Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-05-31 BDHRA Minutes BANYAN DRIVE HAWAII REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY COUNTY OF HAWAII MINUTES MAY 31, 2017 The Banyan Drive Hawaii Redevelopment Agency met at 2:02 p.m. in the County of Hawaii, Aupuni Center Conference Room, 101 Pauahi Street, Hilo, Hawaii, with Chairman Brian DeLima presiding. MEMBERS PRESENT: Brian DeLima and Sigmund Zane. ABSENT & EXCUSED: Mary Begier, Elmer Gorospe, and Barry Taniguchi. ALSO PRESENT: Michael Yee (Planning Director), Daryn Arai(Deputy Planning Director), Amy Self(Deputy Corporation Counsel for the Agency), Lucas Mead (Planner), Christian Kay (Planner), and Sarah Hata-Finley (Secretary). A quorum was not present with two members in attendance. DELIMA: Okay, good afternoon, everyone. I'd like to first thank Sig Zane for attending. Myself and Sig will be the only members present, so I'll call the meeting to order. It's shortly after 2 p.m. It's 2:02 p.m. This is the Banyan Drive Hawaii Redevelopment Agency meeting. While we only have two members present, that means that we do not have a quorum in order to conduct business, so under the rules of a public meeting, when you do not have quorum, you're still able to receive statements from the public, and you're also able to receive presentations by the Department. What occurs is that minutes are taken, and the verbatim minutes are then presented at the next meeting that's constituted, and at that time, we may take action based upon the input made here today. Of course at the subsequent duly noticed meeting where there is a quorum, additional public testimony could be presented, and deliberations would occur on any action items. However, today, we will not be deliberating. We will receive input and presentations. So, at this time, are there any statements from the public? Okay, seeing none, we'll move onto Business of Agency. STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC There were six members of the public in attendance. No statements were presented under this section of the agenda. BUSINESS OF AGENCY The agency took up the following at 2:04 p.m. with six members of the public in attendance. 1. Review and discussion regarding bills of the 2017 legislative session that involve or pertain to properties within the Banyan Drive redevelopment area. Pagel of 8 Banyan Drive Hawaii Redevelopment Agency May 31,2017 Minutes DELIMA: Review and discussion regarding bills of the 2017 legislative session that involve or pertain to properties within the Banyan Drive redevelopment area. MEAD: All right. So, first of all, I'd like to introduce our Planning Director. Michael Yee is with us today in attendance and so is our Deputy, Daryn Arai. Thank you for your attendance everyone. So, today DELIMA: —Maybe you could identify yourself for the record. MEAD: And, I'm Lucas Mead. I'm the planner right now for the BDHRA. All right, so today, again, we're in a unique situation where we don't have quorum so we are going to go through the agenda items for presentation from the Planning Department side, and if anyone of the agency, if you do have clarifying questions—feel free to ask clarifying questions regarding the material. Again, no deliberation or discussion regarding those items. In terms of the agenda, since we do not have quorum, too, under Administration Matters will be moved to the next meeting. All right, so Agenda Item No. 1, as we covered before in the meeting in February, there were eight bills that were brought before the Legislative Session, the 2017 Legislative Session. They were paired, both of them entered a House and a Senate version of the bill so there was essentially four topics that were moved forward in this Session. The first one HB, House Bill 575 and its companion, Senate Bill 274, allowed BLNR or proposed to allow BLNR to extend commercial, hotel, resort, and industrial leases within the Banyan Drive and Kanoelehua Industrial if substantial, commitment to make substantial improvements were made by the lessee, and amended their statute, the State land lease statute which is HRS, Hawaii Revised Statutes, Chapter 171. The next pair that was entered was House Bill 1469 and its companion Senate Bill 1185. Again, that proposed an amendment to Chapter, HRS Chapter 171. It created a framework for DLNR to lead planning committees and identify development districts and also to appropriate funds for the redevelopment actions. Again, that also amended HRS, Chapter 171, which pertains to the State land lease. HB 1310, and its companion, Senate Bill 1184, were, it was brought in and actually is based upon the legislation that would have been proposed in the, in the bills right above it. It proposed to establish a Waiakea Development District as that redevelopment district proposed by House Bill 1469. It would have formed a planning committee and also identify the specific revolving fund where monies would go through to support that planning committee and the redevelopment actions. And, lastly, the one that is different, was different, is House Bill 1479, and its companion, Senate Bill 1292, and that proposed the Hilo Community Economic District which is identified under Hawaii Revised Statutes 206E, so it's different than the other, the other six bills. And, it placed the management of those properties under the jurisdiction of the