HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-12-04 Hearing Transcript-Steve Shropshire SMA 14-058
WINDWARD PLANNING COMMISSION
COUNTY OF HAWAI‘I
HEARING TRANSCRIPT
DECEMBER 4, 2014
STEPHEN SHROPSHIRE,
A regularly advertised hearing on the application of
SHROPSHIRE GROUP, LLC (SMA 14-058)
was called to order at 9:04 a.m. in the County of
Hawai‘i Aupuni Center Conference Room, 101 Pauahi Street, Hilo, Hawai‘i with Chairman
Myles Miyasato presiding.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Myles Miyasato, Charles Heaukulani, Gregory Henkel, Donald
Ikeda, Raylene Moses, and Stephen Ono.
ALSO PRESENT: Duane Kanuha (Planning Director), Danny Patel (Deputy Corporation
Counsel for the Windward Planning Commission), Jeff Darrow (Staff Planner), Sarah
Hata-Finley (Commission Secretary), and Melissa Dacayanan (Planning Commission Support
Technician).
And approximately 18 people from the public in attendance.
APPLICANT:STEVEN SHROPSHIRE, SHROPSHIRE GROUP, LLC(SMA 14-058)
Application for a Special Management Area Use Permit to allow the consolidation of 4 lots and
its subdivision into 10 lots and a road lot with related improvements. The subject property is
located along the north (makai) side of the Hawai‛i Belt Highway (State Highway 19) fronting
the Mile Marker 19 at Waikaumalo, North Hilo, Hawai‘i, TMK: 3-2-005:002, 003, 004 & 005.
MIYASATO: The first item on today’s agenda is Steven Shropshire.
DARROW: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good morning Members of the Planning Commission. I’d
like to take a moment to welcome our new Corporation Counsel, Danny Patel. You’re a brave
man. Welcome. Thank you for assisting us in our matters here. We’re gonna look forward to
getting counsel from you in the future. Thank you.
If I can direct your attention to our presentation this morning. Our first applicant is Steven
Shropshire of Shropshire Group, LLC. Just for reference, the area of this subject application is
within the North Hilo District of Hawai‛i. More specifically, we’re looking in the Nīnole area.
This is just before the first gulch on Highway 19 as you’re heading towards Waimea. The white
line for reference is the Hawai‛i Belt Road or Highway 19. The exact location is actually
fronting the 19-mile marker along Hawai‛i Belt Road.
This is a closer view. This is a map of the County zoning. Again, this is of the Nīnole area. The
colors on the map represent the different types of County zoning. Just for reference, the dark
green represents Agricultural – 20 acres. The lighter green and the—is Agricultural – 5 acres,
and the little shade of darker green is Agricultural – 1 acre. The orange color is actually
Residential – Agriculture, or Rural type, .5 acres, so it means that the minimum lot size is a half
1
EXHIBIT A
acre for each of these lots. There’s quite a bit of RA zoning in this particular area which is
unique to our Island. This is one of the zonings that we have the least of on the Island.
This is the State Land Use Boundary Map, and again for reference, the colors. The green
represents Agriculture. The blue represents Conservation which is mainly the stream coming
down from the mountain. And the yellow represents Rural, and it’s—it works in conjunction
with the County zoning of RA.
This is the General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide Map and again for reference, the
lighter green is Important Ag lands. The yellow represents Low Density Urban which is mainly
for Single Family Residential uses. And the orange represents Rural which again, it’s coinciding
with the State Land Use and the County zoning.
And, this is the whole reason why we’re here today is that the application is located within the
Special Management Area which is a area along the coastline that has special controls on it and
requires an additional step before development. Had this application been across the street, this
application would not have been necessary.
The Applicant is requesting a Special Management Area Use Permit to allow the consolidation
of four lots and the resubdivision into ten lots, and the road lot plus related improvements on
9.789 acres of land within the Special Management Area. The subdivision will consist of lots
averaging approximately a half an acre in size. The proposed cost of the subdivision
improvements which includes roadway improvements, infrastructure, and site development is
estimated to be approximately $212,000.
This is an aerial photo. Just for reference, this is basically the area that we’re looking at. Again,
we have the Hawai‛i Belt Road running through the middle of the map. There has been
construction in the area of single family dwellings. There are several dwellings and older
structures on the property that have been recently renovated. This is the current layout of the
properties, so you’ll see that there are five lots that we’re looking at. This is Lot 5, one-two-
three-four and five. The Applicant is consolidating one, three, four and five, so he’s taking four
lots and out of the four creating ten new lots. So a majority of these lots are going--the new lots
will be on the larger parcel that is currently unsubdivided.
This is what the layout looks out—looks like, proposed layout. So, again, the majority of the
new lots will be on the larger property that’s along the cliff. And this is a proposed layout.
There may be some adjustments as they, in the future.
Because of the fact that the area is a, is located along a steep cliff, we had asked the Applicant to
submit a topographical map which they have submitted. I apologize. This—some of the darker
colors did not come out, but where you see these, these lines in this particular area, this is
showing a steep grade, and this is where you see the, the actual cliff. There are certain areas that
are flatter along the property, but overall, there are some concerns regarding elevations.
2
EXHIBIT A
From the actual road in certain areas to the ocean, there’s quite a bit of elevation drop, as much
as 200 feet in some areas. Along the cliff line, there’s about a hundred foot drop from the cliff to
the property.
These are some site photos. I put a little reference on the side showing which direction these
photos were taken. There was an actually an old quarry site on the property, and this is looking
in that particular area, looking makai, so there’s an actual hole in this particular area.
This is located from, looking from the ocean towards the mountain, and you can kind of see that
area that has a little hole inside it.
This is looking towards Hilo from about where the structure’s located so you can kind of see the
elevation of the property this way. And this is taken from the same place, and you can see the
highway elevation. There’s quite a drop here.
This is one of the areas of concern. This picture doesn’t give it justice, but there was quite a
steep drop from the old rail—railway, roadway lot and down to the cliff line. And this is an area
near the nor—or the Hilo side of the property that’s more flat inside, and then just beyond this is
the stream entering into the ocean.
And lastly, this is a photo taken from that area back towards where the structures are, and again
this area here, there’s quite a bit of drop in elevation that has concerns that we need to address.
