HomeMy WebLinkAbout3-10-15 pcminKA.UA1 PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
March 10, 2015
The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the County of Kauai was called to order by
Chair Anderson at 9:14 a.m., at the Lihue Civic Center, Moikeha Building, in Meeting Room
2A/2B. The following Commissioners were present:
Chair Angela Anderson
Vice Chair Sean Mahoney
Mr. Louis Abrams
Mr. Wayne Katayama
Mr. Jan Kimura
Ms. Amy Mendonca
Absent and Excused:
Mr. Hartwell Blake
The following staff members were present: Planning Department — Michael Dahilig, Leslie
Takasaki, Duke Nakamatsu, Kaaina Hull, Dale Cua, Marie Williams; Deputy County Attorney
Ian Jung,
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Anderson called the meeting to order at 9:14 a.m.
ROLL CALL
Mr. Dahilig noted there were six members present.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Mr. Dahilig recommended moving item H. I., executive session, immediately after the
consent calendar then taking item L.1., unfinished business, before general business matters.
On the motion by Sean Mahoney and seconded by Louis Abrams to approve the
agenda as amended, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote.
Mr. Dahilig presented a lei and plaque of appreciation on behalf of the Planning
Department to Commissioner Jan Kimura for his six years of service on the Planning
Commission as this is his last day.
1
VA2015 Master Files\ Commissions \Planning \Minutcs\2015 -3 -10 Platming Commission Minutes
MINUTES of the meeting(s) of the Planning Commission
Regular Meeting of February 10, 2015
On the motion by Sean Mahoney and seconded by Louis Abrams to approve the
minutes of February 10, 2015, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote.
RECEIPT OF ITEMS FOR THE RECORD
Mr. Dahilig noted a number of supplemental items that were distributed including
additional agency comments from the Department of Public Works and supplemental reports.
On the motion by Amy Mendonca and seconded by Sean Mahoney to receive the
items for the record, all were in favor by unanimous voice vote.
HEARINGS AND PUBLIC COMMENT
Continued Agency Hearing (None)
New Agency Hearing (None)
Continued Public Hearing (None)
New Public Hearing (None)
All public testimony pursuant to HRS 92 (Sunshine Law)
The Commission received testimony from Larry Rivera regarding Coco Palms. He
thanked the Commission with all his heart to do the right thing. People's lives depend on the
project. He shared a song with the Commission.
The Commission received testimony from Rupert Rowe, lineal descendant of Coco
Pahns. His relatives are buried there. He would like to see that area placed into a park so the iwi
that rest there can rest forever. He is a ward of the State based on a liquid measurement that does
not give them the opportunity to protect their past. There is nobody in the roam who is a ward of
the State based upon their race. There is an injured parry of families that live there that is being
violated. Coco Palms should be a memory of their past. Put it back to what it once was and.let
those sleep the way they sleep. He knows there is money involved that represents development.
It disrupts their lives and what they are all about, Kanaka Maoli. They have a quantum that is
very disturbing. They do not have a fair shake in the Court system based upon the word. ward.
He would like to know if they have the same protection the developer has on restoring something
there. It is very disturbing to him. There are a lot of Kanaka out there that don't want to come
forward and voice their concerns because they look like foods to all of those who are not of the
0
VA20I5 Master Fil cs\ Coiwnissions \Planning\Minutes\2015 -3 -10 Planning Commission Minutes
blood, based upon a liquid measurement. He hears singing about Coco Palms 100 years ago.
The Kanaka back then were happy. They never had their lands disturbed. Now it is all being
disturbed from 1957 to now. Nobody can protect their past. They have been destroyed every
day as they go forward. It is sad to say as a kingdom, they are totally losing their identity to the
rich and powerful of the world.
The Commission received testimony from William Fernandez, Keiki o Ka Aina, born on
Kauai, 50% Hawaiian. He is 84 years old and was born before Coco Palms was put into place,
and lived through a time when Coco Palms was in place by the County of Kauai at this historical
spot on the island. All the issues regarding the iwi, the royal aspect of creating Coco Palms was
all decided years ago. The Commission is not being asked to revisit those questions. They are
being asked as Larry Rivera has pointed. out, to bring back to life what the County has already
agreed to build and allowed. to be there. It is time to move forward and complete what should be
done and bring back to life this wonderful place that has so much of the history that he lived
through on Kauai. He was at the torch lighting ceremonies, singing Hawaiian songs for the
people coming here. The tourists have loved Coco Palms and it has been an institution that has
been so important to all of Hawaii and all of the hotels in terms of teaching the Hawaiian history
and aloha. He asked the Commission to move forward and not go back.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Status Reports (None)
Director's Reports for Proi ect(s) Scheduled for Agency Hearing on 3/24/15. (None)
Shoreline Setback Activity Determination
Shoreline Setback Commission Review SSCR - 2015 -09 and Shoreline Setback
Determination SSD- 2015 -27 for a shoreline activity determination Tax Map Key 2 -8 -017. 005
Poipu, Kauai, for acceptance by the Commission = Evan Goldber.
