Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0572.001 2020-2022 oY`-off"° Zendo Kern Mitchell D.Roth o. ;o, Manor Director Lee E.LordJeffrey W.Darrow Managing Director '> Deputy Director O � 1Tf of•N�,J� West Hawaii Office East Hawaii Office 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Hwy • • 101 Pauahi Street,Suite 3 Kailua-Kona,Hawaii 96740 County of Hawal 1 Hilo,Hawai'i 96720 Phone(808)323-4770 Phone(808)961-8288 Fax(808)327-3563 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Fax(808)961-8742 January 5, 2022 Maile David, Council Chair and Members of the County Council County of Hawaii 25 Aupuni Street e Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Chair David and Council Members: SUBJECT: Change of Zone Application (REZ 21-000249/PL-REZ-2021-000007) Request: Single-Family Residential-20,000 Square Feet (RS-20) to Village Commercial-10,000 Square Feet(CV-10) Applicant: Raja Daggula Tax Map Key: 1-9-004:051 Regarding the Windward Planning Commission letter dated December 13, 2021, concerning the above-reference matter, attached please find a copy of the draft transcripts for the December 2, 2021, hearing for your information. Should there be any questions,please contact Maija Jackson at 961-8159. Sincerely, ZENDO KERN Planning Director 1-DaggulaREZ21-007wpetranscript Enclosures cgla"'��E Rif. To: --- Ref. Date JAN - 7 ? =_w_ ianniG h}u aiiec ir= .goti_ Hawaii County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer p1_mn t g r!ha c 7 int Dov_ WINDWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAII I TESTIMONY TRANSCRIPT DECEMBER 2, 2021 I Public testimony regarding the application of RAJA DAGGULA (REZ 21-0002491PL-REZ- 2021-000007) was called to order at 9:15 a.m. via live stream online meeting, with Chairman John Replogle presiding. I 3 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Gilbert Aguinaldo, Dean An, Joseph Clarkson, Michelle Galimba, Thomas Raffipiy, John Replogle 3 J EXCUSED: Dennis Lin i ALSO IN ATTENDANCE: Malia Kekai, Esq. (Counsel for the Commission), Jean Campbell, Esq. (Counsel for the Planning Department), Zendo Kern (Planning Director), Eric Cook (Planner), Christian Kay (Planner), Maija Jackson (Planning Program Manager), and Melissa Dacayanan-Salvador(Windward Planning Commission Secretary) APPLICANT: RAJA DAGGULA (REZ 21-0002491PL-REZ-2021-000007) Application for a Change of Zone from a Single-Family 20,000 square feet (RS-20) to a Village Commercial 10,000 square feet (CV-10) zoning district for approximately 3 6,3 73 square feet of land. The subject property is located on the north side of Old Volcano Road, approximately 335 feet west of its intersection with Wright Road, 'Ola`a Summer Lots, Block"B", Lot 12-B, Puna, Hawaii;TMK: (3) 1-9-004:051. Secretary's Note: "—" indicates indiscernible speech due to internetltechnical difficulties or simultaneous talk. I REPLOGLE: So, we have three (3)testifiers registered to give oral testimony on Item number 1, Raja Daggula, REZ 21-0002491PL-REZ-2021-000007. We have Jon Clarke, Aubrey Hawk and I Evelyn Wight. If everybody could turn their cameras on, I will swear you in together. Please raise your right hand, hands. Do you swear to affirin to tell the truth before the Windward Planning Commission? Please state your name and the town you live in prior to your testimony. 3 HAWK: Yes, Aubrey Hawk. Oh, later, okay. Yes, I do. i I 3 REPLOGLE: Everybody good? i TESTIFIERS: Acknowledged by nodding their heads. REPLOGLE: Okay. Please limit your testimony to three minutes and not be repetitive. Staff 3 will let you know at two and a half minutes by ringing a bell. If you've submitted written j testimony there's no need to read the testimony you submitted, but you are welcome to summarize and update your testimony now. After your testimony commissioners may have 1 EXHIBIT A(DRAFT) questions for you, if there are no questions or questions have concluded, please log out of Zoom platform and switch to the YouTube channel if you wish to observe the meeting. Okay. So, we will start with Jon Clark. Mr. Clark? I can't hear you. JACKSON: Mr. Clark is on mute. REPLOGLE: You're muted. Where did he go? Oh, there you are. You're muted, I don't know if you can hear us? KERN: If you're having a hard time on your phone star six (6) sometimes works to unmute. REPLOGLE: You're still mute. Don't stress, why don't we go on to the next person while you try work it out and you may speak when you're ready. So, we'll move to Aubrey Hawk. HAWK: Aloha Commissioners. Thank you so much for this opportunity to testify regarding the application of Raja Daggula to change its zone from RS-20 to CV-10. I am a resident of Volcano Village and I also serve as an officer on the board of the Volcano Community Association. I also serve as a member of the Board of Directors of the Friends of Volcano School of Arts and Sciences, and I am a volunteer instructor at that school for the international program Roots of Empathy. I am opposed to this application: Our community, at least those of us who've been lucky enough to find out about this issue, we feel blindsided by what we see as a very sneaky attempt to circumvent Hawaii County's new law pertaining to vacation rentals in residential communities. I believe any rezoning to commercial in this area, if it happens at all, should be for the general benefit of the community and not to line the pockets of one non-resident developer. Perhaps it had been technically possible and technically legal to change zones to commercial in this area and add yet another lodging facility to our small village, but it certainly does not adhere to the spirit of the new vacation rental law which was designed specifically to stop the proliferation of vacation rentals in residential communities. We are a small quiet rural community. Though we may lack the resources and inside knowledge that allow this developer to hire consultants,both of whom are former high-level employees of the Planning Department, we do know what is right and it is neither ethical nor pono to bring this absentee owned vacation rental into our community. I implore you, please do not approve this application. Thank you. REPLOGLE: Thank you. CLARK: Jon Clark, can you hear me now? REPLOGLE: Okay, go ahead please. CLARK: Oh great. Aloha to everyone, I hope you had a great Thanksgiving. I'm going to keep it very short, she just articulated pretty much what I wanted to say. This is wrong, this is wrong. This guy is coming in here, bought the lot, I'm Jon Clark, I live in Volcano. I own the property directly behind the applicant. I own two (2) lots back there. The whole thing with rezoning a commercial so that he can come in and put a mini hotel, which is exactly what he wants to do. 2 EXHIBIT A (DRAFT) i i i I I J I That's exactly what he wants to do. If you've seen the plans, you can see it. The septic system alone is going to be a nightmare. I feel sorry for Kilauea Lodge when that hammering starts. I think you all need to do the right thing as she said, be pono, the kuleana is no! You bought this property. You're going to come in and say well you know, I'm just going to rezone it and then throw my hotel on it. Nah, I think you all need to be strong. Disapprove it and just say no! I'm all for development but, not this. Aloha and thank you very much for letting me speak. REPLOGLE: Thank you, Sir, and we will go to our last testifier Evelyn Wight. WIGHT: Aloha Commissioners, my name is Evelyn Wight, I live in IVolcano the [testifier spoke in Hawaiian language - inaudible], of course. Mahalo for this opportunity to provide testimony on the Daggula/Kapoor commercial rezoning request. I'm speaking on behalf of myself and other Volcano residents who are not able to testify today. These include Kalena Blakemore and her family, Jill Briggs, and Eileen Toal-Dervisevic. I am, and we are opposed to this application to convert'a thickly forested residential zone property to commercial zoning in order to circumvent short-term vacation rental laws. Calling it a"hosted rental" in the revised application does not change or disguise the developer's intent to create a vacation rental facility on a residential lot that our community does not want or need. This is a form of spot zoning, which changes the zoning for one piece of land, while the other land around it remains the same. This benefits only the non-resident"landowner who wants commercial development while negatively impacting neighbors who have chosen to live in a residential forested area. People in our community value the native forest and the irreplaceable natural resources found here. Those values are also reflected in the Puna Community Development Plan and the Volcano Long Range Plan which while not legally,as I understand it, not legally binding are strong recommendations that represent community voices across Puna. What we want, when we have development is development that benefits our local