: Any questions for the planner? Seeing none is the applicant here?
Mr. Jaden Nakamura: Good morning Chair and Commissioners, I am Jaden Nakamura,
the agent for the applicant and with me is Mr. Ken Souza Jr.
Chair: Any questions for the applicant? Seeing none, do you have any questions about
the staff report?
Mr.Nakamura: No sir.
Chair: What does the Commission want to do?
Mr. Blake: Where do you anticipate the third house being built?
Mr. Souza: Right now we don't know, we are just subdividing it to split it up and that is
it.
Chair: Any more questions, seeing none...
Mr. Raco: Motion to approve the Director's report for Class IV Zoning Permit Z-IV-
2012-17 and Variance Permit V-2012-08, Kenneth Souza.
Mr. Texeira: Second.
Chair: Any discussion, seeing none all in favor say aye, opposed,motion carried.
On motion made by Caven Raco and seconded by Herman Texeira, to approve
Director's Report,motion carried unanimously by voice vote.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
16
Class IV Zoning Permit Z-IV-2012-18, Special Permit SP-2012-38 and Use Permit U-
2012-14 to operate a sporting clay facility, similar to clgy pigeon shooting,,on property in
vicinity of the Kapaia Electric Power Plant, along the western side of Ma`alo Road further
identified as Tax Map Key 3-8-002:002 (Portion), affecting a total area of 12 acres =Beniamin
Andr ealee Ellsworth (dba Kauai Eco Snortinz Clays.LLC)
Director's Report pertaining to this matter.
Staff Planner Dale Qua: The property is located in Kapaia, as noted the tax map key of
the property is 3-8-002:002. The affected land area is approximately twelve acres. As
represented the applicant is proposing to construct and operate a commercial sport clay shooting
facility. The applicant proposes to construct and operate five shooting stands with eight trap
houses which clays will be launched from. In addition,the applicant is proposing to erect two
containers to be used for various customer operations, one container for storage and one more
container to be used as a retail office. They are also proposing supplemental fencing around the
perimeter of the project site. Participants will shoot in turn for each of the five shooting stands at
various combinations of targets that are thrown from the traps. The facility will handle
approximately five to ten people per hour per phase.
All patrons will be required to participate in safety orientation prior to the activity
occurring. All patrons and persons in or near the range will be required to wear personal safety
equipment at all times including but not limited to eye and ear protection. Further description of
the project in noted in their application. The project has been routed to the various reviewing
agencies for their review and comment. The requirements relating to agency requirements have
been incorporated into the recommendation of the project and that concludes the staff report.
Mr. Texeira: I wanted to know who the landowner is.
Chair: Grove Farm.
Mr. Texeira: So this is a lease.
Chair: Yes.
Mr. Dahilig: And we did verify that they do have authorization to present this permit
before the Commission.
Chair: Any more questions for the planner?
Mr. Blake: Looking at exhibit A on the application where is the applicant's or where on
the map is the applicant's proposed range?
Staff Just for reference purposes the project site is approximately 500 yards south of the
Power Plant facility in Kapaia.
Ms, Matsumoto: There was some reference about the neighborhood but I don't see
any...did any neighbors come forth with letters of support?
Staff To my knowledge the department hasn't received any correspondence.
Ms. Matsumoto: Because I was just wondering about the noise of the activity and how
that would impact the neighbors.
Staff: From a personal reference fortunately the project is located downwind from the
existing residences in Eisenberg Tract. Trades blow out towards the mountain side and this
project is on the mountain side of the existing residents in Eisenberg.
Ms. Matsumoto: And then there is a minimum of people per hour.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
17
Staff Yes, I think the application noted they are going to accommodate anywhere from
five to ten people per hour.
Ms. Matsumoto: So that is the limit.
Mr. Texeira: How would you access this property?
Staff. Currently in order to—it is like going up to Wailua Falls, you would go onto
Ma`alo Road and then you would utilize the existing haul cane roads that are fronting the subject
property. So they share the same roads with the Power Plant site.
Mr. Texeira: If the trade winds are not blowing like they normally do then you might get
some northerly winds, how would that impact the community surrounding that area? Have there
been any studies, any tests done to try to determine that?
Staff I don't think the application has included any type of noise study but they are quite
some distance from the existing residences.
Mr. Dahilig: In reviewing the application Commissioner the proposed site sits in a
natural swale and so its depression is below what is the visual surface in some respects actually
shields the area from a lot of the noise that would be generated out of it. Typically Grove Farm
has also done a lot of private hunting and those types of things in that area and our department
has not received any complaints with respect to hunting noises that go on in that area. This is a
distinct...a similar type of activity that really we think in understanding the cumulative impact of
it would be mitigated by the consequence of the topography in that area.
Mr. Texeira: My question I have in regards to that is sometimes in a swale or an old
cavern it might echo so you don't see that happening.
Mr. Dahilig: The swale actually seems to contain the noise from what I understand
because it is below what is the visual surface that you would see from Hanamaulu and those
types of areas that this depression actually helps contain it verses amplify it.
Chair: It is not like in a bowl,right?
Mr. Dahilig: Yes.
Chair: Anymore questions for the planner, if not I am going to call the applicant up. Is
the applicant here?
Mr. Ben Ellsworth: Good morning Commissioners,my name is Ben Ellsworth and I will
be prepared to answer any questions that you may have about the application.
Chair: Do you have any questions for the planner with the staff report?
Mr. Ellsworth: No thank you,
Chair: Any questions for the applicant?
Mr. Texeira: Could he respond to my question?
Mr. Ellsworth: Yes absolutely. We conducted a series of sound tests in the area and the
way those were conducted we actually had a person down in the area continuously firing shots
while other people were stationed at the surrounding residences. And 1 myself was actually
stationed at the closest house to the property which is back behind Eisenberg, the road ends right
back there. And I went back to that home and actually met with the homeowner and he and I
walked back into his backyard which falls directly off into a gully which is approximately, the
report says three quarters of a mile, it is actually almost closer to a mile than three quarters, it is
approximately almost 5,000 feet from the actual site to the nearest residence. When these tests
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
18
were conducted there was actually just a light trade wind, at another time there was a little bit
heavier trade wind.
But also when we conducted these tests there is no structure there and the actual
structures that will be erected to shoot from, it is kind of hard to explain if you don't really see
how it works but we are shooting away from the residences. And the actual structure that we
will be shooting from is a forty foot container with a roof off the top of that. So in actuality if
you can imagine me shooting this way, I have a forty foot container behind me between myself
and the residences and we feel like any possibility of noise...I mean that container is going to
further baffle any noise leeching to those residences.
Mr. Texeira: But you haven't actually conducted any sound tests.
Mr. Ellsworth: No actual sound tests, no. They were just tests that we did on two
different occasions where we actually went to the nearest residences and had people stationed
where we were on cell phones and saying go ahead and fire a series of shots, fire four shots. And
like I said I was with the gentleman that lives in the very closest house standing in his backyard
and I called my test fire and said go ahead and shoot a series of four shots. So he would shoot
and I asked the resident and said did you hear anything at all and he said he didn't hear anything.
So basically that was how we went about doing those sound tests.
Mr. Texeira: Thank you.
Chair: Any more questions?
Mr. Raco: If I could just add to that, Herman, I live at the end of German Hill and
actually when they were doing their tests I also listened because I live at the end of the road, I am
downwind from where this project is at and I couldn't hear it.
Ms. Matsumoto: So you are going to supply the guns?
Mr. Ellsworth: Yes.
Ms. Matsumoto: Especially for that particular activity then.
Mr. Ellsworth: Right. We have actually chosen to, there is actually going to be two parts
to this. Part of this idea is to allow for locals a place to come and shoot safely where they are not
basically doing it illegally, so local people will be able to use their own guns there. Right now
our application consists of a shot gun only use so there are no high powered rifles; there are no
pistols which is basically a single projectile. Shot guns are very small pellets inside a casing that
is spread out for shooting things that are flying through the air.
Ms. Matsumoto: Back track a little bit. My question was you are going to supply the
guns and then you said no.
Mr. Ellsworth: We are going to supply the guns however local people that want to come
out and enjoy the range will be able to use their own if they have available. Now part of that also
is they will not be able to bring their own ammunition, they will be required to use the
ammunition that we will have there at the range. Because part of our application you will see is
that this is going to be a one hundred percent eco-friendly thing so through extensive studies and
throughout the country you will see that more and more places are outlawing the use of lead shot
because of its toxicity and possibly harmful to the environment as well as the animals. So by us
using steel shot only we eliminate any of the possibilities of harming any animals or the
environment. So you can't just go buy steel shot here on the island so that will be something that
we are going to have to bring in from the mainland and that will be the only type of ammunition
that will be used at the range.
Ms. Matsumoto: Steel shot, that doesn't dissolve at all.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
19
Mr. Ellsworth: It does actually. It is basically breaks down into rust and dissolves into
nothing and is not harmful to any animals whereas lead is a contaminant and harmful to the
environment.
Ms. Matsumoto: And then the clay, can you describe the clay?
Mr. Ellsworth: The clays are also biodegradable and you will see in the report I just
received my notice actually certified mail last night so I don't even have a copy of my
application with me. But in the report there is a paragraph that explains all about the actual
targets and the development of them and how they have become all biodegradable as well.
Ms. Matsumoto: They essentially melt.
Mr. Ellsworth: Exactly and there is no harmful product in those when they biodegrade
they are just gone.
Chair: Just wanted to make something clear, I am familiar with clay shooting and it is a
little bit more expensive having this type of clay pigeons being purchased but just to be eco-
friendly I think it is the right move. These guys have been doing their diligence on the
environment so I applaud them for that.
Mr. Texeira: I just wanted to reemphasize the fact that you mentioned that you will be
providing shot guns.
Mr. Ellsworth: Yes sir.
Mr. Texeira: Now if people have their own weapons they would only be able to use shot
guns.
Mr. Ellsworth: Only shot guns, correct. We also, if I might add real quick, the shot guns
that we are going to be providing for use will all be over and under shot guns. Like I said the
locals that have their own weapons they can bring whatever they like as long as it conforms to
the standards and what we are doing. But the guns that we are going to provide are all going to
be over/under shot guns and the reason being is that that is by far the safest way to do this. That
way the range master who is there watching over can always see, you will see in the rules and
guidelines of the club, that that gun is always open. An over/under shot gun, if you don't know
what that is, it basically breaks in half so once it is open it cannot fire where other types there
could be ammunition inside that you would not be able to see. So we have chosen to use all over
and under shot guns for simple safety reasons.
Mr. Texeira: What is the minimum age?
Mr. Ellsworth: The minimum age is basically we are looking at twelve years old but
there is a possibility that a father and son may be able to come out and do some time. There are
so many opportunities in this where we want to be able to promote gun safety and we want to be
able to teach kids gun safety. So many times nowadays guns just really get a bad rap in the
communities and they really are not dangerous as long as they are used properly and so that is
something that we want to implement possibly down the road. School programs, high school
kids can come out and join teams and possibly compete between the high schools.
Chair: I have a question. The age to have your hunter safety education class is ten?
Mr. Ellsworth: I don't know. I believe that when I took it back in 1922 it was twelve
years old to buy and actual hunting license so I am not really sure about when you can receive
that hunter's safety license. Again a lot of it is going to depend on the actual child; some kids
are more advanced than others but if you will read in our report our main thing is safety.
Obviously we wouldn't be doing this if we thought that it was unsafe so first and foremost we
want to be safe, then next we want to have fun and we want to educate and have a good time.
But the absolute first and foremost thing is safety.
PIanning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
20
I have been running a business here on Kauai for the past fifteen years, we do charter
fishing boats and yes we want to catch fish every day but if you come down to our boat the very
first thing that we talk in the morning is safety because if somebody gets hurt no one is going to
have any fun. So safety is going to be our first and foremost.
Chair: I was just thinking to incorporate the age that you can get your hunter safety class
and your license with the age that these guys can start shooting.
Mr. Ellsworth: And like I said that is why I said the number twelve because I don't really
see young kids younger than that.
Chair: So basically it will be at the age that you can get your license.
Mr. Ellsworth: Right.
Chair: Any more questions?
Mr. Katayama: In your application you talk about gun safety and user safety, I found it
very thin on range safety. What kind of physical barriers are you going to erect to ensure that
you don't have migration across your field of fire?
Mr. Ellsworth: There will be a fence around the actual property that if you see in the
application, I don't know if you have the picture, if you see the actual structures on the property
there will be a fence erected across the front of those structures all the way across the front if you
see the phase one and phase two.
Mr. Katayama: I am more familiar with rifle ranges where you construct berms and on
top of the berms you have signage that says this is a range area and then usually fires into an
open space that is way beyond, create a safety zone basically.
Mr. Ellsworth: The property its self is a natural safety zone,,there will be a fence erected
in front of where we shoot and that is all one straight line if you will see on the map. So no
patrons will be allowed beyond that fence.
Mr. Kataama: I am not worried about the patrons, what I am worried about is people
that are using the property or are up there for some other reason other than shooting because it is
open agriculture land and I am sure there are other uses besides this.
Mr. Ellsworth: Exactly. The range of these projectiles is actually, the breaking range for
a clay target is going to be about forty to fifty yards maximum, and that is a breaking range on a
clay target. The actual shot fall zone is they say 200 yards maximum and that is where based on
angle of trajectory went maximum of 200 yards. In using steel shot it actually decreases those
numbers quite a bit because the steel shot is less dense, it travels at a higher rate of speed but it
doesn't travel as far. And like I said the actual property creates an area where there...that
projectile cannot leave that valley, it can't,it is not possible. We are talking about a maximum
of 200 yards of where it can go. It doesn't go out of site.
