HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning 061317 MinutesKAUAI PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
June 13, 2017
The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the County of Kauai was called to order by
Vice Chair Ho at 9:00 a.m., at the Lihu`e Civic Center, Mo`ikeha Building, in meeting room 2A -
2B. The following Commissioners were present:
Vice Chair Roy Ho
Ms. Kanoe Ahuna
Ms. Donna Apisa
Mr. Wade Lord
Mr. Sean Mahoney
Ms. Glenda Nogami Streufert
Absent and Excused:
Chair Kimo Keawe
The following staff members were present: Planning Department — Jody Galinato, Deputy
Planning Director Ka`aina Hull, Leslie Takasaki, Marie Williams; Office of the County Attorney
— Deputy County Attorney Jodi Higuchi Sayegusa; Office of Boards and Commissions —
Commission Support Clerk Darcie Agaran
Discussion of the meeting, in effect, ensued:
CALL TO ORDER
Vice Chair Ho called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m.
ROLL CALL
Deputy Planning Director Ka`aina Hull: Good morning, Chair. The first item on the agenda is
Roll Call.
Commissioner Lord.
Mr. Lord: Here.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Streufert.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Here.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Mahoney.
Mr. Mahoney: Here.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Apisa.
Ms. Apisa: Here.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Ahuna.
Ms. Ahuna: Here.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Ho.
Vice Chair Ho: Here.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Keawe is excused from this meeting. Chair, we do have a quorum.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Mr. Hull: The next agenda item is approval of the agenda. The Department has one (1)
recommendation to amend the agenda so that Item M.1., New Business for Green Earth Matters,
be moved prior to L.1.
Ms. Ahuna: Motion to approve moving Item M.l .
Ms. Apisa: Second.
Vice Chair Ho: The motion is to approve the agenda as amended and it has been seconded. All
in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Motion carries 6:0.
MINUTES of the meeting(s) of the Planning Commission
Special Meeting of April 27, 2017
Mr. Hull: The next agenda item is approval of the Special Meeting minutes of April 27, 2017.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: I move to accept the minutes of the Special Meeting of April 27, 2017.
Mr. Lord: Second.
Vice Chair Ho: Motion has been made to approve the minutes. All in favor, please?
(Unanimous voice vote) Motion passes 6:0.
Regular Meeting of May 9, 2017
Mr. Hull: Next agenda item is approval of the Regular Meeting minutes for May 9, 2017.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: I move to accept the minutes of the Regular Meeting of May 9, 2017.
Ms. Apisa: Second.
Vice Chair Ho: Motion made and seconded. All in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Motion
carries 6:0.
RECEIPT OF ITEMS FOR THE RECORD
Mr. Hull: Next agenda item. There are no receipt of items for the record.
HEARINGS AND PUBLIC COMMENT
Mr. Hull: So the next agenda item is F., Hearings and Public Comment. At this time, the public
is afforded an opportunity to testify on agenda items. We have, again as I stated in the beginning
of the meeting, two (2) agenda items that will be reviewed today; one is the General Plan and
one is Good Earth Matters. I'll be calling the names of those that signed up for testimony. As in
the past, please indicate if you'd like to testify now at the very beginning of this agenda or if you
are going to hold off until the actual agenda item is received.
So the first name I have for the General Plan sign-up sheet is Joe Frisinger. Did you want to
testify now or at the agenda item?
Joe Frisinger: Now.
Mr. Hull: Next would be Glenn Mickens.
Mr. Frisinger: Good morning. My name is Joe Frisinger. I'm a resident of Princeville.
Mr. Frisinger read his testimony for the record (on file with the Planning Department).
Mr. Frisinger Thank you very much and I hope your decision is to keep it as the Planning
Department wanted. Thank you.
Vice Chair Ho: Thank you, Mr. Frisinger.
Mr. Hull: Next up is Glenn Mickens, followed by Rayne Regush.
Glenn Mickens: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is Glenn Mickens. I'm here to
testify about the Hokua Place.
Mr. Mickens read his testimony for the record (on file with the Planning Department).
Mr. Mickens: I know that all of you guys use the same roads that we do. You see what's
happening. Ka`aina, you use these same roads every day. You see what's happening. I mean,
it's pathetic trying to go through that Kapa`a corridor. Something has to be done. We just can't
ignore it; bury our heads in the sand and say it's going to disappear. It's not going to happen.
But to build more units before we put the infrastructure in place ... let's not put the cart before the
horse. Let's not say we are going to just build it, now we will address the problem. It's going to
take ... address the problem first. I appreciate you Councilmembers [sic] really addressing this. I
know you have a big job.
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Mickens: I'm told you are not paid any money to sit here day after day to listen to people,
but I do hope you do it. Thank you.
Vice Chair Ho: Thank you, Glenn.
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Rayne Regush, followed by Carl Imparato.
Rayne Regush: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is Rayne Regush. I serve as Chair of
the Wailua-Kapa`a Neighborhood Association and our concerns are many with this draft plan.
Ms. Regush read her testimony for the record (on file with the Planning Department).
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Regush continued reading her testimony for the record.
Vice Chair Ho: Thank you, Rayne.
Ms. Regush: Any questions? Mahalo.
Mr. Hull: Next we have Carl Imparato, followed by Darbi S. Freeman.
Carl hnparato: I'll wait until later.
Mr. Hull: Okay. Next up is Darbi S. Freeman, followed by Pat Childs.
Darbi S. Freeman: I'll wait `til later.
Mr. Hull: Next up is Pat Childs, followed by Dr. B Blackwell.
Pat Childs: These are a few short personal comments from myself and observations regarding
Hokua Place. I became familiar with Hokua Place representing one of the members of the LLC
which is developing the project, and in that, I learned a bit about the history of the project and
what its goals were. That being in mind, I would actually like to see the project as it is described
now in the updated General Plan expanded to include the thirty percent of D -grade agriculture
11
land which is now omitted. I would also like to see the Neighborhood designation return back to
Urban in the first General Plan as the County had initially intended. Kapa`a is not going to
suffer a large increase of population from people from L1hu`e or elsewhere moving to Hokua
Place as has been opined. It is simply not going to occur. What's happening in Kapa`a now is
that people are living doubly and triply in homes. Anyone who drives up Lipo Road, Kawaihau
can see what's happening to those neighborhoods. We have parents living with children. We
have children living with parents. We have cousins living with other cousins. These people
need homes. The only way to get homes is to build homes. The vision for Hokua Place is
something like Puhi; where you have an economically integrated neighborhood involving
freestanding homes, varying income requirements, and townhouses and housing developments of
that nature. Puhi has already proven that local families will take a beginner home in a
condominium setting and then later upgrade in their lives as they are able to or as children come
along and their needs are greater. These homes by their very nature — these condominium homes
— are economically, perhaps, outside of the affordable home range, but by the very nature of their
marketing, are within the marketing [sic] home range. We see Puhi regularly go for $200,000;
the units have gone down as far as $80,000 depending on market flow. That is what is needed in
Kapa`a; market flow. People moving out of one home into another and thereby opening up
another living arrangement for others. In other words, I don't see any increase in traffic
whatsoever under any circumstances. The State is working on the highway in 2018, according to
their plan, as everybody here knows. Don't forget, when they leave Hokua Place, most of the
workers will stay in Kapa`a or go out north. The workers that are going into Lihu`e are already
driving into Lihu`e; these are the same cars. Thank you.
Vice Chair Ho: Thank you, Pat.
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Dr. B. Blackwell. Dr. B. And following that is Greg Allen.
Dr. B. Blackwell: Aloha kakou. I apologize. I'm hearing challenged so I'm trying to read lips.
My naive is Dr. B. Blackwell.
Dr. B. Blackwell read her testimony for the record (on file with the Planning
Department).
Dr. B. Blackwell: You're looking at a general plan without an educational component. You
need to look for the future of our youth.
Dr. B. Blackwell continued reading her testimony for the record.
Dr. B. Blackwell: Mahalo.
Vice Chair Ho: Thank you, B.
Mr. Hull: Next, we have Greg Allen, followed by Ron Agor.
GregAllen: Aloha, Commissioners. Greg Allen. I'm sorry that you guys have to hear this over
and over; traffic is terrible, we shouldn't do anything. Hokua Place, for fifteen (15) years, has
been allowing the use of the middle section of the bypass road that we own outright. When we
first got put in charge of the project, there was a fee every year — multiple thousand, $20,000,
$30,000 — that the County was paying to use that road. We have let it be used for the last fifteen
(15) years for free. The gates never closed. I think it's obvious that Hokua Place wants to do
well and do good at the same time. Our plan is to donate that road. We have a Memorandum of
Understanding to that effect with the State Highway Department that has reviewed our plans, our
traffic plans. With the addition of a road through our project that goes mauka — avoiding the
roundabout and the school — going from the roundabout up to the triple intersection with
Kaapuni and Olohena, we actually show that we can reduce traffic. In addition to what Pat was
saying that many of the people are already there, we do believe that traffic needs to be addressed.
We believe that we are doing more for traffic than any other project has or proposed project will.
In addition to that, speaking of affordable, many people said oh, there is only two hundred thirty
(230) affordable houses and there are five hundred (500) single-family. That is absolutely not
true. Our plan is for less than one hundred (100) single-family homes. Almost all of our homes
— six hundred eighty (680) of them — are multi -family townhomes, which by their nature ... it's
the only thing you can do; is to provide a supply that will meet a demand. Economically, that's
all you can do. You can put all kinds of things on there and say well, we are going to have a
buyback program or we are going to force this loan or we are going to do that. In the long term,
if you have a smaller one bedroom townhouse, it is going to be affordable to a young couple.
Hokua Place has been recommended in the General Plan since the 70s. There is a known
need ... in fact, in the County's draft, they say there are new population statistics, so they are
reducing what the old General Plans had, which was about a hundred (100) acres recommended
to become Urban. They are reducing it down to about seventy (70) but yet, they are saying the
new population statistics show that we are going to have more need for housing, so I don't get
the logic. I would ask that you leave the plan as it has been for twenty (20) years that we have
relied upon. In fact, just taking you way back, when I first got involved in this project, it was
going to be fifty (50) single-family homes. The County called me in and asked me to come in
and said will you please build housing. I said yes and I have worked to do something that is
good since then. If it were to go away completely, it would just be fifty (50) homes. The math
on multi-million dollar fifty (50) homes—
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Allen: —or townhouses comes out about the same for us. But to do the right thing and to
provide housing for our community... and just to remind the public, this is a plan. We still come
back to you with details, with exact densities at another date. We go back to the Planning
Commission. We go to the Planning Department. We go to the County Council. All this is is a
plan. This is an area that should be designated so that we can work it out to put houses in this
area. As far as green, all of the good ag land ... most of our project is D—
Vice Chair Ho: Mr. Allen, your three (3) minutes.
Mr. Allen: Yeah, okay. Most of our project is D land; it's bad for growing. Anything that is
good in the valley — sixty-six (66) acres — is staying ag. We are the first people to put a solar
farm in of this large scale in Hawaii. The solar farm that we have zeroes this project's carbon
0
footprint. We have our own water source; enough to give the County five times as much water
as we need.
Mr. Hull: Four (4) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Allen: So thank you, Commissioners.
Vice Chair Ho: Thank you, Mr. Allen.
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Ron Agor, followed by Jake Braken.
Ron Agor: Aloha, Chair, Director, and Commission Members. I'd like to speak about this
project with regard to the technical aspect of it. As the General Plan proposal now, it reduces the
property by one-third. I can understand the Director's concept of densitizing the project in as
little area as possible and leaving some open areas. That, really, would be possible if the
property was level where we could use minimum distances between buildings, but this property
is undulating and has some pretty good slopes on it. In order to avoid massive retaining walls
that would add to the cost of each unit, we would prefer to spread the buildings out and use 2 -to -
1 slopes for a natural setting instead of massive retaining walls. That's why when the
subdivision was first in its conceptual phases, we thought about that; we thought about
condensing the units in one area. But because of the slopes, we can't do it. We need one
hundred percent of the land area that was zoned Urban to make this 780 -unit work. So that's the
technical aspects of it. If you have any questions, go ahead. Thank you.
Vice Chair Ho: Thank you, Ron.
Mr. Hull: Next up is Jake Braken, followed by J Gardner.
Jake Braken: Thank you. I actually want to thank all of the members up here. I think it is good
what you are doing. I know this is a very hard job. Good planning is what is good for the people
here. I'm actually one of Greg's partners on the property. We have been involved with him for
several years and I know that you are expecting... you know what I want to say. We are trying to
do what is good for the community. We are trying to do what is good for the people; we are
listening. We understand that traffic is a problem and I just want to kind of emphasize, again,
that the General Plan is not a permit. We have a long ways to go and we are listening. We don't
expect permits without traffic solutions. We are working to help with that and we are listening.
I want to invite everybody just to speak with us, too. We are going to continue to listen and we
expect to build something that is good for the community and good for the people here. Thank
you.
Ms. Ahuna: Wait. I have a question. Can I, Chair?
Vice Chair Ho: Yes.
Ms. Ahuna: What is your experience on affordable housing; development of affordable housing
as the developer?
Mr. Braken: I have actually done a little affordable housing project on Oahu; we did some
Section 8 housing. We went through and did an affordable housing project there. I have been
working on the mainland almost exclusively for the last few years on affordable housing in and
around Navajo Nation properties. It is a high focus on what we do. It is an interest we want to
make a positive impact on the community and—
Ms. Ahuna: Have you and Mr. Allen ever done any affordable housing here on Kauai?
Mr. Braken: I have not done ... me, personally, I have not. I am not sure what Allen's experience
is, but I know that has been something that he has talked about from day one that we have been
involved with hien.
Ms. Ahuna: Thank you.
Mr. Braken: Thanks.
Vice Chair Ho: Mr. Braken, one second.
Mr. Lord: Hi. Could you shed some light, as a developer, on costs and why it is so difficult to
create affordable housing? I mean, I think that it is a tenn that gets thrown around a lot. I don't
know that I believe such a thing exists in Hawaii, frankly. I think if the term were entry-level,
then I probably could believe that. But when I hear talk about $500,000, affordable, $550,000,
it's not affordable, but I got to believe that is related to cost. So can you shed a little light for us
on that?
Mr. Braken: Certainly. Costs are going to be a very front and center discussion on that and there
are two (2) different ways of looking at that. One is...there are a lot of costs that you just can't
control, but you can plan for the type of community that you are looking for. You can control
some of those costs upfront by planning for a project that is going to be not resort -centered, not
high-end, not exclusive, but more inclusive. Our plans have always been inclusive with the
community, not focused on a particular economic level, but trying to make sure that we have
entry-level, we have room for people to grow, and keeping those families in mind. With that,
without trying to build them that exclusive level and keeping people out of your neighborhood
and building gates, you can control some of those costs upfront. It is very market driven as well.
As the developer, you can set an initial price and the price... resells, people drive from that, and
as Greg mentioned, a lot of that is driven by what the supply is. Having more units available,
smaller units that are affordable, helps bring those prices down — those comparable prices — not
just here, but across the board by just having more availability. I think Pat Childs mentioned,
also, when somebody moves into a unit, it frees up another unit somewhere else and it opens the
market.
Ms. Ahuna: Thank you.
Mr. Lord: Thank you.
Vice Chair Ho: Thank you, Mr. Braken.
Mr. Braken: Thank you.
Mr. Hull: Next we have J Gardner, and following ... I believe it says Gabriela Taylor, I believe. J
Gardner. J Gardner. Okay.
J Gardner: That may be me and I may have signed on the wrong paper. I'm not speaking. I'm J
Gardner, but I'm not speaking.
Mr. Hull: Okay. You didn't intend to speak. Okay, thank you.
Ms. Gardner: I might have signed the wrong paper.
Mr. Hull: Did you intend to speak on the other agenda item concerning the—
Ms. Gardner: No.
Mr. Hull: No. Okay, thank you. Next up we have Gabriela Taylor, followed by Dee Crowell.
Gabriela Taylor: I'll wait.
Mr. Hull: Wait? Next up we have Dee Crowell, followed by Susan Remoaldo.
Dee Crowell: I'll wait.
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Susan Remoaldo, followed by Juan Wilson.
Susan Remoaldo: I'll wait.
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Juan Wilson, followed by Jean Souza.
Juan Wilson: I'll wait.
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Jean Souza.
Wayne Souza: She is going to be waiting.
Mr. Hull: Going to be waiting, okay. I have a Sharon Goodwin, but it looks like it was
scratched out. Did Sharon Goodwin intend to—
Sharon Goodwin: I put my name on the other list. Thank you.
Mr. Hull: For the other agenda item concerning the organic... okay.
Ms. Goodwin: The General Plan.
0
Mr. Hull: So this is the General Plan list. There is also another one up there. We are calling the
names first. If you would like to hold off on your testimony `til the actual agenda item comes
up, we can do that.
Ms. Goodwin: Yes, thank you.
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Rupert Rowe, followed by Anne Walton.
Anne Walton: I'll wait.
Mr. Hull: Okay.
Rupert Rowe: Good morning, Commissioners. My concern is the General Plan still needs to be
fixed. The reason it needs to be fixed is because our last General Plans...we never brought it up
and showed the problems that was never corrected, so we are walking into a blind future without
really having answers on the removal of the rubbish that you folks are passing on the General
Plan. Unless we have a definite answer on how we will remove the rubbish that you all create on
this island... because no other island — twenty (20) years down the road, of my knowledge — has a
plan to move the garbage off of every island. There is no plan. So how can you folks come and
say that your General Plan does not address the problem of the garbage? The kanakas knew this
problem existed the day we became a state because there is no answer for you to take the garbage
out. If you don't have an answer, why would you push a plan that really has no answer and leave
the doubt in the community? So now when we look at the community, we look at the native
person. My question is very direct to one of your commissioners up there; Mr. Lord. He says
the landowner has the right to develop their land. Of course you have the right, but you don't
have the right to pollute the island. Because if you don't have a plan for your project — not the
County now, the developer — if you don't have a plan, then why are you guys accepting the
process because you cannot answer the question on how we are going to get rid of the rubbish.
Okay. Mr. Lord said the landowner has the right. Who is this landowner that you speak of?
Explain that to me. One guy has title and one guy has a warrant deed. Title goes back to the
Kingdom of Hawaii. It states inside of there, "title". The revised statute is the law of the
Kingdom of Hawaii, so whatever things that we take and put in our plan, we taking this plan
from the Kingdom of Hawaii and altering the laws that govern Hawaii to suit the State of
Hawaii which gives out a make believe title, which is a warrant deed, and you have to buy
insurance for the crime that you commit. The other guy owns the land, so how can he be the
stranger on the land? So my question to you folks and all the developers—
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Rowe: Do you have a plan to dump the rubbish off this island? And if you don't have that
plan, don't come in here and say what you guys are going to do because you aren't going to do
anything, because the garbage is going to be there twenty (20) years down the road, the next
hundred (100) years because no county in this Hawaiian Islands can ever get rid of the garbage.
We create the garbage, but we put a blindfold on our eyes. We see the traffic. We understand
we are overcrowded. All of that is a social impact, but nothing like this comes out in the report.
10
I want to see the report on why the other General Plans were never completed and why didn't
you folks go back and fine tune the plans. Easy to put a plan out there and say, this is what we
are going to do. Of course, I like that, I like get paid for my job, too.
Mr. Hull: Four (4) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Rowe: Okay.
Vice Chair Ho: Mr. Rowe, please.
Mr. Rowe: Aloha to all of you guys. Just answer the question; how are you going to clean your
backyard? (Applause)
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Debbie Lee -Jackson, followed by Bobby Farias.
Debbie Lee -Jackson: Aloha. Aloha Kakahiaka. (Aloha) You violate my water rights every
single day by allowing a hundred percent taking of the streams and the rivers. I tried to have the
water issue addressed by requesting a contested case. I wrote a letter and if I could refresh and
maybe ... the letter that I sent in January ... oh, by the way, my name is Debbie Lee -Jackson and I
also represent ... as a member of Hui (inaudible). We are a group of kuleana landowners, kuleana
lessees, taro farmers, fishermen, cultural practitioners, and Native Hawaiians seeking to restore
and preserve the waters of Puna, Kauai. This is so that our descendants and ourselves can
sustain ourselves. The letter goes on to say we herein give notice to the Planning Commission
that we are petitioning to intervene in the Commission's upcoming decision on the Kauai
General Plan Update and will request a contested case. Below we explain our status and
position. This is not a need direct decision or response to your plan, nor is this the first time that
you heard our issues. We have been requesting that the County address our concerns for over
four (4) years. We have met with the Councilmembers, the Mayor's Office, the Planning
Department, and the Water Department. We have been politely received and then rebuked at
every turn. Our rights as Native Hawaiians are protected under the State Constitution, Article
12, Section 7. Our rights to water for our kuleana and our taro lands are protected under the
State Constitution, Article 11, Section 7, and under HRS 174(c). The nature and extent of our
interest includes all kuleana parcels in South Puna, all traditional taro lands, all flowing streams
and their biological resources, and all springs for drinking water in South Puna. The issue we
raise is the General Plan approves and supports the withdrawal of stream water for the increased
growth and development in the Lihu`e area without acknowledging that the current and proposed
stream use violates our rights and State law, despite the fact that the draft plan clearly states that
there is sufficient ground water for the development. If the General Plan Update is approved,
then at least another three million gallons per day of water will be withdrawn from our streams
and permanently allocated to this new development. Law demands that our rights to the water
are addressed before this allocation is made. Our interests would be protected if South Puna
were established as a water management area.
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair.
11
Ms. Lee -Jackson: Our interests are not even acknowledge, much less represented by the
Planning Department. The full record will be improved when our rights and interests are
acknowledged. All of our rights and interests are protected as part of the public trust, thus
clearly within the public interest. So you denying our request and then you bury the water issue
in the plan, you deleted anything about the water, and if you approve the General Plan as is, you
will have breached your duty to protect my rights to the water. I will seek relief in court and
hold you accountable to your duties as commissioners.
Vice Chair Ho: Ms. Jackson—
Ms. Lee -Jackson: Stop raping the land and the water. Thank you.
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Bobby Farias, followed by Yoshito L'Hote.
Bobby Farias: Later.
Mr. Hull: Yoshito L'Hote, followed by Wayne Souza. Yosh, just for clarification, I have you
signed up on both the Green Earth Matters and General Plan. The list we are calling right now is
the General Plan.
Yoshito L'Hote: That's correct. So actually, I will be speaking ... my name is Yoshito L'Hote.
I'm the president for the Kilauea Neighborhood Association. I have been asked by my board and
the community members in the room to make a comment about the Kilauea area, which is to add
the spur part of the new entry road to Kilauea so that it would go all the way to Kilauea Road.
Last night, there was an email that was saying this is not the right venue to, maybe, address that,
but as I was asked by the Board and the community, I am in front of you making that testimony
today. So basically not just limiting the new entry road to Kilauea, but actually taking that road
all the way to Kilauea Road further down so that it would actually become a bypass. Thank you.
Vice Chair Ho: Thank you.
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Wayne Souza, followed by Jean Souza.
Wayne Souza: Later.
Mr. Hull: Later. Next up we have Jean Souza, followed by Kristina Kenegos. Jean Souza.
Mr. Souza: Later.
Mr. Hull: Later, okay. Kristina Kenegos, followed by Greg Crowe.
Kristina Kenegos: Hi. My name is Kristina Kenegos. I am a teacher at Kapa`a Elementary and
I thought I would come and give my testimony in concern about Hokua Place. From my
perspective, as a teacher, I see so many families that need low-income housing or reasonably -
income housing, so I applaud your question about the real cost of housing on Kauai and that is
what my concern is; that is what brought me here, as well as traffic and the lack of infrastructure.
12
So I encourage all of you to do what you can to create a situation if there is some growth, that it
is growth that is accessible to families who live and work here and provide the backbone of the
community. Thank you.
Vice Chair Ho: Thank you.
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Greg Crowe, followed by Rich Schump.
Greg Crowe: Later.
Mr. Hull: Later. Okay. So the next list we are calling for is the list that was specifically for
Good [sic] Earth Matters. Now, as stated at the beginning of the agenda, the Chair is allowing
testimony for any agenda item, including Good [sic] Earth Matters, here in the beginning, or you
can reserve `til later when the agenda item is up. As the Planning Commission amended the
agenda, Good [sic] Earth Matters is directly proceeding the testimony now. So you can officially
testify now or, say, later, but it is the next agenda item as well for your information. So next up
is Rich Schump.
Rich Schump: Later, please.
