Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAugust 6, 2015KAUAI COUNTY HISTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEW COMMISSION Lihu`e Civic Center, Mo`ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A/213 MINUTES A regular meeting of the Kauai County Historic Preservation Commission (KHPRC) was held on August 6, 2015 in the Lihu`e Civic Center, Mo`ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A/2B. The following Commissioners were present: Chairperson Pat Griffin, Anne Schneider, Stephen Long, David Helder (left at 4: 58 p.m.), Charlotte Hoomanawanui, Victoria Wichman, Larry Chaffin Jr., and Kuuleialoha Santos (3:27 p.m. -5 :15 p.m.). The following Commissioner was absent: Althea Arinaga The following staff members were present: Planning Department — Kaaina Hull, Shanlee Junenez; Deputy County Attorneys Jodi Higuchi- Sayegusa (3:02p.m.- 4:33p.m) and Andrea Suzuki (entered at 4:33 p.m.); Office of Boards and Commissions: Administrator Jay Furfaro (left at 4: 00 p.m.), Support Clerk Darcie Agaran. Prior to the start of the meeting, Council Administrative Assistant Eddie Topenio gave the Oath of Office to new Commission Member Larry Chaffin Jr. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 3:01 p.m. SWEARING IN OF NEW COMMISSION MEMBER Ms. Griffin: We appreciate Larry joining us. Last month when Honey Girl was sworn in, she told us a little bit about herself and we introduced ourselves. If you all haven't done that, we'd love to hear that. Mr. Chaffin Jr.: Thank you. I'm Larry Chaffin. I am a fellow of the American Institute of Architects; retired now. I've lived on Kauai for twenty -two (22) years. I came from Los Angeles, California where our firm worked in the seven (7) western states. And I enjoy life here. Thank you. Ms. Griffin: Thank you. Victoria, do you want to introduce yourself as we go around? Ms. Wichman: My name is Victoria Wichman. I work for State Parks. Ms. Griffin: Thank you.. Mr. Long: I'm Stephen Long, Architect. August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 2 Ms. Schneider: Anne Schneider. I worked as a Planner here, Ms. Griffin: Pat Griffin. Deputy County Attorney Higuchi- Sayegusa entered the meeting at 3:02 p.m. Deputy County Attorne�Higuchi- Sayeg_sa: And Jodi Higuchi- Sayegusa. Ms. Griffin: Our attorney. Mr. Helder: David Helder, (inaudible). Ms. Hoomanawanui: Thank you for coming and being here for this. Ms. Griffin: Honey Girl Hoomanawanui. Ms. Hoomanawanui: Honey Girl. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA Ms. Griffin: With the approval of the agenda, if there are no objections, I'd like to switch items D and C, so that we take up New Business first and then Unfinished Business. With that, do I have a motion to approve the agenda? Ms. Schneider: I make a motion. Mr. Chaffin Jr.: I have a question on the agenda. Ms. Griffin: Okay. Mr. Chaffin Jr.: On Page 15, 6th paragraph, 7th word, what is the word? Ms. Griffin: Let's see. Let's wait until the minutes on that because that's part of the minutes. So you moved to approve the agenda. Ms. Wichman: Second, Ms. Griffin: Thank you. It's been moved and seconded to approve the agenda. All in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Opposed? No, motion carries 7:0. Thank you. APPROVAL OF THE JULY 2, 2015 MEETING MINUTES August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 3 Ms. Griffin: Now the meeting minutes. Page 15? Mr. Chaffin Jr.: Yes. The 6th paragraph, the 71h word. Ms. Griffin: Read it for us. Ms. Wichman: Oh, that's my statement. Mr. Chaffin Jr.: "But he was very..." Ms. Wichman: No, I actually want to correct that because that's not exactly what I said. "It was very productive..." It was on Page 18 (sic), right? "But it was very productive to know the people from across the State ", so that's how it should word on that page. Mr. Chaffin Jr.: Thank you. Ms. Wichman: And I also have a correction on Page 18 near the bottom. Where I'm speaking, near the bottom, it's the 8th paragraph. It says "we had Susan" and then it says "inaudible ", its Susan Lebo, L- E -B -O. Ms. Griffin: Thank you. Were there other changes? Hearing none. May I have a motion to approve with changes? Mr. Helder: So moved. Mr. Chaffin Jr.: Second. Ms. Griffin: Thank you. All in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Opposed? Hearing none. Motion carries 7:0. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND GENERAL BUSINESS MATTERS (None) Ms. Griffin: Announcements and General Business Matters, COMMUNICATIONS Ms. Griffin: Communications. We got the one (1) that was at your place, and thank you for that as always, Staff. We appreciate that. Other communications? August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 4 NEW BUSINESS Re: Letter (6/26/15) from Ronald Sato, Senior Associate, HHF Planners regarding Environmental Reviews for Federally- Subsidized Public Hearing Projects Statewide, Section 106 Consultation — Preliminary No Adverse Effect Determination — `Ele`ele Homes, TMK: 24-01:13 & 42; Hui o Hanama`ulu, TMK: 3- 842:30; Kalaheo, TMK: 2- 342:30; Kapa`a, TMK: 4- 5-15:07. Ms. Griffin: Then let's go on to Part D, New Business. D.1. is a letter from Ronald Sato, from HHF Planners, regarding the Environmental Reviews for Federally- Subsidized Public Housing Projects Statewide. This is part of the Section 106 Consultation. Their preliminary finding, you will have read, was that there is no adverse effect; not because these aren't quite fifty (50) years old because they will be in another five (5) months essentially. But on Page 3 of the letter, they state that Fung Associates has shown that there have been enough changes so that they don't have historical integrity at this point. Are there any comments that you want to bring up for us to give a response to HHF? Has anybody been able to see any of these project sites? Ms. Schneider: No. Ms. Griffin: I'm wondering if we can ask HHF for Fung's response on where Fung Associates felt the loss of integrity had occurred and what has happened. I think that would help all of us to see what these character defining aspects of properties in general are of this era. Ms. Schneider: Can we request a letter? Ms. Griffin: Sure. Ms. Schneider: Asking them to define what they think has loss integrity. Ms. Griffin: Would you like to make a motion, Anne? Ms. Schneider: I'd like to make a motion that we send a letter asking them to define what they mean by losing integrity and how many changes have been made. Ms. Wichman: I second. Ms. Griffin: Thank you. It's been moved and seconded that we send HHF a letter requesting more information on how they've defined the loss of integrity and what changes have been made. Is there further discussion? Thank you. Hearing none. All in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Opposed? (None) Motion carries 7:0. Thank you very much, and thanks to Staff. Mr. Chaffin Jr.: Shouldn't it be attention to a certain person rather than just the firm? August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 5 Ms. Griffin: I'm sure that it would go back to Ronald Sato, the Senior Associate, who sent us the letter, too. Thank you. Re: Letter (7/17/15) from Kimi Yuen, Senior Associate, PBR Hawaii & Associates, Inc. informing the KHPRC of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Ha`ena State Park Master Plan that has been prepared pursuant to Chapter 343 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes and Administrative Rules, Title 11, Chapter 200. Ms. Griffin: Item D.2. The letter from Kimi Yuen, Senior Associate, of PBR Hawaii and Associates informing KHPRC of the draft Environmental Impact Statement for Hd'ena State Park Master Plan. I know Ms. Yuen is here. Ms. Wichman: I need to say that I have to recuse from any statements on this because I work for State Parks. Ms. Griffin: Thank you. Please come up, and if you could introduce yourself for our hardworking transcriber. Kimi Yuen: Aloha, Commission Chair Griffin and fellow Commissioners. Thank you for having us today. My name is Kimi Yuen from PBR Hawaii and Associates. With me today is Alan Carpenter, State Parks Archaeologist. Actually I was going to ask, before we get started, we have a slideshow presentation to give you an overview of the project. I also have large prints of the snaps that if maybe Kaaina can help us put up, I can use it in my presentation. Thank you, again, for having us. I'll jump in while they get that up. I don't think the beginning slides are anything ground- breaking or earth - shattering. Just an overview of our presentation, we will go over the meeting purpose, what we are presenting today, project background, the planning process and EIS process that we're going through right now, and then answer any questions that you may have for us. So just briefly, again, we're here to provide an overview of the draft Hd'ena State Park Master Plan. We initially came before this body in 2008 when we kicked this project off. I would just like to say that it's been a long process, but I think it's been very meaningful and we've had very good conversations. I'll have a list up later about an advisory committee of community members, kupuna, local families that have been involved, including business and other community leaders. It's an extensive list of folks that have been involved, and participation has been great. I feel like the plan has come to a state where everybody is comfortable with it, and so we've moved forward with the EIS process. We are also going to follow -up on the pre - consultation comments this body had for us back in 2008, and then again, to answer any questions you may have on the process and the EIS moving forward. August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 6 Just some brief information. I'm sure all of you are familiar with Ha`ena State Park. It's the State Park that is located at Ke` e, on the north shore. It is at the end of the State Highway and comprises of 65.7 acres. The majority of the site is State land, but the County does own a small outparcel of 0.68 acres where Ka Ulu A Paoa Heiau and Ke Ahu A Laka are located. The State primarily used Federal Land and Water Conservation Funds to acquire the property in 1977. What that means is that as the State moves forward and some of the management issues that have come up, they will still be required to abide by certain regulations and guidelines. It impacts things like entrance fees and that sort of thing, so there's a certain set of rules specific to the Federal Land and Water Conservation Funds that State Parks will have to abide by moving forward. Right now, the main reason we're here is that there's currently no adopted State Master Plan for the park or an accepted EIS, and State Parks basically needs that to move forward with any kind of major capital improvements at the park, which I think all of us know the park could definitely use some care and attention. Just briefly highlighting some of the significant sites at the park. Of course, there's the heiau again and the hula platform. Lohi`au's house platform is also located at the State park, and an extensive agricultural complex containing lo`i and `auwai, as well as a couple of loko that may have been, or thought to have been, agriculturally used, too. You have the two (2) wet caves; Wai a Kanaloa and Waikapala` e. Ke` e Beach and Lagoon, which is a very popular visitor destination with roughly three hundred (300) people on the beach at any one time. Na Pali o Makana, which is a prominent peak that you can see from portions of the park, and then, of course, the trailhead to Kalalau Trail and the Napali Coast State Wilderness Park. Much of the park is included in the Hd'ena Archaeological Complex, which is a registered historic place on both the State and National Registers. It was placed there in 1984. The Napali Coast Archaeological District is primarily the area mauka of the highway, and that, too, was placed on both the State and National Registers in 1984. The highway itself, the north shore section of the Kauai Belt Road was put on the National Register in 2004. Here's a picture of the existing site. You can see the extensive lo`i complex on the eastern portion of the State Park. The existing unpaved parking lot is here. The State highway runs along this edge at the base of the pali, and terminates at Ke`e Beach. The heiau is located here and this is where the County property is located; the 0.68 acres. So you can see that it's actually landlocked within the State property. The two (2) loko are roughly in these areas. The site is heavily overgrown, but it used to be cleared, open, if you can imagine, expanse of coastal dunes along the shoreline. The two (2) loko were not covered over like they are currently, and of course the agricultural complex was actively farmed until the 1960's. Alan, feel free to jump in if there's anything. So the `auwai are these little dotted lines that you see running throughout the lo`i. Back in 2008 when we were here, actually it was just me that was here before you seeking any input or thoughts that this body had as we kicked off the project. There were basically six (6) main issues that were brought up, and one was the National and State Registers, which I just went over earlier that much of the site is actually already on both registers. A comment came up about the relationship of proposed trails to the cultural resources and the cultural practices that occur at the park. Fishing August b, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 7 zones, an interpretive program, maintenance and management of the overlapping State and County jurisdictions, and then mapping of buffers of specific resource preserves within the overall complex. I'll let Alan talk about this slide, but basically we asked Alan because State Parks has archaeologists on staff, they did the archaeological overview, survey, and mapping for us. This is one of the graphics in both the Master Plan and the EIS. Alan Carpenter: Alright, thank you Kimi. Thank you, Commissioners, for having me here today. So this essentially is an outline of the park property. As Kimi mentioned, as most of you probably know, Hd`ena is an extremely important historical place; a very storied place associated with import persons and legends, and that manifests itself on the ground, in terms of physical remnants. When I was asked to put this map together to sort of outline where the significant resources are, you can see that each of the colors represent a different site type. Effectively, the entire park is covered by sensitive archaeological sites. Most notably in the dark green, in the white outlines are the actual mapped lo`i bank walls; that's a very large and extensive irrigated agricultural system of lo`i. As Kimi mentioned, it was farmed up until the 1960's and has more recently since the 1990's been revitalized by the Hui Maka`aina o Makana, a curated group we have out there, and they have, again, begun planting and restoring a section