community that benefits the people that live here. That preserves as much as possible, given that humans are living in it the native forest, which is home to endangered birds and plants and species found nowhere else on the planet. This proposed project is counter to these values, and it doesn't appear to have any local benefit maybe one or two jobs and that's not enough to make up for the incredible loss. Allowing one landowner to spot zone for their own profit, that's a dangerous precedent that could further harm our community, both up here in Volcano and throughout the Puna district as more and more people move here and look here for business opportunities. I and we strongly urge you to reject this application. Mahalo for your consideration. REPLOGLE: Thank you Ms. Wight. Are there questions from the Commissioners for the testifiers? Mr. Clarkson you're muted, though, okay. CLARKSON: Yeah, yeah. This could actually be for all three of you. The rezone if it's approved does not limit the use of the property to just the applicant's intentions. Now if the 3 EXHIBIT A (DRAFT) I property is rezoned, anything that is permissible in that zone could be developed. And you all have mentioned the lack of a benefit to the community. Are there kinds of commercial enterprises that would be acceptable in this location? I'm just thinking of a store, a post office. What are the kinds of things that you would find acceptable rather than the proposed vacation rental? HAWK: I could answer that Mr. Clarkson and thank you for the question. Anything but a short- term vacation rental is the short answer. Our community could use a veterinarian, a pharmacy, a doctor's clinic. We have many older residents here who now have to travel all the way down to Kea`au or down to Ka`u for their medical care. We could use a gathering area, an art bookstore, coffee shop that would be a place where the community could come together. A gourmet store or a produce market. The list goes on, it's basically anything that would be allowable in a commercial district, perhaps not a Starbucks or a 7-11. But something that is in line with the look and feel and historic nature of our village and that our community could come, all of us here the several thousand that live up here could come and take part in. JACKSON: Chair, I think— REPLOGLE: Okay. JACKSON: — she froze. REPLOGLE: We lost her. JACKSON: Yeah. REPLOGLE: Okay. HAWK: Which would result in REPLOGE: Oh, she's back. HAWK: Yeah, I froze there for a minute. Am I here? REPLOGLE: Yes,you're here again. HAWK: Okay sorry, did you not catch that or was there a question? CLARKSON: I think I got the gist of your response. So, thank you for that. HAWK: If I might just add Sir. The nature of the process for this issue to come before the community just the way it's designed with these three-by-three sign nailed to a mature `ohi`a tree, I might add. The community needs to have more input and I understand that we do have future opportunities, but before that precious residential lot is changed to commercial if it is changed. I think we really need to have More consensus on what goes in there. Thard,-you. 4 EXHIBIT A(DRAFT) i I i I REPLOGLE: Thank you. Ms. Wight. WIGHT: Aloha, I'd like to comment, and these comments will be only for me. I personally wouldn't want to see anything large developed on that particular lot because of the forest. I understand that nearby lots are already developed commercial, and Kilauea Lodge is right there and there's a few stores and elsewhere. And I know that in the Volcano Long Range Plan this area of the village was described as a potential commercial development, and we do need all those things Aubrey mentioned. So, I'm not opposed to those kinds of things, personally, I feel i like as a State, frankly, let alone as an island, our small community, we need much better management of every piece of land for our natural resources, not for the development of human profit-making machines, whatever they might be whether it's a vacation rental or even a store and so that's my personal opinion. i I think Volcano Village in the Volcano Long Range Plan there's a proposal for a biosphere I think this whole region needs to be reexamined as a place that should be preserved as habitat. As I understand the current zoning laws and excuse me not zoning laws building codes and set back rules that have been changed recently. Those require clear cutting essentially now because of the amount of setback required and the amount of land required for water tanks and septic systems. I am completely for septic systems,by the way, so I hate cesspools they should all be banned everywhere right now yesterday. But in our tiny little village`in this place, the one of the few places remaining in the whole state that has relatively intact native forest_that is home to '• endangered birds, endangered species found nowhere else on the planet. We should have separate building codes that allow for the preservation of this forest, and I get that there's this whole thing about standardization and it's very difficult for a small group of people to have to review applications for a specific area just like other kinds of laws. But I'm personally very concerned about that, and I know this is a little bit_off the subject that you asked Mr. Clarkson. So, I apologize, but for diverting,but this is what I'm personally passionate about and anyway, I 3 just wanted to share that, and I do think we as a community here in the Village and across Puna need to implement something. Not just have a plan, the Puna Development Plan or the Volcano Long Range Plan that sits on a shelf but implement it and put it into law. So that we don't have this kind of thing, and so I mean it's got to be disappointing for the Daggula/Kapoor group to have thought oh, I have this opportunity I'm going to do it and then have this pushback,but they didn't know and the consultants they hired didn't understand and don't have the values that I have clearly, or they wouldn't have approved this idea of changing the zoning. So, I feel like that's an important next step, although again I apologize for going off subject a little bit, I'm passionate about this and I'm really concerned about that. So, I guess that's all I'll say right now. Thank you very much for letting me share. REPLOGLE: Thank you. Any other questions from the Commissioners? AU: Chair? Chair Replogle? REPLOGLE: Yes, Mr. Au. AU: Can you guys hear me, okay? 5 EXHIBIT A (DRAFT) i I REPLOGLE: Yes. AU: Okay, so this question actually can go to all three testifiers. In the background report that i we received. I'm looking at a letter from the Association. By any chance, are any of you 3 testifiers are you part of the Association? HAWK: I am. Aubrey Hawk, I'm Secretary of the Volcano Community Association (VCA). AU: Okay, well that's all I wanted to know and I'm assuming that the applicant is going to address the meetings and some of the things that say it. But if you want Ms. Hawk, if you can just kind of briefly, really short you don't have to go on about it-just give us the gist of how the Association meetings went from your standpoint. HAWK: We had one meeting which the Association had hosted and Mr. Arai and Mr. Fuke who are consultants for the developer were there in person. The developer was there via Zoom, albeit with a bad connection. Several other community members were there via Zoom and about ten (10) of us VCA board members and neighbors and community members were there in person. It was a bit of a chaotic meeting. It was designed just to sort of be a dialogue building, let's just talk story and share what it is we want to do. But the bottom line is we are opposed to rezoning from residential to commercial for the purpose of bringing in any type of vacation, lodging, hotel, motel facility. We as a community believe that the County law that was just recently passed. It actually caused a lot of longtime residents whose livelihood was to operate small B &B's and little STVR's on their property to have to relinquish that income. Even though there was no complaint from the community, because of permitting or just the various things that allowed them that would have allowed them to maintain and be grandfathered in. Now we see an outside nonresident developer with absolutely no connection to Hawaii,let alone to Volcano Village looking to kind of get around that law because they've been able to pay the right people and bring in another STVR. Which we've all agreed,we simply do not need in Volcano Village. There are hundreds of opportunities and places for people to stay. So that was kind of what the VCA, that's where our position stems from. Then secondarily, we are very concerned with larger clear cutting type developments on this particular lot, which is relatively very thickly forested on that whole Old Volcano Road that could potentially be converted to commercial that's probably actually the most forested lot. So those are some really old `6hi`a trees and hapu`u ferns that are in there. Once those are gone, they are gone, and we have determined, the Puna Community has determined that it's very important to maintain that canopy so that our native birds can do their overflights upcountry. So that was the secondary point of the VCA on this project. There's just no way around those 2 points. No matter how they keep trying to tweak it or call it a hosted or say oh we are going to preserve the trees. We know that the plans that they have don't have to be adhered to once this commercial zoning would be approved. Does that answer it for you? 6 EXHIBIT A (DRAFT) REPLOGLE: Thank you. Anything else Commissioners? I have a question and all 3 of you are welcome to answer it. Don't your communities up there have a system for homeowners to place their properties in conservation easements as they sell them? So as an example, you have cleared, built your home, saving as much of the forest as possible. When you sell it, you can put a conservation casement on it that will protect the trees and I asked this because it goes to what all 3 of you have been saying regarding protecting this native forest. Anyone of you could answer that. HAWK: I can answer. REPLOGLE: Okay. HAWK: I know that there's obviously this opportunity that is available to anyone who wants to do it via the Hawaii Land Trust, I believe. We currently have seven(7) properties who have done that so far in Volcano. I'm curious, so how does this pertain to the current issue application that we're talking about? REPLOGLE: I think it pertains to it in terms of what people in your_community think about your forest and what you've all been saying. And I just wanted to know if that was in fact did happen, I heard about it several years ago and I think it may have even started in Mauna Loa Estates. HAWK: Ah okay. Yeah, I know that several people have done that. But it's probably not the kind of thing that maybe someone have a lot of means and know-how and extremely passionate about the environment would'seek out. I don't think it's something that everyone knows about, but I am proud that we do have a handful of people who have done that in the village, one of them is right across the road from me. REPLOGLE: Okay, thank you. Any further questions? Okay. The public testimony ended at 9:15 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Melissa Dacayanan-Salvador Secretary to Boards and Commissions 7 EXHIBIT A (DRAFT) f WINDWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAII HEARING TRANSCRIPT DECEMBER 2, 2021 A regularly advertised hearing on the application of RAJA DAGGULA (REZ 21-000249/PL- REZ-2021-000007) was called to order at 9:39 a.m. via live-stream online meeting, with Chairman John Replogle presiding. COMMISSIONERS IN ATTENDANCE: Gilbert Aguinaldo, Dean Au, Joseph Clarkson, Michelle Galimba, Thomas Raffipiy and John Replogle EXCUSED: Dennis Lin ALSO IN ATTENDANCE: Malia Kekai, Esq. (Cow-isel for the Coinmission), Zendo Kern, (Planning Director), Jean Campbell, Esq. (Counsel for the Planning Department), Eric Cook (Planner), Christian Kay (Planner), Maija Jackson (Program Manager), and Melissa Dacayanan- Salvador(Windward Planning Commission Secretary) APPLICANT: RAJA DAGGULA (REZ-21-000249/PL-REZ-2021-000007) Application for a Change of Zone from a Single-Family 20,000 square feet (RS-20) to a Village Commercial 10,000 square feet (CV-10) zoning district for approximately 3 6,3 73 square feet of land. The subject property is located on the north side of Old Volcano Road, approximately 335 feet west of its intersection with Wright Road, `Ola`a Summer Lots, Block"B", Lot 12-13, Puna, Hawaii, TMK: (3) 1-9-004:051. Secretary's Note: "—" indicates that there were technical andlor internet difficulties, which made the conversation inaudible. REPLOGLE: New business, the applicant Raja Daggula, REZ 21-000249/PL-REZ-2021- 000007. Application for a Change of Zone from Single-Family 20,000 square feet(RS-20) to a Village Commercial 10,000 square feet(CV-10) zoning district for approximately 36,373 square feet of land. The subject property is located on the north side of Old Volcano Road approximately 335 feet west of its intersection with Wright Road, `Ola`a Summer Lots, Block "B", Lot 12-13, Puna, Hawal`i,'TMK: (3) 1-9-004:051. So, we will now have staff will do a presentation Eric Cook is the Planner for this presentation. CAMPBELL: Chair Replogle if I could speak super briefly for one moment. REPLOGLE: Yes. I can't see who it is. CAMPBELL: Sorry, good morning, everyone. This is Jean Campbell. REPLOGLE: Okay. Okay. 1 EXHIBIT B (DRAFT) CAMPBELL: Out of an abundance of caution, I would just like to disclose that I live in Volcano Village not far from this property. As Deputy Corporation Counsel representing the Planning Department, I'm not actually involved in any of the decision making in this project or in this process, so there is no conflict, but I did just want to put this on the record. Thanks. REPLOGLE: Thank you, Ms. Campbell. Okay. Eric Cook, you have the floor. COOK: Thank you Chair and good morning, Commissioners. If you give me just one moment here, I will get my presentation up and share my screen. Okay, is everyone able to see? REPLOGLE: Yes. COOK: Okay, thank you. So as previously mentioned this application is for a Change of Zone, and with that I will get right into the presentation. Here we have the location map. The subject property is denoted with a red star. The subject property is located in Volcano Village within the Puna district. Running through the center of the map here, you see Highway 11. Just to give you an idea of where it is. It's right in the center of Volcano Village. So, the applicant is requesting a Change of Zone from a Single-Family Residential 20,000 square feet to a Village Commercial 10,000 square feet zoning district. The applicant proposes to establish a three(3) unit hosted rental complex that will consist of one(1) 1-bedroom dwelling, 1 two (2)bedroom dwelling and 1 three (3) bedroom dwelling for a total of six(6)bedrooms within the complex. This is the original site plan submitted by the applicant. The initially proposed project was for 3 un-hosted STVR units Short Term Vacation Rentals consisting of a total of 6 bedrooms between the 3 STVR units. In response to public testimony regarding the preservation of the forest canopy and the proposed short term vacation rental use of the site, the applicant elected to downsize the proposed project. This is the revised site plan the applicant submitted. The applicant reports that the revised site plan was intended to increase the amount of forest canopy that can be preserved in the construction process. Additionally, the applicant elected to operate as a hosted rental with a property manager living on site in response to the public testimony in opposition of the establishment of an un-hosted short term vacation rental operation in Volcano. So, right here we have the Hawaii County Code, Chapter 25, Section 25-4-16 and this section describes the regulations surrounding short-term vacation rentals. Short-term vacation rentals are permitted in resort and hotel districts, general commercial districts, as well as village commercial districts. They're also permitted in areas zoned residential or commercial that are also within the General Plan Resort and Resort Node areas. Additionally, they are allowed in multiple family residential districts for multiple family dwellings within a condominium property. Just a friendly reminder to the Commission that this request is for a Change of Zone and not to approve the specific project. Here we have the County zoning map. The subject property is outlined in red. The subject property as well as the properties directly to the north and east are zoned Single-Family Residential 20,000 square feet. Properties directly south of the subject parcel are zoned Agricultural 20 acres and Single-Family Residential 20,000 square feet. Properties directly west 2 EXHIBIT B(DRAFT) of the subject parcel are zoned Village Commercial 10,000 square feet and consist of the Kilauea Lodge facilities. The State Land Use Boundary Map the subject property and properties immediately north, east, and west are all similarly designated as Urban by the State Land Use Boundary map. Properties to the south of the subject property are similarly designated as Urban as well as Agricultural. Majority of the subject parcel is designated as Medium Density Urban which allows for Village and Neighborhood Commercial and Single-Family and Multi-Family residential and related functions. Properties directly north and east of the subject property are designated as Low Density Urban. Other properties to the south are designated as Extensive Agriculture as well as Low Density Urban. Medium Density Urban is the only designation in this area that allows for a Change of