Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-04-01 Windward Exh B Anderson Dec. Tr. Piianai Rev. Living Tr. Kapoho Properties REZ-21-000243 WINDWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAII HEARING TRANSCRIPT APRIL 1, 2021 A regularly advertised hearing on the application of MARTIN ANDERSON DECLARATION TRUST, NORMAN ABRAHAM PIIANAIA REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST AND KAPOHO PROPERTIES , LLC (REZ-21-000243)was called to order at 9:32 a.m. via live-stream online meeting, with Chairperson John Replogle presiding. COMMISSIONERS IN ATTENDANCE: Dean Au, Gilbert Aguinaldo, Joseph Clarkson, Michelle Galimba, Dennis Lin, Thomas Raffipiy and John Replogle. ALSO IN ATTENDANCE: Malia Hall, Esq. (Counsel for the Commission), Zendo Kern, (Planning Director), Jeff Darrow (Deputy Planning Director), Jean Campbell, Esq. (Counsel for the Planning Director), Christian Kay (Planner), Alex Roy (Planner), Maija Jackson (Temporary Assignment Program Manager), and Melissa Dacayanan-Salvador (Windward Planning Commission Secretary). APPLICANT: MARTIN ANDERSON DECLARATION TRUST, NORMAN ABRAHAM PIIANAIA REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST AND KAPOHO PROPERTIES, LLC (REZ-21-000243) Application for a Change of Zone from an Open (0) to an Industrial-Commercial Mixed Use- 20,000 square feet(MCX-20)zoning district for 3.29-acres of land. The subjectparcels are situated at the old Hilo Iron Works property located at 1280 Kamehameha Avenue, Pi`opi`o, South Hilo District, Hawaii, TMKs: (3) 2-2-001:008, 017 through 019, 024, 030, & 034. Secretary's Note: "—" indicates that there were technical and/or internet difficulties, which made the conversation inaudible. REPLOGLE: So, we will be moving on to Item number two (2), the applicant Martin Anderson Declaration Trust, Norman Piianaia Revocable Living Trust and Kapoho Properties LLC, REZ two, one dash zero, zero, zero, two, four, three, (21-000243). Application for a Change of Zone from Open to Industrial-Commercial Mixed Use-twenty thousand (20,000) square feet MCX twenty (20) zoning district for three point two, nine (3.29) acres of land. The subject parcels are situated in the old Hilo Iron Works property located at twelve eighty (1280) Kamehameha Avenue, Pi`opi`o, South Hilo District, Tax Map Key (TMK)three, two, dash, two, dash, zero, zero, one, zero, zero, eight(3) 2-2-001:008, zero seventeen (0 17) through zero nineteen (019), zero twenty-four (024), zero thirty (030) and zero thirty-four (034). The staff will do a presentation, Alex Roy will be doing this as well. Take it away Alex. ROY: Okay, double duty today. Good morning Commissioners, today we are speaking about the Hilo Iron Works property, Change of Zone application rezone 21-two forty-three (243). I'm going to go ahead and share my screen. Oops, okay if you do not know this is the site here located just south of Banyan Drive right along the Wailoa River and kind of approximate to 1 EXHIBIT B Downtown Hilo so, you can it outlined in red here. Here's the TMK map current showing the seven (7) different parcels that make up this kind of project site. There are access easements and such going through the property that you can see but, here is the site right along Kamehameha Street and then of course the Wailoa River is running along the southern and eastern boundary. The applicant is requesting a Change of Zone from an Open to an Industrial-Commercial Mixed Use -20,000 square foot which is MCX-20 zoning district for the entire 3.29 acres of land. The applicant is proposing to consolidate and re-subdivide the existing 7 parcels into four(4)parcels to accommodate the rezone request and if you note that the requirements for MCX-20 means that the minimum lot size is 20,000 square feet. So, that is why the consolidation and re-subdivision is being put forth to accommodate that so, each parcel is at least 20,000 square feet. So, he'll be consolidating and then cutting it into 4 separate parcels. Here's the County zoning you can see all the purple is Open and we have the river here area which is kind of marked as Conservation. You have some CN-ten (10) zoning which is that Neighborhood Commercial, the ML and then of course over here too some Light Industrial or Light Commercial but the majority of the area is zoned as Open. The State Land Use Boundary Map shows all Urban the entire area is Urban except for the river which is actually within the State Land Use Conservation District. The General Plan or Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) map has actually marked this area as you can see it's a darker red as Industrial, the lighter is Open and then you have Medium Density Urban, Industrial, Industrial so, this LUPAG calls out this area as Industrial and of course Conservation is the river. Here is an aerial photograph of the site, you can see that it's fully developed with parking, a number of buildings including the historic Hilo Iron Works building. You can see Wailoa River next door is a Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) DAR - Division of Aquatic Resources has kind of a base yard there, Kamehameha and then of course the parks across the street so. here's the intersection of Manono and Kamehameha right there. The applicant's subdivision plan shows CRS would be the new consolidation and re-subdivision so you can see one (1), two (2) includes that little dog leg there, three (3) and then four(4) the remainder on the side. So, that would be the future subdivision into the 4 separate parcels. Here's a view of the property looking east along Kamehameha Avenue this is the entrance into there's kind of a feeder road that would enter and then you could enter the property at a few locations. You could see the existing structures there and then the businesses that are already active at the site. Here's the view of the property entrance looking