Vice Chair Ho: Oh, wait. Let me interfere. Let us take a short recess and come back at 10
o'clock, please. We are in recess.
The Commission recessed this portion of the meeting at 9:45 a.m.
The Commission reconvened this portion of the meeting at 9:59 a.m.
Vice Chair Ho: Call this meeting back to order. It is my intention that at the top of the hour that
we take a 10 -minute recess just for everyone to catch their breath. With that, we will proceed
with the testimony.
Mr. Hull: Next on the sign-up sheet is David Neaves, followed by Ned Whitlock.
David Neaves: Good morning, Commissioners. Thank you for all your volunteered time;
appreciate it. I'm a farmer in Moloa`a.
Vice Chair Ho: Name please.
Mr. Neaves: Oh, my name is David Neaves.
Vice Chair Ho: Thank you.
Mr. Neaves: I thought I said that; I'm sorry. I have some concerns about this proposed green
waste facility that is going to be proposed on Lot Nos. 69 and 70. I believe we do need more
green waste facilities on Kauai; it's a good thing. I'm just not sure that this is the best location
for this in that there is one (1) existing green waste already there, and the proposal also has their
piles going right up to the borders, not big enough windbreaks, and a lot of issues like that which
13
will be brought up by other people today. The turn is a big issue for me; off of Kuhio Highway
onto Koolau Road. There is no turn lane. There are already trucks trying to turn there. Many
people going to the beach, people going to the fruit stand, the bus turns in there, turns around.
The green waste facility now, they have a straight shot right into it. The new green waste facility
would have to go with 40 -foot trucks trying to make a turn that I'm not even sure they can make.
It is ver_ y potentially dangerous right there for more traffic. Another thing that really bothers me
is fire. These green waste facilities, not regularly, but sometimes do combust. With two (2)
right next to each other, I believe if one catches on fire and the other one catches on fire, it could
burn my own fann out, which is less than half a mile away; Kona winds, it would go right there.
There is not enough water. We have our own private water and there is no fire hydrant or
anything anywhere close, so I'm not even sure what the plan would be to put out a fire. Really,
that's all. I would just like to ... there's more people that are going to bring up other issues on this
and I'll leave it to them, but I would really like for you to defer this approval until some of these
issues that are going to be brought, if they could be addressed. Thank you.
Vice Chair Ho: Thank you, David.
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Ned Whitlock, followed by Orien Huff.
Ned Whitlock: Aloha, Commissioners. I'm Ned Whitlock. I'm a farmer in Moloa`a. My
property is about 100 feet away from the proposed green waste site. My fannworker housing
residence is approximately 1,000 feet away. I'm concerned that the proposed panax/windbreaks
are inadequate for dust and noise mitigation. I'd like to see something taller, denser; perhaps a
couple layers of vegetation would make a big impact on that project. But my overriding concern
is basically taking prime agricultural land that has a good water supply... and it is perfect for
crops. Moloa`a is a great growing area with sunshine, adequate water, not too much water,
rainfall, and it is relatively free of pigs — at least on my farm — so there are a lot of advantages for
crop production. I am always a fanner at heart and would prefer not to see industrialization of a
good farm land. Traffic is also an issue. Definitely around the fruit stand there, you have to be
careful. I recommended that we defer this project until some of these issues can be worked out
on a more formal basis. Thank you.
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Orien Wilkinson Huff, followed by Joseph Schwartz, I believe.
Orien Wilkinson Huff: Dear Planning Commission, my name is Orien Wilkinson Huff. I live in
Anahola; approximately 2 miles from the proposed location for this new green waste site. I have
thousands of hours of experience as a heavy equipment operator, including being the primary
operator of Heart and Soul Organics' Diamond Z and DuraTech grinders. Three (3) minutes
does not give me enough time to read the letter I submitted, so I would just like to highlight a
few of my key points and hope that you take the time to review my letter before snaking a
decision on this topic. Geographic location. The consulting firm on Oahu which prepared this
application suggests that having another green waste site ... sorry, I'm nervous. They suggest the
landfill... sorry. Hopefully you can read the letter. I brought up some points; geographic
location, fire, traffic is a huge one. In conclusion, thank you for taking the time to consider the
points I've made. I think that additional recycling options for Kauai residents and businesses
are important. However, based on geographic location, being directly adjacent to an existing,
14
well-established recycling facility, I don't see how the proposed facility would have a positive
impact, especially on relieving the burden at Kekaha Landfill. In addition, this proposed facility
is detrimental to surrounding properties, traffic on the private access road, and people traveling
Kuhio Highway. The landfill is on the direct opposite side of the island from Moloa`a, so no one
dumping green waste in Kekaha is going to stop and drive to Moloa`a because of this site. The
proximity to Kuhio Highway ... they are saying there is going to be large quantities of material
being stored and processed less than 50 feet from the main highway. In my experience, green
waste recycling generates substantial amounts of noise, dust, and fumes from the large machines
used. These airborne hazards would blow directly over Kuhio Highway. There are already a
number of commercial landscaping companies operating in the Ag Hui disposing material at
various locations and the traffic has been increasing steadily over the years, and the applicant is
seeking to open the site to the public to operate ten (10) hours a day, seven (7) days a week. The
potential traffic increase is enormous and puts everyone who currently uses the road at risk,
especially the very large number of pedestrians that are working in the surrounding agricultural
areas. Everybody knows that traffic is already a huge issue and the proposed facility would
clearly be detrimental. In conclusion, geographic location—
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Wilkinson Huff. Thank you for your time.
Ms. Apisa: Thank you.
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Joseph Schwartz. Oh.
Joseph Schwartz: Good morning. My name is Joseph—
Mr. Hull: Hold on one second.
Vice Chair Ho: One second. Glenda, who did you want to speak to? Mr. Huff?
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Is that his name? I'm sorry.
Vice Chair Ho: Mr. Huff, could you come one time, please? One question from the
Commissioner.
Mr. Wilkinson Huff. Sorry for being so nervous.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: No problem. It's okay. We are all normal people here.
Mr. Wilkinson Huff. Public speaking. (Laughter)
Ms. Nogami Streufert: I have a question, though, on your... according to some of the
information that we got, this green waste area would be adjacent to your green waste area. So
your green waste area is ... where is that located?
15
Mr. Wilkinson Huff: It's directly on the north side of the proposed location.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: So it is right next to the road, also?
Mr. Wilkinson Huff: If you look at an aerial photograph, Kuhi6 Highway veers farther away.
Ms. Nogarni Streufert: Right.
Mr. Wilkinson Huff: I don't have the aerial photograph in front of me, but if you are driving up
Kuhi6 Highway to the north...
Ms. Nogami Streufert: So it is right adjacent to it and it is close to ... is this close to Kuhi6
Highway as this one would be?
Mr. Wilkinson Huff. It is not as close, I believe.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Okay.
Mr. Wilkinson Huff: I don't have the aerial photograph, but if you look, Kuhi6 Highway kind of
makes a turn, so the proposed property is closer to Kuhi6 Highway. They are also proposing just
a single layer of shrubs, I believe, 4 feet tall, whereas the property Heart and Soul Organics
operates on has a 10 -foot wide panax hedge 15 feet tall. The hedge facing the east side of the
property adjacent to where the site is and the border that kind of faces Kuhi6 Highway most
directly has a 25 -foot tall bamboo hedge 20+ feet wide. The border closest to Kuhi6 Highway on
the Heart and Soul Organics property has the additional hedge, the berm, then there's the Hui
road, and then based on how Kuhi6 Highway turns, it gets to a triangle and there is also a large
ironwood hedge on there. So the dust mitigation is completely different.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: So if this green waste were to have those same kinds of optical
diversions, if you will, around it, that would be appropriate and that would make it—
Mr. Wilkinson Huff. I think you can ... yeah. I mean, you can definitely mitigate the effects by
having more vegetation, setbacks farther away. The other thing is the prevailing winds;
typically, trade winds. If you look at the site and you look how it is situated and how it comes
right there, you are going to have much more issues right there, basically.
Vice Chair Ho: Ms. Streufert—
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Okay, thank you.
Vice Chair Ho: (inaudible) please. Thank you.
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Joseph Schwartz, followed by Mark Freeman.
Mr. Schwartz: Hi. Good morning. Name is Joseph Schwartz and I am the neighbor that is most
directly affected by this proposal. I have Lot 71, which you can see on the diagrams. We share
16
about 1,000 feet of fence and a skinny panax hedge will in no way mitigate dust, fumes, or noise.
I think that is ridiculous. As most farmers in here know, you need about 150 feet of dense
plantings that would include bananas, lauhala, hau bush, bamboo to mitigate the noise. Seven
(7) days a week starting at 7:00 a.m.? You are going to have trucks going in there on Sunday?
Again, that is a little bit ridiculous. My main concern is this is prime agricultural land. If you
look in the report that was filed, I think the land was graded C, meaning very poor, but that is not
true. That was done in 1967; fifty (50) years ago. Since then, the land has been farmed with
organic turmeric, ginger, and leafy greens, and it is very valuable farmland. So to turn very
valuable farmland into an industrial, commercial operation... because if you look at the plot plan,
there is no way this is agricultural, even though creating compost is an agricultural activity. I
just don't think the plot plan was very well-planned out; 30,000 cubic yards of green waste
composting right along the fence line with a skinny panax hedge? Would you want to live next
to that? I would have built farmworker housing, an ag barn; I want a farm. Right? It says on
there, 0.4 miles away is the nearest residence. No, it would be 30 yards away. And when the
wind is blowing and you have that much compost going through your kitchen window, would
you want that? I don't think so. I think compost is very valuable to the agricultural process; just
do it in a way that doesn't affect the neighbors. You'll see on the diagrams right there. Push all
that compost back towards the main road and not have it up against your neighbors, right? And
that's also going to mitigate the dust, fumes, noise, and the fire hazard. Everyone out there is in
a well. The water pressure is very low. If there is a fire, what is going to happen? That fire in
no way will be put out. And if the wind is blowing Kona or strong trades, there goes all the
neighbors. So I really don't think from a safety standpoint and from prime agricultural lands
being turned industrial, I don't think it's a wise decision. I think the Planning Department needs
a lot of review on this. Again, as I say, Unit 71 (is) directly impacted. Also, if you look on the
diagram, you'll see the topography has been covered up by the windrows of compost. The
topography... they are upslope, so if there is a—
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Schwartz: Thank you. If there is a rain event, heavy flooding, all of that compost, where
does it go? Onto Lot 71. There also needs to be a berm, as well as a dense 150 -foot planting of
windbreak. Thank you.
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Mark Freeman, followed by Darbi Freeman.
Mark Freeman: I'll wait.
Mr. Hull: Darbi Freeman, followed by Marie Manger.
Darbi Shakira Freeman: Thank you, Commissioners. My name is Darbi Shakira Freeman. I
have grave concerns about the subject application. Way back in 1994, my husband and I
submitted permit applications and went through all of the steps of preliminary due diligence;
substantiating our responses, developing copasetic plans, and gaining unanimous neighboring
support. Permits were granted to us and we were able to legally develop and operate a
commercial composting facility which we have maintained with open doors since. I have great
respect for the protocols designed to responsibly manage development. I implore you to take
17
into serious account the directives of the County of Kauai guidelines; specifically, a Use Permit
may be granted only if these four (4) criteria are met. It must be a compatible use, and I contend
that there is no compatibility. It must not be detrimental to persons or property in the area, and
the applicant's proposed operation is strongly detrimental on many counts. It must not cause
substantial environmental consequences, but very likely it could. And d., it must not be
inconsistent with the intent of the CZO and General Plan. This criteria is debatable. It cannot be
conclusive. In response to the applicant's submitted pen -nit petitions, the applicant claims that
the operations are similar in nature to a solid waste transfer station which is allowable; however,
the operations are not. They are not similar in nature. Green waste material is hauled away from
the transfer stations in Kauai in order to be processed at multiple pennitted locations around the
island. Transfer stations do not set up grinding, windrowing, composting, and screening
operations. Applicant continues by noting that our neighboring facility... this is misleading and
illogical because many years prior to most of the current owners and farmers arriving on these
lands, our permitted composting facility carefully met all guidelines in a location ideally chosen
to have the least impact. We have never approached volume capacity and we continue to be
dedicated to the service that we provide. Webster's defines "compatible" as capable of living
and working together harmoniously that which can function or be used together without change
or alteration. The applicant states in petitions the intent to divert trucks; in other words,
customers from our facility. I contend that there has been no attempt made by the applicant to
practice or demonstrate compatibility and that this application is definitely not a compatible use.
Criteria b., the applicant excessively—
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Freeman: —minimizes their actual detrimental impacts and effects in multiple areas;
certainly, airborne contaminants, dust and fumes, excessive noise, dangers to people and
environment -related fire risk, vehicles and traffic, opening private roads to public use, and
tension between neighbors. I strongly dispute the applicant's assertions regarding minimal risk
as an impact. If the applicants or agents had ever communicated openly with the neighboring
parties, in short, lived by the standards established in the guidelines, it is possible the cooperative
resolutions to these valid issues may have been conceived of mutually. As it is, there is
absolutely no question that the proposed use is detrimental. Criteria c., simply put—
Mr. Hull: Four (4) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Freeman: —there is no way to guarantee that a fire of manmade origin or natural,
spontaneous combustion could not occur that way it's impossible for a new applicant,
immediately upwind of an existing composting facility, to conclusively meet this requirement,
and I believe I have run out of time to address Point C.
Vice Chair Ho: Thank you.
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Marie Mauger, followed by Yoshito L'Hote.
Nancy Marie Mauger: Aloha, Commissioners. Thank you for being here. My name is Nancy
Marie Mauger; I use my middle name "Marie". Since 1999, I have been farming organically in
M
Moloa`a. I also am currently the secretary for Hui II in the Moloa`a Hui lands. However, today
I would like to speak on my own behalf. I have already submitted a letter earlier that addresses
different points. The Green Waste [sic] Matters' application, as you are hearing, is for a 10.5 -
acre compost facility. It has already been tentatively approved by the various County agencies
much to my chagrin, surprise, and alarm, because there are many issues that are being brought up
as you can hear. Jim intends to operate seven (7) days a week, ten (10) hours a day. It intends to
run ten (10) to fifteen (15) large trucks up to 40 feet, be open to the public, and maybe even have
floodlighting. So to me, this is an operation that is better placed in an industrial park rather than
an existing rural, agricultural neighborhood of farmers; ten (10) of whom have pennitted
residences within half a mile of Jim's proposed site, not just one (1) as the application says. The
application says there is only one (1) residence within 0.4 tenths of a mile; there are ten (10).
Moloa`a, of course, has long been favored for agriculture as you are hearing so I won't go into
that. Many of us who are farmers really, really value the land and would like to see it be used for
prime crop growing rather than covering it with green waste.
I would like to focus particularly on what I consider a tremendous burden to the public, which is
the intersection at Kuhio Highway and Koolau Road. In 1997, when the Planning Commission
approved the ag park, as it was called back then, there were only five (5) farmers in Moloa`a at
the time. Today, there are sixty-three (63) units with farm workers who all use the various roads
and what not that are there. The fruit stand has opened since 1997. The Kauai Bus is now there
and uses the fruit stand as a bus stop.
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Mauger: Thank you. The average customers at the fruit stand are one hundred ten (I 10) a
day. There have already been a number of accidents at that intersection and I believe that a study
needs to be done. The Planning Commission recently approved a subdivision with twenty (20)
more homes in the Moloa`a region and I believe that Jim could piggyback with that subdivision
because one of the conditions is a traffic study. I wonder, too — very quickly — about whether we
really need another compost operation when we have one that is operating for twenty-three (23)
years with not one single complaint. Because there are so many concerns regarding fire,
personal hazard to pedestrians, neighbors, etc., I would really ask you—
Mr. Hull: Four (4) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Mauger: I would ask you to very, very carefully consider deferring this rather than
permitting it or condoning it with conditions. We have a lot to work out in terms of getting this
in a way that is compatible with the neighbors. Thank you for your time.
Vice Chair Ho: Thank you, Marie.
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Yoshito L'Hote, followed by Jan Kimura.
Mr. L'Hote: Aloha, Commissioners. I just want to make it very clear that this is a personal
testimony. Moloa`a is not part of the KNA jurisdiction. I have not acquainted myself with the
application so I'm not going to make a comment either for or against. I just wanted to ask the
19
Commissioners to take this opportunity to put the State, the County, and the Hui's together at the
table to solve that intersection because I feel it is a dangerous intersection. Traffic does increase
so if there are ways for this Commission to do that, it would be wonderful to address that point.
Thank you very much for your work. You are having a really tough day today and I hope
everybody remembers to treat you guys with respect. Thank you.
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Jan Kimura, followed by Dan Shook, but Dan Shook's testimony is
reserved for the new agency hearing. Jan Kimura.
Jan Kimura: Good morning, Commissioners. It feels different on this side of the table (laughter
in background) after sitting there for six (6) years, you know? Anyway, I am all for competition.
It is all about bringing the prices down. You have competition... like Hawaiian Airlines, no
competition. You know, Kapa`a (High School), once they (won) the island championship, they
went to Oahu, prices went up. I'm not saying that the Freeman's do that, but anytime there is
any type of competition, the price normally comes down. Secondly, as far as more vehicles,
whether they go to his place or his place, it doesn't matter. They still have to dump their rubbish
somewhere, so the same amount of cars will be coming in; trucks, it doesn't matter. Vehicle
Impact Statement from Larry Dill ... I don't think it is really necessary. Like I said, the same
amount of vehicles will be coming in; whether he gets his permit or they go to the Freeman's.
It's about choices; who, when, where. I'm sure you guys can work that out. You know, the
times, the hours of operation... that you might have to consider, but other than that ... you know,
being a commissioner for six (6) years, I've noticed that it is a "once I have mine, I don't want
you to have yours" kind of deal. I don't think it is fair. I don't think it is right. But as far as
green waste on prime ag land, we can't find fanners as it is. There is farm land available;
Kilauea. They are having a hard time to find farmers to farm even better prime land. So if you
can do something that is ag related on ag land, it shouldn't be a problem. It's a no-brainer. I
hope you guys think about it, not defer it, and move on with it, seriously. Thank you. Oh, by the
way, you guys are doing a great job. I'm glad I'm not there. (Laughter in background)
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Dan Shook, but he has specified to reserve his comments to the new
agency hearing, so we have an additional individual that signed up specifically under the General
Plan list.
Dan Shook: Did you call my name?
Mr. Hull: Oh, Mr. Shook, you have specified here that you want to speak during the new agency
hearing part.
Mr. Shook: That's this hearing.
Mr. Hull: Okay.
Mr. Shook: This is about the compost facility.
Mr. Hull: We are still in the general testimony. You can testify now or you can reserve it to the
specified new agency hearing.
im
Mr. Shook: And that will be today?
Mr. Hull: It should be shortly. There's about nine (9) other people signed up to testify during
the general testimony before the actual agency hearing is held.
Mr. Shook: Okay, I'll wait.
Mr. Hull: So the additional sign-up list for the General Plan ... this is still in the general
testimony, so as stated in the beginning of the agenda, if you would like to reserve until the
specific agenda item comes up, you can note when your name is called. So the additional
testifiers to speak ... Chet Hunt, followed by Mary Paterson.
Chet Hunt: Aloha. My name is Chet Hunt. I would like to talk about a particular page in the
General Plan; it is 2-35. It has to do with the South Shore Plan recommending VDA for the area
from the Beach House to Spouting Horn and somebody changed that. I have not been able to
find out who, but on your General Plan, you want that to go to Residential. My question is who
changed that and why. Okay, no answer. The property in particular — I have been here for forty-
two (42) years — that has always been vacation rental. It has never been a neighborhood. It has
never been a residential neighborhood. There is only one side of the road that has housing. The
other side, now, is zoned VDA; one thousand (1,000) acres. You have changed the zoning there
to a TVR and there was a certain timeframe for the people that own property along there to apply
for... basically grandfathering in their vacation rental business. I have a good friend who lived
there full-time and didn't apply for the TVA [sic] and ran into some financial difficulty, got
conned out of his life savings. The house on either side of him does vacation rental so he fixed
up the bottom half of his house and is able to stay there because he could do vacation rental.
Then along comes the County and says you are in violation and we are going to fine you $10,000
a day if you don't cease and desist, so he has had to cease and desist. He has put his property up
for sale. He is finding it hard to sell because the neighborhood is all vacation rental and his
property is not zoned for that. My question goes back to, when the majority of the people on
Spouting Horn Road do vacation rental and the South Shore Plan recommended that it be
changed to VDA so that it would conform to what is actually being used there, why did
somebody in Planning decide not to follow the South Shore Plan that recommended VDA? Is
this just a place where people come to vent? Or are actual changes being considered from your
end? Do you listen to what people are saying—
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Hunt: —and are you willing to make changes to this plan that you have? That's all I have.
Vice Chair Ho: Thank you.
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Mary Paterson, followed by Judy Dalton.
Mary Paterson: Aloha, Commissioners. My name is Mary Paterson. I am a resident of the north
shore and I am on the Board of Directors of the Kauai North Shore Community Foundation.
Even though I am not speaking on behalf of the whole board there, I do have some concerns
21
about the General Plan not really adequately providing for the plan for the future of our north
shore; not only in the realm of affordable housing, but also with tuition -free high school facilities
as kids have to be bussed all the way to Kapa`a High School right now. Our growing community
is now really in need of facilities for a tuition -free high school. The biggest problem on the north
shore is that there is so much agricultural land, there is not enough land to do anything else. I do
applaud the owner of the Kilauea Plateau, the Haye Family, for putting in, or at least in their
subdivision plan, putting in for the Kilauea bypass road because I believe strongly that that is
really a much needed facility or road to bypass the town. But I would like to see ... as Yoshi said,
I would like to see the spur road that goes all the way out to the Christian Academy and to the ag
land; I would like to see that included in their plan. In short, I just would like to see more notice
and details given for the north shore. It seems like the plan is heavily looking at the Po`ipu and
Lihu`e areas, and even the other side of the island are very detailed in their plan, but the north
shore — it seems like — is fairly lacking in a lot of different areas. Thank you very much for your
time. I really appreciate what you are doing and I ain available for questions if you have any.
Vice Chair Ho: Thank you, Mary.
Ms. Paterson: Thank you.
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Judy Dalton, followed by Hope Kallai.
Judy Dalton: Aloha, Planning Commissioners. My name is Judy Dalton and I am speaking on
behalf of the Sierra Club, Kauai Group.
Ms. Dalton read her testimony for the record (on file with the Planning Department).
Vice Chair Ho: Three (3) minutes.
Ms. Dalton: May I finish? I have two (2) more sentences.
Vice Chair Ho: You may.
Ms. Dalton continued reading her testimony for the record.
Ms. Dalton: We urge you to honestly and thoroughly deal with the issue and impacts of tourism
growth. Thank you very much.
Vice Chair Ho: Thank you.
Mr. Hull: Next up his Hope Kallai, followed by Tim Kallai.
Hope Kallai: Good morning, Commissioners. Hope Kallai. I presented an I I -page letter to you
guys this morning. I don't know if you have gotten it yet. I can't read it but I can walk you
through it really quickly.
IN
It is a request to reject this plan as presented because the facts in this plan don't reflect reality
and they must be corrected. There are serious errors and omissions in this Departmental Draft as
presented, especially in regards to water, water source, water quality, and Native Hawaiian
rights, and the omission of consideration for the sixteen hundred (1,600) people on the DHHL
waitlist for Kauai residential lands. In this whole document, military is only mentioned three
(3) times and it is basically for labels for land designation. The impact of the military on our
island is significant and I think it really needs consideration. I have a major problem with the
water source in this Departmental Draft. It only considers groundwater wells for water use, and
for the past decade, we have been buying ditch water and adding that to our well water for
drinking. Probably in this facility here, we are drinking processed ditch water. So the first five
(5) pages I presented have to do with water source. Kauaiwater.org has an interactive map. You
just touch on the area you are interested in and if you are in Lihu`e, Kapa`a, it says your water
comes from groundwater and surface water sources. Surface water is not mentioned in this
Departmental Draft. Surface and water are mentioned on a couple pages, but it is mainly about
runoff and hardening; surface water is not mentioned. The Kauaiwater.org site furthers that the
surface water source is Kapaia Reservoir. The water is pumped to a filter plant to remove all the
suspended material from the water. The water is then disinfected and fed into the distribution
system. The distribution system in the Departmental Draft does not mention this inclusion. I am
also really concerned about water quality. Page 7 in your letter has the latest Surfrider results
from the bacteria counts on thirty (30) beaches on our island. Anything in red exceeds the
Department—
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Kallai: Excuse me?
