HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-01-08 TCOUNTY
WINDWARD PLANNING COMMISSION
COUNTY OF HAWAI‘I
HEARING TRANSCRIPT
JANUARY 8, 2010
COUNTY OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT
A regularly advertised hearing on the application of
OF PARKS AND RECREATION (SMA 09-000036)
was called to order at 11:25 a.m. in the
County of Hawaii, Aupuni Center Conference Room, 101 Pauahi Street, Hilo, Hawai‘i, with
Chairman Rell Woodward presiding.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Rell Woodward, Dean Au, Takashi Domingo, Andrew
Iwashita, Zendo Kern, and Wallace Ishibashi.
STAFF PRESENT: Brandon Gonzalez (Deputy Corporation Counsel), BJ Leithead Todd
(Planning Director - left at 12 noon), Margaret Masunaga (Deputy Planning Director - from 12
noon), Phyllis Fujimoto (Staff Planner), Jeff Darrow (Staff Planner) and Maija Cottle (Staff
Planner).
And 15 people from the public in attendance.
APPLICANT: COUNTY OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
(SMA 09-000036)
Special Management Area (SMA) Use Permit to allow the redevelopment and improvements to
Reed’s Bay Beach Park, including new restroom pavilion, walkways, walls, landscaping and
related improvements. The property is the site of the existing beach park located along the
makai side of Banyan Drive, Waiakea, South Hilo, Hawaii, TMK: 2-1-5:1.
WOODWARD: Okay, we have one last agenda item. We’ll try and get it in. It’s, we’re going
to break for lunch about 12:30, it’s now 11:25. So we may or may not make the whole thing, but
we’ll at least get started. The item is Agenda Item No. 4, County of Hawaii Department of Parks
and Recreation, Special Management Area Use Permit. Jeff.
DARROW: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Sorry for the delay.
WOODWARD: It’s no problem I had to get my -.
DARROW: Okay. The applicant, if I could direct the Planning Commission’s attention to our
presentation on the wall. The next applicant is the County of Hawaii Department of Parks and
Recreation. The location of our application is within South Hilo. More specifically we’re
looking in the Bayfront area, I’m sorry, the area, Reeds Bay, right in this general area. We have
the property outlined in black. Again, sorry for the difficulty. Maybe next time we can change
that to a different color. But it’s just one parcel, this particular parcel in this area. There are
other associated, there is another associated parcel with the master plan, but in this particular
application we’re only looking at one particular parcel.
1
EXHIBIT C
This is an aerial photo. You’ll be able to see the sandy area; and then again you can see the
different boats moored out in the bay there.
The applicant is requesting a Special Management Area Use Permit to allow the redevelopment
and improvement to Reeds Bay Beach Park. The project will be conducted in two phases. This
SMA permit is only for Phase I, the Phase I portion of the project. The project, Phase I of the
project will consist of a comfort station with restrooms, shower area and storage area. There will
be one or two approximately 12-foot by 12-foot, 140 square foot, pavilions, six picnic tables,
including three that are ADA accessible, walkways, and low seat walls, drinking fountains and
trash receptacles, bike racks, limited trailer kayak access, and landscaping which will include the
removal of selected trees, and replacement and additions with native or Polynesian coastal
species. This is the master plant that was submitted by the applicant. If you’ll look on the
bottom portion of the map you’ll see alternative, Alternative B2 which is a revised master plan
from the original submittal back in 2007. The applicant had originally submitted the Special
Management Area Use Permit for this application. When the signs went up concerning the
application, there were concerns from the public. The applicant had deferred the application to
meet with the public and come up with some possible solutions to be able to work out some
disagreements with the project. So this is a result of the collaboration with the public.
On there, on the master plan you’re going to see the new trees that will be in the area. It’s
difficult to see but there’s outlines of certain trees that will be removed. There are picnic tables,
a pavilion in this particular area. The comfort station is in this area. And this particular master
plan also shows Phase II portion which is located on the adjacent property to the left. It’s similar
to Phase I. One of the big differences is that there’s going to be a 51-stall paved parking area for
the public. One of the, a big issue regarding this application is the fact that the proposal will
restrict parking on the beach and require parking to be either along the roadway or, at this time,
on the gravelled area on the adjacent parking area.
This is a demolition plan. This identifies more clearly the selected trees that will be removed
with this application. These are identified with the circle and an x. So it kind of, and we’ve
recently submitted that to the Commission for their review in case there’s any issues regarding
this matter.
Some site photos of the particular area. This one is from a helicopter, I’m sorry, so you can see
Reeds Bay in this area, again, the boats moored out there, the parking area on the adjacent
property. This is a site photo looking towards the north. You can see the beach area. Again,
vehicles parking on the beach, sidewalk, and the roadway. This is looking to the south in the
opposite direction. This kind of gives you an idea on the width of the roadway as well as, again,
parking on the beach area. And this is the area generally where that comfort station will be
located. The Planning Department’s recommendation is that this request be approved with
conditions. In regards to submittals, again, the only submittal that has come in since then is the
demolition plan that has been submitted to the Planning Commission. Are there any questions?
WOODWARD: Commissioner Ishibashi?
2
EXHIBIT C
ISHIBASHI: Thank you, Mr. Chair. In regards to the kayaks and the trailer, where’s that going
to be located? Cause you cannot park on, anymore on the, where you go in now in that parking
area. Yeah, that -.
DARROW: Okay. There’s going to be, let me just refer to two regulated vehicular access points
to the beach. There will be a designated loading and unloading zone along Banyan Drive
available for small boat and kayak users. So there will be two areas. I believe the applicant
probably can show this a little better. But I believe one is here and then one is in this general
location right here. Is that correct?
KOMATA: I can’t see it from here.
DARROW: This particular area, and then this area.
KOMATA: Yeah.
DARROW: Okay, so it will be in those two identified areas.
ISHIBASHI: Thank you.
WOODWARD: Any further questions? Okay, if we could have the applicant and/or
representatives come on up.
KOMATA: Grab one more chair. Is five too many?
WOODWARD: No. Okay, well, let me swear you all in. If you’ll raise your right hand. Do
you swear or affirm to tell the truth today before the Windward Planning Commission?
REPRESENTATIVES: I do.
WOODWARD: Okay, very good. And who would like to begin?
KOMATA: I’ll begin. My name -.
WOODWARD: Okay, if can you give us your name and address, and then you may begin your
testimony.
KOMATA: Yeah, my name is James Komata. I’m the Park Planner for the Department of Parks
and Recreation, 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 6, Hilo 96720. To my left is Kevin Sakai, he’s a project
manager that’s responsible for this project. To my right I have Leonard Bisel, the landscape
architect, Meredith Tanioka works with Leonard on the landscape, and Ron Terry who’s our
environmental consultant on this project.
We reviewed the recommendation and background report from the Planning Department. We
have, you know, we’re in concurrence. We don’t see anything that requires further discussion at
this point.
3
EXHIBIT C
The one thing that I did want to speak to very briefly was that, a little history on the project.
The, this project came about, some of the converg -, convergence of three purposes. First being
to enhance the shoreline recreational activity, opportunities in Hilo. I believe under Mayor Kim
it was his vision that started this, seeing the overcrowding and the popularity of the beaches
along the Keaukaha shoreline and noticing that Reeds Bay and, along with Reeds Bay Hilo
Bayfront Beach Park were under utilized in comparison. So this was an attempt to enhance that.
Along with that was to, our purpose was to remove vehicular access to the beach because it poses
a safety and environmental hazards. I believe on Kauai maybe about a year and a half, two years
ago there was a kid that got run over because vehicles were allowed on the beach there. So it’s
something that we want to really discourage. We also, as part of the project, want to be able to
increase the usable area of the beach and provide some lawn areas associated with it to enhance,
you know, what, how users utilize that beach park.
Second item is a, was an intent to replace the bathrooms. The bathroom there that’s been
condemned since 1999, I believe, we’ve already cleaned out and converted the cess -, or
condemned the cesspool. We closed that out in conformance with the State and Federal law.
And the third purpose for this project was to provide for ADA accessibility of the park . Right
now we’ve got the sidewalks, and the public right-of-ways are being heaved by a lot of the
banyan tree roots along there. And what we’re trying to do is provide for accessible recreational
opportunities, picnic tables, accessible showers, accessible drinking fountains and walkways on
the site and replacing walkway in the adjacent right-of-way. So that’s the real quick background
as to what the project, how this project came about.
WOODWARD: Okay, thank you. Any questions for Mr. Komata? No? Okay, who would like
to add something?
KOMATA: You had anything you wanted to add on?
BISEL: No.
WOODWARD: Oh, Commissioner Kern.
KERN: Yes. Thank you, Chairman. I had a quick question. The access points for the kayaks or
small boats, are those actually going to be an area where you can pull up to the water, by the
water, to get a trailer in, or is it more of a carry your small boat in there?
KOMATA: The intent of the design along, the drop-off area along the Banyan Drive is for
loading and unloading. We’re providing a temporary loading and unloading space for people to
drop their boats or small kayaks. You can see that hatched area. It’s hard to, hard to see. It’s
kind of by the “e” in Banyan Drive, over here.That’s the, that’s for active loading and
unloading. We envision, in talking with the various community members that had expressed
concerns about getting access to the water with their kayaks, we provided that one option there.
They would load or unload, park in the adjacent property and, you know, continue on to their
kayak and get on in the water.
4
EXHIBIT C
The other option is, I think as Jeff had pointed out, we provided this kind of “s” shaped access
here from this second parcel that we acquired. That provides a little closer access for trailered
boats, larger kayaks. It just gives, you know, two opportunities for them to launch from.
KERN: So they will actually be able to pull up to the water and drop the tail of the boat in there
or just get pretty close?
KOMATA: Well, speaking to kayaks, they can get close. The first access directly off of Banyan
Drive we’re providing a gate there. The gate would be locked. But it’s there to provide access
for anyone that needs to launch or retrieve larger boats associated, probably with the boats that
are moored out there. But also it’s something that we’re discussing administratively in the
Department how we’re going to provide keys and give access to people that require that kind of
access.
There would be, probably a, well, we anticipate there being a process where people could request
the key if they wanted to do any kind of special launching or activity on the beach. So that
opportunity does exist.
KERN: Great. Thank you very much. Looks great, I think.
WOODWARD: All right. Commissioner Iwashita.
IWASHITA: Across from this park there’s that sailboat, that little sailboat thing, the Rotary did.
What, don’t they have access? They wouldn’t have a small boat access from there?
KOMATA: There is a pre-existing small boat launch area that was improved a long time ago
when the Rotary Club worked with the Department of Parks and Recreation to enhance that
beach park. It’s a Kuhio Kalanianaole Beach park. We didn’t do any major improvements to
that. We didn’t, there wasn’t time to get the permits. And that’s something that I believe we had
discussed with some of the boating community as wanting to pursue at some future time,
developing a more formal launching area. Leonard, you have anything?
IWASHITA: I guess what I’m thinking is that, you know, if you really want to maximize the
beach use on this side and, you know, I guess better to have the launch facility on the other side.
BISEL: Right, I think ultimately that was, that would be our long-term goal. Some of the
concerns that we heard from the boating community was that that particular launch was in
disrepair and didn’t really lend itself to getting out into the ocean. And so at this last public
meeting that we held we made some revisions to the current site plan that you see up on the wall
right now to allow for, for the access that was requested. And, you know, the access from Reeds
Bay may or may not be revisited once that launch on the other side is improved.
WOODWARD: All right. Commissioner Ishibashi?
5
EXHIBIT C
ISHIBASHI: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Once we close that bay, that sandy area, you guys going to
pave that over with more sand or -? How you guys going to fix that when we cannot park there
any more? So, how you guys going fix that area? What materials?
BISEL: I can talk to that. I think the intent right now is to reutilize the existing material that’s
there. That material is all fill material that was dredged from the, when the breakwater was
constructed. And so that’s all placed material. Right now it’s very compacted, it has got a lot of
larger chunks of coral in it. It also does have some basalt stone in there. So the idea was, it
would be to kind of loosen that up, take out the larger material, but try to utilize as much of the
existing material that’s currently on site. So it wouldn’t be paved.
ISHIBASHI: So you’re going to make, create one sandy beach, clean it up a little bit and -?
