Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018_0215_KHPRC_Minutes_ApprovedCOUNTY OF KAUA'I KAUA'I HISTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEW COMMISSION Mo'ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A/213 MINUTES A regular meeting of the Kauai Historic Preservation Review Commission (KHPRC) was held on February 15, 2018, in the Mo'ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A/2B. The following Commissioners were present: Chair James Guerber; Vice -Chair Anne Schneider; Althea Arinaga; Lawrence Chaffin Jr.; Gerald Ida; and Stephen Long. The following Commissioners were absent: Commissioner Deatri Nakea (excused); and Commissioner Victoria Wichman (excused). The following staff members were present: Planning Department: Myles Hironaka (arrived 3: 04 p.m.); Deputy Planning Director Ka`aina Hull; Shanlee Jimenez; Alex Wong; Boards and Commissions Office Staff: Commission Support Clerk Sandra Muragin. The following staff member was absent: Deputy County Attorney Jodi Higuchi-Sayegusa. I CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 3:01 pan. ROLL CALL Deputy Planning Director Ka`aina Hull: Good afternoon Chair and members of the Commission, roll call. Commissioner Arinaga. Ms. Arinaga: Here. Mr. Hull: Commissioner Chaffin. Mr. Chaffin: Here. Mr. Hull: Commissioner Ida. Mr. Ida: Here. Mr. Hull: Commissioner Long. Mr. Long: Here. Mr. Hull: Commissioner Schneider. Ms. Schneider: Here. Mr. Hull: Chair Guerber. Chair Guerber: Here. Mr. Hull: You have a quorum Mr. Chair. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA Mr. Hull: The next agenda item is approval of the agenda. Ms. Schneider: I make a motion that we approve the agenda. Ms. Arinaf?a: Second. Chair Guerber: Any discussion? (Hearing none) Any objections? (None) Motion carried 6:0. Mr. Hull: Motion passes Chair. APPROVAL OF THE JANUARY 18, 2018 MINUTES Mr. Hull: The next agenda item is approval of the January 18, 2018, minutes. Ms. Arinaga: Move to accept. Ms. Schneider: I'll second. Chair Guerber: Any discussion? (Hearing none) Any objections? (None) Motion carried 6:0. HEARINGS AND PUBLIC COMMENT Mr. Hull: This next agenda item is agenda item E. Hearings and Public Comment. This is for individuals in the audience that may want to testify on any agenda item prior to it coming up. I see that there is only one member of the audience, and I believe she wants to speak during the actual agenda item. So we will hold off on that, Mr. Chair. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND GENERAL BUSINESS MATTERS Mr. Hull: This next agenda item is ... there are no announcements. February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 19 COMMUNICATIONS Mr. Hull: There are no communications. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Review for Historic Importance of a 1.39 acre parcel located in "Aliomanu, `Aliomanu Ahupua`a, Koolau Nloku, further identified as Tax Map Key (TMK) (4) 4-9-004:013, Owner: `Aliomanu Beach Living Trust a. Director's Report pertaining to this matter Mr. Hull: So we're on to agenda item H. Unfinished Business. Mr. Wong: Aloha, Alex Wong for the record. Mr. Wong read Supplement #1 To Planning Director's Report dated 1:29 18 for the record. (Docitment on file) Mr. Hull: For the Commissioners' edification the original Director's Report still stands as the Department has not found any reason to warrant a determination of historical integrity as far as architectural historical significance itt oncerned. Commissioner Ida pointed out that there c ld g be historical significance on the site, if it's archeological in nature it would take a signifi ant amount of our research on behalf of the Department, which we quite honestly just don't have the resources to do that type of survey at this time. As of now the report stands that there is no architectural significance on the site. Ms. Schneider: So we need a motion to not... Mr. Hull: The Department is recommending this body find that there is no architectural significance on the site, architectural historical significance to the site; however, it's really at the discretion of this body where it wants to go. Chair Guerber: Do I hear a motion that there is no historical significance? Or there is historical significance? We need one or the other. Ms. Schneider: Based on what we've been presented with I make a motion that there's no historical significance to the structure. We don't know about the archeology and only testing will be able to tell us that. Ms. Arinaga: I second. Chair Guerber: Any discussion about this? (Hearing None) We have a vote. All in favor say aye? (Unanimous voice vote) Any opposed? (None) Motion carried 6:0. Mr. Hull: Motion passes Chair. February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 19 2. Discussion on the status of the Certified Local Government. Mr. Hull: The next agenda item is agenda item for discussion on the status of the Certified Local Government. This is again a place holder for when KHPRC has the resources to send staff over to have discussions with the CLG, or when the Department has updates concerning their CLG status and any upcoming events or happenings. At this time the Department has no reports and of course SHPD (State Historic Preservation Division) is not here and not present. There really is no discussion on the CLG. NEW BUSINESS 1. Lihu`e Post Office TMK: 3-6-5:10, Lihu`e, Kauai Proposed Sale & Relocation of Services a. Letter (1/18/18) from Daniel B. Delahaye, USPS Federal Preservation Officer Request for Section 106 Consultation Mr. Hull: The Commission is in receipt of a letter dated January 18, 2018, from Daniel B. Delahaye who is the USPS Federal Preservation Officer, request