HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-02-26.HKCDP.SCMinutes.DraftHarry Kim
Mayor
Michael Yee
Director
Daryn Arai
Deputy Director
County of Hawaii
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN STEERING COMMITTEE
Aupuni Center • 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720
Phone(808)961-8288 • Fax(808)961-8742
1 Monday, February 26, 2018
2 DRAFT Meeting Minutes
3
4 CALL TO ORDER
5 Vice Chair Gomes called the Hamakua Community Development Plan (HCDP) Steering Committee (SC)
6 to order at 5:13 p.m. in the North Hawaii Education and Research Center (NHERC) Conference Room.
7 ROLL CALL
8 Steering Committee Members Present: Glenn Carvalho, Farrah -Marie Gomes, Brad Kurokawa, Lorraine
9 Mendoza, Ka'iulani Pahi'o
10 Steering Committee Members Absent -Excused: Scott Enright, Jason Moniz, Craig Neff
11 Staff: Director Michael Yee, April Surprenant, CoH Planners: LeAna Gloor, Keiko Mercado, and Eric
12 Cook.
13 Members of the public: 26 members of the public were in attendance.
14 ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA: None
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
1. CDP Planner, LeAna Gloor, announced that the County of Hawaii Planning Department CDP
websites were down and that the web hosting service was working to resolve the issue.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS: 6 members of the public provided testimony on agenda
items.
1. Kalani Lyman, representing Papa'ikou, provided testimony on business item #1. His main
concern was with the development of agricultural land in Papa'ikou. Mr. Lyman explained that
his family has lived in Papa'ikou for 6 generations. He expressed concern about agricultural
land being bought and subdivided into many lots for housing. He expressed that he does not
want to see Hawai'i Island overdeveloped and become crowded with traffic issues.
2. Jim Cain, representing himself, provided testimony on business item #1. His main concern was
with Community Action 32. Mr. Cain stressed the need to develop evacuation plans as well as
proactive stream management plans.
3. Tony Guiteras, representing himself, provided testimony on business item #1. Mr. Guiteras
expressed concern about public access to the Papa'ikou Mill. He stated that he would like to
see the agricultural land remain as such. He also stated that the community in Papa'ikou would
like to see that development happen above the highway, preserving viewplanes to the coast.
Hawai `i County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer Page I
33 4. Robert Nishimoto, representing himself, provided testimony on business item #1. He stated
34 that he is a resident of Ninole. Mr. Nishimoto inquired about Policy 18. He questioned the
35 reasoning for requiring a licensed civil engineer and not a geologist to perform a lateral safety
36 buffer, cliff stability and/or geological analysis. Ms. Gloor responded to his inquiry and
37 explained that topic would be covered in a discussion later in the meeting.
38 5. Connie Fay, representing Ahualoa Community Association, provided testimony on business
39 item #1. Ms. Fay expressed her concern that the spirit of the CDP document should represent
40 the needs of the people who live in Hamakua. She stated that she believes the maps within the
41 CDP are not accurate for the Ahualoa area. She additionally stated that she would like the
42 County to walk the Hamakua area to ground -truth road and trail accessibility.
43 6. Carlton Loving, representing Honomu, provided testimony on business item #1. His concern
44 was with Policy 22 and the change in verbiage from "shall" to "should". He expressed concern
45 that the change in language will take the teeth out of the policy.
46
47 APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
48 Chair Kurokawa moved to approve the minutes of the June 8, 2017 meeting, as submitted. Second by
49 Committee Member Lorraine Mendoza. The motion to approve the minutes as submitted passed with
50 5 votes aye, 0 votes nay.
51 REPORTS AND OTHER PRESENTATIONS: None.
52
53
54 BUSINESS:
55
56 The following business item is reviewing the Revision Summary of the Recommend Hamakua
57 CDP, which can be found here: http://records.hawaiicounty.gov/Weblink/1/doc/92120/Pagel.aspx.
58
59 1. Review of Agency Comment on the "Recommended Hamakua CDP" and of Revisions
60 Recommended by the Planning Director: CDP Planner, LeAna Gloor, presented an overview of
61 the agency comments and Director's recommendations to the HCDP. Ms. Gloor stated that the
62 last meeting was in December 2016, in which the steering committee voted to approve the
63 HCDP. Since then there have been agency reviews and suggestions by the Planning Director.
64 From February to June the HCDP was in agency review. Ms. Gloor explained that not all the
65 changes made in agency review were substantive, that many were typographical or naming
66 errors, and clarification of language. Some revisions were made because of changes in state
67 legislature, and that no maps within the HCDP were revised.
