Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-21-14 AAC Minutes(CZ)(tt) COUNTY OF KAUAI Minutes of Meeting OPEN SESSION Board/Committee : ARBORIST ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting Date July 21, 2014 Location Mo' ikeha Building — Meeting Room 2A/B Start of Meeting: 9 :43 a.m. End of Meeting: 10 : 52 a.m. Present Chair Lawrence Borgatti; Co-Chair David Lorence; Members : Dee Crowell, Kawika Smith and Sylvia Smith Also present: Deputy County Attorney Mauna Kea Trask (Left the meeting at 10 : 26 a.m.); Board & Commissions Office Staff: Support Clerk Mercedes Youn; Administrator Paula Morikami (Left the meeting at 10 : 26 a.m.) Public Members : Lorna Nishimitsu, Legal Counsel Hunt Development; Jose Bustamante, Vice-President Hunt Development; Carrie Souza Representative for the Neighborhood Association; Robin Torquati, Patricia Hanwright, Felicia Cowden, Jerry Nishek, Certified Arborist; Steve Nimz, Certified Arborist. Excused Absent SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Call To Order Chair Borgatti called the meeting to order at 9 :43 a.m. Approval of Regular Open Session Minutes of April 29, 2014. Mr. Lorence moved to approve the meeting Minutes minutes as circulated. Ms . Smith seconded the motion. Motion carried 5 : 0 AAC 2014-02 Exceptional Tree nomination submitted by the Kilauea Neighborhood Association, received on July 2, 2014. The applicant seeks to designate a single go Tree also known as Mangifera Indica L. located at the Old Dispensary Building in Kilauea, Kauai, Hawai ' i 96714, and situated on TMK: (44) 5 -2-23 :27 and (4) 5 -2-23 : 28-003 , to be considered as an exceptional tree pursuant to the Kauai County Code Section 22-5 . 3 , as amended. (Deferred on 7-21 - 14) • Tree Risk Assessment submitted by Jim Campbell, ISA Certified Arborist license # 17532 addressing one ( 1 ) Mango Tree also known as Mangiferia Indica L. located at the Old Dispensary in Kilauea. Chair Borgatti opened the floor for public testimony. Arborist Advisory Committee Regular Open Session July 21 , 2014 Page 2 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION The Committee received testimony from Carrie Souza, Kilauea Resident and Representative of the Kilauea Neighborhood Association. Ms. Souza testified that she is here today to support the designation of the Mango tree to the exceptional tree list. She stated the Mango tree is a kupuna tree and deserves the utmost respect; according to the arborist report there are only a few mature mango trees left in Kilauea today. Ms. Souza shared with the committee that this specific type of Mango tree has scientific value in which scientists have taken samples from old growth trees to help them to learn more about El Nino patterns and global weather changes. She stated this specific Mango tree has been observed to be a seasonal as well as year round habitat and a food source attractant for the native Hawaiian Hoary Bat. Ms . Souza emphasized that the Mango tree meets all of the exceptional tree requirements defined in Section 22-5 .2 of the Kauai County Code. Ms. Torquati testified that she is in favor of preserving the long and prosperous life of the Mango tree. She stated in 1982 Hurricane Iwa decimated about 60% of the mature fruit trees in Kilauea, which was tragic for families who relied on the fruit trees for their economic wellbeing and nutritional food source. She pointed out as the economic crisis deepens there will be more and more families finding themselves utilizing church pantries and food bank services to a greater extent. She noted that it would be wise to encourage the growth of the fruit trees rather than removing them. Ms. Torquati reminded the committee about the seventeen Monkey Pod trees in Koloa that were removed to make way for a shopping center, which Arborist Advisory Committee Regular Open Session July 21 , 2014 Page 3 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION resulted in a huge public outcry, but was ignored after a settlement was reached between the County of Kauai and the Knudsen Family Trust. Sadly, the shopping center was never built, which forced her to ask why is everyone so anxious to remove the history of a small town appeal by removing the trees. She stated the Hunt Companies has tried diligently to convince the Kilauea community on its intentions to provide basic services, which she felt would rob the community of its history, food source, and gathering place if they remove the Mango tree. She questions whether the Kilauea center will ever be built, and the safety of the children due to the increase in traffic in the area. She urged the committee to approve the nomination application and designate the Mango tree as an exceptional tree. Ms. Patricia Hanwright began by thanking Carrie Souza for showing great courage in bringing the nomination forward. She stated as an elder living in the community it is part of her responsibility to support the nomination because trees by nature are very special. She stated that the Mango tree continues to bear fruit and is accessible to the public. She expressed her concerns about the removal of the Mango tree because it will forever change the nature of Kilauea, although she believes that change is inevitable; she is not opposed to the development, but it must be done in a conscientious way, and by trading the Mango tree for a parking lot is unworthy. Ms. Cowden stated she understands both