HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN PWMTC 2019/03/12 2018-2020Committee on Public Works and Mass Transit
3rd Session
Hawaii County Building
25 Aupuni Street
Hilo, Hawaii
March 12, 2019
CALL TO
The regular meeting of the Committee on Public Works and Mass Transit
ORDER:
was called to order at 11:20 a.m., in the Council Chambers, Hilo, by
Ms.
Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Chair.
ROLL CALL:
Present:
Ms.
Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Chair
Mr.
Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Vice Chair (came in later)
Ms.
Karen Eoff, Member, Member
Mr.
Aaron S. Y. Chung, Member
Ms.
Maile Medeiros David, Member
Ms.
Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Member
Mr.
Herbert M. "Tim" Richards, III, Member
Ms.
Rebecca Villegas, Member (came in later)
Absent & Excused: Ms. Valerie T. Poindexter, Member
STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business,
FROM THE Statements from the Public on Agenda Items.
PUBLIC ON
AGENDA ITEMS: (There were none.)
CHR. LEE LOY: With that, I'm going to close public testimony for this meeting.
Just to manage expectations, we have an agenda in front of us, and I'm going to
reorganize that a little bit, because I want to take some things out of order. So,
just for my colleagues, we'll be taking Bill 38 first; Bill 39, at which time I will
put the meeting in recess and then turn the meeting over to my Vice Chair,
Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder; and then we will take up Resolution 92-19. If I see no
objections, Mr. Clerk Bill 38.
Change Order As directed by the Chair and with no objection from the Council Members,
of Business: the following item was taken out of order:
BILLS FOR The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, Bills
ORDINANCES: for Ordinances.
PWMTC-3 March 12, 2019
Bill 38: AMENDS CHAPTER 24, ARTICLE 10, DIVISION 1, OF THE HAWAII
COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), RELATING TO
SPEED LIMITS
Amends Section 24-257, Schedule 5 (35 mile per hour limit), Subsection (c),
South Hilo, by revising an existing listing for a portion of Kukuau Street.
Reference: Comm. 156
Intr. by: Ms. Lee Loy (B/R)
Motion to Approve: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder moved to recommend passage of
Bill 38 on first reading. Seconded by Ms. Kierkiewicz.
(Note: Comm. 156. 1, from Committee Chair Sue Lee Loy dated March 6,
2019, transmitting proposed amendments to Bill 38, was circulated.)
CHR. LEE LOY: We have with us, Mr. Yamamoto. If you don't mind coming
forward. I think this is rather straight forward. We're changing the speed limit
signs in this area. Mr. Yamamoto.
(Note: At this time, Public Works Director David Yamamoto came
forward to address the members of the Committee.)
MR. YAMAMOTO: Good Morning, I'm David Yamamoto, Director of Public
Works.
CHR. LEE LOY: Why don't you go ahead and explain this to our colleagues,
thank you.
MR. YAMAMOTO: Okay, our Traffic Division was requested to evaluate the
speed limits along Kukuau Street. Upon them completing their inspection and
review of the segments involved, they determined it was appropriate to reduce the
speed limit in the location on the makai side where the homes are more—have
smaller lot sizes, and the road widths are where it was conducive and appropriate
to reduce the speed limit due to the congestion of the development.
CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Yamamoto. With that, any questions from my
colleagues? I do have in our file, Communication 156.1, which I would like to
amend Bill 38 with the contents of Communication 156.1. I'll need a second.
Motion to Amend: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder moved to amend Bill 38, with the
contents of Comm. 156.1. Seconded by Mr. Richards.
CHR. LEE LOY: I'll go ahead and lead the discussion on this. This actually,
Communication corrects some citation errors within the contents of Bill 38. So,
looking at Communication 156. 1, we've amended the section which was
Page 2
PWMTC-3
Vote on Motion to
Amend:
(Approved)
Vote on Bill 38:
Draft 2
(Approved)
March 12, 2019
identified as 24-256 to be 24-257. And then clarified Kukuau Street.
Mr. Yamamoto, any comments?
MR. YAMAMOTO: No comment.
CHR. LEE LOY: Ms. Villegas.
MS. VILLEGAS: I'm sorry, I just have a quick question. When you said this had
to do with citations?
CHR. LEE LOY: It's the section of the Code that they used. They provided the
wrong section.
MS. VILLEGAS: Okay, gotcha, that kind of citation. Thank you. Not a traffic
citation.
CHR. LEE LOY: Although we are talking. Hearing no further discussion, we
have a motion to amend the contents of Bill 38 with Communication 156.1. All
those in favor.
The motion to amend Bill 38, with the contents of
Comm. 156. 1, was carried by the following roll call
vote.
Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair Lee Loy — 8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Committee Member Poindexter —1.
Excused: None.
CHR. LEE LOY: Now to the main motion. Bill 38, as amended, all those in
favor?
The motion to recommend passage of Bill 38, as amended
to Draft 2, on first reading was carried by the following
roll call vote:
Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair Lee Loy — 8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Committee Member Poindexter —1.
Excused: None.
Page 3
PWMTC-3 March 12, 2019
CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you. Mr. Clerk, could you please read in Bill 39?
Bill 39: AMENDS CHAPTER 24, ARTICLE 10, DIVISION 1, OF THE HAWAII
COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), RELATING TO
SPEED LIMITS
Amends Section 24-256, Schedule 4 (30 mile per hour limit), Subsection (c),
South Hilo, by adding a new listing for a portion of Kukuau Street.
Reference: Comm. 157
Intr. by: Ms. Lee Loy (B/R)
Motion to Approve: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder moved to recommend passage of
Bill 39 on first reading. Seconded by Ms. David.