The Planning Director is recommending that this SMA permit be approved with conditions. I
have a few items that I’d like to bring to your attention before we conclude. Just as a matter of
information, this is again, the zoning is currently in place so there is a—the County zoning
allows for subdivision up to a half acre lots in the RA. The additional requirement because this
property is located within the SMA is an SMA permit to address possible concerns of affecting
the coastlines and the SMA.
There was some concerns that were brought up at the last hearing regarding potential
contamination in the soils, petroleum, old storage tanks from the old gas station that was there.
The Applicant has submitted a report that talked about these, this site being cleared by DOH.
We did send the report to the Commissioners, but it was approximately 70 pages in length so we
didn’t make copies, but we did reference it. We did submit the DOH letter that basically cleared
the site of the issues that were brought up. So, arsenic was tested as well as petroleum products.
In the letter, it talks about approximately 1-1/2 point, tons of material that were taken off site that
were possibly contaminated as well as the two gas tanks that were removed.
A summary, I had asked the Applicant if they could submit a brief summary regarding what was
tested in that report, and that was submitted this morning. It’s just a simple half page letter that
summarizes. It says gas tank removal on the top and it kind of summarizes those issues.
Additionally, this morning, we have received a final coastal erosion study. As we had mentioned
previously that there were concerns regarding cliff stability and the fact that this development is
along the cliff. When that occurs, we ask that the applicants hire people to do what are called
3
EXHIBIT A
coastal erosion studies and geotechnical studies to determine the stability of the cliff as well as
the erosion rate so we can determine proper setbacks from the top of the pali. That has been
submitted, and this morning, there was actually a final report submitted.
st
Additionally, we have received from the Applicant, a letter dated December 1, a transmittal
th
letter, and within that letter, she has response letters to the testimony given at the November 6
meeting. The letter from the DOH regarding the gas tank removal is within that. Also, some
supporting testimony.
Additionally—a lot of info that was submitted—we have several letters that were submitted this
morning. One from Chris and Gerry Allen and also from Susan Forbes. And, I believe with
that—oh, last thing. In looking at the, when we were evaluating this application, we, we, we do
have a standard condition that we place within applications where there are concerns of possible
contamination, mainly arsenic because that’s brought up because of the old sugar cane lands. In
this case, we did receive a report stating that the testing was done. We still do have a condition
that can be added if you feel uncomfortable that it, you feel it needs to be just brought to the
DOH’s attention again and just clear it again. Additionally, in the Zoning Code, it says in the
Rural District, only one single family dwelling is allowed per building site. So, if the, if the
Applicant has the lots created along the coastline, some are one acre. Some are half acre. Even
though it’s .5 acres in size and they have one acre, they can still only put one dwelling, so
regardless of the size of the lot.
We—at the last minute—we thought we better check to make sure if ohanas are permitted in the
Rural District, and they are permitted, so what we’ve done is add a condition in restricting or
prohibiting the construction of a second dwelling on each lot. And that’s a standard condition
we put in a lot of change of zones that want to increase density but we hold it back from
increasing it double with the allowance of an ohana or additional farm dwelling. So, that’s on
the yellow paper that was submitted.
With that, that concludes our presentation. Thank you.
HEAUKULANI: I had a quick question. I’m sorry. For staff. The--I just want to make sure
that I had, I understood the process for the determining the shoreline setback because it were in a
pali here, so, there’s a lot of things that are coming in last minute. Do we have a shoreline
survey yet?
DARROW: The Applicant, this poses a great issue with the Planning Department, and that is,
when we have to deal with applications that are along a cliff, it’s very difficult to get a certified
shoreline to determine the shoreline. What we’ve, what’s been happened, happening in the past
is they basically determined the top of pali as the shoreline. So, if the applicant will agree to the
top of pali as the area that we set back, we can, they can request a waiver from the submittal of
the shoreline survey. Some surveyors or some applicants will choose to do the survey to see if
they can get the certified shoreline surveyed down below but that’s a very difficult process for
the Planning Department to be able to read a setback off of, especially if it’s 50 or a 100 feet
down below. So, we’d rather just setback from the cliff, so at this point, if you look at
Condition—
4
EXHIBIT A
HEAUKULANI: Three.
DARROW: Yeah, Condition Three. We’ve, we’ve asked that this condition be in there, that it’s
either held back 60 feet or if they submit this report and it’s determined that there is stability and
the erosion, the coastal erosion rate is okay to go up to the minimum shoreline setback of 40 feet
along a certified shoreline, we can bring it into that 40 feet. But again, in looking at the report,
just prematurely, it looks like there may some areas in this that we may want to hold back farther
than other areas. So, that’s something that we can work out in the process, but right now, across
the board, it’s held back at 60 feet. With this report being submitted and with the approval of the
Planning Director, they may be able to come in further to the shoreline up to 40 feet.
HEAUKULANI: Thank you.
DARROW: Thank you.
IKEDA: Question. Are we gonna get a copy of the report because I don’t have it.
DARROW: The coastal erosion, the original one was submitted as an Exhibit 10.
IKEDA: Right. No, I’ve seen the original, but you said there was a current one that just—
DARROW: And then today we—
IKEDA: --yes—
DARROW: --let me see if I’ve—
Is that this one?
MOSES: It’s this one—
IKEDA: No, no, no, this is—
DARROW: Okay—
MOSES: This is the one.
IKEDA: I was all right with the other one until you mentioned this and wanted this and this.
DARROW: There’s, there’s a few adjustments in that. The difference is the date. You’ll see
the November versus December, but in talking with the Applicant, there was some minor
adjustments in the report, so that’s the only difference. Any other questions?
MIYASATO: I have one. Just to be clear, this application is for a Special Management Area
Use Permit and not a rezone, Change of Zone.
5
EXHIBIT A
DARROW: Correct, thank you.
MIYASATO: Commissioners, any further questions for staff? If not can we have the Applicant
or representative please come forward? Good morning. Could you please raise your right hand?
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Hawai‛i County Planning
Commission?
SHROPSHIRE/MIKKELSON: I do.
MIYASATO: Do you have a presentation that you’d like to, or a comment?
SHROPSHIRE: Yes, Lori?