sides, and she acknowledges the frustration and concerns; however, she likes to look at things as a win/win situation and even spoke to Matt Hunt to see if he would consider putting the parking lot in the back of the building instead of the front where kids like to play. Arborist Advisory Committee Regular Open Session July 21 , 2014 Page 4 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION In regard to the layout of the site plan she believes that the Mango tree can be preserved by placing a roundabout around the tree, which she feels would not be too much of an adaptation and will not stop the development. She stated that she is in favor of the nomination and applauds the developer for not removing the other existing trees, which to her shows that the developer has a good heart for wanting to keep the community healthy. Attorney Lorna Nishimitsu, representing the Hunt Companies/Kilauea Ventures LLC, stated this development is in the process of the construction drawing reviewing stage. In reference to a tree assessment dated June 16, 2014, from Certified Arborist Jim Campbell to Carrie Souza describing the condition of the tree, nowhere in the report does it reflect any type of conclusion or data to state that the tree is exceptional as defined in Section 22-5 .2 in the County Ordinance. She stated Certified Arborist Steve Nimz, in a report to Jose Bustamante of Kilauea Ventures, LLC, opined that the Mango tree does not meet the qualifications that warrant it to be designated as exceptional. She stated it would be sufficient for the committee and council to recommend preserving the tree to the extent that the years of planning and permitting should be undone. In reference to a report that was submitted by Certified Arborist Jerry Nishek dated July 10, 2014, he concluded that the tree ' s age, rarity and size does not support it being preserved to the extent that the Kilauea Ventures, LLC plans be undone for the purpose of preserving the tree. Attorney Nishimitsu shared with the committee that this is a second attempt from the Kilauea Neighborhood Association to designate the Mango tree as exceptional. She noted that KNA' s first attempt was in June 2013 but for reasons unknown to them the application was withdrawn. Arborist Advisory Committee Regular Open Session July 21 , 2014 Page 5 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Attorney Nishimitsu stated the developers for the Kilauea Lighthouse Village project have been involved with the planning and review process since 2010 and 2011 . She stated the Hunt Companies held numerous meetings with the Kilauea community regarding the layout, including the types of use the development proposes, but nothing was said about preserving the Mango tree. She stated during the public hearing for the land use permit no one from the public, including members from the Kilauea Neighborhood Association who were present, came forward to testify about preserving the Mango tree, which brings the question why now. Attorney Nishimitsu expressed her concerns about the timing of the nomination since the plans have already been approved and is at the point of completing the design and review process with the various County and State agencies . She stated thousands of dollars have been expended to obtain the necessary permits, and although the Mango tree is old it is not considered rare because there are a lot of other mango trees from the species everywhere. In regard to the Hawaiian Hoary Bat using the Mango tree as its main food source, according to two reports that were submitted by Mr. Nishek and Mr. Nimz, there are other fruit trees in the area the bat will use as a food source. Attorney Nishimitsu stated Kilauea is already a developed area and it is not in a distant location or sheltered from development; in fact, Kilauea is in the center of a heavily developed area and many people moved there after the Kilauea Plantation closed. She stated for these reasons, and based on the evidence, she would ask that the committee deny the applicant' s request to designate the Mango tree as exceptional. Arborist Advisory Committee Regular Open Session July 21 , 2014 Page 6 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Mr. Smith asked how many trees are located in the development area. Mr. Jose Bustamante, Vice President of the Kilauea Ventures, LLC/ Hunt Companies stated forty-six (46) trees and palms were assessed on the project site in which four (4) invasive tree species are in conflict with the building footprint and retention pond and have to be removed. He noted that more information about the project can be found on their website www.kilauealighthousevilia eg com . The site features a landscape plan and removal plan, which shows the exact number of trees and those that will be removed. Attorney Nishimitsu introduced Certified Arborist Steve Nimz to the committee. She noted that Mr. Nimz conducted a site inspection on July 17, 2013 , to assess and address the trees and palms impacted by the development. Ms. Smith asked if there were forty-six (46) trees existing on the property. Attorney Nishimitsu stated out of the forty-six (46) trees only one coconut palm has been removed. In reference to the subject Mango tree known as Common Mango Tree #21 , the tree is in conflict with the roadway and parking stalls and has been recommended for removal. She stated to preserve the tree there would be numerous steps required