Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-06-20 Leeward Exh A - Vipassana LEEWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAI‘I HEARING TRANSCRIPT JUNE 20, 2013 VIPASSANA HAWAI‘I (SPP 1091) A regularly advertised hearing on the application of was called to order at 9:47 a.m. in the West Hawai‘i Civic Center, Community Center, Building G, 74- 5044 Ane Keohokālole Highway, Kailua-Kona, Hawai‘i, with Chair Geraldine Giffin presiding. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Geraldine Giffin, Brandi Beaudet, Thomas Hickcox and Thomas Whittemore ABSENT AND EXCUSED: Richard Nelson, III ALSO PRESENT: Duane Kanuha (Planning Director), Ivan Torigoe (Deputy Corporation Counsel), Daryn Arai (Planning Program Manager), Jeff Darrow (Planner) and Noriko Sauer (Commission Secretary) And approximately twelve people from the public in attendance. APPLICANT: VIPASSANA HAWAI‘I (SPP 1091) Amendment to Condition No. 2 (establish meditation center) of Special Permit No. 1091, which allowed the establishment of the Hawai‘i Insight Meditation Center on 15 acres of land situated in the State Land Use Agricultural District. The project area is approximately 2,000 feet makai of Akoni Pule Highway and adjacent to (west of) Halawa Gulch, Napapa‘a, North Kohala, Hawai‘i, TMK: 5-3-007: Portion of 043 (formerly portion of 001). GIFFIN: If the members of the public would please excuse us for just a minute because, as you can see, we just received some information that I think it’s best that we read first. Commissioners and members of the public, we are now on Agenda Item No. 2. It is an amendment to a condition, presented by Vipassana Hawai‘i. And it is an amendment to a former special permit that they, the number was 1091, and what they are asking for is an amendment to Condition No. 2. Daryn? ARAI: Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. If I may direct your attention to the presentation screen. I wanted to first orient the Commission as to the location of this project site. We are looking at the District of North Kohala. This line, red line running to the left and right of the screen is the Akoni Pule Highway, and this particular area is the Kapa‘au area, and then this is the Halawa area in this particular location. As you may see, the project site here is outlined in black. It is situated on lands designated Agricultural, minimum lot size 20 acres by the County, as well as Agricultural by the state Land Use Commission. Zooming closer in, to give you a further sense of orientation, this yellow area here represent some residentially zoned lands, and right in this corner here on the bend of Akoni Pule Highway is the Wo On Store; so that hopefully will give you a really good point of reference as to where this project site is located. As you can see, it’s located on the makai side of the Akoni Pule Highway, roughly 1,800 to 2,000 feet makai of the highway itself. Access to the property is from the highway onto the road, which is basically an extension of Pratt Road that leads 1 EXHIBIT A down to Kapanaia Bay, which is located here off to your right. The project site and its access is located directly off the extension of Pratt Road. This is a depiction of the General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide Map. As you can see, the project site is situated within an area designated for intensive agricultural uses. This is an aerial photo of the property. Again, as you can see, it’s outlined in black. The property itself is about 82 acres in size. The project site will accommodate, or occupy 15 acres, no more than 15 acres of land. Therefore, the Planning Commission has jurisdiction over the special permit; it will not go on further to the state Land Use Commission for disposition. The applicant today is requesting a five-year extension of time to comply with Condition No. 2 of the special permit, which allowed for the establishment of the Hawai‘i Insight Meditation Center on 15 acres of land. Condition No. 2, and I’m going to summarize, requires that the center itself be established within five years from the effective date of the permit. The permit itself was originally approved back in December of 2000. And as you can see, the proposed project would include a meditation hall complex, administration building, kitchen and dining room facility, maintenance facility, forty guest cottages with four bathrooms, residence halls, family housing and general purpose building, tent platforms, and teacher housing. However, when this permit was originally approved in 2000, there was litigation regarding the special permit application, and the litigation went on for a number of years. And since that time, in addition to the litigation, there has been a downturn in the global