of the to `i system. And that's a prominent part of the park landscape today. The two (2) loko; Loko Naia, Loko Kd`e. Loko Ke`e still functions somewhat as a pond. It has standing water at most times, though it is infilled. Loko Naia is dry. It no longer has a pond element to it, but it was there historically; most likely a combination of a lo`i and a fishpond. The yellow areas are the beach dune system. That area is noted of course as an area where people were buried. There have been a number of burials that have come up to natural reasons and one, due to park development in the last few decades. There are historic cemeteries as well. They are hard to see, but right here is one (1) with historic grave stones and right here is another one (1) that may or may not be. It appears to have grave markers, but we're not 100% sure. But the entire dune is considered sensitive as a potential area of burials. So we consider that as one (1) of the more sensitive places. It has conflicting uses because that's also the shoreline where most people want to go and visit. The yellow areas on the mauka side of the road are legendary sites. The wet caves, Wai a Kanaloa and Waikapala`e, are these two (2) areas here. This is Lohi`au's house site, which is a very large platform with unique architecture. A pretty stunning feature, but again, kind of hidden away in the bushes. Ms. Santos entered the meeting at 3:20 p.m. The area in blue, that's mostly the highway, but also at the end of the road, this is the historic Allerton house complex and gardens. It's actually quite modified. It had two (2) homes; previously owned by Francis `I`i Brown, I believe, who may have built the homes. One (1) of them burnt down around 1990. We still have the Caretaker's Cottage, which is a 1920's structure. We hope to restore that as part of the park landscape and also adaptively reuse it for park purposes. August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 8 And the last area to discuss is ... I'm sorry, this is other blue one. This is another historic homestead area where people lived in the early 1900's. The area in red is effectively all the area that has modern disturbance, so that is essentially the only disturbed areas, and that really shows how constrained we are with being able to do any kind of park developments without disturbing historic features. So the main area where the current parking lot is, this is going to be the focus of all future development. This area here represents disturbance from the Taylor Camp days in the 1960's, but there are still remnants of the loci despite that disturbance. This is simply a road that accessed another historic house which is still there; the Montgomery House, again, built in the 1930's, and another one that we intend to hopefully restore and preserve. This is the area most recently developed by State Parks in the 1970's. That did impact some subsurface cultural features, mostly habitational features, but also one (1) burial. In a nutshell, this is a very challenging place to propose development and manage hordes of people. Ms. Yuen: Just to add to Alan's wonderful overview, this central area is right in the middle of where the Hui is actually ... this is the area that they've restored and are currently farming. But this area, Alan if you can correct me, they would not restore this as loci because there were a lot of abandoned cars, and it just would not do well as restored loci. So that's why this small area of the loci is called out as "red" because they wouldn't ever restore it. _Mr. Carpenter: Yes exactly. Due to the nature of irrigated agriculture and pond fields, especially for kalo, if you fill those with water to cultivate, down below the surface there is a lot of glass and metal and other things it that are extremely difficult to remove, so that will probably remain as some kind of use area or perhaps dryland, but it's not going to be restored as far as a loci system. Ms. Yuen: So this is a list of our Community Advisory Committee members. Mr. Carpenter: Which you've seen four (4) to five (5) times already. (Laughter in background) Ms. Yuen: Like I had mentioned earlier, it it a wide variety of kupuna and Ha`ena `Ohana members. We have cultural practitioners, such as Kumu Hula Kehaulani Kekua, on our advisory committee, as well as many of the local businesses and community leaders on the north shore involved in the process. We can leave a copy of this for you folks. This is also in our Master Plan Report as Appendix A. I think some of their titles might actually be outdated since it's been such a long process; we probably have to add like two (2) or three (3) for some of them. So this is the view of the current draft Master Plan. Again, we brought larger prints that are up on the board. So I'll just kind of go over a lot of the highlights of the plan. Maybe it'll help if I can walk up to the printed one and point as I... Again, to give you some orientation, of course, the shoreline is on the top side of the image. The pali is on the bottom of the image. The highway running at the base of the pali; the heiau. So the thought is that traffic and access will come from the highway primarily. At the main entrance... because this is technically the end of the highway, we included a turnaround so that cars that aren't actually going to the park, but actually want to drive to the end of the road can do August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 9 that without backing up traffic as it currently happens. We divert the traffic into a parking lot, and I'll explain in a little bit why its bent in this fashion, but the main reason is that as we had go along in the plan and it's probably a big reason why our finalization of the draft Master Plan got delayed a bit, was that State Parks and DLNR had undergone a Rockfall Hazard Study for this stretch and found that actually the highway lies in a pretty significant rockfall hazard zone. So what that ended up doing was we had to reconfigure this entry portion of the Master Plan because we were putting some of the main visitor facilities right within that zone. I have a map coming up and it's actually on this, but we'll show the different rockfall hazards. But on this plan, it's the little dotted line. What we did was locate all of the visitor facilities outside of that, and this is a modeled rockfall hazard, kind of, predictor of where the rocks are likely to fall. So this was the point of 0% chance of rockfalls, so we tried to locate everything outside of that and outside of that rockfall zone. The advisory committee actually came up with that concept. What that does is, the highway no longer becomes the main access for people to get to Ke`e Beach. We are recommending an elevated boardwalk that actually goes over the lo`i and cuts up towards this hau thicket, and then out to Ke`e Beach that way to get them out of the rockfall hazard zone. The highway, we've talked to State DOT and they are perfectly happy turning it over to State Parks to maintain, but the process for that has not quite been done. The reason for that is that we want to basically limit the amount of traffic that is falling in this area. So what this becomes then is a special access or very limited access roadway. We have a small thirteen (13) stall parking lot at the end of it that we'll maintain, including two (2) ADA stalls. So that would be the primary access for the ADA access to the beach, as well as for cultural practitioners and any kind of halau groups that may be going to the heiau; that becomes their special access to get there. I think we're also talking about fishermen and fisherwomen; they will be able to still use that as a special access. For the most part, the main bulk of your visitor traffic will be diverted to the main parking lot here. We sized it in this plan to be one hundred (100) stalls, which is what was shown in a previous Master Plan that State Parks had developed with a different consultant, back in the 90's. That plan and draft EIS was never finalized, so we came in back in 2008 to try to finish out. Basically, the base of this plan was based off of what was termed a community preferred master plan, but there were issues that people were still uncomfortable with, such as... actually that plan had dispersed visitors all along the coast line, thinking that would minimize impacts, as opposed to being concentrated in one (1) place. But that concept you know, this is not exactly the safest place to swim, you don't have any lifeguards, so that idea got taken off the table. They had actually located picnic tables along the coastal dune, which we didn't think was appropriate, so that is all gone. Now we are proposing restoration of the coastal dune. The advisory committee had made a good point that not only would they be taking care of the environment, but they would also be taking care of the kupuna that are there. The previous plan had bike paths where the `auwai was throughout the complex; we took that out. Really what we're doing is trying to focus the visitor traffic to the main entry parking lot. We have a visitor, kind of, welcome center right at the entry point, so we are focusing the visitor traffic along the elevated and it would have rails along this boardwalk to the hau thicket, and then from there a path directing folks to the beach. What this does is it provides a view, actually, of the lo`i that currently people don't get to experience, and it also opens up views of makana, which is ... I don't think it's up here, but it's the peak is on this side, so there's a little viewing platform here that they could actually see makana now, where they can't see it from the highway. It helps bring out opportunities to interpret the sites that currently may not exist. August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 10 We worked really closely with the Hui that is restoring the lo`i. The discussion points were that because this section of the lo`i is at the base of the pali, it actually is some of the least productive areas of the to `i. The concept is to then, you know, maybe this becomes places where visitors can actually experience lo`i firsthand; maybe they get in there. themselves and can have hands -on kind of experiences within the park. The Hui would actually start to work on the later phases. Phase I actually continues here. These phase numbers relate to a restoration plan that Alan had worked on, I'm not sure how long ago, but the idea is to basically, eventually restore all of the lo`i at the park. What that does is allow the Hui to continue their work on the later phases of the restoration, but then also open up opportunities where visitors to the park can experience it as well. This entire portion that is dashed out around the heiau, we've designated as a hula complex. That in and of itself would require its own, kind of, planning, probably an advisory committee to decide what and how that is, but the idea is that this becomes a place for hula practitioners. In this middle part, we have what we've called a cultural gathering place where we would be proposing an open hale style learning center; Halau Wa`a, for canoes since it's right along one of the bigger `auwai that goes out into the channel. If you can see these little dotted lines throughout the lo`i, those would be limited to pedestrians only, and then things like guided tours might be able to access and have a connection back to the main visitor center there. We've left the historic cemeteries as is and kept this historic road; that's what you see here dashed out. We haven't done anything to the comfort station and constructed wetlands that are currently there and completed, but the thought was because this is such a sensitive site, at the entry point we would be providing a second set of comfort stations. Hopefully what that does is it minimizes the use that actually happens out there because people would be using this as well, so the amount of runoff occurring at Ke`e would be lessened. This little structure here is a caretaker's cottage that was envisioned in the previous Master Plan and a 24 -hour presence; somebody actually hired by State Parks to oversee the park twenty -four (24) hours a day was a recommendation from that plan that's carried over to the current plan. You'll see things like this little dashed box. The Montgomery House is another one, but those are archaeological or historic sites recommended for restoration. At the turnaround, we've identified it as a potential shuttle stop as well, and I'll go over some of the transportation plans and alternatives that came up through the meetings as well. For the most part, the primary focus becomes restoration and protection of the natural cultural historic resources throughout the park. The parking lot, actually Alan, if you could advance the slide, we're showing another plan of the entry area. If you can see, the turnaround is very similar, the parking layout is the same. There's a much more modest welcome pavilion at the park entry, and then the boardwalk carried over. But the concept here is to start small because State funding can be quite tight, and so State Parks asked us to come up with a near -term plan that could be, maybe you know, take a smaller bite of the big nut of the full Master Plan and what could be done to implement some of the concepts, such as the visitor limit which I'll go into a little bit as well. Graphically, we tried to show that one (1) of the main concepts of getting people to the park talked about a remote entry at Princeville. Putting a lot of the parking outside of the park. August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 11 Ms. Schneider: Can I ask where that's going to take place in Princeville? Ms. Yuen: Where? I mean there are a few sites we identified in a Transportation Plan that's in our Master Plan. Ms. Schneider: Because there's no parking in Princeville now. Ms. Yuen: Right, right, exactly. But there is a site, there is a landowner that has offered up a site, so there's a community group that is working on that. It's one of those things that we'll need a lot of funding. It might require County, State, and Federal entities to partner on that, but there is a site that's identified in Princeville. It's a potential site that would hold probably 200 -300 parking stalls, I think is what they estimated at. In any case, what we're showing here at least, if there was parking to be on -site, there's a roughly one hundred (100) stall parking lot. The major management recommendation that came out of the group was to limit the visitors in the first place. You've got over 2,000 people coming at the peak on days; just one (1) day alone; 2,000 people coming to this park and it's just too much. Back in '93, the estimate of visitors, I think when you first started that earlier round of master planning efforts, it was only 350 people a day. So you can see, over a very short period of time, the number of visitors that are coming to Hd'ena State Park