ok commissioners can go ahead and begin i'll go ahead and call the meeting to order first on the agenda is public testimony and a public testimony at this t saying then we're go on to the next item of business communications item c one forward to put your company director state department of transportation requesting comments from the molokai planning commission regarding the national historic preservation ak section one hundred six consultation on the bridge replacement project coming out of we have highway kid two five four zero zero three  seventy meetings which are both the last form soon after the meeting so called to order and therefore needed to be cancelled replacement he did have it in your package in august of the twenty third and we can discuss if there's anything that you want to respond to consul just for information purposes for the commission i just want to reach you the purposes of the section one hundred six process section one hundred six of the national historic preservation act requires federal agencies to take into account the effect of their undertakings on historic properties and for the council not our county council a reasonable opportunity to comment on such undertakings the procedures define how federal agencies meet the tree responsibilities the section one hundred six process seeks to accommodate historic preservation concerns with the needs of federal undertakings through consultation among the agency official and other parties with an interest in the effects of the undertaking on historic properties com at the early stages of the project planning the goal of consultation is to identify historic properties put the affected by the undertaking assess its effects and seek ways to avoid minimize or mitigate any adverse effects on historic propert if you look at the letter that they sent you one page to basically says we welcome any comments you may have on this project we are particularly interested in any information you have on this historic and cultural sites that imported in the area or any other historic or cultural sites about which you may have knowledge in addition if you are acquainted with any persons or organization that is knowledgeable about the proposed project area or any descendants with and lineal or cultural ties or two to or cultural knowledge or concerns for and cultural or religious attachment to the proposed project area we would appreciate receiving their names and contact information so this is your opportunity to provide comment and submit any names or organizations that you think may have information for government thank you it's whatever's in this letter is what the department got a little additional ok thank you very much then my feedback would be number one that i would want to know part of the stakeholder list my other county state her position i believe she is an archaeologist but i don't know if she's a consultant working our or she's teaching school but she's from all she seems to be on lynn archeologists that's born and raised because i'm i would like to see there are archaeological monitoring plan at the time of construction because feedback is it would have been nice for them to give us links to additional information for this project and i'm assuming they did an environmental assessment but i don't see that anywhere referenced here and then when i talk to people that live in cover the law asked me to same question why  and it was evaluated in twenty thirteen but i didn't see why it was a priority so it's one of those and then it wasn't really clear how long the project would take to come from start to completion and what i don't wanna see is the i'm really concerned about the historic and cultural inadvertent finds with a project like this in that area i have one more question can you repeat what document was that the because i heard three different cavell i not sure what the document is called all i know it's all archaeological and cultural and additional information schedule for the june twenty seventh team july twelve twenty seventeen and september thirteenth two thousand and seventeen meetings but due to other lengthy items on the agenda the commission could not hear this matter and at this time i would like to turn the mike over to mr hart so he can make his presentation thank you thank you sir good morning sharon members my name is jordan or plan fenton i think everyone is familiar with the project location this is an aerial photograph of the projects this blue area here is the work area that we're discussing the majority of it is  sidewalk the existing sidewalks there was a assessment and safety assessment on the sidewalks and the clue received a series of recommendations on improvements they needed to do to their sidewalks in order to comply with accessibility requirements and eliminate slip and fall or tripping hazards and then the other item is there is the villian right over here on the corner by the showers that it's currently undermined it's  maybe approximately one quarter to one third maybe one quarter undermined the slab is hanging out over the bank and so they're proposing to remove that there's also a flanking wall it's not a shoreline it's not a rivette meant it doesn't stop wave action it's probably like a foot and a half to two foot wall but they are going to propose to remove that as part of this action so regarding the parcels they're both in the urban district the hotel parcels hotel the parcel where the flanking wall extends into his own park the community plan designations are h one n a one apartment and then the park parcel is open space and go of course this is the state land use map the yellow is urban district the project site is completely within the urban district here is the county zoning map with the hotel in park and then the community plan map so as i noted there was a safety inaccessibility assessment that was done which identified the issues that we have and i'll go through a took a series of photos basically progressing approximately fifteen feet through the entire work area so you can just see exactly what we're talking about and i'll go through that in a moment but it's these these these are the types of issues that are being addressed substandard curb sizes excuse me there's also locations where the grade does not meet a standard so some of those will need to be addressed you have basically grade issues here so what like i said i'll go through a more thorough photo analysis of the sidewalk work but those are character descriptions of what's