Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning 112216 MinutesKAUAI PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING November 22, 2016 The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the County of Kauai was called to order by Chair Mahoney at 9:02 a.m., at the Lihu`e Civic Center, Mo`ikeha Building, in meeting room 2A -2B. The following Commissioners were present: Chair Sean Mahoney Ms. Kanoe Ahuna Mr. Roy Ho Mr. Kimo Keawe Ms. Glenda Nogami Streufert (left at 11:18 a.m.) Absent and Excused: Mr. Wayne Katayama The following staff members were present: Planning Department — Michael Dahilig, Kaaina Hull, Leslie Takasaki; Office of the County Attorney — Deputy County Attorney Jodi Higuchi Sayegusa; Office of Boards and Commissions — Administrator Jay Furfaro, Commission Support Clerk Darcie Agaran Discussion of the meeting, in effect, ensued: CALL TO ORDER Chair Mahoney called the meeting to order at 9:02 a.m. ROLL CALL Planning Director Michael Dahilig_ Commissioner Ahuna? Ms. Ahuna: Here. Mr. Dahilig: Commissioner Katayama? Commissioner Keawe? Mr. Keawe: Here. Mr. Dahilig: Commissioner Streufert? Ms. Nogami Streufert: Here. Mr. Dahili &. Commissioner Ho? Mr. Ho: Here. Mr. Dahilig: Chair Mahoney? Chair Mahoney: Here. Mr. Dahilig: Mr. Chair, you have five (5) members present this morning. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mr. Dahilig: Next item on the agenda is Item No. C, which is Approval of the Agenda. The Department would recommend moving Item K.1., Subdivisions, immediately after Consent Calendar. Taking the Executive Session, H.1., shortly after that and moving Item H.2. to the end of the calendar, and then moving Item I.4. at the top of the General Business Matters agenda for this morning. Chair Mahoney: Chair will entertain a motion. Ms. Nogami Streufert: I'm sorry. Would you repeat that again, please? Mr. Dahilig: Sure. We would take the Subdivision matters immediately after Item G, the Consent Calendar, which is the Committee Reports. Then move directly into Item H.1., which is the Executive Session, but then move Item H.2., which is the Executive Session on the Theodore Blake case to the very end of the agenda this morning. And then move Item I.4. to the top of the General Business Matters section for this agenda. Ms. Nogami Streufert: Mr. Chairman, I so move that we have an amended agenda as the Planning Director has directed. Mr. Keawe: Second. Chair Mahoney: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Hearing none. All in favor signify by saying aye. (Unanimous voice vote) Opposed? (None) Motion carried 5:0. MINUTES of the meeting(s) of the Planning Commission Regular Meeting of October 25, 2016 Mr. Dahilig. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We are now on Item D.1. These are the regular meeting minutes of October 25, 2016. Chair Mahoney: Chair will entertain a motion. Mr. Igo: Move to receive. Ms. Nogami Streufert: Second. Chair Mahoney: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Did you second? Mr. Keawe: No, I think Glenda did. Chair Mahoney: Oh, Glenda did. Okay, I'm sorry. It's been moved and seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All in favor say aye. (Unanimous voice vote) Opposed? (None) Okay, motion carried 5:0. Thank you. RECEIPT OF ITEMS FOR THE RECORD Mr. Dahilig: Thank you, Mr. Chair. We are now on Item E, Receipt of Items for the Record. There has been ... I don't think there's any additional materials that have been circulated to the Commission at this point, so we can move on to the next item. HEARINGS AND PUBLIC COMMENT Continued Agency Hearing Special Management Area Use Permit SMA(U)- 2016 -6 to construct a farm dwelling unit (FDU), garage, agriculture accessory buildings and associated improvements on a parcel located at the tenninus of `Anini Vista Road in `Anini, approx. 900 north of its intersection with Kuhi6 Highway and further identified as 3471 `Anini Road, Tax Map Key 5 -3- 009:003, CPR Unit 2, affecting a portion of a larger parcel containing a total land area of 12.073 acres = Area K. LLC. [Director's Report received and hearing cont'd 7/26/16, cont'd 8/23/16, cont'd 10/25/16.1 Mr. Dahilig. This is Item F, Hearings and Public Comment. Item F.l.a. This is Special Management Area Use Permit SMA(U)- 2016 -6 to construct a farm dwelling, garage, agriculture accessory buildings, and associated improvements on a parcel located at the terminus of `Anini Vista Road in `Anini, approximately 900 feet south of its intersection with Kuhi6 Highway and further identified as 3471 `Anini Road, Tax Map Key 5 -3 -009 Parcel 003, CPR Unit 2, affecting a portion of a larger parcel containing a total land area of 12.073 acres. The applicant is Area K, LLC. There was a Director's Report that was received and the hearing continued on 07/26//16, continued on 08/23/16, and continued on 10/25/16. Mr. Chair, the Department would recommend moving into the open agency hearing at this time. Chair Mahoney: Okay. Mr. Dahilig. Mr. Chair, I do not have anybody signed up to testify on this agenda item. The Department would recommend making a call for any further testimony on this agency hearing. Chair Mahoney: Is there any member of the public that would like to testify on this agenda item? Seeing none. Mr. Dahilig: Mr. Chair, we do have a communication from Mr. Max Graham and Mr. Ian Jung, attorneys for the applicant. I'd like to ask Mr. Jung to come to the mic to state his, I guess, further request to the Commission to defer this item for one more meeting. Chair Mahoney: Mr. Jung. Ian Jung: Good morning, Chair and members of the Commission. Ian Jung on behalf of the applicant, Area K, LLC. We submitted a letter requesting another deferral. We are hoping to reevaluate the project and relook at some of the components that the Planning Department and Department of Public Works raised some issues with. So we are asking for a deferral until December 13`n while we can try and reevaluate the entire project. Chair Mahoney: Any questions for the applicant? Mr. Dahilig: The Department has no objections to their request to defer the item another meeting while they sort out how to move forward with the potential project. Chair Mahoney: Okay. Mr. Ho: Is there any other department (that's) going to be affected? Water? Public Works? Anybody else? Mr. Dahilig: Yeah. All the agencies have been routed as part of their original application packet. But given the Commission's discussions at previous meetings, our department has raised concerns and amended recommended changes to our recommendation to the Commission that has been floated to the applicant for their review, and they are evaluating whether they want to move forward with this at this time. Mr. Jung: We're happy to provide the Commission with an update on December 13th Chair Mahoney: Alright. Any other questions? No? So the Chair will take a motion for deferral. Mr. Keawe: Move to defer to December 151n, Special Management Area Use Pen-nit SMA(U)- 2016-6 ... let's see ... Tax Map Key 5 -3- 009:003, CPR Unit 2. Mr. Dahilig: Just to clarify, that's 13`n, right? Mr. Keawe: What was that? Mr. Dahilig: December 13In. Mr. Keawe: Yes, it was the 131n. Move to defer to the 13`n of December. S Chair Mahoney: It's been moved. Mr. Ho: Second. Chair Mahoney: Second. Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Hearing none. All in favor say aye. (Unanimous voice vote) Opposed? (None) Motion carried 5:0. Thank you. Mr. Dahilig: Thank you, Mr. Chair. We are now on Item F.2. Mr. Jung: Thank you, Commission, and Happy Thanksgiving. Ms. Nogami Streufert: Happy Thanksgiving. New Agency Hearing (NONE) Mr. Dahilig: Thank you, Mr. Chair. We are now on Item F.2. This is New Agency Hearing. We have none for this morning. Continued Public Hearing (NONE) Mr. Dahilig: And no Continued Public Hearings. New Public Hearing Zoning Amendment ZA- 2017 -1: To amend portions of PM -94 -82 relating to Condition No. 7 concerning affordable housing_ Mr. Dahilig: We do have a new public hearing for the Commission this morning. It's Zoning Amendment ZA- 2017 -1 to amend portions of PM -94 -82 relating to Condition No. 7 concerning affordable housing. There is a Director's Report pertaining to this matter as well as agency comment from the County of Kauai. Mr. Chair, the Department would recommend opening the public hearing at this time. Chair Mahoney: Is there any member of the public that would like to testify on this agenda item? Mr. Dahilig. Mr. Chair, we do not have anybody signed up to testify on this particular public hearing. The Department would recommend making a final call for any testimony and if not, closing the public hearing at this time. Chair Mahoney: Is there any member of the public that would like to testify on this agenda item? Seeing none. Mr. Dahilig. Again, our recommendation would be to close the public hearing. Chair Mahoney: Okay. Is there a motion? Ms. Nogami Streufert: I move to close the public hearing. Ms. Ahuna: Second. Chair Mahoney: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Hearing none. All in favor say aye. (Unanimous voice vote) Motion carried 5:0. Thank you. CONSENT CALENDAR Status Reports (NONE) Director's Report(s) for Project(s) Scheduled for Agency Hearing on 12/13/16. Class IV Zoning Permit Z -IV- 2017 -1 and Use Permit U- 2017 -1 to allow conversion of an existing structure into a cafeteria facility that is associated with a school on a parcel situated on the mauka side of Kekaha Road, immediately across and northeast of its intersection with Kala Road, further identified as 8315 Kekaha Road, Tax Map Key: (4) 1 -3- 009:001, and containing a total area of 1.943 acres = Kanaka Aupuni a Ni `ihau Aloha. Mr. Dahilix Thank you, Mr. Chair. We are now on Item G. This is the Consent Calendar. Again, this is for ... we have no Status Reports, but we do have a Director's Report for an agency hearing at the next Planning Commission meeting. This is for Class IV Zoning Permit Z -IV- 2017-1 and Use Permit U- 2017 -1 for Kanaka Aupuni a Niihau Aloha School. Again, this would be for just accepting the report and setting it for a hearing on December 131n Chair Mahoney: Okay. Chair will take a motion to accept the report. Mr. Keawe: Move to accept the report. Mr. Dahilig: And set for hearing on the 13`n Mr. Keawe: And set for hearing on December 13 th . Chair Mahoney: Is there a second? Ms. Ahuna: Second. Chair Mahoney: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Hearing none. All in favor say aye. (Unanimous voice vote) Opposed? (None) Motion carried 5:0. Thank you. COMMITTEE REPORTS Suhdiviginn Mr. Dahilig: Thank you, Mr. Chair. We are now on Item K. These are the Committee Reports. The Subdivision Committee. I believe the recommendations of the Committee have been circulated to the Commissioners for their review. Chair Mahoney: Okay. Subdivision Committee. Report from the Subdivision Committee. Tentative subdivision action, No. S- 2017 -3, Grove Farm, Inc., TMK: (4) 3 -8- 002:001 and portion 02, (4) 3 -8- 003:001, approved 3:0. Subdivision extension request, No. S- 2011 -20, Kukui`ula Development Company, LLC, TMK: 2- 6- 019:026 and 029, approved 3:0. And that was all for the Subdivision report. Motion to... Ms. Nogami Streufert: Could I ask a question on that? For both of these, the resolution of it was to extend the time limit for them to submit their final...? Chair Mahoney: The first one was a tentative subdivision... Ms. Nogami Streufert: Approval. Chair Mahoney: Approval. And the second one was to extend the request. Ms. Nogami Streufert: For them to complete their final plans? Chair Mahoney: Yeah. Ms. Nogami Streufert: Okay. I move to accept the Subdivision Committee meeting minutes. Mr. Keawe: Second. Chair Mahoney: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Hearing none. All in favor say aye. (Unanimous voice vote) Opposed? (None) Motion carried 5:0. EXECUTIVE SESSION Pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes Sections 92 -4 and 92- 5(a)(4), the purpose of this executive session is to consult with County's gal counsel on Questions, issues, status and procedural matters. This consultation involves consideration of the powers, duties, privileges, immunities, and/or liabilities of the Commission and the County as they relate to Civil No. 12 -0065 SOM -KSC, US District Court Ilawai`i, Special Management Area Use Permit SMA(U)- 2006 -4, Project Development Use Permit P.D. U- 2006 -6 and Class IV Zoning Permit Z -IV- 2006 -9, Tax Map Keys 4-3-2:15,16 and 20, Waipouli, Kauai = Coconut Beach Development, LLC. Mr. Dahilig: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm going to turn this over to the Deputy County Attorney for Item H.1. Deputy County Attorney Jodi Iii cgu hi Sayegusa: Chair, we are on Item H.1., Executive Session. Pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes Sections 92 -4 and 92- 5(a)(4), the purpose of this executive session is to consult with the County's legal counsel on questions, issues, status, and procedural matters. This consultation involves consideration of the powers, duties, privileges, immunities, and /or liabilities of the Commission and the County as they relate to Civil No. 12 -0065 SOM- KSC, U.S. District Court Hawaii, Special Management Area Use Permit SMA(U)- 2006 -4, Project Development Use Permit P.D. U- 2006 -6, and Class IV Zoning Permit Z -IV- 2006 -9, TMK: 4 -3 -2 Parcels 15, 16, and 20, Waipouli, Kauai, Coconut Beach Development, LLC. And Chair, I would recommend, I guess ... well, if there's a motion and a second and a vote, we take that vote with a roll call, please. Ms. Nogami Streufert: Can we do this ... since there are two (2) issues under the executive session, could we do them both at the same time? Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: The other attorney that's going to give the briefing for the other executive session ... he's in a deposition at this time, which is why that one was moved to the end of the agenda. Ms. Nogami Streufert: I see. Okay. Got it. Chair Mahoney: Okay. The Chair will... Ms. Nogami Streufert: Mr. Chair, I move that we go into executive session to discuss the first matter under H., Executive Session topics. Mr. Keawe: Second. Chair Mahoney: Okay. It's been moved and seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none. There will be a roll call vote. Mr. Dahilig: Mr. Chair, the motion on the floor is to go into executive session pursuant to an item posted under Item H.1. Commissioner Ahuna? Ms. Ahuna: Aye. Mr. Dahilig. Commissioner Keawe? Mr. Keawe: Aye. Mr. Dahilig: Commissioner Streufert? Ms. Nogami Streufert: Aye. Mr. Dahilig: Commissioner Ho? Mr. Ho: Aye. Mr. Dahilig. Chair Mahoney? Chair Mahoney: Aye. Mr. Dahilig. You have five (5) ayes, Mr. Chair. Chair Mahoney: The motion carried 5:0. Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: About ... no more than 20 minutes I would say. Chair Mahoney: For approximately 20 minutes we'll be in executive session, so you can return later. Thank you. The Commission moved into Executive Session at 9:14 a.m. The Commission reconvened in Open Session at 9:49 a.m. Chair Mahoney: Call the meeting back to order. GENERAL BUSINESS MATTERS Civil No. 12 -0065 SOM -KSC, US District Court Hawaii, Special Management Area Use Pen-nit SMA(U)- 2006 -4, Project Development Use Pen-nit P.D. U- 2006 -6 and Class IV Zoning Permit Z -IV- 2006 -9, Tax Map Keys 4-3-2:15,16 and 20, Waipouli, Kauai Coconut Beach Development, LLC. Mr. Dahilig: Thank you, Mr. Chair. We are on Item 1.4. This is Civil No. 12 -0065 SOM -KSC, U.S. District Court of Hawaii, Special Management Area Use Permit SMA(U)- 2006 -4, Project Development Use Permit P.D. U- 2006 -6, and Class IV Zoning Permit Z -IV- 2006 -9, Tax Map Keys 4 -3 -2 Parcels 15, 16, and 20, Waipouli, Kauai. There's a proposed stipulated amended terms of final judgement pertaining to this action and this item was discussed in executive session. As presented to the Commission, Mr. Chair, our department as well as the applicant's attorneys have worked with each other to come up with a proposed amended permit approval and list of conditions. I believe that there is one (1) additional item that was adjusted pursuant to Section 9 that was, I guess, circulated as a proposal from the developer concerning that amended language and we would concur with that adjustment as well. And our recommendation to the Commission is that the Commission authorize the attorney to take these conditions and represent before the court that the County does concur with the settlement proposal and ask the court to approve the settlement. Chair Mahoney: Do we need any public comment? Mr. Dahilig: And Mr. Chair, as far as I understood, there was nobody signed up to testify at the call for any public testimony. I would recommend making a final call for any testimony at this time. Chair Mahoney: Is there any member of the public that would like to testify on this agenda item? Seeing none. So the Chair will entertain a motion. Mr. Keawe: I move to approve the amended permit approval and list of conditions for SMA Use Permit SMA(U)- 2006 -4, Project Development Use Permit P.D. U- 2006 -6, and Class IV Zoning Permit Z -IV- 2006 -9, Tax Map Keys 4 -3 -2:15, 16, and 20, Waipouli, Kauai, Coconut Beach Development, LLC; and instruct the County Attorney to file this with the Federal Court. Ms. Nogami Streufert: Second. Chair Mahoney: Okay, it's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Hearing none. Can we have a roll call vote, please? Mr. Dahilig: Mr. Chair, again, this is the motion to approve the proposed terms as set forth in the permit approval and list of conditions as amended and to authorize the attorney to file this with the court and represent that the County has concurred with this pertaining to Item IA., and the motion has been to approve. Commissioner Ahuna? Ms. Ahuna: Aye. Mr. Dahilig. Commissioner Keawe? Mr. Keawe: Aye. Mr. Dahilig: Commissioner Streufert? Ms. Nogami Streufert: Aye. Mr. Dahilig: Commissioner Ho? Mr. Ho: Aye. Mr. Dahilig: Chair Mahoney? Chair Mahoney: Aye. Mr. Dahilig: Mr. Chair, you have five (5) ayes. Chair Mahoney: Motion carried 5:0. Thank you. NEW BUSINESS [[l7 Zoning Amendment ZA- 2017 -1: To amend portions of PM -94 -82 relating to Condition No. 7 concerning affordable housing_ Mr. Dahili &. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I neglected to, I guess, ask if, potentially, we could move Item I.3. [sic] before the presentations on the TIGER Grant and General Plan just because we do have the Housing Director here and would like to just expediently move it for her for her convenience. Chair Mahoney: Okay. Mr. Dahilig: Alright. So this is Item I.3. [sic]. We are in receipt of a request from the Housing Director to amend Condition No. 7 on a Planning Measure 94 -82. The condition was Condition No. 7 relating to affordable housing, and initially, the affordable housing condition that was passed about twenty (20) years ago was to require that there were 16 single - family lots that were to be appraised and the County would purchase that at fair market value for those lots. What has transpired, given changes in how the development has gone over the past twenty (20) years, D.R. Horton has authorized the Housing Director to make a request to this Commission to forward a measure up to the Council to change the conditions, and what they're asking is that instead of the County purchasing 16 lots, instead the developer would produce 32 turnkey duplex houses to be available to those eligible at 140% of the area median income or below as set by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The Department, as stated in our November 16`h memorandum, does not have any objections to this proposal and because it's a request coming directly from a sister agency that is charged with the enforcement of this particular condition, we would defer to their judgement at this time and we would actually defer if they would like to make a presentation concerning this request to the Planning Commission. So with that, Mr. Chair... Chair Mahoney: Would someone like to come up and make a ... from the agency? State your name for record, please. Kanani Fu: Good morning. Kanani Fu, Housing Director. Gary Mackler: Good morning, Commissioners. Gary Mackler, Housing Development Coordinator for the Housing Agency. Ms. Fu: What you have before you is a request to amend an ordinance that was approved in 1982, and this is in reference to what we refer to as "Kohea Loa" and their first buildout, which is "Ho`oluana ". The original ordinance was granted under the condition that 16 lots be sold to the County at cost, less 10 %. In working with D.R. Horton and looking at this ordinance ... so fast forward twenty (20) something years later, they are now building and developing out this parcel. We are working closely with D.R. Horton for them to, one, deliver their affordable housing obligations, but also from the Housing Agency standpoint, to get the best opportunities for our families. We have agreed and we like the recommendation of amending the ordinance, so we have requested the Planning Commission to consider that. Chair Mahoney: Okay. Are there any questions for the applicant from any of the Commissioners? Mr. Keawe: I have one. Kanani, what would be the ... I guess it's 140% of the median income. What would that be in dollars as far as what they're looking for as the price of these units? Ms. Fu: So as far as pricing for these duplex units, what happens is we look at a formula provided through HUD on a yearly basis. And this year, I can tell you for a family of four (4), a family can make up to $116,000 a year to qualify to reside in Hooluana. Approximately ... what is considered affordable is approximately 30% of their gross income can be used for housing. If you have a family at the high -end with $112,000, 30% of their income given interest rates 3.75 1/o and HOA fees, we're probably looking at them qualifying for a loan at about $459,000. So the sale price will vary based upon the family - their income. Chair Mahoney: Okay. Any other questions? Commissioner Ho. Mr. Ho: Kanani, what is that breakdown into a monthly payment? Ms. Fu: It can vary. We're looking at approximately $459,000. There will be potential Homeowner's Association fees tied into that mortgage, so approximately $1,500 to $1,800. Again, it's based upon prevailing interest rates at the time of sale, as well as the adjusted area median income for the island, which is determined annually by HUD. Ms. Nogami Streufert: As interest rates rise, does that mean that the price goes down? Ms. Fu: Yes. In that sense, if interest rate rises, their borrowing capacity lessens, so it's based upon the borrowing capacity of the qualified applicant. Ms. Nogami Streufert: It's really, then, the applicant; that the requirements