Zone to Village Commercial, which allows for the establishment of short-term vacation rentals. This map here is pulled from the Puna Community Development Plan(CDP). The subject property it's very small,but you can see here is denoted in blue and it's situated within the Volcano Community Village Center as prescribed by the Puna CDP. Per the Puna CDP a Community Village Center contains a variety of commercial uses of which include bedand breakfast homes and small inns. The proposed Village Commercial zoning is consistent with the CDP map. So here we have a more zoomed up aerial of the subject area. Here we have the subject site is outlined in red. The surrounding context consists of a mix of residential and commercial uses. Several commercial businesses are in operation just west of the subject site, including Kilauea Lodge and Restaurant. °Further west is the Kilauea General Store, Lava Rock Cafe and Thai Thai Bistro as well as the laundromat and True Value Hardware Store. Oh, sorry before I move on, I'll show you so, Kilauea Lodge is here and then down here, this little parcel here, that is the Kilauea General Store, as well as;the Lava Rock Cafe and just a little further west of that you see just off the photo is the Thai Thai Bistro and this green structure here is the Laundromat facility, as well as connected to the True Value Hardware Store. Just to give you guys a little better idea of what you're looking at there. So, we have a couple site photos here. The property is undeveloped and currently does not have a driveway connection to Old Volcano Road. The photo on the left is the property frontage along Old Volcano Road facing west and the photo on the right is the property frontage facing east. Old Volcano Road is a two- lane County Road with grassy shoulders. The private road depicted here is used by neighbors to access the;,property set behind the subject property. And to conclude, the Planning Director recommends to forward a favorable recommendation to the County Council for this Change of Zone application and that concludes my presentation, so I will hand it back to you Chair. REPLOGLE: Thank you, Mr. Cook. Any questions from the Commissioners for Mr. Cook? Mr. Clarkson? CLARKSON: Yes, I just like some clarification on the difference could be from any member of the staff on the difference between on an un-hosted and hosted short-term vacation rentals. Because it was my understanding that the law or the ordinance that was passed by the County Council regulating short-tens vacation rentals (STVRs) did not apply to hosted facilities,but only to un-hosted facilities and that, if the owner of the property is actually living on the 3 EXHIBIT B(DRAFT) I 4 y } i i f property, they can do short-term vacation rentals all they want. So, can somebody explain why this person even needs to do a Change of Zone for an STVR if they're going to host it? COOK: So technically the proposed project to this point is no longer considered an STVR. STVR's are only un-hosted rentals. Once it is hosted it is no longer considered a short-term vacation rental. That is correct that we currently do not have codes and laws in place that govern the hosted rentals. So, it is not absolutely necessary that he apply for the Change of Zone in order to do a hosted rental. What I understand is initially they had proposed un-hosted and then from there they changed their proposal because of the testimony from the community and opposition to the un-hosted rentals. Anything further than that, I would all the applicant or their representative to answer in terms of what their intention is with the Change of Zone. REPLOGLE: Thank you. CLARKSON: Thank you. REPLOGLE: Anybody else? Yes, Mr. Aguinaldo? AGUINALDO: Can you guys hear me? REPLOGLE: Yes. AGUINALDO: Okay, this is for Eric. Eric,you indicated the Puna Community Development Plan. Within the plan for that area, it indicates that they're able to do hosted rentals because that's a big part of it right, I kind of heard you indicated that it fits within those boundaries and guidelines. COOK: So, I can answer that question, so what is fitting in within that map is the Volcano Community Village Center, proposed, and then within the Volcano Village Community Center the types of uses prescribed by the CDP. Allowed and desired uses for that zone includes small bed and breakfast homes and small inns, that was included as the type of business that community would be okay with having happened to develop in that area, which is the Volcano Community Village Center. And so, the property lies just inside of that. It's right inside the Village Center boundary and so the plan is agreeable to that type of use. But it doesn't specifically say this property can do un-hosted rentals, it's just the community when that was created was agreeable to those types of uses within that boundary and the property does sit within that boundary. AGUINALDO: Thank you. REPLOGLE: One moment Mr. An. AU: Thank you Chair. I just want to thank Eric for that presentation, and I just want to make a comment and just to remind my fellow Commissioners that, although the applicant is sharing with us and in the application, they're informing us of their intentions. The fact of the matter is this is a rezone. So, we need to look at it as the rezone. Okay, so I just don't want to get off 4 EXHIBIT B (DRAFT) track here because we are getting into conversation. Let's just stay on point and just ask questions and keep with that. That we're here for a rezone, so thank you. REPLOGLE: Thank you, Mr. Au. Ms. Galimba, you have something? GALIMBA: Right, it's kind of a little bit of a follow on to Commissioner Au's comment. I wanted to just clarify. So, we are considering a rezone, we do have some plans that have been presented to us. So, I guess, my question is, so I guess first we're not approving the plan,just the rezone and so I wanted to ask they would come in for their site plan, and that would be approved by the department, or would they be coming back to the Commission? JACKSON: Chair Replogle, I can answer that. REPLOGLE: Okay. JACKSON: So, the Commission would be making a recommendation on the Change of Zone to the County Council and the County Council would decide whether to approve or deny it. Exhibit 2 of your background report shows all the permitted uses within a CV district. So, if it were approved any of those uses could be established. There's about forty-nine (49)uses that could be established on the property if it's approved. Then, when they come in for what's called a final Plan Approval, they submit that application to the Planning Department and it does not go back to the Commission or Council, this is an administrative approval done by the Department. Typically, if whatever uses proposed at that time is listed as a permitted use in the district and it meets all the code requirements for parking, setbacks,building heights, then the Department would issue the plan approval. GALIMBA: Thanks. So, would there be any opportunities for public discussion or input after this Change of Zone application? If it were approved by us and the Council? JACKSON: So currently we don't have a process in place for engaging the public with plan approvalsunless there's what's called a Special Design District. So Pahoa Village has created a Special Design District, so any plan approval in Pahoa Village goes through I believe is their Main Street-Pahoa Association for feedback. I know Volcano has talked about doing that,but I do not believe that they have`a design district in place at this time. So, the only opportunity for community feedback would be if the commission were to condition like recommend a condition that some type of community engagement occur before plan approval. However, that being said. Once the zoning is approved that community engagement couldn't limit the permitted uses within a district. So, the extent of the community engagement would have to do with how well the structure fits into the community character, rather than what the structure is used for. GALIMBA: Thank you. JACKSON: You're welcome. REPLOGLE: Mr. Clarkson? 