west along Kamehameha so you can see the turn lane where people would turn left into the entrance there. At this time, the Planning Director is wishing to forward a favorable recommendation to the County Council for the Change of Zone application number 21-243. I'll go ahead and clear my screen. Commissioners if you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer. REPLOGLE: Commissioners any questions? Okay, there appear to be none so we will move on to the applicant's presentation Garth Yamanaka of Yamanaka Enterprises Inc is the applicant representative, Vern Yamanaka, Yamanaka Enterprises Inc is also the applicant representative and Norman Piianaia one of the applicants Norman Abraham Piianaia Revocable Living Trust 2 EXHIBIT B will also be speaking. Would the 3 of you please raise your right hand. Do you swear to affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Windward Planning Commission? G. YAMANAKA: With right hand raised, I do. REPLOGLE: You have to unmute Vern? V. YAMANAKA: With right hand raised, I do. REPLOGLE: Okay. PIIANAIA: With right hand raised, this Norman Piianaia I do as well. REPLOGLE: Okay, please state your name and area of residence and did you receive the Planning Department's background report and recommendations? G. YAMANAKA: Garth Yamanaka, one zero one nine (1019) Kukuau Street, Hilo and I did receive it. REPLOGLE: Thank you. V. YAMANAKA: I'm Vern Yamanaka and I'm at four two eight(428) Naniakea Street, Hilo and we received it, yes. REPLOGLE: Thank you. PIIANAIA: Norman Piianaia, I live in sixty-five one two three two (65 1232) Laelae Road in Waimea and I also received it thank you. REPLOGLE: Okay, thank you. Please do your presentation. G. YAMANAKA: Mahalo. Aloha Planning Director Kern, Chair, and members of the Windward Planning Commission. Mahalo for having us here today. We appreciate the favorable recommendation from the Planning Department and appreciate the effort and time put into this from the Director and the staff at the department. I want to first share with you a quick history on the Iron Works project before talking about why we are here before you today. Just to give you a little background of what has happened. In August of nineteen zero six (1906)the property of which the Hilo Iron Works now sits was secured by the soon to be formed Hilo Fruit Company. Work on the factory began in February nineteen zero seven (1907) and by March the building was nearly completed. Newspaper clips that we found from 1907 to nineteen zero nine (1909) spoke about the new Hilo Pineapple Cannery and how it had high hope for the industry based on the quality of the fruit being grown. Production was smooth until 1909, growers and canners could not agree on a price and a the glut of the production spelled doom for the enterprise. The cannery which was mortgaged to the First 3 EXHIBIT B Bank of Hilo was seized by the bank and in nineteen eleven (1911)was sold to the Honolulu Iron Works. In nineteen twelve (1912), reconstruction of the cannery began. In nineteen (1913) the foundry began operation, and the new Hilo Iron Works was in full operation. It would be known as the Hilo Iron Works for the next seventy (70)plus years. The foundry was used to cast things such as sugar mill components and specialty equipment but declining demand for these castings and growing demand for steel fabrication led to the closing of the foundry in nineteen fifty-eight (1958). In a joint operation by Theo H. Davies and C. Brewer sugar plantations the Hilo Iron Works was purchased from Ward Foods Inc. in nineteen seventy-four (1974) in order that it would not close, ensuring the fabrication of the needed components and equipment. During nineteen eighty-two (1982) the sugar plantations on the island of Hawaii suffered large loses and business fell off at the Iron Works. In nineteen eighty-three (1983)the Hilo Iron Works went out of business. The current owners purchased the property in the early nineteen eighties (1980's). We are requesting a Change of Zone from Open to Industrial-Commercial Mixed Use—20,000 square feet(MCX-20) for the 3.29 acres of land. This is in order to accommodate the minimum lot sizes that we have agreed to consolidate and re-subdivide these 7 parcels into 4 separate parcels. Part of the reason I talked about the history of the site was to give you an idea of what was going on prior to the tsunami that hit Hilo in nineteen forty-six (1946) and nineteen sixty (1960). After the 1960 tsunami hit Hilo, the Iron Works property fell under the Hawaii Redevelopment Agency and the Amended Urban Renewal Plan of nineteen sixty-five (1965). The Hilo Iron Works property fell into the boundaries defined as "Open Areas"which were the low elevation areas in closer proximity to the ocean. The Hilo Iron Works property was permitted to have "Limited Industrial"use within the Open area. All uses were intended as interim uses for a term of thirty-five (35)years, or until such time that adequate control measures could be implemented to mitigate the effects of future tsunamis. The 35 years term has expired and so the permitted uses has reverted back to uses allowed within the Open zoning district. This has created a very unique situation for the Hilo Iron Works site. The site which has a majority of its improvements still intact, that has survived two (2)tsunami's and has a history of mixed industrial and commercial use has had a zoning applied to it which has taken away from its highest and best use. I bring up the highest and best use as it is crucial to the valuation of the property. Opinions of value are based on use. The highest and best use of a property provides the foundation for a thorough investigation of the competitive position of the property in the minds of market participants. It can be best described as the foundation on which market value rests. One of the four tests of highest and