Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJanuary-16-2020_Kauai Historic Preservation Review Commission_Agenda Packet COUNTY OF KAUA'I KAUA'I HISTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEW COMMISSION Mo’ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A/2B MINUTES A regular meeting of the Kaua‘i Historic Preservation Review Commission (KHPRC) was held on October 17, 2019, in the Mo’ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A/2B. The following Commissioners were present: Chair Aubrey Summers, Vice Chair James Guerber, Gerald Ida, Stephen Long, and Victoria Wichman. The following staff members were present: Planning Department: Deputy Planning Director Jodi Higuchi-Sayegusa, Myles Hironaka, Shanlee Jimenez and Alex Wong. Office of Boards and Commissions: Commission Support Clerk Sandra Muragin. A. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 3:01 p.m. B. SWEARING IN OF NEW COMMISSION MEMBER Administrative Assistant to the County Clerk Eddie Topenio administered the Oath of Office to planning Mayoral appointee, Commissioner Stephen Long serving a first term ending 12/31/21. C. ROLL CALL Deputy Planning Director Jodi Higuchi-Sayegusa: Commissioner Guerber. Mr. Guerber: Here. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Commissioner Ida. Mr. Ida: Here. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Commissioner Wichman. Ms. Wichman: Here. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Commissioner Long. Mr. Long: Present. October 17, 2019 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 22 Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Chair Summers. Chair Summers: Here. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: You have quorum, Chair. D. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: I believe the Department of Transportation and their consultants have to catch a flight around 6:00 p.m. So their request is to move J.2. before J.1. in new business. So, we would need a motion to approve that as amended. Vice Chair Guerber: I move to approve the agenda with these changes. Ms. Wichman: Second. Chair Summers: Any comments. (Hearing none) All in favor... Commission Support Clerk Sandra Muragin: I am sorry, I wasn’t paying attention. What are the changes? Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: So, moving items J.2. before J.1. in new business and there was a motion I believe to approve as amended by Commissioner Guerber and seconded by Commissioner Wichman. Chair Summers: All in favor. (Unanimous voice vote) Any opposed. (Hearing none) Motion carried 5:0. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Okay, motion approved. E. APPROVAL OF THE MARCH 21, 2019 MINUTES Chair Summers: Could I have a motion to approve. Mr. Iida: Motion to approve. Vice Chair Guerber: I’ll second that. Chair Summers: Any comments. (Hearing none) All in favor. (Unanimous voice vote) Motion carried 5:0. F. HEARINGS AND PUBLIC COMMENT October 17, 2019 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 22 Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: This is the time reserved for individuals to orally testify on any items on the agenda during the public comment period. This is in addition, to perhaps when the items are called. So you can see if there is anyone in the audience needing… Chair Summers: I see no one, but is there anyone that would like to make comments. G. GENERAL BUSINESS MATTERS Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: There are none. H. COMMUNICATIONS Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: None. I. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: None. J. NEW BUSINESS 2. ‘Ele‘ele Pedestrian Bridge Bethany Zedalis, Fung Associates, Inc. TMK: (4) 2-1-005:999; (4) 2-1-005042 Repair of the damaged ‘Ele‘ele Pedestrian Bridge. Repair will include new steel girders and framing, new concrete bridge deck slab, new metal railing, and elevation of the pedestrian overpass an additional 1’ to 2’ approximately, to avoid future impact by passing vehicles. a. Director’s Report pertaining to this matter. Historic Planner Alex Wong: Aloha, Alex Wong for the record. Mr. Wong read the Director’s Report dated October 17, 2019, for the record. (Document on file) Chair Summers: Would someone like to speak for the project? Mr. Hunnemann setup a computer and projector for a power point presentation. KAI Hawai‘i Stuctural & Forensic Engineers Vice President Michael Hunnemann: Thank you commissioners for meeting with us, taking the time. Steve, nice to see you again. Ms. Muragin: Can you speak into the microphone, please. October 17, 2019 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 22 Mr. Hunnemann: Thank you commissioners for meeting with us this afternoon to talk about our project. The name of the project is the ‘Ele‘ele Bridge…Pedestrian Bridge retrofit and pretty much what was described to you already is what we are going to say all over again, except maybe with some pretty pictures and drawings. Ms. Muragin: Can you please state your name. Mr. Hunnemann: Sure, my name is Michael Hunnemann, I am with KAI Hawai‘i Inc. We are structural engineers. Brandon Ching also is from our office and Alison Chiu is from Fung Associates Historic Architects. Proceeded to show the powerpoint presentation. ‘Ele‘ele bridge is located in ‘Ele‘ele Town on the south shore of Kaua‘i on the approach to Hanapēpē Town. The bridge crosses over Kaumuali‘i Highway and it connects a neighborhood community to ‘Ele‘ele shopping center. This is a picture of the bridge, quite some time ago it’s changed somewhat since then. This is just to give you an idea of what the bridge looks like in case you haven’t seen it recently. But bridge details include location, of course is in ‘Ele‘ele. The bridge deck length is 56 feet, measured from the back column to that column. Construction is steel wide flange girders with concrete cast in place deck. Vertical clearance is listed