MIKKELSON: We—
MIYASATO: Please state your name and—
MIKKELSON: I’m sorry—we have been working on this for quite a while and there’s been ups
and downs in trying to get things straightened out and prepared the way it needed to be because
of complications—
MIYASATO: --Could you please state your name and residence--
MIKKELSON: Oh, I’m sorry—
MIYASATO: --before you start yeah?
MIKKELSON: I’m sorry. My name’s Lori Mikkelson. I live in Pāpa‛aloa, Hawai‛i. Anyway,
as far as the, as far as the application goes, Mr. Shropshire purchased this property, having done
the due diligence of finding out the zoning, and the possibilities of subdividing it into half acre
parcels, and it’s a rare area. There’s hardly any properties that are that size in our area, so it’s an
opportunity for people to have smaller parcels that are more manageable than the larger parcels.
Some of us have bigger parcels. We live up there. And, as we’re getting older, it’s getting
harder and harder to manage what we have, so I can see that this is an advantage for older people
obviously. But, also, for younger families, who want to stay in their community, I also have
family that lives there, and they’re involved with Laupāhoehoe School, and it was very difficult
to find a home to buy even in the area, which they finally did. But, that, so this is an opportunity
for young families as well to have a piece of property and build a little house and you know get
on with their lives. And be able to communicate—commute back and forth to Hilo. Anyway, so
that’s, that’s the idea to me about this property, and it’s beautiful. The quarry is fabulous, but
that’s just my take on it, and that’s my, that’s what I see.
MIYASATO: Could you please state your name and residence?
6
EXHIBIT A
SHROPSHIRE: Yes, my name is Steve Shropshire, and I—my mailing address is Post Office
Box 1146, Hilo, Hawai‛i. First of all, I want to say thank you for the opportunity to be here and
for your time and attention. I think Jeff did an excellent job in you know outlining the merits of
the project. You know, as Lori mentioned, I purchased the original, a portion of the property
almost ten years ago, so this has been a decade long project to bring this property to fruition.
We, we developed a property just Hāmākua, the next, the adjacent property several years ago,
and as part of that development, we acquired the Nīnole Hongwanji Church, and just a few years
ago, made a donation to that church, that church back to the, to the community. We are, we are
vested in this area. We, when we first purchased this, this particular site, we contemplated taking
down the old structures that were there, and after listening to people in the community about the
significance of the Kawahara Store, the gas station there, and the plantation homes that were
there, we decided to spend the time and the energy to restore the homes, and restore the garage,
and the old plantation feeling of the property is something that we intend to preserve. We’re
going to have covenants, CC&R’s in our, in our development that require all the homes be of
plantation style, so when it—we have a, I have a picture here of the original garage and the
original home, and you can see there’s been quite a transformation if you haven’t driven out on
the highway and taken a look, I invite you to do but, so, I think what we’ve demonstrated is that
we have a sensitivity for the community, and that we are, you know, intending to do the right
thing here. It’s, it is a beautiful site and, thus far we, you know, we’ve gone through all the steps
to get the proper permits, you know. The first permit was the permit to take down all the
invasive trees. We’ve opened up the scenic views along the highway. And because of the
differential in grade from the highway to the, to the, you know to where the house sites are, I
think that, that’s going to be a benefit to this project because before we started, before we started
this, it was a wall of ironwoods and other invasive trees and now we’ve opened up the views, and
so, that’s just another example of I think how this project will win.
It was also, you know, it was littered with a lot of old cars and debris. We spent, we spent weeks
hauling that, all those materials to the dump. So, we’ve done a lot of cleanup on the site already.
And, in terms of you know, as Lori said, we you know we purchased this property with the
existing zoning, and we, we believe that the plan that we’ve put forth, you know, conforms with
the, not only the General Plan, but also the community development plan, some of the values that
have, that have been coming forth on that in terms of you know locating existing communities
where there, you know, existing town centers like Nīnole where the affordable housing
component. We did decide to restore the two homes there because we believe they’re gonna be,
you know, perfectly suited for you know small—to helping families.
The store was, was an effort to preserve. The rural character and the, you know, they are listed
as historic sites. We wanted to restore or preserve the historic character of the property, and
that’s why we choose to do that, and we hope to come back to you for a Special Use Permit to do
some kind of a store of some sort there as well.
Anyway, that’s all I have, and I’m prepared to answer any question you may have. Thank you.
MIYASATO: Thank you. Commissioners, any questions for the Applicant?
7
EXHIBIT A
IKEDA: Yes, I do. You know, I had, I had two questions but one was answered by your letters
and by the conditions—
SHROPSHIRE: --yes—
IKEDA: --of the Planning Director, so I’m satisfied with one and that was the gas tank and the
arsenic so I was satisfied. Now I’m satisfied with that. The other one was the water credits.
You have what two water credits for ten lots so are you gonna go on water catchment? Is that
how it’s gonna be?
SHROPSHIRE: That’s correct. We actually have, of the ten lots, there are—six are going to be
on water catchment, and four, we have four existing meters—
IKEDA: --Oh, you have four meters?
SHROPSHIRE: Yeah.
IKEDA: Okay, that was my only concern because I know in my district, we have water
catchment also, and rains a lot in Kaūmana City, but they still ran out of water, and I believe they
have a minimum of 6,000 gallons of water, I think. Fire Department required them to have a
minimum of 6,000. So, are you going to have a requirement like 10,000 gallons or something
like that because I know in Kaūmana City, most of the residents have 15,000 gallons.
SHROPSHIRE: Sure.
MIKKELSON: Typically, the insurance companies require a minimum of 10,000 gallons, so if
anybody would get a mortgage they would probably have to have that. And also, because of the
lay of the land up there, it’d be a potential to be able to put in, in the ground, catchments such as
under lanais and so forth, concrete rather than having the exposed tanks.
MIYASATO: Commissioners, any further questions for the Applicant?
HEAUKULANI: Yeah, I had a question. You heard my discussion with Jeff about the setbacks,
ocean setback. Do you have a sense of where you’re gonna go on that or how you’re gonna
resolve that issue?
