Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-10-22 THANNEKEN LEEWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAI‘I HEARING TRANSCRIPT OCTOBER 22, 2010 JEFFREY D. HANNEKEN (SPP 10-105) A regularly advertised hearing on the application of was called to order at 9:46 a.m. in the King Kamehameha's Kona Beach Hotel, Ballroom I, 75-5660 Palani Road, Kailua-Kona, Hawai‘i, with Chairman Frederic Housel presiding. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Frederic Housel, Lani Bowman, Geraldine G Hickcox, Wayne Iokepa and Richard Nelson ABSENT AND EXCUSED: Brandi Beaudet STAFF PRESENT: Diane Noda (Deputy Corporation Counsel), Margaret Masunaga (Deputy Planning Director), Bennett Mark (Planning Program Manager), Maija Cottle (Staff Planner) and Allen Salavea (Staff Planner) And three people from the public in attendance. APPLICANT:JEFFREY D. HANNEKEN (SPP 10-105) Application for a Special Permit to allow for the establishment of a ranch fencing business on a 0.7-acre portion of a larger 4-acre parcel situated within the State Land Use Agricultural District. The subject property is situated on the north side of Kawaihae Road near the 61-mile marker within the Waimea Landmark Estates Subdivision, ‘uli, South Kohala, Hawai‘i, TMK: 6-2-05:31. HOUSEL: Could the Leeward Planning Commission please come back to order. We will proceed with our third item on the agenda today. And this is an application for a Special Permit, and this is to allow for the establishment of a ranch fencing business on a State Land Use Agricultural District. Maija, would you like to do the honors? COTTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning, everyone. COMMISSIONERS: Good morning, Maija. COTTLE: Hope everyone is having a good morning. This application is a Special Permit request. The applicant is Jeffery Hanneken. The subject property is located between Kawaihae and Waimea. It’s actually about four and half miles outside of Waimea. And you can see the subject property on the slide is outlined in red – oops, here we go – it’s in the middle of the slide. Kawaihae Road runs through the middle of the slide in an east-west direction. And you can see the land to the north is actually a very large parcel: it’s zoned Agricultural 40 acres that’s shown in the blue. And the properties to the south are zoned Agricultural 5 acres and that’s shown in the light green. The subject property is zoned Agricultural 3 acres. The General Plan designation for the property is Rural and that’s shown in the dark brown color. And the surrounding lands are designated Extensive Agriculture that’s shown in white. The State Land Use District for the property is Agricultural, which is why the applicant is requesting a Special Permit. 1 EXHIBIT A The applicant is proposing to establish a ranch fencing business on a 0.7-acre portion of a four-acre parcel. The business has actually been operating on the property without a Special Permit since 1999, and the applicant was recently notified by the Planning Department that a Special Permit is required to operate their business on Ag land. They would like to continue to use a portion of the dwelling as a home office and store equipment and materials used in fabricating gates on the property. Specifically, they want to store piping, trailers, hoe rams, a back hoe and attachments for the back hoe. And their clients will not come to the property; the applicant will actually go to the project site everyday. And the owners are the only employees. This is a site plan of the permit area and the property. It’s hard to see here, but the property is outlined in dark green; it’s kind of an irregular pie shape. And you can see Kawaihae Road making of the south border of the property. And the Special Permit area is outlined in red. So the driveway entrance off of Kawaihae Road is in this general area here, and then they have a driveway up to an existing house and a partially-built carport. This is a photo of the property that was taken back in February of this year, and you can see a lot of materials and equipment on the property; this photo was taken around the time that there was a public complaint made. And then you can see this photo was taken in August of this year; the applicant removed quite a bit of the material and equipment from the property. This view here is from the shoulder of Kawaihae Road, looking west; you can see the partially-built garage here and you can see the roof of the house. There is actually a large berm, an earthen berm, here that hides the bulk of the Special Permit request area that’s behind this berm. This area that I’m circling generally is the location of the Special Permit area in front of the berm. And this perspective is looking down the driveway; again, you can see the applicant’s dwelling here and some storage of materials behind the berm near the dwelling and garage. And then this perspective was taken again from the shoulder of Kawaihae Road, looking north, and the Special Permit area in front of the berm that would be viewed from Kawaihae Road is in this general area here. The Planning Department is recommending approval of the permit with conditions. Are there any questions? HOUSEL: Maija, what’s the total land area of the lot there? COTTLE: It’s about four acres. HOUSEL: Four acres total. And so the permit area would be, how big? COTTLE: Point seven acres. HOUSEL: Point seven, so less than one acre of the four acres. COTTLE: Yeah, just under one acre. HOUSEL: Okay. Any questions, Commissioners? BOWMAN: So the Special Permit area would be outside the berm area, correct? 