Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutnov72013 KAUAI COUN`IYMSTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEW COMMISSION Lihue Civic Center, Moikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A/2B MINUIES A regular meeting of the Kauai County Historic Preservation Commission q<HPRC) was held on November 7 , 2013 in the Lihue Civic Center, Moilceha Building, Meeting Room 2A/2B. The following Commissioners were present: Danita Aiu, Chairperson, Stephen Long, Vice Chairperson, Patsy Sheehan, Pat Griffin, Jane Gray, Althea Arinaga, and Anne Schneider The following Commissioner{s} were absent: Kuuleialoha Santos The following staff members were present : Planning Department — Michael Dahilig, Myles Hironaka, Shanlee Jimenez, Kaaina Hull; Office of Boards and Commissions — Cherisse Zaima, Deputy County Attorney Ian Jung CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 3 : 00 p .m. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA Chair Aiu requested that Item C. 2 be moved up on the agenda to come before Communications Pat Sheehan moved to approve the agenda as amended, seconded by Pat Griffin APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES The Minutes of the September S , 2013 meeting were approved as circulated. Anne Schneider moved for approval of the minutes, seconded by Pat Griffin. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND GENERAL BUSINESS MATTERS There were no announcements or general business matters . I November 7> 2013 K.H .P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 2 UNFINISHED BUSINESS Certified Local Government (CL.G) Status Director Michael Dahilig and Planner Ka' aina Hull provided a presentation to update the Commission on the Department' s CLG Status . (On file) Mr. Dahilig explained what the Department is doing to inventory and document Kaua`i's historic assets around the island, and ways they can promote historic preservation through the use permit or building construction process by making changes to the Code if necessary. He and Mr. Hull have discussed potential ways to encourage laird owners to renew old buildings; to convert the use to meet modern demands, yet still maintain the form of the structure to ensure the contextual elements of the town will remain. Mr. Dahilig circulated a draft ordinance that outlines how they hope to implement this. (On file) Mr. Hull stated the Department is seeking the Commission' s input on the draft ordinance presented . He noted that town core revitalization is the main goal of this initiative, explaining how they hope to accomplish that, but still preserve the historic character of the town. Ms. Schneider asked if the Department has done a design workshop to show people what they have in mind, noting that County parking needs to be provided for these town core businesses. Ms . Aiu stated that this is the first time the Commission is hearing about this initiative, and hopes that there will be a Committee of stakeholders to review and discuss the draft ordinance . She referenced the Main Street project she worked on in Waimea and Hanapepe. Ms . Schneider noted she worked on something similar on the mainland where they drew up the entire town to show people what it would look like, which she feels would be a big help. Ms . Aiu noted there was an ordinance deeming Kapa` a Town a historic district, but she is unsure what happened with that. She asked if the Department had looked at that to which Mr. Hull replied yes , noting this is not totally new to Kauai; there are already two similar ordinances in existence. Ms . Aiu asked what the Department would consider "little towns" , suggesting Kapa` a, Hanalei, Waimea, Hanapepe, Lihu` e, and Koloa. Mr. Hull added some of Kilauea, and a few areas in Puhi, Kalaheo, and Po`ipu. Mr. Dahilig provided more explanation on this initiative. Ms . Sheehan agreed that this is a lot of information, and she hopes the Commission will have a chance to provide input on the draft ordinance, stating that each town has its own commercial core that sets it apart from another . She noted that Hanalei and Princeville are November 7, 2033 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 3 very green and may not fit into the proposed ordinance ; having one bill that works for everyone's town core will make every one look the same . She noted that each town is different and unique, and that individuality needs to be maintained. Mr. Hull replied that there is a section of the ordinance that specifically addresses concerns that were brought up by a case in Hanalei, which increases buffers, allowing buildings to be moved back from street frontage to allow for landscaping or community space, but restricting parking stalls in that buffer zone . Ms. Griffin stated that she serves on the Built Environment Committee, noting that this issue has come up several times . She also mentioned that she sat on the Citizen Advisory Committee of the Lihu`e Town Core Plan, which much of this was generated from. She expressed her concern on the lack of greenery in Lihu` e Town, noting its importance, and commented on the pocket parks that have been developed, and have transformed downtown Honolulu. Her main concern which is both historic, and smart growth, is that the Department has not talked to the State , noting the State' s plans to turn the Guy Rothwell police station, built in the mid 50' s, into a parking garage; that is the center ofLihu` e. She further noted that the trees next to the old courthouse as well as the trees fronting the Department of Health, and the tree at Umi and Hardy streets have been cut down; she argues that those were historic trees and there seems to be no plan to replace them. Deputy County Attorney Jung stated that there is a tree ordinance, and