SHROPSHIRE: You know that’s a—that question was handed over to the professionals, so I
hired a geologist, Dr. Jack Lockwood, and it’s all contained in the report, but my sense after
reading the report, I think the conclusion is that there, the cliffs are stable enough to support a
40-foot setback, with exception of a couple area and in those areas, I think the 60-foot you know
may be something we have to defer to, but I think that’s where the you know the Director will
make that call. But, I think that the report is conclusive that there is minimal erosion that’s,
that’s taking place. I think it’s an important study for anyone that’s looking to build along this
coastline because we haven’t had anything of that, that detailed that I’m aware of so, but I’d
invite you to read the report, and I think it, I think it is conclusive that it’s, it’s a reasonable and
safe area to build upon.
8
EXHIBIT A
HEAUKULANI: Have you reviewed the proposed conditions?
SHROPSHIRE: I have.
HEAUKULANI: Including, there were two—I’m not sure if these are, I’m sorry, added
conditions five and six. You see all of these?
SHROPSHIRE: All right. Those were just handed to me this morning. Yes.
HEAUKULANI: All right, are those acceptable to you?
SHROPSHIRE: You know, I think Condition 5 is reasonable. I don’t, I have no problem with
that. I mean, Condition 6, I have a problem with because we have already provided a closure
report from the Department of Health concerning the gas station’s operations, so I don’t
understand, frankly, why I would be required to do anything further than that, but you know, if
it’s a condition, it’s a condition. I don’t think it’s reasonable, but I’m prepared to you know,
defer to your decision.
HEAUKULANI: And with the exception of No. 6 that was on this, came out this morning. The
rest of these are acceptable to you?
SHROPSHIRE: Yes sir.
HEAUKULANI: Thank you.
MIYASATO: Commissioners, any—
IKEDA: Yeah—
MIYASATO: --yeah, okay.
IKEDA: You know, I have a, I have the same question you know because I thought when I read
the, under the Director’s Recommendation, there was a 60-foot setback from the edge of the cliff
for the height of the cliff, and if that was agreeable to the Applicant, you know, I would have
supported, you know. That was one of the reason why I supported the project because you were
going to go 60 feet, but if you’re gonna go closer than 60 feet, then I have to rethink my position.
MIKKELSON: May I add something there? The way the shoreline is up there, and the
existence of the quarry--some lots would be more susceptible to the actual pali than the other, the
way they are. The quarry goes right up to the edge, all rock right to the very edge of it, and then,
it’s straight down of course. But then, there’s others where it sways back so each individual lot,
by the way they’ll all have to come in with an SMA themselves when they build their homes,
you know would be, should be able to addressed kind of individually because of the way they
lay. Make it a blanket across doesn’t really quite do it, you know? So, if, if when they come in
for their SMA for their, when they’re gonna build their homes, then they could be say like, like
9
EXHIBIT A
Lot 3, I’m sorry you guys are going to have to be 60 feet back, but Lot 2, you can go up to 40
feet, because it’s a different, it’s a different lay.
IKEDA: Well, I’m just looking at the Director’s Recommendation and conditions and when I
saw that, then I was in favor you know because I know there’s different sizes because I’m kind
of familiar with the area. But, so, I felt very comfortable with the Director’s Recommendation,
so now if you’re gonna change the rules of the game, I’m having second thoughts. That’s all I’m
saying.
SHROPSHIRE: If I may, Mr. Ikeda, I think you, what you, what you’re ruling on today is, is a
60-foot setback until the individual homeowner or myself can provide you know substantial and
conclusive evidence that something less than that is scientifically—and that’s why I’ve hired,
you know, hired a geologist to go in and do this, and it’s, it’s you know this is something I think
is needed along the coastline because it’s, it gets very subjective. You know one person’s
opinion versus the other, but he did a very, very in-depth study, and I would, I would invite you
to you know look through especially this, this updated version of it, and you know, this is up to
the Planning Director at this point whether, whether he’s convinced or not that, you know to--.
MIYASATO: Commissioners, any further questions for the Applicant. Thank you.
SHROPSHIRE: Thank you.
MIYASATO: Okay, we have some public testimony for today. Could we have Susan Forbes in
this first chair here. In the next chair Richard Toledo, Calvin Motoda, and David Longacre.
LONGACRE (from audience): Longacre.
MIYASATO: Longacre. Okay, you’ll each have 3 minutes for your testimony, yeah? Could
you please all raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter now
before the Hawai‛i County Planning Commission?
FORBES/TOLEDO/MOTODA/LONGACRE: I do.
MIYASATO: Okay, could you please state your name and residence before you testify?
FORBES: Hi, I’m Susan Forbes. I live in Hakalau in Hakalau Plantation Village at 29-2283 Old
Māmalahoa Highway. I would mention that Hakalau Plantation Village is a subdivision created
by Mr. Shropshire, and it’s a great place to live. My husband and I decided to try to capture the
sense of community and gratitude in Hakalau by creating a website. I know this sound like a
commercial but I’ll get to a point. It’s www.hakalauhome.com. For us, Hakalau includes all the
land that was formerly part of the Hakalau Plantation which goes from the 20-mile marker in
Nīnole to Kolekole. With this website, what we’re trying to do is to provide a source of
information for former, current, and potential residents that captures the, the specialness of the
place, both historically and all of the cultural activities that go on. You know, where we live, we
have CC&R’s that call for plantation style homes, too, but it’s hard to know what is a plantation
style home, so on this website within a couple of days, there will be pictures of all of the
10
EXHIBIT A
dwellings of, from the Hakalau Plantation so, you know, it’s a source of, to see what it was like,
but also to create a vehicle so that the old timers can share some, some of their history.
But, then the third thing, which is really why I’m here today, wanted to create a form for
comments about development because we, we do have a sense of responsibility for the land. It’s
just a really special place to live. So, what we want to be doing is tracking all the lands that,
within the former plantation so this is one of them.
I’ve spent the last few days reviewing Mr. Shropshire’s application and supporting documents as
well as all of the community development plan drafts. In the vision statement, there were a
couple of statements that I think that fit well within this context. One is our pristine landscapes
and rich agricultural lands from mauka to makai, native forests, coastal waters, streams and
watersheds, the sweeping views and open spaces are protected and enhanced. I’ve read the
application, the Planning Department’s analysis of site lines, and I understand, you know. We’re
on the side of a volcano. Everything goes down, so you know you’re looking over a lot of
things, but I just don’t agree that ten lots on a narrow stretch of land adjacent to the Belt Road
don’t inhibit sweeping views and open spaces. In terms of view, it’s just my personal opinion
that more lots are worse than fewer lots.