On the motion by Louis Abrams and seconded by Wayne Katayama to approve the
consent calendar, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes Sections 92 -4 and 92-5(a)(4), and Kauai Count
Charter Section 3.07(E), the Office of the County Attorney requests an executive session to
provide the Commission a legal briefing concerning Supreme Court of the United States decision
in Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District (No. 11 -1446) relative to conditions
imposed on land use entitlements. This briefing and consultation involves the consideration of
the powers, duties, privileges, immunities and /or liabilities of the Commission and the County as
they relate to this agenda item.
02
VA2015 Master Filcs \Commissious\Planning\Minutes \2015 -3 -10 Planning Commission Minutes
On the motion
by Sean Mahoney
and seconded by
Louis Abrams to move into
executive session, the
motion carried by
unanimous voice
vote.
The Commission moved into executive session at 9:31 a.m.
The Commission reconvened at 10:22 a.m.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS (For Action)
Class IV Zoning Permit Z -IV- 2015 -8, Project Development Use Permit PDU- 2015 -7,
Variance Permit V- 2015 -1 and Special Management Area Use Permit SMA(U)- 2015 -6 to permit
repair and reconstruction of the former Coco Palms Resort including but not limited to: 350 hotel
units, Lotus Restaurant and Flame Room Bar, the LobbyBuilding, the Commercial Building,
three swimming pools, Queen's Audience Hall, the Palms Lanai, Sea Shell Restaurant, Chapel in
the Palms, 2 of 4 Bridge Crossings; the construction of a new Utility & Maintenance Building
and a new Queen Lagoon Building into a spa and gym facility on the site of the previously
demolished structure. The project is situated in Wailua and located at 04 -241 Kuhio Highway,
further identified as Tax Map Keys 4 -1 -003: 004 or. 005 007 01.1 and 017 and 4 -1 -005: 014
and 017, and containing a total area of approx. 28.523 acres = Coco Palms Hui, LLC. [Director's
Report received 1/13/15 Supplemental No. 2 Director's Report received 1/27/15 Su lemental
No. 3 Director's Report on 2/10/15 agenda, hearing closed 2/24/15.1
Supplemental No. 4 Director's Report pertaining to this matter.
Mr. Dahilig noted a supplemental report number 4 has been distributed and he circulated
a supplemental five. He read the supplemental reports into the record (On file). Since the last
meeting, the Department was going to reconcile specific concerns related to historical
architectural issues as well as gain more information and address by condition perceived traffic
impacts for the project. The Department has been working with the Transportation Agency as
well as the Department of Public Works and has been in contact with the Department of
Transportation to further explore the issue of transportation impacts to the surrounding area.
They provided additional conditions specifically recognizing that the Haleilio and Apana Roads
are County controlled right of ways and are where a predominant amount of exaction focus was
centered. A lot of conditions set forth was premised on the preliminary TZAR that was presented
to the agencies. Condition 21 says given the outstanding evaluation of the traffic impact analysis
report by the Department of Public Works and the Department of Transportation in the interim
the applicant shall provide the following to mitigate traffic impacts created by the development:
A) provide at the applicants expense a shuttle for 18 months after receiving certificate of
occupancy as a pilot program to facilitate transit to and from the Lihue Airport and the
development, B) provide at the applicant's expense a circulator shuttle for 18 months to move
patrons from the hotel to Lydgate and Wailua Beach, the Seashell Restaurant site, the Coconut
Market Place, and other destinations within the main Kapaa transit corridor as determined by the
executive on transportation, C) provide at the applicant's expense a bike share program for the
patrons of the resort to allow guests to ride bikes into Kapaa town and other destinations without
driving, D) the applicant shall work with the State Department of Transportation and Public
4
VA2015 Master Piles \Commissions\Planning\Minutes \2015 -3 -10 Planning Commission Minutes
Works to resolve pedestrian crossing, sidewalks, and vehicular traffic demands created by the
development and bear implementation costs proportional to the impact that arises including
installation of a continuous public sidewalk on the Kuhio Highway frontage between Kuamoo
and Haleilio Road, and E) provide the Planning Department, Department of Public Works and
State Department of Transportation an update to the TZAR one year after receiving certificate of
occupancy evaluating traffic impacts created by the resort. This condition is to gain a sampling
of what the traffic impacts look like after certificate of occupancy contemporaneous with the
running of the interim programs. Finally, provide the Department with a report on the
applicant's efforts to work with the Department of Land and Natural Resources to obtain
permission to use the lands held by lease for mauka access for either vehicular or pedestrian to
allow the movement of residents between Kua>noo and Haleilio Road. (This is meant to look at
whether an access between the two collector roads would be possible to help facilitate traffic
between those two corridors and take pressure off that strip between the two intersections.)