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes.
Ms. Kallai: Oh, okay. Anything in red exceeds the Department of Health warning. There are
only nine (9) beaches that do not exceed the warning level. I really want to get to the
DHHL ... how they just kind of skipped it over and the really glaring thing is Anahola is currently
under development, buildout is slower than expected, Wailua will be the next priority area,
although there is no timetable for development. They have drilled test wells. They are moving
on this plan for Wailua, but it's not in here except to move the wastewater treatment plant out of
the tsunami zone to the DHHL lands. In considering the waitlisters, it says that their biggest
problem for the waitlisters is overcrowding, aging infrastructure and homes, and the inability of
homesteaders to finance expansion and repairs. That is so wrong.
Mr. Hull: Four (4) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Kallai: The problem with waitlisters is they are on the wait list.
Vice Chair Ho: Hope, would you wrap it up, please?
Ms. Kallai: Okay. Thank you. That's mainly ... please reconsider the impact of the Wailua
DHHL lands on an already traffic -impacted corridor. Thank you.
23
Vice Chair Ho: Thank you, Hope.
Mr. Hull: Next on the list we have Tian Kallai, followed by Ken Taylor.
Tien Kallai: Tim Kallai. Thank you, Commission, for hearing us out today. My plea is that you
reject, at this time, this General Plan. Basically, there are way too many pukas and not enough
information to make a concrete decision as to how we should move forward. One of the largest
things that I think it is lacking here is strictly looking at infrastructure. Yes, it talks about a lot of
specific things, such as proposals of new wastewater, this and that. You just heard my wife talk
about beaches and what is happening here. I think that we are giving the rest of the world a
really bad image. If we were truthful with who and what we are and what we are doing with our
oceans ... yes, we talk about water and such things, but boy, if tourists are coming here for the
sake of enjoying the ocean and our quality of life and things that are happening here and if they
really knew what was happening, I don't think that people would be coming. It's about time that
we really look at this because we should be a model for the rest of the world as to how we deal
with things and how we really do care about our citizenry, as well as those that come to visit our
island, and we are not doing that. We are lacking on all levels unfortunately. Right now, there
are other powers to be and things that are happening that are basically superseding the thoughts
of quality of life for individuals here, and we are robbing ourselves of that. Until we do take a
look at this and literally start looking at our infrastructure before we start building homes and
things like this—there are people that already live here on this island. We are tapped out to the
max. By adding more or by exacerbating these problems, it is not going to help our situation in
the future. So I do ask that you, please, look at this plan, reject it at this point in time, and
seriously sit down and vet the process thoroughly through because we are not there and we need
help. Thank you.
Mr. Hull: Next on the list we have Ken Taylor, followed by Sandy Herndon.
Ken Taylor: Good morning, Commissioners. Ken Taylor. I want to first go back to the '73
Community Development Plan for the Wailua-Kapa`a area. In that plan, they recommended a
certain amount of development and they also recommended the need for resolving the traffic
problems. Here we are forty -some years later, we got all the development from that plan, but
none of the traffic solutions. I find it really difficult to understand how we could move forward
with anymore large developments in the Kapa`a area until we resolve the traffic problems. It
doesn't make any sense when you are in a hole to keep digging. We need to understand that. As
far as affordable housing is concerned, I believe the ordinance that was passed at the beginning
of this year by the Council will take care of the affordable housing needs on existing properties
without changing any zoning; that's the direction that we should be going. That way it disburses
the development around so that you don't have and create a traffic jam at one particular site.
This is good planning and we need to go in that direction. I think the Planning Department was
correct when they made the decision to leave the property around the middle school in
Agriculture. Right now, when you drive through Kapa`a-Wailua area and look to the mountains,
we are in an area that has one of the largest housing areas on the island and yet, when you look
up at the mountains, you see little to no housing at this point in time; that ambiance is very
important. We keep talking about wanting to keep the rural character of the island. By building
24
out the hillsides and showing ... all those new houses does not fit in that scenario of keeping the
area rural. So it is up to you folks to make the right decisions and move forward with—
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Tam —taking care of putting the housing in existing properties throughout the area and
the affordability of having second units on every residential lot on the island, again, doesn't just
put it all there in the Kapa`a area. It spreads it out over the whole island; here in Lihu`e, towards
the west side. It solves the problem that we need to address, but it doesn't create more traffic
problems in a concentrated area. We need to resolve the west side and the east side traffic
problems before any more large development is approved. I think this is—
Mr. Hull: Four (4) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Tam —your responsibility to move forward. Thank you.
Vice Chair Ho: Thank you, Ken. I see we are at the top of the hour now so we will recess for
ten (10) minutes and be back here at 11 o'clock. Thank you.
The Commission recessed this portion of the meeting at 10:50 a.m.
The Commission reconvened this portion of the meeting at 11:04 a.m.
Mr. Hull: Next up on the agenda item [sic] is Sandy Herndon, followed by JoAnn Yukimura.
Sandy Herndon: Good morning, Commissioners, and mahalo nui for hearing your community's
concerns.
Vice Chair Ho: Your name, please.
Ms. Herndon: My name is Sandra Herndon — "Sandy" Herndon — and I live in the Wailua
Houselots. I would like to address some of the concerns that I personally have with the General
Plan. The General Plan has proposed future land uses that are not consistent with the existing
zoning designations. Those recommendations essentially hijack what the community plans are
intended to do. Securing resident buy -in for any proposed up -zoning needs to occur at the
community plan level. Encouraging growth in this way is inappropriate when vital infrastructure
improvements have been deferred for two (2) decades. The General Plan overreaches in its up -
zoning recommendations. Using the example of Hokua Place, formally known as Kapa`a
Highlands, is a high-density development proposed for Kapa`a and we ask that the
Commissioners not recommend up -zoning at this time. Again, future land use designation
should come from the community plans, not the General Plan. Also, as far as the policy maps,
the policy maps are unusable due to scale and lack of detail. Figure 3-10, Kauai Visitor
Destination Areas, on page 3-86 provides no meaningful content because the map scale makes it
indecipherable. All of the policy maps are basically incomprehensible comparing them to
excellent land use maps and heritage resource maps in the General Plan 2000. It would be a
travesty to adopt maps that are so acutely deficient; even names of well-known heiau are omitted
from the heritage resource maps and there are inaccuracies in the major landowner maps as well.
25
It would be wrong to approve this draft when there are eighty-seven (87) pages of recommended
actions that have not been updated. A timetable for the implementation of these actions is
needed. The proposal to monitor implementation—
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Herndon: Thank you. —every two (2) years is inadequate and a biannual committee -based
evaluation process falls short unless semiannual progress reports sent to the County Council are
required. This plan can only function as a meaningful policy setting document by designating
short- and long-term priority actions. Basically, I think that this is, without a doubt, a very
challenging proposition for all of you and I get that. I appreciate it. I think that it would
behoove all of us, yourselves included, to take more time to implement some of the
recommendations that have come directly from the community.
Mr. Hull: Four (4) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Herndon: Thank you very much for hearing us. Aloha.
Vice Chair Ho: Thank you, Sandy.
Mr. Hull: Next we have JoAnn Yukimura, followed by Ana Des Marais.
Councilmember JoAnn Yukimura: Chair Ho and members of the Planning Commission, good
morning. JoAnn Yukimura, Councilmember.
Councilmember Yukimura read her testimony for the record (on file with the Planning
Department).
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Councilmember Yukimura continued reading her testimony for the record.
Mr. Hull: Four (4) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Councilmember Yukimura continued reading her testimony for the record.
Vice Chair Ho: JoAnn.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes.
Vice Chair Ho: Please.
Councilmember Yukimura: I will summarize.
Councilmember Yukimura continued reading her testimony for the record.
al
Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you very much.
Mr. Hull: Next up is Ana—
Councilmember Yukimura: Do you have any questions?
Mr. Lord: I have a question.
Vice Chair Ho: Mr. Lord.
Mr. Lord: Hi, JoAnn.
Councilmember Yukimura: Hi, Wade.
Mr. Lord: My understanding was the ... at the last hearing, that the use of the designated
Agricultural designation for that area was to be a placeholder for the community; to give them an
opportunity to then decide what they wanted to do with that land.
Councilmember Yukimura: Well, there is nothing in—
Mr. Lord: So it didn't... excuse me, I just wanted to finish the thought. So it didn't ... it
wasn't ... my understanding was it wasn't an approval of an urbanization of it as much as it was
creating a placeholder so that the community could decide what they wanted to do with that
parcel.
Councilmember Yukimura: But if there is more than double the amount of housing already
proposed, why would you need to have any more housing? There is more than double the
housing that the draft plan says should go to `Ele`ele-Hanapepe.
Mr. Lord: That's a fair question, but it doesn't create the housing. All it does is create a
placeholder for the community.
Councilmember Yukimura: But why do you need it? There needs to be—
Mr. Lord: But does the community want it?
Councilmember Yukimura: Not that I've heard. I haven't heard anybody—
Mr. Lord: I've heard both sides.
Vice Chair Ho: Mr. Lord, Mr. Lord, please.
Mr. Lord: Okay.
Councilmember Yukimura: Mr. Ho, I mean, he has asked me a legitimate question and I'm
answering it by saying that, for one thing, there is no definition anywhere that I found — and if
27
I'm wrong, please correct me — of "Provisional Ag". We don't even know what that means. To
me, the way it is being used, it actually means Provisional Urban and it should be said that way
to be clear. But then there is no definition either of it and there is no justification by the numbers
and by the policies that are explicit in the draft plan itself.
Mr. Lord: Thanks. Appreciate that.
Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you.
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Ana Des Marais and Christine Cook.
Ana Des Marais: Aloha, Mr. Chair and Commission. Thank you so much for this work.
Persuasion in defense of corporate interests is obstruction of justice. Please have this General
Plan be what the people desire it to be. Mr. Chair, this is your position here; however you feel fit
to pass the Council ... pass this General Plan onto the Council should be ... if you feel in your heart
this is what it ought to be, this is what the community and the people have spoken up to request,
then pass it through. If you don't feel that way, make it that way. Anything can be brought up
for a revote; all you need is a second to motion that process. I feel the end goal is something we
can all agree on; a one hundred percent sustainable and thriving island where economic balance
has been restored and all is fair. Things will not be as they were. They will be pono; that is
highly important. The most important law of this land is for things to be pono. So whatever
needs to happen in order for that to be true will happen. On channel 6, it is a new channel
that ... all it does is promote real estate sales and I would like to take a quote from that channel on
how the Visitor Destination Areas are being sold; "Build your dream home and second dwelling
on this one -acre lot in beautiful Po`ipu Beach with just a short walk to the beach and golf course.
Po`ipu Beach Estates is located in the Visitor Destination Area so you have lots of options. Live
full-time, part-time, or vacation rent your home when you are not using it." I feel this is
unsustainable for the same reasons the community has spoken out in the needs of the people that
have been here for generations and those that are coming in. I don't want to shut the boundary of
the island; that is not my intention. I just want things to be fair, pono for everyone so that we can
all enjoy paradise together. I wrote a very short written testimony because I do appreciate your
time and I know you have so much to read. I do not support keeping the Resort designation in
Princeville Plateau area. I do not support the Visitor Destination Area to include a zoning snap
PO300 Tax Map Key (2) 8-2-001:041, (2) 8-2-001:044 through 068. Furthermore, I request the
removal of Po`ipu Beach Estates from the Visitor Destination Area. I'm going to wrap it up. I
understand this is a farfetched request, although for Princeville Plateau, there has been many
community members to speak forward on this. But what would be pono, maybe, is for the entire
island to be a VDA; that way it is not just some people that are using it to profit from and it will
loosen its valuable essence if the entire island has this opportunity to have bed and breakfasts and
all of that. Just in essence, the balance, and this is what we are all coming together to create, so
mahalo.
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Christine Mauli Cook and followed by Presley Wann.
Unidentified Speaker: Christine Cook had to leave, but she asked if she could testify later on the
issue.
28
Mr. Hull: Next is Presley Wann, followed by Mehana Vaughan. Presley Wann.
Presley Wann: Sorry. Aloha, Commissioners. My name is Presley Wann. I have kuleana lands
in Ha'ena, Kaua'i. I'm here ... it is really uncomfortable for me to speak publicly, but I feel these
two (2) issues are really important. In particular, I would like to ... again, the Resort designation
in Princeville Plateau be removed from the North Shore Plan only because I think we have other
issues that need to be addressed again. We already have an overcrowded, stressed out
infrastructure and it is affecting the communities, the rural communities. In Ha'ena, we are
getting, like ... now I read, over a million people visiting Ha'ena. Anyway, I just want to, again,
address the infrastructure. Also, I was glad to see that some of the aha moku language was taken
out because I am a firm believer in the process of aha moku system; however, it seems like the
State Legislators haven't shown the commitment to the process of the aha moku. So I would like
to say, in place of maybe that watershed hui and/or make sure that the community-based, which I
see the language is included that community-based communities are the advisory boards; they
are the drivers from the bottom, up. Again, if you could keep that in mind. Mahalo for this
opportunity.
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Mehana Vaughan, followed by Malia Nobrega-Olivera.
Mehana Vaughan: I'd like to wait.
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Malia Nobrega-Olivera, followed by Amy Markel.
Malia Nobrega-Olivera: I'm going to wait 'til later.
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Amy Markel, followed by Keili McEvilly.
Amy Markel: Hello. Thank you for making time today to listen to all of our concerns. It is very
much appreciated. My name is Amy Markel and I was a resident of Princeville in 2014 and '15
and now again this summer. I am currently going to school at the University of Hawaii at
Manoa in the Natural Resources and Environmental Management Department in my master's
degree program. I support the removal of the designation of Resort for the land use area of
Princeville Phase II. The bluff is just above 'Anini and Kalihiwai reef, an area that is already
impacted by surrounding resorts. The area should not be developed for the purpose of luxury
homes or resort units. It not only impacts the reef via sedimentation, increased affluent, and
increased pesticide and herbicide, as well as fertilizer use to keep lawns green, but also for an
area so rich and abundant in resources previously, it impacts the community by reducing space
that is available to use by the community. Many of the vistas in Princeville are already privately
owned and therefore, due to access issues, cannot be used by the community for monitoring and
caretaking, and as a way to sustain current populations of reef environment. In this way, the
development of the large homes and luxury homes displaces community members which depend
on these open spaces and open areas. So please consider the removal of the Resort designation
for this area. There are already too many resorts in this area and luxury homes, especially with
the development of the Westin and where the St. Regis now stands. Open spaces like this ensure
recovery of a reef. This is not only good for our current community, but also visitors, so take
29
this into consideration when you are thinking about the removal. I thank you for your time and
you can see my written testimony submitted via email back in May. Thank you so much.
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Keili McEvilly.
Keili McEvilly: Hi. My name is Keili McEvilly. I'm a student at Hawaii Pacific University.
Right now I am doing testing on the waters along `Anini and other locations near Princeville.
Right now we are studying the effects of sewage runoff and fertilizer, etc. coming from
wastewater systems, golf courses, and other manmade things along the coast. I believe that if a
lot of people knew what was actually in the streams and nearby salt water on the beaches that
they love, they would be more hesitant in jumping in; visitors would be less likely to return.
Further increasing the amount of marunade nutrients entering our waters will have catastrophic
results; we have seen thein before and we will see them again. Larger homes and resorts may
contribute to (inaudible) financial growth in the State through short-term attraction and high
taxes; however, we know this is short lived and will eventually result in a higher environmental
issue. It is, of course, hypocritical for all of us to say that we want to protect our land and the
water while at the same time requesting affordable housing and schooling. However, I believe
that both can be achieved with the help of a community that is quite obviously ready to work
hard to get these results. Thank you.
Mr. Hull: That concludes our sign-up list for Agenda Item F. Is there anybody in the public that
wants to testify whose naive has not been called? That does not include individuals that are
reserving the right to speak on the individual agenda item. But is there anybody left in the public
that would like to testify whose naive has not been called?
Ms. Freeman: Is this the list that (inaudible) signed in this morning?
Mr. Hull: Correct.
Ms. Freeman: I was on that list, but I wasn't called.
Mr. Hull: What is your naive, please?
Ms. Freeman: Darbi Shakira Freeman.
Mr. Hull: What was the agenda item? Was it on the General Plan? Or was it on the compost?
Ms. Freeman: The General Plan.
Mr. Hull: My apologies. You can testify now or you can reserve that time to speak at the actual
agenda item.
Ms. Freeman: (Inaudible)
Mr. Hull: Like I said, you can either testify now to make your comments known, or you can
testify later when the General Plan agenda item is being reviewed.
0#1
Ms. Freeman: (Inaudible) I'll wait `til later.
Mr. Hull: Okay. That concludes the sign-up list, Mr. Chair.
New Agency Hearing
Class IV Zoning Permit Z -IV -2017-12, Use Permit U-2017-10 and Special Permit SP -
2017 -5 to operate a green waste compostingfacility acility involving Units 69 & 70 of the
Moloa`a Hui I Condominium, on a parcel situated along the makai side of Kuhio
Highway in Moloa`a, approx. 1,000 ft. east of the Koolau Road/Kuhio Highway
intersection, further identified as Tax Map Key (4) 4-9-009:012 (Por.), and affecting a
portion of a larger parcel containing 281+ acres = Green Earth Matters. Inc. [Director's
Report received 5/9/17.1
Mr. Hull: The following agenda item is Agenda Item F.2., New Agency Hearing, Class IV
Zoning Permit Z -IV -2017-12, Use Permit U-2017-10, and Special Permit SP -2017-5 to operate a
green waste composting facility involving Units 69 and 70 of the Moloa`a Hui I Condominium,
on a parcel situated along the makai side of Kuhi6 Highway in Moloa`a, approximately 1,000
feet east of the Koolau Road/Kuhio Highway intersection, further identified as Tax Map Key (4)
4-9-009:012, and affecting a portion of a larger parcel containing 281+ acres. Green Earth
Matters, Inc. is the applicant. The Commission is in receipt of Supplement Nos. 1, 2, and 3 to
the Director's Report which transmitted additional written testimony. The one piece of written
testimony that the Department received recently but was not transmitted in any of those
supplements is a letter from Darbi Shakira Freeman which has been circulated to you folks.
At this time, we have four (4) individuals that have signed up to testify during this matter. The
first name being Rich Schump.
Mr. Schump: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is Richard Schump. I take care of a
large property on the north shore — over five hundred (500) acres — and I am a consumer of a lot
of compost. We use it for different material; we use it for making our trees healthy, our
vegetation around the houses healthy. We also contribute a lot of green waste from the property.
We have cattle as well as sheep, and the areas around there are all beneficial to using compost
and creating green waste that actually makes the compost. When hearing about this situation, the
thing that comes to mind is competition. For years there has been really one place on the north
shore to bring large bulk green wastes. Opening up a secondary situation would be great for the
community. It would be competitive with pricing. It may actually create new products and new
types of composting material that could be beneficial to a lot of different people. It just seems —
and I'm hearing these different things — that one of those scenarios where it's not in my
neighborhood. Having two (2) places side-by-side gives us choices. I mean, going to the
County facilities... a lot of times they are closed, they are muddy, they have long lines. When
I'm sending my crew or my guys to dispose of stuff, if they have to wait forty-five (45), fifty
(50) minutes to do that, it is difficult. Secondly, if we are driving a truck that is over a certain
size, we need to pay tipping fees. Tipping fees ... we need to get tokens or tickets from here
which snakes me come in here, pay for those, prior to going to the green waste facilities. So all
in all, I'm definitely in favor of this facility. I understand that there are some concerns, but I
31
have worked alongside Brandon Miranda for years and he has always been someone that has
made things right and done the best that he could with things. I'm sure, with the right direction,
that this will be the same circumstance. Anything else? Thank you very much. Appreciate your
time.
Mr. Hull: The next testifier is Mark Freeman, followed by Bobby Farias.
Mr. Freeman: Hello, Commissioners. My name is Mark Freeman. I am probably the one
everyone is referring to; the only green waste facility on the north shore, my family and myself.
I have lived in Kilauea for thirty-seven (37) years. My children and my grandkids were born and
raised in Kilauea. My family and I started farming in 1980 at Namahana Farms and soon
realized the need for needing an organic soil amendment to use on our own farming practices, so
that's what led us to get interested in snaking compost since all of the green waste was going to
the landfill. The County put out a pilot compost program RFP; we won it, we did that. We won
the second RFP. Subsequently, we ended up being the only contract on the island with a grinder;
green waste grinder that we bought. So we ended up with a contract for all of the transfer
stations; that was in 1990 or 1991. Probably '91 because right after that, Hurricane Iniki came
along and leveled the place, and that led to contracts with FEMA and the County and processing
well over 100,000 cubic yards of material that we took to, not only the facility we have now, but
extra lands that we permitted to handle the volume at that time. So that kind of brings us back to
today, where we are for the last twenty-three (23) years. We have been doing green waste
composting at our facility and we have been working for the County the majority of that time.
Ironically, our name for our company for many years was "Earth Matters" and we decided to
rebrand ourselves to be "Heart and Soul Organics" after my wife and I just had so much ... we are
so proud of our kids for all of the work they put into our family business; they put their heart and
soul into it, and that's how that name came to be. It seems a little ironic that Green Earth Matters
is right next to us when our name was "Earth Matters", registered with DACA for many years,
but so be it. That's okay. We helped build that place, too.
The competition thing ... I want to set the record straight on the competition thing. Competition
is fine with me. Competition is good. I have been in competition for twenty-three (23) years to
win the County contract while Kauai Nursery and Landscaping and other contractors from off -
island have come to bid. So I'm not going to feel guilty about winning a contract and doing a
good job to where the County invites me back to come and do a good job again because that's
what we have done; we have always performed. We have been real innovative in how we have
created our products and we have developed a really incredible market. So there is room for
competition. I would say there is probably going to be other green waste sites on this island.
Undoubtedly, there actually are three (3) now, not two (2). There is one in Kekaha with
Shredco, so now there will be four (4). There will probably be six (6). There will probably be
eight (8). That being said, that is fine.
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Freeman: I need one or two. I'll try to really streamline. The geography placement of this
site and the plot plan of the 30,000 yards of material being directly upwind of us where it blows
32
40, 50 knots sometimes... and I know that. I have been out there for thirty (30) years. I was one
of the original five (5) papaya farmers and I can answer any question you have about wind,
traffic, potential fire hazard. The fire hazard is really, really huge. If there is a huge upwind fire
with not sufficient water in our water system, the Fire Department has to go to `Aliomanu to get
the first fire hydrant. I have already helped the County put out three (3) fires down the street — it
had nothing to do with the composting — because they couldn't get enough water there. Now we
have reduced water pressure. We have two (2) compost sites beside each other. We process
40,000+ cubic yards a year right now and we have more space to grow, more capacity to grow,
on our facility.
Mr. Hull: Four (4) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Freeman: Proposing 30,000 cubic yards directly on the other side of the hedge of us without
having a large firebreak is, to me, ludicrous. It is an accident waiting to happen. So I want to be
on record that if it does get approved like this and a fire does happen and comes down and burns
down my place and my landlord's property and $2 million worth of our equipment, I am going to
be back here saying I said this.
The traffic issues are real. They have totally underestimated the traffic—
Vice Chair Ho: Mark, could you wrap it up, please?
Mr. Freeman: Yes. There are issues; they are all in my testimony. You are hearing some of the
similars, but there are a lot of things here that really need to be thought through and addressed
properly so that two (2) composting facilities can be side-by-side; like the only two (2) in the
whole state that are side-by-side. It needs to be safe. We need to work together. Of course we
will compete against each other, but a lot of things have been brushed over here and the
community... hardly anybody was notified this was happening. I am the one that asked for a plan
and went and passed it around. I think it needs to be presented in a much more honest way and it
needs a lot more research before a decision is made. Thank you for listening.
Mr. Hull: Next on the testifier list is Bobby Farias, followed by Dan Shook.
Mr. Farias: Hello, Commissioners. Good afternoon. Thank you for the opportunity. My name
is Bob Farias Jr. for the record; third generation rancher, opened a beef label here late last year.
We are going into a completely local product; grass-fed beef product. Our challenges have been
amended soils. I have worked with Brandon for a while now looking for something we could do
to do soil amendments; non -synthetic. We are putting in one thousand (1,000) acres of irrigated
(inaudible), and water won't be enough to (inaudible) the project. We need a soil amendment.