best uses is whether it is legally permissible. Due to the open zoning, the current uses on the Hilo Iron Works site is non-conforming. The non-conforming use has created the following issues. The non-conforming use needs to be approved by the Planning Director. This discretion creates uncertainty as the Planning Director is in an appointed 4 EXHIBIT B position that changes of over time. The time it takes for a non-conforming use approval is substantial and is a deterrent for applicants. The impact on demand for leased space at the Hilo Iron Works site also impacts the lease rates, the lower the demand the lower the price. Non- conforming use also impacts the ability for the landowners and tenants to obtain financing. Lenders view non-conforming use a high-risk property. Risk also affects the cost of financing and so even if it is available, it will be at a higher then typical rate. Financing affects not only the ability to refinance but the ability to sell the property. Available financing increases the pool of buyers and impacts demand. Limited to no financing lowers the demand which in turn adversely affects the price of the property. The impact can be seen in the incomplete revitalization of the site. Portions of the site need repair but without the ability to finance, the ability to attract the best tenants for the site it creates an economic hardship for the landowners. We, therefore, respectfully request approval of the Change of Zone to MCX-20. The goal is not to make any changes to the use or improvements on the property at the present time. The goal is to go from non-conforming use to a legal conforming use. The Change of Zone request is in line with the General Plan designation, I want to point out that in the two thousand five (2005) General Plan the Hilo Iron Works is specifically stated as appropriate for industrial-commercial zoning and uses. The Change of Zone will confirm to the goals, policies, and standards of the land use and economic elements of the General Plan, it will confirm to the Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide Map (LUPAG). I will conclude by reiterating the following comment from the Planning Department. The Change of Zone will complement the existing land uses at the project site as well as the future development plans for Banyan Drive and Hilo urban areas. Approval of the Change of Zone request would result in an appropriate land use pattern that will further the public necessity and convenience and the general welfare. Mahalo for your time and consideration on this matter. REPLOGLE: Thank you Garth. Fellow Commissioners or is there anymore from the other applicants to add to Garth's statement? V. YAMANAKA: Raised his hand. I'm Vern. REPLOGLE: Okay Vern. V. YAMANAKA: You know Garth summed it up very well and the only thing I would say as getting involved with the property from the very beginning. We always saw the property as sort of the gateway to Downtown Hilo and the Hilo Development Agency saw it from the same perspective. As the property had fallen " ", I don't know if you can remember to back to 1983 there were over a hundred(100)jobs that were generated prior to that time when Hilo Iron Works was under full production. Part of our goal was to see how we could bring back a lot of the jobs because obviously economically we were suffering in those days and through that process from basically virtually zero jobs we've eventually today brought it back to almost 100 jobs. We've made substantial improvements to the property and if you remember what it looked like in eighty-three (83) I think we've gone to some extent to make the property much more 5 EXHIBIT B presentable to the eye as you come over the Wailoa Bridge into Downtown Hilo. I think that is just something that has always been in the back of mind of the owners. Thank you. AU: Raised hand. Mr. Chair, I have a question. REPLOGLE: I'm sorry, yes Mr. Au. AU: Thank you Mr. Yamanaka's and Mr. Piianaia for coming forward with this application. I'm glad senior Mr. Yamanaka you mentioned that you talked about jobs and revitalizing that property and I know Mr. Yamanaka junior mentioned that at this time there's no plans for future development but, I would strongly encourage, and I would like to see more development on that property. It is an eyesore, it was an eyesore but now that building is beautiful on the front end and I would like to encourage development and really briefly Mr. Yamanaka Junior and can you just share with me or Mr. Yamanaka Senior. What is your vision for that property I know at this time you have no current development but, what is the overall vision that you want to see and I'm glad you tied it into a gateway for Hilo Downtown. V. YAMANAKA: I think Garth summed it up very well in the fact that it's very difficult for us as owners to put money back into the property without existing zoning that conforms to the use. The financing for that type and that type of situation is very expensive. So, to date, we have not really borrowed any money from any financial institution but we basically put in cash and I think during the time of our holding we've gone to the extent of over a million and a half that we've put into the property of our own cash. That's not normal for business like this but because of this zoning situation it's almost become a necessity it's very difficult. There a lot of people who would want to come in and utilize the property but again without the zoning it makes it very difficult for us to move forward. G. YAMANAKA: I just want to add that he mentioned there have been a lot of people who have approached us and it is due to the unique location along the river. People want to take advantage of that and the problem ends up becoming whether our uses will be approved and then will they be able to get financing to put money into the property because any improvements that