Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-06-18 TFOULK LEEWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAIÒI HEARING TRANSCRIPT JUNE 18, 2010 WILLIAM C. FOULK (SMA 10-41) A regularly advertised hearing on the application of was called to order at 11:00 a.m. in the King Kamehameha's Kona Beac Palani Road, Kailua-Kona, HawaiÒi, with Chairman Frederic Housel presiding. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Frederic Housel, Brandi Beaudet, Geraldine Giffin and Richard Nelson ABSENT AND EXCUSED: Lani Bowman and Wayne Iokepa STAFF PRESENT: Brandon Gonzalez (Deputy Corporation Counsel), BJ Leithead Todd (Planning Director), Daryn Arai (Planning Program Manager), Jeff Darrow (Staff Planner) and Maija Cottle (Staff Planner) And approximately ten people from the public in attendance. APPLICANT: WILLIAM C. FOULK (SMA 10-41) Special Management Area Use Permit to allow the construction of a 16-unit, 4-story condominium building and related improvements. The property is located on the northwest rd (makai) side of AliÒi Drive and on the north side of Hlualoa Bay, Hlualoa 3, North Kona, HawaiÒi, TMK: 7-7-4:25. HOUSEL: The fourth item on the agenda today is a request for a Special Management Area Use Permit to develop 16 condominium units and related improvements Area. Before proceeding on this matter, I think it would be prud Commission to consult with its attorney on the legal matters in executive session. Could we get a motion for executive session? NELSON: So move, move for executive session. HOUSEL: And a second? BEAUDET: Second. HOUSEL: Seconded by Commissioner Beaudet. So we are going to go into executive -. All in favor? COMMISSIONERS: Aye. HOUSEL: Opposed? No? Okay, motion passed. We are going to go into executive session. IÓm not sure how long it will be, but we will then reconvene after the executive session is 1 EXHIBIT A concluded. So if you could please vacate the room, so we can have our executive session, and then weÓll call you back as soon as we are finished. Thank you. EXECUTIVE SESSION - The Commission went into executive session at this time, 11:02 a.m. and came out of executive session at 11:26 a.m. by a motion made by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Beaudet, and unanimously carried by a voice vote of all Commissioners in attendance. HOUSEL: WeÓll continue the public hearing. We are still on the Item No. 4 of the agenda. This is a request for a Special Management Area Use Permit. So we wi -. Are the speakers working now? I donÓt hear them. Can you hear them? Okay, you can hear them, okay. So if the staff would please present. COTTLE: Sure. HOUSEL: Thank you. COTTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The next application is a Special Management Area Use Permit request. The applicant is Dr. William Foulk. The subject property is located in the North Kona District, and itÓs located between Kailua and Keauhou just on the north side of Hlualoa Bay. The property is outlined on the slide in black. And you can see it is zoned Resort-Hotel, which is shown in the bright pink. The property immediately to the north and south are also zoned Resort-Hotel. A little bit further to the north and south are properties zoned Open, which is shown in the dark green. And across AliÒi Drive, just mauka, is shown in brown Î this is Multi-Family Residential Zoning. This is a close-up view of the property again outlined in black between AliÒi Drive and the shoreline. The Kona Community Development Plan identifies the property within the Kona Urban Area, which is shown here in a red outline. The subject property is located right about in this location here. And this is an aerial photo of the site. The property has two existing structures on it: A house here thatÓs shown in an L-shape, there is a guest house, and then there is also a swimming pool, a triangular-shape swimming pool here. The closest residences are to the north and to the south. And this is another shoreline photo of the property. Again, you can see the triangular-shape pool surrounded by a rock wall along the shoreline here. This is the existing dwelling with a large rock wall in front of it, and then a guest house in this area here. The applicant is proposing to develop a 16-unit condominium building and related improvements. This will consist of demolishing the existing dwelling and guest house and shed, as well as removing an existing rock wall that runs along AliÒi Drive, which is about six feet in height. They are also proposing to construct a four-story above grade building containing 16 two-bedroom condo units, as well as 23 underground parking stalls. They are proposing landscaping, and they also would like to retain the existing pool, concrete pool deck and legal rock walls along the shoreline within the shoreline setback area. Are there any questions? HOUSEL: Maija, I have one question. In the documentation, it mentioned 23 parking stalls, excuse me, 22, and this says 23. Is 23 correct? 2 EXHIBIT A COTTLE: Let me check Î if youÓll just give me a moment. The actual number of parking stalls will be determined, are normally determined at Plan Approval. T minimum requirement of 1.25 parking stalls per dwelling unit. So let me just check the report, if you wouldnÓt mind giving me a few minutes here. HOUSEL: So the minimum would be 20, is that it, with 16 units? COTTLE: The minimum was 20 based on the 16-unit. Actually, yeah, the application, Page 2 of the application says 21 full size underground parking stalls and 2 handicapped van stalls; so it will be 23 total, is what they are proposing. HOUSEL: Twenty-three is correct, okay. Could you go back to the aerial photo? COTTLE: This one or this one? HOUSEL: Either one will be fine Î probably the other one. The subject property is the two center dwellings, is that correct? COTTLE: ThatÓs correct. The property line runs right between here, and the southern property line runs in this area here. HOUSEL: So the far left and far right properties are separate properties. COTTLE: ThatÓs correct. These are other single-family dwellings owned by other property owners Î here and here. HOUSEL: Do each of those properties have their own entrance to AliÒi Drive? COTTLE: Yes. HOUSEL: Thank you. Any questions, Commissioners? Thank you, Maija. Now, we are going to take public testimony first. WeÓve got two petitions for standing in this; so we are going to take the public testimony first, and then we will conduct the standing, the applications for standing on this case. So could the following people please come forward and have a seat at the table: Daniel Reineman, Ali Ghalamfarsa Î sorry if I butcher your name Î Heidi White and Joy Mills. Could each of you please raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the HawaiÒi County Leeward Planning Commission? TESTIFIERS: I do. HOUSEL: Please use the microphone. Sorry, I should have reminded you. TESTIFIERS: I do. 3 EXHIBIT A HOUSEL: Thank you. I guess, starting on the far right, could you please? REINEMAN: My name is Daniel Reineman. My address in Kona is 77-6296 AliÒi Drive, and my permanent address is 414 Sea Ridge Drive, La Jolla, Californi HOUSEL: Thank you. GHALAMFARSA: My name is Ali Ghalamfarsa. My address is 77-6306 AliÒi Drive, Kailua- Kona, HawaiÒi. HOUSEL: Thank you. WHITE: Hi, IÓm Heidi White. My address is 76-6129 Plumeria Road, Kailua-Kona, HawaiÒi. MILLS: Aloha. IÓm Joy Mills. IÓd like to use my P. O. Box 4273, Kailua-Kona 96745, if possible. Mahalo. HOUSEL: Thank you. Tell you what, I guess weÓll start -. I just want to mention that if youÓve submitted written testimony, that will be made part of the record, okay? So you have three minutes each to give your public testimony. To ensure you have full time, maybe it would be best not to read your written testimony, because that will be part of the record. So if you have and youÓd like to summarize that, it will conserve your time for you. Is there anyone else at this time that would like to submit testimony? Okay, thank you. As I mentioned, we do have two petitions for standing on this itcally, two petitions to obtain some type of formal status to be heard on Item No. 4, which is this one. If you submitted a petition but all you really wanted to do was to be able to present testimony for or against this application, you can accomplish that by just providing your public testimony. If all you wanted to do was be able to present testimony on this matter, then you can withdraw your petition for standing. Your filing fee will be refunded to you. You could provide public testimony at this meeting, and your testimony will still become part of this record of application. If you still want to continue to obtain formal status to be heard on this item, then youÓll have to establish today, No. 1, that your interest is clearly distinguishable from that of the general public; or you are a government agency whose jurisdiction includes the land involved in this subject request, which no petition at this point according to what was filed by the Planning Department; or you have property interest in the land, i.e. the subject property of the application or lawfully reside on the land, i.e. the subject property of the application; Î (receiving advice from Counsel,) okay, we donÓt need that one, okay, sorry about that Î or even if you donÓt have an interest different from the public generally, the proposed action will cause you actual or threatened injury in fact; or persons who are descendants of native Hawaiians who inhibited the Hawaiian islands prior to 1778, who practiced those rights which were a customarily and traditionally exercised for subsistence, cultural or religious purposes; this is pursuant to Rule 4-6. If you are granted standing as a party, then you may have to obtain at your own expense legal representation to 4 EXHIBIT A assist you with the contested hearing in this matter. (To Corporation Counsel,) should I go ahead with the public testimony at this stage or continue reading this? Okay, so IÓll finish this quickly. A contested hearing would require the preparation for filing of, No. 1, written documents that clearly set forth the issues in dispute; No. 2, the preparation and presentation of exhibits, witnesses and other relevant evidence. After the Commission has established the parties to the proceeding, the Commission may either proceed with the hearing, or continue the matter to a more appropriate time and date, or assign the matter to a hearings officer due to the number of parties involved or the complexity of issues. If assigned to a hearings officer, it is the hearings officer that will determine all pre-hearing deadlines and responsibilities of the parties. As Chair, I would like to take up all the petitions for standing one by one today, if there are no o from my fellow Commissioners. Okay. So now letÓs begin with the public testimony. I think weÓll probably start with you on the far right. And if you would like to present your testimony. Tha REINEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you to all of you for allowing us to be here today to speak on this issue. I submitted written comments, and IÓm not going to read them. So IÓll just summarize concisely that my name is Daniel Reineman, IÓm here as representative of the Crumrine Family, which has the house right here immediately on the north side of the proposed development. My grandfather, Martin H. Crumrine, was represented at the purchase of our property by Howard Lyman himself in 1965. So this property has some time and we are very, very fond of it. We only received all the official notices and background material about the proposed development approximately two weeks ago beginning of this month, so we havenÓt had a whole lot of time to sift through all this or consult with, you know, lawyers or architecture experts any time. So the concerns that now, just now, quickly innumerate are based on our inexpert reading of the material. We have concerns that are environmental in nature, aesthetic in nature, and as well as our own privacy and security on our lot. Briefly, the application states that an environmental impact statement will only be submitted if required; we feel that a development of this magnitude, this close to the shoreline, would