Should an updated TZAR determine a change in the traffic conditions, the applicant is aware that
this permit is subject to modification before the Planning Commission to address these impacts
and acknowledges they may be responsible for the proportionate costs for any impacts for which
a nexus to the activity may be identified. Condition 22 are additional specific CTP types of
conditions set forth by Public Works. At this issuance of building permits, subsequent to
commission action, the applicant shall bear the costs of the following improvements: design and
construction of continuous public sidewalks fronting Apana Road to Haleilio Road and along
Haleilio Road to Kuhio Highway fronting the applicant's property (a minimum of 5 feet wide),
design and construction of a dedicated right turn lane on Haleilio Road from Apana Road to
Kuhio Highway in addition to the existing through lane, design and construction of widening
Apana Road to be wide enough for two way vehicle travel (the applicant shall work with Public
Works on the width, length, and other design detail for this improvement), and finally design and
construction of do- not -block markings along the eastbound. lanes of Haleilio Road at the
intersection of Apana Road. Condition mttnber 10 was amended based on the request of the
Transportation division to state at the issuance of any building permit subsequent to commission
action, the applicant shall bear the cost of design and construction of a bus stop and pullout on
Kuhio Highway just south of Haleilio Road including a 50 foot pullout additional space for decel
and accel lanes. The public transit bus stop shall be fully accessible by the public. The location
and configuration of the pullout and bus stop shall be coordinated with the Transportation
Agency and the State Department of Transportation. The bus stop should include a passenger
shelter, bike rack, trash for single bins and $1,000 a year grant to the Transportation Agency for
20 years from approval to provide maintenance funds for the bus shelter. There was one more
encouraging the applicant to support the bus system and encourage employees to use the bus. He
noted they received further comment from Fish and Wildlife service as well as comments from
the applicant regarding minor tweaks to the language. He noted changes to language in
conditions 3, lb, 17, and 22 based on suggestions from the applicant and consented to by the
Department. Based on Fish and Wildlife's comments, they added an additional condition 28 and
29 relating to lighting concerns as well as the request to develop a monitoring program should.
any biological issues arise conflicting with construction.
Mr. Abrams noted that they received draft traffic impact reports that Mr. Dahilig referred
to as preliminary and updated. He questioned if there has been some other report since the two
to which Mr. Dahilig replied there has been no report since then. As pant of the agency
5
VA2015 Master FilcslCoinmissionsl llanninglMinutes120I5 -3 -10 Plarming Commission Minutes
comments, the Department of Public Works asked for a TZAR. He noted the TZAR is not final at
this juncture, but it is in substance and form that the commenting agencies feel comfortable
making conditions based on those findings in the preliminary TIAR. As part of condition 21,
they left the proviso to say that the TiAR still needs to be finalized and updated once the resort
goes through. As the process goes through, it becomes more of a monitoring and adjustment
process versus something that is fixed.
Michael Belles representing the applicant, Coco Pallas Hui, LLC thanked the Planning
Director and Attorney Jung for working closely with his client to come up with the best possible
recommendation. They are in agreement with the proposed recommendations as amended in the
last director's report. He suggested a revision for the Commission's consideration to condition
10 and condition 23 dealing with the transportation recommendation on installation of a bus stop.
It is difficult and impossible to comply with the condition because there simply is no land to
construct a bus stop and to have the necessary accel and decel lanes required. The commercial
building is only a matter of feet within the state right of way. To physically locate a bus stop
along Kuhio Highway would be a significant disruption of the entire frontage of the project,
would displace parking, and require reconfiguration of buildings. He suggested an in lieu
payment proportionate to the impact they believe they are creating. They would recommend their
contribution be $10,000 which they understand to be a proportionate share that was assessed
another private developer. Beyond that, they have no objections to the report and the conditions
as amended. They would support the Department and the Commission should they see it
appropriate to approve the report as amended with the lone objections being to conditions 10 and
23.