economy, which has also affected this particular project and their ability to establish the center in the time frame as originally required by the Planning Commission. But due to the litigation, the Planning Director at the very bottom did agree to toll the performance time period with a new completion deadline of July 1, 2013. And again, quickly, reasons for the request is due to the delays incurred by the court process, as well as the consolidation of the surrounding land area that encompass about 690 acres of land that ultimately resulted in the creation of this 82-acre project site, or property I should say; the global recession also having effect on the applicant’s ability to perform as required by the special permit, and decrease in capital pledges by its donors. As part of our recent plan approval that was issued in the year 2000, the applicant has downscaled the overall scope of the project, and I can generally represent, it’s about a third of the original size. The original project envisioned accommodating up to a maximum of 100 guests; the number has now been reduced to accommodate approximately 40 guests. The applicant is currently working to secure a conservation easement to preserve prime agricultural land, which is awaiting the Governor’s approval. And as I mentioned, this 15-acre project site is within a much larger 82-acre parcel. This is a site plan of the project site. When the applicant and its representatives are brought forth before the Commission, any questions regarding the location of specific structures throughout the project site may be directed at them. But, basically, the top of the map represents the makai side of the project site. Akoni Pule Highway is off on the bottom of the site plan. Access shown here on the bottom right is where it connects to Pratt Road, which then leads to the highway. And this is a general floor plan for the meditation hall. The Planning Director is recommending approval of the applicant’s request for an additional five years in which to complete construction of this proposed meditation center. So with that, I’m sorry, we have received a number of correspondences from the community, and those copies of which have provided to you. We just received communication today, and which the Commission had the 2 EXHIBIT A opportunity to review just before proceeding with this application. I should also note that in your background report on Page 3, if you look at Item No. 6, it talks about the subject property, the 15- acre project site being situated 2,000 feet makai of the highway within a larger 692-acre parcel; that was the original size of the parcel prior to it being consolidated and resubdivided into the current 82-acre project site. So it’s best to amend that particular number; instead of 692, change it to reflect a size of 81.9 acres. So with that, I stand ready to answer any questions regarding this request by Vipassana Hawai‘i. GIFFIN: Thank you, Daryn. If you hang on just for one minute. I wanted to look at Item No. 18 on Page 4, which were the other comments from the public. And I know it was included in here because I read it – oh, here it is. Okay, it’s way in the back before the goldenrod recommendation. ARAI: Right. Before the, yes, correct. GIFFIN: Right? Okay. So if I understand you correctly, there were three memos from the public: One from Linda Elliott, another one from Norm Piianaia, and also this last one, which we received this morning, from Beth Thoma Robinson. ARAI: That is correct. GIFFIN: Okay. ARAI: And I believe Commissioner Beaudet had a question as well. GIFFIN: Okay. Brandi? BEAUDET: Just a small question on the access to the developable area of the property. I noticed on the photo slide that there was a, which side of the ravine is the actual developable area? And how do they cross the ravine, if it’s on the flat side? So where exactly are we developing? ARAI: This is, the heavily treed area is where Halawa Gulch is situated. The access is right about in this particular location, and then it will come up into the project site, and then the developable area is somewhere in this particular vicinity. BEAUDET: Oh okay, but I thought you said access was coming down the other road, that’s why. ARAI: This road here? BEAUDET: Yeah. ARAI: No, access off the highway is off of this road that goes to Kapanaia Bay, and then it takes a left onto Pratt Road, which then leads to the driveway that enters the project site. BEAUDET: Thank you. GIFFIN: Any other questions? Tom. WHITTEMORE: Just out of curiosity on this, excuse me, the recommendation that’s coming from the director now is with the time extension. But is part of the approval process here that, they are 3 EXHIBIT A talking about downsizing from originally 100 guests