KOMATA: Well in the past, we have a standing approval from the Department of the Army to
go in and remove rocks from the water using, you know, hand, hand-power, no equipment. So
we’ve been doing that from time to time. As part of this project, like Leonard said, the coral, I
believe, we’re calling to have that crushed into a finer material, try to enhance the beach a little
bit, as much as we would be allowed without having to get a beach replenishment permit. At the
inception of the project, the Department did inquire with DLNR’s OCCL to see what the
likelihood of getting a beach replenishment project going as part of this project. And there were
a lot of hurdles. It was almost, I believe it was impossible at that time because Hilo Bay is
impaired, classified impaired waters. And they don’t allow beach replenishment, they didn’t
allow. We haven’t checked on that recently. I know the Planning Department has someone in
their office that specializes in pursuing these kinds of projects, beach replenishment projects. So
it’s something we want to look at because that was always part of the original intent. We could
just never go after that -.
ISHIBASHI: Good.
KOMATA: You know, realistically.
ISHIBASHI: I think that’s great we’re going to fix that bay, it’s great. So my concern with the
boat launching and the kayak launching was that if we’re going to fix that place and we’re going
to allow cars for drive in, that’s defeating the purpose. So that’s why what, well, he said the
other side, that would be one good one to launch the boats. But if we’re going to fix that place
good, let’s, you know, keeps the cars out, keep the cars out. That’s great. Thank you.
WOODWARD: Let me just ask Mr. Komata, have you receive a copy of the recommendation
and conditions and are those satisfactory to you?
KOMATA: Yes, we have and, yes, they are.
WOODWARD: Okay, very good. Any further questions? Okay -.
AU: Commissioner -?
6
EXHIBIT C
WOODWARD: Would somebody else like to -? Mr. Terry, would you like to -?
MASUNAGA: Mr. Au -?
AU: Yes, Ma’am.
WOODWARD: Oh, I’m sorry, Commissioner Au.
AU: I have a concern about the trees.You know, I was reading a book and, you know, that
book, Banyan Drive Book, it explains -- it was a while back but, you can help me with that -- but
something about the trees and a lot of those trees are historic trees because they were named after
presidents and famous people. Are any of these trees one of those trees? You know, I mean,
because it is Banyan Drive and people know it as Banyan Drive as, you know, I mean,
everybody knows it’s trees. So, you know, maybe if you can just kind of -. You know, you guys
just said these are the trees you guys are going to demo -. But I was just wondering if, you
know, I was trying to look through the archaeologic site plan but I couldn’t find it. If you just,
just tell me about it.
KOMATA: Yeah, I believe some of the banyan trees have name plaques associated with them,
some of them don’t. We are proposing to remove several of them that do have names associated
with them. That’s an interesting discussion, there’s an interesting history on that. The
Department has in the past worked with, well, his name doesn’t come to mind right now, but -.
BISEL: Ted Coombs.
KOMATA: Ted, Ted Coombs that I think wrote the book that you’re referring to; and
prior to him I think it was Kent Warshauer that was an avid supporter of the banyan trees there.
I think at the end of the last administration the Department did a, participated in a rededication of
the banyan trees along Banyan Drive, all throughout which Mayor Kim supported the removal of
these trees. From the Mayor’s perspective, as I recall it, and from the Department’s perspective,
that administration, the idea was to enhance the beach area. And right now that’s in, a lot of
those Banyan trees are in strategically bad locations for the proposed plans that we have before
you guys. So I think also in addition to that, like I mentioned earlier, a lot of the banyan trees,
well, some of the banyan trees along Banyan Drive are heaving the sidewalks and, you know,
that’s something that’s going to continue to happen. So what we’re planning to do, well, what
we had envisioned doing was, and I’ll let Leonard go a little more detail on this, was to come
back in with indigenous trees, native trees, and perform some kind of a rededication to those
people whose banyan trees are removed under this project. So I’d like, I’d like Leonard if he
could to kind of expound on that.
BISEL: I think what James ended up on the idea of rededicating some native or Polynesian
introduced trees in that same person’s name through a formal ceremony was where we ended up
with. But there was a lot of discussion that went on from the beginning of the project and several
options were discussed, including transplanting of the trees. And certain trees were actually
looked at, and we had an arborist come down and look at the feasibility of doing that.
7
EXHIBIT C
There is a substantial cost, obviously. I think at that time it was about $15,000, which in my
mind actually is, sounds like a lot of money. But to move a big tree is not a lot of money, those
particular trees lend themselves to transplanting. And the other idea that we tossed around was
the idea of taking cuttings from those same trees or airlayers and actually establishing a tree from
that same, I guess a keiki tree from that same tree, across the street on the Banyan Drive side or
the golf course side of the road. But I think ultimately the answer that we came up with was the
idea of rededicating a new tree.That might be more appropriate in that setting, in that same
person’s name.
WOODWARD: Okay. Any further questions? Okay, any -?
IWASHITA: Mr. Chair?
WOODWARD: Yes, Commissioner Iwashita.
IWASHITA: Going back to sidewalks, right now it’s not a full sidewalk, yeah. So is that going
to be made a full sidewalk for improving pedestrian use?
BISEL: Yes, the portion fronting the park will actually be totally redone and would become a
complete sidewalk, and portions of it would feed down into the park. The original park plan
actually had another portion of a sidewalk which was taken out in this latest scheme because we
got permission from Public Works to actually look at the idea of redoing the sidewalks along
Banyan Drive. And that allowed us to remove a portion of the sidewalk from within the Park,
and that opened up more green space. And that was one of the concessions or one of the changes
that was entertained in the latest site plan. But the new sidewalks will be full sidewalks.
IWASHITA: Okay. One other?
WOODWARD: Okay.
IWASHITA: I noticed in the description of the use it’s swimming, and bathing, and boating.
There’s nothing in there about standup surf board paddling. And I think, I don’t know, driving
around town nowadays like that’s, it seems like it’s really a booming kind of use. Is that going
to, and I’ve actually done standup paddle in the bay. So, I don’t know, is that addressed in any
way?
BISEL: I don’t think standup was actually as hot as it is right now at the time that we did this
plan, but I don’t see why it would be treated any differently than launching a kayak or any other
means of -.
IWASHITA: I guess I’m just thinking -.
BISEL: Means of -.
IWASHITA: Like Ala Moana has issues now with swimmers and standup; and I don’t know if
there’d be any conflict in terms of people in the water.
8
EXHIBIT C
BISEL: Right. I would think that you probably wouldn’t want people doing standup in the bay
there. But as a place to launch I don’t think it would be any different than launching a kayak.
WOODWARD: All right. Does anybody else want to add to the testimony? Ron, give us your
name and address, and then take it off.
TERRY: My name is Ron Terry, 10 Hina Street, Hilo. I haven’t been working on this project
for about a year and a half so I’m a little rusty on some details. But anticipating some of the
testimony that may come here I want to address a couple of issues.And first of them is the trees.
And as a biologist I just want to note that a banyan is a non-native species, it’s highly invasive.
It has its place as a landscape element, but it escapes that place quite often. Banyans are not
appropriate on coastlines. They shade out native vegetation, they create poor habitat, they
contribute organics to the water that are unnecessary, they’re not found in nature.
Our plan includes planting with native and Polynesian species, and these Polynesian species are
adapted to islands that are highly similar to Hawaii. So they’re essentially native species – kou,
milo, coconut, hala. These are the appropriate coastal plants, naupaka and kamani. These plants
belong on the shoreline. They enhance the shoreline, they reflect the beauty and the culture of
Hawaii, whereas banyans do not. And I think dedicating trees like these to those individuals,
rededicating, is the completely appropriate way to blend the spirit of this dedication which was
done back in the 1930’s with our modern needs and in a more enlightened environment. I’m a
kayaker. I’ve used that place many, many times for kayaking and, also, frequently observe
standup paddling there. It’s a very good place to do it. I don’t see any conflicts whatsoever.
It’s, as much as I like driving on the beach to launch my kayak cause it was easy, I completely
supported Mayor Kim’s idea when he explained it to me, because I don’t like to see, I always
thought there was a big conflict with people driving around. Sometimes people are tearing up on
that beach. Oils and other fluids leak onto the beach. It’s just, it’s simply not a good idea to
have that.
Also one thing that may not be clear from the Planning Department submittal which was good
was the extent of public participation that went on in here. If anyone tells you that we did not
consult the public, I’d like to, you know, beg to differ. We had one large public meeting back in
2006 or 2005, I can’t remember the exact date. We had meetings in the Mayor’s office, we had
meetings on site. And in response to the concerns that people brought up, we had a very well
advertised public meeting in May of 2008. And we had, I think, almost 200 people attend in this
very room. And they were given ballots; and they could choose between keeping it the way it
was or going with our first alternate that we presented in the EA and a second alternate. And we
had 140 people choose the second alternate, which is essentially what you see up there with
some tweaks that we got at the meeting. People said why don’t you add this, why don’t you take
away that. We tweaked it and we have the alternative, alternative that you see there. We had
only eight people express a desire to leave it the way it was, and we had a few people vote for
Alternate one, and a few people just declined to vote. It’s difficult for people to come out to
Planning Commission hearings and hang around and testify. I saw two people walk away that
were here, just couldn’t hang around long enough to testify. One of them I know supported the
proposed alternative but he had to go back to work. We have had an extensive public process
9
EXHIBIT C
and I think it has worked. It has come up with a design that’s very good and acceptable to most
of us. Thank you.
WOODWARD: All right, thank you. Any questions for Mr. Terry? Okay, seeing none, if you
gentlemen and ladies may be seated, we have seven people signed up from the public to testify.
So once again if we could limit public testimony to three minutes each please; and if you go
beyond that we will gently but firmly remind you to summarize. Let me call the first four people
up – Fred Fogel, Kathryn Powell, Michael Nakamura, and Richard MacQuiston. Okay,
Mr. Fogel, you signed up first. Let me first swear you all in. If you’ll all raise your right hand.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth today before the Windward Planning Commission?
TESTIFIERS: I do.
WOODWARD: Okay, very good. Okay, Mr. Fogel, if you would start, give us your name and
address and then begin your testimony.
FOGEL: Fred Fogel, 11-3240 Lehua Pele in Volcano. The government passes rules and
regulations for good reason, at least that’s what one would hope. Yet, another branch of
government comes in and asks for waivers to those rules and regulations, okay. Now if the rules
and regulations were outdated or needed changing, then you’re the government, change them by
all means. But the government should set the example. They should follow the rules and the
regulations as they are written with no exceptions and no waivers. If they expect the people to
do that, the government should do that. They should be above and beyond what they expect the
general public to follow. So I respectfully request that you do not grant any waivers to existing
rules and regulations as applies to construction in the special management area permit area of
Reeds Bay.
WOODWARD: Okay. Do we have any questions for Mr. Fogel? Okay, seeing none, Kathryn
Powell.
POWELL: Okay, thank you, sir. I’m scared so please bear with me.
WOODWARD: Don’t be scared.
POWELL: I’m just nervous. Thanks.
WOODWARD: But if you’ll give us your name and address first, that will give you some time
to take a deep breath.
POWELL: Kathryn Powell, 11-3240 Lehua Pele, Volcano also. And I’m bit a of a tree hugger.
Fred and I heard about this through Tim Rees. And I thought, gee, this doesn’t make any sense,
why would they cut down the trees on Banyan Drive, it’s named Banyan Drive for a reason,
there’s banyan trees on it. And I consider those heritage trees because they were built, I mean,
put in the ground in the thirties, most of them, and they spent their lives doing what they should
do, which is grow and make shade and be beautiful. They’re beautiful. And I know that a lot of
people consider certain plants indigenous and others not indigenous. But guess what?
10
EXHIBIT C
Everything is not indigenous. This was originally lava. So everything had to come from
somewhere. So back in the thirties, some people, humans, decided to dedicate Banyan Drive to
the banyan trees and make all these banyans, beautiful banyan trees. In fact, that special area
that Director Todd was talking about, that special neighborhood in Hilo that should look like
that. And I think Banyan Drive has that same heritage to it. And I think, I believe in
development, but I believe in development with some thought and some preservation to what is
heritage to the people who live here. And I don’t see any reason why a design can’t be made
with a first priority to save what’s there. So why should we be waiting for them to plant
indigenous trees when they’re cutting down what’s already there. I need to sit in the shade. I
don’t know about the rest of you, but if you go down there the cars are parked in the shade, the
people are sitting in the shade. So if you cut down all those trees it’s like, okay, we’re going to
put cement and we’re going to put pavement, it’s going to be wonderful like Waikiki. I don’t
think we want it like Waikiki.
So if, if we could design architecturally something that preserves what is important and special
and improved so that everybody, you know, can benefit from the area, that’s my main concern.
And my main upset with the whole thing is that beautiful tree you’re going to cut it down. I
can’t understand that. That big huge banyan over here that’s over that purple building they
trimmed really nicely and that looks really good. They should be trimmed regularly and cared
for, just like other trees.