constitute a significant enough environmental change that an impact statement would be warranted. Furthermore, there are endangered marine species, which, there are some green sea turtle, which are commonly found in Hlualoa Bay and several locations on the shoreline here Î down here, and IÓve also seen them over here. They pull out and bask in the sun and feed on the limu, which grows on the rocks. So for those reasons, we feel that further environmental investigation would certainly be warranted. Aesthetically, this is a very, very special place on the Kona Coast. This bay is unique, I think, and I encourage you to go and take a look at it. As yet there are no big structures surrounding it, and we tried to pull together some images to highlight this, which IÓve attached to my written comments. Right now, itÓs just a series of very small structures surrounding the shoreline, and the net result is it has undeveloped feel and with the, you know, calm waters in the bay, itÓs a very unique and special setting, and we would like to not see that change. 5 EXHIBIT A The structure that is proposed is considerably larger in height and in footprint and anything else thatÓs presently located on the shore of Hlualoa Bay, and it will stand out. You might be able to buffer with some palm trees but, make no mistake, this structure is considerably larger than anything there, and it will be clearly and abundantly visible from the shore and from the water, and not in keeping with the modest size of the buildings that are adjacent. We have a public park on the north side of our property. And if a public easement is granted between our property and the proposed development, we have privacy and security concerns resulting from that. Finally, I guess IÓll conclude and say that we would prefer for the original Lyman property to be restored. ItÓs a beautiful and historic place. We would like to see it maintained in its original state. And this is a Special Management Area Use Permit application Î this is clearly a special, special area. And we would encourage you to take that into consideration as you make a decision. Thank you. HOUSEL: Thank you. Commissioners, would you like to, do you have any questions of the testifier? Okay. Would you like to go ahead and present your t GHALAMFARSA: My name is Ali Ghalamfarsa. I live on the south side of the subject property right here. I purchased this home about two years ago. And when I did purchase the house, I did the normal due diligence to see whatÓs going to happen next door, or potentially whatÓs going to happen next door, obviously. And the most striking thing was that when I walked into the driveway of that property Î in fact, coincidentally, Heidi showed me the property Î and when I looked at the Kamoa Point, I said this is going to be my home. I did not even walk inside the house. And Heidi said, ÐAre you sure?Ñ I said, ÐHeidi, I see this home and I see these turtles. When I see this, this is it, this is my home.Ñ You know, after 75 generations my family finally found a home in HawaiÒi, and this is, we are blessed, totally blessed. What is that -. If you just go on the shorelines, just go on a k see from Kamoa Point there, left side of this bay, it is probably most pristine and true Kona Coast feeling that you would get. I truly understand Î I donÓt want to be a neighbor that my neighbors are going to be feeling that IÓm going to be, you know development within the boundary of laws. But IÓve been requesting that the feeling that to be super sensitive to whatÓs in there, and IÓm asking them to reall there Î what would they do? What would they do, if they were living there? The turtles are there all the time. They are just right below where the pool is. I am a free diver. I dive and swim in the water twice a day. The turtles are always there, 24 hours. I dive at night; I see them. 360 days. They always, like Dan mentioned, always come and, you know, take a little suntan and they play with each other. And I just request, you know, extreme sensitivity to whatÓs going to go on there. When I looked at there -. I donÓt know if this is appropriate to mention this time, but as a, it has been my position as contesting, I have huge, no, sorry, I have great problem with the setbacks and the heights, the way that itÓs been proposed by the applicant. I donÓt know if I should say it in the -. I donÓt have enough time, or -? Okay. And then I will, IÓll read my written testimony Î with documents and exhibits I will show why I have concerns about it, that is they are technically not correct. Thank you. 6 EXHIBIT A HOUSEL: Thank you. WHITE: Aloha. Thank you for allowing us all to come and talk about this very, very special area of Kona. My name is Heidi White. I moved here 41 years ago. IÓve raised three children here and I now am enjoying my grandchildren. IÓm a Realtor with HawaiÒi Life Real Estate. I did sell all the, his wonderful home there and many others. My niche market is oceanfront, and so I know whatÓs going on here in the real estate market with the oceanfront. And I have a lot of concerns with the large development thatÓs proposed. My personal knowledge and opinion is that we have a lot of properties that are oceanfront for sale, and the need is not there. When you weigh the need to the damage to the fragile eco-system, not to mention the incredible development all around with archeological sites, traditional Hawaiian heiau on the mauka side surrounding that Î you donÓt see when you drive by, but they are point from this picture is the most incredible point that was very, very developed Hawaiian archaeological, which is being restored by Hawaiians. And any type of blasting is really going to severely damage the fragile underwater sea life and, you know, whatÓs been built in the past, the historic integrity of the area. You see there is a condo behind, which has incredible views, and there is another condo out of sight behind on this side, and then thereÓs about four up the coast from here. And I want our children and the future children to be able to come down here and see these turtles that are fearless of humanity. And I