for Section 106 consultation with this body. Just as a refresher the United States Postal Service has put Lihu`e and Kauai on notice that it intends to r is looking at, relocating postal services and ultimateN selling the Lihu-e Post Office on t4 open market. The sale of it has been determined by th USPS to potentially impact the historic property and therefore they're subject to Section 106 consultation which means they're required to consult with various parties; this body being identified as a consulting party to the process on what their findings are, and you have that in the packet from Mr. Delahaye. Their findings are that ultimately the sale and transfer of the site on the open market will not have a detrimental effect on the historical integrity of the property. Much of that is predicated on the proposed private covenant that the USPS has provided in which they are stating that it ensures that the architectural integrity of the site will be maintained under the proposed covenants. It's open to you folks for your discussion and comment. I will urge this body —the USPS gave each consulting party 30 days to provide comments and that 30-day window for both this body and the Planning Department runs up this weekend. As short notice as it is, quite honestly action is necessary today. Chair Guerber: We have 2 days. Ms. Schneider: And the lease covenants, how are they enforced? And who enforces? Mr. Hull: There is a Covenant Holder and so they ultimately have to find somebody to hold that covenant. I can say that in a phone conversation with Mr. Delahaye he did inquire whether or not the County of Kauai would be interested in being a Covenant Holder and given the County of Kaua`i's participation in the Certified Local Government and its mission for historic preservation, I do think the County of Kauai could be an appropriate Covenant Holder. However, there are issues with the proposed covenant as drafted that we don't feel is adequate to ensure the protection and historic integrity of the site. If we ever entered into that we would have to resolve that. February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 19 Chair Guerber: So the covenant would have to be rewritten to cover... Mr. Hull: In our interpretation of it, correct. If the Commission ... I drafted a letter. What happened was back in March the USPS entered into Section 106 consultation and they identified multiple parties as consulting parties. Those parties that they intend to consult for the historical review of the site and its possible disposal it identified; the National Trust Register Preservation, Historic Hawaii Foundation, the Lihu`e Business Association, the County of Kauai Planning Department, as well as the Kauai Historic Preservation Review Commission. There were two others. When they initiated Section 106 consultation I received an email from USPS initiating 106 consultation and you folks are listed and we are listed. About 10 minutes after I received that email the same person that sent it to me, sent an email retracting the Section 106 consultation. I interpreted it as they were not entering into 106 consultation. Unbeknownst to me they didn't intend to send that retraction. While Lihu`e Business Association, Historic Hawaii Foundation, and the National Trust did enter into 106 consultation (and) provided comments, we and this body did not because the Department was under the impression that it was not occurring. I contacted the USPS right after Christmas to inform them that we had not been provided, the Department nor this body was not provided the opportunity to participate in 106 consultation because of that retraction email, and I sent the email as proof that I wasn't lying. That's immediately when Mr. Delahaye who is the Historic Preservation Officer of the entire Federal United States Post Office program contacted us to say they will reinitiate 106 for just the Co ty of Kauai Planning Department, and for this body. o that's what you have before you. I have speculated and I am sorry I didn't get to you ear�er, we've been kind of scrambling and working with the County Attorney's Office, a draft letter that the Department will be providing as a consulting party to this whole Section 106 process. And if, Chair, if you allow me, I kind of want to go over briefly some of the points. Chair Guerber: Are you going to read the whole letter? Mr. Hull: I don't think it's necessary, we have bullet points and I can go over the introduction and the bullet points explain each of those bullet points briefly. It's about 7-8 pages long so I don't want to put the Commission through that. He sent his ... this is in direct response to his letter proposing closure and the mitigation measures. So this is our response and ultimately if this body wants to provide its own response that's what you guys are entertaining today. Mr. Chaffin: Excuse me. What's the date of this? Mr. Hull: Forgive me the letter is dated February 15, 2017, it should be 18. That's why we have "Draft" on there. I literally finished the first ... last sentences a few minutes ago. But we'll be sending that tomorrow, scrubbed and edited down. But the letter opens, "Dear Mr. Delahaye, Thank you for your letter dated December 1, 2017 initiating the Section 106 process and granting the County of Kaua `i Department of Planning and the Kaua `i Historic Preservation Review Commission independent consulting party status for the future sale of the above referenced property. The subject property was listed on the Hawai `i and National Registers of Historic Places in 1989, and to this day the property maintains the historical and architectural integrity that was in place when listed in 