2 EXHIBIT A COTTLE: I’m sorry? BOWMAN: It would be outside the berm area? COTTLE: The berm area on this site plan extends from about here and it wraps around to about here. So when you are looking west from Kawaihae Road, you can see this portion of the Special Permit area, but this large portion here is hidden behind the berm. BOWMAN: Right, okay, so that little dogleg is not behind the berm. COTTLE: Correct. BOWMAN: Okay, thank you. HOUSEL: Any other questions of staff? BOWMAN: I’m sorry. And the things that were removed, they were in that dogleg – I don’t know what you call it. COTTLE: They were, yes, I believe, and the applicant can correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe they were actually around this area here, because these ironwood trees in the back are along the northern property line. BOWMAN: Okay, and I can check with them. Okay, thank you. HOUSEL: Thank you, Maija. Commissioner Giffin. GIFFIN: Maija, I’d like to know, when a public complaint is officially filed with the Department, and I saw a copy of that, what steps does a person have to go through to, you know, get rid of the complaint, so that they are in compliance?Besides getting the Special Permit – I know that. COTTLE: Well, in this particular case, the notice of violation was alleging that the applicant had a non-agricultural business on the property, as well as a junkyard, and so for this particular property to come into compliance, they had to remove the junkyard material, which he did, and apply for a Special Permit to legitimize the non-agricultural business. GIFFIN: Okay, thank you. COTTLE: You’re welcome. HOUSEL: Any other questions of staff? Thank you, Maija. We have three people that signed up to testify, and I think it might help us to go ahead and take your testimony before we call the applicant, that possibly, if there are any questions that arise, that possibly the applicant can help answer those questions. So would the three people that did sign up please come up to the table and have a seat: Murray Gardner, Jay West and Tim Ter Meer. GIFFIN: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman? Could I ask the staff to please move that cart? Thank you. 3 EXHIBIT A HOUSEL: Do we need another chair there? I’m sorry. There, okay. If you could please use the microphone – share if you can. Raise your right hand, please. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Leeward Planning Commission? TESTIFIERS: I do. HOUSEL: Thank you. I’ll start on your right side. Could you, using the microphone, state your name and address, please? Yeah, it’s working. WEST: Hi. I’m Jay West. I’m not in favor of you granting this -. HOUSEL: I’m sorry, could you give your address please. WEST: Do what? HOUSEL: Give your address. WEST: P. O. Box 2071, Kamuela 96743. HOUSEL: Okay, now if you would like to give your testimony, go ahead. WEST: Okay. I’m not in favor of granting this Special Permit for the following reasons – I’ve got four reasons: Basically they are, the applicant shows a history of disregard for county regulations; agricultural property is not approved for this type of business activity; there are properly zoned areas located a short driving distance where the applicant is able to legally conduct his business; and one more reason from my personal experience, the County is not able to enforce existing zoning regulations, let alone a Special Permit which leaves interpretation wide open to abuse and non- enforcement. Get into details here. My first reason is: Applicant shows a history of disregard for county regulations. Well, you can see from this, they’ve been doing this for ten years – 1999, I think I read the application at the County. They’ve been doing it without a permit. And so, I’ll just read this: “Applicant has openly conducted a business on agricultural land that was not permitted according to County Code. Over the last ten years the subject’s property became what looked like a junkyard with a scattering of equipment, building materials and even a metal tower structure stored on almost two acres of the property. Applicant did not file information with the County Real Property Tax Division stating the property was used for business. Yesterday I went to the County building in Hilo to gather information so I would have my facts correct for this hearing. I found that the applicant’s records show that they have been taxed at the lowest rate in the homeowner class. According to the applicant’s representative, the property has been used for business for the last ten years. The applicant should have reported to the County Real Property Tax that the property was being used for business and should have been taxed at a higher rate, depriving the County of tax revenues. This open disregard for paying a fair share of taxes puts an unnecessary burden on every taxpayer.” My second reason is: “Agricultural property is not approved for this type of business. Our upcoming elections have highlighted the need for Hawai‘i to become more sustainable. Our candidates for governor are both looking at the Big Island as a source for agricultural products to support Hawai‘i population. There are other properties in the same subdivision that are successfully operating agricultural businesses. So counter to the special use application – or special application, whatever they are applying for – filed by the owner’s representative, this lot is able to support 4 EXHIBIT A agricultural activities.” My third reason is: “There are appropriately zoned areas located a short driving distance where the applicant is able to conduct his business. Counter, once again, to the application filed by the owner’s representative, there are industrial zoned sites in Kawaihae, a short distance from the applicant’s home and current non-permitted business site. Why should this business not have to do the same thing that other businesses have to do, that is conduct business in an area that is properly zoned? If this Commission approves this permit, it could be