suggested if there are any trees she would like to identify, she can bring it up to the Arborist Advisory Committee . Ms. Griffin stated that she is part of the Lihu` e Business Association, and they have been working on identifying trees, but the point still stands that this town core is full of government buildings that are outside of the ordinance ; how is the Department bringing the State building into the fold. Mr. Dahilig replied that if the State wants to build anything, they do need to come to the Planning Department for a permit, which gives the Department that discretionary ability. He further noted that the Town Core Plan has certain design standards that are already implemented into law. Ms. Griffin stated that it was her understanding that the State was not required to obtain County permits, and that it was done out of courtesy to which Mr. Dahilig replied no. In response to Ms . Gfiffin' s question Mr. Hull explained that the government overlay within the Lihu` e Town Core is considered a special treatment public district, which means that anytime a three dimensional alteration is proposed, it requires Planning Commission review, and the issuance of a discretionary permit. Mr. Long commented on the park fronting the Historic County building, noting that he feels it is a lovely town square, yet nobody was there when he recently drove by. He suggested that the County encourage and develop assets they already have in the area, and provide more November 7, 2013 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 4 parking. He shared some parking solutions based on what he has seen in Houston, Chicago, and at Olympic Cafe in Kapa` a. Mr. Long further commented that because of the differences in each of the towns, the Department should look at malting it more specific rather than a blanket ordinance . Mr. Dahilig noted that one of the predominant concerns is that if they continue to promote the ability to develop land as is allowed in the current code, their historic form will essentially be a sea of asphalt and parl6ng lots; a situation they are trying to prevent by establishing this ordinance; elements of flexibility can be built into this ordinance. In response to Ms. Sheehan' s question, Mr. Dahilig explained the process of working on this proposed ordinance, which will include a public hearing portion, as well as additional meetings if the Commission so desires . Ms . Aiu stated the Commission would like to have a workshop meeting to obtain more information, and strongly feels that the Department should meet with stakeholders in other communities as their feedback will specifically relate to their respective towns. Ms. Gray expressed her concern about the traffic along Rice Street, noting that the County has taken away their street-side parking which has affected their business. She also commented that she is concerned for the safety of pedestrians as many people speed through town, and do not seem to abide by the speed limit. Mr. Hull noted that a component of the ordinance will address speed limits through town. Mr . Dahilig added that the Department has been looking at the traffic through town, and ways to incorporate the street as an actual destination as opposed to just a pass-through roadway to encourage pedestrian traffic in the area. This would potentially include narrowing the lanes, creating bike lanes, adding more greenery, and limiting the gross vehicular weight traffic. Ms. Arinaga asked whether the input from the community will impact the Department' s plans to which Mr. Dahilig replied that the public hearing is specifically for the purpose of obtaining input, noting that they are making a great effort to engage those groups that will be affected by this legislation; there will be ample time to get feedback from stakeholders and members of the public. Ms. Schneider suggested that the Department present design drawings for each town, which will help visualize the potential infill. Ms. Aiu commented that they must be diligent in enforcement as she has seen buildings in special districts that have not followed through with what is written in an ordinance. Mr. Dahilig replied that there is a civil fine ordinance that gives the Department the opportunity to use monetary means to compel action in situations where the code is not being adhered to . November 7, 2013 K..H.P.KC, Meeting Minutes Page 5 November 7, 2013 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page f i COMMUNICATIONS Letter ( 1017/ 13 ) from Laurel Loo Shiramizu Loo & Nakamura on behalf of Kikiaola Land Company, Ltd. regarding the Chinese Cemetery Access, Kikiaola, Kauai TMK: (4) 1 -2-013-041 Laurel Loo, on behalf of Kikiaola Land Company, along with Mike Faye, provided an overview of the proposed development as explained in their letter to the Commission. (On tile) Ms. Loo noted that one of the conditions of the subdivision was that the traditional access to the Chinese cemetery be closed off; however, they have support from the community as well as other entities to keep the traditional access open. Kikiaola Land Company is asking for the Commission' s support to allow them to go back before the Planning Subdivision Committee for reconsideration, allowing the traditional access to be maintained; residential access to the subdivision will be a separate access . Ms. Aiu asked for clarification that there is currently a traditional road to the cemetery, and that was going to be closed, and a new road created. The applicant is now asking the Commission to support their efforts to keep the traditional road to which Ms. Loo replied correct, for the traditional users of that cemetery. In response to Ms . Aiu, Mr. Faye provided historical background of the Chinese cemetery, and its location relative to their property