1989. The subject property was listed on the Registers of Historic Places under the Secretary of the Interior's Applicable National Register Criteria A February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 19 and Criteria C, in that the subject property is A) associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; and C) the subject property embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. " And then our letter goes bullet point by bullet point through a series of objections, so I'll just go through those bullet points. The first objection I made, "The County of Kaua `i Department of Planning OBJECTS to the defining of the Undertaking solely as a sale/transfer of the property out of federal ownership. The removal of the postal service from the Historic LThWe Post Office is also al: Undertaking separate and apart from the sale/transfer; however, the removal of postal services is not listed." The essence of this is that the Section 106 review process that they have engaged with you folks as well as us is strictly on the sale. The Department as well as other organizations, including the Historic Hawaii Foundation and the National Trust Register Preservation, object to this because while the sale could potentially detrimentally affect the historical integrity of the site, it is our position that the postal services are integral to the historical significance of the site in that it was listed under Criteria A and C; not just for architectural importance but because of the role that the federal postal service plays at that site. It's intimately connected to its historic significance and therefore to parse out the removal of those services the County of Kauai feels it's inappropriate and a separate Section 106 process should be initiated for the removal of postal services there. I The second objection that the County of Kauai has is that "The Planning Department [sic] OBJECTS to the limited Area of Potential Effect." When a Federal agency is proposing an undertaking and their doing Section 106 review they have to identify the area of potential effect. They have identified in their undertaking solely just the property which the Department, and again as well as Historic Hawaii Foundation and the National Trust Register Preservation, find as inappropriate because it is immediately adjacent to the Lihu`e Civic Center Historic District. In that, the Federal Postal Services operates in conjunction with this historical district and that the APE, or Area of Potential Effect, should be expanded in the proposed undertaking with the United States Post Office. The third bullet point is "The County of Kaua `i OBJECTS to the proposed National Register Addendum/Additional Information de -listing Criteria A from the Nomination Form/Sheet." In the packet you have from Mr. Delahaye he has provided two separate sets of documents. One is the covenant that would, what their claiming, ensure that the next holder or owner of the property would have to adhere to strict preservation standards. The other document they submitted is an addendum to the National Register Nomination form. The Department is in agreement with much of what he provides in the addendum, in fact the addendum provides additional information on the interior space and recognizes the significance of some parts of the Llhu`e Post Office's interior space that isn't recognized on the '89 listing. However, in the addendum there is a ... the USPS marked Criteria C and left out Criteria A and we strongly object to that because of the fact that again, it was originally listed with Criteria A that it's a major contributing, or part of, or associated with events that made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history here in Hawaii. That is our next objection. February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 19 The following objection after that is "The County of Katta`i OBJECTS to the proposed Draft Preservation Covenant which could result in additional adverse effects." And we specifically state that "The County of Kaua `i, Department of Planning appreciates the proposed preservation covenant that would accompany the transfer of title of the subject property. However, the Department of Planning concurs with the assessment given by the Historic Hawai `i Foundation (HHF) in their Section 106 comments, " in which they stated "A covenant that provides adequate legal protection of the historic property needs to include at least the following sections: " And there's a whole array. I am not going to go through them with you all, you can see them, of different things that should be included within the covenant. Some of these are actually included in the covenant proposed by USPS, but many of them are not. And many of the ones that are included are fairly lacking in specificity and this is the part where I was talking about earlier. The Department may be a willing participant in the covenant, but it's not until they are able to rectify these deficiencies would we be willing to enter into that program. Those two objections were just primary objections with the way in which USPS is proposing to mitigate any potential detrimental impact to the historical integrity of the site. The last two objections are just flat out calling a spade a spade and so the next objection states "The County of Kauai OBJECTS to the final decision made by the USPS to close Me LFhu`e Post office prior to initiating the Section 106 process." Federal laws are very clear that any Federal agency participating in undertaking that could detrimentally affect or impact a historical property needs to engage in the Section 10 review process prior to making a final decision. Tom Samra who is