Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-01-08 Exh C Hearing Transcript - Bruce & Laura Gilmore SPP 19-211WINDWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAII HEARING TRANSCRIPT JANUARY 8, 2020 A regularly advertised hearing on the application of BRUCE & LAURA GILMORE (SPP 19- 000211) was called to order at 11:19 a.m. in the County of Hawaii Aupuni Center Conference Room, 101 Pauahi Street, Hilo, Hawaii with Chairman Joseph Clarkson presiding. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Gilbert Aguinaldo, Dean Au, Joseph Clarkson, Donn Dela Cruz, John Replogle. ABSENT & EXCUSED: Thomas Raffipiy. ALSO PRESENT: Michael Yee (Planning Director), Malia Hall (Deputy Corporation Counsel for the Windward Planning Commission), Maija Jackson (Planner), Christian Kay (Planner), Jessica Andrews (Planner), and Sarah Hata-Finley (Commission Secretary). And 5 members from the public in attendance. APPLICANT: BRUCE AND LAURA GILMORE (SPP 19-000211) Application for a Special Permit to establish a religious retreat center with overnight accommodations and the construction of a caretaker's residence with associated improvements on an approximately 1.1 -acre portion of a 5 -acre property situated in the State Land Use Agricultural District. The subject property is located at 19-4251 Haunani Road, about 1,800 feet northwest of the intersection with Maile Avenue, Volcano, Puna, Hawaii, TMK: (3) 1-9- 011:Por. 030. CLARKSON: The next item on the agenda is an application from Bruce and Laura Gilmore for a Special Permit. Due to technical difficulties with the PowerPoint presentation, Chairman Clarkson called a recess at 11:20 a.m., and the meeting was reconvened at 11:24 a.m. CLARKSON: The Windward Planning Commission has returned to session. At this time, we'll get a presentation from Jessica Andrews from Planning Department staff. ANDREWS: So, I'm here to present a Special Permit request for Bruce and Laura Gilmore CLARKSON: Hold up, please [referring to the microphone]. ANDREWS: Testing, testing, okay, I'll start over. I'm presenting a Special Permit for Bruce & Laura Gilmore. This is the location map. Our site is here in red. It is just outside of Volcano Village located on Haunani Road. The Applicant's are requesting a Special Permit to establish a religious retreat center with overnight accommodations and the construction of a caretaker's EXHIBIT C residence on an approximate 1.1 acre of a 5 -acre property in the State Land Use Agricultural District. The Applicants propose to convert an existing 2 -bedroom, 2 -bath, 1,013 -square foot dwelling into a retreat center. The operation will include the following: small prayer shelters and a walking trail through the property's native forest, and an estimated 12 overnight guests per month with no more than four guests per night, and an estimated ten visitors for day retreats, and a parking area with at least four parking stalls. This is the County zoning map. As you can see, the property here is outlined in red. It is zoned Agricultural – 5 acres. The nearby zoning is RS -10, Residential – 10 acres, RS -20, Residential – 20 acres, Agricultural – 1 acre, and Forest Reserve. State Land Use Boundary Map designates this property as Agricultural. You can see it here. It's just on the border with Urban designation and over here, we have Conservation. It, the property is within the Low Density Urban on our General Plan LUPAG designation map, and this is Extensive Ag, and this is Conservation. The aerial photograph shows the site here. It is a very wooded site as you can see, with the vast majority of it being a native forest, and the front portion is where the existing residence is located, right here. And, this is Haunani Road there. Volcano Village would be down this direction. The Applicant's site plan hereI realize these words are very small so I'll describe what is located here just in general terms. This is the existing residence that will be converted into the retreat center, and this is the proposed 2 -bedroom caretaker's house and then nearby you see there is the proposed carport. And, this is the existing drive right here, and then this would be the new drive coming in down Haunani Road. This is Haunani Road. And, the large site map oh, sorry, the full site plan here shows, you know, that detail which is here, and then the lines going up into the property are the trails, the existing gravel trails that wind through the native forest and "T" designates the three proposed prayer shelters. This, these photographs show the site. The top photograph shows the existing house from the entry drive, and the bottom photo shows the front gate as seen from the entry drive on the site looking towards Haunani, and then the—cops, sorry, went to, here we go this is Haunani Road. So, at the top it's Haunani Road looking towards Volcano Village towards the southeast and then the bottom photo shows Haunani Road looking toward the