CHR. LEE LOY: Again, Mr. Yamamoto, any comments on Bill 39?
MR. YAMAMOTO: No comment.
CHR. LEE LOY: Any discussion? Chair Chung.
MR. CHUNG: Thank you. David?
MR. YAMAMOTO: Yes.
MR. CHUNG: What would be involved in reducing this further to one
25 mile -an -hour speed limit? Is that—are there any standards for 25 mile -an -hour
speed limit areas? You know why, that—some residents of that area have been
actually asking for speed humps, and I've been trying to dissuade them, yeah?
MR. YAMAMOTO: Yeah, I believe that particular street wouldn't qualify for
what we have for what we have for typically
MR. CHUNG: For 25?
MR YAMAMOTO: Well, for more that type of roadway. I can defer to our
Traffic Division that can speak to the speed limits and speed humps.
MR. CHUNG: I mean, I'm not saying that, you know, that's the way we should
go, but I just want to know what kind of considerations there are when you
determine appropriate speed limits. Because it's such a short stretch of a drive.
You know, I don't think it's going to inconvenience anyone to go 25 miles -an -
hour. It's only about, like 150 meters, maybe.
(Note: At this time, Traffic Division Chief Aaron Takaba came forward to
address the members of the Committee.)
Page 4
PWMTC-3
March 12, 2019
MR. TAKABA: Hi, Aaron Takaba from the Traffic Division. When we got to
the request, we did a traffic study, and then we determined the appropriate speed
in that area was 30 in the lower section and 35 in the upper section.
MR. CHUNG: So, 25 would be too slow?
MR. TAKABA: Yeah, it'll be too slow, and the cars probably won't be driving at
that speed. Because when we found the 30 and 35, that was what we considered
the safe speed in the area.
MR. CHUNG: Okay, alright. Or if it doesn't work then we can always revisit, I
suppose.
MR. TAKABA: Yeah, sure.
MR. CHUNG: Okay, alright. Thank you, Aaron.
MR. TAKABA: Thank you.
CHR. LEE LOY: Mr. Chung, you yield?
MR. CHUNG: Uh-huh.
CHR. LEE LOY: Any further discussion? Hearing none, oh,
Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, you have the floor.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: It seems like from the last one, we just
looked at Bill 38. We're looking at Bill 39. We got the same section being
quoted. Are we looking to change the Section, Division 1 Section 24-256 to 257
as well on this?
MR. HENRICKS: No, this one is correct.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: This one's correct?
MR. HENRICKS: As far as our review. Yes, it's fine, good shape.
CHR. LEE LOY: Any further discussion? I just have one quick question,
Mr. Yamamoto. How long does it take to change out the current speed limit signs
and provide the new one?
MR. YAMAMOTO: That, I would have to ask our Traffic Division, who would
be scheduling in the work.
Page 5
PWMTC-3 March 12, 2019
MR. TAKABA: Well, it depends on our schedule, but when we do mark the sign
locations, we have to do what's called the one -call, and we check the underground
utilities. So, that takes at minimum, a week. So maybe to be safe, within two,
three weeks, we can get it installed.
CHR. LEE LOY: Are there outstanding speed limits or other signage that needs
to be placed on our roadways? And I specifically ask this question, because a
year ago, I passed a one-way traffic pattern down in Keaukaha, and our
community policing officer has wanted to ticket those driving on that particular
stretch of road, but he cannot because there's no appropriate signage.
MR. TAKABA: Okay, which street is this for?
CHR. LEE LOY: This is near Kealoha Beach Park. We changed the traffic
pattern to help address: One, speeding through that park. So, if you guys could
check on that.
MR. YAMAMOTO: That segment you're speaking about is actually, yeah, Park
property.
CHR. LEE LOY: There's the park, and the park has boundaries, but it's the road
after the park that we changed. And I'll have staff provide you with the ordinance
number, and then you guys can look into it. But, if we could please be better at
putting the sign up. I don't think it should take a year.
MR. TAKABA: Okay, we'll look into it.
CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you. With that, I think the motion on the floor is to
approve Bill 39 and provide a favorable recommendation to the Council. All
those in favor?
Vote on Bill 39: The motion to recommend passage of Bill 39 on
(Approved) first reading was carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair Lee Loy – 8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Committee Member Poindexter –1.
Excused: None.
CHR. LEE LOY: At this time, I'm going to pursuant—well, what I want to do is
place this meeting in recess. Our next communication, the applicant will be
appearing by telephone, so I want to place this meeting in recess, at which time,
when we come out of recess, I'm going to be relinquishing the Chair to my
Page 6
PWMTC-3 March 12, 2019
Vice Chair, pursuant to Rule 5-6. And then let Mr. Kanealii-Kleinfelder take us
through the rest of the meeting. So with that, motion to recess.
Recess: At 11:33 a.m., the Chair called for a recess.
Reconvene: The meeting reconvened at 11:40 a.m.
CHR. LEE LOY: To my colleagues, I'm going to take us out of recess. As I
shared before going into recess, at this time pursuant to Council Rule 5-6, I will
be relinquishing the chair to my Vice Chair,
Matt. Kanealii-Kleinfelder.
Relinquish Chair: At this time, the Chair relinquished the chair to Vice Chair
Kanealii-Kleinfelder.
ACTING CHR KANEALII-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Council Member
Lee Loy. Please let the record reflect that I have assumed the Chair. I'm going to
jump right to, Mr. Clerk, Resolution 92, please.
Return to Order The Chair directed the Committee to return to the order of business.
of Business:
ORDER OF The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business,
RESOLUTIONS: Order of Resolutions.
