Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-06-20 ttavares PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAII HEARING TRANSCRIPT JUNE 20, 2003 A regularly advertised public hearing on the application of WALTER M. TAVARES, JR. (SPP 03-004) was called to order at 11:03 a.m. in the County Building, Councilroom - Room 201, 25 Aupuni Street, Hilo, Hawaii with Second Vice-Chairperson Hannah Springer presiding. PRESENT:Hannah SpringerABSENT & EXCUSED: Fred Galdones William Graham Earl Fujikawa Florence Kubota Francis Smith Jeffrey McCall Aurelio Mina, Jr. Bill Thibadeau Ivan Torigoe, Deputy Corporation Counsel Roy Takemoto, Deputy Planning Director Norman Hayashi, Staff Planner Phyllis Fujimoto, Staff Planner Jeff Darrow, Staff Planner And 3 people from the public in attendance APPLICANT: WALTER M. TAVARES, JR. (SPP 03-004) Application for a Special Permit to allow the construction of a 2,500-square foot building for the establishment of a towing and auto repair business on 1 within the State Land Use Agricultural District. The property is located along the makai rd side of Uluhe Street (aka 33 Avenue), approximately 1620 feet northeast (Keaau direction) of Makuu Drive, Hawaiian Paradise Park Subdivision, Keaau, Puna, Hawaii, TMK: 1-5-16:148. SPRINGER:WeÓre now on Agenda Item No. 3. The Applicant is Walte Tavares, Jr. (SPP 03-004). ItÓs an application for a Special Permit to allow the construction of a 2,500-square foot building for the establishment of a towing and auto repair business on one acre of land situated within the State Land Use District. The rd property is located along the makai side of Uluhe Street (aka 33 Avenue), approximately 1,620 feet northeast (Keaau direction) of Makuu Drive, Hawaiian Paradise Park Subdivision, Keaau, Puna, Hawaii, TMK: 1-5-16:148. HAYASHI:Thank you, Madam Chair. SPRINGER:Thank you, Norman. 1 HAYASHI:If I may direct your attention to the presentation maps on the board. DonÓt get excited when you see all these dots. These are, this map is the map that has been used for a previous application so the dots on the map signifies special permits that were submitted, either recommended for approval, approved a This is Highway 130, also known as Keaau-Pahoa Road. This would direction, and Pahoa direction. This particular area is known as the Hawaiian Paradise Park Subdivision. The main roadways, mauka-makai roadways, with are, first of all, Shower, Kaloli, Paradise Drive and Makuu Drive. There are numerous rd crossroads within the subdivision, starting from 33 Street, all the way down to the coastal roadway which is indicated here. The subject property is located, identified in rd orange at the makai side of 33 Street. rd Again, as a matter of orientation, this would be 33 Avenue or Street, and this would be Highway 130, right in this location. The Applicant intends to construct an auto repair shop as well as to establish a car towing business on the subject property. This would be a building that would house the auto repair shop and office. ItÓll be approximately 50-by-50 square feet in size. Fronting the proposed building would be parking for the structure. The Applicant also intends to provide for additional parking to the rear of the structure. This would be for temporary storage of the cars that are towed or brought in. Generally, the towed vehicles would be sent to other locations, which would be either in Puna or in Hilo, other areas in Puna or in Hilo. The hours of operation for the repair shop would be Monday to Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and the towing business, obviously, Just as a matter of correction or clarification, in the staffÓs Background Report on page 1, we said that the vehicles towed would be sent either to Puna or Hilo. On the staffÓs Recommendation on page 2, on the top of page 2, second paragraph, it says that the vehicles, stalled cars would be towed to repair shops near the site. It should also reflect that Puna or Hilo areas. Staff is recommending that this particular application be approved, subject to conditions. One of the conditions is that this, the life of the towing business and auto repair business be for five years. And this has been consistent with some of the recent Special Permit applications that were granted for this particular area of Puna. Whitney/Mango Trust application, which is situated almost diagonally from the subject property. We are also including the hours of operation, as well as that the Applicant shall provide rd for a 20-foot wide pavement within the 33 Avenue right-of-way from Makuu Drive, this is Makuu Drive, to the subject property. That would be a distance of approximately .3 miles, a .3 mile. 2 We did receive a request for a contested, Petition for Standing to a Contested Case hearing, and that was filed by the Hawaiian Paradise Park Lot Owners Association; and the representative from that Association is here today to speak on behalf of their request for standing and the reason why theyÓre submitting that request. Normally, we would withhold the staffÓs recommendation. But, in this particular case, we felt that perhaps our recommendation may be something that could be satisfactory to the AssociationÓs request for standing. SPRINGER:Thank you. Excuse me just a moment, Commissioners. Members, having conferred with our Deputy Corporation Counsel, Ivan Torigoe, what heÓs suggesting is that we have some background discussion on this matter before us, both before we take up the application and, also, before we take up the Request for Standing in a Contested Case. Our belief is that the Applicants may benefit from hearing the discussion as it ensues and their desire for a Contested Case hearing may be reduced by having access to our discussion. So is there any objection to having discussion on the matter before we take up the application for Standing in a Contested Case hearing? Commissioner Kubota? KUBOTA:Madam Chair, I have no objection to that procedure, except when you talk about discussion, when you say discussion, what kind of discussion are you talking about? Are you talking about questions and answers, or the kind of discussion that we have normally, or is there something special that you wanted from the applicant? SPRINGER:Mrs. Kubota, maybe I can ask Mr. Torigoe to give us som guidance on the course that our discussion might take. KUBOTA:Thank you. TORIGOE:Okay. Thank you, Madam Chairman. As you know, there ha been a Request for a Contested Case filed. And, I think, normal have a little bit of background information, the presentation, and I think the Chair entertains some questions just to flush out some of the background. And then your first order of business is to take up the Request for Standing in a Contested Case. I understand from discussions with staff that the concerns of the Association may be satisfied with the adoption of an appropriate paving and maintenance condition. And so, I think, in terms of the procedure what we want to do is go ahead and finish your basic background presentation and questions to the staff. And then IÓll call up the Applicant, along with the Intervenors, or the requested Intervenors, and see if there can be an agreement to hold in abeyance the consideration of a Contested Case request, to see if a satisfactory road condition can be worked out and included in any permit that may SPRINGER:Commissioners, any clarification necessary? How do you propose we proceed, then, Mr. Torigoe? 3 TORIGOE:As I said, if you want to just, at this point, I guess staff has finished their initial presentation. If the Commissioners have background questions that theyÓd like to ask, just to flush out the background, you can go ahead and do that; and then call up the Applicant and the request, the people who are requesting intervention. SPRINGER:Thank you, Mr. Torigoe. Commissioners, any questions of staff on the information presented to us or clarification? GRAHAM:Madam Chair? SPRINGER:Commissioner Graham, thank you. GRAHAM:As I read over all this material and also the Hawaiian Paradise Park Community Master Plan and all, my first feeling was while a lot of people in the community got together and worked out a plan for the direction they wanted to see future development take place in the Hawaiian Paradise Park area, the industrial node that they had is not where this property is located. So, right away, I got a, you know, a worried feeling that the Planning Commission could be sanctioning a land use in contrast for what the community has already indicated they wanted to do. And then as I read the conditions, I see that there seems to be pretty strong-built around a five-year period, as if maybe the Planning DepartmentÓs feeling is there was real value to providing the service to the community; and that rather than having it wait for some p be operated in a short run at a place that is not particularly in line with the plans that the community has come up with. But then I start thinking is the Applicant really going to build all of this structure and do this paving and all that for site? And, so, then I wondered what will happen in five years if the business is going well and all