Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-05-21 TBAL LEEWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAIÒI HEARING TRANSCRIPT MAY 21, 2010 DANIEL BAL dba WAIMEA COUNTRY A regularly advertised hearing on the application of WRENCH (SPP 10-101) was called to order at 11:08 a.m. in the King Kamehameha's Kona Beach Hotel, Ballroom I, 75-5660 Palani Road, Kailua-Kona, HawaiÒi, with Chairman Frederic Housel presiding. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Frederic Housel, Brandi Beaudet, Lani Bowman, Geraldine Giffin and Richard Nelson ABSENT AND EXCUSED: Wayne Iokepa STAFF PRESENT: Brandon Gonzalez (Deputy Corporation Counsel), BJ Leithead Todd (Planning Director), Daryn Arai (Planning Program Manager) and Jeff Darrow (Staff Planner) And two people from the public in attendance. APPLICANT: DANIEL BAL dba WAIMEA COUNTRY WRENCH (SPP 10-101) Special Permit to operate an auto repair business within an existing building situated on approximately 2 acres of land within the State Land Use Agricultural District. The property is located off the south side of Highway 19 (Mamalahoa Highway) with access between HPM Building Supply and NAPA Auto Parts, Puukapu Homesteads, First Series, South Kohala, HawaiÒi, TMK: 6-4-6: portion of 1. HOUSEL: Our next applicant is Daniel Bal doing business as Waimea Country Wrench. This is a Special Permit to operate an auto repair business within an existing building situated on approximately two acres of land within the State Land Use Agricultural District. Mr. Darrow? DARROW: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If I can again direct the attention of the Planning Commission to the presentation on the wall. Our next applicant is Daniel Bal doing business as Waimea Country Wrench. He is requesting a Special Permit application. This is the location map. The area of this application is within the South Kohala District. More specifically, we are looking at Waimea Town. The general area, what you may be familiar with is the HPM store as located in this general area, NAPA Auto Parts, the Police station Î letÓs see what else Î you might be familiar with, I think itÓs Texaco Gas Station in that area. The subject property is identified with a black outline. We have Mmalahoa Highway that runs in an east-west direction that provides access through this flagpole that is located on the property. The property itself has two separate zonings. Mainly itÓs Agricultural 5 acres, which is identified in green, and then y also have a portion that is commercially zoned, which is the access pole. There was a previous change of zone that occurred right next door to the property to the west that was done by HPM, and they had changed the zoning to CV and Family Ag-3 to be able to increase their business. 1 EXHIBIT C Just some history behind this particular application. The applicant had received a warning letter in 2005. Based on that warning letter, the owner of the property hired an attorney to submit a Special Permit application. When they submitted the application, Director Chris Yuen requested that the applicant go through the change of zone process similar as HPM. Unfortunately, there were some limitations to that based on the access to the property. So at a time in the future when Planning Director Leithead Todd met with the applicant, at that time if they werenÓt able to resolve this access issue, then they just proceed with the Special Permit application, which we have today. So thatÓs just a little bit of background. This shows the General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide Map showing that the actual area of the warehouse is located in the Medium Density Urban area, which is the brighter orange. The outline area, the lighter yellow, is the Low Density Urban. This is an aerial photo. The subject property is identified in a red outline. Again, we have Mmalahoa Highway at the top of the map. You can see that there is the warehouse identified, as well as a dwelling located on the property. The Lindsey property is identified in this general area, and the area of the apartments that was described in the LindseysÓ submittal is located in this general area. The applicant is requesting a Special Permit to legitimize an ex within the existing 5,000-square foot warehouse and related uses on an approximately 2-acre portion of the 5.043-acre property. The reason for the request is that the applicant has more than 15 years of experience in auto repair, holds 14 automotive service excellent certifications, and is qualified in all areas of auto repair. The applicant sees that Waimea is rapidly urbanizing and has very few choices in the way of automotive maintenance and repair. The applicant feels that they can serve the communityÓs expanding need for auto service, stimulate WaimeaÓs economy and provide part-time jobs. These are some site photos. This is actually at the portion of the flag, looking out towards Mmalahoa Highway. This is the highway in this general location. It shows that you have a paved access to the property Î not sure whatÓs going on there. This is looking at the warehouse towards the east; you have the existing warehouse, 5,000 square feet in size, different vehicles that are parked around the warehouse. This is in the area looking north and, again, we show the warehouse on the right and we show the apartments straight ahead is looking to the south, which shows the remainder of the property thatÓs basically landscaped with grass. The Planning Department is recommending approval with conditions. The conditions that the Planning Department did add, a majority of them are in direct response to minimize the impacts that are being caused to the surrounding properties. I would like to make a comment or two. We do have one typo that weÓd like to address, and that is on the, at the end of the Recommendation, Condition Î the initial time extension or administrative Î it says No. 7, weÓd like to change that to 9; so that would be the last Condition we would change from 7 to 9. We apologize for that. Additionally, we are looking at adding our standard water calculation condition that will be a new Condition No. 2, and thatÓs based on a 2 EXHIBIT C comment letter from Department of Water Supply. At the time of particular warehouse has one sink and one bathroom, it seemed like it might be a little bit much to ask the applicant to submit water calculations to Department of Water Supply. But we have not received a revised comment letter from them stating as such, so weÓre going to go ahead and add the condition. And basically itÓs just our standard condition asking the applicant to submit estimated maximum daily uses water calculations for the proposed uses to Department of Water Supply. Lastly, weÓve received a petition for standing in a contested case from Glenn Lindsey. Unfortunately, it was received without the proper filing fee. The Planning Department responded in writing in a letter asking, if itÓs the LindseysÓ intention to proceed with the petition for standing, to submit the needed filing fee, which the Planning Department did not receive, but did receive subsequently another letter of opposition dated April 8, 2010. With that, that concludes our presentation. Are there any questions? HOUSEL: Jeff, I had one question. You mentioned the addition for the water calculation. Which Condition will that be? DARROW: That would be a new Condition No. 2, and all Conditions after that would be renumbered. HOUSEL: I see, okay, so that will become No. 2 and then everythi Commissioners, any questions of the staff? BOWMAN: IÓm sorry. And you said they have one sink and one bat DARROW: ThatÓs my understanding. BOWMAN: Okay, thank you. DARROW: The actual property itself has a single-family dwelling, which would take the majority of the water thatÓs happening, but the additional water particular business, IÓve been informed, only involve a bathroom and a sink. HOUSEL: Are they on the same meter Î both? DARROW: Correct. HOUSEL: Would the usage have to be required from both of those? DARROW: ThatÓs what they would look at, if -. I believe Water Supply said that they had a maximum daily allowance of 400 gallons. So if they go beyond that, then they are going to have to either, probably get a new meter. 