Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-11-02 Hearing Transcript - Celestial Sanctum 501(C)3 SPP 17-192WINDWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAII HEARING TRANSCRIPT NOVEMBER 2, 2017 A regularly advertised hearing on the application of CELESTIAL SANCTUM 501(C)3 (SPP 17-192) was called to order at 9:02 a.m. in the County of Hawaii Aupuni Center Conference Room, 101 Pauahi Street, Hilo, Hawaii with Chairman Gregory Henkel presiding. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Joe Clarkson, Donn Dela Cruz, Gregory Henkel, Donald Ikeda, and Myles Miyasato. ABSENT & EXCUSED: Thomas Raffipiy. ALSO PRESENT: Michael Yee (Planning Director), Malia Ho Hall (Deputy Corporation Counsel for the Windward Planning Commission), Jeff Darrow (Planning Program Manager), Maija Jackson (Planner), Christian Kay (Planner), Shancy Watanabe (Planner), and Sarah Hata-Finley (Commission Secretary). And 7 members from the public in attendance. APPLICANT: CELESTIAL SANCTUM 501(C)3 (SPP 17-000192) Request for a Special Permit to allow the development of a lodge and wellness retreat center, including healing workshops, wellness classes, yoga classes, a certified kitchen, and overnight accommodations for up to 21 guests on an approximately 3.926 -acre portion of a larger 25 -acre parcel of land situated within the State Land Use Agricultural District. The subject property is located at 18-4271 Luna Ikena Road, approximately 1.3 miles west (mauka) of its intersection with Volcano Road (Highway 11), Por. of Ola`a, Puna, Hawaii, TMK: 1-8-010: Por. 105. HENKEL: And with that, the first agenda item today is the SPP 17-192, and it looks like Christian will be doing the presentation. KAY: Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair, and good morning. Happy November to you all. If we can turn your attention to the screen in the back. As you said, this is a Special Permit application for Celestial Sanctum. The subject parcel is located in the Puna District of Hawaii Island; more specifically, in the Glenwood area. As you see here, the, for reference we've got Volcano Highway running generally north -south through the slide. And, we've got Volcano Village here and Glenwood to the right. The subject parcel is filled in, in red here. The Applicant is requesting a Special Permit to allow the development of a lodge and wellness retreat center, including healing workshops, wellness classes, yoga classes, a certified kitchen, and overnight accommodations for up to 21 guests on an approximately 3.926 -acre portion of a larger 25 -acre parcel of land. The Applicant plans to convert an existing five -bedroom, five -full EXHIBIT A bathroom, and two -half bathroom 3,880 -square foot single-family dwelling into the main area for the lodge and retreat center use. In addition, the Applicant plans to convert existing storage space in the existing dwelling into four additional bedrooms totaling nine bedrooms within the existing dwelling. The Applicant will occupy one bedroom, and the remainder will be available for guests. The Applicant also is proposing to build six detached bedrooms, two of which will be ADA compliant, to accommodate additional guests and staff members clustered around a gazebo designated as a formal gathering area, and a 600 -square foot yoga pavilion adjacent to the existing dwelling. The Applicant is proposing to offer 13 retreats a year for approximately five to seven days per retreat. According to the Applicant, the facility will not be available to non -retreat guests while a retreat is in session. During the periods when retreats are not being conducted, the Applicant is proposing to offer their lodge to the public for overnight accommodations for up to 21 guests. The Applicant will provide 15 on-site parking stalls to accommodate guests, including two ADA compliant parking stalls. The Applicant is proposing to construct several greenhouses to grow organic food for their guests, and to that end, develop a certified kitchen to provide meal service to guests. The operation of classes and workshops will be offered between 7 a.m. and 6 p.m. Non -retreat guests are required to check in at 4 p.m. and check out at 11 a.m. As the lodge and retreat center are fully built out, the Applicant plans to hire up to ten employees. The Applicant's reason for their request is in October of 2016, the owners purchased the subject property with the intention to create a wellness retreat center. They decided to purchase the subject property after searching Hawaii Island for many months trying to find the right type of location and environment for the retreat center. Both have a history working in the spiritual health and healing arenas and have experience operating a similar retreat center previously in California. The owners feel that the property's pristine beauty and relative seclusion make this the ideal location for their wellness and retreat center. The owners relocated to Hawaii Island in 2016 and are currently living on the property and operating the facility as a four-bedroom transient vacation rental. The County zoning designation for the subject parcel is Agricultural — 5 acres along with much of the surrounding land. Again, for reference, we've got Volcano Road, Highway 11 running generally north -south through the slide. Access to the subject property is off of Luna Ikena Road, which is a private easement with approximately 10 to 12 feet wide of gravel surface within a 50 -foot right-of-way. We'll get into it a little bit later, but access from the highway is through this Parcel 22. There's a little jog to the left, and then it hooks back up to Luna Ikena Road. All of the owners within this, within this development have access rights across the road. And, again, here's the subject property outlined in red and the permit area in the dashed line. EXHIBIT A 2 The State Land Use designation for the subject property is Agricultural as indicated in green. And, pardon me, that should say County LUPAG designation is Extensive Agriculture indicated in white. Here's an aerial photograph, again, of that intersection with the highway. Here's Hawaii Belt Road or Volcano Road, Highway 11. And, again, you've got the intersection coming through this Parcel 22 