And Lorna Larson here who owns Kilauea Lodge told me that she had previously come down
and offered to, as a suggestion that maybe some businesses in the community would, you know,
adopt some of those trees and pay to have them trimmed properly along Banyan Drive; and they
said no to her. So it’s not like people don’t care about it. I just would hope that improvement
would not be so destructive as to what’s really already there and beautiful, and providing a lot of
shade and comfort to a lot of people who do, you know, use the facility at this time. And I
appreciate your listening. And I’m speaking for the tree, give the tree, give the tree a chance,
you know. It’s nice beautiful trees, and they were dedicated and they deserve to be saved.
Thank you.
WOODWARD: All right. Well, thank you for your testimony. Do we have any questions for
Ms. Powell?
DOMINGO: I have a question.
WOODWARD: Commissioner Domingo.
DOMINGO: Ms. Powell, I just wanted to ask if you were a part in the discussions when they
were planning the improvement of that particular area?
POWELL: Mr. Domingo, to be really honest I don’t go to those things.My boyfriend is the one
that comes to the Council meetings; and he comes and he tells me this stuff; and I get upset. So
for me to actually come is a big thing for me, cause I’m really scared about doing this and
coming out. But I think it’s that , it’s that important to me that I would. So I did not physically
attend the meetings, but I get my information from him. When he comes back and says, well,
11
EXHIBIT C
gee, they’re going to do this; and I’m going why are they doing that, I don’t understand. So I
appreciate your question.
DOMINGO: Your boyfriend is Mr. Fogel?
POWELL: Mr. Fogel, that’s correct.
DOMINGO: Okay. You know, you mentioned about certain rules being changed. Could you
elaborate on that?
FOGEL: Well, there’s a requirement to establish the ocean shoreline which is trying to be
waived; and there’s probably other requirements in this package that are trying to be waived. I
don’t know, I haven’t read it. But if you look at it, I would guess that there are probably other
government regulations that are supposed to happen when you construct in a special
management area that are being waived in this case. And my opinion is it shouldn’t be, it’s the
government, they should follow the rules.
(Ms. Masunaga replaced Ms. Leithead Todd at this time, 12 noon.)
DOMINGO: I can understand what you’re saying if regulations or laws are asked to be waived
then they must, I think there must be some legitimate and important reasons for them asking for
that waiver. And I think -.
FOGEL: Yeah, the reason is they need to spend the money by a certain time. If they have to do
all the stuff they’re supposed to do they may not be able to meet the deadline for spending,
obligating the money.
DOMINGO: So them asking waiver of certain issues to be able to spend the money within a
certain time is an issue for you?
FOGEL: Yes, sir.
DOMINGO: In basic terms what are your feelings with regards to improving that particular
area?
FOGEL: That area is used, well, it would apply to local people quite frequently. It’s very
beautiful and it could be improved. The bath house that has basically just wasted away could be
turned into something like a pavilion, yes. It needs to be improved. It would be nice to have
bath houses or restroom facilities there, yeah. It would be nice to have a better sidewalk. You
could have a raised sidewalk that’s not affected by the roots, a boardwalk. There are other
alternatives to leaving the trees the way they are, leaving the layout the way it is and putting in
things that the public really needs, okay, rather than just cutting them all down and putting in
new trees.
DOMINGO: I’m going to ask you another similar question I asked your friend. Were you in
any of those planning meetings with the administration and the community?
12
EXHIBIT C
FOGEL: Well, yes, the meeting -. I was not at any of the meetings. I was going to go to one but
unfortunately the date that was published was incorrect and I didn’t make it. It was later revised.
It was in the paper. It was my understanding in talking to a few people who were there, that the
alternatives were not wide-based, okay. You had the status quo and you had a couple of
alternatives, but they all involved tearing down the trees and that kind of stuff. There wasn’t,
there was not another alternative. So when you ask people to choose something, you know, they
choose what’s in front of them, not nece -, you know, what they think is the best of the three, but
not necessarily what they really think is what should be done.
DOMINGO: Okay, thank you very much.
WOODWARD: Okay. Michael Nakamura, -.
NAKAMURA: Hello.
WOODWARD: If you’ll give us your name and address and begin.
NAKAMURA: Hello, hello. Michael Nakamura, 1179 North Kumuwaina Street, Hilo, Hilo. I
came to this meeting spur of the moment. I’m a boater. I use Reeds Bay. And I was just
concerned about any plans to change what’s there now. I didn’t know, you know, too much
about the alternative. I kind of do now. As far as my support, it has waivered somewhat from
my original position. Okay? But I still think Reeds Bay as it is now is a nice place. And
Mr. Ishibashi in particular said something about fix it. That kind of upset me when I heard the
word fix it. In my opinion it’s not broken, okay. Every day I go down there to use my boat a lot
of tourist busses stop there. I don’t know if any of you have seen that. And they spend at least a
minute explaining the area and letting the tourists see the area. It’s a beautiful area as is, in my
opinion. That’s the area they stop at. If you past that area towards Banyan Drive where the
parking lot and the grassy area is supposed to be developed, nobody passes there, not too many
people park in there, okay. I can see a development on that side and maybe a grassy area would
be nice with a pavilion for picnics and all that. But then the frontal area near the road which is
what people drive past, in my opinion, is very nice now. And I think with the big tree, you
know, Banyan Drive, yeah, it’s really nice. I think the plan would not make it nicer. It would,
you know, just prevent me from getting to the water in one way, yeah. I’m too old to carry my
boat from the parking lot. I have a dolly where I can wheel the boat; but you’re asking me to do
something that’s a lot more strenuous than what I’m doing now. I would have to pass the whole
beach to get to the area where there’s sand.And if there is anybody using the beach, I would
have to wheel my boat past them. I don’t know how I would do that on the sand, yeah. But
that’s a concern. The opposite side of the water where they were thinking of developing a boat
launch, it’s a possibility, you know, if they do it. But that’s my concerns, anyway, right now.
Okay, other than that I see no objections, yeah. Thank you.
WOODWARD: Okay, thank you. Any questions? Okay, no, let’s see, Mr. McQuistol (sic).
MACQUISTON: I’m Richard MacQuiston and I’m from -.
13
EXHIBIT C
WOODWARD: Oh, Quiston, okay, sorry.
MACQUISTON: Box 5779, Keaau.
WOODWARD: Go ahead.
MACQUISTON: Okay. I’m really going to assume that the work in this area is to enhance
water activity. But I think there’s something that’s a little bit greater if the County is worried
about the safety, is the pollution in that dead-end bay. You’ve got the cruise ships up by the pier,
the tugs, the soil barges, the oil storage, you’ve got a prevailing wind coming right into the bay.
We’ve got a spillway that drains the golf course with the toxins and stuff forever in there, plus
the sewage pump area across the street which has occasional leaks.
Now I would never swim there. I’m down there three or four times a week kayaking. So I
would never swim there. I’ve had tourists ask me would you swim there. I say, no, I wouldn’t.
But they do. Rarely do you see tourists in there; but when they are I’m thinking, well,
whatevers.
The other thing is the spillway. That was put there for some reason. And it takes a runoff from
the high, from the street out front plus whatever is coming off that herbicide, toxicide (sic) area
across the road. The other, I’m going to, racing through here cause I’ve got a couple of things.
On the other side on the Kalanianaole way, that’s not accessible for kayaks. You’re still as far
away as if I parked down by Coconut Grill and humped it up the road. The, there’s not enough
accessibility if you only have one ramp there. And the ramp has got a gate on it and that’s sort of
like an imposing thing. And like Mr. said here if you’re humping your kayak from the other
parking lot, where are you supposed to hump it? Have you ever lift a kayak? That damn things
weigh about 80 pounds so you’re lucky to, you know, be able; and I’m talking about senior
citizens. I’m not talking about young guys who can hold it over their heads and do the hula. I’m
talking about guys who are a little bit older. You know, they need every bit of energy they can
get to just to get the kayak in and out of the water. As to the SUP, the standup paddlers, they’re
in the bay, there are no problems. There’s no problem at all in that bay with the people there.
The people that park on the bay in the side thing are courteous, they’re ohana, they all know each
other. This is their place. And what we’re doing right now is planning to take it away. I’m
hearing from the County, everything we went to look at is a proposal. We got this proposal,
we’ve got -. Where’s your hard plan? I mean, there was a meeting and I tried to go to it but they
changed the date like Mr. said. But where is the hard plan? Proposal, we’re looking into this,
we’re looking into that. You better look into it and get it into somebody so that we can say,
okay, let’s tear it apart or let’s approve it. That’s all I have.
WOODWARD: All right. Thank you. Any questions for Mr. Macquiston? Okay, seeing none,
if you folks will be seated, we have four more people that have signed up to testify. And if they
would approach the table and have a seat - Pat Moore, Tim Rees, Kiko Johnston-Kitazawa and
Elfie Wilkins. All right, if I could swear you in first. If you’ll raise your right hand. Do you
swear or affirm to tell the truth today before the Windward Planning Commission?
TESTIFIERS: Yes. Yes, sir.
14
EXHIBIT C
WOODWARD: Okay, very good. And Pat Moore, you’ll be first on the list. If you’d just give
us your name and address and then you may begin.
MOORE: Okay, thank you. My name is Pat Moore. My address is 1244 Kahoa Street, Hilo.
I’m a frequent user of the bay. I have an 18 ½-foot Wherry. If you don’t know what that is it’s a
long row boat; and I use the bay probably three to five times per week to launch my boat from
there. It’s really the only accessible area that is currently open 24 hours a day. The opposite side
where there’s the old boat ramp which was talked about at low tide it’s full of rocks and it’s very
difficult to bring a boat in safely at that location. This is the only place where there is enough
sand accumulated and where there is a sloping beach where you can roll a dolly down in order to
launch a boat. I don’t launch at Bayfront because it’s a little bit more difficult for my dolly and
the boat. And also I’ve done it once and it broached when I was trying to get out, which wasn’t
very comfortable.
The two locations, I would like to commend the Planning Department for listening to the public.
I wasn’t able to attend any of the public meetings. However, when I saw the sign go up down at
Reeds Bay I immediately went into the Parks and Recreation Department, talked to James,
voiced my concerns to him, and also over to the Planning Department as well, too. And I
commend them for modifying the original plan to have a boat access. Unfortunately, the drive-
up location where they have planned the boat access is the wrong portion of the bay. If you go
down there you’ll notice there’s about a 3-foot drop-off now from where you can drive on to
where the beach is. And when I refer to a beach I’m talking about to the extent of the high water
mark, and that, to me, is what is the definition of a beach. And actually the place where the
people drive on I would refer to as not the beach itself. So that portion of the beach, and it has
been there for a long time. And the currents and so forth have, there’s an embankment of about
3 feet, a steep drop-off and almost no sand is in the water area. And at low tide it is where there
is the most rocks to bring a boat up onto. So I would like the Commission to consider moving
the location of the drive-up area where you can launch to a different location on the beach.
Currently I launch right nearby the spillway; and that’s the best location because it’s a sloping
bank and there is a lot of sand that has come in there. Even at low tide though there’s a rock
problem.
So access is also another concern because right now it’s planned that the beach be locked up. I
launch early in the morning, sometimes at 5 a.m. I stay out late at night. So coming back and
having the beach closed up would be a problem for me. So it’d actually be restricting access.
Also on across the way that is also a park, which he has closed and locked up. So you can’t park
in the parking lot, launch your boat and then come back at a time when it’s locked up. So that’s
also a problem that I think needs to be addressed as well. So I appreciate the idea of providing
keys. I hope that works. I do like a lot of the improvements.
And I guess I should summarize. One of the additional things I would like to say is that I did
read the environmental study; and even though I have a great deal of appreciation and respect for
Mr. Terry I did feel that it did not adequately address the usage of the current users, and that in
looking forward when you do look at these plans that you take into consideration the impacts of
15
EXHIBIT C
the current users and how they’ve been addressed, because I don’t think it was adequately
covered. Thank you very much.
IWASHITA: Mr. Chair?
WOODWARD: Okay, yeah, Commissioner Iwashita.
IWASHITA: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’m not clear where it is that you would prefer the
launching to be allowed.
MOORE: Well, the, if you, well, I can’t really see it.
MASUNAGA: Here.
MOORE: But currently, in fact I’ll just walk up there.
IWASHITA: They have a laser.
MOORE: Okay. Yeah, where James is pointing is right now where -.
NOMURA: Microphone, please.
MOORE: Most of us launch from.
IWASHITA: Please use the mike.
MOORE: Okay.
DARROW: Press the red button.