or, if people are going to say, well, you have to leave now, sorry. Anyway, those are all the issues that sure came to my mind, so I just wanted to put them all out on the table. SPRINGER:Thanks. Norman, I guess that that speaks to the enforcement of Condition 2, among other things. How would Condition 2 be enfor HAYASHI:Well, basically, what we would do is that after five years we would inform the Applicant that, or prior to the expiration of five years, we would inform the Applicant that his permit would expire, will be expiring. He has the option of asking for a time extension. Or if an appropriate area designated for Industrial is found in close proximity within four miles, then he would have that option of relocating into that area. So itÓs whichever comes first, the five years or the designating of an appropriate Industrial zoned area, then this permit would be nullified, unless the Applicant comes in for a time extension. SPRINGER:Commissioner Graham, do you having any follow-up? GRAHAM:Well, certainly, we need to hear more from the Community Association and the applicant about this kind of thing. You know, on the concerned side, 4 also, I have friends in Kohala who are in the auto repair business and all, so, I certainly have some feelings for that. But, on the other hand, I also, you know, recognize that running a compressor is a noisy business and it is very much a, metal work, it is very much an industrial kind of activity. So it seems like that if itÓs inappropriate for the location, itÓs inappropriate for the location, whether itÓs there for five years, or three weeks, or forever. So, because it is so close to the main road, it feels to me like the negative impact is not so widely shared in a sense that, you know, being well down in residential areas. But still itÓs not what the Par for. I feel like IÓm sure thereÓs a lot of people who put a lot of work into polling the community in coming up with that master plan, and I really would hate to go in contrast to them. SPRINGER:Other Commissioners, any questions of the staff? Mr. Torigoe, at this point, should we take up the matter of the Applicants for Standing? TORIGOE:Yeah, I think thatÓd be good. You can call the Applicant up, as well as the Applicants for standing, and get an idea of what the concerns are of the Applicants for standing. And, I guess, you could either just go ahead and take up the matter of standing right away or you could see if everyone can agree to kind of put that off to see if the Commission can deal with the AssociationÓs concerns by way of a condition. SPRINGER:Thank you. Before we get into that, I need some clarification from staff. Were there one or two applications for standing? HAYASHI:There was one application. SPRINGER:Okay. And thatÓs Ms. Mayhew, on behalf of the Association? HAYASHI:ThatÓs correct, on behalf of the Association. SPRINGER:Thank you. At this time, then, IÓd like to invite the Applicants or their representatives to come forward, as well as those individuals who have applied for Standing in the Contested Case before this body. And if I could ask any others who have signed up or would like to give public testimony on this matter to rise, along with the people at the table with us. The names that I have are Dan Payne, Selena Serrao, Patricia Tavares, Suzanne Mayhew and Mike Metcalf, if that is all of you. If you could rise, please, and raise your right hands. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Hawaii County Planning Commission? TESTIFIERS:I do. SPRINGER:Thank you. If we could just go back over the ground rules, if you will, at this time. What Deputy Corporation Counsel, Ivan Torigoe, is suggesting to us is that we have discussion on the issue before us prior to taking up the matter of the Contested Case hearing. Is that agreeable to all those seated before us? 5 TESTIFIERS:No response. SPRINGER:And, Commissioners, do you have any qualms with that? Okay. WeÓll continue forward, then. Could the Applicant and their representative, please identify themselves, and who will be your spokesperson. SERRAO:My name is Selena Serrao. SPRINGER:And your address? SERRAO:My address is P.O. Box 1702, Pahoa. SPRINGER:Thank you. And if youÓll all be speaking, if we could just go down the line there. Sir? W. TAVARES:My name is Walter Tavares. Address, 13521, Keaau. SPRINGER:Thank you. MaÓam? P. TAVARES:IÓm WalterÓs wife, Patricia, and same address. SPRINGER:Thank you. And, you, maÓam? MAYHEW:IÓm Suzanne Mayhew, General Manager for Hawaiian Paradise th Park. I live on 17 Avenue in Paradise Park. SPRINGER:Thank you. And, sir? PAYNE:And IÓm Dan Payne. IÓm president of the Association of Owners in Paradise Park and I live in Paradise Park. SPRINGER:And do you have a residential address? PAYNE:Yes, I do. 15925 Paradise, Halakai, Keaau. SPRINGER:Thank you, sir. At this time, I would ask of the Applicant if you received the Planning DepartmentÓs Background Report and Recommendation? W. TAVARES:Yes. SPRINGER:Do you have any comments on that Background Report and Recommendation? W. TAVARES:No, I guess not. 6 SPRINGER:Thank you. Commissioners, do you have any questions of the Applicant based on the Background Report and the Recommendations that were provided for us? Commissioner McCall? MCCALL:Just a quick question. You are agreeable with their rd Recommendations, including paving the section, the 20-foot wide pavement, from 33 Avenue, from Makuu Drive to your place? TAVARES:I donÓt know. Not for one five-year. If it was zoned commercial maybe I would sign something for that. But for a five-year perm paving the road. SPRINGER:IÓm sorry, sir, whenever weÓre speaking, if we could speak directly into the microphone, then we can pick it up on our tape. Thank MCCALL:So you think thatÓs kind of an unreasonable burden on you just for a five-year permit? TAVARES:Yes. MCCALL:Okay. Thank you. SPRINGER:Commissioner Graham? GRAHAM:Just a question about ownership of the property. I think while I was reading this over at some point, I canÓt find it right now, but I had a feeling that maybe you were in a process of purchasing but it hadnÓt been finalized yet. Or is it, I donÓt know what, just tell me where you are as far as -. TAVARES:Yeah, we bought Òem. We bought the, we purchased Òem already, the -. GRAHAM:You purchased it? TAVARES:Yeah. GRAHAM:Thanks. SPRINGER:Other Commissioners? At this time, IÓd like to hear from Suzanne Mayhew and Mike Metcalf, if you could offer your concerns to us, please. MAYHEW:One of the biggest concerns is, I donÓt even know where to start with this. You know, we have, as youÓve pointed out, industrial nodes within the neighborhood and thereÓs no commercial activity on those industrial nodes, but itÓs, you know, in other parts of the neighborhood, everywhere, and there are logical reasons for that. What weÓre seeing is more and more applications and I hav 7 different avenues here, I donÓt want to confuse this subject. I know what it boils down to is our roads are getting torn up by all the traffic, not just commercial but building, you know, everything thatÓs going on. So weÓre looking forward saying, well, before this comes and, you know, bankrupts us, what can we do, you know, wha we do? And, so, it ends up being just take care of the roads. If someone is going to impact the roads more, then there needs to be some kind of, some balance there so that -. We need the businesses in the Park or close to the Park, but we donÓt want them to bankrupt us trying to take care of the roads on the other side. So weÓd like that balanced. And if I may, now, I donÓt know if this is the appropriate time to do this but Jeff pointed out that there are nodes in the Park and that he felt obligated to look at those nodes first rd for commercial activity. And weÓre seeing a lot of commercial a where the current applicant is and in the area. We may consider, as an Association, trying to rd nurture that area, 33, as more of a commercial area. So, you know, thatÓs just a dre right now, a pipe dream, if you will. But if that has any beari please let it because we want the business, we also want our roads. I mean, we want everyone to be happy. We donÓt want, you know, if someone bough you know, and they live on the mainland and they finally get over here and they retired and they find out that their lot is right next to a, you know, who knows what, a storage facility or something that they didnÓt plan in ag land -. You know, weÓre getting more and more of that kind of situation, so we want to re-do the planning, basically. SPRINGER:Go ahead, Dan, Dan Payne. PAYNE:Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. Let me, with your permission, IÓd like to provide you with just a very brief background statement. Hawaiian Paradise Park has 8,886 lots. We anticipate, I anticipate easily within the next 20 years Hawaiian Paradise Park will have over 30,000 residents. WeÓre not ready for 5,000 and we have more than that now. The Park is a substandard, non-conforming private subdivision. Because we are a private subdivision the County has no responsibility for us. As a matter of fact they tell us that they cannot provide any service or