HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN PWPRC 2018/08/21 2016-2018Committee on Public Works and
Parks and Recreation
23rd Session
West Hawaii Civic Center
74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Highway, Building A
Kailua-Kona, Hawaii
August 21, 2018
CALL TO
The regular meeting of the Committee on Public Works and Parks and
ORDER:
Recreation was called to order at 12:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers,
Kailua-Kona, by Ms. Maile Medeiros David, Vice Chair.
ROLL CALL:
Present:
Ms. Maile Medeiros David, Vice Chair
Mr. Aaron Chung, Member
Ms. Karen Eoff, Member
Mr. Dru Mamo Kanuha, Member
Ms. Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Member
Ms. Eileen O'Hara, Member Member (via videoconference from Hilo)
Ms. Valerie T. Poindexter, Member
Mr. Herbert M. "Tim" Richards, III, Member (came in later)
Absent:
STATEMENTS
FROM THE
PUBLIC ON
AGENDA ITEMS
COMMUNI-
r A TTnNc
Ms. Jennifer Ruggles, Chair
The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business,
Statements from the Public on Agenda Items.
The following individuals registered to speak to comment on Bill 176
(Comm. 1023), and came forward when called by the Chair:
Val Colter.
Mitzi Bettencourt.
Jon Olson.
The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business,
Communications.
(There were none.)
PWPRC-23 August 21, 2018
ORDER OF The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, Order
RESOLUTIONS: of Resolutions.
(There were none.)
BILLS FOR The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business,
ORDINANCES: Bills for Ordinances.
Bill 176: AMENDS CHAPTER 5, ARTICLE 2, DIVISION 3, SECTION 5-25, OF THE
HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED),
RELATING TO THE BUILDING PERMIT PROCESS
The amendment would exempt privately -owned single family residences from
structural review and requirements to provide structural calculations when an
applicant seeks a building permit, provided that drawings are signed and sealed
by a professional architect or a structural engineer who is licensed and insured
in the State of Hawaii.
Reference: Comm. 1023
Intr. by: Ms. Ruggles
ACTING CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Before I ask for a motion I just
want to make a note that we have Director Allan Simeon, Deputy Merrick
Nishimoto, David Yamamoto, and Neil Erickson all in our Hilo Council
Chambers.
Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to recommend passage of Bill 176
on first reading. Seconded by Mr. Chung.
ACTING CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Mr. Chung.
MR. CHUNG: I'm going to be making a motion to defer or continue at some
point, but I wanted to make just a few brief comments about this. I'm going to
assume that this piece of legislation was properly introduced. We had a whole
discussion about legitimacy and things like that. I'm still not clear on
Ms. Ruggles' standing on this body. I mean, I consider her our colleague, but I
don't know what she considers herself right now.
So, just for discussion sake, I'm going to assume that it was a properly introduced
piece of legislation, and I think it's something that has been highly anticipated by
many within the private sector and many people who are just seeking to build
their homes. But, I do know this, it's going to be difficult for us to continue
without her here, but I also know that Ms. Lee Loy has been working on
something for quite some time, and she's been holding off on it, wanting to get
more information from the administration. And of course, she'll have an
Page 2
PWPRC-23
August 21, 2018
opportunity to speak on that too. I actually had something, too, but it's not really
complete. I know she's very close to completion on hers, if not complete
But, with regard to this particular piece of legislation, I think it's not expansive
enough. It only relates to single family homes. If we're going to move in that
direction, which I think we should because we have, and the public has been
waiting for a long time for the building permit process to improve. We certainly
want to give the department an opportunity to speak, too, because we have newly
installed Director and Deputy and I'm sure they want to tell us what efforts
they've been making. But, at the same time, I'm anxious to see what
Ms. Lee Loy is going to be presenting.
I think there also needs to be some tweaking regarding the insurance requirements
for either the architects or the engineers instead of just leaving it to them being
licensed and insured. So, I think Ms. Ruggles was on the right track, but it's just
not expansive enough and needs a bit more thought. Not much more thought,
really, but I think we're moving in that direction.