seen as giving special treatment to one individual. It would also be an unfair business advantage to any competing businesses by lowering the cost of business for this one business.” HOUSEL: Okay, I’m sorry, could you summarize? Your time has expired. WEST: I do have a written, I gave a written -. HOUSEL: Would you like to -. WEST: I’ve thought I might run out of time, too. HOUSEL: Okay, thank you. I have a question for you. Do you live close by? WEST: Excuse me? HOUSEL: Do you live close to this area? WEST: Yeah. HOUSEL: You do. Is it on, is your location – do we have a map, Maija? WEST: I drive by it everyday. HOUSEL: Okay. Is your residence close by? WEST: Yeah. TER MEER: She is about where that letter “A3-a” is, on the extreme left-hand edge. HOUSEL: Okay, you are over, okay, so you are in that area, okay, just curious. So from your perspective, there is a visual problem with having a business there? WEST: I’m sorry, say again? HOUSEL: You say you drive by each day, and you see -. WEST: Oh yeah, it’s -. HOUSEL: Equipment and things like that out there -. WEST: The equipment and stuff is all multiplied and multiplied over the years, and only when the County got a complaint, did they clean up their act and ask for a special use permit. 5 EXHIBIT A HOUSEL: Right, okay. Does it look better now that it’s been cleaned up? WEST: Is that the point? HOUSEL: No, no, I’m asking, from your perspective, has the visual impact been improved? WEST: Well, it looked really bad before. So any removal of anything makes it look better. HOUSEL: Okay. Commissioners, do you have questions? WEST: I’m not, I still have more. HOUSEL: No, I’m sorry, your time has expired. Commissioners, any questions of the -? BOWMAN: I have a question. You mentioned that there are other agricultural uses in that subdivision. Do you mean the entire -? WEST: Subdivision runs all, see that blue, all on the north side of Kawaihae Road. BOWMAN: So, blue, oh okay, so the -. WEST: Yeah, in the applicant’s, in the booklet for the application, it said the land wasn’t appropriate for ag use, and so I’m just countering that. BOWMAN: What, because you live there, what other ag – I’m just curious, I haven’t been there for a while – what other ag businesses are there in that subdivision? WEST: There is a big composting facility – used to be the egg farm. There’s other small farms along the way. If you can just drive by -. I counted, when I was driving down here for this morning’s hearing, and I counted six that I can see by the road. Now, I’m sure there’s other ones, you know, small ag farms and stuff -. BOWMAN: Okay, thank you. WEST: That I’m, you know, I didn’t do a survey. BOWMAN: Thank you. HOUSEL: Thank you for your testimony. Would you like to state your name and address, please? TER MEER: My name is Tim Ter Meer. I live in the area about, well, I live off of Kahinu Place, which is to the left of the little “A3-a,” yeah, the little red line there, no, to the left of that, right there, there’s a little red line, that’s Kahinu Place, I live on that little street. HOUSEL: Did you give your address? TER MEER: P. O. Box 6128, Kamuela – that’s my mailing address. HOUSEL: Okay, thank you. 6 EXHIBIT A TER MEER: I am one of these trouble maker people that complain when I see things that aren’t right, what I consider to be not right. The Souzas have lived at the corner of Kawaihae Road and Kahinu Place for longer than I have, but they consider an ag business to be a truck repair business; they have a large steel business that they have repaired vehicles on, and I have complained about them. And we’ve curtailed a lot of the parking problems they had with junk vehicles and huge 18- wheel trucks being parked there and road grading equipment, whatever, anyway, we’ve cut down a lot on that. There’s the people across the street from my home named Takushi, at least the owners are named Takushi, and they used that as a dumping ground for all of their equipment that they use for road equipment, improvements, whatever. HOUSEL: Could I please ask you to limit your testimony to this particular application? TER MEER: Yes, I will. I’m just telling you that. I’m also one of the complainers of this particular piece of property – I was getting to that, I’m sorry. I have a photograph that was taken back in 2008 of the property when it looked like a junkyard. Anyone who would like to look at that, you may. It’s a very non-effective photograph that my wife took from the street of what it used to look like. It was just terrible. It did look like worse than a junkyard. But anyway, I went by this morning. It looks great right now; they’ve graded things, they’ve put up a new fencing area, and it looks wonderful. But there is no effective business on it right now. What is it going to look like when they start bringing in all of the fencing material and all of the cinder blocks and everything else that needs to be done? It looks fine now, but what is it going to look like when it’s finished? Also, I kind of question the size, the scale size of the, what they call, the garage – the area that they have, that’s a building that has pre-formed walls. But it’s been without a roof for years. And it’s giant. It’s not a garage; it’s a warehouse waiting for a finishing roof. And I seriously wish that you would deny this request. I would like to finish Jay’s, has one little final thing that she wanted to say. She says, “In summary I ask that you do the right thing and deny this special use application. My hope would be that your denial would send a message to all the other businesses that are conducting unpermitted activities on agricultural land that the County and its representatives will enforce the zoning and land use codes. I beg of you to keep Ag land Ag and not subject the land to commercial activities