line. Because . the cemetery falls on Mdaola' s private property, there was a concern raised by the County on who would maintain it; Kikiaola Land Company has volunteered to maintain the cemetery in perpetuity. Mr. Faye noted that the cemetery land can only be used as a burial site; no houses can be built on it. The current designation states one access; however, with the type of large mansions expected to be built on these lots, it was undesirable to local families to have to cross through the properties of these mega-estates to get to the cemetery. The traditional access is within the first 50 feet of the property, right along the edge . He would like to ask the Commission for a letter of support to continue the use of that access. Ms. Sheehan asked if there is still room for burials in the cemetery, and are people continuing to be buried there to which Mr. Faye replied the most recent burial was about eight to ten years ago; however, there is room for more. Ms . Loo distributed an aerial map of the property to assist the Commission. Ms. Schneider asked if the easements will be recorded with the Bureau of Conveyances to which Mr. Faye replied yes, and explained the process by which that would occur. In response to Ms. Schneider' s concern, Mr. Faye ensured that there is no way anything can be built on the cemetery property. November 7, 2013 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 7 In response to the Commission' s questions, Mr. Faye clarified that all the letters they received were in support of keeping the traditional access. Mr. Jung explained the process that would follow should the Commission decide to provide a letter of support, and offered suggested language to be included . On the motion by Althea Arinaga and seconded by Patsy Sheehan to accept the language as stated, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Class IVZoning Permit Z-N-2013- 17 Project Development Use Permit PDU-2013 - 15 , and Use Permit U-2013 - 14 to develop a research complex facilitating research in various dormitory buildings various accessory structures and provision for off-street parking, Tax Map Key: 5 2 013 . 001 Kilauea Kauai Hawaii = The Resonance Project Foundation . Project Manager Gregory Robison and Land Manager Tammy Davis of the Resonance Project were present. Mr. Robison stated they closely reviewed the Commission' s comments, noting the great importance they place on stewardship and management of this landmark. Ms. Davis stated that she reviewed documents at the Historical Society on the sugar plantation, including construction methods, and continues to share what information she has gathered with those who visit. Though they are new to the community they have been meeting people who have ties to the property and its history, inviting them to take a tour of the property. Mr. Robison mentioned that another research project they are undertaking is getting into National Park Service standards and becoming a steward of a historical property. Mr. Robison mentioned the proposal made about a year and a half ago for the re- roofing of the Plantation Manager' s house, noting that had been completed. He explained that the project' s founder and director chose the blue color for the roof, and commented that he learned a lot about the building during the re-roofing process and seeing what was underneath. Mr. Long asked what was underneath, and whether or not it was blue to which Mr. Robison replied it was a quilt of many different substrates with many roofs underneath some of which were hot mopped, made of generally asphaltic materials. The roof colors they uncovered were mostly dark grays and blacks. Mr. Robison stated that as Property Manager, he has made it his kuleana to be the on- site representative to communicate the importance of this asset. They have commissioned an as-built architectural study and documentation of the Plantation Manager' s house as there were no existing plans for the house when it was purchased. A slideshow on the revisions made to the project plan based on the Commission' s specific concerns was presented. (On file) November 7, 2013 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 8 Mr. Robison addressed the Commission' s question on the significance of the dome structure. which mirrors the Foundation' s logo, explaining its relation to the organization' s study of unified field theory, which is based on geometry. The dome will be used for gatherings, lectures, or group class activities . Ms. Schneider asked how the dome relates to the historic building to which Ms . Davis explained that Naseem, the research director, has resolved some Einstein field equations using geometry, which is the basic foundation of his theories. The educational programs will focus on understanding the fundamental forces of nature, and everything in the material world using geometry. Mr. Robison explained that the lawn from the house slopes downward, with the lower elevation being about 20 feet below the top of the slope. The dome would be placed on the lower part of the slope . The dome itself is 25 feet with a raised platform of three to five feet; the visible area of the dome will be no snore than 10 feet above the top of the slope where the house is . Ms. Schneider asked to clarify whether the dome would be white to which Ms. Davis replied yes, and pointed out the illustration of the dome on the property to show how the landscaping hides the dome from view; the dome could be screened with landscaping. . Ms. Sheehan asked if it would be used at night, and if it would have electricity and lighting to which Mr. Robison replied that there is currently an event permit on the site that allows gatherings of up to 100 people per gathering per month, or up to 50 people at two gatherings