2015-09-17 Leeward Exh B (SMA 15-060)

Home

considered.” They go on to state, “It was represented that a public access corridor along the northern portion of the property is not a part of the current proposal in part because of concerns for protection of sacred cultural sites on the property and the need to maintain a positive learning environment for the students. A northern route would also conflict with the proposed ‘Education Zone’ or ‘safe school zone.’ The applicant’s representative confirmed that the public would not be denied access along the shoreline or in the ocean by virtue of the fact that the public can walk on the ocean shelf from Kahalu‘u Beach Park to the north side of the property; the Cultural Resources Commission is concerned that this proposed ocean access will be unsafe under normal ocean conditions. The Cultural Resources Commission recommended consideration of a safe public access route within the makai norther portion of the property that doesn’t disturb or conflict with cultural sites.” And then lastly, in response to our first comment letter the Planning Director responded with a memo to Land Administrator Russell Tsuji. In his response he stated, “My determination to waive the certified shoreline survey requirement was based on the authorities provided in our departmental rules, other authorizes conveyed to the department under Planning Commission Rule 9, and the fact that the most conservative shoreline interpretation was being used to determine shoreline setbacks and therefore, project development envelopes. In essence, we are treating this SMA application as if the certified shoreline was that as determined by the interpretation of the State Surveyor. From that standpoint, there will be no prohibition of shoreline lateral access and appropriate conditions of approval will so confirm. Be advised that lateral shoreline access was also a requirement of previous SMA approvals for this project and those requirements will be carried forward for this project as well. We understand and agree that any and all work conducted makai of shoreline as interpreted by the State Survey will require the necessary consultation and approval by DLNR until resolution of the differing shoreline interpretations result in the formal certification of a shoreline.” So this is the map that was used to base the shoreline setback waiver issued on September 18, 2014, which is our Exhibit 9. Just for reference the line that is referenced in the memo from the Director, which states the certified shoreline that was determined by the interpretation of the State Surveyor, this is the red line that you see through the map. The waiver was granted based on the fact that there was an agreement between the Planning Director and the applicant that the applicant would hold the shoreline setbacks from this red line and not the blue dash-line that was another shoreline that was interpreted through another surveyor. And so you will see two different colors: A green line, which is 40-foot from the shoreline that we are identifying as the red line, and that is because of the fact that there is a hardened rock wall, which identifies the shoreline; and then in the area where there are no hardened structures we have requested a 60-foot shoreline setback, and that’s identified with the yellow line. This is the Public Access Management Plan that was provided within the SMA application. And just for reference on the left side of the map you will see a purple area that proposes a ten-stall public access parking area, as well as a mauka-makai access to Mākole‘ā Beach, and the area for access is identified with purple. There is also a managed access proposed from Kahalu‘u Bay along this orange area to the Heritage Center and then to also two viewing sites that are identified with the binoculars. Our other unresolved issue is the restrictions relating to the educational zone or safe school zone. Just for reference within the application on Page 37, I’ll just read this and 39, it says, “Lateral access 5 EXHIBIT B