Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-04-05 THICDC PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAI‘I HEARING TRANSCRIPT APRIL 5, 2007 HAWAII ISLAND COMMUNITY A regularly advertised hearing on the application of DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION/HAWAIIAN RAINBOWS BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT, LLC (SLU 07-000013/REZ 07-000059) was called to order at 3:05 p.m. in the County of Hawaii, Aupuni Center Conference Room, 101 Pauahi Street, Hilo, Hawaii, with Chairman William Graham presiding. PRESENT: William Graham ABSENT & EXCUSED: C. Kimo Alameda Takashi Domingo Rene’ Siracusa Andrew Iwashita (from 3:06 p.m.) Alvin Rho Rodney Watanabe Rell Woodward Ivan Torigoe, Deputy Corporation Counsel Christopher Yuen, Planning Director Phyllis Fujimoto, Staff Planner Jeff Darrow, Staff Planner And 40 people from the public in attendance APPLICANTS: HAWAII ISLAND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION/HAWAIIAN RAINBOWS BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT, LLC (SLU 07-000013/REZ 07-000059) a.State Land Use Boundary amendment from the Agricultural to the Urban District for 6.718 acres. b.Change of Zone from Agricultural 20-acre (A-20a) to Single-Family Residential 7,500 square feet (RS-7.5 – 6.718 acres), Agricultural 10-acre (A-10a – 118.36 acres) and Agricultural 5-acre (A-5a – 14.46 acres) for 139.748 acres of land. The proposed RS-7.5 and A-5a areas are located along the east (makai) side of the Old Mamalahoa Highway in the vicinity of the Kulaimano Heights Subdivision, Unit V and the proposed A-10a area is located along the east (makai) side of the Old Railroad Right- of-Way, Kahua and Makahanaloa, South Hilo, Hawaii, TMK: 2-8-8:111, 143 through 147. GRAHAM: The next item on our agenda is a rezoning application from, seems like a joint entity, the Hawaii Island Community Development Corporation/Hawaiian Rainbows Business Development, LLC. This is for a State Land Use Boundary amendment and also for a Change of Zone. The State Land Use Boundary amendment from Ag to the Urban District is for 6.718 acres. The Change of Zone includes an Ag 20 to Single-Family Residential 7,500 square feet for 6.718 acres, an Ag 10 for 118.36 acres and Ag 5 for 14.46 acres, a total acreage being 139.748 acres. EXHIBIT D 1 IWASHITA: Mr. Chair? GRAHAM: Commissioner Iwashita, did you have something? IWASHITA: Yes. I’ll ask the Chair to excuse me at this time. I have other commitments I need to take care of this afternoon. So my apologies to the rest of the Members of the Commission. You still have a quorum. Hope nobody gets sick. And I would just ask that my comments from the prior matter as it may relate to this application that it be incorporated into the record in this matter, if there are no objections. Thank you. GRAHAM: Thank you. We have a lot of public on this matter so I want to kind of try and look out for the public as best I can about getting your testimony at an opportune time and not too late a time. And normally our process goes through the Planning Department’s description of the project and then our Commission’s questions, and then the applicant’s presentation, and then all our questions, and then the public testimony, and then we make our decision. I’m afraid that could get really drawn out so what I’d kind of like to do is two-step it just a little bit, like maybe have Jeff give us his presentation and then we restrict our questions to him, but only questions about what he covered rather than going into more detail. And then we get the applicant’s presentation, but just a brief overall presentation, and we won’t question the applicant immediately. And after that we’ll take the public testimony; and then once the public has testified, the applicant can come back and then we can ask a lot more of our questions at that point. We also have a presentation by the Department of Water Supply that we’re going to sort of slip in there early so that everyone is aware of where the Department of Water Supply stands on it. But that’s my plan. Does that sound all right to everybody on the Commission? Sir, did you have a problem? CARVALHO: Yes. GRAHAM: Did you want to just -? NOMURA: Microphone, please. GRAHAM: Would you come to the microphone just a second. Is your question with regard to my plan? CARVALHO: Yes. GRAHAM: Okay, would you just lift up the microphone and give your name and -. CARVALHO: My name is Glenn Carvalho and I live out at Pepeekeo. I have other commitments also but I would like to make a presentation, give my position on this development. So I would like an exception or amendment to allow me to provide my testimony before I have to leave. I have to be out of here by about 3:30. GRAHAM: Okay. So as soon as possible you’d like to do that. I’ve got ya. Sir, in the corner? Come up, state your name and then go ahead. EXHIBIT D 2 CHEN: My name is Chengwu Chen. I live in Pepeekeo. Well, in light of large interest pro and con, I’d like to suggest we move to another date because this is too rush, too much in a hurry and, you know, short-circuit, cutting corners. I think that’s not fair for both sides. GRAHAM: Okay, thank you for your comment. We’ll go ahead then. Jeff, if you want to give us the Department’s presentation, we’ll just ask you any brief questions we have about what you say. DARROW: Sure. Thank you, Commissioner Graham. If I can direct the Commission’s attention to the location map. The area of this application is within the South Hilo district of Hawaii More specifically we’re looking at the Pepeekeo area identified mainly in yellow, which is the zoning, Single-Family Residential zoning. This white line running in a north-south direction is identified as the Hawaii Belt Road. The areas of these applications are identified with red dots. There are going to be two separate areas. Both of them are identified with dark green coloring which identifies the zoning as Agricultural 20 acres. The applicants in this case, Hawaii Island Community Development Corporation, as well as Hawaiian Rainbows Business Development, LLC are requesting a State Land Use Boundary Amendment for 6.718 acres from Agricultural to Urban zoning, as well as a Change of Zone for approximately 140 acres from Agricultural 20 to Single Family Residential 7,500 square feet for 6.71 acres, Agricultural 20 to Agricultural 10 acres for 118.36 acres, as well as Agricultural 20 acres to Agricultural 5 acres for 7.96 and 6.710 acres. The Hawaiian Rainbows Business Development, LLC has entered into an agreement to donate land to the Hawaii Island Community Development Corporation to develop a 30-lot affordable housing subdivision. The layout is identified in this particular area. Just to back up a little bit, access to these particular areas will be from the Hawaii Belt Road on to Sugar Mill Road; and then for the first portion of the project it will be on Old Mamalahoa Highway; and then to get to the remainder of the project it will be down the continuation of Sugar Mill Road. The lots within the 7,500-square foot area will be utilized for a self-help housing project, targeting families meeting affordable housing income guidelines established by the County. The applicants intend to address the existing demand for affordable housing units in the County as well as in the project area.Hawaiian Island Community Development Group has an existing waiting list of approximately 140 families interested in a self-help housing project in East Hawaii. At the same time, Hawaiian Rainbows Business Development wishes to meet the demand for smaller agricultural lots in this part of South Hilo. Since this application has been distributed to the Planning Commission, we have received numerous letters of support as well as letters of opposition on this particular project. Additionally, we have received several late comment letters. One of them is dated March 21, 2007 from the Department of Transportation and, additionally, we have received two comment letters from the Department of Water Supply, one dated March 30, 2007 as well as April 4, 2007. th The April 4 letter also has an attachment of an additional comment letter from Water Supply to Mr. Steven R. Meek dated February 15, 2007. A condition to bring to your attention is Condition M. This is to address affordable housing. If I can read that to you, “To ensure that the goals and policies of the Housing Element of the EXHIBIT D 3 General Plan are implemented, the applicants shall comply with the requirements of Chapter 11, Article 1, Hawaii County Code relating to Affordable Housing Policy. This requirement shall be approved by the Administrator of the Office of Housing and Community Development prior to Final Subdivision Approval. All homes on the RS-zoned property shall be sold at prices affordable to families earning not more than 120 % of the median income in Hawaii County. There shall be no ‘excess credits’ earned by the development on the RS-zoned property for sale or transfer offsite.” The Planning Director is recommending that the Planning Commission send a favorable recommendation to the Hawaii County Council for these two applications. Are there any questions? GRAHAM: Commissioners, do you have any questions for Jeff right now? All right. I know we have a representative from the Department of Water Supply. Mr. Antonio, would you care to come up at this point, and I know some of our testifiers are concerned about water issues; and just let us know how this project impacts water supply and how it will be handled according to your best understanding at the moment. DARROW: Mr. Chair? GRAHAM: Excuse me. Jeff? DARROW: If I could also, this was submitted shortly by the applicant and the applicant’s representative. These are letters of support that have been submitted as part of the record. There is only one copy so I’m just going to send them around for the Commission to take a look at. GRAHAM: Thank you, Jeff. Could you raise your hand and swear to tell the truth today? ANTONIO: Before you do that, Mr. Chairman, I’m here as a representative of the Department of Water Supply. The Manager of the Department of Water Supply is an Ex-officio Member of the Planning Commission as provided for by the Charter; and I’m representing our Manager at this point in time. Whether or not I’m required to swear under oath before I give testimony, I’m not sure whether or not that’s required. I would defer to our Corporation Counsel whether or not I have to do that. I’m here, again, representing the Ex-officio Member of the Planning Commission. GRAHAM: I see. Mr. Torigoe, do you have a comment? TORIGOE: Well, being an Ex-officio Member, you can take his commentary on that basis. I don’t know if Mr. Quirino has some objection to swearing him, I wouldn’t try to force him to do so. GRAHAM: Okay. So could you go ahead and just state your name and address for the record and then speak to this issue for us, please. ANTONIO: Sure. My name is Quirino Antonio. I’m Deputy Manager of the Department of Water Supply. I’m here representing, again, Mr. Milton Pavao who is our Manager of the Department of Water Supply. You need anything else before I proceed? EXHIBIT D 4 GRAHAM: No, go right ahead. ANTONIO: Okay. I wasn’t prepared to make a presentation to this Planning Commission. However, I’m here, again, to answer any questions that you might have regarding some of the testimony that might be presented by the public. GRAHAM: Okay, if that’s the case then -. ANTONIO: We did respond to the application, provided some correspondence to the Planning Department; and you have those correspondence on file. GRAHAM: Okay. So then if later we need your expertise on something we can allow for that. All right, thank you. Mr. Yuen, you have something right now? YUEN: Yes. There have been a number of letters concerning the question of having septic systems given that there is a Department Supply well. There’s a Department of Health rule that they be at 1,000-foot, that they would permit it as long as they were located outside of a 1,000-foot radius. I just wanted to get Department of Water Supply’s perspective on this situation. Are there other situations on the island where you have septic systems, cesspools, in proximity of your deep water wells? Has that posed a problem? Do you anticipate a problem if they’re located, if you have a properly engineered septic system located outside of a 1,000-foot radius in this case? ANTONIO: There were several questions. For one thing, yes, there are a number of septic systems that are located within the proximity of existing wells that we operate on this island. I believe those septic systems are outside of the 1,000-foot radius that the Health Department requires that they be located. In approving or reviewing requests to construct those septic systems, the Department of Health does request comment from the Department of Water Supply. And basically, in this case, should the application be approved as such, I believe, yes, the Health Department would request information or comment from the Department. And, basically, we’ve written letters to some of the, or to a resident in the area and also to others that stated, yes, although there is a, basically we’ve stated to the effect that although there may be a potential that such septic systems might affect our existing wells in the area, the bottom line is, basically, you know, it’s up to the Department of Health to review those requests and come up with their decisions as far as whether or not those septic systems can be approved or not. I imagine what they will propose is it will be outside of that 1,000-foot radius; and I believe the applicant is proceeding with the intent of, I’m not sure whether or not they need a variance from the Department of Health or just approval from them to allow them to construct their septic systems. And, you know, although we’ll comment that these septic systems might have a potential to contaminate our sources, again, I state that it’s still up to their decision as far as whether or not it should be approved or not. Your question regarding whether or not we do have wells that are located in areas where there are septic systems, yes, we do. And our experiences are that any contamination, or we have not experienced any contamination from these septic systems. EXHIBIT D 5 GRAHAM: Okay, thank you. We appreciate your testimony. I think that’s all we need from you right now. Thank you, Mr. Antonio. Would this gentleman that had the 3:30 departure time, would you care to make a short presentation first? Cause we’re ready to take the