to keep it in place. Attorney Nishimitsu stated the property is owned by Hunt Companies and was zoned for development a long time ago; to tell the landowner that they cannot develop after the plans were approved by the Planning Commission may be viewed as a taking by the landowner. She noted the Kilauea Lighthouse Village project is an incredible economic commitment on the part of the developer. Arborist Advisory Committee Regular Open Session July 21 , 2014 Page 7 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Deputy Planning Director Dee Crowell asked if the developer has tried to re-lay out the parking area and driveway to see what type of impact it would have. Mr. Bustamante replied yes, and explained they have tried to work around the Mango tree, but because of the parking requirements in which the Planning Department wanted 220 parking stalls they would lose about nine parking stalls, which would have prevented the development from being approved. Deputy County Attorney Mauna Kea Trask announced due to a staff shortage he would have to leave to attend another meeting at 10 : 30 a.m. He asked if the committee had questions that they would like for him to address before he leaves to which the committee replied not at this time. Mr. Steve Nimz stated after he inspected the Mango tree there is no question in his mind that the tree is healthy; however, it would require a thirty-foot diameter protection zone around the tree if the tree were to be preserved. He shared with the committee as a member of the exceptional tree committee on Oahu for thirty-five years he has gone through several hearings, and through his experience the Mango tree in question would not be deemed exceptional. He stated he understands both sides, and acknowledges the emotional part; however, the committee must look at what the requirements are relative to the exceptional tree assessment. He stated to nominate a tree just to stop development can open a whole can of worms; if the tree can stand on its own and be deemed exceptional then he supports the nomination; however, the issue should have been addressed at the beginning of the process. Deputy Planning Director Crowell asked him to explain the thirty-foot protection zone. Mr. Nimz explained in order to preserve the Mango tree it would require a 15 foot radius and a thirty foot protection zone around the tree. He stated if the efforts to preserve the tree conflicts with County requirements then the tree, in his opinion, does not Arborist Advisory Committee Regular Open Session July 21 , 2014 Page 8 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION fit the criteria to be deemed as an exceptional tree. Chair Borgatti asked if anyone who did not provide testimony would like to now. Ms. Souza asked if she could provide additional testimony to which Chair Borgatti replied he would allow an additional three minutes for anyone who wishes to speak. Ms. Souza stated the Mango tree is the only tree being threatened out of the dozen other trees that were planted in the old plantation days . She stated the other CPR partner adjacent to the development has chosen to preserve all of his trees, and has even offered to work with the Hunt Companies to create the extra space. She stated the reason the issue was not addressed earlier was because of nepotism within the KNA board where some members worked for the Hunt Companies. She stated the two arborists she consulted with were paid off by the Hunt Companies, which is why it took her a long time to find another arborist who had integrity and who could not be threatened. Mr. Bustamante clarified for the record that the Hunt Companies did not pay off anyone for this project, and he was not and is not aware of any inside deals involving the Hunt Companies with anyone on the KNA board. Mr. Nimz stated he has been in the tree business for forty-five years and his job is to look at different types of trees to see whether it meets the criteria to be deemed as an exceptional tree. He stated although he has made recommendations on how to preserve the Mango tree he stands by the facts in his assessment, and that the tree is not rare or exceptional. Mr. Jerry Nishek stated as a person in the tree business he does not believe Arborist Advisory Committee Regular Open Session July 21 , 2014 Page 9 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION in cutting down trees unless it is absolutely necessary. He stated after he did the inspection of the subject Mango tree, in his opinion, the tree does not meet the criteria as stated in the ordinance as an exceptional tree. He stated he did some research, but could not find any historical evidence connected to the tree. He noted that he agrees with the majority that the tree is healthy, but it does not meet the criteria of an exceptional tree . Ms. Patricia Hanwright asked if she could get information on the qualifications of an exceptional tree, and whether it is necessary to meet all requirements, or just a few. Chair Borgatti read Section 22-5 .2 of the County Code defining each of the criteria needed to have a tree recommended as an exceptional tree. Ms . Hanwright stated she cannot see how the committee can contest that the Mango tree does not qualify because it meets all of the requirements in the ordinance. She mentioned not one of them who testified in support of the nomination has said that they are opposed to the development. Ms. Torquati