5 EXHIBIT B (DRAFT) i I i i CLARKSON: Yes, prior to my asking my question I'd like to have staff Eric Cook if he could put up the Community Development Plan that had the dotted line that showed where the Commercial Center for Volcano is. I'm harkening back to a rezone that had a commercial activity next to other commercial activities and I just wanted to see the context of this proposed rezone lot. Yeah, okay, so now the other question, well let me preface this there looks to be a very highly developed lot right across the Old Volcano Village Road from this facility that's not in the Commercial Center. Do we know what that is? There must be a dozen buildings on the lot right across the road. COOK: Okay, so just so I can be sure where you're talking about. Where are you speaking about, you're speaking south of the subject parcel? CLARKSON: Right, south and kitty corner to the east. I just wanted to make sure that wasn't in the Commercial Center, and it isn't but it's not in the Village.Center boundary, but it certainly looked like some kind of commercial operation to me from the aerial photo. Can you show a map that shows where Kilauea Lodge is in relation to this property? COOK: Yes, I can. Before I switch, you can see it in this map that red parcel there just west of the blue section, which is the subject parcel. Portions of that red are Kilauea Lodge,but I can CLARKSON: So, there's a residential lot between this and Kilauea Lodge? COOK: That is actually— KERN: Real quick, Mr. Clarkson you may remember that actually had been rezoned by Kilauea Lodge for a commercial component and transient accommodations behind it and there was the condition of the frontage of the sidewalk that was being imposed, and you had actually helped work out the condition that this condition kind of reflected it as far as the sidewalk component. CLARKSON: Okay, so this all prelude to my question, which is how are the neighboring commercial properties protected, in other words, do we have to put in if we approve this rezone conditions of the rezone such as sound attenuated walls, landscape buffers or does that all go with the plan approval? In other words, do we have to protect Kilauea Lodge from, say, a burger joint during this rezone approval or does the Planning Department have the power to protect the neighbors with requirements for other types of commercial applications? I just wanted to look at the situation and here you can see,by the way, the picture of the parcel is got 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 structures on it. I'm just curious what that is just for context of this rezone application. JACKSON: Commissioner Clarkson I can respond to that. So, in the aerial photo the structures to the southeast. CLARKSON: Correct. JACKSON: It's actually three separate properties. CLARKSON: Oh. 6 EXHIBIT B(DRAFT) 1 I I i i I i JACKSON: It's currently zoned agricultural. So, these are not commercial structures, these are probably farm dwellings and some outbuildings related to agriculture. CLARKSON: Thank you. i JACKSON: Uh huh and then let's see the second part of your requests or your question about landscape buffers and sound attenuation. So, the only land use I'm aware of in the zoning code that requires sound attenuation is veterinary clinics when they're doing overnight boarding. The Director does have some discretion, but we don't typically condition sound attenuation for commercial structures because the assumption is if there's adjacent lands that are also zoned commercial you wouldn't have to buffer noise for similarly zoned properties. As far as the landscape buffer the zoning code, as well as the Planning Department landscape rule lays out the minimum buffers required for commercial zoning adjacent to residential zoning. So, they would have to comply with that buffer requirement for landscaping and a lot of times in situations like this where you have an existing forest or existing vegetation that's well-established folks will just leave natural landscape buffer around their properties to comply with code. CLARKSON: Thank you. KERN: Just really quick to add on to that Commissioner Clarkson. The State Department of Health also regulates the sound decibel levels for the various uses from residential to commercial to Ag, so there is that component there as well. I'm not sure, maybe since we're talking about landscaping and setbacks. I just want to make a clarification it was stated earlier that new codes or that were put into place required greater setbacks or bulldozing of those and to my knowledge there is no such thing as that. There was a new Building Code that was adopted,but as far as the setbacks and the current codes they haven't changed, and no one is required to bulldoze their setbacks. They could leave those however they wanted to leave it,but there is a requirement for the setback against the property just wanted to ride that clarification to anybody watching. Thanks. RAFFIPIY: A question Mr. Chairman. REPLOGLE: Yes, Mr. Raffipiy please. RAFFIPIY: Staff, can you define hosted vacation rental again, please. Who's the host? COOK: So, the host of a hosted rental it could either be the landowner themselves or it could be someone that they have appointed to care take the property, as well as attend to the needs of the guests. So, an employee or the owner themselves. RAFFIPIY: Okay, all right. Okay, because I understand there were discussion it was the property owner and, in your presentation, you said resident manager. So, I just wanted to make sure that we're covered. Thank you. 7 EXHIBIT B(DRAFT) KERN: And the distinction there Commissioner Raffipiy is that, either the owner or operator has to reside on the site if they're considered a hosted rental. RAFFPIY: Got it, thank you, thank you, sir. REPLOGLE: Is there anything further, any further questions? RAFFIPIY: I have one more question Mr. Chairman. REPLOGLE: Please, Mr. Raffipiy. RAFFIPIY: Okay, in the proposed plan as far as the rezoning it can be subdivided into 3 properties, for example. So, the 3 proposed dwellings and there is a minimum 2 septic system. Let's just say, there are 2 septic systems set up in 2 of the properties. Is it okay to be servicing that 1 facility, if that 1 facility is in the third property? Can the septic system in the 2 properties servicing that dwelling in the third property? Is that okay? JACKSON: Commissioner Raffipiy I can answer that. I do not believe that Department of Health regulations allow for a system on one property to service a home on another property. So, if they were to subdivide into 3 lots, they would have to create a third system to service that third structure. RAFFIPIY: Gotcha, thank you. REPLOGLE: Any further questions or comments on the staff presentation? If not, we will go on to the applicant's presentation. Mr. Sidney Fuke, agent for the applicant; Daryn Arai, agent for the applicant and Raja Daggula,the applicant. Please you're all off the air, you need to come on. Please raise your right hand, so'I can swear you in. I see Mr. Daggula but not Mr. Fuke or Mr. Arai. KERN: Mr. Chair, I think it might be your view I see all of them, maybe change your view maybe to-a gallery view up at the top right-hand corner. REPLOGLE: Yes, it says gallery, but they're blacked out. Okay, I will ask Mr. Raffipiy since I can see him if he will watch the applicants. Please raise your right hand so I can swear you in. Do you swear to affirm, swear, or affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Windward Planning Commission? Please state your name and the town you live in when you begin. Have you received the background recommendation from the Planning Department, do you agree with the Planning Department's recommendations, including proposed conditions? RAFFIPIY: Mr. Chair? REPLOGLE: Go ahead with your presentation. RAFFIPIY: Mr. Chair? 8 EXHIBIT B(DRAFT) REPLOGLE: Yes. RAFFIPIY: You're going to swear them in first? They've been raising their— REPLOGLE: That's what I was doing. Okay. I'll do it again. KEKAI: Chair, point of order. You don't need to swear them in. Can you guys just for the record, acknowledge that you're swearing? With an I do or a yes. ARAI: I do. KEKAI: Okay, thank you. RAFFIPIY: Okay, Mr. Chair all three of them affirmed. REPLOGLE: Okay, thank you. I'm not sure what's happening here but Mr. Aguinaldo might need to step in I don't know. Okay, so please begin your presentation. ARAI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is Daryn Arai, I'm a Land Use Planning Consultant. Joining me today online is Sidney Fuke, Planning Consultant, and the both of us are assisting the applicant Raja Daggula and Shalini_Kapoor. Unfortunately, Mrs. Kapoor is not available this morning, so online with us is Mr. Daggula. We have received the Director's background and recommendation reports, and we do appreciate the favorable recommendation, as well as agree to the recommendation and the proposed conditions of approval. We note that we are also acknowledging the findings of the Planning Director, that the proposed rezoning is in compliance with both the General Plan, the Puna Community Development Plan, and the just Volcano Long Range Plan. We do appreciate the staff s presentation that also found consistency of the project with the short-term vacation rental law at least the intent behind the rezoning request. Throughout this process,the applicant clearly acknowledges the concerns expressed by the Volcano Community Association, as well as some members of the community and which prompted them to meet with the Association on September the 23rd. We found the meeting to be very productive and there was a lot of dialogue going back and forth, and we truly appreciated the concerns being