We don't want to use synthetics. The little I know about soil is that synthetics won't get us
where we need to be profit -wise and production -wise on grass. Again, redundancies in the
industry on available recycled material for soil amendments, I think, is a big necessity for our
business side to make sure there is stability in the product that we put down. The cattle business
is a breakeven business, so the inputs that we put into the business, which would be the grass that
we grow, is a big part of it. Without it, again, the water won't be enough. The green waste issue
is a big deal. I mean, it's building more and more. The more urban space we build, the more
33
green waste that goes into it, and so the ability to recycle as much of it as possible is a real issue
to keep it out of the landfill and stuff. Again, as a customer, which I view myself, redundancies,
again, is a good thing. There is always going to be competition in business, but I mean,
redundancies is something that I need on the customer side so that we can count on it day in and
day out to be available for our business. That's all I have today. Thank you.
Vice Chair Ho: Thank you.
Mr. Hull: Finally on the list we have Dan Shook.
Dan Shook: Good day, Commissioners. My name is Dan Shook. I live in Kalihiwai. I have
been farming my land since 1990. I am also a landscape contractor, which supplements my
income because fanning can't always quite do it. I recycle almost all of my green waste
products on my property. It is the only way I can actually afford to do it. It is not feasible to pay
a tipping fee and buy back the compost so we just do it on-site. However, I am often enticed into
clearing jobs for people, tree work, and I need a place to take it. The charges are passed on to the
consumer and that's the way it goes. I, however, really support the idea of another green waste
site because it brings in... it opens the field. The competition then will be better for us to get
better deals.
There is not going to be anymore green waste than there already is. It is the same amount of
quantity material going down the road, turning off the road, going into one or the other site, so
any claim that there is going to be additional traffic is just not real. There is only so much
resource and it is either going to go to one or the other place.
I have been going into that site for a really long time because I buy plant materials from the
applicant. He has a nursery on that same road. He runs a really class operation. When I go into
his yard, everything is neat and clean and organized; very professional. My dealings with the
Miranda Family over the last twenty-five (25) years ... I can't say enough good things about
thein. So they will be a really good operator and they have shown their business skills to be top-
notch on this island.
As far as the claims about fire and all the effects of a green waste site, before I carne to Kauai, I
owned and operated a soil and composting facility in Santa Rosa, California called "Grab and
Grow Soil Products". We composted thousands and thousands of yards every year; mostly
animal byproducts and agricultural byproducts which have a whole lot more offensive smell than
anything we have on Kauai. Unfortunately we don't have those resources here to work with;
otherwise we would have a better product. But the smell that comes from ground up, organic
matter actually smells good to me. It is the manure that is usually offensive in a green waste
operation. A lot of what I heard today... fire... we never had a fire. When you operate a green
waste facility, you have to manage your product or you are out of business. Dust ... they have to
manage that, too. It is going to be in your conditions, I'm sure, of approval that they cannot have
dust leaving their site. And noise ... there is no amount of screen for any kind of a business —
other than the concrete wall — that will minimize noise. We figured that out when we were
looking at the Princeville Airport expansion and what we could possibly do. Vegetation doesn't
alter noise. It's a psychological thing. If you don't see the machinery snaking the noise, then it
34
is kind of out of mind. But it doesn't lower the amount of noise in any significant way. You are
just going to have noise on one side of the fence or the other; that's just the way it is.
Agricultural land is inherent to noise, okay? My neighbors in Kalihiwai Ridge have to put up
with my tractors when we are digging trees and we are tilling our land; that's the zoning they
bought into. I never get complaints about my equipment because they are not even farming next
door, so you know, go live in Princeville if you don't want tractors. Anyway, we don't get
complaints. People in Moloa`a bought their property, basically most of those ag lots, with no
zoning for housing. As you might know, density was deferred to the oceanfront and the rest of it
was supposed to be strictly farm lots; however, the Farmworker Housing Bill has probably
opened that up for some of those people. But most of the people living there haven't—
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Shook: —haven't done the farmworker housing because it's a difficult process to qualify; to
make the threshold of the $30,000 or whatever. It is not that easy for a small farm to show that
kind of income.
Nonetheless, I believe this is a really ideal site. It has already proven itself by the operation that
is right next door. They can mitigate the fire. They can mitigate the dust. They can resolve
whatever visual impacts. I don't see anything that would keep you from approving this.
Especially important is the County needs to have some potential to competitively bid the green
waste that's being sent to the one site now. Having two (2) sites, you will have a better process
to get a better price which should be popular for the taxpayers, as well as the County. Thank you
very much.
Mr. Hull: That concludes the sign-up list, Mr. Chair. Is there anyone in the audience that has
not testified on the Green Earth Matters application that still would like to testify? Now is your
time.
Mr. Kallai: Thank you, Commission. Tim Kalai on this issue. I am all for compost. I am all for
competition. But the one thing that I'm still a little bit leery about, once again, is just the process
of how this was projected and how it went through without having some sort of engagement with
the residences or the community of Moloa`a to have some sort of input, except at this point in
time. A lot of times when things come to us, it is somewhat like this; last minute we hear about
it. I didn't even know about this until I came walking through the doors today. And then I'm
thinking about wow, what's the biggest thing that can happen here? Certainly change is
inevitable as time rolls on. Before there was, maybe, no worker housing in this farming
community or Hui out there, and now there is. And then all of a sudden to hear that you are
doubling an aspect of density right next to each other ... I know that if I were already established
there as a farmer and now I've got a whole other facility that is going to be right next door to one
that already is preexisting there, I would be a little bit perturbed I think. When you hear a
noise...and that's, to me, what is probably going to be the biggest thing that is going to affect
you. If you ever hear big trucks rolling back all the time — backwards, in reverse — you hear that
beeping or buzzing sound pretty much putting that out there. But now if you double that and you
are constantly getting that, eventually I think that is going to wear on somebody's psyche; you
know, having to deal with that. Yes, dust is inherent when you are a farmer; those kinds of
35
things. That could also be mitigated; certain other things. But when you are talking, too ... about
the gentleman on Lot 71, right next door to this. What is going to happen when the big rains,
which definitely do happen in Moloa`a, and all of this is somehow not contained, and if it does
come across onto his property, I would — as a fanner, too — be a little bit upset about that. Once
again, I'm just snaking an issue or point towards the process and how this was vetted without
some sort of public input. If could, maybe a deferral on this and maybe have all of the parties
come together, along with the community, and really see and feel prior to its acceptance whether
this is the best for this farming community at this point in time. Thank you.
Mr. Hull: Is there anybody else left in the public who would like to testify on this agenda item
who has not testified? Please step forward at this time.
Ms. Kallai: Good morning. Hope Kallai. I would just like to remind the Commission that we
have some birds that nest in the Koolau's that are protected and they will be light -impaired. I
don't know if the floodlights were a reality in this plan; honestly, I haven't read it. But if they
are, please, can we consider down pointing lights because the first nesting site of Newell's
Shearwaters in the world was located in the Koolau's; just mauka of this proposed project. So if
there are any lighting situations planned for this, they need to be down -pointed. In fact, all of
Moloa`a needs to be a lowlight area for these birds because there aren't many left. We have
been listening to them for twenty (20) years and the diminished calls at night is significant. If
there is any way we can help and avoid the County from more fines, we need to consider the
Shearwater population in the Koolau's. Thank you.
Mr. Hull: As has been the practice and as the Chair mentioned at the beginning of the agenda, he
intends to recess at every hour on the hour for ten (10) minutes. Is there anybody else left to
testify that wants to testify on this particular agenda item? Okay.
Given the overwhelming amount of testimony that has been received today, the Department
would recommend that the Commission defer the agency hearing and keep it open until the
Commission is ready to take action on the New Business item. So that would be the
Department's recommendation.
Ms. Ahuna: We're not going to hear Jody's... ?
Mr. Hull: No, so this is the agency hearing. So as soon as the Commission takes action on the
agency hearing, we will move into the New Business item, which is essentially the Department's
presentation.
Ms. Ahuna: Then we will get the Director's Report.
Mr. Hull: Correct.
Ms. Apisa: I would go with the Department's recommendation that we defer.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Second.
Ms. Ahuna: Wait. I'm confused.
Mr. Hull: It is a deferral of the agency hearing.
MS.Apisa: Right, of the agency—
Mr. Hull: To keep the agency hearing open—
Ms. Apisa: Right, to keep the agency hearing open for further testimony.
Mr. Hull: Correct.
Vice Chair Ho: If that's a motion, then I need a second.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Second.
Vice Chair Ho: The motion on the floor is to keep it open, for the agency hearing. Is that
correct?
Ms. Apisa: Correct.
Vice Chair Ho: All in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Anyone opposed? (None) Motion
carries 6:0.
10 WATA'-IW7lei 99
Class IV Zoning Permit Z -IV -2017-12, Use Permit U-2017-10 and Special Permit SP -
2017 -5 to operate a green waste composting facility involving Units 69 & 70 of the
Moloa`a Hui I Condominium, on a parcel situated along the makai side of Kuhi6
Highway in Moloa`a, approx. 1,000 ft. east of the Koolau Road/Kuhi6 Highway
intersection, further identified as Tax Map Key (4) 4-9-009:012 (Por.), and affecting a
portion of a larger parcel containing 281+ acres = Green Earth Matters, Inc. [Director's
Report received 5/9/17.1
Mr. Hull: As the agenda was amended, the next agenda item is M.1., New Business for Action,
Class IV Zoning Permit Z -IV -2017-12, Use Permit U-2017-10, and Special Permit SP -2017-5 to
operate a green waste composting facility involving Units 69 and 70 of the Moloa`a Hui
Condominium on a parcel situated along the makai side of Kuhi6 Highway in Moloa`a,
approximately 1,000 feet east of the Koolau Road/Kuhi6 Highway intersection, further identified
as Tax Map Key 4-9-009:012, and affecting a portion of a larger parcel containing 281+ acres;
the applicant being Green Earth Matters, Inc.
The planner we have for this agenda item is Jody.
37
Staff Planner Jody Galinato: Good morning, Chair and members of the Commission. I'll try to
make my report brief where I can and answer any questions after, if you have, just to save time.
Ms. Galinato read the Project Description and Use, Additional Findings, and Preliminary
Evaluation sections of the Director's Report for the record (on file with the Planning
Department).
Ms. Galinato: I'll hold off for the Preliminary Conclusion and Recommendation, but I did want
to add that we did get Supplement No. 4. It wasn't mentioned, but it was a letter in favor from
the Contractor's Association of Kauai.
Vice Chair Ho: Is there someone from the applicant's side? Please come up now.
Brandon Miranda: Good morning, Commission and Chair. My name is Brandon Miranda. I am
the owner of Green Earth Matters.
Vice Chair Ho: And sitting next to you is?
Mr. Miranda: This is Madi. She is (from) a consultant fine that we have used to help us
organize paperwork to get us to get the infonnation and get everything set for you guys to
follow.
The way this whole thing started was ... we own a landscaping company. We have been born and
raised here on Kauai; north shore, Kilauea. I started my own landscaping company about
twenty-four (24) years ago. Over time, we have accumulated green waste from our own
operations; landscaping, tree trimming, as well as landscape maintenance. With the
accumulation, it became such a hassle of dumping it and in return, buying it back for our
landscaping company with compost. We decided to create our own composting site within our
own operations on another piece of property. Our company has grown since then and have
exceeded what we can manage for our own operations, but the use of compost is still needed for
our own jobs, which made me realize that I need to find more options to help my own company.
Through these years — about ten (10) years I have been doing this from my own construction
sites — I have had a lot of people ask me to dump at my site for various reasons; the place not
being open or whatever personal reasons they had. I have always neglected to take much of
other people's rubbish unless they were in dire need or stuck. Would I ever accept it? Because I
needed the space for myself. By taking other people's rubbish, it would cause more issues for
myself. Since then, we have upgraded our equipment to fall within EPA Standards to be able to
grind bigger quantities and create a higher quality of compost for our own use.
Since then, we have now outgrown our spot; that is what made us look into another area for
operations. Most businesses ... I mean, why would you want to start your business right next
door to somebody who is doing the same thing? And it was a real hard one for me because I
looked into other places and the only places that were available was Grove Farm land that could
help me with the situation that I had. I have had conversations with them, but it wouldn't benefit
me at all; bringing my things to Lihu`e when all of my work ... ninety-nine percent of it comes
NER
from the north shore of Kauai. When this property came about, after looking for a long time, it
opened up the doors for me to start my own facility. The more I thought about it, it made more
sense to have the two (2) types of facilities working together because it would be the least impact
on the community. As far as when I did my statement saying fourteen (14) to fifteen (15) trucks,
that was fourteen (14) to fifteen (15) trucks of my own personal use bringing it to this facility. I
don't have control over how much more comes from the facility that is already there. It was
never intended to try and be in direct competition, and the reason for doing it when I was already
doing it on my own.
As far as saying there will be more impact on traffic, I see zero impact on traffic. If they are not
going to my place, they are going to our competition's place next door, which brings in ... the
same gate, same street, same everything. So me opening up next door — when I looked at the
whole picture — was not going to cause any more impact than what is being done already. I feel
for my neighbors. I understand where they are coming from and I take their concerns as value.
am not one who starts things and tries to dump all my problems on other people's areas. We
bring in trucks ... we are the furthest facility inside of the Association. I have ten (10) acres
inside; way inside. On one of our properties we do full agriculture, so we use a lot of our
compost as well; we do bananas, Tongan, mangoes, and lychee. So I understand what they are
saying. I'm not a commercial operation that is just coming in and just thinking that I want to do
one type of activity. This is a need that I have had and used for the last fifteen (15) years.
As far as the roads and concerns about that private road, the actual road is not ... it is a private
road with an easement for the community. It is not something we share with everybody because
there is a lot of crime and stuff that comes in there. It is open farms. People get stolen from.
But that is an access road to the beach or to the shoreline access for the community, so it is not
private. We could never close that road down. It was always set forth, when that association
was built, as an easement to the shoreline. Since then, we travel over two (2) properties, which is
Association I and Association 11, which is called Hui I and Hui II. I sit on the board of Hui I and
we, as Hui I members, manage and mitigate all dust and mud control on Hui II's property as well
because that is our only access into our property and through this process, they all said that they
have no units that needs to travel on that road so why should they have to pay for the mitigation.
Our association took upon their concern and since then have been managing that road mitigation
for the past years. I personally, because of my trucks going in there, personally go ahead and fix
pot holes on an in-between basis of our two times a year that we scrape the road. We have a
private contractor to come in and scrape the road and roll it so that it keeps the red dirt dust
down. We also actively, as our association, are looking at ways to improve the dust mitigation
and we have come up with different solutions for eventually trying to get that paved and all of
that. But, at this time, we have been managing it with our resources. I think as far as that ... I
mean, being that I have been doing it from the beginning, there is nothing that is going to stop
me from managing it now. I think the positive to it, by me mitigating dust, will give action for
watering the roads and helping the community keep the dust down as well for the access.
Vice Chair Ho: Commission members, do you have any questions for Brandon?
Mr. Lord: Chair, I have a question.
39
Vice Chair Ho: Wade.
Mr. Lord: Brandon, I see in the Department's report about the lighting. Can you give me an
idea? It sounds like the parking and lighting is minimal. Can you tell us how many lights are
going to be installed?
Mr. Miranda: I honestly don't know where the lighting came from; floodlights. I have no use
for it. Our operation is a daytime operation, so I don't know where that came from; floodlights
and all of that came from.
Mr. Lord: But I do see in the Department's report that it is requiring shielded lighting, down
lighting only.
Mr. Miranda: I think that the idea was for the gate operation, not for operations of the thing; to
be able to open the gate and stuff like that.
Mr. Lord: I just wanted to answer that one person's question/concern in the audience.
Mr. Miranda: Okay. Got it.
Vice Chair Ho: Ms. Streufert.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: There is a paragraph in here that says, "Groundwater in the area of the
site consists of two (2) basal fresh -water aquifers that are part of the Anahola Aquifer System,
which is part of the Lihu`e Aquifer Sector. The shallow basal aquifer is unconfined, a currently
used drinking water resource, and has a high vulnerability to contamination. The deep basal
aquifer is confined, a currently used drinking water resource, and has a low vulnerability to
contamination." I am a little concerned about contaminating the aquifer and what can be done to
mitigate it. I know that there is a green waste facility right next to you, but if there is any kind of
contamination, this just compounds it so I would like to get some inforination from you.
Mr. Miranda: What I will do is I will pass on the ... we have also gone through the list of the
Health Department as well to understand what we need and so this is where Madi guys came in
and helped us with trying to figure out the Health Department requirements and all of that stuff.
Madi: Yes. We have been working with the State Department of Health. You mentioned
contamination of the groundwater. Leachate was a potential concern, which is when any stone
water will basically seep through activities on-site and potentially enter an aquifer. After
speaking with the Department of Health, all of the material that will be composted on-site will
just be green waste with no food waste or animal byproduct or any other compostable eating
utensils or materials as that. It will just be green waste with water added. So the leachate is
expected to be just an inert material that would not cause any contamination to the groundwater.
Also, looking into the soil type at the site, based on a University of Hawaii study done, there is a
layer of thick, dense clay subsurface. So there is first a layer of kind of a loam silty soil and it is
underlaid by a dense clay which would prevent any seeping or leaching of groundwater from the
site into the aquifer. Speaking with the Department of Health, one concern they did have was the
Eli]
potential of contamination from past use as pineapple fields. Soil sampling was conducted to
address that concern and the soil was found to have no contaminants present.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Will there be any testing that is done during this process to ensure that
there is no leaching into groundwater aquifer?
Madi: There is not a plan for that in place at this time of any testing during operations.
Vice Chair Ho: Ms. Ahuna.
Ms. Ahuna: Mr. Miranda, I understand there are two (2) Hui's, yeah, associations on that
easement and you guys are associated with Hui I, correct?
Mr. Miranda: That's correct.
Ms. Ahuna: Usually in associations, just because I was a part of an association, you usually have
to get approval from your association to move forward. Have you been able to communicate
with the rest of your association with regard to this and what were their...?
Mr. Miranda: Yes, I have. To start off with to even get to this point, I needed to get seventy-five
percent of our association's landowners onboard with acceptance. I have done that. I have
actually gone probably to eighty, eighty-five percent. I probably possibly could have gotten
more, but I just wanted to be ... I didn't want to just be ... I wanted to make sure that I had
majority and with the understanding. I did have some concerns from my neighboring properties
and we have addressed it. A lot of that was to just make sure that we keep the roads because that
is our biggest issue, is our roads in our association. They know that in time we have managed
that to the fullest extent.
Ms. Ahuna: Okay. I guess my other question is, you are a local boy, yeah? (Laughter) I went
to Sacred Hearts, but I don't know. Did you go to Kapa`a or what?
Mr. Miranda: Yes. I was born and raised in Kilauea, and went to Kapa`a High School.
Ms. Ahuna: I guess the reason why I am asking is I think a facility like yours would hire local
people and Kauai people, Kauai -born people, and so forth to provide jobs.
Mr. Miranda: Our company, right now, employs thirty-five (35) employees; all residents of
Kauai. It would definitely be helpful ... and I think the number one thing that made me want to
do composting and stuff was to help me be competitive in my pricing when bidding outside in
contract work. With me being able to manage my own debris and yet, buy my own fertilizers,
compost, or whatever, would give me a little bit of an edge in maintaining a higher quality and
give good value to what we are producing rather than being so high because I have to pay to buy
my compost and pay to dispose of my green waste.
Ms. Ahuna: Thank you.
41
Vice Chair Ho: Anyone else?
Mr. Mahoney: Yeah, I have one.
Ms. Apisa: I'll ask a question.
Vice Chair Ho: Mr. Mahoney first.
Mr. Mahoney: Okay. Fire mitigation was brought up by your neighbor and I wonder if you
could address that.
Mr. Miranda: Well, as far as fire, we are restricted by the Health Department with an astringent
plan of berms, tree lines, water, water trucks, which we have all put or have in place in case of
anything to that matter; no different from what our counterpart has to do as well. We all have to
follow the same ... the Health Department has very strict guidelines that we have to follow and
we are in the process of doing what we need to do to get that. All of that is in place to get
approval from the Health Department.
Mr. Mahoney: Thank you.
Ms. Ahuna: Jody, isn't there a fire ... aren't they subjected to fire—
Ms. Galinato: Yes. There is a condition for a fire mitigation plan with both of them. I believe
they have been working on it. I advised them when the notice carne in from Fire.
Vice Chair Ho: Donna.
Ms. Apisa: You are in Hui I and Heart and Soul, are they in the same Hui? Or in Hui II?
Mr. Miranda: They are in Hui II. Our properties border each other, which divides Hui I and Hui
II.
Ms. Apisa: I am hearing that there wasn't a lot of communication with them or ... when I heard
their testimony. I guess I am a little confused about the communication with them or, not that it
is a requirement, but—
Mr. Miranda: We did everything within our requirements of what was set forth by your
department as far as notifications and it was nothing hidden. We went to the distances of what
was asked and that is what we have done. We have done it in time and done everything that we
were asked to do.
Ms. Apisa: Thank you.
Mr. Miranda: And also, too, I mean, nobody wants something in their community, you know,
and I think that is the hardest part, is trying to ask people, "Let me put something right next door
to you." That was the most difficult thing that I have had because in business, I don't like to
42
impact everybody else. It's a hard thing for me to go ask people, "oh, can I go operate..." you
know, but it really made me open my eyes to concerns and I know, for myself, that I have always
had that concern for other people and not just for my own best interests.
Ms. Apisa: Thank you.
Mr. Lord: Mr. Chair, I have a quick question for Staff.
Vice Chair Ho: Mr. Lord.
Mr. Lord: Jody, do you know what the hours of operations are for the neighboring... Heart and
Soul folks?
Ms. Galinato: I don't know off the top of my head. I do have their file.
Mr. Miranda: I can answer that.
Ms. Galinato: Okay.
Mr. Miranda: I believe it is 8:00 to 4:00, Monday through Friday, with an exception of a
special ... I guess, special use if it is needed by appointment only.
Mr. Lord: Okay. Thank you.
Ms. Galinato: They don't have a condition of time or dates in their approval. This was from.
1994, though.
Mr. Lord: Okay.
Vice Chair Ho: Brandon, where are the collection points for this green waste? Where do you
get it from?
Mr. Miranda: The collection points for me is ... I have a landscaping company and a tree
trimming company, as well as we do landscape maintenance. So right now, all of my rubbish
comes from my own facility. Every day we probably bring home 40 to 50 cubic yards just from
our yards, cleaning, and our clearing, and our tree trimming service.
Vice Chair Ho: If someone would want to bring it to you, they would have to come down to
your property?
Mr. Miranda: If they wanted to bring it to me now, they would have to come. But I'm so far in
from the site that is out there now, I didn't want to cause all kinds of traffic with bigger trucks
coming into my facility to go and dump trash, so that's why I didn't accept any other
people ... unless, like I said, there were people on Saturdays, "eh, I'm stuck with my rubbish.
Can you help me out?" You know, I would make exceptions on certain criteria, but other than
that, my facility is just too small to take outside rubbish.
43
Vice Chair Ho: Wade.
Mr. Lord: Brandon, one more question. Is it critical for your operation to be open seven (7)
days a week?
Mr. Miranda: The purpose of opening seven (7) days a week is just to open up more
opportunities for people to dump rubbish because that is what I've got asked; Saturdays and
Sundays for somebody to come and dump because the other facility was not open. It is not
detrimental. We can stay open five (5) days a week. I was just trying to make it available for
other people's use, if needed.
Mr. Lord: So local people coining to bring their stiff on the weekends when they are not
working?
Mr. Miranda: Correct.
Mr. Lord: Okay.
Vice Chair Ho: Ms. Streufert.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: One of the suggestions was to, rather than having a panax fence, to plant
something else that might be more of a barrier. I am not suggesting that you have to do that or
anything, it's just good neighborliness. Is that something that can be done?
Mr. Miranda: Absolutely. We were just trying to find something that would be quick and fast to
get the immediate impact. We also have other trees along the way — podocarpus — which grows
40 to 50 feet tall, but it is not going to be instant. The panax was the idea that that would be the
fastest way to get the most impact on our plantings. But we definitely... if that's a concern of
putting more trees. I think the setbacks of being that far is a bit much to ask for. I mean, I don't
think my neighboring property is setback 150 to 200 feet from my property, but I have no
objections of installing bigger trees; that is the intent.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: That was the intent. Thank you. It was just a ... as you said earlier, it's
hard to get ... you have to get along with your neighbors, too, so I was just looking for a way that
brings it together a little bit better.
Mr. Miranda: Absolutely.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Thank you.