Attorney Jung noted the new proposed condition 10 regarding language for the in lieu fee
was distributed to the Commission.
Mr. Katayama questioned the number of employees that the project would have on a shift
to which Tyler Greene, Principle of Coco Palms Hui, LLC. replied that they would need to look
at the economist's report, but the total number of employees came out to 550 in total.
Mr. Abrams questioned whether the $1,000 per year grant to the Transportation Agency
for 20 years is no longer part of it and they are now looking at the ill lieu fee of $10,000 to which
Mr. Dahilig replied that they were simply incorporating the comments from the executive on
transportation into the report. It wasn't asked by the Transportation Agency. The applicant is
objecting to conditions 10 and 23 and has proposed an additional condition in lieu of 10 and 23.
The condition was discussed by the County Attorney's office.
Attorney Jung stated that he had discussions with the executive on transportation and
they discussed what would be proportionate share. It turned out the newer aluminum bus stop
facilities including the land work beneath the structure costs about $50,000. The applicant was
willing to pay 20% of that which would be $1.0,000, similar to what was imposed. on the Longs
project.
0
V:\2015 Master Files\ Commissions \PlaniviiglMinutcs\2015 -3 -10 Planning Commission Minutes
Mr. Abrams asked for clarification that the maintenance proposal of $1,000 per year was
not at the Longs project to which Attorney Jung replied it was not at Longs so it was the
determination to strike that provision.
Mr. Abrams suggested that the applicant consider adopting the bus stop to which
Attorney Jung stated that he was not sure there was an adopt a bus program.
Mr. Abrams noted that they adopt signs on the state highways and portions of the
highway to clean it.
Mr. Belles noted there are conditions 1 and 2 in which they are giving $50,000 for each
condition for regional impacts that are miscellaneous or generic in nature that the County can
use. Based on his last experience with an lniki Ordinance hotel application, they were simply
required to have a covered bench in the port cochere. They were not asked to put in a bus
shelter. All things considered and being under the lniki Ordinance they believe it would be more
fair and reasonable to retain the $10,000 contribution and not go above and beyond.
Chair Anderson clarified that her understanding is that the applicant is opposed to
condition number 23 which states if requested by the Transportation Agency due to increased
ridership demand caused by the development, applicant shall provide and additional bus stop and
shelter for the Kauai Bus. She asked if their proposal was to delete that condition altogether to
which Mr. Belles replied yes, that their intention was to consolidate conditions 10 and 23 into a
single condition and have the condition that was disseminated by the County Attorney's office be
adopted in lieu of those two conditions. They believe that condition 23 has the same net effect of
condition 10 which is that at the determination of the County, they would be responsible for
building a bus stop. Because of the constraints of the property, it would be impossible to do on
property. For them to acquire property beyond theirs, they don't have the power of eminent
domain and would be perhaps an economic impossibility to perform.
Mr. Kimura suggested that instead of eliminating condition 23 if they could replace it
with $50,000 for a bus stop somewhere else to which Attorney Jung replied that condition 23 is
proposed to be stricken because it is already a grandfathered hotel. The idea was looking at
another bus stop at Haleilio and Apana, on County roads, but according to Transportation, they
want to keep the bus moving and not having to turn into Haleilio and tuna out onto Apana,
creating an additional 3 to 5 minutes.
Mr. Kimura questioned if it had to necessarily be on or connected to the project to charge
for another bus stop to which Attorney Jung replied that it would have to be connected to the
project.
Chair Anderson stated that the problem of consolidating condition 23 with condition 10 is
that condition 23 deals with increased ridership demand caused by the development which we
haven't assessed given that the actual impacts are not present. Condition 23 seems to imply that
should there be increased demand and need for an additional bus stop for the 500 employees or
for the guest, that there could be an additional bus stop in the future. She asked if there could be
alternative language to include for future impacts. She is concerned that if there is increased
7
VA2015 Master Fil es\ Cominissionsll 'laaning\N4aiutes\20i 5 -3 -10 Planning Commission Minutes
ridership due to the development that they would need an additional bus stop. Mr. Belles replied
that they have done many other things to mitigate traffic and usage of either vehicles or the bus
by internal programs in the hotel and are offering to work with the Wailua, Kapaa, and Waipouli
region on regional systems and to contribute their fair share. They see the problem as being a
regional issue and not being one specifically tied to whatever proportional increase might be
caused. by the Coco Palms Hotel. They're really only proposing about 60 more units than what
they would be outright permitted to build under the Iniki Ordinance with the exception of the one
structure with the bar and grill facility. They are reducing the overall count from 398 to 350.