expressed by the Association members. And with that it prompted further discussion between the applicant, Sidney, and me to explore opportunities where we could try to address the concerns of the community, while continuing to promote the wishes and vision that Mr. Daggula had for this particular property. When we discovered that the association no longer felt that it would be a fruitful dialogue as long as the short-term vacation rental component of the project remained in place. While it was unfortunate that the applicant did continue to pursue opportunities and addressing those concerns which were realized in letters that we provided to the Director dated September 14th and October the 11tH We do understand that you just received a copy of the October 11th letter just this morning and we apologize for the delay, and the oversight. But it really does summarize the position of the applicant given all of the concerns and in some ways the mischaracterization of the applicant's 9 EXHIBIT B(DRAFT) intent. And I won't go ahead and repeat it for the sake of brevity,but the most recent letter dated October 1 Ith really lays things out in our opinion quite well. In the end the applicant is doing exactly what the short-term vacation rental law was intended to achieve, which is to focus these types of transient accommodations in areas that can support it primarily resort designated areas and commercial areas. Which is why the applicant felt that applying for a Change of Zone is the most transparent way of pursuing this request because it allowed for community dialogue, public notice,public hearings and vetting of the project by many reviewing agencies, as well as the County. So, it's a very, very transparent process. The applicant also took a lot of effort in continually revising his proposals. Not only in the modification of the site plan in order to consolidate, re-adjust and reduce the scale of the project, but also to introduce components that will try to address some of the concerns from the community, namely the preservation of the `ohi`a canopy as well as and noise and traffic concerns. We will even note that in response to the noise concerns the hosted component of the project was also introduced and considered by the applicant.<Now granted it would render it no longer a short-term vacation rental as was discussed just earlier in this presentation. But the fact is, it demonstrates where every step along the way the applicant is trying to find those mutually beneficial opportunities to address the concerns of the community, as well as to promote and hopefully achieve what the applicant wishes for this property. So, anyway, we do believe that the request is a proper land use"—"within this portion of Volcano that is designated as a Community Village Center, and we do appreciate the favorable recommendation from the Planning Director and hopefully likewise consideration from the'Commission. With that I stand ready to answer any questions you may have. And if Mr. Fuke may want to add on to my presentation, I'd be more than welcome. FUKE: I'm sorry, I'm holding this because I'm kind of like at a place there's a lot of noise and I'm trying to be really quiet. So,but, at any rate,I just wanted to provide some background for the Commission because this is a project Mr. Daggula had approached me and it's to amounted to my being like the quarterback and I lateral the football to Mr. Arai and that's the reason why Daryn has kind of like taking over the project. But I feel somewhat responsible, so I kind of been kind of like tagging along with Daryn when there was a meeting with the Community Association and also in discussions with the with the architect with the design of the project. When Mr. Daggula first approached me and then subsequently together with Daryn. His primary intent was to construct 3 separate single-family dwellings on the property and have that operate purely as a short-term vacation rental. As the staff kind of pointed out short-term vacation rental does not require any of the owner or a resident manager to be on the property and as a result, you can have a lot of these kind of concerns, noises, so on and so forth. So, based on the comments that we received, the written testimony. So, we kind of went back to the drawing board and then we said what we need to do is to have a hosted vacation rental. Largely because if you have a hosted then there are some controls in terms of who are the occupants of the project and thus minimizing some kind of impact to the surrounding property owners. Then there was also the concern about the excessive size of the structures that it is going to delude most of the property. So, the original plan essentially called for 3 separate 10 EXHIBIT B (DRAFT) structures with a footprint of approximately 5,500 square feet. So, then we went kind of went back and forth and essentially then he scaled down to what is what you see right now. Essentially about a 3,500 square foot with 3 structures so that's his intent. Bottom line today if you can look at his project as being like a six (6) room bed and breakfast operation housed within 3 structures. That is ultimately at the end of the day, if everything goes according to his desire and subject to the Commission and the Council's approval to exact to be what he wanted. Now, I'm kind of like reminded of the situation where like in our neighborhood currently. There was this 1-acre property and it had some `6hi`a and fern trees similar to this property and one day I walked through that area, and I noticed that the entire property was totally bulldozed. It was cleared and so, this is the situation based on existing law what Mr. Daggula is currently enabled he can take out a grading permit and then bulldoze the entire property and then construct 2 dwellings on it and operated as a hosted. But as Daryn had indicated, this is not his intention. His intention is to respect what the community wants to a large extent, in terms of forestry preservation, go through the process, be very transparent and saying that this is going to be operated as a hosted STVR and in so doing, going in with the commercial rezoning. I think that if this rezoning is denied and he just operates based on the existing rule. There is a good chance that the mitigation that the staff is recommending as represented in Condition C, D, L, M, N, O and P basically they will all go away, they will all go away. But with this rezoning there's an opportunity to exercise some measure of control relative to the design of the structures and the respect for the native flora and fauna of the property all 'embodied within the existing conditions. So, with that, my wife who is sitting in the lback me she said I'm talking too loudly, so I guess got to shut up now. Bye. REPLOGLE: Thank you, Mr. Fuke. Is that it for your presentation, Mr. Arai? ARAI: Yes, thank you. REPLOGLE: Fellow Commissioners, questions for the applicant? Okay. AU: Mr. Chair, I have a question. REPLOGLE: Okay, thank you;Mr. Au. AU: I'd like to hear from Mr. Daggula, it's nice hearing from the consultants,but if you could just make a few comments on what Mr. Fuke and Mr. Arai just said about your commitment to addressing in the community's concern. DAGGULA: Thank you, thank you for letting me have the opportunity to present myself. My name is Raja and currently I am the applicant for this zoning change and, yes, we went through a couple of iterations with the VCA and Sidney, Daryn and everyone just to make sure that we actually do this right. Go through the zoning process, make sure that we actually adhere to all the things that are recommended from the Planning Commission and put those proposed recommendations in the project going forward. So, like some of the things that Daryn and Sidney already mentioned we actually looked at a couple of times, several times and did a couple 11 EXHIBIT B(DRAFT) of changes to it adjustments to make sure that some of the issues were addressed. So, we will continue doing that and hopefully get a get a favorable recommendation from the City Council, as well as the Planning Commission. REPLOGLE: Thank you. Any other questions from the Commission? Okay, I will enter, yes Ms. Galimba? GALIMBA: Thanks, I just wanted to ask. So, Mr. Fuke presented sort of two scenarios. One of them being an approval of your rezone with conditions and the other being in the case of a denial. I was just wondering if you would agree with those scenarios. In other words, from my understanding of our discussion, you could have a hosted vacation rental even with under the residential zoning. But you would be able to bulldoze the forest with that so that's not something that you're planning to do. DAGGULA: No, no, no, no, no, no actually in fact, when I actually tried to purchase the property there are 2 lots in the back as well. The lots in the back were actually cleared. I mean they did that to actually