Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-06-05 TMATSON PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAI‘I HEARING TRANSCRIPT JUNE 5, 2007 A regularly advertised hearing on the application of MATSON NAVIGATION COMPANY (SMA 07-000017) was called to order at 9:27 a.m. in the County of Hawaii, Aupuni Center Conference Room, 101 Pauahi Street, Hilo, Hawaii, with Chairman William Graham presiding. PRESENT: William Graham ABSENT & EXCUSED: Takashi Domingo C. Kimo Alameda Alvin Rho Andrew Iwashita Shelly Ogata Rene’ Siracusa Rodney Watanabe Rell Woodward Ivan Torigoe, Deputy Corporation Counsel Christopher Yuen, Planning Director Norman Hayashi, Staff Planner Phyllis Fujimoto, Staff Planner Jeff Darrow, Staff Planner And approximately 19 people from the public in attendance. SMA 07-000017 The Commission took this item up at 10:05 a.m. with MATSON NAVIGATION approximately 19 people from the public in attendance. COMPANY WAIAKEA, SOUTH HILO APPLICANT:MATSON NAVIGATION COMPANY (SMA 07-000017) Special Management Area Use Permit to allow the construction of a 1,760-square foot (88’ x 20’) modular office building and related improvements at the Hilo Harbor. The proposed office building will gain access from Kalanianaole Avenue, Waiakea, South Hilo, Hawaii, TMK: 2-1-9:26. GRAHAM: Our next Agenda Item on New Business is an application for a Special Management Area Use Permit by Matson Navigation Company. It would allow the construction of a 1,760-square foot (88’ x 20’) modular office building and related improvements down at the Hilo Harbor. This proposed office building will gain access from Kalanianaole Avenue in South Hilo. And this situation because it is a special management area permit the Planning Commission is the granting authority, so we will be taking action on this today. Norman? HAYASHI: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just as a matter of orientation, going to this particular overall site plan, the Hilo Harbor is located here in this general confirmation. The subject location, project location is indicated by this orange dot. These are areas at the Hilo EXHIBIT B 1 Harbor as well. Areas across of the Harbor are indicated in gray, shaded in gray, and are areas that are zoned for either General Commercial or Limited Industrial Commercial zoning. This particular area indicated in this yellow shaded color is the Hawaiian Home Subdivision in Keaukaha. This particular roadway is Kalanianole Street going towards Keaukaha; and this would be in the Hilo direction. This would be Kanoelehua Avenue, or also referred to as the Volcano Highway. This particular area is the Banyan Drive area. Going to the site map, this again is Kalanianaole Street going towards Keaukaha. The existing Harbor Road is located off of this map in this general area. If you look at this particular map, this is the roadway or the driveway that leads into the Harbor. There’s also a new secondary access road at this particular location; and that would be generally at this particular location. The SMA line as indicated on this particular property is this particular line. It’s difficult to see but it runs along Kalanianaole Avenue and juts out, a portion, within the Keaukaha subdivision or Hawaiian Home Subdivision. So anything makai of the Highway in this particular line is within the SMA. The current Matson office building is located adjacent Kuhio, existing access to the Harbor in this general location. What the applicant intends to do is to relocate from this existing office and relocate to this particular area. They would be constructing a 1700-plus square foot modular office building that would house their sales office, auto inspection area, a conference room, and they also have their parking in this particular area. Their basic access to this facility would be from this secondary access road. And this particular area is currently gated for security reasons. Once this facility is constructed, then they would use the access from this particular roadway. These are existing structures indicated on this map. These are existing structures within the Harbor area. The Gas Company facility is located in this particular location. We also have the Aloha Petroleum Complex at this particular area. The modular office building would be one story in height and it won’t be visible from the Kalanianaole Street. The structure will be a substantial distance from the shoreline. The estimated development cost of this particular property would be approximately $400,000. The current General Plan is Industrial. As I indicated earlier this area is zoned for General Industrial. The wastewater would be hooked up to the existing sewer line along Kalanianaole Avenue. The