3 EXHIBIT C HOUSEL: Okay. No other questions? Would the applicants please come forward? Could you raise your right hand, please? Do you swear to tell the truth on this matter before the Planning Commission today? BAL: Yes, I do. HOUSEL: Thank you. Go ahead and have a seat. Could you state your name and address, please? BAL: My name is Daniel Bal, and my address is P. O. Box 6905 in Kamuela. HOUSEL: Very good. Would you like to present your comments on this, any comments you have from what Mr. Darrow presented? BAL: I donÓt have too much else to add. WeÓve been, like I say, it has been a long, long process, and weÓve been there for five years and things are going pretty well. Do you have any questions? HOUSEL: Have you received all the background information? BAL: Yes, I have. HOUSEL: Okay. Are you in agreement with that? BAL: With the -? HOUSEL: All the conditions. BAL: I donÓt see any problem with these conditions. HOUSEL: Commissioners, do you have any questions of the applicant? BOWMAN: How many employees do you have? BAL: Right now I have none. BOWMAN: Okay, so itÓs your, basically your operation. And do y and electrical? BAL: Yes, I do. A bathroom is fairly recent, within the last two months. Electrical has been five years. BOWMAN: And you are, like you said, with the agreement that the hours of operation and everything that the conditions state. BAL: Those are, all the hours of operation and the days were the things that I proposed in my application actually. BOWMAN: And the number of vehicles, so thatÓs -. 4 EXHIBIT C BAL: The number of vehicles is no problem. BOWMAN: Okay, thank you. HOUSEL: What kind of repair work do you do at this facility? BAL: We do a lot of stuff that other people wonÓt do Î changing engines, transmissions. We do have gasket jobs. I donÓt have an alignment rack, so pretty much the only thing we donÓt do is fine alignments. But IÓm certified in every area plus more, so we can pretty much have the capability of doing everything. The only thing we donÓt do is f HOUSEL: Do you do bodywork? BAL: We donÓt do bodywork. Only repairs. HOUSEL: Or paint or -? BAL: No painting, no bodywork. Only mechanical. HOUSEL: Thank you. BOWMAN: One of, I think when that first went on, you recognize the growing, you know, that Waimea is growing, and that you could provide, I thought it said some economic opportunities. Was this on -? Mr. Darrow, would you show the first slide -? DARROW: The -? BOWMAN: Where it says the reasons, I guess. BAL: I think it said I was going to stimulate the economy of Waimea -. BOWMAN: Right. BAL: And can help serve the communityÓs expanding need for auto service, stimulate WaimeaÓs economy and provide part time jobs -. BOWMAN: And provide part time jobs. So, is that something you are still looking at? You just said you -. BAL: Absolutely. BOWMAN: Okay, thank you. BEAUDET: I have a question Î I donÓt know, maybe the staff. It was mentioned in the introduction that a rezoning application was made some time back, but due to certain challenges it didnÓt go through. What were the challenges with the rezoning application? BAL: The access road that you see coming down from Mmalahoa Highway, is only 20 feet wide, and itÓs not really wide enough for commercial rezoning; itÓs supposed be 40 to 60 feet wide for commercial zoning. And the fact that HPM owns the property on one side and NAPA owns the property on the other side, they are not willing to give up; twenty feet would be a whole row of parking places for NAPA, and HPMÓs building is too close. So I think in the future when 5 EXHIBIT C this property gets rezoned, there will probably be another access road from the back, you know, in addition to the existing one. DARROW: Does that answer your question, Commissioner Beaudet? BEAUDET: Yes. DARROW: And that is accurate. The issue to limit them from doing the change of zone was the width of the access road. BOWMAN: So when you mentioned that when it will get rezoned, are you, then you are coming off of that cul-de-sac? That would be the access road? BAL: ThereÓs actually a two-lane dirt road coming from the back of that cul-de-sac now to the back of the property, that the farmers use. NELSON: Could you show me that on the, could you demarcate to show me the second entryway? DARROW: That would be right here. So you would come off the highway down here and then it would provide access. BOWMAN: And that FA-3 is just one lot, right? DARROW: ItÓs actually, this is one lot here and thatÓs split-zoned Î Commercial Village as well as Family Agriculture. BAL: ThatÓs HPMÓs property. BOWMAN: Is there anything built on those in the back? BAL: Yeah, HPM just built a warehouse right next to my landlordÓs house. So we just -. Remember the aerial photograph of the dwelling? Right next to the dwelling on the left is HPMÓs new warehouse. BOWMAN: And thatÓs way back in the light blue, or in the purple. BAL: In the purple. BOWMAN: Okay, but there is no, in the FA-3 acres, are there any homes back there? BAL: No. BOWMAN: No. And thatÓs just one lot. BAL: Correct. BOWMAN: Thank you. HOUSEL: The home, or residence, thatÓs on the same property, who lives there? BAL: The owner of the property. 6 EXHIBIT C HOUSEL: The owner does. BAL: And his family. HOUSEL: And thatÓs who you rent from? BAL: Yes it is. GIFFIN: Mr. Chairman. Jeff, could you please identify that road, which would be the alternate access to the property in question? And what are the adjoining property owners? So I can kind of have a visual as to where that road is. BAL: You are talking about the road on the left? I donÓt know the name of the road, but Shell that used to be a Texaco gas station, that goes right along the Shell station Î itÓs now a Shell station Î it goes alongside the Shell station, and then behind the Shell station is CarQuest Auto Parts. And then as you continue, there are residences down that road. As you turn left and get into the light-blue portion, thatÓs HPM. If you look at -. GIFFIN: IÓm aware of that but, Mr. Bal, so you are saying that the Shell station is right by the David Doi dentist office and -. BAL: Yeah, right across. GIFFIN: Okay. BAL: But see, right now that road is used by the farmers, and itÓs like a two-lane dirt road at the end of that cul-de-sac. ItÓs certainly not considered an access to this property, no. But it has been suggested that in the future if we want to do commercial zoning, which the Planning Department actually wants to do commercial zoning, the possibility of widening the flag access road is pretty slim, so there would have to be another access from behind in order to do that. GIFFIN: So the pavement that the road is ends, and then you said thereÓs a dirt road that goes towards that light-blue property, which is your landlordÓs, that could connect to the property in question. BAL: Well, no, the light-blue property isnÓt my landlordÓs; thatÓs HPMÓs property. GIFFIN: Okay. BAL: But yes, it could connect. And it does actually connect now, but itÓs certainly not a developed road. Like I say, itÓs like a two-lane dirt road. GIFFIN: Dirt road, okay. BAL: The farmers that farm back there use that road now for access. BOWMAN: Can you show us that just for clarification? I know where it is but -. With that, yeah, heÓs going to show it. Right there. BAL: Here is the end of the cul-de-sac. Here is the -. DARROW: Mr. Bal, if you could use your -. We have -. 