understand that a public access is granted between DanÓs house and the development, but that to me is not a tradeoff to the loss that would incur, if this development were allowed to proceed. And I just urge everyone to very deeply consider every facet of the development process, because once itÓs there, everything, you know, is permanent, and weÓve lost so much once itÓs happened. And you know, it is the most beautiful stretch of AliÒi Drive; if you were to drive AliÒi Drive, this is the most beautiful stretch. And I thank you again for your time. HOUSEL: Any questions, Commissioners? No? I had one question. Is there currently a public access to the shoreline? WHITE: Well, you see the whole strip of land where the road drops into the water, it carries around the point and there are picnic tables out of the range of the picture, and people enjoy that bay everyday. And wonderful diving. There is reef as well as sandy areas. There is a local canoe who takes school children on a historic Hawaiian traditional canoe, and he comes in nearly everyday under sail. The children chant and learn about the point with all the archaeological sites there. I was just out there two days ago and it was all chicken-skin, because these, a lot of them are Hawaiian children, chanting traditional chants, and itÓ encourage what we all come to HawaiÒi for, is to see the Hawaiian people, the culture and the beauty of these islands. HOUSEL: Right. Is the current access, say, from the left, which will be the north end -. WHITE: Yes. HOUSEL: Along the shoreline to the south? 7 EXHIBIT A WHITE: Yes, there is. HOUSEL: There is. WHITE: Yes. There is water access there, very good water access for the public. HOUSEL: And itÓs walkable, I mean -. WHITE: Yes. HOUSEL: Someone could -. REINEMAN: I can speak to that. HOUSEL: Sure. REINEMAN: Yes, there is a small public park right here with parking, and I donÓt, there is not, there is not facilities or improvements but lots of people park and enter the water right here with their families, or else walk along the rocks to the points here to fish and hunt for urchins and find an Òopihi, and -. HOUSEL: Thank you. MILLS: Aloha. GIFFIN: Aloha. MILLS: My name is Joy Keahipuakahikawe (phonetic) Mills. I am originally from OÒahu. I worked Ocean Safety, City and County on OÒahu for eight years. I am a second generation lifeguard. I transferred to Kona a year ago under the Fire, County, and I just love it here. The oceanscape is healthy and thriving unlike where I had worked befk, Hanauma Bay, is just all gone, and a lot of it through the west side Makaha, itÓs pretty much gone through development. The impact that buildings have on the seascape has really taken its toll. And when I moved here, my mom, Nalee Papahiokakui (phonetic), they had their hui here, and then we had gone to Keolanahihi and did our hookupo, kuhokupa (phonetic) the would surf. And I actually saw Heidi surfing that day, and my mom said, ÐOh, terrific, that wahine.Ñ Because Keolanahihi is originally a womenÓs heiau, or wahineÓs heiau, and that is where, for our culture, you know, itÓs such a special place. And I applaud the Hawaiians who have taken on as their kuleana to go and keep that community there alive and keep the culture there alive. And we did our hookupa (phonetic) there. My mom said that that area is my kuleana now. So I proudly say that I go there when I can, a lot of times before work, to go and practice my heritage of surfing the point. I do and I fish at the point. I actually found this ring at the point one day surfing. So to me, that was full circle, you know, that is our kuleana. And when Heidi had told me that this development is coming in, it wa once again I have come from OÒahu and I have seen development. And is this something that we really want to take away from our children and build another house so someone else from 8 EXHIBIT A somewhere else can enjoy it? Can we in turn do something that would bring our culture, you know, closer to the kids. I see that the canoe come in, they say oli that I know, so I recite with them as they are oli-ing. Can we do something more with this? Can we look at probably doing a Hawaiian culture -? And there is more with eco-friendly tourism than there is, I think. Nowadays, just building more concrete, more concrete, is that the answer? Can we look at something else that would restore such a beautiful site so that more of our Hawaiian children and our Hawaiian children at heart can enjoy and perpetuate, you know, for further use so that we can all enjoy this cultural space? I really ask, and I hope I speak for my other brothers and sisters, that you really reconsider, or consider hard what we can do more than just build concrete. Can we do more? A hula site, a hula heiau or a culture facility, we need more of that along the coast. It is so special. Mahalo. HOUSEL: Thank you. Do you wish to make a comment? LEITHEAD TODD: Jeff, could you go back to the slide that shows the zoning for all three of these properties? So if IÓm viewing that correctly, the zoning for Mr. GhalamfarsaÓs property is Resort? DARROW: Correct. LEITHEAD TODD: And the zoning for the Crumrine property is also Resort? DARROW: Correct. LEITHEAD TODD: So that in the future, if they wanted to, they could tear their house down and build something more dense on their properties because of th COTTLE: ThatÓs correct. LEITHEAD TODD: And, you canÓt see Keolanahihi on this because itÓs further to the south so Î there, thatÓs Keolanahihi, which, although it has zoning for Resort, is a State land and is a -. Is that correct? COTTLE: ThatÓs correct. LEITHEAD TODD: Okay, itÓs not going to be developed. The Betty particularly Junior Kanuha, has been doing some work in that area and is in the process of trying to get, or either has or is in the process of getting some type of a contract with the State so that they are kind of the caretakers of that property. WHITE: By the way, he did want to be here today, but he has chemotherapy; heÓs fighting cancer, so -. LEITHEAD TODD: I think, you know, one of the problems here is that the zoning is already on this property, as