Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN PC 2021/05/18 2020-2022 Committee on Planning Stn Session Hawaii County Building 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawai i May 18, 2021 CALL TO The regular meeting of the Committee on Planning was called to order at ORDER: 11:13 a.m., in the Council Chambers, Hilo, by Ms. Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Chair. ROLL CALL: Present: Ms. Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Chair Ms. Rebecca Villegas, Vice Chair Mr. Aaron S. Y. Chung, Member Ms. Maile Medeiros David, Member (via videoconference from Kona) Mr. Holeka Goro Inaba, Member (via videoconference from Kona) Mr. Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Member Ms. Heather L. Kimball, Member (via videoconference) Ms. Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Member Mr. Herbert M. "Tim" Richards, III, Member STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, FROM THE Statements from the Public on Agenda Items. PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS: The following individual registered to speak and came forward when called by the Chair: Cory Harden: Bill 34 (Comm. 233); and Bill 36 (Comm. 235; comment. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Closing public testimony at this time and moving on to the business of the day. Mr. Clerk, if we could start with Bill 34, please. COMMUNI- The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, CATIONS: Communications. (There were none.) ORDER OF The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, Order RESOLUTIONS: of Resolutions. (There were none.) PC-8 May 18,2021 BILLS FOR The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, ORDINANCES: Bills for Ordinances. Bill 34: AMENDS SECTION 25-8-33 (CITY OF HILO ZONE MAP), ARTICLE 8, CHAPTER 25 (ZONING CODE) OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), BY CHANGING THE DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FROM OPEN TO INDUSTRIAL—COMMERCIAL MIXED — 20,000 SQUARE FEET (MCX-20) AT PIOPIO, WAIAKEA, HAWAII, COVERED BY TAX MAP KEYS: 2-2-001:008, 017, 018, 019, 024, 030, AND 34 (Applicants: M. Anderson and N. Pi`ianaia Trusts; and Kapoho Properties, LLC) (Area: 3.29 acres) The Windward Planning Commission forwards its favorable recommendation and concurs with the Planning Director's request to approve the removal of the affordable housing condition (J). The applicants are proposing to consolidate and subdivide the existing seven separate parcels into four separate parcels. The property is located at Old Hilo Iron Works property located at 1280 Kamehameha Avenue. Reference: Comm. 233 Intr. by: Ms. Kierkiewicz (B/R) and Comm. 233.1: From Planning Director Zendo Kern, dated April 28, 2021, transmitting the draft transcript from the Windward Planning Commission's April 1, 2021, meeting. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, can I have a motion to forward Bill 34 to the Council with a positive recommendation? Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to recommend passage of Bill 34 on first reading. Seconded by Mr. Richards. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Will the applicant and/or representative please come forward. Aloha, Mr. Yananaka, if you could go ahead and introduce yourself for the record;provide us an overview of the request and do let us know if you agree with the conditions of approval that are stated here in the draft ordinance. Thank you. (Note: At this time, Garth Yamanaka, representing M. Anderson and N. Pi`ianaia Trusts; and Kapoho Properties, LLC came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. YAMANAKA: Okay, mahalo for having me here today. Garth Yamanaka. I represent the owners at the property, at the Hilo Iron Works. Aloha, Chair Kierkiewicz; Vice Chair Villegas, and members of the Committee on Planning. Mahalo for having me here today. Page 2 PC-8 May 18,2021 We appreciate the favorable recommendations from the Windward Planning Commission and the Planning Department. The effort and time put into this from the Director and the staff at the department were awesome. We are requesting this change of zone from Open to Industrial-Commercial Mixed-Use in order to accommodate the minimum lot sizes. We have agreed to consolidate and re-subdivide seven separate parcels into four separate parcels. The current owners purchased this property in the early 1980's. Use of the Hilo Iron Works property dates back to the early 1900's; 1906, the property was secured by Hilo Fruit Company, and they had a pineapple cannery from about 1907 to 1909. When the prices on pineapple could not be met, the cannery went under, and it was seized by the First Bank of Hilo. In 1911, it was sold to the Honolulu Iron Works; 1913, after reconstruction of the cannery, the foundry began operation, and the new Hilo Iron Works was in full operation. This business was they ran their business for the next 70 plus years. I just wanted to mention this brief history of the site just to give you an idea of what was going on prior the tsunamis that hit in 1946 and 1960. After 1960, the tsunami hit Hilo. The property fell under the Hawaii Redevelopment Agency and they amended the Urban Renewal Plan of 1965. The Iron Works property fell into the boundaries defined as Open areas, which were the low elevation area in closer proximity to the ocean. They were permitted to have Limited Industrial Use within the Open area. And all uses were intended as interim uses for a term of 35 years, or until such time that adequate control measures could be implemented to mitigate the effects of future tsunamis. The 35-year term has expired and so the permitted uses has reverted back to uses allowed within the Open zoning district. This has created a very unique situation for the Iron Works site. The site which has a majority of its improvements still intact, that has survived two tsunamis, and has a history of Mixed Industrial and Commercial Use has had a zoning applied to it which has taken away from its highest and best use. I just wanted to bring up the highest and best use as it is crucial to the valuation of property. It's the foundation on which market value rests. Due to the Open Zoning, the current uses on the Hilo Iron Works site is nonconforming. The nonconforming use has created the following issues: Nonconforming use needs to be approved by the Planning Director. This discretion creates uncertainty, as the Planning Director is an appointed position that changes over time. The time it takes for a nonconforming use approval is substantial and is a deterrent to applicants. Page 3 PC-8 May 18,2021 The impact on demand for lease space at the Iron Works also impacts the lease rates. The lower the demand for space, the lower the price. Nonconforming use also impacts stability of the landowners and tenants to obtain financing. Lenders view nonconforming use as a high-risk property. Risks affects the cost of financing and so, even if it is available, it'll be at a higher than typical rate. The financing affects not only the ability to refinance but the ability to sell the property. Available financing increases the pool of buyers and impacts demand. Limited to no-financing lowers the demand, which in turn adversely affect the price of the property. These impacts can be seen in the incomplete revitalization of the site, portions of the site-need repair, but without the ability to finance the ability to attract the best tenants for the site it creates an economic hardship for the landowners. We therefore respectfully request approval of the change of zone. There's no intent to make any change to the use or improvements of the property. The intent is to go from nonconforming use to conforming use. Any future improvements would require us to go through the SMA (Special Management Area)process, which is not desired by the current owners. The change of zone request is in line with the General Plan designation. I just want to point out that the 2005 General Plan—in the General Plan, the Hilo Iron Works is specifically stated as appropriate for Industrial-Commercial zoning and uses. The change of zone will conform to the goals, policies and standards of the land use and economic elements of the General Plan. It will also conform to the Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide map. Mahalo for your time and consideration in this matter, and if you have any questions, I'm available. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Mr. Yamanaka for the very detailed history and for a summary of your request before us. And you know, I asked earlier, you've read through and agreed to the conditions of approval stated in the ordinance? MR. YAMANAKA: Yes. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Okay, great. At this time I want to open it up to my colleagues for any questions or comments, and also noting that we have members of the Planning Department here and available. Ms. Lee Loy. MR. INABA: Chairoh, I'll wait. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Sue, you have the floor Page 4 PC-8 May 18,2021 MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. Mr. Yamanaka, thanks for being here. With this action, is a partial consolidation, re-subdivision, so we're going from seven to four lots, and I see like a proposed subdivision. In the past, and I'm just probing. Usually we have PILARs, right, Pre-Existing Lots of Record. So will the additional—since we're going from seven to four,will those three lots, right, because we're going from seven to four, will they be extinguished, or will they still be existing lots of record for later? MR. YAMANAKA: I'm not certain how they would handle that. That might be a better question for Planning. My assumption was that it would be extinguished, but yeah. MS. LEE LOY: Mr. Darrow, the three lots would be extinguished, and we would be at just four lots? (Note: At this time, Deputy Planning Director Jeff Darrow came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. DARROW: Good morning members of the Planning Committee, Chair Kierkiewicz and Vice Chair Villegas. My understanding is that they will be extinguished, but there's always the possibility that somebody could say, "Those are still there, but the whole point of this change of zone and consolidation, re-subdivision is to bring it into conformance. They would have a difficult time going back, because at that point you would have buildings that would be—yeah, thank you. MS. LEE LOY: Yeah, thank you for clarifying that. Chair, no other questions, I yield. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Mr. Inaba, you have the floor. MR. INABA: Thank you. We received written testimony saying that this was a nonconforming operation and that at the point that HIW (Hilo Iron Works) either had to move or was closed, that it would be an Open area. Can you speak to that, Mr. Darrow or Mr. Yamanaka? MR. YAMANAKA: Well, I guess didn't agree with the statement in the comments. The nonconforming use, my understanding because we were in illegal use prior to 1966,that the use is allowed. MR. DARROW: Council Member Inaba, so as Garth had mentioned, this was part of the Hawaii Redevelopment Agency in the Urban Renewal Plan back in the `60's after the tsunami, and they had identified this particular area as an Open area. The uses that were on the property were Industrial. So they had the ability Page 5 PC-8 May 18,2021 to continue with the Industrial Uses, and they had the ability to add uses, but it was limited. They would have to come to us and ask us, is this considered an allowable use under that plan that identified these limited uses. These uses, as long as they continue as nonconforming, they're able to maintain the uses, they're able to repair, they're able to they just cannot expand. So they can continue the intention, I think for the whole Redevelopment Plan was to eventually create a whole Open area along this particular tsunami area. There's been events that have happened. The Redevelopment Agency is no longer active. It's extinguished. There's been the break wall that's been put in; there's protections. This particular area is still very much active. The buildings are still being utilized and repaired and maintained. And so the Planning Department and the Planning Director agree that the most appropriate direction at this point is just to bring it into conformance with its nonconforming use. Currently, it's just the General Plan for this area is Industrial. Even though the zoning is Open, it still allows the ability for the applicant to become Conforming. MR. INABA: Thank you, Mr. Darrow. I see we have Director Kern on the line as well. There was mention regarding affordable housing. Is it correct,that there's no affordable housing requirement for this rezoning because it's in Council District 2, and Chapter 11 doesn't require that? Director Kern or Jeff if you want to answer that? CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Director Kern, can you hear us? A question is being directed to you. MR. DARROW: He might be having a little bit of technical difficulty. MR. INABA: Okay. Jeff, can you answer that question, thank you. MR. DARROW: Sure. No problem. Under Chapter 11, which is the Housing Code, Section 11-4(d). It talks about the requirements for affordable housing for Industrial-type rezonings. There's a trigger and that trigger under Section (d)(2)(A) and (B) is that the rezoning has to at least create 100 jobs. And so in this particular rezoning, they look at that in a particular—right now, one of the triggers is ten per acre. With this project only being three acres in size, that threshold is far from 100. Additionally, there is a Subsection (b)(iv), if I can read this for you, it says, "Hawai`i County Council Districts 2, 3, 4, and 5 would be exempt from inclusion in chapter 11, article 1, section 11-4(d) until such time that either the Hawaii Page 6 PC-8 May 18,2021 County Council or the Hawaii County planning director deem their inclusion necessary and a resolution stating such is passed by the County Council." So there's actually an exemption. MR. INABA: Okay, I just wanted to make sure that that was why this applicant is being exempted from any affordable housing requirements, since it was brought up by one of our testifiers. One last question, being that this so close to the ocean, are there any plans or steps to address sea level rise? MR. DARROW: Whenever we review an application whether it's a rezoning or SMA permit or anything along the shoreline, that's always one of the areas that we look at. Our Planner, Alex Roy, who's with us here took an extensive look at this property with the SLR-XA (Sea Level Rise Exposure Area) Maps that identify those levels; one-foot,three-foot levels over time. And this property was of—it was very little affected, even at three feet of tidal change. And so at that point that really wasn't a major consideration. And that's three feet is quite a long-ways off. I don't think we're going to see that in our lifetime But additionally, there's the concern of a tsunami. It's my understanding these buildings have already made it through two of them. So, any new construction, they have to meet current Codes. And it's pretty intense to have to build something in a major flood zone. MR. INABA: Thank you, Jeff. And mahalo, Mr. Yamanaka, for being here. Chair, I yield. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. And just wanted to note when Alex was doing the modeling for the sea-level rise, I think he noted like 3.3 feet was about 100 to 200 years off. That's what I read in the transcripts for the commission meeting. Maybe you want to elaborate. (Note: At this time, Planner VI Alex Roy came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. ROY: So the SLR-XA, which is a sea-level rise mapper for the State, based off the vulnerability study that they did. They used three different, which is typically, one foot 1.1, 2 feet, and then 3.2; 3.2 is really, you're looking into 2100 to 2150. So what we've used most likely that's realistic is the 1.1 foot, which is something that we could variably see by 2050 or 2060. But we actually look at all the data. And all the way up to three feet, there was very little inundation. From the study real quick,just for your reference, areas lying within a foot of modern sea-level rise, are especially vulnerable. Anything lying above that three to six feet land elevation would put us into the 2100. His property averages about seven, maybe to 12 feet. So he'd be looking at somewhere around 2200 or 2250, Page 7 PC-8 May 18,2021 where there may be some issues. And I think by then we'd probably have bigger problems. But the sea-level rise mapper is available and is used. Just as a side note, I'm going to let the committee know that we are actually pursuing a shoreline study for the entire coastline of this island to look at the hazards, setbacks, impacts, all around. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: And incorporating that into Planning, right? MR. ROY: Yeah, that's to incorporate science-based setbacks and hazard assessments moving forward. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: I appreciate the details. Thank you, Mr. Roy. Ms. Rebecca Villegas, I believe you had your light on, go ahead. MS. VILLEGAS: Yes, my questions would have echoed a number of the questions from my colleagues. I want to thank Cory Harden for her consistent attention to all issues related to this island, and especially to her hometown here in Hilo. She had presented a number of really great question, but most of my colleagues have already asked them. I wanted to thank the Planning Department for bringing forth that science and those numbers and taking all of that into consideration. In 2018 when we went to the POI(Points of Interest) (Promotion Optimization Institute)Planning Conference in Mau`i, it was very much a part of a lot of the presentations there of how we needed to take sea-level rise into consideration and how we're providing, permitting, and change of zoning; and just where people can build and how. And I just want to thank you guys for going that extra step and including that. It's very helpful for myself and I know for my colleagues to be able to rely on that science and technology because we are in a really challenging time for so many reasons. And just from a layman's eyes driving past that property and that building, I immediately look at it, and see, whoa, vulnerability from tsunami, sea- level rise. It's right on a river, so as water becomes