Planning Director is recommending approval of this particular request subject to conditions. Are there any questions? GRAHAM: Thanks, Norman. Just for sense of scale, that 1760 square feet is probably more or less the same as this room here, would you say? HAYASHI: I think it will be much larger than this. It’s 20 by, according to the plan submitted, the building will be approximately 20 feet by 88 feet long. GRAHAM: Okay, thank you. Commissioners? Commissioner Siracusa? SIRACUSA: Yes. I noticed in the conditions, Condition No. 2, landscaping shall be indicated on the plans pursuant to Rule 17. But in the applicant’s application it says that, let’s see, 4.A Description of Environmental Setting, it says that “the project site is largely unvegetated and paved, and only occupied by weed species at the pavement periphery.” So I’m wondering does Rule17 not apply on the general area or was that a noncompliance with Rule 17 from the previous development? EXHIBIT B 2 HAYASHI: Oh, yes, as far as this particular area, the Harbor and its facilities were developed many, many years ago. Rule 17 was not in existence at that time. In order for, as part of this particular request, the applicant would be required to put in some sort of landscaping in accordance with Rule No.17. SIRACUSA: Thank you. May I? GRAHAM: Go ahead, Commissioner Siracusa. SIRACUSA: Yes. I understand that the applicant is requesting that the Planning Director waive the requirement for a shoreline survey. So I would like to ask the Director if he does indeed intend to do that. GRAHAM: Mr. Yuen? YUEN: Yes, I would because the improvements are clearly outside the shoreline setback. I’d have to look at the Rule. I’m not so sure that Rule 17 does require, actually require landscaping on the site because it’s surrounded by Industrial, it doesn’t actually abut. Let’s take a look at that. The reason I say that is that it doesn’t, I think if you have an Industrial abutting a Residential then you would have to do landscaping. I don’t think it requires that you landscape an Industrial site that’s entirely within, contained within an Industrial area. SIRACUSA: Follow-up. GRAHAM: Commissioner Siracusa. SIRACUSA: Do we need then to put another condition or anything else in the conditions there to specify that a shoreline survey is not required so that there would be no question about it down the line somewhere? GRAHAM: Mr. Yuen, do you have any thoughts on that? YUEN: I don’t think it’s necessary as a condition. There’s a rule that says the Director can waive the shoreline certification when the development is clearly outside the shoreline setback. And this site, first of all, it’s the harbor, and the shoreline is largely set by improvements on the harbor; and then, secondly, it is clearly well beyond 40 feet from the shoreline setback. If this were just coming in, say there was already an SMA Permit that allowed it but then the plans came in for the building, they have to show compliance with the shoreline back for the building. And sometimes even though there’s an SMA Permit you have to go recertify the shoreline to get your building plans approved. But in this case it’s quite clear that there’s no point in having a shoreline certification. GRAHAM: Mr. Hayashi, did you have anything ready to go on the landscaping? HAYASHI: Rule 17 does address landscaping and it does talk about the MCX, ML, MG District needing to provide some kind of buffer yard or landscaping. But if the Director EXHIBIT B 3 feels that we should not recommend this particular condition for this particular application then we can withdraw that particular proposed condition. GRAHAM: Okay. Maybe we’ll hold that until we come around to taking action on this. And if the applicant cares to make any commentary along the way on this we’ll be ready to accept that. Do we have anything further? Commissioner Alameda. ALAMEDA: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Norman, I was just wondering if that, you know, that proposed office location, is that to scale? Is that, you know, that little square. HAYASAHI: I don’t believe it’s to scale. This map has been blown up several times. So perhaps you can direct that question to the applicant’s representative when they come up. ALAMEDA: All right, thank you. GRAHAM: Any other questions before we bring the applicant up? Commissioner Siracusa. SIRACUSA: Yes. The letter from the Water Department states that the 6-inch waterline and the 8-inch waterline are inadequate to provide the required 2,000 gallons per minute. So I’m wondering how this will affect or do we have to add a condition about this. GRAHAM: Mr. Hayashi, do you have any comment or response? HAYASHI: Well, at this point in time it’s not clear as to whether in fact the Department of Water Supply would not be able to provide this facility, this small facility, additional water. So that’s something that we’ll work out with the Department of Water Supply at the time of plan approval. GRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. Hayashi. At this point could the applicant and any representatives of the applicant come forward. Thank you all. Could you just raise your right hands so I can swear you in. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter before the Planning Commission here today? TESTIFIERS: I do. GRAHAM: Thank you. So we have the recommendation by the Planning Director along with his conditions, and you’ve heard the presentation from the Planning Department. So we’d like to hear any comments you have about what we’ve heard or any information you’d like to pass on to the Commissioners about this application here today. And when you speak, as you wish, just start with your name and address, please, and carry right ahead with what your testimony is. HERBERT: My name is Neal Herbert, project with SSFM International here in Hilo. My private residence is in Paukaa. And to my right is Ian Birnie who’s the Harbor Master at the Port of Hilo; and to my left is Ron Terry who is with Geometricians who drafted the SMA Permit application for us. EXHIBIT B 4 GRAHAM: Go ahead. Would you like to make any presentation or discussion to the Commissioners here today? HERBERT: No. I think the paperwork is fairly extensive and clear, so I’d rather respond to questions if there are any. GRAHAM: Okay. Commissioner Alameda? ALAMEDA: Thank you. I didn’t see any letters of opposition. Were there any, it doesn’t seem like there’s any surrounding neighbors and all but were there any opposition prior to you trying to get this permit? HERBERT: Correspondence was sent to four adjacent property owners twice. One initially and one in preparation for the hearing, and we’ve received no comments from anyone. GRAHAM: Any other questions from Commissioners? All right, thank you. Yes, Commissioner Siracusa? SIRACUSA: Just as a matter of form and to get it on the record, when I was reading everything I kept wondering how come I don’t see any letters in favor from Ian Birnie the Harbor Master. And so I would just like to ask Mr. Birnie if he would tell us that he approves of this project as a Harbor Master, speaking as a Harbor Master. GRAHAM: Thank you, Commissioner Siracusa. Mr. Birnie, go ahead. BIRNIE: Yes, we do approve. This is part of our master plan. We’re trying to achieve a safe separation of cargo and passenger traffic, and this is the second step. Opening this road will have all of Matson’s cargo going in and out of that road so that that will alleviate some of the traffic that goes in the main gate now associated with passengers. And the next step after that is to expand down towards Kumau Street next to Gaspro, and eventually we’ll have all of Young Brothers traffic going in and out of Kumau Street onto Kalanianaole. We’re not adding any traffic. We’re just separating it better. And the issue with the water, if I may comment on that, is that we’re not adding any people or any facilities. We’re going to add a restroom. But the people who are going to be occupying this office are already in the Harbor in another office. So I can’t see that they would be adding any more water usage. GRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. Birnie. Any further questions from Commissioners? All right, I think you all can go back and be seated again. We do have one public testifier. And if there’s anyone else here from the public who would like to testify on this matter today, please sign up with Sharon at the end table, and we can still take your testimony. The testifier we have is Patrick Kahawaiola‘a. Sir, would you come forward. Thank you. If you’d please raise your right hand so I can swear you in. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter here today? EXHIBIT B 5 KAHAWAIOLA‘A: Yes, I do. GRAHAM: Thank you. You can just give your name and your current address, and then go right ahead with the testimony you’d like to give to the Commission. KAHAWAIOLA‘A: Yes. My name is Patrick Kahawaiola‘a. I live in Panaewa now and my affiliation as mentioned on the thing is with the Keaukaha Community Association. I’m just a little perplexed with the process that’s being used here, but, you know, it’s nothing new that this is how it has to be done. With the exception of my reason for the testimony that I would like to give it’s that if you look on my request to address the Commission, it says here for information and clarification purposes. We did receive, when I said we did, as