2014-07-03 Hearing Transcript - Scott Watson Amend SMA 450

Home

So, to conclude, I’m not asking for anything special. I’m asking for accuracy. That we go with surveyable documents. The setbacks, I’ve never argued the 40-foot setback, but I would like to have the shoreline recognized where the true shoreline is, and then this creates a beautiful public access that everyone has been using for two years. I might add that we have planted all of this with grass, maintained it for the public, so now the public parks on our easement up here, which is our property, walks along the front on grass to the driveway where they walk down a paved walkway all the way to the shoreline. It’s—the County has agreed with all of this in their Agreement, and if you would please, take a, take a look at that when you have a chance. Everyone is in agreement with this from Chris Yuen to BJ to Amy Self. This is a better thing for everyone. It’s a win-win. It allows me to continue building my house where it is, and the Building Department has inspected up to this point and allowed me to continue, so all I’m asking is for accuracy, nothing special. To be treated like everyone else. And the public benefits in the whole deal. Thank you. MIYASATO: Are there any questions for the Applicant? HEAUKULANI: You are asking for something special. Aren’t you asking to continue to build in violation of the existing agreement? I mean, this is the third case this morning that I’ve had to sit here and listen to about people that violate the terms and agreements that are issued from this Department, and then come back in to retroactively ask us to correct their problem. So, I disagree with you, sir, that you have—aren’t asking for anything special. WATSON: Again, the shoreline that is conveyed on these plans isn’t the shoreline— HEAUKULANI: Is it your position then that Judge Hara was incorrect when he cited to you 205-A-45a that expressly grants the County the authority to alter the setback distance? WATSON: This is—I understand what the Judge ruled, but again, this was all, this all came up later. The Planning Department wasn’t even aware of this Condition 11 either until half way through the foundation work, then they stopped us when it became an issue and made us aware of it also. This is the point Mr. Olympia made, that no one knew about this boundary line being the shoreline until it was discovered after they’ve given me a Building Permit and approved all the locations of the structures and the historical data that we had to mitigate. Again, I’ve had to work around all of these existing structures. There’s very little room there left. If the true shoreline is not recognized, there is no legal access to that area at all, at this point— HEAUKULANI: Well, I would disagree on that, but that’s a completely different subject. So, are you saying that there was some type of non-disclosure of Condition 11? WATSON: Yes, we were never made aware of that. HEAUKULANI: Made aware of that. Who was going to make aware of that? WATSON: Nothing was ever filed on Condition 11. It’s, it was discovered by the Planning Department after we started building. We stopped building and we’ve been trying to work this out ever since. The shoreline that is on here, again, isn’t a sea cliff. The deed describes the 11 EXHIBIT E