to 40 guests, is that part of the recommendation that would be taking place? So would it be another, would it be a different project than was originally approved? ARAI: At this point, no. We are not considering the reduction in the scope of the project as permitted by the special permit. The applicant has the luxury of opportunity to reduce the scope of the project but still remaining compliant with the overall terms of the special permit that was granted. Now, if the applicant was proposing something that expanded upon the scope of the original use, then that definitely will have to be considered by the Planning Commission. Think about it this way: the special permit defines the outer parameters of what the Commission allowed back in 2000. If you don’t exceed those parameters, then you can downsize generally at will as long as you don’t exceed the original scope. GIFFIN: Good. Any other questions? Director? KANUHA: Daryn, maybe you can also clarify what happened with the approval of the plan approval, and how they indicated some reduction in the density. ARAI: Thank you, Mr. Director. In 2011 plans reflecting the one-third scale concept were submitted to the Planning Department, and the Planning Department did issue final plan approval, at the same time declaring that the reduced scope of the project remain in compliance with the overall special permit. So the plan approval basically confirmed the continuing conformance of the reduced project with the overall scope of the special permit. GIFFIN: Any other questions of Daryn? Hearing none, thanks, Daryn. Will the applicant or representative of the application please come forward. Good morning. YEH: Good morning. GIFFIN: Will you please raise your right hands. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Leeward Hawai‘i County Planning Commission? YEH: I do. GIFFIN: Beginning with you, Tom, will you please state your name and your position. YEH: Thank you. My name is Thomas Yeh. I’m attorney representing Vipassana Hawai‘i, the applicant. And then on my right is Sophia Schweitzer, Veronica Sophia Schweitzer; she is the general manager of Vipassana. And she is here primarily to answer questions, if they do come up. GIFFIN: Great. Thank you for coming. Tom, did you want to give some general comments? YEH: Yeah, I think it would just be helpful, you know, just from a background standpoint for the Commission to understand, you know, who Vipassana is and what happened between 2000 and now, which is a long time in some respects, but yet considering some of the things that have transpired basically not. First of all, Madam Chairman and Members of the Commission, thank you for considering this application. I did want to thank staff for their very thorough background report and 4 EXHIBIT A recommendation. You know, Vipassana Hawai‘i is a project that actually my former partner, Ben Tsukazaki, had worked on in 2000, and I kind of inherited so to speak. Their mission statement really is to support the teachings of classical Buddhism to make them relevant to the issues of our day, and to give them roots through the land and stewardship. And I think the mission statement really has been fleshed out in terms of what Vipassana has done in the last ten or so years. They do own some of the other property that’s located makai where you see. You know, these resources and the location are really particularly unique. And if you are familiar with the area, it’s a very beautiful location. It includes some shoreline lands as well. And so their goal is really not only to undertake, you know, working in the meditation center that we’ve discussed, but also to kind of protect the remaining resources. And how are they really doing that in terms of creating a unique meditation center that’s conducive to the environment, compatible with what they want to do? There was some discussion that there is a conservation plan that they’ve already obtained approval from the Natural Resource Conservation Service, that requires them to do management techniques that preserves soil, eliminates or prevents erosion, results in some replanting of natural vegetation. So they’ve got that approval. They also have recently received approval actually from the Governor to receive funding that will assist in creating a conservation easement for this and their surrounding lands, which requires them basically to limit their development of the property to no more than two percent of the lands that they have available. They also have, are in the process of working out a public access easement, grant of easement to the County for lateral shoreline access for their shoreline lands. You can reach those lands from either the Kohala Lighthouse or from the Kapanaia Road. So if you take a look at what