president of the Keaukaha Community Association, we did receive a letter from SSFM in regards to the fact that Matson had requested a variance through the SMA based on this building they were going to build. Today we find out that it wasn’t explained. You know, when you see a modular building I assume it is something like on a trailer you’re going to bring in. But obviously it’s not. It’s something modular built to be you bring in all the walls made already in 40-foot sections. I don’t know. So I don’t know how they’re going to do it. But it’s inside the pier. So as far as us in the community, it’s inside the pier, it’s a State pier runned by the Department of Transportation. So our concern in the community would be the traffic. As Mr. Birnie mentioned they’re just rerouting traffic. You know, it’s like the airport, you know, they’re just rerouting planes. However, the impact to the community has not been addressed. And that access road that they have there for their master plan was built years ago. It’s several years it has has been in, as far as I can think, maybe at least five years. It was always blocked by cars being parked there. You could never get in or out. Now it’s obviously going to be used. The proximity to our community is now going to be fairly close. Obviously that side, speaking to Mr. Birnie prior, was just that now we’ll have, it will be because the Matson container yard sits there. So where we can expect from the community to have trucks now come in and out of that side, I’m talking about diesel trucks pulling containers in and out and maybe the mules taking containers around there, how that will affect our community, right now I can only tell you it’s going to be noisy, obviously. But that doesn’t mean this building shouldn’t be built to house the employees that are working there now, those that work in Matson. I would also, but I would like to have some consideration as to maybe the consultants and maybe Matson can figure out, you know, how we may be able to, -. If you know Keaukaha the proximity that we as a community are there, noise is to some may or not be an issue but the airport sits behind us. Matson, the Harbor sits in front of us. Gas Company sits along the drive directly across from our community. So we do have and we are impacted. No one has taken anything seriously yet, but it does happen.We’re already having an impact from all of the gas, Aloha Petroleum, those things happen. And we did have, one individual had to move from the first house when he moved in and had litigation because, of course, was right next to him. The Department of Land and Natural Resources allowed an unpermitted fuel depot to be built; and it’s there. So you have to understand my confusion, how did that fuel depot get built? And then this Commission now going just come in here? I mean they’re asking you now to approve a modular building, you know. I wished that you were there to make sure that that fuel depot wasn’t going to be built. EXHIBIT B 6 You see, that affected a resident in our community, several residents in our community. But an office building, ah, it’s not a big deal. But I think the process that we need for clarification is we need a better understanding as to when something happens inside of these State lands operated by the DOT that you are made aware and then the community is made aware. So, yes, we have no particular argument about this office building being built, the relocation of its employees within the bounds of the space of the Kuhio Harbor. But I still think some serious concerns should be addressed as to how it affects, how it may affect the community; and it’s only the Keaukaha community that’s going to be affected on the egress and egress of those vehicles pulling the containers. It’s coming out of a container yard. The time that they start, Matson’s, when are they going to begin to work? If you know anything about a shipyard or a harbor it’s a lot of equipment. Whether it be an 18-wheeler, excuse me, one of those forklift or those kinds of things, when they back up they have a large loud beeper on them, safety reasons obviously. But depending on the time of day that it starts, it may impact some people in the community, because you can hear them moving around, you can hear trucks moving around, not necessarily engines but you hear that beeper. But the Harbor is not going to move, just like the airport is not going to move, realistically. But the community still needs to find out, and we’d like to find out, just basically how have they taken into account those kinds of impact into the community and how we mitigate them, you know, how we try to mitigate them, anyway. But if I was one of the four, and when I