Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutjun52014 KAUAI COUNTY HISTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEW COMMISSION Lihue Civic Center, Mo ' ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A/2B MINUTES A regular meeting of the Kauai County Historic Preservation Commission (KHPRC) was held on June 5, 2014 in the Lihu ` e Civic Center, Mo' ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A/2B . The following Commissioners were present: Vice Chairperson Pat Griffin, Althea Arinaga, Danita Ain, Kuuleialoha Santos, Anne Schneider The following staff members were present: Planning Department —Myles Hironaka, Ka' aina Hull, Shanlee Jimenez; Office of Boards and Commissions — Cherisse Zaima; Deputy County Attorney Ian Jung CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 3 : 03 p.m. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA With no objections, Vice Chair Pat Griffin amended the agenda to move Items A, B, and C to the end of the meeting, and take up Unfinished Business first_ APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES Anne Schneider moved to approve the April 3, 2014 meeting minutes, Althea Arinaga seconded the motion. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Waimea Foreign Church (Waimea United Church of Christ) TMK: 1 -6-10 : 06 , Waimea, Kauai, Proposed addition and renovation of the existing Baird ' s Hall, Architect Palmer Hafdahl, who is working on the additions to Baird' s Hall, stated the project will double the existing space, which will be used as a community gathering space with larger facilities as is necessary for receptions, and other activities . A pastor ' s office will also be added to the space. Mr. Hafdahl recognized Mike Faye and the long heritage of what has been done to create a strong historic district in Waimea. Not much is being done to the existing items except for the addition of a new entrance from the adjacent street where a large number of church members park; presently, they have to climb a wall to get up to the church level. A small breach in that wall will be made, and steps added. They have entered into a design-build June 5, 20 (4 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 3 Ms. Schneider asked whether this was an after-the-fact permit, noting there are pictures of food trucks already on the property. Staff Planner Ka'aina Hull explained the truck is there but it is not operating. Because it is a use permit the Planning Commission is entertaining, not the truck itself, the truck is allowed to be parked there. Mr. Hull explained the applicant has applied for a Class IV Zoning Permit to request allowance of a commercial operation in an area zoned Open/STC. This permit is ultimately entertained by the Planning Commission for action. The reason it has come before this Commission is because there is a structure on the property that is on the National Historic register. He reiterated while the food truck itself is not a structure, and will not alter the historical smokestack from the old Koloa Mill, they felt it prudent to obtain comments/concerns on this application from this body before it is brought to the Planning Commission. Any comments by this body will be forwarded to the Planning Commission for their review and consideration. Ms. Santos asked whether the food truck is located on the historical site to which Mr. Hull replied it is proposed to be on the same property. Dr. Murray provided a brief historical background of the property, noting there are various historical artifacts such as walls, dams, sugar factory items, etc. , that are spread out over several acres, which the trucks are nowhere near. Ms. Santos asked who owns/maintains the property to which Dr. Murray replied he and his wife do, and have owned it for the past 12 — 15 years during which time they have done a lot of work to preserve what is there. The food trucks will have no direct impact on any of the historical artifacts. Ms. Griffin asked if this permit would allow only two trucks. She noted that when she visited the site, there were two trucks on the property along with a sign in front of the smokestack on the Maluhia Road side along with chairs. Could this permit allow six trucks there? Mr. Hull replied the applicant has specifically applied for two trucks and a seating area. If approved, anything beyond that would require the applicant to return to the Planning Commission for public hearing and approval. Ms. Griffin asked for clarification on the nature of the dining space to which Dr. Murray explained it will be open sky dining. Ms. Schneider asked whether there was running water and bathroom facilities to which Dr. Murray stated Koloa Town has public bathrooms right across the street. Mr. Hull added it is an odd application to come before this body as it is only the use that is being reviewed; there are no permanent structures being proposed. The Department felt it prudent to have this body review the application for any concerns as far as the use is concerned, including where the use is located, or the type of use as it affects the historical property. Ms . Griffin stated this property is not just on the National Register of Historic Places, it is a national historic landmark of which only four exist on this island. She commented that if someone wanted to put a food truck and signage in the middle of Malae Heiau, the Commission June 5, 2014 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 5 Ms. Schneider commented this project does not improve the space, and she foresees the amount of trucks increasing over time. Mr. Hull reminded the Commission that should the applicant get approval for the two trucks he is requesting, if any more trucks show up, it would be in direct violation of the use permit; this permit application is only for two at this point. Ms . Santos commented that she is totally against the whole food truck proposal, but noted that it is the applicant' s property, and as long as he is preserving it, he should be allowed to put two food trucks there. She reiterated that she is against it. Ms . Arinaga agreed that it is his property with which he can do whatever he wants; however, she feels it is an eyesore that takes away from what is there. Ms. Griffin clarified that even though it is private property, they should still work on ways to preserve cultural, historic heritage, which is why these types of proposals come before this Commission. Ms. Santos pointed out that he is not damaging the site or historic structures. Mr. Hull stated it seems the Commission' s concerns are with the appearance of the food trucks, noting that although it is