well as on the two properties next door. And although you have both Mr. Ghalamfarsa and Mr. Crumrine here, or the representative of the family here, at this point in 9 EXHIBIT A time, there is nothing that restricts either of those other two properties from being developed in the future by a future owner. So I have a question about that. GHALAMFARSA: May I respond to that? When I felt this was my home, I had created estate for my family and I have instructed them to prepare the document and have that be recorded, that this property, our home, this property can never be, perpetually restricted from being developed as a resort. We thought maybe weÓll add one small room in back of the barbecue area because itÓs only a very small house that has one bedroom. But I have that, and that weÓll record that this property will never ever be developed as a resort property. ThatÓs my home. And I encourage my neighbors to do the same. When I talk to Dan, I think they are going to talk about it. ThatÓs how sincerely I am about, with the importance of this property, of this whole bay. LEITHEAD TODD: So you wouldnÓt have objection, if the Planning Director were to initiate downzoning of your two properties. GHALAMFARSA: Absolutely not. I encourage you and plea that you would. REINEMAN: I concur. LEITHEAD TODD: Okay. HOUSEL: Commissioners, do you have any other questions to any of the testifiers? Okay. Thank you very much for your testimony. We are going to start on the petitions for standing now, so if you would all return to your seat. Actually, Mr. Reineman, if you would like to remain, then we can save your trip back. REINEMAN: Thank you. HOUSEL: Could you once more, using the microphone, state your name and address? REINEMAN: My name is Daniel Reineman. My address in Kona is 77-6296 AliÒi Drive and my permanent address is 414 Sea Ridge Drive, La Jolla, Californi HOUSEL: Would you like to explain why you petition for standing? REINEMAN: For several reasons, we -. At this point would you lik we qualify for standing, and how our interest is different from that of the general public, or -? HOUSEL: Yes, please. REINEMAN: Okay. We feel that our interest is different from that of the general public because our property is contiguous on the north side of the proposed development, and therefore, we stand to be impacted by it in a way that is distinct from someone that lives elsewhere. Is that sufficient? HOUSEL: And how do you believe your property will be impacted by this development? 10 EXHIBIT A REINEMAN: In a variety of ways, many of which IÓve laid out in the written testimony that I submitted. But for starters, that the setting of this location is quite unique, and the property that we have is currently only impacted by the adjacent property in so far as they have two modest structures and a lot of trees and vegetation, and we prefer that to the wall that would be approximately 50 feet high. So itÓs, there are aesthetic concerns there. We also have concerns about the placement of public access easement directly between our two properties. Currently the properties are divided, the property line is a very low wall; itÓs three feet or less. And that would not, we feel, be adequate to protect our own property as we should in the overheads the, there is a park on the north side of our property and we have a lot of trouble with people coming from that public area onto our property, and we donÓt want that to, we donÓt want to have that on both sides. Those are some of our concerns. HOUSEL: Is the wall on your side of the property, or -? REINEMAN: The wall which currently divides the properties? HOUSEL: Right. REINEMAN: That, I, so IÓm going to answer this question Î IÓm not an expert surveyor Î so my impression based on viewing the plans submitted in the applicati looks like the wall sits, you know, itÓs a stacked lava wall, lava rock wall, so itÓs wide, and it looks to me that it could fall on both sides of the property line. But you would need to ask that question of a surveyor. HOUSEL: Any other ways you feel this would impact your property? REINEMAN: Well, the size of the structure would certainly limit above what we are already experiencing from the existing structures. There will be windows up there looking down into our yard. And more traffic, more people. That will be the extent of it. HOUSEL: Now, do you live on the property? REINEMAN: No, I do not. HOUSEL: Does someone live there now? REINEMAN: Not permanently. HOUSEL: Is it a vacation house, or what is the use of it now? REINEMAN: We use it as a family vacation home. We rent it on a more or less informal basis to friends of family. I resided on OÒahu for four years, and at that time I spent a great deal of time over here, and before that it was mostly summer throughout my life. And I have, as I mentioned, I have, my grandfather Martin Crumrine had three children and together they each 11 EXHIBIT A had two children, so we are nine, itÓs a big family. So all told we spend a great amount of time here, if you add up everybodyÓs time here. HOUSEL: Commissioner Giffin. GIFFIN: Mr. Chairman. If I hear you correctly, I think what you are saying Î and correct me if IÓm wrong Î is that the negative impact on your familyÓs property next door is one of density that this proposal would have, is that correct? REINEMAN: I would say that is certainly one factor. GIFFIN: Well, if I listed some of your concerns again correctly, you brought up privacy, security, the environment and changes to the environment, those were mainly your concerns. I think the security and privacy would go back to density, right, that this proposal would bring up? REINEMAN: I would agree. GIFFIN: As compared to the present structure. REINEMAN: Correct. GIFFIN: Okay, so your main concern is the proposal would increase density. REINEMAN: Right. And we also have some technical concerns with the proposal a bit. Because we are not experts and we havenÓt had the time to fully review it, we havenÓt flushed all of those out yet. GIFFIN: Yeah, I got that, that you said the information your family received was just about two weeks ago at the beginning of this