Hawaii Community Page 2 of 8 Banyan Drive Hawaii Redevelopment Agency May 31,2017 Minutes Development Authority, the HCDA. HCDA, as we mentioned before, has redevelopment authorities in Kaka`ako, He`eia, and Kalaeloa. And, it also established funding for that district. So, in the horse race that was a legislative session, everything in the house bill—the house bill seemed to move forward. Again, the Legislative Session ran from January to May, so it just ended here recently. And, you can see here, this is just a graphic of those paired bills there. Five seven five is the only bill that actually made it through both its House and Senate counterparts and made it through committee or conference and actually was approved by the Leg. Fourteen sixty-nine, which is the one DLNR redevelopment, it kind of swallowed the Waiakea one here under 1310. It went forward, and it made it through both the House and Senate sides, but did not make it out of the committee. And, lastly, the 1292, which is the HCDA and its 1479, it again, it made it through its House and Senate sides and—and also got, didn't leave that, didn't get out of conference, I believe. Sorry, not committee. Didn't get out of the, out of conference. So, in terms of this Session, HB 575 or the amended version of HB 575, which we'll talk about in the next slide, is the only thing that made it through. So, technically, those other bills are not alive in this Session. However, there's, we're in this kind of unique situation where we're in the biennium which means that bills that aren't passed this Session are still alive and can and will carry over to the 2018 Session. The slate will be wiped clean after 2018, but the bills do, are still—they do not have to be reintroduced. They are still alive in 2018. They have to go through their same committees and everything that they were initially assigned to, but they could be resurrected here in the next Session. So, the outcome of it all, so as originally proposed, HB 575 again amended, was proposed to amend 171 to allow BLNR to extend commercial, hotel, resort, and industrial leases within Banyan Drive and Kanoelehua when commitment for substantial improvements was made. In this situation, how it, it went through both a House drafts and Senate drafts and then a conference draft. So, the way it was passed by the Legislature, it amends Chapter 171 to allow the lessees of State lands classified as commercial or industrial with less than ten years left on their lease to request an interest in re-leasing or new lease negotiations with BLNR. It allows BLNR to extend school or government leases with exceptions beyond the 65-year limit that's identified in HRS 171 without going to public auction. So, that is what, how 575 passed the Legislature. Right now, it's on the Governor's desk. Final approval, the Governor's signature or a veto, is—the deadline for that is July 1 lth. So, that action, still is a little time left on that action for the Governor to make his decision. In terms of impact on BDHRA or the redevelopment properties, we don't really identify any. In our review, simply because it was limited to the commercial and industrial leases so that may not have as large of an impact on or may not have an impact on the BDHRA's redevelopment area. And, that is the summary of the 2017 Legislation and where it is and where some of those bills got left off, and if there's any clarifying questions, I can offer, or if there's anything to clarify, I can offer. I'm happy to do so, but that is what we have for Agenda Item No. 1. Page 3 of 8 Banyan Drive Hawaii Redevelopment Agency May 31,2017 Minutes ZANE: I'm good. DELIMA: Thank you. You can move to Number 2. The Agency took up the following at 2:13 p.m. with eight members of the public in attendance. 2. Discussion regarding the Planning Department's continued support of the BDHRA, resources and opportunities available to the BDHRA in the upcoming fiscal year, and BDHRA efforts and direction in the upcoming fiscal year. MEAD: So, regarding Agenda Item No. 2, so this is a discussion regarding the Planning Department's continued support of the BDHRA, resources and opportunities available to the BDHRA in the upcoming fiscal year and BDHRA efforts and direction in the upcoming fiscal. So, in this case, what went through at the State, there was no direct allocation of State funds or support for, to the BDHRA for the fiscal year. There is no—since the redevelopment districts under, under either BLNR or the HCDA did not go through, there was no real allocation that, that could have went towards that type of effort. However, additional discussions from, from the agency with DLNR can identify indirect support for, for some collaborative efforts on behalf of both the State and the Agency here. We do have an MOU saying we will work together towards these efforts, and the DLNR has produced several reports in the past that the BDHRA has seen so there may be some collaborative ways to work there. In terms of funding, we are uncertain with County funding for the Fiscal Year 2018. The Planning Department did propose a comprehensive budget for the BDHRA to function independently. The Planning Department initially was to support BDHRA efforts for the first year till they were funded in, up on functioning by themselves. The budget that we were proposing included staff, supplies, and what