going to happen and then the other item is the pavilion and so this is the location of the pavilion up on the left side here this is the pad that's being undermined significantly so down here down here is the bank this is the area where it's really being undermine d the other photos that i have had the sun with it to my back in this photo so you can see a little bit better this is that low flanking wall this is not it's not a sequel but it is on the shoreline but anyway that's proposed to be removed and then all of the disturbed areas proposed to be replanted with native plants we expect that this area is going to be some sort of ground cover and then the area on the south side of the pavilion there's a big bank and there's other already know back over there so probably be no pockets so that people don't walk through that and go off the edge so anyway what i'm going to do now is i'll just transition to the mitigation measures for the demolition process and then i'll go through the longer set of photos but anyway the work will be scheduled during low tide fences will be put up anticipate an estimate minor permit with some conditions which is satisfactory to the applicant the total budget is and into submitted to be approximately one hundred twenty thousand dollars or less as stated  repair of these existing pathways is an exempted action and then the demolition of the pavilion is happening just because it's a safety hazard it's also you know a potential erosion hazard and you'll see that more from the photos that i'll show to follow so i'm going to transition into just just a slideshow of only photos and i'll just try to briskly walk you through those so you can get a complete understanding of what this is so this is beginning in the parking lot this will be an example this is a tripping hazard that needs to be addressed these areas here also well probably need to be addressed there's uplifting in various locations more uplifting here and so what i did basically as i was just walk through the entire pathway from start to finish some of the shots i turned back to make sure that i caught things but more uplifting uplifting on the corner here  or uplifting over here have appropriate grade this section may need to be reported just because of the great issue there is a break in this this section of the grade goes in the wrong direction and then this here and then this  are issues i believe this is the begin by the pool area these curves are substandard so they'll need to be addressed and whether or not this this grade meets standard need to be addressed as well more curbing that substandard curbing and then the next area it will head down to the cart path so this is the stairs any of these transitions may need to be addressed this asphalt cart path is just intended to be path this concrete connection area transition to a stairway i do go down anyway sorry no work is proposed here but i just go down to the extent of it just to show it ok sorry ok so now we're on the pad looking southwest i this is looking from the corner back up so the walls running this way ok and then this is the excuse me this area is probably the most significant overhang these are all pieces that have come down already and then you know it's so this had been boarded up the last time i looked at it and somebody opened it up so it's an attractive nuisance and you know it's an environmental concern as well so they're proposing to remove it we did get a comment from s h p architecture regarding the status of the structure it's less than fifteen years old or fifty years old is not considered to be a stork and so you know that's the proposed action thank you for your consideration team got numerous calls because of the high water we actually came and covered covered all the way up to the top so some some locals are concern citizens sent some pictures of the high water mark going all the way over during the winter season and actually covering  i want to i want to actually show where and how far of the water waves actually came up to that the vegetation up on the top and you kind of see the war on and the pavilion and so the shoreline team prior to misters vent then i think it was clear  actually sat down with their team and the shoreline team kind of figure out how all would be best you know mitigation measures to help with the falling of the pavilion  waves coming up so it was more of a hazardous area and once the season when now the year twenty sixteen ohm there are a lot of beachgoers that actually kind of congregated in these areas and so they had to block it off they used that didn't where they use the orange mesh that didn't work because the ocean kind of s and so we finally actually came up with thanks to the consultant and the team for actually working out they actually wanted to keep the wall in that is located towards the beach side but the recommendation from the shoreline team was to actually remove it and so with some other mitigation measures that mr hart talked about and those that are in the report those actually came from the shoreline team so i kind of want to give them some credit that they actually came the owners actually came in to actually work with mitigation measures with the show nineteen to see how they could best adjust the situation  and if mr venting doesn't have anything to add and i would turn the time over to the chair ok thank you duties or privileges of the applicant we're going to add a step to this process mr hart opportunity for a public testimony will be afforded to the public shortly do you wish to cross examine any public testify or this thank you so much for working on this project from twenty fifteen i had taken pictures of the recommendations did they realize that this was a project that might have qualified for a major mayor permit as opposed to a minor similar permit because of the addition all additions into a rock wall and of the work related to the shoreline so so you know who the team consisted of and then i can go from there to let you know who yeah i don't know if that's really relevant except that the recommendation is because just in the review that we had today which is the first time we saw the project other than the correspondence we have dated july fourteenth twenty seventeen  realize the scope of the project which is quite large and so i have choco you know with the valuation but it is what it is but i think because the project is a large project encompassing several aspects including hard surfaces and hazardous materials