My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2024-01-03 Email Claudia Rohr Testimony PD Report on SMA Minor Permits
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Board Packets
>
2024
>
2024-01-04 Windward
>
Planning Director's Report
>
Additional Info Provided to WPC for Consideration at 1-4-24 hearing
>
2024-01-03 Email Claudia Rohr Testimony PD Report on SMA Minor Permits
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/4/2024 1:35:06 PM
Creation date
1/4/2024 1:35:02 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
effect on the environment, the Director shall consider every <br /> phase of a proposed action and expected consequences, either <br /> primary or secondary, or the cumulative as well as the short or <br /> long term effect of the proposal. The Director should bear in <br /> mind that in most instances, the following factors of a <br /> proposal, although not limited to same, may constitute a <br /> significant adverse effect on the environment when the <br /> proposed use, activity or operation: <br /> 4) significantly affects the economic or social welfare <br /> and activities of the community, County or State; <br /> 5) involves significant secondary impacts, such as <br /> population changes and effects on public facilities; <br /> 6) in itself has no significant adverse effect but <br /> cumulatively has considerable adverse effect upon <br /> the environment or involves a commitment for larger <br /> actions; <br /> 10) is contrary to the objectives and policies of the <br /> Coastal Zone Management Program and the Special <br /> Management Area Guidelines of Chapter 205A, HRS. <br /> The applicant admits that he is not willing to provide a public access <br /> easement for the existing trail to the beach. The applicant admits that the <br /> subdivision without a shoreline access easement is inconsistent with the HCDP <br /> (which cites to SMA guideline, HRS section 205A-26) (Application page 17). SMM <br /> 23-54 is clearly invalid under HRS section 205A-26(2)(C) because it is inconsistent <br /> with the Community Plan and the zoning. <br /> The SMA minor permit 23-54 is based on the misconception that all of the <br /> conservation land is located within proposed Lot 1 when there is a 2002 SLU <br /> Boundary Interpretation, included here, that establishes a three hundred foot deep <br /> SLU conservation district within proposed Lots 1, 3, and 4. <br /> 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.