applicant next. Would you rather hear from the applicant first, and can you speak thereafter? CARVALHO: I’d rather present it now. GRAHAM: Okay, come forward then. Would you raise your right hand and swear to tell the truth before the Planning Commission on this matter here today? CARVALHO: Yes. GRAHAM: Thank you. And could you give your name and address first and then go ahead and give your testimony. CARVALHO: My name is Glenn Carvalho. My mailing address is PO Box 541 Pepeekeo. My street address is 2852 Onomea Place. I’ve lived out at Pepeekeo since 1981. GRAHAM: All right, go ahead. CARVALHO: First of all, I’d like to thank Mr. Chair and the Committee for allowing me to making this arrangement so I may present my testimony so that I can meet other commitments. As I said, I live out in Pepeekeo and I am in favor of this proposed subdivision being passed. Affording housing as we all know is one of the biggest problems that the State of Hawaii faces today. Developers come into the Pepeekeo area and along the Hamakua coast and they put in their developments, their gated communities, their fancy developments and they give nothing back to the community. We now have a developer that has come in here and has recognized the need for affordable housing, so along with his overall project has agreed to allow and build affordable housing projects. It has been my experience with the self-help projects that the people that spend the time, put in their sweat, their time and their effort to actually physically building the house become more community-oriented. They get to know the other families within their community and they work together as a team; and they are more willing to help with the communities in their development, rather than some people that come in and live in the area. So I humbly ask that the Planning Commission pass this project. Thank you. GRAHAM: Thank you, sir. Would the applicant and applicant’s representatives come forth please. Could you all raise your right hand please. And do you swear or affirm to tell before the Planning Commission today the truth on this matter? TESTIFIERS: Yes. GRAHAM: Thank you. So whatever you folks would like to speak on, go ahead and start with your name and your address. KATO: My name is Keith Kato. I’m the Executive Director of the Hawaii Island Community Development Corporation. My address is PO Box 303, Papaikou 96781. In the EXHIBIT D 6 interest of keeping things brief, rather than deal with a lot of technical issues which I think we would have a chance to discuss later on, in terms of the roads, the septic systems and the like -. I’d just like to kind of point out this particular picture which I believe all of you received a copy of. This is a picture of a meeting that we held on Tuesday. We had over 80 people attend the meeting and all of whom were interested in getting into the self-help housing in Pepeekeo. I think there’s a tremendous need for this kind of a project. There’s a tremendous interest on the part of those who are eligible to participate. And I think that approval of this project will fulfill a significant community need. The typical problem that we have in terms of pursuing more self-help projects is the unavailability of land. In this case, you know, this key component is we’re being offered an opportunity to deal with it. And so we just hope that you keep that in mind as you go through these deliberations. Thank you. GRAHAM: Do we have any questions for Mr. Kato at this time? Commissioner Domingo. DOMINGO: Mr. Kato, with the number of affordable units that’s going to be made available, is there a guarantee that all of those recipients of those homes or lots will be from the community or from the adjacent areas? KATO: We use Federal programs; and as such we’re required to follow Federal rules. We’re really not allowed to discriminate on the basis of where the applicant resides. Generally people will indicate where they’re interested in, East Hawaii or West Hawaii. So on that basis we usually have people from one side of the island or another in the project. But we cannot give anybody any kind of priority, in this case, because of where they live. DOMINGO: That’s a problem for me, and I’m sure those who resided in Kulaimano for a number of years who worked in the plantations from both that particular area and down the coast up to Honomu and beyond to Hakalau. And I guess those who have family with the history of those individuals who lived along the coast have been moved to Kulaimano; and that’s why we have a Kulaimano Subdivision there, which comprises of residents from up and down the coast. Now if they’re telling me that their children or their families are in need of housing and that you can -. That’s why if you can somehow assure me that, yes, those people will be available for the housing and would address their needs, I’d feel comfortable about it. But as you indicated, and I’m fairly familiar with it, is that you cannot discriminate. Whomever applies and from wherever they come from, if they meet the criteria then by law you guys have to grant it to them. Right? So there’s a possibility that there would be nobody from Kulaimano or the adjacent area who would qualify for this housing. KATO: Well, I guess it’s a possibility. I mean theoretically it’s a possibility that everybody in there will be from Kulaimano. We can’t say. DOMINGO: Yeah, I know what you mean, I know what you mean. But I just want to point out that there’s no guarantee that that’s assured for them. What is the community benefit in this case for those people in Kulaimano? EXHIBIT D 7 KATO: Well, I guess you can look at it on two levels. On one level the number of people who have applied, you know, a lot of the people you see in this picture, you know, were not on the wait list and they are on the wait list now. And what happens when we go through our project is although we have a wait list of say 100, I think it’s over 150 now, many of those people probably will say, well, they really don’t want to live in Pepeekeo. We have other projects that we’ve done before, you know, up in Mt. View. Some people prefer to be in Mt. View some people prefer to be in Keaau, everybody has their preference. So out of all of that, not everybody, again, is going to be interested in the Pepeekeo project. And the other factor is the families need to qualify based on their credit as well as the amount of debt that they have in relation to their income. And we find that although, you know, there are a lot of people who want to get into the program, many of them have credit issues; and so they do not qualify. And so it is actually fairly typical that, particularly in East Hawaii, that we may run through the entire wait list to fill up one project. So I think there’s a good chance that a substantial number of people in the project will be those who are, you know, from the area and who want to get in. But I cannot give you any kind of guarantees as to how many of that will be. I think that on another level it’s important I think for the entire community to get more and more homeownership. You know, homeownership, I believe, stabilizes the community from a number of social standpoints. You know, they’ve done studies that show that homeowners tend to have higher incomes, children do better in school, there’s lower crime. I mean all of these things actually I’m learning because I’m a board member of this Hawaii Homeownership Center. But those are kind of facts nationally that have been discovered. So I think regardless of where the people come from, the fact that we’re converting existing renters in our community into homeowners is a substantial benefit. GRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. Kato. Any more direct questions for Mr. Kato before we move on? All right, go ahead. Would you give your name and address first, Mr. Nishimura. NISHIMURA: Brian Nishimura, 1174 Awiki Place, Hilo, Hawaii. I am the consultant for the applicants. I just wanted to touch on a couple of issues. This application, as was indicated, has two components. This is an agricultural component as well as a Single Family Residential component. The Single Family Residential area is situated within that triangular piece that you can see in the middle of the board. That property is located directly adjacent to the area in yellow on the map on the left. And the reason that area was selected was because it is situated within the County General Plan Low Density Urban designation; therefore it is consistent with the County General Plan’s designation for Low Density Urban uses. The Agricultural component includes the two remaining lots that would be created by creating the Agricultural community/Single-Family parcel, both of which would be zoned Ag 5 within that triangular piece. The remainder of the application involves the dot on the right-hand side of the map on the left. That area would include eleven 10-acre sized agricultural parcels. The developer is proposing to address the demand for smaller agricultural sized lots. They feel that there is a sufficient demand for this type of project and is making an attempt to make the necessary improvements to ensure that that happens. They are providing an agricultural water source. They will assist the lot owners in pursuing agricultural activities on those parcels. GRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. Nishimura. Questions, Mr. Domingo? EXHIBIT D 8 DOMINGO: I have questions, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Nishimura, up till now there has, I think, not been any agricultural subdivision except for those parcels which where they’re leased or bought through the former C. Brewer Companies. Is that right? NISHIMURA: The area involved in this particular application has gone through a subdivision to create 20-acre lots. DOMINGO: Okay, so those people who are farming now on existing lands, are they leasing it or have they bought into the parcels, so they bought the lands? GRAHAM: Sir, if you want to speak, would you give your name and address first. INOUYE: I’m Gordon Inouye, Chief Executive Officer of Hawaiian Rainbows Business Development, LLC, PO Box 595, Papaikou, Hawaii. I’ll address myself to answer that question, Mr. Domingo. There’s a combination of both. We have owners that have undertaken agricultural activities on their own, there are those that have leased part of the land out to other farmers and there are others that have leased it into some intensive agriculture like sweet potato. So we have a combination of all three. There are several lots that are not being farmed as yet; and we are working with the owners to encourage them to put it back into good agricultural uses. DOMINGO: In actuality then those who are farming or as you indicated were leasing it, and those who have originally bought them from the sugar company? INOUYE: The history on this property is that the land was originally acquired by Continental Pacific from C. Brewer, and Hawaiian Rainbows Business Development LLC in 2003 entered into a lease purchase agreement with Continental Pacific and acquired 550 acres of agricultural land that this is part of. And so we’ve been involved in the development of putting the land back into good agricultural use again since then, sir. DOMINGO: What’s your anticipated selling price per acre or per parcel? INOUYE: You know, that’s a tough question because I think we all have seen a lot of volatility in the marketplace. A year ago in the Ag-10 marketplace I would have guessed somewhere $40,000 to $50,000 per acre, today maybe $30,000 to $40,000 per acre. Again, it all depends upon where that, you know, where the marketplace is. Some of our Ag-20 lots sold for as much as in excess of $600,000. The most recent contract for the last lot that we have on the contract is at $450,000. So we’ve sold some Ag-20 lots for close to $30,000 an acre; and the most recent one is down to $22,500 an acre for the Ag-20 lots. DOMINGO: So it’s not whether or not you’re providing farming lots for those who live in the area who wants to farm but as you indicated where the marketplace will dictate? INOUYE: That’s correct, sir. You know, the marketplace will dictate where prices are. Some purchasers have been local residents, some have been nonresidents, obviously you know; and when we put something up for sale we don’t discriminate as to who the purchaser is, sir. EXHIBIT D 9 DOMINGO: Now are they all farming on the property? INOUYE: I think I answered the first part. There’s a combination of some owners are farming their property, some owners are leasing it to other farmers to farm their property and then there are certain owners that are not doing anything with their property at the present time. GRAHAM: Mr. Domingo, I would like to try to move it faster so we can get public testimony also at this point. Mr. Inouye, did you have any other presentation you wanted to make at this time? INOUYE: No. I’m just available to help, to answer questions if necessary, sir. GRAHAM: Great; and we’ll probably call you back in a short while, if that’d be all right. Any other questions at this point from the Commissioners? All right, thank you all. If you can sit back then we’ll just get public testimony first now. Well, let me see here. You two folks that I called about three times today already, could you all come up at this point. And I can take maybe, since we have four chairs, two more from my other list here. Perhaps Donald Hanson and Susan Miyasaka, could you folks come forth. Would you all please raise your right hand. And do you swear or affirm to tell the truth today about this matter before the Hawaii County Planning Commission? TESTIFIERS: Yes. GRAHAM: Thank you. I’ll start on my left, and could you give your name and address first and then just proceed right into your testimony. And when you’re finished we’ll see if there are any questions. Thank you. SANDERS: My name is Ronit Sanders. Mailing address is Post Office Box 434, Honomu, Hawaii 96728. Our physical address is 28-721 Kokoke Kai Street, Honomu. I’m an applicant with the Mutual Self-help Housing Project with the proposal of building in Pepeekeo. And I attended the meeting the other night. I gave you a letter that just kind of states our general position on this. I don’t see any reason to reread the whole letter. But I just wanted to say that I know that the neighbors have concerns about this and that we’ll be wonderful neighbors. We’ll bring a real revitalization into Pepeekeo town because we will build our own homes together, working for ten months with putting our sweat equity in. I understand