Res. 92-19: GRANTS A VARIANCE FROM CHAPTER 3, SECTION 3 -6(b)(3),3 -58(b),
3-58(c), AND 3-60(a), HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS
AMENDED), TO ALLOW TWO WALL SIGNS AND TWO DIRECTIONAL
SIGNS ON 75-146 SARONA ROAD, TAX MAP KEY: 7-5-007:009
(ZONED "U" CG -20, KAILUA VILLAGE SPECIAL DESIGN DISTRICT)
Grants a sign variance to Kona Hospitality for two wall signs and two ground
directional signs for the Holiday Inn Express and Suites.
Reference: Comm. 155
Intr. by: Ms. Lee Loy (B/R)
Motion to Approve: Ms. David moved to recommend adoption of Res. 92-19.
Seconded by Ms. Villegas.
(Note: Comm. 155. 1, from Council Member Sue Lee Loy dated March 8,
2019, transmitting proposed amendments to Resolution 92-19, was circulated.)
ACTING CHR KANEALII-KLEINFELDER: Discussion please, Council
Members?
Page 7
PWMTC-3
March 12, 2019
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you. Council Members, what we have before us is a
resolution that has been sitting around this body for five years. And so with that, I
actually want to call forward Mr. Yamamoto, and then Mr. Erickson to provide us
kind of a brief history or summary of where we are on this particular application.
(Note: At this time, Public Works Director David Yamamoto and
Building Division Plans Examining Manager Neil Erickson came
forward to address the members of the Committee.)
MR. ERICKSON: Good Morning Council, I'm Neil Erickson from the Building
Division of the Department of Public Works. And I think I've met everybody
here except for maybe Rebecca.
MS. LEE LOY: And for the record, I want to reflect that Fritz Harris -Glade, the
applicant of this sign variance is on the line with us. So, Mr. Harris -Glade, if you
don't mind introducing yourself.
(Note: At this time, architect Fritz Harris -Glade, representing the
applicant, via teleconference, addressed the members of the Committee.)
MR. HARRIS -GLADE: Certainly, my name is Fritz Harris -Glade. I'm an
architect in Kailua-Kona.
MS. LEE LOY: Mr. Yamamoto or Mr. Erickson, would you please help provide
this body with a brief history of this particular application and what we're trying
to move forward?
MR. ERICKSON: I think that I can probably help. It looks to me like an
application was submitted to the Building Division as early as early 2014, which
was forwarded on to the KVDC (Kalua Village Design Commission) for review.
The KVDC returned it to Public Works saying that it was inconsistent with—the
application was inconsistent with what was provided to them. And so, it went
back, and about six months later, they reviewed it again, around November of
2014. And again, the same comments occurred, and so it was referred back to the
Building Division.
The Building Division at that time was requested to forward this on to County
Council for a variance, which happened in early 2015. And that was reviewed by
the County Clerk, and I believe in the application, it indicated that there was an
approval, and Mr. Fritz Harris -Glade can illuminate us on that because I don't see
an approval by either KVDC or from this Council for a variance.
So it went forward and the County Clerk returned it to us, with again
discrepancies in the application, the variance, as well as the resolution. And so,
this dragged on until 2017 when I started to get involved, when the director at that
time was asking me to figure out how this is going. And so I became more
Page 8
PWMTC-3
March 12, 2019
acquainted with the architect, Fritz Harris -Glade. And so at that point, we were
corresponding. And Fritz maybe you can remind me if that was when you ended
up on the hospital; but again, it went another six months or so before it came
before this Council, and the same issues were identified by the County Clerk,
who's here today, with some inconsistencies in the application, the variance, and
the resolution.
So, this went on until 2018 when again, the plans even as early as two days ago,
came back that reflect the variance application today to some degree. But, what
you have in your package doesn't match what's in the application. In other
words, the number of signs shown for the ground and wall signs are—maybe
partially printed, or one of two pages, I'm not sure. And I brought along the set
that the applicant sent me other day. But—and again, I don't know if this has
actually been through KVDC; whether it's been a positive recommendation or
comments. So, I'm going to have to defer that to the applicant because I actually
don't know and I've only been involved in the Public Works' side since it was
forwarded to me.
MS. LEE LOY: Mr. Erickson, why don't you provide us a processes, as this
particular application had to go through? We have some freshmen colleagues.
I'm not sure if they understand what KVDC is or what their function is. So, why
don't we really keep it simple about what a particular sign variance process is and
this extra special layer that's required for a sign variance in the Kailua Village
area?
MR. ERICKSON: Gotcha. So, for those of you who are new here or are not
familiar with the sign variance process, let me start off by telling you a little bit of
what's required for a sign permit. Sign permits are based on the zoning; the
frontage of the lot. In other words, the longer the frontage, the bigger the sign can
be and the wall area where the sign can be placed.
So, in certain districts, such as the Kailua Village, they have a design board, also
similar to the Pahoa Design Board, right? So Pahoa Village also has criteria that
is different than the rest of Chapter 3. And they have more stringent requirements
than the rest of Chapter 3 for signs. They look at not only maximum size, but the
actual size of the letters. So, in most cases, they're trying to create a pedestrian
type of environment where the signs are smaller, the lettering is smaller, and they
are not meant to be big or billboards by any means. Because signs certainly can
be very large under our County Code. If it's 150 square feet or 15 percent of the
wall area or the storefront, so, they can get rather large.
In addition to that, signs can be—you can have two per each frontage, right?