northwest and the entry gate is there as you can see there. This is the property with a large, you know, kind of a buffer of trees along here. And, this is the entry, the existing entry gate, and the new entry gate would be just down the way somewhere about here. I think I skipped a slide, I'm sorry, oops, here we go, here we are. Sorry, this got skipped here. This is the existing dwelling, a little bit closer, and this is the building that would be converted into the retreat center. And, this photo on the right shows the existing walking trails that wind through the native forest along which they, that the Applicants propose to have three small prayer shelters, about 50 square foot each. EXHIBIT C 2 We've seen this slide, so I'll just jump forward to our recommendation slide. The Planning Director's recommendation is approval with conditions. And, there was a revised recommendation and an additional condition that was added, and that's on the yellow sheet that you all should have. And, just to summarize what's written there. The rationale for adding this condition, this Condition No. 2, is to ensure that the facility matches the description as stated in the application, in Special Permit application including the number of visitors and the full scope of the project. So, to ensure that it, that it maintains that in perpetuity, and also to ensure compliance with County Code and Fire Code. So that would be Fire Code, Building Code, and all relevant codes just to make sure that that's clearly stated in this condition. CLARKSON: Any questions for Planning staff? If not, thank you. Will the Applicant or their representative or both please come forward? Would you please raise your right hands? Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter before the Planning Commission today? B. GILMORE/L. GILMORE: Yes. [Mr. Kern was already sworn in from the previous application.] KERN: Good morning, again, Mr. Chair. CLARKSON: Good morning. KERN: And Members of the Planning Commission. That you for the presentation, Jessica. To my right, I have Mr. and Mrs. Gilmore. This is a nice, unique project. I'm going to let them talk a little bit more about it, what they were going to—one of the things that I want to mention, though that struck me when I did meet with both of them. They love this property, like the woodedness, the property, how it is up there, and it is beautiful, and that's one of the reasons I did want to work with them on this project. We don't want to do something big, you know. We want to be able to have a few people come up there and share that with them and practice their spirituality with them up there, and that's why you can see it's only, you know, one acre instead of the five acres, and that's something I really wanted to point out, and you'll hear that from them as well. So, Mr. and Mrs. Gilmore, you just want to add a little bit to that. And, I can answer any other questions. L. GILMORE: Hi, thank you so much, and thank you for the Planning Commission staff that came up and walked the property with us, heard the story. I'm trying not to be emotional, but this was a spiritual call to build this place, and part of our Christian spirituality is silence and solitude to come away and just be and unplug. So, that's what our call was, and then we got this property. And, you hear the birds, and you know the birds are threatened. And, we spent a lot of time in the park, and we know the threat. The first thing we did was invest in fencing. I didn't want to spend the money that we had for fencing, but if you don't fence off that native forest, those pigs will take it out, and those birds will die. And, so that was our first investment, like we don't have a—we're living in the little house, and everything got put aside so that we would fence it first. So, protecting the property is in my blood, like we're not going to have too many EXHIBIT C 3 people. We're not. The land won't hold it; it's wrong to have too many people. We're not for profit. And, we were talking to one of the neighbors, you know, like are you going to have 50 people up there? No. If you needed to make a profit, then you would have to have a lot of people. I don't know how we're going to survive, I mean, we're not wealthy, but the point is to protect the land and to allow people time to be alone there. So, it's not—it's by appointment only. I love people, but I don't like a lot of `em, so there won't be a lot of them on the land. There may be, we've answered our neighbors, if a small board wants to meet, a church board or another board that feels comfortable. Right now, we still think that we're going to do a freewill offering. So, we're not trying to make money. We're just saying if you think this is important to you, what would you like to give. So, we're here to answer any questions. Oh, and super excited that you said no short-term vacation rental, because whether you believe this or not, but I