7 EXHIBIT C BAL: I canÓt see that -. BOWMAN: Thank you. DARROW: Okay, so this is called Kinohou Street, I believe. So itÓs a possibility, but at this point, based on the circumstances we have, the Special Permit wa LEITHEAD TODD: I might clarify that. When we talk about a possible future extension of that road is that when you look at all of the other land back in that area, right, and we anticipate that in the future as Waimea grows, there may be a rezoning for additional residential use back there, there may be some rezoning for some other uses in that area, that we would want that road extended to provide access to all of that other land that sits behind that property; because as you can see, they have flag lots and other things, and so trying to reduce the number of entrances onto the main highway, we would want any further subdivision back there to come off of Kinohou just to reduce the number of accesses onto the main highway Î thatÓs where we would want to go in a long range, but that is well down the road. And I guess the tug-and-pull on this is that, you know, we did want to do the rezoning, but they couldnÓt work out an agreement with the adjoining property owners on the access, so then it wouldnÓt be consistent with rezoning. On the other hand the use of the property is consistent with the land use maps and, you know, itÓs kind of a tug-and-pull; on one hand Mr. Bal started a business that was not approved because itÓs on Ag land, on the other hand it is a service that is kind of consistent with the growth in Waimea because -. He is not the only one; weÓve had other issues with automobile repair facilities and the lack of appropriately zoned land to provide some of these services to the community. There is some concern about the apartment building, so there is going to be a requirement that they put up a planting screen. And itÓs just part of the growing pains of the community, and also trying to fit properties into whatÓs required under our Zoning Code, and so we ended up recommending this as a mechanism of allowing him to continue the business legally. But it limits whatÓs used on the property, you know, he canÓt do other uses, right, thatÓs just limited, and itÓs limited to the front two acres, which is consistent wit difficult to try and kind of fit stuff in to our code, and so thatÓs why we are here with the Special Use Permit. BOWMAN: Remind me again how long Special Use Permits are for normally. DARROW: Unless there is a condition, a time condition placed on with the land. BOWMAN: Okay, so there is no -. And we didnÓt think of a time limit. DARROW: Correct. LEITHEAD TODD: The Commission can put a time limit. And on the other side of the island we have on some, just so that there is an opportunity to review the use, to review whatÓs occurring on the property, whether there have been changing conditions in the community that require looking at the permits, so we have had a few where we ha of the concern that if a community changes, the Special Use Permit may not either be appropriate or you may need additional conditions to take care of changes in the community. NELSON: I had a question for Mr. Bal. BAL: Yes. 8 EXHIBIT C NELSON: The existing access roadway, which is, you said itÓs 20 BAL: Yes, sir, itÓs 20 feet wide. NELSON: In the future if there is no way that you are going to get any extended width approved, you donÓt see that as a problem for your business? BAL: I donÓt. And the Planning Department, I think rightly so, pointed out to me that once this land is rezoned Commercial, that they donÓt really have much control over what is built there as long as itÓs consistent with the commercial law. So if there was a big restaurant complex that was built back there after it was commercially rezoned, that roa lot of traffic. IÓve been there for five years and itÓs fine for the minimum amount of traffic that I generate. I mean we generally fix three or four cars a day. And so the road is not a problem for me, although it may be a problem, if there was a big commercial NELSON: Out of cue, yes, IÓve noticed a lot of tire burns in one of the pictures over there. So it looks like somebody is using it as a practicing speedway, but -. BAL: ThatÓs not -. NELSON: Go ahead. BAL: IÓm sorry. I should have waited for you to ask your questi NELSON: No, so, my point was that the road as it is built now with the 20-foot width poses no problem for your business. BAL: No problem for my business whatsoever, or for the landowners that live there. NELSON: Okay, thank you. HOUSEL: Commissioner Bowman. BOWMAN: I donÓt know if this is appropriate, but do you know where those -. ItÓs interesting because it looks like a bunch of kids, like, burning rubber. BAL: ThatÓs exactly what it is. It usually happens on weekends. friends, they all have hot rod trucks and hot rod cars. And itÓs a private road; they are allowed to do that. BOWMAN: Okay, thank you. HOUSEL: Now, you said that HPM just completed building a warehouse on the purple area? BAL: Yes, sir. IÓm guessing within the last two years. HOUSEL: Do they use that connector to get to the warehouse? BAL: No, but they park, all their employees park alongside there; a part of that road is used for HPM employeesÓ parking lot where they park alongside their building. HOUSEL: And you say itÓs 20 feet wide? 9 EXHIBIT C BAL: ItÓs 20 feet wide. ThereÓs approximately 13 usable feet after, from the front of the cars to the edge of the road. HOUSEL: Right, that makes it pretty tight. Now, this road is owned by the property owner that you are on, is that correct? BAL: ThatÓs correct. HOUSEL: Does he have any concerns about the parking there? BAL: No, he charges HPM to park there. HOUSEL: Oh, I see. Okay, okay. GIFFIN: Mr. Chairman? IÓd like to direct this question to the Director. So, would it be okay to go ahead and put a time limit on the life of this Special Use Pe conditions, to make sure that they have been addressed and are being complied with? Is that proper? LEITHEAD TODD: I think that the Planning Commission in its wisdom can put a time limit on a Special Use Permit so that they can revisit whether it continues to be an appropriate use and whether the community has changed in that area. And I would think perhaps, you know, I donÓt know, ten years, you know, or any other period that you picked. WeÓve picked different times for different permits. Trying to think, we had guys that had an existing portable toilet business outside of HonokaÒa, and that was one where I had recommended denial of the Special Use Permit, and the Windward Planning Commission didnÓt want to put the employees out of business, so they gave them, I think it was five years, with the thought that they would revisit and basically we were asking in that case the applicant to take a look at whether he could relocate the business. And then we had another one Î IÓm trying to remember what the time limit on that was Î but we had another Special Use Permit where because we wanted to revisit whether the community changed around that use. And part of the concern was that, you know, if we have Special Use Permits, they run forever, and that we wanted to perhaps have a little bit more control over making sure that people were abiding by the existing conditions, and give the Planning Commission the opportunity to even revoke a Special Use Permit, if the applicant was violating the conditions, because weÓve had issues over Special Use Permits and whether people Î something like this is fairly s special use Î but we had others where there have been issues over interpretation over what their activities are, what is or is not a birthday party, and kinds of things like that. And so sometimes we thought that it was better to be able to bring it back and have the Commission be able to evaluate whether the applicant had abided by the conditions, was being a good neighbor. And it was also, the idea was to give neighbors an opportunity to come forward in the future and say if there have been ongoing problems with the Special Use Permit, which we had not anticipated and which needed to be taken care of. GIFFIN: So in this instance, would five years be too short, is that reasonable, what is -? BAL: I have a comment. GIFFIN: Excuse me, IÓm addressing the Director. BAL: IÓm sorry. 