that could degrade the land to a point where is not able to be used for its intended uses.” And that’s it for me. HOUSEL: Thank you, sir. Would you state your name and address, please? GARDNER: Murray Gardner, 62-2088 Kawaihae Road, which is directly across from the property for which the Special Permit is requested. And I emphasize the fact that they are looking for something special; they didn’t look for it for eleven years, but they are looking for it now. Notwithstanding that I’m not here to support or oppose a Special Permit being granted, but it is special, and I think that this Commission should ask for special accommodations from the owners in order to grant them this Special Permit. The parcel itself has a rather sordid history. It had been owned by a couple who were unable to sell it after the first Gulf War, gave it to a church. The church then proposed to build a church. This went before the then Planning Department and Planning Commission and Council, and all granted; however, the Third Circuit Court said thumbs-down, and so no Special Permit was granted for a church on this property. The church then sold it to the present owners, my good neighbors, Hannekens. (Inaudible) was in 1995 and 1996, 7. 7 EXHIBIT A My concerns, besides the fact that the application has rather disingenuous features to that, but we blame that on the agent and not the applicant, I think the amount requested, as has been brought up here, is awfully large for a mom and pop operation. That garage, as has been brought up, could take four or five County fire trucks without crowding it. It’s two stories high. And I think it indicates more is going to be accomplished than it has been requested in the Special Permit. There has been an office trailer, which we don’t seem to get mention, but that was there for a while, a large white trailer, whether it’s a structure or not. In any case, no one can force the applicant to fulfill his promises or meet the requirements and conditions that are stipulated on your pages 5 and 6.We have been told that this is a business that is necessary on the island; there are already 35 fence makers in the telephone book. We know that this is a continuing business because the applicant has told us so nine times in his application. Therefore, there should be a record in his IRS filings and in his GET filings to show whether this business is profitable or not during these eleven years and whether in fact it can accomplish the stipulations and the requirements that the Department would lay on it to keep the property in a reasonable appearance. Thank you for the three minutes. HOUSEL: Thank you for your testimony. If you would like to please be seated in the audience. Oh, I’m sorry. Did anyone have a question of our testifiers? Sorry. Thank you. Would the applicant’s representative please come forward, and the applicants? Use the, if you could, use the microphone and raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth now before the Planning Commission on this matter? APPLICANTS: I do. HOUSEL: Thank you. Mr. Mooers, would you like to give your name and address? MOOERS: Sure. My name is Greg Mooers. My address is P. O. Box 1101, Kamuela, Hawai‘i 96743. My residence is just makai and south of the subject property. HOUSEL: Would you like to lead, or -? MOOERS: Sure. I’ll go ahead. I’d like to clarify a few things. It’s always disturbing when you don’t get comments or responses to the mailings to the neighbors and nothing gets submitted; so you have very little time to prepare or to address concerns. But as always, concerns are concerns and they are valid. One of the issues that seemed to come up is the issue of the Hannekens operating the business here since 1999. I would point out for the record they file business, all the business licenses every year, tax licenses; there is no secret they’ve done business there. In fact, there’s some belief that the Special Permit is not required for this business, and that was the position we took originally when the County cited it. And I will note in the Hawai‘i County Code, Section 25-5-72, Sub-section (23), it says, “Vehicle and equipment storage areas that are directly accessory to aquaculture, crop production, game and fish propagation, livestock grazing and livestock production” are permitted uses in the Ag District. The County of Hawai‘i Planning Department has made a determination previously for a business in Waimea that sells fencing materials and agricultural products on Mn Road, that they didn’t require a permit; R. R. Olson, if you are familiar with that business, has been in business for decades, and there is no Special Permit. So it’s not unreasonable for the applicant to believe that what he was doing was quite legal. When the County cited us, we elected simply to file a Special Permit application, believing that what we had been doing for eleven years was legal, but happy to comply with the County’s request. 