The second statement I’d like to highlight is Hāmākua is a place where change is thoughtful and
deliberate. Our deep aloha for the ‛aina compels and ensures smart sustainable development and
the protection and perpetuation of Hāmākua’s uniqueness now and in to the future.
The application was really, really complete. Based on the criteria included in the application, all
the issues were addressed. However, I think that the Windward Planning Commission is placed
at a disadvantage because the community development plan and process have not been complete,
completed and adopted. It’s a really difficult balancing act between, among developers,
residents, and other stakeholders in between the present and the future.
MIYASATO: Mrs. Forbes, could you please summarize?
FORBES: Yes. One of, you know, it seems as though the process, this is editorial comment.
The process is a reactive one. I’m here today just reacting to an application as opposed to being
in a position where we went out and sought specific kinds of development. So, what I, my hope
is that the community development plan will be adopted sooner rather than later; that the
Commission use the Plan to guide decision-making; and that, that community input is vigorous
and we act together to create our desired future. So, thank you for the chance to testify.
MIYASATO: Thank you. Commissioners, any questions? Thank you. State your name and
residence.
TOLEDO: Good morning. My name is Richard Toledo. I’m, I was, I grew up in Nīnole, 1944
to 1962. I left for ten years to go to school, military service. I came back in 1972, and I worked
for Hāmākua Sugar for 16 years after that. And, after leaving Hāmākua in ’88, I pursued what
my college degree allowed me to do and become a mortgage broker, so I worked in a mortgage
business and properties for another 17 years before I retired.
11
EXHIBIT A
I took a look, I know Steve Shropshire. I’m acquainted with him. I have no interest in this
properties. I have no interest in, financial interest in any of these plans. I do own about 75 acres
in the immediate area which is just Hāmākua of this proposed development, including a piece of
property on the ocean. As a, as a resident, as a long-time resident of Hawai‛i and growing up in
Nīnole, I have noticed over the years that Nīnole is starting to look like the edges of Detroit. We
see a lot of dilapidated buildings. We see a lot of neglected land. We see a lot of unkempt
properties, and I had often thought in my mind that we need somebody to come along with, with
the wherewithal, with the cash, with the patience to go through this process to go ahead and
make the community look vibrant again. I’m familiar with Super Highway Service. As a, as a
youngster, I often drove my car into there for minor repairs. Kawahara would kick me out for
the major repairs, told me to go home and do it in my own garage, but I am, I’m familiar with the
area. I am familiar with the quarry site in the back. I can still remember the highway being
constructed and J. W. Glover storing all of the equipment in the makai side including their tar
trucks and everything else.
But, I support this, I support this project by Shropshire for a number of reasons. One of ‘em, I
think he has proven to be a responsible neighbor. I think that he doesn’t go about this, just
selling land, grabbing his money and taking off. The fact that he has spent ten years with this
piece of property, and time is money, and plus going through all the hoops and everything. I
understand. I also have property on the shoreline. I understand SMA. I understand
Conservation. I understand all of that. I would like to encourage him to continue with this
project. I have no opposition to the number of homes he puts there, considering the cost that he
has incurred in clearing the property and in going through the hoops of proving this and proving
that. As far as I know, for example, I don’t remember that property ever being in sugar cane. I
remember the quarries there. And, I remember the Super Highway Service, and I’m 70 years
old, so my memory goes back a ways.
And I wish we could encourage more people like Steve to come about and put their money down
and give the community what, what we really need, and we’re not gonna have, ever have sugar
cane back. Thank you.
MIYASATO: Thank you. Commissioners, any questions? Thank you.
MOTODA: My name, my name is Calvin Motoda. I currently live in Umauma, and I grew up at
a Hakalau plantation, and as I was growing up, I used to roam around from Wailea all the way to
Nīnole, so I kind of familiar with that area. And, one thing I wanted to comment on today was
that area that we’re talking about for this subdivision was a rock quarry like Mr. Toledo says,
and I, I believe you need to go and see the place instead of looking at pictures because it’s kind
of deceiving, that when you look at that quarry area, it’s a big hole, and there’s I think gonna be
some concerns with runoff during heavy rains because when you look at the property where the
Garage was, it’s like the video showed, that was, it’s lower, so you know, there’s gonna be some
concerns with water, runoffs, and flooding, and I don’t know how that big hole is gonna be filled
up, but anyway I just wanted to make that comment, and I guess I want to end by saying that the
Hāmākua Coast with all the bridges and everything, I think the Planning Commission really
gotta consider the infrastructure on Highway 19. The more people you put in, more cars, I don’t
12
EXHIBIT A
think the Hāmākua Coast can handle it with all those—you can widen the roads, but there’s
always a bridge, and I think that needs to be really considered because if you live out there, and
you try to come in to Hilo, try coming in around 8 o’clock and by Pāpa‛ikou, and see all that
traffic and eventually maybe you’re gonna need traffic lights out there, and you know what’s
next. Going out to Pepe‛ekeō and you know, all this congestion is gonna cost emergency
vehicles not getting to you for help, but anyway, I just want to conclude on that. Thank you.
MIYASATO: Any questions, Commissioners? Thank you.
LONGACRE: Good morning. My name’s David Longacre. I live up Chin Chuck Road in
Hakalau, 29-425 Chin Chuck Road. I run a commercial food orchard as well as live on my farm
which is 12 acres of land. I have anxiety about what I call the creeping luxury residentialization
that seems to be kind of moving up the coastline. Where I live in Hakalau, and I bought my farm
back in ’96. I’ve noticed a lot of what I call the development of view estates on ag land which I
don’t think the owners who may be very nice people have any intention of conducting
agriculture. So, I do have a concern about, about this, this trend in land use that’s coming up,
and I think that the unhindered development of these kinds of land uses and vacation rentals
promotes unintended consequences. Not the least of which is conflicting views of what is
appropriate land use between the luxury residentialists—I just made that word up—and, and
farmers.
As far as Mr. Shropshire’s property goes, I just, a focused concern I would have over this
particular development is the management of sewage and the fact that pesticides and fertilizer
use by the property owners has a potential of direct pollution of the ocean. I recognize that there,
there were other land uses there that already presented that threat to the ocean, but I wonder if
we’re just switching one for the other.