Road? And they have to be different. In other words, you can have a wall sign
and a marque sign, but if you place a sign on the edge of the fascia as well as one
hanging underneath the awning, those are both considered marque signs. So,
you're not allowed to have two. So, this is very much misunderstood everywhere,
Page 9
PWMTC-3
March 12, 2019
and I assume that there's hundreds or thousands of permits—signs that are up
without permits.
So, what happens if this goes to our attention for a sign permit and it doesn't meet
this criteria? We look at it and make a recommendation for denial or let them
know what needs to be done in order to come into compliance. When it's in a
special design district such as Pahoa or the Kailua Village District, it'll be
forwarded to that committee, the KVDC, the Kailua Village Design Commission,
would look at an application based on their criteria and make a recommendation
for approval or denial, or comment on what could be done to make it come into
compliance and its forwarded back to the Building Division.
At that time, the applicant may say, "We would like to seek a variance from this
Code," which means from the recommendation from Building Division or one of
the design review districts. And it goes through the process of creating a
resolution, which you would look at today and request for a variance.
So, it's attached to the application. The resolution, request for variance, all these
should match along with the drawings, and they're forwarded on to the Clerk for
consistency and review. And at that time, if everything looks fairly good, it'll be
forwarded on for your attention. And the criteria for deciding whether or not you
approve or deny a sign variance is in our Code, but I don't think it has been
looked at consistently over the years. Because frankly, most County Councils that
I've come to that look at sign variances pretty much rubberstamp every one of
them. We don't have any people testifying today, so you can only assume that no
one has any objections.
We don't endorse these, they don't meet the Code. And I don't think anybody
from our department or any of the design review committees would say, "We
endorse a variance." So, criteria for you might be, does it affect the neighbors; is
it unusual circumstances, or does it meet the intent of the Code, right? So, if they
can meet all three of those, then certainly perhaps you can grant a variance. But
generally, all of these people have the options to make smaller signs, and they'll
be consistent and fair with everybody else that has one reviewed. So I don't mean
to lecture you about how you'll make a decision, but you asked me the process.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you for that process. So I think I want to walls back to
this particular resolution, and then you mentioned some of the criteria for the
resolution along with certain exhibits or attachments that would be required,
right? You mentioned a favorable recommendation or some type of clearing
house letter from KVDC, along with site plan approval which notates where the
signs are. Is that accurate?
MR. ERICKSON: Let me make it clear though, that we wouldn't be here if it had
a favorable recommendation by any of the—KVDC in this case or the Building
Division. And there would be no variance requested.
Page 10
PWMTC-3
March 12, 2019
MS. LEE LOY: My question was, when this type of resolution comes to this
body for review and consideration, some of the attachments could include a
recommendation from KVDC and a site plan which notates where the signage
will be placed.
MR. ERICKSON: I'm sorry, that is correct. And in this case, it appears as
though the electronic transmittal of the drawings didn't get printed out in the
format that were submitted by the applicant, so they don't look correct in the
application you have. But, you're absolutely right.
MS. LEE LOY: So, my question is, do we have a complete and factual policy in
front of us that this body can adopt?
MR. ERICKSON: I think the exhibit that you have before you is not complete
and that's why the applicant sent me a more complete version. And I brought
along to share, but it's not in a form that you can photocopy or share. So, I'm not
sure it's ready to be reviewed at this time, and I think the applicant is going to
request this be deferred so that the owner can be attending this body, and
preferably in Kona where we can have more testimony.
MS. LEE LOY: I heard a lot of words, but I heard "No."
MR. ERICKSON: No.
MS. LEE LOY: This application is not complete.
MR. ERICKSON: The one that you have does not look complete.
MS. LEE LOY: Alright. Mr. Harris, Fritz, we have you on the line, you've heard
the testimony. You know, I look for your guidance and comments.
MR. HARRIS -GLADE: Well, my recollection of this is completely different than
Mr. Erickson. Originally, the owner of the property had hired a sign company to
submit an application, and that application went to KVDC, but it was smaller. It
seemed to be in total compliance with the smaller lettering of—required by the
Village Design Commission. So at that point, the applicant asked me to withdraw
the application and start over, and that was approximately 2015.
So we went back to KVDC, and in the meeting we took the sign request that was
brought to the meeting and we collectively, the commissioners and myself,
changed everything to meet their satisfaction, and they sent the letter attesting
that, and I believe Councilman Lee Loy, that you have that. I sent that to you
yesterday.
Page 11
PWMTC-3
March 12, 2019
From my perspective, this has been, well I don't know how to say it politely, so
I'll just say it, it hasn't been a pleasant experience. The drawings have been lost
at least three times that I'm aware of by the County. They were put out behind
somebody's desk and forgotten about. I have probably a half -a -dozen or a dozen
emails asking what's the status, and every time I ask the status, I was told that I
had to rewrite the resolution, which I didn't believe was my job to do. I thought
that was something that the County did, and I still don't know who's responsible
for writing the resolution.
I went through at least four different people who are handling the project and they
have gone on to other things. So, we've been kind of the orphan child in this
thing, and at every occasion it gets pointed to me that I'm the one that hasn't met
the compliance, but I believe I have. I've gotten misdirection from the County;
I've been told to wait for six months and submit it after the Sign Code changed or
the sign process changed. So and at one point, Bobby Command even told me to
go ahead and put up the sign, "Forget the variance, you don't need one." So, I
just kind of feel like, yeah, I've been pistol-whipped here, and that's my
perspective.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Harris. Let me just ask, very directly, do you
want to continue to proceed with this sign variance?
