HomeMy WebLinkAboutResponse to Defective Petition for Appeal (Patrick Ferreira) dated September 3, 2026.pdfFrom: mario51Catwc.com
To: Plannino Board of Appeals
Cc: Darrow, Jeffrey W.; noah.arodzinCabverizonwirless.com; Paulaolsontrust.com; LeeAnn Andrade;
oatandco. inc%('cOyahoo.com
Subject: Response to Defective Petition for Appeal (Patrick Ferreira) dated September 3, 2026
Date: Thursday, September 24, 2026 11:04:57 AM
Attachments: ISSUE cell tower Papa"ikou 2026 10-3 appeal.pdf
Plan DeptlettertoVerizonfinalapproval12aael.12df
Plan DeptlettertoVerizonfinalapprovalpaae2.pdf
FinalPlanApprovall2aael.12df
FinalPlanApprovalpaae2.pdf
FinalPlanApprovalpaae3.pdf
Aloha e Bethany,
My name is Margaret Johnson (
). I am sending this email out on his behalf.
Currently, Patrick Ferreira is without internet service and unable to receive and send out email
correspondence. Please add me to communications being sent to him via email. He will
continue to be the primary contact. I will be secondary/backup until he is back online. I will
bring all email correspondence to him that I receive from you. As soon as his internet provider
can complete the needed repairs to get back online, we will communicate that with all.
Attached is his letter of response to the points indicated on the correspondence from you re
the defective petition of appeal as well as other needed documentations. `ISSUE cell tower
Papa'ikou 2026' is Mr. Ferreria's letter of response. The remaining 5 attachments are the
documents we were able to secure to attach as requested.
Please indicate receipt of this email and attachments. With the upcoming storm Nolo, I want
to make sure you received all needed attachments potentially before I lose internet connection
brought on by Nolo.
To everyone copied to this email, we pray for our island's safety and we mahalo our essential
county and state employees for their service.
Sincerely,
Margaret Johnson
PO Box 155
Papa'ikou, Hawai'I 96781
September 22, 2026
Bethany Morrison
Board of Appeals
101 Pauahi St.
Hilo, Hawai'i 96720
Dear Ms. Morrison,
Thank you for your September 3, 2026 letter re. "Defective Petition for Appeal". You were replying to my
August 18, 2026 appeal of. the Final Plan Approval PL-PLA-2024-000347 for a telecommunication facility
in Papa'ikou with applicant Verizon Wireless.
This is my response to your letter and is also an amendment to my appeal.
First, please remember that I am not opposing the tower, just its location so close to homes. The
community and I have done everything right, trying to work with Verizon and Olson Trust, letting them
know how severe the impacts will be to our homes and livelihoods, and suggesting alternate locations
nearby. I hope Verizon will reconsider and locate the tower elsewhere.
For now, I request that work be stopped on the tower until
• 1 receive all the records that were requested before today's date, by me or on my behalf, from
Planning
• I am allowed 30 days after that to file an amended appeal, and
• 1 receive a final decision on my appeal from the Board of Appeals.
Your letter said my appeal did not include three items. Below are my responses re. each item.
ITEM 1
"An appeal filed within the time limits prescribed by statute, ordinance, rule, or by order ofthe Board."
The Board of Appeals Rules of Practice and Procedures say:
2- 1 Waiver or Suspension of Rules.
For good cause shown, the Board may, by majority vote, waive or suspend any rule or rules
of practice and procedure; provided that rules relating to jurisdictional matters shall not be
waived or suspended by the Board. [underlines added]
There are good causes
Cause 1
it appears Verizon, Olson Trust, and Planning are not being required to follow the letter of the law
The letter of the law is the Final Plan Approval. But that document cites an incorrect Use Permit. (see my
response re. ITEM 2 B). If there was any attention paid to this, or any effort to correct it, there is no
documentation in the limited number of records Planning has provided to me. (see my response re.
Cause 2).
Despite the flawed Use Permit, earth -moving equipment has worked on the site (shaking my house to the
point where I asked the Building Department for a stop work order) and a layer of gravel about 20 feet
square has been put down.
Since Verizon, Olson Trust, and Planning are not being required to follow the letter of the law, it is unfair to
require me to follow it.