MOORE: Okay. Thank you. This area is where there is the most sand right now, and where
there are the fewest rocks at low tide, and where most of the boasters launch from. And that’s
where there is a sloping bank. Over here where this drive-up area is planned for there is
currently a 3-foot embankment that drops down onto the sandy gravel. And that’s a condition
that has been there for a long time. And it’s due to the way the currents and so forth have shaped
the beach. Also, this area, oops, okay, I’ll go back. Hopefully I can get to it, oops, forward.
Okay, thanks for the time here. I’ll, I might need some help. Okay, here we are. This area at
low tide is very full of rocks. You’re not going to be able to pick up and move. And coming in
with a boat is going to be very problematic. Even at high tide there’s a lot of rocks that bare
here, especially out in here. And so if you build this and you create a nice sloping area, it might
be suitable. But if the currents and so forth again create a drop-off there, it’s not going to be
where dollies or boats can be launched easily from.
IWASHITA: Thank you.
WOODWARD: All right. Any further questions? No? Mr. Rees.
16
EXHIBIT C
REES: Good morning.
WOODWARD: Hi.
REES: And aloha to all of you. You know, I want to state something real quick.
WOODWARD: If you can give us your name and address first.
REES: Oh, sorry, Tim Rees. Address is PO Box, my mailing address is Box 1787, Pahoa,
Hawaii. I live in Waiakea Uka with my lady and I visit Reeds Bays and frequent it quite often.
My name was mentioned in the SMA Permit application and I am a bit upset about that. I’ve
spoken to different personnel here. It was signed by Bob Fitzgerald. I just met Bob yesterday, I
shook his hands, the first time I’ve ever spoken to the man personally. But it lays out a sense
that the second paragraph of page 2, oh, excuse me, the first paragraph of page 2 it says that I at
my bidding a meeting happened. I didn’t know anything about that. I never met Elfie Wilkins or
any of the other people that -.
WILKINS: I did.
REES: Showed up at that meeting.
WILKINS: I did.
REES: Pardon?
WILKINS: I did meet you.
REES: Oh, but before then.
WILKINS: I did.
REES: Well, maybe we met, I’m sorry. Sorry, I forgot. Anyhow what happened was nobody
from Park and Rec had my phone number then. I had met James Komata when myself and Tony
Marzi met with Billy Kenoi regarding a potential future park project on the Orchid Isle Hotel
piece which is Phase II of this property. We were talking about a Hawaiian cultural center,
trying to hui together and get a group together, start raising money; and we had no clue that there
was any park project going on whatsoever. And at that time James showed me the plan here.
I’m going to have to cut to the chase on that. If any Commissioners would like to speak to me
later -.
I feel that I’ve been presented in the light as something of a trouble maker, and that I went on the
radio on this project and I gave credit to Park and Rec. I never for a moment insinuated that
they had not done anything appropriate and according to the law as far as public notifications
went. Sometimes things slip through the cracks. And if you look at the meeting they spoke of
afterwards where there was a A Plan and a B Plan, I submit that when 142 people are asked to
17
EXHIBIT C
support the first plan, Plan A, and that was done through an email from the Downtown
Improvement Association, they rallied the troops, they said come support the Plan -. The only
plan on the books then was Plan A that we could even possibly have known of. Those folks
came and said we don’t like Plan A, a 142 of us want Plan B. How Plan B got better was it
removed so much hardscape from the shoreline area. I commend Parks and Rec for that. I did
that publicly. I have no gripe with Park and Rec.
Now to the Special Management Area issues, what concerns me, I’ve gone in detail through
these construction plans, not just the drastic demolition of the existing trees, which many are
considered exceptional trees according to State and County law. And it’s unfortunate they
planted banyans, at least in the mind of many people. But our exceptional tree lists state-wide
are littered, if you want to call it that, with invasive trees.Monkey pods invade thousands of
acres of Kau. They’re beautiful in Hilo where they’re at. You – don’t we all like those down
Bayfront? So that should not be the primary concern. And as I ran a petition on this to get
people, we simply asked Park and Rec we said please stop this Plan A that you have and consult
with the public. They did do that, to a degree that they feel was satisfactory.
We’re at this point where what this body needs to focus on is the elevations. It’s problematic for
the people that want to stay driving on the beach, it’s problematic for the planners. It’s
problematic when you ask for a waiver in which the Department, excuse me, Planning
Department can make that call on the shoreline. When, a shoreline against a cliff is not a
problem. That’s where you should have a waiver, something where there’s a structure so far
back there’s no way it could impact it. What we’re talking about here is a shoreline that now
comes up on an elevation where a one- or two-inch rise in a high tide can push it in 20, 30 feet.
And I’ve been taking video of this. I’ve got it documented. I don’t know if the areas where,
there are actually areas that I videoed where the water is plainly and clearly 40 to 50 feet inside
of what was represented as a certified shoreline. You now know it was not. I brought to Parks
and Rec’s attention 18 months ago they did not have a certified shoreline, they needed to get it.
It fell in the cracks. There’s no attempt to sandbag anybody. I brought it again to Mr. Darrow’s
nd
attention on December 22. You’ll notice the date of the letter speaking about this, it’s
rd
December 23.
I have to say one last thing. I consider the largest banyan tree there, the Chinese Weeping
Banyan, a living memorial. If that was planted by the President of the American Legion and the
First Women’s Auxiliary, President of the American Legion, I consider that a living memorial to
our young men and women; and I will fight for it. And what I will do is I will seek an injunction
if this plan goes forward disrespecting the thoughts of our forebearers that were appropriate.
And there’s no one can tell me a weeping benji, a fitus benjimina (phonetic) is an invasive.
They’re only where they’re planted by man. They do not do what the other banyan,
unfortunately, does. And the real problem is the signature tree that’s invading our shorelines all
over the place. It’s another fightus (phonetic)? It’s the strangling banyan I believe, you know.
So we need to look at what’s going on here.
The elevations are problematic. Please, please look at that. We need sand replenishment.
Everybody wants to do the right thing here. We have one shot at it. I suggest what Mr. Higa
suggested. He said, Tim, go to Park and Rec, tell them to run the bathroom separately so there’s
18
EXHIBIT C
no chance of jeopardizing that funding. That’s what this has come down to now. There’s no
need to rush the rest of this plan, there’s no need to waste the work on it. They could very easily
go forward with the restroom plan segregated out of here. And do that, and bring up the rest of it
when there’s a proper shoreline certification and the elevations have been looked into.
At present I calculate every footing being wet when it is implanted probably 40 percent of the
time the way our tide elevations work and the elevations of this construction. I find that
unacceptable.
WOODWARD: All right, thank you.
REES: Thank you for the latitude.
WOODWARD: Let me, any questions for Mr. Rees? Yes, Commissioner Iwashita.
IWASHITA: So just in my mind the, like on this map, well, -. So this dotted line where it says
40 feet shoreline setback -?
REES: That’s correct.
IWASHITA: Your testimony is that that’s not a, may not be a correct line?
REES: In certain areas it definitely is not correct because it does trace the, what was a
guesstimated shoreline. And a survey was conducted. Some of those survey pins are very
accurate as far as elevation goes. But as I stated about the function of here we have a sensitive
issue where a one-inch raise in tide or a just slightly larger wave at the peak of the tide can push
the highest splash of the high tide of the year 20 to 30 feet inland. And that is happening right
stst
now, it happened January 31, January 1. And at two or three weeks before that we had about a
9 to, at the biggest, I would say a 12-inch very small wave that came in and completely arranged,
rearranged all of these shoreline areas. And I’ve got video evidence of that. It’s not to thwart
the plan. It’s just to be taken into consideration.
WOODWARD: And as that would affect the proposed improvements you’re saying that where
some of the, I guess, the new landscaping would occur that that would essentially not work?
REES: Mr. Iwashita, I’m not absolutely sure that -. For instance, the right side of the plan
where there’s that loop sidewalk portion, that is definitely far within the current shoreline. But
that may not matter. As far as is it going to stop the major construction of this project? No, but
it may be something that has to be redesigned out and say you can’t put that loop there. On what
I call the fishing point, the middle point, and the point that has the interpretative sign on it with
the existing ironwood tree, that has actually become an islet. The, the crushed coral is pushed
through with water and washes down in what we would consider the inner bay close to this
section where the gentleman here was speaking about that shelf. And one of the reasons why
you have that shelf is because 80 years ago they laid in the rock layer. So you’ve got a man-
made hardscape that erodes from underneath, and then it continually collapses. Parts of that
eroded more than a foot just three weeks ago. And, again, it may not affect the restroom, the
19
EXHIBIT C
comfort station, but it is starting to get close. It may affect where the landscape barrier goes.
That has an 18-inch footing on it which is clearly in the tides.
IWASHITA: So as to the improvements which is, I guess, the Puna side of this area, your
concern is that that may be overrun by, you know, high tide, high wave kind of scenario and -?
REES: Absolutely. Presently where the sidewalk is located, I have video evidence. And I’m
standing in the water and I’ve got a light set up in the middle of the night, so you can see the
reflection and grab reference points. And I measured it with my tapes and spotlighted that.
IWASHITA: Thank you.
WOODWARD: All right, further questions? No. Okay, Mr. Johnston-Kitazawa.
JOHNSTON-KITAZAWA: Aloha, Mr. Chairman.
WOODWARD: Aloha.
JOHNSTON- KITAZAWA: And Members of the Planning Commission -.
COMMISSIONERS: Aloha.
JOHNSTON- KITAZAWA:Some of whom are familiar to me. I’m Kiko Johnston-Kitazawa.
I’m a native tenant at Honuapo Harbor in Kau, but I grew up in Piihonua in Hilo. My mother
was born in Piihonua. My father was born in Waikiki, was a surf board and canoe builder. And
my maternal grandfather, I have a picture of him standing on a pier at what is now called Reeds
Bay, the footings of which have been exposed over the last 15 years of erosion next to the culvert
that some people call the spillway.
The culvert when it was built was recessed into the coral rubble fill, concurrent with the building
of Banyan Drive, the date you can get off the plaque at the Kanoelehua intersection. I’m
disturbed by the use of certain loaded words, one of them is driving on the beach. In every
administration former to Mayor Kim, that was referred to as the Reeds Bay parking lot or the
coral rubble parking lot for Reeds Bay Park. All of a sudden we’re driving on the beach. It was
fill that was dredged out of Kuhio Bay in the thirties, piped to shore, to make Bakers Beach,
which has now washed almost all back into the ocean. It’s still all sitting out there on the sea
floor. It was bussed, filled on the marshy area. I talked to Dr. Nagakura, retired veterinarian, he
said it used to be all marshy area behind, and they filled and made that coral rubble parking lot.
My biggest objection is the premise that this is a park improvement. Improvement for who and
against who? If we took the dragstrip and said, hey, we’re going to make it the golf course,
municipal, you guys out of here, no more racing cars, there’d be a big scream. If you took the
municipal golf course and said we’re going to make a baseball field, you guys cannot play golf
here anymore, people would be really upset. Same if you took Liliuokalani Park and said no
more picnic here and walking, you know, we’re going to make canoe clubs over here or we’re
going to fill it in and make a go-cart tract. So County Parks has a big responsibility and it’s
20
EXHIBIT C
difficult to serve well. But they did not look at the existing use. The existing use, Reeds Bay is
harbor, boating, water recreation, access to the water, protected water that’s calm even when the
rest of the bay is rough. And when you take something like this and just say, oh, we’re going to
make it something different, you’ve ignored the people who are using it. It’s a heavily used
park. Did anybody go and look at how it’s used? Unfortunately, I have to say probably yes -. I
asked my dad about this. I’m not against visitor industry. I make my livelihood from it. I’m a
canoe builder and canoe sailor, I do school group things, also educational, but I make my
livelihood from it as well. I said, dad, why do they want to close the launching and put a
sidewalk and grass? He goes, if I was you I would look to certain downtown merchants who
think if they make a thing like that they’ll get people to walk downtown from the cruise ship and
spend money if they can only get those darn people out of there. This is not good. For one thing
he said they won’t walk down there. Cruise ship wants to sell them a prebook -.
(Timer ringing at this point).
JOHNSTON-KITAZAWA: Is my three minutes up?
WOODWARD: Yes.
JOHNSTON-KITAZAWA: Okay, thank you.
WOODWARD: All right, any questions? Commissioner Iwashita.
JOHNSTON-KITAZAWA: I do have something else I would like to say if I may be allowed?
WOODWARD: All right, sure. If you want to summarize that’d be fine.
JOHNSTON- KITAZAWA: You have to work with other jurisdictions. In this case State
DLNR Boating. Reeds Bay is the only mooring area in the whole archipelago that does not have
any shoreside facility, no dinghy dock, no shower, no faucet. Why not? They never knew they
needed it. The County always said it was fine to use it as the support place to launch your
dinghy, pull up your boat, pull it into the sheltered part when it’s stormy. We’re up against
some -. A mooring permittee. I have a canoe moored out there as well. They passed a new
thing in the State that says, you’ve always been responsible for your boat if it goes on the rocks
and it’s wrecked, you’ve got to clean it up. That’s good. Now they’ve said we can order you to,
you can’t touch it and you’ve got to let us clean it up, and we’ll send you the bill. So we always
take care of stuff.