10 EXHIBIT C LEITHEAD TODD: I would think that that would be better answered by the applicant, and thatÓs because he has a better idea of what type of an investment he has to make into the place; because part of the problem on some of these is like, letÓs say you are granting a Special Use Permit, somebody invests money in equipment and installing interior renovations in the building, and you may need to give them enough time to basically amortize the investment in the building. And so the applicant would probably be in a better position to address that. And sometimes the reason you want to revisit is to see whether other property opens up that is available. GIFFIN: ThatÓs right -. HOUSEL: How long have you been at the site? BAL: Six years. HOUSEL: Six years. BAL: And my comment was that not much changes in six years; I think ten years would be appropriate. And IÓm not opposed to that; as long as IÓm able to get another Special Use Permit if nothing has changed and everything is still okay at that time, IÓm not opposed to ten years. I think five is too short just because not much changes in five ye BOWMAN: And you have a lease on this building? BAL: I do not. BOWMAN: So, but you are not the owner of the property. BAL: IÓm not the owner. We have, I have a verbal agreement and, like I say, IÓve been there for six years and I trust my landlord. There is nothing in writing at this point. BOWMAN: So if he decided that he wanted you out tomorrow or whatever, that -. BAL: ThatÓs certainly up to him. I mean certainly he will give yeah, he can, at this point he can ask me to leave. BOWMAN: Okay, thank you. HOUSEL: Any more questions of the applicant? BEAUDET: I have a question. HOUSEL: Sure. BEAUDET: Part of the recommended conditions is to limit the size of the Permit to a half acre instead of the requested two acres -. BAL: ThatÓs correct. I think thatÓs okay. BEAUDET: And the warehouse, the square footage of the warehouse is 5,000 square feet, so thatÓs basically -. Where do you intend to have vehicle storage? BAL: There is a condition in there also about vehicle storage that says I have to store them all behind the building instead of on this side of the building that the apartment building is at -. 11 EXHIBIT C BEAUDET: That fronts the apartments, right? BAL: WhatÓs that? Yeah -. BEAUDET: Do you think that thereÓs enough space for you to contain everything within the half acre? BAL: Sure. BEAUDET: And parking? BAL: Sure. GIFFIN: So we are speaking of Condition No. 4, is that correct? HOUSEL: Are there any other questions of the applicant? We do have -. Thank you, sir. Unless we want more discussion -. GIFFIN: How are we going to go about the actual wording of the time limit? And then also the new wording for Condition No. 2? HOUSEL: I think Mr. Darrow is going to help us with that. Commissioner Giffin, we do have one testifier also that maybe we want to hear before we start writing an amendment. GIFFIN: Sure. HOUSEL: Any other questions of the applicant? Thank you very much. Would Cynthia Lindsey please come forward? Could you raise your right hand, please? Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth on this matter before the Commission today? LINDSEY: Yes, I do. HOUSEL: Thank you. Could you state your name and address, please? LINDSEY: My name is Cynthia Lindsey. We have, we live in an apartment directly across from the subject property, thatÓs at 64-1013 Mmalahoa Highway, Apartment 3-2. HOUSEL: Directly north of the property, is that correct? LINDSEY: Okay, north, I have, mauka, makai, or -. HOUSEL: Okay, okay, IÓm trying to get my directions here, too. LINDSEY: Okay, yeah. HOUSEL: Would you like to proceed with -? LINDSEY: Yes. First of all, I see applying for this Special Permit and even considering it is jumping the gun. There are so many things that need to be done to this property before it can be used for any commercial or other purpose. The building has never been completed. I was told by the owner two months ago that he hadnÓt put in a cesspool or plumbing permit thatÓs been finished. The building has never be 12 EXHIBIT C creating a revenue source for a commercial purpose, he is doing it illegally. I mean I have a commercial building. My building there has commercial places. I had to get a certificate of occupancy. I could not rent that building or create any revenue stream, do anything with it until I had completed all of the requirements of the County for building inspections, plumbing inspections, electrical inspections, and all of the other requirements. I think this is grossly jumping the gun to allow someone to operate a commercial business in a building that is unsafe, un-inspected and should not be used for any purpose until itÓs been completed. And Mr. Bal indicated that he has a bathroom and a sink. Mr. Bal did not have a bathroom and a sink for the past six years that he has occupied that place. And I was told two months ago by Curtis Sylva himself in person to my face that he had no septic tank and no cesspool. So I donÓt know where he is getting a bathroom from unless he is using one understanding he wasnÓt, and it was my understanding from Curtis Sylva that he was using the bathroom at NAPA Auto Parts, which he didnÓt use, because I had to stand there and watch him urinate along with all of his employees and assistants and other people squatting on the ground right in front of my door, which was gross. Okay, now, to move onto my other comment. First of all, this Special Permit, this place hasnÓt been zoned for commercial purpose, using an unfinished building thatÓs never been inspected. DoesnÓt this create a variance that the County could be liable, if any employees or customers were injured or hurt in that building because itÓs never been inspec-, if you allow him to continue with the commercial operation in that building and you give him permission with your approval, and none of these things have been completed? YouÓve added them as conditions to give him six months to a year and even another year extension to complete these things; a lot of things can happen in a year, in a day, in a month. And I believe that if someone got hurt or something happened there, that the County would be jointly liable because they gave him permission to go ahead and be there and do this when he shouldnÓt be. That photograph of the road that you showed with the skid marks, those skid marks are people coming in and out of his facility, and the noise there is tremendous, laying rubber there constantly. And screeching and screaming around that corner is dangerous. ItÓs frightening. You canÓt even hear when they are doing it. Apparently, from when I looked up the property tax records, the building, because it is incomplete, has never paid any taxes on that property; there has been no assessments on it. It was designated as an agricultural