build a house. The one in the middle and then the one in the back actually still is forested. The plan is not to do that at alt. There are other opportunities where I could buy the land without the "—". The point I'm trying to do here or whatever is to basically have like a tree house kind of a concept, I can send you those pictures if the Planning Commission wants. I was in talks with the bamboo kind of housing in Pahoa but that's not the intention at all if that was the intention, I would have actually bought the one that is in Pahoa. There are certain lands without the commercial zoning I think or are close to it without the forest cover but that is not the intention at all. I think Sidney was actually making a point, I don't think he wants to have this happen or neither me nor Daryn. All of us really don't want to anything like that it actually defeats the purpose of what we are trying to achieve here. And that's the whole point of actually selecting this thing to have smaller structures, the structures will be even smaller than what was represented in there. But I didn't want to go back to the planner and actually get it done. I can send you some of those pictures if the Planning Commission wants but that's not the intention at all. FUKE: If I might also add,his original plan was to have a single story, and then, however, that would mean a greater footprint on the ground. So, his revised concept now is to have it multi- level 2-story and that reduces the amount of the areas that would have to be denoted. DAGGULA: And the forest cover is essential actually is really essential to the project so that's what I'm trying to say. ARAI: And in fact, if I could, oh sorry. REPLOGLE: Go ahead Mr. Fuke. FUKE: I was just also going to mention that it is Mr. Daggula's ultimate intent to live in the village so, contrary to some of the statements made that he's kind of like an out of state person and has basically no aloha for the property. That would be furthest from the truth. 12 EXHIBIT B(DRAFT) REPLOGLE: Thank you. Anything else fellow Commissioners, questions? Okay, I will entertain a motion for action. AU: Mr. Chair? REPLOGLE: Yes, Mr. Au. AU: I move for a favorable recommendation be forwarded to the County Council, on application Change of Zone Docket Resolution 21-000249 based on the Planning Director's recommendation and proposed conditions, which shall be adopted. AGUINALDO: I second. REPLOGLE: It's been moved by Commissioner Au and seconded by Commissioner Aguinaldo that the applicant's proposal be accepted with the conditions presented by the Planning Department. Is there any discussion on this? Yes, Mr. Clarkson. CLARKSON: Well, I'm really appreciative of the concerns from the people who had testified against the rezone. To me, we not too long ago rezoned the adjacent parcel for exactly the same kinds of reasons that Mr. Daggula wants to rezone this. I justcan't see why the proposal of a hospitality having a small vacation rental, a small hotel next to another existing small lodge or hotel doesn't make sense. You know this is in the Commercial Center as described Village Center is described by the community. I just don't see any reason why we shouldn't approve this rezone. We might want to, I apologize for not being familiar with the road frontage issue and sidewalks,but I think we should ask the same thing of Mr. Daggula that we asked of Kilauea Lodge in terms of waiting until the road is widened and frontages before requiring roadside improvements. But anyway, those are my reasons why I seconded the motion. COOK: Mr. Clarkson if I just might add really quickly. We did add in the exact same condition that the neighboring property has regarding the roadway improvements. So, it's identical to the similar rezone just before, sorry to interrupt, I just wanted to provide that clearly. CLARKSON: Thank you. AU: Mr. Chair?` REPLOGLE: Yes, Mr Au. AU: So, I'd like to share why I support my motion. I share the same sentiments as Commissioner Clarkson. I think this project, I think this rezone is appropriate for the area, I think the proposed project, the proposed development is appropriate for all the reasons that Commissioner Clarkson stated. I'd like to take it a little bit further, we need to boost our economy. We need to show the world how beautiful our Volcano is and how beautiful our Hawaii Island is. I'm sure that's one of the reasons why Mr. Daggula wants to do this and give people and give people a nice experience here, so they can continue to come back and continue to give back to our economy. So, I just wanted to say why I support my motion, so thank you. 13 EXHIBIT B (DRAFT) i i i REPLOGLE: Anything further? Anybody else comments? Ms. Galimba? GALIMBA: Well, I appreciate the comments made by my fellow Commissioners. I will be voting against it because I think we're sort of at an inflection point and perhaps this wasn't the case when these Community Development Plans were made. In which I think people in our communities have become much more sensitive to the impact of tourism basically on our communities. So, I think I want to honor that sentiment, so I will be voting against it still, but you know beforehand what my reasons are. REPLOGLE: Yes, Mr. Aguinaldo. AGUINALDO: I would like to also say that my reasoning for voting for this is based upon zoning first. It's just zoning, and I appreciate the applicant coming forward and going the extra mile which, he didn't have to. Like what was said he didn't have to and, but 1--also appreciate, yes, the community has to voice their concerns as well,and about the native `6hi`a trees and so forth which is truly understandable. Pertaining to that matter, but my vote decision was based upon when I did ask Eric that it falls within, I just see that Page 136 it falls within the preliminary Volcano Community Village Center boundary of what is he trying to achieve. Again, if this goes forward the applicant has to abide by all the rules and requirements necessary that is being said when I say said it's being said as stated on paper today and that's my reasoning. You know Raja I just like to share also is the integrity and the honesty of anyone that must uphold when achieving and getting something because it affects your surrounding neighbors. It could be me. What they said about pono is being good'and being fair and being one within your community. For that reason, my decision because it falls within the dashed line it's within the Puna Community Development Plan. And that's what I just had to share today, thank you. REPLOGLE: Thank you Mr. Aguinaldo. Anything else? Yes, Mr. Raffipiy. RAFFIPIY: Just one question before I make my comment. Staff, so let me just make sure I understand this before I make a comment. So, the landowner has an option,he can decide to let's say if these things don't go thru,he can decide to just proceed with a plan, a hosted vacation rentals and he doesn't have to comply, as long as he's hosting it, he doesn't have to comply with any other conditions, right? So, I understand. COOK: Yes, Commissioner Raffipiy that's correct. Right now, we currently do not have laws are codes in place that are governing the operation of hosted rentals. Because his State Land Use is urban, it does not prevent him from doing a hosted rental. If his State Land Use had been agricultural, it would be disallowed but because of the designations the property does hold whether or not he does receive the Change of Zone he would be eligible to then operate a hosted rental on that property. RAFFIPIY: Okay, very good, thank you that answered my question. My comment on this is that as much as I really understand the plight of the of the neighbors and the community around. I'm kind of torn. I really wanted to support community members,but at the same time, I feel like if I support the community members but staying down then the property owner he can come in and just do everything that the community members wanted to uphold. So, at least if we 14 EXHIBIT B(DRAFT) change the zone, the zoning to this there's some kind of restriction, some kind of conditions that the Planning Department is imposing, and the property owner say that they agreed to in these conditions. So, with that understanding right now I'm going to vote in favor just so that there's some kind of conditions there. The other option is he bulldozed the whole area; I don't want that so I'm going to vote in favor of the rezoning just so that there's some kind of conditions to the activities happening on the property. Thank you. AU: Mr. Chair? REPLOGLE: Excuse me, Mr. Arai you had a comment earlier? ARAI: Yes, sorry, thank you. Just for the sake of complete transparency and clarity I wanted to clarify that the Change of Zone as presented was representing3 short-term vacation rental units. If the zoning does not go forward than the existing single-family residential zoning could allow up to 2 single-family residential