2026 06 10_Appellant Ohana's Objections to Record, Rosehill Dec, and COS_v1.pdf

Home

2025, including but not limited to correspondence regarding the review of the CIA and the scope of the proposed public access easement. F. July 2024 Email Correspondence Between Planner Alex Roy and Daryn Arai Regarding the Public Shoreline Access Easement (PL-SMA-2024-000063) The emails between Planning Department Planner Alex Roy and Daryn Arai, planning consultant for the Applicant, dated July 11-24, 2024, concerning the scope and configuration of the public shoreline access easement for SMA Use Permit Application PL-SMA-2024-000063 are records in the Planning Department's file directly related to the Decision and are a part of and should be included in the Record on Appeal. The emails are absent from the Record as filed though. In this correspondence, Planning Department staff and the Applicant's consultant Daryn Arai discussed the location and configuration of the proposed public access easement. The correspondence reflects a prior understanding regarding the location and width of the pedestrian access easement. Department staff further indicated that the Director was aware of and in agreement with the proposed easement configuration. These emails are the Planning Department's records of the communications that informed the easement condition ultimately imposed in the SMA Minor Permit and are necessary to provide a complete record of the Director's decision -making on that condition. First, Condition No. 6 of the SMA Minor Permit requires a 10-foot-wide public pedestrian shoreline access easement. The email chain establishes the prior negotiating history and the Director's stated position on the easement and bears directly on the easement requirement imposed as Condition No. 6. Second, the correspondence reveals that the access easement was negotiated between the Planning Department and the Applicant's consultant, without involvement of or notice to the `Ohana or other community members with traditional and customary access rights in the area. The emails bear on the extent to which the `Ohana and other community members participated in the easement negotiation.