and then hooking back up to the straightaway, Luna Ikena Road. The subject parcel is approximately 1.3 miles from the intersection at the highway. Here are two aerial photographs of the subject parcel and permit area. On the left here, we've got the entire 25 -acre parcel with the permit area roughly outlined with this dashed yellow line. On the right side, we zoom that in showing the subject permit area, the existing single-family dwelling, and existing greenhouse, driveway access, as well as a catchment tank. The area where they're proposing to have the, the detached bedrooms and gazebo is roughly here toward the back end of the house, and I'll move on here to the Applicant's submitted site plan. Again, on the left, we've got the entire property, 25 -acre property, and just this area in here is going to be set aside as that permit area. It's showing here the existing dwelling, the proposed six detached bedrooms and gazebo, the yoga pavilion area here, and just zoomed in here on the right hand side shows it a little bit closer. Here are some site photographs of the permit area, pardon me. On the top of left, we've got a view of the existing dwelling. The bottom area here is where they're proposing to expand and adding the additional bedrooms within the dwelling. It's difficult to see, but back here, is where you have the existing greenhouse. And, roughly, in this back area is where they're planning to have the detached bedrooms. Here's a view of the area for the detached bedrooms at the edge of that greenhouse in the back, and so, it's toward this side of the property, and a view of the driveway from Luna Ikena Road with the subject dwelling on the right hand side. Here is a street -level view of that intersection with Luna Ikena Road showing where it comes off of Highway 11, and here is some views of the existing road condition, widths and condition of the graveled area going up and down that road. The Planning Director is recommending approval of the Special Permit request with conditions. We received a few additional pieces of correspondence from when you received the Background and Recommendation Report. First and foremost, we got a comment letter from State Department of Transportation outlining what improvements would need to be made at that intersection with Highway 11. We received a letter of support from Victoria and Mike Tanaka, as well as a letter from Zendo Kern, who is the Applicant's representative, indicating that they've read the Recommendation and Background Report, and they're aware of the conditions outlined and—and, in subsequent conversation, they are amenable to them and they can speak to that as well when they come up. EXHIBIT A 3 Also, today, we received some testimony, written testimony from the Awong—Derek and Brenda Awong—that was passed out to you this morning. I'm happy to answer any questions the Commission may have. I'm complete with my presentation. HENKEL: Thanks, Christian. Commissioners, any questions of staff? Then, could the Applicantoh, I'm sorry, go ahead, Joseph. CLARKSON: I noticed, I noticed on this and other similar applications, the area of the permit is a—not a subdivided parcel within the overall parcel, and it's not, it's not the overall parcel. How is the area determined? KAY: Well, in this particular one, in the application, there was a metes and bounds description that was included as well, so that, that's how they determined the location and size of that permit area. CLARKSON: I'm just wondering how this relates to the requirement for Land Use Commission approval for parcels over 15 acres in size. KAY: Sure. CLARKSON: And, this is a 25 -acre parcel. There being no other legal parcel, will this require Land Use Commission approval? KAY: No, what they go by is looking at the permit area versusso, often we'll have a Special Permit be a portion of a larger area, so as long as that Special Permit area is below 15 acres, then it wouldn't require Land Use Commission approval. CLARKSON: So, use under the permit would not be allowed outside this area? KAY: That's correct. CLARKSON: Thank you. HENKEL: Thanks. That was a good question. Anymore questions of staff? Then, would the representative and/or Applicants please come forward? KERN: Good morning. HENKEL: Good morning. Would you raise your right hands, and do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter before the Commission? KERN: Yes. CABADOS: Yes, I do. EXHIBIT A 4 HENKEL: All right. Please state your name, proceed, and you've seen the Director's conditions. Would you comment further on those, please? KERN: Yeah, I'm Zendo Kern. I'm the representative for the Applicant. Next to me is Rick Cabados, who is one of the partners with Katy Joy, his wife, over there in Celestial Sanctum. We have reviewed the Recommendation and Background Report, and the Applicant agrees with those. And, I can speak a little bit more to that question as well that Mr. Clarkson brought up. Typically, kind of like when we had Hawaii Johns here a couple of weeks ago, it was about a five -acre parcel, and they carved out a 1.6 -acre portion for their Special Permit `cause they just want that area. In a situation like this, I found it seems necessary to carve out that area specifically. That's why we had a metes and bounds description done. So, the Special Permit area is, you know, limited to that area, and they can't just go and start building everywhere. You know what I mean? That would be grounds for some type of disciplinary action, so it really keeps it within that defined area which I feel is very important. One thing that I did want to mention is I have one other email of support that I was not able to get through `cause I thought it was going to come in as a letter but it's as an email so at some point here, potentially, I can, maybe we can take a quick five, and I could get that over to Christian. I just didn't want to do that while the presentation was happening. Outside of that, you know, the area makes, makes sense for it. It's up there in Volcano area. Accommodations are lacking on the Big Island. We really tried to address the concerns, and that was, you know, the road. So, the road needs to be improved. The intersection off of the highway needs to be improved. We kept the sound decibel levels down to a residential level around the site. And, you know, we're dealing with yoga and meditation, so it's not like very loud, loud activities. But, with that notwithstanding, we still wanted to make the conditions, so, you know, it was, it was pleasant. It's quiet. It's, you know, regulated, and people can't just do whatever they want to do. So, we really tried to address all of those issues. As you can see, they have a beautiful home up there. It's a beautiful property. Like I said, with the proximity to the National Park, a limited amount of overnight accommodations, this could be, you know, really good for the island in general with visitors, etcetera and, you know, bringing in money and obviously more options for the visitors. So, really, we're here to answer any questions. We think that the, the Recommendation and conditions are agreeable, and they make sense. So, I'll yield for now. HENKEL: Commissioners, any questions? Joseph? CLARKSON: Yeah, I read the easement that was attached to the Background Report which divides the responsibility for maintenance of the access road on a pro rata basis per parcel. However, if this permit is granted this one parcel will have the impact of many, many parcels due to the increase resident occupancy up to 21 people, additional people per day. Has the, the EXHIBIT A 5 Applicant discussed road maintenance with the remaining property owners who are in that easement agreement? KERN: I will let the Applicant speak to that. I know he's a part of the road association as well as he would be responsible for bringing the road up to a standard which will basically be 20 -feet wide, all-weather surface, which is going to be a tremendous amount of improvements to get that up, up to standard. As far as moving forward with on-going maintenance, I will let the Applicant speak to that. CABADOS: Hi Joseph. Right now, the road is actually supposed to be 20 -feet wide, but over time, it's gone down to about 12 feet. We are already in the process of re -doing the road. I'm on the Luna Ikena Road Maintenance Corporation, and so, what we've done is my neighbor has all the heavy equipment, you know, excavator, tractor, backhoe, and so forth. So, we purchased additional equipment at our expense to make the road better. In fact, actually last Saturday and Sunday, we were out scraping the road and widening it somewhat and keeping it so that it's maintained. And, all that's being done. We have yearly dues that come in for road maintenance to add new gravel and keep the road up. But, the neighbor and I and her husband are doing all the labor at no charge to keep expenses down and increase the quality of the road. Because we live there, we want to be able to drive without hitting boulders and, you know, dips in the road and so forth. CLARKSON: So, are you saying that all of the people that are in that road maintenance agreement are okay with the existing financial responsibilities? CABADOS: Yes. Everybody signs when they purchase their land. It was a condition that they contribute $500 per year for road maintenance. So, we manage that money and then we put in additional, we do all the work at no charge. Before, the previous person, was paying someone to come in and, and do maintenance. So, we feel that by us doing all the labor that can add more funds so we can improve the quality of the road for everyone. CLARKSON: Thank you. CABADOS: Thank you. HENKEL: Commissioners, any other questions of the Applicant? Thank you. KERN: Thank you very much. HENKEL: We have no one signed up to—oh, I'm sorry, we have two people signed up to testify. Derek Awong and Brenda Awong, would you please come forward? Good morning. AWONGS: Good morning. HENKEL: Would you raise your right hands? Do you affirm to tell the truth in this matter before the Planning Commission? EXHIBIT A 6 AWONG B.: Yes. AWONG D.: We do, I do. HENKEL: Thank you. Proceed, you've got three minutes. Three minutes each. AWONG D.: Okay, thank you. Good morning, everybody. Just for the record, we are opposed to the development of the lodge, and we've spoken to two other lot owners. So are they. Our reasons for opposition are based on our quality of life, health, and safety. On the health issue, I'm concerned, and in your County Background environmental report, it says that the desired use shall not adversely affect the surrounding properties. Personally, we feel this lodge would definitely have an adverse effect on our properties because topographicallytopographically, they are sitting at the top of the hill, and with this increase of all their buildings, structures, commercial kitchen, I'm not really sure how all that run-off is going to affect us. But, we just feel that there's gonna be adverse effect, so my questions are: Will these guys have to include multiple septic systems? Will the leach field runoff pose any threat to us? Because of the topography, everybody down the hill from these people have livestock, reservoirs for their cattle. How is that gonna affect everybody? I can't see it being in a positive manner. On the safety issue, I saw that the DOT approached it. I heard a little bit about them addressing the entrance at Highway 11. I submitted photos on the very end of the entrance, and a little bit of notes about blind spots. How much earlier—maybe some of you saw me measuring this building. My truck and trailer encompasses about two-thirds of this building. So, in order for me to get off that highway, it takes quite a while, and typically, my wife is following with her SUV and her trailer. So, again, for the potential for accidents, because of that blind spot at the top of Hirano Store, that's a main concern for us. The next picture shows my actual tractor. So, you can see that it takes up the whole road. So, on the safety side of it, we already had one of these guests, `cause these people are already in operation, come hauling down the road. We're occupying the road, and they come straight at us and just swerve right around on the neighbor's property. That's the type of behavior that we, we see coming in the future, and being 21 guests all year long, staff of ten, just, it doesn't sit well with us. So, I'm going to let my wife do the quality of life portion of this, but I do want to, for all of you, my grandson right here, our concerns for our quality of life is not for them. It's actually for him when he's sitting in my position as a papa. We're trying to keepwe, these folks said they found a pristine piece of land. Why would you want to develop it? We found it. We wanted to keep it as such. Same way as a couple of our neighbors who have got their grandchildren also. So, I'll let my wife speak. AWONG, B.: Good morning, I'm Brenda. Okay, we've lived in Volcano since 1978; raised our ohana. Our children, and our grandchildren are continuing to be raised there. We bought this EXHIBIT A 7 property in 2010. We've been—we planted trees on it. `Ohi`a trees, we've added. We're trying to reforest it, and it's secluded. That's why we bought up there `cause it's secluded; it's a dead- end. We didn't have traffic coming in. Once in a while, you have the other property owners, but not continuous traffic. Now, we have continuous traffic coming in and out, flying rocks as they drive fast in and out. To allow this type of development within our subdivision would be contrary to all the reasons why us, our neighbor, Mr. Pa, and our neighbor, Mr. Freitas, families have moved there. They have cattle. We intend to get cattle. We additionally have developed—wait, additionally, the lodge development would create continuous traffic, tourists going in and out. The serenity and the pristine that now exists would be lost. They are providing for 21 lodge, personnel, and they cannot guarantee that they won't all come in individual vehicles. And, they—and they are expecting ten staff members. That's ten more cars. This development has nothing to do with enhancing the Puna community because it is only for the guests of the lodge. If they wanted to enhance the community, they should have planned for it to have a County road access off the highway that would not affect private residents. As for the owner of the road condition, we've been there since 2010, the road was never 20 feet wide. It has never been widened. It's never changed, which we enjoy. You drive five miles down the road, and it's easy to get in and out. They've only recently taken over the road maintenance, and it's deteriorated since they've taken it over. When the other maintenance person would come in, it was, the road was fine. It's sad that the owners of this hotel or lodge didn't even have the courtesy to notify all the neighbors since this is only a 12 -acre parcel. We received a letter in the mail from a Mr. [sic] Higa, but that being said, this is the typical mainlander style with no regard to local neighbors. They only notify the properties within the 500 feet of theirs which is, we're kitty corner to them downhill. Thank you. AWONG, D.: Can I make an additional comment? HENKEL: Sure. AWONG, D.: Mr. Clarkson, you brought up an important point about costs to the residents about the maintenance of the road. Yes, it's set. What I heard this gentleman say, they're going to try and improve the road. However, I don't thinkI don't know if that sits here, but I don't think the rest of the landowners should incur additional costs because they decided to develop it, and now we gotta pick up in the future. But, that was a concern of ours. I do want to make additional comments over here. I have my written comments on some of these so just to kind of put you folks in a perspective. I work for the Army, and I made my comments about we don't know if this is a cult. We don't know what kind of compound they're making, but these are the things that I'm trained to look at. Besides being secluded, who knows EXHIBIT A what these folks will be doing out there with nobody to monitor or follow what they're doing. Thank you. HENKEL: Thank you. Commissioners, any questions of the testifiers? You may be seated. AWONG, D.: Thank you. HENKEL: Would you care to respond to the testimony? KERN: Yes, thank you for the opportunity to respond. Okay, to try—first of all, I wasn't able to get it out. I'm going to email it to Planning right now. We did receive another email of support from one of the neighbors. I can read that to you real quick. It says, "To Windward Planning Commission. Please be advised that as neighbors of Rick Cabados and Katy Joy Freeman who own Celestial Sanctum Retreat Center of Hawaii, we support and concur, with concurrence of their plans and efforts to establish the bed and breakfast business entity on their property located at the address of the subject parcel. We are neighboring owners of Lot No. 343(B), Parcel 1-8- 020:109 [sic] of Luna Ikena Road." And, that's from Michael and Deborah Pettitt. So, they're in support of it as well. First off, on the run-off issue, the Applicant has to comply with State Department of Health. So, currently, the place has cesspool. So, any improvement that he makes, he's actually going to have to put in septic systems, wastewater septic systems that meet with the State Department of Health. So, that should basically cover the runoff, and as any development goes, you have to keep your runoff on your property. If it goes off your property, you're in violation. As far as traffic goes, obviously it will be an increase in traffic. The Applicant is amenable to putting in, you know, speed bumps in front of the property, a couple of them to make sure that they're, that traffic would be slow if there is any of these issues. `Cause it's really, we're not trying to, the Applicant isn't trying to, you know, create a problem. So, here we have some issues, and we can potentially solve them, so a speed bump would be agreeable. The other issue as the testifier had mentioned is coming off of the highway to Luna Ikena Road. It's tight. It's small. It needs some improvements. So, per the conditions, the Applicant has to do what the State DOT requires, and that is, it's going to have to—the present driveway does not meet the current standards so lane widths and shoulder widths are too narrow, so pavement and the pavement structure is unknown. So, he's basically going to have to re -do that and create a driveway, and okay, they say it's driveway sight distance is probably okay, needs to be verified. Turning radius is too tight. So, they recommend