occur will be substantial being in the Special Management Area(SMA) and having to address any other issues that arise through term of development. So, the financing portion of that is super important because not a lot of people have that type of cash just to take that type of risk. But we do get a lot of interest. REPLOGLE: Thank you. Any other questions fellow Commissioners? CLARKSON: Raised hand. REPLOGLE: Mr. Clarkson? CLARKSON: Yes, I have a question for the Director Kern. Let me just preface this by saying that back in the late eighties (80's), early nineties (90's) I was involved in a housing project in Keaukaha, in which the location in the tsunami zone required the construction of all houses to be elevated above the tsunami inundation level. I would ask Director Kern how existing regulations 6 EXHIBIT B concerning building in a tsunami zone would likely affect any redevelopment of this area. Is everything going to have to be built 11 feet off the ground like it was in Keaukaha for residential structures, and I also know that during the or I was told by a tenant at the Iron Works building this is many decades ago. That during the tsunami much of the industrial equipment in the building was washed into the river and had to be dredged out and I'm just would like to know what kind of regulatory protections there are to prevent that kind of thing from happening again especially with possible commercial uses that would involve substances that should never go into a river. KERN: Thank you Commissioner Clarkson, Zendo Kern here, Planning Director. If I get this wrong staff feel free to jump in but this is basically the same situation that we deal with Downtown where it's in a tsunami inundation zone. So, with the existing improvements they are allowed to make a certain amount of improvements to those within the threshold. Anything new though will have to meet the requirements of the tsunami inundation zone which should be very similar to a Keaukaha or Downtown situation. So, it's a bit of both you know what I mean so they can work with what is existing there which obviously makes sense something absolutely new or exceeding a certain dollar amount threshold would have to meet that criteria and it's actually quite a challenging situation and we see in Downtown because a lot of buildings aren't necessarily improved to the level that we'd like to see them because of this situation. So, those regulations will be there but they also get the latitude from what was existing. Does that answer your question appropriately? REPLOGLE: Thank you Mr. Kern. CLARKSON: Yes, it does, it does, and I'd like to ask the Applicants the same question. It's kind of a follow up to Commissioner Au's question about the vision considering the difficulties of building new structures or making major renovations to new structures in a tsunami inundation zone do you just basically see sprucing up what's already there and never passing a threshold where you would have to build to completely different standards that are now required? G. YAMANAKA: Well, you know it is a very challenging situation and you have to really see the economics and the feasibility. So, building anything new or expanding on any type of footprint is just not feasible at this point in time if anything will happen and again there is no plan for any of that and the cost is a big factor and the current situation has been a huge factor in that. But anything that would be done would be with hoping to attract the tenant willing to put in the money, to invest in the property and that would be the main thing that we would be looking at right now is if there would be anyone interested in doing something we would definitely be open to that and taking advantage of being along the river and taking advantage of the view planes. But, again, there is no plans for that it's a huge cost to consider any of that and so hopefully that will be something done in the future and will help us to spruce up the back end of the property which if you can see the overhead pictures, it looks really bad back there. But again for us it makes no sense to fix it up if we can't find someone to put in there so that's been a huge issue for us. V. YAMANAKA: Raised hand. 7 EXHIBIT B REPLOGLE: Mr. Yamanaka. Vern. V. YAMANAKA: I think a good example of what Garth's talking about is the fact that we actually have spent some money in improving the front office spaces that you see. You might see on the wall that we have United State Geological Survey (USGS), you know the Federal USGS has taken over a substantial part of the property but in the process, we need to meet the Federal Codes and Requirements. There's been over almost about half a million dollars spent in just improving the existing structure. Four loads went up from seventy (70)pounds per square foot to over two hundred(200)pounds per square foot. So, you don't really see a lot of that work that we've accomplished in the last couple years. It's all been structurally done where the office spaces have gone but also, as Garth pointed out and Zendo pointed out. Working within the footprint is probably, we have so much space there and so much space that can be improved and if we work in the existing footprint there's a lot of work for us to hopefully create new space and spend the money to improve those kinds of spaces. My understanding is if we work in the existing foot print we are not subject to that new construction criteria that you were mentioning. REPLOGLE: Thank you. AGUINALDO: Raised his hand. I have a question. REPLOGLE: Yes Mr. Aguinaldo. AGUINALDO: This is for Garth and Mr. Yamanaka. So, basically the foot print you guys are indicating is the existing metal structure. I remember back then when you were speaking as far as what the Iron Works building why because we used to bring our flatbed there to get it fixed and weld the bed on because it was