Vice President of USES operations posted a letter, excuse me sent a letter to the County of Kauai on November 29th informing the County of Kauai that a final decision had been made to sell the Post Office and relocate services. And the very next day is when they posted at the Post Office a notice to engage the public in Section 106 consultation, as well as they began engaging with you folks and us on January 18th. While we do have concerns about it and we have comments I guess in the beginning about the mitigation measures to the covenants as to the addendum to the register overall the whole process quite frankly is a bit shibai. Chair Guerber: So the 106 process is meant to help them make a decision. Mr. Hull: Correct. Chair Guerber: But they already said they made a decision first and then they're going through this sham. Mr. Hull: Correct. Chair Guerber: Of 106. Mr. Hull: Correct. That's kind of our final statement as far as the overall process and where that goes. The last statement is just something we had to bring up. When they posted in December 1st to engage the public in Section 106 they had a posting outside of the Post Office notifying the public that they have 30 days to comment on whether, or provide input, on whether or not the public concurred or has comments on the finding of no detrimental effect on the historical site through the closure. There was no documentation provided to the public to comment on. We February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 19 raised this concern with the USPS in a letter, the same letter that raised the concern that you folks haven't been able to engage in 106. We raised a concern that the public could not engage in 106 because the documentation wasn't provided. Mr. Delahaye contacted me and said they will be reinitiating the public Section 106 consultation process and a new posting was posted outside of the United States Post, the Lihu`e Post Office on January 18th; the same time the letter was sent to you folks and to the Planning Department. Staff member Alex Wong recently went over to the Lihu`e Post Office to see if the posting was there, and it is, and it states that documentation will be provided at the front counter. When Mr. Wong approached the front counter and asked for the documentation the front counter informed him that there was no documentation available and was unaware of what to provide him. He did take Mr. Wong's contact information and state that the Postmaster will contact him in the future, but today Mr. Wong has not been contacted by any representative of the U.S. Post Office availing these documents to him. So we're objecting yet again to say, you're failing to meet the necessary criteria to engage the public in Section 106 review. So that is our letter in a nutshell. We provided that for you folks if you want to utilize some of that language for your own action, it's available. If you folks want to go and create some of your own letters or comments that of course is definitely your prerogative. I know Ms. Griffin is here to specifically speak on this item. But I leave it to the discretion of this body. Ms. Schneider: Could we have a letter in support of the County's objections? Chair Guerber: We sure can. Ms. Schneider: I make a motion that we have a letter in support of the County's objections to the way the 106 process has been portrayed to us and the ongoing closure of the Post Office. Chair Guerber: Do we want to list each objection that he specifies here? Ms. Schneider: Yes. Chair Guerber: Multiple motions, make this motion multiple motions. Ms. Schneider: To include all the objections that were included in the Planning Departments letter. Chair Guerber: We're looking for a second. Larry? Mr. Chaffin: Yes. Chair Guerber: Second from Commissioner Chaffin. Mr. Chaffin: Yes. Chair Guerber: Any discussion? February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 19 Mr. Long: I feel that's an appropriate way to approach the motion. I believe that certainly myself, is (in) support of all of the points and recommendations made by the Planning Department in their letter. And I would like to add what one might consider a safety net mitigation comment. That is if at the end of this 106 process, and hopefully it will be carried out in a proper manner, that if the Post Office is sold to another entity, that I noticed in the covenants provided for a new owner is an item of uses. The Post Office as we all know is the center of the community and holds a social fabric of a community together within a historical context of the downtown Lihu`e historic district. And that a mitigating factor (would be) if a new owner purchases the building, that within the covenants there be a provision that there needs to be a similar use in the front of that building. So if the Post Office moves their operation, the social fabric as it relates to the historic context of Lihu`e historic district will not be torn apart' and that we can maintain the use if not the ownership. N, Ir. Hull: I think ... we don't have our illustrious County attorney here but I believe for clarity sake we need a motion to amend the existing motion to allow that. Chair Guerber: So you made that motion to amend it? How about a second? Ms. Schneider: I second. Chair Guerber: So now we have an amended motion on the table and a s cond, the amended motion. Any oth r discussion? Mr. Hull: Probably for simplicity sake maybe if you take a vote on Commissioner Long's motion, and therefore if it holds then it will hold with Anne's motion. But Anne's motion would still be open. Chair Guerber: Let's have a vote. All in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Opposed? (None) Motion