per month. It would have electricity, and will have a projector unit and screen that would not be visible from the outside. In response to Ms . Sheehan' s question, Mr. Robison stated there will be no bathroom facilities planned; there are existing bathroom facilities, and more are proposed to be constructed on the property to serve that need. In reference to the previously proposed underground research facility, one residential housing pod, and temporary office facilities that are now being removed, Mr. Long asked if they were being removed from the program, or just incorporated into a different building on the plan. Mr. Robison replied that the research and science , and administrative office facilities will be combined and incorporated into the existing carriage house, which they are proposing to be expanded to include a second story. Ms. Davis added that with the landscape screening, you can't see the current building from any viewpoint of the house, and feels that it will remain hidden even with the second story added . Mr. Robison stated that the carriage house is considered the main part of the development; the dome is secondary, part of Phase H of the project, and will not be done until the following year. The new building will be approximately 5 ,000 square feet, and includes a basement, which will serve as both an underground hurricane shelter as well as a research November 7. 2013 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 9 area. They are looking at FEMA guidelines to try to obtain a grant to create a community hurricane shelter under government guidelines . Ms. Schneider asked how big it would be and how many people it would shelter to which Mr. Robison replied that it would be 1 ,278 square feet, and would shelter a lot of people. Ms. Schneider noted that 1 ,200 square feet is the size of a small house to which Ms. Robison replied they will be working with FEMA to determine capacity. Mr. Robison explained the process in which they refurbished the shade house using all reclaimed wood and historical details such as antique barn hardware and period light fixtures made in the same decade that the shade house was built. A septic system was installed, which is not tied into anything, and they are proposing to install a couple of single stall restrooms there to complete it as a dwelling. Ms. Schneider asked if the septic system is sized for their proposed 100 person events to which Mr. Robison replied the septic system is maxed at a 5 -bedroom system, even though the unit only has two or three bedrooms. Mr. Robison commented that during the installation of the septic system, they came across an old trash dump , and documented those findings. Upon hiring an archaeologist, they found that the dump pre-dated the house by 50 years; bottles found at the site are from the 1800' s, which included Lea & Perrin' s Worcestershire sauce, Clorox bleach, and Pond' s facial cream. A formal archaeological study has been completed and provided to the State Historic Preservation Division. In reference to the containers on site, Mr. Robison explained they are currently being used as storage, but some of them will be used for the underground shelter, reinforced with concrete and covered with earth. There is an existing container on site , but as noted in the photo provided, the trees surrounding it hide it from view; they are proposing to add an additional above-ground container right next to it. The containers will be painted, insulated, and modified to blend in with the foliage; they cannot be seen from the house . Mr. Long commented that in the photo provided, you can see the container from the house to which Mr. Robison replied they could add strategic landscaping to hide it. Mr. Long further commented that all this money was spent on architectural detailing, yet they are set on using containers for storage. He asked why not construct storage space to which. Mr. Robison explained some of the pros of using containers are : they are secure, weather-proof, economical, and its unitized nature can be picked up and moved. The scientific aspects of the containers , which must be made of steel, have a metal skin that is required to prevent outside electro-magnetic influences, or radio waves from infiltrating sensitive electronic experiments; the steel containers will shield the hyper-sensitive equipment from those elements . Ms. Gray asked if the containers will be air-conditioned as they will get very hot to which Mr. Robison replied insulation and air-conditioning will be added to the containers . Also, the containers will always be in the shade . There are some containers in the rear yard, which are used for storage of tools , and are completely screened from view; the other two containers November 7, 2013 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 10 will be underground. Mr. Long asked how the underground containers will be accessed to which Mr. Robison explained there will be a staircase and an elevator leading down to the container, and pointed out the location of the staircase and elevator shaft. Ms. Schneider asked what the water table is in that area to which Mr. Robison stated they have done test holes down to eight feet and have not encountered any ground water; testing took place during the winter. There is a well on the property that is 300 — 400 feet down and is completely dry. To address the Commission's comments on the construction of garden sheds, Mr.. Robison noted them in the drawings and explained they are being constructed in a way that does not require permits; the sheds are less than 200 feet, and not used as dwellings. They are using Hawaiian and reclaimed materials, and building in a traditional style . Ms. Aiu noted that the Commission had discussed taping a trip out to