i'm finding it difficult to see th e miner permit reasonings why you think it qualifies as a minor permit so going back and forth with the shoreline team and the owners and his team they actually wanted to do something bigger and this was the the best mitigation measurements that we could come up with hired a structural engineer to figure out how they can still keep and preserve the rock area of the it if they could build upon that and keep it they really actually wanted to keep that wall and they were hiring structural engineers to figure out how they can do it and as as they proceed in that take and the undertaking of that the best possible they actually really wanted to keep it so now they agreed that the bests most cost effective was to actually demolish it remove it in its entirety major use that would be one of the criteria mr yoshida can chime in and correct me if i'm wrong but trying to answer your question that is the route this is why they're here at at this stage and the scope of work that they chose because of the other options they actually had was not operable or not not cost effective at the time of them submitting their application during the review so the department will review it and and if there is a need to do a cost breakdown to show the valuation if it will go either over or come back to you and say listen we're getting close to we didn't expect this we didn't expect this we didn't expect this kind of close to five hundred thousand dollars mill that you won't that won't be seen during the estimate i can see where you're going not because that construction during that time but that this would encompass what what the overall project would cost so after this image and you know whatever permits that they would have to get for that it kind of would have to be in that ok that would be constituted in that costs analysis that they would have to submit to the problem with the valuation of the project ok it is that actions within the project that i'm concerned with and those concerns are number one with the actual demolition occurring on the i don't know what company is doing there i don't know what this management practice is the company is in imploring during this demolition all the wall the seam and all how is that going to occur how are they going to traverse over this and over the native grasses to the area in order to remove structures the third would be the replacement plantings question the question for me is has the certified shoreline been done within a  because it looks like we are replacing hard surfaces in areas where the high water is occurring so why would you put hard surface that are constructed of hazardous materials back into high water areas and he also stated on the record that and i am aware that our engineering was used for safety purposes and that got washed all in the high seas so that's putting hazardous materials into the near shore waters and in the ocean that has the impact to marine life so the coastal zone project as to whether the actions occurring within the special management area will impact the shoreline in my opinion there is impact to the shoreline that should not be exempt i and i have more questions then what can be offered either in the paraphernalia that was given to us today on july fourteenth and through the power point but  that does not mean that i do not support improvements of course we do we know that the area has been out of service as a  being impacted by high water and the said that if we are the reason for a certified shoreline certification is because we do have sea level ri on the adjacent shoreline oh papa and for that we can turn to the restoration study have no impact to the shoreline or near shore waters so that's my concern is not really about the evaluation of the project it's the actions that are occurring on a large much larger scale following conditions and i'll i'll go one on one because it actually addresses that the first one is the project shall be in accordance with the descriptions submitted on february fourteenth as repertoire and present representation is made to the department so th be implemented to ensure water quality and marine resources are protected all construction related materials shall be free of pollutants and police are stored in ways to avoid or minimize disturbance no debris p contained in the immediate vicinity of construction through the use of effective suit containment device is because during adverse weather conditions shall be curtailed to minimize the potential for adverse water quality impacts that the contractor shall perform the work in a manner that minimizes environmental pollution and damage as a result of construction operations then vironment to resources within the project boundaries and those affected outside the limits of permanent work sh be protected during the entire duration of the construction period that the activity slash you shall not adversely affect a federally listed threatened or endangered species or a species proposed for such does ignition or destroy or adversely modify its designated critical habitat like the one that goes there that activity you shall not substantially disrupt the movement of those species of aquatic life indigenous to the area including those species which normally migrate through the area that no contamination of the marine our coastal environment trash or debris shall result from the project related authorize activities slash uses that norm or rise construction equipment is to be operated in the water at any time that in the event that there is a petroleum spill on the sand the operator shall promptly remove the can time and needed sand from the beach the applicants number nine is about the the ordinance and the rules and regulations number eleven goes requires that the applicant shall take measures to ensure that the public is adequately informed of the project activities work once it is initiated and the need to avoid the project area during the operation the public access along the shoreline during construction shall be maintained so far as practically practical and within the limitations necessary to ensure immediately for activities and implementation regarding like for example equipment must not be refueled in the shoreline area what to do during visible petroleum people present during those portions of the project which involve any ground altering disturbance in order to document any historic properties which may be encountered and to provide mitigation measures as necessary  fifteen