as 14 feet 10 inches from the bottom of the girder to the top of the highway and because this highway in this area is curved, the highway itself is super elevated or curved, sloped to one side. So the 14 feet 10 inches actually measured from…that’s the minimum measurement out there now. Alison is going to discuss the historic aspect of the project. Fung Associates Historic Architects Alison Chiu: Thank you Mike. Good afternoon. My name is Alison Chiu, I am with Fung Associates, the historic architect for the bridge. We are consulting under Chapter 68 of the Hawai‘i Revised Statues since the bridge is over 50 years old and there are no Federal funds, permits or land associated with this project. So no requirement to consult for Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. The bridge was…the pedestrian bridge overpass was constructed in 1939, as mentioned it connects the residential neighborhood on the mauka side of the highway, to the shopping center on the makai side. Our office, Fung Associates, did a statewide bridge inventory, which was completed in 2014 and we identified the bridge as eligible under Criterion C for engineering. We identified it as a high preservation value bridge because of its distinctive structural type, which has been mentioned. And the materials, everything about the bridge remains in-tact, including the workmanship of the original bridge. There have not been any alterations or replacements to date that we know of, so we feel that the pedestrian bridge retains its integrity, as a good example of a 1930’s steel girder bridge. And we believe that it’s the earliest known pedestrian overpass to be constructed on Kaua‘i. So the teams objective is to retrofit the bridge in the manner that is compatible with its historic character and to make sure that the design is done in keeping with the Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation. So the character defining features of the bridge, including its form and scale and the steel and concrete material, materials pardon me, will be kept with the design of the retrofit. So Mike will discuss more of the existing condition and how the retrofit will be completed. October 17, 2019 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 22 Mr. Hunnemann: Thank you Alison. So the project scope of work. The ‘Ele‘ele Pedestrian Bridge has been impacted by several oversized trucks in the recent past and has sustained significant damage to the steel girders and concrete deck. The project scope of work generally includes removing the existing bridge deck and replacing it with a new deck that is higher in elevation in order to avoid future impact by passing vehicles. The new bridge girders will be a minimum of 17 feet 6 inches above the existing roadway surface to conform to ASHTO (American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials) and the Hawai‘i DOT (Department of Transportation) design criteria for bridges and structures. The super structure, will be constructed of new steel I-beam girders with a new concrete cast in place deck and will have a similar appearance as the existing bridge. The existing railings along the bridge deck and stairs are corroded, and will be replaced with new railings with the similar appearance as the existing railings that are currently on the stairs. The spalls in the existing stairs will also be repaired in the concrete part of the stairs, they will be repaired. Finally, all steel members of the bridge will be cleaned and painted green, including both the new steel and the existing steel that will remain. Existing conditions of the bridge. This is a picture taken a couple of years ago where some of the spalling has begun. Since that time the bridge has been closed to pedestrian traffic and you can see this is a picture of looking up at the bridge deck. The concrete deck slab along the edges has started to spall and in this state to avoid the concrete from hitting the passing vehicles, they’ve chipped away a lot of the loose concrete from the edges and put in some patching material. So looking up at the girder, you can see that this is the damage that the truck hit…incurred the damage that the girder incurred when the truck hit it. The girders actually bent. And you can also see the edges of the concrete that’s been spalled away. Since that time the damage has been shrouded to avoid debris from falling on to the traffic below. Because whatever spalling that was fixed previously will continue to propagate over time until it’s completely fixed. This is a typical view of the stairs and the railings. This part of the railing is original design for the bridge and you can see that its got a top railing, an intermediate railing, a lower railing and the pickets in-between. This is a view walking across the bridge and we suspect that this is not the original design that sometime in the past probably the pickets got too deteriorated so they replaced the pickets with chain link fence. The chain link fence is not connected adequately, so it does pose a safety hazard. The pickets and the lower rail are heavily deteriorated on all parts of the stairs and there’s a…in addition to heavy corrosion we got some spalling in the concrete stair thread. This is a picture looking up at one of the more major spalls in the concrete stair that will be fixed, as part of this project. So our proposed retrofit design. This is a plan view of the existing bridge. This project will not affect the plan view of the bridge, what so ever. What you see now will remain in terms of geometry and location. This is an elevation view of the existing bridge and you can see that the stairs have the nice pickets on both sides. This is the neighborhood side of the highway and this is the shopping center side. This from here, all the way to here, is chain link fence. Our proposed design will include removing all of the railing and putting in new steel girders here and elevating the