Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-01-18 Leeward Exh B (AMEND SMA 412, REZ 17-225 & SMA 17-068)) LEEWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAI‘I HEARING TRANSCRIPT JANUARY 18, 2018 A regularly advertised hearing on the applications of WAIKOLOA BC, LLC (AMEND SMA 412, REZ 17-000225 AND SMA 17-000068) was called to order at 9:58 a.m. in the West Hawai‘i Civic Center, Community Center, Building G, 74-5044 Ane Keohokālole Highway, Kailua-Kona, Hawai‘i, with Chairman Keith F. Unger presiding. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Keith F. Unger (recused from discussion and vote), Nancy Carr Smith, Scott Church, Collin Kaholo, Perry Kealoha, Sonny Shimaoka (until 1:07 p.m.) and Barbara Nobriga (from 10:00 a.m.) ALSO PRESENT: Malia Ho Hall (Counsel for the Commission), Michael Yee (Planning Director), Jeff Darrow (Planning Program Manager), Maija Jackson (Planner), Shancy Watanabe (Planner) and Noriko Sauer (Commission Secretary) And approximately 60 people from the public in attendance. APPLICANT: WAIKOLOA BC, LLC (AMEND SMA 412) Application to amend SMA Permit No. 412 to remove a 7.849-acre portion from the 10-acre permit area so that the permit will cover a remaining 2.151-acre area. SMA Permit No. 412 was approved on November 30, 2000 to allow the development of a recreational/restaurant/office complex, four single-family dwellings, parking area, and other related recreational facilities, and associated improvements and infrastructure. The subject property is located at the south end of ‘Anaeho‘omalu Bay and encompasses the Lava Lava Beach Club, Waikoloa Beach Resort, ‘Anaeho‘omalu, South Kohala, Hawai‘i, TMK: (3) 6-9-007:015. APPLICANT: WAIKOLOA BC, LLC (REZ 17-000225) Application for a Change of Zone from a Resort-Hotel - 2 acres (V-2a) to a Resort-Hotel - 7,500 square feet (V-7.5) zoning district for a 7.849-acre portion of a 10-acre parcel of land. The subject property is located at the south end of ‘Anaeho‘omalu Bay and encompasses the Lava Lava Beach Club, Waikoloa Beach Resort, ‘Anaeho‘omalu, South Kohala, Hawai‘i, TMK: (3) 6-9-007:015 (por). APPLICANT: WAIKOLOA BC, LLC (SMA 17-000068) Application for a Special Management Area (SMA) Use Permit for a two-lot subdivision and development of a resort complex to include 44 rentable transient units, a caretaker’s residence, a fitness and recreational center, a reception/guest services area, and related accessory uses on a 7.849-acre portion of a 10-acre parcel of land. The subject property is located at the south end of ‘Anaeho‘omalu Bay and encompasses the Lava Lava Beach Club, Waikoloa Beach Resort, ‘Anaeho‘omalu, South Kohala, Hawai‘i, TMK: (3) 6-9-007:015 (por). 1 EXHIBIT B UNGER: The next agenda item, Agenda Item Number 2 will be read and heard together with Agenda Item Number 2, 3 and 4, as they all interrelate, and when the County gives the presentation, they will present the entire proposal and application as one, and that will be followed by the applicant’s discussion and then public testimony. Agenda Item Number 2, Applicant Waikoloa BC, LLC, AMEND SMA 412, application to amend SMA Permit Number 412 to remove a 7.849-acre portion from a ten-acre permit area so that the permit will cover a remaining 2.151-acre area. SMA Permit Number 412 was approved on November 30, 2000, to allow the development of a recreational/restaurant/office complex, four single-family dwellings, parking area, and other related recreational facilities, and associated improvements and infrastructure. The subject property is located at the south end of ‘Anaeho‘omalu Bay and encompasses the Lava Lava Beach Club, Waikoloa Beach Resort, ‘Anaeho‘omalu, South Kohala, Hawai‘i, TMK (3) 6\[-9\]-7: Parcel 15. Item Number 3, Applicant Waikoloa BC, LLC, REZ 17-000225, application for a Change of Zone from a Resort-Hotel – 2 acres, V-2a, to a Resort-Hotel – 7,500 square feet, V-7.5, zoning district for a 7.849-acre portion of a ten-acre parcel of land. The subject property is located at the south end of ‘Anaeho‘omalu Bay and encompasses the Lava Lava Beach Club, Waikoloa Beach Resort, ‘Anaeho‘omalu, South Kohala, Hawai‘i, TMK (3) 6-9-7: portion of Parcel 15. And then Item Number 4, same applicant, Waikoloa BC, LLC, SMA 17-000068, application for a Special Management Area SMA Use Permit for a two-lot subdivision and development of a resort complex to include 44 rentable transient units, a caretaker’s residence, a fitness and recreational center, a reception/guest services area, and related accessory uses on a 7.849-acre portion of a ten-acre parcel of land. The subject property is located at the south end of ‘Anaeho‘omalu Bay and encompasses the Lava Lava Beach Club, Waikoloa Beach Resort, ‘Anaeho‘omalu, South Kohala, Hawai‘i, TMK (3) 6-9\[-7\]: portion of Parcel 15. \[At 10:00 a.m. Commissioner Nobriga came in and took her seat.\] UNGER: Before we get into the discussion, I will be recusing myself because of a conflict of interest, or should I say a perceived conflict of interest; I’m a business associate of a lessee at the Lava Lava Beach Club. Our business that we run together is separate, not associated with the Lava Lava Beach Club, it’s completely separate and disassociated. How, and pursuant to the rules and codes of the conflict of interest, technically I don’t have a conflict of interest, but, but as far as a perceived public, as far as a perceived conflict of interest I think there could be one, and therefore I will be recusing myself from discussion and participating in any votes. I will facilitate this meeting as Chair and continue with that responsibility, but as far as discussions or participating in motion and voting I will be recusing myself. With that said, Ms. Jackson, can you begin your presentation? JACKSON: Yes, thank you, Chair Unger. Good morning, everyone. So the subject property is located in the South Kohala District in Waikoloa Beach Resort. You can see the property circled in red towards the bottom of the slide here. And just for orientation you have Queen Ka‘ahumanu Highway running in a north-south direction in the middle of the slide, you have Waikoloa Road 2 EXHIBIT B coming up mauka from there in an east-west direction, Waikoloa Village is shown in the yellow color, and Waikoloa Beach Resort is shown by the sea. The applicant’s proposed development is to subdivide the property, which is about ten acres in size currently, into two lots. One of the lots would be 2.151 acres in size and the other would be 7.849 acres in size. The new approximately two-acre lot would contain the existing Lava Lava Beach Club restaurant and related accessory uses, such as parking. On the new approximately seven-acre lot the applicant proposes to develop a small resort complex consisting of a maximum of 44 rentable transient units that would be housed in various structures. All of the structures will not exceed 30 feet in height. So those rental unit structures will consist of twelve single-story bungalows, 16 two-story duplexes, and 16 units housed also in two-story structures. All of those units will be approximately 750 square feet in size and contain wet bars. The applicant is also proposing to include in the project a single-story caretaker’s cottage, and this structure has actually already been built; it’s the little building that was built by Richard Smart of Parker Ranch back in the 1970’s. It’s located near the large pond, and I’ll be showing you that structure in a minute. So they would like to include that in this proposed development. They also propose a new single-story restaurant/café approximately 1,000 square feet in size, a 3,000-square foot fitness and recreational center located near the pool that would also be one-story in height, a single-story reception/guest services area approximately 3,500 square feet in size, and 55 parking stalls and two loading zones located in the northeast portion of the property, also a swimming pool located between the historic trails on the southeastern portion of the property, as well as landscaping and related accessory uses. There are four existing single-family dwellings on the property located near the sandy beach. Those will either be relocated further mauka or removed. And so those four units could possibly be incorporated into the total 44-unit count. The project will likely be developed in phases with the first phase consisting of some of the bungalows, reception/office area, and the corresponding parking and landscaping. The second and final phase would include the remaining components. And the applicant intends to begin developing the project in late 2019, with completion of all phases within eight years. Total construction costs for the project is estimated at 30 million dollars. So in order to accomplish this project, the applicant needs three entitlements. Two of which the Planning Commission would approve or deny, and then one of which the County Council would approve or deny. So the first permit that’s needed is an amendment to Special Permit \[sic\] Number 412 in order to remove the approximately seven-acre portion of the new project from the approximately ten-acre property. So SMA Permit Number 412 was issued in 2000, and it covered the entire ten-acre property. It permitted a restaurant and some club/spa facilities, the four single-family residential units. And from that permit obviously the Lava Lava Beach Club restaurant has been constructed and the four dwelling units near the sandy beach. So the other entitlement that would be needed is a Change of Zone from V-2a, which is 3 EXHIBIT B Resort-Hotel – 2 acre, to V-7.5, which would be Resort-Hotel – 7,500 square feet. This would be for the 7.849-acre portion of the property, and the current Resort-Hotel zoning, which is the V-2a, requires two acres of land per dwelling or rentable unit; therefore, the current zoning allows a maximum density of five dwelling units. The applicant’s current request is to change the density, the zoning density, to 7,500 square feet per dwelling unit, this would allow up to 45 dwelling or rentable units on the seven acres. And the last entitlement would be a new Special Management Area Use Permit for the seven-acre portion of the property, and that would cover the proposed resort development and the subdivision of the ten-acre property into two lots. This is the applicant’s proposed site plan, and I’m just going to go over a few things on the plan, so bear with me. This road here is called Ku‘uali‘i Place; it comes off of the Waikoloa Beach Road near the Queens’ Market Place and kind of curves around and ends in a cul-de-sac here. The some of the features in the area are public access; there is a 78-stall public beach parking lot just located east of the subject property, and then the folks who want to walk to the beach would walk along this concrete pathway to the cul-de-sac, and then there is a walkway down to the beach in this area here; there is also a comfort station with restrooms and showers generally in this location here. And so you can see the property is this general area here. You can see the two lots, the proposed two lots; one would be here, this is the two-acre property, and then the area outlined in red is the remaining 7.8-acre property. So the request would be, just to repeat it again, is to pull the seven-acre property out of SMA Permit 412 and have it just to apply to this two-acre property. And then seeking, the applicant seeks a rezone of the area outlined in red and 44-unit resort development would be within the area outlined in red. So the existing Lava Lava Beach driveway is located here off of Ku‘uali‘i Place. The restaurant is located here. There’s some parking nearby. And then for the proposed 44-unit development you have a 55-stall parking lot here and admin and café building, reception area in this location. There would not be internal roadways; these are walking paths, concrete walking paths. You have a pool in this location, and then event garden, as well as a little gym facility here. And then the 44 units are spread out in this location and along the southern boundary of the property. Some of the historic and cultural resources on the property are large anchialine pond located here, there is a small anchialine pond just north of that in this location, and then there is an ephemeral, or temporary, pond located in this location here near the parking lot. There are three historic trails that are owned by the State of Hawai‘i, and those come onto the property in this location, this location and this location here. And these three trails meet up off of the property further south and they eventually connect to the Ala Loa Trail further mauka. So as part of the proposal the applicant is, I’m sorry, there is also a petroglyph field here and in this location here. And as part of the proposal the applicant will be providing buffers around a lot of the cultural and archaeological features, as well as the ability for people traveling on the trail to walk along the concrete path here down to the bay. So the County zoning for the property is Resort-Hotel – 2 acres, which is shown in the light purple color. Properties immediately to the north, east and south are zoned Open, and nearby properties further east and northeast are zoned Resort, which are shown in the bright pink color, and Village Commercial, which is shown in the light pink color. 4 EXHIBIT B The General Plan designation for the property is Resort Node on the mauka portion and then Open, which coincides with the shoreline. Properties to the south are in the Conservation designation and the Waikoloa Beach Resort to the north and east is in the Resort Node as well. The State Land Use district for the Property is Urban, which is shown in the light pink. As you can see most of the Waikoloa Beach Resort is in the Urban designation, with exception of the Ku‘uali‘i and Kahapapa ponds, which are located just to the north here. The land to the south is in the Conservation district and further east is in the Agricultural district. This is a kind of panned-out view of the area and the property. You can see ‘Anaeho‘omalu Bay, Waikoloa Beach Resort, this area here is the Queens’ Shops, the Kings’ Shops, and then Ku‘uali‘i Place curves around to the subject property here. And then this is a closer-up view of the property. Again, you have the public beach parking lot just to the east of the property. You can see the large anchialine pond, the existing structure that was built by Parker Ranch in the 70’s, Lava Lava Beach Club and the four existing dwellings near the sandy beach area. And this is a view of the mauka side of the property. So the eastern boundary of the property is just off of the slide, and you can see the anchialine pond, the large one, is generally in this location here under the palm trees. This is a graded area that will generally be the location of the future parking lot, should the permits be approved. This is the existing view of the Lava Lava Beach Club driveway from Ku‘uali‘i Place. Again, you can see the anchialine pond generally here. The roof of Lava Lava is this red roof in the background. And this is a view of the shoreline. This is standing at the north end of the property looking south, so you can see the Lava Lava Beach Club restaurant is located here. And then this is somewhat of a panorama shot but it’s not quite connected, so this tree here, the roots are these roots here, so you can see a whole pan of the bay and the shoreline. And a view of the Lava Lava Beach Club restaurant, as well as one of the single-family dwellings located here. A view of the sandy beach area and the four dwellings, one, two, and hard to see there behind the kiawe trees, but three and four. And lastly a view of the shoreline near the south end of the property. So this is, this picture here was standing kind of in the middle of the sandy beach area looking south, so the south end of the property is generally in this location here. And then this view is standing at the south end of the property looking north back towards Lava Lava Beach Club, which is shown here with the red roof. So the Planning Director is still formulating a recommendation, and suggests that the Commission conduct a site visit of the property before making a decision. The Department has consulted with 5 EXHIBIT B various agencies, such as Fish and Wildlife, State Historic Preservation Division, National Park Service, Nā Ala Hele, about how to minimize impacts to cultural, historic and natural resources. And many of these agency recommendations could be included as conditions, if the Commission were to approve these permits. However, there are a few unresolved issues that need additional consideration, so we are just kind of going to bring that out to you, and hopefully, have a discussion about how some of these issues can be resolved. One of the main issues is zoning density. There’s several resources on the property, and so the question is, based on the amount of development the applicant is proposing, is there enough developable area on the property to accommodate both the proposed development and protect the natural, cultural and historic resources on the property? And so that’s the first question: Can the property accommodate a 44-unit resort development given the resources on the property and the need to provide adequate on-site parking, or alternative off-site parking so that the public beach parking lot is not used for commercial purposes? The existing Lava Lava Beach Club restaurant does not have adequate on-site parking. They