Laserfiche WebLink
ii. Commercial agricultural activity in such close proximity will be intrusive and disruptive for adjoining <br /> homeowners (TMK (3) 3-2-003:040 and TMK(3) 3-2-003:02). Property values are also likely to be <br /> negatively affected. <br /> c. Potential NON Agricultural Commercial activity. The recent acquisition of non-agricultural goods stockpiled <br /> near the pali gives us grave concerns about a potential stream of non-agricultural business and associated <br /> traffic. <br /> d. No consideration of alternative access to the property on the Ka'aheiki stream side was addressed in the <br /> SMA Application or Background Report. <br /> e. Electrical, water, and access easements for this development chops the neighbors' property into small <br /> sections that severely limits owner use/development. <br /> f. Concern with coastal erosion. We are concerned that the unique topography of this parcel (very steep <br /> gradient on both sides of the View Corridor)will require extensive grading which may destabilize the <br /> shoreline and lead to coastal erosion. <br /> g. Observed pattern of establishing and abandoning projects/equipment on this property. <br /> h. Scenic and Open Resources— In this section of the SMA Application it is noted that "the subject property is <br /> not visible from any public thoroughfare in the vicinity including The Hawaii Belt Road".While not visible <br /> from the Hawaii Belt Road,the subject property is quite visible to tourists who pass the shoreline via cruise <br /> ships, helicopters, and airlines. It does have a substantial impact on the scenic views experienced by <br /> immediate neighbors and their guests. <br /> 4. Recent Developments(Post SMA Application Submission) <br /> a. The applicant is moving to the mainland. We were told by the applicant that this will be used as a vacation <br /> home, not a primary residence. <br /> b. A massive 20x20x20ft high tent/shed structure was erected within 10 feet of the pali. <br /> c. A 40 foot container was placed on the site location designated for the farm dwelling. <br /> 5. Actions requested of the Windward Planning Committee <br /> a. We request a shoreline survey to determine stability of shoreline and whether the proposed development <br /> is appropriate given the topography and geologic structure of the property. <br /> b. We request that the Conservation District boundary along with the required setbacks be clearly identified <br /> and marked on the site. <br /> c. We request a site visit be conducted to gain understanding of the topographical challenges this property <br /> presents for commercial agriculture and construction.Additionally to appraise the nature(temporary or <br /> permanent) and location of existing structures, especially those within setbacks. <br /> d. We request removal of structures that do not comply with land use regulation. <br /> e. Have the Planning Department request that the applicant explore consolidation and relocation of the <br /> electrical,water, and vehicle access easements to the Ka'aheiki stream side of the property which will <br /> provide the following substantial benefits: <br /> i. More direct access to applicant's property; <br /> ii. Removes all traffic from across neighbors' properties; <br /> iii. Precludes the need for excavation and retaining walls adjoining both properties; <br /> iv. Allows the property owner of RU-1 to develop the land makai of RU-1; <br /> v. Retains RU-1 for utility access only. <br /> f. Provide feedback to the two immediate home owners (TMK(3) 3-2-003:040 and TMK(3) 3-2-003:02) as we <br /> are the only ones directly affected by this development. <br />