And the last sum -, last winter storm at 3:30 a.m. there were nine vehicles on the beach launching
boats to go run extra anchors, chain, pull boats that were on the rocks off. There’s still two boats
that went on the rocks. One was lost. County Parks has a bad habit of locking up parks at night.
And you can tell I’m upset about this cause they arbitrarily without notification closed Honuapo
Canoe Landing, putting blocks around, despite having put, yes -. Do you put input, do you get
involved with meetings? Yes, I do. And very often you say the stuff and it just goes through
anyway like that. So lot of people I talked to said no use go, it’s going to happen anyway. So
today I said, well, I’ll come and say. But Reeds Bay historically has been the place. So I submit
21
EXHIBIT C
that it should not be turned into a walking park like Liliuokalani Park or a picnic park. It should
stay just the way it is. And as it is, it’s going to have problems. But if you put people out onto
the street to park and get their kids to the water and their board to the water and the boat to the
water, they’re going to get run over by the guys blazing up and down the street. And he’s,
someone else is right, that people, generally speaking, inside the parking lot are very careful.
You’ll see parents park with their car, kids swimming, watching closely. Somebody drives fast,
they get yelled at. Thank you for your time.
WOODWARD: All right, thank you. You had a question, Commissioner Iwashita?
IWASHITA: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I guess part of, you know, my observation, right, I guess
my concern would be that, regarding your, you know, wanting to keep the continued access. Is
that, you know, old trucks with leaking oil and stuff?
JOHNSTON- KITAZAWA: Oh, may I please address that?
IWASHITA: Yeah.
JOHNSTON- KITAZAWA: Thank you for reminding me. Okay, the initial report by the
consultant said the reason the boat, beach is being eroded is because of people putting their
trailers in and out, and the reason the beach is being polluted is because cars driving on the coral
parking lot are leaking oil. Do you know that that triple box culvert drains all of Banyan Drive
right into Reeds Bay? And the real reason for the worst erosion on the beach is the water coming
off Banyan Drive down the driveway carving a gully every time it rains, and when the County
went, and puts the hoses down in the drain all this black sludge comes out into Reeds Bay. So I
would say that, yes, an old truck could leak on the parking lot of Reeds Bay and its miniscule
compared to everything else happening from Banyan Drive Road. Thank you.
IWASHITA: Okay. What, I understand what you’re saying. You’re saying solve the big
problem. But what I’m talking about is -.
JOHNSTON-KITAZAWA: No, I’m sorry, no. I’m not saying it’s okay to have this problem
because there’s a bigger problem. I’m just saying to use that as the excuse to close off the public
access is kind of a, a bore. And to stop calling it, driving on the beach when it’s always been the
parking lot, that’s kind of a sneaky word switch, too.
IWASHITA: Okay, thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
WOODWARD: All right, thank you. Elfie Williams.
WILKINS: Wilkins.
WOODWARD: Wilkins, excuse me. All right.
WILKINS: Hi. You want my -?
22
EXHIBIT C
WOODWARD: Name and address, please, yes.
WILKINS: Elfie Wilkins, 20 Akepa Street and also Banyan Drive, and in Hilo. Okay. I wasn’t
prepared. I just came by chance because I was waiting for the bathroom to start on November 2,
2,‘08 and that was after we had public meeting. I went for the walk, I voted and I talked to
whoever was in charge. And then now finally that, I’ll be counted the -. The, what you call,
SMA, that wasn’t quite in order even though everything out was done. And so I thought well
I’ll just come, coming along, probably they don’t need me. And I put down, so I’m kind of
nervous, okay? I put it down in order of priority for me.
There are children playing in the water every single day and I cannot understand why no, anyone
doesn’t want to change it, have it. Because the cars, I counted them up to 30 cars on weekends,
and don’t tell me that all the cars are okay. So for me the keiki are very, very important.
The second thing is I was against cutting the Banyan Drive because I was the last person of the
Hilo Outdoor Circle, I was the last president. But then thinking things over and that that would
improve the area like Onekahaka in a, in a way, you have all the picnic tables so that the family
could go there and picnic instead of going into with a car and put a big tent around it which takes
away from the other people who might want to go there -. Okay, so I sacrifice the banyan and I
just hope that they replace it with some other tree because we need the shade. And, by the way,
those are not exceptional trees because they were not nominated.
And the other thing, the shower would be great for anyone who goes in there and comes out.
And the bathrooms are really needed because even those portable bathrooms twice now they
were vandalized. So you have the whole thing on the floor.
And lastly I believe if we don’t do any pathway or anything to go to the bathroom or so, the
ADA is going to come down on you and demand it. That’s all.
WOODWARD: Okay, thank you very much. Any questions for Ms. Wilkins? All right, you all
may be seated. Thank you very much.
PUBLIC: Can I say one more thing, real quick?
WOODWARD: I’m sorry, that’s pretty much it. No rebuttals.
PUBLIC: It’s not a rebuttal.
WOODWARD: Okay. All right -.
PUBLIC: So is written testimony still being accepted?
WOODWARD: No, not at this point. Okay, if anybody would like to make a motion -.
IWASHITA: Can we ask the applicant to come forward again, please?
23
EXHIBIT C
WOODWARD: Certainly. We’ll have the applicant come back, forward. Okay, Mr. Komata,
did you have anything to say in regard to the public testimony that has been submitted here?
KOMATA: Yeah, I’d just like to clarify a couple of the issues that were brought up. It was
mentioned about converting the existing bathroom into a pavilion. You know, I believe that’s
not a practical idea. It’s, right now it’s within the high reach of the waves. So as the structure is
it shouldn’t be where it is right now. So we’re proposing to demolish and remove it completely.
Boardwalks was also mentioned. You know, we’ve tried boardwalks. Kahaluu Beach Park we
put in accessible boardwalks. The first series of winter surf twisted that and broke it all up; and
we had to come back in with concrete. So, you know, we’ve tried that approach, it’s not as easy
as it sounds. It’s not as successful either.
On the, I think it was mentioned twice or three times about the date being changed on the public
meeting. Our consultants on our behalf posted the notice in the newspaper that was accurate. It
was the Tribune Herald reporter that on, in their own story posted the wrong date. So, you know,
it wasn’t our mistake. It was the newspaper’s.
It was mentioned about the park being open 24 hours a day. All parks under County jurisdiction
are closed, are opened only 6 a.m. to 11 p.m., regardless of whether the gate or not. That’s in the
County Code. That’s undeniable.
The launching watercraft, the issue of launching watercraft at beaches, I believe our park rules
speak to that. Excuse me, launching watercraft from beaches is actually not an allowed activity.
It’s just something that has gone on historically at Reeds Bay, something that we’re okay with
working with, I guess. The policy has never been to go after stopping that kind of use at Reeds
Bay.
The location of the second boat launch, if you look at the site, I think it’s pretty plain to see that
that location that Mr. Moore mentioned is pretty much in line with where we have the Banyan
Drive drop-off loading and unloading spot. So, you know, I don’t see an issue there. The second
boat launch area, which is near the restroom, is provided in the only area where you can have
vehicular access. It doesn’t interfere with the pedestrian uses or beach uses. So, you know, there
was some concessions made on our part to provide that second access. We’re providing the most
reasonable spot that we could determine on that site.
And like Ms. Wilkins said, the last point, on the exceptional trees, the banyan trees are not
exceptional trees, not in the County Code. So I just wanted to clarify that point. That’s
something we checked on many times.
WOODWARD: All right, thank you. Commissioner Iwashita.
IWASHITA: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Komata, I guess, you know, what about the point
raised as far as no comfort or other facilities for the boaters who moor out there under, you
know, with mooring permits? And, I guess his -, because historically I guess the point was that
24
EXHIBIT C
there used to be facilities before and so the State doesn’t prov -, you know, they don’t provide
like Ala Wai Harbor and those places, right, where they provide for those facilities. So -.
KOMATA: Yeah, all the beach side improvements are County, County improvements. The
State manages the moor, mooring spots out there, but they haven’t contributed anything to the
enhancement of this project, in this project or prior to that.
IWASHITA: And I guess the point, the point was that, I guess historically the State doesn’t have
anything because historically there were some facilities that were, you know, the County had
there. So, you know, and I guess I’m not a boater but it makes, you know -. I guess my concern
would be you moor there, you come in your little dinghy, whatever they have, you know to get to
shore, right, and they need to have that access, and especially if in a storm situation where Civil
Defense is telling you, you know, go down and secure your boat, right? And if the place is
locked how you’re going to do that?
KOMATA: Right, and that’s where we, I had mentioned earlier about coming up with the
system that anyone who is a licensed, is licensed to moor in Reeds Bay should have a key to any
gate that we do install. So they would have access any time they need it.
IWASHITA: Okay.
KOMATA: The, you know, just to add to that, DLNR was involved in the EA process. They
were consulted throughout the progression of the project. So that’s, I think, I believe, that’s how
that discussion started along with one of the individuals that does moor in Reeds Bay. So that’s
how that discussion started.
IWASHITA: And then my other point, well, my other concern was about, you know, the, the
accuracy of the, where the shoreline is and the high wash of the waves and how some of these
proposed improvements might be inundated as you saw, you know, like at Kahaluu Park, the
example you just talked about how, you know, what you did was inundated by high waves. So -.
KOMATA: Yeah, the lines, the lines shown on that, on the maps that you guys have, are the
proposed certified shoreline and the 40-foot setback which is based, you know, as an offset from
that line. The certified shoreline will be whatever the State Surveyor approves, you know,
through their process, as well as DLNR. So what we had asked for was some flexibility on -.
Depending on where that line is, you know, we’re more than willing to adjust the plans to
accommodate any changes in that line that’s shown on the plan.
IWASHITA: Okay, so in terms of where the actual, ultimately, where the walkway and so forth
will be set, it would depend upon the, some future work that’s supposed to be more accurate on
locating where the high wash of the waves or where storm surge would get to?
KOMATA: Right. And in the design process we have to rely on the expertise on the surveyor
that’s part of our consultant team. So he set that line. It’s a matter of him proposing it to the
State Surveyor’s Office and DLNR, having them certify it. They can agree, disagree, they can
move it in one way or the other based on site photos, site visitations. So, you know, we’re
25
EXHIBIT C
subject to whatever. Wherever that line ends up being, we’re subject to the rules as applies to
that line.
IWASHITA: I guess, even though I said it was the last thing it’s not. I notice on your
demolition map that the banyan out on the Hamakua side of the beach, or one of them, the largest
one actually out there between the two is not being demolished. And I guess giving the rationale
I heard earlier from Mr. Darrow I don’t understand why that is.
KOMATA: Well, I believe, I know -. Leonard, can you come up and discuss that? My
recollection is that there was particular interest in that one banyan tree. There was, when we met
at the site with a group of about 8 or 10 people that was their priority tree. That’s the one that
they wanted saved. And so I think we acquiesced at first or, that was shown in the plan and we
gave in and said we agree to keep that tree there as a part of this plan; but in the future if once
our other trees start taking place, then we would look at maybe replacing that down the line. Is
that correct, Leonard?
BISEL: That’s correct, yes.
IWASHITA: So you would have to, would that, that would be, if you later on need to demo that
tree that would just be a minor SMA kind of a thing? You wouldn’t have to come back to us?
BISEL: Yeah, I believe it would be a minor action.
IWASHITA: Does that sound correct, counsel?
GONZALEZ: What is the question?
IWASHITA: I’m sorry, the demolition of the banyan tree that is not being, approval is not being
sought for in this application, it’s just one tree that would be a minor SMA administrative
matter?
GONZALEZ: I don’t know. You’d have to ask the Director.
MASUNAGA: Yeah, I think you’re right on that.
IWASHITA: Okay, thank you.
WOODWARD: All right, Commissioner Domingo, you had a question? No?
DOMINGO: I’d just like to mention this -. You know, I’m torn apart from what I’ve seen in the
plan and from what has been said by the public, Parks and Recreation, and from what I’m
hearing from the public. It seems like P&R is just satisfied that everything has been addressed
and that it’s ready to go, yeah. And what I’m hearing from the public, he said, hey, everything is
not being addressed here, we need some, maybe some clarification or some assurances and
perhaps there might not be an understanding from the part of the public with regards to what,
what’s here actually in the plan. So, you know, I don’t know, I’m not ready to vote on this and
26
EXHIBIT C
give, give it a stamp of approval, until I’m assured that everything has been addressed and
adhered to, everyone has been heard.