carried 6:0. Mr. Chaffin: Can you clarify or site what that motion is? Chair Guerber: This is the motion to support the letter individually... Mr. Hull: No, the one you just voted on was the.... Chair Guerber: The original one with his amendment. Mr. Hull: No, it was Stephen's motion to amend. So essentially it includes Stephen's motion to require a mail type service or something similar at the front of the building and that now includes it within Anne's motion but the overall motion has not been voted on. It's still open. Chair Guerber: So we're still open. We're just voting on the amendment. Mr. Hull: Including... yes. February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 19 Mr. Chaffin: I have a question. Is this too vague that we're not being specific as to what the use is? Could it be a place that sells socks? Chair Guerber: Well, the Post Office currently doesn't sell socks. The Post Office now provides snail service, so what we want to do to maintain that service for the historic district that all the people that now want to cross the street... Ms. Schneider: To keep the fabric... Chair Guerber: ...to place their mail, to get their mail, continue to do that. That's the motion in a very simplified way. That we maintain the historical significance of the Post Office even if the U.S. Post Office isn't in that building. Mr. Hull: Correct. So ultimately it's to have a mail service use or something similar in nature to that use at the front of the building and ultimately the Covenant Holder, if one is found, would be the responsible party for interpreting what is similar in nature to that mail type usage. Chair Guerber: Should we specify what these, those things are or should we wait? Mr. Hull: It's at the discretion of this body. Coming from the Planning Department and my familiarity with land usage it's a never ending... I Ms. Schneider: So what do we need now, a second? Mr. Hull: Well your motion is still on the floor. I think you... Chair Guerber: We voted on the amendment. Mr. Hull: No, the vote is already taken on the amendment. So the amendment passed and is now part of the overall motion. We're still engaging in dialogue and discussion on whether or not additional language is going to be added to Commissioner Schneider's motion and also to ... I would recommend the opening, to a certain point, the discussion up to the general public. Chair Guerber: I would like that. Should we take a vote first? Mr. Hull: No, so the vote would end it. Chair Guerber: Now we're doing the discussion. Let's open it up to the public. I am suspending the rules at this point. Pat Griffin: Good afternoon Chair Guerber and Commissioners, my name is Pat Griffin and I feel privileged to be here with you today on this unfortunate topic. The work that the Planning Department has done on this is excellent and it follows strong objections from Historic Hawaii Foundation and from the National Trust for Historic Preservation. One of the issues with Ann Sarver's Facilities Headquarters person from her letter of last spring was that area of potential effect and the Post Office is defining it simply by the properties boundary. She had mostly February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 19 inaccuracies on when the surrounding properties were built. We are now in an historic building which she dated it '78 instead of '64 to '66, and there were several others. That area of potential effect is really important because it supports the idea of a covenant, being to have some P.O. (Post Office) boxes remain in that Post Office building. And I know since you all are preservation experts at this stage you know that we judge things in the historic preservation by areas of integrity. One of those areas of integrity is association and that building has always, since 1939, been associated with post office activities. It will affect other historic properties not only this Civic Center historic district, but the historic museum, the historic Civic Center. A thousand people are employed by the County. There are a lot of P.O. boxes so I would encourage a strong statement about that, and also to repeat all of those additional issues and it's in the Planning Department's letter. You can also go back to Historic Hawaii Foundation's letter to list those. It's a little difficult not to get angry at some of the things because in fact the first letter that went up at the Post Office was last February 1 st saying that it was no longer necessary, and was going to be sold at fair market value. Then they said no, wait a minute, we haven't done this. But Samra talks about the public meetings, but they didn't as being part of the open process, but they didn't have any sign in sheet, they took no notes, and they were profonna. So this 30-day period ... as president of the Lihu`e Business Association I wrote on April 27th asking to be a consulting party and I have not heard anything since. Anything you can do to support the Planning Department by saying this is not a true Section 106 review process would be helpful. To recap, I think that actually listing additional covenants that should ... and having them run with the deed so they are attached in perpetuity nd adding that ability to retain some post office presence there through P.O. boxes. Objecting t the process itself because if any of these organizations (like) Historic Hawaii, National Trust, actually fonnally object to the Section 106 process as having been inadequate, you will have documented that also. Thank you. Chair Guerber: Any questions? Mr. Ida: You're here today as a private citizen? Ms. Griffin: I am. But for full disclosure I sit on the Board of Trustees of the Historic Hawaii