is quite significant. The first issue would be to reduce the number of visitors that come to the park on a daily basis; that would include folks going on the Kalalau Trail. But the idea is that you would have a flexibly sized parking lot, depending on what kind of transportation alternatives could get worked out. The County has been working on a north shore shuttle that they've been trying to get off the ground as well. Ms. Schneider: That's already failed. Ms. Yuen: Well, yeah I mean, the entity is still there, but I don't think the energy and the interest has yet, so I don't want to give up on that either. I think it's still a potential and I know the County is planning to do a study on a north shore and south shore shuttle. We're kind of keeping those options loose at this point, but the idea is that we won't overbuild a parking lot if some of these other solutions can work. If it doesn't, at least State Parks has, in their Master Plan, a one hundred (100) stall parking lot identified. The preference was to pave it with a permeable surface, which is why it's colored the way it is. Initially, it could start off with Phase I that lighter tan area, and you could keep the part in green as kind of an open lawn or grand lawn that you could have events or hold educational events or even community events in this space. You have a more modest welcome pavilion, but again, the boardwalk would be an integral part of implementing this near -term plan. If you look near the highway, you'll see a red line and a green line. Again, those are the rockfall hazard zones. The red line was where a 5% chance of a rockfall event might happen, and the green line is the 0% chance. Everybody just decided that rather than try to come up with some engineering solutions along the cliff, the advisory committee's priority was to preserve the cliff August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 12 and not impact the cliff with any kind of engineered solution; let's just move everybody outside of that zone. Even members of the Hui felt that that was a better way to go. Again, to go over some of the key management recommendations that came out of the plan as well, these four (4) were seen as critical to being implemented no matter what the park ends up doing. I think when they are looking at transportation, entry fees, all that kind of stuff, that's still up for debate, but these were the four (4) that everyone agreed needs to happen, regardless of what other management decisions are made. The first one is to create a cultural advisory group and a broader community advisory group. It would be something similar to the advisory group that we had for the Master Plan effort. I think we would open it up to them to participate as well, but that's not to say that they will be the ones on this community advisory group. The cultural advisory group would be much more specific and require people with actual expertise in the different cultural, you know, there's fishing, there's hula, there's agriculture, that sort of thing, so very specific cultural advisor for State Park. The second item, again, is the initial daily visitor limit of nine hundred (900) people per day; that would include everybody going to the park or day hikers on the Kalalau Trail. This does not include the sixty (60) camping permits for the overnight further down on the Kalalau Trail, it would not include the thirty (30) hunter permits that are allowed, it would not include cultural practitioners, it would not include any kind of special halau or to `i work groups, school or educational groups, fishermen, or the cemetery caretakers. The discussion was to see what the impact would be over time; let's set a number at this outset and see what the impacts are to the park. If it continues to be a problem, they could adjust it down, as well as if it seems like there might be an ability to increase it that is still on the table as well. The idea is to at least set an initial daily visitor limit, which is less than the current number, but again, it is still higher than what was happening in the early 90's. But the idea is to see what the impacts would be to the park. Mr. Helder: Would local residents have to apply for a permit to go? Ms. Yuen: No, you wouldn't apply for a permit, but you would have to, basically, plan your trips. There will be tickets, and whether they charge a fee for it or not, and whether residents get charged or not, I think that's still open. I. Mr. Carpenter: Actually, we've already gone out to the community, so residents are not going to pay entry or parking fees under a previously vetted agreement between us when we went out for fees statewide a couple of years ago. We're actually in the process of codifying our existing and proposed fees in our administrative rules; that's going to happen, actually, in the next couple of weeks. So any fee will apply to out -of -state visitors, but not to locals. But if we set a limit, there has to be a way to have a control point or a system for adhering to that limit. Mr. Helder: So if you lived in Wainiha, for instance, and you wanted to drive out there. Mr. Carpenter: Yes, that's one of the challenges and there are other things that could come into play. For example, the peak times, you may limit the peak times, but guys who need to go out and fish early in the morning or people who want to go at night when there's really not a capacity issue, everyone is already gone, those may be totally open and available. At least that's one (1) of the August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 13 things that I think would be imperative to the local community because you can't plan the nice days or the days when the akule are there, that kind of thing right, so it will be a challenge. There was an overwhelming desire by the advisory committee to set a limit, essentially because visitor experience is being impacted and particularly, local visitor experience is being impacted by the absolute crush of people heading to the end of the road. Mr. Helder: I understand that, but when you live out there that makes up a large portion of where you have to go. You're basically limiting accessibility for people that live there. Ms. Hoomanawanui: That's true. Mr. Helder: That's a problem. Ms. Hoomanawanui: You're right. Mr. Helder: That constitutes a taking, really, of what we have out there. Mr. Carpenter: If you're fishing or you're practicing culture, you're not beholding to these limits. So that may be a challenge to prove or I mean, you figure, just considering how it would actually operate. It's probably going to be a bunch of people familiar with the area and locals or a community group, possibly even, running this under some kind of agreement. They are going to know the difference between someone from Minnesota and someone from Wainiha. Ms. Schneider: I think that's part of the problem here now. The beaches, everyplace is so crowded that there's no place for the local people to go anymore. Mr. Helder: Yeah, and it's what it sounds like, it's another... . Ms. Schneider: And we keep catering to the tourist experience, rather than to the local experience. Mr. Helder: Yeah. Administrator Jay Furfaro: Excuse me, Madam Chair. May I recommend that you finish the presentation and then go into a recognized Q &A afterwards? Ms. Griffin: Thank you. Mr. Carpenter: Okay, thanks. Mr. Yuen: The third key management recommendation was to require a visitor orientation prior to park entry. That is simply to educate anyone who comes to the park about the sensitive natural and cultural resources there. Especially if you are a local resident, you would only have to do it once, and after that you would be cleared of having to do it again. So there's different types of ways to implement that, but the idea is that, you know, because of the conditions that can turn on a dime in this environment, it's imperative that anyone who goes there knows the potential range August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 14 of hazards that are out there and be aware of them. It could also include things like daily weather reports; whether there's potential flash flood warnings or that kind of thing. Basically the idea is to help educate anyone who goes out there because it's not only the tourist, but there maybe Kauai folks that aren't familiar with the conditions out there, too, that may require some education. And then the fourth one is to require Staff and Volunteer education since they are at the front lines of any kind of visitor interaction; whether they are local or out -of- state. To just quickly go back over the issues that were raised by this body back in 2008, we did go over the National and State Registers. Again, the relationship with the trails to cultural resources and practices, the idea is to focus visitor traffic on that boardwalk and get them safely to Ke' e outside of that rockfall hazard zone and open up the views of the lo`i and makana. And again, it will not preclude cultural practitioners' access to the sites because we will-have the highway remain as that limited access corridor. Even the hunters, we were talking about being able to park at the parking lot at Ke`e. Fishing zones, the Master Plan basically defers to the Ha`ena Community -Based Subsistence Fishing Area rules that were just adopted by the Board of Land and Natural Resources in October of 2014 and recently signed by the Governor; I think that was just Tuesday. So rather than having an overlapping set of rules or concepts, the group just decided to defer to those area rules that are now signed into law. Interpretive program. The entire Chapter 5 of our Master Plan report goes over a proposed interpretive program. And with Victoria Wichman now on staff as an Interpretive Specialist here on Kauai, that would probably fall under her purview for implementation. Maintenance and management of the overlapping State and County jurisdictions. It had gone back and forth in a lot of different discussion and concepts, but currently, the County actually has a stewardship agreement with the Hui to manage that site. I don't know if Alan wants to elaborate on any of that. Mr. Carpenter: Actually, they have two (2) agreements. The Hui has an agreement for the lo`i, and they more recently have an agreement, since we started this process and you ask actually, the County has started their own program with the great support of the Mayor and they have, how many? Three (3)? Or just two (2)? Ms. Wichman: What? (Inaudible) agreements? Mr. Carpenter: (Inaudible) agreements under the County. Ms. Wichman: Right now, officially, one (1). Mr. Carpenter: Just one (1)? Ms. Wichman: Yes. Mr. Carpenter: Plus this one? Ms. Wichman: Yes, they are working on this one. Kaneiolouma is the first one. Mr. Carpenter: Right. August 6, 2015 KNPRC Meeting Minutes Page 15 Ms. Yuen: This one actually hasn't been signed. Ms. Wichman: I really couldn't answer that. I don't know. Administrator Furfaro: This one hasn't been executed yet. Mr. Carpenter: It has not yet? Okay, so still in the works. Mr. Yuen: But that's what the County... Administrator Furfaro: That's No. 21 Mr. Carpenter: That's No. 2, alright. The last one, the )mapping and buffers of specific resource preserves in the overall complex, that is included in the plan, but I just want to add from my perspective. The issue of buffers around archaeological sites is a development driven rule within the Chapter 6E, Historic Preservation Law. I prefer to flip that back to the opposite where what we like to do within parks is preserve everything, and instead our buffers should constrain the amount of construction that goes on, so that in fact we put a buffer around where construction activities can occur, everything outside of it is actually preserved. But the buffers, in this case, will be barriers to roadways, trails, vegetation, and things like that. It's not the same concept as you see when someone develops a hotel complex and they put buffers around the burial sites and the heiau because that's all they are required to preserve. We try to preserve everything, so we're kind of doing the opposite. Ms. Yuen, So if you remember the map that Alan had shown where we had those red areas of disturbed areas, we really tried to keep anything we are proposing to those disturbed areas that could never really be restored. Quickly, the EIS process, and I think some of you may be familiar with this, but an Environmental Impact Statement is a significantly more intense document than a standard Environmental Assessment. Really, with this project, there are so many triggers that we just decided that an EIS is probably more appropriate for this project because besides the use of State and County lands, you have area within a shoreline, historic sites, it's a conservation district, and there's actually an existing helicopter facility within a conservation district, shoreline area, and registered historic site that we are actually relocating, just a tad, in the plan from its existing site. Again, the EIS is not the actual permit. State Parks will still have to come back for their actual development permits, should they move forward on any of the construction projects, and this is just a list of them. I won't go over them in any detail, but again, the EIS is the disclosure document and where potential impacts are vetted and mitigation is proposed as part of what is being proposed in the Master Plan. So when they actually implement it, a lot of the mitigation concepts that come out that are brought up by community members and the public are rolled into the EIS. With that document, State Parks now has a good basis to really make sure that when they do move forward with implementation, they are taking into consideration all of these mitigation measures. August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 16 This is just a quick overview of the EIS process. The EIS prep notice was completed back in February and March of this year. We are currently in the draft EIS stage with the public review and comment period open right now. It closes on September 8th. After that, we will move forward with revising the EIS and incorporating all of the comments that are received. Then, the final EIS is accepted by the Governor, unless he so decides to delegate that authority. So if you had a chance to look at our document, this is just a kind of quick overview of the organization of the document itself. If you decide to delve deeply into it, or if you don't have the time to really delve deeply into it, the first two (2) sections, the project overview and Section 1 include the Master Plan summary, as well as the summary of all of the impacts that are discussed in the later chapters. Chapter 3 is a description and more detailed assessment of the potential impacts and mitigation measures to the natural environment. Chapter 4 is those impacts to the human environment. Section 5 is conformance with the regulatory laws and guidelines and policies. Section 