Vice Chair Ho: Jody, was there a late memo from the Department of Transportation that might
suggest that he would have to put in a turnout lane on Kuhio Highway?
Ms. Galinato: Their original comments, they had none, and no additional. We talked to them
this morning and they are going to take another look at it. That's all I know.
ME
Vice Chair Ho: Do you hear that Brandon?
Mr. Miranda: I got that and I don't understand the reasoning, just because of the fact that
whatever is going there now is going there now. Whether I have my operation or not, it's still
going there now. So I don't know how the assessment would affect ... or me opening up a facility
would affect any more traffic to the area, and that's one of the things that I have looked at when
figuring that this would be the ideal spot for the situation, not impacting other communities' farm
area that we don't really have much on the north shore that would be open arms for a facility. I
know the Kilauea Ag Park was trying or thinking of doing something like that, but good luck
with trying to do that in a community around them that doesn't do any type of agricultural type
of deals. I think the idea of two (2) like-minded companies doing the same thing would be the
least impact to the community overall.
Vice Chair Ho: Any other commissioner? I know that the Commission might have some
amendments to put on this or some additions that they would like to see on it. Do you want to
voice yourself now?
Ms. Nogami Streufert: I guess I'm concerned about the aquifer because that does provide water
from Kilauea down to 'Ele`ele, according to the map that is in the General Plan. If there is some
way to ensure that it does not get into the aquifer or that some kind of mitigating action can
be ... to ensure that it doesn't get into the aquifer because that is the major water supply for all of
Lihu` e.
Mr. Hull: The Commission is in receipt of a fairly lengthy set of requirements from the
Department of Health; it's about five (5) pages long. That is one mitigating factor into it. If the
Commission wants to ... see, generally, when we are looking at certain agencies like the
Department of Health or the Fire Department or engineering or so forth, it has been the practice
of the Department to recommend that the Commission not adopt their recommendations as
conditions of approval because they sign off on a building permit, and ultimately, on those
building permits, they have a signatory to it, which they will not sign unless it meets their
conditions. In this situation, there is no pending building permit. So if the Commission would
like additional teeth to what any one of these agencies have stated would be a requirement, you
can adopt their conditions as a condition of approval to your permits.
Ms. Galinato: We do have to sign -off on a fonn for Department of Health that they have
complied with our ... whatever we put in our conditions prior to them starting operations, so that
would be the only sign -off.
Vice Chair Ho: I think where Ms. Streufert is going is that I think she would want some kind of
a protection, either testing yearly, biyearly, or some assurance that no water [sic] is seeping into
the drinking water, I guess.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Yeah, that there is no contamination of the drinking water. But I'm not
sure how to put that in there and whether that's ... if you feel that that is contained sufficiently in
the Department of Health recommendations, then I would be comfortable with the Department of
Health restrictions that they have on it. But I just want to make sure that we are aware that
45
although there is already one (1) green waste facility, which was approved a long time ago, we
don't really know whether ... because it's going to be the same soil, it's right next to each
other... whether that has had any impact upon the aquifer. We just want to be sure that there is
no future impact upon the aquifer system because as people are saying, water is not just a right to
have, but it is also a right to have good water and we just want to be sure about that. That's all.
Ms. Galinato: Understood.
Mr. Hull: I think when Jody gets into the recommendations here shortly, should you want to
amend that to the effect.. because the Department is in agreement that we don't have the
expertise to monitor that specific thing, so we would rely heavily on the Department of Health.
So if the Commission wants to move the application along today, so to speak, the Department
would recommend an additional condition of approval requiring Department of Health's
approval prior to operation.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Does the Department of Health actually monitor the aquifers?
Mr. Hull: They go through a process in which various permits are necessary for runoff that
could potentially affect rainwater, but as far as whether or not they are actually monitoring each
and every single aquifer, I couldn't answer that on the record today.
Vice Chair Ho: I think, also, Mr. Lord had a question about safety if there is a fire there. If there
is no well pressure or water pressure in the area, you would have to boost it so that there would
be some kind of a fire prevention or a hydrant system available to firefighters or even for
yourself for a fire. Would you be willing to absorb the cost for something like that? A pump or
something that would boost the water pressure in that area?
Mr. Miranda: Our property, where we are working at, has 70 to 80 psi pressure off of a 2 -inch
water meter. I can fill up a tank fairly quickly. I don't know how much more pressure I would
need to boost off of 80 when 80 psi, I think, is more volume, but we did talk with the fire side of
it and their recommendation was having a bigger fill standpipe rather than a spigot to fill up their
firetruck if need be and having a water truck on-site for any type of needs for that.
Vice Chair Ho: The Fire Department recommended this? Just the spigot?
Mr. Miranda: A water standpipe.
Vice Chair Ho: Water standpipe?
Mr. Miranda: Yeah, for adequate water.
Ms. Ahuna: Mr. Miranda, is that something you guys already have? Do you guys have a water
truck?
Mr. Miranda: Yes.
M
Ms. Ahuna: Access to a water truck?
Mr. Miranda: Yes.
Ms. Ahuna: Could that be something that maybe you guys always have filled in case of a fire?
Mr. Miranda: That wouldn't be a problem.
Vice Chair Ho: Last chance. Anybody?
Mr. Lord: So the 2 -inch meter seems to be a commercial size, right? Correct?
Mr. Miranda: Correct.
Vice Chair Ho: 2 -inch would be volume, not pressure.
Mr. Miranda: Volume, correct.
Vice Chair Ho: Volume -wise.
Mr. Miranda: Yes.
Mr. Lord: But he is saying he has got 75 psi on pressure, so that's ... the concerns that others had
about low pressure apparently don't apply to this particular site because he has got a larger meter
with high pressure.
Vice Chair Ho: Ms. Apisa.
Ms. Apisa: I guess, you just stated about not having the spigot. Have you increased it so that
you've got the ... what the Fire Department required?
Mr. Miranda: We have the line already at our gate. We have the line at our gate.
Ms. Apisa:. So you are fulfilling that?
Mr. Miranda: Correct. We didn't do the standpipe at this point because there is no use. We are
not expected to do it, but our water meter is there. I can upgrade to a 3 -inch meter if I want to to
give more volume restriction. But, you know, we do ... that area has bad water pressure further
up closer to the tank, but as you get further down, the pressure increases because of the flow.
Ms. Apisa: So you have the capacity there?
Mr. Miranda: Yes.
Ms. Apisa: Thank you.
47
Vice Chair Ho: Commissioners?
Mr. Hull: At this point, Jody hasn't read, onto the record, the conclusion or recommendation.
think she can summarize the conclusion for you folks. Ultimately, the recommendation of
tentative approval does have seventeen (17) conditions of approval. This commission has been
in receipt of that. I don't know if you guys want to go over them individually. I think we are
fine with just sticking to what was previously transmitted, but if Jody could summarize the
conclusion.
Ms. Galinato: Surely.
Ms. Galinato read the Preliminary Conclusion and Preliminary Recommendation sections
of the Director's Report for the record (on file with the Planning Department).
Ms. Galinato: If you wanted to amend my report ... you have the wording? Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Hull: In addition to the conditions of approval, given the discussion as it has proceeded
forth, the Department would amend the recommended conditions of approval to include
Condition No. 18 which states, "Prior to the operation commencing, the applicant shall provide
documentation to the Department that all the requirements of the Department of Health have
been met." It would also include Condition No. 19 which would state similarly, "Prior to the
operation commencing, the applicant shall provide documentation to the Department that all the
requirements of the Fire Department have been met." And then finally, Condition No. 20, and
also similar language, "Prior to the operation commencing, the applicant shall provide
documentation to the Department that all requirements of the State Department of Transportation
have been met."
Ms. Ahuna: Is the County's recommendation to approve?
Mr. Hull: It is an approval with the amended conditions of approval, and that's just from hearing
the concerns of the Commissioners and that would just incorporate, essentially, those three (3)
agencies as has been voiced by the Commissioners as having concerns with fire, with highway
access, as well as with health and runoff issues and potential impacts to the aquifer. That is as
much as the Department could provide as potential conditions of approval for you folks should
you want to act today. If there is additional information necessary, ultimately a deferral would
be required and the Department would have to get back to you folks.
Ms. Ahuna: What I'm hearing is that the County is recommending to approve, and just as a
commissioner, I feel like this applicant has done his due diligence, we have already addressed
the traffic concerns, the fire concerns. It's just really offering, to me, another option for our
community out there. I mean, look at Hawaiian Airlines. That's just my take. We need more
options; otherwise things get costly for us local people. I would like to make a motion to move
to approve with these new amendments that Director just shared.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Second.
Vice Chair Ho: The motion on the floor is to approve. Seconded. Last chance for discussion
anyone. Discussion? Seeing none. Ready to vote. Can we have a roll vote, please?
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Lord.
Mr. Lord: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Streufert.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Mahoney.
Mr. Mahoney: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Apisa.
Ms. Apisa: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Ahuna.
Ms. Ahuna: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Chair Ho.
Vice Chair Ho: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Motion passes 6:0, Chair.
Vice Chair Ho: You got it.
Mr. Hull: The next agenda item is ... well...
Vice Chair Ho: At this time, I'm going to recess us for lunch. We'll see you back here at 1:30
(p.m.) Thank you.
The Commission recessed this portion of the meeting at 12:37 p.m.
The Commission reconvened this portion of the meeting at 1:34 p.m.
Vice Chair Ho: The Planning Commission meeting is back in session.
Mr. Hull: Good afternoon, Chair and members of the Commission. As a matter of clean up, the
last agenda item that you folks took action on — as a matter of housekeeping operations — there
was no actual closure of the agency hearing. So while action was taken to approve the permits,
no agency hearing was closed, so at this time, the Department would recommend that the agency
hearing for Class IV Zoning Permit Z -IV -2017-12, Use Permit U-2017-10, and Special Pen -nit
49
SP -2017-5 to operate a green waste composting facility involving Units 69 and 70 of the
Moloa`a Hui I Condominium on a parcel situated along the makai side of Kuhi6 Highway in
Moloa`a, approximately 1,000 feet east of the Koolau Road/Kuhi6 Highway intersection, further
identified as Tax Map Key 4-9-009:012, and affecting a portion of a larger parcel containing
281+ acres, applicant Green Earth Matters, Inc., that the agency hearing for that agenda item be
closed being that the Commission took action.
Ms. Apisa: Since I made the motion to defer it or keep it open, I will make the motion that we
close the agency hearing.
Mr. Mahoney: Second.
Vice Chair Ho: All in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Motion carries 6:0.
Mr. Hull: Motion carries. The next agenda item ... we have no further hearings and public
comment.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Status Reports
Director's Report(s) for Project(s) Scheduled for Agency Hearing on 6/27/17 (NONE)
Mr. Hull: We have no Consent Calendar.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mr. Hull: There is no scheduled Executive Session.
GENERAL BUSINESS MATTERS
COMMUNICATION (For Action)
COMMITTEE REPORTS (NONE)
Subdivision
Mr. Hull: Nor is there any additional General Business Matters, Communication, or Subdivision
Committee meetings.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS (For Action)
50
Zoning Amendment ZA-2017-3 relating to updating the General Plan for the County of
Kauai and technical amendments, related to the definition of Development Plan.
[Hearing continued 1/31/17, hearing closed and deferred 2/28/17, deferred 3/14/17,
3/28/17, deferred 4/25/17. deferred 4/27/17.1
Mr. Hull: So the next agenda item is Item L., Unfinished Business for Action, Zoning
Amendment ZA-2017-3 relating to updating the General Plan for the County of Kauai and
technical amendments, related to the definition of Development Plan. Hearing continued on
January 31, 2017; hearing closed and deferred on February 28, 2017, deferred on March 14,
2017, deferred again on March 28, 2017, deferred again on April 25, 2017, and deferred again on
May 27, 2017.
The Commission is in receipt of Supplement No. 1 [sic] to the Departmental Draft of the General
Plan Update. Included in that supplement was an addendum that included written testimony that
the Department has received and was transmitted to this commission. Additionally, you, as
individual commissioners, were transmitted another forty-six (46) pieces of written testimony
that were not included in that Supplement No. 6. For the record — I'm going to have to read
these correspondences to the Commission onto the record — a letter from Margery Freeman;
letter from Agnes Marti Kini; letter from Anne Walton; letter from the Hanapepe-`Ele`ele
Community Association/Jean Souza; letter from Gabriela Taylor; letter from Greg Allen; letter
from Timory McDonald; letter from Amy Arnett -Smith; a letter from Carol Beardmore; a letter
from Charlotte M. Turner; a letter from George Hoffberg; a letter from Dorothy Perry; a letter
from Pamela Burrell; a letter from Eli Smith; a letter from Frank Marsh; a letter from Juan
Wilson; a letter from E1iel Starbright; a letter from Andrianna Mendivil; a letter from Alfred
Frank Kelly; a letter from Mira Walker; a letter from Laurel Brier; a letter from Nya Day; a letter
and testimony from Jack Day; a letter and testimony from an individual with the first name
Marianne, no last name listed; a letter and testimony from Jillian Auberger; letter and testimony
from Vivian Hager. All of those were transmitted to you folks via email prior to this meeting.
There are an additional nineteen (19) pieces of testimony that you have received as a hard copy
today, and for the record, that testimony was received from Karen Anderson, from Tracy Mills,
from Sharon Westerberg, from Joan Levy, from Mary Mulhall, from Neil Vonhof, from Abigail
Jones, from Jennifer Larson, from Karen Wood, from Maggi Quinlan, from Leslee Dancosse,
from Rob Dorman, from Robin Oaks, from Karen Gonzalez. Another piece of testimony from
Marianne with no last name listed. More testimony from Katherine Muzik, another from Bonnie
P. Bator, another from Sea and Bill Peterson, another from Luke Evslin, and a final piece of
testimony from Kyle Kagimoto.
We now have the individuals that have reserved their right to testify before the individual agenda
item. The first on that list is Carl Imparato, followed by Darbi Freeman.
Mr. Imparato: Aloha, Commissioners. My name is Carl Imparato and today I am testifying on
behalf of the Board of Directors of the Hanalei-Hd'ena Community Association.
Mr. Imparato read his testimony for the record (on file with the Planning Department).
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair.
51
Mr. hnparato continued reading his testimony for the record.
Mr. Imparato: One last statement — my personal observation — is that if the County refuses to
address the growth issue, I think it may be addressed in less controllable ways. The growing
tension, the frustration, the hostility in the communities are palpable and if the problems allow to
fester and grow, it seems clear to me that there will be undesirable consequences. Kaua`i's
health is poor. It is like a patient that is in a very serious condition. It needs surgery and
rehabilitation, but all the General Plan is offering is a facelift. Thank you for your time.
(Applause)
Mr. Hull: Next we have Darbi Freeman, followed by Gabriela Taylor.
Ms. Freeman: My naive is Darbi Shakira Freeman. I respectfully submit this to the Planning
Commissioners and I want to acknowledge that having testified earlier today and had the
outcome that I have, I'm still debating whether to include a paragraph that is in my written
testimony or not. I wish that I had been the previous speaker and been able to offer that
testimony. Many of the points that that gentleman made are ones that I share.
Ms. Freeman read her testimony for the record (on file with the Planning Commission).
Ms. Freeman: I hope you will read my testimony and read the paragraph on page 1 that I
skipped.
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Freeman: I am in support of well -reasoned and productive action directed toward immediate
and long -teen increases in the quality of life. I am in support of visitors and locals enjoying the
freedom to traverse this beautiful island in gratitude and pleasure, not frustration and despair. I
urge you to take a single action today that demonstrates your alignment with a compass that all
the counties of Hawaii agreed in alignment to protect. Thank you.
Mr. Hull: Next we have Gabriela Taylor, followed by Dee Crowell.
Ms. Tam Good afternoon, Commissioners. Thanks for hanging in here. I learned a lot just
since the last time I testified. I actually read some things in the General Plan. I thought I read it
all, but I focused on a couple of things that I would like to read to you.
Ms. Taylor read her testimony for the record (on file with the Planning Department).
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Tam Pardon me?
Vice Chair Ho: Three (3) minutes.
Ms. Taylor: Already? Oh my heavens. I barely got started.
52
Ms. Taylor continued reading her testimony for the record.
Ms. Tam Just in conclusion, I would like to say, again, Hokua Place is not in the right spot. It
is going to cause major, major problems we have already discussed in Kapa`a with the traffic and
other things. So I would ask you to not approve of Hokua Place as proposed at this point. Thank
you very much.
Mr. Hull: Next we have Dee Crowell, followed by Susan Remoaldo.
Dee Crowell: Good afternoon, members of the Commission. My name is Dee Crowell. I
represent Princeville. I provided written testimony that you can read. Just to summarize, thank
you for all the work that you've done. Appreciate all the deliberations you've gone through the
last six (6) months and we support the plan so far. Thank you.
Mr. Hull: Next we have Susan Remoaldo, followed by Juan Wilson.
Ms. Remoaldo: Good afternoon. My name is Susan Remoaldo and I am a resident of `Ele`ele,
and also belong to the Hanapepe-`Ele`ele Community Association. I take issue with the
attribution to one person in Exhibit 2, Revision No. 3, Hanapepe-`Ele`ele Planning District,
revise Hanapepe narrative section in Supplement No. 7 to the Director's Report, June 13, 2017,
Departmental Draft of the General Plan Update. The suggested revisions for the end product of
community association member concerns followed by discussion then agreement, resulting in the
testimony submitted on behalf of the Hanapepe-`Ele`ele Community Association by Jean Souza
and should be accurately acknowledged as such in the exhibit. The Hanapepe-`Ele`ele
Association will be two (2) years old in July. Spurred into fonnation by residents interested in
the future and fate of their community after the Plan Kauai community meeting in Hanapepe in
May 2015. An announcement in the local newspaper in July 2015 inviting others who shared
similar interests and concerns to meet; that was how I became involved. Over the next twelve
(12) months, the group met weekly to become better informed about our community. We used
these meetings to get to know each other better and identify what was important to us in the
community at -large. We familiarized ourselves with published reports, listened to subject
specialists and other guest speakers, engaged and facilitated discussions, visited other
communities to learn about their experiences and concerns, and hosted informational community
events among other activities. In early 2016, we committed to becoming a HARP community —
a Hawaii Hazards Awareness and Resilience Program community — and dedicated one meeting
a month to that effort. Since November 2016, we have reviewed successive General Plan drafts
and supplements, offered verbal testimony, and provided additional written testimony. There
should be no question our participation in.the General Plan process over the past two (2) years
has been a collective effort utilizing our various skill sets. Thank you.
Mr. Hull: Next we have Juan Wilson, followed by Anne Walton.
Mr. Wilson: Aloha, Planning Commissioners. My name is Juan Wilson.
Mr. Wilson read his testimony for the record (on file with the Planning Department).
53
Mr. Hull: Next up we have Anne Walton, followed by Sharon Goodwin.
Ms. Walton: Good afternoon, Honorable Chairperson and Commissioners. I'm Anne Walton.
Ms. Walton read her testimony for the record (on file with the Planning Department).
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Walton: Thank you.
Ms. Walton continued reading her testimony for the record.
Mr. Hull: Four (4) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Walton continued reading her testimony for the record.
Ms. Walton: I'd also just like to comment that in my eight (8) pages of written comments, on the
first page I made an error and I have provided you with a replacement page for that. My
apologies for the confusion on that. Thank you for the opportunity to speak.
Mr. Hull: Next we have Sharon Goodwin, followed by Wayne Souza.
Ms. Goodwin: Good afternoon. I am Sharon Goodwin from Wailua Homestead. I am going to
stand with respect to the water. I am here to talk about watersheds and water, and the water
cannot be here to speak for itself. I have been here before you twice to talk about water. The
very first time was eliminating the ideas of the public trust doctrine. The second time was to tell
you that I had been to the Blue Hole diversion and saw one hundred percent of the water from
the north fork of Wailua flowing into the direction of Hanama`ulu. Find out about it. Do
something.
Moving on, the General Plan states that about three million gallons per day of water will be
required to support the plan development around Uhu`e. All of this water will be coming from
our streams. I request that the Commission deny approval of this draft of the plan until the water
required for the growth in the Uhu`e area has first been allocated to public trust needs. As the
applicant, the Planning Department must first demonstrate that there is no reasonable alternative
water source before approving developing that will depend upon stream water, then they have to
assure that there is no impact to the streams and to stream users before that water is allocated to
the development. In 2014 — and I know many of you are familiar with this — the Hawaii
Supreme Court explained that the County has the affinnative duty to carry out this constitutional
responsibility exactly in cases like these and I cite the Kauai Springs versus Kauai County
Planning Commission case. The Kauai County Planning Commission won; that's folks like
you, your predecessors. I quote, "The public trust creates an affirmative duty of the State and its
political subdivisions to take the public trust into account in the planning and allocation of water
resources and to protect public trust uses whenever feasible." Please follow your duties as public
trust -
54
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Goodwin: —public water trustees. Follow the guidelines that the court has laid out. Hold
yourselves to the same standard to which you held Kaua'i Springs and if you do not follow your
duties under the law, I will personally seek relief from your actions in court. Again, I stand for
the water. Thank you. (Applause)
Mr. Hull: Next we have Wayne Souza, followed by Jean Souza.
Mr. Souza: Good afternoon. My name is Wayne Souza.
Mr. Souza read his testimony for the record (on file with the Planning Department).
Mr. Hull: Next we have Jean Souza, followed by Greg Crowe.
Jean Souza: I'm Jean Souza. I'm representing the Hanapepe-'Ele'ele Community Association
and Susan Remoaldo, here, is my human easel to hold up some graphics because sometimes it
can be pretty confusing, what we are talking about, so I have some screenshots and some other
reproductions of some relevant pages. I have over twenty-five (25) years of experience as a
planner. I have been in the public sector doing planning for a number of public agencies and I
also had my own planning consultant fine. My specialties are land use and regional planning,
and I have served eight (8) years on the County's Public Access, Open Space, and Natural
Resources Preservation Fund Commission.
On Thursday, I submitted to the Planning Department, and was forwarded to you by Director
Dahilig, the Association's edits to the June 13"' version of the plan. However, there were some
major disconnects or inconsistencies in the plan that are more complicated than I was able to
reflect then, so I'm presenting that now — verbally — and you have a handout as well.
Ms. Souza presented her testimony for the record (on file with the Planning Department).
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Souza-. Thank you.
Ms. Souza continued presenting her testimony for the record.
Mr. Hull: Four (4) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Souza continued presenting her testimony for the record.
Mr. Hull: Five (5) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Souza continued presenting her testimony for the record.
Ms. Souza: Thank you very much.
061
Mr. Hull: Next we have Greg Crowe, followed by Christine Cook.
Mr. Crowe: I think you are just getting passed around a couple of pieces of paper that I want to
refer to in my testimony. Before I begin, my apologies for not being more prepared today, but I
had some family health matters that came up that required my attention the last few days; that's
actually part of what my testimony is about and as you probably all know, my name is Greg
Crowe. Mahalo and aloha to everyone who has put so much time and attention to this General
Plan Update. I have given my background before, so I'll skip that due to our limited time. But
my personal situation today really just is an illustration of a general problem that there has been
throughout this General Plan Update process; the lack of really sufficient time for the public to
get the latest update and have time to review it and make comments. This last one is another
example of that. The draft was released five (5) days before this hearing; that's not enough time
and it included the weekend. How is anybody who is not spending full-time on this going to
have a chance to review all that? So I have a few questions and requests that I'll try to
summarize quickly today to stay within the three (3) minutes, and I'll submit a complete written
testimony in the next few days.
Question No. 1, why the rush on this General Plan? There has consistently been too little time to
review and comment throughout the process and right up to this time with only five (5) days
from the online release for the most recent General Plan, and those five (5) days included a
weekend as I mentioned. This lack of advance scheduling and adequate time for meaningful
public review and comment has been the experience since the beginning of the drafts being
released; even the first draft, at best, gave the public thirty (30) calendar days when the release of
that first public draft for public comment, but that thirty (30) days was going right into the major
holidays when most people are heavily scheduled and/or are even off -island. Was that
scheduling due to some external pressure? Or just insensitivity to ... that it would inadvertently
limit meaningful public review and comment? Or was it, as some suspect, intentional to limit
public review? It does not have to be that way and should not continue that way. For
comparison, Honolulu provided a minimum of two (2) months and up to five (5) months for
comments after each release of their General Plan drafts, then their planning commission has
several more months to review the draft that resulted after much more time for input from the
public. Please see the flowchart that was handed out of Honolulu's General Plan Update process
showing that two (2) to five (5) months — that's the graphic with the dark background — for
public review of each draft and then their planning commission has an open-ended several
months for review. So why the rush for Kauai? As in some of my previous testimony, I suggest
and request that the Planning Commission select at least a couple of the more complex and
contentious sector goals and hold some workshops led by experts so that both the Commission
members and the concerned public are better informed to make better plans and actions for
Kaua`i's future. This is not just a plan for the next twenty (20) years. What we do now, or don't
do now, and over the next twenty (20) years will have impacts for good or for bad for centuries
to come. Let's take some more time to make the General Plan as good as we can.