Ms. Matsumoto: So you are talking about a pretty extensive fence line then.
Mr. Ellsworth: Actually no it is all visible. The fence line will be basically in front of
the structure so patrons can't get into the property. This is a pasture, there is nothing there. And
like I said if there are cows even seventy yards out there it can't hurt them at seventy yards.
Mr. KatUama: One other sort of physical question,what is your anticipated usage for
this facility? You must have a number that you think...otherwise you wouldn't do this business
plan.
Mr. Ellsworth: I actually don't have a number. I am doing this business plan partly
because it is something that I love to do. Back when I was younger I worked at a similar facility
and it was something that when my alarm clock would go off in the morning I jumped out of bed
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
21
and couldn't wait to get to work. And so I don't have a number but I know that I want to do
something that I love to do so when my alarm clock goes off I want to jump out of bed and go to
work.
Mr. Katayama: What kinds of utilities are available at this site?
Mr. Ellsworth: We don't need any utilities. All the throwers are battery operated which
will be recharged by solar power and basically there are no utilities necessary for this operation.
Mr. Katayama: For your patrons what kind of comfort facilities will be provided?
Mr. Ellsworth: Right now we are in the process of researching all the different avenues
for that. We are looking towards compostable toilets and then we are also working with the
Health Department possibly about just using a portable type toilet as well. In that discussion part
of the thing that we run into is that this activity is something to where you are there for maybe
thirty minutes to an hour maximum. So the toilet facilities will be of very little usage.
Mr. Blake: Picking up on what William was talking about with regard to range safety, I
know that down in Kekaha they announce when they are going to be using the pistol and rifle
range and they have flags that go up, I believe. It is a visual reminder to people who may not
have heard that there is something going on there. I think that just out of an abundance of
caution if the landowner would permit you to put signs outside your actual leased area that say
this is a facility that operates seven days a week and it is a shooting facility and don't go past this
sign if at all possible. Hopefully it doesn't get shot up by people who like to do those things to
signs.
Mr. Ellsworth: The property is pretty secluded; it is on Grove Farm property. It is back
roads where really the only people that are back there are the other leases, the farmers, the cattle
ranchers that we have a good rapport with. But that is definitely an option that we are...we
could definitely post some signs surrounding that area to let everyone know that there is going to
be some shooting going on. But like I said before the projectile, really the way that it is set up
especially by using the steel shot and the effective range of shot guns it really cannot leave the
area, it cannot get out of site.
Chair: Just for common courtesy for your neighbors, one hundred yards,both sides of
the road coming and going. The road goes right through, right? So one hundred yards to the
right, one hundred yards to the left,just let them know that it is a clay shooting range,just a sign
of warning.
Mr. Ellsworth: Right, absolutely.
Chair: And times that you will be open for business so if they hear any shots they will
say oh this guy is shooting. Any more questions because we are done here already. Let's wrap
this up already.
Ms. Matsumoto: What kind of flags, what color are the flags out in Kekaha?
Mr. Blake: I don't recall. I haven't been out to Kekaha for a long time but the Hawaiian
Gun Club can provide or the NRA which I am sure the applicant is familiar with.
Ms. Matsumoto: I like that idea actually. I think it is a really good signal.
W. Blake: Like an airport flag that billows, it is moving and it catches your eye.
Ms. Matsumoto: The idea of colors,red means in action and yellow or green would be...
Mr. Blake: It would probably be red when you are shooting and nothing when you are
not shooting.
Chair: Do you have a problem with that Ben?
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
22
Mr. Ellsworth: No.
Chair: So you can incorporate that with the Planning Department's staff.
Mr. Ellsworth: And if I may Commission, I have done extensive research on the safety
of this. I have contacted the NRA. I have contacted the National Shooting Sports Federation
and just trying to get any type of statistics as far as safety, as far as incidences go, they basically
tell me there is no statistics because this is by far the way that it is all set up is by far the safest
way for anyone to be handling guns. As so there are no statistics as far as instances or accidents.
The only instances that they can come up with deal with actual people that are reloading their
own ammunition and it is reloaded incorrectly and that will be some that will not be allowed at
the range. We are only going to be shooting factory manufactured ammunition.
Chair: So you are going to work it out with the staff and that will be acceptable as far as
the flags and signs. Do you want to add anything to that? We are talking about the signs and the
flags right now.
Ms. Matsumoto: No.
Chair: We will have staff write something up before we vote on this.
Ms. Matsumoto: So on your estimated rates sheet here I see...it is a question about the
keki. You have twelve to seventeen for family and then you have tourists, twelve to fifteen. So
why do you have different ages,that is one thing and then when they are in those age ranges is
there a requirement that there be an adult with them?
Chair: Absolutely, anyone under eighteen will definitely have an adult with them.
Ms. Matsumoto: So again why do you have the two different age ranges?
Mr. Ellsworth: I honestly don't recall that answer. The only thing that I could think of is
that as far as the prices that I am trying to give the local kids a price break as much as I possibly
can where I would consider the tourist kids at fifteen...over that age they would be paying the
regular rate. That is the only thing that I can think of right now is that I am trying to help out the
local kids as best I can.
Chair: Any more questions? Staff, are you ready with that amendment? This
amendment is to what you and Cammie suggested,the flags and signs.
Mr. Dahilig: Mr. Chair,we would incorporate in our report for review purposes an
additional condition thirteen that would read, "Applicant shall work with landowner and the
department to create and implement a plan concerning external warnings beyond the property to
inform individuals the active nature of the range and the dangers imposed to them. These
warnings shall be but not limited to signs and flags of different colors."
Chair: Are you okay with that Ben?
Mr. Ellsworth: Perfect.
Chair: What does the Commission want to do? Sorry, Ben I am going to ask you to step
down for now, there are one or two public testimony that requested to come up.
Unidentified Speaker; Thank you. I am not against guns or hunting.
Chair: Can you say who you are?
Ms. Ginger Carlson: I am Ginger Carlson and I live on Ma`alo Road. I am not against
guns or hunting or this business and it sounds like a really nice plan. About a year ago across
from where this place is on the other side of the road a corn field went in and they were shooting
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
23
birds for two days,two weekends in a row all day long, shooting,bam,bam,bam. All of
Hanamaulu Subdivision up there and all of us who live here heard it, every shot. It went on and
on and on. And it is at that same elevation. But the winds don't always go that way and
sometimes the high winds come up and there is always stuff, a natural breeze coming down that
valley and it was really unnerving. So I would like to ask you if you would add to this if it
bothers the neighbors they would do some sound mitigation. I know I hear gunshots all the time
on my property from that area.
Chair: Just a real quick question,how are you going to determine what comes from the
shooting range and what comes from the...?
Ms. Carlson: That would be very easy because if you have ten people shooting and they
do their maximum at one hundred shots you are going to have a thousand shots per hour.
Chair: No, my question is how are you going to determine what shots are coming from
the shooting range and what shots is coming from the corn field?
Ms. Carlson: The corn field was two weekends only. They were clearing the birds out
before they put the corn in.
Mr. Raco: Chair,if I may, I am a resident as I said of German Hill downwind from this
project and I don't know if you know but I have investigated that issue of the two weeks and
every other three months. And actually what we found,personally,was that there is a farmer
that grows rice over there and every year when he harvests and plants he,he plants twice a year,
in order to keep the birds out of his rice fields he has this contraption that blows a sound like it is
a shotgun till the birds are gone.
Ms. Carlson: I drove up there and asked.
Mr. Raco: In my instance I live right next to a farm so that is I bought in to the project
when I live there.
Ms. Carlson: This was just two weekends. This was just two weekends. I don't hear
that. I drove up there and I talked a man working in the field and he said that they were killing
the birds because they were going to eat the corn seed. It was a new plot. But the plot was
horizontal.
Mr. Raco: I have never seen them shoot birds in the corn fields; actually they use the
bird catching contraption that the dove goes inside. It is less inhumane because there are
neighbors that walk back there. Chair,that is what I wanted to say.
Ms. Carlson: I just hope that if the sound does come down that there could be maybe
insulation put into those things that they are doing as opposed to...I know my property is for sale
and if someone was walking on my property and they heard a consistent sound like I did when
that other thing was going on nobody would buy the property.
Chair: Thank you,next?
Mr. Pat Cocket: Aloha Commissioners,my name is Pat Cocket, I live in Eisenberg Tract.
I am here to testify about this sporting clay facility. My major concern is noise. I live on the rim
on Ecolu Street and when I google earth the distance from this facility site to my house it came
out to be three quarters of a mile. When I google earth to the nearest residence at the end of
Ecolu Street it is six tenths of a mile, one kilometer. Maybe the staff could actually use GIS and
get the real distance because there is a discrepancy in what people are saying. Second,this
application mentions a phase two which would actually give this facility ten stands instead of
five. Is the second phase in this application? If this application is approved would it also include
the second phase?
Chair: I think it does.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
24
Mr. Cocket: You are saying it does.
Mr. Dahilia: Yes.
Mr. Cocket: So I appreciate the applicant doing his sound tests but I am,a little nervous
about this protocol. He had people using their ears. I don't know where he stationed them in the
neighborhood. I don't know how many shotguns were firing at the same time or for how long. I
would like to request that the Commission add a condition that requires them to do a scientific
analysis of the noise. I would like to refer you to a document on the internet called Clay Target
Shooting Guidance on the Control of Gun Noise by the Charter Institute of Environmental
Health 2003. They lay out a scientific method and protocol to measure noise using calibrated
equipment, site selection of where to put the equipment to measure the noise. Also extensive
testing under different meteorological conditions because there can be a difference of up to thirty
decibels depending on the weather in the sound.
In the report from the Planning Commission they say because there is topographic
recession this will protect us from the noise. My research shows me that yes, it may or it may
not and they suggest that an individual assessment is required, early discussion with an acoustic
consultant. So I am asking for a scientific analysis of gun noise from the site over a period of
time, different meteorological conditions, different weather because I think it is better to do it
before than after the fact. So I have a concern about the real distance to the facility and
concerned about the protocol the applicant used to measure the noise and so I am requesting
basically another condition making them do a real scientific assessment. And the protocol is out
there, it is there, it has been done many,many places in the country.
Mr. Dahilig: Commissioners based on our reading of the particular application it wasn't
something that was discussed in-house whether from a proportional standpoint would this
warrant the type of noise impacts that would require...like we have let's say with a rock concert
at Anaina Hou or those types of things to warrant sound monitoring. And I think the approach we
took on this that we didn't think such a condition was necessary at this point and that if it did
warrant some type of further mitigation that the appropriate process would be through an order to
show cause based on complaints received by our department. And so I think that was, we kind
of felt was the appropriate mechanism to address this particular issue because we feel that
enough due diligence was done on this behalf by the applicant and compounded by the fact that
the topographical nature of the particular site would seem to insulate tbie site. So it is still an
issue that could be brought back to the Commission should we from a departmental standpoint
receive a large amount of complaints about noise.
Mr. Texeira: Why do you need a large number of complaints? What if you had just a
few complaints especially from those neighbors that are right where the sound is? Isn't a few
complaints enough to justify?
Mr. DahiligM As with anything we look for patterns of persistent issues and so each
complaint is going to have to be investigated with our inspectors on a case by case basis. And if
it seems that there is a patter evolving concerning impacts that were beyond what we were
anticipating given our recommendation then at that time an OSC would be appropriate.
Mr. Texeira: So in other words if a person complains a staff member will go out to
determine if that is a legitimate complaint.
Mr. Dahilia: That is correct. Ultimately we have to verify each complaint and as you
know Commissioners we work off a complaint basis. I would like to move off complaint basis
but that is currently how we operate so if there does seem to be a persistent issue concerning
noise we will definitely come back and visit the issue. But I think we are satisfied given the due
diligence done and the natural area that we feel that the recommendation as presented including
the additional condition with the safety issue is appropriate to mitigate the particular project.
Chair: Does that answer your question?
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
25
Mr. Texeira: My question is, another question if I could Mr. Chair, in terms of electronic
monitoring is it that much of an inconvenience or cost to do electronic monitoring?
Chair: Monitoring or testing?
Mr. Texeira: Monitoring.
Chair: I am not too familiar with it but to leave a monitor out there for sound I think that
would be very costly on the applicant.
Mr. Texeira: I think you would do the monitoring if you had them go out and do a shot...
Chair: If you leave it out there for X period of time I think that is kind of going
overboard.
Mr. Texeira: I agree with you, if testing is the correct word then testing is what I would
ask.
Chair: If the department feels it necessary if they do have any complaints.
Mr. Texeira: Well I am saying that even if we don't have complaints what is wrong with
doing some monitoring, electronic monitoring. I don't understand, that is why I am asking if the
cost is so prohibitive...
Mr. Dahilig: Monitoring works in hand with enforcement and quite frankly
Commissioner it is an additional item that from a staffing standpoint I would not want to have
my staff constantly in this position to continually monitor one project when we have many other
enforcement issues that are out there. And so I would rather take it on a complaint basis based
on audible observations by surrounding neighbors at which time it is more appropriate for us to
then say okay, maybe now is the time to do some type of monitoring or maybe now is the time to
order a test. But to be engaged in what would be a constant policing of the noise for the site I
think would be a burden on department resources.
Mr. Raco: Let me add to that Herman. I was reading the recommendation, if I hear you
right then with the testing and I guess this is a question for the Director, would it be available
that we put a review in one year so that at least it is public, an applicant has the time to evaluate.
This is the first time that as a Commission we are handling an application like this, would it be
fair to have like a status report?
Chair: Is that acceptable with you?
Mr. Texeira: I think it's great.
Mr. Raco: That way we would know and the neighbors would know and we can evaluate
it and if there is more implication then...