6 describes the alternatives we looked at as we went through this process. (7) is the contextual issues, and much of this is the requirements of doing an EIS document, so it gets more technical as you get further into it. The 8th is just the list of agencies and individuals we consulted with. (9) is the. list of preparers, references. And then the actual comment letters we received during the pre- consultation period and the EIS prep notice period are actually attached in the last two (2) chapters with our responses to those written comments. So just a quick overview, we've distributed the draft EIS to quite a few public agencies, as well as individuals and community groups. Copies were also provided to the media and the public libraries, including Princeville Library, the Lihu`e Regional Library, and Kauai CC Library. Technical studies that were done for the EIS are also attached as appendixes, which is why the document gets really long and voluminous, but these are attached as appendixes to the draft EIS. And then the remaining project timeline. We're hoping to get through the draft EIS with the September 8t11 comment period deadline, revise it, and submit to the Governor and OEQC for review by October. Then, it actually goes to the Board of Land and Natural Resources for their review of the final EIS, and then again, it has to go back to the Governor for final acceptance, and then OEQC actually publishes it. After that, we will be finalizing the Master Plan itself, which would also require Board of Land and Natural Resources approval. With that, do you have any questions for us? Administrator Furfaro: Madam Chair, before you open the questions to the members, may I have a moment as I'm leaving to go to visit with the Mayor for another meeting? Ms. Griffin: Of course you may. Administrator Furfaro: Thank you. First of all, I'm delighted to see the presentation, but I wanted to just give some clarity here. On the Princeville shuttle bus, that issue is not dead. I do want you to know the Mayor launched a new committee of which George Costa and myself both got anointed to be on the committee, probably because of our visitor industry experience. So we've launched the original meeting with the resort operations at the Princeville site. And Lee from Planning and August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 17 Public Works is really our transportation guy, so just to answer that question, it is trying to be reestablished; just for general information. I also want to say that our committee is also looking at options with landowners for the acquisition of property. We've been in touch with both the Federal and the State offices. That is in reference to your comments about the alternative parking location up on the north shore. That's being coordinated with the fact that we're still trying to get information as to what will happen with the Kilauea Lighthouse and those visitor centers, so there are things going on. What we're hoping to hear from the Planners also is there is a component of this land that's missing, and obviously they touched on it, on the financial aspect; fees and costs associated with general operation, stewardship, and so forth. So I just wanted to give you that piece of information, so that Chairwoman, you knew that (inaudible) going on along that way. And again, to remind you that your task is really to focus on the historical aspects of the plan and that stewardship. I'm sorry I have to leave, but thank you. Ms. Griffin: That's alright, and thank you. And it's good to get an overview of the transportation, but I did want to remind this Committee (sic) that our kuleana is the historic preservation aspect. So transportation, who the Caretaker is going to be, where the engineering is, is outside our purview, unless it relates directly to historic preservation. What I'm going to do is ask you all to have questions, if you do, to Ms. Yuen or Mr. Carpenter. Then, I'm going to open it if there's public comment, and then we'll have further discussion, and make a decision on how to proceed. Thank you, again. Mr. Fufaro: Again, I want to apologize for interrupting, but the discussion without a rules of following makes it very difficult for the Staff to record the meeting, so that's an apology from me for reminding. It's better to have speakers recognized when Q &A is proposed. Ms. Griffin: Thank you. Administrator Furfaro: Thank you, Madam Chair. Administrator Furfaro left the meeting at 4:00 p.m. Ms. Griffin: Are there questions of Kimi or Alan regarding the presentation? Mr. Helder: I'm still having trouble with this, the restriction of use and... Ms. Griffin: preservation. Excuse me, David, unless you can specifically say why that is affecting the historic Mr. Helder: Cultural access. Cultural access has been historic for people here to be able to go out there and have whatever, whether they're a practitioner that is recognized by doing hula or standing out there and playing a `ukulele. I don't care what it is, when you describe the accelerated use of the park that's causing an environmental impact that you're trying to mitigate, that accelerated use is not by the people who live here. It's by increased tourism that's promoted here. When you start August b, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 18 saying, if I'm standing out there and I want to go out and play my `ukulele and I'm not allowed to because the limit has been reached of tourists, it means that my access to that park is restricted because you've promoted the use of tourists over the people that have been here and have traditionally been able to go out there, and practice whatever it is that they want to practice, in preference to tourism. So I understand; I live near there. It's a place that I go regularly and under the plan that you've just described, I would not be able to. There would be no spontaneity in what I would want to do as a resident here. And that representing from where I live, that represents probably 25% of what's available to me near where I live. So what I am really seeing here is it constitutes a preference by the State Parks system, under which you've designed here, for accepting tourism at the expense of the residents of Hawaii and Kauai, right here in particular. I don't find that acceptable, to tell you the honest truth. I don't know what you want from this particular body, an acknowledgement so that you can go forward and check this off, but I don't agree with what I see. Mr. Carpenter: Okay. I appreciate that. If I may, it's certainly not the intent to limit any local or cultural access of this. I'll back up and say that this plan represents a tremendous collaboration between the State and.the community, particularly as expressed through the community advisory group, and both the limits on the number of people and the limits on parking were not anything proposed by our side. Those came 100% from the local community. In fact, we had many long discussions and debates, and I think we would have been very disingenuous inviting the community to give their input and then ignore it. This isn't completely vetted yet, nor is the solution as to how to implement it clear, but we gave the community their say and we accepted their recommendations, and that became embedded in this plan. The big public meeting where it goes out to everybody else is coming up, and that's going to be a time when I'm sure we are going to hear plenty, but I think the public is also going to hear from those in the community and their reasons behind the decisions they made to put that in. Ms. Griffin: Hang on because if there are other questions, specifically on the presentation, we can take them, but then I want to open it to anybody in the public who wants to speak, and then we can come back and discuss. So are there other questions? Ms. Schneider: Could I ask where it is in relation to the plans for Koke`e? Is this going to come first? Or is Koke`e going to come first? Because you have a master plan for Koke`e. Mr. Carpenter: I don't know which is going to come first. Depends on where the funding comes from and the priorities of the Division. I can't say for sure which one is going to come first. They are both, kind of, proceeding concurrently. We don't have a whole lot of extra money for either. Ms. Schneider: I would just like to say, as a business person in Hanalei for 25 years that I really object to this plan. Ms. Griffin: Okay. Ms. Yuen: I do want to add to Alan's comment about the visitor limit. I made the point that because the State acquired the lands with Federal monies, I mean, we wrestled with that like can August 6, 2015 KFTPRC Meeting Minutes Page 19 we let the local guys go unlimited and just limit visitors only to the park? But because it was acquired with Federal monies, we cannot discriminate somebody who lives in Hawaii even, much less somebody from Kauai, from somebody who is from the mainland. So that is something we are wrestling with in figuring out how to implement this visitor limit, but the idea was that this would just be a first cut, we would let local practitioners continue to use the park, and see what happens then. I don't think we've defined it necessarily, and that may have been on purpose that we weren't overly specific about who can go, who cannot, but the idea was that we are trying to keep it loose enough to respect the local community that still wants to go, and like Alan said, maybe in the mornings and evenings there's no visitor limit; it's only from the peak hours that that number counter starts. But there are a lot of different ways that State Parks can actually implement this and that's why it's a management strategy. It's not something that's set in stone. It's something State Parks can adjust if it's not working. If the local community says like after a month, I still cannot get to the park, this is not working, and State Parks takes a look, well the environment, the experience at the park has changed with even that initial reduction, you know, hey maybe that gets adjusted. But the idea is to creatively come up with a way to, I mean, like I said we cannot discriminate between locals and non - locals, so how can we reduce that but still respect those who live in the community who still want to go to the park whenever they want without clearly saying the 900 only applies to out -of -state people or something to that effect. State Parks has to be very creative on how this gets implemented, but the idea is and like Alan said, the intent was never to reduce the number of local visitors. In fact, the whole point of why it was instituted, according to the advisory committee, was that local people don't even go now because it's not someplace they want to go; it's just overrun, they just don't want to be there. So the first thing that needs to happen is the period of ho`oma`a; let the park rest, let nobody in for a week. They're talking about just trying to get everything back under control, start at some point, you know 900 came up because it was less than half, it seemed like a reasonable number based on historic counts, and then adjust it from there. If we're finding out that local residents are being precluded from using the park, these guys are not going to keep taking those phone calls, they are going to make adjustments, and that was the idea. It's a management call, it's something that's adjustable over time, but the community just felt the park just needed a break; it is just way too overrun, it's been way too overrun for way too long, and everybody just... Mr. Helder: I don't disagree with you, but it sounds like it's de facto become a Federal Park, Ms. Griffin: Is there anybody from the public that wants to speak at all? Okay. Deputy Director Kaaina Hull: If I could... Ms. Griffin: Yes, Kaaina, Mr. Hull: Was there somebody that wanted to speak? Sorry. Ms. Griffin: No. August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 20 Mr. Hull: If I could interject here, too. Kimi folks have had a bit of a yeoman's effort. I actually attended a few of the meetings in the beginning, and they are extremely contentious meetings that they've held out in Hd'ena. Essentially, the big issue was moving the visitors away from the rockfall because they didn't want to have to, essentially, strip away that rock area. I think this Commission is focusing on what is one (1) of the primary issues of the park and that's access, which is not going to fall on deaf ears because that's the big controversy right now going on with them. And that's where they will be focusing on for the next several years as they push through the EIS and they actually push through the permit process. What I would urge this Commission to realize is that don't let that issue, necessarily, be your sole focus in the sense that there is some cultural practitioner access issues, as Commissioner Helder is getting into, but there maybe other historical issues at hand that will get lost if you solely focus on this big controversial side, be it the recognition of the Caretaker's site or the restoration of that cottage in particular or the historical district that's in that vicinity. You may want to take this time to address these historical issues because it's not only the purview of this Commission, that's really where a lot of the authority and a lot of the potential changes or where the State, through this EIS process; will be really listening to what needs to be said about the historical, be it cultural practitioner, be it structures, be it archaeological sites. If this Commission misses that opportunity because it's going to focus on the real controversial issue, which is going to get a lot of focus and that will probably be the bulk of the focus that they have to handle with, but don't let the other historical elements fall by the wayside in exchange for that. So I kind of urge this Commission to kind of focus on some of those other issues that might not be as controversial or sexy as access, but it really deserves as much weight, if not more sometimes. Ms. Griffin: Thank you. And I do have a question. In the maps in your presentation, you showed the elevated boardwalk over the to `i and I know that some of those walls have been carbon dated to 1,000 years. I was wondering if the Hui Maka`aina o Makana agrees with that route. Ms. Yuen: That was actually recommended by them. Ms. Griffin: Okay. Ms. Yuen: So, and Alan you should jump in, where we've located it, Alan right, there's actually no stone walls. Mr. Carpenter: Right, Ms. Yuen: It's earth berm. Mr. Carpenter: There are earth berms in between, probably what are older stone walls, and these are later additions that subdivided the lo`i. We thought about it, specifically in a way to impact as little as possible and from an Archaeologist standpoint, which is my background, we have plenty of places if we need to do more research, but we did a full inventory survey of this prior and actually our dates were actually 700 years old for this particular