Foundation. Mr. Hull: Pat, I know that you have some familiarity with the artwork that was at the Post Office. In reviewing the register nomination forms the artwork was actually catalogued and would appear to be a contributing element to the historic significance of this site. Do you have any insight as to where that artwork is now? Ms. Griffin: Generally, the current Postmaster said there are three pieces of artwork. I think that she's confused. There are two pieces that were done by Marjorie Blasingame at the ... during the work progress administration in the depression. The last I heard from a previous post master was that they were in the administrator's office. I know that JoLynn knows about them. What happened is (the) conch blower was vandalized and the bottom section of that got broken off. I've asked the National Trust because there is some evidence that at least some artwork in public buildings has to remain in the public, it doesn't get sold with the building. I haven't been able to ascertain (and) I don't know if it's just a certain period that required that or if all the public art. But if you're going to talk to Mr. Delahaye, that is a really good question to ask. February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 19 Mr. Hull: The art isn't there right now? Ms. Griffin: No, after it was vandalized the conch blower was removed and then they put up some sort of security or something that there was an ads holder that was above the door that goes into the post masters office in the back part, and that one came down because there's some obstruction there now. But those are important pieces. Marjorie Blasingame also did the beautiful art deco bridges at Ala Moana Beach Park, if you've admired them and did a wonderful piece of Pele at the Volcano House and other artwork around the islands. Mr. Hull: In your capacity as a member of the public would you be amenable or advisable to the motion that the artwork be restored and returned to its original place in the covenant? Ms. Griffin: If it's sold with the building it will enter (and) probably become a private ownership. So I think the first thing to do is to establish whether it must remain in public domain. Chair Guerber: You're saying that the artwork is historic in itself? Ms. Griffin: It's historic in itself and it is a part of (the) public heritage. Chair Guerber: Any other discussion? Ms. Griffin: Thank you. I Chair Guerber: We have before us a motion. Mr. Long: If I may add potentially two amendments to the existing motion on the floor. Mr. Hull: So Commissioner just for clarity sake because I know Sandra (Muragin) will be drafting these minutes. You may want to start off with "I would like to make a motion to amend." Mr. Long: I would like to make a motion to amend the current motion that is open on the floor with two points. One is to underscore the bullet point request by the Planning Department in their February 15, 2018, letter to the Federal Preservation Officer of the United States Postal Service that the government and the postal service are here to serve us, the citizens of this country, and we have a process called Section 106 to make sure that the government operates in a way that looks out for the citizens. It's very clear from the testimony presented by the public and the Planning Department that Section 106 has been violated and not been processed in a proper, and correct, and legal fashion, and I would propose that the Section 106 process be done from brand new, start all over, and be done properly. Secondly, there is some artwork associated with the Post Office that is mentioned in the National Register of Historic Places application and that artwork should be located, identified, restored, and remain in the public domain; not sold and become private property with the building. Ms. Arinaga: I second. February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 19 Chair Guerber: So this motion asks or demands that the 106 process start again from scratch in good faith from the government and that we want to be consulted with it all along the way. Ms. Arinaga: And the second part of that would be... Chair Guerber: That the artwork be preserved, restored, and returned, and remain in the public domain; not part of a private sale. Mr. Chaffin: I have a question on the term "restored." What does that mean? Chair Guerber: There are museums around the country that restore artwork that will take upon themselves that they will repair tears, blotches, whatever and they will actually do the restoration so you cannot tell, as close as they can so it looks as good as it was before. Any more discussion? Mr. Ida: I really like making them do it all over again. Chair Guerber: I personally think they should start again. They did not do it in good faith in the first place. Mr. Ida: My experienc with 106, I've seen so many times where I think the g vemment is trying to slide everythi g under. So yes, I totally agree. I Chair Guerber: Yes, this property is very vital to this community in a historic sense. So let's have a vote. All in favor of these motions? (Unanimous voice vote) Opposed? (None) Motion carried 6:0. Mr. Hull: Motion carried. So that again was the motion to amend the original motion so (it) now includes these two other points of... Chair Guerber: Are we ready to vote on the original motion? Mr. Hull: You want to ask for further discussion. Chair Guerber: For further discussion? Mr. Hull: I think I'll say too, all parties here are looking at the fact that the Section 106 process has just been not executed in good faith, and I think this body has seen several proposals under Section 106 particularly because of the highway improvements that you