will be on the applicant, rather than on the County or on the Housing Department to make it affordable for these people. In other words, if it's affordable now with 3.7% but tomorrow it goes up to 4.2 %' , I'm qualified at the 3.7% but I'm not qualified at the 4.2% because I'm really at the ... then what happens? Ms. Fu: Affordability is just determined on income. It's not determined on the outside factors. But what a family can afford ... so the price of the home, for example, just to go $100,000, 30% of that is affordable for a house. The sale price of the home is set just on the income that is determined by HUD. What a family can afford is then determined on their ... it's their responsibility to make the mortgage, to secure the lender, and those things. We can assist with those things as far as financing, but the price is set only based on income. It's not set based on prevailing interest rates or outside factors. Chair Mahoney: Commissioner Ho. Mr. Ho: When the family qualifies for a house in that place, are you a guarantor of the loan? Or you just help them secure it? 12 Ms. Fu: We have been guarantors of loans before. Particularly, it's based upon availability of funds and the types of funds we have. We are restricted with Federal funds of who we can serve because of income. We do not anticipate financing these loans, but we can. The option is there. Because typically, from our standpoint, if the homes are set for this rate ... excuse me, this affordability, for the most part we do have families that qualify for traditional financing outside banks that they can utilize. Chair Mahoney: Okay. Commissioner Ahuna. Ms. Ahuna: Will there be any support in regards to applicant/application support? Like to help the applicant actually apply and walk through the process? Ms. Fu: Yes. The homes will be distributed out based upon our Home Buyer Loan Program and the participants that we currently have. We have approximately 350 families on that list and we have Home Buyer Loan Specialists that work with the families early on to get them prequalified and get them ready for home buyer. And it's not only just for Kohea Loa, for this phase, it's for all other properties and parcels that become available on Kauai. So our program does do some homeownership, some financial readiness, and then we do have them attend some financial literacy classes, so they do receive support from us, as well as non -profit organizations and other private organizations trying to get them home buyer ready. Chair Mahoney: Any other questions? Ms. Ahuna: I do. Chair Mahoney: Commissioner Ho. Mr. Ho: Are you...? Ms. Ahuna: Yeah. Go ahead. Chair Mahoney: You have the floor. Mr. Ho: Okay. Do you have to qualify for this? I mean, do you have to be an island resident, pay taxes in the State of Hawaii? Ms. Fu: For this particular project, there is a six -month marketing period where it's only offered to Kauai residents, so that will not be... The marketing period is for six (6) months only to Kauai residents. Chair Mahoney: Commissioner Ahuna. Ms. Ahuna: So this is kind of like an extension to what's already ... the affordable housing that's already there currently, so to speak, or...? Like, in expanding the units that's going... 13 Ms. Fu: The current ordinance just ... it plainly states that the County buys 16 lots at prevailing market rate less 10 %. Right now it's approximately $2 million; that's what we're estimating just to buy 16 lots. What we are asking for in this amendment is that in lieu of the 16 lots, that D.R. Horton develop and deliver 32 completely built, turnkey units on these 16 lots. So we are not... 16 lots, we only get 16 homes. Here we are able to get a little more density with 16 lots and 1 duplex on each lot, and we are also ... because D.R. Horton is developing these units, they come online timely with the market units, so there are a lot of benefits through this amendment. In addition, we see that when you have the developer developing affordable units as well, there's that design consistency with the market and the affordable, so we see that as a benefit for our residents. Chair Mahoney: I think it's a good strategy that ... the way you're doing it. Ms. Nogami Streufert: Just one more question. I like the idea. I like the way that you're thinking and the flexibility, but is there any stipulation that once you buy one of these units that a resident has to ... should live in it rather than somebody buying it for speculation and then having it be either resold or ... I think there are some areas where you have affordable housing where if it's sold within the first "x" number of years, there has to be a first right of refusal by the County or someone else. Is there anything like that that's going to be here? Or is there anything that says that in order to buy one of these units, it cannot be for speculation, it has to be for people who live here? Mr. Mackler: So the 32 duplex units are subject to the requirements of our housing ordinance, Ordinance 860, which is our affordable housing ordinance which requires a 20 -year buyback as a deed restriction on all of the restricted sales. So during that 20 -year period, the purchaser is required to owner - occupy, and if they are to sell the unit, they have to first ... the County can exercise the first option to repurchase and resell the unit. Ms. Nogami Streufert: Great. Thank you. Chair Mahoney: Okay. That sounds good. Any other questions /concerns for anything? No? Okay. Mr. Dahilig: Again, Mr. Chair, our recommendation is to concur with the Housing Director's recommendation to amend this condition, and the action proposed to the Commission would be to approve and forward to the Council for its action. Chair Mahoney: Okay. The Chair will entertain a motion. Mr. Dahilig: Just to clarify, this is Item F.4.a. Chair Mahoney: Do we have a motion on the floor for Item F.4.a.? Ms. Nogami Streufert: I move to accept the Director's Report on the Zoning Amendment ZA- 2017-1 to amend portions of PM -94 -82 relating to Condition No. 7 concerning affordable housing. 14 Mr. Keawe: Second. Chair Mahoney: And that includes the recommendation to the ... okay. It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Hearing none. All in favor say aye. (Unanimous voice vote) Opposed? (None) Motion carried 5:0. Thank you. Mr. Macker: Thank you. Mr. Dahilig- Thank you, Mr. Chair. Ms. Fu: Thank you. GENERAL BUSINESS MATTERS (Continued) Presentation on the status of the TIGER Grant Update. Mr. DahiliK. Alright, Mr. Chair, this is all that we have for the action items for today's agenda; other than the executive session that will be coming at the end of the meeting. But to let the Commission know and keep the Commission in touch with what's going on with other activities beyond just the regulatory realm, I've asked our Long Range Division to provide two (2) updates for the Commission; one relating to the TIGER Grant and the other one relating to the General Plan. And then we'll go into one more discussion that the Deputy Director will talk about on ZA- 2016 -6 regarding "Uses in Districts ". So I'd like to ... if we could just maybe pause for a second while Lee gets the PowerPoint projector set up and passes out the handouts. Lee has been pivotal as our Transportation Planner in helping secure the $13.8 million from the Federal government. Right now ... I'm sure he's going to get into this in his presentation. We've got an approval from the Council to move forward with a design with the traffic controls in place and we are now going through environmental entitlements. But I think he's going to go over some