that the applicant shall plant vegetation land rid of the shoreline i maintain the vegetation planted in the shoreline area to ensure the beach chan's it part of fronting the property is kept passable and free of vegetation that the project shoreline do we know what the shoreline certification i method and because it is the calculation of the charlotte setback is greater than six hundred feet which the surely a set back is one hundred fifty feet so there for the actual work is is work on the shoreline that would be the the removal the wall and then obviously the the undermining of the the pavilion you know that's really the shoreline is is right under the pavilion right there and so that's why we did file issue and setback assessment but you know this we believe this action is is able to be assessed to be exempt from assurance or back variance based on a just being a repair and maintenance of existing and also the removal removal of structure from the shoreline area if i could and team did after listening to him did come up with that they support this project and the reason is that they're removing the wall and the reason why they're real and that was one of the recommendations from the shoreline team to the the owners and they what they would support this in within that area  i'm sure to revisit the question about whether or not we had any comments i did think of one request that we do have there is a one year duration on the work and there's also a requirement that we have an approved archeological monitoring plan from as  have already prepared our archaeological monitoring plan and we have submitted it to sh pretty but you know they definitely have a lot of work right now and they've they've take some time to respond to applications and so what i'm requesting is that there be consideration that the  the one year duration start at the department's receipt of a siege pretties approval of our our monitoring plan because that would be the earliest date we could actually do work thank you take us to hurt  what would happen to these improvement plans and what happened to the permit can be transferred to department administers that process regularly can't can be transferred is what i'm saying ok thank you saw that too i don't condition number is if we in that high water mark i also know the cement that is planning to be removed is a great idea it should be removed because it's also in sure see vegetation plan or restoration plan and part of that is that we don't run into issues with and i know you said you're going to see it's kept free from passable   if it's possible the condition could be amended to to say that we would plant in the disturbed area because we're not we're not proposing to do any additional planting except for basically stabilize the area that's going to be disturbed because the  pad is partially buried and then there's going to be you know when that's when that's removed that area's going to be exposed and then the wall is partially buried so when that's broken and dug up there's going to be a hole and so the proposal is just to put the over the exposed soil area and then plant and so when you're talking about planting we're not proposing to do any action because i all the action is going to happen from the monk aside you know taking out of the shoreline area which which i agree with you i think that the shoreline from when i walked it is is either under the slab and then at the face of that wall and sometimes it's going to there's a portion of the wall that's actually floating so there's the sand is under under the wall so anyway the only area proposed to be to be planted is the disturbed area and obviously there is also no accretion is as far as you could try it a land owner could try and do that but the state doesn't allow you to clean land and not that that's the intent here but it's just not this was actually a suggestion made from the shoreline team so some of these conditions are actually actually came from the shoreline team to actually have vegetation because after  so it was what the applicant the consultant provided and which you have here i don't see what we've done what they've done that you guys did it did not see in here hard i would just like to add that normally we don't prepare g i s maps for the department even for us i mean major permits but what i would say also is that you know i recognize that there is an interest in making sure that there is a complete understanding of what the project area was so i did take approximately one hundred photographs which we went through and that's what i believe is is the submittals and representations that are being made to the to the commission here today the department has those on the computer here and that's the work area that we're talking about we did use aerial photographs and outlined the hard skipper that you can see in the aerial photographs but there wasn't a set of plans on record that was was usable for the sidewalks and there wasn't a new land survey of the entire area and i think that you know in the con in the context of the scope of what this project is which is basically making these mr chair i would like to state for the record that that i'm uncomfortable with approving multiple improvements it would have been easier for those two to separate projects because i hardly go to a sin like my the maker of the eighty when it was really clear that it was just too close to the shoreline period these hard surfaces and structures are still too close to my opening in and so at least we could have dealt with that separately instead of being at a bundle package an all or nothing so that's where my uncomfortable issues come within because even with the sixteen conditions be repaired isn't a concern for myself and the demolition itself saw he says stated my concerns on the record in a more discussion community about their section of our lives and how they feel i live there and all my family lives on the west side and that's all i hear a ball is when are they going to take this thing down and not only that i see uses that area let's not get it twisted that that some kind of resort area community use it in fact they drive their cars all over the place that's why the ranch had to hire a security form firm to stop that kind of incursion that kind disrespect on the land the fence didn't fall in the water the entrance the fence was ripped down by the locals threw it on the ground then it went into the ocean so let's get that right that's what happened the watering come in take