do have the amount required by the Zoning Code, so they do meet Zoning Code requirements, but it still isn’t adequate. And I’m sure you’ve seen from a lot of the public testimony that that’s one of the biggest concerns we are hearing is there’s just not enough on-site parking. Customers have been using the public beach parking lot or the northeast portion of the property as overflow parking. So the applicant will be providing 55 new stalls as part of the 44-unit resort development. But what that would create is that would cause Lava Lava to not be able to use that parking area that they are using now as overflow parking. Another question is, will the proposed location of the pool and event garden between two historic trails have a negative effect on the cultural use of these trails? As I mentioned before, the property has cultural, historic, natural, recreational and scenic resources that require preservation buffers ranging in size from ten feet for some historic sites up to 100 feet for construction activities around green sea turtles. And just to show you this area that the question was just referring to, so these are the three historic trails here, one, two and then three. And so the applicant is proposing a pool, a little fitness center and an event garden between these two historic trails. State Historic Preservation Division did recommend, or did concur with the applicant’s preservation plan, which recommended 15-foot buffers around the trails, measured from the edge of the trail. And I just want to go over a few of the, of those preservation buffers that were recommended in the applicant’s preservation plan. So again, you have the historic trails here, one, two, three; those will have a 15-foot permanent preservation buffer. It should be noted that one of the trails, this trail here, was recently desecrated, and the applicant wrote to the Planning Department, informing them of that, and they intend to restore the trail back to its former condition. Other resources on the property that will have preservation buffers are: A cave complex here will have a ten-foot buffer; the ephemeral pond, the preservation plan recommended a ten-foot buffer; the anchialine pond, the small anchialine pond, the two petroglyph areas have I believe a ten-foot buffer as well. And then you’ll notice these green lines here, these are smaller trails, this is a network of smaller trails that connect to the larger main trails, and the preservation plan did not recommend preservation of those trails; however, some of the segments of those smaller trails will be preserved within the 15-foot buffers of the primary trails. So another question the Director would like to hear the Commission’s concerns are is related to the threatened green sea turtle. The turtle is not classified as endangered yet; it’s threatened. But 6 EXHIBIT B it has been known to be located in that area of the property and to the south of the subject property. So, will an increase in the amount of people on the property and beach area adversely affect threatened green sea turtles that bask and may nest in the area? The Department has consulted with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Staff went out on a site visit with Fish and Wildlife Service staff last week, and they provided a memo with recommendations in your background report, and you should also have gotten a supplemental email with further recommendations this morning. So some of those recommendations that Fish and Wildlife is making is that mechanical and construction activities cease within 100 feet of a green sea turtle until the turtle voluntarily leaves the area; also avoid holding large gatherings, and minimizing lights during turtle nesting season, which is from May to December; and placing signage informing the public of turtles and how to, how to behave around the turtles, and also have an on-site, on-staff monitor to place temporary boundary fencing, should a turtle come up to bask on the beach. Fish and Wildlife did not indicate the distance that the temporary boundary fencing should be placed from a turtle; we are assuming it’s not the full 100 feet that’s required for the construction activities, but we are consulting with them still to find out that distance the boundary fencing should be placed. The last two concerns are related to the shoreline setback and public access. So the survey that the applicant provided showed that the shoreline has moved about 30 to 80 feet since 1968. The applicant is proposing to implement a 60-foot setback for any structures from the certified shoreline, but the question is whether that is enough to protect those new structures and future, from future shoreline erosion and ensure safe public access. And I’m just going to go back and show you on a map real quick. So taking those measurements the 80-foot movement of the shoreline was in this area. You can kind of see the current certified shoreline; it’s a solid light black line here. And so the 80-foot inland movement was in this area, you can see a pretty big gap here. The 30-foot movement was in this general area here and then further to the south. And lastly, is the current ten-foot wide public access easement located mauka of the certified shoreline adequate or should the public be able to enjoy the entire sandy beach area, similar to the sandy beaches to the north within the Waikoloa Beach Resort? And I’m just going to back up again to that photo and show generally where that, so, the applicant under SMA Permit 412 agreed to a floating easement, a ten-foot wide floating public access easement, and basically what that means is anytime the certified shoreline gets recertified and the shoreline moves in, the access easement will move mauka as well, so it’ll be located just mauka of the certified shoreline. And so currently the certified shoreline is, again, this black line, so the current public access easement is located along that line and ten feet mauka would be the corridor for current public access. So that concludes the presentation from staff. I do just want to bring to your attention the handouts that we have for you; so you should have your background report, we also have provided public testimony in, it looks like, three groups, so you should have one batch that is from, let’s see, thth January 11 to January 13 and that one, the first email, if you are looking at them, is form thth Barbara Funk, and the next batch is dated from the 13 through the 16 and that first one on top is thth from Cassandra Crandall, and the third batch is from the 16 to the 17 and that email on the top th is from Kevin Reece McPherson. You should also have a fourth batch, sorry, from the 17 to the th 18, the name on that first one is Rodrigo Romo. And just for Commission’s information and public’s information the Planning Department provided all public testimony to the Commission up 7 EXHIBIT B until 9:00 o’clock last night; so if anything came in after that, the Commission does not have it. And then you should have an email from Eldridge Naboa of Fish and Wildlife. We also handed out this morning a letter from William Lazenby, Julia Alos, Jojo Tanimoto, Barbara Schaefer, and, I’m sorry, let’s see, Olivia Cockcroft. I’m also going to hand out three more that you can pass around, we only have one copy, and that’s from Mike and Sue Kniss, Victoria Serrao and Marcie Davis. And the applicant provided this binder and they will go into more detail on the contents of that in a few minutes. And that concludes my presentation. I’ll be happy to answer any questions the Commission has. UNGER: Thank you. Commissioners, are there any questions? CARR SMITH: Yes, I have a couple. Can you explain why the trails appear to end on the map? JACKSON: On, on which end? This end here? CARR SMITH: Yeah, those trails that you pointed out appear to end and not go any further. Is that typical? JACKSON: I don’t know the answer to that question. I know the applicant’s archaeologist is here, and he can probably provide information about why those trails end where they do. CARR SMITH: Okay. And do we know, is 2014 the last time that this shoreline was certified? JACKSON: It was actually 2015, yeah. And let me explain why that was. So typically, certified shoreline surveys are only valid for one year. When the Planning Department receives an application, we honor that certified shoreline survey, even if it takes more than a year for the application to get through the approval, the entitlement process. So what happened with this particular application was in 2015 the applicant submitted an application similar to what you have before you, and then the State Historic Preservation Division determined that their archaeological inventory survey was somewhat outdated; it didn’t meet the criteria according to SHPD rules for an AIS. So the applicant agreed to redo that survey and that process took about two years. During the process the applicant created a revised AIS, they created a new preservation plan, they revised their site concept several times to what you have before you now. And just for a little further background, when SMA 412 was issued in 2000, the trails were known at that time, those three primary trails, and the State Nā Ala Hele informed the applicant and the Department that those were trails that were owned in fee by the State under the Highways Act. But at that time SHPD didn’t determine them as historic trails for whatever reason. So what happened was there were no preservation requirements for those trails at that time. Since then, since the new AIS came out, new preservation plan, SHPD has changed that determination and they are seen as historic and culturally significant, which is why now the applicant change their site concept to accommodate those preservation buffers. CHURCH: You said one of the — CARR SMITH: Thank you. 8 EXHIBIT B CHURCH: — trails was desecrated. I wondered what was done to that trail to be desecrated. JACKSON: I think it was bulldozed. We can have the applicant provide more information on that. CHURCH: So it wasn’t the general public then. It was the, it was the owner of land, developer? JACKSON: The applicant doesn’t know who bulldozed the trail. And so, if you look, if you look at your, let’s see, Exhibit, excuse me, just a minute here, okay, Exhibit Number 11 of your background report, there is a letter from the applicant explaining how it was discovered that the trail was desecrated and what actions they have taken to remedy the destruction. And I’m sure that the applicant will provide more information on that as well. SHIMAOKA: One of the questions I have is I haven’t heard anything on, in regards to what the applicant plans to do to enforce some of these wahipana that’s there, the trails. Do they provide any kind of security or any kind of procedures? Because, you know, we know that the locals respect the property, but when we have visitors come, what kinds of insurances that we have? And also I wanted to find out what is “voluntarily leave the area” mean on the green sea turtles? What does that mean? JACKSON: That means that the turtles leave on their own when they are done basking. SHIMAOKA: Okay. And so that’s when construction can continue? JACKSON: Ah, yes. SHIMAOKA: Okay. JACKSON: That’s when construction within 100 feet can continue. SHIMAOKA: Okay, so as long as they are there there’s no construction allowed until they leave. JACKSON: Within 100 feet, correct. SHIMAOKA: Within 100 feet. JACKSON: Yeah. UNGER: Any other questions? Thank you, Ms. Jackson. If the applicant would come forward. Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth before the Planning Commission? APPLICANT’S REPRESENTATIVES: \[Inaudible response in the affirmative.\] UNGER: Please state your name and area of residence. 9 EXHIBIT B PLUNKETT: My name is John Plunkett. I’m from Santa Barbara, California, and I am an owner’s rep/consultant to Waikoloa. Most of our presentation will be made by Mr. Fuke to my right. UNGER: Thank you. FUKE: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. My name is Sidney Fuke. I’m a planning consultant, and I’ve been retained to assist with the preparation and processing of the applications before you. HEAD: Good morning. My name is Scott Head. I live in Kamuela, Hawai‘i. And I’m a representative for Waikoloa BC, LLC. UNGER: Thank you. FUKE: I wanted to add that I live in Kaūmana, Hilo. Sorry I didn’t put that in. I think that, you know, the staff report is very comprehensive, I mean, you know, you just look at it, you had like about over, I guess with all of the additional testimonies, well in excess of like 700 sheets, and it’s difficult to go through all 700 sheets, so we can understand why even for the staff it took a while before they could, you know, generate the report for you and having all that information and the questions that will probably come up today that, you know, they recommend that you take a site visit and during the interim, you know, spend some time, your precious time, to review all of the material that has been presented to you. The applicant has been in this process for nearly three years. And I think that as, you know, the staff had mentioned, the initial application was filed back in 2000 and, you know, September 2015, but it didn’t start then; it started way before then because they had to look at a lot of the information that needed to be generated before they came forth with something. So what I would like to do is like I passed out, you know, that small little maybe half-an-inch type of binder, you know, I kind of like want to walk you through that because it will give hopefully the Commission with some sense of understanding of like what the thought process was on the part of the applicant. And during the course of going through that, I think that some of the questions that the Planning Director has raised, I think may be directly or indirectly addressed. So, and I also hope that, you know, the, at the next, you know, I know because you have a lot of people who are going to testify, so we’d like, you know, hopefully an opportunity to address these additional concerns that may come up that, you know, which we don’t initially say now, or find now, at the subsequent meetings. So in the handout that I, you know, they are kind of like numerical right now, so I wanted to basically, you know, in the exhibits, kind of share with the Commission like what was the planning process. Initially you have to look at like, you know, is the infrastructure adequate, you know, primarily, is there water? The answer to the question was yes. What about your wastewater system? Yes, there is, because it’s all, you know, it’s all wastewater, a private sewer system in that area, so that’s how it’s going to all be hooked up. They also look at, look at the 10 EXHIBIT B condition like about drainage, what the flooding is, you know, your tsunami hazard line, you know, the topography, all those kinds, they have to take those things into consideration. But there are other things that I’d like to kind of highlight for you, and they are kind of like in this binder. One of the things that they had to look at was, you know, first of all like on the first page it’s like, what is the General Plan show? You know, the General Plan shows Resort, because obviously the General Plan, and I have that map, if the General Plan were, you know, Conservation District for example, then you know that it was not possible. So that’s one of the first steps they had to look at; they had to look at what the General Plan is. And then the second sheet is like, you know, what’s the zoning? And the zoning of this property, you know, like as the staff indicated, is Resort, and there is zoning on the properties all south of that is all Open; it’s basically all the way up until Hualālai it’s all Open. And so what this map graphically tries to illustrate, you know, the second and, the second map is from the General Plan standpoint and the zoning standpoint, you know, this is really like the age of any urban expansion, you know, in this particular area. Moving south until you hit Hualālai, because of the General Plan considerations, basically what you see now is probably what will be there in probably all of our lifetime. The third sheet, the third sheet I included was like what the zoning is. And so, you know, so they have to look at the regulation; they look at the General Plan and they look at like what the zoning is. And the zoning on the property is Resort, and when, you know, Mr. Head had asked me like what are my thoughts, I said like, well, probably it’s resort, some sorts of resort things, but I think you should look at some lower density activity, and lower density, you know, try to keep it like at residential level scale. And that’s the reason why, you know, and to their credit, you know, they accepted my recommendation to go over the residential scale. The residential scale for, the lowest for single-family residential is RS-7.5. If you look at all in the resort’s one, and this is the zoning map for the Waikoloa area, you see like V-1.25; V-1.25 suggests one unit for every 1,250 square feet. If you look at the other one, RM, RM-1.5, RM-6, they all suggest one unit for every 1,500 square feet, one unit for every 6,000 feet. So in relation to the overall Waikoloa Resort area, from our resort standpoint or residential standpoint this would be the lowest zoning density, V-7.5. Then, you know, they had to look at like the archaeological considerations, and this kind of like led to the delay and perhaps, you know, I take some fault in that. But they had like an, already, SHPD, State Historic Preservation Division, approved archaeological inventory survey, so what I have there is like a letter that’s dated October 23, 1996, and basically saying that they approve the site, or approve the plan, approve the archaeological preservation program for this plan. They said, had only four stuff, four things, which are like two petroglyphs, and which were pointed out by Maija, you know, Ms. Jackson, and there were also two anchialine ponds. If anything, those would be the four things that will require preservation. And then on May 16, 2001, they approved the preservation plan, you know, along those lines. The staff also kind of pointed out, you know, that the other sheet I had like from Nā Ala Hele, and Nā Ala Hele, you know, back in October 30, 2000, basically said, and I highlighted it for you, “the State Historic Preservation Division has not recommended the trail for preservation because sites of similar types are preserved elsewhere in the resort area.” So, you know, we kind of like started, you know, like on some of these parameters and, you know, on hindsight they were antiquated, but nevertheless we used these as kind of like initial benchmark to start the planning process. 