month, and so itÓs kind of new to you. REINEMAN: Yeah. GIFFIN: Okay, thank you. HOUSEL: Any other questions? Okay. You mentioned that you occasionally offer it as a rental property. REINEMAN: ThatÓs correct. HOUSEL: Who do you rent to? REINEMAN: Friends of the family. HOUSEL: Just the family then? 12 EXHIBIT A REINEMAN: Family, well, we donÓt rent it to family; the family just goes. But we rent it to friends of the family. HOUSEL: I see, okay. And how often is it rented? REINEMAN: I donÓt have that number in front of me. My mom manages the rental aspect, but in total probably several months out of the year. HOUSEL: And do you advertise it? REINEMAN: Not currently. HOUSEL: In the past you have, though? REINEMAN: I donÓt believe so. But you would have to speak to the person in handles that. She is, I mean she is not a property manager, sheÓs a preschool teacher, but -. HOUSEL: But do you -. REINEMAN: I donÓt have any recollection of ever advertising it. So IÓm quite, IÓm very sure the answer to the question is no, but I donÓt have that officially. HOUSEL: Okay, thank you. Do you have any other comments youÓd like to make as part of our consideration for your standing? REINEMAN: Not in regards to the petition for standing. But I would encourage you to come and visit this area. HOUSEL: Just, we want to make sure we hear all the information, and so if there is any other specifics youÓd like to offer us that you feel that this proposed development may, you know, impact your property, we definitely want to consider it all. REINEMAN: ItÓs all delineated in the written comments. HOUSEL: Okay. Thank you very much. REINEMAN: Thank you all very much. HOUSEL: Is there any discussion? Would anyone like to make a motion to deny or grant standing to this petitioner? BEAUDET: I would like to make a motion to approve of standing on this application for petition. NELSON: I second. 13 EXHIBIT A HOUSEL: Seconded by Commissioner Nelson. Any discussion? Maija, would you like to conduct a vote? COTTLE: Sure. Commissioner Beaudet? BEAUDET: Aye. COTTLE: Commissioner Nelson? NELSON: Aye. COTTLE: Commissioner Giffin? GIFFIN: Aye. COTTLE: And Mr. Chairman? HOUSEL: Aye. COTTLE: That is four-zero to grant standing. HOUSEL: Thank you, Mr. Reineman. Okay, the motion to grant standing was approved for Mr. Reineman. LetÓs move to the second petitioner. If you would like to come up Î IÓll try to get your name right here Î Mr. Ghalamfarsa, is that -? GHALAMFARSA: Yes, sir. HOUSEL: Good. GHALAMFARSA: A hundred percent correct. HOUSEL: Please state your name and address one more time for us. GHALAMFARSA: Ali Ghalamfarsa. I reside at 77-6306 AliÒi Drive, Kailua-Kona, HawaiÒi. HOUSEL: Would you like to explain to us why you felt the petition for standing is important and how this may affect you? GHALAMFARSA: The reason is because I live next door on the south side of their property. ThatÓs where I reside. I live there. And I feel that this development will impact my life and that little home there. But honestly, again, IÓm more here for the overall, more for the bay than myself. I mean, there could be a hundred-story tower building, I donÓt intend to change my life style sincerely; IÓll still enjoy the water, IÓll still enjoy the turtles and all of that. But that definitely does impact this property. There is, just, I did a little schematic, the mass of this building compared to -. May I bring it over there? (Speaking to staff), also if you donÓt mind, thereÓs, I have made a set, it is identical copies, one for each, and then, yeah. 14 EXHIBIT A HOUSEL: Did you submit this as part of your -? GHALAMFARSA: No, sir, I did not. Just for -. I will later -. HOUSEL: Would you like to? GHALAMFARSA: Yes, I do like to submit this. HOUSEL: Okay. GHALAMFARSA: IÓm sorry, so thereÓs nine copies, several copies of the site plan, and then just one copy of that perspective that shows a block. And thereÓs also, when I decided to purchase the property, of course, as soon as my offer was accepted, I did a due diligence, the normal that you would do Î door. I went to the Planning Department and I looked at their records and also all the documents regarding this property and the neighboring property. There was, the previous owner had constructed a small carport. I believe the permit was not compl feet from the shoreline. In addition to that, they had a four-foot overhang into their 20-foot shoreline. So when I purchased the property and then realized that me as the new owner had to make that correction, which I did, I applied for remodeling, renovating the house that IÓm in. Actually, if you ever, I would be glad to show it to you. I have used every single piece of the old redwood and stone that is in that house, recycled the whole, just all the material. The tin roof is still there. We took every single piece of redwood, planed it, cleaned it, oiled it, put it back on. There are three, four layers of paint and stain. At any rate, not only I cut the four-foot overhang that was protruding to the setback, but I also took the whole carport out; thereÓs only four four- by-eight or -ten beams there just to support surfboards and paddleboards. So I opened that whole section. Then I realized in the records that in that letter on the second page, youÓll see in bold a letter dated September 30, 2008, Page 2, near the bottom, it sta it clearly states that I could not have 20 feet setback, I should have 40 feet setback for any improvement. So when I wanted to recycle some of the old lava rocks there to build a barbecue, I built the barbecue 40 feet, just to be safe, 40 feet 4 inches Then I saw, when I saw the sign for public for a new development, I made a trip; I went to Hilo and met with one of the staff of the Planning and requested to s for this project. Apparently, the file, the application that they filed was returned to the applica I believe because it was not complete. I just wanted to make sure what kind of setback they had. To make the story short, 20-foot setback was granted to them. And I questioned it, that why, you know, 20-foot setback was granted to them and I was being asked day, I mean, I hired an