they’ve done and what they are proposing to do, they are really very unique in terms of their being able to actually do a sustainable management plan. Now, you know, all these efforts really do take time from dealing with the various agencies and working out the development plan. They do also, as part of their retreat activities, propose to maintain much of the agricultural component for the parcel that you are taking a look at. So the retreat activities will actually include participation by the participants in doing agricultural activities as part of their program. So that, you know, essentially retains the character of the land, allows them to do their retreat facilities, and has a combined approach that’s pretty sustainable. I was just going to mention also that, yes, I mean, we looked at the issue also in terms of what the previous plans in 2000 had proposed. And I think the Planning Department is, you know, spot-on in terms of saying, you know, if there is a need for flexibility, it’s there currently; because of, you know, the economy and some of the scale-down issues, they are looking at a smaller plan and still consistent because it has a major components of what was there before. But, you know, having the flexibility is a good thing. But if there are any other questions, we are certainly open to entertain those. GIFFIN: Commissioners, any questions of Tom Yeh? Hearing none, or, ma’am, the woman who, I’m sorry, your name is? SCHWEITZER: Sophia Veronica. GIFFIN: You want to speak into the mike. SCHWEITZER: Yes, thank you. Thank you, Chair. Sophia Veronica Schweitzer. 5 EXHIBIT A GIFFIN: Okay, I’m going to call you Sophia. Any questions of Sophia? Hearing none, thank you. There are members of the public who have signed up to testify this morning, and so if I may ask you two to please step back so that we have enough chairs. YEH: Thank you. GIFFIN: And I’ll call you back up, Tom. Thank you. Will Beth Thoma Robinson, William Bennington and Charles Oldfather please come forward. Okay. You have access to the microphones. Will you please raise your right hands. Thank you. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Leeward Hawai‘i County Planning Commission? TESTIFIERS: Yes, I do. GIFFIN: Thank you. Beginning with you, ma’am, your name? THOMA ROBINSON: My name is Beth Thoma Robinson, and I’m the one who interrupted you Commissioners and Director with the long written remarks; I figured I had a lot to say, and so it might be easier to give it to you in written form. GIFFIN: Thank you. Why don’t you begin your testimony. THOMA ROBINSON: Thank you. So my comments today are based in two different perspectives, one of which is that I am a licensed Realtor-Broker with Hawai‘i Life Real Estate. I practice in the Kohala area, and very specifically, I was engaged in 2009 by the Board of Vipassana Hawai‘i to sell a noncontiguous parcel of theirs. So I’ve been involved with them, and involved in sales in this area. I mentioned that there have been seven parcels sold between where the retreat center would be and Kapanaia Bay since that time, since 2009. I was at least one side of the transaction of five of those sales. So I do think I have a good sense of what neighbors think from a real estate perspective, because obviously one of the disclosable items is that there is a special permit for a retreat center by this organization on these adjacent lands. I can say without doubt that every buyer has viewed that as a positive thing. What they don’t want to see, because they are attracted to this area, which is incredibly beautiful, historic, full of cultural resources, recreational resources, what they really don’t want to see is another cookie cutter subdivision going in. So the fact that Vipassana Hawai‘i, as the staff mentioned, owns not only this 80-some acre parcel where the retreat center, but actually the lands that go all the way makai to the ocean, as well as to the west; this means we have a large landowner who is committed to stewardship rather than development. So I can say from a real estate perspective buyers and the community view that very positively. I’m also a member of the community, and have participated in our North Kohala CDP process in 2005 when we had our first meetings. So I know that there are at least three areas of the CDP that this touches on. Two of them are in fact addressed by the conservation easements that the attorney just referred to. It’s really rare to have an opportunity that you actually have a landowner giving up easements to make sure that these areas do get protected in terms of both agriculture and the shoreline public access on the shoreline parcel. The No. 1 priority area in the CDP for enhancing the public shoreline access is from Kapanaia Bay to