that the developer is gaining, you know, much advantage by rezoning other areas. But we’re so grateful that he chose self-help rather than perhaps offering the community a park or some of the other things that developers offer when they want to come in and rezone, that they’re offering the opportunity for affordable housing, which is a tremendous need on this island. I have a young son who’s in a wheelchair who goes to school here. My husband passed away when my son was four; and we came here thinking that we could somehow manage to get a small farm up Hamakua coast so that my wheelchair bound son would have a way to support himself. Well, things went not slant wise, hit Big Island, and that’s not possible. Now it would just be wonderful not to be displaced. We’ve been in three separate rental homes that have been sold because everything got so opened; and we were legally asked to leave so that they could sell and make a profit on their property. And we’re tired of that. We want to own our own home, we EXHIBIT D 10 want to be somewhere. I don’t want to go into an old people’s home. I don’t want my son in subsidized housing. I want to be in our own home; and this is an opportunity for us to do that. Communities get a little nuts when it comes to low income housing. But this isn’t the same. We’re not Section 8 people. We have to qualify as low income people, which we certainly do; but we also have to be financially stable and reliable or we’re not passed. Plus, we have to have a passion for what we do or we won’t be out there working 40 hours every weekend for 10 to 12 months to build our own homes. Our neighborhood will not deteriorate, you can bet that. So I just wanted to come and reassure the Planning Commission and the people of Pepeekeo who are here to testify that we’ll be great neighbors. Thank you. GRAHAM: All right, thank you, Ms. Sanders. Anyone on the Commission have a question? Okay, go ahead, sir, name and address. POWER: My name is Martin Power. My address is PO Box 434, Honomu, Hawaii. I also am an applicant. I understand that there are quite a few people here from Pepeekeo that are concerned about the neighborhood; and if I lived there I would probably have some concerns myself. But we’ve talked kind of at length with the developers and they seem to think that they can handle all of those concerns, and that we could come together and build their community a little larger than it’s now and give us an opportunity to own homes, too. I’m a full-time student, I’m a single parent; and I have a job; but it’s just not enough to buy a home here these days. And I could qualify for this and I could own my own home; and I would love that. That’s all I would say. GRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. Power. Any questions? Sir? HANSON: Hi. My name is Donald Hanson and I’m Vice-President to the Pepeekeo Association. Earlier today I gave you this letter from Lorraine Mendoza. GRAHAM: Address, please. Could you give your address also for the record, please. HANSON: My address is Pepeekeo, 28-501 Kulaimano Road. And I could either read the letter, unless most of you have read it already, that if you’re, you know, your time is short -. GRAHAM: Yeah, you don’t need to read it. But if you just have a summary of a few sentences would be fine. HANSON: Well, the summary for this is we’ve been holding hearings. We’ve held four hearings so far with the Pepeekeo Community Association. And as you know with the history we want to get all the facts out before we do anything in the Pepeekeo area. And this exactly the same thing we would like to continue doing here; and that’s why we would like to have you defer this until all the information is in and people of Pepeekeo are fine with the project. We’ve had three meetings on this and they’re not turning out the way we want. We still have to get more information because we got people in from the different departments, heads and stuff like that to give us information, and half of them didn’t even know why they were there. So until we have information from all the different departments on why this thing is progressing I think we need to back off a little bit and not, you know, get too far ahead of ourselves. EXHIBIT D 11 GRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. Hanson. Any questions? DOMINGO: Mr. Chairman? GRAHAM: Commissioner Domingo? DOMINGO: Mr. Hanson, from what you’re saying is that your association has not made a decision for or against but that you need further time to discuss the issues? HANSON: That’s correct. And we were also having more meetings with the people in the area so that we can decide how this is going to benefit the community, the Pepeekeo community. We don’t care about the outsiders. I mean you’ve got to remember Pepeekeo started with self-help people building their own homes. They came in out of the homes that the plantation had down there. And we’ve got a couple of self-help programs that were already developed inside of Pepeekeo on the land there. So, you know, we’re not against self-help, we just want to take this thing as it goes along and don’t want to hurry it up in case there’s mistakes, like there were with other projects in the past where there have been mistakes, you know. DOMINGO: In your meetings so far that you’ve held, have you invited the developers to sit in on the meetings? HANSON: We’ve talked to developers, we went to one of their meetings back in January. We invited them to a meeting in Pepeekeo, the association, in the community building; and we’ve had Yagong there and he brought some department heads that he didn’t fill them in on what they were there for. And we just need more time to, you know, get this thing feathered out so we can, you know, we know what’s going on so that the people feel more comfortable with what’s going on, you know. The community, we need to find out, you know, if the land is going to be perking out from cesspools or what have you, and all the rest of this kind of stuff. You know, if you don’t know what perking out means, that means when you dig a hole, put water in it and you’ve got so many minutes to run down; and if it doesn’t run down, that means the land isn’t suitable for a cesspools, you know. DOMINGO: Have the developers made any request to come and sit with the community organization to brief you folks on the project? HANSON: Yeah, they’ve been there and we’ve had meetings with them, and we’ve had meetings with Yagong. And we had a meeting last Wednesday; and that’s how this letter was written that I gave to you. Because there were about 40 or 45 people there and this was a general consensus of the people in a community that we would like to, you know, have more time to just talk to people in the community and see how this thing goes and just kind of slow it down a little bit, you know. Thank you. GRAHAM: All right. Ms. Miyasaka? MIYASAKA: Hi! My name is Susan Miyasaka and I live in Pepeekeo. And I am one of the neighbors who is close to this proposed project; but I hope you do not discount what I’m saying because I know what it’s like to live in this neighborhood. I know what it’s like to drive EXHIBIT D 12 on those roads every day. My husband and I take walks past this property so we know this property very well. All right, I am testifying in opposition to the proposed rezoning of this TMK by Hawaiian Rainbows and Hawaii Island Community Development Corporation. We need affordable housing, but not at the expense of the community’s safety and the environment. I have the following objections to the proposed rezoning and self-help housing project: 1. The proposed 30 homes in the affordable self-help housing project will have individual septic tanks and leaching fields. These 30 homes will be located upslope and just at the 1000-foot radius of the Kulaimano well that supplies water to the Pepeekeo community. In fact, 7 lots will be located partially within this 1000-foot radius. And according to a letter that I attached from Mr. Milton Pavao, Manager of the County of Hawaii Department of Water Supply, there is a potential for septic systems in this TMK to adversely impact the source water quality. th In a public meeting that was held on March 16 Mr. Christopher Yuen, Director of the County Planning Department, gave out erroneous information that this Kulaimano well would be made inactive after the new well was drilled and online. He was incorrect. I now have information in writing from Mr. Milton Pavao that states that the Kulaimano well will remain active even after the new well comes on line. As a result, there is a potential for 30 individual septic systems and leach fields to contaminate the Kulaimano well that services the Pepeekeo community. 2. The State of Hawaii Department of Health (and that’s my third attachment) recommended denial of the subdivision, because the proposed lots are 7500 square feet in size. A minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet is required for individual septic systems. In a public hearing held on th March 16, Mr. Harold Yee from the State Department of Health stated that variances have been given in the past for affordable homes. In my opinion, such a variance would be unwise given the potential problem of source water contamination. 3. This proposed development will be located off Old Mamalahoa Highway with a one-lane bridge with poor visibility accessing the Kulaimano Subdivision. The other access is via Sugar Mill Road, which is a private road. The intersection of Old Mamalahoa Highway and Sugar Mill Road is a potentially dangerous one. I travel this every day, I know. It has very poor visibility. Imagine 30 homes multiplied by 2 cars per home – there is a potential for increased traffic across a one-lane bridge with poor visibility or a private road with a dangerous intersection. 4.This proposed rezoning of 6.7 acres of prime agricultural land which is zoned 20 acre Agricultural to Low Density RS 7.5 is poor planning. It will place 30 affordable homes in the middle of agricultural lands. For example, a farmer below this property grows sweet potatoes, green onions and other vegetables. There is a potential for pesticide drift from neighboring farms to adversely affect the health of children in this proposed subdivision. th At the public meeting on March 19 Mr. Christopher Yuen stated that this rezoning would not place a low density urban development in the midst of agricultural lands because properties across the street are zoned Low Density Urban (RS-10). This is correct. However, although the Makahanaloa Estates subdivision is zoned RS-10, current covenants only allow one house to be built per lot. I request that a decision on rezoning this TMK either be denied or postponed until these four problems are solved. There should not be a rush to approve this rezoning request when the EXHIBIT D 13 proposed affordable homes will not have access to County water for 2 to 3 years. And you can see that in the letter from the County Water Department. First, a study needs to be conducted by the appropriate State of Hawaii or County of Hawaii agency to determine whether the proposed 30 homes with individual septic systems and leach fields have the potential to contaminate the active Kulaimano well. Second, the developers should request rezoning of 6.7 acres to RS-10 (and not RS-7.5) in order to follow the State of Hawaii Department of Health rules and regulations. No variance on required lot size should be given that could increase the potential to contaminate the active Kulaimano well. Third, the State of Hawaii, the County of Hawaii, and the developers need to address the problem of increased traffic across a one-lane bridge with poor visibility and a dangerous intersection onto a private road. One solution would be for the State of Hawaii to condemn the private road and convert it into a State road, but this needs to be done before the development is approved. And I sort of applaud Commissioner Iwashita for saying that this kind of development, now is the time that you should look at the potential problems rather than trying to address problems, you know, 5, 10 years down the road. Fourth, the developers should explore a land swap with a property that has access to the County sewer system, is not accessed by a one-lane bridge or a private road with a dangerous intersection, and is not located in the middle of prime agricultural lands. Again, I want to state that affordable development is needed but not at the expense of community safety and the environment. Thank you. GRAHAM: Thank you, Susan. Any questions from our Commissioners? All right, you all may go back. Thank you much. The next four testifiers I have are Lucy Meek, Steve Meek, Rick Roper and David Miller. Could you all come forth, please. I thought I said four but am I getting five? GELBER: What was the last name of David? GRAHAM: David Miller. GELBER: Oh, I thought you said David Gelber. GRAHAM: All right, would you folks raise your right hand please so I can swear you in. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth before the Planning Commission today on this matter? TESTIFIERS: I do. GRAHAM: Thank you. I’ll start on my right this time. Ma’am, if you’d like to start with your name and you address and then give your testimony. L. MEEK: I’m Lucille Meek and my address is Post Office Box 982 in Pepeekeo. After reading Mr. Yuen’s recommendation, I am very disappointed. He states that the Planning EXHIBIT D 14 Department has received 16 letters in opposition to the proposed affordable housing project. Of these, at least 13 come from owners of larger lots adjacent to or makai of the proposed housing project. To purchase a large agricultural lot is simply not an option for most of the island population that is looking for housing. This is among one of the findings that caused him to ask for approval of the Change of Zone. In my perspective, Mr. Yuen has placed these people as second class Pepeekeo residents. He knows nothing of our backgrounds or how some of us came to live in Pepeekeo. When my husband and I moved here 14 years ago we had nothing. We lived in a one-bedroom, 400 square foot house with 3 children under the age of 12.After working about 80 hours a week for most of the 14 years we were able to be where we are. Many of the other landowners also have difficult stories to tell of how they came to where they are. We are for affordable housing because we know how life can be personally. Not only do we have children that would also some day like to own their own house, but we have worked in areas where people of low incomes lived. We had a food bank in our home and helped many people whose electricity was about to be cut off. I have helped stop a man from committing suicide. I chased down a man only to hear his wife say be careful he has a gun and then talk him out of it. We have volunteered our time to remodel apartments that were used to help the homeless who were in transition. So I know personally how hard life can be. Three years ago, unlike people who have lived in Pepeekeo all their lives or for many years, my husband and I chose to make Pepeekeo our home and our community. We were blessed because it was before the prices went up and with my husband’s expertise in construction we were able to build our own home. My concerns are for my community. Placing a dense urban subdivision in the proposed location will be harmful to my community. I am very disappointed that Mr. Yuen has included this in his recommendation. I have been working on petitions against this rezoning and I am not through. But so far I have about 140 petitions signed. Majority of these are from people who live in the Kulaimano Subdivision. From the people that I have spoken to approximately 90 percent of the people that I have spoken to are against this rezoning. Of the 45 letters sent to those who have land within the 500-foot perimeter of the proposed sites, those we have contacted within this perimeter, which is 27, the percentage is the same, approximately 90 percent in opposition. One of the key reasons for this opposition is the road issues which I want to briefly mention. I rd read the letter from the Police Department that was written on January 23. It said that upon reviewing the provided documents and visiting the proposed site they do not anticipate any significant impact to traffic and/or public concerns. Well, I wrote them back. And when I wrote them back I said I would like to know what was the basis for their conclusion when all the existing homes in this area are built there will be approximately 100 or more homes. Now this includes the Pepeekeo Point, the Orchards of Pepeekeo and other properties in this area. This, of course, does not include the current proposed 6 lots turned into 43 lots more. This is in itself will put an added significant impact to the traffic and/or public safely to the privately owned road from Highway 19 to Old Mamalahoa Highway. Also the existing old Mamalahoa Highway is narrow and has only a one lane bridge should the cars from this planned subdivision choose not go in that direction. Going out onto Highway 19 is at times already dangerous with cars zooming. There is limited sight since the highway is raised from both sides. Cars heading to the EXHIBIT D 15 Hamakua Coast now use the shoulder to turn into Sugar Mill. And coming from Hamakua we need to use extra caution that we don’t get hit from behind because the cars are going 60 miles plus behind us. No mention was made to have a traffic light put in that intersection.Since the Old Mamalahoa Highway is part of the scenic route in a way because the tourists don’t stop at no store and go up and say, oh, it’s all over scenic route let’s turn here, but they continue on. So in a sense it is part of the scenic route. Many of our tourists visit our island going on this scenic route. This is also added traffic and nothing of this was mentioned in the letter. As you know, we do not have a police substation in Pepeekeo. What effects will adding these homes have to the community with the shortage of police? Lastly, none of the existing families who live near the proposed area were interviewed as to what it is like now on a daily basis, or their opinions as to what it would be like with the possible 30 to 60 cars right there on the Old Mamalahoa Road? When reviewing the documents were all these facts taken into consideration? This is a letter I sent to the Police Department. When they wrote back they didn’t mention any of this, nothing. But they did say that they agree with my view that this project will impact traffic and/or public safety in the Pepeekeo area. Thank you for listening to me. I know it was long. GRAHAM: Thank you, Ms. Meek. Do we have any questions from Commissioners? Sir, go ahead. S. MEEK: My name is Steven Meek, Box 982, Pepeekeo. And I had given out some maps that I wanted passed out. I wonder if things got passed out. DARROW: Yes. S. MEEK: Okay. Cause I want to address the water first. I just have like three points. In the original letter from the Water Department they mentioned -. Up there you see there are three lots; and the middle lot would be for the self-help housing. The one closest to Sugar Mill Road is well outside the 1,000-foot barrier. But in their letter they say all three of those lots would have the potential to contaminate the water. So even though it’s outside of the 1,000 foot on the original letter they’re talking it still has the potential to damage the water supply. Now in subsequent clarification they have not said that it’s not true, but they’ve tried to clarify. But now one of the issues I have and I’m curious about, they’re talking about they have septic systems and their wells. I’m wondering how many of them are this dense of a nature, where there’s 30 being proposed right outside that 1,000-foot perimeter. And, also, as you can see on that map I gave you, I kind of put down the subdivision on a topographical map. And can you follow how that’s on there, Commissioners? And you can see that on the northern border of the proposed 30-lot subdivision, there’s a stream that actually flows right through there. Now the stream does not currently go all the way down to the ocean. It has been diverted. So now it runs on the northern part of the, and it has been diverted to the top of the eastern part of the lot. So you combine the high density, this type of drainage problem -. And I took some pictures a while back during the heavy rains and it becomes like a river. It’s a stream, as you can see on the map. It’s diverted and heads down towards the well. So the question is the Water EXHIBIT D 16 Department is already saying, yes, anything even outside 1,000 foot has a potential, but now you combine the high density and this type of drainage problem which that’s going to have to stay there in one form or another, you know, the septics going onto that and coming down, I just wonder if there’s any other conditions that exists like this one around any other well in the County. It’s like a triple whammy problem here. My next point has to do with the water situation on the lower proposed subdivision where they’re going from Ag 20 to Ag 10. And on the original application they said County water would be provided for those lots. I want to make one point real quick about the drainage. In Mr. Yuen’s comment he says it’s technically zone X but in the paperwork from the Public Works Department it has not yet been mapped by FEMA. So if it has never been mapped, it automatically is considered zone X. So just cause it’s considered zone X does not mean there’s not a flooding problem, which there is a flooding problem. But getting back to the water over there, originally they were going to have water for those lots. That subsequently has been denied by the Water Department. They will not be getting water. And my understanding has always been if there’s no water there’s no rezoning. Now Mr. Yuen in his recommendation says, well, they can’t subdivide until they get County water. But how can they ever be guaranteed County water if they’re denied now? We live right above there. We don’t have water. They say we don’t know when you’ll ever get water. We’re on a variance but in essence this would be just like a variance. And so I just have a real question how can you rezone if there’s no water? I thought that was always a basic condition, no water, no rezoning. And I wanted to make one final point. Mr. Yuen in his recommendation calls for 120 percent median income to be the cutoff for the affordable housing. And my understanding it’s somewhere in the nature of $270,000 per home. And then also in his recommendation he says it’s very hard to find anything under $400,000. And that caught me offguard because I know that, I don’t think that’s fully accurate. And so I just got this yesterday. And so I asked my son who is a starving real estate agent right now since things have slowed down to run up a quick, in the last, printout; and I told him to go from Papaikou to Honomu, which is in this general area. He found, this is covering the past year, the houses sold, under contract, everything, 21 homes for $300,000 or less, and 11 of those $275,000 and less, which would be the same as what these may be qualified for. So I’m not saying that there’s not an affordable housing problem. I’m saying there are things right at this point available to people. And I gather people have said to push this through, rush this through. It’s just wrong. So my recommendation would be to flat out deny the lower subdivision since there is no water; and as far as the upper one if that is ever going to be developed require the developer to fix that intersection at Sugar Mill Road and put in at a minimum turn lanes. And my final one is if it’s not denied at least defer it so these things can be fleshed out better. Thank you very much. GRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. Meek. Do we have any questions? DOMINGO: One question, Mr. Chairman. GRAHAM: Commissioner Domingo. DOMINGO: Are you part of the Kulaimano Association? EXHIBIT D 17 S. MEEK: Pepeekeo Community Association. DOMINGO: Is that one of the reasons why you folks are asking for a deferral on the matter, so that you folks can further discuss this and -? S. MEEK: Well, actually, there’s actually another reason which I forgot to mention, Susan had mentioned. There are some of us actively looking for other sites. And they said why haven’t you come up with something already. Well, it has been taking a long time just to try and get a grip of what’s going on here. But there are some potential sites, I think, that could work. In fact, last night I was just talking to Richard Ha and he thinks he knows of a really good site that could possibly be used, but, you know, haven’t checked that out. But that’s one of the reasons also, finding alternate possible locations within that would be better suited. DOMINGO: But realistically when you, even if you find an alternative site and you’re looking for a place for them to develop, you know, they already have control of this land that they’re applying for rezoning for. I don’t know how they’ll ever be able to do it by just switching over to another site. Because then they’ll be saddled with one on the present lands being considered for rezoning and a new parcel that would then need to be going for rezoning and whatever requirements there may be to develop that site. It’s not realistic, yeah? I don’t know. Maybe you’ve got some answers to that. S. MEEK: Yeah, obviously I could answer that question. Obviously I don’t think it would be easy. But that site it really has a lot of problems. So we’re just trying to say we will do what we can to find an alternative site, if it’s possible. It might not be, but we’re just not saying. We’re trying to do everything we can to help everybody. DOMINGO: If they can mitigate the kinds of concerns you folks have, would you folks then support the project? S. MEEK: Well, if they took care of the road that would, of course, certainly help a lot. If they hooked into the sewer, that would certainly help quite a bit. However, there is the one remaining issue, and that’s an Urban spot zoning dense subdivision right in the middle of Ag land which would not be solved by any of those things. And not only does it encroach on the Urban but, as stated by the State Land Use Commission, should really be checked out. This subdivision being surrounded by agricultural lands will have health and safety issues involved; and that’s inside your packet. So, yeah, I’d say the minimum they’d have to mitigate these problems, put in turn lanes, hook up to the sewer, but there still are more issues beyond that. DOMINGO: Thank you very much. GRAHAM: Mr. Woodward? WOODWARD: I understand from reading several of the letters, and I think I have about 27 or 30 of them, that one of the concerns is that for a number of year local residents who have property right on the waterline have not been given County water, for whatever reason. There wasn’t enough of it, wasn’t meter available, something like that. Now all of a sudden it seems kind of strange to me that they can put in 30 new dwellings. I mean am I correct that the EXHIBIT D 18 residents there who have been on the waterline, basically sitting on top of it for years, have not had water for years? S. MEEK: That is correct. In fact the waterline that will service these 30 goes directly in front of our house but we’ve been repeatedly denied. There is a variance with that but, however, the reason the variance was given to us was there’s not enough water. L. MEEK: Can I? One real quick one. GRAHAM: All right, go ahead. L. MEEK: Okay. In the Planning Commission letter Mr. Yuen states that there is no sewage nearby. The sewage plant is right there, right down a little ways. S. MEEK: It’s on this map. L. MEEK: Yeah, you can see it on the map. So I just want to mention that. GRAHAM: Thank you, Ms. Meek. Sir, would you give your name and address and go ahead. MILLER: My name is David Rush Miller. I live at 28-1223 Mamalahoa Highway. I believe and support the development of low income homes to meet the County’s housing crisis. Please do not dismiss what I am about to say because the proposed housing development is directly across my home of 29 years. I believe that there are good reasons, having nothing to do with me or the location of my home, that this development should not be located on this piece of property. The land which is, I’m going to abbreviate some of this because it has perhaps been presented better than I could. But I’ll just mention briefly, the land which is proposed for the 30 homes is on a flood plain. You’ve seen the picture of it. A picture is worth a thousand words. Every afternoon I walk my dog on that area and when it rains as it frequently does in Pepeekeo as you probably know, my dog loves to swim in the 2 ½ to 3 foot river that flows down that, through that area. So it isn’t just that it’s within 1,000 feet. Let me use another analogy. If my grandson’s little sailboat were put on that river and allowed to continue down it would land right smack in the well that we’re talking about. This development could be