68 Ms. Gloor presented the revisions made to Policy 1 regarding the urban growth boundary.
69 Chair Kurokawa inquired if the urban growth boundary will be added as a symbol to the maps.
70 Ms. Gloor stated that we will provide clarity with the maps and that the urban growth
71 boundary will be added into the legend when the maps are updated.
72 Ms. Gloor presented revisions made to Policy 2 and Policy 4. Chair Kurokawa inquired about
73 Policy 4 and if there would be changes to allowed uses when rezoning a parcel from rural to
74 family agricultural. Ms. Gloor explained that the changes were made to be in agreement with
75 State Land Use Districts, and it was not addressing a change to the allowed uses.
www.hiplanningdept.com hamakua(a�hawahcounty.Qov Page 2
76 Ms. Gloor presented the revisions made to Policy 5, Policy 8, and Policy 13. Chair Kurokawa
77 commented on the deletion of Policy 13. He stated that he understood it was removed to be in
78 line with State Land Use Laws but disagreed with the limitation on planning strategies within
79 State Land Use Laws and expressed that he hoped in the future the State Land Use laws
80 regarding minimum lot size in the Agricultural District could be revised to allow for clustering to
81 protect natural resources.
82 Ms. Gloor presented the revisions made to Policy 18, Policy 20, Policy 22, and Policy 34. She
83 spoke to an earlier question regarding Policy 18 and the requirement of a licensed civil
84 engineer to perform cliff stability and geological studies. She stated that the policy requires a
85 licensed civil engineer because the state of Hawai'i does not license geologists or other types of
86 soil scientists, and it is common in other states to require a licensed professional perform the
87 studies. Chair Kurokawa stated that he would like to see the County suggest a more specified
88 professional than a civil engineer and Ms. Gloor stated that since the policy is calling for a
89 future change in code and department rule, the exact wording of the rule/code change is still
90 to be determined and it is possible that further clarifying requirements can be added through
91 that public process of revising the code/rule to ensure that civil engineers have specific
92 geotechnical experience.
93 Committee Member Pahi'o expressed concern about consideration for inland cliff setbacks and
94 not just shoreline setbacks. Ms. Gloor explained that inland cliff setbacks are covered in Policy
95 39.
96 Ms. Gloor discussed Policy 39 and Policy 48. Chair Kurokawa inquired about the 40% slope
97 standard originated in Policy 39, and Ms. Gloor explained it was based on the similar guidance
98 used by other municipalities for slope setbacks.
99 Ms. Gloor presented the revisions made to Kokua Action 19 and Policy 78. Chair Kurokawa
100 inquired about Policy 78. He noticed that Honomu was not on the list and asked how they
101 determine where water availability may be inhibiting infill capacity. Ms. Gloor responded that
102 those communities listed in Policy 78 were previously identified as areas that may have water
103 issues that inhibit infill capacity, but that does not limit the Policy from applying to other
104 communities in the future who may have, or develop, water capacity issues that inhibit infill
105 growth.
106 A member of the public asked how Ninole will change when more houses are built. Ms. Gloor
107 responded that she was not clear about the question, but if it is referring to recent
108 development in Ninole, that development was based on existing zoning and there is nothing in
109 the CDP to facilitate growth in Ninole.
110 Ms. Gloor presented the revisions of Community Action 32, Community Action 34, Policy 108,
111 Policy 110, Policy 115 and Policy 118.
112 A member of the public inquired about Policy 18 and asked why parcels with cliffs over 40 feet
113 have recommended setbacks and not cliffs that are less than 40 feet in height. Ms. Gloor
114 answered that 40 feet relates to the current minimum setback.
115 Committee Member Carvalho expressed concern over the change in verbiage from "shall" to
116 "should" for policies 8 and 22. He believed that the committee was very deliberate about when
117 they chose to use the word "shall" and that removing it would take some of the teeth out of
www.hiplanningdept.com hamakut0hawaiicounty.-ov Page 3
118 the policies. He expressed he would like to see the verbiage to remain as "shall". Ms. Gloor
119 explained that the changes in verbiage were recommendations from Corporation Council and
120 these two policies were not originally intended to be mandates.
121 Chair Kurokawa (in relation to Policy 108) expressed concern that the State and County are not
122 doing anything to preserve viewsheds. He stressed the need to identify and protect scenic
123 resources in future planning so that Policy 108 could be implemented.
124 A member of the public stated her concern with the dairy farming operation in O'okala; that
125 there is no policy that addresses the number of animals dairy farms are allowed to keep. She
126 asked if there is anything that can be done to amend the CDP to address the dairy farm
127 situation in O'okala. Ms. Gloor responded that the focus of the meeting is not to revise the
128 CDP, but to review the agency comments and revisions. She explained that the situation with
129 the dairy was not an issue during the creation of the CDP, therefore it was not addressed in the
130 CDP and there are other appropriate mechanisms to address issues with farming practices. Ms.
131 Gloor pointed out that there are other policies in the CDP related to watershed protection that
132 may relate to the dairy issues, but that the dairy is not specifically addressed in the CDP.