that fence away the trash that police in the end did needs to be cleaned it needs to be cleaned up yesterday so that's my opinion need to be reported to a proper grade and then the curbs there there would be more of a standardized curbside like you see in any excuse mostly concerned with the shoreline sure ok so so basically you go to the photos  area and then like i was saying proposing bohu who are planted in that area and then on the where the pavilion is and the slab on this other side that would all be removed and then there would be netting over any of the expos soil there and i recommend well i would suggest based on there is no pocket there already just planting more not park on that location just because that is a is a higher bank that would be it there's it's just remov where the wall is removed and so i think that that would that should be filled in with the soil that's immediately around it so i think that it would generally not as much of this area but if you if you look at the photos that that look north that just keep going the up go to go the other direction sorry keep going maybe back to the presentation anyway the wall the wall goes into the bank as it goes farther towards toward away from the resort and that that portion is the lower slope but when you take when you break the wall up and you take it out it's going to be a trench and so what should happen is that around it should be pushed into the trench just so it's not a hole and then the biodegradable netting would be putting over that and then the plantings put in that area so as far as exact gr couldn't i couldn't tell you but the intent would be to make it not just so it's smooth as opposed to being a tree you know hole that you can step into but that's it it's just removal stabilize it and that's it yeah but anyway up on that bank if you look at it when it's the inside the power point there might be a better photo but anyway as it goes in that direction it sinks into the wall when it when it's closer to the pavilion is kind of out in front of the bank but on the on the lower on the other end it's it's kind of sits inside the bank to get the dig it up dig it out basically when you break it you have to pull it out there it inside the power point there there might be a better photo of it there you see how it gets buried by the the grass goes over it it's starting to starting to go into the bank but when you break that out that will be the that will be a hole there and so it just what i was saying just pushing the soil into that hole that's immediately around it just a staple which to smooth it out as opposed to leaving a hole which is just a different  approval of the archaeological monitoring plan and one year from that you commissioners were all the more discussion i i have one discussion and i want to get it on the record accessibility during construction period and i know i don't  is that suffice or would but i'm assuming there is a public access from all that is specifically designated as a public jordan heart so i think that what we could propose to do is start with one end of the wall the north end of the wall first remove it and finish and finish it so that could be open and then move on to the t seeing is i go to the hotel and i park my car in one of the resort area parking spaces and then i traverse to the shoreline so i'm assuming there isn't a more you  for public access that is granted along with the hotel when it was bill all i'm saying is i do not want that x is area to be blocked in any way because it did that if you're not sure on the record then i would like a condition eighteen to be that the that that pool sides will ensure that there is public access from the parking area to the shoreline during the construction period property hopefully parking in that and walking to the beach we want to make sure that that is i mean how are they going to get to the beach of the park and to the beach because you have signage that says beach parking right on the front parking lot the only areas that would be fenced off would be areas that are under construction at that time with regard to the sidewalks those would be done incrementally and so there wouldn't be fencing off the entire area to block up shoreline access at any time there might be portions of a specific location where they need to work at the time they're actually doing work but they're not going to be fencing the entire area that we're talking about in this project at the same time and then keeping it blocked for a long period of time ok thank you because i was alluding to  so it's a safety issue with this because there is going to be ongoing construction and that's usually mitigated by been seen and what i don't want to happen is that the person civil of his plan or the public hearing began at the june twenty eight twenty seventeen meeting and the public hearing was closed at the august night twenty seventeen meeting the matter was deferred to the aug twenty third tw seventeen meeting the commission to last at the august twenty third twenty seventeen meeting soon after the meeting was called to order and the meeting had to be cancelled the commission low score added september thirteenth the commission take action on a subject application re so this is a considered a contested case pursuant to law that will determine the legal rights duties or privileges of the applicant we're adding a step to this process as well so mr opportunity for public testimony will be afforded to the public shortly do you wish to cross examine any public testify just wanted to add as you look at the report just to make sure that you know that the report is dated and was submitted in june twenty eighth twenty seventeen so the report is based before you begin can you please state your name for the record you know point boy do you solemnly swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes thank you i just have a couple of notes use i don't even think residence is a primary use and so i do feel like it's kind of a blatant repurposed thing and without even trying to do agriculture at all you know those water is an issue but there are ways to use it in the land that are more aligned with the primary or even secondary uses so that's my concern and i think it's been mentioned here before that the resolution is in progress it just doesn't make sense to keep improving especially especially on short term rentals while we're still in a place like it's undecided what the cap is going to be it could be more it could be less i'm not