warehouse. I donÓt know if itÓs built to commercial construction standards, codes, requirements. And he is not paying commercial property taxes. As a landowner and a commercial property owner, I pay commercial property taxes on my building including my residence. And I think this is just, by allowing this is setting a precedent and indicating to the general public that you can get away with bloody murder. There have been many times when IÓve stood at my front door and seen over 40 cars parked in this area between the apartment and the building. And if he is going to have that many vehicles, heÓs Î they are in there all the time Î there is no way heÓs going to fit this on half an acre. HeÓs been there over six years now. My first complaint when I went to the Planning Department in Kona was in 2004, and they wrote a letter in 2005, and it has taken this long to get to this point. Are we going to be having him drag his feet and drag his feet with these conditions and come back again and again? What do I have to do to get this thing resolved to where it is in compliance with the law and conditions and regulations? I mean the building should not be being used for any purpose right now or for the past six years in the condition itÓs in now. 13 EXHIBIT C He is saying that there is no available space in Waimea, that Waimea has grown and he canÓt -. Well, the Lex Brodie building right directly across Mmalahoa Highway is vacant and there is a big sign that says ÐFor LeaseÑ right now. He has plenty of access to other facilities out by the airport IÓve seen for lease. I donÓt see why he needs to use this particular spot and get a Special Use Permit when there are more than adequate properties that are this type of business. He also Î you have a photo showing that runway between the two buildings Î he is storing fuel. Akana Petroleum has delivered fuel. Directly between the car that is adjacent to the left side of the building and the building, there are four 55-gallon freestanding drums filled with volatile fuel, and that is how far from my residence. What happens if somebody goes out there and smokes a cigarette and it blows up? What kind of safety precautions are there? There is none. There is 200 gallons of fuel plus sitting right there on the corner of that building in 55-gallon drums Î itÓs just not safe. The noise from his operation is disturbing at night. And thank goodness that one of the conditions is that tow trucks canÓt come in there at night, because they come in at all hours with their lights and their chains and their other noise. Anyway, I strongly object to this Special Use Permit. And I donÓt think that this is the time to be even considering it until that building and, as theyÓve said, that possibility of putting in a road where the whole property could be rezoned, because there are ade available to him in other areas of Waimea, and there is no need for the Special Permit. HOUSEL: Okay, thank you. Commissioners, any questions? GIFFIN: I have a question of staff. Mrs. Lindsey spoke of the building being incomplete and without certificate of occupancy as a result of its incompleteness. Has that been pursued by Planning, our department? DARROW: This has been pursued through the conditions of approval. One of them would be final plan approval, which the applicant will need to achieve Î submit plans for the property, and we would take a look at landscaping, parking, re-striping at that time. The other condition that we were looking at is Condition No. 6, which was addressed through comments from Department of Public Works letting us know that the permits are incomplete, and that because the applicant is going from an Ag warehouse use to a commercial use, he also has to submit a building permit for a change of use to commercial. And so our standard condition in regards to these types of issues is similar to this where we give the applicant a period of time to get everything in order, and itÓs usually six months. And in this particular case, additionally, because of the change of use, they have to also do an additional permit as well. LEITHEAD TODD: I have a couple of concerns, and IÓd like to have our background report indicates that there is supposed to be connection to an existing cesspool, but I have Ms. Lindsey saying that this is not connected. And so IÓd like some clarification with that because IÓm very concerned if itÓs some ongoing operation. BAL: Well, itÓs really easy to find out; all you have to do is come and see our working bathroom in the warehouse. I mean they are claiming that we donÓt have one, and we do have one. And there is a common cesspool that is connecting the main house and the warehouse, and this -. LEITHEAD TODD: Then thatÓs illegal. BAL: WhatÓs that? 14 EXHIBIT C LEITHEAD TODD: Then thatÓs illegal. BAL: I thought thatÓs what the Health Department had asked -. LEITHEAD TODD: That would be a gang cesspool, and that would be cesspool serving the single-family residential house and the warehouse, that is a problem. BAL: Well, IÓm told by the landlord that thatÓs what he has done. LEITHEAD TODD: That would not be permissible under current EPA regulations. So that is something that we need to look into, because thatÓs my understanding of the Environmental Protection Act regulations on gang cesspools and there would need to be a separate cesspool or septic system for this building, I believe. So that has to be looked into before we go further. DARROW: If I could interject, Planning Director? We did look into this matter; we contacted Department of Health and we spoke to Dane from the Kona office to find out the status of the Department of Health permit for the cesspool. He indicated that their requirement was that there was a cesspool for the dwelling that they wanted the applicant to fill in and create another cesspool or septic system Î he just said whatever it requires Î and connect the warehouse and the dwelling to that particular new cesspool or septic system. He said that it hadnÓt been inspected, and so that he was going to have to go out there and inspect it to confirm that compliance was achieved. And again, based on Condition 6, we had also required that the applicant comply with Department of Health requirements as part of this situation. ItÓs going to be a process in the plumbing permit, as well as Department of Health coming out to do their inspection to confirm compliance with their requirement of filling in the existing cesspool or, if itÓs been done already, the previous cesspool, and creating a new one. Mr. Bal is saying that somehow they have a working bathroom; IÓm not sure if that means that theyÓve put in another cesspool, which would not be right, or if they had complied with the requirements of Department of Health. And as part of our condition, again, it gives the applicant a period of time to resolve these matters and that is a period of six months. HOUSEL: Mr. Darrow, on the electrical and plumbing permits, do you know when those were originated? DARROW: Just one minute. BAL: Am I allowed to ask questions to Mrs. Lindsey? DARROW: If I could answer -. LEITHEAD TODD: Actually, no. You can direct questions to staff, if you have some, but basically this is -. DARROW: We have a plumbing permit that was -. Oh, IÓm sorry, Madam Director. To answer the ChairmanÓs question, the plumbing permit, Permit No. M006044 8, 2000, the electrical permit, Electrical Permit No. E025606, was issued on April 26, 2002, and the building permit was issued on July 17, 1998. HOUSEL: Mr. Bal, IÓd like to understand, are you responsible for closing these permits, finalizing these permits, or the owner? BAL: The owner. 