constructing a 22 -foot wide, two lanes, with 4 - foot shoulders and a 25 -foot turn curve radius. It also requires that they put a streetlight in. So, there'd be a streetlight and not a traffic signal but a streetlight to light the intersection, and the intersection would be improved to what the State would be okay with. So, that would eliminate, you know, traffic being backed up. It will allow whatever types of vehicles need to get in there. So, as again, the Applicant is fine with putting in speed bumps in those areas of concern, and the other issue that Commissioner Clarkson had brought up, and I think got a little bit more clarity on that is well the Applicant is going to improve, make a substantial investment to improve the EXHIBIT A 9 road. We have to. Moving forward, that road exists, and we have traffic going up and down, right? So, the road's being used, and we have the, the road association, everybody putting in their money. So, if there was a concern that the Applicant is going to increase the traffic volume which will increase the wear and tear on the road, the Applicant would be agreeable to upping their side of it to, you know, upping their amount that they would pay in to the road association to make up for that. `Cause, again, it's not trying to put any more burden on any other property owner. The other property owners will actually have the benefit or having the intersection, the road, all of those improvements and, like I said, the Applicant would be agreeable to increasing that amount. And, as far as the last comments that were made, you know, the Applicant is going to have a meditation and retreat center. As far as monitoring goes, we know how this works in the County. If the neighbors see something that isn't, that they don't like, they'll make a complaint. If they're working outside of what they're supposed to be doing, they are going to make a complaint. And, so, there is a monitoring, there is a checks and balances on that. It's a little disheartening to, to be questioned about, you know, a cult or something like that in this type of situation where, you know, these are good people that are into, you know, yoga, meditation, healing, a long track record in it. And, yeah, so I think that pretty much covers all those things, and we did, the Applicants did talk to some other neighbors and, you know, we haven't had any complaints. They've been agreeable with it, and like I said, we have two letters of recommendation for it. And, I think that pretty much addresses any concerns. I'd be open to any discussion with the Commissioners on detailing more of those concerns. HENKEL: Myles. MIYASATO: Yeah, Chair, I have a question on that KERN: Yes. MIYASATO: —the access. The State Department of Transportation. Do you interpret that 22 feet to be the run, the length of that driveway? That's how I read it. KERN: The length of the driveway. I interpretso, we have two things happening here. We have to meet with the Fire Department standards, which is 20 feet width all the way up of all- weather surface. The way that I interpret State Department of Transportation is coming off of the highway. As you notice, there's a, there's a hill that goes up there. So, at least until the top of the hill, until it, you know, kind of flattens out, it would look like this, and then after that it would be the all-weather surface. That would be a minimum of 20 -feet wide that would be compliant with the Fire Department. And the Applicant wouldn't be able to operate their business until that was complete. MIYASATO: Isn't the driveway the length of that roadway going to their property? It doesn't say the entrance from the highway. It says the driveway, recommended reconstruction driveway of 22 feet wide, 11 -foot lanes with 4 -foot paved shoulders. EXHIBIT A 10 KAY: Mr. Chair, if I can address that? Or Mr. Miyasato, if I can address that? DOT is responsible for their right-of-way. So the improvement, their intersection improvements would have to meet with DOT requirements within their right-of-way. The remainder of the 1.3 miles of Luna Ikena Road would have to meet with the Fire Department requirements, and that's in Condition 6 for a Fire Department access road. And, again, that's a 20 -foot wide access width, all-weather surface. Those plans for that actually need to be approved by Fire Department prior to the improvement being done so I know the Applicant was talking about speed bumps. That would have to be something worked out and approved by the Fire Department as well. Again, this is to be able to get Fire Department apparatus to the subject property. And, just to really to quickly to address Commissioner Clarkson's issue in terms of maintenance, the Condition 6 reads that the Applicant shall install, construct, and maintain improvements for Fire Department Access Road, access to the subject property meeting the requirements of the Fire Department. The reason we put that maintenance piece in there as well is because that's what the Fire Code reads. So, again, notwithstanding whatever CC&R's or road association rules they have in place, maintenance of that road ultimately comes down to the Applicant, so, and in meeting the requirements of Fire Department. Does that address? MIYASATO: Okay, thank you. KAY: Thank you. CLARKSON: Yes, thank you. KERN: And if I could just add on to that? I think logically, did you see the picture of that? The hill coming off of there. The logical approach would be to have that extend up to the top of that hill even though it'd be, you know, outside of the State right-of-way. It just wouldn't make sense to stop it part way up that hill, but to continue it up that hill and then, as Christian had mentioned, all-weather surface to the top. HENKEL: Any other questions? Thanks, Zendo. KERN: I thank you all very much for your time, and we humbly request or humbly ask for your support on this application. Thank you. HENKEL: Is there anyone else in the audience that would like to testify on this agenda item? Then, I would look for a motion to close public testimony. AWONG, D. (from audience): I'd like to make a comment if I may. HENKEL: You can make a brief comment. AWONG, D. (from audience): Okay EXHIBIT A 11 HALL: —But you have to come to the