Having said all that, I do believe the County is probably going to approve this application. For
what it’s worth, I’ve been driving past that place for years and years, and I noticed over the
years, there’s been no meaningful populations that I can tell of native flora or fauna residing
there, and ironically enough, there is the possibility to re-establish some of those populations of
native trees, for example, if only through the landscaping that these, this subdivision into homes
might, might offer.
I do see that the County may in the future face a backlash if it repeatedly approves these kinds of
suburban intrusions into agricultural areas, but if the County could meaningfully, meaningfully
use these opportunities, and they are opportunities, to draw non-agricultural land uses such as
what I call view estates, to areas closer to the ocean, because that’s what these people want to
see, is the ocean, and away from Important Agricultural Lands, that actually might turn out to be
a good thing, but I think it would need to be coupled with a more creative and proactive
enforcement of the currently identified appropriate ag, ag uses on agricultural lands.
So, thank you. That’s it.
MIYASATO: Thank you. Any questions, Commissioners? Thank you. You can all have a
seat, thank you. Could I have Sharon Blank come forward in this first chair here? And Akiko
13
EXHIBIT A
Masuda and Robert Nishimoto. Could you all please raise your right hands? Do you swear or
affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Hawai‛i County Planning Commission?
BLANK/MASUDA/NISHIMOTO: I do.
MIYASATO: You can go first. Please state you name and residence.
BLANK: Sharon Blank, I live at 32-9--
DARROW: Microphone—
MIYASATO: Please use the—
BLANK: Sharon Blank, 32-922 Hawai‛i Belt Road. I live on Nīnole ocean, Nīnole oceanfront
at Mile Marker 9.3 and watch with interest the activity of the community, both human and
natural. Nīnole is a small, humble community, and with assistance, it has been possible to gather
the opinions of many of the residents. The, our informal poll, if you will, revealed that most
people in our neighborhood did not have any idea what was being proposed for that location, and
that the vast majority opposed the addition of ten lots at that location. Regret, regrettably, they
are also unable to be on record due to fears and have requested that their thoughts be anonymous.
They are a diverse group with generational roots to newcomers. The reasons for their opposition
range from environmental impact to the uglification of the coast and the lost of our rural way of
life. All feel that ten additional lots there are too many.
My comments to the Commission today reflect the thoughts of 26 Nīnole households and six
fishermen who work this section of the coast as well as three outside households. There is much
about the Special Management Area that is not reflected in the application submitted by the
Shropshire Group. This section of the cliff bottom is in fact frequently used, and is accessed by
several climbing groups including the Waikaumalo Stream. Small fishing boats and abundant
wildlife are little noticed but very active below the cliff. Views of the ocean and horizon across
the property have been appreciated by passersby for decades, whether through trees or when
cleared.
The proposed subdivision will have a greater impact than that indicated by the Shropshire Group
on the SMA. The report by Geohazard Consultants concerns my--confirms my own observation
of the routine loss of the cliff edge by half a foot a year. Although heavily vegetated, the cliff in
front of my home has slumped noticeably, with trees and grasses now several feet lower than
they were a year ago, markedly improving the view, but also demonstrating the constant loss of
cliff. One local joke is that Hāmākua means crumbling cliffs. This is confirmed by a fisherman
who skin dives this section of the shore below the cliff including my home and the subject
property. In the 30 years he has watched, there has been marked loss of the upper layers. There
are also dramatic events. A massive slide less than ten years ago took the northwest corner of
my property and about 600 feet of the coast to the northwest. Similar soil structures in
Laupāhoehoe have caused massive slides and required major retrofit of structural foundations.
14
EXHIBIT A
Soil erosion and runoff from the site directly to the ocean can also be expected, and no doubt
have already occurred with the denuding of the site. Silt and construction fences have only
recently been installed and appear somewhat haphazard. The development will create
contaminants from cess—construction, cesspool seepage, household and lawn chemicals, all
among the known pollutants found along our shoreline. The impact of ten new households will
add significantly to the toxic load of this SMA location.
MIYASATO: Could you please summarize?
BLANK: Four lifelong residents have noted with alarm that a pit on the port—project side was
the location of long-term dumping of petrochemicals, as well as a mixing and storage site for
pesticides. To the best of their knowledge, there had been no testing, much less mitigation for
contaminants. Disturbance, such as that has already has occurred does release such contaminants
into the environment.
On behalf of many silenced Nīnole residents, I humbly ask that the Commission carefully review
the many and complex issues and the impact that this proposed development will have on a
sensitive location, and deny the SMA Use Permit as previous--as is being presented.
One additional thought I did have is that the old railroad bed is noted as an area of stability along
that cliff; however, properties such as mine and the adjacent one have had significant slumping
and dropping of the old railroad bed. What else? I think that’s—and loss of habitat is certainly
an issue. We see a lot of hawks, owls, and other things that of course will be reduced. Thank
you.
MIYASATO: Thank you. Commissioners, any questions? Thank you.
MASUDA: Aloha, my name is Akiko Masuda. I live at 29-2091 Old Māmalohoa Highway in
Wailea which is the Hilo side of the Hakalau Veterans Park. I am the owner and dishwasher at
Akiko’s Buddhist Bed and Breakfast at the former Motonaga Garage Service Station. I own that.
Our claim to fame is our annual Wailea Village mochi pounding. This year will be
thth
December 28, Sunday, and this is our 17 year we’ve been doing it. This year’s year theme is
living our legacy, living our kuleana. I learned about mochi pounding only when I moved to
Wailea 23 years ago and bought my place. The old timers talk about the good old days, and as I
questioned further ‘cause I never did it in Honolulu where I grew up, the old usu, the concrete
thing we pound; the kine, the pounders; the steamer boxes, they all started to appear from the old
th
timers basements, so we started our mochi pounding 17 years ago. And now, our 17 year, our
haole neighbors, many of them never even knew what mochi was let alone say the word. It rolls
off their lips, and they help wash the hundred pounds of rice. They whittle down the kine. They
fix the steamer boxes. They chop the firewood. They even say anko. And you should hear the
Florida lady say “anko” because she counts how many cans of anko we gotta buy to roll 629
balls, based on the hundred pounds of mochi. She’s done her math work for us.