15 EXHIBIT C HOUSEL: The owner is. BAL: Yes, sir. HOUSEL: Is there any reason that you know of why he hasnÓt done that? BAL: Which permit are you talking about? HOUSEL: All of them. BAL: We just found out that we have to have all these change of use and building permit and stuff; we havenÓt had time to do this. It already has building permits for the Ag warehouse; those have all been done. And you know, Mrs. Lindsey said thatÓs unsafe; I donÓt know how that could be, I donÓt know what is unsafe about the building. It has new electrical in it thatÓs been inspected by the County and approved, and -. HOUSEL: Well, what I read here is the Department of Public Works says they are still open, the permits. BAL: From years ago you are talking about? HOUSEL: Yes. BAL: No, I donÓt know why. And I donÓt really, yeah, IÓm not privy to what he is doing with that. HOUSEL: Okay. Commissioner Giffin. GIFFIN: I have a question of Brandon. If the Special Use Permit goes with the land and we have these conditions that are supposedly not complete by the landlord, I am sensing a feeling of discomfort about this whole application without even speaking tolandlord and, you know, going deeper into this. And I may be totally out of order, Brandon, but could you clarify that for me in terms of these conditions? GONZALEZ: Well, I donÓt know what to clarify except -. I mean you just, you asked the question but you just made a statement, so -. GIFFIN: Could we delay the approval of this application until some of the permits and some of the, yeah, permits were finalized? GONZALEZ: Definitely. If you guys require more information to m want to take the time, and the additional information or materials will assist you in making a more informed decision, then itÓs within you guysÓ discretion to continue the matter until that information is provided to you. ARAI: Mr. Chairman, maybe, if I could clarify something, maybe it will help this discussion. The building permits that still remain open are for an agricultural storage building consistent with the current agricultural designation. The Special Permit needs to be decided upon by the Planning Commission to determine whether this ag storage building may be converted into an industrial type of building that would support this automotive repair business. So the Special Permit needs to happen first before we can determine how to best finalize the building permits. If the Special Permit is not approved, then we can work with the applicant to finalize the building 16 EXHIBIT C permits for an ag storage building; but if the Special Permit is approved, then weÓll work with the applicant to finalize the building permits for an automotive repair shop. I hope that clarifies things. LINDSEY: Excuse me, may I make a comment? HOUSEL: Yes, please go ahead. LINDSEY: IsnÓt it true that the owner could build a commercial building with commercial permits, should he choose to, even though itÓs not zoned for such a thing? DARROW: To answer your question, Mrs. Lindsey, the application today is for a Special Permit, which is specific to a specific use, and the use is an existing auto repair facility within the existing warehouse. So they couldnÓt come in and do a restaurant or do any other type of commercial venture without either amending the Special Permit or changing the zoning of the property. LINDSEY: He couldnÓt overbuild his building to meet certain commercial building requirements -? DARROW: At this time -. LINDSEY: At his choice, if he chose to do so? DARROW: The Permit limits it to a 5,000-square foot building. LINDSEY: But he couldnÓt overbuild his building, should he choose to with the idea in mind that at some point in the future he wanted to have it rezoned or reclassified as a commercial building and meet all of the permit requirements of a commercial building? DARROW: Again, you would have to, if -. LINDSEY: If the owner chose to do such a thing? DARROW: If the owner were to amend the Special Permit, if approved, or change the zoning of the property Î he couldnÓt just do it just on his own. LINDSEY: Can I recommend to the Planning Commission that they donÓt even address this until theyÓve spoken to the owner because Mr. Bal apparently doesnÓt even have a lease agreement with the owner to even maintain this type of business. He has been operating an illegal business for six years, and I donÓt see that continuing on is going to make it any less illegal. DARROW: If I could -. LINDSEY: And if the owner was here addressing the Commission, I think you get a lot more clarity on what is actually going to be happening. DARROW: If I could clarify for this. HOUSEL: Yeah, please do. 17 EXHIBIT C DARROW: In these types of situations where we have a landowner and an applicant that differ, we require that the applicant (sic) sign the application as part of an authorization to allow the applicant to submit the application. In this particular case, the owner who is Curtis Sylva, has authorized the application through his signature on the application. Additionally, as IÓve mentioned previously, is that in 2005 Daniel Bal actually did not submit the original Special Permit, but the owner of the property hired an attorney to submit the original Special Permit application. I think, IÓm not sure what the reason was Î it could be based on the amount of money, it was, to continue with the lawyer Î but anyway, at this time the owner has authorized the applicant to submit the Special Permit. HOUSEL: Help me with this Î IÓm trying to understand. As far as the relationship between the landlord and Mr. Bal, if these conditions in Condition 6 are not the responsibility of Mr. Bal and instead are, the conditions are applicable to the landlord, then is it not appropriate to address these to the landlord rather than Mr. Bal? DARROW: In these situations we place the condition on the applicant; if the condition is not complied with after six months, if these permits are not finalized, then at that point the applicant is in noncompliance with this condition. Even though he may have to work with the landowner to achieve compliance with these conditions, ultimately the applicant is responsible for compliance. LEITHEAD TODD: Just want to point out for the Commissioners that report, youÓll note that a previous Special Permit issued by the Planning Commission in 2006 for an automotive body repair shop was only issued for a two-year period. So there is some past action by the Planning Commission that has set some kind of precedent there. But the Commission can do a number of things Î and Mr. Gonzalez can correct me, if IÓm wrong: The Commission can defer this matter and request additional information be provided and request that the property owner come to address some of these questions; the Commission can deny the application for Special Permit, if you are uncomfortable with the history and the existing conditions; or you can approve it. So you have options of approval, denial, deferral to get additional information. BOWMAN: I heard concern of commercial businesses. The Special Permit will allow only the existing commercial venture, which is car-fixing or whatever it DARROW: Correct. BOWMAN: Okay. So that -. I heard that concern, and I wanted to make sure that just as it is with all the conditions. Okay, thank you. HOUSEL: Anyone else would like to have comment? BOWMAN: Yeah, IÓm with Ms. Giffin. IÓm a little concerned that everything is on the owners of the applicant, and with no lease, IÓm just wondering what active part the landowner is willing to take in this, if any. And maybe the applicant can address this? BAL: I have a great relationship with the landowner. And IÓve been there for six years without a lease, and if I was really worried, IÓd be pressing