Mr. Dahilig: I guess I would from a departmental recommendation standpoint it seems
reasonable. I would want to see if the applicant would concur with such an item but I think we
would be willing to incorporate it as part of our recommendation.
Chair: Ben, can you step up please, Ben do you have any problems with what they are
suggesting right now?
Mr. Ellsworth: Was it just to put a provision in for a twelve month review?
Chair: Yes,basically.
Mr. Ellsworth: Just to come back in, have a meeting; go through any complaints it might
have that is fine. And if I may had real quick I didn't put in the report that we originally got
some of the equipment in that is used to do this and some buddies of mine and I went out and we
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
26
tested this equipment and we were out there for four to six hours just blasting away. I mean we
shot probably eight to nine hundred clays, some of nay buddies brought out their high powered
rifles and shot some targets. I mean we blasted away for five to six hours and if there was going
to be any noise somebody would have heard that because it was World War III. It wasn't just a
clay bang,bang,here and there with a twenty gauge shotgun going off. We were blasting away
for some hours.
Chair: Thank you,Wayne do you have something to add?
Mr. Katayama: Well I am just looking at this for the Director or staff, in the
recommendations the discussion today was for phase one and phase two so that is ten shooting
positions. There was also a lot of discussion about the caliber and the type of load that will be
used. In the recommendations how do we govern this? What keeps them from using that as a
zeroing in range for bigger weapons? Who manages?
Chair: That won't be allowed.
Mr. Katayama: Where does it say that? Right now there is an intent and representation
made by the applicant but in the Director's report, we are talking about a use permit here and in
that normally we specify conditions under which that use permit is granted. Now in this who
governs the actual operations to say that it is complying with the applicant's representations?
Chair: So we can just put it in there as an amendment that....
Mr. Dahilig: Commissioner, what I would...when we send our inspectors out or we get a
complaint about something you are correct in terms of the thirteen items that essentially become
the governing element of the permit. If you feel that it is appropriate for the Commission to bear
upon the department more teeth concerning some of the representations in particular the type of
shot, the caliber of weapons, these types of things certainly that could be added as a condition as
well. If you would like particular attention paid to what is being represented and from a teeth
and enforcement standpoint that would help govern our enforcement process.
Mr. Katayama: I think that is your call as the Director but there has been two basic
approaches by applicants, one is looking at what is permissible use and the other is by looking at
since it has not been omitted therefore assume it is permitted. And it depends on how you want
to address this issue. I don't know who governs this kind of activity quite candidly, I think
everything else we have sort of a category of oversight. It is not clear in my mind who has this
oversight over the granting of the use permit.
Mr. Jung: The Commissioners can take a look at condition number one, it says the
proposed structures and facilities shall be constructed and or operated as represented. But I think
if the applicant is willing to represent the type of product or guns you are going to be using I
think that would be a fair assessment of what type of guns will be permissible under the use
permit.
Mr. Ellsworth: Is that a question you are asking me?
Mr. Jung: Yes, if you are willing to represent the type of equipment you will be using in
your operations then should there be a complaint about higher caliber weapons being used.
Mr. Ellsworth: Right. Obviously this project, there is substantial financial investment for
me to do this and so the last thing that I want to do is to invest and then have it shut down. So
without actually answering that question I want to go ahead and say that I am going to do
everything in my power to make sure that the community finds us to be good neighbors. Is that
acceptable?
Mr. Jung: It is up to the Commission. If you guys are concerned about higher caliber
weapons being used then you guys can certainly...
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
27
Chair: I think he mentioned that the only type of weapon that will be allowed there will
be shotguns. Isn't that what you said earlier?
Mr. Ellsworth: Right.
Chair: So no high powered rifles.
Mr. Ellsworth: That was something that was brought up as potentially down the road to
allow...and this is again any pistol or rifle shooting that would possibly occur down the road
would be one hundred percent of a facility for local people. And so the reason that I hate to say
right now that we never, I promise you that we are never going to do anything like that, I hate to
be able to shut that down because the local people really have nowhere to go to sight in their
rifles or shoot their pistols legally. So for me to say right now that we are never going to do that,
I don't really like that and to be honest with you this is something that I feel strongly about
because part of the idea behind this is to provide a facility that local people can enjoy. And by
me saying that we are never going to do that basically cuts out where a person could come out
and legally sight in their rifle or shoot their pistol.
Chair: How about we amend it saying that if and when you do decide there is a need for
it that you work it out with the department as far as pistol or high powered rifle.
Mr. Ellsworth: Absolutely. And again, like I said, that part of it would be for the local
people, guys from the mainland aren't bringing their rifles and their pistols over here,this is for
the local people. I am not going to make...
Mr. Dahilig: So Commissioners and maybe I can try to address it this way, condition
number one would apply and if the applicant is representing that he is limiting his operations to
shotguns and particularly steel shot and eco-friendly clays then that would be the first half of that
paragraph. The second paragraph would relate to any changes and would give the department
flexibility to evaluate whether a change in operations would warrant a Planning Commission or
approval. And we would take it both on two steps, one would be what is the Commission's
intent by the condition of the line, the second part would be with respect to whether the
operations to that point thus far before the request have generated any types of issues that would
warrant non-approval of the expansion of use. So it does give our department a mechanism to
reevaluate administratively whether an expansion of different fire arms would be appropriate at
that time.
Mr. Raco: If I may Chair,just to further the discussion and possibly end the discussion
would be back to the original question and that is why I would propose what your concerns were
was the same concerns I had, Herman. And to Ben is that I think condition number fourteen, the
status report, it is an equal hand shake for you as the applicant and the user and for the public to
come out to see how we are going to react to this. Obviously we don't"know what we are talking
about as far as just noise but what if traffic impacts and other things that we would want to do so
that is why I feel strongly to add a condition like number fourteen to have a status report for a
year to be added would compile all these issues that"what if s"we do not know at this time.
Chair: Let's wrap this up, one question each and that is it we are moving on.
Mr. Blake: I think it would behoove the department to have a format for asking questions
when people call in and say there is a lot of noise going on and you have no idea really what it is,
when it happened,how long it took place, what time of the day and so forth. So I think we
should have a questionnaire available to the people that answer the phone. And the second thing
is, is it feasible to limit yourself to gauges like twelve, sixteen, twenty, twenty eight, four ten?
Mr. Ellsworth: Absolutely. This is primarily going to be only twenty gauge and twelve
gauge with the emphasis on twenty gauge.
Mr. Blake: So you are not even considering ten gauge.
Mr. Ellsworth: Absolutely not. That is not a gauge that is used for this sport.
Planning Commission Minutes
.Tune 26,2012
28
Ms. Matsumoto: Well I think that partially answers my question or concern and I was
wondering if it would be appropriate when people come and say if they ask to use their own gun
could the company log that in to record what kinds of guns are being used on the property. That
is one thought. I was just really confused because when you first started out you talked about
safety and environmental safety and all of that and then we started going in the direction of oh,
but I want to eventually possibly be able to have local people use other kinds of guns and that
confused me.
Mr. Ellsworth: If I may, basically the County Attorney asked me a question and the way
he proposed that question he wanted me to close a door and I don't feel like it is necessary to one
hundred percent close that door right now. All I wanted to make sure was that that was a
possibility of an option in the future, it is nothing to do with my permit but I don't want to have
to close that door for this application.
Mr. Blake: Can I add something to what he has to say to her?
Chair: This is it guys.
Ms. Matsumoto: Well I don't know if it should be it because this is a really, I think this
is...
Chair: Yes it is but we are still going over the same thing over and over and over again
and I feel that the questions that you guys have asked have been answered by the Director, the
Attorney, the applicant and the staff.
Mr. Ellsworth: Any concerns about the noise I can assure you that I have absolutely zero
questions about the noise.
Chair: If we have new questions and concerns that are different than what you guys
already asked then by all means go for it.
Ms. Matsumoto: I don't shoot. I don't have hardly any knowledge of guns. I don't
know what a ten gauge gun is,what it sounds like. I don't know if using a regular bullet sounds
the same as using his bullets and all that impact. So I would like to ask those kinds of questions
and get those answers.
Mr. Blake: Let me add one thing before Cammie's concerns, if you are going to into
single projectile high powered rifles, low powered rifles,muzzle loaders or pistols, there is a
whole different set of safety considerations that have to come into play. So if the applicant or
anyone else wants to create a range like that which I think would be welcome on Kauai because
people shoot all over the place, to do it properly takes a lot of ..there has been a lot of research
done already and it will take a lot of commitment to do that. So it is whole different ball game
from shotguns.
Ms. Matsumoto: It is the difference between, what I am hearing is it is the difference
between a rifle range and a clay pigeon shotgun range and so I would like to keep the...we are
talking about a certain application, what they are asking for. So we are not saying this is going
to be a potential range.
Chair: No. What I suggested was that if and when they decide or even think about in the
future that they want to do a shooting range or target range they would have to come back to the
department. They can't just do it on their own. It is not a gimmie. If they want it they will have
to come back to the department and ask for it and make sure all their ducks are in a row before
they can even allow anybody to come in with a pistol or a high powered rifle. As of right now it
is just a shotgun and that is all they are allowed if we pass this application. And once that is
done and Ben decides in the future like I said to come back and want to open up a target range
with high powered,pistol, muzzle loader,whatever, anything other than a shotgun they will have
to come back to the department with their ducks in a row.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
29
Mr. Dahilig: Commissioners, I just want to put for the record that already at that point it
is becoming a stretch for the expertise of my department. I am a Honolulu kid and the first time
I shot a gun was on this island. And so understanding what the difference is between a twelve
gauge versus a twenty gauge versus...I didn't even know there was a difference between a
shotgun and a rifle for heaven sakes. I am going to have to rely on the expertise of the guys in
my department like Mike Laureta and Myles Hironaka who I hope don't retire because they are
going to be in a situation where they are going to have to assist me and the fellows in my
department to really bear upon implementing something that becomes more and more elaborate
when we start defining gauges and we start defining these different types of things. We can
certainly embark down that road because ultimately the safety and concern and wellbeing of the
public is at stake. But the more narrow we start getting into this versus that, I just want to put
forth for the Commissioner's sake I may not have the intellectual capacity within my department
to let's say five or ten years from now be able to make such a determination at that point. I
certainly understand the mechanics of this but it may become difficult to enforce.
Mr. Ellsworth: If I might real quick, so basically Mr. Chair, you said if we wanted to do
anything beyond what is actually right in the application we have to come back to the
Commission for whether it be a new permit or permission from the Commission so that should
answer any of those questions as far as what may or may not be in the application. And I agree
to that, that is just something that...like I said I just don't want to close the door all the way on
that but if you say that I would have to come back in to apply for a separate permit or a variance
to the actual permit then I totally agree with that and that is fine.
Chair: I think it is necessary that we put it in that form because it is totally different
when you shoot a shotgun and high powered.
Mr. Ellsworth: Absolutely.
Chair: So we are not even talking about high powered or muzzle loader, right now it is
just shotgun and that is all we are going to deal with right now. If you want to come in for
anything different than a shotgun then you will have to come back again.
Mr. Ellsworth: Perfect, thank you.
Mr. Katayama: May I make just a comment, in granting a special use permit, I think that
is what we are doing and in this case it is the use of a firing range. And what form that takes
should be appropriate for the public's safety, the operator's safety, and the community. I don't
think by a special use permit, again I have asked the Director this question, are the permits
granted on a specific use basis or is it granted on a what is precluded basis like if we grant a
special use permit to operate a firing range. Now the applicant is responsible to ensuring that the
proper safety measures both for the users of the range and the range safety, the neighbors. So the
fire zone for a high powered rifle becomes a lot different than a shotgun. Whose responsibility is
that to ensure that those rules are complied with? And I am hoping it is not the Planning
Department because we have already addressed the use issue today. And I guess where we are
getting difficulty is the proposed use under paragraph three that it is not very clear on whether it
is use by preclusion or use by asking for approval. These are things I want to do or I just want to
use it for this therefore since you didn't say no I can use it whatever way I want.
Mr. Dahilia: Part of what generates this is that if there is something that is not listed then
it is by law prohibited. So this is an affirmative approval. How the Commission chooses to
stylize the flexibility for the use as well as the use for the flexibility for enforcement is certainly
the Commission's prerogative up to this point. And certainly there are through this discussion
the department is observing that there are many issues that are positive for the application but
also issues that remain unanswered. I would suggest that really because this is and not to use this
pun loosely but this is a moving target. We need the flexibility to be able to adjust appropriately
within the amount of authority the Commission is willing to give for use. If the Commission
feels that the band width of authority is limited to the type of gun and the gauge then that is the
authority that our department will work within. If it is broader than that then as paragraph one is
written right now then we can certainly have a little more latitude to work within that authority
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
30
but ultimately it is up to the Commission to delegate upon my department from an enforcement
standpoint what exactly is this allowed use and how to go about enforcing it.
Mr. Katayama: I would argue for the fact that the special use permit for range will
govern anything that is consistent with that use. Now the specifics of ensuring public safety,
operator safety,user safety, I think that is sort of administrative at that point. But what I don't
see is the mechanism to ensure that that is happening. I don't wish the applicant to be coming
back to this body every time there is a change, I want to add a pistol, I want to add a rifle. I
don't think that is for this body to be addressing, I think that is for your or somebody's
department to be addressing.
Mr. Jung: I think I can address that. I think that is covered under condition one where
any changes,the second sentence says any changes to said structures and/or facilities and/or
operations shall be reviewed by the department to determine whether Planning Commission
review and approval is required. So I think there is inherent with that little discretion that you
guys are giving to the department to evaluate whether or not the Commission should bring this
back up based on the degree of the change of operations. If it is up to the pistol, if it is just a
pistol and the department wants to say that is not a big enough change then it might not come
back to you.