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Crowe: Oh, my preliminary is counted, too. Well, I'll just run through quickly. My other
questions are we need to define clearly what is rural. It is stated throughout the plan numerous
56
times, but there is no definition of it, and in fact, that leads to conflicts within the plan in terms of
rural policies. I'll submit that in my written testimony, and then there's... affordable housing has
similar things where affordable housing really needs to be defined as is mentioned briefly in the
plan to really include affordable living because it is not just a housing cost, it is the cost of
transportation, the cost of energy, the cost of utilities, the cost of food. All of those could be
addressed in ways that are very positive in the General Plan. One thing that I will say is I have a
closing remark on a positive. On page 3-24, under Permitting Actions and Code Changes, No. 3,
there are projects and programs, "Support a flexible planning process and robust monitoring
system to allow—
Mr. Hull: Four (4) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Crowe: —timely changes in strategy and resource allocation for the housing program." I say
"amen" to that, but please, where are the actual plans and actions for that flexible process, robust
monitoring, and timely changes in strategy and resource allocation? So please take the time to
review this plan in detail and get the necessary information for yourselves and the public to make
this what it could be for Kaua`i's future. Thank you, again, for your time and attention.
Mr. Hull: Next we have—
Vice Chair Ho: One moment. Right now we are going to break for a recess for a tape change.
We are in recess now.
The Commission recessed this portion of the meeting at 2:21 p.m.
The Commission reconvened this portion of the meeting at 2:30 p.m.
Vice Chair Ho: The Planning Commission is now back in order.
Mr. Hull: Next on the speaker sign-up list we have Christine Cook, followed by Mehana
Vaughan.
Ms. Vaughan: Christine had to leave. She submitted her testimony and basically, it just said that
she...she left it, that she opposed the designation of the Princeville lands as Resort. She swims
there, she loves the area, snorkels there, has lived in the Kalihiwai area a long time, so she said
she submitted it and is not able to be here.
Mr. Hull: So calling Mehana Vaughan, followed by Malia Nobrega-Olivera.
Ms. Vaughan: Ano ai me ke aloha (inaudible). It's good to see you all again. I want to thank
you so much for your time and for your steady effort into this plan. I have submitted three (3)
documents today. They were submitted last week as well so you have likely seen them. There is
a timeline of land use history of the Princeville area, there is a testimony with a map, and then
there's a list of property sales of relevant lands in this area. Thank you for allowing us to testify
last time about research in this area which focused on ecological and socioeconomic impacts.
Today I want to focus on some of the planning issues. As many people have said, there are
concerns that the policies of the plan do not match, at this point, the land use maps and some of
the specific actions. I'd like to read from the General Plan Draft which says, "Given concerns
regarding stressed infrastructure, including roads, wastewater systems, and parks, the policy is to
prohibit expansion of visitor destination areas and where possible to reduce VDA boundaries and
remove Resort areas where entitlements do not exist. So three (3) points today, this is out of
keeping with that policy of expansion of VDA areas, it is not an area where entitlements do not
exist, and third, it is not in the interests of the public. If you look, this is a noncontiguous area of
agricultural lands. It is an expansion of the resort to a new area without the infrastructure to
support it. Also, this particular land on the central plateau is agricultural lands which have been
subdivided into seventy-five (75) units, so leaving this designation on the General Plan
effectively expands the VDA to include these seventy-five (75) units and allows seventy-five
(75) new very high-end, luxury transient vacation rentals on the agricultural plateau. This is an
issue our county has spent so much time dealing with — nonconforming uses outside of the
Visitor Destination Area — and so this would create a new problem in an area where it is already
a problem. `Anini already has thirty (30) such units and this is in addition to all of the growth
within Princeville. So that's the first issue. The second issue is that this is not entitled. If you
look at the timeline on page 2 and page 3, you can see the initial 1983 Kauai Planning
Commission approves the General Plan amendment petition rezoning the western plateau for
single-family residential public and multi -family residential uses and the central plateau for the
same uses. Again in 1985, the Kauai County Council rezones western and central... these were
originally projected and conditioned to include affordable housing. So this was more of a multi-
use sort of a property, a designation, when it was put on. It was considered to include families,
to include school, and to include public uses. There are special pen -nits for the use of the golf
course and the Princeville Clubhouse on agricultural lands, but only for those uses. And when
you look at arguments before the Planning Commission—
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Vaughan: —and the LUC, that was because those were supposed to be public use facilities to
benefit the entire community, whereas those are now private. Just to wrap up, in 1991, the LUC
revoked their Urban zoning on the central plateau because the western plateau was not continued
in time, so this area does not have the State level land use designation which is needed for
Resort. It also does not have the County zoning. All it has is this outdated, issued in 1983 under
very specific conditions and circumstances, General Plan designation, which remains and which
is what we are dealing with today, but which is quite out of keeping as the Planning Department
has said with their policies and with all of the goals of this General Plan. Just the last thing to
say is it is also out of keeping with what the public wants. You have received, by my count, at
least over forty (40) testimonies asking for this designation to be removed. I haven't seen any
more than one (1) or two (2) asking to the contrary, and that is just the community saying—
Mr. Hull: Four (4) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Vaughan: —so much has changed since 1983 when this original Resort map was made.
Thank you so much.
Ms. Ahuna: Can I ask her a question, Chair?
58
Vice Chair Ho: Just a moment, Mehana.
Ms. Ahuna: Mehana, can you just share your definition of the Resort zone or designated land
use on this map? What is your interpretation of it as a community member? The pink zoning
under Resort.
Ms. Vaughan: It is complicated because ... and we have submitted other figures to show this. I
think there is a figure in here, but there is a western, a central, and an eastern plateau, right? The
western plateau includes ... you know when you enter Princeville and you go to the fountains and
on the right side there are newer condos — Queen Emma Bluffs — that was the start of the western
plateau. So when this zoning was issued in '83 and then again in '85, there were five (5) years to
build that out completely. There is also the parcel, which to my understanding is within the
western, which is right around the Princeville Clubhouse, so right across from the dump; that
area. So those were Special Use Pen -nits for that Clubhouse to exist, and that is an issue. Taking
Resort off of this little pod here where there is no Resort currently —just that big, empty, hulking
clubhouse — would be a good thing because this is a very ecologically sensitive area. This is
right between the two (2) forks of `Anini stream and we have talked about the affects we've seen
of the building of the golf course and the Clubhouse already since 1983; how much that stream
sedimented and changed in that short time. Kanoe, to complete your question, this is the central
plateau area — this big pink bubble — and this area has currently nothing built. It is completely
agricultural. This is the area that is in cattle and the golf course runs through. So when you look
at LUC dockets, it is confusing because there is one pertaining to the golf course lands and there
is one pertaining to this and they overlap.
Ms. Ahuna: Thank you for sharing.
Mr. Hull: Next we have Malia Nobrega-Olivera and that will complete the list.
Ms. Vaughan: Thank you so much.
Ms. Nobrega-Olivera: Aloha. My name is Malia Nobrega-Olivera, born and raised here in
Hanapepe, Kauai in the Kona moku. This is my first time coming before you as the Planning
Commission, but I want to make it clear that this is not the first time my voice is being heard
here because my voice is a part of the collective voice of the Hanapepe-`Ele`ele Community
Association. I have been one of the active members that has been attending the meetings and we
have been working together as a collective community on many different issues, like Susan was
sharing earlier and the rest of our community members. So mahalo to ... yeah, our voices ... even
though we are not here, that they are able to carry that forward for us, and we really wanted to
make sure that that was clear. I am also here with my mom, Rosalyn Nobrega, who was born
and raised here on Kauai as well. I spent some time the last few days reviewing it even more in
depth on the last version that was made available. I wasn't able to submit this, but I wanted to
share some of the changes that I wanted to recommend to specific areas.
Ms. Nobrega-Olivera explained her testimony for the record (on file with the Planning
Department).
59
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Nobrega-Olivera continued to explain her testimony for the record.
Mr. Hull: Four (4) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Nobrega-Olivera continued to explain her testimony for the record.
Ms. Nobrega-Olivera: Mahalo nui.
Mr. Hull: We have no additional testifiers signed up. Is there anybody in the public that has not
signed up and has not been afforded the opportunity to testify at this time yet? You may testify
now.
Puala Norwood: Aloha kakou. (Aloha) `O wau inoa Puala Norwood. My name is Puala
Norwood. I am a kama`aina kanaka and I live in the mauka area above Kapa`a in upper Kapahi.
I want to urge the Planning Commission to please consider my concerns regarding the
development of our island and to please keep in mind the limited resources, the already strained
infrastructure and roadways that are overcrowded with traffic, and the rapid loss of our open
green spaces. I strongly oppose the rezoning of agricultural lands for development of resort or
housing. We do have a shortage of affordable and lower income housing, and thus far, the
developments that have been permitted to go through, I believe, have not kept their agreement
and their word regarding low-income and affordable housing. Kauai island is currently facing
problems from rapid population growth and overdevelopment. I think that our tourism numbers
have risen, as well as our number of residents has risen exponentially. Please consider the
socioeconomic and cultural lifestyles that suffer by the strains to land development and
limitation and overuse and improper use of natural resources, specifically water and land. I urge
the Planning Commission to consider the future of Kauai as weening away from tourism and
moving back to, or towards, sustainable agriculture, small family farms, and ... I'm not talking
about the kind of agriculture that biotech industry represents. I am talking about families
farming and providing food for our island and the State of Hawaii, and possibly for exportation,
so I believe that that is a wiser use of our land. We are on a very small island, obviously with
limited land resources, and the water is quite precious. Remembering that Kauai is the Garden
Island. Remembering that climate change, rising sea levels,—
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Norwood: —limited resources, oil dependency, etc. So we should plan for our future with
wisdom, incorporating the values of our ancestors, and the Hawaiian culture. Planning for a
sustainable future would be my recommendation. Thank you very much. Aloha.
Mr. Hull: Again, there is no other additional testifier that has signed up. Is there anybody here
in the public that would like to still testify that has not testified yet? Mr. Shigemoto.
Tom Shigemoto: Good afternoon. For the record, my name is Tom Shigemoto. I wasn't going
to testify today, but after hearing some of the testimony already mentioned, about `Ele`ele
E
especially, I thought I wanted to come up here and clarify some things. About ten (10) years
ago, we undertook a planning process for our lands that were described by Wayne and Jean. We
would have been happy if there was a Hanapepe-`Ele`ele Community Association formed. We
were looking for people to serve on this Citizens Advisory Committee that we did form. So not
having this association, we relied on contacts we had, people we knew who lived in the
community, worked in the community to serve on this Advisory Committee that we formed;
there were about ten (10) or eleven (11) folks. So we went through this process and then we
developed a plan for the area, again, described by Jean and Wayne from the edge of `Ele`ele and
Port Allen all the way to Wahiawa Gulch and also the lands on the east side of Wahiawa up to
the area fronting Numila, the coffee factory. Now, these lands are not included in the IAL; you
all understand what the IAL is. We went through that process. Thirty-seven hundred (3,700)
acres of our lands were designated for IAL and the rest were left out for our future development.
The area that was described by JoAnn this morning — the area fronting the coffee factory — was
actually part of the South Kauai Development Plan project, not part of the West Kauai
Development Plan process. Anyway, when this plan ... the General Plan Update started, we had
an opportunity to share with the Planning Consultants and the Staff what our plans were, so that
is what we did, okay? Early on, the areas designated were not quite as extensive as they are
today, but through the process, we kept on asking that those lands be considered because what
you need to understand is the entitlement process is so long and encompasses a lot of decisions,
we need to have some predictability as to whether or not we would be able to get the critical
mass for us to justify putting in our infrastructure. The County and State never provided that for
us. We provide everything that we need. So if we can get all of these lands designated, then
when we—
Mr. Hull: Three (3) minutes, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Shi eg moto: Thank you. —when we move forward, then we will be able to make the decision
as to whether or not this is economically feasible to move forward. And that's all I wanted to
clarify today. Thank you very much for what you guys do.
Ms. Ahuna: I have a question, Chair.
Vice Chair Ho: Excuse me?
Ms. Ahuna: I have a question for Mr. Shigemoto. Mr. Shigemoto, what is "Provisional Ag" to
you?
Mr. Shigemoto: From what I understand, "Provisional Ag" is these areas are set aside for when
the County does their community development plan updates. So they are not looking at any kind
of designation right now, but would be entertained at the time that the County undertakes its
development plan updates.
Ms. Ahuna: Okay. So I guess right now, for instance, that land use prior to this General Plan is
just "Ag", so in this General Plan Update — the revised version — it adds the word "Provisional".
So how would that affect a project for yourself, moving forward, to remove or have that
"Provisional Ag" there?
Coil
Mr. Shigemoto: Are you talking about the two (2) areas? Or the one (1) area—
Ms. Ahuna: Yeah, so ... what would be the difference, for you, in your interpretation of
"Provisional Ag" versus "Ag", what it is designated now?
Mr. Shigemoto: Well, the—
Ms. Ahuna: Because that is the concern of the community that they have been consistently
raising. So as a commissioner, I'm just trying to understand why the community is so concerned
with the word "Provisional".
Mr. Shigemoto: Well, if that's all they are concerned about, then what will happen is, at the time
the West Kauai Development Plan is being formulated or studied, then they would look at that
land. So if you eliminate that portion, we believe we have enough with what is being designated
for us to do something within the plan period.
Ms. Ahuna: To me, if the community is asking to remove the word "Provisional", why don't we
just remove it? What is the... and we are moving in a place of doing a west regional plan, so
there is opportunity for that. So maybe, Ka`aina, you can explain that.
Mr. Hull: If I can interject and I don't want to ... I'm going to look at Jodi to see if she blocks me
and says we should hold off `til the actual discussion point, but as the Department had proposed
the Provisional Agriculture designation, it was the intent of the Department to allow for the West
Kauai community during their community plan process to participate in the discussions to
whether or not that should be upgraded to some other higher intensified use. What Mr.
Shigemoto is saying is correct, though. If indeed, going through the community process, there is
overwhelming support to say no, that needs to be kept in Agriculture, then it gets kept in
Agriculture. All it does is essentially acts as a placeholder to say you, as a community, can
discuss this now to move it into a higher intensified use. If that placeholder is not there, that
discussion cannot take place because the fact that it will have a GP designation as pure
Agriculture. That's essentially why that was put there; to let the community have that discussion
in totality through the community planning process. But it does not give the property owner any
entitlements whatsoever at this point. It just says you, as a community, can have the discussion
if you want a higher intensified use.
Mr. Shigemoto: Thank you.
Mr. Hull: Is there any additional testimony from members of the public that have not testified at
this point? I think the testimony part is done for now, so at this point, Chair, at your discretion,
I'll turn it over to Marie Williams, the staff planner.
Vice Chair Ho: Right now we are going to take a 5-minute—
Unidentified Speaker: (Inaudible)
GL
Mr. Hull: At this point, there is public testimony that is being received. No questions are being
had from the public.
Vice Chair Ho: We are going to go into a 5 -minute recess and be back at 3 o'clock. Thank you.
The Commission recessed this portion of the meeting at 2:54 p.m.
The Commission reconvened this portion of the meeting at 3:02 p.m.
Vice Chair Ho: We are back in session.
Mr. Hull: Okay, Chair, all of the testimony has been received at this point. I would like to turn
it over to Marie Williams, our staff planner, to give the Supplemental Report to the Director's
Report on the proposed amendments.
Staff Planner Marie Williams: Good afternoon, Chair Ho and members of the Planning
Commission. Transmitted before you is our Supplemental No. 7 Director's Report for Zoning
Amendment ZA-2017-03 and this, of course, is the General Plan Update. Maybe what I'll do is
quickly go over our findings as expressed in the report and take you through the exhibits, and
then answer any questions you may have, or if you prefer to go straight into discussion amongst
the Commission, that's fine.
What we provided you was a...what we are calling the June 13, 2017 version of the
Departmental Draft of the General Plan Update. How this is different from the previous version
is that it includes the edits in Supplemental Report No. 6 and several floor amendments that were
made the last time we met. Those floor amendments, we put in writing in Exhibit 2; just to be
clearer about the changes that were made. This draft has been online, available for the public as
well, since last week. I just want to be very clear that we integrated as many of the previously
approved amendments as we possibly could, but there is additional copy editing work that has to
be done, as well as other non -substantive revisions related to the formatting, design, numbering,
and the graphics as well that can't be completed at this time. We are going to have to wait until
the plan is approved. That's essentially our findings at this point. As you can see, we aren't
recommending any additional changes at this point, but you do have several possible
amendments before you that you may want to discuss and we are here to answer any questions
you might have.
Mr. Hull: To just reiterate Marie's comments and the recommended amendments that you have
from the Department, to be clear, the Department is ready for action at this point. As a reminder,
at the last Planning Commission meeting that ... I commend you all in going through the very
long discussion process on several ... or, virtually, the bulk of many of the controversial points.
You folks even went through the exercise of taking votes on many of the controversial points to
see what the decision of the Commission was and ultimately, it was sent back to the Department
with those votes having being taken to do really, somewhat, non -substantive changes, and to
have one last pass at it. So at this point, the Department is ready to move forward — let me
backtrack — with the exception of the Provisional Ag, which I do believe there will be
considerable discussion here today concerning the Provisional Ag, but aside from that,
substantial discussions were taken place at the last meeting, so the Department is ready to move
63
forward. We do not anticipate, at this point, giving you folks any more department -initiated
amendments for the General Plan. Now, this ultimately is going to be a commission -stamped
document should you guys eventually decide to move out, so if there are other bits of
infonnation that you folks need to continue on forward, of course that is another issue and we
will accommodate that as best we can. But just to be clear, the Department, at this point, is ready
for you folks to take action on the recommended General Plan amendments. I turn it over to you
folks now.
Vice Chair Ho: Who wants to be first?
Ms. Ahuna: Chair, I have a question before ... because I know Commissioner Streufert has
requested a term for "Provisional Area" so I will let her read that; however, just to clarify, in
reference to Provisional Ag, or even Resort designation... this question is for you, Ka`aina. You
are telling us that there is no room to make a change in the designation should the west side
regional plan come up; there is no room for change. So, like, the south shore plan ... when they
did the south shore plan, you cannot change a land designation during the regional planning time
period.
Mr. Hull: No, I wouldn't say that. I wouldn't want it to be misconstrued as the fact that you
cannot have the discussion at all — maybe I over -spoke when I stated that — but it all needs to
conform with the General Plan alignment. So if the General Plan ... say, when Marie and her
team hold these community plan outreaches, when looking at urban types of uses, if it is not
within a designated Urban or Residential Community or Neighborhood General or one of these
designations that allows for this up -zoning later on, then it cannot get a LUC amendment for the
State Land Use District, nor would it be able to get a County Council reviewed (and) approved
zoning amendment because they would be in direct contrast to the General Plan designation of
Agriculture. So it is taking a step into the hybrid of saying we are not quite saying it should be
taken out of Agriculture. What we are saying is there may be some further discussion related to
an increased type of urban use above and beyond agriculture and let's defer that to the
community plan discussions. By having that provisional aspect, it then allows for ... should the
community plan move forward with an increase type of use, it allows to say, in fact, it still is in
keeping with the General Plan policies. But if it is a pure Agriculture maintained GP
designation, then no matter what the West Kauai plan states, it would be in nonconformance
with the General Plan and therefore, they couldn't move directly on to the changes at the LUC,
nor could they move for changes for zoning amendments at the County Council. They would
have to go back and come to you folks again for the General Plan discussion.
Ms. Ahuna: To make an amendment in the General Plan.
Mr. Hull: Correct.
Ms. Ahuna: So the land use zoning, like Resort or Provisional Ag, it doesn't ... so you are telling
me it doesn't give a developer a fast track through the process of permitting. They still would
have to go through the same permitting? I'm just trying to understand that permitting process.
Mr. Hull: Just to be clear, Commissioner Ahuna, we are talking about, specifically, this
Provisional Ag designation.
Ms. Ahuna: Right.
Mr. Hull: The concerns that are arising out of that, as well as/or the Resort designation.
Ms. Ahuna: No, just any land use designation. In reference to the land use maps, because I feel
that they are very inconsistent with the narratives, so the land use maps in here — any of these
designations — are ... there is no room for change should an amendment ... or some community
want to make a change in any of these designations.
Mr. Hull: They can always amend the GP, the General Plan, designation; that can always be
done. First it has to come to you folks and then ultimately it has to go to the County Council for
their review and action.
Ms. Ahuna: Okay.
Mr. Hull: But you could not take another portion of land that currently has a GP designation and
go to the LUC and say I want State Land Use Urban or go to the County Council and say I want
Resort zoning or Residential zoning. It could not happen because those would be not in
conformance with the General Plan designation. So the first start of all changes is going to
initiate at the General Plan level.
Ms. Ahuna: Right.
Mr. Hull: That's essentially how that works. By having a Resort designation or by having any
designation right now that does not have the Land Use Commission Urban accordance or the
County of Kauai zoning accordance, they still have to go through both of those bodies to get
those changes made first.
Mr. Lord: So Ka`aina, as a follow up to Heather's question, a potential applicant couldn't even
go in front of a governmental body until such time as the Community Association finalized its
plan for that growth area. Correct?
Mr. Hull: If we are talking about, say, the ... because there are certain areas in the community
planning areas that already have say a State Land Use Urban designation or a county zoning.
But if we are talking ... say, for example, the Provisional Ag.
Mr. Lord: I am talking about Provisional Ag.
Mr. Hull: The Provisional Ag, not even then would they be able to come in for an application.
My point being that if the Provisional Ag is maintained, then the West Kauai community is
going to be involved in the West Kauai Community Plan. In that particular area, for this
section, even if they adopted, say, Residential Community later on or Neighborhood General or
even went as far to say Urban Center, in that particular area because they don't have the State
GE
Land Use designation, they still could not apply for residential development or commercial
development. After the West Kauai Community Association, if they adopted that, then it would
be incumbent upon either the County or the landowner to trigger an application before the Land
Use Commission for them to get their State Land Use Urban designation. Even after that, they
still cannot apply for large-scale residential development or commercial operations because then
they would have to petition the County for a zoning amendment to get the appropriate zoning in
that area, and that would go through, again, you folks and then the County Council level. So
there are a myriad of different layers for where that Provisional Ag layout is before any
application can be reviewed for a full-scale urban -type development.
Mr. Lord: What is your experience in that process, even if it has the designation, in terms of
timing?
Mr. Hull: Years.
Mr. Lord: Years.
Mr. Hull: All of which would provide an opportunity for further public input.
Mr. Lord: Got you. Okay, thank you.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Could I ask a question, also, on that?
Vice Chair Ho: Ms. Streufert.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: I'll put it in a different way. We are looking at it right now from the
community input side of it. There is an entity that owns that land right now. How do their rights
differ and what is the process that they have to go through that might be different when it is
Provisional Ag versus Ag to get it into another format, whether that is Neighborhood General or
whatever else? What is the process that is different for the landowner?
Mr. Hull: If they wanted to ... ultimately they are going to have to get the Land Use Commission
amendment and then ultimately they are going to have to get the zoning amendment. If there is
no Provisional Agriculture here to have that possibility at the community pian level, they would
ultimately come to you folks with a petition to amend the General Plan.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: But how would that be different if it stays Agriculture?
Mr. Hull: They would be proposing to change it. Like, if it stayed as Agriculture, the landowner
would have to petition the Planning Commission and ultimately the County Council to amend
that General Plan designation.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: And if it is Provisional Agriculture, then what?
Mr. Hull: Well, if it is Provisional Agriculture, which would allow for the West Kauai
community planning process to occur and discuss whether or not it should be increased, if the
community process says no, we want to keep it as Agriculture, then they would have to go
through the process of amending the GP, as well as amending the West Kauai Community Plan.
If the West Kauai Community Plan says indeed we want a higher intensified use, we would like
some residential uses there, from that point on, if that plan is adopted, then the landowner would
just be going to the Land Use Commission for a State Land Use District change and going to the
County Council ultimately for a zoning change.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: So does this mean that by going Provisional Agriculture, it gives the
community more say into how this land is used as opposed to leaving it as Agriculture? Is that
correct?
