Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN PC 2021/08/18 2020-2022 Committee on Planning 13th Session West Hawaii Civic Center 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Highway, Building A Kailua-Kona, Hawai i August 18, 2021 CALL TO The regular meeting of the Committee on Planning was called to order at ORDER: 9:01 a.m., in the Council Chambers, Kona, 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 Mr. Holeka Goro Inaba, Member Mr. Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Member (via videoconference from Hilo) Ms. Heather L. Kimball, Member Ms. Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Member Mr. Herbert M. "Tim" Richards, III, Member (came in later) 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 individuals registered to speak and came forward when called by the Chair: Paul Norman: Res. 179-21 (Comm. 348), in support. (representing Community Alliance Partners and the Neighborhood Place of Puna) Shirley David: Res. 179-21 (Comm. 348), in support. (representing Community Alliance Partners in Kona Patrick Hurney: Res. 179-21 (Comm. 348), in support. (representing Habitat for Humanity-Hawaii Island) Darryl Oliveira: Res. 179-21 (Comm. 348), in support. (representing Hawaii Island Housing Coalition) PC-13 August 18,2021 Kaikea Blakemore: Res. 179-21 (Comm. 348), in support. (representing the Neighborhood Place of Puna) CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Seeing that there are no other testifiers, I am closing public testimony at this time and moving on to Order of the Day. 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. Res. 179-21: AUTHORIZES THE EXEMPTION OF CERTAIN CODE REQUIREMENTS, PURSUANT TO SECTION 201H-38 OF THE HAWAII REVISED STATUTES, FOR THE HONUA`ULA AFFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT IN KAILUA- KONA, HAWAII, COVERED BY TAX MAP KEYS: 7-4-004:014 AND 092 Honua`ula LLC requests a change of zoning from Agricultural 1-acre to Multiple Family Residential 2,000-square feet and seeks exemption from Hawaii County Code Sections 5-7-1 and 5-7-3 to waive County permit fees to develop 111 affordable rental units for persons whose income is under sixty percent of the Area Median Income. Reference: Comm. 348 Intr. by: Ms. Kierkiewicz (B/R) CHR KIERKIEWICZ: May I have a motion to forward Resolution 179-21 to the Council with a positive recommendation. Motion to Approve: Mr. Inaba moved to recommend adoption of Res. 179-21. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Okay, we have the applicant here joining us in Kona. If you could please come forward and introduce yourself for the record. But before you do that, I believe our Housing Administrator Susan Kunz is on Zoom. Hi Susan, good to see you. I have a favor to ask of you, 201H? This is the first one that this Council is going to be reviewing this term. There's a couple of new folks that may be familiar with the concepts. But if you could just provide us a quick overview of this tool and its intention to help with affordable housing across the State, that would be really helpful to kind of tee up the conversation. Page 2 PC-13 August 18,2021 (Note: At this time, Office of Housing and Community Development Administrator Susan Kunz came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MS. KUNZ: Sure. Thank you. Good morning, Chair, and good morning Council Members. My name is Susan Kunz, I'm the Housing Administrator for the Office of Housing and Community Development. This tool, like Chair mentioned, is called the 2011-1-38. It is a Hawaii Revised Statute and it was created as a tool to help affordable housing projects navigate this process, to keep the housing project affordable. So it allows for certain exemptions from State and County Codes. Like I said, to keep the project affordable and to streamline the process. So I'm very excited today to see this project coming forward to this Planning Committee. It is 100 percent affordable housing project which will house families at 60 percent of the Average Median Income. I know I'm preaching to the choir and I've heard it throughout the morning, which I was really happy to hear. But you know,we are in such dire need of affordable housing. The numbers are correct. We need to produce about 13,000 units in the next five years to meet this need. And we are so far from it. So to see a project like this coming forward is really, really exciting. So the two waivers that they are seeking today is a zoning change. The second one is to waive some permitting fees to help keep the project affordable. I believe that we have Directors Kern and Rodenhurst with us today. I hope they're there to help us talk through the approval of these exemptions. And I guess at this time, I will want to introduce Carlo Mireles, who's the Chief Operating Officer (COO) for Mirein Consulting, Mirein Development who is the developer for this project. I'm going to allow him to introduce his team and talk to you a little bit more about the project. Carlo. (Note: At this time, Mirein Development Chief Operating Officer Carlo Mireles and Chief Executive Officer Bruce Beard came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. MIRELES: Thank you, Susan. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Council Members. I'm deeply appreciative. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Carlo, if you could do me a favor? Get as close the mic as possible. That's it,thank you. MR. MRIELES: Thank you, sorry. Good morning, Chair. Good morning, Council Members. I'm deeply appreciative to be here. I am Carlo Mireles, the COO of Honua`ula. My partner, Bruce Beard on Zoom is joining us from the Seattle area. And he's our CEO. Along with Ron Kim, who represents our law firm. Page 3 PC-13 August 18,2021 We've really made a great effort to be mission-centric to affordable housing for all the different levels of housing that we're seeing burdened in our community. And we really take a strong position on making our project 100 percent affordable. And in the 201H, as you know,there are basic minimums, 50 percent in one unit. And we've chosen to go 100 percent. The highest AMI (Area Median Income) that the 201H allows is up to 140 percent of an AMI. And we are at a 60 percent AMI or less. We were awarded 44 project based vouchers, which will allow individuals that are in a 30-50 percent AMI level be able to be part of our project. And in terms of the length minimum requirement from the State as well as the County is 20 years. And we are at 45 years. And so we feel very, very strong with the direction that we're going with being able to provide the housing for the homeless families that are living in their cars; for those that are shelter burdened and spending more than 30 percent of their income on housing that ultimately takes away from the food and essentials. Of gas to get to work and medical supplies and everything else just to be able to survive here in our beautiful island. And so for us to be in a position to be able to continue that effort to be good community partners to our neighbors, community as a whole; to our schools that are desperate to find and recruit teachers that are needing affordable housing. To the hospitals that are in a staffing crisis and also are needing affordable housing. We feel really, really good with the direction that we're going and we humbly ask for your support of our resolution. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Carlo, for that. Anybody from the team joining us via Zoom. Any comments that you'd like to make to this body? (Note: At this time, Attorney for Honua`ula Ron Kim came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. KIM: Good morning, Chairperson and Members of the Planning Committee. This is Ron Kim. I'm the attorney for Honua`ula. We just wanted to comment, you know, that we are really happy to see an affordable housing project moving forward within the County. And we really just do thank you for your time and energy in considering, you know, our request for these exemptions. And of course, we would thank all the departments that have helped us get to this point. You know, the Housing Department, Department of Public Works, and Planning Department. We all worked together I feel like, to present this project to this Council. So thank you. Page 4 PC-13 August 18,2021 CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you for that. And I just want the record to reflect that Council Member Tim Richards has joined this committee. Thank you. Okay at this point, I'd like to call forward Public Works and Planning Department Directors. If you could come forward and in partnership with the applicant Carlo, you can stay there walk us through the exemptions that are being requested as part of this resolution today. (Note: At this time, Public Works Director Ikaika Rodenhurst and Planning Director Zendo Kern came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. RODENHURST: Hello, Ikaika Rodenhurst, Director of Public Works. It's pretty simple for DPW where it's basically talking about our permit fees under our Code 5-7-3. And we're allowing this waiver to go by due to the 201H process. We're supportive of this project. We understand there's a housing crisis and we want to do what we can to support this coming out of OHCD and in conjunction with Planning. So as far as the building waiver, that's the brief summary of where we stand on this for DPW. I'll be happy to take any questions. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: That's very straight forward, Director. Thank you. I just want to call my colleagues' attention to the exhibit attached to the resolution. There's a request for two exemptions. Director Rodenhurst went over the second request. And Director, correct me if I'm wrong, but this is the usual type of request that comes through with these applications, waiving the current fees. MR. RODENHURST: Correct. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Okay. Thank you. Director Kern. MR. KERN: Good morning, Madam Chair and members of the Planning Committee. I'm Zendo Kern, Planning Director, here in Hilo. We've reviewed the request. We feel that this is conducive to the 201H process. This is what the 201H process if for. It's consistent with our land use policies and principles. The basic request is expedite the zoning from an Agriculture zoning to a Multi-Family zoning. When we look at the Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide Map (LUPAG), there is a request in there as well from Low-Density Urban to Medium-Density Urban, but the fact that the urban expansion area abuts right up to it, there is room for interpretation around that. So we'd interpret that the Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide Map would also be consistent with the project. So while it's in there as an exemption request, it doesn't necessarily need to, but there's no need to take it out as well. Page 5 PC-13 August 18,2021 So again, we concur with the project. We think its sound. We think it's in the right place. It meets all the land use principles that we'd want to look at. And feel very strongly about supporting the project. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Director. You mentioned interpretation. Just want to make sure that Corporation Counsel has weighed in and is supportive of the departments' interpretation. Is anyone from Corporation Counsel on Zoom and able to weigh in? MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Chair, you have someone in Hilo from Corporation Counsel, I believe. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Okay, great. (Note: At this time, Deputy Corporation Counsel Jean Campbell came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MS. CAMPBELL: Good morning, Chair. This is Jean Campbell, Deputy Corporation Counsel representing the Planning Department. And yes, we do agree with Director Kern's interpretation here. This is consistent. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Perfect. That's all I needed to hear. Thank you. Okay, at this time, I'm going to be opening it up to questions and comments from my colleagues. Mr. Inaba, you have the floor. MR. INABA: Thank you. Thank you, Carlo, for being here. I want to start off by saying a big mahalo to you and your team for committing to a project like this that provides 100 percent affordable units here in our community. I just have some questions regarding the traffic mitigation. Just as a background for my colleagues, they did a traffic study last year during COVID non-school time, but they went the extra step to redo the traffic study last week so we can get accurate counts not based on projections or assumptions. So this development has gone above and beyond, and I'm just trying to figure out based on the possible mitigation steps that have been recommended, how do we go about making sure that they're included as part of this application? And I think there's mitigation steps coming from the developer's consultant, and then there's some things that DPW on our end that we can do. So how does this come together? Because it is a concern and we have such standard traffic patterns there already as determined by the traffic study. Page 6 PC-13 August 18,2021 CHR KIERKIEWICZ: So Mr. Inaba, I think it would be helpful if you identified the issue, and then I believe the applicant can prescribe the appropriate solution, the mitigation measure. And then we would work to, I believe, route an amendment to be included in this resolution. MR. INABA: Okay, is that correct? Is that where we put something like this in the resolution or is it in the application? Maybe Corporation Counsel or somebody can weigh in on this, because I called yesterday but I'm not sure. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: I'm just going off of experience. We had two applications last Council term. A very similar situation did occur and our office worked to float amendments to the resolution. MR. INABA: Okay, based on the traffic that was submittedI got it yesterday, but do we have on DPW's end, some understanding of which mitigation steps we're looking to proceed with? MR. RODENHURST: Yes, we are in discussions with them right now. As you stated,this traffic study concluded as of last week Friday. So obviously, we haven't finalized what mitigation methods are going to be going forward, but we do have the recommendations and we're working with them to discuss what would be required and how that's going to look for them and for DPW. As you stated,there are some areas where it's been identified that there is some traffic issues regardless of this project, and we're looking to see what we can do to address that. If it will require something as much as a traffic light. And we're looking to a possible traffic warrant study for that. And we are discussing that. MR. INABA: Okay. So in light of granting this applicant's request, which I