They come, a whole community, most of them haole now, and they have adopted this tradition.
It’s part of the heritage. By the mere fact that they have moved to Wailea, to Hakalau, they have
15
EXHIBIT A
embraced it, and we’re very, very grateful. My local friends, many of whom are from
Keaukaha, Mountain View, Oahu, Laupāhoehoe, Kohala, they come in and they kokua. They do
not live in the area, but they kokua to support this tradition.
The moral of these stories I’m telling is because these new residents, they’ve settled here and
they’ve shown by their actions that they are part of the community. They participate. They
work. They wave to each other. They tell their stories. Many have dropped by my place to
mourn the loss of a pet, companion, but they come by. We are a community. They drop by fruit,
leftover vegetables, which we share with community members and our kupunas. We live in a
very special place, and we are all about relationships whether you’ve lived here two years or all
your life. And we talk to each other. We know each other’s names.
Now, human beings as we all know have been motivated from time immemorial to buy
something big and cut ‘em up small and make profit. That’s just the way it is. Whether it’s a
pie, marijuana, property. Cut up big, make small, make profit. That’s what motivates us. But
Hawai‛i is different. The land, the rivers, the ocean, the mountains, the rocks, they’re all endued
with spirit, and those of us that are born and raised here, we may not talk about it, but we feel it.
We know when there’s certain places we don’t go or when we go, we go with great, great
respect. We don’t shishi at a certain place. We know, ‘cause there’s a spirit even if we cannot
see it.
MIYASATO: Ms. Masuda, could you please summarize?
MASUDA: Okay, summary. Now is the time, kuleana, to be responsible, and I feel Windward
Commission and Steve Shropshire, you fell in love with Hawai‛i. We all love Hawai‛i. And we
pray that you will be guided to use that love to guide you on four properties. Four properties, to
show the once the relationship you had with the ‛aina, and with those four, you leave a legacy
that goes way beyond us. Our time, your time, and the people of Hawai‛i will honor you with
great respect and aloha ‘cause you left a legacy that we can all be proud of and our grandchildren
who cannot afford to live in Wailea and buy today, can live here. Amen. Mahalo.
MIYASATO: Thank you. Commissioners, any questions? Thank you.
MASUDA: It’s your turn.
MIYASATO: Please state your name and residence.
NISHIMOTO: Good morning. My name is Robert Nishimoto. I was born and raised and still
live in Nīnole. I grew up in Nishimoto Store, so it’s a landmark in Hilo, I mean Nīnole.
Applicant claims to be sensitive to the community and they’ve talked to the community but I’ve
been there all my life, and nobody contacted me about the development. The only way I found
out about this was to the sign they posted. So, where is the sensitivity of the community, and I
work at the polls. I’m retired. I live there. I grew up there because I fished that coastline all my
life. For that reason, I became a professional in that field of marine science. So that’s to remind
you that, that unfortunately Mile Marker 20 development, if that’s the case, where locals can
16
EXHIBIT A
buy, I’m fearful of what this promise about locals can buy in this property mean to, to our locals
here, you know?
Again, I’d like, I can appreciate that there’s a report about the petroleum product and the gas
tank, but I’d like to read that myself. I feel I’ve been broadsided. You have access to it, but as
the one who brought that issue up, I’d like the decision delayed so at least I can review it. I grew
up there. I have no knowledge that somebody dug up those tanks. I’m not questioning the, the
truthfulness of Department of Health, but I’m trying to get some, some information from them
also, but maybe I’d like to review that if possible.
What’s happening to me bothers me because the sediment barrier was put up after the fact, after
all the groundwork was being done. It’s, it’s still continue to be put up again. Is this pono? You
know, vague, not telling the whole truth. Now, I’m worried about the opihi population there. I
fish there. My grandson fish there. My father took me there.
Also, this excuse about, I read the report about cesspool. The person that wrote this report claim
that cesspool is safe, but remember now, this is an engineer. He worries about structural things.
This is not a, a water chemist or a hydrologist. There is definite problem with leakages.
Remember opihi is a very serious, and it’s a very protected resource. I’d like to remind you that
the highly endangered hawksbill turtle juvenile uses that coast as a habitat. You can contact
NOAA if you’re interested so that’s what I’m worried about. Again, the runoff. Even the
practice of not putting up sediment barriers and after rainfall, there’s absolutely the most--I also
have a report about this back on the opihi population. So, I’m really concerned about the sense,
that your sense of community. I’d like to welcome, but unfortunately I did not on their mailing
list, and I’d be very happy to give my mailing list.
And, in closing, I’d like to hope you can, I can have a chance at least to review the DOH report
about petroleum products, and I can remind you that I am a PhD. in life, in marine science, so I
think I have some credibility to review the, how, how, how--how good this report is, so thank
you very much.
MIYASATO: Commissioner, any questions?
IKEDA: Can I ask a question?
MIYASATO: Sure.
IKEDA: You know, Mr. Nishimoto, I heard you just, your last testimony and right now, you say
that you fish in the area.
NISHIMOTO: Yes, I do.
IKEDA: Because one of the reports I read said that no one can fish in there because it was
impossible to get to or something like that.
NISHIMOTO: I live there, and you know, if you looked at the—you know where--
17
EXHIBIT A
IKEDA: --I know where you live because I know your parents very well.
NISHIMOTO: Okay, I’m trying to explain to you how I get to that spot. You could go down
through the quarry, but now it’s gated off by the new Applicant there. The other access now is
on the Hilo side of the Waikamaulu Bridge. There’s cars there, very frequently that climb down
the side. There’s a small cemetery there with three headstones. You can go there and cross that
river and go across. I go fish for moi. I fish for opihi. I used to go from Nanue all the way walk
over and used to come out by Nishimoto Store, there was a place to come out there. You still, it
can go but I’m not, I don’t risk anymore, but at least down by Waikaumaulu, I go down. And, I
also use Waikaumaulu Stream to catch opai.
MIYASATO: Any other questions, Commissioners? Thank you.
BLANK: Thank you.
MIYASATO: I’d like to close the public testimony for this agenda item. Commissioners, any
discussion? If not, I’ll accept a motion.