we identified as the next step which was the environmental studies to do, to execute or to move forward a Master Plan for the redevelopment area. However, with the County-wide budgetary constraints right now, there is, the funding did not make it through. However, it is worth noting that the funding has to be approved by the Council so there may be—there may be something that comes through eventually. If there is limited funding or if we do—if the BDHRA agency is able to get some funding, there are actions that are, you know, outside of a Master Plan which can move the BDHRA goals forward. Some of that money could be used towards less, you know, lesser, less expensive efforts such as, maybe as staff support; some sort of studies for the environmental assessment or the EIS that we see or that we identify as being a step towards a Master Plan; implementation of some of the recommendations from Blue Zones; design on construction of entry features. There's kind of several options there that the BDHRA could entertain if there is funding that is allocated. The limited County funding could be used in collaboration for matching to accomplish other BDHRA goals as well. Another resource, of course, is the Planning's continued support of BDHRA. While we were supposed to sunset our support of BDHRA as kind of the support staff for the Agency, if the Page 4 of 8 Banyan Drive Hawaii Redevelopment Agency May 31,2017 Minutes Agency does not receive the funding for staff, the Planning Department will continue to provide staff and support for the BDHRA and their efforts. And, that kind of leads us to maybe what the roles of the BDHRA will be in the upcoming fiscal year. You know, in terms of leadership, we identified the next step is moving forward a Master Plan for the redevelopment of the Banyan Drive area. However, that Master Plan, what we've identified as the next step being environmental assessments or environmental impact statement, it does require some level of funding. Another option for BDHRA's role in the upcoming would be something like engagement where we continue to have deeper communication with the leadership which includes DLNR, the County, the lessees of the parcels within the BDHRA area, and also take an active role in commenting or producing 2018 legislation. This, the benefits here are, of course, minimal funding is required to do it. It does require time on behalf of the Agency and staff And, you know, we can start to figure out how BDHRA and our roles can develop in collaboration with these other, with other parties. And, lastly, advocacy which the Planning Department has been doing with the BDHRA, and that is really commenting on actions within the redevelopment area even though there's no Master Plan currently there. And, this, you know, is the most minimal of time commitments that we've identified, but it's an action that we currently do and what we continue to do. Essentially, identifying or commenting upon actions within the redevelopment area as they pertain to what the BDHRA has done so far. And, with that, that kind of concludes the County's or our side here on, on what this 2017, what the funding for BDHRA and what their possible roles for 2017, or I'm sorry, 2018 would be. And, I'm happy to, we have again the Planning Director, and we have our—yeah, we have our Planning Director is here if we need further clarification or anything like that. DELIMA: We'd like to recognize Representative Richard Onishi who came in attendance. You want to make any statements, Richard? ONISHI (from audience): No, I'm good for now. DELIMA: Okay. ONISHI (from audience): Sorry, I'm late. DELIMA: No, no problem. If you could go back to the listing of—the one before that. Okay, so, what you didn't mention there is the, and maybe the Planning Director could comment about the General Plan amendments for the Banyan Drive, whether the Director intends to initiate any amendments to implement the plan that was adopted. SELF: It's not an agenda item. So, this is just for purposes of giving a presentation. DELIMA: Okay, so, the discussion regarding Planning Department's continued support, resources, and opportunities available by the, in the upcoming fiscal year and efforts and direction in upcoming fiscal year, so one of the directions and actions for the upcoming fiscal Page 5 of 8 Banyan Drive Hawaii Redevelopment Agency May 31,2017 Minutes year is whether or not the General Plan amendments to implement the Master Plan is going to be initiated by the Department because when you look at resources and Planning's continued support of the Agency, I'm inquiring whether or not the Department is planning to initiate General Plan amendments. So, I think under this agenda item that can be asked. We're not going to take action today, but I think that language of that agenda item is covered. YEE: Okay. I don't know at this point in time exactly what kind of amendments I would be looking at. DELIMA: Okay. YEE: I do know from the aspect that the work of, of this Agency—you know, you've done some work, and it was good work. And, so if there are things there that should float up to the General Plan, it would make sense to take a look at that. Just because there's no funding or anything, I wouldn't just throw away the work that you've done and the conceptual things that you have created to this point. DELIMA: Because there