Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN PC 2019/11/05 2018-2020Committee on Planning 18th Session Hawaii County Building 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawaii November 5, 2019 CALL TO The regular meeting of the Committee on Planning was called to order at ORDER: 4:31 p.m., in the Council Chambers, Hilo, by Ms. Ashley Kierkiewicz, Chair. ROLL CALL Present: Ms. Ashley Kierkiewicz, Chair Ms. Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Vice Chair Mr. Aaron S. Y. Chung, Member Ms. Maile Medeiros David, Member Ms. Karen Eoff, Member Mr. Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Member Ms. Valerie T. Poindexter, Member Mr. Herbert M. "Tim" Richards, III, Member Ms. Rebecca Villegas, Member STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, FROM THE Statements from the Public on Agenda Items. PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS: The following individuals registered to speak and came forward when called by the Chair: Richard Koval: Comm. 533, comment. Sidney Fuke: Comm. 533, comment. Dorotiea Morris: Comm. 533, in opposition. Gregory Brown: Comm. 533, comment. Alan Brockman: Comm. 533, comment. Zendo Kern: Bill 111 (Comm. 545); comment. Jeana Jones: Comm. 533, comment. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: I will close public testimony at this time. Mr. Clerk, I would like to take up the nominations. We have a lot of folks that are willing to serve that have been waiting for several hours for their nomination to be heard. So if we could start with Communication 550, please. PC -18 November 5, 2019 Change Order As directed by the Chair and with no objection from the Council Members, the of Business: following item was taken out of order: Comm. 550: NOMINATION OF STACEY E. AGUTAR TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS From Mayor Harry Kim, dated October 18, 2019, submitting for the Council's review and confirmation the above nomination. Requires Council Confirmation by: December 1, 2019 (Section 13-4(1), Hawaii County Charter) Vote on Comm. 550: Ms. Eoff moved to recommend confirmation of the (Approved) appointment of Ms. Stacey E. Aguiar to the Board of Appeals. Seconded by Mr. Richards and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members David, Eoff, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kierkiewicz — 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Chung — 1. Excused: None. Executive Assistant to the Mayor Rose Bautista provided a brief narrative of the nominee. Committee Members spoke in favor of the appointment. Chair Kierkiewicz informed Ms. Aguiar that she does not need to appear before full Council for final confirmation. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Mr. Clerk, if we could move on to Communication 551, please. Comm. 551: NOMINATION OF MARISA R. BANKSTON TO THE KONA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN ACTION COMMITTEE From Mayor Harry Kim, dated October 18, 2019, submitting for the Council's review and confirmation the above nomination. Requires Council Confirmation by: December 1, 2019 (Section 13-4(1), Hawaii County Charter) Page 2 PC -18 Vote on Comm. 551 (Approved) Comm. 552 Vote on Comm. 552 (Approved) November 5, 2019 Ms. Eoff moved to recommend confirmation of the appointment of Ms. Marisa R. Bankston to the Kona Community Development Plan Action Committee. Seconded by Ms. David and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members David, Eoff, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kierkiewicz — 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Chung — 1. Excused: None. Executive Assistant to the Mayor Rose Bautista provided a brief narrative of the nominee. Committee Members spoke in favor of the appointment. Chair Kierkiewicz informed Ms. Bankston that she does not need to appear before full Council for final confirmation. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Mr. Clerk, Communication 552. NOMINATION OF ROSELYN C. MOLINA TO THE KONA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN ACTION COMMITTEE From Mayor Harry Kim, dated October 18, 2019, submitting for the Council's review and confirmation the above nomination. Requires Council Confirmation by: December 1, 2019 (Section 13-4(1), Hawaii County Charter) Mr. Richards moved to recommend confirmation of the appointment of Ms. Roselyn C. Molina to the Kona Community Development Plan Action Committee. Seconded by Ms. Eoff and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members David, Eoff, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kierkiewicz — 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Chung — 1. Excused: None. Page 3 PC -18 November 5, 2019 Executive Assistant to the Mayor Rose Bautista provided a brief narrative of the nominee. Committee Members spoke in favor of the appointment. Chair Kierkiewicz informed Ms. Molina that she does not need to appear before full Council for final confirmation. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Alright Mr. Clerk, Communication 553. Comm. 553: NOMINATION OF MAX EDWARD NEWBERG TO THE LEEWARD PLANNING COMMISSION From Mayor Harry Kim, dated October 18, 2019, submitting for the Council's review and confirmation the above nomination. Requires Council Confirmation by: December 1, 2019 (Section 13-4(1), Hawaii County Charter) Vote on Comm. 553: Mr. Richards moved to recommend confirmation of the (Approved) appointment of Mr. Max Edward Newberg to the Leeward Planning Commission. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members David, Eoff, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kierkiewicz — 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Chung — 1. Excused: None. Executive Assistant to the Mayor Rose Bautista provided a brief narrative of the nominee. Committee Members spoke in favor of the appointment. Chair Kierkiewicz informed Mr. Newberg that he does not need to appear before full Council for final confirmation. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you Ms. Bautista. Recess: At 5:25 p.m., the Chair called for a recess. Reconvene: The meeting reconvened at 5:30 p.m. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Aloha. If you could take your seats, the Planning Committee is out of recess. And just a quick announcement, if you are streaming this meeting live, after the Planning Committee is finished, we will go back to Ag, Water, Energy, and Environmental Management. There are a few things on Page 4 PC -18 November 5, 2019 the agenda that we want to get through this evening. So, thank you so much for your patience. A lot of heavy, interesting discussions today, so thank you. MR. KANEALII-KLEINFELDER: Chair, if I may? Bill's been here almost all day, and Mike came in the last couple hours. So I'm hoping to get to Bill because he sat in the last meeting too and sat for hours. And then actually left at the end. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: We actually talked story with him about it, and we're going to continue to move forward with Planning and then reconvene Ag, Water. Thank you so much for your concern. MR. KANEALII-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Bill, I tried. Thank you. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Mr. Clerk, if we could move on to Bill 111, please Bill 111: AMENDS ORDINANCE NO. 09-90A, WHICH RECLASSIFIED LANDS FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL — 10,000 SQUARE FEET (RS -10) TO INDUSTRIAL — COMMERCIAL MIXED — 20,000 SQUARE FEET (MCX-20) AT WAIAKEA HOUSELOTS, WAIAKEA, SOUTH HILO, HAWAII, COVERED BY TAX MAP KEY: 2-2-050:043 (Applicant: Trevor R. Rodrigues) (Area: 45,800 sq. ft.) The Windward Planning Commission forwards its favorable recommendation for this amendment, which will allow a five-year time extension to comply with Condition D (Time to Complete Construction) and Condition F (Future Road Widening). The applicant is requesting to construct a veterinary clinic with 25 parking stalls, as well as two other buildings for commercial office and warehouse space. The property is located along the north side of East Kawili Street at the corner of Laukapu Street in the Waiakea Houselots. Reference: Comm. 545 Intr. by: Ms. Kierkiewicz (B/R) ; and Comm. 545.1: From Planning Director Michael Yee, dated October 11, 2019, transmitting the draft transcript from the Windward Planning Commission's October 3, 2019, meeting. Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to recommend passage of Bill 111 on first reading. Seconded by Mr. Richards. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Can I have the applicant or consultant, representative please come forward their representative please come forward, Mr. Fuke? And while we're at it, Director Yee? Page 5 PC -18 November 5, 2019 (Note: At this time, Planning Consultant Sidney Fuke and Planning Director Michael Yee came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. FUKE: Hi. Good evening. I'm here representing Dr. Trevor Rodrigues. It's basically a time extension request. He's already got his building permit. The bank is ready to sign his loan, except that since July 2019 was the deadline when the building had to be completed, obviously, he needed an extension. So subject to the Council's approval of this proposed ordinance amendment, he's going to get the financing; get the building all up and running. So, we respectfully request your approval of this extension request. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. And Director Yee, if you could elaborate just a little bit, because I was going through the background information, and so the Planning Department put forth a favorable recommendation for a time extension and the Planning Commission had actually removed the time element attached to that. So hoping you can dive into a little bit of the details on that. I have a little bit of comments that I want to put forward, but I'd like to hear from you and what your position is on that. MR. YEE: Michael Yee, Planning Director. At the Planning Commission, Commissioners felt like the zone change was consistent to what we want to see. So why put on a time extension if this is what we want to have? Even if they don't accomplish in the short term, we still want this. And so from their perspective it wasn't necessary to put that time limit on it again. And they clearly had questions around where were they at in the permitting system. Did they have a contractor in there? They're ready to go. So from a common sense standpoint, I think they felt comfortable that this was going to get done and there wasn't a significant risk, like it wasn't going to be. In the greater scope around when we've been struggling with time extensions and trying to figure out the new language, I understand your kind of hesitancy around this. But I think particularly that the commission has been very in tuned to time extensions and what that means. And so, I don't think they frivolously put something forward that was not consistent with what we want to see. Again, when I'm sitting here today, I'm representing what the Planning Commission wanted, and not necessarily my own point of view on my original recommendation. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Anybody have questions or comments? If not, I'm just going to continue to probe Director Yee on this one. Ms. Lee Loy. Page 6 PC -18 November 5, 2019 MS. LEE LOY: Yeah. Thank you, Chair. Thank you Sidney, Director, for being here. You know, this is in my district and exactly what Director mentioned. You know, this is the type of revitalization for the area we wanted to see. And I really appreciate that the commission is kind of rumbling with these time extensions, because that's always been my concern is that we set expectations for them to get a building permit and go through plan of approval, or get, you know, the infrastructure in when we don't have the best permitting system or review system for them to meet these expectations. So I'm going to be asking the rest of my colleagues to go ahead and support this. As Mr. Yee mentioned, you know, it's imminent. Everything's really ready to go. And I just want to again, use this as an example that as we set expectations and put conditions on various zoning applications, that they have reasonable expectations, but also back to the agencies that have to review curb, gutter, sidewalks; subdivision applications, plan approval. That the agencies can actually meet the timelines also. So, it's on both sides of the counter that has to work together. Chair, I yield. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Any other questions or comments? Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: It's just nice to see a project that has curbs, sidewalks, gutters included in it and then be held to that. So I appreciate you holding to that in this document. Always good to see. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Alright, if I could just dive into it. Oh, Mr. Richards. MR. RICHARDS: Yeah, I was just going to say, as Council Woman Lee Loy said, this is her district, and I think as we all agree we like to listen to the representation from that district very closely. That being said, we are looking for the economic growth development generator type of thing. And this is something that is part of that deal, so I'll definitely be supporting it. Thank you, I yield. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: There's no question I support what's before us. What bothers me a little bit was going through the transcripts of the Planning Commission and having a commissioner say that it's been a waste of time to go through all these time extensions. So there have been 20 bills that have come before the Planning Committee this year. Eleven of them, not including this one, have been a request for a time extension. And I kind of appreciated knowing that this was coming forward, Page 7 PC -18 November 5, 2019 because what it did was it exposed me to a lot of other agencies outside of the County that we rely on to make the process work. Case in point, the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD). First bill that came before us, Ka`upulehu Development, waiting seven years to hear from them. This is not uncommon. Had we not gotten time extensions, I never would have known. Well maybe I would have if I worked in Planning, that there's some severe issues. So over the last six months, I've been working very closely with Planning and Public Works to actually figure out ways the County can work better with SHPD. I think these are great moments where we can stop, check our systems. And so if going forward we're going to remove the time element from conditions, I ask you to reconsider. I think it makes sense for this bill that is before us, but I don't want the message to go back to the commission that says we're setting new precedents. No time extension parameters on anything. You know, in the past what we've discussed is keeping time differently. So just as we Council Members have the time clock running. We have the time clock running. We have five minutes to speak. It stops when the person we're talking to in front of us has the floor. So I wonder if, as applicants are moving forward meeting the various conditions in the ordinance, that when they've submitted their part of the application, that the time stops ticking, that it pauses while it is being reviewed by Building or SHPD. Just trying to think of creative ways we move forward. Again, I hesitate to just give up any sort of timing element in these permits going forward. So, just wanted to share that. MR. YEE: Agree with you, and I just want to remind you that we did come in front of the Council and gave a briefing on time extension issues. We also have presented to both Planning Commissions our work so far around revising rules and stuff around time extensions. So, one of the great legacies I'm trying to leave behind will be some changes around time extensions. And so, that's in the works. It's been a little bit buried behind a few other things in Planning, but we are working on it. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Okay, that's great to hear. Any other questions or comments? Ms. David. MS. DAVID: Just a short one, and I thank you, Chair, for mentioning that, because I'm looking at Condition P which was Condition R before, and I'm happy to know that this is just for this particular application, because if the "conditions should not be met or substantially complied with," and you took out "in a timely fashion," then the Director may initiate rezoning. Page 8 PC -18 November 5, 2019 So I think for this case, I'm happy that you folks are confident that we will not have a timing issue, but I think any application really needs some reference to a timeframe when they need to complete certain things. So, thank you for working on that and trying to fine tune that, because I think it's really important to keep track. Thank you, I yield. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. Go ahead. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: You're wanting to take the five year out, in general? MR. YEE: On this, yes. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: But I mean, in general, like out of the—it's in our Code. Isn't there a section where it says, "There will be a five-year requirement." MR. YEE: No. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Are you sure? MR. YEE: Yes. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I remember reading through somewhere in our Code and going through the bill looking at different sections in there. There was a section requiring a five-year time limit for projects. Am I wrong? MR. FUKE: That's usually associated with part of a zone change ordinance, but I don't believe it's written in the Zoning Code per say. No, it's not a rule. It just says that the ordinance and rules say that the Commission or the Council could adopt conditions that assure performance along those lines. So, but as far as like whether there was a three, five, or ten yearI don't believe there was any numerical assignment. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I've got to go back and look, because I remember seeing about a five-year—there was a very specific section that said five years was a requirement. I've got to go back and look, and maybe it was either in subdivisions, because when I was looking at subdivisions or roads, or it would have been in the DPW (Department of Public Works) Section. Okay, thank you. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Okay, so to be clear, what's before us, we're removing the time element for when the conditions of this bill for ordinance will be met, but Page 9 PC -18 November 5, 2019 just for this one, okay, because my reading of the transcripts by the commission was that they wanted to get rid of it in general. MR. YEE: No, I don't think that was there in that conversation. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Okay, well Mercury's in retrograde, so I would have misinterpreted. It's been a long day guys. Thank you for humoring me. Any other questions or comments? Thank you Mr. Fuke, Director Yee, for being here. We have a motion on the floor. All in favor to forward Bill 111 to the Council with a positive recommendation, please say "aye." Vote on Bill 111: The motion to recommend passage of Bill 111 on first (Approved) reading was carried by the following voice vote. Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, and Chair Kierkiewicz — 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Villegas — 1. Excused: None. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Alright Mr. Clerk, back to the top of the agenda, please. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Excuse me, I'm just going to say it again, Department of Ag was here way before Planning, so it would be respective to have them come up beforehand. Just putting that out there. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, I hear you loud and clear. You put in a communication during a committee day in which you were not here. These individuals waited on that day. And so, I'm going to move forward as Committee Chair and exercise my authority and move forward with Communication 533. Thank you. Return to Order The Chair directed the Committee to return to the order of business. of Business: COMMUNI- The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, CATIONS: Communications. Comm. 533: REQUESTS AN UPDATE BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 18-114, RELATING TO REGISTRATION OF SHORT-TERM VACATION RENTALS From Council Member Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, dated September 30, 2019. Page 10 PC -18 November 5, 2019 Motion to Close File: Mr. Richards moved to close file on Comm. 533. Seconded by Ms. David. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: If I could bring forward the representatives from the Planning Department. I believe there's a presentation. (Note: At this time, Planning Director Michael Yee came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. YEE: Michael Yee, Planning Director. I'm here to cut the tension. Now you know what it's like to feel like our Planning Department right now. I read in the newspaper article that Ashley wanted to get a temperature of the situation. I can tell you, it's at least 103 right now. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: It's boiling right? MR. YEE: Yes. And given that it's been a long day for you. Now you know exactly how my staff has felt for like months now, every day, and you'll see the stats on the overtime. Based on some of the comments as we're trying to get the presentation up, there were folks testifying around changes to the bill. I don't disagree with many of the comments around changes that are necessary, but I need to just say probably what's on your mind. We're not here to redraft to craft a new bill or to make revisions. We're here to talk about how we're implementing the bill; the adjustments that I can make within my authority to try to make it as smooth as possible. And yes, there's going to be frustration out in the public and stuff, but we're trying. You know, there was comments around, like different placards. Yes, that happened early on. That was fixed a while back. So there's only one placard design going out to folks, okay. Part of the complications when you have an office here and one in Kona, and trying to insure that consistency when we're all kind of flying and building the plane as we go, right? Alright and so, okay, I think we're ready to launch. Thank you. First of all, quick shout out to early on, I had a lot of help from Duane Kanuha when he came out of retirement to help to take on the deputy position. And given his expertise and experience, he was able to really help with the processing and trying to refine the processes within in the department. Good to know, he's gone home few weeks back. He'll rehab there, but I also want to announce then that April Surprenant is the Acting Deputy Director of the Planning Department in his absence. But we do miss Duane and everything that he brought to help the department in the time he was back. Page 11 PC -18 November 5, 2019 (Note: At this time, Planning Director Michael Yee came forward and provided a PowerPoint presentation to the members of the Committee. For viewing of subject presentation, see the DVD copy of the meeting proceedings on file in the Clerk's Office. A copy of the PowerPoint presentation is made a part of the record, see Comm. 533.1.) MR. YEE: So with that, I have to take questions. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Director. Questions? Ms. Eoff MS. EOFF: Thank you. Not so much questions I guess, but I just want to add to your thanking your staff You know, nobody could have really realized the impact of such—that this would have. I mean we tried to foresee things, of course, during discussion and consulting and all of the time that went in to trying to draft something that would be solid and legal, but you never know. So I mean the department hasn't had to take on something like this for a long time, and like you said it came on top of a lot of other things. So I just want to congratulate you. I feel kind of like from what you've said you've gone maybe to the peak and now it should be a little bit easier, although there's a lot of paperwork to do, but I think the stressors might have been sort of sorted out so you know where to go at least with what. And I completely agree that those trying to register homes in legal zoning districts probably should get set aside while you take care of the ones that are nonconforming use, because those are the ones you have to scrutinize a lot more carefully. And so I think that's a great plan personally. And yeah, during this whole time, I received lots of phone calls and complaints and everything just because I've been associated with the process. But you know, trying not to get too involved in what, you folks had to do, but I hope I was a little bit helpful just trying to guide people or calm them down. No, I think, you know, I think you've done an incredible job. And I just wanted to clear something up about this five bedroom issue, because Sid talked to me about it a long time ago, and I didn't feel like I could do anything really to change the momentum of that, because my understanding was that after you have more than five bedrooms, you may be defined more as a hotel or a lodge or some other such thing that just didn't conform to the definition of what we were regulating. So I'm not sure how you would explain that, but that was my understanding about why the five bedroom number, because otherwise you are defined as something different than a dwelling. MR. YEE: Yes, Council Woman Eoff, you are absolutely correct that in our discussions, you know, once you go to six bedrooms, you're starting to move into Page 12 PC -18 November 5, 2019 that lodging kind of category. Because if a lodge came to us and said, "Hey we want to do a lodge of six bedrooms." Then they fall into certain kind of building codes and stuff So do we want to—we were unwilling to sit there and say, "Hey people you can create a lodge in a neighborhood and just call it a vacation