Ainakea, and Vipassana Hawai‘i’s parcel is about a mile long stretch of that access. So this is really significant for our community. And then the final thing, which, you know, it’s kind of amazing the change in tenor between 2000 and now, but even between the time of the CDP and now with respect to the issue of overnight 6 EXHIBIT A accommodations on agriculturally zoned lands. And as a member of the Access Committee, those individuals who have been assisting Vipassana Hawai‘i in the creation of these easements, they are some of the same groups represented who were so opposed back in 2000 in principle. But what they’ve found is that in practice having a landowner whose values and goals are consistent with the values and goals of the community is actually real positive. So I’m available, if anyone has any questions of me from either of these perspectives. GIFFIN: Commissioners, any questions of the testifier? Thank you. Thank you for coming forward this morning. And then to your left, sir, your name? OLDFATHER: Good morning. GIFFIN: Good morning. OLDFATHER: My name is Charles Oldfather. I’m from Hāmākua. I was born and raised here on the Big Island and, in Honoka‘a, and I have a small landscaping company here. I’m the land manager for Vipassana Hawai‘i. I’ve been with them for about five years. And I just want to say a couple of things real quickly in support of this project. First of all, Steve and Michele are great people, and I’ve known them for a while now, and, you know, a lot of integrity, you know, they are really committed to sharing the teachings of Buddhism and Buddhist meditation, and it has been great to work with them. And the main thing I really like about this project, like – what’s your name again? THOMA ROBINSON: Beth. OLDFATHER: Like Beth was saying, you know, I mean, this is an incredibly beautiful place, beautiful coastline land, you know, you go down there and it’s amazing and beautiful just to be there. And what you see in this area is more and more gated communities popping up and private estates and, there is nothing wrong with that, you know, but if the whole coastline is nothing but gated communities and private estates, you know, it kind of leaves out the average people of Kohala. So this kind of access to open space is important to the community, I think. So it’s, you know, I think this project will make this land a resource to the community of Kohala in the way that it will be available for anybody who wants to come down and practice meditation and spend time on the land. And also, you know, I just want to say real quickly about meditation. There is all these studies coming out about all the benefits of meditation, you know; it’s scientifically proven now how meditation especially reduces stress, as we know stress is almost chronic these days in some of our communities. So to me that’s really important. It’s, like I said, scientifically proven to reduce stress and creates wellbeing and possibly even prevent disease through reducing stress, because stress is a component in a lot of diseases, is what people are finding now. So, yeah, I just, I really like this project, and I think it’ll be a good resource for the community of Kohala and for the Big Island and the State as well. And I hope you guys will support it. Thank you. GIFFIN: Thank you for coming. Commissioners, any question? Hearing none, hang on just a minute, I’m going to get your name. You must be William Bennington. BENNINGTON: Yes. 7 EXHIBIT A GIFFIN: You may begin your testimony. BENNINGTON: I, too, am speaking in support of Vipassana Hawai‘i and the retreat center. I have been a meditator for a couple of years now, and have known Steve and Michele for 25, and long have cherished the idea of having a silent retreat center on the island like this. Especially now that I’m in the era of Social Security, traveling off island to go to a retreat center on the mainland, and even now at this point even on O‘ahu, is becoming cost prohibitive. It’s, I know personally the level of their integrity. This is a teaching that is given freely. There is no cost for the teaching; it’s just for the minimum cost for accommodations while you are there. So I think it’s an asset not only to individuals but to the community and to the island as well. Thank you. GIFFIN: You’re welcome. Commissioners, any questions? Hearing none, thank you very much, the three of you. Could you please step back. And I’m going to ask Tom and Sophia to please come forward again. YEH: And Madam Chair? GIFFIN: Yes. YEH: I made a bit of a faux pas because, you know, some of the testimony in support have mentioned a couple of names, Steve and Michele, you know, so you may -. GIFFIN: Yes, that was going to be one of my questions. YEH: And actually, they