And I wanted to say one more thing too. You know, we were talking about
liability. One of the speakers spoke of liability. The county actually has a
liability by doing things in the building permit process by changing architects or
engineers' plan. We become liable. Joe, I think you can probably speak to that
later on at some other time because we have that landmark case, right? Cootey
versus Sun Investment, back in the 1970's Big Island case. I don't know why we
haven't really been following the precepts of that case. We've actually been
going opposite of what we should be doing. That's all I have to say, but I'm
hoping we can defer this though.
ACTING CHR. DAVID: Thank you for your comments, Mr. Chung. Before I go
to Ms. Lee Loy, I'd like to make a note that Mr. Richards has joined us. Welcome
back. Ms. Lee Loy, do you want to defer to the department?
MS. LEE LOY: Yes, for right now.
ACTING CHR. DAVID: Okay, great. So, in Hilo, Director Simeon and Deputy
Director Nishimoto, would you care to come to the table and give us your
comments regarding this proposed legislation?
(Note: At this time, Department of Public Works Deputy Director
Merrick Nishimoto and Department of Public Works Building Chief
David Yamamoto came forward to address the members of the
Committee.)
MR. NISHIMOTO: Good afternoon.
Page 3
PWPRC-23
August 21, 2018
ACTING CHR. DAVID: Good afternoon. Identify yourself for the record,
please.
MR. NISHIMOTO: My name is Merrick Nishimoto, Deputy Director of Public
Works. Thank you for this opportunity. We see the intent of this bill and we
highly respect the intent to speed up the process for the building permits, and
therefore, help the community. Unfortunately, I will go on record now that DPW
(Department of Public Works) does not support this bill. And saying that, I'm
going to let subject matter experts dive into the details as far as why we do not
support this bill. We do support the intent and the logic of getting things more
efficient in the building department for permits, however, we do not believe this
bill will help that. And with that, I will turn it over to David Yamamoto, who is
the building division chief
ACTING CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Nishimoto, and Mr. Yamamoto, go
ahead. Identify yourself for the record.
MR. YAMAMOTO: David Yamamoto, building chief.
ACTING CHR. DAVID: Thank you.
MR. YAMAMOTO: I concur with Deputy Director, Merrick Nishimoto in that
we do not support this bill. Basically, in issuing a permit, the building division is
charged with assuring that the plans and specifications are meeting the Building
Code. So, in issuing a permit without any review, we cannot comply with the
requirement that the application meets the Code. And basically, that's the cut and
dry, short version of why there is a requirement to review these permits and
applications before a permit is issued.
In legality wise, maybe our Corporation Counsel can speak to how the county is
charged with the responsibility of life safety and enforcing these codes and what
could be the ramifications for exempting a review of plans and specifications and
just issuing a permit without any review.
ACTING CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Does Mr. Erickson want to weigh in?
(Note: At this time, Department of Public Works Plans Examining
Manager Neil Erickson came forward to address the members of the
Committee.)
MR. ERICKSON: Neil Erickson, Plans Examining Manager for the Building
Division in the County of Hawaii. There were a couple of things that were
stated. Jon mentioned snow loads. You know, our building codes are not
universal, they're very specific to every region and specific to Hawai'i County in
fact. And certainly, snow loads are not required. In fact, there's a 20 percent
Page 4
PWPRC-23
August 21, 2018
reduction for all roof loads and maybe he's not aware of that and the draftsperson
that's here today may not be aware of it. All of your roofing numbers needn't be
as strong as specified in the Code, and discounts are available. Building Codes,
unfortunately, evolves through disaster, and so, whether it's a hurricane or an
earthquake, these kinds of things become more and more specific about what kind
of requirements we need to see.
The International Residential Code (IRC), on the other hand, is very general. It
gives you prescriptive methods and it really allows for a lot of things under the
Code that are easy to accomplish, and anybody who wants to spend a few minutes
reading the Code or go through an analysis of that—in fact, I spend a lot of time
with the applicants that come to the counter and I explain to them the options that
the IRC gives. And they are not difficult to achieve. Even the single-wall home
is permitted, if you're interested in rebuilding that house. It just needs to be
engineered because it's not a standard, prescriptive method. But, those kinds of
things are out there.
