|
VAN PERNIS: No, I don't.
<br /> VITOUSEK: Okay. Commissioner DeFranco.
<br /> DEFRANCO: Hi, yeah, Mr. PieriI got some reverb there, I'm sorry. My question is, to Zendo
<br /> and to you, is it seems like the biggest missing piece—maybe I'm wrong—and also Mr. Roy, is
<br /> there is an erosion question here and the effect of erosion and to make sure that there is a proper
<br /> investigation of the effect that would have on the beach next to it. And I think that it sounded to
<br /> me like if you are willing to look at that and come up with an additional information, that then I
<br /> got the feeling that Mr. Planning Director would approve this. So, I don't know, to question, are
<br /> you willing to look at doing further erosion studies and presenting them to the county?
<br /> PIERL Absolutely, 100 percent. The reason that they, prior to that, they weren't done when
<br /> they were asked for was I was forcefully told that they weren't going to let this project happen
<br /> because it would set a precedent. And until I spoke to and had a meeting with Mr. Kern,
<br /> Director Kern, at site, and he said to me pointblank he said a precedent isn't a major concern of
<br /> mine, the beach next door is the major concern. And I agree with him 100 percent. Like I said
<br /> in the letter that I sent, I offer to do, you know, monitoring as for the studies. He said that there
<br /> was, you know, if the wall got approved before that—again, reiterating what's said in the letter
<br /> that there was no way for the county to force us to do that unless we were willing to post a bond.
<br /> And I spoke to the board of directors on that, and they said yes, we will commit to further studies
<br /> without any problem. But if, as I was told, the decision was predetermined that there was a
<br /> setting a precedent and it was no way they were going to let it happen, you know you also read
<br /> the letter and read the comments from the person that did the original erosion report, and you
<br /> read the comment from Charles Fletcher, Chip Fletcher, the preeminent authority that writes the
<br /> books and the papers, that all these laws and statutes and regulations and codes that everyone is
<br /> reading and relying on, they reference his writings, his books; he is the expert. He, like I said, he
<br /> got the erosion report, he did not get any other information, but his response is plain and simple,
<br /> it's in the letter that I sent. Thank you.
<br /> DEFRANCO: Yeah, I appreciate that, and I also just want to mention I heard the planning
<br /> director say this, like you said, too, that that wasn't going to set a precedent, that he had taken
<br /> that off the table already. So all of us got that. I think that we also understand that maybe if you
<br /> were to supply some further studies, that this would probably be approved, so. And I'm glad that
<br /> you pointed out the, how the different walls weren't in order—because it, when I looked at it, it
<br /> didn't make sense that we had them out of orders, so that was good to know how the drawings
<br /> played out there. Thank you.
<br /> VITOUSEK: Commissioner Newberg, I mean, Vice Chair Newberg, please go ahead.
<br /> NEWBERG: Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Mr. Pieri. Two questions. Being that it's a project
<br /> for Kona Reef, is it correct to know that any of these mitigation procedures, should they be
<br /> allowed, would be paid for the owners, would be paid for by the owners of those condos at Kona
<br /> Reef?
<br /> 15
<br /> EXHIBIT A
<br />
|