Cause 2
1 am hampered from writing an effective appeal because the Planning Department has not provided
documents used as the basis for the Planning Director's decision, such as:
• any communication between the applicant and Planning re. the incorrect Use Permit
correspondence re. the application, to and from the applicant and Planning Department, with
reviewing agencies such as Water Department, Public Works, Fire Department, Planning
Department, and State Historic Preservation Division
items cited, but not included, in the Final Plan Approval
o Sheet L1.0 and condition 1 re. landscaping
o Detailed background for Structural engineer report and Structural Certification Plan
o Copy of Hawaii County Code 25-4-12 as it existed on the date of application
o Air Space Report dated 1/12/22
o Development plan
Cory Harden requested the documents on my behalf by e-mailing Planning Department on August 10,
2026, and going to Planning in person on August 31 and September 9 and 11, 2026. Some documents
have been provided, but not all.
On September 14, 2026, Cory also asked County Council staff for a copy of the County Code as it existed
on the date of Verizon's application., but there is no response yet.
Cause 3
It was impossible for me to comply with the appeal deadline, because neighbors were not notified that a
decision was being considered, nor when it was finalized.
This occurred despite recent, well -publicized County Council decisions and public comments that
highlighted numerous concerns about telecommunications towers.
• July 22, 2020
Resolution 678-20 passed by County Council; called for a pause on 5G small cell antennas
• August 4, November 1, December 4 and 19, 2024; and February 4, 2025
Bill 194 considered by County Council and Windward and Leeward Planning Commissions; contained
standards for telecommunications towers
• June 4, 13, 18, 30 and July 7, 2025
Bill 24 considered and passed by County Council; set standards for telecommunications facilities, such as:
Survivability of everything on towers with 100 mph winds
Efforts to seek alternate locations
Co -location for other providers on one tower
Information to neighbors
Fire protection measures
Maintenance plan
Visual impact analysis
Greater setbacks
6-foot fence and anti -climbing device
Light shielding
120 day deadline to remove tower after abandonment
Protections for natural beauty
The only public notice for the current project appears to have been this brief mention in the November
13, 2024 Hawai'i Tribune -Herald.
PLAN APPROVAL ... 4.*Verizon Wireless/Edmond Olson Tr. (PL-PLA-2024-347) New 66'
Monopalm/Telecomm Facility on 0.8640 acs., (por.), S. Hilo, TMK: 2-7-033:019,
To see notices like this one, I would need to carefully read the Tribune -Herald every single day, which is
unreasonably burdensome.
The only reason I knew the tower was being built is that I noticed workers at the site and asked them what
they were building.
I also did not know that appeal was an option until about August 15, 2026.
Cause 3
A tower was also proposed for the site several years ago but never built (PLA-17-001481). Verizon's
historic consultant for that proposal, Nicole Okina of Bureau Veritas, interveiwed me, probably around
November 2015, based on records for that approval. But I do not recall Ms. Okina mentioning the planned
tower.
So Verizon took advantage of my freely sharing my knowledge to futher their own interests and inflict
impacts on me.
This is not a "iurisdictional matter".
According to a September 18, 2026 e-mail from Bethany Morrison to Cory Harden, the Deputy
Corporation Counsel, Sylvia Wan, "confirmed that there is no definition for 'jurisdictional matters' in the
BOA rules or elsewhere used for BOA' "
However, Black's Law Dictionary, eleventh edition, defines "jurisdiction" as
"1. A government's general power to exercise authority over all persons and things within its territory;
esp., a state's power to create interests that will be recognized under common-law principles as valid in
other states. <New Jersey's jurisdiction>. 2. A court's power to decide a case or issue a decree <the
constitutional grant of federal -question jurisdiction>. —Also termed (in sense 2) competent jurisdiction; (in
both senses) coram judice; adjudicatory jurisdiction.
"Rules of jurisdiction in a sense speak from a position outside the court system and prescribe the
authority of the courts within the system. They are to a large extent constitutional rules. The provisions of
the U.S. Constitution specify the outer limits of subject -matter jurisdiction of the federal courts and
authorize Congress, within these limits, to establish by statute the organization and jurisdiction of the
federal courts. Thus, Article III of the Constitution defines the judicial power of the United States to
include cases arising under federal law and cases between parties of diverse state citizenship as well as
other categories. The U.S. Constitution, particularly the Due Process clause, also establishes limits on the
jurisdiction of state courts. These due process limitations traditionally operate in two areas: jurisdiction of
the subject matter and jurisdiction over persons. Within each state, the court system is established by
state constitutional provisions or by a combination of such provisions and implementing legislation, which
together define the authority of the various courts within the system" Fleming James Jr., Geoffrey C.