Mr. Dahilig: And maybe Commissioners just for peace of mind maybe what would be an
appropriate way to do this is an addition to paragraph number one, if there were to be a change in
the type of firearm used that the department would consult with the State DLNR Hunter Safety
Education Program to receive feedback concerning the expansion of that type of use. And if the
that is an appropriate way to at least have that expertise brought into our department and we
consult with them so that we know exactly what we are getting ourselves in to from an expansion
should we decide to do it. If that is amiable to the Commissioners and also the applicant we can
certainly recommend that.
W. Raco: I just have something to ask Commission Katayama. You were saying that
this is a range but I don't see it as a range because the description on the application and the
Director's report specifically says that this is a commercial sport clay shooting facility. There is
not one word that says range so I don't know if your definition of range and facility is the same
but for me I can differentiate from a range that is out like in Mana and a commercial sport clay
shooting facility which is not a range. Correct me if I am wrong, if I have the two definitions
different but that is what I see. And in the application to me it is black and white.
Chair: Real quick comment, I am a gun enthusiast. I have more guns at home than we
have people in this room right now. Kids learn how to shoot in somebody's pasture,back roads
which I think is very unsafe. Someone mentioned about signs being blown away, that is how
kids learn how to shoot a gun. I just think that this facility will keep the guns and its owners in
the right place. So with that being said do we have any more questions? So let's go on with the
recommendation that was changed, did we add any more?
Mr. Dahilig: Commissioners,just let me try to piece this together. We have the twelve
conditions as laid out in the report. The department is recommending an additional thirteenth
condition and it states, again, "The applicant shall work with landowner and the department to
create and implement a plan concerning external warnings beyond the property to inform
individuals of the active nature of the range and the danger posed to them. These warnings shall
be but are not limited to signs and flags of different colors." I have also heard and the
department is willing to incorporate with the applicant's consent a condition fourteen which
would read, "Applicant shall submit within one year of approval a status report concerning the
operation of the property." And then the department is willing to incorporate for its
recommendations an additional sentence to paragraph one on page seven that would essentially
read, "Should any changes be proposed concerning the type of firearm or gauge the department
shall consult with the State Department of Land and Natural Resources Hunter Safety Education
Program." So that would be fourteen conditions,two additional ones that were recommended on
the floor as well as an amendment to condition number one.
Chair: Does that cover all your concerns?
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
31
Ms. Matsumoto: So going back to if people want to come in and use their own gun is
there language about that because you said something about twelve and fifteen?
Mr. Dahilig I guess just to be clear, as I understand right now what the applicant is
proposing is clay shooting only using eco clays and twelve or twenty gauge shot with firearms
that are either provided by them or brought in by themselves. But they will not allow shots to be
brought in externally other than the ones they provide for fear of ecological concerns. And so
that is the operated as represented baseline the department would use for enforcement at this
point.
Chair: So basically they can't shoot anything other than the bullets they provide.
Mr. Ellsworth: Correct.
Chair: So if they say twelve and twenty and they provide the bullets that is the only kind
of shots they can allow to be shot there. No four, ten, sixteen gauge. So basically they are in
control of their destiny.
Mr. Ellsworth: Correct.
Chair: Any more concerns or questions?
Mr. Raco: Chair, I motion to approve Class IV Zoning Permit Z-IV-2012-18 and Special
Permit 2012-38,Use Permit 2012-14,with the additional comments and conditions thirteen and
fourteen and the amendment to condition number one.
Mr. Texeira: Second.
Chair: Any discussion, seeing none all in favor say aye, opposed, seeing none motion
carried.
On motion made by Caven Raco and seconded by Herman Texeira,to approve
Directors report as amended, motion carried unanimously by voice vote.
Commission recessed at 11:55 a.m.
Meeting called back to order at 12:06 p.m.
Continued Public Hearing (NONE)
New Public Hearing (NONE)
All public Testimony pursuant to HRS 92
Chair: Right now is public testimony; my understanding is we have a few that came in
late. We are going to have public testimony then we are going to break for lunch. This public
testimony will be on the Kilauea Ventures, LLC. Can you state your name please?
Inaudible): Good afternoon sir, good afternoon everybody. I am Ms. (Inaudible)
from Kilauea and this is my husband(inaudible) who was born and raised in Kilauea and he is
going to be ninety seven next month,July 25'h. He was a World War 11 veteran 100 Infantry
Battalion. He would like to speak with you sir.
Mr. (Inaudible): With the high cost of gasoline we need a shopping center in Kilauea.
Although I renewed my driver's license I don't drive anymore. We need several stores in
Kilauea, Foodland,maybe Safeway. With the high cost of gas too far to travel to Kapa`a or
Princeville. That is about all I guess.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
32
Chair: Thank you very much for coming out, making this journey all the way from
Kilauea.
Ms. (Inaudible): He would like to have the building in Kilauea. Plenty old people cannot
drive in Kapa`a, Lihue,thank you so much.
Chair: Anyone else want to speak on this agenda item?
Mr. Carrie Souza: Hello,my name is Carrie Souza. I work in Kilauea in the stone
building, the historic shopping center. I have written out a few notes that I have on this agenda.
The forty four thousand feet of commercial space is much too large for the existing road to
support it. The amount of people that need to come down that road to make that place come
alive is way too many for the narrow little road that we have. We have a lot of elderly and
children and people walking around,the trucks, all that is going to be too much for that little
road. There are a lot of people that I have spoken with in Moloa'a area, Larson's Beach Road,
those outskirts of Kilauea Town,they do support the shopping center or they support having
somewhere to go to get groceries but they don't support it without access to it. They don't
support it without the by-pass road.
When the by-pass road was offered at the meeting that a lot of people came to at the
Kilauea School nothing was mentioned that the zoning would change if that by-pass road went
in, nothing was said about the zoning changing, about that plateau being subdivided into
potential housing and density. So after the people were informed they thought they were going
to get their shopping center and their by-pass road no problem. It is not the case. And after that
was accepted then the read information wasn't provided for them. So I think there needs to be
more disclosure before the community can really evaluate what the needs are. The way to go
around it or I think a solution at this point would be to start smaller. I don't know what anchor
tenants they have lined up or anybody for leasing currently but the need seems to be more
grocery store. There was interest in the hardware store although I don't know what is going on
there. But if they start smaller and we use the existing road and then work gradually into what
the needs of the community I think that would be somewhat of a solution.
The other thing that was mentioned is they wanted to build this out without having leases
secured so you would have this structure empty for potentially a year. I will tell you right now
that is a dangerous idea because the stuff that goes on behind the dumpster, the little building
built for the dumpster and these little storage sheds, too much goes on in that area. There is a lot
of drug dealing, there is a lot of people that come there at night and that is where they hang out in
the dark areas. So I think to build that out and leave it vacant would be a really big mistake.
Thank you for your time.
Chair: Anyone else in the public want to speak on this agenda item?
Mr. Ron Weiniger: Thank you, my name is Ron Weiniger. I live at 4111 Kilauea Road,
Kilauea. I just want to echo a number of the comments that were made by Ms. Souza. I am not
just here to be patently opposed to the shopping center but the traffic bottle neck at the
Menehune Mart now in mornings and evenings is ridiculous and it is getting worse and worse by
the day. I think the children's safety, the safety of the pedestrians up and down that road will
definitely be threatened, they will be in danger. I hope that the Commission will give some
thought to that.
Chair: Anyone else in the public?
Ms. Souza: The other thing is with that piece of property that Mr. (Inaudible) sold to the
Hunt Group, as I understood there was supposed to be improvements put in that, sidewalks and
street lights towards the Post Office, I hope there will be accountability in that, that the Hunt
Group regardless of when this shopping center goes in or whatever takes responsibility for what
has been previously agreed on,thank you.
Chair: We will be closing public testimony and I will not be accepting anymore
testimony on this agenda item once it is closed. With that being said can I have a motion to close
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
33
public testimony again? I don't need a motion? Okay, it is closed. Anyone else that comes in
late, I am sorry, it is what it is, no more public testimony on this agenda item.
Commission recessed for lunch at 12:14 p.m.
Meeting called back to order at 2:00 p.m.
Chair: Before we left for lunch I asked for public testimony so we will not be asking for
any more public testimony on this agenda item, I am sorry. We did one at 9:00 and a second one
right before lunch so we are not asking for any more public testimony on this so I just want to let
the public know this is where we are at. I noticed a couple more new faces here; sorry it is just
the way it is so, Dale.
Staff Planner Dale Cua: Rather than reading the recommendations for the project or do
you want me to go through the whole evaluation or just keep it simple with the conclusion?
Chair: The quick version.
Staff: I will just read the conclusion(on file).
Chair: Any questions for the planner?
Mr. Dahilig: Commissioners, let me just dovetail on this and if you will indulge me just
for a second.
Mr. Blake: I have a question. Dale, there has been some testimony about why this or
excuse me in the opinion of the witnesses the development is too big. So if you subtract off the
parking how much of the total development of the 40,000 square feet I think it is, is restricted or
applicable to just the buildings?
Staff Let me grab the file folder. Noted in the staff report, what you would call tenant
spaces would come out to 40,000. That is excluding the parking area.
Mr. Blake: It is not like it is 40,000 square feet of actual commercial space, it looks like
the majority of the space is landscaping and parking based on that chart on the wall.
Staff. Going back to the Director's report, the original Director's report dated back in
November,the leased space or the tenant spaces comes out to 40,000.
Mr. Blake: What kind of space?
Staff Tenant spaces comes out to 46,800 square feet and that would include...this
information all comes from the application so as proposed the tenant spaces would include
spaces for hardware, market, a pharmacy, a bank, auto parts store,restaurant,retail, there is a
clinic, some office spaces and for community as well.
Mr. Blake: That answers my question.
Mr. Dahill : Just to dovetail on the analysis that Dale engaged in as well as with some of
my input as well, I did pass out a two page handout with a highlighted area in orange. As you
know when we look at the development of an area particularly when it comes to these higher
scrutiny permits we always go back to the General Plan, the Development Plan, as well as if
there is any specialized plans. In this particular case there is the Town Core Plan. We look to
whether there is consistency from a policy standpoint. And as you noticed from the first page the
North Shore Development Plan update earmarks this area for neighborhood commercial and was
further confirmed in the zoning map as you see as highlighted in orange.
Now just from a standpoint of a temporal standpoint you will notice that these things look
actually quite old and the proposal in the North Shore Development Plan to have this area as
commercial actually was presented to the community as far as our research a month after I was
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
34
horn. So this has been an area that has long been earmarked for this type of commercial
development notwithstanding the presence of an additional artery road. The notion of artery
road is something that came up and as you Iook at your report in the 2005 town update. The
artery road, the new town entry as they would call it was an idea that I think everybody thinks is
needed and certainly why it took so long for our department to formulate our recommendations
and conditions was largely a consequence of two things. One was the new town entry road and
the other one was concerning the PD nature of the project. As you notice it is not quite a full
horseshoe or full moon and if you look there is a little bit of residential, specifically R-6,that is
part of the project site.
And so as a recognition of the fact that the parcel is split zoned we have been able to
work out with the department of water and you will see in the recommendations below that the
project must include loft style housing as part of the development and that is going to be four
units, so just some background for the Commission. The other one is with respect to the road.
We have had extensive discussions with the Department of Public Works and it has been for the
most part a ball that has been in their court for the past six months. As you know our department
is not staffed with licensed engineers. The responsibility of reviewing whether a project will
create impacts lies with the Department of Public Works with respect to the road network.
Now when we look at the road network a TIAR or Traffic Impact Analysis Report was
paid for by the consultant and was reviewed for consistency by Larry Dill and his engineering
division. I am sure as the applicants will show, they will give you their side of what has been
going on with respect to negotiations about the new entry road,improvements and these types of
things. But I want to be clear to the Commission that from the outset after we had done an
analysis we conveyed our opinion to the applicant that we did not think there was enough of a
proportional burden and a constitutional nexus to require the construction of the road at this time.
And I want to be very clear that that has been the department's evaluation given the TIAR and
the history and the background concerning these plans. So again the area was earmarked as
commercial well prior to the new entry road, so this type of use was already anticipated as a
consequence of the existing town without the expansion to the northwest, so with that
Commissioners and Mr. Chair, if you would like we can call the applicant up at this time or if
you have any questions regarding our report we are more than happy to answer.
Chair: Any questions?
Mr. Dahilig: Mr. Chair, I just want to note that the office did receive four more
testimonies in the record in support from Aria Layman, Murley Cruz, Claudia Antonio and
Melbun Ubungan and one in opposition from Makaala Kaumuoana.
Ms. Matsumoto: When was the TIAR done?
Mr. Dahilig: The TZAR, the draft of the TIAR was circulated between the departments
not only our department but State DOT,DPW, and that was in the later half of 2011. The
Department of Public Works and that tends to be the main beehive of activity on this particular
TIAR,provided comments to the developer in April of this past year upon which time there was
an exchange of responses and discussions about the interpretations of the TIAR and the
mitigation measures proposed. The final version of the TIAR was sent out as late as last week.
So based on Public Works comments the TIAR was adjusted and you saw it in advance of the
final stamp what the engineer put on the TIAR that the Public Works Department did convey its
final recommendations to the department on June 1St of this year. So we were hinging on a lot of
the Public Works comments to then notice the meeting for the evaluation and eventual approval
and deliberation of this application. But we had to wait until Public Works was done with their
work and that is why it took a substantial amount of time. And as you know, Commissioner,we
did include the whole TIAR for the Commission's review as part of our Director's report on the
matter.