any assistance to us because we are a private subdivision. We are responsible for our own roads, we have 137 miles of roadways that we have to maintai maintenance fee to every lot owner in the Park for that purpose. charge, we can never do more than just keep up with minimum main access roads off the highway are paved. It was only last year that, finally, for the first th time in 30 years, we paved three miles of lateral roads. We paved two miles on 28 Street and one mile of Beach Road, itÓs down at the other end. In the Park, with all of the owners that we have, with all of the promise that we have, the only governing structure is the Board of Directors of the Association. ThatÓs the only thing weÓve got to serve the function of governance for the Park because the County wonÓt. But when we try to exercise that responsibility, we sometimes are ignored, overlooked or overturned by County officials. ThereÓs not a thing in the world we can do about that. And one of the problems that weÓre having right now is because of just such an event in December, last year. The Mango/Whitney Trust, you know, filed for a Special Use Permit, they wanted to legalize what they had already been doing for the past 8 four or five years. They brought that, the proposal to the Board. The Board looked at it and we made two recommendations: One, that they do some agricultural, some planting just to hide how ugly the place was going to look. And the other, because their business was moving heavy equipment, bulldozers, graders, rollers, all of that stuff that they pave the road from their driveway to Makuu, which was the nearest one. They didnÓt agree to that but we established that as a condition of our approval of their permit. WeÓd originally filed a Contested Case hearing but after talking with staff here, we withdrew that. But our understanding was that the Commission would look at the conditions. They didnÓt do that, they ignored the conditions. You did not make that a part of your approval process. When I complained to the Planning Director, he sent me a letter and said, ÐWell, you can still do that, you know, thatÓs between you and the applicant.Ñ We have no authority. We have zero authority. We canÓt make anybody do anything, which is why we established conditions to the special use permits that come to you. Because youÓre the only people who have the authority to impose the conditions. Now, if you donÓt follow our recommendations, if you donÓt insist that the applicant comply with those recommendations, then we have no function and all go home. Or, forget that weÓre the only possible governing body for the Park and become strictly a road maintenance organization. Now, I have no quarrel with WallyÓs application. I think itÓd be great, I really do. However, because you are a Planning Commission, let me make sure what weÓre doing here is weÓre going to wind up de facto strip zoning, okay? So weÓre going to have business enterprises along the highway and nowhere else, and thatÓs strip zoning if there ever was such a thing. At the moment, IÓm not too discouraged about that, but I probably will be later on. SPRINGER:Thank you, sir. PAYNE:We donÓt care about him. But if weÓre going to talk about, you know, making Wally pay for the road, then you have to go back and look at the decision that you made last December. Because one of our conditions with pave the road, you let Òem off the hook. I canÓt make them pay, and theyÓre not going to do it voluntarily. If they had done it voluntarily, then I would have asked Wally to repay them half of the cost of the paving if the Whitney/Mango Trust had opted. If thereÓs a way to go back and require the Mango/Whitney Trust to pave that road, then weÓll have two people sharing the cost. And because it is going to result in additional applications for Special Use Permits on that road, we will ask each of those then to pay their pro rata share so that when the road is paved from wherever to wherever, everybody will have spent an equal amount of money on the thing. And I certainly understand, Wally, you know, his position; you know, five years doesnÓt seem like an appropriate time to amortize that kind of an expense; except in all probability, at the end of five years theyÓll come back and, again, will be approved. So I hope thatÓs helpfu 9 SPRINGER:Thank you. I would ask the Deputy Director if he has any comments. The application is clear. But comments particularly Mr. PayneÓs remarks regarding the previously-approved permit? TAKEMOTO:I canÓt react to why we didnÓt include that condition. That I would need to defer to the Director. But I do have some questions. First of all, does the Association have a way to assess, based on use? So, in this case, if itÓs a non-residential non-ag use, youÓll be able to charge a higher assessment fee than you can, you know, based, the amount collected, based on the proportionate impact on your roads? PAYNE:We have done that in the past. Until very recently, it was a policy of the Board to charge any business in the Park five times the normal road maintenance fee. One of our new members of the Board, who is our vice president and the owner of the storage yard in the Park, was violently opposed to that. And when we looked at it, we canÓt tell, we donÓt know how many businesses there are in the Park. Do we charge the, you know, somebody who is cutting hair in their living room, you know, three times a th month? Do we charge them the same thing we do the nursery thatÓ Street? You know, we donÓt have the ability, we donÓt have the capability to supervise and enforce that kind of, so weÓve abandoned that. We no longer charge an extra cost to anybody. ThereÓs a road maintenance fee per lot, thatÓs what there is. Incidentally, the County owns property in Hawaiian Paradise Park and youÓve been getting a free ride, but weÓre going to send you a bill -. MAYHEW:They got a bill, theyÓre late. PAYNE:YouÓre late, youÓre overdue. MAYHEW:You got interest already. PAYNE:Yeah. We could pass, we have the authority to pass a special assessment; but in order to do, so we have to get the approval of a huge majority of the lot owners. And since at the moment most of our lot owners are absentee, we would never be able to get that together. TAKEMOTO:Because if there was an existing, where you could, I me would be a way you could collect from the previously-issued special permit as well. And one way you could determine whoÓs running a commercial business is if you based it on special permits that the County has issued. And those that didnÓt receive a special permit and you know are operating a business, you can report them to us. And itÓll be a violation, and we would go and enforce; and then you could collect based on a special permit. PAYNE:George Curly who had a little car repair business he was operating, you know, on his own property and had to been doing that for years, was not licensed, was not permitted. He built a large storage shed on his propert 10 agricultural purposes, and then applied for a special use permit auto repair service. That was approved. Our vice president, who owns J&JÓs Rental Storage, he applied directly to the County for a permit to build that building. The Board of Directors of the Park didnÓt know anything about it until it was accomplished. TAKEMOTO:Yeah, we could provide you with any special permits iss know, to the Board to notify you, but thatÓs just a suggestion. Another question is, like paving, what standard are you looking at? Because would you accept as a compromise acknowledging that this is just a five-year permit, you know, trying to be sensitive to the amortizing of cost, would, say, a 16-foot wide double-chip sealed kind of solution work? PAYNE:The paving that we did last year was very minimal, it was two inches of asphalt on the existing road bed, rolled; and that cost us $75,000 a mile. You canÓt chip-seal for that. We could work out, as a matter of fact, Ms. Mayhew is working on some new material which is less expensive and, hopefully, longer lasting. We would love to be able to pave our roads to meet, you know, County specifications so that you would hopefully someday in the future take Òem over; but the cost is very, very high. At the moment, if we look at using our own financial resources, itÓll take us 20 years to get our roads paved; and thatÓs doing at a level that the County would not accept. TAKEMOTO:One final. You mentioned that the Hawaiian Paradise Park is considering designating this area as a commercial area, possibly. And what is the status of that? PAYNE:With quite reluctance, but essentially we would be accepting the reality of the times. This is an absolute violation of the AssociationÓs master plan, and weÓre aware of that. But weÓre also aware of the fact that the areas in the Park that were designated for commercial use will never be developed until there are paved roads, water and sewer available. God knows when that will happen. In the interim, we have small people who want to make a living, who want to provide a valuable service to the people in the Park, they make applications, they apply for special use permits; and we do our best to find a way to accommodate them. One of the ways we acco try to impose conditions that make sense for the long-range view of the Park that is not too onerous of a condition. SPRINGER:At this point, I would ask the parties sitting at the table if there is anything more that you might have to say to one another or negotiations that you might be able to make among yourselves away from our table. If so, we might continue this hearing until such time as you could come back to us at our next Hilo meeting, perhaps, having worked out a compromise. Does that seem feasible? Otherwise, weÓll continue on with discussion as if moving forward on your request for a Contested Case. Commissioner Graham? 