Mr. Hull: Yes. I would agree with that statement.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Okay. So they have more options by doing it Provisional Agriculture as
opposed to Agriculture.
Unidentified Speaker. We disagree. We think this is (inaudible) interpretation (inaudible).
Vice Chair Ho: Excuse me, Anne. This is our discussion. Please.
Ms. Ahuna: So in that regard, I am going to change to ... the same discussion but go back to the
Princeville Phase II Resort. To me, the community doesn't want it zoned or the land use map.
They would rather have the landowner go to the LUC; that's what they are saying. So it is kind
of opposite in a sense where they would rather have thein have to go through the process to get,
the amendment in the General Plan. We had over fifty (50) something testimonies month after
month about the same thing, so I am just putting it out there.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: So they want us to keep it Ag, or they want to keep it Open.
Ms. Ahuna: They want to keep it Ag. I mean, they don't—
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Or Open. It is Open right now, isn't it?
Ms. Ahuna: If the landowner wants to go to ... I mean, they still can apply for Resort, but they
would just have to go through exactly what Ka`aina just said; they would have to go through a
State Land Use change because it is not in the General Plan. Correct?
Mr. Hull: Correct. Just to somewhat (inaudible) so we can bifurcate and have the discussion
individually, with the Resort designation with the Princeville Plateau area, what Commissioner
Ahuna said is absolutely correct. If it is not in this plan, they would have to come back before
you folks again. The vote was taken at the last meeting. If you guys want to retake the vote, it is
your prerogative if you want to go back there.
For the Provisional Ag, I'll be quite clear, guys, I'm not lobbying for either or. I understand that
there are many members of the public that don't feel our interpretation is accurate, but it is. But
two, I am not going to fight for this, quite frankly. If your sentiment is that you don't want it in
67
there, you don't want it in there and the community doesn't really have that opportunity in the
future. All we are saying is provide the community the opportunity to have that discussion. If it
is your sentiment that, you know, let's just not go there, it is not something we are going to fight
a full fledge (inaudible) attack on it. It was just an idea to allow the community input at the
community plan process, and I'll leave it at that.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: So if...I'm sorry.
Vice Chair Ho: Go ahead.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: If one were to include in the glossary of terms a definition for
"Provisional Area" — whether that is Resort or whether that is Agriculture — which says, "a
provisional area is an area on the land use map to be defined and designated via a future
community planning process due to the sensitivity of its potential regional impact. The regional
community planning policy, once adopted by ordinance, is considered consistent with this plan."
That gives more power to the community for control over their destiny, if you will.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Streufert, I know, has circulated this proposed amendment to the rest of
the Commission. The Department has read it and feels that it further clarifies the matter, and if
there are no objections, the Department is willing to incorporate it as a friendly amendment to
our report; if there are no objections. If there are objections, then indeed I think a discussion
should be had, but if there are no objections, we can incorporate this definition—
Ms. Apisa: No objection.
Ms. Ahuna: I definitely think we need a definition because it is not in there, so I have no
objection to this; however, this is ... yeah, go ahead.
Mr. Hull: I'll look at Jodi. We don't need a motion, I believe, or...
Deputy County Attorney Jodi Hi cgu hi Sayegusa: We would need a motion. This is considered
an amendment to the main motion, right? So it is an amendment, so we would need a motion.
Mr. Hull: Could the Department, because we have no objections to it and we are not seeing
objections from the Commission, could we incorporate it to our report as an additional
amendment without having to get a motion? Or are motions still necessary?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: I would get a motion and a second for the Commission.
Ms. Ahuna: Can you add your other one, too?
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Oh, alright. Could I do two to the Glossary at the same time? The
second one is a walkshed. That was a something that was a new term to me — a walkshed — and
this is with the Planning Department's assistance on this. A walkshed is a quarter to a half mile
radius walking distance or a comfortable walking distance between locations. So it defines a
distance, it defines what it means.
I move that we add both of these terms to the Glossary of Tenns; one of them for "Provisional
Area" and one for the "Walkshed".
Ms. Apsia: Second.
Vice Chair Ho: Motion is made and seconded. Do we have a discussion? This walking
distance, Glenda, is ... could it be ... what does it mean? Could it be a road? Could it be a pass
way? Could it be...
Ms. Nogami Streufert: It's a walking distance.
Vice Chair Ho: Walking ... just distance?
Ms. Nogami Streufert: It's a walking distance.
Vice Chair Ho: Motion has been made and seconded. All in favor? (Unanimous voice vote)
Motion carries 6:0.
Ms. Ahuna: Alright. I would like to make a motion to amend the testimony edits provided by
Malia Nobrega on June 13th. We were given a copy so if you guys can all look at thein. I
believe our Planning Department has already reviewed and they are okay with it, so I would like
to make a motion to amend the testimony edits provided by and submitted by Malia Nobrega-
Olivera on June 13, 2017.
Mr. Mahoney: Second.
Mr. Hull: Let me just turn to Marie. I know, overall, we did not have any objections. I know
there was one concern concerning page 2-5, concerning homesteads. Marie, is that language
accurate and appropriate?
Ms. Williams: Yeah. The Homestead designation is, in fact, new and what it does is, it doesn't
necessarily cover all parcels of land that were created through one of the three (3) Homestead
Acts in the early 1900s, but what it is meant to do is acknowledge those remaining parcels that
have not gone through ... not located today in the State Land Use Urban District or Rural District
because those parcels would, in fact, have R-1 through R-10. They would fall under that type of
land use. So what I would recommend with ... I think the language is good. In terms of the map
change, I would recommend that the land use map be changed to include those parcels that are
Homestead lots that are in the Agricultural State Land Use District.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Could I ask a question?
Vice Chair Ho: Yes.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Would Anahola also be a part of that? Is that also a homestead?
Ms. Williams: No.
•e
Ms. Nogami Streufert: That is not a homestead.
Ms. Williams: No. I mean, that is Hawaiian homestead land but it's not created through
the... yeah, the Homestead Act.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Same terminology that you are using?
Ms. Williams: Similar, yes.
Ms. Ahuna: Marie, can I add that to my motion to also snake a change in reference to the land
use map to change it to identify the Homestead designations of these areas?
Ms. Williams: Yes.
Vice Chair Ho: Ka`aina, a motion was made and seconded.
Ms. Higuchi Sayeg sa: We have a motion and second for all of these items, so you would want
to clarify you want to amend the amendment.
Ms. Ahuna: And in addition, to amend the additional... what Marie said.
Ms. Higuchi Sam tg lsa: Okay. So I would say let's take a vote on the amendment to the
amendment and then we'll go back to the rest of the changes.
Ms. Ahuna: Okay. I would like to make a motion to amend the testimony edits submitted by
Malia Nobrega-Olivera on June 13, 2017 in addition to making a change on the land use map to
identify Homestead areas within page 2-5, Homesteads.
Mr. Hull: And a second would be necessary.
Vice Chair Ho: Second?
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Second.
Vice Chair Ho: Any discussions? Voting. All in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) All against?
(None) Motion carries 6:0.
And your second...?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: So going back to the amendment for the rest of the June 13"'
amendments afforded to us by Malia Nobrega-Olivera.
Ms. Ahuna: Okay.
Ms. Higuchi Save isa: I think we had a motion and a second, so we just need to vote at this
point or other discussion.
E
Vice Chair Ho: Any discussion? We are going to vote. All in favor? (Unanimous voice vote)
Motion carries 6:0.
Ms. Ahuna: Okay. I have some more. I'm not pau.
Vice Chair Ho: Ms. Ahuna.
Ms. Ahuna: At this time, given reason and the rationales that the community have shared over
and over and over for months now, I really want to propose to the Commissioners to just
like ... okay, I proposed this Subcommittee last time; that got shut down. So I just want to
propose like ... and this is not going to cost us any money, but to defer the General Plan to engage
in just a half-day workshop to address critical areas, and this would be to direct the Department
to then facilitate this workshop. So the Department would facilitate because they know it best, as
well as to engage in a half-day workshop to address ... I just want to open this up to discussion
before I actually make a motion. It would be like a half-day workshop that I'm proposing that
the Department actually facilitates to just really revisit all of these critical areas that the
community has shared with us. They've actually fine-toothed this whole thing already, or they
did all the homework, but how are we even responding to it?
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Ahuna, I would ask for clarification because as has been presented
over the past six (6) months to you folks, there are numerous critical areas. I think the
Commission made significant leeway in the past meeting to take decisive action on many of
those controversial issues, but for the Department's own edification, we would have to know
what are the specific critical areas because—
Ms. Ahuna: I mean, infrastructure and transportation specifically because it kind of relates to
everything else that we have been talking about, and really just focusing on doing small
breakouts in this workshop. The specifics of the details of the workshop can be identified with
the Department and they can help identify through testimony; however, I think it's really
important for us to engage in and really ... like, they have already done a lot of the homework.
How can we engage in being a part of having an open discussion community versus it being just
testimony and not being able to really interact with them, with the community? So all of the
CAC meetings, I understand we did those, but it is really filtering all the CAC meetings into one
(1) half-day workshop that the Planning Department would just ... I mean, I don't know.
Vice Chair Ho: Do any of the other Commissioners have an opinion on this?
Mr. Mahoney: I think we ... another meeting... we've gone through all kinds of testimony, we've
gone through all kinds of meetings. I think concerns have been brought to every commission
meeting and had been addressed. I mean, I'm sure there is ... I think everybody has been listened
to and ... you know, the people that are here, they put a lot of time and effort, and I appreciate
that. But there are also a lot of people that aren't here because they have to go to work, they
have to support their family, and they are not here to add their contributions, too. I think that all
of the meetings that the Planning Department has ran ... I don't see any point in another
workshop.
71
Ms. Ahuna: Well, we have never had a workshop.
Mr. Mahoney: But we have had a process and I think it has been ... you know, if there is some
specific concern that we haven't voted on or ... I think we are a decision-making body, too, here,
so if there is something that specifically needs to be addressed as an item, we could bring it up
and talk about it if that's...
Vice Chair Ho: Ms. Streufert.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Maybe just to refresh our memory, could Marie or could you go over
how we got to where we are now and all the things that have been done?
Mr. Hull: Yeah. Just as an example, like, when we are talking about transportation and other
critical issues, there is a reason why Marie and her team took several months to go through those
with the CAC. It is because a lot of time, expertise, resources, and consultants were brought in
and in many of those CAC meetings, I can say it was actually... you had a fuller room than you
have today in which members of the public were noticed and came out and participated in those
various meetings. An entire meeting itself — when we're talking about, say, just transportation —
was dedicated to that, as well as above and beyond the CAC taking multiple meetings with our
own Engineering Division and the State Department of Transportation, there was a multi -day
workshop with interdepartmental agencies to fold in strategies for improving our transportation
systems. I'll just kind of turn it over to Marie to kind of say how those workshops went and
further clarification.
Ms. Williams: Yeah. When it comes to — let's see — transportation, we definitely knew that it
was a really important topic, so we started, not only two (2) years ago with the beginning of the
public process, but really five (5) years ago, now, when we started our Phase I of this project,
which is our technical report phase. We had a Technical Advisory Committee convene to kind
of guide us through the process and show that the development of these technical reports was, in
fact, a transparent process. One of those reports was, in fact, an infrastructure capacity report
that has been ... I believe the consultant was R. M. Towill, an engineering firm on Oahu, and
they included within that report ... they did an analysis of all our major infrastructure systems,
transportation included; that has been available. On top of that, we actually went a little bit
further. When we launched the public process, we realized we wanted more detailed
infonnation, so our prime consultant for this project completed kind of a Phase II infrastructure
assessment and these have been online. Just to take a step back, I think it's really important to,
again, note ... and I know Lee Steinmetz, our transportation planner, has brought this up that a lot
of what you see in the plan really builds upon an approved plan — approved by County Council in
2013, the Multimodal Land Transportation Plan — and it was developed in part to really serve as
basically the transportation element of our General Plan, and we brought that thinking in and
then, again, we hired the Consultant, Jim Charlier, who conducted that initial plan in 2013 to do
another assessment and he interviewed twelve (12) stakeholders. He did a report and we used
that to infonn the actions. In addition to that, we were fortunate to build off of the State's
Federal Aid Highways Plan. It is their long range plan. They completed it in 2014 and then
furthennore, there was the Kapa`a Transportation Solutions Plan completed in 2015 that had a
Technical Advisory Committee and a Citizens Advisory Committee group as well and that was a
72
more realistic plan getting to the issue of congestion in the Wailua-Kapa`a corridor. I think
Ka`aina mentioned that we have had workshops specific to this topic and we have had several
stages of agency participation as well where we go to them or our consultants go to them and we
do interviews, we work through what—we give them a copy of our working draft and they help
us craft the actions; that has been done several times with Department of Transportation and
other stakeholders. Just something to note, what is kind of unique about transportation in the
General Plan is that, as you guys know, Lee Steinmetz... I'm bringing him up again. I'm sorry.
He can't be here today to talk more about this, but he is our transportation planner and it was his
job to focus on this and really develop the policy in here and make sure it aligns with everything
going on. He did a really great job. No other topic in this plan probably received that degree of
focus from a single staff person. I think I have pretty much summarized what we have done in
regards to transportation and doing this public process; not only with the public, but engaging
our agencies as well.
Vice Chair Ho: Any other commissioner? Donna, do you have something? Wade?
Ms. Ahuna: Thank you. I wanted to thank Marie for sharing that. Just as a new commissioner, I
am not prepared to vote on this, but I mean, if you guys are all comfortable with moving
forward, then I'm good, but I'm just telling you. You guys already know my vote. For the
record, though, I'll just put my motion on the table if that's okay.
Vice Chair Ho: That's fine.
Ms. Ahuna: I would like to make a motion to defer the General Plan to direct the Department to
engage in a half-day workshop to address critical areas of the plan, the policies, land use maps in
general, and move the main motion to approve following this workshop.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: I'll second it.
Vice Chair Ho: A motion has been put on the floor and seconded. Commissioners, do we have a
discussion?
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Yeah, I would like to ask a couple of questions. In order to make this
more useful and not be another community outreach, what are you proposing?
Ms. Ahuna: A half-day workshop that can be kind of detailed in reference to ... with the Planning
Department kind of putting all of what she just said because as a new commissioner, I'm not ... I
mean, I have never attended any of those workshops or been apart of that and we are making a
decision here based on past history that I'm not comfortable with. All I've known is what has
been before me in the last six (6) months and it's the same testimonies that I don't feel we
necessarily really addressed any of them, like the real hard core ones.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: But if you opened it up, you could have hundreds of people in attendance
for each community to be represented in a certain way or... I just want to know how you
envision something like this.
VAI
Ms. Ahuna: Well, based on the testimonies, we can really just define those areas in relation to
the critical areas and critical testimonies that have come before us in the last six (6) months, and
then we put them into breakout sessions — I don't know — but that could be determined with the
Department, or more details can be detennined between now and the actual workshop.
Mr. Hull: I'll just say this. If this is the desire of the Commission, ultimately the Department
will schedule something like that, but I would have to be quite clear and apologies for being so
blunt, Commissioner Ahuna, but the Department would be hesitant whatever outcome or
majority input comes from a half-day workshop on which the Department and members of the
public have participated for a year, two (2) years in which members of the public, stakeholders,
and an array of different experts and agency leadership have attended an array of these meetings.
So if we hold one (1) half-day workshop, I just want to be clear, if that's the desire of the
Commission, we can do that, but whatever the outcome is from a 6 -hour workshop, I don't think
that the Department would even be comfortable moving forward with a recommendation of that
outcome because it would be disingenuous, quite honestly, to the amount of input and public
discussion and input that has happened for the past two and a half (2 %2) years on these very
issues, and I just have to lay that on the record.
Ms. Ahuna: Understandable.
Vice, Chair Ho: Commissioner Lord.
Mr. Lord: I'm trying to understand because I, too, haven't been here a long time, but as I
understand what Marie has said, each of these aspects of this proposed General Plan have been
vetted and gone through in enormous detail by experts, by community members, by committees,
just by everyone over the last couple of years and this plan is a reflection of the outcomes of that
work. Is that correct?
Vice Chair Ho: I believe so, yes.
Mr. Lord: Okay. So I'm not sure I understand what the purpose of another workshop is when
the work has already been done.
Vice Chair Ho: Anyone else?
Ms. Ahuna: For myself, I just don't understand how we, for six (6) months, have heard the same
community testimonies and yet, they are continuous; they are the exact same. How are we
taking the communities' interests of the same ... like, for the six (6) months. I understand that this
process has gone on for two (2) years, but why do we have the same community input over six
(6) months? The exact same testimonies continuously and we haven't responded to those. So
how do we respond to that?
Mr. Hull: I want to be clear, Commissioner. I mean, there has been some definitely themes
running throughout the testimony and that's not to say that the Department or some of those
discussions with the interagency comments or during the CAC was meant to ignore some of
these themes. They were definitely tested, prodded, and the ultimate decision you have before
74
you is the recommendation. What you are seeing a lot of times within the themes is that there
are many individuals in the public that disagree with that recommendation. I can guarantee you
are not going to make everybody on this island happy.
Ms. Ahuna: I understand that.
Mr. Hull: Ultimately, there are going to be disagreements from various sectors on the proposals.
The reason you are hearing many of these things is because the Department has tested and
prodded these; we haven't ignored thein. We have definitely taken an in-depth intimate look,
especially when we are arriving at the level where it's a theme that we are continuously hearing.
It's just that we have tested and prodded them, and found that we are not in agreement with that
particular objection.
Mr. Lord: Well I do have to say, just as a member of the Commission, that this isn't the only
opinion that I hear, right? I get other opinions outside of this room by people who can't attend
and many of them differ from some of the opinions that are expressed here, so you are going to
have this wide variety of opinions. Everyone has a stake and everyone wants for the island to be
the absolute best it can be, but how we get there is going to be viewed through our own lenses.
So I just know that there are many opinions out there.
Ms. Ahuna: I understand. A lot of people who can't attend provide written testimony; however,
all of the written testimony I have received is all the same testimonies, whether they attend or
not. It's fine. We can move forward. I'm just going to put out two (2) more amendments then if
we are going to—
Ms. Apisa: Well, we have one on the floor.
Ms. Ahuna: Well, yeah, we have my motion on the floor.
Vice Chair Ho: There is a motion on the floor. It has been seconded. Everyone understand it?
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Yes.
Vice Chair Ho: Calling for a vote. All in favor? Oh, one moment please. They are asking for a
roll call vote, please.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Lord.
Mr. Lord: No.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Streufert.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: No.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Mahoney.
75
Mr. Mahoney: No.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Apisa.
Mr. Apisa: No.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Ahuna.
Ms. Ahuna: Aye
Mr. Hull: Chair Ho.
Vice Chair Ho: (Silent)
Mr. Hull: The motion fails 2:4.
Ms. Ahuna: Okay. Because we are moving in this direction, I want to ... in reference to all of the
information we have received on the Provisional Ag, I would like to revisit that, especially now
we have Commissioner Streufert's definition of "Provisional" on the table, so I would like to
revisit the past motion that was already approved and I want to put it back on the table now that
we have a definition of "Provisional" to then snake a motion to remove the land use designation
of Provisional Ag on the Hanapepe land use map.
Vice Chair Ho: Commissioner Ahuna, one moment please. I think we need an interpretation
from our attorney.
Ms. Ahuna: Okay.
Ms. Hi ug chi Sa ey gusa: At the last meeting we did have the motion to remove the Provisional
Ag, so we kind of visited that topic and voted. So at this point, I think being that it is the very
next meeting, technically somebody voting in the affirmative, which was to vote "no", could
make a motion to reconsider at this point. There is still the main motion that still has yet to be
voted on, but we voted on this very issue so in the effort of moving forward the discussion, I
think the correct procedural matter would be a motion to reconsider this previous action item.
Ms. Ahuna: Okay. So can I make that? Or does it have to be a "nay" vote person to—
Ms. Hi ucg hi Sam tg isa: If we could take a brief recess and we can check the record just to see
what the vote was and then, again, it would be ... I believe the motion failed so whoever voted
with the prevailing side, i.e. no, would have to make that motion to reconsider.
Vice Chair Ho: We will recess for five (5) minutes.
The Commission recessed this portion of the meeting at 3:45 p.m.
The Commission reconvened this portion of the meeting at 3:56 p.m.
76
Vice Chair Ho: We are back in session.
Mr. Hull: Chair, we went into recess to look into the motion that was made at the previous
meeting concerning removing the Provisional Agriculture designation. The specific motion that
was made was a motion to remove the Provisional Agriculture designation from the Hanapepe-
`Ele`ele area.
Ms. Higuchi Sam tg isa: Again, as I stated prior to our break, because we already considered the
motion in the very last meeting we had, I think at this point we would need a motion to
reconsider the vote on the amendment just to move the discussion forward.
Mr. Hull: To clarify, we checked the records. As Jodi pointed out, a motion for reconsideration
can only come from a member that cast the vote in the prevailing group so the only person that
would not be able to introduce a motion for reconsideration would be Commissioner Ahuna, but
any other commissioner can introduce a motion to that effect for reconsideration.
Ms.AApisa: No motion here.
Vice Chair Ho: I see none.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: I would like to make a motion. I move that we consider the Princeville
Plateau designation as a Resort to be changed to Provisional Resort.
Vice Chair Ho: Change to Provisional...
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Resort.
Ms. Ahuna: Can we have a discussion on that?
Mr. Hull: You would need a second for the discussion.
Ms. Ahuna: I second that.
Vice Chair Ho: All in favor?
Ms. Apisa: Discussion.
Vice Chair Ho: Oh, I'm sorry.
Ms. Higuchi hi S_ayegusa: I guess we were sort of changing gears. We were talking about the
`Ele`ele area, but now I think the—
Ms. Nogami Streufert: We are at the Princeville Plateau.
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Now we are on Princeville.
77
Ms. Ahuna: So because I can't make the motion, thank you, Commissioner Streufert. Honestly,
Provisional Resort doesn't mean anything. It's the same as Provisional Ag, so to make myself
feel better about this, I really want to stress to all of you commissioners that this is a huge vote
right now. Glenda put it on the table as Provisional Resort. I would like to stress that, to me,
that really doesn't mean anything. We have heard from over fifty (50) community testimonies,
over and over again, that this Resort designation, along with what Director Hull said, is that this
designation of Resort for any of the landowners there allows thein to just move in an application
process that is aligned with our General Plan because it is in there and the community doesn't
want that in the General Plan as that. They would like to see it remain as Ag. We have the
timeline. We were given all of this information from Dr. Blaich regarding that land area and I
think it is really important to really understand what it is right now because as Ka`aina shared
earlier, the designation and the land use means that it is aligned with our General Plan so that the
landowner does not have to go for an amendment with the LUC or the County or to us
commissioners to snake a change in that. Should we keep it as Ag and remove the Resort then
the landowner still can do resort or development in that area; they would just have to come
before the Commission, to us, and to the LUC to then move forward with an application for
development. Am I right or wrong on that? Ka`aina, can you maybe...
Mr. Hull: What that essentially does is it would require thein to also look at, during their
community plan process update or if they wanted to amend their community plan, it would
require a community plan amendment to occur on those lands. Whether that happens with the
County -initiated community plan update or whether they initiate it on their own, ultimately that
amendment would have to take place.
Ms. Ahuna: But it doesn't mean that the landowner can't do it. They would just have to come
before an amendment. Correct? They would have to ask for an amendment.
Mr. Hull: They would have to do an amendment, correct.
Ms. Ahuna: Yeah. So I'm just putting it out there. Glenda put a motion on the table for
Provisional Resort, but to me, that doesn't mean anything. We are right back to Provisional Ag.
The word "Provisional" is...
Mr. Hull: Well, I'll say this for clarification. For this particular issue, it does actually put
another layer on the landowner. In essence, the community plan — and I'll have to look at Marie
on this — the community plan would have to reflect Resort in order for them to go to the Land
Use Commission and then ultimately to the County Council to get their necessary zoning and
State Land Use District changes, but it was only if the community plan reflects it and I look at
Marie to see if the community plan currently reflects Agriculture or if it reflects Resort. Do you
know off the top of your head, Marie?
Ms. Williams: I don't.
Mr. Hull: We'd have to check for that.
Mr. Lord: I also wanted a point of clarification, Deputy, or maybe for the County Attorney. The
vote here, the original vote, was to leave that area designated as Resort in the General Plan.
Correct?
Ms. Ahuna: No. It was to change it to Provisional.
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: So I guess switching gears, so now we are talking about Princeville.