say I, I’m speaking out for the community, we were one of the four people that received the letter, yes, we did. This is the reason I’m here to respond; and that’s basically because the rules of this Commission makes it so. It tells me if I want to object to it, I’ve got to object to it with a $100 bill before.I’d like to hear everything else and then object; and then I’ll gladly pay my $100 through a check. So I’m not going to pay you $100 to come and object before I hear what I need to object to. But that’s basically where I’m at in hearing that. So I think, however, whichever way this project goes, I think it’s something that, again, I take the word of the harbor master that within the realm of the, as we were told as a community, within the bounds and parameters of the Airport, within the bounds and the parameters of the Hilo Harbor, they do these certain things. I’m still a little bit confused as to why because it’s in an SMA, the Harbor is inside of the SMA, that this 1760-square foot building really needs approval by you. But if that’s what it is, then this Commission should look at some of the impacts that it may have, serious impacts that they may have within our community. So thank you. GRAHAM: Thank you, sir. Also, in case you didn’t see, we do, our basic document that we work with here is this white many page background report that we read over in detail. So if you don’t have that, this is a public document so you can also just get that for your review. Any questions from the other Commissioners? SIRACUSA: Yes. GRAHAM: Commissioner Siracusa. SIRACUSA: I hear your concerns and I can imagine what it must be like to have the Harbor on one side and the planes overhead constantly. That obviously can’t be changed. All EXHIBIT B 7 we’re supposed to be looking at here is the storage building, not any of the other, I mean, not the storage building, the office building, not any of the other impacts that the, where the access road is going to be, or anything like that. It’s not the kuleana of this Commission today. And because it’s going to be built or set up as a modular building within the pier area which is within the SMA, that’s why it has to come before us. So what I’m concerned about is that was your community informed when all the meetings were taking place about the 2010 master plan for the Harbor and the 2015 master plan for the Harbor? Was your community brought into the loop, and was your community brought into the loop by Mr. Terry and Geometrician when they were working on this plan? KAHAWAIOLA‘A: I will tell you this – basically because of the fact, I’ve only been the community president now there for about 7 or 8 years, so if it happened, and if it happened within the 7 or 8 years, no. I can’t speak for the predecessors that came before me in Keaukaha. But I can tell you from history I’m a life-long resident of Keaukaha that not too many things, whatever it does, the master plan for the airport didn’t involve us till 8 years later. So I’m assuming, and that’s with the respect to the DOT, I’m assuming if they did that no, we weren’t involved. Because I try to stay as active as I can within my community based on the fact that it is on Hawaiian Home. I as a community leader have taken advantage of the opportunity during the General Plan for Hilo itself; and till today I have not received responses about the General Plan, whether or not the General Plan includes the land that is involved that has the status of Hawaiian Home Lands. We’re not addressed in the General Plan. And when I say that the Hawaiian Home lands are not specifically addressed in the General Plan, and I can never get that, the County is working with an MOU and an MOA with Hawaiian Home, and is that -. Well, Mr. Torigoe and many of those in the Corporation Counsel know my position with that. So the General Plan has not addressed our community or any native Hawaiian community as far as that’s concern. Roads in limbo have not been addressed. We tried to -. It’s not that I don’t raise the question with them; but the answers I get whether it be just that it’s, it’s an issue beyond those that were there present that night. So I’m assuming that’s what’s happening here, that -. But I will make every effort to come before any Commission and the County Council to raise those questions. But I appreciate those facts, that if it’s not your kuleana then yes. But I need to know the next kuleana where it goes; and I’m assuming the County Council would -. SIRACUSA: I would suggest to Mr. Birney and the gentleman who made that presentation that the Harbor people in general, you know, start trying to include the Keaukaha community in their dialogue. I think that’s really important. I