Hazard Jr.+John Leubsdorf, Civil Procedure,S. 2.11, at 55 (5t"ed. 2001)
3. A geographic area within which political or judicial authority may be exercised. <the accused fled to
another jurisdiction>. 4. A political orjudicial subdivision within such an area <otherjurisdictions have
decided the issue differently>.
So the 30-day rule does not appear to be a jurisdictional matter.
ITEM 2
"A statement explaining: (A) how the decision being appealed violates the law; (B) or how the decision is
clearly erroneous; or (C) how the decision is arbitrary or capricious, or characterized by an abuse of
discretion or clearly unwarranted exercise of discretion"
Both (A) and (B) are relevant.
(A) Violation of law
The tower conflicts with the Hamakua Community Development Plan.
The tower is in the viewplanes of a number of homes.
In the Hamakua CDP Planning Area, applications for Use Permits for wind energy facilities and
telecommunications antennas/towers shall include viewshed and, as appropriate, line -of -sight analysis to
demonstrate how the request does not cause substantial, adverse impact to the community's character,
including open space, public views, and areas of natural and scenic beauty, and propose conditions to
mitigate scenic impacts. (HCC 25-2-60 & 64)
Hdmdkua Community Development Plan, p. 63, underlines added
• The location has some historical value.
Plan approval and related conditions shall consider ... archeological and historic sites, and historic
buildings when assuring that ... natural and manmade features of community value are preserved. (HCC
25-2-77(a) & 76)
Hdmdkua Community Development Plan, p. 63, underlines added
The only historic property remaining within the project parcel is the 1920 agriculutural office. The building
retains its historic integrity and appears to meet, at the local level, Criteria A and C for listing in the
National Register of Historic Places. However, it is not currently listed and is not considered a significant
property.
January 21, 2016 letter from Nicole Okino, Bureau Veritas North America, 841 Bishop St., suite 1100,
Honolulu, Hawai'i 96813, to Lucas Mead of Panning Department, from Final Plan Approval PLA-17-
001481, January 19, 2018, underlines added
The tower conflicts with the 2005 County General Plan.
NATURAL BEAUTY ...7.2 GOALS ... (b) Protect scenic vistas and view planes from becoming obstructed
(h) Protect the views of areas endowed with natural beauty by carefully considering the effects of
proposed construction during all land use reviews.
(i) Do not allow incompatible construction in areas of natural beauty.
2005 General Plan, p. 7-3
PUBLIC UTILITIES ... 11.3 TELECOMMUNICATIONS
11.3.3 Standard (a) In the development and placement of telephone facilities, such as lines,
telecommunications and cellular towers, poles, and substations, the design of the facilities shall consider
the existing environment, and scenic view and vistas shall be considered and preserved where possible.
2005 General Plan, p. 11-13
LAND USE ... 14.3 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT..14.3.3 Policies... (f) The development of commercial
facilities should be designed to fit into the locale with minimal intrusion while providing the desired
services. Appropriate infrastructure and design concerns shall be incorporated into the review of such
developments.
2005 General Plan, p. 14-25
(B) Erroneous decision
The decision is clearly erroneous, because the Final Plan Approval, Condition #4, says "Applicant to comply
with all conditions stated in Use Permit 2022-000004 (PL-USE-2022-000004).
The 2022 Permit
• is for Renegade Towers, not the Verizon tower
• is for 3331 Kaumana Drive, not the 27-256 Old Mamalahoa Highway cited in the Final Plan
Approval.
• requires a 180-foot tower. The Final Plan Approval requires 60 feet
• requires a pine tree design. The drawings submitted for PL-PLA-2024-000347 show a palm tree
And Final Plan Condition #5 appears to require access to Kaumana Drive, several miles from Papa'il<ou.
Staff person Norren Kato told Cory Harden that actually no permit was required for the Papa'il<ou tower,
when Cory visited Planning on September 11, 2026. It is unclear whether, or how, this was communicated
to Verizon, what law or regulation was being followed, and what relevant records exist.