microphone. AWONG, D.: Those people who said, who Zendo said were in favor of the development, one is a developer who was, told the neighbor she wants to develop there prior to them arriving. The folks who live there now are simple country folks. They didn't even know about this. They don't have email. They don't have none of that. Those are the folks who are saying they don't want it either. They just want to keep our Big Island country lifestyle as it is. That'sI just needed to say that. HENKEL: Thank you, Mr. Awong. AWONG, D.: You're welcome. Thank you for your time. HENKEL: I would look for that motion now. DELA CRUZ: So moved to close public testimony. HENKEL: Is there a second? CLARKSON: Second. HENKEL: It's been moved by Commissioner Dela Cruz and seconded by Commissioner Clarkson to close public testimony. All in favor say, "aye?" COMMISSIONERS: Aye. HENKEL: Opposed? Public testimony is closed. Now, we'll look for a discussion and a motion to action. I have a little bit to say. Mr. and Mrs. Awong, I really appreciate you coming forth and expressing your concerns, but, you know, it seems to be the biggest concern is the, the maintenance and access of the road which I believe that the plan that the Applicants are putting in place would remedy that and make it easier to drive big equipment in and out like you said you had which are also hard on the roads, you know, as well as volume. As far as the, the other comments about, you know, yoga and cults and stuff like that, II don't really give that much weight. I'm a combat veteran whose life has been enhanced by practicing yoga and meditation. So, anyway, that's my thoughts. Anybody else? CLARKSON: Can we discuss without a motion? Should we have a motion? HENKEL: I think we can discuss first and move. Is that right? HALL: Either way. CLARKSON: I'mif there's a motion for approval, I'm going to vote against it, and the main reason is that I see Special Permits as being special. We're seeing a lot of them come through. EXHIBIT A 12 They're no longer unusual as far as I can tell, and I think it's incumbent on a Special Permit applicant to demonstrate why existing State law being, I don't want to say circumvented, but being made exception to by a Special Permit, should benefit the community, especially the local community, to be given the privilege of doing something that would not normally be allowed. And, it's a privilege, not a right. There's no obligation for anyone to allow a lodge in an agricultural area. And, so far, I don't see any benefit to the local community except, and I see a lot of drawbacks. If I were a property owner there, having bought in a very isolated, rural location, I would personally be very upset to find a ten -employee, 21 -occupancy lodge being established next to my farmstead. And, so that's just my comment. HENKEL: Any other discussion? MIYASATO: Chair, I have—you know, I just have a, I also have a concern. If this, if a motion does go through for approval, I forgot to ask the Applicant on this issue, but there is a request to phase the project timetable even, I guess it reads sort of, reads even without completing the conditions, and so I have a problem with that also. KAY: Mr. Chair, if I may address that as well? The way that we wrote the conditions is all of the conditions would need to be complete prior to operation of the requested use. Currently, the Applicants are operating a four-bedroom transient vacation rental which currently is not illegal. It's not a, it's not a bed or breakfast or anything like that. They're just renting out rooms in their home, so that's what some of the current impact that the testifiers talked about. But, for purposes of this Special Permit, we were clear that all of these conditions would need to be met prior to operation of their lodge use. MIYASATO: Okay, yeah, I understand that. It just, it seems like there's a request in here to start this retreat operation prior to compliance with the conditions. KAY: Yes, thank you. We saw that as part of the application. We felt it prudent to disagree with that and require that all the improvements be done prior to operation of the lodge and wellness retreat. Again, in terms of the overnight vacation rental that's going on right now, there's nothing illegal going on there. So, they could continue to operate up to that, what they're doing now, but for the extended use that they're proposing, they'd need to complete all the conditions first. MIYASATO: Okay, thank you. HENKEL: Excuse me, I, in the presentation, I understood that the retreats are going to be five days to a week long. Is that correct? KAY: That's correct. The Applicant is proposing up to 13 of those retreats a year. So, during the times of those retreats, there will be no other non -retreat guest allowed. In the times between those retreats, the remainder of the year, the Applicant is requesting the ability to host up to 21 guests overnight at any time. EXHIBIT A 13 HENKEL: Okay, I see that as kind of mitigating the traffic, too. There's not going to be everyday 21 people going in and out. They're there for a week and then. KAY: Yeah, I understand, and the other thing that the Applicant talked about in the application was the purchase of a multi -passenger van to accommodate those retreat guests. Our understanding is in between, non -retreat guests would likely be using their own individual vehicles. CLARKSON: May I comment on that— HENKEL: —Yes, go ahead. CLARKSON: because I'm very familiar with this kind of argument. This is near Volcanoes National Park. I'm assuming that people who fly out to Hawaii even for a retreat will want to take in a little bit of the scenery. They will be coming and going in between their lessons and going to the Park, going and seeing a little bit of Hawaii. I still don't quite understand how a van system would work. Most people will not all come in on the same flight, so whether they have individual cars, 21 individual cars perhaps, or 21 individual van trips to go to the airport to pick up a participant really makes no difference. The other thing that was not mentioned that to me speaks to the impact on the neighborhood is the need, going to be the continuous need for heavy truck traffic on the access road hauling