attorney and I started spending thousands of dollars Î I think over $7,000, I spent. And finally, you know, I just stepped back because they told me that there was a mistake that the Planning Director had made. The Planning Director had made a mistake. Of course, my house was renovated and all done. I donÓt regret it. ItÓs still fine, you know, with 40-foot setback, because I didnÓt do anything except the barbecue. But then again, I learned that now with a new application they are being granted, that they can do the 20-foot setback. Now, the 15 EXHIBIT A reason that they told me that I could not have the 20-foot setback is, on that site plan 1117 you see there was a lot line alteration subdivision, because of that subdivision that was dated after I believe 1997, thatÓs the reason I could not qualify for that 20-foot. Then later they told me, well, that lot line alteration was not really a subdivision, itÓs insignificant. But again, a subdivision is a subdivision; the land was subdivided and there was a lot line alteration. And I was told that, well, it did not really affect anything, it would not affect the rule, the intention of Rule 11-16 (sic). But I believe the intention of that rule is that people cannot manipulate by subdividing, therefore going from 40-foot to 20-foot setback, therefore not getting closer to the shoreline Î I think thatÓs the, I really believe thatÓs clearly the intention that that cannot be manipulated and abused. Now, that lot line alteration, the map that I showed you, if you see, I think it had great impact; because of the way the line is now, with the 20-foot setback, the building can be built a lot closer to the shoreline. ItÓs very clear. So anyways, that is basically one of the biggest concerns that I have, is that setback from the shoreline. The next is height, which is technical, and I donÓt know, I would probably question that at the Plan Approval level, which I believe this is not the place to talk about, so I will not. But I know clearly the way what has been proposed does not follow the definition of the building height as, you know, it is in, you will see, 1991, which we are still follo HOUSEL: Commissioners, do you have any questions of the applicant, or the petitioner? Okay. I had a question. When was your house built? GHALAMFARSA: Nineteen fifty-seven, I believe. It was my birthday; we were actually born together. HOUSEL: And you live there full-time? GHALAMFARSA: Fifty-two, IÓm sorry, Ó52. Yes, I do. HOUSEL: Okay, you live there full-time right now. And do you plan to, I think you mentioned you possibly might add on to your home? GHALAMFARSA: IÓm sorry? HOUSEL: You might expand your home at a future date? GHALAMFARSA: Maybe build one small bedroom in the back, maybe. HOUSEL: Okay, just so IÓm clear and so the Commission can have all the facts and understand your position, how do you believe this proposed development will GHALAMFARSA: Density Î pretty much similar to what the concerns of my neighbor has Î density, the height, the privacy. But again, IÓd like to state again that I donÓt look at it too personally; I look at it long, super long term, yes. 16 EXHIBIT A HOUSEL: Okay, thank you. Any other questions from the Commissioners? Would someone like to make a motion regarding approving or denying this petitionerÓs standing? BEAUDET: IÓll make a motion. IÓll make a motion to grant standing on this petition. NELSON: Second. HOUSEL: And seconded. Any questions or discussion? Okay. Maija, would you like to take the roll. COTTLE: Yes. Commissioner Beaudet? BEAUDET: Aye. COTTLE: Commissioner Nelson? NELSON: Aye. COTTLE: Commissioner Giffin? GIFFIN: Aye. COTTLE: And Mr. Chairman? HOUSEL: Aye. COTTLE: The motion passes, four-zero, to grant standing to Mr. Ghalamfarsa. HOUSEL: YouÓve been granted standing in your petition. GHALAMFARSA: Thank you. GIFFIN: Mr. Chairman? HOUSEL: Yes. GIFFIN: I donÓt know if this is the correct time to bring it up, but I am not kamaÒina to Kona, and so I would like to request that we have a site visit. HOUSEL: IÓm sorry, say that again? GIFFIN: I would like to request that we have a site visit. HOUSEL: Oh, all right. Certainly we can consider that, and see if thatÓs appropriate. Okay. Now, the next thing that we need to decide is to whether the Leeward Planning Commission will 17 EXHIBIT A conduct the contested case hearing on this matter, or we have an option to, you know, have what is it, give me the right language here. GONZALEZ: Refer to a hearings officer. HOUSEL: Refer to a hearings officer Î thank you. Do we all want to have some discussion on that before we vote? No? GIFFIN: In light of that, once again, Mr. Chairman, IÓm asking that this body, whether we have a hearings officer or this body is going to serve as a hearing body or some of us will be part of that hearing body, whatever, because we have granted standing to these people, I am requesting once again that we have a site visit. HOUSEL: Yeah, I believe we should address this one first, and then we can take that matter up. I would certainly bring that up. Would someone like to make a motion regarding if we should, if the Leeward Planning Commission should handle this contested case or we should appoint a hearings officer. BEAUDET: You need that as a motion or -. HOUSEL: Yes. BEAUDET: As a recommendation? HOUSEL: If you would like to make a motion to do that. BEAUDET: IÓd like to make a motion that the Leeward Planning Commission oversee the contested case. NELSON: Second. HOUSEL: Any discussion on this? Maija, would you like to take a vote? COTTLE: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Beaudet? BEAUDET: Aye. COTTLE: Commissioner Nelson? NELSON: Aye. COTTLE: Commissioner Giffin? GIFFIN: Aye. COTTLE: And Mr. Chairman? 