really the use that will be reviewed by the Planning Commission, the appearance of the trucks, and how it interacts with the historical structures on the site can be considered. Ms. Griffin stated the bigger issue is whether or not this type of commercial activity should be placed in the middle of a national historic landmark; is this an appropriate use for this landmark. Deputy County Attorney Ian Jung explained the intent of the historic preservation review process is to look at how to mitigate impacts of proposed projects on certain historic sites . In this case, they' re not really affecting actual historic structures, but they are affecting a historic area with a commercial use. The Commission only provides a recommendation to the Planning Commission on the use issue; however, they must have a rational basis for those recommendations by looking at how they can mitigate the impacts of the use. Ms . Griffin stated this is a national historic landmark, and there is still an integrity of setting, location, and association to consider. She noted that Ms. Aiu made a suggestion for mitigation by moving the location of the trucks to create a delineation between the food trucks and the historic landmark area; however, that would also affect the preservation of another area of the property. Still, there must be an effort to move the trucks out of close proximity to the smokestack, especially if there is a possibility of that project being permanent. Ms . Griffin commented that in reviewing this zoning and use permit, they need to keep in mind that it is not just the smokestack they are discussing. Danita Ain moved to recommend the applicant lessen the negative visual impact by moving the truck to create a better degree of separation between the trucks and the historic landmark, changing the colors of the truck, and ensure signage is in compliance with County ordinance. Anne Schneider seconded the motion. The motion failed by roll call vote: 4 Ayes (Ain, Schneider, Arinaga, Griffin); 1 Nay (Santos) June 5, 2014 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 7 Broverman stated they know it is very important, and they are trying to get it done as quickly as possible. Ms. Aiu asked whether the use permit proposal for the food trucks went to SHPD to which Ms . Broverman replied she has not seen anything. Ms . Griffin stated that application will be before the Planning Commission on June 22. Ms. Broverman stated she would check if it is in their intake system, and if so they will try to get it out as soon as possible. Ms. Griffin stated there were several legislative bills about various preservation issues, and requested an overview of what bills passed and where they are now. Mr. Downer stated the only . . bill that passed related to preservation was a bill that would convert SHPD staff to civil service positions. No bills related to the substance of historic preservation passed; they all died. One got as far as Conference Commission, but it died there. Ms. Griffin requested a briefing of the Federal process. Mr. Downer replied the report was hand-delivered to Washington two weeks early, and the park service representatives there seemed very pleased that it was turned in. It is an extensive document, about 1 ,200 pages, so he doubts they will receive a response very quickly. However, he is cautiously optimistic they will accept everything in it. The only thing that still needs to be done is the Division audit, which should have been done in 20101 but was not completed for that year as well as 2011 , 2012, and 2013 . The draft letter of engagement has just been received from the audit firm, and they anticipate having something for the Chair to sign by next week, and will likely take four to six months to complete. Ms. Santos expressed her frustration that there is not support or help from SHPD with the National Preservation list, and she feels it is a waste of a good list. She questioned the point of being on the list, or even registering as no help, or protection is given. In addition to that, she stated it seems that there is no way to contact anyone in SHPD by telephone to discuss any concerns, and there is no way that SHPD would ever step up to protect a site at all, except maybe to write a letter, which does not have much of an impact. Mr. Downer expressed his appreciation for the comment, and stated he feels everyone there today has the same thought. He explained they only have authority to comment on a State project if they get a permit application, and when their comments are forwarded, it is ultimately the decision of the agency or division; SHPD cannot force a decision. Ms. Santos stated she understands that, but it is disheartening and upsetting that the decisions they make hold no weight. She used the Lihu` e Bridge as an example where this Commission made suggestions on what they wanted, yet the design has been totally changed, and when the bridge is unveiled, it will have no historical value whatsoever. 4 Ms. Griffin stated what she thinks has been difficult is staffing, and having many vacancies . She asked what the Division ' s needs are in addition to the new hires that they have. Mr. Downer stated there are a total of 29 positions in the Division, of which seven are currently vacant and have been advertised. When those are filled, it will be the first time in living memory that all SHPDs positions will be filled. Referencing Ms. Santos ' concerns, Mr. Downer feels staffing contributes to that and as they get more staff on board, they will be in a position to be more proactive. They will be able to have more effective communication with the Planning Department as to why preservation is important, and its economic and social value. June 5, 2014 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 9 of past CLG funding, they have created inventories of historic structures and buildings, some of which are also archaeological sites. When permits are received that may touch upon those properties, they are brought before this Commission for review. In addition, they receive requests for reviews pursuant to Section 106 . Ms . McMahon shared a history of SHPDs staff in the 1990 's, and the importance of having adequate staff and office space. COMMUNICATIONS There were no communications. SELECTION OF NEXT MEETING DATE AND AGENDA TOPICS Ms . Griffin noted the next meeting is scheduled for July 3, 2014, but asked if Mr. Hironaka could follow up and possibly reschedule as members will be on vacation during that time. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 4: 36 p .m. Respectfully Submitted, MI Cherisse Zaima Commission Support Clerk Date: