|
PIERL I think I understand you, but as far as anything goes, the Kona Reef condominium
<br /> association is going to put to go for all of those studies for all the construction. The only
<br /> question that I would throw back to you is they are going to require us to do all these major
<br /> studies to prove the validity of the project, but, is the county going to do a study for the beach?
<br /> Because we don't know what's going to happen to the beach next door whether we build the wall
<br /> or whether we do nothing, you know, that's up in the air. The recent high surf on the Kona
<br /> coast I think you ought to look at Honl's Beach right now, what the damage of just the recent
<br /> high surf was. The other point is there is a separation between what comes in to Honl's Beach
<br /> cove and what comes up over the lava shelf in front of the Kona Reef. I got off, sidelined off
<br /> your question, but, yes, Kona Reef will strictly build for what's needs to be done.
<br /> VITOUSEK: One point there, I'd like to have Alex respond.
<br /> ROY: I just wanted to inform the commission that the county is undertaking a comprehensive
<br /> island-wide coastal hazard and riparian hazard study, and we are just in the process of planning
<br /> that, monies are being aligned, in fact, aerial photographs are being flown at the moment, we are
<br /> working with UH; so the county is actually working on a comprehensive island-wide shoreline
<br /> study.
<br /> VITOUSEK: (Inaudible–microphone on mute) Sorry, Commissioner Newberg, are there any
<br /> more questions?
<br /> NEWBERG: Thank you for that, Mr. (indiscernible–echo), so again—we have an echo again.
<br /> Getting back to the cost, my question was towards the construction cost, and I believe you stated
<br /> that, again, a bit rhetorical but, that would be paid for by the owners of those particular condos at
<br /> Kona Reef.
<br /> The second question I have, and at this time the only other question I have, is you didn't
<br /> mention your letter submitted, seven-page, which looks to be mostly of an email thread, which
<br /> page 3 has an email from Chip Fletcher, and what I found was startling, if not all of these emails,
<br /> was the last paragraph by Mr. Fletcher saying, "Lastly, the owners of this building need to know
<br /> their location is doomed." Would you possibly speak to that, Mr. Pieri?
<br /> PIERL The thing that I can say about that is, or what I want to say about that, is Mr. Fletcher did
<br /> not get the complete project papers. He got the erosion report (indiscernible–simultaneous
<br /> speech) while I was talking—so he only, you know, like I explained, he only got the erosion
<br /> report, so he did not get the other documents. I don't think he got the topographical map, you
<br /> know, I don't think he got pictures of the shelf, he didn't get elevations for the buildings
<br /> themselves, you know, versus where the hightide line is, because weI did provide, you know,
<br /> hightide line map, I did provide the 40-foot setline back [sic] with map, or the topographical map
<br /> with elevations—so he did not get any of that information. And he is probably correct to an
<br /> extent with just the basic information that he got that Alex says is useless.
<br /> NEWBERG: Thank you, Mr. Pieri, I just wanted to confirm that. In closing at this time, you
<br /> know, this is going to be an ongoing project that, if I may as well act for the other commissioners
<br /> 16
<br /> EXHIBIT A
<br />
|