2024-03-04 PL-SMA-2023-000046 Nohea Ka'awa Members of SMA2023-046 Working Group Opposition Testimony

Home

March 4, 2024 Hawaii County Council Chambers Planning Commission 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, HI 96720 To: The Windward Planning Commission of the County of Hawaii Re: BLACK SAND BEACH LLC (PL-SMA-2023-000046) Aloha Chair Lin, Vice Chair Danielle, and Windward Planning Commissioners, This testimony is being presented in strong opposition to the request made by Black Sands Beach, LLC to acquire a special management area use permit application to develop within the Ahupua`a of Nmole, Wailau and Punalu`u. A working group meeting formulated to look over the SMA took place on Tuesday, February 27, 2024. At the meeting, members of our community were able to generate a list of important issues we felt was important for those of you who are serving on the Windward Planning commission to highly consider, and we share those points with you below. We strongly feel that to approve this SMA Application prior to addressing other important factors, plans, documentation, and regulations puts the natural and cultural resources and people of Ka`u in irreversible jeopardy. We urge you to approach this SMAA with caution and hope that this testimony will give you a deeper understanding of the impacts that this project will have on `aina. Further SMA approval should be deferred until issues of life and limb are rectified, such as water, fire hydrants, waste treatment, access and traditional cultural practices, shoreline changes and certification, crowd control and safety. If and when further SMA projects are approved,specific and enforceable mitigation measures must be provided in detail. 1. Prior to any application or project,the area in the SMA should require an updated EIS/DEIS and EA,as well as updated coastal setbacks and a certified shoreline survey.Project consultant Daryn Arai (a former County Planning Department employee) is asking that the 1988 FEIS be accepted (this FEIS is over 35 years outdated). However, the SMA permit application contains a supplemental AIS to the 1988 FEIS, which, along with the fact that an EIS was being prepared for the 2006 proposed development, would indicate that at minimum a supplemental EIS be required as well. He is also requesting a waiver of a shoreline certification, which ignores the impacts that climate change has had on the coastline since the time of the last certifation. a. The proximity of proposed development to the shoreline is not appropriate and a certified shoreline survey must be conducted. A shoreline certification was waived by PD Zendo Kern in previous SMAA. The current shoreline certification is 50 years old, and since that certification, sea level changes, earthquake, and shoreline subsidence, and climate change would indicate that the 50 year old certification may be inaccurate. According to §13-222-11: Validity of certified shoreline. (a) Certification of the shoreline shall be valid for a period no longer than twelve months from the date of certification. The justification in the SMAA for waiving the survey is because "no new improvements or uses anywhere near the shoreline or in conservation zones. However, the 8,000 sq ft, 2.5 story