him to get one. But they want me there, and IÓve been there long enough so that IÓm comfortable with the fact that they want me there. And IÓm their income and they have told me that, you know, IÓm part of their monthly income. So itÓs in their best interest to -. And the landowner has said heÓs been trying to work since weÓve been getting these notices from the Planning Department; heÓs be engineer come out to inspect the septic system, the cesspool and, you know, he is also working 18 EXHIBIT C along to get all these conditions met. So we are not opposed, I mean itÓs not that we have opposing viewpoints. ItÓs just that I do sometimes have to push him to get things done. But he does want to do it, itÓs in his best interest to do it, and IÓm not afraid of them kicking me out. On the other hand, you know, if they do ask me to leave, they canÓt just put someone else in there; whoever else rents that place is going to have to go through this whole process again because the Permit is mine, you know, for my business. So like I say, IÓm not worried about the landowner asking me to leave, IÓm not worried about him not getting the building permits, IÓm not worried about him not making the improvements. ItÓs in both of our best interest to do so. LEITHEAD TODD: Mr. Bal, you are operating under misunderstanding of the law. The Special Permit runs with the land. If the Special Permit is granted, it goes with the property. So the landowner could kick you out and have somebody else come in and run an auto shop there. It does not belong to you individually -. BAL: Okay, I didnÓt know that. But what it is that they would have to run the exact same kind of business IÓm running, right, because this Permit is only for LEITHEAD TODD: Yes. BAL: Okay. LEITHEAD TODD: But I am growing increasingly concerned about the fact that this has been going on since 2005, and the landowner hasnÓt done anything about getting the existing permits closed. So I recommend that the Commission should discuss whether you want to defer or whether you want to take other action. DARROW: If I could interject real shortly? It was brought to my attention that there is a possible alternative as well, and that is to add the landowner as one of the assigns responsible for complying with the conditions of approval. So it would be in essence applicant/landowner. So that was something brought to my attention. HOUSEL: Ms. Giffin. GIFFIN: Mr. Chairman, I need to express to our staff that I appreciate the information that you have just shared with us; however, the discomfort that I expressed earlier persists. And IÓm appreciative also of the DirectorÓs three options that she listed for us to consider, and I need to express that IÓm in favor of the first option that she expressed to us, and that was a deferral. HOUSEL: Any other comments? BOWMAN: I would like to agree just because everything is so haz lease, there is no definite commitment from the landowner. I just would not feel comfortable passing this today. HOUSEL: Mr. Beaudet. BEAUDET: You recommend that we defer for what purpose, though? GIFFIN: First of all, I would like to see the landowner here because, as we know, this permit goes with the land and there are extenuating circumstances that obviously have not been met by the landowner. For me to go ahead and agree to the approval of this Special Permit, I just couldnÓt do it today, especially with all of these extenuating circumstances, and I think we need to have, I would need the time under this kind of purview to question the landowner. 19 EXHIBIT C BEAUDET: So are you recommending that we defer until open permits are closed? GIFFIN: I donÓt know that we need to even specific, you know, be that specific, Mr. Beaudet, but I think that what we need to do is speak with counsel, and perhaps also staff, on wording for what would be appropriate in terms of a length of time for deferral. And if we need to state why, IÓd be happy to do that. HOUSEL: Mr. Bal, I have a question. Obviously, thereÓs a lot of concern about the situation here and a lot of unanswered questions. Would you be in agreement to continue this matter? BAL: As long as IÓm allowed to work while we continue, I have no problem. BOWMAN: I have a question maybe, Mr. Bal. I donÓt want to see any economic hardship on anybody, and IÓm just wondering if you have any idea of Î I donÓt know if this is a correct question Î but it just seems like you need to finalize all these and you said you have your plumbing and your electrical. Do you see finalizing these permits as a hardship? So the commercial, so it can be legal as a building to run your business rather than an agricultural storage. BAL: IÓm going to have to invest some money and getting the electrical installed. IÓve done part of it already. And in order for this to pass, the only thing that IÓd have to do -. In fact, the only thing the building needs is Î itÓs certainly not an unsafe building, itÓs only like an eight years old or something like that Î so the only thing that I would need to pass is to get some, the electrical installation like installed a conduit and brought it up to the code. I mean the electrical is installed now, but itÓs not up to the code. BOWMAN: Because even if we were to pass this today, you understand that this would need to be done within six months. BAL: I donÓt see that as a problem. BOWMAN: Okay. BAL: I mean basically all we have to do is make drawings and submit them to the Building Department. Everything is all done -. GONZALEZ: Okay, well, no, thatÓs not the point; the point is the Planning Commission has been trying to inform you that they donÓt have enough information right now to make a decision and they are not comfortable making a decision. They want to continue this matter as one option so that, to give you an opportunity to get information, if it exists, to answer their questions. The other option is they can try and vote today, if they are comfortable, either to approve it or deny it. BAL: And your question to me is -? GONZALEZ: ThereÓs no question. IÓm trying to explain to you what the situation is. ItÓs not a matter of you submitting documentation and itÓs going to be approved. What they are going to do, if they are going to continue it, is to continue the hearing, and you are going to come back here again with the owner. And thatÓs when any documentation would be reviewed by the Commission; any other additional questions would be answered by you or anybody else. BAL: Yeah, thatÓs fine. 20 EXHIBIT C NELSON: Mr. Chairman? LINDSEY: This has been going on since 2004. This apply-for-a-Spe delay-delay, forget-it, drop-it, I have to go in and make another complaint before the Planning Department will even make any action. I have constantly over and over the years -. And you are just giving him another continuance to drag his feet to not do anything. This is just, itÓs an on and on and on and on. Some decision needs to be made to stop this at some point. There has to be an end to it Î either itÓs okay for him to operate illegally a commercial business where there is no commercial building or he is not allowed to do that. And there are places in Waimea that are available for rent right now Î Lex BrodieÓs old building, the buildings out by the airport Î there are plenty of places for an automotive repair shop in Waimea. There is no need to continue to have an illegal operation for over six years to continue to operate in Waimea. And I recommend denial. HOUSEL: Thank you for your comment. If you concluded your testimony, if you could go ahead and return to your seat. Thank you. Mr. Bal, did you have something youÓd like to say? BAL: No -. HOUSEL: Okay. BAL: Oh, I did have one comment. I