11 GRAHAM:I just had one other sort of maybe mediation kind of an approach that came to my mind so I thought IÓd throw it out here and -. SPRINGER:Okay, please. GRAHAM:It seems like to do this specific amount of pavement improvement for a five-year term is a little unduly harsh, yet you folks need to have the roads improved. At the same time weÓre looking at a situation where maybe a five-year term, that could be extended anyway. So it seems like when I put all those factors together, if in fact this amount of road improvement would be appropriate for a 15-year permit or something like that, then maybe the road fee could be prorated so that if you divided up what would be an appropriate fee for operating this over 15 years and do one year at a time increments then they would pay such a fee each year. So if theyÓre only going to go five years theyÓre only paying one-third of it. If theyÓre going to stay 15 it will be a little longer. That seems to be as some kind of a mediated ground that could work for both sides. PAYNE:Well, thatÓs assuming, Mr. Graham, if somebody has the cas put upfront to pay for the paving. GRAHAM:Because your sense is that the pavement will be needed ri PAYNE:Yes. GRAHAM:My sense is that his auto repair business is not a heavy equipment business at all. ItÓs just, well, he got one tow truck, heÓs towing cars and things like that. It doesnÓt feel like it would be real hard on the roadway. PAYNE:Yeah, yeah, thatÓs true and we could work that out. I mean, weÓre flexible, you know. I told Wally, you know, that we were contesting his application not because we have anything against him or what heÓs trying to do but because weÓre in this catch 22 situation where we have responsibility that we, and no authority, and the only place weÓre going to get authority is from you guys. But -. SPRINGER:And presumably, also, with the concern that your concerns were not met adequately by this body in conditions of the previous -. PAYNE:Absolutely. As a matter right now the only problem that Wally and I would have working this out is the Whitney/Mango Trust, which you guys gave a free ride to six months ago, and I donÓt know how, what weÓd do about that. MAYHEW:And I might add, weÓve had several complaints about the damage theyÓre doing to the roads from their neighbors. So, and if you look at the map, if they had paved, these guys are like two lots past, so it would just really be, you know, turn of the knife if they had to pave the whole road. 12 SPRINGER:Thank you. Does the Applicant have any comments at thi W. TAVARES:Yeah, the construction company, I think they maintenance the rd road, they grade Òem, yeah. They only take care of 33. PAYNE:Yeah, the Mango/Whitney Trust people do maintain the road and that they do grade it when it gets too rough, but they canÓt do anything to control the dust. SPRINGER:I see. Would the Applicant be willing to maintain the roadway in its current condition? Would that meet some of your concerns? PAYNE:No. SPRINGER:Is there any, would there be any reason to continue this, the hearing on this application for you folks to discuss or negotiate some sort of a compromise? I would ask the perspective Intervenors first. PAYNE:What IÓm hopeful is, what IÓm sitting here hoping against that somehow or other between the Planning Director and the Corporation Counsel they can find a way to undo the mistake they made six months ago. Th everything very, very much easier. KUBOTA:Madam Chair? SPRINGER:Mrs. Kubota, if I may recognize the Deputy Director before yourself? KUBOTA:Yes. TAKEMOTO:Taking up on the attempt by Commissioner Graham to find a mediated solution, what if we, instead of five years made it a 10-year permit to amortize your cost. When the previous one comes in after five years, we would hit him for contribution at that time. But, in the meantime, youÓd have to pick up the front-end cost, but knowing that you have 10 years to spread it over. SPRINGER:MaÓam? P. TAVARES:Well, what we were thinking of is that if itÓs just for five years, you know, we think that pavement is unreasonable and we think that if there is a plan to turn into industrial area, then, you know, we could look into the situation as a permanent. But even itÓs 10 years, $75,000 a mile is, we wouldnÓt be able to put up a building, you know. So itÓs really unreasonable. PAYNE:But I think you mentioned that it was a third of a mile from where you are to Makuu. Wally, is that correct? 13 W. TAVARES:WhatÓs that? PAYNE:Is it a third of a mile from where youÓre located to Makuu? W. TAVARES:Third of a mile, yeah. PAYNE:Yeah, okay. So itÓd be, then, about $25,000. TAVARES:So 25,000? PAYNE:Yeah. SPRINGER:Mrs. Kubota? KUBOTA:Yes, I was going to ask a more fundamental question. We be involved in discussion of -. I understand the BoardÓs concern, I also understand the ApplicantÓs concern for your needs. But we seem to be getting ourselves involved in private matters that, that -. I guess, the fundamental question that I want to ask is awarding special permits, does it involve mitigation, yes, does it involve our solving their maintenance or money problems? Since it is private subdivision, should not the owners of the subdivision be involved in it rather than a public commission such as ours? I seem to feel that in awarding a special permit some months ago to the Mango Enterprise, we were derelict in our duties in not assessing or demanding that they provide improvements to the roadway. Was that our responsibility? I mean, whether we did or not is moot. And, today, I feel that it is flying in our faces that had we done that, this would not be here today kind of a movement in discussion. And I just would like to have clarified whether it is, in essence, our responsibility along with awarding special permits to get involved with private property concerns. SPRINGER:Mr. Torigoe, can you offer us any question, I mean, any guidance? TORIGOE:Well, I think whenever youÓre looking at these special permits, you obviously have to look at the adverse impacts of surrounding properties. And I think historically when youÓve had private roadways that are going to be impact, thatÓs something that the Commission has looked at. I would defer to the Deputy Planning Director for any further comment on that. SPRINGER:Thank you. Roy? TAKEMOTO:It seems kind of obvious that maybe Chris kind of went what Commissioner Kubota was expressing, especially in terms of the response that he gave to Mr. Payne. But Chris is not here so I cannot really confirm that. But it is an issue, you know, when government responsibility ends and when private responsibility supposed to take over. So it is a close question. I would feel that it is something that is 14 in the realm of government regulation because we are introducing a use that is not permitted as of right; and, so, we should be looking at the impacts. SPRINGER:Thank you. And, Mrs. Kubota, the reason for the discussion continuing as long as it is now is to see if we can either reach a conclusion or some sort of mediation between the parties away from our table or if we should take up the matter of the Contested Case hearing. I think weÓre quite close to that. Other Commissioners, are there any questions or comments? Commissioner Mina? MINA:Yeah, you know, like the conditions, yeah, the first one, No. 1, okay, if they donÓt follow the condition thatÓs provided in the conditions we have set for all of the applicants that came through, itÓs part of one of those things that the Director got to look at, whether he complying with all the conditions in the stuff. And if itÓs not done, it shouldnÓt be binding, Òcause itÓs a binding thing right here once we approve this. And it states right there, I mean, if you donÓt follow the conditions, you know, itÓs subject to denial. SPRINGER:Any other Commissioners? Commissioner Thibadeau? THIBADEAU:Madam Chair, could you fill me in on the history of th of the five-year term for the person taking, I mean, where did it come from? There must have been a reason for it. Why is it five years? SPRINGER:I would defer to Roy. TAKEMOTO:Norman, you have any background? HAYASHI:I can just assume that the intent was to grant applicant to grant applicants this permit for five years so that once the General Plan is adopted, the revised General Plan is adopted, reflecting where industrial areas should go, commercial areas should go within this area, then those individuals that received the special permit would