don’t think that’s something that, if that hasn’t been done, you know, in the past, I think they should start doing it now. There’s a community that’s impacted and they should be brought into the loop so that if you have concerns you can get together, sit down and talk about what you can do to mitigate. Right? At the same time, as I said, you know, we’re only here to discuss one modular building, and that’s our kuleana right now. And, obviously, the building itself is not going to be impacting you guys. It’s a pretty small building. It’s the other stuff that’s really bothering you; and I can understand that. So I hope that the people in charge of the Harbor will make every effort in the future to pull your community into the loop and to open dialogue with you. Thank you for coming in. KAHAWAIOLA‘A: Sure. I would appreciate it. And, again, I want the record to reflect that the Keaukaha community is not against this modular building being built. Okay? EXHIBIT B 8 GRAHAM: Thank you, sir. And I appreciate your testimony. KAHAWAIOLA‘A: You’re welcome. GRAHAM: I think we’re finished with the public testimony, so we can close the public hearing on this today. Do we have, we can bring it now to the direct attention of the Planning Commission, this SMA Use Permit request. Commissioners, do you care to make a motion or begin a discussion? Commissioner Watanabe? WATANABE: I’d just like some clarification, since the landscaping in Rule 17(a) was brought up by the Director, if indeed it does apply or if, when it’s within the Industrial area it would be exempt from that. GRAHAM: Mr. Yuen? YUEN: Well, it’s okay to leave it as a condition but in actual fact there wouldn’t be any landscaping required by Rule 17. Rule 17 has a buffer yard landscaping requirement when an Industrial site, when the building site is adjoining a residential area. So this building site being within a completely Industrial area you wouldn’t have to landscape to separate the Industrial from adjacent Industrial. The other thing that might kick in as far as landscaping is parking lots. Whether a parking lot is, there’s buffering yard requirements for parking lots, too. But if you have a parking lot of more than 12 stalls then you have to landscape the parking lot. This would not have more than 12 parking stalls associated with it. So you wouldn’t have, unless they actually made, I don’t think they need to make 12 parking spaces with this building. But, unless they made more than 12 spaces on the site, if they did that, then they would have to landscape the parking lot. GRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. Yuen. WATANABE: Follow-up. GRAHAM: Yes, Commissioner Watanabe. WATANABE: However, I think you’re indicating that we do not need to make any changes to Condition 2 as it’s currently worded because it does as required by Rule 17. So we don’t have to eliminate that or anything, right? YUEN: I don’t think it’s necessary, as I said. When they come in they’ll still have a plan approval; but the fact of the matter is that if you follow Rule 17 you won’t actually have to make landscaping. GRAHAM: Okay, thank you. Anything else, Commissioners? Commissioner Siracusa. SIRACUSA: It may very well be that they are not required to follow Rule 17. However, consider this – all those big diesel trucks moving back and forth generating a lot of fumes and a lot of noise, living across the street from the Harbor is not only smelly but loud and EXHIBIT B 9 ugly. And I think as a “soft” to the community, I think it would be a very nice thing to do to require some landscaping certainly on the Kalanianaole side of the structure. And I would like to see something included in the conditions that would require that. I think it would make the relationship between the community and the Harbor a lot more harmonious; and, you know, it’s a nicer work condition for the people who work at the Harbor as well. GRAHAM: Thank you, Commissioner Siracusa. Commissioners? Commissioner Watanabe. WATANABE: I’d like to make a motion, but before I do may I can comment on Ms. Siracusa’s comments. I think you’re correct in that landscaping may help mitigate some of the issues along the Kanoelehua Avenue. However, I can’t from past memory, whether the buildings abut the highway, etc. -. So I think we should forego that and let possibly the Harbor Master, etc. work that out with the community as you had suggested. And with that I’d like to make a motion to approve Special Management Area Use Permit (SMA07-000017) based on the Director’s recommendation and subject to all of the conditions as stated. SIRACUSA: Point of order. We haven’t asked the developer, the applicant, to come back again after the public testimony