2024-03-05 PL-SMA-2023-000046 Deborah Ward Opposition Testimony

Home

Policy 26 Encourage those developments that are not coastal dependent to locate in inland areas. (HRS 205A-2(c)(3(D)) Policy 27 To reinforce existing protections,the official Ka'u CDP Land Use Policy Map designates coastal areas in Ka'u as open space to be preserved, protected, and connected to the rich network of natural and cultural resources in the region. Development and construction in the coastal "Conservation"and "Open"areas shall be minimized and,when necessary, limited to recreation, research, and education facilities unless otherwise permitted by law. Policy 28 On lots that are at least partially within the Special Management Area (SMA) in the Ka'u CDP Planning Area, establish shoreline setbacks at the earliest stages of the land use planning and development process at a minimum of 1,320 feet(1/4-mile); however,the applicant may request that the setback be reduced by providing information to the Department, including information required for SMA review,which would allow for an assessment of the proposed activity's impacts and in consideration of the physical limitations of the property. For lots created prior to the date of adoption of the CDP with an average lot depth of two hundred feet or less,the shoreline setback line shall be 40 feet. Policy29 No development, including subdivision, shall be approved in the SMA unless the development will not have any substantial adverse environmental or ecological effect. (HRS 205A-22(3)&205A-26(2)(A)) Policy 30 Amend Planning Department Rule 11 to specify that the Planning Department establish shoreline setbacks in the Ka'u CDP Planning Area in accordance with Policy 28. Policy 55 Do not allow incompatible construction in areas of natural beauty. (GP 7.3(i)) Community Objective 12: Establish or expand retail, service, dining, and entertainment centers in rural villages and towns capable of supporting Ka'u-appropriate growth. The Welcome Center, Museum, fish market, open market and restaurant proposed in the current SMA proposal are not in accordance with the policies listed above, and would certainly increase the traffic near and adjacent to the crowed beach with limited parking and access. Threats to the coastal ecosystem from the large crowds already attracted to the small and sensitive beach are impacting the endangered wildlife whose only habitat is limited. 3: EA/ EIS Triggers The last EIS was completed in 1988, 36 years ago. Only supplemental cultural, fauna and floral surveys have been updated. A DEIS was offered in 2006, but never finalized or accepted by OEQC. The proposed Sea Mountain project elements that triggered the 2006 EIS review,include the following: "1) a proposed upgrade or replacement of the existing wastewater treatment facility that would increase its capacity to serve over fifty additional residential units, 2) proposed D Ward Comments 4