They believe that it is becoming quite punitive in terms of focusing on the bus stop when they
have already contributed what another developer has contributed in the recent past. It would be a
hardship and unreasonable to impose this condition or having it hanging over their head knowing
what the cost of a bus stop could be.
Mr. Kimura asked if they considered putting the bus stop on the south end of the property
to which Mr. Dahilig replied they have left the specific determinations up to each agency which
has jurisdiction. At the last meeting they discussed having the crosswalk at Kuamoo and the
Highway. While that has merit, it hasn't been studied so they tried to craft conditions as in
condition 22 to provide for future studies of such activities and bear the cost should the amended
TIAR show that there is a reduction on traffic impacts as a consequence of moving the
crosswalk. If a bus stop in an additional area is warranted given the proportional impacts of the
resort, then it should be studied. He can only speak from what is transmitted from the agencies.
If they had objections from the TIAR not being able to reflect the traffic impacts, they would
probably have gotten a myriad of conditions, but he thinks what they are seeing is a comfort
level with the TIAR at this point to proceed and both agencies reflect that. The Commission is
wrestling the what -ifs. Condition 23 handles the what -if scenario. He suggested bundling
condition 23 into the study elements of condition 21 so the TIAR is specifically directed to look
at whether or not bus stops are appropriate in other locations. This way they wouldn't leave it as
a unilateral condition for exaction but allow it to be studied first. That at least memorializes the
desire by the Commission to not foreclose the opportunity to have an additional bus stop levied
in case it is warranted by study.
Mr. Katayama questioned the expected. level of service to mitigate visitors renting cars to
access the property. Condition 21A asks to provide a shuttle service between the airport and the
property. He questioned if they would be shuttling once an hour or on demand to which Mr.
Greene replied that it would take three years for the hotel to be at stabilization: The first few
years, in terms of the level of service with the shuttle, they would need to assess the demands and
how often the customers are coming to the hotel that would also tie in with flight patterns. If
they are at 30% occupancy the first year, it's hard to say how often that shuttle will run back and
forth. They'll have to assess it once the hotel is opened based upon the occupancy. At the last
meeting they spoke about the green package. They want to educate the travelers that they can
come to Kauai and not be dependent on the rental car. That was the spirit of the shuttle running
through the Kapaa Wailua corridor. If they elect not to rent a car, they would be picked up at the
airport, and given free use of bikes for their stay. It's their belief that once they educate the
travelers that they can do that, it will grow very quickly through social media, and it will be part
of their marketing plan.
:
VA2015 Master riles\ Commissions \Planning\Minutes\2015 -3 -10 Planning Cotmnission Minutes
Mr. Katayama noted that the condition is there for 18 months. He questioned the long
term solution for helping the guests access the beach to which Mr. Greene stated there will be
four shuttles; an airport shuttle, a Wailua- Kapaa, Lydgate Park shuttle, a North Shore, South
Shore shuttle, and a shuttle to bring people to the beach within the resort running on a regular
loop.
Mr. Katayama asked for clarification that condition 21 A &B are long term integrated
transportation plans for the guests to which Mr. Greene stated that they see them as programs
that will carry on. In their minds it boils down to the guest experience. If they can come here
and have a pre - packaged tour or a bike ready for them, that would be an enjoyable experience.
They feel it is something they would never want to do away with.
Mr. Abrams noted that if they applied the CZO to what is proposed right now, 561
parking stalls would have been required, so they are roughly about 150 short. He questioned the
plan to deal with that situation. He was focusing on the bus which was the alternative form to
get people out of cars. He questioned the location of the nearest bus stop to which Mr. Greene
replied it is in the Brick Oven Pizza shopping center, close to the edge of the property. To
further alleviate parking, they also have workforce housing requirements. They purchased a
property across the street on Haleilio and will have 30 work force housing units. They agreed to
give Coco Palms employees first right of refusal on those units. He believes they will fill up
quickly with employees. They can not only enjoy that bus stop, but can also walk across the
street 150 yards to work.