site, with a later phase about 300 years ago. But we did consider banking that research potential, or whatever, as well for the future, August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 21 and this is a route that was as close to the rockfall zone as we could get and still be safe. The boardwalk breaks the continuity of that system a little bit, so you want to have it as close to the highway or as close to the edge of the lo`i system as you possibly could so that you have an unbroken system from there all the way to the ocean. It was definitely considered. The secondary thing, of course, is that we hear that people aren't learning or appreciating enough about things, other than the beach and the trail, and this is an opportunity to send people to let them really appreciate it from above without standing in it and impacting it, and give them interpretive stories along the way; safely. It enriches the experience for everybody. Ms. Schneider: Were you going to rebuild the Allerton Cottage? Mr. Carpenter: The Allerton Cottage is still in fair condition. Ms. Schneider: No, the one that burnt down. Mr. Carpenter: We have no intent to rebuild the Allerton House, the main house, no. The potential is there for perhaps a staging area, maybe even a roof pavilion, or something like that that can be associated with prep for hula practitioners as they head to the actual traditional site. But no, we are not going to try to replicate the old house. Ms. Yuen: I think part of the discussion we had, and we on purpose kind of left very little recommended for that area because we feel the hula community should really be the ones to say what happens in that space, so that's why we just kind of designated the area as a hula complex. In initial discussions with Kumu Hula Kehaulani Kekua, she actually thought well, you know, maybe it's not too bad to have it as an open staging area, or whatever it is, for them. I think those ideas will come up later and what they want to actually do in that space, but that's why that area we don't really have too much recommended. It's for a future planning phase that should involve the hula community. Ms. Griffin: I was impressed with the plan. I know it was a result of a lot of hard work and a lot of years and some fault starts. One of the things that 1, and we got this document of 1,018 pages fairly recently, it's been less than 24 hours, so while I've seen parts of it, I haven't seen the whole thing, but the idea of having a cultural advisory committee sounds really good. But you know and I know that places like the 1977 Uhu`e Development Plan recommended a community advisory committee, and I was wondering with our kahu relationship with Kaneiolouma and the other private - public partnerships that are starting, is that the way you see it? Or are you recommending to reserve a certain amount of funds to have that happen? How is the Master Plan going to assist making the advisory committees actually happen? Ms. Yuen: If you want to read another voluminous document, the Master Plan report itself is attached as a CD because it was just way too much paper to print, but in the appendix of that, the advisory committee probably vetted every possible thing on this, so there was a whole meeting set aside even to discuss that and what that would be like. NTBG has a similar committee, so they kind of framed out some existing rules that would be on it, how often they would meet, and that August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 22 kind of thing, so that was attached as an appendix as kind of a groundwork for State Parks to look at and use possibly in doing this. I think the great thing about this project and our current advisory committee is that there is still a lot of energy. Like they want to see this through and they were the ones that said hey, what about a broader community advisory group, so I mean the fact that they would still want to keep on it, and the concept there was that they just meet maybe once a year with State Parks to see where they're at, implementation. If there's any kind of projects to come to, I mean State Parks, this is a wonderful resource for State Parks to have, too, because now they have a body that they can vet things off before they have to go in front of the larger public, so I think both ways I mean, it's in State Parks interest to keep that going. I don't think this community will let them not have one, so this is a pretty vocal, active community group. I think State Parks will be hearing from them whether they like it or not, honestly. Mr. Carpenter: We like it actually. Ms. Yuen: Yeah, no I think it's been great, the relationship. And even over the, it's been 7 years, I've seen it change and evolve, and I think it's a good thing, so hopefully it can continue. Ms. Griffin: As to the houses and even the orientation center and all, we would expect as a body, the Historic Preservation Review Commission, to be involved as you all look to rehabilitate those. Any other questions? Mr. Long: Yes, I have a question. Ms. Griffin: Yes. Mr. Long: Is the area mauka of the old highway then off limits to the public; the caves? Ms. Yuen: That's a good question. Mr. Carpenter: Well most of the area mauka of the highway is cliff, but there are the two (2) caves; one (1) immediately adjacent to the road and one (1) with a walkway, old asphalt roadukay; up to it. There's a third site, there's a rock shelter, and then there is Lohi` au's house site right at the end. They aren't going to be developed to attract people, and of course this plays very heavily into the fact that they are all within the rockfall zone. So traffic will be diverted away from the caves, and in fact what was originally envisioned as the pedestrian pathway was the highway corridor. That all got changed due to the rockfall assessment, and the desire by the community, and us, to not deface makana, the cliff. So everything got pushed into a safety zone. There will be viewing opportunities of the cave, presumably from the same pathway, the elevated pathway. Whether we will allow people at their own risk and with adequate warning to go and approach the caves, I mean I think, personally, it's kind of an eye sore right now with the number of signs and warning signs we have, probably. I think we don't physically have the ability to keep people out, but they will not be invited there or it won't be developed. August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 23 Ms. Yuen: The primary reason for that is that according to the rockwall engineers, those are actual the most hazardous areas because of the shear face of it. If a rock fell off of it, it would fall on you. It's not going to bounce, it's not going to go anywhere else; it is going straight down where people would be. So that is what we were wrestling with. Mr. Long: Has anyone ever been hurt by a falling rock? Ms. Yuen: There's been stories. I mean, even a member of our advisory committee had said there was one (1) instance when they have gone out, drove the length of Ka 'e. In that short time that they turned around to come back, there was maybe a 7 or 8 foot boulder that had fallen on the highway. And this was many years ago, but it's happened not in too distant history. Even when we heard the initial findings from the rockwall engineers, they had identified, was it four (4)? That you guys actually ended up removing that could have imminently fallen within that time, so State parks went ahead and dealt with those rocks that were about to fall down. It's not something that State Parks wants to just kind of say, well you know, people still want to go there; it's a huge liability for them. Mr. Long: It has to find balance. Ms. Yuen: That's exactly it. Mr. Long: From protecting the public and... Ms. Yuen: If nobody sued State Parks, right, if nobody sued State Parks, took everything under their own, or followed the signs, or whatever, but anyway... Mr. Carpenter: It's a liability issue, but nobody wants anybody to get hurt or killed either, right, so. Mr. Long: It would be nice if, in your plan, those cultural areas, the caves, you know, some people like to go to, and particularly the one up above local people like to go to, not encourage, but maybe at your own risk. I'd like that. Ms. Yuen: Yes, exactly. And I think... Mr. Carpenter: It would have to be. Ms. Yuen: Yes, it would have to be. And the other way we could address those key sites that we know people still want to go to, maybe it becomes a guided tour, maybe something that's a little more controlled where it's not just a free for all, but people are informed of the risks and you do this knowingly. But those things kind of need to fall into place now that State Parks knows the potential hazards that are there. Ms. Griffin: Anne. August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 24 Ms. Schneider: How does this impact the road that's on the register? Ms. Yuen: So actually, the impact is going to be less because you won't have so many people or cars on it. Ms. Schneider: Right, but will you change anything about the road? Ms. Yuen: No. No. If anything, what had come up was if there was a potential way to make that surface more pervious, meaning water can actually filter through it a little bit better, that was kind of discussed, but there was some debate about actually changing the paving material and whether that would jeopardize its integrity. So that kind of discussion, I think, was on the table for now because I don't think it would maintain the integrity that got it on the register, but otherwise there's nothing else. Ms. Griffin: Okay. Mr. Long: You know, if lot coverage is an issue, there are new materials out for paving that are semi - permeable; just in the last few years. Ms. Yuen: That's definitely what we're proposing; even for the pathways. Of course the boardwalk would have an open structure, I would think, so that wouldn't be an issue, but you know, even the pathways around the parking lot, all of that is discussed as having permeable material. Mr. Lonw: Is the boardwalk ADA? Ms. Yuen: It would be. It would be recommended to be ADA. Mr. Long: How wide? Ms. Yuen: We've estimated between 8 and 10 feet. It depends whether State Parks is going to allow bikes or not on it. I think if we're going to do bikes, then 10 feet would likely be the minimum width. But we also don't want to impact the lo`i either so it's that delicate balance of something that's too intrusive to the lo`i versus appropriate access, but yes, at the minimum it's ADA accessible. Ms. Griffin: Commissioners, we have some choices here. We can accept as presented, we can make comments today, or we can take the documentation back, study it more, and there's time for us to make comments at our September meeting. So what is your pleasure? Ms. Schneider: I think it would be better if we all had a chance to read the document before we make any comments. Has everybody had a chance to read it? (Laughter in background) Ms. Griffin: And the 137 page CIA, Cultural Impact Assessment. August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 25 That will put some pressure on our Staff to be able to take comments at our September 3rd meeting and get it to the Master Plan folks by the gth before the comments close. Mr. Hull: Kimi, the comments period closes September 8d'? Ms. Yuen: Yes, Mr. Hull: Well, that depends because I know we talked with the Chair earlier about possible change because of staffing for the September meeting. In order for the comments to go to OEQC for the comment process from this body, it has to be acted upon by this body; it has to be officially voted upon by this body. Ms. Griffin: So if there's other important business, perhaps we can have two (2) meetings next month. Mr. Hull: Yeah, it's just that the meeting will have to be held prior to September 8th, right? Mr. Helder left the meeting at 4:27 p.m. Ms. Griffin: Right, that would be what's on the agenda now; as the Yd Mr. Hull: Oh, I see where you're going Pat. Ms. Schneider: We have a meeting scheduled for the 3rd Mr. Hull: That's correct, yes. Ms. Schneider: So would you have time if we? Mr. Hull: I think what would be, probably, best in order to facilitate somewhat of an efficient meeting, would be if Commissioners had particular comments that they wanted to float during the Commission hearing that you forward it to Staff and we can craft it in a manner that would be most appropriate for a motion and discussion. Ms. Griffin: That's an excellent suggestion. Thank you. Is everyone willing to do that? Take a stronger look at, or a longer look I guess, at this document. Come back next month, and in the meantime, before the one (1) week sunshine rule, get comments to Staff, so that the discussion at the September Yd meeting can be directed and easier to translate into a memorandum. Mr. Hull: You can email those directly to me. If we have any questions or discussion the comments that are emailed, then I can discuss with you how exactly you want that. And just to be clear, as I watch Jodi possibly hesitate, as long as the comments aren't shared with other Commission members, right? (Laughter in background) August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 26 Ms. Schneider: Just with you. Mr. Hull: Just directly with Staff to help with the crafting. Ms. Griffin: Of course. We wouldn't dream of doing anything. May I have a motion to defer? Ms. Schneider: I make a motion that we defer all comments until the next meeting on September 3rd, Mr. Helder returned to the meeting at 4:29 p.m. Ms. Griffin: Is there a second? With no second, the motion dies. So may I have another motion on how to respond to the Hd'ena State Master Plan? Ms. Higuchi-Saye Did you folks have any comments now? There are a couple of options here; you can defer it to the next meeting, make comments at that point, make comments today, receive it at this point. Ms. Schneider: I think it was such a long document that it was too much to absorb in a couple of hours to make comments. Ms. Griffin: This body is charged with the responsibility to protect, preserve, and maintain the historic resources of the County. It is incumbent on us to respond to documents of this level of importance, so I'd like to get some comment or the deferral to next month. Yes, Stephen. Mr. Long: I'd like to make a motion that we defer our comments on this plan until our next meeting, but in preparation for the next meeting that all of our comments, after we have read the text, be forwarded to Myles or Kaaina before the meeting, so they are concise and to the point. Ms. Schneider: I second the motion. Ms. Griffin: It's been moved and seconded that we defer any official comments until our September .3rd meeting, and that the comments that each of us individually have about the plan, having reviewed it more thoroughly, be forwarded ... what's the Friday before September 3Td9 Mr. Hull: August 28th Ms. Griffin: Before August 28th, so that there will be the opportunity