There was a motion at the last meeting to remove the Resort designation from the North Shore
Land Use Map.
Mr. Lord: Right.
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: And I think there was a little more narrative matching figures with
narratives in the text, but basically the essence of the motion was to remove the Resort
designation, and that motion ultimately failed with—
Mr. Lord: So Glenda's motion has what effect on the prior motion?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: It is an entirely new motion. It is another amendment. It is basically
folding in the Provisional definition now that that has been included as an amendment, so now
applying that to this Resort designation.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: The Resort designation has been in there since at least the 2000 Plan in
that same area so it is not a change from the 2000 Plan right now. But the reason for bringing it
up is because I thought it deserved a little bit more discussion because if one of our
commissioners is not feeling comfortable with it, then we should at least have a discussion as to
why—there may be some compelling argument that we have not heard before and it behooves us
because it is an important document to hear all of the arguments so I have put that forth.
Mr. Lord: I'm glad you did it. I guess I'm trying to understand what the effect is on the prior
vote. Does it mean a vote against Glenda's motion leaves it Resort?
Mr. Hull: Correct.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Yes.
Ms. Ahuna: Her motion was to change it to Provisional Ag.
Mr. Lord: So a vote in favor changes it from Resort to Provisional Resort. Gotcha. Thank you.
Ms. Ahuna: Ka`aina, can you define what that means again? Because you said it changes that.
Mr. Hull: Yeah, so given the adoption of the amendment including the definition of "Provisional
Area" that happened about an hour ago, a Provisional Area is an area on the land use map to be
defined and designated via future community planning process due to the sensitivity of its
potential regional impact. The regional community planning policy, once adopted by ordinance,
M
is considered consistent with this plan. So even if the General Plan of 2000 designates it as
Resort and, say, Commissioner Streufert's motion is adopted, we would have to ... the community
plan needs to say it is in Resort as well and that we have Staff running to find out because if it is
currently in Resort, then this Provisional Area snatches with its community plan. Now, if the
community plan says Agriculture, then, in fact, the community plan does not conform with this
Provisional Area, so the only way that they could then move on to get their LUC and zoning
entitlements is they would first have to amend the community plan. So it just depends where
they are right now and like I said, Staff is running over to check. If you guys need a 2 -minute
recess, we can find that out relatively quickly.
Vice Chair Ho: Any discussion? Any follow-up discussion?
Mr. Mahoney: Take a recess until we find out.
Vice Chair Ho: Right here.
Ms. Nogamni Streufert: Or can we table this and go on.
Mr. Lord: Yeah, we can move on.
Ms. Apisa: I think they...
Mr. Hull: We'll ask for a 2 -minute recess.
Mr. Lord: Do you want to table it and move on to another topic?
Ms. Apisa: No. Let's just get it over with.
Mr. Hull: 2 -minute recess.
Vice Chair Ho: We need a 2 -minute recess here. Thank you.
The Commission recessed this portion of the meeting at 4:06 p.m.
The Commission reconvened this portion of the meeting at 4:08 p.m.
Vice Chair Ho: We are back in session.
Mr. Hull: After looking at the map, there is a project... excuse me. For a refresher, the question
that we needed a 2 -minute recess was for how would this Provisional Resort designation on the
General Plan Update affect the Princeville Development for the particular Princeville Plateau
area. In looking at the maps, there was a project development designation that is in the vicinity
but is not quite the exact lines of what is right now being ... a motion was made to put into
Provisional Resort, so ultimately, the landowner... before they went for LUC as well as zoning
entitlements, they would first have to go through a community plan amendment or wait for the
County to initiate a community plan update to this area, so it, indeed, is another barrier and level
that requires either the developer or the County to initiate.
91
Vice Chair Ho: Donna.
Ms. Apisa: I have lived as a full-time resident there since 1981 and it was, to me, common
knowledge that that was always Resort; that is all I have ever known it as. Is the 10 -year "use it
or lose it" provision still in place?
Mr. Hull: That language is still in the General Plan Update, correct.
Ms. Apisa: So is it realistic to put more restraints? I mean, the developer still has to go through
all of the County pen -nits and regulations, so is it reasonable to put another step in there?
Ms. Ahuna: I think it is reasonable.
Ms. Apisa: That might not be realistic to do within ten (10) years.
Vice Chair Ho: Sean.
Mr. Mahoney. Well, the 10 -year "use it or lose it" is already in place so—
Ms. Apisa: Right. But I'm just saying this would be another layer that they need to complete
within the ten (10) years, if we change it.
Ms. Ahuna: Why would it be another layer? Adding the word "Provisional" is just ... I mean, it's
just making thein accountable to the community. It is creating an accountability to the
community. The landowner has to be accountable to the community. I personally don't even
want it Resort at all, but I'll take Provisional. You know what I mean? I think it's just holding
the landowner to be accountable to the community. There is no resort there now. We don't even
have ... there is no infrastructure plan. We already have tons of traffic. It is just going to hold
that landowner to be accountable to the community; one (1) additional step.
Ms. Apisa: The community didn't even exist forty (40) years ago.
Ms. Ahuna: Speaking from a ... I'm just going to get really upset right now because Native
Hawaiians existed forty (40) years ago.
Ms. Apisa: No, I'm saying Princeville.
Ms. Ahuna: No. All over Kauai we existed.
Ms. Apisa: I agree.
Ms. Ahuna: We lived and thrived here so—
Mr. Hull: If I could intercede, (inaudible). As we look at decorum as we get into some very
controversial issues, just remember that parliamentarian discourse is to direct the testimony to
81
the Chair and the Chair can call on you individually for your testimony; just to keep this cordial
and moving along. Thank you.
Ms. Nogaini Streufert: Could I get a ... I'm sorry.
Vice Chair Ho: Go ahead.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Could I get a ... a "yes" vote on this would mean what? And a "no" vote
would mean what?
Mr. Hull: A "yes" vote would mean that a Provisional Resort area designation would go into
that Princeville Plateau area. Ultimately what that would require is, indeed, the landowner,
should they want to pursue resort development on this area of land, would currently... with the
existing Resort designation, they would have to go for the LUC petition to amend the State Land
Use District and then they would have to go to the County of Kauai and ultimately the Council
for an amendment to their zoning. If this amendment passes, it would add an additional
amendment to be required at the community plan process.
Vice Chair Ho: Do we understand the vote, Commissioners?
Mr. Mahoney: It adds another layer; a hoop for them to jump through. This is not guaranteeing
or giving a pass or ... they have to jump through all the hoops no matter what. This is not like
a ... and they still have the clock running if they chose to do that.
Ms. Ahuna: Yeah, so why not just give them the extra layer? What's the—
Mr. Mahoney: On the provisional part?
Ms. Ahuna: Yeah.
Mr. Mahoney: Yeah. I'm alright with that.
Ms. Ahuna: I mean, the community is a community. We have one (1) landowner, two (2)
landowners versus tons of people in the community and traffic and infrastructure and sewer and
waste. What is one more jump that they have to go through? Why give them the fast track?
Mr. Mahoney: That's not a fast track.
Mr. Lord: There's not a fast track.
Ms. Ahuna: Well, it's one more hoop—
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Sorry, I just—
Ms. Ahuna: So if it's not a fast track then why not give thern—
RN
Vice Chair Ho: (Gavel) Bring order back here. Alright.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Could I ask a ... how long does it take to develop something?
Mr. Lord: LUC and County zoning, rezoning.
Mr. Hull: A minimum of three (3) or four (4) years, if not longer. I mean, you do have
developers in the room that can attest and I know they would attest to. You are looking at
generally, at least statements that I have heard, for LUC changes and then zoning changes, in
theory you can get them in three (3) to four (4) years, but in practice, you are looking at six (6) to
ten (10) years.
Mr. Lord: Right.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Even without this additional step.
Mr. Lord: Right.
Mr. Hull: Correct.
Vice Chair Ho: If you have nothing... I'm sorry, Mehana, no. If there is nothing substantive
(or) more to add to it, the motion, I will ask for a vote on the motion. Again, "yes" is Provisional
(inaudible) and "no" means Resort.
Mr. Mahoney: Say it again, please.
Vice Chair Ho: A "yes" vote puts it in Provisional. A "no" vote leaves it in Resort. Roll vote,
please.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Lord.
Mr. Lord: No.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Streufert.
Ms. Streufert: No.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Mahoney.
Mr. Mahoney: No.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Apisa.
Ms. Apisa: No.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Ahuna.
83
Ms. Ahuna: Yes.
Mr. Hull: Chair Ho.
Vice Chair Ho: Yes.
Mr. Hull: Motion fails 2:4.
Vice Chair Ho: I believe, Commissioner Streufert, you have something.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Yes. I would propose to amend the General Plan by adding two (2)
pieces in there from ... which were submitted by Luke Evslin and they pertain to the Paris
Climate Agreement. They would be added on page 3-115 after the paragraph describing Act 83
and it says, "In 2015, 195 countries signed on to the Paris Climate Agreement, which set a goal
of limiting global temperature rise to within 2 degrees Celsius. To achieve this, the Agreement
calls for rapid emissions reductions and full decarbonization by the second half of the century.
Though the United States has signaled that they will pull out of the agreement, Hawaii is a
member of the United States Climate Alliance which is a coalition of states committed to
upholding the Paris Climate Agreement by "achieving the U.S. goal of reducing emissions 26-28
percent from 2005 levels" by 2025. In support of achieving these goals, SB 559 was signed into
law in 2017 which "requires the State to expand strategies and mechanisms to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions statewide in aligmnent with the principles and goals adopted in the Paris
Agreement. ""
And then, also, to rewrite the third paragraph, "In alignment with SB 559 and Hawai`i's pledge
to the United States Climate Alliance, the General Plan's policy is to reduce islandwide
greenhouse gas emissions by at least 26%-28% from 2005 levels by 2025, and 80% by 2050.
Because those targets are lower than those deemed necessary by the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change and the Paris Climate Agreement to keep temperature change below 2 degrees
Celsius, the County should aim for the higher benchmark of 40% reductions by 2030. Statewide
emissions for the year 2007 are shown in Figure 3-13."
And on page 3-117, "While we have progressed with renewable energy production for
electricity, we must address and find ways to reduce or offset the fuel consumption of the
transportation sector..." I'm sorry. That is all I will do right now; just those two.
Mr. Hull: The Department has received that particular piece of testimony from the public
and—oh, excuse me. Before discussion, I think there's a second necessary. Was that a motion,
Commissioner Streufert?
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Yes, it was.
Vice Chair Ho: A motion has been made. I need a second.
Mr. Mahoney: Second.
Vice Chair Ho: Seconded.
Mr. Hull: Okay. So the Department has read and received that testimony and the motion as
(inaudible) by Commissioner Streufert, the Department would not have any objections to that
motion.
Vice Chair Ho: Any more discussion?
Ms. Apisa: Discussion. I would support it if it were reworded. I just think there is so much talk
about the Paris Climate Agreement. I mean, it could change or whatever. I'd like to reword it so
that we achieve the goal without references to any Paris Climate Agreement or Senate Bills or
whatever; achieving the same goal without reference to those. I support it in thing without
making it our own statement of achieving the same goal without referencing the Paris Climate
Agreement or Senate Bill 559.
Mr. Mahoney: Chair?
Vice Chair Ho: Yes.
Mr. Mahoney: But I mean the agreement is the agreement due to those conditions; that's what
makes it in the agreement, isn't it?
Vice Chair Ho: Does that have to be taken verbatim?
Mr. Hull: I think to Commissioner Streufert and Commissioner Mahoney's point is that ... well,
Commissioner Apisa, I can understand the desire because what if the International Community
should adopt a different set of accords in the future or the State Legislature adopt a different set
of standards in the future.
Ms. Apisa: And this is for, like, twenty (20) years.
Mr. Hull: Right. Those accords have been adopted and while the ... excuse me. The Paris
accords have been adopted by 197 nations with the United States pulling out officially; however,
the State of Hawaii Governor and all of the respective mayors have signed an agreement to still
maintain those specific standards, as well as the State Legislature passing a document affirming
those standards as well. Without bringing out ... the Paris accords are several hundred pages
deep, which we could adopt just that language, per se, but I don't think it's quite necessary. Just
using the title in reference is, the Department feels, appropriate. Should the International
Community, and the United States including, as well as the State of Hawaii, make amends to
various standards, those standards would hold the new light of day when they are amended.
Does that make sense? I wouldn't muddy the water.
Ms. Apisa: So in other words, it is a reference to the—
Mr. Hull: Correct, the very large document. (Laughter)
M
Ms. Apisa: The large document of standards, yes. It is the easiest way to reference the
document.
Mr. Hull: Yes.
Ms. Apisa: The standards.
Vice Chair Ho: Are you okay with that?
Ms. Apisa: I am okay with that.
Vice Chair Ho: Any other discussion? Seeing none. We'll call for a vote. Roll call vote,
please.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Lord.
Mr. Lord: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Streufert.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Mahoney.
Mr. Mahoney: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Apisa.
Ms. Apisa: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Ahuna.
Ms. Ahuna: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Chair Ho.
Vice Chair Ho: Aye.
Mr. Hull: The motion passes 6:0, Chair.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: I have one (1) last amendment. Sorry. On page 3-79, it is about the State
Park improvements. Table 3-2 lists the State Parks on Kauai, which would include Koke`e
State Park, Polihale, Waimea Canyon, Waimea State Recreational Pier, Russian Fort Elizabeth,
Ahukini State Recreational Pier, Wailua River, Hd'ena, and Na Pali. The second paragraph says
that one (1) option is to raise revenue through entry fees for visitors at highly accessed areas. I
would like to take that sentence out because I do not believe that people who live on Kauai
should have to pay to go to any of these State Parks. And then also under Partnership... to follow
onto that, the Partnership Needs, to eliminate (e) which says to establish State Park entry fees for
visitors to provide revenue to fund master planned projects and improvements. I understand that
that is in the State plan, but I don't believe that it should be on the County General Plan because
I do not believe that residents should be limited ... as expensive as it is to live on Kauai having to
access to all of our recreational parks is something that should be available to everyone.
Ms. Ahuna: Are you (on page) 3-79?
Ms. Nogami Streufert: 3-79 (e). To take that out, but then to also take out the last sentence of
the second paragraph.
Ms. Apisa: But the last sentence says for visitors. One option is to raise revenue through entry
fee for visitors and heavily accessed areas. Is that what—
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Right. Yeah, to take that out because visitors can mean Kauai visitors
who go to the parks.
Ms. Apisa: Yeah, a visitor who goes to the park.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Right.
Ms. Ahuna: How can we word it to make it transient visitors? Can we add something there?
Ms. Nogami Streufert: I would prefer to leave it—
Ms.
t
Ms. Ahuna: So we can look at Kama`aina or ... I don't know, (inaudible).
Ms. Nogami Streufert: My motion is to eliminate this and to eliminate the last sentence and—
Ms. Higuchi Saye sa: Yeah, we still need a second.
Ms. Apisa: I'll second.
Ms. Hi cug hi Sayegusa: Okay.
Ms. Apisa: We don't have to give an option. We could achieve it with...
Ms. Nogami Streufert: There are some other ways that you could do it.
Mr. Hull: For clarification, the Department acknowledges that this was part of the State
Department of Land and Natural Resources Parks Plan. The Department would acknowledge
that they have that ability to do it regardless of (inaudible) with the General Plan language. The
Department understands where Commissioner Streufert is coming from, but being that the
gesture would be primarily symbolic, the Department wouldn't necessarily have any objections
at this point.
:ill
Vice Chair Ho: Any further discussion? Moving on to a vote again. Roll vote.
Mr. Hull: Roll call. Commissioner Lord.
Mr. Lord: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Streufert.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Mahoney.
Mr. Mahoney: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Apisa.
Ms. Apisa: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Ahuna.
Ms. Ahuna: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Chair Ho.
Vice Chair Ho: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Motion passes 6:0, Chair.
Vice Chair Ho: I believe Mr. Lord, you would like to (inaudible).
Mr. Lord: Yeah, I have one (1) item for discussion. The section on Solid Waste Disposal and
Recycling; (page) 3-63. One of the testifiers this morning said that we weren't doing anything
about our trash, so I wanted to review the section and understand what we were doing. It does
have quite a few initiatives listed in it between construction of new materials recycling facility,
deposit beverage container law, citing a new landfill, reducing waste from building materials,
packaging, and other major waste generators. The one thing I thought was missing here was the
exploration of other ways to reduce or eliminate our trash through new technologies, and I don't
see that listed here. I thought I would propose some language that would amend it to include
that.
So I would like to make a proposal that we amend the language in that section to state that the
County will explore other remedies to the solid waste disposal system through new technologies
and alternatives.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Second.
Vice Chair Ho: Discussion?
Ms. Ahuna: What is the wording? The language?
Vice Chair Ho: Ka`aina is putting it (inaudible).
Mr. Hull: Drafting. Commissioner Lord, if you could correct me if I got some of the wording
wrong. The motion would be to include the language on the solid waste section to state, "The
County will explore other remedies for solid waste disposal through new technologies and new
methods.
Mr. Lord: Very good.
Ms. Williams: Director Hull, may I recommend amending the action on page 3-66 so there is an
action connected to that new language? And I think the appropriate action to amend would be
under Projects and Programs, Action 3.c., so it would be revised to state, "Reduce solid waste
volume through new technology and source -reduction programs that reuse building materials,
minimize packing materials, and other measures. Focus attention on large volume purchasers
and developers." That also might be an appropriate connection to the actions. We are just trying
to be consistent with the narrative and the actions.
Mr. Hull: Yeah, the Department would be as fine as Marie has brought up the additional action
under Projects and Programs, but ultimately, it would be up to this Commission whether or not
that a motion to amend that original proposal from Commissioner Lord is necessary.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: I move to amend Commissioner Lord's amendment by adding the
language that Marie has put in.
Ms. Ahuna: I second that.
Vice Chair Ho: Any further discussion?
Ms.AApisa: So we are voting on the amendment to the amendment?
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Yes.
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Yes.
Vice Chair Ho: Roll call, please.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Lord.
Mr. Lord: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Streufert.
Me
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Mahoney.
Mr. Mahoney: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Apisa.
Ms. Apisa: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Ahuna.
Ms. Ahuna: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Chair Ho.
Vice Chair Ho: Aye.
Mr. Hull-, Motion passes 6:0. So you would be back on the main motion now, as proposed by
Commissioner Lord and amended by the recent language you just adopted.
Ms. Ahuna: I have a question. My only question left, I think. Wait, are we on a motion right
now?
Vice Chair Ho: We are still with Mr. Lord.
Ms. Ahuna: Oh.
Mr. Hull: We are in discussion.
Ms. Ahuna: Okay. Never mind.
Mr. Lord: What do you need from me?
Mr. Hull: Oh, no. I was just pointing out that we are still in discussion on Commissioner Lord's
amendment for the waste program.
Mr. Lord: Okay. So we can move on with my next question?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: We still need to vote on your proposed—
Mr. Lord: Okay. So do I need to restate something?
Vice Chair Ho: No, no.
Mr. Lord: Okay.
.E
Vice Chair Ho: For me to call for a vote.
Mr. Lord: Okay.
Mr. Hull: Roll call. Commissioner Lord.
Mr. Lord: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Comissioner Streufert.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Mahoney.
Mr. Mahoney: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Apisa.
Ms. Apisa: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Ahuna.
Ms. Ahuna: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Chair Ho.
Vice Chair Ho: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Motion passes 6:0, Chair.
Vice Chair Ho: Ms. Ahuna.
Ms. Ahuna: Okay. On ... wait. I'm on two (2) different plans right here. I think it is (page) 2-10.
Vice Chair Ho: While Ms. Ahuna is looking for her section, will we be entertaining any more
amendments?
Ms. Ahuna: Okay, I found it.
Vice Chair Ho: Okay. Ms. Ahuna is ready.
Ms. Ahuna: Okay. On the Department Draft, June 13`x', page 2-9, I just want to get more
information or if you can just explain, Deputy. Under "North Shore", what does it mean,
"Residential Community at Princeville Airport changed to Transportation"?
91
Mr. Hull: The Staff Planner, I know, has worked with that intimately so I am going to defer to
Marie on this.
Ms. Williams: Yeah. In the existing General Plan, the area around the airport is actually
designated — let me double-check — Residential so we felt that given it is, in fact, an airport and
not an appropriate place for housing that we should designate it under what it actually is.
Ms. Ahuna: Does that give it more opportunity to expand in the airport by designating it
(inaudible) Transportation?
Ms. Williams: No, because we ... just to go back a step to clarify, the Discussion Draft of the plan,
which was released in November of last year, actually recommended expanding the Princeville
Airport. But through the outreach process, a lot of people came out and said no, we do not want
this, so we have removed that and I believe the new action explicitly states do not expand the
Princeville Airport, except as a hub for parking or shuttle service.
Ms. Ahuna: Okay. I just wanted clarification.
Vice Chair Ho: We are going to go into a 5 -minute recess.
The Commission recessed this portion of the meeting at 4:33 p.m.
The Commission reconvened this portion of the meeting at 4:39 p.m.
Vice Chair Ho: We are back in session.
Mr. Hull: Commission members and Commission Chair, if there is no further discussion,
ultimately the Department would be looking for a motion to recommend and transmit the
General Plan Update as amended to the County Council for its consideration and adoption.
Vice Chair Ho: Commissioners, discussion, please.
Mr. Lord: Chainnan Ho, do you need a motion?
Vice Chair Ho: No, discussion first. Oh no. You got a motion. Yes, I'm sorry.
Mr. Hull: You would need a motion prior to the discussion.
Vice Chair Ho: Yes.
Mr. Lord: Okay. I would make a motion that we adopt the General Plan as amended for transfer
to the County Council.
Mr. Mahoney: Second.
Vice Chair Ho: A motion has been put on the floor and seconded. Discussion, please.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: There has been a lot of work that has gone into this document. I don't
think it is a perfect document, but I am not sure we will ever get to the point where it is a perfect
document. This is a starting point and it goes to the Council where they can also make changes.
I presume that until it is totally adopted, there can also be other minor changes that can be done.
But I think we have gone through this many times and the community has gone through a lot of
this many times. Again, it is not perfect, but I think it is ready to go.
Ms. Ahuna: Well, for the two (2) years that I haven't been here and that Marie and Marisa and
the Planning Department team and just overall, I just commend you guys for all the work you
have done, but I also want to commend the community for the work that they have done in really
understanding and reading through and sifting through the plan and providing extensive
information to all of us and for extended hours of coming to these Commission meetings and
being here and testifying. I am along with Commissioner Streufert. I don't think it is a perfect
document; however, I don't think it ever will be, but I still believe there is a lot of
inconsistencies. The land use maps don't match up with the narratives. I am really disappointed
in the land use maps and the designation of certain areas. I just wanted to put that out there. But
I appreciate everybody's hard work, especially all of us commissioners who sit here voluntarily
for long hours.
Vice Chair Ho: Anyone else? Anyone else? Last call. Seeing none. Motion on the floor.
Mr. Hull: Roll call?
Vice Chair Ho: Yes.
Mr. Hull: Roll call. Commissioner Lord.
Mr. Lord: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Streufert.
Ms. Nogami Streufert: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Mahoney.
Mr. Mahoney: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Apisa.
Ms. Apisa: No.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Ahuna.
Ms. Ahuna: No.
Mr. Hull: Commissioner Ho.
93
Vice Chair Ho: Aye.
Mr. Hull: Motion passes 4:2.
That finishes our agenda items.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Topics for Future Meetings
The following regularly 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-213. 4444 Rice Street. Lihu`e. Kauai. Hawaii 96766 on Tuesday. June 27. 2017.
Mr. Hull: The Commission is in receipt of the pending applications. If you have any further
discussion on those applications, we can take questions now or you can contact the Department
in the future.
The next scheduled meeting to be held. The following regularly scheduled Planning
Commission meeting will be held at 9:00 a.m., or shortly thereafter, at the Lihu`e Civic Center,
Moikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A-213, 4444 Rice Street, Lihu`e, Kauai, Hawaii 96766 on
Tuesday, June 27, 2017.
ADJOURNMENT
Vice Chair Ho: Motion to adjourn, please.
Mr. Mahoney: Move to adjourn, Chair.
Ms. Apisa: Second.
Vice Chair Ho: Moved and seconded. All in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Motion carries
6:0. We are adjourned.
Vice Chair Ho adjourned the meeting at 4:43 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by:
Parei�e Agaran,
94
Commission Support Clerk
( ) Approved as circulated (add date of meeting approval)
( ) Approved as amended. See minutes of meeting.
95