rental." MS. EOFF: And I'm sure that would have opened up a lot of other problems. MR. YEE: Right, and to then skirt certain building codes around the safety of those guests that we put on other lodges that legally would go through that process and then follow those codes. So that's exactly where we fell on that. MS. EOFF: So I wanted to make sure I was still—because that was kind of a while back when we had discussed that. MR. YEE: I would agree with having to relook at that in the future for resort notes. I think that should certainly be looked at, but again, I will easily also say that was also balanced with the safety of having folks stay in a place, right? And so how do we insure the safety of folks and having numerous bedrooms. There are safety things that are in lodges and stuff Fire systems, sprinkler systems, whatever may be, right? And we want to make sure our visitors are safe. MS. EOFF: That may be a discussion for a later time after all of this sort of settles. The other one was the common thing you mentioned and I think I understood that before, too. Well two things, why we offer the nonconforming use certificate even though most residential neighborhoods, like you said, the people don't want them there. But we were pretty much advised that we had to offer that option, given there was nothing illegal about having a vacation rental prior to our new law. So because of that we offered this nonconforming use. MR. YEE: Yeah, so before seeing the majority of our PO's (purchase orders) based on us denying in the agricultural lands. Can you imagine if we had denied in residential zones, right? MS. EOFF: Exactly. And we had something in our Code that does provide for the nonconforming use situation. Yeah, the Ag one was basically because we cannot violate state law, and so that was a difficult thing for people to understand. But all in all, all those other glitches, I think you did find solutions and helped people, and just feedback. I don't know too much about the Hilo office, but in the Kona office, I heard many, many times people who were worried. You know, had sort of like issues beginning to get their packet together. By the time they got through, they were admiring and just acknowledging the wonderful staff and how well they were treated, and how helpful people were. So the staff in Kona actually patient and helpful, and consoling. And you know, people had to come back multiple times, Page 13 PC -18 November 5, 2019 but in the end, they had nothing but praises for the staff You know, the law itself, maybe they were not happy with, but I think the treatment was excellent. So, anyways, thank you. And I'm sure we weren't the only county that suffered all of these, you know, issues. And maybe there's consolation in that. Everyone, not only in our state, but all over the nation, is facing this issue. MR. YEE: Can I make one quick comment on this? So, I've taken the question, so where do we stand in terms of who's out there left? So early estimates, there were 6,000 to 8,000 vacation rentals. That also probably included hosted rentals. So at 4,000 applications, that leaves the question of, who's out there? How many of those are hosted; how many of them are illegal? I have no idea. I can tell you, we certainly have illegals. We're going to have folks that realize they probably couldn't do it on post `76 (1976) lots and are just going to operate until they get busted, who knows? So I have no idea how many hosted are out there, and what's the number, but I'm sure it's not a small number given the experience from the other islands. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Ms. Eoff Mr. Richards. MR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Chair. And thanks, Michael, for being here and giving an update. For those of us from previous term when this was put forth, it was suspected it was going to be daunting. Your numbers are validating that concern, 4,000 opposed to 800 annual. I want to come back and talk to that. Your comments about the 1,000 comments coming in, which 900 -plus are negative, also validates something that I noticed as we went through the hearings and public testimony, that the recurrent theme throughout all of that was bad neighbors. And that was probably what brought it more to light than anything else. Yeah, there were zoning issues; conforming issues, all that, but the bad neighbor that was the most. I think one of your—I've got so much paper to read. One of the comments you made in this was that with that, even though it's in the nonconforming area, the point is that if they're being a bad neighbor, still that there's going to be a way to say, "Hey look, you had your shot. We gave you a shot, and if you're not managing trying to be good neighbor, you're going to lose your shot." So I think there is a safeguard for the community as a whole. And trying to strike that balance between coming forward with people's right to have an economic generator, because that's what we struggle with. And we have people that run vacation rentals. Some people are putting their kids through college with that. Some people are able to go visit family on the mainland while they run it here. And you've heard all of these deals. Page 14 PC -18 November 5, 2019 It was purposely crafted to give Planning and the Planning Director latitude to try and accommodate for some of these things coming forward. What I'm most interested in Michael is the comment about the overtime you're pushing, and your morale in the office and long hours and all that. And I don't think any of us thought it would be quite at the extent we're at. Of course, none of us planned on the volcano, and so, there's a lot more demands on your department. And as we go into the budget process and what we need to do, I'm the first one to start looking at numbers and being very fiscally minded. But that being said, if we want to get through this process and maintain some sort of working staff at the other end, are you going to be seeking more resources to go forward, because we don't want to burn out the staff and everybody resign. That's not going to solve anything. MR. YEE: I'm trying to bring on the staff as much as the system allows me to do so as fast as we can. So, that's the first part of my answer. Part two is, the plus side, we weren't ever sure where we were going to fall on the number of registration fees that we were going to collect. So at 4,000 initial, 4,000 x $500 is substantial. And then with 1,000 nonconforming that have to come in annually at $250 a year. That's a decent revenue stream. And