KOMATA: Can I respond to that?
WOODWARD: Yes, please.
KOMATA: The, you know, as we mentioned, I think Ron Terry mention on our behalf, we had
several opportunities for public input, both public meetings. We’ve on numerous occasions met
with people individually over the counter at our Department, sat in the conference room, and
went over the plans with them. Anyone who has been interested in this project we’ve been more
than happy to spend time with them, and we’re trying to work out their concerns. We went
through the EA process, we went through the NEPA process, we went through many public
processes where people can provide that kind of input. Why that input is coming in now, I’m not
sure. We’ve heard some of it. Like we mentioned earlier, we have modified the plan quite a bit
to take into consideration some of the concerns that were brought up during those various
processes. So, you know, I respectfully disagree to some extent on that position.
DOMINGO: You know, on the comment side what I heard was that many things that the public
have expressed, what we’ve heard of, probably might have been addressed. But the one, one
issue is that those people who’s using the bay in itself has not really been heard. You know,
that’s what I’m hearing too. So -.
KOMATA: Well, again, everyone had an opportunity during the process, through all those
processes to provide input.You know, we, I think we went above and beyond. Normally we’re
just required to post notice in the newspaper to get people out there. Our contractor or our
consultant Leonard Bisel, we required him to actually serve all the residents and business owners
and landowners of the Waiakea Peninsula, and any lands, any parcels within 1,000 feet of this
Park, you know, personal certified mail notifying them of the process. So -.
WOODWARD: Okay, I would like to just make one comment, and this is after discussion with
our Corporation Counsel Mr. Gonzalez. In granting or denying a Special Management Area
Permit, our area of, the area that we have purview over is protecting the ecology, protecting the
coastline. Okay? And a lot of the use issues we’re talking about, we haven’t heard much about
potential ecological problems from one use or another. So I think we may be getting a little bit
far afield here. That’s just my two cents worth. And I’ll ask Mr. Gonzalez if he has anything to
add to that as far as what we base our decision upon. Mr. Gonzales.
GONZALES: Nothing new.
WOODWARD: Okay. That’s pretty much it. All right. Commissioner Kern?
KERN: Just a quick comment. Born and raised on the Big Island, grew up surfing Pohoiki.
Back in the day we could pull up our trucks right up onto the beach, camp out, throw out huge
40-, 50-foot wide tarps and just make it however one wants to make it. And all of a sudden
somebody came along one day and said, hey, you know what, we want to block off the access to
27
EXHIBIT C
this spot so you guys have to park on the road, no one can drive out there, you can’t camp the
same way you used to do it. And so the guys that were used to it, I was one of those guys, it was
a shock, it was. You know, we weren’t happy about it. We were kind of pissed off about it.
Then that, and it started happening. They put the barricades, we had to park on the roads and
what not. Well, you know, the County came through and actually improved it, put the sidewalks
in, put the pavilions in, parking area and what not. And I go back there later -- you know, went
to the mainland for a little while, experienced that, a little different type of life -- went back there
and said, this is awesome, this is great, love it. And so it’s just, it’s a real challenge because, you
know, you’re from both sides of it. I drive by there, it doesn’t look as, Reeds Bay doesn’t look
as attractive to me as it may to the folks that use it. If it looked more like that, it may be more
attractive to me. So it’s challenging when you’re one of those local guys sitting in that spot and
saying, you know what, we like it like this, this is, this is how it is. That’s how it was for me at
Pohoiki. I go back there now, I’m very happy the way that it has changed to now. It’s better for
my family. My wife and daughter can go down there, safe. Goes really good.
PUBLIC: Twenty-four boat launching though -.
KERN: I know, there -. Nothing’s perfect. I’m just, you know, a little slight metaphor, what I
experience now. Some things you see from one side and a little later it actually is a decent thing.
But there needs to be, you know, compromise and everything else made. But part of that isn’t
our issue. But thank you anyways. I appreciate it.
WOODWARD: All right. Thank you, Gentlemen.You may be seated. Do we have a motion?
MACQUISTON: Can we entertain any more comments in regards to his deposition?
MASUNAGA: No, no.
WOODWARD: No, sir. No, sir.
REES: If they make comments that are not intended to be false but inaccurate under oath, would
you like to have a clarification on the actual law on the exceptional tree status?
KOMATA: By law there’s supposed to -.
MACQUISTON: (…inaudible).
REES: There are two ways by which that happens.
WOODWARD: No, the way this is -. No, we don’t really turn this into a debate.
REES: Okay.
WOODWARD: Do we have -? Any of the Commissioners would like to make a motion in this
regard? Okay, Commissioner Iwashita, did you have something to say?
28
EXHIBIT C
IWASHITA: Yes, Mr. Chair. With regard to Item No. 4, Applicant County of Hawaii
Department of Parks and Recreation SMA 09-000036, Special Management Area (SMA) Use
Permit to allow the redevelopment and improvements to Reed’s Bay Beach Park, including a
new restroom, pavilion, walkways, walls, landscaping and related improvements, I move that the
application be approved in accordance with the recommendations and conditions set forth in the
record herein.
WOODWARD: Do we have a second?
KERN: Second.
WOODWARD: All right. Well, at least that allows us to open it up for discussion. Who would
like to go first?
IWASHITA: I would, Mr. Chair.
WOODWARD: Commissioner Iwashita, go ahead.
IWASHITA: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I guess the long pause speaks a lot for what my impression
is the concerns about what’s being proposed. And, you know, I guess the concerns that have
been raised in the testimony about access and so forth, I personally feel that providing the
County’s commitment to provide keys to the boaters who have mooring permits in the bay to me
addresses that. That essentially gives them access to their boats even beyond the, what were the
hours, County park hours, whatever?
KOMATA: From 6 a.m. to 11 p.m.
GONZALEZ: Six a.m. to 11 p.m.
IWASHITA: Yeah, 6 a.m. to 11 p.m., whatever the hours were, as a practical matter to take care
of the boaters’ needs. I, you know, when I was a kid and the VFW thing was still down there
and the Hau tree and everything before they built the hotel, you know, it was a great place to be.
I have many fond memories of being down there Sunday afternoons picnicking and so forth. So,
and it hasn’t been that way since they built the hotel, and the hotel burned down and, you know,
all that stuff. So I would really like to see, personally, you know, improvements made to make it
more accessible so we can have, you know, the keiki have more access to this. And I see the big
picture in the long run, I see that. And, actually, personally I’d be more radical, I’d want to shut
down part of the road and make it one way and provide more parking out there, you know, to
make it more accessible that way; but that’s down the road.
But I think that what has been proposed and in front the, as indicated earlier, you know, our
perspective in approving SMA permits is to look at the environmental impacts and make sure
that those are addressed. You know, the water quality obviously is an issue. But, you know, I
don’t see that this, well, I see this project as mitigating against whatever current use, you know,
adverse effects current use might have. So from that perspective I support the application.
29
EXHIBIT C
And I think that the County and the Department has heard the comments about, you know, the
inundation and those kinds of issues. And in actually making the improvements I think it
should -. If there’s going to be any error, err on the side of keeping the improvements away from
the water so, you know, they won’t be inundated as -. You know, it’s not Honolii but, you know,
it’s the same kind of thing, you don’t want to build it in a way where you’re going to have to go
back and fix it the next year. So those are my concerns, and I think they’ve addressed them.
That’s why I made the motion.
WOODWARD: Okay. Well, we do have, since we now have opened this for discussion, if there
are questions for the public testifiers that would be, this would be an opportunity to ask them
questions if you have any. Commissioner Domingo.
DOMINGO: You know, as stated by Mr. Iwashita, there are other options that could be
considered. And I don’t know if we’ve addressed all of those options with regards to, you know,
having you put your boat on a dolly and just try to maneuver all around the place. And, you
know, I don’t think any provisions for that have been made for existing uses of the, of Reed’s
Bay. And I think there’s some adamant resentment about some of those statements made which
I think some of the testifiers are trying to refute, but they’ve been, they’ve been denied that
opportunity due to the rules of the Commission. So, you know, that’s why I say I speak with
some reservations with regards to this application. I’m not satisfied that everything has been
addressed and all options have been considered. .
WOODWARD: Mr. Gonzalez, you had questions or comment?
GONZALEZ: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Commissioner Domingo, I believe with the Chair’s
statement he has opened it up for the Commissioners to call up previous public testifiers, if they
wish, to give clarifying answers to questions from the Commissioners, because there’s a motion
on the floor and it’s a discussion. But I think , I mean I think the Chair just gave you guys that
option, but I think he’s limiting it to clarifying. Cause like we don’t want this to be a running
debate forever. So -.
DOMINGO: Yes, after one of the representatives from the Parks and Recreation made a
statement and that individual in there I think had some disagreements and were not satisfied that
those statements were accurate or true in fact, then probably I’d like to ask him to come up and
see what that really meant.
WOODWARD: Okay. You’ve been sworn in already so if you’ll just give us your name again,
we’ve got everything else.
REES: Tim Rees. Thank you very much, Commissioner Domingo and Mr. Chairman. You did
give me latitude earlier on and I very much appreciate that. This, specifically to the law that
Mr. Komata was referring to, I don’t think he’s as familiar with that law as he believes he is.
What you have is the State has a very strong exceptional tree statute in the HRS. I’m sorry I
don’t know the number of it. County law mirrors it exactly. And if you think about this it’s a
well-written law. It says there are two ways by which trees will get exceptional status. The first
one is by their inherent nature, inherent historical and cultural nature or, and they use the word
30
EXHIBIT C
or, by the process, and now I’m paraphrasing, where the arborist advisory committee in each
individual county receives requests from the public. And so they do a study on the tree, they
make a recommendation to the County Council, and then those trees can be specifically
designated on a list by the County Codes. But just because a tree is not listed does not mean they
do not get exceptional status under the law. In fact, any person, this is how serious they were
about this rule, and if you think about it there would be no exceptional trees if you allowed
developers to cut down trees that weren’t inherently of cultural and historical value. All the
kamani trees could have been cut down at Pohoiki, and then this is why we need that process,
that there are two ways. The law recognizes something achieves its status by its inherent nature
and it can be specifically recognized. That’s another avenue to do it. And the reason why, you
know, I said something, I knew that was a little out of line and I apologize for it, is because if
you think of the process of a tree being submitted, these trees were submitted to the County
Council 80 years ago. This whole plan was submitted and approved. So there were County
Commissioners back then and there were Park Commissioners that submitted it. It’s essentially
equivalent to a modern specific designation.
And I’d make one last point. There’s a book on these trees. There are signs on these trees. We
have treated no other trees in this County or in this State with more recognition. And they are in
the General Plan, excuse me, they are in the Hilo CDP. They’re the first item, Natural Resource,
mentioned for preservation. Keaukaha Shoreline Plan of 1978 adopted that Hilo CDP
recommendation in 1975. So obviously there’s a long history of County looking at those trees as
a good thing. It’s something worthy as a natural resource worthy of preservation. So thank you
very much, sir.
WOODWARD: All right. Thank you.
DOMINGO: Mr. Rees.
WOODWARD: Commissioner Domingo.
DOMINGO: This would involve the participation of the Arborist Commission. I think we do
have an Arborist Commission in the County. Don’t we?
REES: We do but unfortunately it’s not seated. They don’t have a quorum, they don’t have
enough people. Mr. Bisel was a member of the Arborist Advisory Committee and they were
functioning at that time. I don’t know how long they’ve been down but they just don’t have the
people there. So that’s not an avenue that’s open. And I’m trying to tell you folks that this is not
a threat in any way. I’m just saying that me as a person I do believe, and so do the
environmental assessment. It said it wasn’t going to do anything to the signed trees along
Banyan Drive. If you approve this as is, you’re going beyond the environmental assessment. So
it’s a very serious thing. It was pointed out, you know, in that assessment that these even will
not be touched. It said that there might be root pruned or pruned; and nobody is against that at
all.
And I don’t have no special love for banyans. To me it’s more what they represent. Maybe they
picked the wrong tree. I wish -. But what happens if the next Mayor comes along? Actually
31
EXHIBIT C
Harry Kim is the guy that really said no banyans. You noticed there was a Plan A and there was
a meeting to choose? Plan B did not even in any way try to mitigate removal of the demolition
list of the banyans. It’s the same exact number. They switched a couple of trees but there was
no attempt at mitigating that viewplane impact or any of the more proper items that you folks are
to consider here under an SMA application.The viewplane is enormous created by those
banyans, and it’s very beautiful.I wish they were native.