potable water to support the commercial kitchen. And, commercial kitchens use a lot of water. A typical truck hauls 5,000 gallons. I can see one or more of those trucks per week grinding their way up to the lodge, and affecting the, affecting their neighbors with noise and traffic. HENKEL: Do you have a response, Zendo? KERN: Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Appreciate the response, the comments very much. Again, we're on the, you know, the Big Island, and it has its challenging arenas that we have very little Urban land. We have a lot of Ag, and we have a lot of Conservation. And, in this place like Puna, you, say you want to do something of this nature, you're very limited on where you could do it. And, some of the places that would be allowable wouldn't—they don't have the ambiance. They don't have the feeling that you'd want to have that, so it's, it's tricky. You know, any time you come in and look at a Special Permit, it is kind of a case-by-case situation. Does this, does this make sense? When looking at this parcel, seeing that it is surrounded by large parcels, it's out there, keeping the sound decibel levels down. It, it felt like it, you know, it was a right location for that type of activity for that type of endeavor. One of the things I want to also add in to that is these are all Ag parcels, right? And, if Ag was a, was more viable here in the County, there would be a tremendous amount of truck traffic going up and down that road. There would be no road improvements that need to be done. So, that, that potential exists. I know it's not necessarily the reality of what's there now, but it could be. Somebody could start a farm up there, and they could have massive trucks going in and out of there. EXHIBIT A 14 Where, in this case, we're not just saying hey can we do this and have these cars come up there. We want to improve the road. We want to make, make it a better place, make it a better situation by doing this and be respectable to, to the neighbors, and to the community. Any time there's change, it's, it has some challenges. If there were other locations in Puna that had that same type of locale and had the zoning, then that would be a lot easier, but we're challenged as a County from that perspective. I believe four percent of our Island is Urban. The remaining of it is Conservation and Ag. Thus, we have the Special Permit process. So, it's, it's, while we completely understand where you're coming from, it's, it's challenged because of the County that we live in and the way that it's been planned. Or lack thereof from many years ago. So, we're kind of having to go along as we can. The, you know, we're open to a discussion. I think this is a good, I believe this is a good project. It's for the right reasons. It's quiet. It's mellow. There are overnight accommodations that are needed for the Island. There really are especially up in that area. So if, let's say the 21 number on, or regular overnight accommodations was too high, what would be something that, be a little more comfortable with. I think keeping that for the, you know, retreats makes sense, but overall, you know, if there's problems with this, I think that this something that would be worthwhile to have a discussion about instead of just a straight, you know, no. Or, you know, we're open to working with the Commission to try to come up with an agreeable solution. And, on the side of the water trucks going up there, the Applicant still does have to maintain the road, so he'll be responsible for that. And, one could argue that the truck would actually compact that road down and make it more solid. CLARKSON: Nice try. KERN: I know. But, you know, regardless of that wear and tear, the Applicant would actually have to maintain it, so. MIYASATO: Zendo, you know, I heard you say continue discussion with the Commission, but I'm just wondering if you would have a continued discussion with the community on some type of compromise. KERN: Absolutely. Yeah, there's never been a problem with doing that. We sent out the notices to surrounding property owners as, as required. Based on my conversations with the Applicant and them talking to the neighbors, you know, obviously some are for and some are against, but that's, you know, never a problem. HENKEL: Anymore comments? Discussion? YEE: I have a comment not for Zendo, though. I hear Mr. Clarkson's concern about when does Special Permit not be so special when we're making them all the time. I think Zendo did make a point around so much of the land is for Conservation and Ag. And, so I have been challenged with trying to make recommendations around a lot of special use applications. In this case, you know, yoga retreats and stuff weren't necessarily addressed in writing our Code, and so we're struggling with where's the best place to put them. And, you know, that goes along with where EXHIBIT A 15 do we want to place transient vacation rentals, and so right now, we're looking at special overlaid districts that would include the Volcano area and stuff because we do need units up there. And, that's not, you know, it's not out there yet, but, you know, we're looking at those kinds of considerations of we have these uses and without having, you know, very specific guidance of where they can go, we are having to address them through the special use. And, I wish we could get to a place where we could be more specific about what zoning and what areas, but we're not there today. So, hence, there was a lot of, of considerations into what we wanted to have the Applicant provide up front. So, I think that's one area of, of trying to balance both the economic development, you know, goals that we have for the Island and quality of life issues for all the residents. I think one last piece was looking at the community development plan for the area, and it certainly wasn't inconsistent with what we were seeing with the CDP. But, again, it's not as if the CDP was specifically addressing a yoga retreat, you know, right there. But, we did look for some guidance there. So, I just wanted to make those comments. Thank you. CLARKSON: So, I'm familiar with the fact of rezone applications don't necessarily, can't be conditioned on a particular