rotten. So, what I foresee here is like the question was being asked from you folks the potential like basically the expectation like you said had interest. What kind of interests were there to utilize yes we like to attract because the selling market point is the river right view, location, location you guys got ample parking but, what is the highest and best use is to have that being considered and a thought of what kind of jobs and anticipation being attracted to come in or what is being offered or what kind of businesses so, I'm assuming that big metal building is what you're trying to have the use as an Industrial-Commercial Mixed is that correct? G. YAMANAKA: Well, you know that's the space that a lot of people have interest in because of the location next to the river but, again, that's not the goal of what why we are doing this. The goal isn't to develop everything at this point in time for future use whether it's the current owners or some future owner. You know that would be an opportunity for them and some of the people have come in we've had a brewery approach us; we've had restaurants, we've had a gym that they've worked on in the past and it's an unique property we do have the ability for mooring on the back side as well and so there is a lot of opportunity for future users of the property. But again, the regulations is not something that is just easily, easy to get through, there's a lot of cost involved and a lot of concerns and going through processes like these to overcome. So, interest is great to have but the reality is it's very difficult to get things done this been a huge problem. This helps us go in the right direction and for us the concern has always been it survived us 2 8 EXHIBIT B tsunami's I think part of the reasoning back in the day was that eventually these buildings would fall down if anything else came through, but the reality is the buildings are very strong. They are structurally overbuilt with the type of work that they were doing back in the day so I think these buildings are going to be here for a long time so hopefully something like this helps us to get to a point where we can really make it a very attractive gateway as they put it to the Downtown Hilo area and Bayfront as well. So, I hope that answered your question. AGUINALDO: Yes, it is. Thank you. REPLOGLE: Thank you both. Anything further from fellow Commissioners? GALIMBA: Raised hand. REPLOGLE: Yes, Ms. Galimba? GALIMBA: Thank you Chair. I wanted to thank the Yamanaka's, don't giggle John. I want to thank them for their history, background, historical background that was very interesting and useful. John and I have known each other for a very long time so it's just funny to be in this very formal situation. I wanted to ask about the property and I think this actually might be more for the Planning Department than for you folks but I wanted to thank you for that information. Besides the tsunami risks obviously we have projected sea level rise and so I wondered about this area in general are there considerations and standards concerning sea level rise in these kinds of properties? KERN: Zendo Kern here, I'll speak to that. The position that we're in there is a concern for sea level rise around the entire island and I'd say around the entire world. This one is a little bit unique, and I'd say is there concern there? Sure, but because it's been existing and it's there. What this is, is more of a housekeeping effort to get things squared away, straighten out so as they say they can actually make investments into it. I believe that this area as far as anything new goes the tsunami inundation zone basically far exceeds that and I will let Alex add to that. So, well there is concern around the entire island not a lot of concern with this as its existing and as it's housekeeping and anything new would have to meet tsunami inundation which would kind of take it to a whole another level that would also basically account for that probably through multiple lifetimes and generations to come. But Alex has a lot of knowledge around the coastal and sea level rise as well so let him add to that. REPLOGLE: Alex? ROY: Okay, Commissioner I'm going to share my screen I'm going to pull up what's the sea level rise vulnerability and adaptation mapper or Sea Level Rise Exposure Area(SLR-XA). So, hopefully everybody can see so what I've clicked on is approximately one point one (1.1) foot of sea level rise and then exposure area in blue. So you can see the property is actually on a bit of a rise on that corner so even with 1 foot of sea level projected sea level rise the inundation would be very minor along the back end along Wailoa and then even if we go up to 2 feet you see the inundation is still minimal starts to creep in. So, we'd be looking at something that affects almost up at the 3-foot range which you know they're talking could be 100 or 200 years from 9 EXHIBIT B now. 1.1 is more realistic for sea level rise in this area and so because of the bay, the river, the inundation is minimal because there's again a small little rise where this property is located. Then I also share here is the tsunami map for Hilo Bay you could see the subject properties kind of right in the middle here but the mapper kind of extends all the way out kind of precariously goes around the airport. So, there's a lot of development that's within that already existing area all along there that would have to be taken into account tsunami evacuation. Here's the aerial of the site so, any work that would be done on the property would require an SMA review so they'd have to go through a number of reviews to conduct any development or construction but just know that this area would be the place that would be inundated would be kind of along the backside of the property due to sea level rise and passive flooding too also would be more issues and would just really