8 EXHIBIT A As far as a Special Permit, there is criteria in the code that requires certain things to be demonstrated in order to, for the granting of a Special Permit, and that’s what the application was about. The legislature in recognizing that certain lands in the Agricultural District might not be best suited for agricultural activities and yet classified as such, and recognized that 49 percent of our state is in Agricultural District. We have an awful lot of land from barren lava to Class B soils that are all in the Ag District, okay? But recognizing that there are other uses that are reasonable, the Special Permit application process was established to identify those and to establish criteria for granting the permit. And that’s what the application addresses and that’s what the Planning Department has supported. There were some issues raised about real property taxes. The fact that whether or not there is a Special Permit or business occupying, is not a real property tax issue; there’s no form to be filled out by the applicant if you have a Special Permit. Was the County aware that the business was in place? Yes. They’ve been aware every since then. The County had no problem in identifying it when they file the notice of violation, because they went to the Department of Business and Economic Development and found the listing for the license. There is no secret that this business has been operating there. And there is no impact on real property taxes. So the applicants were not shirking the responsibility to pay their taxes. Their taxes are based on the use of the property, and that has never been hidden from anybody. They have their licenses and, as Mr. Gardner suggests, we do have, yes, in fact, Internal Revenue filings and we do pay our taxes. Ms. West raised four points – I would like to address those. The first thing was the issue of the applicant has a disregard for county regulations. I think I’ve addressed that, and believe that the applicant feels that what he has done is quite legal. And we have complied in every step of the way; when the County identified an issue, we responded. When they said, “no, you had to apply for a Special Permit,” we have applied for the Special Permit. Whether we agree or not, that’s not the issue. I do not think the applicant has shown a disregard. Second thing is Agricultural property is not approved. Well, that’s exactly why we have a Special Permit and that’s why we are here today to determine if this is a reasonable use of this property. The soil here is Class E – it’s very poor. He could put up warehouses like the egg farm did. But I’ll note that the Department of Water Supply already complained about the amount of water that the applicant was using on the site, and that water is used only for irrigation of the landscape buffer. If there was an agricultural use -. And I’ve looked at land in this area for quite some time for ag people, and I’ve asked Billy Bergin who is a state vet for many years, you know, “how many cows can you graze on an acre of land,” and he said, “no, no, how many acres of land to graze one cow.” This is not productive agricultural land. You can pave and put anything on it, and call it agriculture, but it is not well suited land. The ALISH systems, the Land Study Bureau system, which classified the soils, identified the soils as Very Poor, Class E. The third point is there are properly zoned areas in Kawaihae. There are properly zoned areas, but they are also very expensive. And this business has been operating on the property that the applicants bought for this business, for eleven years, and for them to have to relocate and essentially have two pieces of property, one to reside on and one to do the business on, is financially not feasible in certainly not today’s economy. I’d point out – Maija, could you go to the site plan, please – the area, there is a berm right along this area here, the majority of the activity of gate building occurs behind the berm and is absolutely invisible from the road. This area in front of the berm was to accommodate truck, trailer and back hoe that are accessory to the use. Now, those are private vehicles that, if this were a farm, he could have no problem, there is no problem parking; but because it’s also used in the business, we had to include this area in the Special Permit. So as far as visual impact, if this ranch business fence building is not here, he can still park his truck and trailer here, all right? So the use of the land would be the same; it’s just that he would have to 9 EXHIBIT A conduct his business somewhere else. So the visual impact of him building gates behind this berm area, there is no visual impact; you cannot see from Kawaihae Road anything behind that. Now, Mr. Gardner brought up a point, well, there was a trailer parked there. And there was. That was a construction trailer parked in front of the berm for quite some time – it had absolutely nothing to do with the Hannekens’ business. It was a trailer, a construction trailer that was owned by a friend of theirs who was looking for some place to store. Should they have allowed it to stay there as long as it did? Probably not. Did it bother people? Yes, it did. Did it bother me when I drove by? Yes, it did. Is it gone? Yes, it is. All right? I think Tim brought up a question – I’m sorry, Tim, I can’t pronounce your last name, I’m sure I would butcher it – but concerned about that it looks wonderful now and what’s going to happen when the business comes back. Well, the reality is that all the materials that were stored before are not coming back because the business that Mr. Hanneken and his wife are in is gate building behind the berm; they will not be stockpiling nor they are requesting permission to stockpile any fencing materials, hollow tile, fence post, whatever, in front. And I guess in closing that one point I would make, Ms. West says the County is unable to enforce the codes; they had no trouble in enforcing the complaint against Mr. Hanneken, all right? That’s why we are here today. That’s why the site is clean. So I have great confidence that the County can in fact support the Zoning Code, enforce it and support the Special Permit. The Hannekens are with me today to answer any questions that you may have about their business or about the site – happy to answer them. HOUSEL: Commissioner Giffin. GIFFIN: Mr. Mooers, the public testifiers also raised the issue about the garage, and I think the second testifier, along with the third testifier, brought up the size of the garage -. MOOERS: Twenty-five hundred square feet. GIFFIN: I don’t know, and its height, they said that it’s really