11 EXHIBIT B 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 morphed into something more than what was initially submitted back in 2015. And you can also see, you know, right on the mauka side of the anchialine pond a series of structures – this is back in the 2015 plan; now, if you look at the 2017 plan, you know, which was submitted, there are no structures between the pond and the parking lot. So, the point being that over time and through a lot of interactive relation, you know, interaction with the staff, we’ve had, and the County Cultural \[Resources\] Commission, you know, we’ve had to modify the plans to reflect to come to where we are today. Item Number 6 basically I’ll just kind of like summarize, you know, just talks essentially about the, just make it easier for the Commission to find it because in 700 pages you are going to have difficulty finding it, but over there it’s basically talking about the County Cultural Commission, and until going through this process I didn’t really realize the value of the County Cultural Commission, but we appear before them three times, and during all of the times constructive criticism was given on the updated archaeological inventory survey, as well as the preservation plan. They made some excellent recommendations, and based on those recommendations, Dr. Alan Haun who is also here and he’ll testify and answer your questions, he made some modifications. And only with the modifications or accommodations of the comments made by the Cultural, County Cultural Commission, then the plan was submitted and SHPD finally approved it. The SHPD approved it in, back in 2017 they approved the inventory survey and they approved the preservation plan as well. The figure in Number 7 is something that’s already there, and I’ve kind of like covered it. But Item Number 8 is basically a letter from SHPD, which is kind of burdening your 700-page document, but it’s November 7, 2017, and SHPD in that letter basically said that they approve both documents, the archaeological impact survey, or archaeological inventory survey, and the preservation plan. But there is one section that I’d like to kind of read to you largely for emphasis because there’s, you are probably going to hear comments about like the developer is not responsible or not taking into accommodation the archaeological features on the property, but this is what SHPD says like on Page 2 of their letter, and I’ve kind of highlighted for you, “The conceptual plan incorporates the agreed upon preservation measures between the landowner, the SHPD, and the Hawai‘i County Cultural Resources Commission. \[These\] preservation measures include: (1) the site specific boundaries and buffers; (2) construction barriers; (3) \[partial\] restoration and re-naturalization and maintenance of the trail systems; (4) \[maintenance and\] coastal sand replenishment; and (5) a beach stabilization plan.” The coastal sand replenishment and the beach stabilization plan, they were needed because that’s where the one of the two petroglyphs are; they are right by the ocean, and they are going to be eroded and lost. So they had to come up with some program to see how we are going to save the petroglyph. So those are all agreed upon, and with that understanding, then SHPD went through. You see Page 3 of that same letter; SHPD basically says that they want to see archaeological monitoring, they want an archaeological monitoring plan. Well, the monitoring plan, archaeological monitoring plan has already been there. And most critically they wanted to see a plat map showing where the archaeological preserves, which include the trails, where they are; they wanted to have it mapped out by metes and bounds survey. And that leads up to the destruction and how, and the discovery of the desecration of the trail. 13 EXHIBIT B Then on, you know, Item Number 9, you see the, you know, like you hear and read the comments that come up, you know, relating to this project, and when I’ve read through almost all of those comments, they seem to have like a common thread, you know, the thread being like what’s the impact to the anchialine ponds, what’s the impact on public parking, what’s the impact on coastal access, the marine life and, you know, resources, such as the green sea turtle, and what about the archaeological, cultural resources. So from that standpoint on the anchialine pond, you know, that’s the Item 9, you know, the Fish and Wildlife Service is, they’re one entity like how we rely on SHPD on archaeological end, from the Fish and Wildlife Service, you know, there’s a lot of reliance on what, you know, they have the technical knowledge, so we rely on whatever they have to say in addition to our own consultant, in this case here Dr. Brock and Dr. Steve Dollar. But the Fish and Wildlife Service, specifically as it relates to the anchialine pond and the damselflies, says like you know the plan that you guys have prepared by Dr. Brock, that’s the best you can do. And that’s, that’s, that’s their statement on Page 8, and I kind of highlighted it for you; it says, “In addition to the measures listed below,” all of which the applicant had agreed to accept, it says, “we strongly recommend that you implement the management plan” prepared, you know, in Exhibit B, Exhibit Delta, rather, that’s the plan prepared by Dr. Richard Brock. And it goes on to say the Fish and Wildlife Service supports SHPD’s recommendation to monitor the two anchialine ponds and the ephemeral pond. And that’s going to happen. I’d like to also kind of, you know, like the staff pointed out to the email that’s also found in the same section towards the end, you know, from Eldridge Naboa, you know, with the Fish and Wildlife Service – he went on the field inspection and I accompanied them and, you know, I learned a lot from the inspection as well – but, you know, his recommendation, you know, was to say that on the large anchialine pond, for example, not the five-foot buffer that Dr. Brock had recommended in his management plan but a 40-foot buffer. But that’s why they accommodated, as you can see, you know, the 40-foot buffer is like, you know, you see the big pond and there is no, no dwellings between that pond and the proposed parking lot area. And then talk about placing signage, sure, you know, that’s all going to happen. So in addition to whatever was written in the Fish and Wildlife Service’s letter, these additional recommendations by Fish and Wildlife staff, the owner has said, the applicant has said we’ll accept. There was also the other issue about, you know, the green sea turtle – and, again, please feel free to ask the question of Dr. Dollar, you know, and Dr. Brock, you know, those kind of question because they’ll be here to testify as well – but on the issue of the green sea turtle, again, the Fish and Wildlife Service, they are kind of like I would consider the agency guru, you know, on this kind of area as well, and if you look at Page Number, Page 6 of their letter, which I’ve enclosed, it specifically talks about green sea turtles. This is like Item Number 10, and then the second page of that letter from Fish and Wildlife Service, and basically it says the, on the green sea turtle, the Fish and Wildlife Service consults on sea turtles, and then they go on to suggest what needs to be done, you know, to minimize the impact. And I think Ms. Jackson had read some of their mitigations then and also how you address the green sea turtle issue. And all of those recommended mitigation by, suggested by the Fish and Wildlife Service is acceptable to the applicant, and should the Commission in its wisdom decide to approve the SMA Permit and make that as a condition, it’s not going to come with any objection on the part of the applicant. On Item Number 11, you know, really deals like with the lateral coastal access. The staff talked about like there have been some concerns about like, you know, whether there is some restriction 14 EXHIBIT B in terms of lateral movement along the shoreline. To our knowledge there has not been any restriction on lateral movement in that area. They’ve had signs prepared in the past, and the signs were redone largely because the signs that were initially placed gave the public a misconception in terms of where you can and where is the public access and where is not. So the signs were replaced with the photos that I show you over here, and these photos are the County-approved public access sign, and they are placed at the location where it becomes unmistakable in terms of where the public’s right to traverse laterally along the shoreline, you know. In the area of the public parking, which is Item Number 12, we realize that there are times like, you know, like Lava Lava, you know, when there, because it’s a very successful operation, there have been situations where when they do fundraising whether it’s for the Kona Hospital Foundation or other kind of fundraising, they are going to have large gatherings in that area, and then at those point in time they don’t have enough parking. It’s like any other situation. They’ve met the Zoning Code requirement. We meet our Zoning Code requirement when we construct our single-family dwelling and you put up two cars, and then that’s all the code requires. But how often, how often have we had, you know, we’ve had a situation where you have parties and then no more enough parking stalls, you know, so they park on the street and they park wherever. And then that’s the same situation; you satisfy the minimum requirement for parking, but on the other hand there are going to be situations where additional parking is required. But, so anyway, like one of the things that was causing a lot of heartburn on this parking issue was that having the special events. The Planning Department was rightfully so said that that’s not allowed. And so the applicant as landowner basically told Lava Lava, its tenant, to say you’ve got to stop that, you’ve got to comply with the County’s requirement. So it’s stopped, it’s ceased. That, however, doesn’t take away the fact that sometime the restaurant is going to be busy and you are going to have like the turnover. Just like a golf course, you know, like you have like one, you know, four stall- the stall requirement for a golf course is like four stalls for every hole. But then so that might be enough, but when you have the turnover, the first guys begin tee-off at 7:30 and the next guys come in at 11:30; but what happens if at ten o’clock or 10:30 they come, and you are not going to have enough stalls. It happens at the Hilo Municipal quite often. But what I’ve shown on Page 12 is like the number of stalls in that area, you know, it just shows you, you know, you have like about 65 or 70 stalls in that area, but that property, that property, which is situated immediately mauka of the, you know, the property that you are now being, you know, under consideration right now, is owned by the applicant. They created that parking stall, the parking area. It’s a five-acre site. Now, that five-acre site today, if you look at the last page that I had included, it’s a schematic, it’s a schematic that shows that it can easily be expanded to, up to like about 124 stalls in all of the already improved area so they don’t have to do more grading and all that stuff. But if you look at this, it’s kind of clear that you can have additional parking. And the applicant is willing to have this additional parking to accommodate for this overflow, you know, at time overflow need. So double the amount of parking, and that can be done all by the applicant at his expense. In the area of the trails, you know, I mentioned earlier that there was some destruction. And it was what, the applicant discovered that, and the applicant discovered this how? Because, they don’t visit the entire ten-acre site every day or whatever and neither does the archaeologist go, you know, go visit the site, but what happened was that in the preservation plan, and as recommended by SHPD and the County Cultural Commission, they said that you know what, you guys should as 15 EXHIBIT B soon as possible do a metes and bounds survey of all of the site that are going to be preserved, which are not only the petroglyph sites but all of those trails. So it was when the surveyor, you know, this was like before, you know, before getting any approvals, so they were just going to do that anyway. So then they hired the surveyors, the surveyors go out and they said like what happened to this segment of the trail? It was destroyed. They didn’t do it. But they don’t know how. Somebody did it. So all they did in a responsible way, they contacted the State, they contacted the Police Department because, you know, it’s like an unlawful entry and destruction of their property. So it’s under investigation right now. But, nonetheless, in the mode of also be proactive, you know, what’s done is done, so the question is like, how do you restore it? So then they hired Dr. Haun and he is here, again, you can ask him the question. So he prepared like what’s included in that Item Number 13. It talks about a trail reconstruction plan, and basically that, you know, talks about like they would try as best as they can to re-naturalize the trail and to make a nice transition. But to begin with, the re-naturalization of the trail was part of the overall preservation plan afterwards, so it’s not independent. So eventually they can kind of duplicate the situation, but it’s not going to be like how it was like before the destruction, but it will have the appearance of being almost like how it was before. So finally, it kind of like gets to like where we are right now. And, you know, based on all of the comments that we’ve heard, you know, from agencies, from discussions with the Planning staff, read, you know, reviewed the public comments to date, the applicant has made further modification to the plan, which is reflected on Item Number 14, and that \[inaudible short dialogue among the applicant’s representatives. An enlarged copy of the modified plan was brought in and shown to the Commission and the audience.\] And I think if you look, if you look at that plan and you compare with that, because that’s kind of like what is the current application right now. So what I’d like, you know, to direct you to is like if you look at the mauka southern corner, you know, where the trails are, you could see the, where the swimming pool and there was like a lawn area, the idea right now is that whole area would all be kept as an open space. So in term of the buffer where, you know, the Cultural Resources Commission had recommended that maybe using Nā Ala Hele’s guideline for trail buffer of 15 feet from the edge of the trails. It’s no longer 15 feet; it’s considerably more than that, it’s like one whole swap, you know, this area has been set aside and kept in its natural state. The other thing is that like, you know, from a density standpoint and the height, what they came up with the revision, again, they said like okay rather than doing 44 units they’ve been in the position to just do 40 units. So the plan before you reflects 40 units, and more critically, along the shoreline on the makai section they are all single-family dwelling, you know, not single-family, they are single-story in height. In previous, previous plans reflected multiple stories in that area, two stories. So as best as, you know, like I can say like, you know, we’ve heard a lot of the comments, we’ve tried to address almost all of them. I know that the Director had indicated like there are a number of issues that he would want to have the Commission consider. One was in relation to the density and whether there is going to be enough parking, and I think that in the record we’ve tried to say like we can address that issue, the density as it translates to the issue of parking. They talk about the trails and then the pool being between those trails like that, and we are saying that it’s out, we are not going to have any pool, no activity area in that area, it’s one natural area. On the green sea turtle whatever the Fish and Wildlife Service recommendation, you know, is advancing, their recommendations are acceptable, you know, to the applicant. In terms of the ten-foot wide lateral 16 EXHIBIT B access we’ve already spoken with the staff and we say that, you know, it will be shifting, you know, depending on where the tide is, you know, from a practical matter because, you know, it changes during the course of a day and it changes whether you have high tide, low tide, monster tide or whatever, so we say wherever it is, because the objective is to allow for unfettered lateral access, you know, through the property, you know, along the shoreline. Speaking about access, too, also the plan called for, you know, this plan and also the current plan, you know like, I think, Ms. Carr Smith, you questioned about like why do the trail end; my understanding, and Dr. Haun can collaborate, was that that’s all they could find, it just ended for some reason. So when we went before the County Cultural Commission, they had said like okay if that’s what, if that’s what on the ground, but we know at some point in time it’s got to go down to the shoreline, so can you integrate that into your plan? So we said yes fine. So the plan before, that plan, as well as the current plan right now, reflects the extension of the trail down to the shoreline. So anyway, I’m getting hoarse, so I think I’m done. UNGER: Thank you for the presentation. At this time, if members of the public are trying to plan their day, what we are going to do, we are going to open up the meeting for questions between the Commissioners and the applicant. After that we are going to take a short five-, ten-minute break, and then we are going to open up the meeting for public testimony. So to probably make the question-and-answer period a little bit more efficient, why don’t we call up your consultants now? They can be part, I mean, if you want to stay there that’s fine, and they can be part of the question-and-answer period. Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth before the Planning Commission? APPLICANT’S CONSULTANTS: Yes. UNGER: Please state your name and your area of residence. DOLLAR: My name is Steven Dollar, Honolulu, Hawai‘i. HAUN: Alan Haun, Kailua-Kona. BROCK: Richard Brock, Honolulu, Hawai‘i. UNGER: Thank you. Commissioners, any questions? CHURCH: I guess I have a, I have a question. It seems that increasing concern for developments that are near a shoreline, particularly larger ones, as a result of the porosity of the soils is the leaching of chemicals through the porosity of the soil and into the ocean affecting everything from algae to coral and so forth. On Sidney Fuke’s Tab 4 from on anchialine pool resources it shows the change in surveys in 2001 to 2015, and in particular phosphorus increased by about 250 percent and is beyond the standard, and also, this orthophosphorous increased about 60 percent. So I was just wondering what impact a small property like this, a modest size property like this is going to have. I can’t imagine that it’s going to be helpful, but I was interested in the sort of the technical conclusion. 17 EXHIBIT B BROCK: It’s a very good question, and all I can do is draw on my own personal past experience. There are a bunch of ways of looking at it. One way is to go to some of the areas where there is no development whatsoever; Makalawena, we use that as a controlled site. I used Kūki‘o before anything was down there for ten years as a controlled site, sampling, doing water sampling and watching nutrients through time. And what I found like at Kūki‘o – there are seven parameters that have standards, State standards, that are, you know, that are currently used – and what I found down there is six of the seven standards over a ten-year period were all out of compliance at Kūki‘o. At Makalawena it – phosphorus is one – Makalawena, similar sort of thing, 65 percent of the time that standards were, you know, when I sampled, 65 percent of the time, I had 65 percent out of compliance over a 15-year period. Okay, so that’s one way to look at it. Another way to look at it is to look at what do we see on developed property, you know, pre-development, developed, and going through time. And what we have found – and I’m basing this on more than 20,000 samples collected in West Hawai‘i over, starting in 19, about 1985, 86, so it’s a considerable period of time and effort – and what we find is that the concentrations of nutrients bounce and there is no rhythm to it that I can tell. So sometimes when you sample, things are high; other times when you sample, they are low. And what you are referring to there are two little sets of samples based on, it was about, six or seven samples in the ocean just right out in front, because they asked me to just take a quick look, two times, 15 years apart, or 14 years apart, and one time, the first time, yeah, they were lower, then next time, oh, we had, we went from two out of compliance to four – I think that’s it, I mean, you probably have it in front of you. And I can go back tomorrow, and we might have higher, non-compliance, or it might be lower. CHURCH: That’s fine, thank you very much. I think what you probably summarized is that given the violation in some of these areas, it’s kind of a sad state of affairs everywhere. Thank you. CARR SMITH: Sir, on that same topic, what changes have you seen occur if you have done any tests on the bigger ponds in front of the Marriot or in front of Kōlea area? Do you have any sense of how those have changed since the development there at Kōlea? BROCK: They have changed. They’ve gone some, like I said, sometimes things are up, other times things are low. Overall, looking at Waikoloa, which I started sampling 1986 something like that up to present, overall over the years things went high early on because you have a golf course growing, is one thing, and nutrients go through the roof. Does that impact things in anchialine ponds? At the concentrations that we have measured and some of them are quite high, no, it has no impact, and I attribute that to the fact that in a lot of undeveloped areas we get similar, sometimes high, results in anchialine ponds; it just says to me that the things that have evolved in those ponds, the little ‘ōpae ‘ula shrimp and things like that, are completely insensitive to it; it doesn’t make any difference to them. The numbers aren’t impacting them. Now, if you are talking pesticides, potentially, yeah, you could have a problem. But we sample for pesticides and we don’t find them. So it’s a big system, and you’ve got a lot of ground water moving beneath your feet into the ocean, and there is a lot of variability. CARR SMITH: Thank you. UNGER: Sorry, did you have a comment? 18 EXHIBIT B DOLLAR: Yes, regarding your, your comments on phosphorus. I’ve seen the same kind of thing, and what we sort of have concluded is when you see these huge spikes in phosphorus but not in nitrogen, it’s a result of people using the pond because phosphates are high in soaps and detergents. And as Dr. Brock said, it’s usually ephemeral. But to repeat what he said, the most of these anchialine ponds are now we call nutrient limited, meaning that they have very high levels of nutrients in their normal healthy stage, and it’s only when you have other things getting involved like alien fish that got to mess up the balance that you see the degradation. UNGER: Any other questions? Thank you. We are going to go ahead and take a short break, and then we’ll open the meeting up to public testimony. RECESSED The Chair called a recess at 11:19 a.m. RECONVENED The meeting reconvened at 11:35 a.m. UNGER: The hearing is back in order. We’ll go ahead and open up the hearing for public testimony. There are 27 people signed up to testify. I would like to request that testimony be limited to three minutes. This is not an issue for the convenience of the Commissioners or for the convenience of the County staff; this is so that your neighbor to your right and to your neighbor to the left can also testify who also gave up their day and their time to be here. It’s our goal here to hear from every one of you, so please kōkua. Thank you. I’ll be calling up testifiers six at a time. And before I do that, if everybody here that is ready to testify, if I can swear you in one time. So if you would please, please raise your right hand. I swear or affirm to tell the truth before the Planning Commission? I do? TESTIFIERS IN AUDIENCE: I do. UNGER: Thank you. So I will be calling up the first six names: Barbara Schaefer, Thomas Murray, Max Newberg, Kamuela Plunkett, David Harlow and Mary Wills. Thank you. Before you start your testimony, if you could state your name and the area of residence. So we can start here, ma’am. SCHAEFER: Aloha. UNGER: Aloha. SCHAEFER: My name is Barbara Schaefer. I live in Waimea, Kamuela, and today I’m representing the Board of Directors of E Mau Nā Ala Hele. Do you want the names of everyone or should I go ahead? UNGER: That’s not necessary. SCHAEFER: Okay. I mean, of — UNGER: Oh, no, no, go ahead and complete your testimony. 19 EXHIBIT B SCHAEFER: Okay. E Mau Nā Ala Hele is a non-profit trail advocacy group dedicated to preserving and protecting the ancient and historic trails of Hawai‘i, including their natural and cultural surroundings. The area under consideration today contains many sites of historic and cultural importance. As evidenced by the archaeological record and a simple walk through the area today, this place had, and continues to have, special significance and value to the people who live and visit here. We have quite a number of concerns but I’d like to highlight three today. One is the zoning buffer of the area. The original V-2a zoning provides a buffer between the more densely zoned resort center and the adjoining open space land. We consider this still very desirable and much more appropriate than the proposed V-7.5. The proposed zoning and resulting development would have a significant negative impact on the historic sites and the viewscapes from these sites, the natural beauty and the natural resources of the area. While we acknowledge the applicant’s statement that their proposed rezoning is a least dense of the resort zonings, we still believe the current zoning is best. We recommend the zoning remain unchanged. Natural resources. Of concern is the impact further development would have on the water quality in and adjacent to the project area. The applicant seems to claim because water studies done say it is not unusual that several water quality parameters do not meet the State Department of Health water quality standards, that this is all right. We disagree. And some of their solutions don’t seem sufficient or practical. Just for example, directing excess water to the landscaped areas where the ground would be more permeable and can thus absorb the additional water, does not seem like a reasonable solution, because the ground in this area is permeable, the water will still percolate into the ground and the nearby ocean. Parking considerations are another one of our areas of concern. If the rezoning and development are to proceed as described, the parking considerations are very inadequate. Parking from the Lava Lava Beach Club already overflows into the proposed development area. And if you would, nd please take a look at the photos that I provided today. These were taken on December 22 of last year at approximately six in the afternoon. I walked the area and counted about 120 cars. This included the Lava Lava Beach parking but did not include the public parking area. So this is without any more development there. And if you look at the pictures, you can see the palm trees that was pointed out in the other testimony, surrounding the anchialine pond. And the second photo on the page shows the public parking in a distance relative to the overflow parking there. We worry that — UNGER: Kala mai. Please summarize. SCHAEFER: Yeah, we worry that the spillover to the nearby public parking area could adversely affect the public’s ability to access the area. The response from the applicant to this concern still does not adequately address the problem. The solution suggested seemed very difficult and unlikely to be enacted and/or enforced. 20 EXHIBIT B We urge the Commission to do a walk through the area. And I noted in the newspaper the other day that you have that planned for your February meeting. We much appreciate that you are willing to do this. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. UNGER: Thank you. To clarify, there is no set site visit; that’s part of the discussion today. SCHAEFER: Okay. UNGER: Thank you. NEWBERG: Hello. I don’t believe I was here to swear in, if I need to. UNGER: Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth before the Planning Commission? NEWBERG: I do. UNGER: Thank you. Please state your name and the area of residence. NEWBERG: Max Newberg, Waikoloa. UNGER: Thank you. NEWBERG: I just wanted to say thank-you to the Commissioners here for allowing us to speak. My name is Max Newberg. I’m the Kona Field Representative for the Hawai‘i Regional Council of Carpenters. We are better known as the Carpenters Union. We are in full support of the amendments being requested by Waikoloa Land Company for their project at ‘Anaeho‘omalu Bay. We feel it’s been demonstrated, again, here today by their flexibility and willingness to accommodate what will help make this even a more fitting project for the area. As carpenters, we represent 600 men and women here on the Island of Hawai‘i and their families. Also, I believe Waikoloa Land Company being willing to offer livable wages, which is something becoming more and more difficult for our working families to achieve. We, we learn our trade through our State-recognized apprenticeship program, and hope that all of our men and women that are carpenters and drywaller are able to apply their craft and help build their communities and make a livable wage so they are able to raise their families and be a part of this community. We also enjoy recreation. This is a very busy place, home to not only the bay where everybody wants to enjoy the beach, also the paddle team and, again, the restaurant as well. We feel what they are reducing in their density is another show of them being able to find a proper fit and place for the location and the enjoyment. And I believe this bid of a project, although will provide construction jobs, will also provide jobs for those that will remain and maintain this project after completion. And with no shame or humor involved, we’ve all been in line after a full working day with somebody in a high-vision shirt, and it’s not always a most enjoyable smell that you get after a hard-working day as a trade’s person. And so what we try to do is teach our members to be able to work with efficiency, work hard and diligently, not only learning their craft and passing it down to future generations, but being able to support responsible development, which we feel this is. Thank you. 21 EXHIBIT B UNGER: Mahalo. PLUNKETT: Aloha. My name is Kamuela Plunkett. I live in Pu‘ukapu, which is part of Waimea kalana, a traditional land designation that runs from the top of South Kohala down to the coastline. My background is in anthropology, archaeology, and my current study is specifically on the resource distribution and planning, heritage, preservation, restoration according to landscapes. So I submitted a letter and I believe it’s Exhibit 43. And I would just appreciate it if you guys took the time to read it, and I’m just going to build off of, off of this letter. I do believe that the expanded development is going to affect all of the resources that everybody has been talking about, the anchialine ponds, the fish ponds, but also what I want to talk to expanding on this is the sense of place. I use the trails and the beach three to four times a week. And the question about the trails, one thing you’ve got to realize is that the trails are not just walkways of the ancestors; they also connect the resources. Although it’s not in this project area, there is a huge quarry site to the south, and these trails come from there, and the question is why do they end? They end in the vicinity of the water, the pond. If you look along those trails, there’s excavation sites. There is a huge excavation site. Whether they were excavating, creating these pockets in the lava field for getting a blading material, building material, or searching for more water, that’s the essence of this cultural landscape. And when you are coming from the south, heading into ‘Anaeho‘omalu and Waikoloa, if we just build, you lose the aspect. Right now that portion of land is a transition point from natural, cultural slowly into the resort full-on mode. If we build right there, we lose that transition, we lose the sense of place. And also, the natural resources. That area is part of the northwest Mauna Loa aquifer system, and everything under it, all the water we use are connected. So it’s not just about the initial construction but it’s the ongoing maintenance of the place. I found a few more ponds that is not on the report. And the anchialine ponds, if you find ‘ōpae ‘ula in one pond that is not connected on the surface but they both have ‘ōpae ‘ula, that’s just common sense that they are connected. And ongoing, ongoing development, maintenance and increased human presence is going to affect these ponds, as well as the fish ponds to the north and the bay. I’m going to end with this, more like a story. So in my research from the 60’s on, the community has become more and more detached from the coastline. From Mauna Kea Beach Resort and you come all the way down the coast, and now we are at the last portion of South Kohala. The last portion, the closest access point to trails and the beach that I know of, because I access the trails every week. And what I see, no matter what the General Plan says, I believe we are at the turning point. I believe planning and proper resource management, cultural resource management, is at the turning point. And I just want to read this from the County’s water plan. It says that full build-out of the Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide demands nearly four times the amount of water than full build-out of zoning due to the great proportion of urban area in LUPAG. Anyway, what this is basically saying is that the proposed urban expansion for the coastline is four times greater, the estimated water use is four times greater than the aquifers can put out. So when is the turning point? I believe this is the turning point. When are we going to start to have our planning and our permitting match what our resources can provide, both cultural and natural? Thank you. UNGER: Mahalo. 