be able to try and seek approval of their use within these identified areas, and I think this is why the five-year limitation was granted. THIBADEAU:Okay, I understand what youÓre saying. YouÓre giving people five years, which has a reason for obviously somewhere, and yet you p conditions in there which are not really practical on a five-year span. It seems to me that somewhere along the line there has to be a median line between the length of the permit and the extent of the demands. And I suspect that one of the reasons is that, if youÓre going to give people a five-year permit, itÓs going to create continuing more problems for permitting something which they canÓt possibly comply with. YouÓll end up with people saying, IÓll see if I can go along with the five-year plan; and the fifth year youÓre going to go along and say, well, you didnÓt meet all those conditions, youÓre dead. ThereÓs no rational reason that I can see for a five-year plan. ThatÓs what IÓm looking for. IÓm looking for the answer to that. Somebody has a reason for a five-year plan, or is it 15 something they grabbed out of the air, or thereÓs another reason for the period, another time period? TAKEMOTO:Seems like something grabbed out of the air, yeah, to give -. But if it was something, you know, agreeable to the Applicant, you know, then -. Because the idea was -. THIBADEAU:Perhaps they had a choice -. TAKEMOTO:Yeah, but in the previous ones, the conditions seem to be commensurate with the time period. This one is the exception where weÓre imposing an expensive road improvement condition for a five-year term. So I think this is where weÓre getting stuck here. THIBADEAU:You had two previous plans that have five years, I think, two permits that have five years. TAKEMOTO:But I donÓt think they had those improvement requirements either, huh? THIBADEAU:ThatÓs correct. YouÓre asking my question. TAKEMOTO:Yeah, so this one is the one where we have a five-year, the same term period, but with this additional expensive condition. THIBADEAU:Right off the top from somebody who had a discriminatory practice -. TAKEMOTO:You mean the condition? THIBADEAU:One person gets a five-year plan and very few requirements and the next person gets a five-year plan with a whole stack of requirements. The environment hasnÓt changed enough to create a change. TAKEMOTO:Right. THIBADEAU:Except as the time goes on people get more cautious an you end up with a whole stack of restrictions which doesnÓt necessarily fit the original plan. TAKEMOTO:No, I agree with you that when you compare this application and how it has been treated with the previous one issued in December, there is an unequal treatment, so thatÓs why weÓre struggling. But, on the other ha precedence rule all the time because it could be in the previous mistake, possibly, so weÓre trying to correct it and not, you know, make things worse. 16 THIBADEAU:If you change a petition, if thereÓs something wrong, it doesnÓt make anything right. TAKEMOTO:Right, right, exactly. SPRINGER:And, also, Commissioner Thibadeau, the five-year timeframe may have been with the intention of within that time getting more commercial-zoned property in that region in keeping with the General Plan. THIBADEAU:Wishful thinking syndrome, IÓm aware of it. TAKEMOTO:Can I make one -? SPRINGER:Yes. TAKEMOTO:Okay. Ten-year was still kind of not too good. But what if it was coupled with or the condition was written in a way that you would work with the Association to have that area redesignated Industrial so that there would be some long- term designation or permanent designation as Industrial-Commercial within your time, 10-year period, so that should the 10-year period end but that designation was in place, then you would be allowed to continue that use. Then, would it be acceptable? But then youÓre still taking a risk because you donÓt know within that 10-year period if the Association will accomplish that redesignation. But if youÓre willing to take that risk and the Association is moving in that direction, would that be acceptable? SPRINGER:I would ask the representatives from the Community Association, I see that you have the recommendations before you. Is Condition 10 acceptable to you or are you looking for a different condition? PAYNE:With your permission, Madam Chairman, there are a couple o other issues I would like to raise now for future meetings of this kind. IÓm sure weÓre going to be having them. One is we had virtually no notice of this Special Use Permit application until we had almost no time to respond. Understand that the Board of Directors has all of the authority, no individual member has any. Getting them together, we meet regularly now on a monthly, maybe on a bi-monthly basis in the future, so we do need time to deal with these things automatically. IÓd also like to point out that we received no information about the application except the bare bones. We just today received the background document. We just today received the yellow thing, which I still donÓt know what it is, oh, itÓs the recommendation sheet. Those would be very helpful to us if we had them somewhere, unless thereÓs some reason that we should not have that information. It would just make our job a whole lot easier. SPRINGER:Thank you. Norman, can you respond to that request? 17 HAYASHI:I didnÓt quite get it. But it is, if he did say that they did not receive a copy of the application, we did send a copy of the application to the Association. MAYHEW:We have the application. HAYASHI:Yeah. As far as the Background and Recommendation, we normally do not provide that to the, other than to the Commission and to the Applicant. Anyone interested in reviewing the files are welcome to do so in our office. Out of courtesy, I earlier this morning, presented, gave them a copy of this, the staffÓs Background Report and proposed Recommendation. SPRINGER:Thank you, Norman. As the question still remain to the AssociationÓs representative, does Condition 10 meet your concerns or are you looking for something different from Condition 10? And, you know, take a moment to read it, to consider it if you like. Could we take a five-minute -? PAYNE:ThatÓs fine. SPRINGER:And that meets your concerns on this matter? PAYNE:I have no quarrel with this. IÓm not sure what the Whitney/Mango people are going to say or what action they would take. SPRINGER:Does this condition address your concerns? Would you s looking for a Contested Case hearing to be held on this matter if this, the application goes forward? PAYNE:If they pave the road to the appropriate landscaping, we will not contest it. SPRINGER:Along the .3 mile section that fronts their property? PAYNE:Yes. SPRINGER:Okay. Commissioners, having heard this answer to the question regarding Condition 10, are there any, is there any further discussion on this matter before us? Commissioner McCall? MCCALL:Well, what IÓd like to do is ask the Applicants, what conditions would you, under what conditions would you find our conditions f acceptable? I mean, like, say, if the Special Permit was, for instance, for 20 years, 30 years, 7 years, will, what, or are there some other conditions under which you would consider this, consider the conditions we put here acceptable? W. TAVARES:Or pave the road? 18 MCCALL:In particular, paving the road; and I think they brought up the landscaping. W. TAVARES:If you zone it commercial, IÓm sure the construction company would, you know, share the cost with us or pave the road if you guys make them commercial. But for the permits, going to be kind of hard. YouÓve gotta us little time to establish the business, huh? MCCALL:Sure. I mean, well -. W. TAVARES:Yeah, down the road. MCCALL:I mean, if a longer term permit, in effect, could, you kn mean -. W. TAVARES:Yeah, yeah. MCCALL:I mean, IÓm exaggerating but a 30-year permit would be, i or a Special Permit with no -. W. TAVARES:Like when, when -? MCCALL:No expiration date is, in effect, rezoning but, I mean spot rezoning which weÓre not supposed to do, but -. SPRINGER:MaÓam? P. TAVARES:And, also, thereÓs a lot of, as they mentioned, a lot of small businesses in Paradise Park. So would it affect the whole community or just us? You know, would they have to go back and say you have to pave this section now and find out whoÓs doing business? Because that would seem more fair, not as if -. Because the precedence is set now because, you know, itÓs going to just affect us because weÓre here at the wrong time, you know. The person before us, as was menti we know that, we want the roads paved, too, if we have an industrial area. And right now weÓre just going to have a, weÓre not going to have customer services. ItÓs just going to be his tow truck, where he fixes his cars, and he would be, you know, selling it from the insurance company so we donÓt have this incoming traffic. And we noticed that thereÓs a lot of roads where thereÓs a lot of incoming traffic and, you know, we know thereÓs a lot of drug users and, you know, we know that thereÓs a lot of reasons why the roads are so bad. And we donÓt think that the amount of cars that weÓre going to have in our business is going to affect the roads one bit. As it is where weÓre living right now, you know, weÓre not doing any excess traveling compared to our neighbors. So, we donÓt see why we have to put up all this pavement for our business which does not entail, you know, a lot of heavy traffic. 