more like a, and I think I have this quoted correctly, there is no roof, and that really it’s more like a warehouse. And I wondered whether or not you or the applicants can talk about -. MOOERS: I’ll respond and then I’ll let Jeff respond. First of all, it’s a permitted structure for a three-car garage with a loft, all right? It’s 2,500 square feet. I don’t think we can get, I don’t know how many fire engines Mr. Gardner suggested could be stored in it. But it is permitted. And I’ll let Jeff respond any of the questions about -. HOUSEL: Before you do, would you give your name and address, please? HANNEKEN: I’m Jeff Hanneken, and we live on the property, 62-2100 Kawaihae Road, P. O. Box 1846, Kamuela. HOUSEL: Okay, thank you. Go ahead. HANNEKEN: Part of the reason that the garage is taking a while to get completed and get a roof on is, you know, we are trying to do this project out of pocket. Times are slow now, so the pocket’s 10 EXHIBIT A pretty slim. The hollow tile and things that was brought up that were on the property were for the garage construction, you know, some of the building materials. So, that won’t be coming back. We are building the garage to be able to park our vehicles and equipment in, you know, also some of my hand tools and welding tools and stuff like that that I have. HOUSEL: Do you have, anyone have a question of the applicant? Where is the garage on the property? Is that shown on the left? MOOERS: Yeah, it’s the structure right here. HOUSEL: Is that behind the berm, or -? MOOERS: It’s kind of a cliff face here as it comes up. So if you look at the site photographs, you can kind of see that you can see the side of this; but it opens into the area here, and then the berm comes off the edge of the garage this way. HOUSEL: I see, okay. The one photograph that Maija had, that was the one that had all the material before it was, when it was being stored. Where is that on that site plan? MOOERS: Where was it? HOUSEL: Where was it, right. MOOERS: It was out in this area here. HOUSEL: Okay, and that’s all been removed, is that -? MOOERS: Yes, it has. There was a violation, you notice that the County settled the violation for storing the material. HOUSEL: For your business of building gates, how much material do you need to have on hand? HANNEKEN: I’m not sure how to answer that, you know, as far as tons of material or, you know, like that. There’s not a great lot of material there at any one time, you know, time to time if you, you know, if you post a few rolls of wire, miscellaneous pipe and structural steel that we use in the business; as far as stockpiling semi-loads of stuff, that doesn’t happen. I’m not quite sure how to answer that. HOUSEL: Right. So you don’t, I mean, you don’t need that amount of material that was previously there, is that correct? HANNEKEN: Yes. And everything that we are going to need is going to be behind the berm there. The material that was in that photo was, it was laid out trying to, you know, my wife ran a lot of it on Craig’s List and things like that; that was a lot of things that were left over from different projects and stuff, and we were trying to keep it so maybe somebody else could use out of a small roll of wire or, you know, something like that. We are not doing that anymore. Partial rolls of wire either stay on the job site or they get put to the dump. HOUSEL: Okay, thank you. 11 EXHIBIT A NELSON: I have a question. HOUSEL: Commissioner Nelson. NELSON: Yeah, I have a question. Is it feasible and profitable, rather than construct the fence material on your property, but to do it on site? The reason I say that is I’m surrounded by cattle ranches and they are constantly doing, they are fabricating fences, either expanding or repairing, on site. And so whatever materials they need, they bring onto the site, and do their construction there. So my question would be, in light of all these complaints, is that an option that you have where you could actually, if you’ve got a contract out there for 1,000 feet, you could do it in increments but on site rather than the materials being at your place? MOOERS: Commissioner, let me respond first, and then I’ll let Jeff respond. They don’t build fences on site; they do, all fencing is built on the project areas. What’s fabricated behind the berm here are gates, and that’s done there because his welding equipment and things like that are there. And that has not been a problem; no one has ever complained about what’s occurred behind the berm. The issue was always, okay, the storage of material out here, which is gone. And we are not requesting for storage of material out here; what we are requesting out here, the only area that would be visible, is storage of truck, back hoe and trailer. So you are right; all the fencing on sites – and he has done hundreds of miles of fencing on this island – is done at the ranch wherever it is. But here they are just doing the welding to fabricate gates. NELSON: Okay, thank you. MOOERS: Okay? And one thing I’ll point out, if you look at the conditions, there is a requirement for landscaping along here to shield this. There are eight-foot high pepper trees planted now. And there is a condition, and I wanted to address that condition that is proposed by the Planning Department; I would like to make a, suggest a change to the language in that condition. Currently, Condition 6 says, “A landscape buffer shall be established and maintained at a minimum height of fifteen feet along the property line fronting Kawaihae Road at a sufficient length to screen views of the special permit area from Kawaihae Road and surrounding properties.” Right now, from this area here and to the gate and then into the gate, they have planted California pepper trees, which become, as you know, quite full and quite