Mr. Abrams stated that his understanding is the County's domain only really deals with
Haleilio and Apana so they are basically deferring to the State to handle that jurisdiction should
the TZAR decide they need a bus stop. Mr. Dahilig stated that item 23 will be integrated into the
litany of items 21 as part of the scope of study and note the exaction that further bus stops may
be levied as a consequence of that. Should the DOT decide they want to weigh in and partner
with the transportation agency to accommodate such a thing, a proportional share of that cost
should be levied to the applicant.
Mr. Abrams questioned conditions 1 & 2 requiring the $50,000 exactions each for
historic preservation programs and current place snaking. He asked the applicant if they would
have objection if they convinced the County that part of that could go to taking care of a bus stop
that may or may not show up on the property to which Mr. Belles replied that if the County
wants to use the money for other purposes and they do it through proper means of budget and
finance, then they would have no objections. They are paying money to the County and the
County is going to spend the money for its own public purposes.
Mr. Belles added that they offered, in his experience, far more than any other private
resort developer has ever offered before in terms of public parking. They've offered a total of 40
parking stalls; 20 north and 20 south of the project. Typically an assessment against an entire
hotel would be anywhere from 10 to 20 units in total. it is a balancing act trying to balance the
shuttles, with parking, with the green package and they're hoping that at the end of the day
nothing is conclusive. They don't know until they start it and get into the program. That's why
some of them are test or pilot projects to see what best works to benefit the community and the
E
VA2015 Master Files\ Commissions \Planning\Minutcs\2015 -3 -10 Planning Commission Minutes
experience of their customers. If they are unhappy or can't get to where they want to go then
that's going to have to change. Considering the Iniki Ordinance grandfathering a number of
units above what would be outright permitted and that were less than what was there before, they
feel it's a fair trade off on what is being proposed and what is being exacted.
Mr. Kimura asked if a park and ride was considered for employees to which Mr. Belles
replied they were told they needed to keep all parking on site.
Mr. Dahilig stated that based off of their analysis and the surrounding area, they were
concerned with extraneous parking in the residential communities. They want to be clear that
they want the impacts to be inclusive on the property.
Mr. Belles noted that they are working on having the housing project within walking
distance and the first option will be given to employees. They won't be able to solve all of the
parking, but they will as a practical matter be revisiting it during the second TIAR within a year
after the project.
Chair Anderson asked the Director to read the proposal to fold in condition 23 regarding
the need for an additional bus stop into condition 21.
Mr. Dahilig stated that the proposal would be to strike and replace condition 10 with the
recommended language that was distributed by Attorney Jung. In lieu of striking condition 23,
the proposal would be to lift the language farm condition 23 and add it to the end of condition
21E to state: provide the Planning Department, the Department of Public Works, and State
Department of Transportation an update to the TIAR one year after the certificate of occupancy
evaluating traffic impacts as created by the resort and analyze the need for additional bus stops.
If requested by the Transportation Agency due to increased ridership demand caused by the
development, applicant shall provide proportional support for an additional bus stop and shelter
for the Kauai Bus,
Chair Anderson asked the applicant if they are agreeable to the proposed change to which
Mr. Belles stated that he was glad to say that they have no objections and they support the
proposed change.
Mr. Dahilig stated they would incorporate the changes into the report and reflect the
renumbering of the conditions that follow condition number 23.
Mr. Katayama asked if it would include the letter of March 9 to which Mr. Dahilig stated
that would be correct. Instead of 29 conditions it would be 28. Condition 23 would be
mitigated as a consequence of the phrase proportional support, so they would leave 23 as is and
amend 21E to say analyze the need for additional bus stops.
Mr. Belles stated the applicant has no objections because it would be either a
subparagraph or stand -alone number so it's form over substance.
10
VA2015 Mastcr Filcs\Coimnissions\1'lanning \Minutes \2015 -3 -10 Planning Commission Minutes
Mr. Kimura questioned what the recommended motion would be to which Attorney Jung
noted procedurally the Director is trying to incorporate the commissioners' concerns into the
staff report. The Commission would make a motion to either approve, deny or modify the
recommendation.
Chair Anderson clarified that there was a supplement number 5, also language that was
discussed to condition 10 to read as the applicant suggested, the inclusion of changes to number
21, and the inclusion of proportionate to number 23.
Ms. Mendonca questioned if the housing for employees would be built simultaneously to
the hotel or after the fact to which Mr. Green stated that it would be built simultaneously so it
would be ready for the first batch of employees.
Ms. Mendonca asked for clarification that employees will have the right of first choice to
which Mr. Green replied yes.