then we'll eventually have new registrations and fines that go out. So there's money there, clearly on this overtime, we're just rolling over our registration fees to be able to pay our overtime now. So it hasn't been—luckily I'm in this position. I don't have to worry about how we're funding the overtime, but I also know that if the revenue stream is only let's say a quarter million dollars, that's not going to fund seven positions regularly as we had first thought. So it's going to depend on how many registrations. And again, we're smart enough not to just go out and hire seven people right away and just launch into that. But we clearly know we have the comfort zone of hiring a Planner III; hiring a couple inspectors; doing the on-line compliance. That at a bare minimum, we know we can kind of afford and we should do it regardless. So, I don't think we need to ask for additional resources right now beyond what we had originally planned. Again, out there looming is Part two and three around hosted rentals and stuff like that and what kind of on -slot that may bring someday. So, yeah, I think we're good for now, but we have to pay attention to that new revenue flow and what's going to be a sustainable revenue. Because even on that 1,000 nonconforming, overtime that number should shrink, right? So, we have—it's going to be a budgeting exercise all the time. Page 15 PC -18 November 5, 2019 MR. RICHARDS: Okay, I'm worrying about what Planning Department looks like four or five years from now. If you get through this onslaught and we burn you out, we're having trouble getting things done now, and we as a Council should be mindful of that conversation because this is something we did to you which is for the County. MR. YEE: I want to add that the Planning Department is a special department, and I'm not just saying that. Because of the long-term vision and the mission that we have, there's a different focus from the employees that work there. Yes, but not every single one, but the majority of folks are really in there to help the community. And yes, morale issues and stuff, but I got to tell you, the managers have a good pulse of their staff, and we will get through this. And the morale will be fine, you know, after this period goes—you know, we finish up. But we do need to have that window where we do finish up. So you know, I understand you're worried. I think the managers and I talked often to try to make sure we're paying attention to the staff and that we don't do anything that will harm the department long-term wise. But that's what's special about our department. We keep taking on the work. MR. RICHARDS: Okay, well, we'll just keep that in mind. And again, Michael, appreciate that it's about balance and striking that balance in there. So with that Chair, I yield. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Ms. Lee Loy, did you have a couple questions? MS. LEE LOY: I did and thank you, Michael. And thank you for unpacking all of the nuances of what this piece of legislation created. I did have a question regarding the—under your administrative challenges, the covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC&R). Well, you know, it did come up, and there was a real kind of bright line or encouragement from Corporation Counsel that, you know, those CC&R's, the County was going to stay away from. And now it's becoming a challenge, and so I just kind of want to hear from you. MR. YEE: So, on Page One of the ordinance, in the first section, there's a line that says. This bill basically does not override CC&R's. We're going to lean on that at this point to say, if we don't override CC&R's, blah, blah, blah. Okay, that's where I'm going to go. MS. LEE LOY: It's fine, we can talk and stand in some real honest conversations offline. Regarding the application process, incomplete or missing building permit records. I know we, you know, got help from HELCO (Hawai`i Electric Light Company). But my question to that is, because looking ahead, we still have to Page 16 PC -18 November 5, 2019 look at hosted, right? And we know now that the building permit record keeping was never designed for lending itself for these compliance issues. And I was just wondering what you would suggest as far as how we can create maybe a better system so that, you know, all these different pieces that now have to sing as a choir, can start working together in breaking down some of those silos. MR. YEE: Yeah, the answer is EnerGov. It will show us the way. I think the simplicity, not to really answer your question would be—it really takes having DPW (Department of Public Works), us and other, you know, partners in this, to really get into a room and ground truth any future bill, right? I think that's what we learned on this bill, which was, it couldn't be treated like any new ordinance, that you know, you assign it to a department and say, "Okay, go forth, make it happen." This kind of situation, again, let's say a hosted bill, will have to sit there and you take the bill, where we didn't do the rule making, we start thinking about the rule making, we start going to departments and testing something, "Okay, here's the made-up application. Let's run it through and see what happens," right? I think we have that wisdom now to know that's how we would want to ground truth any future bill around vacation rentals. And to try to work out those kinks ahead of time. And we've certainly learned a lot already on this one. But yeah, I will also say this system as imperfect as it was, we were trying to capture illegal structures. Like we wanted people to be in permitted safe structures. And so this has really exposed a lot of folks that were operating in illegal structures. And so it did accomplish that. It did capture some innocent folks that just may have had some open permits and never got closed for some reason or another, and we didn't anticipate that. But you also have to think about the good ones that we did catch, that there are things that people with the money and power will go off and just do, because they take a strategic risk at doing it. They have the means to do it and they make a calculated guess that, "Hey, I'm just going to do this." Well, sometimes that calculated risk falls on the other side where it's not so easy to get, let's say, a vacation rental now. And so, in this case, the system also has its benefits, as painful as it is sometimes. MS. LEE LOY: I think I have three more questions. Board of Appeals Cases, Hire a Planner III to assist. Are we retooling that job description a little bit