steel girders with these spacers here on either side. And then pouring new steps which is just a, it’s just an extension of the existing steps, okay. October 17, 2019 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 22 So we are not removing any of the concrete stairs at all. We’re just putting new concrete that’s an extension of the existing stairs and then we’ll have a new cast in place concrete deck all the way across and the same thing on the other side. Then we’ll add new railings from start to finish with a nice picket design that duplicates what the original construction consisted of. And this is just a quick shot of the cross section of the hand rail. And that’s it. So we’re open to any kind of questions you may have. Chair Summers: Any questions from anybody. Mr. Ida: Do you know if the pedestrian bridge was still in operation that it did serve as a connection between that ‘Ele‘ele subdivision. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Sorry, one second, let’s make sure that… Mr. Ida: Okay, I know the connection between the ‘Ele‘ele subdivision and the shopping center is facilitated by this pedestrian bridge but if the bridge was built in 1939, I don’t think the shopping center was there. I think the shopping center came in the 1950’s. In fact, I think it was the first shopping center on the island. But I don’t, you know, I just kind of wanted to know what the original purpose for this pedestrian crossing… Chair Summers: There may have been a store there even though it wasn’t a shopping center thought, right? So it might…it could have been a little group of…wonder? Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Do you folks have any information? Hawai‘i Department of Transportation Fred Reyes: (inaudible, spoke from the audience section) Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Sorry, could you speak into the microphone so we can record the… Mr. Reyes: Fred Reyes, from DOT highways Kaua‘i. Brought an old map of 1939. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Yes, so here you can speak into the mic there. Mr. Reyes: Here are some images. There’s a date there of December 1939 and shows some images of buildings. What they are, I am not sure. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Okay, thank you. Ms. Chiu: I’ve also heard that the Hanapēpē Hongwanji originally had some ties or is tied to its original location which used to be where the current ‘Ele‘ele shopping center is. So that might be part of what we can find out with the historic maps and information. I think if the commissioners or community has any other information about that, we would be interested to have that and if we could find out more information too, we’d be happy to share. Mr. Long: I have some questions. October 17, 2019 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 22 Chair Summers: Please go ahead. Mr. Long: The girders that are raising the deck. How are they going to reflect the historical nature of the existing steel that’s there. Mr. Hunnemann: The shape of the new girders will be exactly same shape as the existing girders. Mr. Long: Same size. Mr. Hunnemann: The same size, probably maybe an inch or two. Maybe exactly the same, we haven’t finalized that size yet. Mr. Long: Thank you. My second question on the railing. Was the existing railing with the existing balusters to code with the four inches maximum spacing between? Mr. Hunnemann: They are actually, yes. Mr. Long: Okay. And I noted that the existing railing is basically like a two and half inch top rail with a square steel second horizontal member which appears square bar vertical balusters going down to a rectangular lower supporting core. Will that precise railing be duplicated. Mr. Hunnemann: The pickets are actually a combination of square bars and round bars. I think over time, you know when they couldn’t find square bars so they just threw in some… Mr. Long: So which came first, the square bar or the round bar? Mr. Hunnemann: There’s a lot more squares than round, so my guess is the squares. Mr. Long: Yes, I think it would be squares too… Mr. Hunnemann: Yes. Mr. Long: That’s also much more industrial. Mr. Hunnemann: Yes, yes. Mr. Long: So will that, square bar vertical baluster than be maintained? Mr. Hunnemann: That’s our plan, yes. Mr. Long: Thank you. Mr. Hunnemann: Sure. October 17, 2019 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 22 Mr. Long: And my other comment that I have isn’t necessarily historical. But in protecting the historical nature of the bridge, I noted that one side had a elevation height of 14 foot 10 inches and the other side there was a sign that said 16 foot. So maybe that’s why people been driving into the bridge. Mr. Hunnemann: Yes, they look at the 16 feet and… Mr. Long: Think its 16 foot. Mr. Hunnemann: Hope for the best, yes. Mr. Long: So, my suggestion would be that when you put these in that the signage be correct. Mr. Hunnemann: This is Larry Dill, District Engineer. District Engineer Larry Dill: (inaudible) Chair Summers: Speak into the mic, please. Kaua‘i District State Highways of the Hawai‘i Department of Transportation District Engineer Larry Dill: That’s a good point to bring up, Mr. Long. Because of the super low elevation of the highway the controlling height, depends on which side you’re approaching it from. So when you approach it from the west, heading east bound you see the 14, 10, 14 foot 10 sign (inaudible). If you’re going west bound, you see the 16 foot, because that’s what the highway restriction is for the west bound lane. So it is dependent upon which lane you’re on. Mr. Long: Thank you for the clarification. Mr. Dill: Assuming you’re on the right side of the road. Mr. Long: Thank you. Or forward not backwards. Mr. Dill: Yes. Mr. Long: Excellent. Chair Summers: Thank you. Any other questions. Can I get a motion? Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: So I think at this point, unless there are any more questions, I think the options are to receive, motion to support or if you folks have any comments or suggestions to provide the consultant and the Department of transportation, so, you know, the options are yours. Vice Chair Guerber: I move we support this project. Ms. Wichman: I second. October 17, 2019 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 22 Chair Summers: I think we heard our comments. All in favor. (Unanimous voice vote) Any opposed. (Hearing none) Motion carried 5:0 Ms. Wichman: Am I allowed to say thank you. Mr. Hunnemann: Thank you commissioners, very much. Ms. Wichman: Thank you very much for a well needed project. Mr. Hunnemann: Thank you. 1. St. Catherine’s Patoral Life Center (PLC) Building Mark Ventura AIA, LLC TMK: (4) 4-6-015: 058 Conversion of the existing nunnery into a kindergarten classroom building. Renovations include interior dormitory walls demo, some exterior demo, installation of a new partition walls, and installation of fenced playground area. a. Director’s Report pertaining to this matter. Mr. Wong: My Director’s Report for this project is also brief. Mainly because this specific structure is not on any historic register or even our county historic inventory list. So with that being said… Mr. Wong read the Director’s Report dated October 17, 2019, for the record. (Document on file) Chair Summers: Mark, did you want to present to us? Mark Ventura, AIA, LLC: Good afternoon, Chairperson Summers and Commissioners. My name is Mark Ventura. Appreciate that Alex (Wong). I want to…I don’t have a lot of information. I don’t have a presentation right now. As it stands, I don’t even have a contract with these guys. What I am doing is to trying to help them move along the lease. So this started with me talking with Ka‘āina (Planning Director Hull) at the Planning Department, who recommended I speak with Alex, which I did. And, so what we have is a…I think you’ve seen the photos, there were couple photographs that Alex had in the report. It’s a single story, stucco, clad masonry building. He mentions the jalousie windows. There’s a asphalt shingle roof that is not the original roof on there. Kamehameha Schools wants to lease the building, which now is for the most part empty although they do use it on occasion for church community meetings and I think Laura Lindsey has an office in there. So they would turn that over to them. Essentially, for the exterior we were planning on changing the windows because the energy code is going to dictate that we do take the jalousie windows out. Other than that, they’re essentially putting two classrooms that will need access to the exterior. So I think we’re looking at adding one, probably taking a window opening and converting that to a doorway to the exterior. So we need exiting for these classroom buildings to the exterior. I think that’s probably going to be the extent of our work on the exterior right now. I think the roof is actually in decent shape we may October 17, 2019 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 22 replace the roof and like I said the windows. But other than that, I am not anticipating much else on the exterior other than painting. We’ll probably paint, it probably needs a paint job, right about now. Then we’re going to fence off a portion of the rear of the building for a kind of a dedicated playground for them. That’s the intent of it. But right now we haven’t really done a whole lot more in there. There was a sketch that they put together with a concept of what they want…what the interior looks like. But, I don’t have that with me now, so. That’s all I think I have to say right now, but if you have any questions, I could respond. Vice Chair Guerber: This doesn’t qualify as a historic building, at all. That’s no question, that’s a statement. Mr. Long: So, exactly what are you looking to this commission for today? Mr. Ventura: I am just trying to appease Planning Department, so I sat down with Wong and tried to determine. So, basically any comment you may have, we really, I don’t really see us changing the look of the building much, other than those requirements. But, so, yes, just looking for comment and… Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: I believe the building is not a residential building and its over 50 years old. It’s technically subject to Historic Preservation review, and so I think that was part of the reason why it was referred to this body, if there’s any comments or suggestions on the renovation project. I am not sure if Alex had anything else to add. Mr. Wong: I’d also like to add that the building is historic due to its age; however, based on the evidence it has lost its historic integrity. Ms. Wichman: Aloha, this is Commissioner Wichman. I just have a question. This is just maybe a comment, but if Kamehameha Schools does decide to lease this building, I would highly suggest that they look into the history of this nunnery. I read a newspaper article about it today and on how it became, how existed or became to exist. And I think the history of the building itself and the nuns and the one music teacher that came there. It’s quite interesting. And as Kamehameha Schools if they’re the ones that are going to be, or whomever leases the place, just to have the history be known of that place would be really, really important. Especially because of the age and there is history of this place. Mr. Ventura: Yes. Ms. Wichman: Just my comments. Thank you. Mr. Ventura: Okay, appreciate that. I am going to suggest that we make it a little bit more than that and honor that with the school. I think that would be a good thing for the school and education in general, so. Mr. Ventura: Thank you. Ms. Wichman: Appreciate the comment. October 17, 2019 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 22 Mr. Long: So, thank you Mark for coming before us in a preliminary basis. So do you intend to when you have