19 SPRINGER:Thank you, maÓam. Commissioners? Roy, do you have any suggestions to us on the way to work our way out of this dilemma at this point? Otherwise, I think we need to hear on the Contested Case. SERRAO:I was just kind of thinking, you know how you mentioned a raising businesses, the tax they had to pay for road maintenance though it was a small business or a big business or, you know, itÓs not damaging any of the roads, they are a business, they are making money. And, you know, if they would go to Hilo, they would, their expenses would be way more than what they, you know, what theyÓre doing there. So by making them pay more for road mainte think, equal for everybody, you know, regardless of if some person disagrees or not, you know. PAYNE:We would love to do that. SPRINGER:I think now weÓre getting into the, weÓre getting into the business of the Community Association, however. There was -. Commissioners, any comments? We have another individual from the public who would like to comment. This might be a good time to hear from him. But before that, Commissioner Thiba THIBADEAU:Yes, IÓd like to ask the Deputy from the Planning Department a question. So right now the five years is reasonable -, as opposed to no, no time limit? Let me give you a practical consideration. This gentlemen might put in a 20-foot piece of pavement, he goes to the bank and get, to borrow money from the bank for that 20-foot piece of pavement and the bank says but youÓve got a five-year restriction on your permit, thereÓs no way in the world we can loan you that money with the permit restriction. Is there some rationale for five years or ten years, or is it? IÓm new at it, thatÓs why IÓm asking the question. I donÓt know the basis for the time limit. TAKEMOTO:No, I think youÓll be reasonable to tailor the time limit to the condition. So, since this is the first permit that we may impose a road improvement condition, I would think the time limit should be adjusted accor THIBADEAU:Thank you. SPRINGER:Comments from the parties at the table, then, hearing t discussion? The Applicant? KUBOTA:Madam Chair? While heÓs pondering -. SPRINGER:Yes. KUBOTA:I have a thought that just occurred to me. Under the present Condition 10 discussion thatÓs taking place, IÓd be prone to vote against the No. 10 if the life of the permit remained intact. So the solution might be a consideration of what Jeff and Bill were talking about in terms of lengthening the life of 20 SPRINGER:Thank you, Mrs. Kubota. MAYHEW:IÓm not sure if Deputy Director is aware that thereÓs a history of requiring paving off and on in the past. ThereÓs a veterinary clinic in Hawaiian Paradise Park that was required to pave from the main road to their driveway. And Pastor Nofu is sitting with us today, his permit was approved based on paving, or there was negotiating. So there is some history off and on. SPRINGER:If I may call on the individual from the community who up and has indicated that he would like to speak. Mr. Metcalf? Could you come forward, please? You have already been sworn in but if you could please stepping back. If you could please offer your name and your resident address into the microphone for the record. th METCALF:My name is Mike Metcalf and I live on 17 and Makuu. I just want to say a couple of things. I read this thing, WallyÓs thing for the towing. Paradise Park has doubled in population in the last 10 years. ThereÓs nobody else out there doing it, I mean, not in the Park. ThereÓs expected 7,000 people in there. At last count about 2,000. And on the second point on the road thing, I mean, this is no disrespect but heÓs not the one tearing up the road. The water trucks are tearing up the road. WeÓve had it now for two months, those guys run 24 hours a day. They use Jac Makuu at 3:30 in the morning. The cinder trucks, you know, itÓs one of the fastest subdivisions in the State, youÓre talking about a 36-yard truck, loaded to the hilt. Those are the people that are tearing up the road. And while I appreciate the ParkÓs concern for the roads, I mean, I live on the dead-end road in front of the community center. They should have to pay my road to my driveway where everybody that misses it turns around, hits my fence and drives back out. But being on the dead-end, IÓm on the end of the list. But I donÓt see any, you know, rational even-handed way of assessing that kind of a financial penalty to start a business that we need so badly already, and excluding all these other people that really, you know, I mean, those trucks are big. Water is 8 lbs. to a gallon. A 5,000-gallon tank could do them out. You know, some of those things are 35,000, 45,000 GVW. ThatÓs whatÓs tearing up the roads. I mean, theyÓre running all the time. So, I mean, heÓs got a one-time tow truck and a car. I mean, where is the damage? ItÓs just not going to be there. I mean, I donÓt know -. ThatÓs pretty much all I want to say. SPRINGER:Thank you, Mr. Metcalf, for that insight into the community. Any questions of Mr. Metcalf? Okay, that comes back to us now, Commissioners. There has been some discussion and support from among us for an essential proposed Condition 2, which would adjust the life span of the permit. Do we want to discuss that in terms of putting up, either articulating that is open-ended or putting a duration on that? Mr. Graham? 21 GRAHAM:I know Mr. Tavares brought before that, it seemed as if m has some connection with this Whitney/Mango group. I was wondering if there was any way if we did put this off for one meeting cycle that they could meet with them and maybe, you know, extend their five-year permit and get those things taken care of, and gets the whole thing in one swoop. The problem might be, is the vacation time and, to put them on the agenda and all that kind stuff. SPRINGER:Roy, your response to Commissioner GrahamÓs -? TAKEMOTO:That sounds like a good suggestion. How does the Appli about that? W. TAVARES:WeÓve still got to come up with the money in the begi pave the road. Right now weÓve got to put up our building. ThatÓs what we need the money for, and not pave the road right now. We need one maybe o years, maybe after five years, you know, we bring this up again and see about paving the road and maybe with this, you know, more road maintenance or som For now, as far as right now, if I gotta put up the money for pave, $25,000, I cannot. MCCALL:If you were sharing the cost with Mango Trust, you know, maybe, so, 12-5, do you think that might fly? TAVARES:Yeah, that maybe we can agree on, but you gotta give us time, you know, let me get the business kind of established, you run Òem. So the five years would be good. And after we renegotiate, then before you guys give us another permit, we have to, you know, get something done about the road. MCCALL:Can I respond? SPRINGER:Yes. MCCALL:IÓm hoping, I donÓt know, would the parties here be willing to sit down? And IÓm thinking it would be really good to get the guys from the Mango Trust, you know, see if you guys can sit down, talk this over, come to see if you can come to some agreement that would be beneficial to all parties. ÒCause I think you guys arenÓt that far away; and maybe we could continue the hearing and, you know -. We can do a Contested Case but if we do a Contested Case, weÓre talking 12 months and a lot of cost, you know, to do it. You know, if you guys are willing to sit down, and bring these other guys in and come back to us a month to work something out. W. TAVARES:As far as right now, they running their business and I donÓt know if they going like, you know, dish out money if they donÓt have to, you know. ItÓs us -. 