really am supportive of, I just need to know based onI mean this is again, my district and the constituents have this has been the ongoing concern from the very beginning of this project being potentially in this neighborhood. So when will DPW weigh in and give this body some inclination as to which steps we'll be proceeding with? And Director, knowing that we just got the study, but it's before us now, so I need to ask these questions on behalf of the neighborhood. MR. RODENHURST: Well we are in, you know, like you said the early stages of reviewing the study. But we already have identified some of the methods that are quite agreeable. Things such as restricting left turns; the possibility, like I said, a traffic warrant study for that intersection; sidewalk go-abouts with crosswalk flashing beacons. That's going to help especially on the Manawalea Street site area. In fact, Traffic will be going to check on the site distance over there. I think that was the previous concern that you Page 7 PC-13 August 18,2021 brought forward to Traffic. And so they are willing to go forward and take a look at what's over there. We're working with them to see what kind of a timeline we can see. It shouldn't take too long, but I'll default to OHCD (Office of Housing and Community Development) and to the developer on this one. And how we're going to be looking forward on when we can agree to something. MR. INABA: Okay, so we'll be able to include it in this resolution prior to Council approval? MR. RODENHURST: I think that's possible, yes. MR. INABA: Okay, good. I'll follow-up with you. I just need reassurance there and those neighbors need reassurance. And unfortunately the study couldn't be done all this time with school being out. So school just started,they got to it right away. And I think some of these mitigation steps, obviously, you folks as developers have committed to and are supportive of implementing, and then I think some of the things on the DPW end with regards to the line of sight at Manawalea, I'm not sure that's the developers' kuleana. That's a preexisting problem, but it's a safety concern when you hit that intersection and you're not able to see whether you can take that right turn at the top. And just as a point of reference, this is right up the road here. So when you get to the top, where Kealakehe Elementary is, it's that intersection that I'm concerned about and the traffic study pointed out substandard wait times, if you will, at the Ulua`o`a and Palani Road intersection. So preexisting problems, but problems that could be worse, and that I would like to see, you know, helped out here with the mitigation steps that the study has provided to us. MR. RODENHURST: I'd like to point out that so far that Honua`ula has been very agreeable to our discussions and bringing in their fair share of traffic improvements in the area. MR. INABA: Great. Alright, I'll follow-up with you folks. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. I have Corporation Counsel taking a look at the affordable housing agreement and seeing what language is in there to ensure that whatever is agreed upon with the department is honored. But also, there's some generic language we can insert about the applicant, you know, moving forward implementing any type of traffic mitigation prescriptions by Public Works. So, in the event that we're not able to get the exact sort of mitigation measure, I think that's a great catchall that sort of ensures that we're able to have the developer essentially deliver on this. Council Member Kimball. Page 8 PC-13 August 18,2021 MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. And I just have some general questions about the 201H process following up on Council Member Inaba's question. So if we pass this resolution that means that there is no rezoning ordinance that we additionally have to do? CHR KIERKIEWICZ: That is correct. MS. KIMBALL: The primary vehicle for any conditional agreement is the Affordable Housing Agreement with the Office of Housing? CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Yes. And keep in mind if you read the statute, we have 45 days to act on this. To approve, approve with modifications, or deny. If we do not act in the 45-day window, which started. The clock started ticking when this resolution was filed with the committee. It's automatically approved. So it's very urgent that we work in collaboration and in partnership with the developer to ensure that what we want, in terms of mitigation measures are included. Because if not, it just passes as is. MS. KIMBALL: Got it. Thank you for that. And then, I actually had a question for the Clerk, which is that, you know,talking about this condition regarding the traffic that Council Member Inaba mentioned, given the title of this particular resolution, it doesn't seem like it would be appropriate to include it here since the resolution is specifically authorizing exemptions? MR. HENRICKS: I think that the title still captures the emphasis and primary objective of the resolution, which is to make clear that the Council is authorizing certain exemptions. And adding a clause whether it's, you know, near the end or somewhere including specifics or perhaps maybe, you know,just that there will be traffic mitigation. I don't see that as being outside of the title. However, if the Council preferred, through its discretion to include that in the title, that could be done. Titles to resolutions can be changed. But you know, deferring to Corporation Counsel, I don't think that would be necessary to modify the title. And I think that what is being proposed, if necessary, if the Council sees to do that it could be added to the resolution as it stands now. MS. KIMBALL: Great. Thank you for that. Colleagues, I appreciate you giving me some leeway for clarification on this process. But given this 45-day window, do we really have any capacity to amend? I'm just trying to think of timeframe and holdover. It seems like that's not even really feasible. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: It's possible. MS. KIMBALL: It is? Okay. Page 9 PC-13 August 18,2021 CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Yes. If we move this forward to Council with the idea that we're moving in amendments at Council. You just need one reading of this at Council to be approved. It's not a bill or ordinance. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you for that. I don't have anything substantive on the project, but I just had some question about the process. With that I yield, Chair. Thanks. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Anyone else? Chair David. MS. DAVID: Thank you, Chair. And good morning and welcome. Thank you for your presentation. And I'm glad and I appreciate Council Member Inaba bringing up the traffic issue, because I think I recall this in the past coming up and the community was very non-supportive because of the traffic impact in that congested area already. So thank you, Mr. Inaba for taking a hold of that issue. And I think, given that, looking at your proposal that is probably the only issue that was of concern in my mind also. And my question basically is to you, Mr. Mireles is, as a developerI mean we've seen developers come and go. And their idea of affordable housing would be a portion dedicated to affordable. But I'm just curious where your heart is on doing an entirely affordable housing development in Kona, and because it's definitely needed as you said. But what was your driving force to do this, to actually step up and take that step? MR. MIRELES: Yeah, I appreciate that question deeply. A quick answer would be that there's many individuals in our community that I would consider staples of our community. Individuals like yourself that are giving every ounce of their being to give to the community. And my family and I, we moved here because my father has terminal cancer. And when my mother was diagnosed with cancer we saw a community step up to support her, to support her family. My son just graduated high school. He's getting dropped off this week to go to college. He's the result of our community of teachers and Cub Scout masters, soccer coaches, neighbors, who have just given everything they can to others. And when we're in a position like ourselves, like my partner Bruce and I, to be able to take our time, talents, and treasures to be able to give to others and what we're knowledgeable about, we feel that affordable housing and these types of projects are what we can do to have the greatest impact in our community. Page 10 PC-13 August 18,2021 MS. DAVID: I really appreciate that, and I feel your sincerity, and I want to thank you. Because I think you would set a precedent or at least a high goal for what we would like to hope for in future developments to address our serious housing issue for our local people not having to travel miles to get to work. So I really appreciate it and aloha you folks for doing this. MR. MIRELES: Thank you. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Vice Chair Villegas. MS. VILLEGAS: Aloha Carlo. Thank you for being here. You know, my sentiments echo that of Chair David. Every time we've met and talked about this development and the opportunities to provide housing for members of our community who are struggling to make ends meet for lack of a better term. And I'm really grateful for your consistent efforts. I think the last time we met it was community people and there were some concerns, and you took those to heart. And as it has been exemplified in this traffic study. And not trying to kind of get around it, but to recognize the difference in what the traffic would be like before school is back in session and after. And taking those things into consideration, I think that this there will be bumps, there will be hiccups. Keeping everybody satisfied is impossible as we all know sitting in this job on this dais. But I really want to commend you and thank you for your authentic and sincere efforts to do something for our community at this level, which I can't imagine the profit margins are very high, but I do know that the gains for our community and for housing opportunities will be there. And I just thank you for your service. And I thank you for taking the time to address the concerns of that community and of Mr. Inaba. And that's what it takes, is working together. So I want to thank you for that. With that I yield. MR. MIRELES: Appreciate that. Thank you. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Anyone else? Council Member Chung. MR. CHUNG: Yeah, I'm just wondering. You guys—are tax credits available to you for this development? MR. MIRELES: Are you talking about affordable housing credits? MR. CHUNG: No, Federal tax credits. MR. MIRELES: Yes. Page 11 PC-13 August 18,2021 MR. CHUNG: Okay. So that's one of the incentives. MR. MIRELES: That's right. MR. CHUNG: Okay, no problem. You know, I just want to bring that up because—and I fully support this, of course. But let's just make very clear that, you know, there is some benefit to the developer, right, it's not just, "Oh we're going to do something really nice." Because nobody can afford to do that. MR. MIRELES: Correct. MR. CHUNG: Right? So that, you know, okay. Thank you. MR. MIRELES: And that's the correct statement. I would just add that the different Federal programs tied to low-income housing tax credits that help support the capital stack for a project like this is necessary when you have lower rents that you're trying to make awardable to different AMI's. And you know, where market rate, environment,that capital stack wouldn't be supported and the underwriting for a project of this nature would not happen. MR. CHUNG: Right, of course. And that's the purpose for those tax credits. Let's give incentives to persons like you. I just wanted to make sure everyone understood. MR. MIRELES: Correct. And it allows us also to be profitable to maintain the operation to continue the momentum and to build more projects. Thank you for the question. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Anyone else. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Chair, if I can. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Yes, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Chair. You know, excuse my lack of knowledge, but what is 60 percent of the area average median income in Kona or in this area? MR. MIRELES: In terms of salaries, that would range from a low $30,000 to as high as the mid $80,000's. And that's based upon the family units and who would qualify in family size for one, two,three, and four bedrooms. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: So the AMI is $30,000 to $80,000? Page 12 PC-13 August 18,2021 MR. MIRELES: At a 60 percent AMI. And then we do have project-based vouchers that would allow income levels to be at a 30 percent to 50 percent AMI. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. And then what is the cost for these units? MR. MIRELES: One bedrooms would be roughly $960 all the way up to four-bedrooms being at $1,490. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Thank you for that answer, Sir. And then, this is a question more for Planning. Do affordable housing projects have to comply with Chapter 25 or our Subdivision law? MR. KERN: Yeah, unless the specific code element is exempt through this process, they would. I mean basically all other necessary laws and requirements are upon any developer like that. So in this case, it's multi-family, so they're not doing a subdivision, so we're not really getting into Chapter 23. As far as Chapter 25, they'll have to come in for plan approval. We'll look at, you know, parking and all other requirements, as they're not exempted. The true exemption really here is exempting the zoning. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, so like a normal subdivision, you know, you make X amount of houses. But you get to have X amount of the area put aside for a park or a common area. Is there any kind of requisite for an affordable housing project like that? MR. KERN: I don't believe this one would trigger any of that, but if it were to trigger and it wasn't exempt through this process, then they would have to be required to do that. So any exemptions outside of Chapter 25 that would apply to a project would be covered in this exemption. Our Code doesn't actually go specifically into affordable housing project exemptions within the Code. That's why there is a 201H project MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. And then I read through the document. There's a lot of information here. One thing that caught my attention is, there was a community meeting for Honua`ula, and I just recognized that it says 2020 and not 2021. So it was dated August 17'', 2020, and I looked at it and said, how could this meeting have occurred yesterday? But completely my mistake, because it said 2020. I missed that. Okay, I have no further questions. And then thank you for the information today. And I appreciate Council Members in Kona, their input, because ultimately this affects their side of the island much more so than ours. So I will take to heart their comments today. And mahalo for being here everyone. Page 13 PC-13 August 18,2021 MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Council Member Inaba. MR. INABA: Thank you. Real quick, I just want to circle back. And thank you, Council Member Chung for pointing that out. Something that I wasn't aware of. Can I get an opinion from Corporation Counsel? You kind of answered this, Council Member Kierkiewicz, but I would like to hear it from where do these mitigation steps get put in? Because in looking at this resolution, like Council Member Kimball pointed out, it does look like a weird place to try to put in some mitigation steps. So is it—would it be here or would it be in the agreement? (Note: At this time, Deputy Corporation Counsel Malia Hall came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MS. HALL: Hi, this is Malia Hall, Deputy Corporation Counsel for the Office of Housing and Community Development. Council Member Inaba, yes, it would be morea proper place for it would be in the Affordable Housing Agreement. There already is. It's kind of an Affordable Housing/Development Agreement that we have with Honua`ula. And it covers basically that they have to be in compliance with all, you know, State, Federal, and County regulations. And I believe that would also cover, you know, if we implemented mitigation steps that they would also have to comply with that to be in compliance with their Affordable Housing Agreement. MR. INABA: Okay, so in the housing agreement, not this resolution? Is that right? MS. HALL: Yes. MR. INABA: Okay, and the housing agreement is amendable still? MS. HALL: Yes. MR. INABA: Okay. And one last question. Like I said, there's kuleana that this developer has, you know, indicated that they're willing to meet. And there's kuleana on our end as a County. Some of which addresses the problems that are already existing. So, is there a way to make sure that our end as a County is met as well? Because there is an existing problem as validated by this traffic study. So how do we hold ourselves accountable? Because I know this agreement can hold them accountable, but we have parts to this picture that need to be addressed as well. Page 14 PC-13 August 18,2021 MS. HALL: I think that could also be added into the agreement because I think there is a portion, you know, where you say, this is the County's responsibility, and this is the developer's responsibility. And everybody's kind of held to those standards. MR. INABA: Got it. Okay, thank you so much, Corporation Counsel. Chair, that's all I have. And mahalo again, Carlo, and your folks' team for bringing this and getting this traffic study done. I really, really appreciate it and look forward to seeing these units in our community. MR. MIRELES: Thank you, Council Member. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Anyone else? Great. Administrator Kunz, thank you for shepherding this application through the process, ensuring that all County agencies, our State agencies have weighed in. Appreciate the work by Planning Department and our Public Works Director. Carlo, thank you for investing in our community. You know, we had a great conversation that I thought would take 30 minutes, but went on for hours. And I was just so impressed by your willingness to work in partnership with community and find a good solution. And this project has all the right ingredients. And so, thank you for going above and beyond. I'm just so touched by your willingness to give back and wanting to do the right thing. We don't always getI feel developers that are motivated to do the right thing. And you are just one of those rare cases. So I'm hoping that there are other opportunities for you to develop affordable housing around this island because it is sorely needed. MR. MIRELES: Appreciate that. Thank you. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Yeah, thank you. There is a motion on the floor to forward Resolution 179-21 to the Council with a positive recommendation. All in favor please say "aye." Vote on Res. 179-21: The motion to recommend adoption of Res. 179-21 was (Approved) 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. Page 15 PC-13 August 18,2021 CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Motion carries. This will be at Council next meeting. Thank you. MR. MIRELES: Thank you. Appreciate everybody. Thank you very much. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Mr. Clerk, if we could move on to Bills for Ordinances. BILLS FOR The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, ORDINANCES: Bills for Ordinances. Bill 57: AMENDS ORDINANCE NO. 13-98, WHICH RECLASSIFIED LANDS FROM (Draft 2) AGRICULTURAL—3 ACRES (A-3a) TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL— 10,000 SQUARE FEET (RS-10) AT WAIAKEA, SOUTH HILO, HAWAII, COVERED BY TAX MAP KEY: 2-4-003:PORTION 021 (Applicant: Kristilee and Henry Correa Jr. Trust) (Area: 6.003 acres) The Windward Planning Commission forwards its favorable recommendation for approval, which would delete Condition C (Time to Secure Final Subdivision Approval) in its entirety and amend Condition K(Fair Share Contribution). The property is located along the north side of Kawailani Street, adjacent to and east of the Life Care Complex. Reference: Comm. 331.3 Intr. by: Ms. Kierkiewicz (B/R) Postponed: August 3, 2021 (Note: There is a motion by Ms. Lee Loy, seconded by Mr. Inaba, to recommend passage of Bill 57 on first reading.) ; and Comm. 331.1 From Planning Director Zendo Kern, dated July 12, 2021, transmitting the draft transcript from the Windward Planning Commission's June 3, 2021, meeting. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Mr. Clerk. You know, this matter came before us at our last Planning Committee meeting. There was testimony that was submitted by a neighbor to the applicant. And I just wanted to elevate conversations that have been happening between the Planning Department, Public Works, and the applicant to ensure that mitigation measures that have been in place. So at this time, if I could just get someone to read in the communication for me so that we can have a discussion around it? That would be extremely helpful. Motion to Amend: Ms. Lee Loy moved to amend Bill 57, Draft 2, with the contents of Comm. 331.4. Seconded by Mr. Inaba. Page 16 PC-13 August 18,2021 CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Director Kern, if you could just lead us through the amendment that is before us? MR. KERN: Sure. Thank you. Zendo Kern here, Planning Director. So yeah, both parties discussed this matter and came to a mutually agreeable determination on what they would do. So essentially, it says that, "Prior to the issuance of Final Subdivision Approval, the applicant, successors or assigns shall construct roadway improvements within the 50-foot wide roadway easement located with the subject TMK . . . from the entrance of Kawailani Street to the entrance of the proposed subdivision consisting of approximately 20-foot width pavement widening to accommodate paved parking spaces and a three-foot-wide asphalt paved Swale to accommodate pedestrian access along the western side of the subject parcel. The applicant shall construct these improvements to match with existing pavement conditions." So essentially that was agreed to by both parties, and I believe mitigates any of the issues that were there regarding the Life Care Center, the easement, and access. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Great. Thank you, Director. I just want to highlight that we've got the Life Care Center across the street. So, heavily used area and this would certainly help with the development of the subdivision, but also just the high traffic that often comes with life care centers in communities. So, thank you. And I appreciate the applicant working diligently with Mr. Yeh, your department, and Public Works to have come to a solution. Any questions or comments? Council Member Chung, this is your district. MR. CHUNG: Oh, thank you. And you know, I wanted to thank the Chair as well as the parties for working this matter out. This property is located in the district that I represent. I just have one question, though,just to make clear. When it says here, "Consisting of approximately 20-foot pavement widening." So that's an increase of 20 feet to what's already existing? MR. KERN: Yes, that is correct. MR. CHUNG: Perfect. Okay, yeah, one more thing, you know, I was looking all over and so if someone could help me. Was there a traffic study done for this project? MR. KERN: No, there's no traffic study done for this project. It didn't trigger a traffic study. The traffic study at the County level gets triggered when 50-vehicle trips would be generated or potential 50-vehicle trips. And this would be based off of lot counts. It does not. Page 17 PC-13 August 18,2021 MR. CHUNG: What was that again? Zendo, I'm sorry. It's triggered when? MR. KERN: It's triggered when you're going to receive 50 vehicle trips. So in subdivisions, it's essentially when you exceed the 50 lot count. So in this case, it does not trigger a traffic impact analysis report. MR. CHUNG: Okay. And then I guess the last question I would have, and this might relate to some other sections of this ordinance. But, is the entrance, the ingress and egress to and from that subdivision, going to be off of this easement or off of Kawailani, or both? MR. KERN: In this case, the primary access will be through this easement off of Kawailani and then it will enter into the proposed subdivision. And if you drive in, you'd enter to it from the right. So there wouldn't be another access point off of Kawailani. MR. CHUNG: Perfect. Okay, so I'll address those points a little bit more after this matter is passed. Thank you. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Anyone else? Okay, there's a motion on the floor to amend. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Chair? CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, go ahead. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Mr. Kern, so there's 21 lots being created, is that correct? MR. KERN: Yeah, I believe that is the case, yes. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: And then, how do you find the vehicle numbers for that? MR. KERN: The vehicle numbers? Can you MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: You're saying there's going to be less than 50 vehicle trips per day from the proposed subdivision. MR. KERN: Yeah, so when you look at a subdivision, we do it off of a historically, it's always been done off of a lot count. So, if it's a commercial activity that would be one thing. But if it's a subdivision, we count by lots, so it wouldn't be triggered until you really hit that 50 lot count for TIAR (Traffic Impact Analysis Report). Page 18 PC-13 August 18,2021 MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: So that traffic then is based on one vehicle per lot? MR. KERN: It's based on the lot count, yes, in this case for subdivisions. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Is that a normal process for us? MR. KERN: That is. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: So one vehicle per lot is assumed as part of the traffic impact, correct? MR. KERN: Correct. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: That's interesting. And then, I'm looking at the proposed layout for the lot. How are people going to access on the front? There's Kawailani access, and then there's the access along the, looks like the Life Care Center. And then there are lots that front the road that takes people into the middle of the subdivision. And there's no access from Kawailani. And I don't know what this road is called. It's very hard to read, but the easement that's here. This is in the proposed subdivision from the applicant. It's towards the back, almost towards where we have a letter from the Planning Department. MR. KERN: Yeah, so if you would access from Lots 1, 2, 3, would be accessed off of the easement there. And then the other lots would be accessed off of, you know, either off of Roadway A, or off of the two private dead end streets at the end that go down. So those ends with the turnaround, those would be private dead-end streets. So all lots would be accessed from within—off of Kawailani, excuse me. All lots would be accessed once you get in the access easement and not off of Kawailani. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, thank you. And then I did note on here that as part of this ordinance, it looks like they're going to do—and I really appreciate this, that you're going to do underground utilities. Is that correct, Mr. Correa? (Note: At this time, applicants Henry "Hank" Correa II and Hank Correa III came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. CORREA III: That's correct. Page 19 PC-13 August 18,2021 MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Alright. I really appreciate that because I think given, you know, as we're all evolving as a construction industry. But I mean, I've been to a lot of subdivisions. I installed a lot of solar in my lifetime, and the subdivisions that really catch my eye are the ones that have done underground utilities and really done a nice job at laying out the subdivision. I think long-term, it's a way of beautifying our County. And so, I appreciate that you guys have done that. I know that it's a little bit more expensive, but I think very worthwhile in the end. MR. CORREA III: Thank you. And we agree as well. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you for doing that. I have no further questions. Thank you, Mr. Kern. Thank you for being here today, Mr. Correa. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Mr. Chung. MR. CHUNG: Yeah, so wait, Zendo. So there are going to be some lots that are going to have their driveways on this easement? MR. KERN: Yes, that's correct. If you look at the attachment—you folks should all have this in your file at the end of—on mine, it goes from Real Property Tax Clearance, end of the proposed subdivision. And on the back of that, there's a list of surrounding property owners. MR. CHUNG: Where's that? Okay, wait. Where is that Zendo? MR. KERN: I'm not exactly sure where it's in your stack, but if you go to the County of Hawai Planning Department Background Report. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: That's the packet that follows the yellow printed ordinance. MR. KERN: To the end of that, after the amended conditions. MR. CHUNG: Well,just tell me how many. MR. KERN: So there will be four lots before it hits Road A which is their main access point into the subdivision. And then three above that. So it'll be Lots 1, 2, 3; technically Lot 4 could be access off of Road A. And the same is true for Lot 5. That could be accessed off of Road A and the other two Lots 6 and 7 would be accessed off of the easement. Page 20 PC-13 August 18,2021 MR. CHUNG: Okay. And is there any reason why it has to be off of that easement or could it be done within the subdivision itself? MR. KERN: Based on the layout that is here, that would be virtually impossible to do it from within the subdivision. I do think it would be beneficial to take a look at this layout. I do think it'll make logical sense on where these are coming out. In order to avoid that,the entire subdivision configuration would probably have to be changed. MR. CHUNG: Okay. And then so, when it says here in the amendment, the road widening is to accommodate paved parking spaces, that's going to be on the Life Care side? MR. KERN: Yeah, I believe so. I think the applicant could talk better about what they're doing as far as the parking within that easement. MR. CORREA III: Good morning. So essentially, what we agreed to with Mr. Yeh, is we would expand the pavement that currently exists is about 29 feet. That is a strip of parking along the Life Care Center side and then the actual drivable area, so the total amount is about 29 feet. So we're going to be adding approximately 20 feet to the pavement to accommodate for parking as well as pedestrian use. MR. CHUNG: On that side? On the Life Care side right? MR. CORREA III: No, on our side of the boundary. MR. CHUNG: So there's going to be additional parking on your side of your property? MR. CORREA III: That's correct. MR. CHUNG: So how is that going to be accomplished with the driveways of the individual properties? I'm just kind of curious. MR. CORREA III: That's something that we'll need to look at still. In our talks between the Planning Department as well as Mr. Yeh, we did not accommodate for how the driveways to those lots that are on the easement would be accommodated. MR. CHUNG: Alright. Thank you. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Director Rodenhurst, did you want to weigh in on any of this? Page 21 PC-13 August 18,2021 MR. RODENHURST: Director Rodenhurst, Department of Public Works. Yeah, we're working with the Planning Department to go over this. My understanding as we discussed already, the traffic study wasn't warranted for this particular project. And with this easement widening, it would accommodate the traffic of folks coming in as well as the parking for the surrounding area and for pedestrians. We support this at this time and because it doesn't have any additional roads coming on to our County roads, we have no comments against it at this time. Happy to take any other questions you have regarding this, but I've been working closely with Planning on this to see if there's any concerns for us in our County roads. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Okay. And Director Kern, one thing that, you know, was sort of mentioned at the last committee meeting following up on Mr. Yeh's testimony, it was said that he wasn't noticed and I just want to make sure. Is that, in fact true, and what are we doing to insure that this doesn't happen going forward? MR. KERN: So when an application is submitted, the applicant is required to submit a list of surrounding property owners that would be specified by codes. So in certain cases, it's 300 feet; in certain cases, it's 500 feet, and in other cases, it's 1,000 feet. So when we intake we will review—staff will review that list for completeness against the RPT (Real Property Tax) and surrounding properties and ensure that it does in fact, meet all of those properties that would be required to be notified. If the list is delinquent and the application would be either returned or the applicant would be notified that the list was inadequate, and they'd have to add the parcels and the names to that list. Once we go forward from there, the standard policy has been that the applicants are required to submit notifications to those surrounding property owners. And they send in either a certified mailing list or an affidavit. And from there, our staff doesn't go through and double-check that. This has always been the policy with the Planning Department. We're looking at that now. You know, staff is very busy working, lots of things to do. So for us to have to go through and review all of those is quite cumbersome. So we really rely on the applicant to do that work and ensure that proper notification is surrounded. In addition, there's also a sign that goes up as well. Does that answer your question? CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Okay. I appreciate knowing the process MR. KERN: So that's the process. So in this case, it does appear that the party, Mr. Yeh, and his trust was not notified in this case. Page 22 PC-13 August 18,2021 CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Okay, thank you for that. We have a motion on the floor to amend Bill 57, Draft 2, with the contents of Communication 331.4. MS. LEE LOY: Chair, before we get to the question, I had a question myself. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: On the amendment? MS. LEE LOY: On the amendment, yes. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Okay, go ahead. MS. LEE LOY: And actually it was around the subdivision and the interior roads. And I'm not sure if this is for Director Rodenhurst or for the applicant. When I look at the subdivision map, we have Road A with a cul-de-sac. And then we have what's going to be what looks like private driveways. And I'm trying to understand the road widths of the private driveway accessing Lots 8, 9, 10—looks like 15, 16, 17, and 18 MR. KERN: Council Member Sue Lee Loy, I'm happy to answer that. MS. LEE LOY: Yes Zendo, thank you. MR. KERN: Certainly. So within the Subdivision Code, Chapter 23, there is what's considered to be a private dead-end street. You're allowed to access up to six lots. They can't exceed three acres in size. And that access would be 20-foot wide right-a-way with 20-foot wide pavement. So in this case, the Lots 12, 13, and 14; 20 and 21 clearly meet that all day along. You know, Lot 8 through 11, and then 15 through 18, you would consider Lot 11 and Lot 18 being accessed off of Road A. And then Lot 8, 9, and 10; 15, 16, and 17 would be those six that would be allowed to be accessed off of a private dead-end street. MS. LEE LOY: Great. MR. KERN: Yeah, that's oftentimes confusing, MS. LEE LOY: Thanks for clarifying that,the six lots, because I saw the eight. Chair, thank you, and I'm ready for the question. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Great. Thank you. Motion on the floor, all in favor please say "aye." Page 23 PC-13 August 18,2021 Vote on Motion The motion to amend Bill 57, Draft 2, with the contents of to Amend: Comm. 331.4 was carried by the following voice vote: (Approved) 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: Back to the main motion. Any questions, comments, Mr. Chung. MR. CHUNG: Director Rodenhurst, you know, in light of what we just passed and the representations made, take a look at what would be Condition C. I mean it was D; it was taken out or whatever, and it's now presently proposed as C. "All driveway connections to Kawailani Street shall conform to Chapter 22." Is there any need for that? Or should it be specifically stated that there shall be no access from Kawailani Street? I just want to clean things up. MR. RODENHURST: Yes. So it is my understanding right now that there are no roads directly accessing Kawailani Street. If there were it would be subject to this. MR. CHUNG: So what would you prefer us do? You know, my staff is watching right now, and then they can prepare the necessary amendment. Do you want us to take out the reference, that second sentence? Or would you prefer us to say that, "There shall be no access or connections to Kawailani Street from this subdivision?" MR. RODENHURST: I have no problem with it being there at this time. MR. CHUNG: There is no reason for it to be there. That's why I'm giving you an option. Which would you prefer? There's no reason for it to be there based on the representations made. Yeah, so do you just want us to take it out completely, that whole sentence referencing all driveway connections to Kawailani Street? Or say that there shall be no access from the subdivision onto Kawailani Street? Access or accesses. Those are the two options. What's easier for you to administer, given what's been represented? MR. RODENHURST: So just so I'm clear, I apologize I had a hard time hearing. It is the determination between "access" versus "connection?" Page 24 PC-13 August 18,2021 MR. CHUNG: Okay, well we can say, "No access or connections." Basically this, nothing connected, no ingress, egress, driveways or whatever from Kawailani off of this subdivision. Very simple. So in other words,they cannot come out, you know, use that as a main or as Mr. Kern said primary access from the subdivision or to the subdivision. So you're not going to have a new road going into the subdivision off of Kawailani, and certainly no driveways off of Kawailani. That would be disastrous. MR. RODENHURST: Correct, so yes, I would say that we have no access. MR. CHUNG: And no access? Okay, perfect, we'll do that. Okay, and then, you know, under F it says, "A drainage study of the property, if required, shall be prepared." What would trigger a drainage study to be required? I don't really think there's going to be much drainage problems over there, but you know, I'm just kind of curious. Could we just take out, "if required" and just have them do a drainage study? And it might just be a real short one. MR. RODENHURST: I think to see the final plan on this would be helpful as far what would require the drainage study. Without that I cannot say we need to take this out. I think it says it right there, "if required" so we're going to need MR. CHUNG: No, but if we took it out then you would have to. It will be prepared. So all I'm saying, I don't care whether it's required or not required, I want your perspective. Should we have it required or leave it as is. And if you tell me,just leave it as it and you guys will exercise your discretion, that's fine. MR. RODENHURST: I think leaving it as is would be more beneficial. MR. CHUNG: Okay. So I'm okay, but Madam Chair, my staff will be doing the necessary amendment as it relates to Condition C. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: That's great. Council Member, is it your preference to keep it in committee or are you okay to move it forward to Council? MR. CHUNG: By all means, yes. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: These are friendly amendments. Okay, great. Thank you. Just want to make sure. Anything else? MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Chair can I? Page 25 PC-13 August 18,2021 CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, go ahead. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I'm just remembering a couple years ago, and I think we had the Director of Housing and Community Development at the time, I think it was Neil Gyotoku. And I remember him coming forward and there was some concern over drainage in an area that was near this. I'm not saying it was this area,just was near this. So, I like Mr. Chung's, you know, request of what would trigger that. And we do get a lot of rain on the Hilo side, and why it wouldn't be required. And what is the trigger, Mr. Rodenhurst for, you know, a drainage study? MR. RODENHURST: Well, the trigger would be is, how does the final plans affect the drainage of the existing area, and proving how that changes some of the water flow. And that would probably be what would trigger it. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: It's not a requirement now for, you know, construction of this size or this scope? MR. RODENHURST: If they can prove that the drainage is not significantly impacted, there would be no requirement for the drainage study. But for the most part,these typically do require some level of drainage study because there is a difference when you do develop a property, and that would trigger the requirement to issue a drainage study. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, thank you for that, Sir, I appreciate it. I yield, Chair. Thank you. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Okay. Mr. Chung. MR. CHUNG: Just to expand on that. You know, but what Mr. Kaneali`i- Kleinfelder was talking about was something that was coming off of Haihai. You know, real different situation in terms of topography. And the Housing Director didn't come in his capacity as the Housing Director. He had to take vacation on that one. And I think, you know, it was not well accepted by some members of the Administration. And that subdivision actually is going quite well I understand. So your department will assess whether a drainage study is necessary then, upon looking at the necessary, well, the proposed improvements. MR. RODENHURST: On submitted plans, yes. MR. CHUNG: It's not going to be something coming from the developer, and saying, "Well, we don't need a drainage study." Page 26 PC-13 August 18,2021 MR. RODENHURST: They would have to prove they would not need one, and we would have to review it and confirm that or dispute that. MR. CHUNG: But what do you mean, they would have to approve? MR. RODENHURST: They would have to prove, they would have to show that that development isn't significantly impacting the drainage. MR. CHUNG: That one is not needed. So the burden is on them to show that it is not needed to you guys. Okay. And you guys have your staff people kind of looking carefully. I don't think there's flooding issues over there. I really don't. But if you're on the other side of Life Care, now that's a different story, right, for sure. But okay, thank you. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Anyone else? Okay, thank you for the discussion. We have a motion on the floor to move this bill forward with a positive recommendation. All in favor please say "aye." Vote on Bill 57: The motion to recommend passage of Bill 57, Draft 2, Draft 2 as amended, on first reading was carried by the (Approved) 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: Motion carries. Bill 57 will be read at the next Council meeting. Seeing as there's no other business, may I have a motion to adjourn? Page 27 PC-13 August 18,2021 ADJOURN- There being no further business, at 10:19 a.m., Ms. Lee Loy moved to adjourn MENT: the meeting. Seconded by Ms. David 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: Motion carries. Planning Committee is adjourned. Thank you. Approv-•: 1 IN\ Z 2l Ms. As ey L. Kierkiewicz, Chair ( ate) Planning Committee AK/dt Page 28