placed elsewhere in the County. The County owns land in Paauilo that it is contemplating selling. This development could easily be located on the developer’s land outside the flood plain. If it were placed about 1,000 Puna of the proposed location, it could be connected to a sewage treatment plant, avoiding the use of 30 septic tanks which would drain into the well which supplies the water to the Pepeekeo community. I have other comments in my written testimony but I’ll skip them over because I think they’ve been better presented by others. And I want to go on to one simple statement and question. This developer has asserted to the Pepeekeo Community Association, and to you on the Planning Commission, that it is donating EXHIBIT D 19 6.718 acres to the HICDC. That is a clever equivocation. The point of fact, what we have here is a deal. The deal is that the developer will give the land to HICDC provided, and only provided, that you the Planning Commission and the County Council will give the developer something of very substantial value, a rezoning of his A-20 land to A-10 and A-5. I have repeatedly asked the developer to tell me what the real terms of the deal are. How much more money will he get for the smaller parcels than would be the case of the existing zoning. At one of the meetings he mentioned the fact that he had gone to the Planning Director and asked for rezoning down to Ag-10 and Ag-5 and was denied. So obviously this issue of low income housing would never have come up if it hadn’t been for a deal, a quid pro quo. How much more money will we get for these smaller parcels than would be the case with the existing zoning? He claims that he doesn’t know. I have too much respect for these businessmen to believe that that’s true. I ask you as the Hawaii County Planning Commission to determine the value of what you are being asked to give the developer and consider whether it is in fact a fair trade. To put it simply, what would this land sell for today if you don’t approve the application? What would the land sell for today if you do approve the application? The real donation here is not by the developer to the HICDC, it is the donation of value by the taxpayers of Hawaii County to the developer. I urge you before making a final decision in this matter to determine, and I’m sure it can be determined and I’m sure that appraisers are available, to determine how much you are being asked to give them before you make any decision in this matter. Thank you for your attention. GRAHAM: Thank you. Any questions, Commissioners? I have a question for Mr. Yuen in regard to your testimony. When Commissioner Siracusa left, when she had to leave a short while ago, she asked me on the way out, she said the thing that strikes me about this is that we have two seemingly unrelated parcels appearing on the same rezoning ordinance and wondered why that was the case and all. And it seems like that speaks to this issue of a deal. So I guess my question to you is do these two segments each stand on their own two feet or are they put together because there is some kind of a deal or whatever? YUEN: The agreement, my understanding of the agreement to donate the property is contingent upon the rezoning of the Ag-20 area to the Ag-10. GRAHAM: Thank you. Sir, you may go ahead now. ROPER: Yes, sir. GRAHAM: Name and address first, please. ROPER: Richard Roper. My address is 28-1219 Old Mamalahoa Highway. I live directly across the street from the proposed residential subdivision that’s being talked about in this proposal to you. I’ll give you a moment to think about all the personal reasons I might have for being against it; and those would all be correct. There’s noise, there’s lights, there’s cars, there’s tvs, there’s a great degradation in the living environment of that area. But I have two particular worries that are not private, they’re public, and these have been brought up before. One of them has to do with the fact that the subdivision empties out onto Old Mamalahoa EXHIBIT D 20 Highway, and that the only public access to that is an old one-lane bridge. Now at the beginning of this presentation the gentleman at the podium was talking about the access. I hope that it was noticed when it was brought up that one of those accesses is not public. It’s a private road. It actually is part of the parcel which saddles that road on both sides. It belongs to, it is owned by Richard Ha and it is part of his parcel. It is not a public road. This brings up problems with liability in case we would have an accident or death on that road. It brings up problems of upkeep. Is the County going to keep up a private road? Is the State going to maintain that private road? And in the absence of these, the only access to this development is a one-lane bridge on a very narrow road. This is my first concern. My second has to do, as has already been stated, with public health. This proposal is for a dense aggregate of open sewage of septic tanks which have been used for generations here. Now the problem in this particular parcel is that the water doesn’t always stay underground. Those of you that are familiar with septic tanks know that the basic idea is that the waste leaches out the side of the tank and down into the ground. And as long as these are spread far enough apart so there’s plenty of leach area for this effluent to be absorbed into and detoxified everything is fine. The Health Department by their regulations has said that the minimum they would recommend is 10,000 foot lots for this; and yet this particular development is down to 7,500. The reason I mentioned that I’m right across the street is that I am intimately familiar with this piece of property. I’ve lived there for just short of a quarter century. This is my neighbor. We have watched that property fill up with water time and time and time again. An open septic system works well, except in one situation; and in that situation it should never be used. And that’s when the water level will rise up to the surface. Because in that situation the effluent is no longer being taken down into the ground. It’s being washed to the surface. I fear that that’s what’s going to happen on this piece of property if we put dense open sewage systems in a place where the water level comes up, not down. Okay? My neighbor has a basement. As rare as hen’s teeth in Hawaii, okay. Not much of a basement, just small room, cinder block. It’s dug into the ground, it has got a slab floor and a cinderblock wall. When you stand in it your eyes are just about the level of the ground. Every time we have a large storm that room fills up with water. And it doesn’t fill up from the top. It fills up from the bottom. It’s not water running along the surface and flowing into it. It’s the water literally running through the ground and bringing the water table up. Now in his situation in his cement room, the only thing that happens is a few tools fall down and some, some spare pieces of wood float to the surface. If that room were a septic system, that’s not what would be floating to the surface. Now we’re talking about a development that is supposed to be for the benefit of the low income housing. There is a need for that on this island, a very desperate need; and I’m sure that all you gentlemen being connected with the local government have received numerous notices about how important this must be. That does not mean that every proposal that has to do with low income housing is necessarily good. And I think low income housing is a very vital, very important problem that needs to be addressed. My difficulty with it is this particular piece of land and whether it is suitable for such a development. If I was someone who couldn’t afford a house, but who was able to get one of these pieces of property, was able to build through my own sweat equity, to build a home finally for my family, a little piece of the aina that is now EXHIBIT D 21 mine that I’m not having to pay rent on, putting money into someone else’s pockets and then after a year after heavy rains find sewage water on my property, I would be extremely upset. I teach science. I’m a school teacher. And one thing I tell my students is you can’t break the laws of science. They will break you. Every since our Archimedes we’ve known that water will float things up. What’s going to happen? You notice I don’t say might. What will happen on this particular piece of property is that we’re going to have a very serious public health problem further down the line. I want to go back to what Mr. Iwashita said earlier. The time to fix problems is before they become problems. In all the meetings that we’ve been having for this people have been asking questions and the response has always been, “Well, we’ll take care of that. Somewhere down the line that will be taken care of. We don’t know exactly how or why or by whom, but we’ll take care of that later on.” Is it there’s going to be like a magic land fairy that comes around and settles all these problems? This is a very serious problem lurking in the eaves. It’s not unforeseen. This is something that if we look at the land and what it does, not just as a square on the map, but how that land interacts environmentally we should be able to see the problems that are going to happen there.I’m not even bringing, well, I’m bringing up, I’m not going to harp on the fact that there’s a water well just down hill from this land. There’s a sewage treatment plant within a quarter mile, but it’s too expensive for this development to connect these houses and take the sewage down to that treatment plant. Instead we want an open sewage system? This is one of just a few problems. Mr. Domingo asked if this was one of the reasons that the community association needed more time. Yes, because we’re starting to find out after getting replies from various officials and various organizations that there are more problems here that we knew at the beginning, that these problems need to be investigated and solved before we approve this. Do people need a place to live? Yes. Is low income housing a priority? Yes. But we need to make sure that the places we’re going to put these people are going to be a benefit to them and not a problem further on down the line. Thank you. GRAHAM: Thank you, sir. We’ve had very good testimony here. In fact, we’ve had 8 people testify and it has been more than 45 minutes. So when we go forward I’d like you all to try to not repeat and try to move a little faster. First, do we have any questions for this testifier? WATANABE: I have one. GRAHAM: Mr. Watanabe? WATANABE: I have one question. We just heard about a sewage plant. You indicated it’s a quarter mile away. You’re on septic though, not on -? You’re not hooked on -? ROPER: I am on septic. I’m in an old plantation house with an existing septic system. WATANABE: So where does the pipe end? ROPER: My pipe ends in a septic tank -. EXHIBIT D 22 WATANABE: No, no. What I meant is where does that sewage pipe end? The sewage system is collecting sewer from some place. Where does it end? If it’s a quarter mile away -. ROPER: On input you mean? WATANABE: Yeah. ROPER: Where does it end as far as input? WATANABE: Yes. ROPER: Am I in a location where I can connect to it, is that the question? WATANABE: Yeah. ROPER: No, I’m not. It doesn’t extend as far as I know over the bridge. Okay? It’s on the other side of that one-lane bridge in the Kulaimano Subdivision. It was actually put in, my understanding, to handle the effluent from that division when it was formed, but it doesn’t go beyond that bridge. WATANABE: Okay, thank you. GRAHAM: Commissioner Woodward? WOODWARD: Yeah, I have just a question. It looks to me like there’s two ways in and out as you mentioned. And we have a memorandum from Department of Public Works dated th February 13. It says “The portion of old Mamalahoa Highway north of Easement R-1” which I guess is abutting the property, “and Highway Belt Road has been abandoned by the County and quit by the State. Easement R-1 is a private right-of-way of 60-foot width.” So it sounds like that’s an orphaned highway that nobody is maintaining it. ROPER: Yes, sir, that’s my understanding. It used to be used as an access to the old Pepeekeo Mill. Once the new Belt Highway was built it actually connected the Old Mamalahoa Highway up to the new Belt Highway. Its distances I would guess may be 75 to 100 yards. But it was created at that time to access the new highway by the plantation. WOODWARD: So that’s the most direct route to the main highway? ROPER: That s the most direct route but it is indeed private. It’s not public. GRAHAM: Okay, thank you. You all can go back now and maybe we’ll take a 5-minute recess and then we’ll move on with the next testifiers and try to go a little more quickly. RECESSED The Chair called a short recess at 4:45 p.m. RECONVENED The meeting reconvened at 4:50 p.m. EXHIBIT D 23 GRAHAM: I’ll call the Planning Commission back in session. I have like 10 or 12 more testifiers here. Maybe some of them have left but I’ll call them till we get 4 and hopefully you folks will not rehash what we’ve done before and just make real clear your feelings and any new information that we haven’t had before. Okay, I have T. J. Steele, Chengwu Chen, David Gelber and Michael Kraus. WOODWARD: Looks like everybody stayed. GRAHAM: Would you all please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth today before the Planning Commission on this matter? TESTIFIERS: I do. GRAHAM: Thank you. I’ll start with the left and you just give your name and then your address and then go right ahead with your testimony and try to be concise. T. J. STEELE: T. J. Steele, PO Box 979, Pepeekeo. I’m for a full-on denial of the whole deal, not a deferral. I heard deferral more times in the meeting I went to the Pepeekeo Association, where they brought in guys from the State and the County, than I ever heard before. Everybody was deferring to everybody else. Nobody had any answers for any of the things that we’ve heard already today that have been brought up. It’s no surprise to me that the developer the first thing he brought up was affordable housing. That’s the key. That’s how we’re playing the game. And I think you’ve heard all these people speak and no one has ever spoken against affordable housing, only the location. It’s the wrong location. It’s the wrong place for 30 units. And I can’t imagine, Chris Yuen, I can’t imagine the pressure you’re under to try to come up with property for affordable housing. So God bless you for that project. But this is not the right site for all