sure it could be zero so i just think it makes more sense to hold back until that spinal and and just special use permit and i think it is it's just something that should be especially an angle and i think more looked at a little more critically and not just you know i was just experienced or seen or read minutes where there are just handed out so frivolously without  consideration so that's all i have to say thank you be planning commission so on page three one through six is there a commendation correct and number one it can be changed from june to november and i don't have any questions on this chair but your commissioners to discussion sure since i made the motion to deny it's basically because i don't agree with the department's conclusions of law and three any commercial use public use or facility on lands in state ag or ruled districts shall be subject to the requirements of procedures and guidelines of tool six  the use adversely impact surrounding properties and we have a lot of testimony on short term and those that i believe support the inferences services to respond to tourist types of activities and i cite that many there's been many drownings involving tourists at the and we all know that it's been an issue for emergency services we know that the infrastructure is antiquated and the roads are in bad shape that they don't have sufficient lighting and they're just they're just antiqu so privately owned the private water system and the fire suppression and police response is inadequate and in twelve the conditions insurance have arisen since the district boundaries were drawn and my response is that there is substantial evidence statewide of and perverse impacts by a short term home rental for the special use being requested for many in the community plan and the applicant has not demonstrated public demand or market and i believe the testimony is anecdotal and the applicant has not demonstrated or proven the economic and social benefits of the used to the community and i stating it's my belief that it's actually the reverse the land upon which the proposed use is sought is unsuited for the permitted uses within the district the now and the part the eggs on the land where the proposed use is sought sorry the applicant has not successfully submitted the following and i put the statement of applicants interest of reasons for the special permit was applicant has not conveyed the length of time that the special use is needed special use permits should be for a period of time for which the use is needed as should not be used as a substitute for real zoning needs and then and special use permit should not be indefinite and then example of that is not a good thing grains they have to come in for special use permits even though they've been operating write it down and so i did and i passed it along to you as part of my own findings of facts and conclusions of law as to why i made the motion to deny thank you for your commission to recover another motion or condition it is not necessary to do that but if you guys want further discussion and you guys can come to our resolution as a body with that being said  permit like this is is there the same day for all the permit is granted if no decision is made by this board proconsul yes as we stated earlier in previous meetings this one in the next one on the agenda public hearing i believe an august ninth we did the calculation it comes out to december seventh as the final date for maybe if we could just take out that first line that says in f e m a question mark if yes is it a development i believe this is not an estimate at all so maybe we just eliminate any discussion on a subway and we can just go to the guy nights on special use permit special permit quick to approve those types of not non permitted uses in areas that are not zoned for those uses and so with that  i did research some of this and that's why you see the inferences within the paraphernalia that i handle that is not consistent with the zoning  by the applicant for home or morals and so i have really nor has it in in my motion to deny and stating the findings of facts and conclusions of law having just attended and then use commission because this is fifteen acres or less the planning commi tasked with that responsibility that actually would be a land use commission meeting had this area been fifteen acres or more it would not be here today and it would be in front of them and use commission who is clearly demonstrated that and has been very contentious in other areas throughout the state that the loss of to commercial uses that are not consistent with egg production is frowned upon and so i don't know what else they can say to to be very clear that the law i lands and what there's proposed to be used for and specifically with this case it's a hard sell for me because a stone's throw away less than a mile less than two miles away you have five areas that are zoned for commercial uses for tourism and short term rental so it's a really hard sell that's why you have so it would be if the if this commission sits press that it that we are going to bomb test by the learned use commission and state of hawaii to look at parcels and commercial use is inconsistent with ag and so on land if we set precedents now that we're going to go down that road of spot zoning outside of the parameters of state zoning and the county i  would be very cautious to set that precedent because it will open the door to really bad planning  i think we have the obligation to stick to the law and to make sure that incompatible and inconsistent uses are not al so there's like thirteen fourteen if i did so facts that i submitted to this board in support of my motion to deny because it flies in the face of adversity to the existing permissible uses within and lands the the state  makes many inferences to gentlemen estates and there are large cases that were won i very comfortable in my motion to deny it and i would be uncomfortable trying to amend this to make it more palatable to approving because i don't see it so inconsistent with the objectives of two or five in two of my view that i really can't think of a way to i'm in that and make it more amenable for approval comment or maybe mr chair list talkable default so if by default this commission those not approve or deny and takes no action and this permit is approved we may be opening the door  because and i think it's really not a good precedent for this commission to set that we are indecisive in a for an