Mr. Blake: What was the date of submission?
Mr. Dahilijz: The initial date of submission or final submission was June 19,2012.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2412
35
Ms. Matsumoto: I am looking at this map here,the one with the orange,how many
entrances into Kilauea are there from the highway?
Mr. Dahilig: When this map was created back in the 80's it was one, one on the north
and one on the south and then you have more minor entry roads between that stretch.
Ms. Matsumoto: That could lead to that town center.
Mr. Dahilig: Correct. So there are some back roads that you could take to the town
center but the main focal point of entry to the town has always been by the gas station.
Ms. Matsumoto: This is not a question about the road but on the map with the orange
marking there is a small section that is designated Open,what is that?
Mr. Dahilig: It is the area to the south of the driveway. There is a driveway that leads up
to the stone building and that particular area has actually been conveyed over to the County of
Kauai Department of Parks and Recreation. And so that area is not part of the development but
is meant for open space and-that type of thing.
Ms. Matsumoto: It will remain that way?
Mr. Dahilig: Exactly,unless Lenny decides to do something with it but I don't suspect so.
Mr. Katayama: I have a procedural question for the Director. The study professionally
done, it presents the baseline case under different scenarios, it also looks in the fixture,it presents
again different traffic levels under three different scenarios. Now to the extent that this is
forward looking and an estimate if in the future the actual patterns do differ and in this case I am
sort of looking at the upside in case the traffic conditions are a lot heavier for whatever reason.
What is the department's procedure based on the cumulative impact theory that we are using on
the developer as we move forward?
Mr. Dahilig: The cumulative impact if we all had a crystal ball we would all be rich,
right, and I understand the concern there. In all frankness Commissioner the TIAR and the
engineer's assessment on both sides, from a professional opinion standpoint is the best
information we have to go off of In this particular case it would be difficult for us to leave open
ended some type of levy on the developer from an unanticipated standpoint by saying that the
impacts created only and only by that particular project have contributed to what was not
predicted in the report. It is not impossible but part of the concern is that once we do the
exactions and we do the levy we would have to engage in some type of order to show cause on
the permit to then compel the developer to come in and build additional improvements, etc. So it
is a bit of...I understand there maybe being some hesitation to rely on the professional opinion
but the professional opinion is the best we have.
Mr. Katayama: I think what I am trying to understand it how do we strike a balance
between not unfairly burdening the developer by whistling past a grave yard and causing this
project to sort of front a lot of these develop expenses if they are not needed. But in the case that
it is wildly successful or there is some issues that were not...assumptions were not correct and
these things were all built on assumptions and then from there your model it out and I understand
that. What I am trying to do is strike a balance between the community's concerns that we have
heard this morning and to ensure that this developer does not shoulder and unfair burden.
Mr. Dahilig: At first instinct when we were reviewing the project one of the things that
we had discussed was this notion of phasing, downsizing and phasing. And we thought that
maybe by doing the downsizing and phasing we would be able to in a sense build in the project
and slowly acclimate the area from a traffic standpoint to what the full build out would be. The
difficulty with that is the impact that would be mitigated as a consequence of phasing ultimately
stems from the traffic report. And when we look at the traffic report in terms of what Public
Works is sending us it is very clear that the amount of impact with the mitigation measures as
proposed by the licensed professional engineer would bring the service levels at or near what
they are right now.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
36
And so I understand there is some hesitation to accept that but it is above my pay grade
and my expertise. Going about that it would be difficult for us to then preclude the developer to
say you can only build 35,000 square feet and leave 7,000 un-built until we figure out what is
going on with the traffic when we actually have the traffic impact analysis report saying that
mitigation can be done as a consequence of certain improvements to the road network. And so
that is why we have had to at least from a recommendation standpoint dial back from the phasing
perspective because we did not feel we had the requisite information and data to support not a
full build out as a mitigation measure.
Mr. Kata ama: I am fully in support of the developer putting together a proposal that
they feel very comfortable in absorbing the risk and I think that is fair. I think we should support
that. But again a portion of the concern is based on a forecast. Now the probability of that
forecast going either way I have no feel for but I guess what I am hearing is there is not a safety
nets either way. For example if the project was a total failure and traffic flow actually decreased
the developer would have put in 46,000 square feet or 44,000 square feet of commercial space
that would be and some vacancy rate that would be a burden to carry. I don't want to see that as
well. So I am trying to sort of strike a balance here without putting the burden up front.
Mr. Dahilig: And those are the, I guess Commissioner, that was the difficulty in trying to
craft these particular set of conditions knowing that we already had a study in hand that
(inaudible)had been evaluating that did not reflect the degree of mitigation that the community
is actually calling for.
Mr. Blake: Did we make any promises? Did the County make any promises to the
Kilauea Town vis-a-vis the development of this community center?
Mr. Dahilig: The only promise I made at the KNA meeting was that I would be requiring
a mixed use element as part of the project. It would not be a full commercial, that there would
have to be some residential element integrated into the project. With respect to the actual road
the Department of Public Works engaged in,a discussion with the developer as outlined in my
report about the feasibility of constructing the new town entry road. It comes into this really
lengthy discussion and I will try to paraphrase it but the thought was to use the proportional
exaction that would be levied upon the developer to construct the portion of the entry road which
was from Kilauea Road to the shopping center and then the dedication with another party which
were the Hayes for the land underneath what would be the entry road. Those two would be
coupled together to serve as a twenty percent match for federal funding if the project could be
put on what is called the State STIP or the State improvement for transportation.
The only way that you can get funding is if the State Department of Transportation on
Hale Kuwila Street,Honolulu, says okay, Kauai County we recognize that this is a project that
is eligible for federal funding, you need to put an anti of twenty percent to the feds and we will
funnel eighty percent of the funds over to you. But the catch is from what I understand is that if
we put something like that on the STIP something has to come off the STIP. And so this is the
type of island wide evaluation that Larry Shuppe needs to engage in before saying okay, we are
going to put it on the STIP, we are going to do it now,we are going to chase federal funding
because that may come as a consequence of highway widening in Koloa, it may come in as a
consequence of repaving down in Kekaha. And these types of projects had to be weighed and
evaluated and determined whether okay, is it appropriate for the six year plan to then have this
project jump everybody else. I think that was part of Larry's dilemma in trying to negotiate this
because it was a possibility of having the twenty percent match and any time you have twenty
percent match from a soft side then the County doesn't have to levy out the hard cash for it is
very appealing. And the Hunt Development Group was helping the discussion to facilitate that
but essentially it took four parties, State DOT, County DPW, Hunt, and the Hayes to then sit at
the table and come to some kind of agreement on it and they just couldn't work something out.
Mr. Blake: Were any promises made to Kilauea prior to your becoming Planning
Director?
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
37
Mr. Dahilig: That I don't know. I can't speak for. I am sure the developers can say what
they need to say about your question Commissioner. I know from at least a departmental
standpoint where we have made representations before the community the only thing that we
have said from a policy standpoint we would require as either an exaction or a mandatory
condition was the construction of four residential units in recognition of the PD nature of the
application.
Mr. Blake: Not make short shift of the community testimony that talked about what
certain members of the community would like to see there and are not in the initial plan but to
me most of that stuff is market driven. It is just like former Commissioner Jimmy Nishida
saying it is the American way, spend all the money on Coco Palms. Here if you want to have a
certain type of business and enough people want it I don't think a successful commercial venture
like the developers would just ignore that. If you want a gym or whatever else they hope to see
there it will come. We have been faced as a Commission with putting a lid on development
because it is going to affect the like types of commercial ventures in the surrounding area and I
don't think it is our place to be in everybody's business. As long as it is not detrimental to the
public then that is what I believe we should most focused on.
Chair: Any more questions for the department? Seeing none is the applicant here?
Ms. Lorna Nishimitsu: I am making the introductions of the persons who are present to
answer questions and provide information. We have Mathew Hunt with Kilauea Ventures, one
of the principals,Allen All with Hunt Companies,Jose Bustamante with Hunt Companies,
Michael Packard from SSFM, he is a traffic engineer, Steve Au, the architect, Wayne Wada with
Esaki Engineering and Surveying who is here is you have any engineering questions about the
site. And with that Mr. Hunt will try to address some of the issues that were raised about what
kind of commitments have been made to the community.
Chair: Do you have any questions or concerns about the staff report?
Mr. Hunt: No I do not.
Mr. Dahilig: Mr. Chair,just for clarification, we are not in conditions yet but just
because we do have that question I did pass out a memorandum this morning clarifying what the
conditions were from Mr. Dill and it is included in the addendum. It should look like this
essentially and what it is stating is based on Larry's clarification of his June 1"transmittal over
striking the last line of condition number thirteen on page ten of the second supplemental report.
So just to clarify that that concurrence is with knowledge that our recommendations have been
revised based on clarification from the County Engineer. As well as one other addition which is
we are asking for design review along with landscape review so not just landscape review only
but design review by the department for esthetic purposes.
Mr. Raco: Condition number what?
Mr. Dahilig: Condition number two, so it would be condition number thirteen and
condition number two. It would be item L.1.11 and it should look like this, a one page
memorandum from me this morning, sorry dated yesterday.
Chair: Thank you, do you have any questions or concerns about the staff report?
Mr. Hunt: None other than what Mike just spoke to.
Chair: Did you get this report too?
Mr. Hunt: I haven't seen the memo yet but I am aware of it.
Mr. Dahilig: Their attorney has taken a look at it.
Chair: Any questions for the applicant at this time or do you want him to give his speech
first?
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
38
Ms. Matsumoto: Yes.
Mr. Hunt: Good afternoon Commissioners. I am just going to run through some
responses to public testimony that was received at the initial public hearing and also those that
were received today. As the Planning Director mentioned there was a request and also through
the community that we include a residential component into the project so we now integrated
four live/work units into the site plan. We worked with the Planning Department and the
Department of Water to secure the additional water capacity needed for these units. This is
something that we had thought of at the initial onset of our design process but we lacked the
needed water to incorporate the residential components. So now that we have that additional
water we have now included it into the site plan. It is over here if you look at my laser pointer,
top right hand corner of the site plan. It is four units with the commercial space on the ground
level. It is consistent with the smart growth initiative and it will actually be the first of its kind
on the island of Kauai.
Another concern was the impact on neighboring residents was not taken into account.
From the onset of our design process we designed the project to keep parking located on the
interior with the buildings and dense landscaping placed on the exterior of the project. This will
not only help prevent any sound transference but also provide a visual buffer to the project. This
is the edge along the Titcomb residences and this would be the other side of the project. Another
thing we also did was we relocated a restaurant based on community concerns, we actually had a
restaurant located right there that was near the residences. Based on community concerns it is
relocated over here away from the neighboring residences.
This is one I can speak to that has obviously come up a bit today that the project is too
large for Kilauea and there is not enough local resident demand to support it. From the onset we
did an extensive market study that showed demand for 49,000 square feet of retail and
commercial space specifically for the types of uses that we are proposing. And the interest we
have received so far helps confirm this with over thirty Kauai based businesses and startups that
we have received interest from.
Another comment was that the project will take away from the features of the historic
plantation center otherwise known as the stone buildings and that we did not provide
architectural perspectives for the community to review. We actually did provide design plans in
eye level perspectives in our first community workshops in early 2011. We also posted these
designs on our website in 2011 and we also have produced a new eye level rendering to illustrate
the architectural relationships that is below the site plan over here. And we actually used actual
photos and overlaid them on to an elevation view so you can see if there is any over shadowing
of the stone buildings there. Another thing we are looking at doing is incorporating some stone
elements into our buildings; this was a recommendation from one of the community members to
help it blend in with the stone buildings. Historical signage will also be used throughout the
project which could help highlight the historical significance of these important buildings.
This is definitely one of the main concerns that we have received, increased traffic and
impact on pedestrian safety. Through our TZAR we have recommended a variety of pedestrian
safety and traffic calming device measures, this includes new sidewalks, crosswalks,bike lanes,
and raised pedestrian crosswalks. For traffic calming devices we are looking at speed tables,
signage for approaching stops and crosswalks and the main mitigation measures we are looking
at include a signalized intersection at Kuhi`o Highway and Kolo Road. This was committed by
DOT over a year ago. Left turn lanes at Kilauea Road and Keneke Street intersection. We have
committed to this through our TIAR and so for reference the project site is right here and it
would be a left turn lane there and a left turn lane there so it allows through traffic and not any
backup coming into that main intersection.
We also included a three-way stop at Kolo Road and Kilauea Road which is over here on
the right hand side and two access points off of Kilauea Road, one being right in and right out so
traffic doesn't back up at this one entry point. Main access will be from the Post Office road
down into the project where we have access points coming off that main Post Office road. Our
goal is to make Kilauea a more walkable community reducing the need to use vehicles by local
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
39
residents for their shopping and service needs. We want to make this as safe as possible through
these mitigation measures.
New town entry road must be completed before KLV is allowed to open. This is
something that we cannot agree to based on a variety of factors. A timeline we received from
Public Works was a minimum of five plus years, we also got this confirmed by Ray McCormick
with the District DOT branch. The caring costs and market uncertainty for a delay like this
would make the project untenable, a delay of at least five years. The new town entry road is also
not currently sponsored by the County so there is a lot of ambiguity on when work could actually
begin on that road. A rough estimate on the cost of this road from Public Works is six million
dollars and this does not include our portion of the new town entry road which represents around
thirty percent of the entire road. This also could lose the required twenty percent match for
federal funding which we are offering to access the needed federal funding for this road. We are
not capable of paying for this whole road out of pocket so accessing federal funding is critical.