to have a concise report that the Commission then can respond to. August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 27 Any discussion? (None) All in favor? (6 ayes) Opposed? Ms. Santos: Me, Ms. Griffin: So it's six (6) in favor, one {1) opposed. Motion carries 6:1. Thank you so much. We appreciate the time that you've spent with us today. Ms. Yuen: Thank you for having us. Mr. Carpenter: Thank you. Ms. Higuchi - Sayegusa left the meeting at 4:33 p.m. Deputy County Attorney Andrea Suzuki entered the meeting at 4:33 p.m. Re: Letter (7/27115) from Donald L. Snrith, P.E., Acting District Engineer, State of Hawaii, Department of Transportation, Highways Division requesting to discuss the bridges that are currently planned for rehabilitation or replacement. Ms. Griffin: So Item D.3., under New Business, is the letter from Donald L. Smith, F.E., Acting District Engineer from the Department of Transportation to discuss the bridges that are currently planned for rehabilitation or replacement. Mr. Smith, it's always a pleasure. Donald Smith: Hello. Donald Smith, Hawaii Department of Transportation, Kauai District. Ms. Griffin: We got your letter, so let us know what you're thinking. It looks like today you're going to talk about Kapaia. Mr. Smith: Actually, at the last meeting for Oma` o Bridge Park Project, the Commission requested that the Hawaii Department of Transportation produce a list of bridges that we might or would be working on in the future. So I would like to address that. Ms. Griffin: Okay. Mr. Smith: I did bring ... did everybody get the handout? If you look at the handout, the bridges that are highlighted are bridges that we are currently working on either a design contract or working on a design for. There are two (2) lists; one (1) list is the functionally obsolete State bridges list. Functionally obsolete is, essentially, means that when it was designed, it will no longer meet the purposes of the current roadway system; whether it be for types of vehicles or size of vehicles, weights of vehicles that type of thing. Then the structurally deficient list, which is the smaller list, is actually a list that's generated from our Federally Mandated Bridge Inspection Program. Once a bridge receives a rating of a certain number, it becomes or is on the structurally deficient list, I will say this carefully because it doesn't necessarily mean it's going to fall down, but it does mean that it needs attention. It helps us to generate a list of what to work on next, so you can see on that August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 28 list that most of those have been highlighted so we are going to be working on those. I think the Wailua River Bridge, we are actually under contract for repairs. The only one on this list I'm not 100% sure about is the Lumaha`i Stream. It's either one of the Wainiha Bridges that we're going to replace or it's either the one, for some odd reason it's still on the list. I don't think so, I think it's one of the Wainiha Bridges. But if not, the Lumaha`i Stream Bridge has already been replaced a long time ago. I'm not sure why it's still on the list. I, actually, was not (inaudible) that question before I got here today, but just had come across it. I apologize for that, but if it's on these lists, that means, for all practical purposes, it's part of the infrastructure that needs work, either way. So somewhere down the line as you look at this, it will be in line to have some work done to it. To answer the Commission's request from a longer lookout on what we might be doing, I present that. Ms. Griffin: Thank you. Mr. Smith: Any questions? Ms. Griffin: I'm sorry. In your letter of July 271h, you said you'd like to present the Hanama`ulu (Kapaia) Stream Bridge Project. Do you want us to ask the general questions first and then you'll go to the Kapaia Bridge? Ms. Schneider: I just had a question about the Wainiha Bridges. Mr. Smith: Yes ma'am. Ms. Schneider: Are you going to replace them? Is that what you're planning to do? Mr. Smith: Currently, yes. Just on a note, you will get a request for the September 3`d meeting for Central Federal Lands, who is currently working with the Hawaii Department of Transportation, to deliver some projects, which are the three (3) Wainiha Bridges, Hanapepe, 7E, and Kapa`a Stream Bridge. Part of your handout was actually some of the material from those folks, just to give you a heads up and to be thinking about it. At this point in time, I can speak generically about any of the projects, but I really want to wait. This was really just to kind of give you a heads up for what's coming on the September Yd meeting, so you all could be thinking about it, identify things you would have questions about or concerns to give to Central Federal Lands, and we'd come back next month. Ms. Griffin: Other questions? Okay. Tell us about the Hanama`ulu Bridge. Mr. Smith: Thank you, Chairperson. We are currently at a point, I guess, of trying to collect information, input, and community input to come up with a design alternative for this project. What I have given you, there's three (3) pages in your handout, there's actually three (3) pages that were part of the presentation that we gave at the public meeting. We have not made any decisions yet whatsoever. The Kapaia Bridge, of course, and I don't have it listed on here, but I August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 29 believe it was built in the 30's if I'm not mistaken. The design for the Kapaia Bridge was actually for a fifteen (15) ton truck. If you equate that out, that's... versus what we allow today, it's much less than half. It is also on the structurally deficient list. There are issues outside of, but when you have a bridge that's that old, carrying that amount of weight, what you will find is it will start to show signs of fatigue and distress, which is what's occurring at the Kapaia Bridge which is part of this project. We intend to upgrade the structural integrity. From an engineering standpoint, I don't know of any other way to do that other than to rebuild it. I'm not sure of an avenue by which I guess anything's possible with an amount of money, but there are some deficiencies there in width. We do have some bikes and pedestrians and some other users that have to face the restrictions there that we'd like to look at going forward, and of course we'd like to bring that up to current loading standards. The last picture that was included in that is the APE, which is the area of potential effect or impact. One (1) of the things that I'm definitely very interested in, from hearing from this Commission now or going forward, is that anything that you all are aware of, not only with the bridge itself historically, you know, any historical significance there with the bridge, or in the area that you would like to bring to our attention as we move forward with this project. Ms. Santos left the meeting at 4:41 p.m. Mr. Chaffin Jr.: What are the legal implications in this discussion? If there is an accident, is the State or the County responsible? Because they know this is a problem and they haven't either closed it or rectified it. Mr. Smith: If it was a problem of immediate or eminent danger, we would close it. So that's the reason I said that carefully in that we call it the structurally deficient list, but that doesn't mean, ..if you were to close all of the bridges across the United States that were on the structurally deficient list, we wouldn't go anywhere. It is just a measure that we use to put on that bridge to let us know that we need to take action. I kind of had to address that at the public meeting; should we be driving on it? Well, it's okay. If at any point in time, which is why we have the Federally Mandated Bridge Inspection Program so you do go back to that bridge, and then if anything is identified during that time limit that remedial action or immediate action will be taken. Thank you. Ms. Santos returned to the meeting at 4:42 p.m. Ms. Griffin: Other questions? Can you tell us on correcting the geometric deficiencies, what is the width of the bridge now? And what will it be? Mr. Smith: 1 think that currently..: and I do have this information, I just did not bring it with me. Again, I must apologize. I think there are two (2) 11 foot lanes and two (2) 2 foot shoulders, so it's currently about 26 feet, maybe. Ms. Griffin: Okay. And the shoulders, currently part of it is fudge factor and part of it is curbed with a very narrow sidewalk, essentially. When you feel like you're taking your life in your hands August b, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 30 as you walk it, I might add. The S foot wide shoulders, are you talking about totally demolishing that bridge and building something new from scratch? Mr. Smith: Yes ma'am. Ms. Griffin: Is it going to have curbs? Is part going to be shoulder, part essentially a lined extension of the lanes? Is any of it going to be curbed for pedestrians? Mr. Smith: Curbed? Ms. Griffin: Yes. Mr. Smith: C- U- R- B -E -D? Ms. Griffin: Right, right. Mr. Smith: Okay, got you. Yes, there will be a separation. I can't tell you what that would look like just now because we haven't come up with it, but yes, there would be a distinct separation between the pedestrian facility and the roadway facility. It's at least possible that we could put a bridge with two (2) lanes, shoulders which would be the bike lane, and a pedestrian walkway outside of that. At this point in time, I'm just not sure. Ms. Griffin: Surrounding the bridge, under it, what historic areas and perhaps residences are going to be impacted by this? Mr. Smith: Did you get, by any chance, the letter that we sent? Not that one, the consultation letter. Ms. Griffin: No. Not to my knowledge. Mr. Smith: I should have sent it with this packet, but we did send you, and I was kind of curious, we did send an actual consultation letter, which actually outlined all of those historical areas that were documented. I should have included it. Again, lesson learned. (Laughter) There are quite a few, to my understanding, historical features in this area as it was once a farming community. I guess at some point in time the plantation, the plantation land, I don't know of all of the structures or all that went along with that either, but there is quite a bit in the area. Ms. Griffin: Stay right there. I just want to make sure. Is there anyone from the public that would like to testify in large or scope of knowledge? Okay. Then we will keep going. Last year, I think it was completed, there was a statewide historic regimentory done, completed by Fung Associates and the State. I'm wondering what comments are in that document about this bridge; its level, the importance, its history, and so forth. Mr. Smith: I don't know. August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 31 Ms. Griffin: Okay. (Laughter in background) You know what, I'm thinking if there's time, if everybody else agrees, it would be a good idea to come back to us with a larger scope on the adverse impacts of this particular job and what historic resources are being affected. Do I need a motion for that or can we just get a...? Mr. Helder: He basically said that this is a presentation about what is going to happen next month. Isn't that right? Mr. Smith: No. Not for the Kapaia Bridge. Actually, I am here only in the spirit of coming to you early and often. (Laughter in background) Ms. Griffin: And we'll always enjoy seeing you, Donald. Mr. Smith: The idea is, we haven't made any decisions yet. It's really just part of the 106 consultation process to go and find out all of the historical information I can. I am here for that reason to find out any historical information that I can. I will make sure that I can go back and make sure that I send that letter back through the process, the consultation letter, so that you can get that to everybody because it does identify some of the historical components of the area. There are some components of that area that were not included in that report at the request of the folks in the area. You know, you have to have their permission, so a lot of that is included. I'll make sure you get that. Ms. Griffin: Okay. That's really helpful because it's easier for us to respond when we have more knowledge and information on the property, whatever it is. So that will be really helpful to us. Yes, Stephen. Mr, Long: I have a question and a comment. The question is, I see here two (2) 12 foot lanes with 8 foot wide shoulders, plural, so is that two (2) 8 foot wide shoulders and two (2) 12 foot lanes? Which would be... Mr. Smith: That would be a total of 40 feet. Mr. Long: 26 to 40 feet. So right now, its 11 and 11, and 2 and 2; and they want to go to 12 and 12, and 8 and 8. That's the question, thank you for clarifying that. And the comment is, in general, it's easier for me to respond to drawings, particularly when it's a physical object, rather than words. So if you want to present design ideas, for me it's easier to see them in a graphic form. Ms. Schneider: I agree. Mr. Smith: And I realize that. Again, keeping in mind that the spirit here is just to let you know as early as possible before any decisions have been made. I understand exactly what you said. I do intend to come back. I guess the idea was is that if you had identified it though as a bridge that, August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 32 such as the Oma` o Bridge, where you did identify it as a particular group of bridges that you were concerned about; if you had any concerns early on that should be addressed. So the idea would be is that you know I'm planning on tearing this bridge down. (Laughter in background) Because I physically don't know how...I have very few funds, so you know, if I don't have to, I wouldn't, but in this case I do believe I do, and I wanted you to know that. Then if you had any concerns in regard to that and to this particular structure you know about. I will come back with some additional information. I will, at some point in time, come back with design alternatives that we choose; whether it be makai or mauka, I'm still struggling with that right now so. Ms. Griffin: There are times when a bridge is so important, historically, and within the life of the community that it becomes finding ways to preserve it is the first priority. There are times that the historic properties, view plains, cultural activities around it become very important. It is sounding like that may be the case in this particular structure, so that's why I was asking and why it would be helpful to have more information on that. By the way, while I'm thinking of it, thank you so much for waiting so long to take your turn. Are there other questions particularly on Kapaia? Other suggestions for Mr. Smith who is abit new to this game in Hawaii? Suggestions on corning back to us in ways to make all of our lives more comfortable? Then, may I have a motion that we formally