be along that backside there. So I just wanted to share that information for the Commissioners. KERN: Mr. Chair if I may? REPLOGLE: Thank you Alex. Yes,please go ahead. KERN: Just so that the Commission knows this isn't exactly related to this application but in general anything along the coast we are certainly looking at the impacts of sea level rises it's a consideration that we're taking in on all applications at a very high level, a very serious level it's a real thing. So, we are really working on doing that and I think we're really blessed also to have Alex Roy who actually worked with the DLNR Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands (OCCL) for many years. So, bringing his knowledge and depth of experience in here has certainly added to the team and we're grateful that and certainly something that we are looking at on all coastal type properties. Thank you. REPLOGLE: Thank you Zendo. Fellow Commissioners anything else? LIN: Raised hand. REPLOGLE: Yes, Mr. Lin? LIN: Thank you Chair. Just a curious question, has there been an application to rezone this property in the past? Just from the history that Garth provided the Yamanaka's have been part of this property since the change of ownership. So, I'm just curious why now or has there been any other attempts to rezone this property? V. YAMANAKA: Well I can tell you that we haven't had any other rezoning application. We always had a very good working relationship with Hilo Redevelopment Agency. We had a broad-based support from I think an understanding from government and Downtown community about our place and so this whole thing about the lapsing of the ordinance that allowed us to use the property in an industrial way under the old Hilo Iron Works uses. I think to some extent we never anticipated that we would have to come for rezoning but now that we need it that's why the initial application. We have not had an application before. 10 EXHIBIT B G. YAMANAKA: If I can add, I think what spurred it was we had a few applicants looking for approval of use and the process to do it took so long and the answers we got back were vague and the reasoning behind it was that we had the Open zoning and we had reverted back to that. So, it had never really been an issue prior to that in our mind and so once that happened in talking with the ownership group, I said this is something we really need to address. We did start this I want to say maybe a year or 2 years ago so it's been a long process just to get here. REPLOGLE: Thank you. LIN: Thank you. ROY: Raised hand. REPLOGLE: Alex? ROY: I just want to add that when the Banyan Drive Hawaii Redevelopment Agency (BDHRA) was active Garth came in front of the agency and presented the history. He gave a really cogent presentation on that and Banyan Drive that agency sent a letter of support for this rezoning and I'm with Garth I think that was 2 plus years ago that we started this process. So, he's been working this at least with myself for the past couple years. REPLOGLE: Thank you. Anything further Commissioners? CLARKSON: Raised hand. REPLOGLE: Mr. Clarkson? CLARKSON: One last question and this is also for the Planning Director. I assume that this is not the only non-conforming use in Open zoned areas that have been grandfathered in over the decades and I also assume but want to conform with you that there's virtually no money for eminent domain condemnation and buying out of owners of non-conforming properties in order to make the property use conforming. Is that the case that that is not a possibility that this property could be turned into a park or some other recreational facility that would conform to the existing Open zoning. KERN: Commissioner Clarkson, yes, this is not the only property in this type of situation. I do not have the data on the extent of the other properties and you are also correct that to my knowledge there are no funding sources available at this time especially in the current economic situation that we are in to really even begin to entertain that at this time. I would say the only other focus would be more on the Public Access, Open Space and Natural Resources Preservation Commission (PONC) which would be related to them acquiring like open spaces and there's a lot work for them to do there. I don't think this would fit into that criteria maybe at some point in the future Federal monies could be available I don't see it from a County budget standpoint happening for" " I couldn't even begin to venture when. Does that answer your question? 11 EXHIBIT B CLARKSON: It does, and I mean it clarifies the fact that basically the choice here is to make it easy for the current owners to make this facility a presentable and useful facility or let it basically deteriorate until I mean you know. I'm just impressed that they put so much money into it without any ability to get a lot of tenants in there but still if the rezoning application is unsuccessful I don't see what alternative there would be but for gradual abandonment. KERN: Yeah, and you know and that's why I think with the methodology that they're coming in with with kind of the housekeeping and then seeing where it goes from there is the right way. I think not supporting this or having it go the other way wouldn't serve the community it would further deteriorate, it's an eyesore, it's going to eventually go into a negative place where this is an opportunity actually kind of taking it the other way and it is existing. So, that's why certainly we support this, and we believe it's the right thing not only for the landowners and the applicant but again for the Hilo Community in general driven by that as long as I've been alive and would love to see it shining it's nice to see what they have done as you say there has been that investment in there and it looks great. So, we fully support that. CLARKSON: Thank you. ROY; Raised his