so that, not only does it have some of the experiences of a Planner III, but maybe some legal qualifications so that that position might be more multi -pronged to address some of the technical background writing as it goes into Board of Appeals that will later then be taken up to Third Circuit Court. Has any thought been given to that? Page 17 PC -18 November 5, 2019 MR. YEE: Yeah, I would generally say, no. I think we're going to leave the legal side to Corporation Counsel. This Planner III is really meant to help expedite the paperwork, insure that the deadlines are being met. That given the load on clerks, on their current workload, that to try to place a bunch of deadlines and other things, very sensitive documents flowing, that we wanted a Planner III level. And also, we're very intentional about Planner IIL I know this is not how other systems work, but we're trying to create a career ladder. Yeah, what's a career ladder? A way for people to move from the desk to other jobs, and to get into Planner series. If we keep shoving everything up to a Planner IV, V, or VI, we'll never get that career ladder. And so, we are trying to intentionally create some Planner III positions to do that to solve a second issue we have in the department. MS. LEE LOY: Okay. I do want to ask about one testifier who talked about consistent language. When they get, you know, these notifications, there's language from Kona side and different from Hilo. What's going on over there, Michael? MR. YEE: Inconsistency. Well on the placards that got fixed. I don't know what the specific example is. We are trying to work from template forms. There's kind of template language for certain things that a certain vacation rental may have on their property. So an approval letter is not going to look exactly the same. There may be a clause or something else that came up through testimony that we add into it. Generally speaking, it's generally all template language though. So I'm not sure what they're really talking about. I'm not sure what that inconsistency is at this point because I know even within our system we made a big change where I have a Program Manager in Kona. I have a Program Manager for administrative permits. Program Managers that quarterback these applications. At a certain point to make sure we had consistency I've just made one of them, you know him, Norren Kato as the main quarterback. So he is overseeing and trying to ensure that we have that consistency. You know, again not easy, because now he's driving over to Kona once a week to have to deal with their issues. So again, it's just added stress to a system. But in the end we felt that was necessary. Again, we have fabulous managers that, you know, go the extra mile to make sure we get this done the right way. So I think we're fixing the inconsistencies. I'm not going to lie, it probably occurs, but when we're aware of an inconsistency, we're definitely are trying to fix them. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, and this really is my last question, and maybe it's just nervous laughter, EnerGov. I've been incredibly patient with that, and you Page 18 PC -18 November 5, 2019 know, I'll just put it out there. I'm going to be forwarding a communication for a status update, because I want you, Public Works, IT (Information Technology) right here at the table, and we need to iron this out. Because if it really is supposed to be the tool and I said it in another committee, it's failing. And if we're going to rely on it then we need to make a commitment, whether it's additional resources, building Administrative Rules around it, whatever. I need to have that frank and honest discussion with everybody at the table so this body can get a clear understanding on what that tool was supposed to be and what type of resources need to go into that. Please, Michael, help me comment on that one, because if this is going to be part of the additional concurrent demands, these things need to run in parallel with one another if we're going to have, you know, a government system that works. Michael, please. MR. YEE: EnerGov, you're right, it's a tool. I want to add that I said during my presentation that a system like this exposes where the systems are broken and not working efficiently, where we sit in silos too much. EnerGov is part of that. I wish, Ms. Lee Loy, that I had a magic wand to help with the situation. At this point, we've been in the testing phase, and the funny part is lot of our key people working on vacation rentals are also our testers. So trying to squeeze that time out of them to find that time to test the software; to test the processes, becomes difficult. I'm sure we're causing some of the current delays possibly, but we had to make hard choices in the department. But we're trying to keep up with that schedule. I've heard that schedule has been pushed back a little bit. So that gives us a little more breathing room for now. But you know, what's cutting 20 hours of overtime to 18 hours? It doesn't make much of a difference at this point. It just sits out there as just another priority we have to address. Again, we can't go back in time. Just, there was never enough resources given to the project for everyone to implement well. So the whole EnerGov team is grinding through the process. And luckily I don't have to sit through those meetings. Douglas Lee and Norren has had to sit through those. You know, lucky for them they get to do that, and they are doing their best to motivate the staff to do their part to bring the software online. So that's the best answer I can give you on EnerGov. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Director. And, you know, all joking aside, our Deputy Clerk Aaron Brown also sits on that committee, and it's floundering. It's not making me happy. And a lot of people know when I'm not happy. There's quite a bit of rumble that happens at this table. So thank you for your honesty, Director. I'm going to yield. Thank you, Chair. Page 19 PC -18 November 5, 2019 CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Mr. Richards. MR. RICHARDS: Yeah, just a quick follow up, Michael. And just like you said, this whole process has highlighted some of the broken things. But this is also highlighting how broken a lot of our processes are. And one of the comments I've started to make is that, I fear one of the biggest obstructions of our County moving forward is our County government itself. And if we don't clear this up and move it forward, and that's why I asked the question, do we need to get more resources allocated? Not just for Planning, but we've got to kind of streamline things. Clean things up and move them forward. And like you said, this does highlight some things. I fear I know we're backlogged in our building permit process, and now we dump on five years' worth in a matter of months on you. And those numbers are not lost on me, and I just fear for moving our economy forward. So we'll have this conversation further. Thanks Chair, I yield. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Director Yee, thank you so much for braving it out for me and coming out here. That wasn't too bad, right? I still have my questions. MR. YEE: DEM's (Department of Environmental Management) waiting. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: They'll be quick, I've got like four because my colleagues asked the other ones, so I'm grateful. But you know, we've highlighted broken systems, but I think it's also important to highlight that you released that thought as a leader in this moment. That was really, you know, kind of like a crap show. You've helped to navigate things with a lot of finesse and positivity, and so I appreciate that. And I appreciate your staff very much for their commitment to doing their best to make the process and the system work, so thank you. I'm curious, I don't think you shared with me how many appeals have been filed so far. Just one? MR. YEE: No, there was a slide that said we had eight appeals. You know, I had a couple more that came in today. We're clearing some off the deck too, so when I created that slide I knew there were eight. Again, they're kind of precedent setting, kind of decisions that get made. So those might clear more appeals. So you know, we'll see. But you know, again, the main message around the Board of Appeals is they're all generally challenging than post `76 Ag land restriction we put on. Page 20 PC -18 November 5, 2019 And again, when we go to the Board of Appeals, I really need the State to make sure that we hear from them around their stance on that, because that's going to be really important. And again, like I said, win or lose at Board of Appeals, we're going to go to Third Circuit Court. And we know that. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: So you've processed about a quarter of all the applications that have been submitted? MR. YEE: Yes about that, yes. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Okay, so I'm going to use the same metric here with the number of appeals that come through. So eight x four, 32. Have you anticipated like the cost associated with the appeals process? MR. YEE: No. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Okay, we can leave it at that. That's fine, but just considerations, because now we're in budget time. Can you tell me a little bit about the process for issuing denials? MR. YEE: I'm not sure what you mean by that, but I'd certainly sign off on denials. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: I mean is there any engagement with the applicant to kind of talk through the decision prior to issuing the letter to insure it's based on facts, the denial? MR. YEE: I would say a bulk of the denials also, and it's reflective in the number of appeals, are based on this post `76. Okay, so that's pretty straight forward. We're going to have a few denials out there that have to do with illegal structures and other things, but the bulk of them are the post `76. So it's pretty straight forward. When we send out a letter, there's a check -box kind of thing so you check a box and say okay, this is where you're not consistent. And so people are very clear at that point, at least I feel they should be clear about why we're denying the application. They may not like it, but I think we're clear about it. During the process of an application, if it's not dealing with the post '76 issue usually, and we're trying to clarify building permit issues or whatever, we are working closely and asking for additional information to help clarify that. It's not like you send it in and we just give you a rejection. If there's more information we need, we request it. Page 21 PC -18 November 5, 2019 And I've certainly signed off on a lot of acknowledgements asking for additional information. That was part of adjusting, and the process we used to not accept an application if it wasn't complete, we sent straight to eventually kind of acknowledging receipt, but saying, "We need this if you really want us to kind of finish off reviewing your thing." So that helped expedite getting some more acknowledgements and expediting that process. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: So one of the rules state that Planning will respond to an applicant regarding completeness within 15 days from the date the application was filed. Have we met this deadline for all the applications? MR. YEE: No. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Okay. Are you worried at all about 10(c), about a decision not being rendered within 90 days and automatic approval. MR. YEE: Every night. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Okay, the other thing I'll just note and no need to comment, or whatever. But, you said something earlier, we want to make sure we're putting people into safe, permitted structures. I just think that's interesting, because I don't think we have the same standard when we're handing out Section 8 vouchers. Not for you, but hopefully, Housing is tuning in to this conversation. Anyway, any other questions or comments? We have a motion on the floor to close file on Communication 533, all in favor please say "aye." Vote on Comm. 533: The motion to close file on Comm. 533 was carried by the (Filed): following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members David, Eoff, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kierkiewicz — 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Chung — 1. Excused: None. 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. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Do I have a motion to adjourn? Page 22 PC-18 November 5,2019 ADJOURN- There being no further business, at 6:46 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 David, Eoff, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kierkiewicz—8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Chung— 1. Excused: None. CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Planning Committee is adjourned. Thank you for your patience everyone. Approved: I )1 Cl /--o i CI Ms. Ashley Kierkiewicz, Chair (Date) Planning Committee AK/dt Page 23