of the items relating to ... you know, why we did the grant, why we went forward with it, what's the principles regarding design, and how we move forward from here just so that the Commissioners are up -to -date as to what's going on. And then I guess we'll shut down the lights. Lee, you ready to go? Lee Steinmetz: Yeah, let me go ahead and get the... Okay. Mr. Chair and members of the Commission, good morning and thank you for taking some time. I know we have some new commissioners, so I wanted to give a bit of a background, as Director Dahilig mentioned, on our TIGER Project and the various components of that. Mr. Steinmetz presented a PowerPoint presentation on the TIGER Grant for the record (on file with the Planning Department). Ms. Ahuna: Is that the same as Kapa`a? Like that middle lane? 15 Mr. Steinmetz: Yeah, so the design of this would be similar as in Kapa`a on Kuhio highway with one (1) lane in each direction and the dual left -turn lane. Mr. Steinmetz continued with his PowerPoint presentation. Ms. Nogami Streufert: Can I just ask a question? So, then, if you were riding a bicycle on that bicycle lane on the ... towards the area and then you came to that intersection, there would be no more bike lane? Mr. Steinmetz: Right. So what we will be doing on Rice Street is transitioning to shared -lane markings, which are called "sharrows ", and you can actually see the little symbol. So going from `Eiwa Street to ... going makai, yes, you're right. On this side ... on the Wa`a Road side of the street, you would be sharing the lane with cars. And part of the idea is cars are going slower, so we feel ... within that commercial core, again, we felt it was a higher priority to provide on- street parking than to provide bike lanes. Also, `Eiwa Street and ... well, `Eiwa Street has a two - way bike lane on it, so for people who don't want to ride on Rice (Street) and are going elsewhere, they can go onto the `Eiwa Street bike lane and then that connects over to the shared - use path and also to the bike lanes that we have on Hardy Street. So we're trying to look at this as an overall network as well. Mr. Keawe: Is that area where you're coming in the bike ... right before Wa`a Road and you've got the sidewalk extension, that's where it ends? Mr. Steinmetz: Right. Yes, you can see that there's a dashed portion of the bike lane just uphill from Wa`a Road so that's kind of the transition area to go from a bike lane to a shared lane. Mr. Keawe: (Inaudible) transition area. Mr. Steimnetz: Yes. Mr. Ho: Lee, all of your crosswalks... you know the flashing lighted things when you cross, those seem to be really helpful. (Inaudible) Mr. Steinmetz: Yes. Mr. Ho: Do a lot of them have that? Mr. Steinmetz: As we go through our conceptual design and look at our budgets, we are looking at incorporating those flashing lights at other crosswalks as well, and particularly at mid -block locations, but we are going to look at all of our crosswalks to see where we should add those. Mr. Steinmetz continued with his PowerPoint presentation. Mr. Steinmetz: Thank you very much. Ms. Nogami Streufert: Can I ask a question? Wei Mr. Steinmetz: Yeah. Ms. Nogami Streufert: Your bike paths on both sides of Rice Street seem to start and stop at different places. Is that going to be a hazard either for drivers or for bike riders because it's not clear when it stops, when it starts, how to get around these things? Mr. Steinmetz: Yes. So... Ms. Nogami Streufert: Is there a possible resolution for that I guess is my question. Mr. Steinmetz: Yeah, again, so basically what we decided to make as a priority is on- street parking, so we're making sure that those bike lanes connect to side street bike lanes. We will be doing signage that indicates the end of those bike lanes. We'll be sure that we have adequate transition spaces, so everybody is aware of that and signage on the road, so people know where bikes are supposed to be. So we think that we will be able to address that safety concern through those types of treatments. Ms. Nogami Streufert: Because the other possibility is that they would start riding their bikes on the sidewalks, which would be a problem for pedestrians, especially with our aging population here. Mr. Steinmetz: Right. We are trying to ... yeah. Basically, within our County Code right now, bicyclists are allowed to ride on sidewalks, except in Commercial districts. So within our Rice Street area, bicyclists would be prohibited from riding on the sidewalk, so yeah, you're right. We are trying to snake it so that it is safe for bicyclists to use this street, and for bicyclists and cars to share the street. And again, there are some bicyclists who simply will not feel comfortable given the volumes on Rice Street, so we are trying to provide ample parallel paths for them to be able to take where they feel more comfortable riding. Ms. Nogami Streufert: Okay. Mr. Steinmetz: Yes? Mr. Ho: Did you have to condemn any of the property? Is that all County property used? Mr. Steinmetz: All of the property is County right -of -way, so there's no... Mr. Ho: Condemnation. Mr. Steinmetz: Condemnation. The one exception to that is our shared -use path goes ... where it goes by Wilcox Elementary School through the parking lot by Wilcox, that's actually State property, but we're working with the State to get a joint -use agreement. There's no condemnation or actual acquisition. It's just going to be a joint -use agreement. Chair Mahoney: Lee, I want to thank you, first, for the presentation. It's going to take a lot of public education to ... you know, to any change, but to change the pattern, like the pattern 17 language, but I think it's very impressive, the work you've done and the Department has done. Getting safer for pedestrians and bicyclists. Sidewalks, you know, to me, is—and the bicycle paths and the alternative routes that you guys have come up with it are very impressive, and that's the only way people are going to come down is if they feel safe. If walking is the idea, I think you guys have come up with some terrific ideas. Mr. Ho: Lee, one other question. When the bus stops to let people on and off, is that ... is the bus still in one of those lanes? Mr. Steinmetz: So we have a couple different locations. As much as possible, we are designing those bus stops to be turnouts so that the bus pulls out of the lane, but it depends on the amount of right -of -way that we have. So for example, we have one (1) bus stop by Rice Center, by the bowling alley, and there we have ... we don't have enough sidewalk to actually construct a bus shelter within the right -of -way that we have if we did a turnout. So in that particular bus stop, the current design is for the bus to stop in the lane; however, we're talking to the property owners to see if we could build the shelter on private property and if we can do that, then we could have the bus pull into a turnout, but that's subject to more discussion with the private property owners. Chair Mahoney: Okay. Any other questions? Comments? Mr. Steinmetz: Okay, thank you. Chair Mahoney: Thank you very much for your presentation. Very impressive. EXECUTIVE SESSION (Continued) Pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes Sections 92 -4 and 92- 5(a)(4), the purpose of this executive session for the Planning Commission is to consult with the County's legal counsel on questions relating to Theodore K Blake v. Planning Commission of the County ofKaua `i, et al., Civil No. 09 -1 -0069. This consultation involves consideration of the Commission's powers, duties, privileges, immunities, and /or liabilities with regard to this agenda item. Mr. Dahilig: Commissioners, if you wouldn't mind in indulging, I guess, a little bit of a schedule change here. We do have the attorney available for the other executive session that's on the agenda, so rather than moving it towards the end, if we could, maybe, take a pause between the presentations and ask the County Attorney to read in the executive session language for this particular item and then we'll close the room again. Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Okay, Chair, we are on Item H.2., Executive Session. Pursuant to I Iawai`i Revised Statutes Sections 92 -4 and 92- 5(a)(4), the purpose of this executive session for the Planning Commission is to consult with the County's legal counsel on questions relating to Theodore K. Blake v. Planning Commission of the County of Kauai, et al., Civil No. 09 -1 -0069. M. This consultation involves consideration of the Commission's powers, duties, privileges, immunities, and 'or liabilities with regard to this agenda item. So, again, we would need a motion. Chair Mahoney: Chair will entertain a motion to go into executive session. Ms. Ahuna: I motion to go into executive session. Chair Mahoney: Is there a second? Mr. Keawe: Second. Chair Mahoney: Could we have a roll call vote? Mr. Dahilig: Mr. Chair, the motion on the floor is to go into executive session, Item H.2. Commissioner Ahuna? Ms. Ahuna: Aye. Mr. Dahilig- Commissioner Keawe? Mr. Keawe: Aye. Mr. Dahilig- Commissioner Streufert? Ms. Nogami Streufert: Aye. Mr. Dahilig: Commissioner Ho? Mr. Ho: Aye. Mr. Dahilig: Chair Mahoney? Chair Mahoney: Aye. Mr. Dahili &. Mr. Chair, you have five (5) ayes. Chair Mahoney: Motion carried 5:0. So we'll be going into executive session. Maximum 20 minutes. The Commission moved into Executive Session at 10:46 a.m. Ms. Nogami Streufert left the meeting at 11:18 a.m. The Commission reconvened in Open Session at 11:22 a.m. 19 Chair Mahoney: Call the meeting back to order. GENERAL BUSINESS MATTERS (Continued) Presentation on the status of the General Plan Mr. Dahilig: Thank you, Mr. Chair. We are now on Item I.2. This is a presentation on the status of the General Plan Update. I'm going to invite, I guess, my Planning Program Manager for Long Range Planning Marie Williams to come up and give the presentation on where we are right now, but I just want to state for everybody's edification that she and her team have been doing a bang -up job the past 19 months trying to wrestle this behemoth of a project. Obviously, looking and trying to get thousands of voices distilled to one (1) document is never going to be easy, and as much as you may want to reach consensus sometimes, sometimes you have to make a judgement as a professional planner to make certain recommendations. So that's the process that we're currently undergoing through now, but I just wanted to, you know, give kudos to my staff just thus far for moving forward with something that pretty much is pretty heavy; I'll say it's pretty heavy. So she and her team are here. I'm going to turn ... Mr. Chair, with your indulgence, I'll turn the mic over to her and we'll go into the presentation. Chair Mahoney: Yes. Definitely. Look forward to it. Planning Program Manager for the Long Range Division Marie Williams: Okay. Thanks, Mike, for the introduction. Good morning, Planning Commission and Mr. Chair. My name is Marie Williams. I'm the Planning Program Manager for the Long Range Division and we are ... me and the team are very happy to be here to give what is our third update to you all on the General Plan. As Mike aptly described, it's a very big project and there are a lot of moving parts. It's very ambitious in some ways and we definitely need a team ... a large team of people to move it forward and review the progress that we've been making and make corrections if need be. But very quickly ... because we have some new faces, I wanted to quickly go over what we presented previously. Ms. Williams presented a PowerPoint presentation on the General Plan Update for the record (on file with the Planning Department). Ms. Williams: Okay, that's it. Thank you. Chair Mahoney: Thank you. That was wonderful. Are there any questions? Thank you very much. That was a monumental task to do and we really appreciate it and your team's hard work. EXECUTIVE SESSION (Continued) Pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes Sections 92 -4 and 92- 5(a)(4), the purpose of this executive session for the Planning Commission is to consult with the Counts legal counsel on questions relating to Theodore K. Blake v. Planning Commission of the 20 Count EofKaua `i, et al., Civil No. 09 -1 -0069. This consultation involves consideration of the Commission's powers, duties, privileges, immunities, and /or liabilities with regard to this agenda item. Mr. Dahili &. Mr. Chair, I'll turn it over to the County Attorney to, I guess, close the item related to Item H.2. relating to the Theodore Blake, I guess, executive session. Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Yes. Okay, thank you. Again, so just for the sake of the record and public notice with regard to H.2., Theodore K. Blake v. Planning Commission, et al., the Commission approved the proposed terms of settlement as set forth by ... as presented in executive session and authorized our office to go forward with engaging with the other parties. Thank you. GENERAL BUSINESS MATTERS (Continued) Update on Zoning Amendment ZA- 2016 -6: A Bill for an Ordinance amending Chapter 8, Kauai County Code 1987, as amended, relating to Section 8 -2.4 entitled "Uses in Districts" = County of Kaua `i, Council. Mr. Dahili &. Mr. Chair, I will turn this over, now, to the Deputy Director on Item I.3. This is update on Zoning Amendment ZA- 2016 -6: a bill for an ordinance amending Chapter 8, Kauai County Code 1987, as amended, relating to Section 8 -2.4 entitled "Uses in Districts ". Deputy Planning Director Kaaina Hull: Good morning, Chair and members of the Commission. So there was a request to update the Commission on the zoning amendment to allow multi- family construction in the Residential R -1 through R -6 Zoning Districts. So just to somewhat refresh the Commission's memory, back in June or July, the Commission received a proposed draft bill from Councilmember Arryl Kaneshiro to amend the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance to allow multi - family construction in the R -1 and R -6 Zoning Districts. And all that ultimately means ... multi-family construction is shared wall construction; be it duplexes, triplexes, or apartment units. Currently in the R -1 through R -6 Districts, multi- family construction is prohibited, so you can only construct single - family dwellings in those zoning districts. Those zoning districts above R -6, which are R -10 and R -20, you can construct multi - family construction; you just can't in those lower zoning districts. So all the bill essentially proposes is that ... in looking at the fact that Kauai is currently in a housing crisis, in particular the housing crisis for its on- island local population, and that multi - family construction can — one — reduce the costs of construction as well as provide the potential for affordable by design units for the local population. Councilmember Kaneshiro is just proposing to allow that type of construction to occur in the R -1 through R -6 Districts. To parse out any confusion that has happened with the bill, the bill does not allow for additional density, and that (inaudible) to say if a property qualifies for two (2) units, it can build two (2) units and