2024-01-03 (2) Email Claudia Rohr Testimony PD Report on SMA Minor Permits

Home

Brian Clark Living Trust is not able to dedicate or record a public easement for the use of the trail. The Trust has no intent to deny access to the trail subject to certain occasional closure actions allowed within HRS 264-1. The trail was built in 1996 with sound conservation principles to provide a hardened surface on an acceptable grade to the trail users. The Trust reserves the right to use the trail, those privately owned areas of the beach and river for its proposed eco- tourism and potential film industry uses. B. Adequate and properly located public recreation areas and wildlife preserves are reserved... The beach provides access to the ocean for surfing and fishing recreation uses. The trail and private property restrictions include not allowing dogs or pets on the premises to protect native Hawaiian Monk Seals that occasionally bask on the beach or swim in the puniawa. C. Provisions are made for solid and liquid waste treatment, disposition, and management...The parcel is serviced by County of Hawaii DEM sewer mains that cross through the property and take waste waters to the Papaikou Sewage Treatment Plant. All four lots will be required to connect to the sewer mains through utility easements. Lot 1 is already connected to the mainline. Should any construction activities occur on the proposed lots solid waste management measures as well as BMP's to minimize adverse effects on the area will be employed. D. Alterations to existing landforms and vegetation, except crops, and construction of structures shall cause minimum adverse effects... The 4-lot subdivision project will not alter any existing landforms or vegetation and will not cause any adverse effects. Any future action for construction of dwellings or defined 'development' actions upon the lots created will require an SMA application that will need to address these potential effects. 2. No development shall be approved unless the authority has first found: A. That the development will not have substantial adverse environmental or ecological effect... B. That the development is consistent with the objectives,policies, and special management area guidelines... C. That the development is consistent with the county general plan and zoning... (These three elements are answered together herein),The 4-lot subdivision action will not trigger any adverse environmental or ecological effects. Certain actions that may occur in the future may need to address potential cumulative impacts from multiple actions taken on the four lots. At the current time the subdivision action itself does not create an impact. The subdivision is consistent with the objectives and policies of the special management area in that conditions are emplaced to protect the shoreline with building setbacks and view plane preservation. Further to that, access to the ocean and recreational uses are recited. The subdivision is consistent with the current Ag-3 zoning and appears compliant with the Hamakua CDP.