ITEM 3
"A copy of the Director's decision being appealed"
THIS IS ATTACHED.
I appreciate the volunteer service of the Board of Appeals members and appreciate the consideration
given to my appeal.
Sincerely,
Patrick Ferreira
cc.
Noah Grodzin, Real Estate Wireless
Verizon Wireless
255 Kahelu Avenue
Mililani, Hawai'I 96789
Paul Alston
Olson Trust
P.O. Box 446
Papa'ikou, Hawaii 96781
Jeff Darrow, Director
Planning Department
101 Pauahi St.
Hilo, Hawai'I 96720
C. Kimo Alameda, PH.D.
Mayor
William V. Brilhante Jr.
Managing Director
West Hawaii Office
74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Hwy
Kailua-Kona, Hawaii 96740
Phone (808) 323-4770
Fax (808) 327-3563
December 16, 2024
County of Hawaii
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Noah Grodzin, Real Estate Wireless
Verizon Wireless
255 Kahelu Avenue
Mililani, HI 96789
Email: noah.grodzin(a,verizonwireless.com
Dear Noah:
Jeffrey W. Darrow
Acting Director
Michelle S. Ahn
Acting Deputy Director
East Hawaii Office
101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3
Hilo, Hawaii 96720
Phone (808) 961-8288
Fax (808) 961-8742
SUBJECT: Application: FINAL PLAN APPROVAL (PL-PLA-2024-000347)
TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITY
Applicant: VERIZON WIRELESS (NOAH GRODZIN)
TMK: (3) 2-7-033:019, South Hilo, Hawaii
We have reviewed the above -described plans for the proposed Telecommunication Facility pursuant to
FINAL PLAN APPROVAL. Enclosed is a copy of the FINAL PLAN APPROVAL for your files.
Please be aware of the conditions of approval that are part of this FINAL PLAN APPROVAL for the
proposed project. These conditions listed on pages 2-3 of the FINAL PLAN APPROVAL document
must be complied with prior to the operation of the new Telecommunication Facility.
For your information, all accessible parking spaces shall comply with County, State, and Federal
standards and requirements. Please find the most current requirements at the Disability and
Communication Access Board website at http://health.hawaii.gov/dcab/parking, or visit our website for
helpful information at hgps://www.planning.hawaiicounty.gov/resources/resources-references.
Should you have any questions, please feel welcome to contact Larry Nakayama of the Planning
Department at (808)961-8149 or via email at Lance akayamaahawaiicoun ov.
Sincerely,
e7Fre� ky Dgwow
Je4reyW Darrow (Dec 21, 2024 09:47 HST)
JEFFREY W. DARROW
Acting Planning Director
www.planning.hawaiicountV.gov Hawaii County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer planning@hawaiicounty.gov
Noah Grodzin
Verizon Wireless
PL-PLA-2024-000347
December 16, 2024
Page 2
LHN:ta
\\coh0l\planning\public\Admin Permits Division\Plan Approvals\2\PL-PLA-2024-000347 Verizon Wireless TMK 270330190000 letter.doc\
Enclosure: PL-PLA-2024-000347 Form
cc: danette(&martinpacific.com
COUNTY OF HAWAI`I PLANNING DEPARTMENT
FINAL
PLAN APPROVAL
PL-PLA-2024-000347
APPLICANT/AGENT:
DATE APPROVED:
Verizon Wireless / Danette Martin
December 16, 2024
LOCATION:
TAX MAP KEY:
27-256 Old Mamalahoa Hwy., Papaikou, HI
(3) 2-7-033:019
PARCEL AREA/PROJECT AREA:
ZONE:
37,635.84 sq, ft, (0.864Acres)/520 sq. ft.
Commercial Village-10,000 sq. ft. (CV-10)
PROPOSED USE:
Telecommunication Facility
As Shown on Plans
Comments
Front Yard: (Mamalahoa Highway)
Tower:
170' -0"
OK. 20' -0" Minimum required.
Equipment Shelter:
120' -0"
None required.
Note: Section 15-4-40. (d) In CV and CG
districts, where the building site is bounded by
two or more streets, a minimum of one front
yard shall be require. Its location shall be
determined by taking into account the
relationship and impact of the development to
the adjoining streets.