22 MCCALL:Yeah, but they also do realize that five years from now thereÓs a fair probability theyÓre not going to get their permit renewed. TAVARES:Oh, youÓre talking about like in five years; oh, yeah, something like that. MCCALL:Well, no, well, IÓm saying, IÓd like to get in an agreement now or, you know, rather than wait five years, so -. TAKEMOTO:Is there some confusion? Because, Mr. Tavares, weÓre saying that we would, the Commission may entertain amending MangoÓs permit to 10 years if they agree to share the cost with you folks. So your cost would be 50 percent, theirs 50 percent. We amend their permit to 10 years, yours would be 10 y PAYNE:Pardon me. Will the Commission and the Planning DirectorÓ office be -? SPRINGER:Excuse me. PAYNE:IÓm sorry. SPRINGER:Go ahead, Roy. TAKEMOTO:No, no, no. SPRINGER:Did you want to finish getting an answer from him? Mr. Tavares? TAKEMOTO:You folks thinking or -? W. TAVARES:I donÓt know. WeÓre still going to have to come up w money and thatÓs the hard part right now. Why donÓt, we cannot just get a permit for the five years like everybody else and when we do, you know, for reapply, then we set the pavement, we talk about that? SPRINGER:Mr. Payne, before I recognize you, Roy, if we tinker with the previously-approved applications, would they need to come back before us? They would need to be heard again? TAKEMOTO:Yes. SPRINGER:And that seems tenuous. It seems like thatÓs something be difficult to commit to, that they would come before us, Òcause theyÓre already operating under a valid permit. Mr. Payne, thank you for waitin 23 PAYNE:I was just going to ask if the Planning Commission and the Planning office would be flexible on the time period? Not 10 years, letÓs talk about Mr. ThibadeauÓs idea of why not take 25 years, or maybe forever. TAKEMOTO:I think the whole basis for a time limit is because it doesnÓt fit with your master plans. So if you folks are in the movement of amending that master plan to include this area, I think this time limit can go away. SPRINGER:Commissioner McCall? MCCALL:Just to make sure -. The time limit is in your recommend The Planning Commission can remove it if we so desire. So, I mean, itÓs a flexible thing. ThereÓs no, you know, thereÓs no particular veto on it. SPRINGER:And if I may ask, both of the parties at the table, is that the direction thatÓs more agreeable to both of you, then, that we adjust the timeframe of the Special Permit? And that leaves Condition 10 in place, however. Is that correct, sir? W. TAVARES:On paving the road, what if itÓs more than $25,000? I mean, you guys going -. You know, we might agree to paving the road and might be $60,000, $70,000, you know. PAYNE:WeÓre more than willing to sit down with the other parties and with Wally and his people and just talk about it, and see what we can come up with. SPRINGER:Okay. I was thinking that as well. And perhaps the Association could perform the role of mediator, rather than placing the burden on the Applicant. And if the Association would be willing to do that, would both parties be willing to consider a continuance of this hearing and to come back in a month? And before we make any sort of commitment, I should ask staff if thatÓs a feasibility, given our present planning schedule. HAYASHI:Yeah, our agenda could accommodate that. SPRINGER:Commissioner McCall? MCCALL:IÓd just want to put in, if weÓre going to try and get Mango Trust involved in this which, I mean, they are -. At the moment it sounds like they are not spending a whole lot but they are spending money on maintaining that road as it is, I mean, and they realize this as an ongoing thing, theyÓre going to continue to be spending money -. If we can give them some sort of a carrot -. You know, if weÓre looking at giving you guys, and if the agreement is, you know, the Special Permit will have no expiration date, or 25 years, or whatever, you know, that could be it, a carrot for them, also, too, you know. And I think that, I would like you guys to think about putting that into your negotiations when you talk with them to see if, you know, if we can get them involved in this. 24 MAYHEW:Extending their -? MCCALL:Yes, extending their permit also, I mean, and that, you k making it worthwhile for them. SPRINGER:Keeping in mind that to extend the permit, they need to come back -. MCCALL:ThatÓs correct. SPRINGER:And make another application -. MCCALL:To make it worthwhile, I mean, theyÓre going to need to c in 4 ½ years as it is. W. TAVARES:For them to be worthwhile would be, you know, if heÓs commercial, that would be worthwhile for them come back. But ev lifetime permit, one, you know -. This permit is different than you get zoned commercial, the land worth way more money, so -. SPRINGER:And if I understand it, thatÓs the direction of the Association may be moving, also. So I think that thatÓs, at this juncture, if the parties are in agreement and if the Commissioners have no objection, it may be time for discussion to get back to the community with the Association committing to contacting the Mango/Whitney Trust and working with the Applicant, Walter Tavares, and his people, and see if some sort of agreement can be reached on how to proceed on this matter. And that includes whether or not the Association would care to continue with its application for standing for a Contested Case hearing. If you can come back in one month and w happened in the community and whether or not the Association would like to continue with this application, we can do so; and it can be put on the agenda for our next meeting in in Hilo which would be in one month. If thatÓs agreeable and there are no objections from the Commission, I would then consider a motion to continue. But IÓd like to hear if there are any objections or if anything needs to be clarified for anyone? Okay, so, hopefully theyÓll come to an agreeable outcome. If they cannot, then weÓll take up the matter of the Contested Case hearing, if thatÓs the wishes of the Community Association. MINA:So if they reach an agreement, then theyÓll probably withdraw this -. SPRINGER:That would be their, one of the options for them. KUBOTA:Madam Chair? 25 SPRINGER:Mrs. Kubota? KUBOTA:I have a question for Corp. Counsel. SPRINGER:MaÓam? KUBOTA:Mr. Torigoe, what weÓre asking of these participants today or next month, is it procedurally legal, are we on the right track? TORIGOE:Yeah, if the participants are willing to agree to do that, yes. And, so, I would like to ask on the record, you know, if the Applicant is willing to put off the consideration of the Contested Case and discuss possible settlement with the Association? Is the Applicant willing to do that for the next month? P. TAVARES:IÓm kind of unclear on one thing. Okay, what we real five-year variance where we can do our business; and, in the meantime, weÓre waiting to see if Paradise Park wants to zone our area as Industrial. And when that happens I donÓt if the County is the one who has to make a decision. Is that what it is? Do you folks make a decision to turn it into Industrial if Paradise Park agrees? You know, whoÓs, I mean, what procedure do we go through? And if we can do that in five years, we rather have the five years and wait on the road maintenance. And when we do, if it does turn Industrial in five years with all this, you know, well, five years goes by really fast but if we can do it in five years, then weÓll, everyone who owns a lot with a business can chip in for the road maintenance and whoever moves in will take part in that cost, too. ThatÓs what we thought would be fair because a lot of people would be moving into the street to do business. And then this way wouldnÓt be a burden on just one or two businesses, and this way we donÓt have to wait for one more month, because I have to take another day off. But itÓs like, you know, if we can have that done where we can try to, you know, see what Paradise Park wants to do with the Industrial areas and get it changed to Industrial in five years, we might be able to do it. We donÓt want to make it 10 years and then have to wonder, you know, whatÓs going to happen after that. SPRINGER:Yeah, I donÓt think that we can make any guarantees with regard to the timing on -. P. TAVARES:Yeah, I know thereÓs no guarantee but we thought mayb years might be a start where we can see whether, what theyÓre going to decide as an Association and what the County will decide, you know, in rezoning the area. And, in the meantime, we donÓt think that any additional burden should b of, you know, future plans that weÓre not sure of. SPRINGER:Thank you. Mr. Takemoto, can you answer that for them? IÓm wondering if in the discussions if, at some point, the parties, it might be proper for the parties to discuss with the Planning Director the outcomes of their discussions. 26 TAKEMOTO:What youÓre proposing, I think, is a matter that needs to be discussed with the Association, whether that is the direction that is acceptable, which is why I think we need to continue this to the next month and just work it out. ÒCause what youÓre proposing makes sense -. W. TAVARES:You guys would agree to that, like in five years before they give us one, renew the permit so the road gotta be paved? And by then p businesses inside, you know, and -. SPRINGER:Excuse me, that discussion should be directed towards the Chair. But, may we take a five-minute recess for the people at the table to have some time for discussion. And then we come back to the table at 12:30; and then we can also be discussing lunch plans, if necessary. RECESSEDThe Chair called a short recess at 12:25 p.m. RECONVENEDThe meeting reconvened at 12:40 p.m. SPRINGER:This meeting of the Hawaii County Planning Commission is now reconvened. IÓd like to thank the staff and the Commissioners, as well as the members of the community and parties that are before us for taking this time to meet off of the record. And, at this time, Mr. Takemoto, do you have the results of your us? TAKEMOTO:Okay. Let me throw this out and see if this captures w discussion was all about. This would be Condition No. 2, yeah. It would be amended to read -. Let me just explain the general idea, that itÓll be a five-year permit with no extension, unless the road is paved; and the idea is that within the five-year period, this area would be rezoned to Commercial with the support and assistance of the Association, and that the rezoning process would be, hopefully, the way to equitably distribute the cost of the improvement of this road to the benefited properties. So to express that concept, Condition No. 2 would read: ÐThe life of the permit for the towing business and auto repair shop shall be for five years from the effective date of this permit or upon rezoning,Ñ and then continue on, Ðor upon new industrial-zoned lands becoming available within an approximate 4-mile radius from the subject propertyÑ to the end of the sentence. And then a new sentence that would read: ÐNo extension of this permit shall be granted unless the road is paved.