Speaking to the TIAR the proposed mitigation measures in the TIAR are expected or
projected impacts of traffic from the project. The traffic engineer has worked with DOT Public
Works to finalize the TIAR to appropriately address the traffic impacts. There is concurrence
with the findings of the TZAR to address these impacts. At this time Public Works does not
recommend full construction of the new town entry road at this time which gives further
ambiguity on when this could actually start. Funds would not be available immediately given the
plan's projection six years into the future. Yet we are still committed to working on and pushing
the new town entry road process along. Over the last year and a half we have held a variety of
meetings, once we found out that Mr. Hayes was willing to donate the land needed for the rest of
the road we met with KNA multiple times, the Department of Public Works,the State Senator,
the State District DOT offices, Mayor's office,U.S. Fish and Wildlife, as well as a variety of
community groups. Our contributions to this process the main one being the Post Office road
improvements and dedication that compromise the needed twenty percent private matched access
to federal funding.
The Post Office road comprises approximately thirty percent of the length of the new
town entry road which we do plan on improving as part of our project so essentially thirty
percent of this road would be done in conjunction with our project. We have spent a lot of time
and money on this approval and funding process somewhat voluntarily to help move this along.
We also commissioned the needed functional classification justification report which upgrades
the proposed road from a minor rural collector to major rural collector. This was required by the
DOT Department of Planning,basically you have to show the feds that there is a need for the
road. So using our traffic numbers and U.S. Fish and Wildlife traffic numbers we were able to
show that it can qualify for the STIP. And where it sits right now is we are waiting sponsorship
from the County for placement on the STIP. The DOT has accepted this classification report so
as Mike said it essentially sits with Public Works right now.
I would just like to reinforce that we remain committed to working with all parties to
make this a reality and for more details you can visit our website where I have posted over the
last year and a half timelines of our meetings, info on all the meetings, who we have met with
and the whole process we have gone though. We have been as transparent as we can through this
whole process as we push for this road. And if you don't mind I will just take a couple more
minutes to respond to the testimony received today.
This is in response to testifier David Dinner. He suggested that we have kept quote
"people in the dark". This can't be anything of the case. We have attended almost every KNA
meeting since we started the project. We have been very upfront and foregoing with community
from community workshops to posting all the information and renderings and updates that we
have onto our website. We met with the KNA transportation committee, we have really tried to
not keep people in the dark we have done just the opposite. He suggested that we aren't pursing
as a green project and I disagree,we absolutely are continuing to pursue this as a green project as
is evident in the testimony or statement that I submitted at our first public hearing. We have
made no false promises. A laundry mat was brought up,we considered it but we don't have
enough water capacity for a laundry mat. We actually have included an exercise facility into our
project, we did not forget that, that was a request through the community. We actually have
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
40
three interested tenants for that exercise facility so that was in response to a request from the
community.
We disagree that we are going to put Kilauea businesses out of business. Actually Patty
Ewing who owns Kong Lung Center is a supporter of the project and she has submitted a letter
of support for the project. We feel there are other businesses in the community who would
support the project too. His suggestion that it would be a tourist oriented project,we have from
the very beginning have approached this as a non-tourist oriented project, one that is going to
serve the needs and services of the local community. Getting back to is it too big? Based on our
current interest so far we have the demand to support it.
Moving on to testifier Debbie Sandy, she said that we were not committed to using local
workers unless it was economically feasible. I never said that. I don't know where that came
from. In fact from the beginning we have posted on the website about using local workers and
contractors. I have mentioned this at multiple meetings, community workshops, the KNA, this is
even in my statement at the initial public hearing and we have been in contact with several local
contractors and suppliers. This is in response to testifier Carrie Souza who talked about the
plateau property and their subdivisions plans. I would just like to say that property is not under
our control and is not part of our project. The project will take time to build so it is not like it is
going to be a huge increase in traffic all at once. We have certain buildings that we have targeted
for certain tenants to move in to so this will take some time to do. As far as having an empty
shopping center we will not build something that is not going to get filled. In fact without leases
we cannot even get financing for this project. It is pretty standard for banks to require at least
sixty percent lease up before they will even give you construction financing. This isn't going to
be a spec shopping center. And that is about it.
Mr. Blake: I may have missed it but are you going to have twenty four hour security?
Mr. Hunt: Yes, that is something we are looking at, at least night time security, that was
the most important thing and actually I missed that myself. Onsite security and established
operating hours were two of the things that we added in response to concerns from the
neighboring residents.
Mr. Blake: The other issue and I may have missed that too was sidewalks along the
Lighthouse Road frontage and Post Office road.
Mr. Hunt: Yes, as part of our improvement plans for the Post Office Road including the
improvement plans that we would have to do where the left turn lanes go there is a sidewalk that
would go there and there are sidewalk improvements that would go all-the way along Post Office
road as well including bike lanes.
Mr. Blake: Including bike lanes.
Mr. Hunt: Yes, I believe that is what the plans show,the bike lanes are right next to the
sidewalk. I think that is the plan.
Mr. Blake: So you are talking to the complete streets people.
Mr. Hunt: Exactly.
Ms. Matsumoto: How about crosswalks.
Mr. Hunt: As you can see, I don't know if the site plan has them on this one but we do
have crosswalks coming across here and here and then across here. Basically where you see
these walking paths we would have crosswalks coming right near where the driveway entrances
are. We would like to do a crosswalk across here as well. I wish we had that site plan; we had
another one that did show the crosswalks, I apologize. It is up on the website.
Ms. Matsumoto: So people can get from that area across to the other side, the older.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
41
Mr. Hunt: Yes, absolutely. We had quite a few in there. I think Public Works thought
we had too many. They have to be approved by Public Works,the locations of those crosswalks.
Mr. Blake: Are there going to be stoplights?
Mr. Hunt. The crosswalks? I think that is also a Public Works decision. I don't think
that was included in our TZAR as a mitigation measure but we are looking at raised crosswalks
too.
Mr. Blake: You mean over the street?
Mr. Hunt: No they would also act as a speed calming device so it is like a hump that
comes up to the crosswalk. .
Chair: But that doesn't really control traffic as far as traffic is concerned. That would
control speed but not traffic.
Mr. Hunt: It will help with speed and signage of course will be included showing that
there are crosswalks that you are coming up on. And with the left turn lanes that will also reduce
any kind of congestion at those main intersections.
Chair: One of my concerns would be if this project is approved how will the construction
crew get to and from this project?
Mr. Hunt: As of right now as I am sure you know there is only one way to access the
project site. There is no way—you can't get there without getting on Kilauea Road.
Chair: At the last meeting back in November the Hunt Group said they would be coming
or all traffic from construction would be coming through the back part of the property that comes
from Banana Joe area somewhere from the highway and not through Kilauea Town at all.
Mr. Hunt: We are working on that. We did get what is called a temporary driveway
permit through the DOT which allows us access off of Kuhi`6 Highway but we do not have an
agreement yet with the property owner Bill Haye to build a construction road through his
property.
Chair: Don't you think you should have done that before you came here today?
Mr. Hunt: We haven't come to an agreement yet.
Chair: From the last meeting back in November I was kind of reassured by the Hunt
Group that all construction vehicles, all construction vehicles, with this project would be coming
in through the back of the property and not through the town of Kilauea at all.
Mr. Hunt: That is our goal, that is why we moved forward with getting the needed access
permit but we do not have an agreement with the...
Chair: Isn't that the property owner right there? I am just saying. It has been long
enough where I feel there was more than ample time for something to be worked out.
Mr. Hunt: I think a lot of this was contingent on the road as well.
Chair: It the County's bad for taking so long. Actually it wasn't the County's fault but
anyway, getting back on track. Going back to that construction road something needs to be
worked out. Having traffic coming through there will be unacceptable to the residents of
Kilauea. They have voiced their concerns on the construction crew coming in and out of Kilauea
Town. We are not talking small trucks we are talking semis in and out and something needs to
be worked out on the behalf of the residents of Kilauea. It is showing major consideration for
them.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
42
Mr. Hunt: I understand and we have been working on that process even though we aren't
quite there yet.
Chair: And what if it doesn't happen?
Mr. Hunt: Kilauea Road is a public roadway. We will have traffic control plans in place.
We have developed a whole schedule of how many loads, light,heavy, traffic loads. We will
avoid peak hours.
Chair: Where are you at with working out the deal with the landowner?
Mr. Hunt: I can't comment on that at this point in time.
Ms. Nishimitsu: Whether or not the developer can work out an agreement with a private
landowner is somewhat beyond their control because if they are prohibited from using what is a
public roadway and that is something that Public Works has not imposed as a condition would
essentially prevent them from reasonable use of their property. Developing in allowed under
your zoning codes, your plans etcetera. There is a real concern that if the Commission prohibits
use of a public roadway that that essentially acts as a denial of the project because he is unable or
the developer is unable to work out an arrangement with the private property owner. We are not
aware of other projects on this island that have been prevented from using public roadways for
construction vehicles to access their lots especially if their lots are only touched by one public
roadway. I think it would have been if all things could fall into place and an arrangement could
be worked out Hunt will certainly choose that route but to impose that as a condition could
possibly make this project untenable or unviable.
Chair: My decision might is based on the health and welfare of this community being
that the construction crews come through Kilauea. It would be a big concern of mine and that
might just be the base of my decision here.
Ms. Nishimitsu; We understand that Chair, it is just that this island has grown
exponentially since we were children which is why there is so much roadway construction that is
going on that has impacted all of us, especially where Kukui Grove and Gaylords is. All of us
have been negatively impacted even if we don't live there but that is what comes with a growing
population. And the drive for commercial and industrial development is driven by population
growth, it is inevitable. I don't see any way around it, yes it is an inconvenience, and it is
humbug. My parent's house was impacted by the County's decision to put the roundabout where
it is but it is what it is. Some of us are just not adaptable to change. Some of us have realized
that if we want a place where kids can come back and live and work that growth has to come too.
Mr. Dahilig: Just for perspective there is a project out on the Kilauea River and that
particular residence, Somers, was almost forty thousand square feet. That particular house with
its seven suites and large amount of grading...I would actually suggest because when we did the
remediation work to dredge the channel they amount of grading that Somers was engaging in
was quite a lot, they moved a lot of dirt. No such restriction to control traffic along Kilauea
Road was ever imposed on that particular type of project. I think when you look at the type of
construction impact and again this is a rough back of the envelope type of comparison that you
wouldn't see more traffic as created by what you saw during the construction during the Sumer's
house, same square footage or a little bit less square footage, the amount of grading that went on,
same entry, same exit. The community has not been subject to a large scale type of development
with the types of equipment and trucks needed to go in and out of that road before. It is not a
usual thing given the past construction of the Sumer's house.
Mr. Blake: From what you said Chair, all entry into the development area was supposed
to come around Banana Joe's, not Masaki's store. The other thing, I remember one of the public
witnesses talking about how difficult it would be in the morning and in the evening when you
have all commercial traffic and lighthouse traffic combined using Kilauea Road. One of the
other things that I would suggest is that deliveries be scheduled so they do not come at those high
peak traffic times and that there be no on-street parking whatsoever on Kilauea Road, or
Lighthouse Road. That might help alleviate the traffic impact somewhat.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
43
Ms. Nishimitsu: I don't think the developer has a problem with no parking on Kilauea
Road but they don't have control over Kilauea Road which fronts a County park. If the County
Council passes a resolution prohibiting parking this is not something that would affect our client.
I suspect that people might be parking in the park.
Mr. Hunt: Actually people are parking on our property right now; it is overflow parking
coming from Kong Lung. I don't think people can actually park on the side of Kilauea Road,
right now I don't think there is enough space.
Mr. Blake: So you will provide for your worker's parking.
Mr. Hunt: I believe we can.
Chair: We are going to take a short five minute recess. I have some major concerns that
I have to talk to my attorney about.
Commission recessed at 3:06 p.m.
Meeting called back to order at 3:19 p.m.
Mr. Dahilig: Commissioners, given the concerns raised by certain Commissioners and
validly so, the department has crafted an additional condition it would be willing to recommend
as an additional condition number 20, to be put at the back end of the condition list. Would the
Commission want to hear the condition now or wait until we are done with the applicant?
Chair: Wait until we are done.
Mr. Dahilig: We do have a condition that we may want to propose for this particular
issue.
Chair: Go ahead and read that condition first.
Mr. Dahilig: "Applicant shall provide parking to accommodate all its workers onsite and
shall instruct all construction vehicles to refrain from parking along Kilauea Road. The applicant
shall also work with the Planning Department to develop and implement a construction delivery
plan to alleviate traffic impacts during construction of the project in the event the applicant in
good faith is unable to secure a reasonable agreement for alternate access for construction related
traffic across the adjacent parcel."
Chair: That is acceptable with you guys?
Mr. Hunt: Yes.
Chair: I know this is kind of out of the ordinary but I know the_landowner is here and I
wanted to know if you had any comments on or response to Mr. Hunt's request for construction
crews using that property.
Mr. HM: Let me back up by saying first of all what Matt said in terms of contacting and
working with Bill Haye on the idea of the road and the matching funding and so on, we spent a
lot of time working on that. The construction road was part of the bigger picture of the bypass
road until such time as for whatever reason this thing got stalled in Public Works and then Matt
stopped calling me about the road. And we have not talked lately about the idea of there being a
construction road without a bypass road. Now, as a result of your comments,we started talking
about that during the break. I still believe that the ultimate solution to make the community and
this shopping center and whatever else happens in Kilauea and with what is going on at the
Lighthouse they were in support of putting the road in. When we said we would put up the land
everyone was really excited about it,it had a lot of attraction.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
44
And I still think that it is a game changer for the town of Kilauea and for the broader
North Shore to have that bypass in somehow so whatever we can do to make that happen before
we lose his funding. His funding, he paid more for his property than I paid for mine so the land
under his land that is going down there past the Post Office is a bigger contributor to the co-
matching funds than the rest of the road which is mine because my property didn't cost near
what his did. So it would be a shame to lose that funding because there is a timing stall with
what is going on at the Public Works Department because that is important funding. I know
Matt talked about, I am not sure where he picked up on that notion that let's not lose that funding
because without that co-matching funding the road is going to be a lot harder to get in than it is
now that we are all aligned to try and do that. So I am behind the bypass road and I am behind
working on something with Matt in the meantime in terms of a construction road.