think the big picture here is what the Planning Director said at the beginning that the use of the property is consistent with the long-term goals of the economic expansion of HawaiÒi. I mean the spot that IÓm in and the place that IÓm using is consistent with what they would like to see there. LEITHEAD TODD: ThatÓs kind of misstating what I said. IÓm just saying that we were trying to weigh and balance competing interests here, and one is that, you know, frequently we try to work with people who are doing businesses that are illegal under the Zoning Code, and try to work with them to make it legal. The preference was that this be rezoned and go through that process; you werenÓt able to, so weÓve tried to work with you the Special Permit. But along with that the -. So we make a recommendation based on that, but ultimately the Planning Commission has the authority on whether to approve, deny, defer to get additional information, and whether they are comfortable with the fact that this has been going on since 2004. NELSON: Mr. Chairman? HOUSEL: I have a question of the Planning Director. The recommendation is currently favorable to pass this. Have you considered changing your recommendation? LEITHEAD TODD: I have questions and information that I would like, you know, that without -. At the moment I have to admit that IÓm wavering, and thatÓs because I have some concerns about the cesspool in particular, and I think I want the property owner because I want to know why he hasnÓt done anything further to complete stuff. And he has been collecting rent from Mr. Bal since 2004, so obviously he has had some income to address some of these issues. So I think I would like to see the property owner. No offence to you, Mr. Bal. I think you are trying to do the best that you can under the circumstances, but we have a property owner who is the one thatÓs really in violation. HOUSEL: Commissioner Nelson, did you have a comment? NELSON: Mr. Bal, IÓve been listening to the testimony in this case, and I just feel that there is a serious disconnect between you and your landlord in terms of good clear communications with 21 EXHIBIT C the Planning Commission, and obviously thatÓs been shared today by my fellow Commissioners. And it would be in the best interest of your business and the interest of your landlord to come back here and to clear up some matters that are really at this point very confusing. I just wanted to say that. BAL: I would like to point out that my communication with the Planning Department has been excellent. NELSON: ThatÓs just one half of it, though. See, there is another part of this thatÓs missing. HOUSEL: Commissioner Giffin. GIFFIN: Brandon, when I make a motion, do I need to say how long the suggested deferral would be, or -? I mean I donÓt want it to be open-ended, I understand that, but whatÓs reasonable? GONZALEZ: I think some of the best language is until, to be continued to the next hearing upon compilation of the information or something. And then the staff has a flexibility to fit it on the agenda. You made your point you want it done in a timely manner. GIFFIN: I do. GONZALEZ: And then thatÓs the best way. GIFFIN: Okay. Mr. Darrow, could you work up some language regarding the length of time or, you know, the consideration that corp. counsel just mentioned regarding flexibility, making sure that you people can fit it in a timely manner in our schedule and that kind of thing, because I will make a motion. DARROW: Okay. If I can just get clarification, Commissioner Giffin, and that is that the information that you are asking the applicant to provide is information regarding open building permits, electrical permits, plumbing, as well as the situation with the cesspool or septic system on the property, is that correct? GIFFIN: Correct. DARROW: Okay, so -. GONZALEZ: I also believe there are issues regarding the lease arrangement -. DARROW: Lease, correct. GIFFIN: Thank you. DARROW: So we would ask for a deferral until such time that the Planning Department has received pertinent information regarding outstanding permits Î building, plumbing, electrical, and the Department of Health Î as well as information regarding a lease agreement with the owner and the applicant, as well as you would like the applicant and the landowner present for this next, for the hearing. So if it would be okay, we can schedule or allow it to be scheduled for next hearing as long as the Planning Department receives that information. If not, we will continue deferring until we do receive that information. 22 EXHIBIT C LEITHEAD TODD: Mr. Darrow, I would recommend no more than two months. I would like it rescheduled next month; if the information is not in, it can be rescheduled the month after that but no further than that Î up or down, two months from now. DARROW: Okay, thank you, Planning Director. GONZALEZ: Yeah, then the matter has to get resolved. HOUSEL: Commissioner Bowman. BOWMAN: I just have a quick safety issue. I donÓt know if the storage facilities of gasoline, if thatÓs something that is just a part, if in fact it is something that should be addressed Î IÓm not sure about that. BAL: Those barrels donÓt contain gasoline. When they do contain fuel, itÓs diesel fuel. And theyÓve been empty for six months. BOWMAN: And thatÓs allowable, I guess, to have diesel. ThatÓs all I care; IÓm not picking anything specific out but just the safety of storage of fuel. DARROW: I am sure that there are safety requirements regarding that. I believe it falls under the Fire Department, and also I believe that there is Solid Waste or one of Department of HealthÓs divisions gets involved in that. BOWMAN: Just so everything gets addressed. Just so, then you donÓt have to come back and address something else. And I think that, I would just like to add, you know, I know that you want to move on this, but then I think everything can get done at once, and then there is the assurances of not having to come back and have more information required. Thank you. HOUSEL: Commissioner Giffin. GIFFIN: Mr. Chairman, maybe to facilitate any more discussion on this issue, I should make a motion. HOUSEL: Please do. GIFFIN: I move that we defer Special Permit Application 10-000101, utilizing the verbiage that was presented to us by staff, including all of the conditions, the situations that we wanted addressed that were raised by staff, by our Director, and also that was raised by our corporation counsel. NELSON: Second. HOUSEL: Do you mean to include a limit of 60 days also? GIFFIN: Yes. That was raised by our Director. HOUSEL: Okay. Do we have a second? NELSON: Yeah, I did second, yeah. 23 EXHIBIT C HOUSEL: Second? Okay. So we have a motion made by Commissioner Giffin, seconded by Commissioner Nelson, to defer this with the appropriate language from staff for maximum of 60 days. Any discussion? Do you have comment? Okay. Mr. Darrow? DARROW: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I wonÓt go into the long details of the motion, but with that IÓll take the roll call. Commissioner Giffin? GIFFIN: Aye. DARROW: Commissioner Nelson? NELSON: Aye. DARROW: Commissioner Beaudet? BEAUDET: Aye. DARROW: Commissioner Bowman? BOWMAN: Aye. DARROW: And Mr. Chairman? HOUSEL: Aye. DARROW: The motion passes, five to zero. HOUSEL: Mr. Bal, I hope this is clear to you that obviously there are a lot of unanswered questions here, and we would very much like to get this solved as soon as possible. So if you could convey that to the landlord, that would be very helpful. BAL: Thank you, Commissioners. The discussion ended at 12:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Noriko Sauer, Secretary Leeward Planning Commission 24 EXHIBIT C