MR. HARRIS -GLADE: Yeah, and I think it's to the County's advantage. I mean
the amount of revenue that comes in from the bed tax and from the sales tax is to
the County's advantage. This particular property in previous reviews has been
granted the right to have a variance because of its unique location. It's not on a
fronted street, it's a half a block back from Kuakini Highway. It's very hard to
find, and that was the purpose of the request, so that people could actually find the
building.
There's no opportunity to put a directional sign on the corner of Sorona and
Kuakini Highway, because that property does not belong to the applicant. So,
you're in mid -block, and they need some way to get people there from the airport.
So, they can't find it once they come down Henry Street.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you Mr. Harris. One final question for you. What is the
property zoned?
MR. HARRIS -GLADE: I think its CV Commercial (Village Commercial), I'm
not sure. I don't have that zoning map in front of me, but I'm pretty sure, it's CV
Commercial.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you. Mr. Erickson before you, you have
Resolution 92-19, in the title, it reflects a Zoned "U". How did the
department provide this information as far as the appropriate zoning?
Page 12
PWMTC-3
March 12, 2019
MR. ERICKSON: Council, this looks like
MS. LEE LOY: I'm asking you to take a look
MR. ERICKSON: I don't know anything about zoning. That's a Planning
Department issue, so this would have been stated by the applicant. It looks like
CG -20 (General Commercial) would be more appropriate, but the "U" must have
been a left over. So, again, this doesn't get routed back to Planning for their
review, so I have no idea what the zoning is.
MS. LEE LOY: Mr. Erickson, this work product came from the department, and I
think it's a duty of the department to provide this body with a factual resolution.
MR. ERICKSON: So, just to clarify for Mr. Fritz Harris -Glade and for the rest of
this Council, the resolution is written by the applicant. I have another example I
was going to bring in today by Walmart that is very complete. And weagain, I
don't look at this, but I can see your point about routing this back to Planning for
verification. It's not part of the process now. This goes to the administrative
clerks, and they write it up and forward it electronically to you. So in this case, I
have to take responsibility and say, "I didn't know." I didn't know what the
zoning is. I just didn't think about looking at it.
MS. LEE LOY: I appreciate what you're saying about whose duty it is, but when
I review the Code, the Signage Code, Chapter 3 and the duties of KVDC, all of it
is filtered back to this department for then it to be forwarded to the Council. I
don't think it's the applicant's responsibility. It's no different than when an
applicant applies for a change of zone ordinance and its run through its processes
through the Planning Commission. It is the department that prepares the Zoning
ordinance for this body to further evaluate. My heartburn is you provided us a
factually inaccurate document that this body cannot act upon. Is that a fair
assessment?
MR. ERICKSON: Yeah, frankly, I think it's been a waste of time. I think this
needs to go back to KVDC and have the Planning Department review the
application again. There's too many discrepancies with this application. And just
to let you know, as much as I agree, it would be our responsibility to write the
resolution. It's never been the case, we always forward this on to the applicant to
create.
MS. LEE LOY: I'm going to correct the record. That's not correct. Jessica, who
was in your division would prepare resolutions to this effect when they were
coming through the process. So, you have past practices where an individual
from the department would prepare a factually correct resolution and then forward
it to this body.
Page 13
PWMTC-3
March 12, 2019
MR. ERICKSON: I stand corrected if that's the case. Of course, she's no longer
with our office.
MS. LEE LOY: I think my larger concern is that this particular application has
taken five years, and I have a simple question. Is that a reasonable expectation for
a sign variance?
MR. ERICKSON: Certainly not. I mean many others have come and gone before
this one and after this one, and I have to give the applicant credit for his
perseverance in order to come into compliance with the code. So, I mean in that
case, we have to just say, "Thank you." But, for our side, yeah, there's the ball
looks like it's been dropped numerous times, and I can only take responsibility for
that.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. I yield at this time. I'm looking forward to
any comments from my colleagues.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Ms. Eoff.
MS. EOFF: Thank you. I remember this coming before us, and I remember all
the reasons why they were seeking a sign code variance. Because for one thing,
it's a Holiday Inn Hotel, and there's a standard sign. This is what I remember,
and I'm trying to ask my staff to find the committee report to help jog my
memory some more. But, I remember hearing that the reason they wanted a
variance was because Holiday Inn has a certain sort of sign that has to be used to
identify the brand, Holiday Inn, and it's also got to be a certain size. I don't
remember what happened, except for I guess we postponed it. But are they in
business without a sign; or what's on the building now?
MR. ERICKSON: Fritz, can you answer that question? Are there standards at
Holiday Inn, as we're seeking, and is there a sign on the building now?
MR. HARRIS -GLADE: Yes, there are corporate standards, and I had a lengthy
conversation with IHG (InterContinental Hotels Group), which is the corporate
parent. These are franchises, by the way. So, their franchisee is responsible for
meeting certain terms and conditions, and I explained to their corporate people
that you can't have your corporate standards because it doesn't work in the
Village. As a point in fact, I used to be the Vice Chair of the Kailua Village
Design Commission many years ago, so I know how the process works.
So, we compromised and we came back to KVDC and said, "What if we do this?"
And this was to make a compromise in the size of the letters and break up the sign
so that it wasn't what you would typically see out of the corporate handbook,
which was not very appealing for Kailua Village. It's just, you know something
you might see on a freeway in the mainland. So, there was a compromise on the
applicant's side to try to do something better; and currently there may be a small
Page 14
PWMTC-3
March 12, 2019
sign on the building, but I don't believe there's any sign until you get to the front
door.
MS. EOFF: Thank you. And the last time it was up for review at the Kailua
Village Design Commission, were they in support of a compromise or a sign
variance with a compromised size?