the reasons that have already been brought up. It’s not about trying to help the farmers in Ag, and it’s not about affordable housing. And it’s about making profit on land which I got nothing against.I mean, you know, that’s the way the economy works. I’ve got no problem with that, and nobody spoke against that either. But it’s not about a better deal for the farmers and it’s not about affordable housing. It’s about the wrong place to try to shove in 30 units. Thank you. GRAHAM: Thank you. Any questions from Commissioners? DOMINGO: Just one question. GRAHAM: Yes, Commissioner Domingo. DOINGO: You live in the immediate vicinity of that proposed project? T. J. STEELE: I’m about ½ mile, ¾ mile down the road on the Old Mamalahoa Highway. DOMINGO: I see. T. J. STEELE: Yeah, so I mean I go down there all the time but I’m just right down the road. EXHIBIT D 24 DOMINGO: Do you farm? T. J. STEELE: I’m sorry? DOMINGO: Are you a farmer or -? T.J. STEELE: No, I tried sheep once and it didn’t work too well; and I’ve got a few palms. But, no, no. But I do know enough about, from friends who do farm, that there’s a time in which you get a lot too small to sustain any kind of farming. And so I know that if we get them too small -. And I think at one time we zoned this area for Ag-20 with the idea that we had a long-term vision. And I guess the, thanks for bringing that question up because my biggest concern about this is that we’re losing our long-term vision that we had at one time decided we were going to have housing here and we were going to have agricultural lots over here; and now what we’re doing is we’re willing to give up on that big picture planning to try to accommodate a short-term goal, which is more affordable housing. And so if we keep cutting these things down too small, we’re actually going to do away with the farming in that area, and this may not be the right spot for high density. DOMINGO: You know, let’s look at a scenario here, hypothetically.If the developers are able to find a place for an, an adequate place to build affordable unit housing around the immediate vicinity but not at that place, and if there’s an ability to have some kind of transaction with the County if we look at some vacant County lands and being able to acquire those lands for a housing project, would you approve the total project as presented? T. J. STEELE: Sure, as long as I could take a look at where they were proposing that site. Right now the biggest problem is there’s no infrastructure and that’s what we’ve heard during, when we brought the people in from the State and the County to give us answers to questions. Everybody deferred to each other. It’s because there’s no infrastructure there. Some of the infrastructure problems you’re not going to be able to solve. You’ve got one-lane bridges all the way to town that you’re not going to be able to widen. You’re not going to be able to do anything with that. So development down the Hamakua is going to have to be limited as this place grows, just because of the limitation of your infrastructure. But the limitations on the site that we’re talking about now for infrastructure are just, they’re insurmountable. And that’s why everybody was deferring to everybody else, cause nobody could answer the questions. If the County found or somebody found a site where it was we took care of those problems, water, sewer, and we could talk about, you know, how we’re going to do with the road, the post office -- You know, the police and fire say if you come we will build, so I know they’ll have to do that -- but, yeah, nobody is objectionable to that. In fact, that’s one of the ideas that we keep hearing, is a landswap idea. Nobody is against the affordable housing idea, the self-help project sounds great. It’s just not the right place. You can’t shove this thing in there because of all the things we’ve already heard about. But, yeah, everybody, I think would be more than happy. You know, if you’re just talking about cutting twenties down to tens and a few fives, you can still do farming with fives from what they tell me, from what some of my friends have told me. You know, if you go to tens and fives, you can still do it. But anything lower than that, we’re really going with a different concept. And I think we’re losing our big picture of what we’re trying to do planning wise down the Hamakua and in this area. And I think we’re just doing it EXHIBIT D 25 for a short-term gain for some affordable housing; and I can understand, why but it’s just the wrong place. So, yeah, landswap would work good for me. GRAHAM: Okay, thank you. Sir? CHEN: My name is Chengwu Chen. I live directly across from this 30 housing proposals, which is 28-1197 Old Mamalahoa Highway. Okay. First I want to make two apologies. One, I will not be able to articulate as good as my neighbors. They put me to shame. And second thing is unfortunately I did not attend Chris Yuen’s presentation and therefore I didn’t have an opportunity to bash you either. So my apologies. Now on with that, I am totally against this particular project. Self-help is a good thing and everybody already praised on it. Let’s not beat up that one to death. But I look at the 20-acre subdivisions of those lands, right, if you really want to promote -. You know, the State of Hawaii, the County of Hawaii is all playing lip service about supporting our farmers and agriculture and all of that, but they go around cutting the land. Right? And that itself, it’s kind of shameful thing to do. Right? When you look at it, as I put in there, nobody wants to put a price on those lands. But there’s one price that was quoted in there during his presentation to Pepeekeo community. He asked me how much do you think the land that he’s donating to the County is worth. I says, uh, we figure about half a million dollars. He says yeah, a little over half, about $600 to $700 million (sic) for a six-acre lot. Okay? So now put yourself in your farmer’s shoes. Okay? How many of those farmers can afford $600,000 to a $1,000,000 land to farm the land? And the other way to look at it is how many people who spend $600,000 to $l,000,000 to buy a piece of land? It’s gone to “book lip” that’s all, to plant sweet potatoes. That’s the first thing I have difficulty. Right? So that’s, and there is some, like I said it’s just rumble, right? Cause pretty much everybody else is saying the same thing already. I do want to tell you a little story, takes about two minutes. Four years ago when I looked over across the road there were about 200 to 300 acres of sweet potatoes, you know, taro leaves, and very different farmings. All right. And it was a very vibrant, there were lots of farmers, they were even singing their old Chinese folk songs, okay, as they go to work and come back. It was so refreshing. And fortunately I’m a bilingual so I can get to listen to that, you know, the old tunes that I miss and reminisce of old times. And then, you know, Hawaiian Rainbows came in and did their Phase I project, cutting it into 20 acre lots. Right? And that’s of course including that Lot A that has been proposed to subdivide.One of my farmer friends came in last night and asked me, to borrow money from me. He told me that the Lot B that’s he’s working on, he won’t be working on the lot any more in the next two months because the owner wants him to get out of the lot. Why? Owner doesn’t like farming any more. And how many more lots left as farming? Twenty acres out of 200 to 300 acres there. Now you can sing about agriculture, you can talk about, you know, trying to do agriculture stuff, but let’s not try play lip service. Okay? That’s the reality of today’s farmer. They’ve been told, as they cut up 20 acre lots, they’ve been told to get off the lot because the owners, either they’re rich or they’re from mainland or from anywhere, or they just want the land as an investment, they’re not using it any more. They just let it sit growing weeds. What a shame, what a waste, you know. Those beautiful land sitting there without doing agriculture. Now if you cut the land into 10 acres or 5 acres, how many of those owners are going to be really farming? It’s a fake farming. It’s somebody’s vacation home or something -. That’s a shame. I apologize. That’s my little adding of what I see happening in yesterday and today going forward. EXHIBIT D 26 GRAHAM: Good. Thank you for sharing that with us. Any comments? Commissioner Domingo again. DOMINGO: Thank you very much. You apologized two times. No need to apologize. I appreciate what you said and, you know, the whole truth behind that. And that’s another issue that I’m concerned about; and it’s not anything personal to anyone. But when people see the rezoning of agricultural lands and when you upzone the lands, you certainly increase the value of the property. And I think your friend who is farming on the land that has been leased to him or loan to him, I presume the owner has found out that it’s more lucrative, the return is even higher when you sell the land for that purpose, rather than collecting lease rental every month or every year. So what I’m afraid of is that as we rezone the agricultural lands along down the coast, you know, into smaller parcels, what we’re doing is encouraging those lands to be sold, and to be sold or used not for people who live here but to be sold to those who come from outside of our county because they have the resource to pay for the cost of the land. And then what we’re actually doing in the long run is to diminish or to, not diminish but we certainly increase the value of the land, and we diminish the emphasis of going into real agriculture. And I think that’s what we’ve got to look at as we consider all rezonings.Thank you very much. GRAHAM: Okay. Sir? GELBER: Hello, my name is David Gelber. My address is PO Box 493 in Pepeekeo. I live about a half mile towards town from the proposed development. Currently I serve on the Board of Directors for the Hawaiian Organic Farmers Association (HOFA). We’re the certifier, the only certifier here in the State of Hawaii that certifies farms to be organic. We also are an educational entity. We do a lot of workshops and things like that, fly a lot of people in from the mainland to educate our farmers. I’m personally against the project for many of the reasons that a lot of the people have specified previously. Coming from the point of view more of a farmer, I mean I’ve got a load of manure in the back of my truck right now that’s waiting to be applied to my plants when I get home. But coming from the point of view of an agriculturalist and just dealing with a lot of the information that floats across my desk that I get from the Hawaiian Organic Farmers Association in regards from the State of Hawaii, the Legislative, I guess the State Legislature, I see a lot of information coming across my desk that basically indicates that a priority for the State of Hawaii is to become more sustainable in the terms of providing food for our people here. Currently the State of Hawaii is considered a, you would call it a cargo culture, 90 to 95 percent of our food comes from the mainland. Currently, you know, we can sustain that for a certain amount of time until God forbid some disaster happens. Then I think things could get pretty ugly pretty quickly here if we don’t have some sort of alternative plan in place to provide ourselves for our own food needs. The area in Hamakua is one of the prime agricultural areas in the state. And as many people here have stated as we divide these areas, these parcels into smaller and smaller parcels, it reduces the efficacy of farming on these lands. And I realize also there’s a major need for affordable housing here in the State; and I feel as though perhaps this is maybe not the best place that this could be put in prime agricultural lands; and essentially that’s my opinion. Thank you. GRAHAM: Thank you, sir. Go ahead, sir. EXHIBIT D 27 KRAUS: My name is Michael Kraus. My address is PO Box 212, Pepeekeo. My business address is 28-354 Sugar Mill Road, and that is the old Sugar Mill Garage. I bought my property from Continental Pacific, I guess.It was the company that sold the surrounding properties to Hawaiian Rainbows or is selling it to Hawaiian Rainbows. I want to speak against this project. Pretty much all my reasons have been spoken here by other people. I drive that road every day, several times a day. I have seen the water flowing across that property. I know it exists. I couldn’t imagine that somebody was going to build housing on that place that turns into a flood zone every time we have a couple weeks of rain; and we do get a couple weeks of rain and the water flows through there. I feel very sorry for anybody who goes in there and tries to build their own home; and then have 12 to 14 inches of water running in their front door couple of years from now. And that is going to be a problem that is going to fall on the taxpayers. Somehow or other we’re all going to get stuck with it. I don’t like seeing the prime agricultural land gone.I’ve got a lot of friends around there who are farmers, and who farms this land. I have a farm of my own right up here on Amaulu Road; and I know how hard it is to make a living even on the 27 acres I’ve got. It’s a small parcel. I’ve got 16 acres of usable land out of 27 acres and it’s very difficult to make a living. If I had to rely on that alone and I didn’t have the tree business I wouldn’t make a living. I don’t think I can keep the land. The septic drainage problems, everybody has gone over that over and over again. I have a real problem with the traffic. I have had several close calls where Kulaimano Road comes into Sugar Mill Road. Several times my trucks have almost hit lost tourists who come up there, don’t know where they are, make a circle around. Putting another 50 or 60 cars a day into that intersection is not a good idea, not without some kind of change in the way the road is. And people have mentioned coming in from Hamakua, coming in from Hamakua is dangerous because it’s a climbing hill. People are, the speed limit drops down to 45 right there but most people cross that intersection quite a bit above 45. I’m always worried, I’m always looking in my mirror when I come that way. And I do that, or a truck belonging to me probably does that a dozen times a day. We have to make that left turn. And that is a dangerous spot. Cars will whiz by me on the right-hand side, just whiz like that; and they go right by me through the intersection on the right-hand side. And like somebody else mentioned, it’s coming in from the