only two (2) units. Just now under the bill, as opposed to having to construct two (2) separate single - family dwellings, they can now have a shared roof construction. So there is reduction in construction costs by having shared roof construction and shared wall construction as well as on infrastructure; be it on water meters as well as possible shared septic systems. It does reduce the cost of construction. So it does not 21 increase density in any way whatsoever. It just allows for a different type of construction; a reduced financial burden type of construction for property owners. So it went up to the County Council. You folks approved it and recommended approval to the County Council, and it went there in September and has been in public hearing since then at the Committee level. It's coming back up on December 5`h, I believe. Ultimately, I can say the temperature at Council seems very agreeable with the draft proposal. There has been some concern from at least two (2) councilmembers about, I'll say, the massing potential of shared wall construction; that is to say now in areas that only have single - family dwellings, you may have apartment complexes, so to speak. So we're having that discussion with the Council still at this point, but for the most part, I can say, it seems fairly agreeable to the draft ordinance. Chair Mahoney: A big clarifying issue is there's no change in the density. And even if...like you said, if they didn't build an attached system somehow, it could be single units. I think that's one of the points that ... you know, that density's not going to increase on that, but the savings would be on...like you explained about doing the attached dwelling, some of the cost that could be saved on that, and there is no change in the density. Mr. Ho: Did I miss something? Can you build a separate unit? Mr. Hull: Well, only ... so, every single residential property, you can build, actually, a second unit. Under the zoning classifications, the simplest being R -1, that equates to ... you can have one (1) dwelling for every one (1) acre of property you own within that zoning district. So if you have one (1) acre in the R -1 Zoning District, you can build one (1) house. If you have two (2) acres in the R -1 Zoning District, you can build two (2) houses. If you have three (3) acres in the R -1 Zoning District, you can build three (3) houses, and so on and so forth. You can actually build ... every single property qualifies for a second dwelling because of the fact that the ADU Law that was passed in the 1980's essentially said for any property that qualifies for only one (1) house, you can qualify for an ADU. So there is some confusion. An ADU, technically under zoning, is not a second dwelling; it's an additional dwelling unit afforded to property owners that can only build one (1) unit. So if you have one (1) acre of R -1, you can build one (1) single - family dwelling and one (1) ADU or one (1) additional dwelling unit. Now, if you have two (2) acres in the R -1 Zoning District, it means you can build two (2) dwelling units; can't build the ADU though because that property qualifies for two (2) houses, right? So the ADU only applies to those properties that can build one (1) house. So every property on Kauai can build at least one (1) house. Now, somewhat ... I don't want to muddy the waters here, but it somewhat points to the fact that there is some conflict in the Zoning Ordinance because if you have a property that is R -1 and one (1) acre, you can build an ADU, and the ADU Law was passed after the 1980 prohibition on multi - family construction. So the ADU ... those who qualify for ADUs can actually construct it with shared wall construction. Their next door neighbor, though, may have two (2) acres of R -1; therefore, it doesn't qualify for that ADU, but qualifies for two (2) dwelling units. He is, therefore, required ... or prohibited from using shared wall construction because he qualifies for two (2) dwelling units. It's a kink in the law you could almost say where it's not being ... the density allocation is not being equitably distributed throughout the island based on what you qualify for. But at the end of the day, to go back to the point, Commissioner Ho, is that this bill doesn't afford the opportunity to build another unit. It just says however many units you qualify (for), you can build those together. 22 Mr. Ho: So it's only attached dwelling we talking about? Mr. Hull: Well, if you qualify for, say, six (6) or ten (10) units on your property, you could essentially construct, now, all of them connected, which would more look like or resemble an apartment complex. Mr. Keawe: Oh okay. So that was ... the concern was if you've got an R -6, you could actually build six (6) units all attached to each other and make it look like an apartment building. Mr. Hull: Correct. Mr. Ho: So, one more if I could. These attached units can have a kitchen? Mr. Hull: Yeah. A dwelling unit can have a kitchen. So if you qualify for two (2) dwelling units and you want to attach them, there would be two (2) kitchens in there. I'll be honest. The issue that some of the councilmembers are wrestling with, with the massing, is the...the example was put up that what if you have forty (40) acres of R -1? You could put a 40 -unit mega apartment complex in one spot. We're doing the research to see how many properties like that would qualify out there. We're doing that right now to provide it for Council, but quite honestly, there aren't many properties R -1, forty (40) acres in size. But even if we philosophically go there, the thing is is that does it impact it more? The overall neighborhood. Because, indeed, you can say yes, you are dropping a 40 -unit complex or two (2) 20 -unit complexes, you know, into this area, or four (4) 10 -unit complexes, which might not necessarily be the same as what the overall form and character of the surrounding neighborhood is, but you're also able, now, to put it in two (2) acres, right? Which is when you're talking about cluster -type development. So where you had a 40 -acre property, now while you are massing in one area, you also now have thirty -seven (37) or thirty -six (36) acres of open, farmable, or landscaped area which would be far less impactful, say, on the neighborhood. So it's an honest discussion going on up at Council, and it's being vetted ultimately. I think some of it may be put to rest once we have those numbers of how many properties out there qualify for, say, these massive complexes. We don't anticipate many, if any at all, coming online. At the end of the day, this is really to accommodate the mom and pop type of builder that just wants to take advantage to build that second unit for the in -laws, for their children and shared wall construction is just cheaper. Chair Mahoney: Okay. Commissioner... Mr. Ho: Has there been any movement to changing the codes? The setbacks? The heights? The property use? Does that all remain the same? Mr. Hull: Well, you folks reviewed the ARU Bill as well, which actually does, to a certain degree, give an additional density to properties; it was looking just in the Lihu`e area. That has been stalled at Council because of the fact that some of the councilmembers were concerned that while they appreciated the idea of affording new types of rental units within the limited domain to be put here in Lihu`e, the question was why shouldn't it be allowed in other places? So we're actually doing the research in the Department to go out to the various communities to say, do you, as a community, want this ability to increase density