are some General Plan amendment require—the General Plan would have to be amended to implement some of the proposals in the action. And, the other, the other thing I think that we could include as an effort and direction in the upcoming year is to determine whether the new Planning Director and the new administration would want to propose refinements or changes to the plan that was adopted because there may be different perspectives. People may have been able to chew on the plan and come up with other ideas and suggestions. I was at a meeting where there was a discussion about the fact that in the Banyan Drive area, peninsula, although we have beach parks, Coconut Island, there are no facilities for little children to play. There's no playground. And, there are no other, there are no activities for teenagers or older children. So,perhaps present landowners may want to tweak the plan that we had proposed, and then there were some other discussions about the use of the golf course. So, I think one of the opportunities in this upcoming fiscal year is that we not get totally weighted to what was adopted but we open minded to new insights or suggestions from the general public, the leaseholders, the owners of particular parcels and, you know, the Department and other planners. So, I think that would be a good opportunity. YEE: So, right now, we're in the part of the General Plan update where we're going out to a lot, to the CDP action committees and working with them on feedback on General Plan changes. Given that there's not a CDP for Hilo, you know, we're figuring out how to solicit that, the comments from Hilo regarding the changes that need to float up. And, so, we're in the process of that. Note that the General Plan update, you know you know, we're targeting probably like Spring of 2018, so we're right in the right point of time to start engaging with the community to be able to kind of float ideas up. DELIMA: And, I think that would fit into the limited amount of money that can be funded within the budget for the, you know, Blue Zone recommendations, so we can understand what are the Blue Zone recommendations, you know. What exactly would a cultural study involve, and perhaps a further discussion about other opportunities in the area. So I think, I think as we put this item on a future agenda that we should be open minded about making revisions that have Page 6 of 8 Banyan Drive Hawaii Redevelopment Agency May 31,2017 Minutes support from landowners, leaseholders. And, before we start spending money for design and construction of a district entry feature, I know that there's a wide range of views on how that place should ultimately look like. So, I don't know if we should invest money early on when we don't really have a view what the long-range view would be. So, anyway, those are some of my thoughts, but I'm really concerned that we, as we're in this General Plan amendment, that we really pin down the changes that they are consensus for changing. Something like the commercial areas that have been identified, I think we should try to codify that to avoid that becoming an issue in the future. Anybody want—Sig, you want to, have any questions? ZANE: You're good. DELIMA: Okay, well, the best I can. Okay, so I don't have any more questions. We can maybeI think that would be the end of our meeting so to speak. MEAD: Yeah, that would, that can conclude this, and again, this is, you know, under those opportunities that we were just exploring. You know, those are really what I see as being, or probably what we see as being some of those, the engagement there, and so I'm happy to work with you in the future on building an agenda that can accomplish some of these, the identified things, moving forward. Especially when we have a quorum. DELIMA: Well, I would like to indicate that the members that are not present were absent and, are absent and excused from today's meeting for a variety of reasons, and, again, I would like to apologize to the members of the public that are here because we don't have a quorum. We cannot deliberate. We cannot take action. But, frankly, at this point, we really need to take a step back, engage in what was adopted, and see how we can refine and build some collaborative action plans that the administration, landowners can support as we do not have the necessary funds to move aggressively with an environmental assessment in order to attract capital investment on the peninsula. So, with that, since we do not have a quorum, we will adjourn the meeting, and thank you all for coming, and the minutes of this meeting will be provided to the rest of the Agency members at the next meeting. Okay, thank you very much. We stand adjourned. The discussion ended at 2:27 p.m. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS 1. Approval of Minutes from the February 22, 2017, Banyan Drive Hawaii Redevelopment Agency meeting. The Agency did not take this matter up due to the lack of quorum. Page 7 of 8 Banyan Drive Hawaii Redevelopment Agency May 31,2017 Minutes ANNOUNCEMENTS — There were no announcements. ADJOURNMENT—Chairman DeLima adjourned the meeting at 2:27 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sarah Y. Hata-Finley, Secretary ATTEST: Brian DeLima, Chairman Banyan Drive Hawaii Redevelopment Agency Page 8 of 8 Banyan Drive Hawaii Redevelopment Agency May 31,2017 Minutes