do. That was one of the things that God said from the very beginning, and my question to God is like how am I going to pay for this, but it's like, it is not for there will, no, you know, that's against who we are. Like this is a place of meeting. That's our call. KERN: Thank you very much, and he is about to ask us, but we've reviewed the Background Report and recommendations, and we agree, correct? L. GILMORE: Yes. B. GILMORE: [Nodded yes.] CLARKSON: Thank you for that. And, are there any questions for the Applicant or their representative? REPLOGLE: I have a question. I really appreciate what you've done with the fence to protect the forest. That's, that's big. That's a huge outlay. My question is, and this relates to my feelings about taking potentially, potential agricultural land and doing something other with it than agriculture. Therefore, I ask this. Would you consider putting a conservation easement on your property? And, what that would entail would be it's, it would be attached to the property should you sell it or whatever happens down the road, but that nobody could come in and remove that forest and do something else there. B. GILMORE: No, I didn't [inaudible]. L. GILMORE: No one's ever explained that to us. We don't know about that law or that allows for that. I'm not opposed to that. I'd want to make sure. So, one of the things that we are not currently or understand that we will be non-profit, because one of the things that the lawyer told us was if that happens, Bruce has children, and we couldn't leave that property to the children right like if that was—but to put a conservation easement if that, what that means is that somebody comes in and is required to have to have the same heart that we do, then yes, I don't see why we EXHIBIT C 4 REPLOGLE: —What it would do is if Bruce left his land say to his children, they can't come in and clear that forest. It's got the they could rebuild the house or whatever, but what in essence it does—somewhat it takes value off the property because now you can't put up 20 houses, but that's the objective. L. GILMORE: That's okay, our neighbors would like that better. REPLOGLE: And, the conservation easement is now tied to the land, and someone would hold the easement such as Hawaii Island Land Trust or something, and once a year, they would come to your property, walk down your trail, and go, yep, it's all here, and good. And, there already is something like it in place in the subdivision I believe across the street from Volcano Village where—is it Mauna Loa Estates? L. GILMORE: That is across the land. REPLOGLE: It is? AGUINALDO: Mauna Loa Estates, yeah. REPLOGLE: Yeah, so what they did within that subdivision, homeowners began to put their properties, attach conservation easements to them. So, the forest doesn't get removed. The house is there, you build into the land rather than on it. And, so, I personally think you should do that, and I don't know if this Commission has the wherewithal to say as a condition you have to do it. L. GILMORE: Right. KERN: I think you've seen their reaction. That's actually, I think, great information. I would caution adding things like that as conditions, but I think you have some applicants here that are more than willing to look at that and I'd say do it. Like I said at the beginning, they are attached to this property in that same type of way. REPLOGLE: I understand that, and I'm not trying to be a king. L. GILMORE: No, no, we appreciate B. GILMORE: No, no REPLOGLE: I really believe in it L. GILMORE: the, the information, and we had a botanist come walk on the property to check out Rapid `Ohi`a Death. We have alcohol to spray on our shoes and on the like—and, we're building, it's not really the ideal place. Our architect was Seth Warner who was at this earlier, and his whole thing is not to go into theI mean, he did want to because it's really EXHIBIT C 5 beautiful, and it's really tempting to want to build in the forest, but we're staying on that front end to keep the forest clean, to keep people out of the forest that are, that might carry disease. REPLOGLE: So, the easement would basically put your wishes down, legally attach it to the land, and to—well, if we're here that long L. GILMORE: Amen. REPLOGLE: Two hundred years from now, that property would look even better than it does today. Thank you. AU: Mr. Chair? Comment and question. I appreciate your guys' love for the land. This is very unusual for our Commission. People want to come and build things and do developments, and you guys actually love the land, so it's kind of inspiring to hear your story. You made a comment that, so the questions I have, is you made a comment that you guys fenced the whole property? L. GILMORE: Yes, sir. AU: And, when did you guys buy the property? L. GILMORE: Two years ago in May. AU: Thank you. L. GILMORE: So, yeah, we got the property in May and fenced in November. REPLOGLE: Just a point of