tall, and it’s one of the species that will survive the heat and the wind in this area. The current language says, “The landscape buffer shall be opaque from the ground to a height of at least six feet and shall not contain any completely unobstructed openings more than 3 feet wide.” I’m concerned about the language because there is no time frame involved, and I feel somewhat uncomfortable that how it would be interpreted. And I’ve talked with the staff about this. And the recommended change that I have is that to say, “The applicant shall submit a landscaping plan to the Planning Department for review and approval,” so that they can look at a specific plan of where the trees are planted, what the variety of the tree is, and decide if that’s adequate. And then if it is, it’s signed off and we agree, and part of it is we have to continue to maintain the landscaping; so we can’t cut the trees down. Then the last portion, the last sentence of Condition 6 would remain, “All required landscaping shall be installed within ninety days from the effective date of this permit.” So the only thing we are doing is we are taking out what I think is maybe an area for opinion or argument as far as whether or not it’s 60 feet high, or opaque or not, and coming up with a specific plan that shows the trees and the variety of the trees. And in fact, we have such a plan here today which, if the language is approved, will be submitted to the Planning Department for the review and approval. 12 EXHIBIT A HOUSEL: Commissioner Giffin. GIFFIN: Mr. Chairman, I’d like to ask Mr. Mooers a question. Would your landscape plan then go from where the pepper trees are currently planted, which is I think right by that curve? MOOERS: Yeah, it’s from here to here. GIFFIN: Yeah. Would it continue down? MOOERS: No. GIFFIN: Okay, so it would end where the pepper trees are -. MOOERS: It would end where they are now. The concern is if you go down here, they are really not going to do anything because there is quite a bank that comes up here; so you can plant a 20- foot high tree and it’s really not going to block much. And the other concern from DOT is that once you get past this point, if you start planting a lot of things here, you obstruct the view of a very -. GIFFIN: Vision -. MOOERS: Corner here. So as you are coming down Kawaihae Road, if you’ve got a tree line blocking here, it’s blocking your view of the corner; if somebody stalled right behind the curve here, you are not going to be able to see it. GIFFIN: Okay, so your landscape plan, if I’m assuming correctly -. MOOERS: It will be from here to here -. GIFFIN: Is the existing -. MOOERS: There’re ironwood trees along the back here. I think there was some mention about the amount of land, the seven-tenth of an acre seem like a lot for a mom and pop; if you take the driveway out, which runs through here, and the 20-foot wide tree line that comes through here, and the parking area in front of the house, there is a very small area to construct gates. They don’t need a large area to construct gates. But the biggest area really is the area on the front where they have to park the vehicles. GIFFIN: So your landscape plan that you are going to propose is to maintain the existing -? MOOERS: And to have some additional, but that -. GIFFIN: Okay, where would the adding be? MOOERS: There would be some additional in here and probably some additional up in here. And then we basically want confirmation from the Planning Department that the pepper trees that were planted here that are two years old and now about eight feet high, at least eight feet high from the inside of the property, is that, you know, we are on the same page; we don’t want to plant something and find out the Planning Department doesn’t think that’s doing the job. So that’s why 13 EXHIBIT A we want to have a plan approval, so that we can get concurrence from staff that what we are proposing addresses their concerns. GIFFIN: Okay. I had one more statement that I wanted to make, and maybe the applicant can correct me if I’m wrong, and it goes back to the question that the Chairman asked regarding the amount of material. And since we are only speaking about construction of gates -. Is that correct? MOOERS: That’s correct. GIFFIN: Okay, then, am I correct in assuming that you would be ordering or buying material for gates that you have a contract for, so therefore you would no longer be stockpiling or buying in excess of the contract that you are working on now, or as you have a contract? Is that correct? HANNEKEN: Well, generally, yes. When we have a project contracted, we buy the material for that project. Usually, I think most contractors, you know, if you have a project where you are going to need X amount of, you know, you are going to need 300 feet of pipe, it comes in the nearest length or something like that, you know, you may have more than what you need. So there will be certain amounts from time to time of different materials there in excess of what the project actually took when it was done. BOWMAN: But, may I, so all this material would be behind the berm. Because I guess maybe economically, I can see where you would like buying in bulk; I mean, I’m thinking logically, right, you get a better, what you are saying is sometimes you get a better price for, say, you need 300 feet but you get a better price for 500, so you buy 500, that kind of excess. HANNEKEN: Yes. Sometimes that will happen or, like I said, if a certain package, you know, you need five of something and a package is eight, you have three of something left over. BOWMAN: Yeah. But that will all be behind the berm out of sight. HANNEKEN: Yes, ma’am. BOWMAN: Okay, thank you. HOUSEL: When you have material left over from a job, what do you do with it? HANNEKEN: Depending on what it is, if it’s partial rolls, that get disposed of; otherwise, you know, it goes behind the berm into the storage area. BOWMAN: I just have a comment and this is because I never throw anything away, and when I heard it’s going to the dump, I went, oh. Have you ever considered Habitat For Humanity? Because they, I believe, they will give you a tax write-off for excess materials. That’s just something to consider. I don’t know if you -. Have you ever heard -? HANNEKEN: I’m not much aware of that program, but we can check that out, yes. BOWMAN: Okay. Because they have a store here in Kona. Just a comment. 