The one question I did want to touch on was whether or not the word "insurance"
should be included. And yes, maybe Council Member Chung has a point to a
degree. Most plans stamped and signed by architects in Hawai'i are working for
the draftsperson, not the owner. So, regardless whether insurance is provided,
they're not insuring the homeowner. So, if something should happen, there's no
direct relationship between the homeowner and the architect. So, the liability,
whether it's insured or not, gets lost. There's no direct contract with the architect
and the homeowner. And that's something I think that we've been remised, as far
as enforcing in this county. Other specific details in the Code, I'd be happy to
address, but, I think I'd really like to hear from our Corporation Counsel with
regard to application of the state laws which we're bound by duty and right to
uphold.
ACTING CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Erickson. Corporation Counsel, would
you like to respond or expand?
(Note: At this time, Corporation Counsel Joseph Kamelamela came
forward to address the members of the Committee.)
MR. KAMELAMELA: Good afternoon, Chair, and members of the County
Council. I was hoping that there would be a little bit more expansive on the
process, but maybe they can deal with that. I do know that Council
Member Lee Loy had been working with building on something that I think is
kind of exciting. So, she has an opportunity.
But, we had a State Building Code that had already been adopted, and so
generally, there's a certain time period in which, if the counties wanted to amend
it, they have a two-year period to do so. So, we kind of missed that amendment
Page 5
PWPRC-23
August 21, 2018
period and maybe that's why Maui was able to slip it in. Because I heard that
coming in.
But currently, we all know that, yes, DPW has the duty to enforce and ensure
compliance with the Building Code because they're the only agency that we have
looking at it. I wanted to kind of mention that Cootey case that Council Member
Chung had talked about because that kind of states in a nutshell that, yes, we have
a duty to regulate, but that's all. If there'sI think that it was done wrong with
calculations. In Cootey, it was a flood case, there were problems that the
engineers had done some calculations, which happened to be wrong, but the
county wasn't liable because all it had was that duty to regulate. In the end, it was
the engineer who was held responsible because the calculations that was done.
Another reason why I mentioned the calculation is because I noticed that's
something that's discussed in this particular proposed bill. I'm not too sure why
people want to do that, but because the building codes are meant to ensure safety
and health, there's reasons why, over time, more and more requirements are
made. Because maybe there's flood, maybe it's tsunami concerns, there are
hurricanes that we had to deal with. So, the Building Code was meant to take care
of those situations, along with the health concerns with plumbing and the
electrical. So, I think there should be a body that's responsible and what the
proposal does is to eliminate that duty and not really account for sometimes the
licensed professional potential errors, because that happens.
What I've seen in the department so far, and I don't know if the number that is
correct. Yes, usually the first submission, people are going to forget to put things
but it's my understanding that over 50 percent of those submissions on the first
time around gets approved. Then, there's a second submission and then maybe
it's like 30 percent more. So that eventually, whatever needs to get done gets
done, and then from what we call from making the stats, we have 7 percent that
maybe have more than four submissions. But, it's important that somebody be in
charge of compliance because of the health and safety concerns that is something
that we need to look at.
And sometimes when you hire people, too, two things happen. The person that
you hire, you know, have an interest somewhat to the people that hire you. So,
that's why sometimes they're just doing what the homeowner wants. But the
second point that I've seen, too, is because there are draftsmen that are involved,
sometimes we have just the licensed professionals stamp and then actually what
happens is that over time, there's kind of a relationship that's built with some of
those people with Public Works where they want the help from the department.
So, we have that kind of a relationship going on. I know that I went beyond just
the legal things but I thought I wanted to give some background.
Page 6
PWPRC-23
August 21, 2018
ACTING CHR. DAVID: Okay. Thank you very much. Now I'm kind of excited
to hear what Ms. Lee Loy's got to say on this. Thank you, Mr. Kamelamela.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair, and Mr. Chung is absolutely right. I have
been working very hard with the Department of Public Works and all the various
stakeholders, not only the architects and the draftsmen, but even the vendors that
provide building products for the construction of homes. And I do want to defer
this because first and foremost, I'm going to defend the Department of Public
Works right now. They take a lot of heat for the timing of the building permits,
but what people fail to recognize is they are just one of many eyes and checks that
have to go through these building permit applications, including the Department
of Health, Planning Department, Fire Department. And so, there is a number of
people that we have to streamline a process for. We have the UBC (Uniform
Building Code), we have the IRC Code, we have the Fire Code. At some point,
we have to smooth all of these things out, in addition to all of the building
calculations and the footings, whether they're on slab or on post and pier and
what the soil depths are. It is a very complexed issue.