interest. I fenced almost 2,600 acres of forest in Ka`u and in South Kona. So, I know what that took. L. GILMORE: That's big, we're small time. B. GILMORE: Yeah, we're just small time. L. GILMORE: We thought it was big-time to us, but small-time for you. REPLOGLE: Building that fence is a big deal, boy. L. GILMORE: Yeah. B. GILMORE: And, maintaining it. L. GILMORE: Yeah. B. GILMORE: Walking the fenceline. EXHIBIT C 6 REPLOGLE: Once a week. L. GILMORE: Yeah, and somebody asked a question about whether we wanted to, that it's designated at Ag, and what that means. I have a background in [inaudible]. I used to live in Alaska for a lot of years, and what I think the heart of having agriculture land is to protect the land and to the space and the building. So, while we don't do agricultif you walked on that land, you don't want us to make it ag land. There are `ohi`a-s that are three and four hundred years, the botanist has said. There are species on our land that he didn't know were still in the Village. So, you don't that's why you exist. To make these Special Permits available. CLARKSON: Any further questions or comments? Thank you very much. KERN: Thank you all. CLARKSON: And, at this time, we'll proceed to public testimony. We have one person who has asked to testify. Would Cathleen Gormley please come forward? Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter before the Commission? GORMLEY: Yes, I do. CLARKSON: Please introduce yourself and describe where you live in relation to the application project and proceed. GORMLEY: My name is Kathleen Dale Gormley, and I'm a resident in Volcano Village, and I live, our home is exactly across the street from the proposed property, and my husband and I also own the five acres adjacent to the property in question. So, we have two pieces. We have our residence across the street, and then we also own the five acres next door. I appreciate very much the owners' wish to preserve the property because it is an excellent property. It's beautiful. It has lots of big `ohi`a-s on it and the hapu`u are gorgeous, so it is well- suited for contemplative or retreat environment. The concern that my husband and I have is traffic. This is a one -lane road with small shoulders that are very muddy when it rains. So, there's no place really to pull over. My concern is how much would it be enforced as far as the limitations of the property, the numbers of people that could come for a retreat and how much traffic would be generated and would all the parking be on the property or not, because there's no parking on the road at all. It becomes personal for my husband and I because we're right next door, and the proposed driveway is directly opposite our driveway, and so this access, emergency access is extremely important to us, to be able to have emergency vehicles come in because in 2000, my husband had a heart attack and had a quadruple bypass which is now 20 years old; meaning, he's at risk of a heart attack at any point because bypasses don't last forever. So, we are concerned that we not have a traffic jam on that road. That's a personal issue, and without parking on the road that would hinder access. EXHIBIT C 7 So, my question is what are the constraints if this were to be approved in terms of how many people can access the property? To give you an example, I'm personally aware of religious, or not so much religious, more a contemplative, spiritual entity on Oahu that bought a property on Pacific Heights Road, and they did a wonderful job renovating it, improved it, probably increased the value of the surrounding properties. However, they have biweekly meetings, and there may be anywhere from 50 to a 100 people at those meetings every week. And, the parking is horrendous when those meeting take place, so it is not our interest to agree to something or to support something where there could be that kind of meeting taking place with traffic, with access, with big ruts on the side of the road, because when people do try to go off the pavement to let somebody go by, then you have ruts that are 7-8 inches deep of mud. And, it's really unsightly. So, those are our concerns. Also, another concern we had is in the event that the property is sold or inherited, what are the limitations on the new owners? If it was purchased by a church facility, we would not want those large meetings on a weekly basis taking place, and what kind of control is there in the event that this is approved. So, those are basically my concerns, also my husband's concerns, who couldn't be here today because he is at work, but, I do like the suggestion of the conservation easement. I also did not know anything about that, so that would be a good, I think, would help resolve a lot of questions that people have in mind about something like this. So, my question is what kind of limitations are there in terms of the numbers of people that can come in? CLARKSON: So, to answer your