and respond. GRAHAM: That’s true. We haven’t. Would you like me to do that, Commissioner Siracusa? SIRACUSA: I would because I have a question for them. GRAHAM: Okay, Commissioner Watanabe, would it be all right for you to hold that motion for now -? WATANABE: Sure. GRAHAM: Withdraw that? Okay, thank you. You were all sworn in before. Go ahead, Commissioner Siracusa, if you have questions. SIRACUSA: Yes. Well, you’ve heard Mr. Kawai -, I’m sorry, you’ve hear the previous testimony from the community and you’ve heard my comments. And I’m wondering if you would agree to work with the community; and if you would agree whether or not landscaping is required to see what you could do in some, any way to mitigate the hardscape of the view of the Harbor from the Hawaiian Home lands. BIRNIE: We’re bounded on one side -. GRAHAM: Mr. Birnie, go ahead. BIRNIE: Excuse me. We’re bounded on one side on Kalanianaole by the Gas Company and on the other side by properties that are privately owned but leased to an auto paint shop and Brewer Environmental Industries, a sand warehouse and that sort of thing. There’s really no room along the fence. Plus, if you have foliage too high there it becomes a security EXHIBIT B 10 issue the Coast Guard would shoot down. You have to understand that this office structure is well inside, well away from Kalanianaole, so it may or may not even be visible from Kalanianaole. I don’t see where we could put any foliage in that would mitigate noise because of where the fences are. But I’d be happy to take you down there and show you. GRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. Birnie. Any follow-up, Commissioner Siracusa? SIRACUSA: Well, just to point out that if you have a fence you can always plant something that will climb on the fence, you know, like a vine; and even that helps to do some mitigating. GRAHAM: Thank you, Commissioner Siracusa. HERBERT: Can I make one comment. First on some of the issues that were raised by the community representative, there was an environmental impact statement done for the master plan and all the development in the port; and that undoubtedly included the surrounding community where normally it’s done like that. A copy of the EIS was provided to the Planning Director and there may be some, you know, enlightening aspects on this issue in the EIS. The other thing about landscaping is if you look at the photo on the right side where the yellow rectangle is, immediately behind that rectangle is an area that is an easement for underground pipelines; and it’s undevelopable in that regard because of the underground pipelines. Planting trees and other things with the root structure would be detrimental to whatever is underneath there. It also is behind, as Ian said, very tall warehouse buildings which render this area invisible within the port along with the adjacent Gas Co. facilities. Other than that, if there is some other way that we can work out or the Harbors Division of the Department of Transportation can work with the community, you know, I would be in favor of that. GRAHAM: All right, thank you, sir. Any other Commissioners, any questions of these gentlemen? All right. Thank you. You can go back know. I appreciate your coming forward again. Commissioner Watanabe, I guess I would ask you to reintroduce your motion at this time if that will be all right. WATANABE: Okay. I move to approve Special Management Area Use Permit SMA 07-000017 based on the Director’s recommendations. GRAHAM: Thank you. Is there a second? WOODWARD: Second. GRAHAM: Seconded by Commissioner Woodward. Mr. Hayashi, did you have something to say? HAYASHI: I just wanted to ask the Commission for all of the applications if they would be able to close the hearing before they make a motion to either approve or to act on the application. I think that’s a practice that we should start to implement. EXHIBIT B 11 GRAHAM: Thank you for your suggestion. I’ll try to be aware of that. We have a closed public hearing now. We have a motion on the floor that has been seconded. Do we have any discussion by the Commissioners? Norman, go ahead with the vote. HAYASHI: Commissioner Watanabe? WATANABE: Aye. HAYASHI: Commissioner Woodward? WOODWARD: Aye. HAYASHI: Commissioner Alameda? ALAMEDA: Aye. HAYASHI: Commissioner Iwashita? IWASHITA: Yes. HAYASHI: Commissioner Ogata? OGATA: Aye. HAYASHI: Commissioner Siracusa? SIRACUSA: Aye. HAYASHI: Chair Graham? GRAHAM: Aye. HAYASHI: Mr. Chair, motion carries. GRAHAM: Thank you. So the applicants will be notified in writing of our approval of this application today. The discussion ended at 10:45 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon M. Nomura, East Hawai‘i Secretary EXHIBIT B 12