Hilo side to make the turn down the hill, almost everybody pulls over into the shoulder. There isn’t a turn lane there. There’s a shoulder there. Cars and trucks regularly stop in that shoulder. So that isn’t available all the time. I won’t tie you up saying the same things over and over again. I’ll just let you know that I don’t think that it’s a good idea. The land is inappropriate especially because of the way it floods. And if they’re going to put in 30 septic systems in a place that fills with water, I don’t think it’s a good idea. Thank you. GRAHAM: Thank you, sir. Any questions? All right, thank you all very much for your testimony. I think I’m down to the last four on my sign-up list here. But there has been a lot of good testimony. Mr. Bob Williams, Gayle Steele, Fred Wohlschlagel, and Gilbert De Motta. And if there’s anyone else here who hasn’t testified that wants to, if you want to just go see Sharon right now she can let me know. Would you all please raise your right hand. And do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter before the Hawaii Planning Commission today? EXHIBIT D 28 TESTIFIERS: I do. GRAHAM: Thank you. Ma’am you can start there, start with your name and address and give us your testimony. G. STEELE: Okay. My name is Gayle Steele and I live on old Onomea Road. It has two exits, one out on the regular highway and one, we live right on the old scenic highway across the botanical garden. So I experience both issues of traffic going one way or the other. I wasn’t really going to say anything today cause I felt that everything would be covered. And what prompted me to sign up last minute was what Mr. Iwashita said about the vision of the Hamakua coast. My husband and I moved from Oahu 7 years ago; and we owned property both in Kona and in Hilo; and we chose Hilo because of what we thought was a long-term vision for the Hamakua coast, which was to keep the country country. And so I know what that’s like because I lived in Kona 25 years ago and I saw what happened to Kona. And the only reason why I’m prompted to even participate is I hate to see it going to that direction. And so I feel like there are two issues. One is about breaking the Ag 20’s into 10’s. And I feel that that’s just the beginning. Like then what’s next, you know, 10 years down the line? And I feel like there’s some kind of deception involved too because most of the people that spoke for the affordable homes did it, like if you saw this piece of property that they’re talking about -. Have any of you seen this site? I mean regardless of whether the wells or the sewage or the whatever, just the physical location of this place to put 30 homes in it, to me, it boggles my mind that it’s even up for debate that you would actually do that.And I don’t blame the people who want to speak for the chance of owning one of these properties. Because if I could qualify I would want to own one of these homes too because the unobstructed ocean view is beautiful. And so earlier what my husband said, the bottom line is to see what the appropriateness of where you’re going to be putting the affordable homes. It’s like totally just inappropriate, just by physically looking at it. And I would urge all of you, and I’m sure most of you live in Hilo are familiar with the area, just to drive down that road and to envision 30 homes being put there. It’s almost like, it’s a crime. GRAHAM: Thank you for your testimony. Any questions? All right, sir. WILLIAMS: I’m Bob Williams. I live on old Onomea Road as well where I’ve lived for 12 years. My wife and I built our house together, self-help, a few friends helped, a few trades people. And we’ve farmed there for the whole time, 12 years. I’ve ranched in Paauilo mauka before that, dating back to 1984. So I’ve farmed and ranched and, of course, like most farmers and ranchers had a day job to sustain my farming habit. We do pretty well with about 500 mac nut trees and tropical fruits. Maybe we gross $15,000 of which I may net $2,500. So obviously I’m living on a DOT pension, and a DOE pension, and also social security; and this is almost like a lifestyle, sadly hard lifestyle. So I realize that you can’t farm and make a living out of it if you’re buying a 5-acre lot for $500,000. I mean the fellow in the back who’s a farmer can certainly attest to that. We all know that. This is a little bit about Gentrified Estates, is really what it’s about. And that’s a sad thing because like everybody else feels it just destroys the whole purpose of the Ag, and it’s just a matter before we become Kona. You know, there are two, couple of things I just wanted to say, you know, here we are, Tribune Herald, most dangerous roads in the state, you know. Here we are, we’ve got an intersection EXHIBIT D 29 right there coming across that hill and traffic, not just 30 lots, 43 lots by my count, plus what has already been sort of forced down Mr. Yuen’s throat with the Continental Pacific Subdivision. Right? Well, that was PC, or else you’ve got to give us a subdivision. So altogether it’s about 150 lots conceivably. But certainly Gordon Inouye guys shouldn’t be responsible for all that, but they want to add 43 more to the 100 plus that are already there. So I’ll imagine two cars per or if they put their additional farm dwellings there and what have you four cars, and on it goes. So basically it’s a 40-foot wide road going in, dumping into a 20-foot, you know, inadequate County road across a private road. It’s one of the most dangerous intersections in the state, probably already needs a traffic light going up mauka and coming down and going across left to town. It’s a killer. I go through that all the time. The site per se is everything as described.I really encourage the Planning Commission to go check it out if you have any further qualms or -. The 10,000-square foot lots is the minimum of septics, we’ve heard that. It’s a flood zone, we’ve heard that. You know, basically the conclusion of this study was that developers must be held responsible for paying for road improvements, says the Hawaii County Safety Council. I see Russell Kokubun has got two bills in the Legislature right now trying to support, preserve the Ag lands and so on. So this whole thing is flying cross purposes on all that. And it’s really for what? It’s for private profit, that’s what it’s for. And, of course, the sweetner is the affordable housing. I am a proponent for affordable housing. I worked at Pahoa High School for 10 years; I worked with families like that, self-help; I’ve done the same thing, I worked with Habitat for Humanity. God knows that we built our own house. I did it when I was 56, not 26, by the way. You know, so I really think that this is, you know, affordable housing is great, so on. And this project just needs to stop right here. We don’t have these questions answered. We have contradictory answers coming, answers really coming from various people and Highways, Health, lots of buck passing going on. I don’t know why we’re even holding this hearing at this point, frankly. I hope you certainly stop it or defer at least as a bare minimum. Thank you. GRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. Williams. Any questions? Mr. Domingo? DOMINGO: I just want to tell Mr. Williams that’s part of the process, this hearing. It’s a necessity. Okay? WILLIAMS: Thanks. DOMINGO: And it’s not like I enjoy spending my whole day when I’m retired coming in town, and sit down and listen to, you know, the woe is me and all of the problems that is before us. So I don’t appreciate the fact that some people think that we’re coming here and we don’t need this hearing at all WILLIAMS: Bless your hearts. Thank you very much for doing this. Everyone here, all of us have been hanging since 10 o’clock this morning so, including Mr. Chen and his friends. GRAHAM: All right. Thank you, sir. WOHLSCHLAGEL: Hi. I’m Fred Wohlschlagel and I presently reside in HPP. We have property there on Sugar Mill Road with plans to build. And at the present time we have cattle on EXHIBIT D 30 there and we’ll probably go into some small crops when we get over there closer. I’m an ex-well driller, developer, did a lot of septic systems. And as far as I can find out, this is one of the last states who allow cesspools. And the septic systems that I’ve been witnessing don’t seem by most people standards to be much of a system. The tank is there and a little bit of leach field. But when I was doing up some properties and I had to put in tanks, we put in a tank similar to what we’re using, with a 100 feet of leach field per bedroom. It’s not anything like that here. And they said, well, you can still get away with cesspool. I said it isn’t what we can get away with. It’s what’s optimal. Now without going on that any longer, I live downhill. When I took the property, we were told about the berms, don’t disturb the berms, it’s for soil conservation, control the water during the rains. They talked about changing the lay of the land to handle that water problem that everybody has brought up. They act like it’s real easy. Well, if they do something to manage the water, it will probably force it over the berm and onto the property below. Mr. Chen talked about the gentleman that was taking off as a farmer. Well, those are the people that are the ones that are joining us right over the fence or over the berm from this projected thing. I’m the next property down; and I’m concerned about not just going down towards the community well, which I’m very familiar being a well driller, but also groundwater. Everybody said it’s percolating up when it’s wet, and then going over the berm and contaminating the crops below, sweet potatoes for one. I don’t want human waste fertilizing the crops we grow. So I’m not going to go on about it much. But I wasn’t going to speak because it has been handled so well, but I thought I’d get down and dirty. And, also, the people from the Health Department where I came from would come out in the yards when they did areas like this, and they take little clean dowels and poke them in the yard and smell them; and they said do you want your children playing on that. And I say that houses on 7500-foot lots packed into 30 density, the stick is going to stink. That’s all I have to say. Any questions? GRAHAM: Thank you, sir. Any questions? All right. Sir? DE MOTTA: Gilbert De Motta, 2617 Kilauea Avenue, over the last five years. But for the 70 years I was born and raised at Pepeekeo. As you know, back in the early 50’s that so- called bridge was narrow they say. You remember all the traffic from Kona to Hilo, that was the main highway. When the sugar plantation was in operation, all the trucks passed through there. How many accidents we had there? None. So I feel it was safe. I was born and raised there, I saw that highway. No problem at all. That bridge, everyone would stop. They respected each other. Why today they cannot do that? I believe they will still do that if that highway, they know there would be more homes in the area. That’s number one. That bridge I feel is safe enough. Okay, Number two, Kulaimano when they developed it back in 1966, fortunately I was involved in housing with C. Brewer and the ILWU, it was affordable housing. We paid only $11,100. Today because all of those expensive homes are coming up, what it’s going for? Three hundred thousand dollars. How can our kids afford it? I gave my son my house in Pepeekeo and I moved to Hilo in my dad’s house. It’s the only way I can afford it. Now when Kulaimano started off back in 1966 we had cesspools. Okay, when they dug the well, we still had cesspools. That well, I mean the sewer plant came in after, way after. All of that cesspool was going down 300 something homes at that time. And why we end up with the sewer plant? Because Farmer’s Loan wouldn’t allow us to build our last increment, Increment 5. Because of that, then Yoshito EXHIBIT D 31 Takamine got money that we built the sewer plant to develop in the area. But prior to that it was all cesspools. We didn’t have any problem with that. When the plantation was in operation, we had the well. Now all the fertilizers, sewer, we never had problem with that well. Why today we’re going to get problems? Because of the 30 homes coming in the area? I believe we would never have a problem. If we have a problem it would be long time ago, but we never had that problem. So I’m all for it; and this is the only way our kids can afford to get a home. I know because I was involved from Day 1 in Kulaimano till the last plantation closed up. Okay? Thank you very much. GRAHAM: Thank you, sir. Any questions? I wanted to ask you a question, sir, about the sewage plant that came in. You said that all the increments were done with cesspools and then just for the last increment they needed to do the sewage plant. Did they retrofit any of the other older houses so that their cesspools would be replaced by a connection to the sewer plant or -? DE MOTTA: We all had to hook up to the sewer plant. It was an agreement between the County and C. Brewer. GRAHAM: All right, thank you. DE MOTTA: Okay, thank you. GRAHAM: Any further questions? Thank you all very much. . DE MOTTA: Thank you. WOHLSCHLAGEL: Thank you. GRAHAM: Well, that would seem to end our public testimony today. We’re at a late hour. My sense is we could make a motion to adjourn and meet again next time, or do a site visit or something, or we could invite the applicant back again to give us a more full presentation, we can question more directly, and with the intention that maybe we can make some decision tonight. But we have only five of us, so what would you all like to do? DOMINGO: Before we even consider that, Mr. Chairman, I was wondering if we could have Mr. Antonio from the Department of Water Supply come up again. I just have one question for him. GRAHAM: Certainly. DOMINGO: Mr. Antonio, with the testimonies that we’ve heard regarding the flooding conditions and the flow of water in that vicinity, has there been any indication that it has contaminated the well? ANTONIO: The well was developed back in the, probably early or late seventies, I believe. And like Mr. De Motta had mentioned, the Kulaimano Subdivision was developed with cesspools. And the cesspools were there when the well was in operation and is still in operation. EXHIBIT D 32 And then eventually the sewer plant came in. Since the well went in, I have no experiences as far as it being contaminated by sewer waters or the like. For your information, as far as operating our source waters or our water systems, we have to comply with