2021-02-18 Leeward Exh A (SMA 20-076 & SSV 20-012)

Home

really ultimately all we are trying to do. So at the end of the day that was, we'd asked for more information, but unfortunately, they were reluctant to provide that for us, so. CARR SMITH: Thank you, Alex. VITOUSEK: Are there any other questions of, from commissioners, of staff? (No audible response) Okay, seeing none, we will move on to the applicant's presentation. Mr. Pieri, please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Leeward Planning Commission? PIERL Yes, I do. VITOUSEK: Okay,please state your name and your area of residence. PIERL Raymond S. Pierioh, we've got(indiscernible–echo)Uluwehi Place, Kailua-Kona, Hawaii. VITOUSEK: Have you received the background and recommendation reports from the Planning Department? PIERL Yes, I have. VITOUSEK: Okay,please go ahead with your presentation. PIERL The thing that I want to do the most is that I want to get facts out front. There are numerous errors in the Planning Department's recommendation. There are human errors in the background report. And I think the facts are the most important thing here. I'm sorry Alex left; I hope you are still there because I did want to ask one question for him. After all that he said, I'm looking at the paper that came from OCCL back in 2017 that says the OCCL did not have any comments on this project. That's part of the FEA. Okay, so where I'd like to start is with the county Planning Department's background report. We are looking at exactly what the wall is and what the wall isn't. The—let's see here to begin with, Alex got the submissions of the wall designs incorrectly. The one that he showed you as the second submission was actually the first submission, and it was part of the FEA. It was done by Engineering Partners in Hilo. I could not convince them they signed the contract to do a rock wallI could not convince them to do anything but this. So after 10 months to years' time their project was included in the FEA. Looking at their project, it was, it was just a ridiculous idea. I wrote a letter and sent that to the county, explaining what the situation was with that par—with that wall's designs. The second wall design, the face of it was left open for demonstration purposes only. We at one time hoped that we could build the wall closer to the shoreline, but when we found out that that was not going to be possible, the north end of the wall was moved back so that it could be covered 100 percent. No part of this wall will be seen. So that kind of clarifies as far as the design problem. But the first design was just utterly ridiculous. Monolithic pour with face stone that serve no purpose. It also would have required to dig a trench, dig a 400 [sic], a full 220 feet of trench that the wall was going to sit in all at one time. It 10 EXHIBIT A