|
flora on, or resources on the property per se; but the property acts as a conduit to allow it.
<br />So, as I said earlier, IÓm please with the mauka-mauka access.
<br />The Background Report contains, just a technical item, the Background Report contains
<br />numerous responses by Mr. Conventz, as a consulting representative, numerous
<br />responses to numbers of memos and statements. And I, theyÓre not immediately adjacent
<br />to one another, and so I canÓt tell if all of those comments are contained in the document.
<br />If, to the extent that theyÓre not, itÓs very difficult for any member of the public, including
<br />myself, to follow exactly what they were responding to because theyÓre, you know,
<br />theyÓre very short, as they should be, responses. But I donÓt know what they are. So, if
<br />IÓm mistaken there, I apologize but I didnÓt see the juxta position. Normally, when the
<br />Council gets the Background Report, thereÓs a comment from an ag
<br />then immediately following thereafter is the letter from the consultant. And I didnÓt see
<br />that in this case so I had a hard time following that. And I may have, you know, I may
<br />not, because IÓm used to that I didnÓt see it there.
<br />The last comment I want to make pertains to, again, to the Coastal Zone Management
<br />Act. And this comment will come as no surprise to you because youÓve heard it from me
<br />on a number of occasions. The Recommendation from the Director
<br />page 2, that ÐThe proposed development will not have an adverse impact on coastal
<br />recreational or visual resources to the shoreline and coastal ecosystems.Ñ That may be
<br />true, but it may not be true. And to my way of thinking, it will be true if there is no
<br />runoff, whether itÓd be sedimentation from surface runoff or from other non-point source
<br />pollution, in particular drywells. And inasmuch as this is directly adjacent to the
<br />shoreline and AA waters, I would again ask that there be a specific condition that to the
<br />extent there are any drywells or other kinds of on-site runoff m
<br />they be connected to the sewer system, as will this project, which IÓm very glad to see.
<br />ÒCause some properties makai of Alii Drive are not. So I applaud the applicant for that.
<br />But the use of drywells so close to the shore should be eliminated. And if anyone has any
<br />questions about the impacts relating to that, I would again refer you, for the record, to the
<br />Findings of Facts, Conclusions of Law, Decision and Order in the TSA case pertaining to
<br />a rezoning, excuse me, a land use reclassification before the Land Use Commission, I
<br />believe it was early last year, relating to impacts on the Kaloko-Honokohau National
<br />Historic Park and some of the concerns that the Land Use Commission had. As we all
<br />know, the TSA project is quite, is probably a hundred times the distance from the
<br />shoreline as this project is. And I believe that covers it.
<br />Dr. Rosendahl has noted that the two sites which he identified in 1989 are possible
<br />clearing mounds. I would urge that caution be taken in this area, especially along the
<br />shoreline because there have been, adjacent properties have, there have been numerous
<br />burials found on adjacent properties. And so I just caution the applicant to have a
<br />monitor there to ensure that no iwi kupuna or other cultural resources are disturbed in any
<br />way. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission. IÓd be happy to answer
<br />any questions.
<br />10
<br />
<br />
|