are both here today. We have Michele McDonald, she is a secretary of Vipassana, and then Steve Smith is on the Board, and then we have Trent Cornell who is the president of the Board. And basically, Steve and Michele, as I understand, were very, very instrumental; this is kind of their brain child and their vision. And so they’ve been able to bring this into fruition as has been discussed. So, thank you. GIFFIN: Thank you. That was going to be one of my questions. But was there anything else, Tom, that you wanted to add? YEH: I don’t think so, unless there are any questions at this point. GIFFIN: Commissioners, any questions of the applicant? I have a question or two, Tom. Looking at the aerial photo then, and earlier, I can’t remember if that was one of the public testifiers or you in what you presented, if I wanted to access the bay, and it has a Hawaiian name, I cannot remember it, but -. YEH: Kapanaia. GIFFIN: Yeah. If I wanted to access the bay, do I have to trespass over said property or is that already established as public access? YEH: Yes. The mauka-makai access is, and Daryn is pointing it out, you enter off of the same main entrance off of Akoni Pule and then you run down, I think it’s a County, it’s a dirt road and is very passable, and then it runs you to Kapanaia – Point? 8 EXHIBIT A SCHWEITZER: Kapanaia Bay. YEH: Kapanaia Bay, and on the end of there actually is an area that has been designated where historically has been know as the family heiau of Kamehameha I. It’s somewhat in disarray, but it is protected by, you know, wooden fences and some signage out there that kind of lets people know the significance of that area. GIFFIN: Okay. So this public easement that you were talking about earlier that goes from the bay, I think, south, right? YEH: It goes, well, maybe west; it would go from Kapanaia Bay along the shoreline to the left, as you are looking at the map, towards -. GIFFIN: Okay, to the lighthouse, did you say? YEH: To the lighthouse, yeah, continuous trail. GIFFIN: So that’s public. YEH: That is already declared. There is a little bit of history; when the original subdivision was done, there was a requirement, there was a settlement agreement, there was a declaration of public access, which also contemplated negotiation of the specific grant of easement to the County, which is being worked on now, but notwithstanding that Vipassana already allows the public to laterally access the shoreline between those two locations. GIFFIN: Yes, but it’s not established officially as -. YEH: It is established from the standpoint that the declaration of public access easement has already been recorded. But the next step is to finalize the grant of easement, which then goes to the County Council for acceptance, and then the County takes over. But in the meantime the public does traverse along some pretty well defined trails in locations. GIFFIN: So is that part of the, what is the trail system that we have that goes around the whole island? YEH: Na Ala Hele? GIFFIN: Na Ala Hele, yes. YEH: I’m not sure if it has the designation, but it’s certainly intended to kind of supplement that access, yes. GIFFIN: Okay. Earlier you also spoke about a conservation easement that was granted to this applicant. Where on that map is it? YEH: Sophia? SCHWEITZER: Yes. Vipassana Hawai‘i is the owner of five lots, 254 acres. Like you see, where the meditation center is -. 9 EXHIBIT A GIFFIN: Yes, that’s in the black. SCHWEITZER: Yeah, it’s named Lot 4. Then makai of Lot 4, you will see Lots 2 and 3, Lot 2 being, yeah, that’s 2, right, and 3 is there, and then, no, I’m sorry, that’s Lot 3 where Tom is now, this is Lot 1 and that goes all the way along the shoreline to Kauhola, and then Lot 3 is over there, and then Lot 5. That’s 254 acres in total. That will all be receiving conservation easements. GIFFIN: So all of those lots that you just pointed out in its entirety will be affected by the conservation easement. SCHWEITZER: Yes. GIFFIN: Okay. So once again, who, Tom, who are the owners of this parcel? YEH: Vipassana Hawai‘i. GIFFIN: Okay, then who is the entity, Vipassana? Who are those people? YEH: Good question. GIFFIN: The Board? Is that the Board that you introduced us to? YEH: They are part of the Board that helps to operate that entity. It is a nonprofit entity and, that’s basically it, yeah, which owns the property, yes. GIFFIN: So, Vipassana, the applicant, they are the, it is the fee owner of all of this land. YEH: The fee owner, correct. Yes. SCHWEITZER: Yes. There is actually Lot 5, Michele can speak to Lot 5 maybe? Yeah, so it’s, oh, yeah. GIFFIN: Okay, thank you. So, if, for example, I’m a member of the public and I’d like to attend a meditation session, are you open for business