use, but Special Permits can be so that if somebody stopped offering yoga, the permit would then become void? YEE: Christian CLARKSON: In other words, can you condition a use for the permit? KAY: So, the Special Permit will generally run with the land. So, should the Applicant's decide to sell, pass on, what have you, otherwise, otherwise get rid of the property, that the new owner would be able to continue to run the uses that the Special Permit are approving. The, we have a condition here, Condition No. 2, that reads the operation of the lodge and wellness retreat and related improvements shall be conducted in a manner that is substantially representative of plans and details contained with the Special Permit application with several different dates. Any substantial expansion of the facility or uses beyond what is represented in these documents shall require an amendment to this permit. So, that said, all of the, all of the uses that we would approve under a Special Permit could continue. If they were to change or expand in a substantial way, then we would have to amend the permit. But, there's nothing saying in here currently that if they stop offering yoga or what have you then the permit would be null and void. If a new owner were to purchase the property and not want to run a lodge or a wellness retreat, then they could ask for a revocation of that permit. You can offer a condition that says the use runs with the owner, so should they sell it, get rid of it, then that the use would be null and void. So, that is an option that you have as a Commission, but generally, it doesn't go that way. EXHIBIT A 16 HENKEL: Yes, Mr. Ikeda. IKEDA: Christian, hold on. You know, when I read what you're saying, to me, the interpretation is as long as they operate a lodge they can continue with this, this permit. KAY: Correct. Yeah, I mean, there a quite a few things that are being requested under this Special Permit so as long as, really what this is speaking to is somewhat the limitation of what they can do. If they want to expand beyond what they're requesting right now, then they'd have to amend the permit. So that's correct. KERN: If I could real quick just add on to the Special Permit conversation. I think it's important. I've been in situations where the Applicant wanted to do a rezone and a Special Permit would make so much sense because it's very specific, and we couldn't do it. One of the beauties of the Special Permit is that it does have to be specific unlike a rezoning where if you get the rezoning, you have a broad range of uses you can do once that's done. With the Special Permit, it really does have to be very specific which is why the conditions are in there to allow that, and you can't really go beyond, beyond that. You know, it's really nailed down to what they can and cannot do, which I feel is very important for Special Permits, especially in these situations. It's critical, because we're not giving, you know, an open checkbook so to speak. Do whatever you want to do. You know, because they're special and they're unique. So, I think there's a lot of value in having it be specific. MIYASATO: Chair, you know, I, personally I see this as a big impact, the amount of guests that's being requested, and the fact that some of the neighbors and the community are opposed to it. I'm just wondering if a continuance would be a consideration to see if something can be worked out. CLARKSON: I would concur. I think it, I personally would like to see the Applicant get together with all of the neighbors on that road and see if there's any way they can come up with a plan that meets with their approval either to mitigate traffic or—and there's a lot of very good, speaking to the Director here, impact mitigation in the conditions, but even so, it's still a very big project for a very quiet, you call it Rural community. And, I wish it were in Volcano Village or someplace that's more used to transient accommodation. But, I would be more amenable if they could, if they could come up with a program that would meet with, not just the required people within 500 feet, but all of the people along that road could be talked to and their concerns be heard and maybe a plan come up that would meet their needs. KERN: Yeah, we would not have a problem, you know, contacting all the surrounding property owners again in setting up, you know, a meeting and do our very best. I know from the Applicant's perspective, definitely open to working with it. You know, and that's the best that we can do, so definitely, we can plan a meeting within this month to hopefully make it before the next Planning Commission meeting and do everything that we can do to come to an agreeable solution. I can't guarantee that everybody's, you know, going to go there, but we can certainly do our best effort and, you know, adjust things to make it, you know, more agreeable to the neighbors, to the community, as well as well as the Commission. EXHIBIT A 17 HENKEL: Thank you. Corp. Counsel, would it be appropriate it to, I mean we're still waiting for a motion to action. Could one of those motions be to postpone for a month while mediation? HALL: [Nodded yes.] HENKEL: Okay. Anymore comments or a motion? MIYASATO: Chair, I'll make a motion. I make a motion for a continuance on application Docket No., oh excuse me, Special Permit Docket No. 17-192. CLARKSON: Second. HENKEL: It's been moved and seconded to a postponement on Special Permit No. 17-192. Roll call vote, please, Christian? MIYASATO: Chair, just to be KAY: Just to clarify—sorry. MIYASATO: to be for the call of the Department, too. KAY: Call of the Department, okay, so MIYASATO: To re-agendize. KAY: Okay, thank you. All right, thank you, Mr. Chair. Commissioner Miyasato? MIYASATO: Aye. KAY: Commissioner Clarkson? CLARKSON: Aye. KAY: Commissioner Dela Cruz? DELA CRUZ: Aye. KAY: Commissioner Ikeda? IKEDA: Aye. KAY: And Chair Henkel. HENKEL: Aye. EXHIBIT A 18 KAY: Thank you. Motion carries five, nothing. KERN: Thank you all very much. HENKEL: Thank you all, and you'll be notified in writing of this decision. The discussion ended at 10:01 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Sarah Y. Hata-Finley, Secretary Windward Planning Commission EXHIBIT A 19