indecisive because we're unsure of the law or or the parameters under which we're operating then maybe we need more training or maybe we need yeah someone specific to come in and and specifically detrimental in the long run if we take no action ok so basically we have no meeting no they're meeting in november this is our one and only meeting in november or december meeting us on december thirteenth and your deadline is december seventh so ultimately molly to see how we're doing with how we're doing with getting more planning commissioners on board and  option that is given this body is the fur then my requests pending that the fir will would be to schedule a special meeting before the end hearing was initiated it was initiated purposely ignoring that we were not going to have time to complete the hearing and now we find ourselves in this c so i'm very upset that i'm really disheartened and i am not accepting of a deferral unless it will be for a special meeting that is held before december seventh two thousand and action so having said that you said december first and that can go on if the county appoint people correct and how would we so you could make a a mystic chair we're missing a commission commissioner today the commissioner should be back i'm assuming from vacation there would be member that would make either one way or the other and saw let's not forget that we do have one more member that is outstanding i think that we're need to apply we're going to have a special meeting that's going to be not december thirteenth meeting is going to be a meeting that that happens before december of this commission will then be present in order to make a decision  i don't know of any else besides that can we speak to i am number one on the conclusion forget that this is a state permit it is not a county permit it's a special use permit that has restrictions on it  says that it shall be valid until june thirty twenty twenty and i've heard say that that number that date has changed over multiple times because they have it written in here is the first change was august to august thirty first and then most recently staffs in november s how can we are dress this because my thinking is if the difficult goes to the seven and by default this permit is issued who changes the conditions of these permit of these items one through six do we have authority to change diagrams one through six because i would change the date i would change that the to a very short date the first would be to change that permit time to june first twenty eight my purpose for making that amendment is i cannot see us going past june first twenty eighteen without a full commission six months  time to get commissioners approved to this planning commission and i think it's reasonable i don't think it's unreasonable to request  last four meetings that i attended but this plenty commission that i was put on the spot to be very specific a ball my objections on the record and so i kind of took the lead from  that maybe i should have stuff written down if if if i think that it was pertinent and it should be easily transmitted to staff as conclusion the law and that's why i did it so the nice of you coming up with area well it's hard for a commissioner that doesn't have any formal training to respond that fast on the ground and to deny with one descending vote which is the chair and saw in giving you that time alone is not giving you but in the mending the time issu opportunity of three more people coming on with the addition of the chair that it's mission to the four with the chair that's five that's fifty fifty that you permit might get for the whole county so i don't think we're is that of the world well i think on the agenda we also have another applicant that faces the same situation as and i mean for some of the home is through the old they've been doing that for through the year and nobody ever say one w you have to change that because there's a flaw in the planning commission rules or whatever rules that these default times where if you know make one decision in ten days you're permit is granted that is a huge flaw in the law to me it was never acceptable to me that all of these permits are just granted because you ran out of time or you was unable to make a decision i would like to i'm in first item one i think it has no bearing on whether we deny the for or whatever the permit like we've got a to our eye hands up and quit b and look the other way or whatever we say because we don't have any enforcement and just because people operate illegally for years and years and years and years doesn't make it ok it's not ok voted on the last meeting that wasn't ok so that shouldn't have any bearing on whether this gets approved or not or making it legal the way to solve this is for all the people who want to do short term home rentals come in and do a community plan i'm in mid to change the zoning to make their commercial uses ok that's the way they do it that's the proper way to do handle all these types recommendation story of item number one and i'm doing this because in the event that we cannot come to a conclusion by december seventh that this be to june one twenty eighteen and then the risk to applying the s grant it for a month but in the meantime they have to file a renewal application in hundred i mean it could be in december late it's basically going to be them you know and then hundred twenty days before the june first expiration date after already submitted a renewal that's what it that's what it sa expiration if they if they want to come in and reapply or because it expires they don't have any time to request for a time extension so a sixty day period or ninety day would would plus my motion for second and discussion i would be hard pressed to a move which one is amended with a condition to approve i guess it would be discussion so just discuss ok just the condition only without a  ok commission chair if you would bear with me let me try to mitigate this either way i need to ask two questions before we get into nitty gritty number one just for the record mr monroe with the applicant be willing to waive the deadline for the planning commission to make its decision even just for thirty days twenty seventeen meeting the commission at the twenty aug twenty third twenty seventh meeting soon after the meeting was called to order and a meeting had to be canceled the commission at the september and this is totally off subject and some more procedural things that we have to go through what i would