The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2018-02-01 Public Testimony Transcript - Cellco Partnership USE 17-074WINDWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAII PUBLIC TESTIMONY TRANSCRIPT FEBRUARY 1, 2018 Public testimony on the matter of the application for CELLCO PARTNERSHIP DBA VERIZON WIRELESS (USE 17-000074) was taken at 9:40 a.m. in the County of Hawaii Aupuni Center Conference Room, 101 Pauahi Street, Hilo, Hawaii with Chairman Joseph Clarkson presiding. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Joe Clarkson, Donn Dela Cruz, Gregory Henkel, Donald Ikeda, Myles Miyasato, Thomas Raffipiy, and John Replogle. 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) (to 9:45 a.m.), Christian Kay (Planner), Shancy Watanabe (Planner), and Sarah Hata-Finley (Commission Secretary). And five members from the public in attendance. Secretary's Note: This matter was scheduled to be continued to the March 1st Commission meeting; therefore, there was no action or discussion by the Commission on the application. APPLICANT: CELLCO PARTNERSHIP DBA VERIZON WIRELESS (USE 17-000074) Application for a Use Permit to allow the construction of a new, non -manned telecommunication facility, consisting of a 155 -foot tall steel monopine tower, retaining wall, 6 -foot tall fencing and related facilities within a 1,050 -square foot lease area on a 33,106 -square foot parcel, situated in the County's Agricultural 1 -acre (A -la) zoning district. The subject property is located at 15-1463 21st Avenue, approximately 1,700 feet north of the Kaloli Drive – 21st Avenue intersection, Hawaiian Paradise Park, Keaau, Puna, Hawaii, TMK: (3) 1-5-038:013. CLARKSON: As I announced before, Item No. 2 on the agenda has been continued. The Commission will not be taking any action on that item today. Because it was on the agenda and publicly noticed, those people who have signed up to testify are certainly welcome to do so. However, all we will do is take your testimony and enter it into the record, and that will be all we will be doing today. I would actually recommend, if I may, to testifiers that they return when the application will be heard by the Commission so that questions can be asked of them by the Commission and they can hear other testimony, ask other questions related to that testimony. But, if you're not able to return for that second hearing and you wish to make your testimony today, you're perfectly welcome to do so. So SUZUKI [UTAE] (from audience): When—when is the next, the public hearing? CLARKSON: How long has that been continued for? 10V1111.11 1.1 HALL: It's going to be the next one, March—March 1st SUZUKI (from audience): March lst? CLARKSON: March lst SUZUKI (from audience): Ok, I'll come back and testify then. Maybe by then I will have a written testimony as well or shall I, shall I bring written testimony before that? HALL: You can do either. If you want to submit early, you can do that, and then if you, but if you just want to bring it that day, you can do that as well, so—but you can come up Ms. Ohara. CLARKSON: And, you're Eileen? OHARA: I am. CLARKSON: Would you please raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter before the Commission today? OHARA: I so affirm. CLARKSON: Would you please state your name for the record and then continue. OHARA: My name is M. Eileen Ohara, and the reason—thank you, Commissioners. I understand that this is being postponed to a later date, but I can't be sure that I'll be able to make that, so I thought I'd take this opportunity since I am available right now, and it's good to see some new faces on the Commission. Welcome, everyone. As you may be aware, I do represent District 4 on the County Council, and this particular application is in that district, and I have heard from nearby residents about some concerns, but there's a broader picture that I wanted to speak to because I feel this is perhaps something that we need to eventually codify with regard to siting cell towers. My experience in the District of Puna, in the subdivisions of Puna, has been that we have a much more positive response to siting cell towers when it is done on communally held land. In my experience in Hawaiian Shores Community Association, we went forth with a cell tower in 2011, and it was decided to place it in the most remote location that we could provide that still met the demands of the cellular service providers. And, that was on lands that was held by the Homeowners' Association at the end of the dead-end street up against a large State parcel of land so that the nearest residence was more than 200 feet away. Do be aware that in spite of efforts to mitigate noise, there is an incessant hum that comes from these operations. So, trying to get that distance from nearby residents is really, really critical. In that instance, we had to—it was required that we get three-quarters of the membership of the Homeowners' Association to agree and that went forward and we got that and so we built the EXHIBIT B 2 tower. Nanawale has also built [a] tower on their held community association lands and that has worked out well as has Leilani. Not only does it help to prevent some land use conflicts within these subdivisions of Puna, it also provides an alternative revenue for the homeowners' association so they're not fully dependent on the membership fees, assessments that are issued annually. In this case, we're talking Paradise Park, 8,800 lots, and they are rapidly being built on. We're well over 5,500 built -out lots in the subdivision approaching 6,000. We're about two-thirds built out in HPP, and while it is zoned Agricultural, the subdivisions of Puna, one has to understand were zoned Agricultural under terms that we don't have on the Codes today. Meaning, we don't agricultural lands that are less than five acres. But, back when, we did the substandard subdivisions. They were zoned Agricultural. That being said, these non -conforming ag lots are mainly being used for rural residential, not agriculture, and so the build out in Paradise Park is increasing rapidly, and I am concerned that the proximity of this tower on a privately held parcel will potentially impact the neighbors in that area. Many people are concerned about radio-frequency waves and things like that. There's also the noise factor, and, ultimately, there's the sight, our scenic impact, visual impact of cell towers. I have found that it's best to work with a third party, cellular construction company. In the case of Hawaiian Shores Community Association, we dealt with a company, Vista Towers, and the reason I say that is when you have a sole carrier application, Verizon Wireless and/or AT&T, the towers are not built to accommodate the other pertinences of the other carriers. When you use a third -party tower construction company, they will build the tower and accommodate all the major carriers to site their appurtenances on that tower. A 150 -foot tower can easily accommodate three or four cellular carriers. You have to have the 10 -foot vertical distance to shield, and they can still get the gain that they're looking for in terms of coverage. So, I think that this is some issue that we might want to consider codifying at some point because if we just allow sole carrier towers to be built, we're doubling and tripling the number of cell towers that might eventually be built in the County of Hawaii which is more of a visual blight. It doesn't really benefit the residents since we can site on single towers. So, these are some of the issues I brought forward. I'd likeI said I've been in contact with some of the nearby residents to this particular lot. They have some health concerns about it and what not. I'm not saying I don't share those. I'm just, that's not why I came before you today `cause I think this is an important issue that we need to consider how to properly advance construction of cell towers on the Big Island. We need the coverage. Absolutely. So, that's what I brought to you today. Thank you very much. Any questions? CLARKSON: I'm sorry. There won't be any questions OHARA: Oh, that's right. CLARKSON: —from the Commission today, but your testimony is now part of the record for this application. EXHIBIT B 3 OHARA: Thank you, and you have it in writing as well. Thank you. CLARKSON: Thank you. The public testimony ended at 9:48 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Sarah Y. Hata-Finley, Secretary Windward Planning Commission EXHIBIT B 4