ask for him to bring more material to us about the Kapaia Bridge at the next meeting? Ms. Schneider: I make a motion that we have additional material for the Kapaia Bridge at the September Yd meeting, if that's possible. Ms. Griffin: Wait. It's been moved. Do I have a second? Ms. Wichman: Second. Mr. Helder: Now you can have discussion. Ms. Griffin: Second. Now. Mr. Chaffin Jr.: When you say "additional information "... Ms. Schneider: Well, like Stephen would ask to see some drawings. It would be much easier to assess through a drawing. Ms. Griffin: And the historical sites around it, the things that we were asking; what the historic bridge inventory says, what the current width is, so how that enlargement is going to impact. So more about the current structure and the impacts that changing it will have. August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 33 Ms. Santos: I don't think he's going to have that at the next meeting. This was just a, hi, how you doing, here's a bridge, I'm going to tear it down, maybe I'll come back in another six (6) months. Right? Mr. Smith: Yes ma'am. (Laughter in background) Ms. Griffin: You may not have drawings, but you should certainly have, Donald, the historical information and the historic bridge inventory is a done deal. So I think there will be, if not, drawings, which we wouldn't want you to do all of that without us anyway. Mr. Smith: Right. Ms. Griffin: But I think that the information on the impacts to historic places we can certainly... Mr. Smith: Then my request would be to revise the motion to allow me to come back when I have a fuller picture. Not at the point when the decisions are made, but just when I've been able to put together the information because I won't have any pictures. I will forward you the consultation letter, which ... I'm not sure what went wrong there ... so I will forward you the consultation letter which has the APE and all of those sites identified. I don't want to confuse the September 3rd meeting because you'll have lots to talk about with CFL, so if you could just wait for this one, I'll come back when I have a fuller... Ms. Griffin: May I have an amendment that we not have it on the September 3rd meeting, but at the earliest meeting when the necessary materials are available? Ms. Schneider: I amend the motion that we ask him to come back when he has the materials available to brief us on the project. Ms. Griffin: Second? Mr. Helder: Second, Ms. Griffin: Okay. It's been moved and seconded that we amend the motion asking Mr. Smith to come back when he has all of the materials available for discussion. All in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Opposed? None. The amendment has carried 7:0. Now for the full motion that we ask Department of Transportation, Mr. Smith, to bring these materials to us that will help define what the historical sites are around it and what impacts are going to have with this new bridge and the demolition of the existing. Discussion? Hearing none. All in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Opposed? None. The motion carries 7:01 Mr: Smith: Going forward, again, in the interest of making sure the information gets to you so that you have the availability to call me up to see it and all of those things. I don't want to waste August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 34 any time, but I don't want to come too little, don't want to come too much. So as me being new to this situation, I just ask for your patience and your feedback to let me know when we're doing good, or we want more, we want less. And we will do what we can on our end to make sure that you get that information and have time to digest it and comment on it and have input on the project. Ms. Griffin. Thank you. Ms. Wichman: I'd just like to thank you very much for all of the information that you are giving us, and your willingness to keep us apprised of what's going on. I really appreciate that, Thank you. Mr. Long: It's not easy moving to Hawaii with all these names, but you'll get it; just stick with it. (Laughter in background) Ms. Griffin: Victoria's right. We do really appreciate it and do not mean these questions antagonistically in any way. We just have to work through this together and we got into practice with your predecessor so it's really good. And we do appreciate your willingness to come, so thank you very much. Mr. Smith: Thank you. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Ms. Griffin: Now, we have other business. We have all of the Unfinished Business. Especially C.1. and C.2. I believe that the Permitted Interaction Group in C.3., we decided last month we would wait until Kauai Nui Kuapapa made a presentation. Mr. Helder left the meeting at 4:58 p.m. Ms. Wichman: Yes, I had mentioned that to them, and they didn't contact Myles in time for this one. Ms. Griffin: Okay, Ms. Wichman: But they'd like to do that. Re: Discussion on the status of the Certified Local Government. a. Compile list of neighborhoods on Kauai appropriate for surveys of historic residences. Ms. Griffin: Alright. Our discussion of Certified Local Government, compile a list of neighborhoods on Kauai appropriate for surveys of historic residences. We've had some discussion and agreed we would come back this month and talk about that because the State Historic Preservation has some funds. They are hoping to identify two (2) residential areas on August 6, 2015 KFIPRC Meeting Minutes Page 35 each island to follow -up on a State, and possibly National, Register nomination. Do you have any suggestions? Ms. Schneider: Well, in looking at the plat maps, we can see both Hanapepe and Hanalei have many historic properties that are over the 50 year and are endangered. Ms. Griffin: Others? Ms. Wickman: You had suggested the Gay and Robinson property at one time. Ms. Griffin: I actually have several suggestions, but I don't want to dominate the,. Kaaina's laughing at me already. Ms. Wickman: Looking for the districts though, it was a little difficult to look for districts. Ms. Schneider: Well if you took the inventory and put them on the plat maps, and looked at the plat maps, you could see Hanapepe and Hanalei both had numerous properties. Ms. Wichman: No, they do. Ms. Schneider: Of course Olokele Sugar, that whole street as well. Ms. Griffin: I know you're in archaeology, but as our State Historic Preservation Division representative, would you come up to the hot seat for us please, Mary Jane? I'm sorry, Anna. Excuse me, Anna. Forgive me. And I knew that so well, I just, forgive me. Yes, you are here. I spoke to Mike Faye about the west side and the first thing he said was Kekaha. There are lots of residences through there, part on the beach, but part in the neighborhoods that are endangered because as styles change, these aren't particularly appreciated. I have pictures of several Kapa`a residences, I mean they're casual pictures, they're windshield pictures, that would give a sense of that. Also, the Waimea Plantation Camp, Lihu`e side of the Plantation Cottages, is really well kept. They're well attended. There are people living there that take great pride in them. There is a Hongwanji, the Waimea Higashi Hongwanji, again, well kept; and classic worker plantation houses. We talked about Kaumakani. Again, it's a real special little avenue and the houses on it. Ms. Schneider: And it has street lamps. Ms. Griffin: It has street lamps. It has this, really unusual for the area, Spanish- Mission style amenda building. Then the Olokele Mill at the end of the property. Ms. Schneider: And the Plantation Manager's House which is on the other side. Ms. Griffin: Right. We have a member of our Commission who knows the Hanapepe /Kalaheo area well, so I did not approach that area. But I also wanted to talk about `Akahi and `Elua Street because the Lihu`e Town Core Plan addresses some of the possibilities of that like keeping the August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 36 hedges a certain height and a hunter business in the back. There are still several houses on `Akahi Street; `Elua, though, is still more intact. However, this house that's near Ahukini on `Elua Street is currently on the market for $899,000 with the "For Sale" sign saying "commercial property potential ". That's why I think these two (2) blocks are exceedingly endangered even with the Town Core Plan activity. Again, I have several pictures of homes. The next, in the district where I live, especially since Ms. Arinaga is not here today, is the Kapa`a Baby Beach area that were Plantation Management homes and along that beachfront, too. A lot of those are pretty safe in the neighborhood, but a lot of the ones right along the oceanfront that are becoming B &Bs and things, the pressure to build differently is strong. Since four (4) of the nine (9) of us are from the north shore, I thought that those of you from that area would be good; although there are places, like you say, along Weke Road where you've got old craftsman houses. A few are on the National Register, but when there's a house on the Bay that is a historic home and it's on the market for $30 million, there's a good chance what's going to come will be very different. So in terms of endangered and what's happening to that community, that is there. And these are for you. Other places? _Mr. Lonw. How would you like us, as a Commission, to make a recommendation for these folks to follow? I mean, should we want to decide these are our three (3) or four (4) top neighborhoods? Anna Broverman: I think that would be really helpful for us. We're planning on doing at least three (3) days of surveys here in September. We're going to have about eight (8) to ten (10) people doing it. I think if we could have a recommendation o£..I'd say three (3) to four (4) areas we could definitely do in that time period, so those would be very helpful to have as suggestions. Mr. Chaffin Jr.: Who is "we "? Ms. Broverman: State Historic Preservation Division. I'm with the Architecture Branch. Ms. Griffin: This is Anna Broverman. I apologize, again, sitting back there I had a mind warp. (Laughter in background) Alright, so what are your recommendations? Ms. Schneider: Do you want to just list them? Mr. Chaffin Jr.: What are the parameters of our recommendation? You mean a small area or a large area or? Ms. Schneider: That they are eligible to be a district, right? August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 37 Ms. Broverman: Yes. We're looking at Residential Districts, so Housing Districts, but also places with commercial main streets, potentially. We want them to be eligible for the Register and we also are looking for places that are potentially endangered. So those are our criteria. Ms. Schneider: Do we want to make a recommendation? Ms. Griffin: Yes, that's what I'm asking for is that, like Stephen suggested that we order it in some way, say five (5) different areas or whatever they can look at. Mr. Chaffin Jr.: I would like to see a list of what the areas could be and then we could pick from that list. Ms. Schneider: The list is the inventory, isn't it? Ms. Griffin: The areas are where there are several historic ... and this is residential that they're doing. The State, this year, passed a law that historic houses no longer need to go to the State Historic Preservation Division for review, unless they are already on the State or National Register. In doing that, they also gave $100,000 each of two (2) years for SHPD to locate and identify and potentially place on the State Register or something, follow -up in a way that will give us a body of appreciated historic districts. Historic districts vary in size considerably and they are almost always non - conforming structures within that historic area. Ms. Santos: I have to leave, in like five (5) minutes, because we have a salt maker's meeting. Ms. Griffin: Okay. Ms. Santos: Okay, so I'm going to do my nominations. I do the Waimea Town because that's a good one; that whole section right there before the Cottages. Then I do the Hanapepe Town. There's that side street right there and all those back streets over there; that includes Hanapepe Valley, just because. Ms. Schneider: Both sides of the river. Ms. Santos: Yes, both sides of the river, yes. I say Pakald, just because. You have to add it to the list. Ms. Schneider: Absolutely, Ms. Santos: You have to add it to the list. You can't not add it to the list. Ms. Griffin: You know, I couldn't get down there to take photos. I found one (1) aerial, but... Ms. Schneider: Yes, Makaweli. August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 38 Ms. Santos: And plus because they want to do all that development over there, that is high on the list of places. Mr. Long: You know, you are only going to have money for two (2) or two (2) and two (2)? Ms. Broverman: Two (2) what? Mr. Long: Two (2) historical neighborhoods. Ms. Santos: They have eight (8) people here. They are going to have eight (8) people here to do the assessments. Ms. Broverman: Yes. And it's not going to be a money factor; it'll be time. So we are trying to get a document of areas surveyed to the legislature by February. Mr. Long: How many neighborhoods are you going to do? Ms. Broverman: I think, realistically, we can do about four (4) neighborhoods. Mr. Long: Four (4) in one (1) year? Or two (2) in one (1), two (2) in the next? Ms. Broverman: Yes, for this year. And we'll have money for next year as well. Mr. Long: You do? Ms. Broverman: Yes. Mr. Hull: And Anna, that's four (4) for Kauai or four (4) statewide? Ms. Broverman: Kauai, Mr. Long: Okay, so that's four (4) for Kauai in the first tranche of money. Ms. Broverman: Yes. Mr. Long: Okay. Ms. Santos: So I'm going to name mine, and then you guys can say "yay" or "nay" Mr. Long: Yeah. I was just wondering if we had to combine the Pakala and Waimea. I'm sorry. Ms. Santos: Well Pakala is big; Pakala is huge. It's not Kaumakani where it's just that one (1) street. Ms. Schneider: Right, right. August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 39 Ms. Santos: You know what I'm saying? I mean, that would be the most prominent one, but we're not really developing Kaumakani right now because in Pakala they want to go and build a ... whatever they're doing over there. I mean, that would be my top pick right now. And maybe Pakala with that one (1) Kaumakani road, and the Manager's house across the street. That's kind of my thing for the west side. McBryde is kind of cool, but it's so run down over there, but people are still living in there; people still got their stuff going on in there. I think that's not really a neighborhood anymore so it doesn't count. Mr. Hull: Yeah, and to somewhat interject, as the recommendations come through, Staff can look at them further as well. But I think also to Anna's point, or to SHPD's point, if the purpose is essentially because the State legislature passed a law that removed the requirement for residential buildings to have