On the motion by Jan Kimura and seconded by Sean Mahoney to approve Class IV
Zoning Permit Z4V- 2015 -8, Project Development Use Permit PDU- 2015 -7, Variance
Permit V- 20154 and Special Management Area Use Permit SMA(U)- 2015 -6 with twenty
nine conditions with the consent of the applicant, the motion carried by unanimous roll call
vote.
GENERAL BUSINESS MATTERS
2014 Annual Status Report and Request for Extension for Project Development Use
Permit PDU - 2009 -9 and Class IV Zoning Permit Z -IV- 2009 -6, Tax Map Key 5 -2 -013: 001,
Lihue Kauai = Koamalu Plantation LLC.
Acting Planning Director Kaaina Hull stated that the applicant is requesting a time
extension to go beyond the time allotted under condition 5. In accordance with condition 10, the
applicant is providing an annual status report. These permits have lapsed under the limit
established which was November 2014 for full construction to complete. It is not under
construction as of yet and they are requesting an extension. The global economy and real estate
market value in Hawaii in the last five years prove increasingly difficult to secure traditional
financing for real estate development on Kauai. Resolution of the eminent domain process with
the State Department of Transportation to accommodate the ongoing Kaumualii Highway
widening project tools approximately four years and delayed the siting of the housing project.
Given a renewed ability to secure financing as well as resolution of the siting concerns the
applicant is able to commence with the project. The proposed project will be providing much
needed housing stock to Kauai's housing inventory including a minimum of 30% affordable
units administered in the County of Kauai Housing Agency. In order to accommodate
development of these housing units, it may be appropriate to delete condition number 5. The
Department is recommending the extension be granted via deletion of condition 5 which requires
completion back in November 2014.
11
VA2015 Master Files\ Commissions \Planning \Minutes\2015 -3 -10 Planning Commission Minutes
Mr. Kimura questioned the, length of the extension request to which Mr. Hull replied they
have not specified and the Department is in agreement that no specification is necessary.
Mr. Kimura questioned that initially they gave them five years and now they are saying
they don't need it to which Mr. Hull replied that there were certain standards at the time. Given
the widening of the roadway, various financing issues, they were not able to meet the
requirement, however the affordable housing units is what the Department views as vital to the
Lihue connnunity. The Commission can impose a time requirement if they choose.
Chair Anderson disclosed that she had been involved with this project in her former
work. She recused herself from this particular matter and from the decision making and turned
the meeting over to Vice Chair Mahoney.
Mr. Abrams questioned if there have been any recent talks with the Housing Agency to
which Mr. Hull replied they have been in discussions with Housing and the last the Department
checked they did not have any issues with the development and did not submit any comments.
Avery Youn, authorized agent for the applicant, stated that he agreed with the staff
report. Condition 10 requires them to come before the Commission every year for an annual
status report in which they can go over conditions at that time also. The major delay was
construction of the four lane highway. Now that it is almost done they can pick up again.
Financing was also a problem, but it has since been resolved.
On the motion by Louis Abrams and seconded by Jan Kimura to approve, the
motion carried by unanimous voice vote (5 -0).
Chair Anderson resumed the meeting.
2014 Annual Status Report for Project Development PDU- 2013 -1 S Class IV Zoning
Permit Z -IV- 2013 -17, Use Pen-nit U- 2013 -14, Special Permit SP- 2013 -5, Tax Map Key 5 -2 -013:
001, Kilauea, Kauai — The Resonance Project Foundation. [Director's Report on 2/10/15 agenda
taken out of consent calendar 2/24/15.
Mr. Dahilig noted this was taken out of the consent calendar by request and placed on
today's calendar for further discussion.
Staff Planner Dale Cua stated that the project received Planning Commission approval on
December 10, 20.13 to develop a research complex facilitating research in various science
practices that would include construction of a research facility containing offices and workshop
areas, dormitory buildings, various accessory structures, and provision for off street parking.
The dormitory facility would provide housing for resident staff members, visiting scientists,
invited researchers as well as other education program participants. The attached status report
and progress report is provided by the applicant pursuant to condition 13.
12
VA2015 Master Files\ Commissions \Planning\Minutos120I5 -3 -10 PIanning Commission Minutes
Ms. Mendonca stated that initially there were some concerns by the public. She
questioned if there have been any complaints since then to which Mr. Cua replied there were
none whatsoever.
Mr. Kimura stated that in 2013 they had their plans all set in place. It seemed like a
necessity to the permits then, but all of a sudden they are in slow motion. He questioned what
has taken so long to which Mr. Cua replied there is a building permit for one of the structures
within the facility and they are planning to come in for another facility that may or may not
involve a design change.