the site, noting it would help the Commission visually understand the plans . She asked if the applicants would mind if they did a site visit possibly before the next meeting. Mr. Robison stated he would be honored to have the Commission over for a tour; however, he noted that they are scheduled for the Planning Commission on November 12. Ms. A.iu expressed her reservations on the dome, and Ms. Gray asked if the dome would be lit up at night, and will the community be able to see the rays of light. Mr. Robison replied absolutely not . Ms . Davis added that there are very tall trees of bamboo and vegetation surrounding the area. Ms. Gray asked if there will be sound coming from the dome to which Mr . Robison replied not emanating outside, further noting he would be okay with including a condition that states no light will emanate from the dome. Mr. Jung stated for clarification that when the Planning Commission deals with projects in the North Shore planning district, there are conditions imposed that require downward shielded lights to avoid potential impact to native wildlife. Mr. Robison commented there is not any residence within 1 ,000 feet of the dome site . What little noise generated from a gathering would not be heard beyond the boundaries of the land . Ms. Annaga expressed her hesitancy about the dome, noting she has many questions about it, and there does not seem to be a direct plan for it yet. Mr. Robison stated the dome dimensions, noting that a drawing is included in the plan submittal packet. He explained it would be used for yoga, lectures, etc. Ms . Davis explained the past uses for the dome at their previous site included staff meetings, discussions, lectures, demonstrations , presentations, etc. Ms . Schneider commented that she would prefer to see something more sympathetic to the house to which Ms . Davis replied that their organization is excited about preserving and respecting the history of the land. Ms. Davis stated she is in tune with Hawaiian agriculture and will be bringing in traditional crops such as sugar cane, pineapple, and bread fruit. She also November 7, 2013 K.H.P.R.C, Meeting Minutes Page 11 noted that they recognize the historical significance to the community, and that their organization represents the future, how to use energy in a way that is beneficial to all beings; they are bringing the best of the old, and moving forward with what is new. Mr. Robison commented that the nature of the geodesic dome structures is not necessarily a long-term structure; it' s essentially a high-end tent. It will not be there forever, and is easily dismantled . Ms. Griffin stated the issue of the dome from a historic preservation standpoint is how it affects the landscaping, and history of the site as the house sits in a larger historical place . She noted that the sweeping lawn that descends from the house all the way down is a really important aspect of the historical context. She questioned the placement of the dome to an area less intrusive to the placement of the position of the house, which takes advantage of the lawn expanse that says a lot about how plantation managers viewed themselves. Due to time constraints, the current item was postponed. The current Unfinished Business item resumed immediately following New Business . NEW :BUSINESS Letter 9 / 18 / 13 from Michael Hunnemann KAIHawai'i Inc. requesting to present pl aps for upgrades on Opaekaa Bridge Kapahi Bridge and Puuopae Bridge on behalf of the Department of Public Works County of Kauai. Mike Hunnemann of KAI Hawaii and Tonia Moy of Fung & Associates presented a Powerpoint slideshow on the bridge plans . (On file) Ms . Griffin asked for clarification on the wall proposed to be constructed on the Puuopae Bridge, noting that it appears to be translucent in the plans . Mr. Hunnemann explained the purpose of the wall would be to disguise the length of the extended steel girder at the end of the bridge. Part of the wall will be buried . Mr. Long noted that there is a certain beauty to the industrial design of seeing a girder, and asked that they look at whether it is required to build that wall, and determine if it is really a visual mitigation, or just more concrete . Mr. Hunnemann stated they felt adding the concrete would retain the appearance of the bridge length. On the motion by Anne Schneider and seconded by Althea Armaga to accept no adverse effects of the bridge plans, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote. UNFINISHED BUSINESS (Cunt.} Class W Zoning Permit Z-IV-2013 - 17 Project Development Use Permit PDU-2013 - 15 November 7, 2613 K.H,P,R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 12 and Use Permit U-2013 -14 to develop a research complex facilitating research in various dormitory buildings various accessory structuresi and provision for off-street parking, Tax Map Key: 5 -2-013 : 00 1 , Mauea Kauai Hawaii = The Resonance Project Foundation , Ms . Aiu summarized that the Commission likes what the applicant has done so far, but they are still uneasy about the dome structure, and are hoping to minimize the impacts. 