22 EXHIBIT B MURRAY: Aloha. My name is Thomas Murray. I’m a retired, I reside in Kealakekua, mauka, I’m a retired carpenter, and I just wanted to say from my past growing up in Hawai‘i, 1955 came over from O‘ahu, but the construction industry has supported myself and my family with benefits and decent wages where I can live over here, you know, I can afford to live here. So I am going to ask for support for this project because a lot of the work that I had was all out in this area, Waikoloa Land Development, hotels, condominiums, kept me employed for 30 years. So, and I utilize the access to these facilities, I’ve been out to eat, enjoy the beach and whatnot. I was denied access to Waikoloa when I, beach, ‘Anaeho‘omalu Bay, when Boise Cascade first developed the road down there, I drove down and then they told me to turn around and go back, it was a private property. The resorts have opened up access to the general public and I appreciate that. So I just ask for your support and granting the amendments for quality construction. Usually these projects have all been nice quality construction out there in that area. Thank you. UNGER: Mahalo. WILLS: Aloha. My name is Mary Wills. I live in Waikoloa. I strongly recommend that the Leeward Planning Commission deny the request to amend SMA 412, and here are my concerns. I have concerns, and I paid a lot of attention to what was claimed by the developers. There is no disability access – oh, please put up the screen. If you are handicapped and you want to get to the beach now, there is the public parking, there is the small cul-de-sac for two disabled parking stalls, and then you have to go down a steep ramp to get to the beach. I don’t see a handicapped wheelchair, wheelchair, the ones with the big balloon wheels, so as the population in Hawai‘i is getting older, there is no accommodations for people who have handicapped. The other main concern I have is for parking. In the initial plan before the pool was moved and four units were taken away, there were 55 stalls. That’s for people. Where do the employees park? Who is going to be staffing the administration and all of the other populous that they need just to run the resort? There is no parking for them; they will park in the land adjacent. Each time more people park in the land adjacent, older people like me who would like to walk to the beach have a longer trek to go. And I’m physically able, I don’t mind, I walk. My other concerns are the proposed expansion cannot survive without the Lava Lava Beach Club to point one. Look at where they have their loading dock; the loading dock is available on the Lava Lava Beach Club driveway and then there is the loading and support. The way they have their café, who is going to go to that café? More than just the people who live there unless we the regular people will be denied. There is no place for them to park. So the claims that we have adequate parking is not true. There is no substantial, the numbers that are for parking stalls in Lava Lava and for this proposed resort plus their employees, you are in the adjacent parking lot in the land next door. It’s owned by the same people. What is to say that they would deny that parking lot? Oh, we will further expand, but that’s okay, we will give 44 parking stalls somewhere. So that’s my concern about parking. The other words that are used in this development are wet bars in each of these units. Is that just a side step? So when you have the wet bar, we would like to further amend that all these units that have wet bars be allowed to have full kitchens, therefore they will be permanent residence, and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Is it just another side step using that kind of language to allow more expansion and instead of having wet bars, full kitchen? Again, what can our resources provide? 23 EXHIBIT B Who will han- what kind, what do we do with the sewage, the water demands, and the power demands on our grid? We have frequent blackouts, as you know, of power. Is there going to be any type of limit to what we can possibly provide for further expansion? The, I’m speaking as a person, there are also other animals that use the shore. We have the turtles. There’s, oh, don’t worry, we will take big plastic fencing any time there is, the turtle will be surrounded by fencing. If I were a turtle on the beach and someone came with plastic fencing, okay, it’s time for me to leave now, and the turtle will vacate. What about the sand crabs? What about the herons? What about the seasonal birds that come to be on Hawai‘i? Who will stand up for them to say this is too much population density? We need to limit. I wholeheartedly agree that we do need transition from this is open, this is resort. Why must we develop to the very end? Why cannot we have a transition period? For those various reasons, again, I strongly recommend that you please deny the access, the request to amend SMA 412 and allow so much dense development in that particular land, which cannot stand by itself. It must rely on the other parcel; it should be treated as one parcel. Thank you for your consideration. Aloha. UNGER: Aloha. Thank you. You all may be seated. Thank you. David\[sic\] Harlow, Francois Arlhac, Mereane Hamatake, Joel Cohen, Julia Alos and Richard Brock. Rick Gmirkin. You can start, Mr. Gmirkin. GMIRKIN: Aloha mai kākou. My name is Rick Gmirkin. I’m the archaeologist for Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail. Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, thank you very much for allowing Ala Kahakai to provide comments regarding Waikoloa BC. The presentation earlier this morning by the applicant was well received I think for some of the aspects, removal of the pool and also the event lawn and facility. That being said, that broader landscape is still one of the things that we have been asking for preservation of since the beginning, since we’ve been involved in commenting on this project. So the project area, although small, is home to important cultural and natural resources, including 14 archaeological sites comprised of over 300 features, over 230 individual petroglyphs around this property, habitation complex including caves, anchialine pools, threatened and endangered species, including endangered orangeblack damselfly and the threatened green sea turtle, and of course trails. ‘Anaeho‘omalu has been a major destination for native Hawaiians for well over 800 years. As one of the major coastal hubs, or villages, in West Hawai‘i, trails enter this location from many directions, and I mean this particular parcel directed basically that main anchialine pool on the property. At least four major branches of prehistoric trails enter the subject parcel from the south and, as mentioned before, they connect to the, they connect to the Kīholo-Puakō Trail and the Ala Loa. These trails and one in particular was used all the way through historic times, and it’s evidenced by, you know, deep grooving, as well as horseshoes along the trail itself. These trails have been in use for well over 500, I would, I would say over 1,000 years. The archaeological preservation plan and project SMA heavily emphasize the preservation of those three, of three trails, and of the intensive trail network within the project area. There is still concern for all of these other trails because of the recently damaged trail, the one that was, one of the three that was intended to be preserved. Use of heavy equipment in this fragile cultural landscape will place the remaining trails and associated buffers in jeopardy. And I’m pointing more toward by the area where the cave site is, and that stretch of still intact ‘a‘ā lava 24 EXHIBIT B on the southern part of the property in the ‘a‘ā flow. While a 15-foot buffer slightly better than a ten-foot buffer, the Ala Kahakai believes the entire trail network and the associated sites, including the undisturbed lava in between, make up a unique heavily modified cultural landscape worthy of preservation as a whole. Regarding the coastal lateral trail, there is still some need for work with the landowner and the applicant. Currently, the signs that direct folks laterally on the coastline are located makai of the current certified shoreline, directing people to places where now during high tide they’re walking in water there, you know, it’s not the most inviting scenario at the time. I do appreciate that the landowner is willing to work with opening up that to a broader area for pedestrians to walk through. In terms of natural resources, the anchialine pools, of course, are extremely important on this. And they also speak to ground water. They also speak to the low elevation of the area. Again, there is a threatened and endangered species on the property. There are also two other endangered species that have been identified nearby, and this is the anthracinus yellow-faced bee, as well as the Hawaiian hoary bat. I myself have seen the Hawaiian hoary bat in the daytime in the lava field in Kīholo State Park. Recent king tides kind of give us an idea of the, of how our shorelines are going to do, as well as th anchialine ponds. On May 25 of last year king tides came through and the main anchialine pond, as you can see in blue up there, basically that lower, that lower broader area was saturated with water, and we have photos I believe in our testimony, or our written comments, that are in your packet. That being said, the ten-foot and even the 30-foot buffer in some places, the ten-foot at least, is going to have troubles with that at least on the Lava Lava Beach Club side, because already it’s pretty close. So 30 feet is, I think there is already parking areas in that spot. UNGER: Would you summarize, please? GMIRKIN: Certainly. I’ll summarize just by talking about the visual impacts. Again, this is an incredible landscape. You can clearly see the project now from Queen Ka‘ahumanu Highway. I believe that the site visit will hopefully illustrate what the impacts of two-story buildings to that area of natural beauty as called out in the County General Plan. So, thank you so much for your time. Ala Kahakai recommends the Leeward Planning Commission deny the proposed subdivision and rezone, and Ala Kahakai requests that the applicant consider not subdividing and maintaining the current zoning. Thank you. ARLHAC: Aloha. My name is Francois Arlhac. I am a guest here in the kingdom of Hawai‘i and a fulltime resident of Waikoloa Beach Resort since 2005. Why am I here today? Why are all of us here today? This is a very easy decision, not a hard one. On one hand we have a historic Hawaiian site, a bay that belongs to the community, and a beautiful and delicate ecosystem that is home to countless species, including protected turtles, a place that we want to preserve for all. And by the way, if anyone here in this room truly believe that construction would stop because a sea turtle comes to rest on the beach, show of hand? I didn’t think so. 25 EXHIBIT B On the other hand we have greed, no, I take that back, greed is what is already, already shamelessly built there; this is way beyond greed. We have a corporation that treats nature like a commodity and that is willing to sacrifice a historical preserve to make more money than they can ever spend. We have Lava Lava Beach Club that exhibits the worst colonial attitude as if they own the entire bay. If you just take a look at their own map, look where the red line is to the left. It looks like they own the entire shoreline, including the ocean, and that’s their own red line. And the parking issue is a daily issue, not a special event one; it happens every day. I know because I bicycle there every evening. And cars that want to go to Lava Lava Beach Club have no place and they go to the public beach parking. But you do not have to take my word for it; all you have to do is read the exact words that the Waikoloa Land Company posted right at the entrance of the bay. Right there, that’s their own words, I have pictures if you need, but I’m going to quote them: “The company president, Ronald Boeddeker, was a man of extra ordinary vision. In a rapidly changing Hawai‘i, he saw Waikoloa as a sanctuary for both man and nature. To that end, he conceived a resort that would abide in harmony with its environment, fulfill the historical destiny of the area, as a place of culture, a playground fit for royalty and a special place of the spirit. Waikoloa Beach Resort was designed as a master planned resort community where all development conformed to the contours of the land itself, rather than imposing man’s ambitions on nature. Respect for the past, a present committed to the enrichment of life, and a sense of responsibility to future generations were integral to the design. The land and sea, the past and its stories, are all facets of the climate of natural enrichment guests discover at the resort. Now, as always, the human spirit is energized by open space, a continuum where creation has been carefully shepherded and is entrusted to the future.” So as you can obviously see, that permit goes against the very own philosophy proclaimed by the Waikoloa Beach Resort. And the only permit that should be discussed is not one that builds more and destroys the bay further, it is a permit that removes entirely the Lava Lava Beach Club from a preserved historical sacred site on which it should have never been authorized to be built in the first place. Mahalo. ALOS: Aloha. Good afternoon. My name is Julia Alos and I live in Waikoloa. Can everybody hear me? I’ve been visiting Waikoloa ‘Anaeho‘omalu Bay for 27 years since I moved here, and I find it very historical and historically significant and cultural, rich location that has been enjoyed by many locals and visitors alike. Since Fukushima Tsunami it drastically changed the landscape and the beach in that area. I see a 50 percent loss of sand, there is no more shade because all of the palm trees are now swept away and there’s a little stubs, few stubs, there is hardly any more left on the shoreline. And I feel that the Army Corps of Engineers put hardened sand in the area at the beach where we only have 50 percent, and it’s really made the hard, the sand very hard. And I feel that this area has been enjoyed for century by Hawaiians, it’s their home, by Parker Ranch employees and their family, native Hawaiian fisherman practicing with their forefathers taught them to sustain their culture, feeding their families where their ancestors worked hard to build this ancient pond and maintained them to feed the royalty. Evidenced by documentation and its testament by the witness of the offering of makahiki that continues today on this site, just to name a few things. I feel it is an important, these are important issues and they are legally binding. 