hand. REPLOGLE: Alex? ROY: Just a reminder to the Commissioners that the Hilo Iron Works building is actually a historic building so tearing it down would be virtually impossible not it's not on the register of historic places but it is a site and has been cited as by State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) as a historic building. REPLOGLE: Thank you. Everybody good? Okay, I'd like to say something and that is when I was little at Hilo Iron Works there was a D-six (6) caterpillar in a showcase window in that factory. Every time we drove by it, I would look at that tractor and in 1960 it got sucked out and they never found that tractor. Where it went, it's probably still out in Hilo Bay as a house to manini or something but it disappeared and Hilo was flattened. But the Hilo Iron Works building the Yamanaka's are right it was built well and the building withstood it. The water took the caterpillar out but not the building and while I hear the undercurrent of concern about the tsunami we are after all human and we are allowed to make mistakes and I think the best course of action as Director Kern stated is to allow the facility to improve and I would assume people going in there know where they are and yeah, I think it's worth doing just letting it fall down would be worst. Anyway, that's all I have to say. So, if there's no further questions, I will entertain a motion to close testimony and discussion, motion for action. JACKSON: Raised her hand. REPLOGLE: Yes, Ms. Jackson? 12 EXHIBIT B JACKSON: Thank you Chair. I just wanted to find out whether you asked the Applicant if they received the Background and Recommendation and if they agree to the conditions? REPLOGLE: We did, they said at the beginning they did but I will ask it again. JACKSON: I didn't hear that, I'm sorry. REPLOGLE: Okay. You the Applicants agree with the Planning Director's recommendations? G. YAMANAKA: I think we just had some questions on the applicability of some it but, that would be it and I wasn't certain whether we addressed that after or now? REPLOGLE: Now. G. YAMANAKA: Okay. REPLOGLE: Now, you should. G. YAMANAKA: There are certain elements of the conditions or the affordable housing and maybe something I need to learn more about but, after reading through it I just wasn't certain considering the unique situation of the non-conforming to the legal conforming what was applicable and what wasn't applicable. It didn't seem like everything was but I guess that gets worked out later whether it is or isn't. REPLOGLE: Director Kern? KERN: Yes, so the challenge with that one is it's not something that we come up it is driven by Chapter 11 under the affordable housing. So, any rezone is subject not every rezone but various rezones are subject to the affordable housing component. We looked at this because again it is a bit odd to have that tied to an MCX zoning that doesn't actually create affordable housing or excuse doesn't create housing units. But, what they've done is they've included basically a certain amount of employment threshold so, as employment grows to a certain threshold then there is a want for a certain amount of affordability. That is not something that we create again that's a Chapter 11 under affordable housing I think it's something that we can definitely further discuss and if there is a way that Council can work on amending that or adjusting that that would be an option. Don't necessarily know how it will affect you folks because it hits a certain threshold and don't know the inner workings of the amount of employment there and what not. So, that's where that one came up, Maija do you want to add to it? JACKSON: I do actually that was one condition we put in because it's our standard condition but because of the MCX zoning like Director Kern said we weren't really sure how it applied. While we've been in this meeting I've been looking at the Housing Code to try to clarify how it would apply in this situation and I actually think we can recommend deleting the condition because there is a section in the Housing Code that says that it would apply if you can create 100 13 EXHIBIT B or more jobs and the ratio they use is ten (10) full-time jobs per acre. So, we're looking ata maximum you have a 3.29 acre parcel we're nowhere near that 100 jobs threshold. So, I think it would be reasonable to actually delete the condition in this situation. KERN: So, as the Director I'd like to change my recommendation to delete that condition. I think that will take action by you folks as the Commission because it's on there but that would be our recommendation and I want to apologize it's been a lot of stuff going on within the department and a lot of work going on and so we are doing the best that we can we probably should have caught this a little bit earlier so I take responsibility for that again confer to amend my recommendation to delete that condition. REPLOGLE: And so GALIMBA: Raised her hand, question is that Condition J? Which condition is that? JACKSON: Condition J. KERN: Yes. GALIMBA: Okay. Thank you. REPLOGLE: Okay, so this is a question also. Do we take a vote here as Commissioners to allow the Director to delete this condition that we agree with it or how do we proceed? AU: Raised his hand, Mr. Chair I prepared to make a motion. HALL: I'll answer your question Chair. This is Malia. REPLOGLE: Thank you. HALL: The Director is allowed amend his recommendation as he sees fit and then you guys have the discretion to agree with his recommendation or amend it as your own and set it up how you would like it to be sent to the Council. REPLOGLE: Thank you. Mr. Au you wanted to make a motion? AU: Yes, so, I move that a favorable recommendation be forwarded to the County Council for application of Change of Zone, Docket Number 21-000243, based on the Planning Director's recommendation and to delete Condition J. AGUINALDO: Raise his hand, I second. REPLOGLE: So it's been moved by Commissioner Au and seconded by Commissioner Aguinaldo, Alex will RAFFIPIY: Raised his hand, Mr. Chair? 