2018-01-18 Leeward Exh B (AMEND SMA 412, REZ 17-225 & SMA 17-068))

Home

In the meantime we knew that what those studies did not indicate, they did not indicate like any cultural assessment, you know, with a recent decision that was made by the Supreme Court relating to the Kapa‘akai decision; you had to address, decision makers needed to address the cultural resources on the property and not necessarily only the physical archaeological things. And so before they started on the program, they said, okay, let’s do a cultural impact assessment. So that’s what’s found in Item Number 3, you know, a cultural impact assessment was done by Alan Haun in 2015. You know, I’m just taking you through chronological, you know, from, chronologically. And then in summary what the impact assessment showed was that in Dr. Haun’s discussion with some of the people who have some interest in that area, they found that the trails were important. So, you know, we had to take that into consideration. Then the other thing we had to look at, you know, way back when, you know, we needed to figure out like what’s the relevance of, you know, what’s the importance of the marine life in that area, the anchialine pond, and is the project going to have any adverse impact, you know, to the marine life in that area? So they had commissioned three different professionals to specifically evaluate that, two of whom are here today and they’ll be able to more in detail answer your questions. The first consultant was this guy named Dr. Tom Nance, and his job was essentially to look at the hydrology on the property, things like if you are going to have a drainage system, if you have normal rainfall, people just kind of like do the landscaping and all that, what permeates, you know, what goes through the ground and what eventually comes down to the shoreline. So he did that kind of assessment. Then you had somebody like Dr. Steve Dollar who is here today. He looks at that information and then he says like based on that this is the impact, you know, to the coastal line, to the sea turtles or other marine life in that particular area. Concurrently, based on the evaluation by, the analysis by Dr. Tom Nance, we had Dr. Richard Brock. Richard Brock is a specialist dealing with anchialine pond and he’s here today so you can ask him the specific questions about whether the project would have any adverse impact on the anchialine ponds themselves. So Item Number 4 just basically talks about, you know, that’s Dr. Brock’s report and he can speak to you directly on that issue. But I think what’s really important, you know, in Dr. Brock’s study, I say that because I’m leading up to something eventually, you know, he talks about like the management zones to anchialine pool buffer, you know, around the, and what he had recommended way back when, I mean in 2000 and, 2015, was that the width of the buffer zone should be five feet. But we all know by looking at that map already, it’s no longer five feet; it’s considerably more than that. And I’ll give you more detail in terms of what ultimately is going to be proposed. On Page 5, excuse me, Item Number 5, Item Number 5 is the first site plan that was submitted and which, you know, you don’t have it, but I needed to kind of just share because that application was subsequently withdrawn, not withdrawn, or modified, to where we are today. But I think that just so that the Commission will have some ideas as far as like how we came to where we are today. You know, that site plan, if you see, first of all it shows only a 40-foot shoreline setback, and then it shows like, you know, all the, on the trails in that – what you see over there is the map that’s currently, the pending application, but in that area you can see, you know, if you remember where the fingers of the trail were coming down, you can see that those trails like now a half have been preserved – if you look the plan that was initially prepared back in 2015, none of them, you know, like just a small little narrow buffer of those trail was preserved. So it’s kind of like really 12 EXHIBIT B