guys see, and over the past few years you know... Ms. Schneider: They've really consulted much more than this. Mr. Hull: They want to enter into a memorandum agreements with you folks, they want to bring you guys to other meetings, and it's an ongoing dialogue the DOT (Department of Transportation) has had with you folks on projects that have very little impact on historical sites February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 13 of 19 in some situations. And low and behold we have this other agency coming that is a clear impact to historical resource and... Ms. Schneider: And an impact to this town. Mr. Hull: And I can also state that the Department on behalf of the Commission did request that Mr. Delayhaye or a representative from USPS be present to engage in a dialogue. Mr. Delayhaye stated that could not occur. The Department requested his reconsideration and that you do indeed send a staff member to engage in a dialogue to have a meaningful discussion towards the 106 consultation and again he did have to decline. He did mention that if there are any questions that the Commissioners or the Commission as a whole had he would be more than willing to answer them to the best of his ability. When I responded in the email would that extend the 30-day window, I didn't get any response yet. Chair Guerber: Is there anything we can say to make it stronger? Mr. Hull: From the Department's position I think this is sufficient. Mr. Chaffin: Could there be clarification that it doesn't have to be in person on the site? Could it be done through telecommunications, video, or some other such...? Mr. Hull: (Ve can follow up with Mr. Delayhaye and to see if he i� able to perhaps engage in a Skype type of dialogue with this body. But for the purposes of the fact that the 30-day window does close in the next few days the Department would recommend that you folks take action here today, and then we'll follow up to see if he can engage in ... say a video dialogue or teleconference. Chair Guerber: All in favor of this motion say aye? (Unanimous voice vote) Opposed? Mr. Chaffin: Whatever the motion is. Chair Guerber: It's the original motion that Anne proposed. Chair Guerber: Are there any opposed? (None) Motion carried 6:0. Mr. Hull: The motion passes. 2. Appointment of investigative committee members (Permitted Interaction Group) to discuss, explore, and survey other parts of Island of Kauai to update the Kauai Historic Resource Inventory. Once formed and the task completed, the investigated committee will present its findings to the Commission in a duly noticed meeting for decision -making. Ms. Schneider: I would like to continue doing this. I know Stephen is going to be off the Commission in the next couple of months so we need another person at least to participate. February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 14 of 19 Chair Guerber: Must the members of this committee be Commissioners? Ms. Schneider: Yes. Mr. Hull: Technically yes. We did check with the County Attorney's office. Ms. Schneider: Jim, if you have some free time and Kalei, if you have some free time. Chair Guerber: How much time does it take? I have no time. Ms. Schneider: It doesn't take that much. We go out, we look at properties, and we are thinking of trying to get the Kapa`a baby beach neighborhood as the district. Chair Guerber: Okay, I'll do it. Mr. Hull: Generally there will be a nomination to it and then a vote. So... Ms. Schneider: I nominate Jim. Mr. Hull: And then I guess if a Commissioner would be willing to nominate Commissioner Schneider. I Mr. Long: I nominate Commissioner Schneider to be on this PIG. Mr. Hull: So that's two. Mr. Long: I also nominate Victoria Wichman. Chair Guerber: That's three. Mr. Hull: Three is a sufficient number. If there are any other Commissioners that are interested, they can have more. Ms. Schneider: I nominate Kalei if she has time. Ms. Arinaga: I will. Mr. Hull: Commissioner Arinaga. Mr. Ida: I have a question. What is the Kauai Historic Resource Inventory? Mr. Hull: Under both the Certified Local Government program as well as the Historic Preservation Review Commission's enabling ordinance the County of Kauai is required to maintain a Historic Resource Inventory of sites here on the island, and it's essentially... for the most part it adheres to the Secretary of Interior's standards to recognize historically significant sites here on Kauai above and beyond say the 50-year threshold. So you have the 50-year February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 15 of 19 threshold that now it's only placed on non-residential structures and all those can be considered historic. The loose way of describing the inventory is, it's above and beyond the 50-year cycle, but it's not quite as high as the State or National Register. It's just an inventory that the County of Kauai recognizes these as historically significant and in many situations of course qualify to be nominated to the State or National Register, but it's up to whether or not the landowners want those nominations to occur. So where it comes into the actual regulatory review or this body's authority under Hawaii Revised Statutes, any non-residential structure over 50 years old is considered historic. For years it was every structure over 50 years or older is historic, so therefore any of those structures that were proposed to get a building permit or zoning permit and for alterations or changes or demolitions the Department would send to you folks for your review. Now that the Hawaii Revised Statutes have been changed to say it's only non- residential structures over 50 years old that are considered historic. The County of Kauai