|
The application indicates that this project, this subject property, excuse me, is in the flood
<br />zones, in particular Zones AE and VE, that means flooding from makai as well as mauka.
<br />I can tell you from my personal experience that there is flooding from mauka there; and I
<br />know also from my personal experience thereÓs flooding from makai. So I would pay
<br />particular attention to this and insert conditions, whatever they need to be, to ensure that
<br />thereÓs no building within these zones. It says theyÓll conform to Chapter 27 of the
<br />County Code. But I would urge you to preclude any building in the flood areas, most
<br />especially from makai, because this is guaranteed to create property damage, perhaps
<br />lawsuits and maybe loss of life. So I would caution you to be very, very careful about
<br />that. As I say, I see one rendering of the pool, in the vertical, but I donÓt see anything in
<br />the horizontal regime there, that is the plot plan.
<br />So, perhaps, in this case, because of the inundation zone, you may wish to have larger
<br />setbacks. IÓm unclear from looking at the FIRM maps exactly how far the inundation is.
<br />But if it extends beyond 40 feet, I would urge you to pay particular attention to that
<br />inasmuch as youÓre the final arbiters of this, so that the future owners of either the units
<br />and/or the, and the common areas, itÓs projected to be a condominium, will not suffer
<br />damage or, in fact, maybe file any litigation as a result of allowing building in these
<br />areas.
<br />LetÓs see, in the Background Report, description of the property, No. 20 on page 4, talks
<br />about recreational and visual resources. As we all know, this is now within the SMA but
<br />subject to the Coastal Zone Management Act. And in that description it says, ÐThe
<br />proposed development will not substantially interfere with or detract from the line of
<br />sight toward the sea from Kuakini Highway, which is the nearest state highway to the
<br />coast.Ñ Did anyone think about Alii Drive?
<br />Talking about coastal resources, scenic resources, if someone can show me that a 42,
<br />average height of 42.5 feet on the shoreline is not, does not have any, does not interfere
<br />or detract from the line of sight towards the sea, I would be very, very surprised.
<br />Now we all know in driving along Alii Drive that the line of sight towards the sea has
<br />been closely interfered with or detracted from; and IÓm not suggesting that that in and of
<br />itself is a reason for you not to approve this. Of course, I just want to note that that
<br />statement, while correct from Kuakini Highway, has no bearing whatsoever to those
<br />driving along Alii Drive. And IÓm wondering why. And just because Kuakini is the
<br />upper reach of the SMA, why is that Alii is not listed there?
<br />Furthermore, the next one, 21, talks about cultural resources and it says, ÐNo valued
<br />cultural, historical or natural resources exist on the property and there is no evidence of
<br />any traditional customary Native Hawaiian rights being practiced on the site.Ñ I would
<br />note that, I believe itÓs in the grant of easement recorded that part of the reason for this is
<br />to comply with the traditional or customary gathering in that area; and I can assure you
<br />thereÓs a lot of it for limu, for fishing, for family recreation. So we see this phrase quite
<br />often. And I think itÓs, there may not be traditional and customary gathering of fauna or
<br />9
<br />
<br />
|