DOMINGO: With regards to speaking of other options, as we look at the plan, does any one of
these options come clearly into your mind as to what can be done? You know, I think the whole
intent behind the plan is a good one. It provides for the community as a whole. But I think one
of the comments was that, you know, although we’re providing for the community as a whole
we’re somewhat neglecting those who are using it at the present time, and those are the ones that
are really making noise right now.
REES: Personally I tend to agree with you. As for the trees, I can tell you this, I spoke with
over 2000 people when I ran the petition down there, which was users and all sorts of people -.
When I went on the radio, Mynah Bird, Russ Roberts, Ken Hupp, Brad “Be Free” Freemen, the
lights lit up. It’s an issue that people, and the paper went with the banyan tree. Now what I just
want to explain is that the people that wanted the most urban type of beach park there, the ones
that, as you were saying, close off access, they wanted the sidewalks down low, there was very
few of them when the other option was presented. But from the very beginning, I’m not lying
here, at least 90 percent of all of those people said but why would you cut all those trees, they’re
beautiful. So everyone loves and wants to have native Hawaiian -. We were all behind that, and
I still am. The problem here is what the people really were looking at in those trees, what they
represented culturally and historically and, not only that, the shade footprint was a huge matter.
And if you look on the landscape construction plans here any one of the shade footprint of those
banyans that are slated for demolition, the biggest ones are going to be replaced with a 6- to 8-
foot wide shade canopy. This doesn’t provide a comfortable place to hang out for our disabled
community, for the children, for our elders. This is really what concerned people. They really
weren’t so much about banyans or, you know, can’t cut that tree no matter what. They looked at
the plan and said, Park and Rec told us early on we have no intention of replacing the shade. Go
down any day of the week and see where people hang out down there, or even at all of our parks.
It’s nice to get out in the sun and recreate; but when you decide to kick back and watch your
kids, your grandkids, you’re hanging under a shade tree. So that was the main concern. Thank
you very much, sir.
WOODWARD: All right, thank you.
DOMINGO: For recreational purposes, I think having a shade is one of the most important
things. You know, when you spend time with a group of people or organizations or even with
your family, having a shade is the most important thing.
WOODWARD: Okay. Any further discussion or questions? Thank you, Mr. Rees.
REES: Thank you very much for the latitude.
32
EXHIBIT C
WOODWARD: Okay. Seeing no further -. Commissioner Ishibashi.
ISHIBASHI: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I thank the testifiers for clarifying the shoreline and the
beach and the parking lot. I never know about that. So that’s an interesting part. So it’s the
parking lot that I was talking about that is a parking lot, you can drive on there, okay.
JOHNSTON-KITAZAWA: I went to talk to the former County Parks Deputy Director and she
goes there’s no parking lot. That’s -.
NOMURA: Microphone, please.
ISHIBASHI: You can come up, brother, talk.
WOODWARD: Yeah, you can come up. If you’ll just give us your name again. You’ve been
sworn in already.
JOHNSTON-KITAZAWA: Kiko Johnston- Kitazawa.
WOODWARD: Okay.
IWASHITA: Use the mike.
JOHNSTON-KITAZAWA: Yeah, thanks. Someone asked for suggestions about what might be
a workable plan?
ISHIBASHI: Well, I just wanted to see because if I’m going to fix um like Brother condemn me
for saying fix um -.
JOHNSTON-KITAZAWA: Yeah.
ISHIBASHI: If we’re going to fix something, I’d like to fix properly. If we’ve got to address
that 3-foot drop off to the beach, if we’ve got to fix something, let’s fix something that is proper.
JOHNSTON-KITAZAWA: So here’s the thought and it’s just a thought -. The first plan had
sidewalks, grass plantings and what were called benchwalls. The bench wall they got by
Liliuokalani Park. It’s a place to sit down. But when you look at where it was, it was obviously
a barrier across the launching place. The launching place is the driveway nearest the culvert. So
Plan B we heard, okay, they’re going to, maybe, maybe we can eliminate the benchwall and you
can go launch your boat there and then go park on the street. Well, it’s not ideal cause, you
know, but you can do it. Yeah? This gentleman here, a lot of the older gentlemen who fish or
row, you know, they’ve got a little rowboat in the back of their truck, they back it down the
beach and they slide it out of the truck onto the sand or into the water, and then they go drive up
and park in the parking lot, which is now we’re told is the beach. But we’ll be now driving onto
the road and parking. Why not leave that part there open, and why not leave it open 24 hours a
day? Because it is the place to get at the harbor. And I realize the County can say, hey, we’re
not the State Harbor, that’s their kuleana, we don’t have to accommodate that. The fact is
33
EXHIBIT C
they’ve accommodated it for over 30 years. Hilo Sailing Club used to meet in that parking lot,
launch all their boats there. When I was a little kid Captain Lyman, Captain Piianaia. You
know, now they say, oh, no, no, you know, only for walking. And I’ve heard people say, not
anyone in this Planning, but I’ve heard people say let’s get rid of those shade trees then all those
bums hanging around there won’t be there cause no more shade. I don’t like to hear things like
this. They haven’t met the people who are sitting there enjoying that. Sure, in any crowd there’s
always going to be people who play music too loud or throw rubbish, but it’s a small minority.
You know, most of the people are enjoying family life, really using the park. It’s like building
the go-cart track on the golf course - you’re taking it away from one set of park users and
handing it to another desired set of park users. So, yeah, we had opportunity for input, and the
input was largely ignored except in small ways. They had a set way of we want to do this, and
thank you for your input, we’re going to do this anyway. Thank you for letting me -.
ISHIBASHI: Okay. Thank you. You know, I work with your mom a lot down Kau.
IWASHITA: Mr. Chair? I have a follow-up question.
WOODWARD: Yes.
IWASHITA: So just, from a, get clear in my mind, what you just said was you don’t have a
problem with banning the cars from going, being parked on the makai side of the sidewalk, you
just don’t want the gate locked?
JOHNSTON-KITAZAWA: Actually I would wish to leave it how it is; and I would ask you to
go down there on a weekend and spend some time seeing how this park is actually used. I would
not envy the position of being the only guy with the key and asking everybody else to move
away from the gate so I can go in there. I don’t think that’s a good precedent. And I don’t trust
County Parks to make the key available because they said it would be available for launching at
Honuapo but it’s not available on weekends and it’s not available at night. And when it gets
calm enough to launch, you might not be able to get at it.
IWASHITA: Thank you.
WOODWARD: Mr. Komata, did you have something you would like to add to that?
KOMATA: Yes. Thank you. I wanted to mention, or I wanted to address the exceptional tree
issue; and I’d like to ask Leonard to help me in doing that. What I meant to state was the banyan
trees are not listed in the County Code as exceptional trees, not specifically. I don’t know, I
can’t speak to Mr. Rees’s interpretation of the entire Code, that’s his interpretation. So I wasn’t
meaning to interpret the Code, I’m just saying it’s not listed as exceptional trees.
BISEL: I’m Leonard Bisel, again. I actually served as the chairperson for the Arborist Advisory
Committee for 7 years during Harry Kim’s two terms. And my understanding of the State law is
that there is not at one or the other. A tree does not become exceptional simply because of its
age. There is still a formal process. That has to happen in order to become an exceptional tree
and to be put on that list. And then once it is nominated and accepted, it has to go to the County
34
EXHIBIT C
Council and the County Council has to accept that tree as well. So there’s a formal process. It’s
not just by default that it becomes an exceptional tree.
ISHIBASHI: Well, that was my next concern, Mr. Chair, was -. Cause I get hard time voting in
favor of this based on the trees, because I believe in a living heritage on trees. I believe in that. I
do that for my kids. They plant their own trees in our farm to perpetuate them that they when
plant that tree. You go down Milolii we plant trees in honor of grandpa, and grandpa’s trees we
plant next to grandpa’s trees, and everybody carries on that as a living heritage. Now we’re
going to identify trees that are going to be cut down which is a living heritage. Now we’re got to
try to see if bypassing the process of putting these trees on the list, then you’re circumventing
something over here. Cause if that’s a living heritage and the County got to recognize that as a
living heritage versus we’re going to rededicate one different tree, I don’t know what that
process is. Because I believe in living heritage. When you plant one tree and the person who
plant that tree, it’s forever.I’ve got tangerine trees that my son planted. He’s dead now. And
we eat that fruit today because of him, he planted that tree. That’s something, I cherish that. So
I’m a tree lover too, but to one certain degree. You know, I cannot see you guys cutting down a
coconut tree over here on the edge but yet we’re keeping these other trees, the big banyan. Why
we’re going to cut down one coconut tree? You know, I cannot understand that part. But that’s
why I get hard time on this project only on the tree issue. The rest I believe we’re doing the right
thing for the right purpose. We’re trying to protect the shoreline, it’s all good. The trees is the
one. If we’ve got to get trees to be on the list, then let’s find some way to do that. I don’t know
how we’re going to do that, but that’s my concern.
WOODWARD: Okay, yeah. We had one other question. That was, are you, does this project
address the idea of trying to increase the use of this property to a wider range of users? I mean is
that part of the Parks and Rec plan?
KOMATA: No, I think -. Well, like I mentioned earlier when I opened, it was those three issues
that were the genesis of the project. The Department does have an obligation to, you know, the
public to provide safe recreational opportunities. So I believe that was the driving factor in
trying to get the vehicles off the beach, trying to remove it off the park, trying to remove it from
where there are people walking, kids playing, trying to enhance that aspect of the beach park
itself. You know, I wanted to mention also that the park, well, I think, the County Code, Chapter
15 states that the director has the authority to designate where vehicles are allowed to be driven
and parked within parks. If it’s not designated by the director, it’s not allowed. So that’s not
really an issue that this SMA is being applied for. It’s part of the intent of the project, but it’s not
something that would require an SMA to do. The directors could do that at their prerogative.
So -.
WOODWARD: Okay, thank you. And I would just remind the Commissioners that our, really
our job and our duty here is, in an SMA approval, is to protect ecology. And we have been
getting off, a little bit off the path, I think, in some of these discussions. But I will leave it open
now for any further discussion that Commissioners feel necessary.
IWASHITA: Mr. Chair?
35
EXHIBIT C
WOODWARD: Yes, Commissioner Iwashita.
IWASHITA: Thank you, Mr. Chair. We were handed this morning this L-1.1, the demolition
plan. And I’m trying to find it in the EA. Can you point out to me where it is in the EA?
KOMATA: That L-1.1 was prepared subsequent to the EA. So it’s not in -.
IWASHITA: So it was not part of the assessment?
KOMATA: That exhibit is not in the EA.
IWASHITA: So, I -. Mr. Chair?
WOODWARD: Yes, sir.
IWASHITA: Okay. So I guess my concern then is that, couple of levels. One is notice of what
this project is proposing to do. Two is on the environmental level in terms of an SMA
Assessment, you know, SMA, our SMA assessment, clearly removal of many, many trees has an
environmental impact. And so at both those levels I would have, I’m concerned that we really -.
That cannot go forward. So as far as my motion is concerned, I would still make the motion but
exempting, not including what was presented today in L-1.1. Because, one, it’s a notice issue, to
me rather significant too, mainly, legally, that would be -. I have issues that there’s legal notice
about this aspect of what’s being, what we’re being asked to approve. And two is that, you
know, it’s not, the environmental impact of this proposal, removal of all these trees, has not been
assessed. So I’m revising my motion (laughter).
DOMINGO: Mr. Chairman?
MASUNAGA: Is it a friendly amendment?
WOODWARD: Let’s see.
KERN: I need to second that, is that right?
IWASHITA: Yes.
MASUNAGA: So -.
WOODWARD: Well -.
KERN: Second.
MASUNAGA: It’s just a friendly amendment.
IWASHITA: Friendly amendment.
36
EXHIBIT C
MASUNAGA: It’s a friendly amendment and he agrees, the person that seconded. So it’s okay.
WOODWARD: Yeah, it just, yeah, okay - uh.
KOMATA: Can we respond to that issue?
IWASHITA: Sure.
WOODWARD: Yes, go ahead.
KOMATA: Mr. Iwashita, I wanted to respond to your, couple of your comments. One was the
reason that sheet L-1.1 was not included in the EA is because that is part of the construction
drawing package that happened subsequent to that. So, but to be clear, there was trees specified
to be removed that were included in the environmental assessment. And so it’s just a matter
of -.
IWASHITA: That’s what I’m asking. Where is that?
GONZALEZ: It’s 17, 18, and 19.
DARROW: Commissioner Iwashita, it’s also part of the master plan that’s in the EA that I
specifically identified as the trees to be removed. The Demolition Plan that was submitted was
just so that it could clarify without the master plan what trees were going to be removed, so that
there wasn’t a confusion. Because on the master plan they’re kind of outlined and it was difficult
to see. So we were requesting something that would be easier to show the Commission what
trees they were looking at removing.