1 Ms. Sheehan asked for clarification on Building W to which Mr. Robison explained that Building W is a house that is proposed to be built in the future . He provided a floor plan, and explained it is a ten bedroom residential dwelling that will be used as a dormitory, which will be located hundreds of feet away from the existing structures. Ms. Davis added they are currently renting three different properties, and the purpose of the dormitory is to enable them to have scientists on-site in the same area. Ms. Sheehan asked if it is for employees or visitors to which Mr. Robison replied it is for collaborative scientific personnel . They currently host a number of scientific personnel with advanced degrees, noting that the biggest concept of this project is to have a collaborative research park environment where all the needs are met. In response to Ms. Sheehan, Mr. Robison stated this development would be part of Phase II. Ms . Sheehan asked what the main house will be used for to which Mr. Robison replied it is being used as a residence that will always be occupied with rotating staff. Ms. Sheehan stated that the other buildings are situated away from the house, and noted that the parking area seems to be in the middle of nowhere , which may be problematic if it is raining. She questioned the purpose of having the one parking area in its current location as opposed to small parking areas near the other buildings. Ms. Davis stated they do not like to have a lot of cars near the front of the house, or the other buildings. They have provided visiting staff with bicycles and electric golf carts, which ties into their goal of decreasing fossil. fuels . Ms. Sheehan commented that she would like to see in the plans a way to screen the parking lot from view. Mr. Robison provided an aerial view of the entire property, pointing out the locations of the various buildings and structures in the proposed plan. He noted the parking lot will not be paved, but they will cover it with permeable gravel or bricks . Mr. Robison addressed Ms . Griffin's previous question on whether they had considered other sites for the dome . He noted its particular location was chosen because of the difference in elevation and the partial screening the existing mature greenery would provide; additional fast growing greenery will be planted . Mr. Long pointed out an area on the aerial photo, asking for clarification that it would no longer be lawn, but an orchard to which Ms . Davis replied yes, and further explained the location. Ms. Griffin stated that she is sure there are strong reasons and considerations for the dome' s dimensions, and asked for clarification on the height of the platform . Mr. Robison explained the purpose of the platform is so the dome can be adjusted to the existing topography, and avoid any grading. He explained the dimensions of the dome, stating it would November 7, 2013 K.H.P.R.C, Meeting Minutes Page 13 be placed at the bottom of the slope . Ms. Davis added that the done would not be visible to anyone other than visitors to the property. Ms . Schneider pointed out that their consideration is the dome in relationship to the house . Nis . Griffin noted that significant changes for minimization have been made with consideration to the community as well as to the Commission's concerns, and noted the need to adapt as times change . The question becomes how to do that without compromising the integrity of the intent of the historic structure . Mr. Robison stated upon looking at the nomination for the historic registry, they discovered that main house alone is registered with the National Park Service, not any of the ancillary structures, and not even the site itself. The actual wording includes the Manager' s House and the area immediately adjacent to it. Ms . Griffin replied that it is true, but they also look at things that are eligible, and treat them in the same way to which Mr. Robison stated he is in agreement, and holds it in a broader sense than the letter of the registry. Ms. Sheehan asked if they have kept his neighbor informed of everything, noting the dome is fairly close to his property. Mr. Robison replied yes, noting that the neighbors did have some concerns , which the applicant immediately tools into consideration, complying with every request. Ms. Davis added that it has been an opportunity to get to know their neighbors and learn about their ties to the property and the community. Mr. Long thanked the applicant for mitigating the Commission's and the community' s concerns. Referencing the storage containers, he said if that is required to house their scientific activities, he would like to request that the public face of the containers is treated as sensitively as other structures on the property. Considering that Building W is part of Phase III, Mr. Long suggested that it come back before the Commission before that building is approved. Referencing the dome structure, Mr. Long would prefer that it be omitted from the design because he does not see any historical significance , and he believes it adversely affects the lawn area of this estate . However, if the dome should remain and be placed in this area, he would Eke to request that it be camouflaged with natural colors and materials (not white), that it be heavily landscaped with indigenous or endemic plants, and that the mass of the dome be minimized by using slab on grade design starting at the lower level of the slope . On the motion by Stephen Long and seconded by Althea Arinaga for recommendations to the Planning Commission to omit the architectural dome from the design plan, or mitigate adverse effects by including the conditions as stated, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote. Lorna Nishimitsu noted that Jonathan Chun may address whether this Commission has the authority or jurisdiction to make restrictions on portions of the property that is not registered with the Federal government. Ms. Aiu stated that they are an advisory Commission, and they are only making recommendations on what they would like to see . November 7, 2013 KH.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 14 SELECTION OF MEETING DATE AND AGENDA TOPICS The next meeting was scheduled on December 5 , 2013 . November 7, 2013 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 15 ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 6 :20 p .m. Respectfully Submitted, Cherisse Zaima Commission Support Clerk Date :