like to do is a commission is and and i hate i know they have a right and i think it's kind of hard for me as the public testimony part i know the public has a right to hear but it's unfortunate that we have to listen to and it's not unfortunate because that's their right to testify but sometimes they go on for four hours and it's a shame that we don't get through the meeting because you guys got to leave and they want to come up and testify for the same thing and i want to hear the testimony but how can we in the meeting to the public that when they testify for five always in a meeting for three meetings in a row we find ourselves in this situation where we weren't allowed we do we kind of work with the public as a commission to let them know that hey man now we're facing this kind of things where we can't act what they're asking us to act on because just by virtue of loss of as a commissioner is that the testify over and over and over and we just can't we just can't do anything we sat there for three meetings and couldn't do anything i share your concern and und to offer public testimony what would be a good thing is if the chair who is presiding over the readings take control during public testimony as you all seeing you know the chair at the time tried to do a three minute limit and the he would be talked over he wouldn't be able to add here to that three minutes so you know whoever is is presiding over the meeting really has to take to testify and that was helpful but we don't have to let them testify but if the chair can control the meeting control the time limitation and really everybody only has one time to testify unless they're going to g that took two meetings this summer out of that for us a lot of things happened but we cannot you know try to do better with regard to time constraints earlier i know that their passion is an issue and i know that they're passionate people and i don't want to take that passion from them but i want to work i want to work with them to let them know that sometimes your time in our hands for four hours rather than leaving us because there meetings that i just want to vote i want to make a motion that's going to support everything that they're saying but i had to listen to four hours of testimony then you guys have to catch a plane and i walked out of the meeting going man if they would just let me move there i would have moved on what they wanted but they insisted on coming in here when you try to cut them off they want to throw the mike point finger you which is part of the job i understand but i want them to understand we need to work together and sometimes that's a cover song and that's why it is it can be you standing in a hearing if you if you do not have due process it's a biggie but yeah you can control that when you  do you solemnly swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes thank you just about testimony i think i understand with the length that it goes on but the more you say something the more important it becomes too keeping the record is important even if i say the same thing over and over again also in the past we had rob stevenson which contributed to the length of the meetings and the inability to make decisions and right now we're short on commissioners so but also contributing to the application or pull our his farm plan agreed upon by the community not in those exact words but really close to that so that's where they're at right now illegal versus legal just because it's been legal illegal for thirty years means it's been wrong for thirty years it doesn't you know justify it being right or what's the big deal now i was in the life thirty years ago so  that hope there is that they've been multiplying to where the impacts are undeniable the internet happened which streamlines the process of connecting travelers to owners and the renting out process to advertising it's you can search and find a house in under a minute i live in a neighborhood with both legal and illegals and i do notice that the illegal ones are rent out much less with lower frequency than the legal ones and what is called enforcement is a problem but it might take a while but it does happen i turned in an illegal vacation rental and they were served papers to seize their operations so enforcement does happen and that's pretty much all i have to say issues repeat exactly the same thing that i said earlier but basically i have i would be not in favor because of the repurposed thing about but it doesn't prove to energy facility so i would say and not in favor ok if you have questions commissioners yeah did you test the post before the first time we heard this and you i think i remember i might how many think i remember that the open testimony just to open this up and then ended the life so all the changes you know you make changes for us to you know and so i'm so sorry you know we have to go the way i see what they have a good time twenty five years thirty years they had a good time they made a lot of money so we got to look at it that we now are there people for it is not my fault is not all  is why we have something like this to come here and show us that you know what you got scared you guys know what's going on we don't we never knew what was going on people was making money to come out here and say you know what it's all ok so i'm really really blessed to be here today to share with you guys because i don't need you guys i'm here because i love jesus in watching the class comment since the county council mandated this training i find it unacceptable to have this l training for commission members under these circumstances the county council mandated the training the county council needs to provide a the money's to bring the school to do it at a time when they're on break but i think it's tickets disrespectful to who native hawaiians and culture saturday i'm not one hundred percent sure but i think i'm going to be in florida on december ninth and having said that i've attended law trainings at least three to four times in the past w other state boards and commissions so i'm familiar with the training but even having said that i really wish that my comments are convened planning staff and  council that this commission should be afforded the opportunity to engage with the person in person because sometimes they feel that this commission made that  which is really an environmental law and yet this board does not have that environmental and expert and that's why it's not helpful to move projects along ther