stringent DOH, Department of Health, regulations; and we continually monitor our sources. And like I said, we haven’t experienced any contamination off of that source. DOMINGO: Thank you very much. GRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. -. ANTONIO: And I’d like to add further that we are also in the process of developing another well. It’s located mauka of the subdivision. And that well we just tested and it’s a good producer. I think we tested at 700 gpm which can provide about a million gallons a day. It will provide good water for the community. Although that well may come on line, the existing well that’s in operation now will remain there. I mean we wouldn’t deactivate it, the fact that it hasn’t been proven to be a problem. And we’ll continue to operate that well. DOMINGO: So when that new well is put into operation, that would mean that water will be made available to the present applicants and to those who are not able to acquire any meters right now? ANTONIO: We’ve stated that the applicant or the affordable housing project will get water upon completion of that well. However, we stop short of saying water will be available for Rainbow’s Ag subdivision or even those parcels that were previously subdivided under the variance provisions of the County Code where because water wasn’t available they were able to subdivide with a waiver. We haven’t made a determination as far as yes or no whether or not these lots or these parcels will get water; however, you know, discussions are still open on that matter. DOMINGO: Okay, thank you very much. WOODWARD: If I might follow-up on that. GRAHAM: Commissioner Woodward, go ahead. WOODWARD: Thank you, sir. We have a letter from Mr. Pavao that says due to cost, etc., etc. that at least the time he wrote us the letter that he had no plans in the foreseeable future to bring water to any of those 10-acre lots. I mean, is this new information that you’re giving us now? ANTONIO: What’s the date of that letter from Mr. Pavao? WOODWARD: Let’s see if I can find that for you. WATANABE: Mr. Chair, we might be a little bit confused here. I think he stated that they’re not going to provide water to the Ag lots but it will -. EXHIBIT D 33 WOODWARD: Basically, yeah. WATANABE: Yeah, and he also stated that, what he did say though is that they haven’t yet determined whether they will provide water to the current residents, you know, when that new well comes on line. And so it’s my interpretation that that’s still in discussions and it’s not ruled out. It may occur. You just don’t know how much capacity you have? ANTONIO: Yeah, you know, we did state in the letter saying that water will be made available for the affordable housing and not the Ag 5 or Ag 10 subdivision that Rainbows is -. However, you know, I’ll just expand that a little bit where discussions are still open on that matter. th WOODWARD: Let me just read you the letter here. It was dated February 15, “Upon completion of the Department’s Kulaimano well, which is currently under construction, water can be made available for the proposed subdivision,” gives the TMK numbers, “to support the proposed 30-lot RS-7.5 affordable housing development and the two (2) Ag-5 lots. However, the Department cannot provide service for the proposed Change of Zone (Ag-20a to Ag- 10a)…into 11 lots. Extensive improvements and additions would be required, which may include, but not be limited to, source, storage, booster pumps, transmission, and distribution facilities. Currently, there is no funding available from the Department for such improvements and no time schedule is set .” ANTONIO: Yeah, basically the last phrase that you had stated is almost like a standard statement that we provide or write in our letters. However, you know, I could correct it at this point in time saying that in fact we are proceeding with the development of that well that I just mentioned. Again, we just completed testing that well. The next phase is to design a production well and design the electrical and pump for that proposed well. There might not be a definite time schedule for it. You know, we are hoping that we can do that within couple of years. GRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. Antonio. Okay? DOMINGO: That’s all. GRAHAM: Okay. DOMINGO: I don’t have questions for Mr. Antonio. But could we call back Mr. Kato up front? I’d like to ask a question. GRAHAM: If you’d like. All right, I was wondering if we’re going to try to keep going with this matter today, fine. But if we’re going to continue to the next time anyway, maybe it’s best we get most of our stuff answered next time when it’s all fresh to us when we’re dealing with it. DOMINGO: Okay. Just one question. GRAHAM: Surely. EXHIBIT D 34 DOMINGO: I think having this been brought to the surface for discussion, and I think today’s meeting, has been very fruitful by the fact that it has been an information gathering session for us and also for the community and especially for the developers, because for them they’ve gotten to know what the strong concerns of the public is and what some of the concerns of the people on the Commission is. So I’d just like to ask Mr. Kato one question. GRAHAM: Mr. Kato, could you come forward. Thank you. DOMINGO: Mr. Kato, the affordable units and the development of that parcel, I’m not sure if I read that the Public Works are insisting that you folks put in curbs, gutters, and to take care of the drainage. KATO: Yeah, that was their comment. You know, actually the final improvements don’t get determined until you go through the subdivision process. DOMINGO: Okay. You know, in view of that what I’m concerned is that because the description that they gave to us with regards to the land and the flooding that occurs there, you know, and if you’re required to put in those improvements, then you can probably hardly call it affordable because of the cost to build that infrastructure. KATO: Well, you know, if we have to do curb, gutters, sidewalks, it definitely increases the cost. But let me just give you some sense of perspective. We expect, we’re pursuing a similar project up in North Kohala. And based on what we see, we expected those houses to be less than $200,000. So it could further lower the price if we had to do less improvements; but nevertheless, it still is affordable. GRAHAM: Okay? DOMINGO: I’m done. Thanks. KATO: Could I just say one thing? GRAHAM: Certainly. KATO: If the Commission decides, you know, to go ahead and continue the hearing and they want to take more public testimony, I would request that you do it at a time where the people who are not independent business owners or not retirees can come, which is basically during the evening hours. Because the clientele who would be in these 30 units, you know, they’re really not able to come at hours like 10:30 in the morning or 1:30 in the afternoon. I realize it’s a significant inconvenience for all of you, but I think if you want to get the full range of public input it’s something worth considering. GRAHAM: Okay, thank you for that thought. Well, Commissioners, where should we go from here? What’s your pleasure? DOMINGO: Mr. Chairman? GRAHAM: Commissioner Domingo. EXHIBIT D 35 DOMINGO: Well, you know, in view of the fact that I come from the district, although way many miles down the road, and after listening to all the concerns raised, I feel it incumbent upon me to make a motion that we defer action as suggested by the letter from the Kulaimano or Pepeekeo Community Association. And, you know, they have some valid issues they’d like to discuss, and hopefully they can get together with the developers and discuss it. I’m not sure if they would be able to come up with some agreement. But I think to know the issues and to discuss it is very important. Now that we all know where so-call everybody is coming from it would be well to continue, and it would give the people a good starting point to really go into some serious discussions. And I think another, perhaps another suggestion is if we can take some kind of site inspection for us to go there and to actually see the area. GRAHAM: How do the other Commissioners feel about that? Commissioner Watanabe? WATANABE: I, in deference to my colleague, I respect the fact that it’s, you know, in the Hamakua area. But we did basically only hear one side. We did cut short the presentation by the developer. So I don’t think we should be making a motion to defer the overall zoning request, etc. Now if we’re saying it’s kind of late in the evening, we want to continue to the next meeting or if we want to even schedule a site visit, that’s one thing. But to, you know, actually try and make a decision on this without really giving them the full benefit of making a full presentation I think would not be entirely fair to the applicant. GRAHAM: Right, that certainly is in keeping with my thought, that if we feel like we want to move towards a decision tonight, then we could call them back up and have a fuller presentation. But if we want to look at just continuing to the next meeting then we can just go ahead and do that now so that their presentation is fresh for us the next time we meet. So Commissioner Domingo has made a motion, I believe for continuance to the next meeting and also for site visit. Is there a second to that motion or how does the rest of the Commissioners feel? WOODWARD: I’ll second that motion. GRAHAM: All right, seconded by Commissioner Woodward. Any -? I’m certainly in accord with that. Do any of the other Commissioners have any thoughts? All right. Jeff, do you want to take a vote on the motion? DARROW: Sure. This is going to be a motion to defer this matter and to schedule a site inspection. We do have two applications before us. So what I’ll do is I’ll take the vote for the State Land Use -. YUEN: Let’s take them both together. DARROW: Just combine them both. So this vote will be for both applications. With that, I’ll take the roll call. Commissioner Domingo? DOMINGO: Aye. EXHIBIT D 36 DARROW: Commissioner Woodward? WOODWARD: Aye. DARROW: Commissioner Rho? RHO: Aye. DARROW: Commissioner Watanabe? WATANABE: Aye. DARROW: And Mr. Chairman? GRAHAM: Aye. DARROW: The motion passes five to zero. GRAHAM: Also, before we’re totally done with it I know Mr. Kato expressed his concern that, you know, some of the people who would be interested in being in this project are probably working people and probably have a hard time testifying. Is there, do the Commissioners see any suggestion to deal with his concern? DOMINGO: Mr. Chairman? GRAHAM: Commissioner Domingo. DOMINGO: I’m going to somewhat make a facetious kind of remark. I want it to be an issue-oriented meeting, rather than a numbers kind of thing. Because I know when you consider affordable housing, you know, it’s like apple pie and motherhood, everybody is in favor of it. Even me I would be in favor of it. But I think we should look at the issues and really discuss it. So, but whatever the Commission wants, I’ll yield to it. I’ll come anyway. GRAHAM: Commissioner Woodward? WOODWARD: I would agree completely. I think really that would just be more people beating the same drum and we know, like he said, it’s apple pie and motherhood. Nobody is opposed to affordable housing. It’s the facts that we really need to get and that has to do with location and suitability of the site, and so on and so forth. And I think a site visit would be much more valuable than -. And if we do that in the morning and then commence the meeting here, that’s what I would suggest. GRAHAM: Okay. So are we finished with this matter? It seems like we’re kind of all in accord. Commissioner Rho? RHO: You know, I think that all of us or most of us took notes and we have a series of questions that maybe the applicant can prepare answers to. And I think there are questions that they may want to answer or can answer but there are other Departments, State EXHIBIT D 37 Departments included, Wastewater for one, that I think we need the answers from them. One is that requirement of 10,000 square feet; and at the next meeting I would like an answer. I mean the letter that we got clearly states that that won’t be approved, 7,500 square feet won’t be approved. So, I mean, I assume that it’s possible to get a waiver, etc., etc. But I’d like answers to some of these questions. And I guess the people who testified also alluded to that, in fact actually stated that, that they’re not, they don’t feel that they’re getting the answers that they need, or their questions are not getting clear answers. And so at the next meeting instead of possibly postponing this thing again or deferring it again we need to have some of these questions answered. I mean, you don’t, I don’t know how to say that except to say that we need all these people here who can answer the questions and not either defer or say at this point that’s our standard answer. GRAHAM: Mr. Yuen? YUEN: You know, we can ask other agencies to come. There are some questions that the Department may be able to answer. On the individual wastewater system, the Department of Health has a rule that requires a 10,000-square foot lot for an individual wastewater system unless you obtain a variance. There’s a process for obtaining variances. They have granted variances on a number of instances. There is no guarantee that someone can obtain a variance. There’s a process. The applicant has to justify it. In this case if the rezoning went through to allow 7,500-square foot lots and no variance was granted, then the applicant would have to develop 10,000-square foot lots. GRAHAM: Okay. Anything further from the Commissioners? WOODWARD: Commissioner Rho, were you suggesting that we all submit questions to be submitted to the applicants prior to the next meeting, written questions? RHO: No. But maybe the minutes can be -. WOODWARD: Oh, yeah, there are plenty of juicy stuff there, sure. GRAHAM: Okay. Thank you. Jeff, did you have something? DARROW: No, just a clarification. On the motion, was this to continue to the next Hilo meeting or -? GRAHAM: Yes. DARROW: Yes, okay. GRAHAM: Good, and schedule a site visit at that time also. DARROW: Yeah, I guess we’ll wait for Norman to return to schedule a site visit, or we’ll just schedule it for that particular day on the day of the hearing. GRAHAM: Yes, that’s the usual procedure. Good. EXHIBIT D 38 DARROW: Okay, thank you. GRAHAM: Okay, well, that’s it. Thank you all for your testimony and attention on that matter. The discussion ended at 5:57 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon M. Nomura, Secretary EXHIBIT D 39