2007-09-21 TD-BAR - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

GRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. Torigoe. So I think we’re clear on all of that now. I also wanted to announce, I guess we’re getting close to 11:30, is we do have lunch scheduled for 12 o’clock so we’re going to break at 12. And I also have one more public testifier come in. Mr. Vitousek if you have nothing further now maybe I could bring the other public testimony in and then I could after that turn it over to Mr. Fuke. VITOUSEK: If we could just say that the applicant concurs with the Planning Director’s statement of where we believe we are procedurally and what the appropriate procedure to follow is. GRAHAM: All right, thank you. The other public testifier, I have Curtis Tyler. Mr. Tyler, if you’d come forward please. Could you raise your right hand for me, please. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth before the Planning Commission on this matter here today? TYLER: Yes, I do, sir. GRAHAM: Thanks. And could you give your testimony, starting with your name and address. TYLER: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Hawaii County Planning Commission. My name is Curtis Tyler and I have provided previous testimony on this agenda item, excuse me, on this proposed, on this application for an SMA project, and as I’m sure most of you who were there at the meeting will recall. My concern revolved around the lack of a cultural impact assessment. And while the Director and I have disagreed on whether or not it was needed to be done, the applicant to their credit, and I wanted to state this for the record, has arranged for a cultural impact assessment to be done. The applicant has provided me with a copy of the cultural impact assessment. I have reviewed it. And as I’ve told the applicant I am disappointed at the way it was handled by, not by the applicant, I want to make it very clear, but by the person who prepared their cultural impact assessment. I do not think that it meets the requirements of the Ka Pa‘akai O Ka‘aina case. However, it was done and I wanted to make a public statement today to the Commission that I appreciate that the applicant did this. I also reviewed the findings of fact, and conclusions of law in terms of the appeal. And I suppose that the applicant could have relied on that appeal, not to have done a cultural impact assessment if they wished; but they choose not to go that route, and for that I’m grateful. I continue to have concerns about the impacts on the cultural resources that are there; and the fact that people who are familiar with these were not interviewed is a problem for me personally. And I just needed to tell you how much I appreciate what the applicant has done to try to comply with what some of us understand the Supreme Court decision on the Ka Pa‘akai O Ka‘aina case to be. Thank you. I’ll be happy to answer any questions if I can. GRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. Tyler. Commissioner Iwashita. EXHIBIT B 14