more and more prevalent in our potential crisis areas. Thank you for taking that into consideration. Thank you guys for doing you due diligence in those capacities. I guess my only question would be to make sure that crisis hits, you know, some natural disaster happens, that financial liability for that does reside with the property owner and doesn't get passed on to taxpayers. And so, is that something that—is there any way to answer that? MR. YAMANAKA: I mean, as a landowner, I don't think the expectation is that the government is going to bail us out if something like that happens. Whether Page 8 PC-8 May 18,2021 FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) comes in. You know, it depends if people have the flood insurance in place to cover that. You know, being down there and going through all tsunami evacuations and things like that, you know, it's something that's always on the mind. And I think we have our plans in place there to deal with that, when it happens. MS. VILLEGAS: Thank you. You know, FEMA is this national fund to kind of support incredibly big disasters. And I suppose I should clarify that my—you know, one of the comments brought up earlier today was for different projects, the money falling to our County to pay for. And just making sure that I myself am not approving of something that then creates financial liability for our County Government, because we aren't taking into consideration some loophole or something. MR. YAMANAKA: I think for us, is well, we're not planning to build anything as well. It's already existing, so the risk is already there. MS. VILLEGAS: Right. MR. YAMANAKA: And so, you know, what the intent of this was always just, instead of being in the nonconforming to get into conforming. So,that risk is going to be there no matter what happens here. MS. VILLEGAS: But this essentially just opens up the opportunities for what you can utilize, who you can rent to, and what kind of operations can happen there. MR. YAMANAKA: You know, it allows us to bring it to its highest and best use, which will allow us to invest more into the property, to make it look better basically. MS. VILLEGAS: Okay, thank you. Jeff, did you have something you wanted to add? MR. DARROW: Your question regarding liability. I mean, that's always a question, right, with anything the County does. Everybody wonders if the County is going to be held liable for our actions. And that's probably more of a Corporation Counsel question. But I know in the past, every one of our permits used to have a condition that says, "The applicant cannot hold the County liable." And at some point, they took those conditions out. And I would believe that it was just guidance from our Corporation Counsel that, you know, these are requests by applicants. If anything happens on those properties or they receive a permit, it's by their request. Page 9 PC-8 May 18,2021 These bodies that approve these, you know, even though they're the County Council and the Planning Commission, they're, you know,just trying to do what our land use guidance is for the island. It's trying to promote our island to move forward with our land use plans and guides to be able to do those things. But again, like I was saying, in any situation, you talk to attorneys, and they always say that, you know, they'll always try to pull in the big pockets. The County, the State with whatever it is. But as far as liability, I would not see that in this case as well. MS. VILLEGAS: Okay. Thank you for sharing that advice. Is that something that you might be comfortable commenting on, Judge Strance? (Note: At this time, Corporation Counsel Elizabeth Strance came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MS. STRANCE: Thank you, Elizabeth Strance, Corporation Counsel. Good thing I like you, Jeff. It's hard to answer a hypothetical question about, right. Does approval of this bill create liability on the part of the County? It doesn't sound like it. I mean there's nothing that jumps out, you know, some of the concerns about the condition of the property have been described and they're known. Sometimes I think there's a distinction between liability and responsibility and that tends to change over time. I mean I think we all know, you know, if you look at the history of development on this island and areas that at one point were sort of off on their own without expectation of County liability, becoming County responsibility. So I think, you know, liability is fairly specific. And you know, I don't want to say, there's never liability, like if we knew that there was a significant risk of something, and the County went ahead and said what we're going to approve something knowing that there's this danger and then subject the public to that danger. But this particular bill is simply to align its current use with the Zoning Code. And so I don't see any liability that jumps out. I think what you folks are talking about though is, if someday down the road, will there be some responsibility on the part of the County? And that will be dependent upon what development requests are made down the road, and what the conditions on the ground are down the road. And so it would be your future Councils and future Planning Departments that would be addressing that. So, that's a big, I don't know. There's nothing that jumps out me. But this seems to be a pretty straight-forward bill to address a pretty straight-forward issue. MS. VILLEGAS: That's really helpful. To me that's indicative of making the best decision you can based on the information you have at the time, right? And Page 10 PC-8 May 18,2021 that's the best we can do. So thank you for clarifying that for me as much as possible and just outlining it in such great terminology. And thank you again for being here. I yield. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, you had your light on, did you have a question? MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I did. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Okay, go ahead. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thanks for being here today. Question, Nonconforming use, you threw around a few times, but for the nonconforming uses, does that change upon rezoning to Mixed Commercial-Industrial? MR. YAMANAKA: Yeah, that's the intent. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. MR. YAMANAKA: To get it to conforming. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: And then after that, I mean maintenance and all of those things can take a different form? Does that change the way that you can upkeep the property, destroy buildings on the property, rebuild? MR. YAMANAKA: Well, rebuilding is a question where if we went through that process of rebuilding, we would have to go through a much more extensive SMA process, plan approval. That I wouldn't be surprised if it ended up definitely in the Planning Commission. But you know, it allows us to get the best tenants, to get the highest and best use out of the property, and it allows us to borrow money. Right now, all the repairs, it has to be cash because we can't borrow money to repair anything. So if we have a large—like we changed the roof on the property. It had to come from cash. And so, that's the hardship that gets placed on it, but by getting it to conforming, now the banks will be more willing to lend money, which will allow us to repair the properties much more easily. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, so by changing the zoning, the buildings on the property become conforming. MR. YAMANAKA: Yes. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Then from there can kind of proceed with a plan, whatever that plan may be. And in this case, it's subdivision. Page 11 PC-8 May 18,2021 MR. YAMANAKA: Yeah, no plan for development. No plan for adding on anything. Yeah, if you increase the footprint, you're going to have to go up 15-20 feet off the ground, probably at least. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: That's what I've seen at other places. This was discussed in the minutes too, was you know, what does it include. If you're going to change things what does that mean. Yeah, tsunami inundation, that was brought up by Ms. Harden. She does a really good job as far as looking into details and projects and understanding things that even I don't sometimes. So I appreciate what she had brought up regarding tsunamis. She also brought up roads and how you tie in with that small section of roadway that fronts into the property. That is a County street, correct? MR. YAMANAKA: We went to the State. I believe the State is the one that handles the highway. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: That small connector that goes back into the Iron Works building itself. What is that? MR. YAMANAKA: Yeah, when they redid the bridge, I'm not sure if everyone's aware of what it was before. But when they redid the bridge over there, that's what they required as the access to the property. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: And is that a County road? MR. YAMANAKA: State. The County MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: That small little road. MR. YAMANAKA: The one fronting the building is maybe, County. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: That's County, correct? MR. YAMANAKA: Yeah, the driveway going in maybe County. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. But any improvements to be done will be handled by your corporation or your business? MR. YAMANAKA: To the roadway? MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yes. MR. YAMANAKA: No improvements are required that I understand for the roadway. Page 12 PC-8 May 18,2021 MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. MR. YAMANAKA: Nothing's changing that's why. We're just in existing use. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. And then, the plan is to consolidate the seven lots that are existing now? MR. YAMANAKA: Yes. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: And then create four new lots under a different zoning type, correct? MR. YAMANAKA: Yes. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: And then, given that change, I think Ms. Lee Loy touched on this earlier, you know, what happens to the existing buildings? They get wrapped into new lots, how does that work? MR. YAMANAKA: Yeah, part of the consolidation, re-subdivision was because in order to do the rezoning, you needed a 20,000 square-foot minimum. And a good portion of the lots, maybe three or four at least, would have been under that if we kept it at the existing lot number. And so the whole point of consolidating and re-subdividing was to get everything into a 20,000 square foot. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I guess, and maybe a better question, does anything need to be removed to fit within the new lots that are created. MR. YAMANAKA: No, that was a back and forth and it took a while, but we were able to find a configuration that wouldn't require that. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Subdivision, I don't know if this applies, but subdivisions, anywhere else usually there's a percentage of the land that's set aside for public use. Does that apply in this situation? No, because it's Commercial-Industrial? Okay. And is there an intention to create any kind of a trail along the waterfront so that the public has access behind the property, more so than they do now? I know there's a walkway now that exists or a cement pathway for part of that area. MR. YAMANAKA: I mean we would love to collaborate on something like that if it's available, but we have no plans. It seems like a process that would be hard for us to get done on our own. Page 13 PC-8 May 18,2021 MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Is there a requirement of that? I know it's State Land Use. It's Conservation land, correct, that you border on? MR. YAMANAKA: I believe the river isI'm not sure if it's Conservation. It is? Okay. The river is. Yeah, so, I mean it would be a great place to have some type of boardwalk, and we'd definitely be open to that. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: It could even be a benefit to your property as well, if people were able to walk, especially from the hotel area and back along the area of the river. MR. YAMANAKA: With the whole Bay Front Trails I know plan was to have to have they've met with us before. And we see them walking along there and we thought it would be a great combination, to work together on that. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. And maybeI'd like to see that. I know it's not written in your document, but I think that would be a great thing that you could bring forward to the community. MR. YAMANAKA: Well you know, they had mooring back in the day. It was a use that was allowed under the Redevelopment Agency. That was always an interesting thing that we thought could be incorporated, allow access into the river. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: That would be interesting. It would be very rare. MR. YAMANAKA: We've had canoe clubs and a lot of people approach us wanting to use that area to get into the water as well. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. MR. YAMANAKA: Yeah, we're open to a lot of things. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I had a question for Alex, actually. You can come back up. (Note: At this time, Planner VI Alex Roy came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Your numbers are interesting, because I've heard different numbers from different people when I sat in some meetings when I first came into office, regarding sea level change. So you're saying in the next 100 years you're expecting, I guess, 1.1 to 3 feet of sea level rise? Page 14 PC-8 May 18,2021 MR. ROY: I actually brought another, one of the preemptive papers that's been referenced quite a lot as the Slangen 2010 paper. I brought it because I thought it's interesting as we speak to that situation. Sea level change is a result of a changing climate that's often regarded as a global uniform process with the same sea level rise occurring everywhere. Clearly this is not the case. There are so much spatial variability when you're discussing sea level rise, so the models of SLR-XA are one, they were modeled using data from Oahu, Kauai and Maui. Big Island often is left off. That's' one of the reasons that we're trying to do our own study. So there's so much variability. So we look to the State, but I also do my own research. I have 15 years of CZM (Coastal Zone Management) experience. Then I worked for DLNR (Department of Land and Natural Resources), Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands for seven years. So I have a lot of experience with trying to eek out the best knowledge moving forward. And SLR-XA seems to place that, but there's a lot of variability with the model so I often refer to published works, which are very variable. So the numbers that I gave you are ones that are ones that are consistently used, but others may use other numbers. So the State uses one, two, and three; that's pretty common, and then some will even look to six foot. But you could break it down even more. They talk about millimeters per year, meters, things like that. So it kind of all depends. The State uses the one, two,three pretty much; but others use something that to me could be a little more site specific. So some of my numbers may be different than others. But the idea is that it's extremely variable, sea level rise. You know, there's so many things to take into account. So the impacts, we start with SLR-XA. That's really a starting point for me,just to kind of see what does the State think the condition could be. Then you move into looking at geomorphology, so the landform surrounding the coastline, how that impacts development, roads, bridges, things like that. In my opinion, before Hilo Iron Works would be impacted, Bay Front Drive would be gone, the whole thing. So that's what I mean. So there'd be, you know, inundation, there could be flooding, sporadic flooding that comes up the river. I mean that's always a possibility. Tsunamis we've all faced. But being in a river system, yeah, that prevents an extra because water comes rushing up that river. So you know, we take that into account. But I think you have to look at the elevation of the property and the predicted change. And so even if we took six feet of sea level rise change, it still wouldn't impact his property. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: What is the elevation of that property. Page 15 PC-8 May 18,2021 MR. ROY: I looked this morning, and you may have better numbers, but based on what I saw, it averages the lowest point I saw was about six or seven feet but that was on one far edge, and actually went up to about 30 feet. So it kind of slopes up towards the road. I think we can all kind of agree that kind of from the highway it kind of slopes down to the river, which makes sense. But the average was about 12 or 13 feet. So if you take that into account, 12 feet of sea level rise, we're looking hundreds of years from now that would be affected. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Do you account for as well that not only sea level rise, but like storm inundation? MR. ROY: Yeah, of course. Yeah, you know, high tide events, king tide events, you know. We have El Nino, and La Nina, that affect our local sea level rise, so we have to take into account all of that. So that's why I say SLR-XA's a starting point for me, and then I look to see what other specific data might help to better understand that area. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: How recent is the data in that SLR-XA? MR. ROY: It's actually fairly, I would say, you know, the data collected, and the models run maybe five, six, seven years. Because it came out of the sea level rise vulnerability report the State put out,that came out in 2016 I believe, or 2017. So it's a few years old, but you've got to remember models. These are climate models that are, if you look at the SLR-XA map you can see the segments of the model are very large, so it's not real accurate. But to me it's a starting point for any kind of regulatory planning that you do with the shoreline, and then you really need to look at a lot of other different things. And that's why I'm the Senior Planner for the SMA and CZM here at the Planning office, because of my experience, to kind of try to take a wholistic view. Because it's very complicated sometimes. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: It seems like it. MR. ROY: It is. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I only asked you because I watched a presentation with one of our local scientists, I think it was from UH (University of Hawai`i), and he explained that sea level rise is expected, it could be exponential as we see more and more melting, more and more global warming and increased runoff. But the interesting thing that he presented that day was that because the earth is round and because we spin, sea level rise will be higher at the equator and in the equatorial regions versus higher up on the planet because of the natural tendency of water to hit the bulge of the planet, being that we're spinning. Page 16 PC-8 May 18,2021 MR. ROY: Yes. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: That was the most interesting thing. So not only do we see, you know, he showed a higher-level rise but he said given our location, and any of the equatorial areas will se more rise than other places, which he touched on as well. I thought that was really interesting. MR. ROY: I mean the three big ones you have to look at is the amount of ice melt from Greenland and from Antarctica; two is the temperature of the oceans as the temperature rises in the oceans they expand, so sea level rises just due to temperature changes; and then you have this other thing called isostatic rebound which is the land. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: That's the one you're talking about? MR. ROY: Yeah. So you've got land that's actually rebounding because of the past ice age. So that puts MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: The weight, yeah? The weight is lifting? MR. ROY: So all those things, depending on, you know, if we look at the coast of Maine versus the coast of Hawaii versus the coast of Chile, we'd have to take into account different amounts from those kind of three different things. So very variable. And so yeah, but I do agree that in Hawaii, for us the affects of melting ice will be far greater than in some of the more northern and southern regions, for sure. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yeah, thank you. Thank you for that. MR. ROY: I'll talk all day long. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: If we could. My final question. Has the Planning Director ever been a consultant for or worked with you guys before his directorship appointment? MR. YAMANAKA: No. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Not at all, not for any part of your agency, not for any group as far Yamanaka or any of the other applicants? MR. YAMANAKA: No, not that I'm aware of. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Thank you, I yield. Thanks, Chair. Page 17 PC-8 May 18,2021 CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Mr. Richards, you had your light on. Do you have any questions or comments? MR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Chair. No,they were covered. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Okay, thank you. Anyone else? MS. KIMBALL: Chair, if I may? CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Ms. Kimball, go ahead. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Yamanaka, for being here. It's nice to see you in person. We have talked on the phone. I had a couple of questions. The first one is just for clarification. I understand that in your disclosure that there's no intent at this time to either sell the property or do additional development, but in the future should additional development be proposed,that would still fall under the requirement of having to do an SMA permit. Is that correct? Maybe that's a Planning Department question. Mr. Darrow or Mr. Kern? (Note: At this time, Planning Director Zendo Kern came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. KERN: Zendo Kern, Planning Director here. Can you hear me now? MS. KIMBALL: Yes. MR. KERN: Awesome. Yeah, if any expansion of the buildings or new would require an SMA. As it is right now they're exempt, underneath their current footprint, so they can do minor repair, minor alterations. Painting, replacing siding, et cetera. But if there's to be an expansion or say part of it were to be levied and rebuilt, it would require an SMA. If it didn't exceed the $500,000 threshold it would be an SMA minor; if it exceeded that threshold then it would be an SMA major. And as stated earlier, it would have to conform to tsunami code, flood codes, et cetera. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. I think that just became a little unclear through part of the conversation, and I asked that in response to some of the concerns Ms. Harden raised because I think most of those concerns would be addressed at such time additional development might happen. I certainly—it just makes sense to rezone this to conform with the way the property is currently being used, and I can see that even with minor repairs that would be permitted, it would improve both the visual quality of the site, I think that was mentioned by one of the commissioners, that it does look a little ugly, in disrepair; and I also think that there's probably some environmental benefits from, you know, replacing the Page 18 PC-8 May 18,2021 siding on some of those warehouses which could contain lead paint or other things. One of the questions that I actually sent an email out to Director Kern, so I hope he has a response ready for me. But in other situations where we do subdivisions, that is often the opportunity for us to either levy a fair share, the housing credits which again don't make sense in this particular case nor is it allowable—my thought is that our action here to rezone this property will provide the benefit to the landowners. I know there's no intention to sell at this point, but it does inherently increase the value of this property should they want to sell in the future. So my question to you the Planning Director, or Mr. Darrow, would be is there another point in time where the County could get some compensation essentially for doing this rezoning, or if there's some other mechanism, either at the stage where they go through a permit, where we can essentially get a bite of the apple. I'm not asking for anything above and beyond, but I do think it's fair that the County receive a little bit of a benefit for basically increasing the value of these properties due to rezoning. MR. KERN: I can start on that, and Jeff can follow up on it. As far I'm aware of there's no set mechanism for another say bite of it like we would with fair share, right? You will see in certain rezonings where it's CV (Village Commercial) or CN (Neighborhood Commercial) or a Commercial zoning that allows for housing units and the fair share would say if there were housing units built then they would pay their fair share. But only if they were built. So in this case, there really isn't that mechanism to my knowledge. Obviously, the uplift that we would get would be increased property tax base, you know, increase to the area, more from a general State GE(General Excise) tax. On that side, but not a mechanism like fair share. Jeff, do you want to add to that? MR. DARROW: Not much to add. I mean, I think Zendo answered it correctly. We do have a condition that we put in a majority of the rezonings that says, "Should the council adopt a unified impact fees ordinance setting forth criteria for imposition of exactions or the assessments of impact fees, conditions included herein shall be credited toward the requirements of the unified impact fees ordinance." At this point, there has been no impact fees ordinance created, but in the future that could be a possibility. And that is one of the conditions within this ordinance. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Director and Deputy Director. Using the example of the Pepe`ekeo Point Subdivision, and I know this took place a long time ago so maybe the rules have changed. There was at that time a subdivision, an agreement that took at the point of sale. The property, a small portion of the sale would go to the County to a special fund to help with the park in that community. Is there an opportunity to do something like that? I realize any additional fees to the landowner would be burdensome, but I'm wondering if there could be a new Page 19 PC-8 May 18,2021 thing written in at the point of sale where some portion of it would be returned to the County at that stage. MR. KERN: Jeff, do you haveI don't have the history on that particular project. Do you by chance know what the axis around that was? MR. DARROW: Sure. Yeah, that was there were two subdivisions. One on the north side of the power plant and one on the south side. And part of the conditions within those ordinances were that for each sale of the lot they would the developer would put $15,000 towards a community benefit. Again, that was a unique situation. There was quite a bit of community input, not so much opposition, but participation in that process and through an agreement with the developer, with the department, with the Council, they were able to come to that agreement to place that community benefit assessment within that ordinance. That was I would say very different from this particular type of situation. I mean, I understand your request, but in regards to using that as an example related to this, it's quite difference. In this particular case, it would just be a situation where the Council would come up with a condition and feel like this particular rezone should, you know, put some money towards some project in this particular area that would benefit it. One of the things alluded to earlier was the potential in the future for a community benefit of accessing along the river. In this area normally we don't address in a change of zone application, it will come up in SMA permits. So in the future, there's a high likelihood that it will come before the Planning Department and/or the Planning Commission for an SMA permit where we could assess that particular benefit. MS. KIMBALL: Okay, thank you both for that clarification. I do support the rezoning of this property. It makes sense. And I'll also say that the Iron Works building is one of my favorites in Hilo, from the outside. From the inside it needs a little TLC, but it is one of my favorite buildings in the area. With that, Chair, I yield. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Anyone else in Kona? Here in Hilo? Okay, great. Mr. Yamanaka, thank you for joining us today. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Chair? CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Oh sorry. Go ahead, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. How long was this Open zoning for? MR. YAMANAKA: I don't know the exact date. I believe around the 1965 period is when they blanket-zoned the whole area. Page 20 PC-8 May 18,2021 MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Wow. `67? Okay. Are you going to keep any historic features on the building itself? Is there any plans to keep some of that? I mean it's historic. MR. YAMANAKA: We have no changes planned. No changes. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Then sewer. How are you connected to the sewer right now? MR. YAMANAKA: To the sewer. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: You are connected to the sewer? MR. YAMANAKA: Yep. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: No special equipment, no nothing? MR. YAMANAKA: No. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Then height limit. For MCX, there's a height limit of 45 feet. Are all the buildings under 45 feet? MR. YAMANAKA: That I'm not—I don't have that information on me. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. How does that play into this? Because if they switch from Open to Mixed Commercial, the buildings that are existing, if they're over 45 feet, is that an issue? MR. DARROW: It would be a nonconforming—again, when there was discussion about becoming nonconforming, that's mainly land use at this point. The structures don't all of a sudden become conforming. There might be a lot of features of the existing structures that are still nonconforming. Obviously they don't meet current code today, but in the future moving forward, they couldn't build. If it is over 45 feet, they couldn't do that going forward and they would have to comply all the current code today. But the nonconforming use of the existing structure can continue on as long as it exists. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, so are you saying no—sum that up. How would you sum that up? So the buildings that are there can stay. It's okay if they're more than 45 feet, they'd just be nonconforming buildings. MR. DARROW: Correct. Page 21 PC-8 May 18,2021 MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: And what does that mean for them as far as developers. MR. DARROW: I don't see that as an issue in regards to his dilemma with funding or loans. I think they want to just see that they are in a permitted zoning area and that they're consistent with current land use zoning. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Then final question, given the open zoning is more to protect the area where it sits—and I think that's appropriate you're wanting to switch to Commercial. Commercial is a lot more open as far as the uses. I mean if you have someone there doing manufacturing, or you know, commercial use that's not really environmentally friendly, if that were to happen, how do you protect the resources in the river and everything that's being done there. Do you have a plan in place for that? MR. YAMANAKA: You know, it's something we would monitor if it was a concern of ours. We're on the property managing it, so you know, we want to be following all the laws and guidelines. And so if something like that was occurring, we would definitely get into action on that. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Then procedural question. If the Council was to say we want to make sure there is a walkway along the river, is that something that can be added into this ordinance as part of the zoning change? MR. DARROW: The Council has the ability to place conditions on the change of zone. Normally, as I mentioned, those types of conditions come up in a different process. But again, there isn't anything saying you cannot do that. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Interesting. Yeah, that's why I figured I'd ask you, because you would know. Normally it's in the subdivision process with the later process that comes up, but because we're in the zoning change MR. DARROW: Normally this would come up in the SMA review. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: But that doesn't come in front of the Council, correct? MR. DARROW: Correct. But it is one of our main priorities in reviewing SMA permits is public accessing and protection of public recreational resources when they're available, to be able to protect those. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, so you're not saying no. And you're saying that it is an option. It's up to the Council if we want to make a condition upon approval of the zoning change. Although normally it would be the SMA or the special use permit. Page 22 PC-8 May 18,2021 MR. DARROW: This is unique because this isn't along the beach. You know what I mean, it's a river mouth. So it's not like MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Oh, it's Conservation then. MR. DARROW: Yeah, well the water is Conservation. So the unique thing is that it's, you know, even in an SMA we'd be going, like, we're asking for public access along a—what is it, a rock wall? Or you have a strip there? MR. YAMANAKA: It would be like a bank. MR. DARROW: A bank. So along the bank of the river. Again, that's something that there are portions that go way inland, but still I think they're under the SMA, but if something's not coming before us with the SMA and you're right here and the applicant is amenable to this particular allowance, it doesn't appear that there's anything that would stop you. As mentioned, one of the Council Members is asking for a community benefit or a public benefit. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: No, you did good. You've answered my question. Thank you. Chair, I yield. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Anyone else? Okay, seeing no other comments, Mr. Yamanaka thank you for your presence and your patience, and for your continued investment in the Iron Works property. For me, this has always been a very simple straight forward request. We're clarifying the use, period. We're just putting a label on it, and it aligns with a number of existing plans, our General Plan, the Redevelopment Plan, the Urban Renewal Plan. So this is not some strange and out of the box request, it is just simply putting a label on an existing use and bringing it into compliance. And I think that should you have the desire to potentially attract new tenants to incubate more opportunities, I think it's going to make it a lot easier for yourself, those tenants, to be able to access capital. And we certainly want to be able to support you in that, because everything so far has just been cash investment. So thank you. Great discussion. We have a motion on the floor to forward Bill 34 to the Council with a positive recommendation. All in favor please say, "aye." Page 23 PC-8 May 18,2021 Vote on Bill 34: The motion to recommend passage of Bill 34 on first (Approved) reading was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kierkiewicz—9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Mr. Clerk, moving on to the next item on our agenda, again wanted to take up Bill 36, please. Bill 36: AMENDS ORDINANCE NO. 723 WHICH RECLASSIFIED LANDS FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-10) TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERICAL (CN-10) AT WAIAKEA, SOUTH HILO, HAWAII, COVERED BY TAX MAP KEY: 2-2-041:PORTION OF 75 (Applicant: Kelly Kagimoto) (Area: 9,425 square feet) The Windward Planning Commission forwards its favorable recommendation to approve this amendment, which would repeal all conditions of approval while retaining the Neighborhood Commercial district classification to allow for the development of a retail building. The property is located at 2169 Kino`ole Street, Waiakea Homestead Lots. Reference: Comm. 235 Intr. by: Ms. Kierkiewicz (B/R) and Comm. 235.1: From Planning Director Zendo Kern, dated April 28, 2021, transmitting the draft transcript from the Windward Planning Commission's April 1, 2021, meeting. Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to recommend passage of Bill 36 on first reading. Seconded by Mr. Richard. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Will the applicant and the representative please come forward? (Note: At this time, Consultant for the applicant Daryn Arai and applicant Kelly Kagimoto came forward to address the members of the Committee.) CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you so much for your patience. Ms. Kagimoto, Mr. Arai, if you could introduce yourselves for the record, provide an overview of the request, and do let us know if the conditions of approval articulated in the ordinance is something that you're agreeable to. Thank you. Page 24 PC-8 May 18,2021 MR. ARAI: Good morning, Chair Kierkiewicz, Vice Chair Villegas and members of the Committee. My name is Daryn Arai. I'm here today assisting Mrs. Kelly Kagimoto,the applicant on this particular matter, who's sitting to my left. We're appreciative of the favorable recommendations by the Windward Planning Commission as well as the Planning Director, and we do agree with the recommendation. The matter before you is quite simple. I kind of view, if you're familiar with this particular area of Waiakea, it'sI kind of think of it like four corners. It's a concentration of commercial uses withing that portion of the Waiakea district. And you have very, very long-time established activities there. You have Waiakeawaena Elementary School on the south side of the subject property; you have two gas stations and various restaurants; well-known restaurants like Kandi's located on the mauka side; and of course adjacent to the subject property is Kagimoto Store that has been there for over 15 years and prior to that it was the former Ando Store. So the property itself and the zoning that encumbers at least the front half of the property was there and established with the adoption of the City of Hilo's zone district map back in 1967 or 54 years ago. The back portion of the property,just a little over 9,000 square feet of this 20,000 square foot parcel, was subsequently 40 years ago, in 1981. So imagine the surprise when Mrs. Kagimoto purchased the property in 2019 to discover that the one 20,000 square foot property is encumbered by two different mechanisms. One being a legacy zoning that was established 54 years ago and another zoning ordinance which we are hearing today, established in 1981, 40 years ago. So the request is really simple. It's just really to bring the two zoning and how they operate, bring them together to provide for a uniform platform for which the applicant is able to move forward and pursue the development that she hopes to establish on the property, which is a retail store. And hopefully she can duplicate the success that she currently has at Kagimoto's. So that's really as simple as I can put it. So we do appreciate your support of this request. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, and just on the conditions of approval. MR. ARAI: There are actually no conditions of approval. So we do support the recommendation too. And to clarify, because of the legacy zoning that applies to the front half of the property on Kinoole, there are no zoning conditions. So we simply want to align the back portion with the front portion so there's a uniform platform moving forward. Page 25 PC-8 May 18,2021 CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Great. Thank you for clarifying that. Yeah, this is a unique situation. Thank you, Mr. Arai. MR. ARAI: You're welcome. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: I do want to open it up to folks for questions or comments. Ms. Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you. You know, as an alum of Waiakeawaena who used to run across the street to Ando Store to go grab candy, this is just exactly what the neighborhood has had for as long as I've been alive, for as long as Kelly I know, and the legacy of purchasing that store from Andos. And we miss Errol terribly, and raising your kids there, providing them jobs, I mean, that store is busy from 5:00 in the morning all the way to 10:00 o'clock at night. So thank you for continuing that neighborhood legacy that I know myself and many others went to Waiakeawaena is just accustomed to. And Mr. Arai, it's just wonderful to see you again. And this actually a wonderful project for you to bring forward. So thank you both for being here. Chair, I'm going to be supporting this rezone. Thank you. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Great. Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Anyone else? In Kona? On Zoom? No? Okay, great. Again, very simple. Oh, Mr. Kaneali`i- Kleinfelder. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Is this for Kagimoto Store? The famous Kagimoto Store? Can you give us a little history on your store for those of us who may not know that are not from Hilo? MS. KAGIMOTO: History. We've been running the store for about 15-16 years now, my family and I. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I stop there almost every morning to get musubis in the morning for my kids. When the school was open, it was like the Friday routine because if you've got time to make breakfast in the morning, great. If not MS. KAGIMOTO: You eat a musubi on the way to school. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Exactly. I really like your ratio of rice to Spam. MS. KAGIMOTO: Thank you. Page 26 PC-8 May 18,2021 MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Sometimes it's too much rice and only a little bit of Spam, but yours is almost—actually almost perfect. It's like half inch rice on the top, Spam in the middle, and half inch on the bottom. Which is practically perfect. And your sauce is right on, and I like the spicy ones in case you were wondering. MS. KAGIMOTO: Thank you. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: So yeah, I'll be supporting this today. Mahalo for your time. MS. KAGIMOTO: Thank you. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Anyone else? Mr. Richards. MR. RICHARDS: I have to respond to that. Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, I'm hoping I don't make that a condition that they maintain the Spam ratio. Chair, I yield. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Okay, great. Thank you. Yeah, certainly a fixture in the community. I grew up, up the street to what was then Ando Store, and see you a few times of week getting musubi and things for my kids. So thank you. I just love that it's bustling and busy, and it's great to see youth and it's working. It's a real `ohana effort. So really wonderful that you are looking to expand in the area. It's going to be a great resource for the community. Again, real simple, very straight forward,just eliminating the conflicts for this miss-match zoning so that you can proceed. So thank you, Mr. Arai, for being here. Thank you, Kelly. Great to see you. We have a motion on the floor to forward Bill 36 to the Council with a positive recommendation. All in favor, please say "aye." Vote on Bill 36: The motion to recommend passage of Bill 36 on first (Approved) reading was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kierkiewicz—9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you both. Have a great day. MR. KERN: Madam Chair? Zendo here. Page 27 PC-8 May 18,2021 CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Yes? MR. KERN: If I may, I'm going to be signing off right now. The next one I'm conflicted out on it and Jeff will be taking over. So I hope you all have a great rest of your day. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Mahalo, Director. Thank you. Members, we have one final item on the agenda and that is Bill 35. Mr. Clerk, when you're ready. Bill 35: AMENDS ORDINANCE NO. 09-138 WHICH RECLASSIFIED LANDS FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL— 10,000 SQUARE FEET (RS-10) TO INDUSTRIAL-COMMERICAL MIXED —20,000 SQUARE FEET (MCX-20) AT WAIAKEA HOUSELOTS, WAIAKEA, SOUTH HILO, HAWAII, COVERED BY TAX MAP KEY: 2-2-035:034 (Applicant: JP Automotive, LLC) (Area: 22,300 square feet) The Windward Planning Commission forwards its favorable recommendation to approve this amendment, which would allow a five-year time extension to Condition D (Time to Complete Construction). The property is located at 513 Kalanikoa Street, Waiakea Houselots. Reference: Comm. 234 Intr. by: Ms. Kierkiewicz (B/R) and Comm. 234.1: From Deputy Planning Director Jeffrey W. Darrow, dated April 28, 2021, transmitting the draft transcript from the Windward Planning Commission's April 1, 2021, meeting. Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to recommend passage of Bill 35 on first reading. Seconded by Mr. Richards. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: I believe that we have the representative for the applicant, Mr. John Pipan,joining us via Zoom, and because this was a former client of Director Kern's we have Deputy Director Jeff Darrow filling in for Planning Department. Mr. Pipan, if you could introduce yourself for the record and provide an overview of the request for today and let us know if your client is in agreement with the conditions of approval that are stated in the draft ordinance. (Note: At this time, Deputy Planning Director Jeff Darrow and representative for the applicant John Pipan came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. PIPAN: Yes, aloha. Thank you, Chair Kierkiewicz, members of the Planning Committee. Thank you to the Planning Department, Deputy Director Page 28 PC-8 May 18,2021 Darrow, Planning Department staff. We appreciate their hard work and the favorable recommendation being forwarded by the Planning Commission on this time extension request. JP Automotive, a long standing local owned and operated business, their current operations are just across the street from the proposed new site. He bought this site in 2015, has been working toward securing all his permits and approvals, and basically just ran out of time. There were several difficulties, some of them of a personal nature, illnesses and deaths in the family. He got his building permits approved, and the zoning ordinance ran out. The time to complete construction. So we're asking for another five years to complete construction. This will help him to secure financing for the construction. We have reviewed the terms and conditions of the requested amendments to the ordinance, and we're in agreement with all of those. I welcome your questions. Thank you very much. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Any questions or comments? MR. INABA: Yes, I have some questions. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Mr. Inaba, go ahead. MR. INABA: Deputy Darrow, for the conditions that are being removed in this bill, are those conditions that have been met, or how is this working? MR. DARROW: Aloha, Council Member Inaba. Yes, we've added an addition to Condition B regarding the fire flow requirements. On Condition D, we've removed the part of the condition that speaks about plan approval because the applicant has already secured plan approval. Then Condition J, they've already received their solid waste management plan. And Condition K, the new J, is just the new wording for that particular condition. MR. INABA: Okay, thank you. That wording, that's going to be the consistent wording we use from now on? MR. DARROW: Yes. Did we get that correct this time? MR. INABA: Unfortunately, no. MR. DARROW: No? Okay. MR. INABA: So I'll—are you folks going to be able to correct that word? MR. DARROW: Sure. Page 29 PC-8 May 18,2021 MR. INABA: And I do want to point out being that we had to see it again, it starts off from the bottom of page three everyone, section Jsorry, top of page four. "In the unlikely event that surface or subsurface historic resources . . . " and it goes on and on. I'm just wondering if that wording is putting kind of an idea that there might not be these objects or resources. I don't know if this is a question for Corporation Counsel, but we're putting it into these bills, like, "In the unlikely event," is that standard? Because that's not what was there before and I don't know if that's a smart thing to do, we're putting that idea that it's unlikely. To me, it's very likely. We don't know what's subsurface everywhere across this island. Yeah, and Jeff if you want to answer. MR. DARROW: Yeah, I understand completely what you're saying. A friendly amendment can be done. What happened was at the hearing that the changes were made to this particular condition, this one was already in process coming forward. The new ones that are coming before Committee and Council, we've been revising those before they come to the Committee and Council. So the request would be to remove the word"unlikely," and then also before "cease,"we would put, "the applicant shall," cease work. Correct? MR. INABA: Correct. Thank you. And that's all I have for this bill. I just want to clarify though, if we see applications coming before us with letters signed by you, should we assume that the Director has a conflict with that application? MR. DARROW: Yes. MR. INABA: Okay. And it's my understanding that a list of the Director's former clients has been created. Can we please get that list sent to Council Members? MR. DARROW: Sure. MR. INABA: Because one of the constituents, my constituents, asked and I was told to let them know they can request it directly from the department. But I think it might be helpful for Council Members to have the list of the Director's former clients for quick reference moving forward. MR. DARROW: If I may elaborate on that,there were two lists that were made. One was a list of applicants that Director Kern has worked with as well as projects. So that going forward if it's either that particular project or that particular applicant or client that the Deputy Director would be working on those. MR. INABA: Okay, so to clarify, we're going to get the list that includes the projects and the applicants? Page 30 PC-8 May 18,2021 MR. DARROW: I just need to confirm that's public record and available. I would think it is, but just need to confirm that. Then we will forward those lists. MR. INABA: To all of us, please. Thank you. Chair, I yield. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, go ahead. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ma'am. I wanted to take a minute to commenda little bit off subject, but within the realms. To commend Mr. Inaba for seeing that—in my first term I struggled with the language as well, and it was always stated as bring "in the unlikely event," although every single place that we're proposing construction is going to need to have a SHPD (State Historic Preservation Division) or archaeological inspection. And it should be "in the event," or"in the likely event,"because normally we do find something below the surface, or not even below the surface but on the surface. So I struggle with that as well, and it's just been two years and I completely forgot about that initial struggle. But I too would like to see a change in our wording that more fairly represents the situation and not just assumes that there won't be anything found. Because I think that speaks highly to understanding the history of our island, and what lays below the surface. That's a great push, Mr. Inaba, and I appreciate you bringing that back up. If you don't see it, I would suggest just doing an amendment to each one that comes through until the department gets the exact wording that you're looking for. That helps us as a Council make sure the wording is correct for our ordinances. Regarding the ordinance itself, I'm looking through the documents in the ordinance, and I see multiple letters all addressed to the Planning Director;to Zendo Kern, to Zendo Kern. If he has a conflict of interest, which it has been stated that he does, I mean, how does the process occur where he's being addressed as Planning Director, but how is it a conflict director. How is that handled within the department? MR. DARROW: We've asked the previous applicants to please that have worked with Director Kern in the past to please address it to the Deputy Director, but there are times that it still comes in to the Director. But it's immediately, when it's intaken, the intake Clerks review who it's coming from, and if it's on those lists, it bypasses the Director. So he never will see those correspondence. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. I would hope so, that everyone is being and following that list. I too would like to see that list so we can better understand who we're dealing with as far as consultants and companies and whoever's had dealings with the Planning Director. It helps us move along as a Council. Yeah, so if you could, please forward that list to everyone. And both Page 31 PC-8 May 18,2021 lists it sounds like. Then I think we need to if that's confidential or not. Okay, thank you. I yield Thank you, Chair. CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Any questions or comment for the applicant Okay, seeing none, Mr. Pipan, please extend my gratitude to your client. I know that significant progress has been made over the course of a number of years despite some personal issues that the family has had to endure. So fully supportive of this time extension request and do believe that it is a reasonable ask considering how much progress has been made on the parcels. So there is a motion on the floor to forward Bill 35 to the Council with a positive recommendation. All in favor, please say "aye. Vote on Bill 35 The motion to recommend passage of Bill 35 on first (Approved) reading was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kierkiewicz—9. Noes: None Absent: None. Excused. None. CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Mr. Pipan. Mr. Darrow. Great to see you. Can I have a motion to adjourn? We are at the end of our agenda. Can I have a motion to adjourn? ADJOURN- There being no further business, at 12:38 p.m., Ms. Lee Loy moved to adjourn MENT: the meeting. Seconded by Mr. Richards and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kierkiewicz— 9. Noes• None Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. KIERKIEWICZ• Planning Committee is adjourned at 12:38 p.m. Thank you. Approved:pi VIA 10(242,4 Ms. Ashley L Kierkiewicz, Chair (Date) Planning Committee AK/dt Page 32