14 EXHIBIT A MOOERS: I think the Hannekens had a history of saving a lot of things, and I think that’s why they got into trouble. And so they’re consciously making an effort, you know, not to do that. But they do have the other at the landfill in Waimea too, the transfer station, of excess construction materials and stuff. But I think the application is very clear as to any materials that they keep would stay behind the berm and they would not use the area in front for storage. I do want to point out one thing – it’s in your packet, but the letter of support from Ross Fulmer who lives across the street. And Ross asked me if he should come today, and I told him, no, no need, I haven’t heard any complaints, and I guess now I wish he had come. But I do want to call your attention to the fact that Ross who lives just across down the curve a little ways -. I can show you, right here, he lives right here in the Knehoa Subdivision. And his letter of support is included in your package. And I live right there. HOUSEL: I’d like to see if our Deputy Planning Director would like to comment on the proposed changes that you suggested, Mr. Mooers, to Item No. 6. MASUNAGA: I am in, I have no opposition to that because it would require a review by our staff, relating to the types of trees and the landscape plan, and that is fine. Because sometimes, you know, if you have it in a condition and then you go to order it and it’s not there, then you can’t comply; so I understand how you would want that flexibility. HOUSEL: Okay, so that language would be acceptable to you? MASUNAGA: Yes, it is. HOUSEL: Thank you. COTTLE: Mr. Chairman, can I just clarify one point with the applicant? HOUSEL: Sure. COTTLE: On Pages 1 and 2 of the application, it says that the area south of the berm, which would be visible, is to accommodate parking a trailer and implements associated with a back hoe; but today I heard you say that a truck as well as the back hoe and the trailer would be parked. So, can we just get some clarification on the record of what will actually be parked in that area? MOOERS: I spoke in error. The truck will be above, so it’s just the trailer, the trailer to haul the back hoe and the back hoe implements, which is if you go back to the photo of what the site looks like today, that’s what’s there now. COTTLE: Okay, so the -. MOOERS: No truck. COTTLE: Trailer and the back hoe -. MOOERS: Back hoe -. COTTLE: And the attachments -. 15 EXHIBIT A MOOERS: And the attachments for the back hoe. So you were correct, I was in error. HANNEKEN: You can see the back hoe setting up -. MOOERS: Right there. COTTLE: Okay. MOOERS: I think you had another photo of it. And here is the trailer -. COTTLE: And the trailer is missing. MOOERS: The trailer is not in the picture now, that’s correct. COTTLE: Okay. BOWMAN: I just have a minor question. If this was not a Special Permit and in an agricultural area, could you have a back hoe and a trailer and a truck? MOOERS: Yes. BOWMAN: Thank you. HOUSEL: Commissioner Giffin. GIFFIN: I just have one more question. I can’t remember who it was, but I know it was one of the three testifiers, that stated there was a tower there as well? MOOERS: There was an old communication tower cut in length that was stocked on the side; it was a wind tower that he was going to use to put a windmill up on the property. GIFFIN: And it’s no longer there. HANNEKEN: No, we’ve dismantled it and moved it. MOOERS: But wind turbine is a permitted use in the Ag District. GIFFIN: Right, right, I know that. HOUSEL: Commissioner Bowman. BOWMAN: I would like to move that we approve SPP 10-105. GIFFIN: Along with the -. BOWMAN: Along with the conditions and changes to Condition 6 per the applicant and -. 16 EXHIBIT A HOUSEL: Could we ask – sorry to interrupt you – could we ask, Maija, do you have language for the Condition 6? COTTLE: We can, what I would like to do is go back to the office and then just check to see if we have a standard condition that we use. But the language that Mr. Mooers mentioned is very similar to what we’ve used in the past, so it would read something very similar to that; “The applicant shall submit a landscaping plan to the Planning Director for review and approval.” And then keeping the last sentence of Condition 6. GIFFIN: I second. HOUSEL:We have a motion from Commissioner Bowman to approve this application, is that correct, Commissioner Bowman? BOWMAN: Yes. HOUSEL: Okay. And the second by Commissioner Giffin. GIFFIN: Correct. HOUSEL: Any questions, discussion? Maija, would you like to take the roll? COTTLE: Yes, thank you. Commissioner Bowman? BOWMAN: Aye. COTTLE: Commissioner Giffin? GIFFIN: Aye. COTTLE: Commissioner Hickcox? HICKCOX: Aye. COTTLE: Commissioner Iokepa? IOKEPA: Aye. COTTLE: Commissioner Nelson? NELSON: Aye. COTTLE: And Mr. Chairman? HOUSEL: Aye. COTTLE: The motions passes, six-zero, to approve. MOOERS: Thank you very much. 17 EXHIBIT A HOUSEL: Thank you. Congratulations. You will receive the documentation shortly, I’m sure, from our Planning Department. The discussion ended at 10:40 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Noriko Sauer, Secretary Leeward Planning Commission 18 EXHIBIT A