14 EXHIBIT B REPLOGLE: Yes. RAFFIPIY: May I ask Mr. Au if he would agree to further in addition to what the revision of deleting that Condition J to re-label the subsequent conditions so that all the conditions will be labeled in sequential order. So, if we delete Condition J, K will become J, L and so and so forth? AU: Yes. So, I'd like to make REPLOGLE: Okay. AU: add that to my motion. RAFFIPIY: Thank you Mr. Au. REPLOGLE: Thank you both. KERN: Raising his hand. Mr. Chair? REPLOGLE: Yes. KERN: I just wanted to say potentially give the applicant an opportunity to respond to any other conditions that he may want to discuss. I'm not sure if there are. REPLOGLE: Of course, thank you. Mr. Yamanaka's? G. YAMANAKA: You know I appreciate this ability to talk about it. I think for us it was just more some of it were the word proposed so I wasn't sure if would we be considered existing, or the rezoning is considered as a proposed project? So, that I think was just a little,just a little uncertainty on our end whether we'll be considered existing, or this is basically a new project or proposed project as defined in some of the terms. REPLOGLE: Director Kern I think that's for you? JACKSON: Raising hand. ZERN: Maijado you want to answer? JACKSON: Yeah, if you don't mind so I see the word proposed in Condition B, the very last sentence this is related to the water commitments. So, our intention and correct me if I'm wrong Director Kern was that this condition to have appropriate water meters and valid water commitments would apply to the existing property and upon consolidation and re-subdivision this condition would need to be met by creating a water meter for each new lot. So, if language is needed to clarify that we could change the word proposed to existing use in the last sentence. I'm just looking through the other conditions. 15 EXHIBIT B G. YAMANAKA: There's I believe H; L has the word proposed. JACKSON: So, Condition H is kind of the same thing, the Sewer Code already says that if there is an existing line fronting a property you are required to connect, that's a requirement in the Sewer Code even if this condition were not in here. So, if the existing development is not currently connected to the sewer you would need to meet Department of Environmental Management(DEM) requirements for that connection. Then Condition L is just the catch all that you need to comply with any rules, regulations, and laws and that applies to the existing development as well as any proposed future use. KERN: We are open to feedback on that because something that we don't want to do, and we only have so much latitude that we can have we certainly don't want to set up conditions that are impossible. You know what I mean we don't want to set conditions that are achievable and in alignment and again on the sewer side its quite challenging because we don't have the authority over that so basically a condition that goes in there that's already in that code. But perhaps there is a way to find some latitude I'm not sure. Garth, what's your feelings around that? G. YAMANAKA: No, I appreciate that, and I think a lot of this is straight forward, the water meters is something that we've done the water calculations for the Water Department and we're okay with that it makes sense to have the additional meters. So, yes everything looks good. KERN: Thank you. REPLOGLE: Okay, was there anything further? CLARKSON: Raised hand. REPLOGLE: So, we are, yes Mr. Clarkson? CLARKSON: I hate to do this, but I just want to ask Counsel Hall, this is just a niggling thing as to the format of the motion. Has the Director used his prerogative as he always says to change his recommendations and removed and renumbered remove Condition J and renumbered them such that we don't have to make a motion including that or has he not? HALL: My understanding is that Director Kern has removed J. I do not know that he also said that he was renumbering or re-lettering I should say. I don't think there is any problem with being redundant but for technicalities sake if you guys want the motion amended to just say your adopting the Planning Director's recommendation with also re-lettering because of his recommendation you can do that as well but as it stands, I don't see a problem with the motion. REPLOGLE: Thank you. Are you good, Mr. Clarkson? CLARKSON: Good to go. REPLOGLE: Okay, Mr. Au would you be able to repeat your motion? 16 EXHIBIT B AU: Yes, I will. So, I move that a favorable recommendation be forwarded to the County Council on the application for Change of Zone Docket Number 21-000243 based on the Planning Director recommendation and the deletion of Condition J which shall be adopted. KERN: and renumbered. AGUINALDO: I second. REPLOGLE: And renumbered and it was seconded by Commissioner Aguinaldo. AGUINALDO: Yes. REPLOGLE: And we will now have a roll call vote. ROY: Okay, Commissioner Au? AU: Raised hand, aye. ROY: Commissioner Aguinaldo? AGUINALDO: Raised hand, aye. ROY: Commissioner Clarkson? CLARKSON: Aye. ROY: Commissioner Galimba? GALIMBA: Aye. ROY: Commissioner Lin? LIN: Raised hand, aye. ROY: Commissioner Raffipiy? RAFFIPIY: Waved hand, aye. ROY: And Chair Replogle? REPLOGLE: Aye. ROY: Motion carries 7-0. REPLOGLE: Thank you. 17 EXHIBIT B G. YAMANAKA: Mahalo everyone, appreciate it and have a great day. Thank you. CLARKSON: Waved hand. AU: Waved hand. V. YAMANAKA: Raising hand, thank you very much. AGUINALDO: You're welcome and waved hand. LIN: Waved hand. REPLOGLE: And you will be notified in writing as to the results of today. G. YAMANAKA: Mahalo. The item ended at 10:34 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Melissa Dacayanan-Salvador Secretary Windward Planning Commission 18 EXHIBIT B