|
Community Development Plan. I think it's a reasonable use of the property. It's quite less dense
<br /> development than it had been previously approved. And
<br /> UNGER: Great
<br /> MOOERS: we ask for your support.
<br /> UNGER: Okay, wonderful, thank you for the clarification. Did you
<br /> VITOUSEK: I do.
<br /> UNGER: Okay, we'll go ahead and continue a question series here.
<br /> VITOUSEK: Sure. You know,just looking at this, I get it, you know, I get what's happening, I
<br /> get that this is a good direction for the project, for the property. For me, growing up utilizing this
<br /> property and accessing this property in a traditional sense through the neighboring State
<br /> property, accessing along the ala loa trail, fishing, diving at Waiakailio Bay. You know the
<br /> importance of this property, and I can see that it's being addressed through preservation, through
<br /> the easements that are being created for public access, through the archaeological commitments
<br /> that are being made. My only concern is that we are stopping short of completion of the historic
<br /> preservation review process in not having those preservation plans, specifically burial treatment
<br /> plans and then also the shoreline access plans here for our review when we are being asked to
<br /> make a determination on issuing the Special Management Area Permit.
<br /> MOOERS: I appreciate the concern. This is an issue that comes up all the time about sequence
<br /> of historic sites, or windows project is to be reviewed. I think, you know, Bob, Dr. Rechtman
<br /> pointed out that depending upon the density that's allowed has a direct impact on which sites are
<br /> preserved and which sites are data recovery. And I think the commitment we've made is to
<br /> preserve those sites. There has been a burial treatment plan done for this, but it will have to be
<br /> revised to reflect whatever the new plan is that's approved. And typically, in a development
<br /> cycle is that the inventory survey is done, and then approved by SHPD, and then typically prior
<br /> to subdivision approval, the other plans have to be submitted, approved by both SHPD and the
<br /> Planning Department. It'll be very difficult for us, if we had submitted, for example, on the
<br /> nine-lot subdivision, if we had submitted a preservation plan and date recovery plan, we would
<br /> have to throw them out and start all over again because now we are going to six lots and some of
<br /> those sites change. So, I understand the desire to have all that information, but I think what we
<br /> have is an identification of all the sites, a commitment to preserve certain sites and a
<br /> commitment that those studies will be done and approved prior to a ground disturbing. So, I'm
<br /> hoping that that's enough of an assessment.
<br /> As far as a public access plan, in the application, the applicant has made several commitments, as
<br /> far as location of stalls, the trail, the lateral trail. But we have some issues; the trail, currently,
<br /> the Jeep trail goes right through some archaeological sites. And so, we've talked with Ala
<br /> Kahakai and Na Ala Hele, and said look, we're going to have to work with you guys to figure
<br /> out how we are going to align this so that it doesn't go right through these archaeological sites,
<br /> and they've agreed to do that. So all of those are going to kind of work in project. You notice
<br /> 18
<br /> EXHIBIT B
<br />
|