My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2024-03-05 PL-SMA-2023-000046 Anne Celeste Opposition Testimony
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Board Packets
>
2024
>
2024-03-07 Windward
>
#3 Black Sand Beach, LLC (PL-SMA-2023-000046)
>
Additional Info Provided to Commission at 3-7-24 Hearing
>
2024-03-05 PL-SMA-2023-000046 Anne Celeste Opposition Testimony
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/5/2024 4:14:18 PM
Creation date
3/5/2024 4:10:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Plan Doc Template
Document Date
3/5/2024
Description
2024-03-05 PL-SMA-2023-000046 Anne Celeste Opposition Testimony
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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
6. Has no disaster mitigation plan <br /> The area has many potential threats:An active cinder cone, increasing quakes,the loss <br /> of ohia due to ROD,which means the dying forest no longer catches rain, causing more <br /> flooding, and with lack of bridge repair,there is a possibility that residents could not <br /> escape <br /> 7. Needs an updated shoreline assessment <br /> The storm of 2022 necessitates a reassessment of the shoreline setback. <br /> 8. Has no burial treatment plan <br /> Were archeological studies done? <br /> g. Did not grant residents due process.We were not made aware of critical developments. <br /> Many residents thought that the plan had been discontinued. <br /> .We never heard about the County meeting until Feb 29, 2024—only 7 days ahead—we <br /> were blindsided <br /> We were not informed of the developer's Dec 3.5 2023 filing forthe SMA <br /> The developer's plan was not communicated to the entire community,the community <br /> was allowed almost no information, no input, and no answers to their questions <br /> .There was no meeting prior to approval of this development so that the people of kau <br /> could express their deep concerns about the devastating impact this development will <br /> have. <br /> . In addition,the Planning DirectorZendo Kim has recommended approval—before we <br /> were even allowed input! <br /> 10. How will this impact local fisherman who depend on the waters for their food and income? <br /> Already tourist cars fill their beach. How is their ramp access protected? <br /> 11. The beach is already at capacity on most days, often with Soo people. <br /> The developers'plan can easily bring 600 overnight tourists plus Soo day tourists to the <br /> beach.That's i000 people in addition to the Soo that are there now,for a total of 3.3oo <br /> on the beach. <br /> The beach is only 3 acres, maximum.That's 433 people per acre. <br /> To bring this home,that's 3.o8 people per one-quarter acre,the size of a typical home <br /> lot. Imagine 3.o8 people on your housing lot! <br /> Already the public toilets are over-crowded. <br /> Beach capacity should be limited. <br /> 12. The existing infrastructure cannot support the influx of tourists <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.