Ñ SPRINGER:Mr. Tavares, does that meet with your approval? W. TAVARES:Yeah, we agree with that. SPRINGER:Thank you. Members of the Community Association, does that meet with your approval? 27 PAYNE:Sure. I think we did a pretty good job. SPRINGER:Great. Good use of those 10 minutes. Commissioners, do you have any questions regarding this amendment to Condition 2? Did everybody get the wording? Satisfied? MCCALL:Oh, I was just asking the Deputy Planning Director, we would also be removing the current No. 10 from the -? TAKEMOTO:Yes. SPRINGER:Thank you for that, Commissioner McCall. Mr. Torigoe? TORIGOE:Madam Chair, I was just wondering, if weÓre removing No. then the amended No. 2, do you need to say anything about the specification of the pavement? TAKEMOTO:Yeah. SPRINGER:The dimensions. TAKEMOTO:ÐNo extension of this permit shall be granted unless the road is rd paved to provide a 20-foot wide pavement within 33 Avenue right-of-way from Makuu Drive to the subject property.Ñ So itÓll be incorporating 10 into that last sentence. SPRINGER:Thank you, Mr. Takemoto. Mr. Torigoe, is that satisfactory? TORIGOE:Yeah. SPRINGER:Thank you. Commissioner Mina? MINA:I was wondering, whoÓs going to pave the road? Is the applicant going to pave the road? TAKEMOTO:Well, hopefully, within five years that strip would be rezoned to commercial and those owners whose properties are being rezoned would be required to contribute proportionately to the cost. MINA:To who the cost would be -? TAKEMOTO:TheyÓre going have to work it out among themselves, either the Association would be the ones coordinating or -. You ask a good question Òcause it is a private road. So we would need to figure out in the rezoning condition how to coordinate that collection and construction build-out. SPRINGER:Mr. Payne? 28 PAYNE:Suzanne just mentioned to me that if thereÓs some way that board could have approval over the details of paving the road, you know, the specifications that it would meet? TAKEMOTO:So instead of saying 20-foot wide pavement, we would say -? PAYNE:A 20-foot wide pavement acceptable to the Board of Directors. TAKEMOTO:Could it be less than a 20-foot wide -? PAYNE:What IÓm concerned about is if they, you know, one way to that condition would be to go through and put down a quarter-of-an-inch of asphalt and run a roller over it and say itÓs paved. Okay? So if itÓs going to be a road in the subdivision, you know, it should be at least to come up to our sub-minimal standards. MAYHEW:If I may add something. IÓm also concerned about the liability of when we do construction on the roads that we have, and weÓre the ones doing the construction, basically. WeÓre the ones that hire the contractor so that, you know, not just anyone goes out and hires a contractor and paves the road and then leaves us liable. You know what I mean? So if we just had some kind of -. SPRINGER:You need to coordinate the hiring? MAYHEW:Right, like in a liaison way or something, just for the liability. MCCALL:That could be spelled out in the condition. I mean, just say, you know, either, you know, or -. MAYHEW:Coordinating with the office or something -. MCCALL:Coordinating with the Paradise Park Road Maintenance Committee, or -. MAYHEW:HPPOA, the OwnersÓ Association. MCCALL:Something to that effect, yeah. TAKEMOTO:WhoÓs the official owner of this road? The Association? MAYHEW:The Association. TAKEMOTO:ItÓs not one of those undivided interest among the lot owners, huh? PAYNE:It is. 29 MAYHEW:There are two increments, yeah; and thatÓs a whole other mess. But, yeah, basically, the liability lies on the Association. And, so, thatÓs -. This has come up in the past. If people want to put waterlines in and stuff, thatÓs fine; but they need to go through us to make sure that while theyÓre doing the construction, say, someone doesnÓt fall in a ditch or something like that, just so that we can be involved with the construction itself. SPRINGER:Mr. Takemoto, then, might we add an additional sentence, Ðpaving to meet the specifications of the Community Association?Ñ TAKEMOTO:Unless just at the end of, you would say, ÐNo extension of this permit shall be granted unless the road is paved,Ñ and we say, add, paved Ðto provide a rd 20-foot wide pavement within 33 Avenue right-of-way from Makuu Drive to the subject property in coordination with the Association.Ñ KUBOTA:ÐMeeting with the approval -.Ñ TAKEMOTO:ÐMeeting with the approval.Ñ Okay. SPRINGER:Is that acceptable, then, Mrs. KubotaÓs suggestion of meeting -? TAKEMOTO:ÐMeeting with the approval of the,Ñ what is the official title of the Association?Ñ MAYHEW:ÐHawaiian Paradise Park Owners Association.Ñ SPRINGER:Thank you. Mr. Tavares, does this new language pose any problems for you? TAVARES:No. SPRINGER:Thank you. Mr. Takemoto, could you please read the newly- amended Condition 2 for the Commissioners, in its entirety? TAKEMOTO:ÐThe life of the permit for the towing business and auto repair shop shall be for five (5) years from the effective date of this permit or upon rezoning or upon new industrial zoned lands becoming available within an approximate 4-mile radius from the subject property, within a reasonable period to effect the relocation, whichever occurs first. No extension of this permit shall be granted unless the road is paved to provide a rd 20-foot wide pavement within the 33 Avenue right-of-way from Maku'u Drive to the subject property, meeting the approval of the Hawaiian Paradise Park Homeowner's Association.Ñ SPRINGER:Thank you, Mr. Takemoto. Commissioners, any questions or comments on this application before us now? Hearing now, may I have a motion, please? Mrs. Kubota? 30 KUBOTA:Madam Chairman? SPRINGER:Yes, MaÓam. KUBOTA:After much discussion and deliberation, IÓm glad we resolved the problem, I think. I move that the Special Permit (SPP 03-004) be approved by the Planning Commission, along with the Findings and Recommendations provided to us by the Planning Director and -. MINA:Madam Chair, weÓre out of motion, out of order. We ought t this one first. KUBOTA:What is that? MINAThe Petition for Standings, we gotta take Òem first. KUBOTA:Mr. Mina, donÓt do that to me. I didnÓt finish my sentence. You said more than your share today already. SPRINGER:And we welcome that. Thank you. Would you care to mak motion? MINA:No. But whether theyÓre going to drop this petition or not -. SPRINGER:Members of the community Association, are you withdrawing, then, your application for Contested Case? PAYNE:Yes. SPRINGER:Thank you. Commissioner Mina, would you care to make a motion? MINA:All they got to say if they drop this petition and, whether they drop it or not. SPRINGER:Yeah, would you care to make the motion -? MINA:No, they call -. SPRINGER:To accept their withdrawal? MINA:If they going withdraw Òem? Are they going to withdraw? SPRINGER:ThatÓs what they just said. 31 PAYNE:Yes. MINA:Okay. Well, I accept the withdrawal of the petition. GRAHAM:Second. SPRINGER:Thank you. Commissioner Mina has moved to accept the withdrawal of the Petition for Standing, and it has been seconded by Commissioner Graham. All those in favor, indicate so by saying aye. COMMISSIONERS:Aye. SPRINGER:Any opposed? Thank you. And thank you, Commissioner M Commissioner Kubota? KUBOTA:I forgot where I was. ItÓs on record. So I will continue in the interest of time, along with the Findings and Recommendations provided to us by our Planning Director and with amendments to our conditions, as such, No. 2. I donÓt think itÓs necessary, I think the Deputy Director read it for us; and I think it meets with my understanding, so I shanÓt read it. But No. 2 needs to be re-worded and, as well as the deletion of No. 10. SPRINGER:Thank you. KUBOTA:And I think that about does it. SPRINGER:Is there a second? MINA:Second. SPRINGER:Thank you, Commissioner Mina. Any discussion? Norman? HAYASHI:Was it seconded by Commissioner McCall? SPRINGER:Well, it was a tie but letÓs give it Commissioner Mina. HAYASHI:Commissioner Kubota? KUBOTA:Aye. HAYASHI:Commissioner Mina? MINA:Aye. HAYASHI:Commissioner Thibadeau? 32 THIBADEAU:Aye. HAYASHI:Commissioner Graham? GRAHAM:Aye. HAYASHI:Commissioner McCall? MCCALL:Aye. HAYASHI:Chair Springer? SPRINGER:Yes. HAYASHI:Madam Chair, motion carries. SPRINGER:Thank you. Thank you for your patience. Thank you for cooperation with one another and youÓll be informed in writing o MAYHEW:Thank you. SPRINGER:Aloha. YouÓre welcome. The discussion ended at 12:52 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon M. Nomura, Secretary 33