MR. HARRIS -GLADE: Yes, and I forwarded a copy of the letter to Councilman
Lee Loy yesterday. I don't know where? Somehow that letter got lost in the
process, but it went through the process. We got the commission to approve the
compromise. There was a letter that followed, that was at that time, sent to the
previous Director of Public Works. And I revised the resolution at least five
times by direction by either Kelly Wilson or Neil Erickson, or someone else at
County Council. So, we've been trying to do everything we're supposed to do,
and I'm just at a loss of what to do next.
MS. EOFF: Okay, thank you. It seems like we would need to, for one thing, have
a more complete packet transmitted to us, and possibly a redraft. Maybe this
needs to be either withdrawn or postponed, because it seems like there's a lot of
inaccuracies in the resolution, so I wouldI mean I'm not sure what the process
would be, but it seems like we may need to withdraw this and start with a clean
reso, and with all of the attachments that would belong in the packet with maps or
drawings that we can actually see better and with the recommendations from the
Kailua Village Design Commission. Because otherwise, we can't really do
anything, I don't think, meaningful here. Thank you.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. Eof£
Ms. Lee Loy.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Eoff, for those comments. I have prepared a
comprehensive correction to this resolution, but I needed to use this opportunity
for this body and this department to understand how we hope to get good work
product from them, which is factually accurate and which this body can further
act upon.
Again, I'm hoping for any other discussion, but I do have a way forward that
helps Mr. Harris -Glade; that helps the department and really expedites this
process which has been waiting for five years, which I think is just unacceptable.
It's bad practice. Chair, I yield.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Mr. Richards.
MR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Chair. It's kind of hard. Where to begin? The
fact that this has taken five years, obviously no one likes this situation. And I
think where Councilwoman Lee Loy is going with this comes back to one of our
Page 15
PWMTC-3
March 12, 2019
initial conversations we had earlier today concerning the overall structure and
culture of trying to get things done.
If we, again, want to get our County fixed and our economy really rolling, we
have to be very mindful of getting things done in a very timely fashion. And, this
predates me as far as that goes, but I think what we're discussing, yeah we have
an issue here with this sign, and I appreciate Mr. Erickson saying, accepting
responsibility that we got pukas in our process. But, I think the bigger picture is
that we have a culture issue as far trying to get this embraced and going forward.
And so, I'm not an expert in any of this stuff, but Itimeframes are important,
and I can only imagine from a business standpoint, you're going to run out of
time, patience, and quite frankly money, if we're not responsive to the needs of
these businesses as we come forward.
And so, we've discussed the impacts of this last year and the natural disasters that
we've had; the lava inundation, the hurricane, and everything else that we faced
associated with that. Our economy took a huge hit, huge hit. It's estimated
maybe $500 million is what our economy took a hit this last year. The only way
we're going to be able to recover is if we are very sensitive to getting the
economy rolling, which means being sensitive to the needs of our constituents,
specifically businesses here.
So, I'm hearing what Council Woman Lee Loy is saying, that a retooling,
restructuring, whatever the case may be—it's interesting that we started the
morning this conversation, and now we're going to end the morning with this
conversation. But, very, very mindful of that, we have to facilitate, streamline.
And I don't know what the process is, but I hear what's being said, I yield.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Richards.
Ms. Kierkiewicz.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. Like Ms. Lee Loy, like Mr. Richards, I
am feeling in so many ways, heartburn, nauseous. I mean, I'm cringing the whole
time the applicant is recalling the experience that he's taken over five years to get
a variance, and I think of the things that I could do in five years. I could birth a
child, raise her and send her off to Kindergarten. Lots can happen.
I don't feel comfortable taking a vote on the measure that's before us. I think we
need full documentation. Documentation around the process that this variance
has been reviewed under. I mean, I think about the thick stacks of info that we
get for each application that's coming through from the Planning Department. I
read through all of it, every single thing. All of the minutes from the Commission
meetings; the recommendation letters, all of it. Because, I feel we have a
responsibility to make decisions with all of that in mind, because that's our
number one responsibility here is to legislate properly, and we can't do that if we
don't have good information.
Page 16
PWMTC-3
March 12, 2019
I feel, I'm sorry, I justI have to express my sincere apologies to the applicant. I
know I wasn't involved but I really feel for you and I just wonder how many more
of these stories are out there that we haven't heard. Who else has gone through
this arduous process? And I do feel that the system is broken. Something is
wrong. There is a profound issue with this process.
Earlier this morning we talked about the various time extensions that were coming
before us as a Council and needing to review the system holistically so that we
that we can create something that works for everyone. I think we need to put a
communication forward to have a robust discussion about this process so that it's
clear and it's transparent, and nobody's working in silos anymore. I mean, clearly
there's not a lot of communication going on between the departments, and that
scares me. We're supposed to be working together as one County, functioning
efficiently together.
And so, thank you, Ms. Lee Loy for bringing all of this to light. I know that with
your very capable hands, you're already crafted some amendments to this
resolution, but I think perhaps maybe we need to lay this on the table until we can
get more information from Public Works and the applicant before we vote on it.
So, with that said, I yield the floor. Thank you.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Ms. Eof£
MS. EOFF: I have a question. The positive recommendation from the Design
Commission, when—that you said you transmitted a memo, when was that dated?
I mean, it is a current—was it before the Design Commission currently or is this
like several years back? So, I'm just wondering if there's—
MS. LEE LOY: If I may?
MS. EOFF: Yes.
MS. LEE LOY: I provided a legislative timeline on this particular application.