to go through SHPD review, and therefore SHPD is now looking for residential neighborhoods in order to fold those residential structures back into the review, potentially, should changes be made. I think Waimea Town or Hanapepe Town are perfect candidates for historic districts in and of themselves. For the purpose of folding say residential structures in though, that might not necessarily be there because of the fact that those are primarily commercial structures. If there are alterations being made to structures over fifty (50) years or older, they are going to have to come to you folks anyway. Ultimately, what the goal SHPD is, to a certain degree and correct me if I'm wrong Anna, is trying to establish is to somewhat quickly fold in a few areas of residential areas. Ms. Schneider: So Hanalei Town, Hanalei /Weke Road would definitely be one (1) of them. Mr. Hull: Yes. If you're going like the Ching Young Village area, then some of it might be lost because of the fact that they are going to have to come in no matter what. Ms. Schneider: I have been talking to them. Ms. Wichman: That's the problem that I found, too. The problem I found was you look at housing districts, you know, so most of the historical districts that we have are commercial now. Maybe at one time they were houses, but they have all become commercial, so it's kind of limiting. Ms. Griffin: Right now, there are only six (6) residences on this island that are historic and taking advantage of the historic tax credit. Do other Commissioners have recommendations? Ms. Santos left the meeting at 5:15 p.m. You mentioned Hanalei /Weke Road. Ms. Schneider: I think there are also areas in Kilauea that are associated with the sugar. They are sort of being impacted now as new buildings are coming in, and they are all residential. And only one (1) of them is on the Register; the Trombley's house. August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 40 Ms. Griffin: As I started out, I mentioned Waimea, the plantation camp, not Manager's houses. Lihu`e, here, which those houses were almost the first time that Lihu`e Plantation sold land for Managers and things to come in; Consolidated (inaudible) bought a property for their Manager and built a house, Kress bought a property, General Shinseki grew up on `Akahi Street. Ms. Schneider: Some of them are unique. Ms. Griffin: They are classic, Hawaii vernacular, single -wall, but they are right here in town and I think endangered. So I 1 Town Track, which is what it's formally called. And then, lil Beach area. Anything else, other Commissioners? 9 foot ceilings, tung and groove, could like to bring up the Lihu` e .e I said, there was Kapa`a Baby Mr. Long: I'll just put in my two cents worth. In picking up on what Kaaina said about Hanapepe and Waimea Town, and I don't know how to judge that myself in weighing whether a commercial versus residential and what we see in the value. But in placing a lot of weight on what Kaaina said, I would go like this: first for me would be the Pakala and that street. I'm sorry I don't know the street with the street lamps. Ms. Griffin: Kaumakani. Mr. Long: So that would be one (1) and I would couple those together because they are pretty close and similar. No. 2 for me would be Kapa` a. Is it Fuji Beach? Yes. No. 3 would be Hanalei, and No. 4 would be Llhu`e. Ms. Griffin: Other suggestions? So we've got the suggestion of Pakala/Kaumakani, Kapa`a/Pineapple Management /Baby Beach/Fuji Beach area makai of the road across from Big Save and south, the Hanalei/Weke Road and... Mr. Lona: Not just Weke Road, I mean, there are some other areas. Ms. Griffin: Makai of the road? Or would you go...? Mr. Long: Oh no, it's all makai of the highway. You know, like the Kobayashi's house and property on the beach. Ms. Griffin: Right. And Lihu`e Town Track; `Akahi and `Elua. Is there discussion about differing, adding? May I have a motion? August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 41 Ms. Schneider: I make a motion that we submit these names of these districts to the State for their information. Ms. Griffin: Okay. Second? Okay, it's been moved and seconded. It was Larry Chaffin that seconded that we submit to the State these names for further research. All in favor? I'm sorry, discussion? Ms. Wichman: Discussion. Will we be able to submit more names if they come up? And if we have anything, oh we forgot about this one? Ms. Broverman: Yes. You can go ahead and send your suggestions to me, and I can give you my card if you need my contact information. Ms. Wichman: Just wondering because we might, like tonight in the middle of the night, wake up and go, oh I forgot about this place, you know. So I'm trying to think like, Koloa, but it's all commercial downtown Koloa, but there's got to be something in Koloa. There are all these places, and you have to think of housing districts, and I think really limits it. Ms. Schneider: We're thinking of what's most threatened. I think when you look at anything on the shoreline like in Hanalei, I think those are all threatened. Ms. Wichman: I mean, if we move and approve this list, this isn't finite, right? We'll be able to act. Ms. Broverman: No. I'm planning on solidifying which areas we're surveying within the next week or two, and so you could still give me ideas until then. Ms. Wichman: Okay, thank you. Ms. Griffin: Stephen. Mr. Long: I'm sorry, I was unclear about ... there are two (2) tranches of money? Ms. Broverman: Yes. Mr. Long: One (1) this year and one (1) next year? Ms. Broverman: Yes. Mr. Long: $100,000 each year? Ms. Broverman: Yes. August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 42 Mr. Long: Just for Kauai? Or for statewide? Ms. Broverman: It's for statewide. Mr. Long: And Kauai gets what percentage of that? Ms. Griffin: I'm sorry, Stephen, hold on to that and we'll ask, but we have a motion on the floor. It's been moved and seconded that we submit these possibilities to the State for their survey. We should discuss specific to the motion. Mr. Long: And it is specifically to Victoria's concern of being able to present additional neighborhoods in the future, and I'm trying to clarify that we have another whole year in which to present additional neighborhoods. Ms. Griffin: Okay. It's been moved and seconded that we submit these naives, the first four (4) in order and the rest that have come up, to the State for their survey coming up soon. All in favor? (5 ayes) Opposed? You're opposed? Ms. Hoomanawanui: Yes. Ms. Griffin: That's five (5) in favor, one (1) opposed, and the motion carries 5:1. You look like you have something you want to say. Mr. Hull: I was going to add, real briefly, because the discussion is going into historic preservation of particularly residential structures and the districting and the process that goes by. I just want to make the Commission aware that... and I believe some Commissioners are aware because the topic was brought up particularly about commercial redevelopment of residential properties, like in Kekaha or whatnot. One (1) thing that is on the books that is of fair amount of lucrative gain can be done to it through historical preservation is, currently you guys may well be aware of the transient vacation rental issue, for or against, wherever you are at. It's an extremely lucrative business and it's proven to be so. The only way that you can legally get a transient vacation rental now on this island, outside of those visitor destination areas, is to have your property on the Historical Register. If you are on the State Historical Register, you can become a legal TVR; kind of just literally stamped over the counter. Right now, individuals, property owners, and quite frankly, investment houses from California and China are trying to figure out how to get their hands on TVRs here, and the one (1) way you can do it is to have your property registered. That doesn't mean that you are going to be able to register this... Ms. Schneider: So that means automatically they get the...? Mr. Hull: You can automatically get that approval. But it doesn't mean to say like "oh I have a house now. I'm going to put it on the Register." Obviously, Anna will attest to the fact that it's not that easy to get on the Register. It's going to have some type of significant place, either the August 6, 20 [ 5 KRPRC Meeting Minutes Page 43 architecture or the history of Kauai. But just so you folks are aware, that is a particular avenue, boon, and reason to register as we're trying to push property owners to go that route. Ms. Griffin: And that's a County ordinance? Mr. Hull: As within the actual Transient Vacation Rental Ordinance. We kept, kind of, silent on it because of the fact that we were afraid that it would blow out of control. Quite frankly, nobody has even attempted to use it in the past five (5) or six (6) years, and it would be actually nice to see if that would actually work because it might get some folks more amped and pumped about preservation. (Laughter in background) Ms. Broverman: I apologize, but my flight literally leaves in an hour, so I have to leave. Ms. Griffin: That's fine. We normally are not this extensive, but we do appreciate it and you will be getting a letter from us. Ms. Broverman: Thank you all very much for your comments. It's very helpful. Ms. Wichman: Thank you. Ms. Schneider: Take care. Ms. Griffin: Is there anything else on this discussion before we go on? Re: Report from investigative committee members (Permitted Interaction Group) to discuss and explore strategies on 'informing the public and land owners on the State and National Register of Historic Places Nomination Process and Incentives for placing historic structures on to the National or State Register of Historic Places. Ms. Griffin: Okay. Our last order of business is the report from the Permitted Interaction Group to discuss and explore strategies on informing the public and land owners about the State and National Registers and incentives. We did meet; Anne, Stephen and 1. Stephen, can you give a report about what we discussed? Mr. Long: I can do that. On August 15th, Anne Schneider, Pat Griffin, and myself met at the Princeville Library to discuss how the Kauai Historic Preservation Review Commission could promote and encourage the listing of properties to National Register of Historic Buildings. We came up with five (5) ideas. (1) was just get the word out with articles in Local and State printed materials about the benefits of National registration, including tax credit benefits. (2) Articles by owners who have already placed their properties on the National Register and have had positive experiences with that as a hook to other potential nominees. (3) Would be displays in libraries and other public places that would circulate and change. (4) We noted that there were August 6, 2615 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 44 very few residential and commercial buildings on Kauai that are actually on the Register. We discussed the importance of two (2) in particular, the Shell Station in Uhu`e and the Convention Hall, as prime potential candidates for nomination. And (5) we were going to identify and contact owners of potential properties that are excellent candidates for nomination to have a more in -depth discussion with them to see if they might be interested in pursuing it. Ms. Griffin: Thank you. Did you have something to add, Anne? Ms. Schneider: No, Ms. Griffin: We knew this was a partial list and that several of it, like No. I getting the word out, would take incentive and participation for us to actually to do it. Is there any discussion on the National Register? Changing the mindset about it in the'public? Mr. Long: You know, we were going to have Ian, who's now lost to us I'm sure, or somebody give us a talk on the tax credit incentives. If we were educated in that way then we could educate other people. Ms. Griffin: Is that something that the Staff can put together and ask Ian for next meeting? Great. So hopefully because that is an incentive, certainly. May I have a motion to accept this report and to keep the discussion on placing historic structures on the Register to keep it on the agenda, so as we move forward that can remain on our minds and we can follow through. Ms. Schneider: I make a motion that we accept this report and keep working on it, if not the next meeting, the meeting after to have some resolution. Ms. Griffin: Second? Ms. Wichman: Second. Ms. Griffin: Thanks. It's been moved and seconded that the Historic Preservation Review Commission accept this report and to keep it on future agendas so that we can continue to discuss it. Yes? Mr. Chaffin Jr.: Can you define what the report is? Ms. Griffin: First of all, as you know from your time in the County, for more than two (2) of us to talk about something like this and make it more efficient to bring back, instead of taking time for everybody, a Permitted Interaction Group was started. The report was to find out ways to change the mindset, that's been identified, that the National and State Registers are a burden, rather than a possibility. So that's what Stephen was saying, was we came up with five (5) different possibilities on getting the word out through various means, having displays and getting the word out, and finding out more about tax credits and other financial incentives. So that's what the report is, and instead of just... August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 45 Mr. Chaffin Jr.: Excuse me. It's a verbal report rather than a printed report? Ms. Griffin: Correct. Mr. Chaffin Jr.: Thank you. Ms. Griffin: Other discussion? It's been moved and seconded. All in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Opposed? Hearing none, the motion carries 6:0. Re: Report from investigative committee (Permitted Interaction Group) to discuss and explore creating a Smart Phone Application to identify and highlight Historic properties on Kauai. Ms. Griffin: And the other PIG, on smartphone apps, has not yet met. Ms. Wichman: No. We'll defer that for now. Ms. Griffin: Okay, so please keep that on the agenda. COMMISSION EDUCATION (None) Ms. Griffin: E, Commission Education. We have none today, but are looking forward to next month. SELECTION OF NEXT MEETING DATE AND AGENDA TOPICS (9/3/2015) Ms. Griffin: The next meeting will be on September 3rd. Are there any other agenda topics, beyond what we've just identified, that someone would like to put on the agenda? Mr. Chaffin Jr.: This is just a question. Being a new member, are the meetings usually ending at this time? Ms. Griffin: No. This one is really long. Mr. Chaffin Jr.: Or should we start earlier? Ms. Griffin: No, this is unusually long. So agenda topics? No. Hearing none, the meeting is adjourned. ADJOURNMENT August 6, 2015 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 46 The meeting was adjourned at 5:33 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, arcie Agaran Commission Support Clerk Date: 1 *0119