Chair: Without getting into detail I hope something can be worked out. We will just
leave it at that for now. Matt, a couple more concerns. Where the housing is going to be did you
work it out with the residents there? Are you going to put up hollow tile wall to but a barrier up
between the project and the homeowners next to that?
Mr. Hunt: We had multiple workshops presented not a hollow the wall but what we call
a green screen. It is basically a green wall, a little bit more visually appealing, as well as living
walls on the back sides of the buildings themselves with green roofs. So that was expressed to
help provide a visual and sound buffer to the residences.
Chair: The housing that is proposed is that regular housing or is that affordable housing?
Mr. Dahilig: We have comments from Housing Agency that the inclusion of the four
units does not trigger an affordable housing requirement. The units that we are asking for an
exaction standpoint are going to be market units. The reason why we have done this as I
mentioned is because the mixed zoning of the parcel but also the department, as we mentioned in
our report, is looking at this as a potential case study for us to develop smart growth and mixed
use policies down the line as we get through this discussion about form based. As you may
recall about three months ago we brought in Dan Parolek from San Francisco at Opticos Design
and this is the type of project that we are looking at as a test case for a core area that has a
live/work/play type of approach. It is similar to what you would see even in Kapolei and
actually they have sold,-out their units in Kapolei with the live/work/play where you live upstairs
from a dentist office or lawyer's office downstairs. So that is what we are trying to test in this
particular scenario and we think of it as a win/win because additional housing units will be
added, it provides us a test case, and at the same time it is more in align with what the purpose of
the project development permit is meant to do which is combine and spread uses across a broader
area.
Ms. Matsumoto: In a letter from Donna Apelado Shumocker she talks about...it is
related to the housing and the change in zoning. Could you explain that?
Mr. Dahilig: The PD permit essentially is a means of taking areas that are split zoned or
have different zoning and being able to mix and match and spread those types of uses over one
larger area. In essence the zoning underlying the parcels still remains the same but with this
particular statutory mechanism that they provide with this permit we can actually say even
though the residential is here because of the PD we think it is more appropriate in this particular
place. We think that having the loft style housing fronting the actual main access will help
contribute to more of the promenade vibrancy that you would see along many of the smart
growth or mixed use corridors we have been researching on the mainland that do have the
live/work/play elements right up against the main thoroughfare versus buried in the back of the
project.
Ms. Matsumoto: This letter says that any change in zoning would impact the community.
Mr. Dahilig: These uses are in accordance with the underlying zoning that has been
defined by ordinance.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
45
Chair: I just wanted to state or make a comment that the Hunt Group has done
everything in their power as far as my knowledge through the department who I have worked
very closely with on this particular project. They have done everything in their power to get this
bypass road put in and a lot of residents in Kilauea have some concerns about the bypass road
being put in before construction can start. But unfortunately it doesn't work that way. I just the
public to know that it is not to the fault of the Hunt Group that this bypass road is not being put
in, I know they have tried numerous occasions to get it done. Unfortunately it didn't work out
that way. I am a little bummed about that but it is what it is. All we can do is try and if all the
ducks are not in the row it is not in a row. With that being said do we have any more questions
for the applicant?
Mr. Raco: Lorna, from the last meeting notes as I go through my packet is there any
revised elevations, architectural elevations that were requested?
Ms.Nishimitsu: Part of this might be my fault. When I spoke with you I thought you
wanted construction drawings so when I spoke with the department trying to get clarification it
was do we go all the way to construction drawings? We don't know whether you folks are okay
with the layout of the buildings which in fact had to change as a matter of fact. The department
told us. I think the concern is that your development will not be so massive as to overpower the
existing historic stone buildings. We don't want the loss of the history by your development
behind the stone buildings. So what our client was told to do was prepare those elevations that
show that because of the distance between the existing stone buildings and their project the stone
buildings still don't play a prominent role in Kilauea because they are dear to the people of
Kilauea. So that is what was prepared. We didn't go into the construction drawing phase to
show elevations except for these schematics if you want to look at them in these renderings
which don't have measurements on them. But they are all going to meet the North Shore
Development Plan heights.
Mr. Raco: I wasn't looking for construction documents. I think if I wanted to
construction documents I think that would be over and beyond as a Commissioner to ask you to
give me construction documents. But that was one of my notes here that I had and the other note
was that we talked about bus stop locations, were there bus stop locations identified on your site
plan?
Mr. Hunt: No we have not identified any bus stop locations yet but I know one of the
recommendations...
Mr. Raco: There is no recommendation as far as right now from the department that says
that we need to provide bus stops,right?
Chair: I think there is a bus stop at the Kilauea Gym right now in town.
Mr. Dahilig: That is condition number eight, Commissioner.
Mr. Blake: I remember back in the early 80's a housing proposal was floated across
Kuhi`o Highway and it rose and fell on the existence of a private sewer treatment plant that the
developer would or would not put in. And I remember the community at that time came out,
well the testimony was divided between two people, the people that wanted to move to Kilauea
but couldn't find housing and the people who lived in Kilauea and didn't want any more people
in there. The ones that lived there for a long time or moved in just under the wire were
successful in convincing the Council I believe it was,to nix the private sewer treatment plant for
about forty homes or sixty homes so the project died. On one hand it was a victory for the
people who wanted to maintain their little enclave and I don't say that facetiously, I understand
that, it is a great place to raise children and so forth. On the other hand it did not make available
to the general public the opportunity to move into a really nice place to raise children.
So again we have it seems like the same push/pull between the people who want to keep
Kilauea as it was in 1980 or 90 and the fact that as has been pointed out the population is
growing exponentially. A lot of the development is taking place on the North Shore because that
is where people envision Hawaii or Kauai to look like and we can't stop that. So either you
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
46
provide for the general public interests and desires or you are just going to drive prices up. I will
give you an example, Po`ipu where they had the fire, those houses used to go for$25 thousand.
My friend just sold her house for$500 thousand and it is happening already on the North Shore.
So when you are talking about balancing it is hard to look somebody in the eye that is opposed to
what you might want to do or what the other side might want to do but it is just the price or
progress. So the thing is,to me,to those who don't want anything to happen don't give up your
belief but have a plan B if you don't get your way. Same with the other side, if they don't get
this as it has been presented or what it is,hopefully they have a plan B.
Chair: Just to comment on that. Those who don't want change they probably just got
theirs so they don't want anyone else to get theirs. Kilauea which I feel is unique, I was born and
raised there during the plantation days, and we accepted change, we wanted to change. And
without that change Kilauea wouldn't be the way Kilauea is now. We allowed change so they
could open up the subdivisions and make it bigger and turn Ag. Land into gentlemen farms, I am
just saying that we allowed change. And now that those who own the property around Kilauea
don't want change—now to me it is like I got mine and I don't want you to get yours and I don't
feel that is right. I believe in change and I believe that we have to do it morally and in control.
So with that being said do we have any more questions for the applicant?
Mr. Texeira: I have a question for you as a resident of Kilauea. In your opinion is life
better or worse?
Chair: All depends on how you look at it. We have lost a lot of hunting grounds, a lot of
access to the mountains and the oceans which is a bad thing to me but now the County is starting
to put their foot down and say we need access. It is a little late, we have lost all this access to the
mountains and to the ocean already and that is the only downfall, I feel, to the community has
lost is access. So with that being said, again, are there any more questions for the applicant?
Mr. Texeira: I have a question. I just have some thoughts I wanted to express. I want to
feel the sense or the pulse of the community, what does the community really want and need and
I have a hard time gauging that. I see testimony for it but I don't think it necessarily reflects the
desire of the community. And so as the applicant you have worked with the Kilauea
Neighborhood Association, you have worked with the residents,does anybody have a real sense
of what the community wants in terms of this shopping center? I certainly would like to know
because I don't know the answer to that.
Ms.Nishimitsu: We have some ladies from Kilauea, some opposed, some in favor of the
project who aren't permitted to testify but I think the character of the testimony that has come
before you show that there is a community not so much divided but with different opinions. You
have the graying population who doesn't want the inconvenience or maybe has a fear of having
to drive into Kapa`a to fill their prescriptions or to drive to Princeville to fill prescriptions or pick
up a gallon of milk that doesn't cost a fortune. So they see the convenience of I can just send
tata man over across the street to pick up the milk for me because I forgot to get it. So there is a
community benefit in that sense.
The vendors that come with the tenants that build the center will be drawn based on what
the perceived community needs are and they vary, there is a health store component,there is a
Safeway or Thymes component because there is so much more choice, there is a fitness gym
component. And what the landlord does is makes available the space for these vendors to come
in and serve the needs of the community. If those businesses fail someone else generally will
come to fill the space. So if you want the true pulse of the community I am not sure you are
going to get it from any community on this island having sat through all these Planning
Commission meetings. In one household you can't get people to agree.
Mr. Texeira: In my opinion if any community was together enough and indicated what
they wanted as a community it was Kilauea. I don't think there is any other community like
Kilauea with the Kilauea Neighborhood Association and the community its self was close knit
enough to give you a sample of what they really wanted over the years. This is the first time that
I don't see a real strong indication from the community on this project and this is such an
important project. I am just kind of surprised there is no real public input. I personally feel that
just gauging what was said so far I think most people are in favor of this shopping center, it
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
47
represents a good thing,but maybe the size of the shopping center is perhaps larger than what
they had anticipated. I don't know, that is just my sense of if I was to look at it and make a
gauge I would say it is a good project, I think it is kind of big and that is as far as I can get on
this.
Mr. Dahilig: Commissioner,not to interject but I think when we embarked on trying to
understand why this area was earmarked as commercial and again I gave you two documents that
go back all the way to 1980. We were trying to understand how did this continue to remain in
commercial even as late as 2005, the 2005 year is important because it is less than seven years
ago when this plan was actually reconfirmed. And the way that the Kilauea Town plan was put
together from then way that we looked through our records they had carets meetings with KNA,
they had all these different stakeholder meetings, and in fact we had an article that was in the file
and they had a caret that actually drew 140 participants. It reconfirmed that area as commercial.
We can cut the pie in many ways Commissioner is terms of what do we look at as the
litanous test of this is the pulse of the community and I wish we had an answer because it would
make planning a heck of a lot easier for us. But we have to look at these types of(inaudible)that
indicate to us no, the plan is not antiquated,the desire for commercial is still there, and the fact
that we are looking at something that is less than seven years ago tells us from a planning
horizon that this is still a very valid desire the town and it drew a lot of people to that caret. In
fact from what I understand from our long range planner what we can see from the files is that
the caret actually last not only one but a number of days where you had many participants
coming through and giving their input. And we could not find in our files anything that gave the
indication that they wanted to pull this particular parcel out of commercial and move it into
either residential, Ag. or park space. So we believe it is still relevant today in terms of where the
community wanted to see development up until now.
Mr. Jung:, Loma indicated that there were people unpermitted to testify. That is not the
case, there were two opportunities for people to testify, one at 9 o'clock when we take public
testimony and again the Chair allowed people to testify right before the lunch break so just to
clarify the record.
Ms. Nishimitsu: I stand corrected.
Chair: For the planner, do we have all agency comments in already?
Staff Yes.
Chair: And the Department of Water, we are good with that?
Staff: We have received comments from Public Works and Water.
Mr. Dahill : David Craddick is in the audience back there and I just want to thank him
for working with us on this because it is a bit unusual to get a free pass from David but we
certainly did. And again it is because of the element that we are looking at the housing as an
exaction, it is not something that the developers had incorporated in their project so we wanted it
for test case reasons and David was more than willing to accommodate us.
Ms. Nishimitsu: I just want you to know that the developer is getting excited about being
the pilot project for this live/work situation because some of you are as old as I am and
remember when towns, the strip development,where the proprietors worked below and lived
above. And there are still many buildings in Kapa`a Town that were operated in that fashion.
Ms. Matsumoto: I have a comment about the community. I hope that if this passes that
that center becomes a place that is very useful to people because when you talk about our ninety
seven year old gentleman friend who came and talked this morning about that it will save on gas,
it is true, if a center works you are going to get your mail, you are going to get the things you
need, your supplies. And then you won't have to be driving all over town to get all these
different things and it could lessen traffic flow ultimately as well. It has potential. I am looking
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
48
at the map of Kilauea, it has the potential for being a really nice center where people can walk
from their home to do their business, it is relatively flat.
Chair: Any more questions for the planner,the applicant? Seeing none what does this
Commission want to do? We have to read the conditions, right? We have to make a motion
first. Are we just going to read the added conditions?
Mr. Dahilig: Commissioners, as mentioned previously what the department in its
recommendation proposed nineteen conditions. Upon clarification with the Department of
Public Works condition thirteen was adjusted as well as condition number one based on
departmental desire to review the actual vertical design before the plans are approved. We have
also based on further discussion are willing to incorporate in our report an additional condition
number twenty and that condition number twenty which I understand is without objection from
the applicant would state, "Applicant shall provide parking to accommodate all its workers on
site and shall instruct all construction vehicles to refrain from parking along Kilauea Road. The
applicant shall also work with the Planning Department to develop and implement a construction
delivery plan to alleviate traffic impacts during construction of the project in the event the
applicant in good faith is unable to secure a reasonable agreement for access for construction
related traffic across the adjacent parcel." Mr. Chair that would be our recommended twenty
conditions to this particular application should it be approved by the Commission.
Chair: When you say construction delivery we are talking about anything to do with
construction, am I correct?
Mr. Dahilig: That is correct. That is how we would interpret the enforcement.
Mr. Raco: The condition as you just read it, it says"refrain not to park", so they can only
refrain when in other conditions we read before said there shall be no construction parking.
Mr. Dahilig: We are saying shall instruct all construction vehicles to refrain and the
reason we wrote it that was is because the actual no parking authority actually rests with the
County Council. So what we are trying to do is be very strong in saying you shall tell these guys
don't park there.
Mr. Raco: So why don't we put a condition and say they shall not park. In my opinion
as a Commissioner is if they are implementing construction the neighbors and the community
shouldn't be responsible for that. They should be able to designate an area where they are not
constructing and have all employees parking there and contain themselves. Now as far as the
delivering, I know that is a public road but they can certainly...I know that condition has been
there in the past.
Mr. Dahilig: You may want to have the attorney weigh in on this.
Mr. Jung: I think the intent of either serves to restrict parking along the road but the
County Council by resolution takes action on where to put no parking areas so in this case I think
the way the department is stylizing the condition is to inform the applicant that during
construction time periods or the phase of the construction project then they cannot park on the
side of the road. So to have it specifically for the construction time so they won't be able to park
pursuant to that condition. If we put a general statement that no parking along the...
Mr. Raco: I am saying construction. I am not saying when they open up; certainly they
can park wherever they want.
Mr. Jung: Then I think the department's recommendation serves that purpose of no
parking.
Mr. Raco: I don't think the language says that.
Mr. Jung: Refrain means to not do something.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
49
Mr. Raco: Why don't you just say it in plain language that no parking shall...all
construction parking shall be contained within the construction area.
Mr. Jung: It is up to you in your recommendation.
Mr. Raco: I am just asking,Mike.
Mr. Jung: If you want my opinion I think it serves the same purpose but if you want to
be more simplistic in the language that is fine.
Mr. Blake: I vote for specificity.
Mr. Dahilig: If we take the word "refrain" and put the work"not",not park,will that
work?
Mr. Blake: It is not so much we are worried about the developer it is the delivery man
who is late or early and decides he would rather park someplace else and you don't know about it
until the delivery is made, it is off-loaded, and someone says hey what are you doing, too late
already.
Mr. Dahilig: "The applicant shall provide parking to accommodate all its workers onsite
and shall instruct all construction vehicles to not park along Kilauea Road."
Mr. Raco: Chair, do you want a motion to go into discussion and accept each motion or
do you want to just handle all the motions...?
Chair: Would that be satisfactory to you?
Mr. Jung: I think if the department is making this recommendation then you guys won't
have to act on the amendments. So it would be incorporated through his report.
Chair: So we can do them all at once.
Mr. Jung: It is up to you guys.
Mr. Dahilig: Commissioners,my apologies, I didn't not catch it, there is an existing
condition twenty so this would be condition twenty one.
Chair: I do hope the developer, Matt, that you guys understand how delicate this traffic
in Kilauea is regarding construction, after the fact when you guys are done building. Traffic is a
major concern,to me, especially with the construction crew; you have a lot of dust, a lot of
equipment coming in and out. If you guys can somehow make it possible if you can work it out I
think the community would really appreciate it. You can't control each and every driver coming
through that road. When they were doing that house down in Kahili or Rock Quarry those
semi's were coming in and out and they were flying up and down that road. The developer had
no control. Well they had control but they didn't control them. So if you could somehow keep
construction crews out of Kilauea it would be great but I can't control the third parties so it is
what it is.
Ms. Matsumoto: What is the speed limit on that road?
Chair: I think it is twenty five miles an hour.
Mr. Blake: When there is a blue and white car visible.
Chair: I am sure once this construction starts if we do pass it there will be people on the
phone calling that these guys are speeding. I guarantee it. We will have a lot of police officers
out there, unofficially.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
50
Mr. Blake: The other thing I think the public should remember or maybe be reminded of
is this is a use permit also and by definition the use has to fit into the community. So if the
permitted activity is not fitting in whoever notices that or is concerned with that can file a
complaint with the Planning Department and the department will act on it. So it is like having
eyes on the project 24/7.
Chair: With that being said, you read the conditions?
Mr. Dahilig: Yes and just as a clarification, again, it is condition number twenty one that
I read orally.
Chair: Do we need to make a motion to amend the conditions?
Mr. Dahilig: That is part of our report so you wouldn't have to.
Chair: So we already had our discussion, can I get a motion or what does this
Commission want to do?
Mr. Blake: Move to the next step.
Mr. Raco: Motion to approve PDU-2012-1, Use Permit U-2012-7, Variance Permit V-
2012-5, and Class IV Zoning Permit Z-IV-2012-7.
Ms. Matsumoto: Second.
Chair: Is there any discussion?
Mr. Raco: I have one discussion amongst my Commissioners, we talked about our
neighbors and the neighbors surrounding the property and I think I talked to Lorna about this on
recess was that I had one concern which hasn't come up yet about the sound of air conditioning
units and wall pack lighting that would inherently through light probably over the wall, over the
landscaping towards the neighbors. If, with the pleasure of my fellow Commissioners, if you
guys want to entertain a condition to or I could entertain a condition to have no utilities or wall
packs or all interior lighting be shinning within the commercial property.
Chair: Works for me. I think that would be more than acceptable.
Mr. Dahilig: No utilities or wall packs...
Chair: In other words the lights have to be shinning on their property.
Mr. Raco: And the only reason I say that is if I was the neighbor in the back of their
property and usually my backyard is nice and dark and if my house and my room is towards the
back now all of a sudden when this development comes up they need security and the lighting is
on 24/7.
Ms. Matsumoto: That is true. I have also seen places in an establishment where the glass
recycle bin is right next to the person's house because it happens to be behind the...
Mr. Raco: That is what I meant by utilities, any kind of grease trap, any kind of utilities
air conditioning units.
Chair: Now that you mention it I don't know if it is in one of the conditions or not but do
you guys plan to put up a green wall? Who is responsible if the wind blows all these leaves into
you neighbor's yards? I mean seriously, that is why my concern was putting up a hollow tile
wall but as far as a green wall,my neighbor has trees with leaves blowing into my yard all the
time and I hate it. I don't have trees in my yard and the reason is I don't want to clean it up. So I
don't think the neighbors of the property would want to clean somebody else's mess up. I don't
know if it is in one of the conditions in there of a green wall or not or we should have one or we
shouldn't.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
51
Mr. Dahilijz: I would like to refer that question to the attorney to discuss the law of
nuisance.
Chair: We don't have to get technical here.
Mr. Jung: Without getting technical,technically if your property is being so called
damaged by another property such as leaves then you could potentially file a private nuisance
claim against the other landowner. I will leave it at that because it is more of a private civil
matter versus a zoning matter.
Chair: It is something to think about before you guys plant the types of trees you guys
are going to plant.
Mr. Raco: On the Safeway project we put walls between the two commercial properties.
Aside from this motion that is where I was going to head next is I would like to take the
developers point of saying yes, green walls are beautiful but really they would be putting up a
hollow tile wall.
Chair: Security for the neighbors,privacy.
Ms.Nishimitsu: I guess if you impose it as a condition the neighbors cannot blame them.
Chair: That is the reason I like hollow tile walls, for one you have privacy, you don't
have to clean up somebody else's mess, all the delinquents that hang out. Not saying that they
will be but they throw bottles over the wall,not over the wall but it's easier to throw it through
the trees than over a wall. I am just thinking as being a neighbor that I would rather have a
hollow tile wall that looks like a hollow tile wall versus the beauty of the trees that...
Mr. Raco: Put both.
Mr. Dahilig: Commissioner,just to get circle back to Commissioner Raco's suggestion,
the best language I could come up with would state, "Utilities or lighting wall packs shall not
bleed effects onto adjacent residential parcels." We are talking about noise, smell and light and
so bleed is the best word I could come up with.
Mr. Blake: I have one other caveat for the owner, if you are offered a moss rock wall be
darned sure where that moss rock comes from because they rustle rocks in Koloa, build walls in
Wailua, and there is film of people taking the rocks and off loading the rocks and nothing is done
about it.
Chair: I have heard from a bunch of neighbors that they would rather see a hollow the
wall than a green wall but it is not something I can really impose on you but it is something that
you guys should seriously think about and do it on your own, talk to the department and to the
neighbors,just to be good neighbors. With that being said are we done here?
Mr. Dahilig: Let's try this, "No utilities or lighting wall packs shall be installed adjacent
to or directed towards the adjacent abutting subdivision property lines."
Mr. Raco: Read it again.
Mr. Dahilig: "No utilities or lighting wall packs shall be installed adjacent to or directed
towards the adjacent abutting subdivision property lines."
Mr. Raco: I will motion to put that on the floor.
Chair: Any comments on that?
Mr. Texeira: Second.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
52
Chair: Any discussion, seeing none, all in favor say aye, opposed,motion carried.
On motion made by Caven Raco and seconded by Herman Texeira,to approve
amendment as read by the Director, motion carried unanimously by voice vote.
Mr. Raco: What about the walls?
Mr. Dahilig: Just for clarification,was the green wall idea the neighbor's idea or was this
your idea?
Chair: It is a good idea, it brings out the beauty but as far as practical I think the
neighbors would rather have a hollow tile wall. If I was living next to it I would demand a
hollow tile wall.
Mr. Dahilig: How high was your green wall?
Mr. Hunt: I think we had around six feet.
Chair: I would suggest if you guys don't mind working it out with the property owner
next to you guys and go by the majority because you won't please everybody. Some will want
trees, some will want a hollow tile, some won't want anything but if you guys could work it out
with your neighbors. Just go with what the majority wants.
Mr. Jung: Mike, is there a design review element to this?
Mr. Dahilig: There is.
Chair: And then you have to work it out with them.
Mr. Raco: Would the design review come before the Commission for review or that
within the department?
Mr. Dahilig: The department. We can do it either way. I think what we will do is we
will ask the applicant to get some type of written concurrence from their adjacent property
owners in terms of what they are looking for, for protection, and we will go off that.
Chair: Is that acceptable?
Mr. Dahilix I don't think we need it as a condition...
Mr. Raco: Yes we do.
Mr. Dahilijz: You want it as a condition? Okay.
Mr. Raco: Chair, if I may just for discussion, is there hours of operation as far as
construction,the timeframe?
Chair: That is something they are going to work out with the department. I made it very
clear to the department what my suggestions were as far as time to start, time to end,time for
delivery, they are going to work it out. They are going to put the community first in this
particular thing so I think I can depend on the department to...
Mr. Raco: But no weekend work.
Mr. Dahilia: If we hear something especially from this guy we will make sure—we will
let him know. The condition, Commissioner Raco, would read as an additional twenty three,
"Applicant shall work with adjacent subdivision residents to identify hollow the wall, Concrete
Masonry Unit wall heights appropriate to shield the adjacent impacts from the project."
Mr. Raco: So moved Chair.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
53
Ms. Matsumoto: Second.
Mr. Texeira: This is a condition? And you are saying that the applicant put in a CMU?
Chair: No, that they work it out with their neighbors, the majority of the neighbors. If
they want a green wall they will put up a green wall. If they want a hollow tile wall they will put
up a hollow the wall. It is up to the...if they don't want to put anything...
Mr. Texeira: So the condition is that they work it out with the community.
Chair: Yes,with the department and the neighbors. I am just going to leave it up to them
to work it out. I don't think it is fair that we impose a certain condition on them, some of the
neighbors want it, and some of them don't want it. So if that is acceptable with you we are
moving on. Any discussion on the amendment, all in favor say aye, opposed, motion carried.
On motion made by Caven Raco and seconded by Camilla Matsumoto, to add
condition No. 23,motion carried unanimously by voice vote.
Chair: Back to the main motion,we are in discussion of the main motion, any discussion,
we are going to have roll call.
On motion made by Caven Raco and seconded by Camilla Matsumoto, to approve
P.D.U-2012-1,Use Permit U-2012-7, Variance Permit V-2012-5 and Class IV Zoning
Permit Z-IV-2012-7 with 23 conditions as consented to by the applicant, motion carried
unanimously by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Raco,Blake,Katayama, Matsumoto, Texeira, Kimura -6
Noes: None -0
Absent: None -0
Not Voting: Vacant -1
Commission recessed at 4:10 p.m.
Meeting called back to order at 4:20 p.m.
Executive Session: Pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes Sections 92-4 and 92-05(a)(4)
and Kauai County Charter Section 3.07(E) the Office of the County Attorney requests an
executive session with the Planning Commission to discuss a proposed settlement of the Fifth
Circuit Civil No. 12-1-0103 Weatherwax Family 2000 Trust vs. Planning Commission of the
County of Kauai and County of Kauai regarding Special Permit SP-2011-24 and SP-2012-34
Tax Map Key 5-3-04:20, Kalihikai, Kauai = Weatherwax Family Trust and related matters.
This briefing and consultation involves the consideration of the powers duties,privileges
immunities and/or liabilities of the Planning Commission as they relate to this agenda item.
On motion made by Herman Texeira and seconded by Hartwell Blake,to go into
executive session, motion carried unanimously by voice vote.
ADJOURNMENT
Commission adjourned the meeting at 5:27 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted.
jxe-
Lani Agoot
Commission Su ort Clerk
Planning Commission Minutes
June 26,2012
54