And just as a thumbnail sketch, the application was submitted in April of 2014. It
went to KVDC in May of 2014, at which time—and this might be some other
resolutions that Ms. Eoff recallsa Resolution 466 was transmitted to the
Council in June of 2014. That particular resolution was postponed to the call of
the Chair in July of 2014, at which time in September of 2014, a second
resolution came before this body, which provided the revised application as
outlined by Mr. Harris -Glade. At our October 14, 2014 meeting, Resolution 553
was amended to Draft 2, at which time Council Member Kanuha withdrew
Resolution 466. And then at our November 2014 meeting, Resolution 553 was
postponed indefinitely, and at which time it went back to KVDC; and in
November of 2015, KVDC provided their revised recommendations and
Page 17
PWMTC-3
March 12, 2019
comments, which is what Mr. Harris -Glade explained today, which is the four
different signs. It has been sitting in this department since that time.
MS. EOFF: I see, so the expectation was that after that last review by the Design
Commission, we would have seen a revised packet, which is finally coming now,
but it's still incomplete, and mistakes. So I'm wondering, you said you—and I'm
looking at your work on this amendment, but it doesn't fix that "U" in the title. I
don't know if that needs to be changed or if we can. That's why I was
recommending that if we need to start fresh or if this is the vehicle. But I guess
we can keep discussing that.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Ms. Villegas.
MS. VILLEGAS: Thank you for all the back history and the timeline and to get a
better understanding of this. And as it is in the district that I'm responsible for, I
hope to play a role in following this through. I do have some concerns about
signage size in Kona, and we have some other businesses who just put up the
signs and say they're going to pay the fines and disregard some of the values that
the Kailua Village Design Commission has put forth.
So, I would just ask if you could keep me abreast of what this fuller packet looks
like that I could wrap my head around. Not only the past, and my apologies for
the cracks in the system and for the delays here, and my hope would be that we
could move forward and find a solution for the signage.
I do believe that when I've driven pass the building, there is some sort of signage
up there, because it does indicate what it is. However, I personally want to make
sure that it's not billboard size. Because this is—while the location of the
building itself is kind of further aback, it is right in the heart of our unique and
precious little town. And already it's placement kind of surprised me in general,
as somebody that lived there before I ran for office. So, just wanting to make sure
that it's appropriate. So, thank you for including me in that going further.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Chair Chung.
MR. CHUNG: Thank you. You know, I was wondering why Ms. Lee Loy had
relinquished the chair. Now I know. But you know, of course we have veered
from the substance of this matter, but you know, I think what's been brought up
really speaks of a broader issue. I have to say, depending on whose account you
take, it's concerning, perhaps even disturbing.
All I can say is this, you know, and I frequently tell constituents that, the County
Council really doesn't have too much say over administrative matters, but this is
what we can do. And I'm not really laying any fault on the department right now.
I don't want to jump to conclusions, although I've got to say though if from what
I heard today, and from both sides, I have to kind of feel for the applicant, okay.
Page 18
PWMTC-3 March 12, 2019
But having said that, I think the administration should know, and David you've
only been on board for about a month, but, if things like this continue to occur
then I guess the department or departments can expect to have to explain
themselves. And I think that's the lesson to be gleaned from today. And I feel
really bad for Mr. Harris and you know, having to wait for five years, that's
inexcusable, but there may be reasons I don't know. But, when you have two
different accounts of what went on, inquiries have to be made, right? So anyway,
that's all I have to say. Thank you.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Ms. Lee Loy.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. Thank you to the rest of my colleagues. And
really, this really was intended to be a teaching moment. One, for the department
to provide us, you know, a work product that this body can further act upon. So
with that being said, I'd like to amend Resolution 92 with the contents of
(Comm.) 155.1. If I could get a second?
Motion to Amend: Ms. Lee Loy moved to amend Res. 92-19, with the
contents of Comm. 155.1. Seconded by Mr. Richards.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Is there any discussion?
CHR. LEE LOY: Yes, Chair, please. What I've done is try and provide a
pathway forward for Mr. Harris -Glade along with the department. And what this
body can find in Communication 155.1 is a substantive deviation from the
resolution that was presented to us. It corrects all of the factual inaccuracies that
were provided to us in Resolution 92 and is red -lined as provided by the
communication.
What I am going to be asking further is that, if this body so incline to do and
adopt this communication and turn this into a Draft 2, is to have the department
take this back to KVDC and have them further evaluate this resolution to insure
that the recommendations that they made back in November of 2015 and that this
resolution is a true and accurate reflection of their recommendations. And further
direct this body, this department to not only provide this body with a favorable
recommendation from KVDC, but any and all exhibits that should come with this
final version that this body can further act upon.
I'm going to further request that this be done in an expeditious manner, and that
this body see the action from KVDC and the department no later thanI wish we
could do that but KVDC has their own schedule. I'm going to say April 9. That
gives KVDC time to schedule their meetings. Oh, I'm looking at Mr. Yee. You
know what, I'm still going to put a nail in it. I want it back to us by April 19. If
KVDC does not meet, I expect a letter from this department explaining the status.
With that, I yield the floor.
Page 19
PWMTC-3
March 12, 2019
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Seeing no further discussion, on
the motion
MR. RICHARDS: Real quick.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Sorry, Mr. Richards. You're
quick, you're quick there.
MR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Chair. As a point of clarification, may I ask
Councilwoman Lee Loy a question?
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yes.
MR. RICHARDS: To verify the substantive content of your communication is
what you have that came from Kailua's—okay. Correct? I yield.
MS. LEE LOY: Yeah, for the record, my staff along with the legislative review
branch has done a comprehensive review of all of the legislative background
material on this. The resolution you have before you articulates all of the
recommendations from KVDC along with the appropriate and accurate reflections
of the Code and the KVDC; sections of that Code.