Mr. Kimura questioned what kind of permit is needed to put a container on the ground to
which Mr. Cua replied the Building Division will require a permit.
Chris Almida, Executive Director for the project, stated that the primary holdup is
financing. They are a non - profit organization operating under a grant. The grant is directed
primarily to the scientific research with a certain amount apportioned toward capital
improvements. They have done some of the improvements including the containers that have
been built out and other improvements within the property. They rely on additional financing
from donations through their membership programs and academic educational programs, and it
has taken time to build those things out and have the flow continue. Their main priority is the
research that is where they focus their funds.
Mr. Kimura asked for clarification that in 2013 they needed to have it approved then and
there because they would lose the funding. He stated that it has been approved, but they are
looking for money again. Mr. Ahnida replied that the way the grant is written, they had to meet
certain milestones on a regular basis. The disbursements were tied to those milestones. The
permits were very early in the milestone process.
Mr. Kimura stated they knew the deadlines coming in for the permits. He asked for
clarification that they felt they could meet those milestones back then and then they didn't to
which Jonathan Chun, representing the applicant, replied that the milestone was to obtain the use
permit for the project. Now that they have met that milestone, they need to get additional
funding for the construction. That is not part of a milestone in terms of the existing grant for the
research. They operate under more than one grant. The major grant is the one that had the
milestone regarding the pem-At to fund the research. They receive funds from other donors for
capital improvements and they are in the process of raising those funds. He added that they
have an existing request to the Planning Department for a slight amendment to a building and
they can't build until approved by the Department. There is a pending request to the Department
in a change to the design to the building. The ones they could do they have done.
Mr. Kimura asked about the other structure for the housing to which Mr. Chun replied
that would be phase 2 which was always in the original application.
On the motion by Sean Mahoney and seconded by Jan Kimura to accept the status
report, all were in favor by unanimous voice vote.
13
VA2015 Master Files\ Coinmissions \PlanningNinutes120 1 5 -3 -1 0 Planning Cwmnission Minutes
The Commission recessed at 11:47 a.m.
The Commission reconvened at 1:25 p.m. (Ms. Amy Mendonca was not present)
COMMUNICATION (.For Action) (None)
COMMITTEE REPORTS (None)
UNFINISHED BUSINESS (Continued)
Six-year Capital Improvement Program Report Presentation. Deferred 2/24/15.
Supplemental No. 2 Director's Report pertaining- to this matter.
Staff Planner Marie Williams stated that they are seeking approval of this year's six year
capital improvement report. They aim to submit the report with the Mayor's budget that will be
given to Council on March 16. In the future, they will try to bring this report to the Commission
at an earlier date so they can have adequate time to review the report and projects. They made
changes to the report based on discussions on February 24. Per Chair Anderson's request, they
included chart 5 on page 7 of the amended report that groups projects by types with detailed
funding sources. She noted that for solid waste projects the funds predominantly come from the
issuance of general obligation bonds, projected to go out in the next few years. Roadway,
multimodal, and bridges projects are predominantly from federal sources through the State
transportation improvement program. They added a new horizon project, the Kilauea bypass
road, including a short description and cost estimate. The Department recommends that the
Commission approve the attached report and the immediate transmittal to the Mayor's office for
submittal in the financial year 2015/16 budget.
On the motion by Jan Kimura and seconded by Sean Mahoney to approve, all were
in favor by unanimous voice vote (5 -0).
NEW BUSINESS (None)
ANNOUNCEMENTS
The following scheduled Planning Commission meeting will be held at 9:00 a.m., or
shortly thereafter at the Lihue Civic Center, Moikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A -2B, 4444
Rice Street, Lihue, HI 96766 on Tuesday, March 24, 2015.
Chair Anderson notified the Commission that staff will be contacting them regarding
scheduling of contested case hearings. If commissioners have any blackout dates she requested
that they forward them to the secretary.
14
VA2015 Master Piles\Commissions\Planning\ Minutes \2015 -3 -10 Planning Commission Minutes
ADJOURNMENT
Chair Anderson adjourned the meeting at 1:31 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by.
Duke Nakamatsu,
Commission Support Clerk
( ) Approved as circulated (add date of meeting approval)
( ) Approved as amended. See minutes of meeting.
15
VA2015 Master Files\ Commissions \Planning\ Minutes \2015 -3 -10 Planning Co nunission Minutes