question, and it was briefly touched on in the presentation from Planning staff, there is a condition that has been added to the application or the condition of approval. So, it says, "The operation of the religious retreat center and related improvements shall be conducted in a manner that is substantially representative of plans and details contained within" their application and "in accordance with the decision of the Planning Commission. Any substantial expansion of the facility or uses beyond what is represented in these documents shall require an amendment..." Their application specifies that there would be no more than ten people for day retreats or four for overnight accommodations, so during the day, there would be no more than ten people, and for overnight, no more than four people. Presumably, that would be typically a couple of vehicles. I didn't notice myself, maybe some other Commissioner or staff can correct me, in the conditions whether there was any requirement for on-site parking for all visitors, which would be, I think, a good condition to add especially based on the description of the roadway. ANDREWS: Yes, Commissioner, it was part of the application. As stated, it was four, four on- site parking stalls. CLARKSON: Okay, is that going to be sufficient for ten visitors during the day? ANDREWS: Right, Condition 2. We can look at Condition 2. EXHIBIT C JACKSON: Chair Clarkson, for any Special Permit or Use Permit approved by the Commission, our codes require that all parking be provided on site. Typically, no off-site parking is allowed if you're approving a use above and beyond what's normally allowed in the zoning district. CLARKSON: Okay, so the answer to your question is people are not allowed to park along the roadway and then go walk into the property, and the limitations, the description of the use in the application is described in a condition as being limiting. GORMLEY: So, my understanding is that there could be how many people overnight are allowed? CLARKSON: Four. GORMLEY: Four people overnight and ten during the day, so potentially you could have four people every night and ten people everyday coming into the facility. CLARKSON: Well, the -12 overnight per month. GORMLEY: Oh, per month. CLARKSON: Yes. GORMLEY: Okay, okay. And then the other times when people would be coming in, is there a limit to that? CLARKSON: It's just from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. is the day -time limitation. So, people would be coming on day visits from 10 to 5, no more than 10 and no more than four at any one time overnight, but no more than 12 per month for overnights. So, you could have ten people every day GORMLEY: —Four or five cars potentially. CLARKSON: Right. GORMLEY: Everyday. CLARKSON: They all have to go in and park inside the property. GORMLEY: Mm-hmm. CLARKSON: And, then you would also have the overnight visitors, a couple of cars three times a month basically. GORMLEY: Okay. So, it would be limited to ten visitors a day coming in and out of the property potentially. EXHIBIT C 9 CLARKSON: Correct. GORMLEY: And no parking CLARKSON: on the roads— GORMLEY: on the roadway. CLARKSON: Correct. GORMLEY: At all. That would be excellent, yeah. CLARKSON: Well, that's the situation. GORMLEY: Yeah, because it's impossible. It's impossible to park on the road. CLARKSON: Okay. GORMLEY: You cannot. It's a hazard, and it defaces the property, you know? Okay. CLARKSON: Any further questions for this testifier? REPLOGLE: It's not a question, but from what they stated their purpose was for this retreat center, it does not appear that huge crowds are part of that. Ten people might even be a lot of people there at one time. GORMLEY: Yes, and that's why I feel that in any kind of approval, it would have to be in writing what the limitations are, because things change. People's lives change, and sometimes they sell their property, and the next owner should not be allowed to come in and do that. Bring in crowds of people. AU: Mr. Chair? Ms. Gormley, I appreciate your testimony. You know again it's inspiring. They believe what you believe as far as your land, and, you know, I appreciate that. I think the question that you really want answered is how is all of this going to be regulated? GORMLEY: Yes. AU: And, unfortunately, it's not going to be regulated by any government agencies as far as someone physically going out there watching. So, you know, we get complaints all the time. The Planning Department gets complaints that applicants are violating their special use permit or whatever we approve, and we rely on you to speak up and complain. And, you know, that's where, I mean, that's the only regulatory thing that there is really. I mean, you know, if you make a call to the Planning Department, they are going to come down and investigate, and they're going to give, they're going to penalize the Applicant. So, we need you and your neighbors to