133 Councilwoman Poindexter addressed commented that there are ongoing efforts to resolve the
134 dairy issue separately from the CDP.
135 Councilwoman Poindexter inquired about Policy 118. Ms. Poindexter asked if the policy
136 included confined animal feeding operations for cattle and other livestock other than pigs. Ms.
137 Gloor stated that community originally was concerned about the minimum distance
138 requirements for beekeepers — for example, the requirement for bee hives to be 1,000 feet
139 away from public roads might not work for our small beekeeping operations. Ms. Gloor
140 pointed out that other amendments to the code may be appropriate to address other farm
141 issues, but this particular policy was focused on how the zoning requirements of minimum
142 distances affect the operations of small farms.
143 2. Discussion of Steering Committee Roles during CDP Adoption: Ms. Gloor announced that the
144 recommended HCDP is to go before the Windward Planning Commission on April 12, 2018 at
145 5:30 p.m. at the North Hawaii Education and Research Center conference room. Ms. Gloor
146 stated that it will be agendized as a CDP meeting and she invited and encouraged both
147 Committee Members and members of the public to attend.
148 Ms. Gloor presented the process of the Planning Commission review of the HCDP. The first
149 hearing is Thursday April 12th, 2018 at the North Hawaii Education Research Center at 5:30pm
150 and the second hearing will be Thursday May 3rd, at 9:00 a.m. at the Aupuni Center conference
151 room in Hilo. The first hearing will primarily involve a presentation to the commission about the
152 CDP and it will take testimony from the public. The second hearing is the opportunity for the
153 commission to discuss the CDP and vote on recommending it to the County Council.
154 Committee Member Carvalho asked if the Steering Committee would be meeting again after
155 the February 261h meeting. Ms. Gloor replied that there is not another anticipated meeting for
156 the Hamakua Steering Committee prior to the Windward Planning Commission meeting.
157 Committee Member Carvalho asked if Steering Committee members have to accept the
158 proposed changes to the HCDP if they do not agree with them. Ms. Gloor responded that if
159 committee members have issues with the Planning Director revisions, the planning team would
160 be interested in hearing about them. She stated that the Planning Department would not want
www.hiplanningdept.com hamakutahawaiicounty.-ov Page 4
161 to move forward a CDP that the Steering Committee would not stand behind. She also stated
162 that all testimony on the revisions would be presented to the Planning Commission.
163 Vice Chair Gomes stated that she believed the united voice of the Steering Committee stands
164 with the approval of the HCDP. Vice Chair Gomes stated that any further comments that a
165 Steering Committee member chooses to make is up to the individual to speak as a citizen,
166 unless there is a request to open up the vote again to discuss substantial issues with the HCDP.
167 She announced that it could be opened up for discussion if there were any Steering Committee
168 members who feel that any of the revisions warrant further debate.
169 Committee Member Carvalho expressed disappointment that the Steering Committee does not
170 have the final say in approval of the Hamakua CDP. Chair Kurokawa asked Committee Member
171 Carvalho if he was uncomfortable with something other than the recent revisions.
172 Committee Member Carvalho stated that he thought the Steering Committee was not given
173 enough time to review and reflect on the revisions to the HCDP. Mr. Carvalho suggested that
174 the Steering Committee take more time to review the revisions and that they meet again to
175 discuss those changes.
176 Chair Kurokawa stated that he had voiced his opinion on the changes and that he accepted the
177 revisions to the HCDP. Vice Chair Gomes stated that she approved of the revisions and would
178 stand by the recommendations of the Planning Director.
179 Ms. Gloor announced that if the Steering Committee would like to revisit the revisions to the
180 HCDP for discussion, they are welcome to do so, although it would need to be at a separate
181 agendized meeting.
182 Vice Chair Gomes stated that a vote could not be taken on the revisions to the HCDP because it
183 was not on the agenda and she asked Steering Committee members to address the issue of a
184 future CDP committee meeting with Planning Staff via email if there is a desire to continue the
185 discussion of the revisions to the HCDP.
186 AGENDA FOR NEXT MEETING: Planning Commission review of the HCDP on April 12, 2018.
187
188 ADJOURNMENT: Vice Chair Gomes adjourned the meeting at 7:15 p.m.
I:•
190 All Action Committee information can be viewed and downloaded from our website:
191 http://www.hawaiicountycdp.info/hamakua-cdp
192
www.hiplanningdept.com hamakutahawaiicounty.-ov Page 5