Commissioners, do any Commissioners have any questions for the Applicant concerning any of
the public testimony or does the Applicant have any comments for any of the testimony?
SHROPSHIRE (from audience): I do.
Thank you.
MIYASATO: Just a reminder that you’re still under oath, yeah?
SHROPSHIRE: Yes. So, I just wanted to comment on Mr. Nishimoto’s comment that the
quarry was gated off. The quarry is not gated off. We have a long history of allowing residents
to fish on all the property that we, properties that we own along the Hāmākua Coast. As long as
people are respectful, we, our, our gates are open. We’ve, more recently, we’ve actually
provided a fishing access, deeded access trail to a piece of property we own in Hakalau just for
this specific reason, so I want to just clarify that we have no objection. It is a very steep cliff. I
would question the safety of it because it’s, in some cases, 60-80 feet straight down, so the fact
that you know you can access this from the rivers and other thing, I wasn’t aware of.
We did notify the community by virtue of the fact we’ve had the notification posted on the
highway for several months.
He mentioned the sediment barrier. We were not required to do a sediment barrier. We did that
on our own initiative because there was less than an acre grubbed but we did, you know, there is
a riparian buffer that’s between the area that was, that was disturbed and the ocean, which is
substantial, existing riparian buffer that acts as a filter.
18
EXHIBIT A
I just want to also point out that in Mrs. Blanks testimony, she mentioned that, it seems to me
like, and I think Ms. Masuda, or Akiko Masuda, also touched on this that you know there’s this
general feeling, and in Ms. Blank’s testimony, she said that the purchasers of these new lots will
undoubtedly be wealthy and not connected to the existing community. It’s so ironic to me that
she just purchased that property, an oceanfront property, around a year ago is my understanding,
that it was over a half million dollars. So somehow it’s interesting how these people come to
Hawai‛i, and you know months later they go from newcomer to vested and now they’re basically
saying we don’t want anyone else here, and I think this is happening time and time again.
Ms. Forbes, the beginning testimony, talked about the fact that this is too much density but she
lives in a development that I, that I was personally involved with—
PATEL: Excuse me, Mr. Shropshire. I would recommend that you stick to addressing any
Commissioners’ concerns and not necessarily addressing members of the public.
SHROPSHIRE: Okay, all right, so let’s see. The concerns of the, the other concern was Mr.
Longacre’s concern that these, the view estates and the, that are happening along the coast, and
the importance of protecting Important Ag Lands, and I think that this project is an example of
doing just that. It’s locating a people in an existing township, higher density, so that we can
allow those ag lands to remain open. So, this is, this is—this is really what’s a trend that should
happen as a development strategy along the coast.
Anything else? Any questions that I, you know—thank you.
IKEDA: Can I ask—
MIYASATO: Commissioner Ikeda.
IKEDA: Can I ask Director Kanuha a question?
KANUHA: Sure.
IKEDA: Mr. Kanuha, can the, Mr. Nishimoto have a, have a copy or a chance to read the health
report? Yes? No? You know, if he can, I might ask for a defer, but if he cannot, we just go on
with it.
KANUHA: Certainly. It’s part of the—it’s a public record. You know, he can have a copy of it.
MIKKELSON: Jeff, Jeff, I have a copy.
DARROW: Okay.
MIKKELSON: Should I just give it.
DARROW: Yeah, you might want to give him the, the--let me.
19
EXHIBIT A
SHROPSHIRE: This is the final closure report.
DARROW: Oh, you have the—
MIKKELSON: I have copies of it.
SHROPSHIRE: Yeah, go ahead, that’s the final closure report for the Commission by the
Department of Health.
DARROW: So, this is the orig—one for Mr. Nishimoto. This is the approval letter from DOH.
Secretary’s Note: Italicized portion of discussion was at the audience section of the meeting
room. Mr. Darrow gave Mr. Nishimoto a copy of the subject report.
MIYASATO: Commissioners, any discussion? If not, I’ll accept a motion.
IKEDA: I move to defer Special Management Area Use Permit application SMA 14-000058, be
deferred to the next Planning Commission meeting.
MIYASATO: I have a motion. Do I have a second?
ONO: For the sake of discussion, I’d like to second that motion.
MIYASATO: I have a motion by Commissioner Ikeda, a second by Commissioner Ono. Any
discussion?
IKEDA: Yes, you know, I’d like to give the, like Mr. Nishimoto and any of the residents a
chance to look at the report to get satisfied, you know. For myself, I’m kind of satisfied, but I’d
like to give everyone an opportunity to look at everything and have a feeling that, just to clear
their minds.
MIYASATO: Okay, thank you. Any further discussion on the deferral?
ONO: Mr. Ikeda, would this, you’re placing this on the, you are recommending that we place
this on the next meeting agenda?
IKEDA: Yes, yes.
ONO: I’m not comfortable with this—are the parties going to be present? Would you object to
that:
SHROPSHIRE (from audience): Am I going to be present?
ONO: No, would you object to this?
SHROPSHIRE (from audience): Of course I would—
20
EXHIBIT A
ONO: Yeah, I understand—
SHROPSHIRE (from audience): The closure report, I mean, I think we provided the—
HATA-FINLEY: Microphone—
ONO: I’m sorry.
SHROPSHIRE (from audience): Expert wise, we have Department of Health.
ONO: Fine, I guess the thing is, that document is so thick. I’m just wondering if the decision is
to be made today, he would have to digest that and rebut so on—
IKEDA: No, that’s the reason I asked for a deferment to the next Planning Commission meeting.
ONO: Okay, thank you.
MIYASATO: Commissioners, any further discussion on the deferral?
DARROW: The motion before us is to continue this application until the next Windward
Planning Commission. With that, we’ll take the roll call. Commissioner Ikeda?
IKEDA: Aye.
DARROW: Commissioner Ono.
ONO: Aye.
DARROW: Commissioner Heaukulani?
HEAUKULANI: Aye.
DARROW: Commissioner Henkel?
HENKEL: No.
DARROW: Commissioner Moses?
MOSES: Aye.
DARROW: And Mr. Chairman.
21
EXHIBIT A
MIYASATO: Aye.
DARROW: The motion passes five to one.
The discussion ended at 10:15 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Sarah Y. Hata-Finley, Secretary
Windward Planning Commission
22
EXHIBIT A