We really did a lot of heavy lifting to make sure that this applicant does not have
to wait any longer. But, I also want to direct the department that this is a good
teaching moment, and now you folks have a template on how to move items
through the Sign Variance Code process, specifically as it applies to KVCD.
Because what I heard Mr. Erickson say during his testimony was that there
probably are a number of businesses in Kailua Village who have put up signs
illegally.
And so, if this provides a bright line of expectation for any applicant who is doing
business in Kailua-Kona, a pathway forward, this is the tool. And that's how I
want to help. This wasn't easy. This really was intended to be a teaching
moment, and I hope going forward, because I stand ready to help this department.
Mr. Yamamoto knows that loud and clear, but we cannot help unless we
recognize our deficiencies.
MR. ERICKSON: Can I just recognize that I understand and I'm willing to
accept that challenge, because I want to do it. And I want to do it right, and
you're right. Right now, we're working with Planet Fitness, for example. So, I
don't want to wait until we have complaints. We want to make it easy for
applicants. I really do want to help them.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Is there any further discussion?
May I ask if we have any further comment from Mr. Harris on the phone?
Page 20
PWMTC-3 March 12, 2019
MR. HARRIS -GLADE: Yes, I appreciate the interest that the Council has taken
in this. It made me look terribly ineffective to my client, and I don't know how
much damage was done there, but if I can make this happen and he can finally put
up a sign, maybe he'll forgive me. But you know, again, its constructive
criticism. This application has been lost on numerous occasions, can't find the
documents. As a matter of fact, on another matter, this morning I got an email
from someone from the Building Department asking me if I had certain drawings
in my possession. And they said, "No, you have them." And about an hour later,
I got an email, "Oh yeah, we found them." So, there's a real challenge here with
document control, and I hope that that goes along with the teaching moment
where the Department of Public Works can, maybe with their new computer
system, have a better way of tracking where things are. And that would be nice.
And Mr. Erickson, I hope you don't take this as any kind of a personal front. It
was never my intention to put you in the hot seat.
MR. ERICKSON: Thanks Fritz, but it goes with the job.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, thank you very much.
Thank you for your time. So on the floor, we have a motion to amend by
Ms. Lee Loy.
Vote on Motion to The motion to amend Res. 92-19, with the contents of
Amend: Comm. 155. 1, was carried by the following roll call
(Approved) vote.
Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Eoff,
Kierkiewicz, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas,
and Acting Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder – 8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Committee Member Poindexter –1.
Excused: None.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: So back to the main motion then.
Do we have a motion to forward Res. 92-19, as amended by Comm. 155. 1, to the
Council with a positive recommendation?
MS. LEE LOY: Chair, I'd like to further amend that motion, that we forward
Resolution 92-19, as amended by the contents of Communication 155.1 to the
Kailua Village Design Commission. I think I stated for the record—well, let's
just vote on that motion.
Motion to Refer: Ms. Lee Loy moved to refer Res. 92-19, as amended to
Draft 2, to the Kailua Village Design Commission for
Its review and comments. Seconded by Ms. David.
Page 21
PWMTC-3
March 12, 2019
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Is there any further
discussion?
MR. HENRICKS: Just to be clear, the motion is to refer this resolution, as
amended to the Kailua Village Design Commission for its review and comments.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yes.
MR HENRICKS : Thank you.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you.
MS. LEE LOY: Yeah, thank you. And it really is, I'm hoping that this will
become a pathway forward and really take care of Mr. Harris -Glade that has been
waiting for five years. It's my intention that this resolution in its complete and
thoroughness can be expedited through the Kailua Village Design Commission.
At which time it will then come back up through its processes, and as I stated for
the record what a complete packet would look like from the department before
coming back to this committee.
I'm also doing this in an effort for recordkeeping purposes. Our Clerk doesn't
like to hold things indefinitely in purgatory, communication purgatory. And so
with that, this actually provides a clear, bright path of what the next steps are. But
as I did mention, I do expect something back from the department by April 9.
Even if it's not a complete packet, a status update. Thank you, I yield.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Any further discussion?
MR. HARRIS -GLADE: I have one final question, please.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yes, sir.
MR. HARRIS -GLADE: So, in the future, who is responsible for writing the
resolution for a variance?
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: We had a hand raised by
Mr. Neil Erickson from the Building Division.
MR. ERICKSON: Just to make it clear, the Building Division for Public Works
will be responsible for writing resolutions to forward to the Council, and making
sure that they're accurate and contain the right references. So just for clarity, I
thought I'd raise my hand despite the pain it causes.
Page 22
PWMTC-3 March 12,2019
ACTING CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, I believe we have that on
record. Any further discussion? Okay, seeing none, may I have the vote? All
those in favor?
Vote on Motion to Refer: The motion to refer Res. 92-19, as amended to Draft 2, to the
(Approved) the Kailua Village Design Commission for its review and
comments was carried by the following voice vote.
Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Eoff,
Kierkiewicz, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas,
and Acting Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder— 8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Committee Member Poindexter— 1.
Excused: None.
ADJOURN- There being no further business, at 12:33 p.m., Ms. Lee Loy moved to adjourn the
MENT: meeting. Seconded by Mr. Richards and carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Eoff,
Kierkiewicz, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas,
and Acting Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder— 8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Committee Member Poindexter— 1.
Excused: None.
ACTING CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, that ends our Third
Session for Committee on Public Works.
404IP
47\-- /Q1z:ACk
I L. K. Lee Loy, Chair (Date)
Public Wor, and Mass Tr. • it Corn oittee
SL/dt
Page 23