stated as a planter she knows how long it takes for a tree to grow. She noted that the Mango tree is about 76 to 100 years old according to Jim Campbell' s report, which is one of the exceptional tree requirements . She stated it behooves her to think that anyone could replace a 100 year old tree; it' s irreplaceable, which is why they want to move forward to honor the tree. She stated there is a decent chance that the Kilauea Lighthouse Village will not be built in the end, which is why she does not understand why the tree has to be removed. She suggested that the developer wait it out, and although she is not a professional certified arborist it seems to her that the Mango tree qualifies as an exceptional tree. Chair Borgatti asked if the members had more comments. Mr. Lorence Arborist Advisory Committee Regular Open Session July 21 , 2014 Page 10 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION noted that an assessment was submitted by Maureen Murphy, asking if it would be a good idea to read the assessment. Chair Borgatti noted that the report from Ms. Murphy of the Outdoor Circle basically concurs with Mr. Nishek' s and Mr. Nimz ' s assessment, that although the Mango tree is healthy it is not exceptional in size, age, rarity, and historical significance. Ms. Souza noted that although Ms. Murphy is affiliated with the Hunt Companies it is not the same information she gave when she came to look at the tree. She noted that her purpose is not to shut down the development but to enhance it. Ms. Smith noted that Ms. Murphy does agree with everyone that the tree is healthy; however, it is not an exceptional tree candidate. Staff advised Chair Borgatti to refrain from having back and forth dialogue with members of the public while the committee is discussing the matter. Chair Borgatti announced public testimony is now closed. At 10 : 39 a.m. Chair Borgatti called for a five (5) minute recess . The meeting reconvened at 10 :44 a.m. Chair Borgatti noted that if the public wants a copy of Maureen Murphy' s report to go the Office of Boards and Commission to request a copy. He also noted that the Arborist Committee is an advisory body, and the final decision is up to the Council to determine whether or not the Mango tree should be designated as an exceptional tree. Chair Borgatti reminded everyone in the room that public testimony portion of the meeting is closed and he will now call for a motion for the purpose of deliberation. Mr. Smith moved to approve the application to designate a single Mango tree situated on TMK Arborist Advisory Committee Regular Open Session July 21 , 2014 Page 11 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION (4) 5 -2-23 -27 and (4) 5 -2-23 :28, as an exceptional tree. Ms . Smith seconded the motion. Discussion Mr. Smith stated he would like to do more research before the committee makes a decision to recommend to Council to designate the Mango tree as an exceptional tree. He stated although he appreciates all of the information that was provided to the committee including the written testimonies he would like to do more research. Mr. Lorence stated as an advisory committee it ' s their duty to review the available evidence at hand. He noted that he had read all three assessments, two of which agree that the Mango tree does not meet the criteria to be designated as an exceptional tree. He noted he would also like to do more research before making a final decision. Deputy Planning Director Crowell stated if he had to vote today he would vote against the nomination. He voiced his concerns that he is against anyone nominating a tree to the exceptional tree list without the approval of the owner. He noted where he comes from there are three mango trees bigger than the subject Mango tree and he does not feel that the Mango tree is exceptional. Ms. Smith stated she tends to agree because the committee cannot save every tree; besides, she does not believe the subject tree fits the criteria as an exceptional tree. Deputy Planning Director Crowell suggested that the Ms . Smith withdraw Ms. Smith withdrew her second; Mr. Smith her second. withdrew the original. Arborist Advisory Committee Regular Open Session July 21 , 2014 Page 12 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Chair Borgatti called for a motion to defer the matter for continued Deputy Planning Director Crowell moved to discussion at the next meeting. defer the matter for continued discussion at the next meeting. Ms . Smith seconded the motion Discussion Deputy Planning Director Crowell stated even though he does not think the tree is exceptional at least there will be a good faith attempt to try to save the tree because it would add a lot of character to the center. He stated he would also like to see how it would impact the development by preserving the tree. Mr. Smith asked if the committee decides not to place the tree on the exceptional tree list can the committee still make a recommendation to Council to keep the tree. Chair Borgatti stated the committee can only make a recommendation to designate the tree as exceptional or not. Motion carried 5 : 0 Announcements There were no announcements . Adjournment At 10 : 52 a.m. Chair Borgatti declared the meeting adjourned. Submitted by: Reviewed and Approved by: Mercedes Youn, Staff Support Clerk Lawrence Borgatti, Chair O Approved as circulated on August 4, 2014. O Approved as amended. See minutes of meeting.