IWASHITA: Okay. Where is that? What pages?
MASUNAGA: It’s 17, 18, 19.
IWASHITA: I don’t see the master plan.
GONZALEZ: It’s in the EA.
IWASHITA: Okay. But there’s no map. So you’re talking - okay.
DARROW: The master plan is under the Appendix 1, Exhibit 2.
WOODWARD: All right. So your question has been answered, Commissioner Iwashita?
IWASHITA: Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair.
WOODWARD: Okay.Commissioner Domingo.
37
EXHIBIT C
DOMINGO: Mr. Chairman, you know, in view of the fact that there were some great deal of
hesitancy in trying to get a motion whether to approve or deny this application, and with the
comments of some individuals that have been made, is it proper to make a motion to amend the
main motion as given?
WOODWARD: You want to know if what now?
DOMINGO: If you would entertain a motion to amend the main motion.
WOODWARD: Well, you can make a motion to make an amendment. That would have to be
voted on separately.
DOMINGO: Okay, sure. I amend that we defer action on this issue.
GONZALEZ: That’s not an amendment.
WOODWARD: That’s surely not a -.
GONZALEZ: That’s not an amendnent.
DOMINGO: That’s an amendment to the main motion.
GONZALEZ: It’s a motion to delay action.
IWASHITA: It’s a privileged motion. That’s a privileged motion. I mean, doesn’t matter if we
have one.
GONZALEZ: You can, you don’t have amend.
DOMINGO: Come again.
GONZALEZ: It’s not a, it’s fine.
WOODWARD: All right. So you want to make an amendment to -?
DOMINGO: Defer action on this.
WOODWARD: Defer action?
DOMINGO: Yes, on this issue.
IWASHITA: Is that for a time certain?
DOMINGO: Until the next meeting.
WOODWARD: All right. Do we have a second?
38
EXHIBIT C
GONZALEZ: What is the main motion then? What was the pending motion?
DOMINGO: The main motion is to approve.
KERN: If we defer we have the -.
GONZALEZ: Yeah, our time limit because it’s going to be automatically denied -.
MASUNAGA: Yeah.
GONZALEZ: Denied if you don’t take action. Okay, before we move forward on your motion,
Taka, I want to be clear what the pending main motion is. Because I don’t know if
Commissioner Iwashita wants to continue with his amendment, after his question was actually
answered, or not.
IWASHITA: No, no (laughingly). Well, my assessment of procedurally where we are is that
based on Commissioner Kern’s friendly amendment, is that there’s a motion on the floor to
approve the SMA application. And so, but my understanding of Robert’s Rules that apply is that
Commissioner Domingo’s motion to defer action on this is a privileged motion, that we can vote
on without my withdrawing the main motion.
GONZLEZ: I wasn’t asking you to withdraw. I just wanted to find out, cause I missed that
whole discussion on your amendment, sorry.
IWASHITA: Oh, okay. Yeah, so on the floor right now is the motion, my motion, seconded
with the amendment to approve the application.
WOODWARD: All right. So if there is a second for the motion to defer-.
ISHIBASHI: Point of clarification, Mr. Chair. I’m trying to see what was the amended motion.
What was that?
IWASHITA: The amended motion, the amended motion says that the, approve without regard to
what they submitted today, this L-1.1. So as I understand the application and the EA attached,
the bottom of page 18 it says the “The signed banyan trees lying in the street would be left in
place.” So the objections about the L, I guess my understanding is the objection about L-1.1 is
that it includes the signed banyan trees lying in the street. So in effect the approval would be
with the exception, you know, that the signed banyan trees lying in the street would not be
demolished. It would be trimmed and managed in order to control excessive growth, as stated in
the EA. That’s the current status of the motion as I intended to be made.
WOODWARD: All right. One other thing I’ve been informed is that the funding evidently will
lapse - if this is not approved, then it is defacto denied - and that there is a time limit on this
funding for this project.
39
EXHIBIT C
KOMATA: Can I clarify that?
WOODWARD: Yes.
KOMATA: There are Federal funds that fund a portion of the project that will lapse. The
balance of the project is funded by CIP money that will not lapse. So I don’t recall the numbers.
I believe -.
MASUNAGA: I think it’s $250,000.
KOMATA: Yeah, I don’t know, I forgot what the overall project cost was. But it is a significant
portion of the project. So if that funding is lost, then the project would either die or the scope
would have to be renegotiated within the available monies remaining.
IWASHITA: I think given the concerns expressed by other Commissioners about this whole tree
demolition issue, is my sense of where we are, is that the motion as it stands now which basically
protects the signed trees in my mind would make it acceptable as far as the concern for
maintaining these trees.
WOODWARD: Commissioner Ishibashi?
ISHIBASHI: Thank you, Mr. Chair. So regards to the environmental impact on the current trees
assigned for demolition, removing these trees on the parking lot area, you’ve got one, two, I
guess the big ones, that environmental impact to the shoreline, would the root system cause the
shoreline to move out? We had that impact study? We’ve got these couple big trees here, would
that removal of those trees cause the shoreline to move?
BISEL: I can’t answer that with certainty, but -. So, I, I can’t answer that with certainty.
IWASHITA: Mr. Chair, just for clarification in my mind, which of these, I’m looking at L-1.1.
And so, I’m not sure which ones are the signed trees. Are they the three right there in the
middle? Are they all signed?
BISEL: They would be the ones that are planted, excuse me, the ones that are planted directly
along Banyan Drive.
IWASHITA: Okay, so those are three? There are three planted directly on Banyan Drive?
KOMATA: I believe the plan shows four.
IWASHITA: Four? One, two, three, oh, oh, the small one right by the driveway entrance?
KOMATA: Right.
IWASHITA: Okay, okay. So my understanding is those four trees would not be removed as,
because in the EA it says they’re not going to be removed?
40
EXHIBIT C
WOODWARD: Is that correct?
KOMATA: Well, the proposal in front of you right now the way the plan is prepared, those four
trees are slated for removal.
IWASHITA: Yeah, but if we approve it per the EA they won’t be removed, right?
KOMATA: Oh, absolutely. I mean if that’s a condition that you guys put forth, then we have to
abide by that, yeah.
IWASHITA: Okay, so that’s my intent.
WOODWARD: All right, so you want to, your motion then is to approve it with the trees
remaining as in the original EA?
IWASHITA: That’s correct.
WOODWARD: Okay. And, Commissioner Kern, that was acceptable to you?
KERN: That’s right.
WOODWARD: Okay. All right, I think we’ve about beaten this horse to death. Do we have
anybody else that want to take another swat at it before we haul it off?
POWELL: Just make sure they don’t cut down those trees.
MASUNAGA: Yes, that’s what they said.
WOODWARD: That’s what we’ve been talking about.
POWELL: Yeah, but how do you make sure they don’t cut down the trees? Just saying they’re
not going to cut down the tress doesn’t -.
WOODWARD: Okay, all right, all right. First of all, this is not going to be a public discussion
between you and me. But to answer your question, and this is the last one I will answer, that was
what we were talking about. This is a condition of the approval.
POWELL: Thank you, Mr. Woodward.
WOODWARD: Okay. So, anything further?
GONZALEZ: What is the condition of the approval?
WOODWARD: What?
41
EXHIBIT C
GONZALEZ: What is the condition of the approval?
WOODWARD: It is per the original EA which calls for saving those four trees.
GONZALEZ: Okay.
WOODWARD: All right. And now is that acceptable to you? I mean it might be your only
choice. But I mean is it acceptable?
KOMATA: Yeah, the four trees identified for removal, if those are not removed that’s
acceptable.
WOODWARD: Okay. So we’ve got the agreement from Parks and Rec. What more do we
need?
IWASHITA: Mr. Chair, sorry -.
WOODWARD: Okay, Commissioner Iwashita?
IWASHITA: I guess I like to beat horses (jokingly). The concern about the locked gate,
Mr. Komata, can you address -. Well, I guess I don’t really see a real need to lock it. If there’s a
prohibition for parking, you know, makai of the sidewalk that can be enforced by our police
force. Then do we really need to lock it? I’m asking Mr. Komata.
KOMATA: Yeah, I mean, that’s standard practice at the majority of our beach parks - if you
look at the Keaukaha shoreline, if you look at Pohoiki like Commissioner Kern mentioned, if
you look at Hookena, Kahaluu, Pahoehoe, a lot of our beaches, if not all of them. I believe the
only one that’s not locked now is Reeds Bay, with the exception of Hilo Bayfront Beach Park
because there are gaps in, where vehicles can access the park. It’s not, the frontage is not fully
hardened.
IWASHITA: Okay. So I guess my point is that, I understand your point that most of the parks
are locked. My, what I’m asking is, is that I guess because of the boat access issue, right, and
not just for the moored boats but for like Mr. Nakamura, I believe it was, recreational boat users,
right, that frankly I don’t really see a need to lock the gate, lock it if the prohibition can be
enforced by the police.
GONZALEZ: They can’t enforce it unless there is a gate.
POWELL: It’s the only place that has the yacht.
KOMATA: Yeah, that’s a difficult issue to tackle. Police don’t necessarily respond to park
issues as readily as they do some other activities that go on. We have problems, we have
difficulties getting police to respond to all kinds of violations at our parks. So if we can prevent
it assuredly this way, you know, that’s our preference. You know, the police force with a lot of
the issues that happen in all of our parks, it becomes a problem trying to get them to come out
42
EXHIBIT C
and respond in a timely manner. They have other things that they need to address. So if we can
address this with a locked gate as we have at all of our beach parks, you know, that’s our
preference.
WOODWARD: Thank you. You know, with all due respect Commissioner Iwashita, I think
we’re getting into the kind of micromanagement mode now. It’s really a Parks and Rec decision
and not a land use or an SMA-based decision. Did you have anything further?
IWASHITA: No. Thank you, Mr. Chair
WOODWARD: Okay. Any further discussion?
JOHNSTON-KITAZAWA: May I ask him a question about Hookena Park?
GONZALEZ: You can ask him afterwards.
WOODWARD: You can ask him afterwards, yeah, yeah. That’s not really part of our
discussion. Okay, Jeff, let’s take a vote.
DARROW: Okay, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Before we take a vote, if I could just get a
clarification from Commissioner Iwashita. I just need to be clear on the amendment. If it’s okay
with you maybe a condition so that it’s clear -. It appears to me that we’re looking at the four
banyan trees that are along Banyan Drive to remain. If, maybe I could draft a condition that
states that the four banyan trees identified in Demolition Plan L-1.1 that are situated along
Banyan Drive remain and not be removed.
IWASHITA: That’s fine; and perhaps just parenthetically or otherwise describing them as the
signed banyan trees -.
DARROW: Okay.
IWASHITA: Referred to in the EA.
DARROW: Thank you.
WOODWARD: Mr. Gonzalez?
GONZALEZ: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think you may have to include language there, “unless
they impede upon public health and safety.” Or else if there arises a situation where they’re
rotting people can look at the clause and say you can never remove them. I think you need that
exception in there.
DARROW: So “public safety and health,” correct?
MASUNAGA: Health and safety.
43
EXHIBIT C
IWASHITA: Well, perhaps we can address it this way, and that is that “subject to the Director
being able to approve a minor SMA to remove it if it’s under certain circumstances deemed
appropriate by the Director.” I mean that’s something that I think addresses the concern raised
by counsel.
DARROW: So this would be a condition that would state that these four trees will remain. If
they are to be removed for any reason, that they would need to be applied for an SMA Minor
Permit from the Planning Director?
IWASHITA: It would seem to me that’s, would be necessary anyway under the circumstances.
DARROW: Yeah. Okay, so this will be added as an additional condition in the SMA Permit.
With that I’ll take the roll call. Commissioner Iwashita?
IWASHITA: Yes.
DARROW: Commissioner Kern?
KERN: Ayes.
DARROW: Commissioner Au?
AU: Aye.
DARROW: Commissioner Domingo?
DOMINGO: No.
DARROW: Commissioner Ishibashi?
ISHIBASHI: Aye.
DARROW: Commissioner Woodward?
WOODWARD: Aye.
DARROW: The motion passes five to one.
WOODWARD: All right.
IWASHITA: Just -.
WOODWARD: Yes.
IWASHITA: I’d just like to express my appreciation for everyone who came to participate in
this process today.
44
EXHIBIT C
WOODWARD: I think everybody got a little something and nobody got everything they
wanted, so we must have done a good job.
The discussion ended at 1:42 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Sharon M. Nomura, Secretary
Windward Planning Commission
45
EXHIBIT C