units. So again, the rezoning the difference between the two comes down to basically one additional unit that could be used as a short-term vacation rental. I just wanted to make that clear so everyone really understood the scope. REPLOGLE: Okay, thank you. AU: Mr. Chair? REPLOGLE: Mr. An. AU: So, for further discussion, I would just like to add a few comments to Commissioner Galimba's concerns about the community as well as Commissioner Raffipiy's concerns about the community. Us commissioners, all of the commissioners here we do really care about you and the community. There are safeguards in place in the conditions that the applicant had approved upon. They are more and over and beyond of what they can actually do right now, so, the developer does have the community's best interest in mind. But as a landowner, the developer has rights as well. So, he's expressing his rights, as well as the community is expressing their rights to oppose or support a development or a rezone. But I think that the developer is going out and beyond, and doing what they can to address, but at the same time to do what they want to do, and to move forward their vision that they have of the property. So, I just want to make that comment to Commissioner Galimba, you know all of our input, all Commissioners input are very fortunate because we do represent the community, so thank you, Commissioner Galimba. REPLOGLE: Thank you,Mr. Au. Mr. Clarkson? CLARKSON: Just one last, very quick response. REPLOGLE: No, take your time. CLARKSON: To Commissioner Galimba that I agree with her about the impact of tourism on Hawai`i Island and in a way. How wonderful it was to go to the beach in the middle of the pandemic and find nobody but myself and my spouse there. But the benefit of the rezone is that 15 EXHIBIT B (DRAFT) it will allow other options for this property should circumstances warrant. This in the Village Commercial Center and for whatever reason tourism fades away in Hawaii then there will be the opportunity for other businesses in this location and even the testifiers from one of the testifiers from the Community Association was all in favor of those kinds of businesses just not the vacation rental. But if it were me, I'd rather have a vacation rental next door, rather than a grocery store, but even a doctor's office but anyway that's it for me. REPLOGLE: Thank you, Mr. Clarkson. Anything else? Yes, Ms. Galimba? GALIMBA: I think I hear you all and in some ways it's a little bit of a moot point whether we change it or not, I think. I mean it is important. I think he can do his vacation rental either way. It's just a matter of 2 houses or 3 and I think in both cases I think it was Commissioner Aguinaldo that was urging him to be in harmony with the community that he's hoping to join. And I would join Commissioner Aguinaldo in that, and I think you know in Hawaii we have a tradition of working together with our community which is kind of unique and part of it it's not in the laws, it's unwritten and that's as important as anything. So, I want to say that my vote is not sort of against the developer, or the landowner in any way, it's simply a sort of a decision and it's a very on the fence sort of decision and I'mjust sort of a little bit on this side. REPLOGLE: Thank you. Anyone else? Well, if I might make my comments. I agree that not for me at this moment, but things have changed here and within our_State we're talking about a new face of tourism and a new way of taking care of our natural resources, protecting them. We can't forget where we live, way out here one of the most isolated places on the planet and just because we have laws and regulations that were made in the past. It's the past that has brought us, I think, as a planet globally to this point of things are changing and we just cannot keep doing business as usual and I don't know that laws can keep up with that. And so, approving or disapproving at this point Mr. Daggula is offering,I think, possibly the best option for that property and it could serve as a good example of a way to do it. But I am short of not allowing any building I don't know how; I don't know how you can stop doing this right at the moment. This is something that's weighed on me through my whole time here and,more importantly, in watching our agricultural lands be zoned into residential or commercial. We have to really put on the brakes or figure out a way to do this. I think Mr. Daggula is offering a good way. I want to believe that. Anyway, that's just I guess I'm pontificating but that's how I feel about this thing, and I don't know how I'm going to vote yet. Anyway, are there anymore comments? We have a motion on the floor, yes. I'm sorry, Mr. Daggula, please go ahead. DAGGULA: So, I understand what Commissioner Galimba has said, is there anything that we can do in the plans that will maybe get her approval? Is there something that we can change or is there something that I can do right now to do to get her approval because I really like what she's saying, but I'm just trying"—" thank you. GALIMBA: I just wanted to respond to Mr. Daggula. Honestly, I don't know that there is, and, in a sense, we're not supposed to be making a decision on your site plan so much as the Change 16 EXHIBIT B (DRAFT) t i i x i of Zone. I guess I'm listening to the community, and I live in the district, so it has a special resonance for me, I understand that community pretty well even if I don't live there. So, I want to trust that you're going to do the best for the land either way. So, I guess what would help me to change my mind would be to go back out and sort of have you change the minds in the community that what you're going to be doing is very much in line with their vision. That's pretty much what I would need so thanks for asking. REPLOGLE: Mr. Daggula? DAGGULA: So, I tried to approach the community. We actually had I think a couple of hours of discussion, and we want to go back to them to actually see what other things that we can do and but, that request was denied. Saying that as long this is a STVR component to the land or the zoning they felt that it's a waste of everyone's time. I was hoping that we could have come to some understanding, in these conversations people said they would like to have a coffee shop or a bookstore or doctor's office like many things. Then I asked them but is there was one thing that you wanted, and there was no real consensus, and I tried that approach as well. But I think since Sidney's here I'm not sure if he's here or not, butiDaryn is here we didn't put that in the discussion or in the comments section of what we have written. But we actually did go back, and we tried going back again that's the reason we pushed the November meeting to December, because we were hoping that we will get at least another chance if not two to talk to the VCA community. But unfortunately, that was turned down, maybe we'll have the opportunity going forward as well,because we don't want to cut that conversation off. I just want to continue that conversation and see if we can take this forward and if no one is willing to talk to me, I really can't do much. I mean maybe that's because I'm outside, so I don't know. I've tried and I'll keep trying until I find a way to get to them, I guess. That's all I have. REPLOGLE: Thank you, Mr. Daggula well spoken. Anything else? Okay. Staff will you do a roll call, please. COOK: Thank you Chair, Okay so a roll call vote to approve the Change of Zone request, as recommended by the Planning Director. JACKSON. Excuse me, sorry; I just want to clarify the motion. It's to send a favorable recommendation to the County Council, as recommended by the Planning Director. AU: Yes. COOK: I apologize. Okay, so Commissioner Dean Au? AU: Aye. COOK: Commissioner Aguinaldo? AGUINALDO: Aye. COOK: Commissioner Clarkson? 17 EXHIBIT B(DRAFT) 3 I CLARKSON: Aye. REPLOGLE: I think he said aye. COOK: Oh. REPLOGLE: You're muted Joe. CLARKSON: I'll say aye again. REPLOGLE: Thank you. COOK: Thank you. Commissioner Galimba? GALIMBA: No. COOK: Commissioner Lin, sorry, Commissioner Lin is excused. Commissioner Raffipiy? RAFFIPIY: Aye. COOK: And Chair Replogle? REPLOGLE: No. COOK: Okay, motion carries with four(4) aye and two (2) noes to forward a favorable recommendation to the County Council for the Change of Zone request. REPLOGLE: All right, thank you Mr. Daggula and Mr. Arai and Mr. Fuke for your presentation. ARAI: Thank you for your vote and happy holidays and to the departing Commissioners Chair Replogle, Commissioner Clarkson and Commissioner Raffipiy, thank you for your service to the community and I am glad that I had the pleasure of working with all of you, thank you. REPLOGLE: Thank you. DAGGULA: Thank you. The item ended at 10:53 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Melissa Dacayanan-Salvador Secretary Windward Planning Commission 18 EXHIBIT B(DRAFT)