right now? SCHWEITZER: No, we are not. GIFFIN: Okay, so you are not accepting any members of the public to use the facility and/or the property. SCHWEITZER: We actually do have people help on the land once in a while, like he said, Charles, he is a land manager. So we have people quietly help with some of the land’s management, farming; in that sense, yes, we do allow community members. GIFFIN: For a fee? SCHWEITZER: Not for a fee. No, we do not charge, no. 10 EXHIBIT A GIFFIN: Free. So they may, I may come, and if I deal with Charles and ask him if I can sit there and meditate for -. SCHWEITZER: Or you can ask me or Michele or, sure. GIFFIN: All right. Thank you. Any other questions, Commissioners? Okay, then, hang on just a minute, we did go on record earlier about the two other letters that we received in support of this application: one by Linda Elliott, the president and center director for the Hawai‘i Wildlife Center, and Norman Piianaia who did also write a letter in support. Okay. Hearing no other comments, Daryn, have I forgotten anything? How about you, Ivan? Did I forget anything? None? It’s just so that I guess the motion maker must be very clear about what the motion is, right, and the conditions, especially Condition No. 2. ARAI: Condition No. 2 and the revision made to the background report to make an adjustment to the acreage of the property. I think part of the confusion is that when, maybe it’s not confusion but, when the application was first presented to the Planning Commission in 2000, it was prior to the consolidation and resubdivision that occurred over the Surety lands. So the parent parcel was originally about 692 acres, I think it was. But subsequent to the approval of the special permit in 2000, not only was there the court litigation but there was also this ongoing consolidation and resubdivision action, which basically parceled out an 82-acre, 81.9-acre project site, which is now defined as the new Parcel – I can’t remember the parcel No. – the new Parcel No. 43. So maybe that’s why, where you could discuss the entire larger 692-acre parcel as part of the original request, now it’s actually a separate entity, so that’s why I asked the background report reflect that. GIFFIN: Yeah. Okay, so, Commissioners, I think what Daryn is referring to is Page No. 3 of the background report right under the Description of Property and Surrounding Area, No. 6. Subject Property, to be changed from 692 to 81.9, correct, Daryn? ARAI: Correct. GIFFIN: Okay. BEAUDET: Question. GIFFIN: Brandi. BEAUDET: Does the change to the background report need to be identified in the motion, though? GIFFIN: I think it would be better. BEAUDET: It’s administrative, though, right? ARAI: No, it should be made part of -. BEAUDET: Because the conditions remain the same regardless of the size of the subject property. ARAI: True, right, true. GIFFIN: But it’s a mistake in the background report. 11 EXHIBIT A ARAI: But I think it’s cleaner if you made that part of your motion because actually, accepting the background report and the recommendation to be included as part of the overall decision. It’s just cleaner. GIFFIN: Okay. So do I hear a motion? Thank you, Brandi. BEAUDET: I’d like to make a motion to move for the approval of Special Permit No. 1091 in its request for a five-year extension of time relating to Condition No. 2, along with the corrections as recommended by staff to the background report, Page 3, Paragraph 6, correcting the acreage of the subject parcel from 692 acres to 81.9. GIFFIN: Thank you. Do I hear a second? HICKCOX: Second. GIFFIN: It’s been moved by Commissioner Beaudet and seconded by Commissioner Hickcox that, hang on, the request for an extension of time to Permit No. 1091, along with specifically No. 2, Condition No. 2, found on Page 3 of our recommendation, and also in our background report Page 3, No. 6. Subject Property, be changed from 692 acres to 81.9 acres, be approved. Mr. Torigoe just asked if I should ask for questions. So, any questions? Or discussion? Thank you. No one would like to discuss this any further, Daryn. ARAI: Okay, thank you. GIFFIN: You’re welcome. ARAI: Okay, I’m calling the roll. Commissioner Beaudet? BEAUDET: Aye. ARAI: Commissioner Hickcox? HICKCOX: Aye. ARAI: Commissioner Whittemore? WHITTEMORE: Aye. ARAI: And Madam Chairwoman? GIFFIN: Aye. ARAI: Madam Chairwoman, the motion carries with four aye votes. GIFFIN: Thank you. Tom, you’ll be notified as usual in writing. YEH: Thank you very much. 12 EXHIBIT A GIFFIN: You’re very welcome. Nice meeting you. SCHWEITZER: Thank you. GIFFIN: You’re very welcome. The discussion ended at 10:30 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Noriko Sauer, Secretary Leeward Planning Commission 13 EXHIBIT A