18 EXHIBIT A HOUSEL: Aye. COTTLE: The motion passes, four-zero, for the Leeward Planning Commission to hear this contested case. HOUSEL: Okay, so the Leeward Planning Commission will conduct the contested case. Since the Leeward Planning Commission will conduct the contested case hearing on Leeward Planning Commission needs to set the date for the contested case hearing. And so, do we have a motion to set the SMA 10-41 for contested case hearing on Î what was the date, th Daryn? August 27? Okay. Would all the petitioners please come to the table? A applicant, too. Since you are -. You are the applicant, I beli FOULK: IÓm Dr. William C. Foulk. HOUSEL: Okay. Would you raise your right hand, please? Do you swear to tell the whole truth before the Leeward Planning Commission today? FOULK: I do. HOUSEL: Could you state your name and address for the record? FOULK: IÓm Dr. William C. Foulk, F-O-U-L-K, 75-5656 Kuakini Highway, Suite 301, Kailua- Kona, 96740. HOUSEL: Okay. We havenÓt made a motion yet, have we? So letÓs take the motion first. If someone would like to make a motion to have the contested case hearing at the next Planning Commission, excuse me, not the next one, but the August 27, 2010 BEAUDET: I would like to make the motion for the hearing to be conducted on the date of August, the Leeward Planning Commission meeting date of August 27, 2010. NELSON: Second. HOUSEL: Second? Okay. Any discussion? Maija? COTTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Beaudet? BEAUDET: Aye. COTTLE: Commissioner Nelson? NELSON: Aye. COTTLE: Commissioner Giffin? 19 EXHIBIT A GIFFIN: Aye. COTTLE: And Mr. Chairman? HOUSEL: Aye. th COTTLE: The motion passes, four-zero, to conduct the contested case hearing on August 27, which is a Friday. HOUSEL: I want to let you know there are some deadlines that need to be met to proceed with this Î I havenÓt seen this before, so IÓm reading, bear with me Î yeah, actually, maybe the corporation counsel would help us with that. GONZALEZ: Thank you, Mr. Chair. According to Rule 4 of the Planning Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure, the following deadlines are going to be established: By close of business on Î one second, okay, thank you Î by close of business on July 15, 2010, the parties are to submit a summary of their statement of issues, a written exhibit list, written witness list, and any exhibits they want to enter for the contested case hearing. Do the parties understand that? And you have to conform and comply with Rule 4. Not only do you have to file that with the Planning Department, you also have to provide it to the other people sitting at the table with you Î Dr. Foulk and the two intervenors now. Also by July 30, 2010, is a deadline to submit written objections to any exhibits or witnesses. Are there any questions from the parties? GHALAMFARSA: No questions from me. GONZALEZ: May the record reflect that they all shook their head from left to right, indicating no. HOUSEL: Counsel, will the petitioners and applicant receive this in writing? GONZALEZ: Yes, they will receive a follow-up letter in writing from the Department notifying them of the deadlines and the dates. HOUSEL: Coming back to Commissioner GiffinÓs request for a site visit. Would you like to make a motion to do that? GIFFIN: Do we have a date that we should do it by? GONZALEZ: Well, I would ask that you just leave the date open t th Department staff. But I do know that we are looking at doing that on August 27 during the same day that we have the contested case hearing. GIFFIN: So you are suggesting that the hearing and the site visit be on the same day, as well as our regular agenda? GONZALEZ: Yes. 20 EXHIBIT A GIFFIN: Okay. GONZALEZ: Again, rather than lock it in to a specific date, you know, we are going to have to meet the notification requirements by Charter and State Law, so just ask for them to schedule a site visit. If the Chair is going to put it up for the vote that the Commission wants it, then they will set it up. GIFFIN: Okay, then I move that this body take a site visit to the area that is in question, and the date to be determined by our staff. NELSON: Second the motion. HOUSEL: Motion seconded. Any discussion? Okay. Maija? COTTLE: Commissioner Giffin? GIFFIN: Aye. COTTLE: Commissioner Nelson? NELSON: Aye. COTTLE: Commissioner Beaudet? BEAUDET: Aye. COTTLE: And Mr. Chairman? HOUSEL: Aye. COTTLE: The motion passes, four-zero, to take a site visit at the schedule of the Department. GIFFIN: Thank you. HOUSEL: Thank you, Maija. Just let you know, since the Commission has voted to handle the contested case, I the Chair will act as the presiding officer. Thank you very much. GONZALEZ: Oh, one second, though, for the housekeeping matter. read in his preamble earlier, you know, the contested case proceeding is a quasi-judicial function, so you may want to consider hiring a legal counsel to assist you. Of course, the parties Î the applicant and the intervenors Î can always agree to waive the more formal aspects of the proceeding, but it should be done in writing. Additionally, in regards to the Trust, we are going to need a legally authorized representative of the Trust with authority to bind the Trust and make decisions on the Trust present at the hearing. 21 EXHIBIT A REINEMAN: Can I get that in writing? GONZALEZ: Well, you can get it sure, but I mean, IÓm informing make the call to your family members, because we need a representative that has a decision- making authority on the Trust to bind the Trust. And it will also be good, behoove you folks to have witnesses that can answer questions, you know, regarding your concerns. HOUSEL: Thank you, gentlemen. BEAUDET: Question. What is the next step for the applicant? GONZALEZ: The next step for the applicant is Î thank you, thatÓs a very good question Î the next step for the applicant is to meet the deadlines and be prepared to present their proposed project. I think, practically speaking, the applicant has heard the concerns of his neighbors, and th heÓs going to have to come August 27 prepared to answer those issues and inform the Commission to their satisfaction of how those are non-issues or how he plans to mitigate any of the concerns. Does that sufficiently answer your question, Commissioner Beaudet? BEAUDET: Yes, it does. GONZALEZ: Thank you. HOUSEL: Thank you very much. That concludes our last item. The discussion ended at 12:37 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Noriko Sauer, Secretary Leeward Planning Commission 22 EXHIBIT A