Now having said that, Mr. Nishimoto and the Director Simeon, and even
David Yamamoto, has been in the room where I have asked them to toe the line.
That waiting six, nine, 18 months for a building permit is absolutely unacceptable.
If we intend to find ways of increasing our revenue stream and the only option we
have is real property tax, we have to permit structures. That's how we increase
the revenue stream. Now, they know we have to manage expectations, and a lot
of times consumers coming in have a mindset on what they want and all of these
different individuals, the draftsman, the architects, the consumer, the building
industry themselves have to navigate all of this to deliver to a homeowner what
they want. And it is an incredible bridge to gap.
That being said, we have worked long and hard for the last four months coming
up with a flow chart to manage these expectations. But, also to educate, which is
something that Mr. Erickson is talking about, to educate the draftsman or the
consumer on what is already available to them within these various codes or how
to meet those expectations with the structural calculations. I hear Ms. Colter's
frustration. Sometimes it's one way and another time it's somewhere else.
That being said, we have identified all of those short comings and I have a
commitment from members within the Planning Department and within the
building division to start to close the gap, manage those expectations, and provide
what we hope could be a very streamlined building permit process in which
someone can get in and out within four to six months. That is our goal.
The other piece that I'm hoping to work with is the Charter Review Commission,
because all too often people complain to the building department with no resolve.
And maybe there's an opportunity to create some type of advisory board that the
Page 7
PWPRC-23 August 21, 2018
department can interface with and the public can interface with to help filter the
concerns, rather than sitting across the table and taking up valuable time where
Mr. Yamamoto or Mr. Erickson could be reviewing plans rather than explaining a
process. I shared all of that with you to say I have been working diligently with
the department and I think we have something pretty exciting coming forward.
I don't want to go too far for fear of violating any future sunshine laws, but
Mr. Chung is absolutely right. We're not just looking at single family residential,
we're looking at expanding the process. This is the bread and butter for us and
the department also knows that if they're requesting more staff, we need to meet
some expectations that we can guarantee people will have their building permits
and there's a return on that investment.
We're working with the industry to get preapproved packaged homes. We're
looking at additional dwelling units that could help supplement some housing,
mid -and short-term. I mean, we're trying to incentivize them. We're looking at it
all. So, I'm just going to leave it right there. If we could just please defer this,
and I'm also going to be looking back at the Department of Public Works to
convene another stakeholders meeting with people in the industry, like our
draftsmen, like our architects, but also our contractors. Because they're the ones
putting the homes together. That being said, I'm open to any suggestions or
comments for outlining what I hope will be a very comprehensive and valuable
tool for our housing industry coming forward.
ACTING CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Thank you. Council
Members, anyone else? Mr. Chung, do you want to?
Vote on Motion to Mr. Chung moved to postpone Bill 176 to the call of the
Postpone: Chair. Seconded by Ms. Eoff and carried by the following
(Approved) roll call vote:
Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha,
Lee Loy, O'Hara, Poindexter, Richards, and
Acting Chair David — 8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Committee Member Ruggles —1.
Excused: None.
Page 8
PWPRC-23 August 21, 2018
ADJOURN- There being no further business, at 12:31 p.m., Ms. Poindexter moved to adjourn
MENT: the meeting. Seconded by Ms. Eoff and carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha
Lee Loy, O'Hara, Poindexter, Richards, and
Acting Chair David — 8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Committee Member Ruggles — 1.
Excused: None.
MS. DAVID: We are adjourned. Mahalo everybody.
Approved:
r /
s. Maile Medeiros David, Vice Chair
Public Works and Parks and Recreation Committee
MD/jm
�--- (Date)
Page 9