drawings of the building and the remodel and all of that, you’re going to be coming back before the commission with that. Mr. Ventura: I don’t know. If that’s a requirement then, yes. But if not, then we do have to obviously go through the whole permitting process… Mr. Long: Right. Mr. Ventura: So that’s something we could do, but… Chair Summers: As it has no historical integrity would we require that they come back? Because it… Mr. Long: Well, can we determine the historical integrity has been lost? Chair Summers: I think we can because there are certain… Mr. Long: Oh yes, that’s the recommendation of Alex… Chair Summers: Right. Mr. Long: And the planning department. That’s not been reviewed by this commission, that’s just a recommendation. Chair Summers: Right. Mr. Long: It’s not a set in stone. Chair Summers: And if you look at the list of what the categories are than you look at the photos in this representation, it feels like you could make a determination. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Or provide suggestions at this point on the proposed plans at least. But of course if you folks do wish to review it at a later stage, that’s up to you folks, as well. But, you know, I mean, the applicant has come before you folks at this point to try to receive any suggestions… Mr. Long: Yes, with a verbal concept, but not with drawings and elevations, and floor plans that we use to make our decisions. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Okay. Chair Summers: Wouldn’t we be making a decision on access? So you’re saying you need to see more before you agree that its lost its historical integrity. October 17, 2019 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 22 Mr. Long: I just think that when someone comes before the commission that they come forward with a plan, with floor plans, site plan, elevations of the proposed renovations. And I don’t see those here. I just see a vague reference to concept. Vice Chair Guerber: So we could decide to deny this, we could decide to support this or we could decide to receive this. Should we receive it we would receive it pending and then if something really happens with it they would come back to us. Mr. Long: Yes, because at that point something real to take a look at on paper and we can make real comments. Chair Summers: How would those elevations and plans inform you of its historical integrity? Mr. Long: I don’t think we can talk about a building without them. Vice Chair Guerber: We’d have to see if we can dig up photographs of it in the past. That’s something that would be done by the staff, perhaps. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Or the applicant. Vice Chair Guerber: Well, yes. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Yes. So…do you folks have clarification on the plans that were submitted? These are preliminary, not really reflecting any… Mr. Ventura: Yes. So those basically shows the demolition that we’re proposing for the inside and the concept that Kamehameha (Schools) gave us, which is the floor plan. And the elevation, that actually does show I think the new doors we’re proposing. The roof plan is existing and the cross section is accurate. And then the elevations, which are pretty much what there is now. It does show the new doors, so. But really that was more for lease documentation and to give the engineers something to look at, we’re still getting proposals together and that kind of thing. But there is some information in there, I don’t know if you got a chance to see it. So my guess is that’s going to be pretty darn close to what we end up having. We have to build the bathrooms in there, we’re going to do that and we got to get the improvements. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Okay. So you folks can make a…receive this matter, you can support it, you can provide comments at this point or recommendation to come back at some point in the future once plans have been finalized a little bit further… Chair Summers: I guess I want clarification on what the rest of you are looking for, for the next meeting. Because it sounds to me we know that the roof is not original, we know that the windows are not original, we know that a lot of it is do need to see proof of that. And that would not be in an architectural rendering or plan, that would be historical references. So I would like clarification on what you’re asking for. October 17, 2019 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 13 of 22 Mr. Long: In general, I think its important for us to make decisions based on drawing that are real proposals, not just sort of an idea or concept. Chair Summers: But the whole – what we’re looking at is the historical integrity of the building. Brand new drawings of what’s going to happen is not going to show the historical integrity. So if we’re saying that this is a historical structure that we’re looking at the historical aspects of it. Shouldn’t we be looking at those historical photos or representations and not the…because the new plans don’t really have a relationship if it has no historical integrity. So I am asking what specifically… Mr. Long: Who determines historical integrity of the plans? Chair Summers: Well we have… Mr. Long: …(inaudible) or the commission? Chair Summers: We have standards that we can look to. There are Federal standards that have…that give us specific items to look at. I feel like that’s what we look at. Ms. Wichman: Let me comment also. Chair Summers: Yes. Ms. Wichman: Because the jalousies and the roof has been replaced…or the jalousies are going to be replaced, the roofs been replaced, doesn’t mean there aren’t historical values within that building. Chair Summers: Right. Ms. Wichman: They’re tearing down walls inside, I mean there’s a lot of things going on… Chair Summers: So that’s what I am asking… Ms. Wichman: Besides what’s already done. Chair Summers: What, what are we asking for? Ms. Wichman: Well… Chair Summers: Because he’s saying architectural plans, that doesn’t seem like that gets too historical. Ms. Wichman: But it is part of it. Mr. Long: I can tell you what I would like to see. October 17, 2019 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 14 of 22 Chair Summers: Yes, that’s what I am asking. Mr. Long: I want plans and elevations. Chair Summers: And how is that showing the historical integrity of the existing? Mr. Long: I just like to see final plans and elevations, final plans and elevations. Chair Summers: So that sounds more like building and planning code, rather than historical. Vice Chair Guerber: Well we don’t have any photographs or anything of what it looked like in past… Chair Summers: That’s so, that would be… Vice Chair Guerber: …(inaudible) but we maybe we’ll have to ask for that as well. Chair Summers: That’s what I am saying. What are we asking for? That’s what I’d like to… Vice Chair Guerber: So see how the new design fits the old historical way it will look. Chair Summers: Right and so, what you’re saying is the historical documentation and then look at the new plans and elevations in relationship to that. So that’s kind of what I am getting at. Are we asking for some photographs, are we asking to try and find drawings, this article you’re talking about? I just want to be more specific in what we’re asking for. Vice Chair Guerber: I think Stephen (Long) is only asking for something we can…that’s the final thing that we can decide on. This is just a sketch. Chair Summers: Right. Mr. Ventura: This is a…you got a concept set of plans here that is essentially what is going to be. Yes, we’re going to develop the bathroom but it shows the walls were taken out and the proposed plan. I mean, that is the plan… Chair Summers: Yes. Mr. Ventura: It shows the bathrooms. That’s the direction… Chair Summers: But it sounds like all of you want to see photographs of what it looked like in the past, to than compare with his drawings. And that’s what I am trying to ask, is that what we’re asking for? It’s more historical documentation. Mr. Long: Mark, do you have the materials called out, the new roofing materials, the new windows and all that kind of details of that? So we can take a look at that. October 17, 2019 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 15 of 22 Mr. Ventura: Yes, we don’t have the new windows, we’re showing the existing jalousies. So, we have to research that. Mr. Long: And there… Mr. Ventura: But basically we’re going to do energy efficient. Probably double hung windows is what I’d guess. But we do call out the finishes on this plan. So, I mean, this would be a concept plan, I think it plans a section and elevations of what its going to look like. I don’t have any historical photographs of what it did look like before, at this time. Eventually its available, as far as that goes. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Perhaps at this point it might be worth seeing if commissioner may want to make a motion at this point and whether, you know, for instance, please return with, you know, come back with more information on the historical character of this particular building when plans are a little more solidified or that sort of thing. Or you can receive it and with no suggestions and no comments, essentially, its just receiving the plans as is with no input. Chair Summers: So if you receive it… Vice Chair Guerber: We’re just thanking them to let you know its coming. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Yes. Chair Summers: But, then you have no… Vice Chair Guerber: There’s no determination at all. It just says thanks for giving us the idea and please come back when you have it more solidified. Chair Summers: That’s what receiving is? Vice Chair Guerber: That’s what receiving is. Chair Summers: Yes, they will come back Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: No. Vice Chair Guerber: They wish to. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Yes, not necessarily. Its just accepting what was presented with no comment or suggestions, or requests to come back in. Chair Summers: Got it. So it sounds like. So could I have…I think you’d like to see more, I think you’d like to see more. So could we have a motion. Mr. Ventura: Can I ask a question please? Is there a way that you could sort of, maybe give me some conditions? Because my question that would be, what is it that you do want to see? October 17, 2019 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 16 of 22 Vice Chair Guerber: I can tell you what I’d like to see here with this. I’d like to see some old photographs of how the place looked on the outside, perhaps on the inside as well. The ideas of what the roofing used to be. If you’re going to change the roof we would really like you to put back a roof that was more like the original roof that was on the place. We’d like you to bring it back to its original state, as much as you can. I know you got to follow the building code and the energy efficiency things but there are things about the look and feel of it that’s what we are about. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: This would be when our attorney would come back and say there’s technically no motion on the floor. So might be best to encapsulate that in a motion and then, you know… Ms. Wichman: Right, we will, definitely. Vice Chair Guerber: But we’re just discussing this. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Right, right, right, right. Chair Summers: Yes, trying to (inaudible). So its not on the historic register. It has been determined, by planning (department) that it has lost its historic integrity. If we say we want the roof to be back to what it was, does that hold any weight? Is it just a suggestion? Mr. Ventura: Because they may… Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Yes, I mean, again, technically this building is considered historic because it is… Chair Summers: Because the age alone. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: The age alone under 6E. And so if there’s any suggestions from you folks on preserving characteristics that you find unique or require, you know, saving or mimicking then, you know, that’s I would think that’s within your purview. Vice Chair Guerber: This kind of on the side. Stephen (Long) when you…I think what I am getting, what you’re asking for is in general when a project is presented to us, why waste our time with projects that aren’t probably not going to happen. Lets’ wait until the projects are pretty well into the design phase and then bring it to this commission. And we should probably set up some standards about what we expect to see when these things are brought to us. Chair Summers: That’s a great idea. That’s a great idea. Vice Chair Guerber: Am I right? Is that what you’re kind of thinking? Mr. Long: Without unduly humbugging Mark, this is my first time as a commissioner, this time around. But not seemingly pick on you because I am not. I am just saying, in general, when a project comes before the commission there should be historical documentation and floor plans October 17, 2019 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 17 of 22 and elevations of the final proposal in order for us to be able to make an educated and informed decision. That’s my feeling. Vice Chair Guerber: And it doesn’t have to… Chair Summers: Sounds good. Vice Chair Guerber: There is no motion. What should we move? There’s nothing to receive. Is that right? Chair Summers: What would the motion be if that’s what we want to see? No? Vice Chair Guerber: I guess so. Mr. Long: So if I were to make a motion it would be. I move that we receive this application and request that the applicant come forth again when they have more, if any historical documentation and final floor plans and elevations for us to make an educated and informed decision. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Was that a motion, or? Mr. Long: That was. Chair Summers: Yes. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Okay. Vice Chair Guerber: I second that. Chair Summers: And any comments. (Hearing none) All in favor. (Unanimous voice vote) Oh sorry. Mr. Ida: I just wanted to say that I appreciate you being here today. Or even though, you know, we may consider it kind of early but I am glad you guys are thinking about it and you know about this component of this possible project. Vice Chair Guerber: And I totally agree, really… Chair Summers: Yes, thank you. Vice Chair Guerber: Appreciate you being here to do this. This is great. Mr. Ida: I just think, you know, it’s a good thing, not a bad. Chair Summers: So all in favor. (Unanimous voice vote) Any opposed. (Hearing none) Motion carried 5:0. October 17, 2019 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 18 of 22 Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Hearing none. K. COMMISSION EDUCATION COMMITTEE Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: No report, as far as I know. L. KAUA'I HISTORIC RESOURCE INVENTORY UPDATE COMMITTEE Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: As far as I know, no... Mr. Long: I have a bot about the historic inventory committee. And just a thought for us to think about… Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Yes. Mr. Long: Because it was this commission that corrected the work of the hired historical consultant and we…this commission did the historical inventory for Līhu‘e, Kalāheo and Kōloa. And it was, I think, extremely well received and a very useful inventory for the planning department. And in our next meeting I am going to propose that we consider forming an additional PIG (Permitted Interaction Group) to carry out those same historical inventory work on the next communities. Which might be Kapa‘a. You know we as individuals need to think about that carefully because that took 14 - 4 hour Friday afternoons. And that’s just the commissioners. And then, Myles and Alex, on the department side, had to prepare for those meetings. So it’s an investment on the planning departments part also. But I am willing to carry on that effort, as a commissioner on the PIG. I would like to think about that at next meeting and talk about it more. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Okay. Ms. Wichman: I was on that PIG as well, and I agree with Stephen. I think we need to spread it out a little more. The three communities, the three to four communities that we did inventory we did see things that should have been on the inventory that weren’t. And things that, no way they should have been on the inventory. So there’s that kind of stuff and so for a re-evaluation or re- inventory things like this, you know, could be possibly settled or, you know at least, more, I don’t know, familiar. More up to date. Chair Summers: You actually saw things that shouldn’t have been on there? That surprises me. Ms. Wichman: Oh, didn’t we. Mr. Long: There were 672 historic structures identified by the consultant and we took off a 140 of them and added 63. I am making those numbers up, but that’s pretty close. Chair Summers: No but, yes. October 17, 2019 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 19 of 22 Vice Chair Guerber: That’s about like that? Its about that number? Mr. Long: Yes, it was that bad. Ms. Wichman: Individually house to house, getting out the car, walking up and down the street. Only one person came out and wondering what we’re doing. So it was pretty cool…it was well worth it. I really believe and I hope the planning department hopes it was valuable as well. And Myles (Hironaka) was with us and I believe that he was enthusiastic about getting this done, so. Chair Summers: Wow, I am impressed by all of you. It’s a lot of work. Vice Chair Guerber: It was. Yes. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Okay, we can definitely discuss that at the next meeting. I think Myles stepped out as well, so we can coordinate that type of discussion for next meeting. Ms. Wichman: Thank you. M. HISTORIC PRESERVATION PUBLICITY COMMITTEE Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: I am not sure if there’s a report on that. I don’t think so, to my knowledge. N. ANNOUNCEMENTS Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: I don’t think we have any. O. SELECTION OF NEXT MEETING DATE AND AGENDA TOPICS (11/21/2019) Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Topics do you folks have any… Chair Summers: I really liked what these two brought up, which was having more of a, not a list of what we want to see. But, you know kind of maybe giving…letting people that are coming before us know that we want to see a certain level of… Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Okay. Chair Summers: I don’t know, historic... Vice Chair Guerber: We should develop some requirements… Chair Summers: Some requirements, yes. October 17, 2019 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 20 of 22 Vice Chair Guerber: Before they come before this commission. They should have this, and this, and this. Chair Summers: Well, I mean, based on what you’re all saying I agree. Otherwise its kind of a…is it a waste of time for everybody? If it isn’t at a point where it can be looked at carefully. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Right, I mean, to be honest I kind of want to go and clarify on how, I guess, Ka’aina (Planning Director Hull) perceived… Chair Summers: Yes. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Or received projects or refer projects and that sort of thing; and how the commission would refer to this body. You know, I know that a lot of projects do come before the department for like a pre-consultation type of meeting, prior to even going to the planning commission. So, you know, at what point would it be ripe enough to come even before this body. You know I think, for the most part we’re lucky that people do come in and try to do the pre-consultation which case we would refer any project that would have an effect or could be possibly characterized as historic to be reviewed by this body. So, you know, the timing of it is not always exact and the abundance of caution that we would prefer to have them come before you folks. So, but of course if you folks want to develop additional requirements or standards to notify potential applicants on what you folks would like to see, we can talk about that, sure. That might be something appropriate to be folded into your rules. Because ultimately that would ultimately govern expectations of applicants. So we can put that on the agenda to further discuss that for next meeting. Chair Summers: Stephen had it… Mr. Long: Applicants have come before this commission and asked preliminary basis and both welcomed, helpful and appreciated. Paul (inaudible) on the gas station, you know a number, I can think a half dozen, where they come before the commission on a preliminary basis knowing that for feedback and knowing that when they have their final proposal they come to us with a full package. It’s not uncommon. And its helpful to have Mark come in talk to us, I mean, now he can go back to his office and got to put the materials down on here, they want to know what the windows will look like. I guess they have a little more work to do. And we have an idea about what that’s going to do and I know Mark’s a highly respected local architect. He’s going to do a great job. Vice Chair Guerber: Sure. Mr. Long: We just, you know, for final decisions we need final sets of drawings. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Okay. Ms. Wichman: I also think that sometimes the architect’s clients have a lot to do with pushing… Chair Summers: Oh that’s a good point. October 17, 2019 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 21 of 22 Ms. Wichman: To get these kind of like, is it checked off or not. And knowing who his client is that’s usually, well that’s how things go sometimes, yes. They want to know if it’s going to be approved or what kind of hoops they have to jump through before they even want to commit. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: But suffice to say we can put that and list that as an agenda item, perhaps at the next meeting so that we can really come and flesh that out a little bit more in a discussion and it also complies with Sunshine. Chair Summers: Does that have a relationship with what planning requires? I guess. What do you require for your first review? Or do you have a list of requirements that you in order to even make a directors report, do you have a minimum set of requirements. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: But, again, I don’t want to stifle the conversation but this is not, is not an actual item. Chair Summers: Oh, that’s right, sorry. Thank you. Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: So again, we’ll place it on the next agenda and then we can talk about that and also prepare some suggestions from the departments point of view. Vice Chair Guerber: Okay. Chair Summers: Did we figure out our date? Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: Yes, I believe its November 21st. P. ADJOURNMENT Chair Summers: Do I need a motion to adjourn? Ms. Higuchi-Sayegusa: I believe our rules do require a motion and a second to adjourn. Ms. Wichman: I move to adjourn. Chair Summers: Second, anybody? Nobody wants to adjourn. Vice Chair Guerber: No. I don’t want to adjourn. Mr. Ida: I second. Chair Summers: All in favor. (Unanimous voice vote) Motion carried 5:0. Chair Summers adjourned the meeting at 4:04 p.m. October 17, 2019 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 22 of 22 Respectfully Submitted, Sandra M. Muragin Commission Support Clerk ( ) Approved as circulated. ( ) Approved with amendments. See minutes of meeting.