overall on properties? The Lihu`e Plan 23 calls for it, so that's why we pointed to that, but we're doing the research right now and outreach with the communities to see if that's something that they'd be amenable to or desire. As far as setbacks and heights, right now we don't have anything on the books, per se, as an island -wide approach in the Lihu`e Town Core Plan as well as the South Kauai Plan, both of which looked at their community plans as a way to really have a hands -on approach at the form and character and uses of those structures - particularly residential in their community. They have actually changed setbacks and changed heights. So some of the setbacks in Lihu`e have been altered, in the Town Core at least, as well as the height has been expanded up to five (5) stories and that was where the community said we want this. When you take a look at South Kauai, they have changed setbacks so you don't have as robust setbacks. They have also removed density in certain parts of South Kauai where as long as you meet the design standards, it doesn't matter how many kitchens you have in the place. But something about height... talking about height, the South Kauai Community Plan process, much of the community wanted to still maintain that small town feel and they felt that extending the height would not be appropriate for the area. So as we go through the community plans, we can anticipate additional moves being made in those various areas for setbacks and height to accommodate, among other things, housing. Chair Mahoney: Any questions for our Deputy Director? Mr. Ho: This... Mr. Kaneshiro's bill, does that overlap the ARU? The one we're trying to do for Hanamd'ulu, Lihu`e, and Puhi. Mr. Hull: It would be in conjunction with it. I mean, if Councilmember Kaneshiro's bill passes, it would just apply to all types of dwelling units. If the ARU passes, it would be applicable. And I'd say there's a bit more concern with the ARU, I'll say honestly, up at Council than there is with the multi - family construction, so we'll see how that navigates the political... Ms. Ahuna: They're completely separate? Mr. Hull: They are two (2) completely separate. The ARU was introduced by the Administration by the Department and was done so prior to the introduction of the multi - family construction bill, so they are two (2) separate bills, but they are both trying to attempt to address the housing issue here on Kauai. They are not whole scale ... you know, you've seen that number in the General Plan presentation that we have a 1,400 -unit deficit right now on the island and the next 20 years we're projected to need 9,000 more units just to accommodate in- island growth; most of it from natural births. I don't mean to sugarcoat it. Neither the ARU nor the multi - family construction bills are going to solve that issue. They are an attempt to begin addressing it and I think they both will do well in addressing it, but you're going to be seeing, I think, from the Administration and from Council, I would imagine, multiple and numerous moves to begin addressing the housing crisis we're in, and this is just the beginning, quite honestly. Mr. IIo: Does the ARU Bill still have the housing size you can build on it? Mr. Hull: It currently does. For the most part, it still is in the shape and form you folks had it at. I think if, ultimately, the communities want it in their areas outside of Lihu`e as well, we'll be 24 introducing another bill that is very similar to that. Well, I don't want to get ahead of the process. We'll be meeting with communities to see what they want, if they want something. But right now, as the ARU sits in ... somewhat in definite deferral up at Council, it still has the size limitation, still has the prohibition on CPR'ing and selling off, yeah. Chair Mahoney: Hopefully this can be vetted in Council. Everyone knows that there needs to be some bold steps for housing and it's got a good foundation, literally and figuratively, and hopefully it will progress. Mr. Ho: One last one, Kaaina. Mr. Hull: Sure, Commissioner. Mr. Ho: The permitting, now, for those units will all be done over - the - counter? We won't hear any of them in our meetings here? Mr. Hull: I'll say, as proposed for the multi - family construction, it would be all over -the- counter. Some of the issues wrestling... like I said, some councilmembers have raised concerns about the massing, and there is a potential to say if you reach a certain mass, you have to go to the Planning Commission. There is some discussion going on at the Council at that level. Mr. Ho: What is it? Mr. Keawe: So the guy who comes in with the forty (40) acres... Mr. Ho: Oh, I see. Oh yeah. Okay, okay. Mr. Hull: So that discussion is going on right now, and we'll see where that goes, essentially. Chair Mahoney: Yeah, how many 40 -acre parcels are there (inaudible); it shouldn't the cloud the issue. (Laughter in background) Okay. Any other questions? Mr. Hull: Thank you, Commissioners. Chair Mahoney: Thank you for your presentation. ANNOUNCEMENTS Topics for Future Meetings The following scheduled Planning Commission meeting will be held at 9:00 a.m., or shortly thereafter at the Lihu`e Civic Center, Mo`ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A -2B, 4444 Rice Street, Lhu`e, Kauai, Hawaii 96766 on Tuesday, December 13, 2016. 25 Mr. Dahilig: Mr. Chair, these are all the items that we have for today's meeting. I am circulating, at this time, the on deck sheets. This is the batting order for the next few months. As you can see, there's a variant amount of items. Leslie will be asking, I guess, the Commissioners to, I guess, if you haven't already responded, to look at additional days for a specific Planning Commission meeting to handle just the General Plan. Mr. Keawe: That's in January, right? Mr. Dahilig: Yeah, January. So we're looking at, I believe, the 30`h or the 3151 as potential days just to hold a General Plan hearing and workshop, alone, just on that because we anticipate... you know, just in preparation. We'll see where the process goes. Those dates may not work based on how the draft is still moving forward, but, you know, trying to track forward, if we are looking at releasing the departmental draft to the Planning Commission, we are looking at potential dates for that. As for, I guess, the next meeting, which is December 13, 2016, 1 do need to inform the Commission that we do have a very heavy agenda for that meeting. There's a number of contested case hearing motions that are up for the Planning Commission's consideration, so I would just be prepared to be ... maybe not bring your toothbrush, but maybe ... we'll have some coffee available. So we'll let you know that ahead of time so you're not (inaudible). Mr. Keawe: So is this an all - nighter? Mr. Dahilig: Well, it'll move forward as justice provides; I'll say that. Mr. Keawe: As justice provides? Mr. Dahilig: As justice provides. Mr. Keawe: Okay then. (Laughter in background) Mr. Dahilig: In any event, Mr. Chair, the next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, December 13, 2016 in this room. Chair Mahoney: Okay. Any ... that's it. Do we need a motion or no? To adjourn. Mr. Keawe: Move to adjourn. Mr. Ho: Second. Chair Mahoney: Moved and seconded. With no further business, all in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Motion carried 4:0. ADJOURNMENT Chair Mahoney adjourned the meeting at 12:03 p.m. 26 Respectfully submitted by: Jarc�ie Agaran, Commission Support Clerk ( ) Approved as circulated (add date of meeting approval) ( ) Approved as amended. See minutes of I meeting. 27