Front Yard: (Waipahi
Road)
Tower:
90' -0"
OK. 14' -0" Minimum required.
Equipment Shelter:
17' -0"
15' -0" Minimum required.
Side Yard: (South)
Tower:
30' -0"
OK. 14' -0" Minimum required.
Equipment Shelter:
18' -0"
None Required (Abuts CV zoned District)
Side Yard: (East)
OK.
Tower:
27' -0"
14' -0" Minimum required.
Equipment Shelter:
18' -0"
None Required (Abuts CV zoned District)
Note: Section 25-4-12 (a) (1) Freestanding
antennas and towers shall be setback from
every five feet of antenna height.
Hawai'i County is an equal opportunity provider and employer
Danette Martin
Final Plan Approval for TMK: (3) 2-7-0033:019
PL-PLA-2024-000347
December 16, 2024
As Shown on Plans
Comments
Height of Structure:
Tower: 60' -0"
Equipment Shelter: 14' -0"
OK.
500 feet maximum allowed.
45 feet maximum allowed.
Access to parking: Existing paved driveway off
Waipahi Road.
OK.
Must comply with the requirements of the
Department of Public Works
Off -Street Parking: None shown.
OK.
None required; unmanned facility.
Loading and
Unloading Space: None shown.
OK.
None required; unmanned facility.
Density Not applicable.
OK
Fencing and Walls:
OK.
Material: Chain Link
Height: 6 feet.
Location Perimeter of compound.
Landscaping: See Sheet L1.0
OK.
See condition 1.
Others: Tax Clearance
Structural Engineer Certification
FAA Certification
FCC Registration
OK.
OK.
OK.
OK.
Per Real Property Tax Office Records.
Structural Certification Plan (Sheet S 1).
(Vectors Engineers -Wells L. Holmes -
Licensed Professional Engineer)
See Air Space Report dated 1/12/22.
See Plan Approval Transmittal Letter.
Site Drainage Plan:
OK.
Approved October 9, 2024.
Special Management Area: No
OK.
Project is not within the County's Special
Management Area (SMA).
Related Planning Approvals:
PLA-17-001481
OK.
Issued on January 19, 2018
Pending Violations: None.
OK.
HRS-Chapter 343: Not applicable.
OK.
DLNR-SHPD Clearance: N/A
OK.
Airport Hazards: N/A
OK.
Outside of 5-mile radius.
Danette Martin
Final Plan Approval for TMK: (3) 2-7-0033:019
PL-PLA-2024-000347
December 16, 2024
Conditions of Approval:
Prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy, approved landscape planting and improvements shall be
established per approved landscape plan and in a manner consistent with the Standards of Rule 17
Landscaping Requirements. Plants shall be maintained in a manner conducive to their health and growth.
2. Prior to approval of a Certificate of Occupancy (C.O.), the Planning Department may inspect the subject
property to verify compliance with the approved plans. A C.O. shall not be approved where the buildings,
site improvements, landscaping or use plans are found by the director to be inconsistent with the submittals
for which the Final Plan Approval is issued.
3. No modification to the plans without prior written approval. All work shown on the development plan
covered by this Final Plan Approval shall be completed. No additions, substitutions, or alterations to the
site parking, landscaping, or building design plans covered by the Final Plan Approval, shall be made
without prior written approval of such changes by the Planning Department. A written request for approval
of such changes shall be submitted and include scaled plan sheets clearly specifying all proposed changes.
Upon assessing the requested changes, the director may approve or deny the requested changes or require a
new, complete application for Plan Approval where the director finds the changes to be substantial.
4. Applicant to comply with all conditions stated in Use Permit 2022-000004 (PL-USE-2022-000004).
5. The applicant shall install a driveway access apron in conformance with Chapter 22, County Streets, of the
Hawaii County Code. Project Access to Kaumana Drive, including the provision of adequate sight
distances, shall meet with the approval of the Department of Public Works — Engineering Division.
6. Applicant shall comply with all other applicable laws, rules, regulations and requirements of Hawaii
County.
72 P y W. ayi-ow
Jeffrey Darrow (Dec 21, 2024 09:47 HST)
JEFFREY W. DARROW
Acting Planning Director
LHN: to
\\coh01\planning\public\Admin Permits Division\Plan Approvals\2\PL-PLA-2024-000347 LLC TMK 270330190000 form.doc