really watch. And, that's probably what you're getting at, you know. You know, EXHIBIT C 10 we can set forth all these rules, but the only people that are going to, are going to make it happen is the Applicant. He's going to follow the rules, and the neighbors to watch. GORMLEY: So, that brings up my question. Is it appropriate to concede, to approve the application based on the fact that there is no regulation? Basically, you're just— HALL: —There is regulation GORMLEY: believing people's words that this is what will happen. So, is that appropriate to approve it based on an application, somebody's word, if there's no enforcement. HALL: There is enforcement. CLARKSON: He was just giving you practical advice as to how to enhance enforcement. There is still enforcement, and if the permit's terms and conditions are violated, then there is still a violation. But, it is true that the Department, and I think the Director would corroborate this, does rely to a certain extent on people, you know, members of the public, bringing to their attention potential violations. GORMLEY: And, if there was a violation, what is the procedure and what is the outcome? ANDREWS: Can I just CLARKSON: —I'll have the Director reply to that. YEE: File a complaint form with the Planning Department. ANDREWS: Additionallyoh, I'm sorry. YEE: Which is on-line. ANDREWS: And, at the end of their recommendation and the conditions of approval, it's stated in writing here that "Should any of these conditions not be met or substantially complied with in a timely fashion, the Planning Director may initiate procedures to revoke this permit." So, that, and if the Planning Commission approves this application, we can provide a written copy of all of this documentation so that it is in writing, but, that is included at the end of the conditions, that if the conditions are not complied with, the permit may be revoked. Additionally, to address another question that I don't think was addressed, the entitlement, the approval of this permit runs with the land. So, any future owners are held to the same compliance, the same conditions. It does not change if the ownership changes. GORMLEY: Okay, I have one question. How unusual is it to modify a zoning and to give a application of this type of approval? Is this highly unusual or is this normally done or? CLARKSON: Special use permits for ag land? EXHIBIT C 11 GORMLEY: Yes, yes. CLARKSON: We get them just about every month. GORMLEY: Okay. CLARKSON: Usually they are yoga centers— GORMLEY: Mm-hmm. YEE: Disguised as vacation rentalsI just want to add to because you made a comment around enforcement. Just every permit we issue is based on promises, right? So, you need to understand that every permit, everything we try to decide on is based on representations, but it is the job of, you know, of professionals to review the applications in front of us and to have some firm understanding that the promises can be followed up on, okay? CLARKSON: Any further questions for this testifier? If not, thank you very much. Please be seated. And, does the Applicant have any response to the testimony? KERN: Not really. I was just going to point out basically everything you folks had pointed out that Special Permits are super specific. They are only allowed to do what they are allowed to do, and everything you folks went over, so you got, handled it. Thank you. CLARKSON: Thank you. At this time, there being no further public testimony, I'd ask for a motion to close public testimony. AU: Mr. Chair, I'm prepared to make a motion. I approve, I move to approve Special HALL: Close public testimony. CLARKSON: Oh no, we're closing public testimony first. AU: Yeah, okay, I make a motion to close public testimony. REPLOGLE: Second. CLARKSON: All those in favor? COMMISSIONERS: Aye. CLARKSON: Opposed? Motion carried. Public testimony is closed. Now, we are, the Chair would ask for a motion for action. AU: Mr. Chair, I am inspired to make a motion to approve Special Permit 19-000211 based on the Planning Director's recommendation which shall be adopted. EXHIBIT C 12 AGUINALDO: I second. CLARKSON: Any further discussion? ANDREWS: May I just confirm that it was Commissioner Dela Cruz who made the second, offered the second? I'm sorry, who was that? HALL: Aguinaldo. AGUINALDO: Aguinaldo, Aguinaldo. ANDREWS: The motion has been moved by Commissioner Au and seconded by Commissioner Aguinaldo. May we call the vote? Commissioner Au? AU: Aye. ANDREWS: Commissioner Aguinaldo? AGUINALDO: Aye. ANDREWS: Commissioner Dela Cruz? DELA CRUZ: Aye. ANDREWS: Commissioner Replogle? REPLOGLE: Aye. ANDREWS: And, Chair Clarkson. CLARKSON: Aye. ANDREWS: The motion passes. CLARKSON: You'll be notified in writing very soon as to the action the Planning Commission took today. The discussion ended at 12:02 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sarah Y. Hata-Finley, Secretary Windward Planning Commission EXHIBIT C 13