26 EXHIBIT B They need to insure the constitutionality, guarantee native Hawaiians’ gathering and access rights that are protected, as well as the fragile and natural cultural resources. And I don’t think buffers cut it. It must be predicted in a context that has meaning and to protect the culture and practices that are relevant to this practice. I also think that looking through the General Plan there is a, let me see, there is retreat resort area. Now, if, with an SMA coming out for you to get this rezoned, I feel that, in the General Plan it says, “Retreat Resort Area: A retreat resort area is generally an area that provides the user with rest, quiet and isolation \[for an\] environmental experience …. Maximum visitor units: 50 ….,” maximum, maximum visitor units 50, “Resort acreage: 15 acres minimum ….” They want to do 44 units in a half of the 15 acres that the County’s General Plan is saying for resort, resort unit, 50-unit property, so I think it’s pretty much a non-starter to, even though I know they are in the Waikoloa node, but we are here discussing what they are trying to revise on their SMA and get it subdivided or subzoned, and I don’t feel that’s fair. I also feel that these intentions were probably from the inception, as you look at the plat over here and you see that there is just that small development, and I feel that there was possibly artful deceit and they’re bringing this back up again now to rezone and get more development here. Why? Why, why is that? I don’t feel that’s really fair. And that’s all I have to say. I hope this does not go through and it remains as the size it is. Aloha. UNGER: Thank you. COHEN: Aloha. My name is Joel Cohen. I’m a resident of Waimea. I am a former member of the South Kohala Community Development Plan Action Committee. I’m not a scientist, so I’m not going to talk about ecological issues. And I’m a 17-year, my wife and I are now 17-year residents of our island and we certainly are attached to the culture, but I’m not in the position to be speaking about cultural issues, either. But I believe, I strongly believe common sense comes in to play here that the climate is changing ever so fast, so what we think of at the present, two years from now, four years from now, 20 years from now, long after I’m gone for sure, things are changing and they are changing at a more rapid pace, so what we see in a plan today is going to be different. And we have to adapt, there are many properties that will be under water that are already existing. So specifically, I listened to a presentation from the developer a year or so ago, and I made a point that 60 feet from the shoreline on a sunny day is not adequate, and I made a suggestion at that time that they think about it. In fact, their response was, “Mr. Cohen, that’s a good point, we really need to think about that a little bit more.” And I’m disappointed to see after a years’ time it hasn’t been changed. I think about the Kona Village Resort. Beautiful. Very much something that I hope will happen in a sensible way, tactful way and return to it. And I think about, and I just want to leave just this one, one, two words, three words actually: Long term planning. Something we sometimes lose sight of. Long term planning. So what’s going to be happening 20 years from now and how do we prevent catastrophe, which is inevitably going to happen. Mahalo. HAMATAKE: Aloha Chair, Council \[sic\] Members. My name is Mereane Hamatake. I am a resident of Ka‘ū, and I am basically here to support the applicant. I sit on the committee of Joint Apprenticeship Committee for the Hawai‘i Carpenters Apprenticeship and Training Program. I also have a background of Hawaiian descendancy, which involves particularly this area in specific. My family, my family’s history is Mokuola; we are basically the original residents of Coconut Island, the Keli‘ipio ‘Ohana. I’m here today to basically support the applicant as far as 27 EXHIBIT B their due diligence that they continue to research historical and preserve with these buffers that are currently in place, and making the improvements to these buffers for the petroglyph areas, the ponds, the trails that are already there, that exist. We have about 600 apprentices here on the Big Island. So I represent as the coordinator their training program. A majority of these apprentices are of Hawaiian descendancy, and we know already with inflation and the cost of living here in Hawai‘i that it’s already hard for our local people to put foods on the tables of their families. And so the entity that I represent provides them with the skills through training for them to become successful trade people in our industry and to make a good wage, to provide for their families and to sustain their living here in Hawai‘i. And so thank you very much for allowing me to comment. I speak on behalf of these apprentices coming up through my program. Aloha. HARLOW: Aloha everybody here. My name is Daniel, not David, Harlow, and as though I am haole, I have been born and raised here my whole life. I have never known anywhere else and I have never loved any other place other than this place. I am also raising my son to treat this land with such love and respect as I do. And I urge you to take into consideration that, yes, this is another proposed site on an archaeological place, but still, one has never been so willing and so negotiable in this. And can we not take advantage of that? They are willing to listen to you, and if you make certain decrees, then they have to abide by them. And so I say don’t just deny them flat out, talk to them and see how far they are willing to negotiate on their stance. And as a carpenter’s apprentice, I do say there is very little work as a single mother that will provide for my whole entire family since my parents are elderly. And this is one career, which I can see a future for me and my family. Thank you. UNGER: Thank you all. You may be seated. Alan Haun, Mark Saito, Patrick Belgium, Simmy McMichael, Laura Caverly and Chris Gaughen. Sharon Willeford and William Lazenby. Ku‘ulei Keakealani. Thank you. You may begin Ms. McMichael. State your name and area of residence. MCMICHAEL: Aloha. My name is Simmy McMichael. I’m from Kona. And I’m here to ask you to deny this. I have strong ties to the ocean and also the sea mammals and the turtles. I actually worked at Sea Life Park also, and lived in a tank with whales, dolphins and turtles for three years, literally living in a tank with them as I was a swimmer. So I also have the first surf shop in Kona. I’ve had it since 1978. And the ocean is what we need to protect. This is what the tourists come here for and this is our lifestyle. When we were younger, we used to go to the ocean to cleanse our body; whenever we had any kind of rash or infection, we were told to go to the ocean to protect and cleanse our bodies. Now, we have an open cut or any kind of rash, we are told to stay out of it. There is staph and MRSA in the water. So we really need to prioritize protecting our ocean. This is our natural resources. And I’ve been concerned about all the development that affects the ocean. I’m not against development. I have real concern when it affects directly with the ocean. So I went through the documents this morning and quickly read through it. So I wanted to highlight: The West Hawai‘i, “The West Coast of the Island of Hawai‘i has area specific water quality standards (Chapter 11-54-6\[d\]). The major difference between these specific criteria and the general criteria for open coastal waters for the rest of the state is the consideration that high nutrient groundwater mixes with ocean water within the nearshore zone.” Compliance with the DOH criteria requires three sampling dates, spaced within 14-day period, and this was not complied; 2015, only one single sample. In this one collection, a number of samples exceeded the limits, also exceeded the DOH geometric means standards. There is evidence in 28 EXHIBIT B increased nutrient input at the site of the Beach Club. The marine water samples, 1996, 2001 and 2015, “water quality was examined in the two anchialine pools as well as in the ocean - - - demonstrate that there is a considerable efflux of groundwater entering the ocean fronting the project site. This groundwater signature is evidence at distances in excess of 500m from the shoreline and is the primary reason why several quality parameters do not meet the Hawai‘i State Department of Health regional water quality standards.” “In summary, it appears that many parameters are out of compliance in the marine waters fronting ‘Anaeho‘omalu Bay and this has occurred for many years.” “Examination of marine water samples from any coastal areas with little or no hinterland development (South Kohala, North Kona, South Kona, \[Lana‘i\], etc.) reveals that often the waters do not meet the state \[water quality\] standards for both open coastal waters as well as the West Hawai‘i regional standards. As noted \[above\], groundwater inputs may easily account for the lack of compliance.” “The water quality standards represent human criteria imposed on a natural system.” Lava Lava Beach Club transect has noted numerous noncompliance in two surveys. “\[These\] data suggests that there is a greater efflux of groundwater fronting the Lava Lava Beach Club project site than is occurring offshore of the Waikoloa fishponds to the north.” Noted in conclusion on Page 15, the Marine Environmental Assessment 2015, “The project may have an impact on groundwater as a result of percolation of excess irrigation water from both potable irrigation and brackish irrigation sources.” Impacts to the marine environment is considered from the activities on land, delivery of materials, freshwater, sediments, nutrients, and potential toxic materials, to the ocean through infiltration to groundwater, surface runoff and wind transport. The lack of compliance should be seriously considered. And I ask you to consider to make your decision based on the health and safety of the public. We need to protect all our natural and cultural resources for the next generation. Mahalo. KEAKEALANI: Greetings to you all. My name is Ku‘ulei Keakealani, and I live in Waimea in a particular section called Lihue, Waimea. But I must, and could not not, acknowledge my homelands of Pu‘uanahulu, North Kona. ‘Anaeho‘omalu actually boundaries my ancestral homelands. ‘Anaeho‘omalu is the northern boundary that comes right up to Pu‘uanahulu, which would be the south boundary. It was referenced a little earlier; I come before you as a Parker Ranch child. I was one of those children in the 70’s, who was I would say beyond privileged, blessed, to have access into ‘Anaeho‘omalu, as dad was a Parker Ranch cowboy. So basically, really I think I ask you to perhaps look at me as you would look to ‘Anaeho‘omalu. Dad assured that he fed us from that very ocean. So I am essentially here because of place, ‘Anaeho‘omalu, Kīholo, Pu‘uanahulu, Waimea, Ka‘ū at one point; we lived in Kapapala, trying to be a true reflection of place and to perhaps be the voice. I pulled on the side of the road this morning, destined for Kona Civic Center, and I was compelled to pull on the side of the road. So in ‘Anaeho‘omalu before we got to the boundary, I stopped, and I picked up a passenger. As odd perhaps as this may seem to folks, that’s okay, I’m okay with being a little odd, I picked up this pōhaku. I want to encourage you a site visit, if none of you have been at the site. And not that I want to invite myself, but I would love to walk along your side in this very place that we are looking at right now on the map or 700-page documents and then some perhaps that you need to read through. But this rock for me represents accountability. My accountability perhaps is this very rock. Your accountability I think is encased in it as well. And I think that’s my voice today to, for all of us to be in a healthy space to hold each other accountable. Capacity, threshold, all of 29 EXHIBIT B those things, if the gravity of the seat that you hold is one that we are perhaps at the whim of for you to make good judgement. Clarity, sometimes the head-space, information can deceive us. So I’ll, I encourage you to move to kind of a heart-space, na‘au space, because that doesn’t deceive you like our mind does our thoughts. So my voice, again, is to encourage you to look clearly deeply. These trails, one last thing, I am in education, and these are trails that we have, and we continue to, take our youth on. We walk from Kawaihae clear out to Kalaemanō and we camp along the ways of these trails. And I can but try to convey to you folks this kind of emotion when we are walking with our high schoolers of Kanu O Ka ‘Āina and an infinity pool is right alongside the Ala Loa, and what happens, and when these babies are saying to us why, how come, what happened, why, and I have no answer, I do not know, I was probably a little girl or not born when these things perhaps were passed. But, that space, feel that kind of space, and so really I don’t know how much more I could perhaps say, or any of us, that could impact and influence you. But one last thing: Papa Earl Kawa‘a comes in to one of our meetings and I’m going to leave you with this, he says, we are on O‘ahu for a KS meeting and he says, “I pose a question to all of you. What are you willing to live with? What are you willing to live with?” The plane ride home I wrote a poem and I entitled it “What Am I Willing To Live Without.” What am I willing to live without? I put that out there. I pose that question to each of you. What are you willing to live with? And further, what are you willing to live without? Eia ala. Mahalo. CAVERLY: Good morning. My name is Laura Caverly. I was born and raised in Āhualoa, Hawai‘i, and I continue to reside there. As a young person, child, I spent a lot of time along the coastline between Kawaihae and ‘Anaeho‘omalu. And a lot more educated and people connected have spoken about specifics of the areas, so I’d like to speak to some broader concerns that I have in seeing this development, which I was lucky enough to see in the newspaper and decided I would come here to speak. In my time growing up I’ve seen a lot of development; I saw Hāpuna going from a very pristine white sand beach to having a large hotel on it, which to this day is very impactful to me as a person and also to my children who don’t have the opportunity of having the empty beach that I had. And continuing along the coastline around ‘Anaeho‘omalu and that whole area used to be you could start at the end of Puakō, at Paniau there was just a small house there, now there is a big house there. And now there is, next to Orchid Hotel, you know, in my teen years you could still go there between the Orchid and Mauna Lani there was that space where there is a surf spot, my family is surfers, so a lot of my beach going was related to areas where there was surf, there was that, there was a big space there between there where you could, where there is that surf spot peeks, but there was a whole area that there was nothing there, now there’s very large multi-million dollar mansions that just walking along that shoreline is not the same feeling to walk along an empty shoreline as to walk next to something so different that’s not part of it. And then you continue along, along to ‘Anaeho‘omalu itself, the Hilton didn’t used to be there, I was there, that’s okay, that was a little more of a rocky area I didn’t go so much. Next to that you start to come towards ‘Anaeho‘omalu Bay, it was a whole area where there was another surf spot there, it was a nice ‘a‘ā feel that had some anchialine ponds, and I know because I used to swim in them when I was a girl, and one day I went there and instead of that there was a bulldozed area, flat, none of that’s there anymore. And then along the shoreline and I go there now used to be that the ocean would come up and pushed waves back and there was some sandy areas, you could sit there, you know, you are not going to necessarily swim there, it’s very rocky, but there was space and you are like in the open and you are in the nature there, now there is a wall and you can see where the rocks are pushing up against the wall so there is no more sandy 30 EXHIBIT B spot because the ocean has been stopped there, and there are some very nice houses there, very nice that someone put a shower for the surfers, that’s nice but it’s not the same. And then continuing along ‘Anaeho‘omalu used be, there wasn’t anything there, and now there is all that Kōlea development, massive development there, you know, the hotel was already there when I was a child. And in truth the place they were referring to wasn’t a place that I frequented when I was young, but I have been frequenting a lot in the last ten, 15 years. And it’s a very special place. I go there a lot of times when I want somewhere more quiet, because a lot of the other places are more crowded. I go there to pray. I go there when I need time to think. And before, I know people who were married there where Lava Lava was, just really small, maybe it wasn’t legal but a little ceremony because it’s a very special place. And then all of a sudden there is like a restaurant there. I’m not really, I wasn’t, just raising my children, I wasn’t really paying attention to what’s happening. Then there was a restaurant and some bungalows, and I was very upset when I saw that there, I was like, “Oh, my goodness. What’s happening?” Okay, at least the bungalows they are not so big, you know, the restaurant I see the people enjoying there, you know, and having a good time, they want to eat some food and watch the sunset, it’s beautiful, I understand. I have friends who love to go there, but I want you to know I don’t go there even though I might like to with my friends stop there some time to sit on the beach and have something to eat and drink, because I don’t feel it was right to put that there, because it takes a place that is for everyone, and not everyone can afford to go there, you know, because something you have to look at is what’s happening, a lot of these places are for people who are very well-off and can afford. Yeah, we all want to go stay right next to the beach, you know, but we all can’t and still all have it; some people aren’t going to be able to go there. And you’re going to have to look what’s happening on our island, because as I go down the coast I see Kūki‘o, I don’t know how far that is starting to sprawl out. I’m happy to hear from the speakers about this project that that’s all open space, because I haven’t educated myself, although I’m planning to, you know. But I see a lot of development and that’s all for multi-millionaires, so you’re going to have to consider – oh, I’m sorry, I’m speaking a lot. This dichotomy between we work really hard here, we have construction workers, my husband is a construction worker, we need to make our livings, and we are having a lot of this tourism, and how we relate, because if you take too much to develop, then the people who really live here are going to start to not feel good about working