utilizes this Historic Resource Inventory particularly for residential structures to say it has been identified as a historically significant structure, and if you are proposing to do any alterations you have to go before the Kauai Historic Preservation Review Commission for their review and comments. Does that make sense? I might have been a little long winded on that. Mr. Ida: Yes, but so this does not include pre -historic... Ms. Schneider: Oh no it does include, it does include archaeology. Mr. Hull: Myles, does the historic invent�ry include pre -historic sites? Mr. Myles Hironaka: The existing historic inventory includes registered sites. Mr. Hull: So registered pre -historic sites. Mr. Hironaka: Yes, correct. Mr. Ida: Registered with whom? Mr. Hironaka: Registered with the State or the National Register. Mr. Ida: Oh, you mean it has to be on the National or the State Register? Mr. Hironaka: Well just for clarification, the current list just includes that. Mr. Hull: So the current inventory, when we first hired the consultant services back in the `80's to catalog historically significant sites on Kauai, those would automatically include the National and State Register sites. But then the inventory went above and beyond that to recognize other structures or buildings or sites that are of historic significance. But from what I am understanding from Myles, that the further update, beyond the National and State Register, didn't include pre -historic sites. Mr. Ida: But it can. February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 16 of 19 Mr. Hull: But it can, yes. Chair Guerber: And does this PIG determine whether it will or not? What is the purpose of this? Ms. Schneider: We have been looking at structures. Chair Guerber: Structures? Mr. Hull: Yes, and it's not to say that the PIG could not entertain pre -historic. I think the reason being that the expertise of this body have been primarily architectural as well as the services that was rendered on the original survey. But that's not to preclude that Commissioner Ida with your expertise if you wanted to join the PIG and look at other sites as well. I think that would be appropriate if you wanted to join in. Mr. Ida: Good to know. Chair Guerber: Where are we? Mr. Hull: So currently we have Commissioner Schneider, Commissioner Arinaga, Chair Guerber, and Commissioner Wichman nominated to the Permitted Interaction Group. If there are no others the Department would recommend closing the nomination. Ms. Schneider: I make a motion that we close the nomination Ms. Arinaga: Second. Chair Guerber: All right, all in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Any opposed? (None) Motion carried 6:0. Mr. Hull: Not to be parliamentarian, that was just a motion to close the nomination. Now you have to have a motion to approve the nomination. Ms. Schneider: I make a motion that we approve the nominations. Ms. Arinaga: Second. Chair Guerber: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? (Hearing None) Any objections? (None) All in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Motion carried 6:0. Mr. Hull: The motion passes. For the Commission and Commissioners' own edification, should any other Commissioner like to join the PIG there is still one more slot available that would ... no, sorry, that's four. Actually there would be no other slots available, I apologize. And with that we concluded the agenda Chair. COMMISSION EDUCATION COMMITTEE February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 17 of 19 KAUA'I HISTORIC RESOURCE INVENTORY UPDATE COMMITTEE HISTORIC PRESERVATION PUBLICITY COMMITTEE HANAPEPE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT COMMITTEE SELECTION OF NEXT MEETING DATE AND AGENDA TOPICS Chair Guerber: Next meeting. Do we know when the next meeting would be? Mr. Hull: It will be the third Thursday of March. Currently we don't have any potential projects but if we get some we will be forwarding you the agenda. ADJOURN-INI ENT Chair Guerber: Can I have a motion to adjourn? Ms. Schneider: � make a motion that we adjourn. Ms. Arinaga: Second. Chair Guerber: All in favor... Mr. Chaffin: What were the dates again? Mr. Hull: It's the third Thursday of the month. Chair Guerber: These meetings are always on the third Thursday of every month unless notification (or) unless there's nothing to review, which the Planning Department will tell us about that. Mr. Long: I have a question. When we did the historic surveys with the previous PIG the work that Myles did to prepare the site tours was extraordinary. And with the absence of his recommendations, I am just hoping that the Department can find the resources to support that kind of effort in the future for this new PIG, whose community it hasn't been decided yet. But one for consideration might be Kapa`a Town. Ms. Schneider: Kapa`a, I think the baby beach area. Chair Guerber: So those notes are preserved right? Mr. Hull: Correct. February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 18 of 19 Chair Guerber: Digitally? Is that how it's done? Mr. Hull: Yes, correct. So Myles was taking care of it and I think we will be working resources wise (on) who —what staff member will be going along, whether it's Myles, or whether Alex will be picking up the reins, we'll have that in the discussion. Mr. Long: Alex has been terrific also. Ms. Schneider: And we want to thank the Department for providing the support. Chair Guerber adjourned the meeting at 3:59 p.m. I ( X) Approved as circulated. 05,1718 ( ) Approved with amendments. See minutes of February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 19 of 19 Re pectfully Submitted, Sandra M. Muragin Commission Support Clerk meeting.