in the tourism and all this, and there is going to be hard feelings, and that’s not good for all of us here. So thank you for your consideration. UNGER: Thank you. GAUGHEN: Hello, my name is Chris Gaughen. I live in Waikoloa Village. And I wanted to first off thank you for considering doing a site visit, if you do not decide today just to deny the applications. I have many family and friends that visit the beach and shoreline frequently, especially for fishing, and I have concerns about shoreline access. Specifically at ‘Anaeho‘omalu I feel that it is already compromised by such things as if you want to go to the south end of the beach, you kind of have to go through a jumble of chairs and tables, and it’s already, it’s already a bad situation down there as it is. ‘Anaeho‘omalu, I’ve actually had a security guard at sunset tell me that they were going to arrest me for being down there, that the beach was closed. And this is against the protections that are there; the law is that you can be there at sunset. I’ve had to file complaints with the County about the gate accesses being closed before the legal hours of the closure, or it’s before the hours that were for the special use permit, I think specifically what it 31 EXHIBIT B was. I just think that it’s the wrong site for increased density going from four to 44 units, it’s not the right place. The footprint is too small for that, it’s too close to the ocean, and it’s going to affect negatively the beach area for the public residents, as well as the visitors that want to access actual sand. And lastly, I would just like to say that I think that we need to be very conscious that dollars made today should not be held above protecting the environment and the long-term cultural resources. Thank you. WILLEFORD: Aloha. Sharon Willeford. I already spoke, so I’m not going to take much time. We all must have gotten caught in a traffic on the highway. This is not the way Kona was even seven years ago. What has happened? The overdevelopment is out of hand. And who are we doing this for? For the rich who can fly in and afford the flights, and come in in their jets, and take up our space. But there are so many homeless Hawaiians and other people that we can’t even take care of. We can’t just do everything for the rich. We need to preserve this place for the future generations. And, it’s just out of hand, please consider that, and let’s just have a moratorium on development and have a good look at it. Mahalo. UNGER: Thank you. LAZENBY: Good morning. I’d like to start in thanking the Commission for this opportunity to speak at this hearing. My name is William Lazenby. I’ve been a resident of Kona for 46 years. During that time most of my career was spent in the construction industry, first as an apprentice carpenter trained by the Carpenters Union, and then as a journeyman carpenter certified by the State of Hawai‘i. During the slow times when construction work was not available I worked as a commercial fisherman and charter boat captain. I’m thankful for the skills available to me to help me support my family during those times. I’m currently semi-retired, occasionally working as a relief charter boat captain. I’m here in support of the proposed resort development by Waikoloa Land Company located in Waikoloa Beach adjacent to the Lava Lava Beach Club. My reason for the support is I recognize the need for quality construction projects that employ local tradesmen. It’s my opinion that this project will be well-suited to do that. I like the fact that it’s a low density layout with an elevation maximum of 35 feet. It’s in harmony with the surrounding environment, leaving a minimum impact on the view plane from mauka locations. Although I’m retired, I’d like to see the younger generations able to find work home, rather than leave, have to travel on the mainland to secure work. My own son had to do this in 2008 during the economic turndown. Even though a construction project may only provide work for a year or two, those jobs are very important to those tradesmen and their families. Furthermore, high-end resorts provide long-term permanent opportunities for local residents. My best friend’s daughter and son-in-law work at such a resort and earn a living wage with full benefits, allowing them to purchase their own home. I believe this project is a win-win for our community and our island in general. Thank you for your time and thoughtful consideration. UNGER: Thank you. You all may be seated. Thank you. Cherie Griffore, Shannon Rudolph, Joshua Lanakila Manguil, Michaela Larson, Sue Kniss, Pomai Bertelmann, Ruth Aloua, Nicole Collins. You may begin. GRIFFORE: Okay. My name is Cherie Griffore and I’m a resident of Kona. In Puakō there is already a history of sewage spills and dirty water making people sick. What is being done to 32 EXHIBIT B correct and resolve this issue? Wouldn’t it be irresponsible to build more in an area, knowing you have a broken system that puts public health and safety in jeopardy? A DOH report just came out to say there are 150 cesspools. Those are leaking raw sewage into our ocean. The report prioritize Puakō as a Level 3, which means it has potential to affect the water. This has to be addressed before we put more people in potential danger. There are cultural trails and petroglyphs within the area you are looking to build on. If the National Park Service is telling you it’s worthy of preservation, let’s listen to them. This is the only part of the area I go to relax and reconnect with the earth. The hotels we have out here already do not run at full occupancy. Please do not destroy Hawaiian history and culture for another development for people who visit here once a year. There are also Hawaiian sea turtles that go there. One time I took a picture with nine of them in one bay and there were 15 on my way out. You built up the rest of A Bay; let’s leave a little for the turtles and us residents to relax and rejuvenate. My boyfriend’s family are lineal descendants from Pu‘uanahulu. If you destroy this property, how will my boyfriend’s mother tell her granddaughter the stories and the history of their land, if she can’t recognize the area? My boyfriend’s cousin is a caretaker for the bay south of A Bay. Please talk to the lineal descendants from this area, and please talk to the kia‘i, or guardians, who care for these areas. We are already seeing impacts of climate change. Let’s plan ahead and be proactive so we don’t have to be reactive. LARSON: Aloha. My name is Michaela Lehuanani Larson and I am from Miloli‘i to Hawi. Now, I had so many things I wanted to share and say, but many of the people have already said it and I don’t want to repeat. I can only tell you from my experience. We used to go down to where Lava Lava is, and, you know, I give credit for people who try to make themselves better and earn money, there is nothing wrong with that, but it is intrusive to those who enjoy the natural environment that we here on the islands get to enjoy. But it’s becoming less and less. We used to dance hula. We used to have hula hālau right there where Lava Lava is, and then we would jump in the ocean, come back up and have a picnic. We did that every Saturday, you know, and it’s just those things just keep getting eliminated from our lives. I work in the hospitality industry, so I understand, you know, we need places, but again, they are not full all year. I danced hula all my life. The economy went kaput. I cannot dance hula no more. It’s not because of the 60 pounds I gained, okay? Let’s make that clear. It’s because the economy changed, so I cannot go and knock on the door and just say this is what I do. I had to figure out something else to do. So now I do ceremonies, I do Hawaiian ceremonies on the beach, and when I take my people who want to get married or celebrate the passing of someone’s life, and we go down there and we say, well, you know what, we cannot go over here, now we have to go further south because, and as we are walking past, these boutique type personalities, you know, which is a privilege, then that’s okay, they worked hard to or, you know, things whatever their history, but you looking at them and you smiling, you know, and you know me, I’m always smiling, and they look at me like, who are you to walk in front of me, you know, and they are on the water, in the water with their chairs, in the water. The space there is very limited, right in front of Lava Lava there is only a small space where the kids and us can go in and out, yeah? Now we have to go way south, now we have to like swim over the lava rocks, you know, in order to get to the deeper waters. That’s just not cool. And something, you know, we say it’s for future generations and future generation, but it’s really just about doing the right thing. What is the right thing? You know, it’s not, it’s, one day, what, Mahai‘ula, we’re talking about here at the table? Makalawena? We’re going to have this discussion then? Kainaliu Beach. You know, places we all know. So it’s like when does it stop? 33 EXHIBIT B So what I’m asking for is balance, yeah, to understand the need for balance. And I feel bad for those who rely on the industry of development, but you’ve got to look at balance, yeah. Mahalo. COLLINS: I thought I was okay, and then my heart decided to race a hundred times faster inside me. Thank you, though. Aloha. My name is Nicole Collins and I am from Waimea. I currently live in Kawaihae, Hawaiian Homestead. ‘Anaeho‘omalu is such a special place to me personally – since everybody has talked about everything else that’s happening in this area – it’s a place I visit at least once a week when I’m on island because I travel a lot, and it’s my place that feel right. It’s where I first went to when I started my ‘ūniki practice, and I would go down there because the south end of the beach is, was, very inhabited only by the turtles who had to hear me chant, as I was practicing down there. And when we all came down from Maua Kea, that’s the first place I went to cleanse myself form all the activities that was happening up there. And once Lava Lava was built, you know, I was freshly 21, and so everybody was like all excited that there was this new bar. But the more people we saw moving into the area, the more human impact that was happening you watch this place change and erosion that was taking place from nature itself, and how even now till today, like last week I was down there to go hi‘uwai at night, and I like to travel with as minimal things as possible, and I can’t even walk past there in my bathing suits and all the tourists that are just there and staring at you like what are you doing going this way in front of us while we are trying to watch our sunset, can you please stop and take a picture for us because, you know, like, that sort of impact when you are trying to put your mind right, this place that so many native people go to set their mind right, and that impact that happens to you while you are doing that, it’s, it needs to stop. And I don’t understand how another development, this proposed 44 more units, is going to help the people in the area who constantly go there for healing. And besides that, having the parking structure, or the parking, not adequate as it is, and any given day, it’s not just special events like Francois was saying, it’s every single day; anytime you go down there at sunset the parking lot is completely packed. And I don’t see how another, what, 59 stalls is going to help any of that situation. And putting a fence around the turtles while they are in construction, I mean, you walk, when you first get to the beach and you are walking along the trail and you see the honu it’s like just at the shoreline and you are like, oh, cool, and you walk on your way, you are gone for a couple of hours and you come back, and the turtles are like ten feet up the shoreline. So how are you going to put a fence around it, if they still travel up and down the beach and wherever they go you are preventing them from their natural state also. So I really hope you folks go down and take the time to consider what’s happening down there and see it for yourself and, yeah, mahalo. ALOUA: Aloha mai kākou. My name is Ruth Aloua and I’m a resident of Kailua-Kona. I’m a kia‘i loko, I’m a mahi ‘ai, I’m a kia‘i Kanaloa. I’ve also a degree in archaeology, anthropology as well. So I realize that as a Kona resident for me ‘Anaeho‘omalu falls outside of our district, and so usually I wouldn’t come up here and speak. But I know the ‘ohana who have connection to this ‘āina that we are talking about, ‘Anaeho‘omalu. My partner, Hawane Rios, her ‘ohana has deep connections to this ‘āina. And I’m here to support the call for denial of the request and to visit this ‘āina with ‘ohana who are from this place. I’m not going to speak as if I have a deep connection to this ‘āina. I have connections to all ‘āina, but I have, my deepest connection is to Kaloko, and I’m a kia‘i loko, a fishpond guardian there. And I’m going to talk about some of the things that the scientists have talked about. I’m not taking about scientific perspective; I’m talking from a cultural practitioner of fishpond guardian. 34 EXHIBIT B So one of the things they talked about was the buffer, the buffer being changed from five to 20 to 40 feet, whatever the feet may be, when it comes to anchialine pools, I’m going to tell you, at Kaloko Fishpond next door we have Kohanaiki, Kohanaiki is several hundred feet away from Kaloko Fishpond and we are worried about leaching, we are worried about nutrient blooms, we are worried about phosphorus, all of these things that they are saying are perhaps anomaly. Sometimes this is true there is anomaly that happens with the natural ecosystem. This is not unusual; however, when we are introducing pesticides, fertilizers, herbicides into the environment, this is contributing to the overall health of the water, and we start to impact the water, what we are doing is we are impacting the fishery. So there was a roundabout answer that you have actually got in to the question that you had asked originally. We are talking about turtles, we are talking about impacts to them. I’m going to tell you right now that I work with the National Park Service and a lot of times we are going through federal bureaucracy, so we work with the Department of Fish and Wildlife and we work with NOAA. And the laws that are in place now are inequivalent, they are inadequate. So the turtles, 15 to 20 feet you have to stay away from them, technically, put a fence around it; it’s the vibration, the vibration of the human walking on the sand, the vibration of the voices, the vibration of the construction equipment that would totally change the whole environment. And that is one thing that we are not really talking about. We are talking about, we are not talking about the visual disturbance and the, the full impact of the human presence that we are looking at onto the beach. I’m going to talk about archaeology just slightly. So from, archaeology is relative, depending on who the archaeologist, then you are going to be getting different results. But I’m going to tell you right now that if you talk to the ‘ohana from this ‘āina and you ask them what is your criteria for preservation, what they’ll say is aloha for ‘āina. So we wouldn’t be talking about anything being sacrificed. Humans would be having as little impact on the environment as possible, leaving all our kuhuahulikoeana, all of our ancestral places intact. So we’re looking at this rezoning, the ‘āina is already momona. It is already fat. Everything that we need is already there. Right? So what they want, make them do everything what already exist, because what we need is already present. Whatever we do is irreversible already. All of these, the shoreline developments, if they fail, who’s stuck with the burden? It’s the community. What type of developments serve the community? That’s what we really need to be looking at because what I keep hearing is struggle from the Carpenter Union, and I understand that, because there is not one person in this room who doesn’t know what it feels like to not know where the next paycheck is coming from, whether you aren’t going to be able for eat, whether you aren’t going to be able for get your kids lunch for school, pay gas, fix your car, that’s not a new, that’s not a new thing, that’s common in Hawai‘i. What we need to be looking at for these developers is what kind of development can help you but also serve the community while helping these carpentry people. My mom is a single mom. I have compassion for that. I have compassion for every human being trying their best. But the truth is if we outplayed on their philosophy of we need jobs, we’ve got to develop, this whole island is going to be developed and it’s going to be too late. And just as a side note for the water, I’m fighting for Kona’s water for protection, and I’m going to tell you if it’s four times over the limit, when you make a decision and if you approve this, what you have to realize is you allotted them water. And that’s taking from future generations. So does 35 EXHIBIT B this, does this development actually benefit future generations? So I stand with the ‘ohana of this ‘āina, and I ask for a denial of this application. And I know, you know, with the commemoration of our queen and the illegal act that’s done onto her, that she will stand with these ‘ohana and she will stand in aloha for ‘āina, so I’ll stand in aloha for ‘āina. Mahalo. BERTELMANN: Aloha nui. My name is Pomai Bertelmann and I come from the ‘āina of Waimea. I was raised, like Ku‘ulei had said, by my ‘ohana at ‘Anaeho‘omalu from the 70’s to the mid-80’s. Our ‘ohana would be down at ‘Anaeho‘omalu for approximately three weeks at a time, two or three times a year. But that place, like many others, I’m fortunate to be a Ranch kid, and when you are a Ranch kid, some of the things, well, when you are a Ranch kid, your reach of land based on knowing place is mauka-makai; it is not just mauka, it is not just makai. Your understanding of the physical landscape and features develops over time and comes from heavily inside the Ranch truck, the back of a horse, or observing the gathering and the throw of uncles whose net would \[inaudible\] in the kai. Again, we learn at the young age that the lands mauka were appealing to the lands makai. I am here in opposition of the SMA 412, SMA 17-000068 and I’m asking you to deny that. At ‘Anaeho‘omalu, when we were growing up, these are some of the memories I remember the best. Day and night crabbing sessions, walking out to Keahualono after the first morning bathroom run because any time after 8:00 a.m. on the lava field meant that you were in the imu of the area, cooking and baking. We learned that repairing a net was equally important to throwing it and being nourished by the abundance within, and that the snacks came from a coconut tree and a dry he‘e and i‘a was candy. We were constantly reminded to stay out of the Kahapapa and Ku‘uali‘i fishponds and we were reminded willfully to not hanaina the ‘ōpae ‘ula, ‘ōpae huna, ‘ōpae kea and the loko wai ‘ōpae by the big house and down at ‘Akahi Kaimu – everybody called that the Lone Tree, but it has a name and it has a place in all of our na‘au. So what are all of these? These are all impressions of my childhood, and these impressions of my childhood are actually passed onto the students that I teach at Kanu O Ka ‘Āina and the students that come to our programs at Nākālaiwa‘a and ‘Ohanawa‘a. These places, we take these students to these places, we take, we gift our children to with the National Park Service, with the Hui Aloha Kīholo ‘ohana, with the ‘ohana that Ku‘ulei talks about, these kids walk the 18 miles multiple times in a number of years, because they want to understand the alaloa the way their kūpuna did. My students also come here to Keahuolū, Hale Pā‘ō, with the QLCC ‘ohana, with Uncle Morgan and Uncle Lyle with Kamana, and what we do there is we help to reinvigorate and reignite the loko wai ‘ōpae. We’ve been doing that now for three years, two times a month. We mālama the ‘ōpae ‘ula because the ‘ōpae ‘ula is not just something that we can look at and think, oh, everything is healthy; ‘ōpae ‘ula has a function, it feeds the ko‘a. If the fishing ko‘a is not healthy, that means ‘āina is not healthy. If the ‘āina is not healthy, that means the forest is not healthy. So we reinvigorate, we’ve started to replant the pumpkin and the kalo and the ‘uala in that area to bring about and to inspire learning, intergenerational learning, for these places. ‘Anaeho‘omalu has and can serve the same purpose. But that has not been on the agenda of the last 20 years in that area. Eighteen miles, or 18 minutes or 12.4 miles down the road from ‘Anaeho‘omalu is Kaūpūlehu, ʻ Kaūpūlehu. I’m a lineal descendant of that ‘āina to the Kahinu ‘ohana. With that said, the ‘ohana ʻ in the last five years has worked really hard on Try-wait. The Try-wait movement that has inspired all of us as kanaka Hawai‘i to take a breath, to slow down, to pay attention to the fact that overfishing is real. You cannot quantify that by scientific numbers, you cannot. Case in point I go 36 EXHIBIT B back to Keahuolū. My kids right now have opened up five fishponds, five ‘ōpae loko fishponds; however, on the Hilo moon of every month when the moon, when the sun is in the northern horizon, I mean, norther hemisphere, on the Hilo moon of those six months, when you go down there, Keahuolū, all 23 ponds becomes one large fishpond, one large wai loko, wai loko ‘ōpae. With that said, we go back to Try-wait. Their kuleana as determined by the, it’s a movement that has been enacted with the vision to rest Kaūpūlehu’s reef and restore abundance to those land ʻ areas. This is a community-based plan and movement to restore marine resources and ensure that the traditional subsistence and cultural fishing practices are sustained within the ahupua‘a of Kaūpūlehu is not the only ahūpūlehu for our future generations. Kaʻʻupua‘a suffering this issue; we all are, we all are. And to echo everything that many people have said, I’ll sum it up with this mana‘o. I sailed this coast for the last 24 years onboard the deck of many double-hull voyaging canoes. Each year where it used to be, each year where it used to be a physical feature of reference becomes swallowed up by us to more development. In 20 to 30 years from now while standing on the deck of a canoe looking towards land where our grandchildren will be trying to determine the next place of safe harbor by prominent physical features birthed by our ‘āina or by navigating the rooftops of condos, bungalows and hotel developments. I, in closing I go ahead and I say mahalo nui to all of those who put in a conscious effort on all sides of this to be able to put in the time, to understand ‘Anaeho‘omalu more freely, more intently. Potentially we are all the hānai that is in the ho‘omalu of this, of this consciousness. And it is my hope that all of you will make the right decision, from cerebral to na‘au, and from na‘au to our ‘āina. Mahalo. RUDOLPH: Aloha. My name is Shannon Rudolph. I live in Kona. I’m a 35-year resident. I’ve been frequenting ‘Anaeho‘omalu Bay for that period of time. I went out to see about how the development had proceeded last year. I walked down the beach and came upon a coconut tree right outside the restaurant with a sign nailed to it that says no fishing beyond this point, and I thought, I turned away from it and looked down to the other end of the beach and saw all the lounge chairs and beach activity rental whatever and the umbrellas, and I turned to look back at the sign and the whole beach was covered in chairs, umbrellas and tables. And it wasn’t even that busy but I had a hard time even finding a place to park; there were cars parked on both sides of the gravel road and the parking lot was already full, and it wasn’t even a special event going on at that time at the restaurant. The parking is totally inadequate, and to add 55 more parking spots is not going to help because a lot of times people that would rent those proposed places, units, they are going to have friends, they are going to come with friends, they are going to have friends on the island that are going to come and visit them, and their kids’ friends, plus employees. There is not enough room for parking as it is, and 55 more parking spots is not going to be enough. I’m also concerned about the endangered, three or four endangered species there, the threatened species, the turtles. I’m concerned about sewage. I’m concerned about the pesticide runoff and fertilizer runoff, like the fertilizer in the Gulf of Mexico has killed practically half the gulf. So I just want to reiterate what everyone else has already said. I’m concerned about all of those things, and especially for the feeling that the local people get when they go down to the beach and they are totally surrounded by chairs and tables right on the beach and there is hardly anywhere to walk between the chairs and the shoreline, and how, how it’s so heartbreaking for them to places that they come to all their lives that they feel unwelcome and they feel encroached on. And I, I mean 37 EXHIBIT B I’m a newcomer relatively speaking; I can’t even imagine how the people that have lived here feel about that encroachment on their, where they’ve grown up. It’s sacred to them. It’s become sacred to me. And there is just, it’s just too big of a thing for that area. The shoreline needs to be preserved. I know that people need jobs, but I know that once the construction is done there, once the proposed construction is done there, that all of the workers will be back here again to speak in favor of the next project and the next project and the next project while the people left behind at the project will be making minimum wage that won’t even be able to afford to stay there or eat there. Thank you. UNGER: Thank you all. You may be seated. We have one more person that signed up to testify: Phaethon Keeney. And if there is anybody else in the audience that would like to testify, you can come up also at this time. \[At 1:07 p.m. Commissioner Shimaoka had to leave the meeting and was excused.\] KEENEY: Aloha. My name is Phaethon Keeney. I come from Honoka‘a up mauka, and as you can see there, it’s raining today and it’s very cold, and I drove down past ‘Anaeho‘omalu and saw another beautiful day at the beach there, and really strongly felt a desire to go, as I usually do, because it’s one of the last few remaining beaches that is undeveloped, relatively undeveloped, and, but thinking about this project upcoming and why I was coming to Kona, thinking, you know, how again feeling pushed out, you know, feeling the, as so many of these places along the coastline have been developed over my lifetime, our connection with those places has been impacted. I, I wear with me today a necklace I made from shells from Kīholo, these earrings are from ‘Anaeho‘omalu. The moments that I’ve had there have been powerful partially because the experience of nature in its most open welcoming state, and when you have people who are claiming the area, as they have the right to do, it’s private property and they can develop, other people don’t feel as welcome and it’s just the way it works. And not just people but the animals, the creatures that we share those spaces, and the plants, you know, it all changes. And that experience is saddening. So I just wanted to, there were so many good points made here today about why you should deny this application, I just wanted to say it’s the cumulative impact, it’s, that you should be considering, and it’s the responsibility of this Commission to consider that, that it is one of the last few remaining beaches that we have the feeling of open, expansive connection to in the very deep state of appreciation of this island. So I just want to consider that impact cumulatively to not just the beaches that we have remaining but the people here feeling welcome on this island, feeling, feeling part of the community, feeling part of something, you know, bigger and whole. There is only, you know, a few ways to get to that experience, and that’s by either, you know, in the state of nature or in development in communities that are in balance and, you have the feeling of positive growing connectivity, things that are, that are good, good communities. And they exist here and we have them, and there’s ways to develop, there’s ways to do building and construction. I, I, you know, coming from Honoka‘a I love my town and I love that was built, I love the way it was built, you know, and the people that live there, it’s a very welcoming place. And I just hope that we can build with further aloha and further welcoming for everyone here. So that’s all I wanted to just say. UNGER: Thank you. 38 EXHIBIT B KAMAKA: I am Sandy Lehua Kamaka. I come from Kailua-Kona, Hawai‘i. I have things to say, but before I’m going to start saying, what I need to, what I had on my heart to say, I will, my cousin Ku‘ulei Keakealani already came before you folks, and she has, I’m going to read what, a statement that her father has given to her, which I would like you guys to just take this deep into your hearts: “I no go fish there already. I raised my children at ‘Anaeho‘omalu. I no go throw net there anymore. Sonny Keakealani.” To even hear uncle’s words, “I no go. I no go,” that’s a deep impact on our kanaka-s today, it’s a deep impact on our kupuna-s today. As much as the impact has been affecting, as much as the impacts are affecting our ‘āina, it is also affecting our people, it’s affecting our kūpuna, it’s affecting our ways of life, it’s affecting our stories that come with us. Again, I’m going to go right back to cousin Ku‘ulei Keakealani story telling. I’ll protect her, I am one of many who will protect her because she holds the treasures of our lands. If you folks have ever been on the trails that she speaks of and you walk these trails with her, as she tells you the stories as you are on the trails where these stories had occur, there is a relationship that you can see, that is deeper than what we can get from a textbook, what we can get from a school classroom, what we can get from just reading off of the social media. The impact on our kanaka ‘ōiwi-s plays a big impact on how, how we think about our lands today. What if we were not in this building and we were on the lands of ‘Anaeho‘omalu? Would we be more open to hearing the hearts of everyone that has spoken through their hearts? We need to hear the hearts of the people. We need to hear the heartbeat of our lands. And, yes, so, with that, you know, I say that the richness of Hawai‘i, the richness of our lands, lives within us. The knowledge that we hold is not all the knowledge that are written in the words of a textbook; it is written in our hearts, it is written in the ways of our lives, it is written, it is imprinted in us. And so the only ways that we get to, really get it out there into what the ‘āina also is speaking is through our voice. It is our voices that is also a big factor. We are up against the numbers of dollar signs that are beyond our limits, beyond our capabilities to achieve to get these kind of millions and millions of dollars so that we could buy the land. If I could buy the land, I’d buy it just to preserve it. That’s basically it. But to be able to challenge these big developers with money and to see what they see and not see what we see, it’s a big concern for me. That is just a negative effect to our ‘āina kūpuna. You know, I am a Hoa ‘Āina of Hui Aloha Kīholo, also with Ku‘ulei Keakealani. And, you know, the relationship we have with the Nature Conservancy began not by them just coming in there and just developing or doing whatever they wanted to to our fishpond, that fishpond is, is so sacred to us, but they took the time out to know the inference of the land, to know the people of the land; they got the families together, they took the stories of the families, they took the true history and the true living words of today from the people, from the families, from their stories. And, you know, the relationship that we have between culture and science is amazing that we have down there at Kīholo. And as I speak it Kīholo in my heart so deeply because I, I love Kīholo to the depth of my life, and the shorelines of Kaʻūpūlehu, too, ‘Anaeho‘omalu, and beyond the mokupuni of Hawai‘i. It’s all the same. Every ahupua‘a deserves this, this richness. And if we keep on allowing development and we keep losing our trails and we keep losing these stories to these places, who are we anymore? Just like uncle said, “I no go fish there already. I raised my children at ‘Anaeho‘omalu. I no go throw net there anymore. Sonny Keakealani.” And I leave with that. Mahalo nui loa. 39 EXHIBIT B UNGER: Mahalo. Thank you. That’s all the people on this list. So, is there anybody else in the audience that would like to testify at this time? \[None.\] Thank you. Commissioners, I need a motion to close this portion of the hearing. KAHOLO: So move. NOBRIGA: I second. UNGER: We have a motion by Commissioner Kaholo, second by Commissioner Nobriga. All in favor? COMMISSIONERS: Aye. UNGER: Oppose? \[None.\] Motion moves. Public testimony is closed. At this time then, Commissioners, we need a motion to act on these agenda items. NOBRIGA: I so move \[inaudible\] these agenda items, we make a decision for a site visit. UNGER: Can you speak into the — NOBRIGA: Oh, I’ve got to repeat that now? UNGER: Yeah. NOBRIGA: I so move we act on these items on the agenda, and also that we make a decision on a site visit physically. HO HALL: Let me clarify your motion. So you are making a motion to postpone, or continue, these matters until next hearing, until you guys go do a site visit to ‘Anaeho‘omalu. NOBRIGA: Well, I think it’s important that we see what they are talking about. HO HALL: Yeah, but I just wanted to clarify your motion. That’s what you are saying, yeah? NOBRIGA: Yeah, that’s fine. HO HALL: Okay. Thank you. CARR SMITH: I’ll second that. UNGER: We have a motion by Commissioner Nobriga, second by Commissioner Carr Smith. Open to discussion. KAHOLO: I have one. What Commissioner Nobriga said is true. Being from the ‘āina, you know, we need to go out there and see what it is. What’s happening, I understand what these two ladies were saying out there, as development move forward, the people, the island people, the 40 EXHIBIT B locals, are moving away from their heritage, which is collecting, gathering out there, you know. My parents, my grandparents, always taught us this is your livelihood, the ocean, the mountain. If any people take that away from you, what else you’ve got? The only thing you’ve got is Costco. And that is not good. The reason I’m stating that that is not, there is a lot of chemicals in it, whereas Mother Nature gives you something very precious that nurtures your body, move you ahead. But when you take that away from the individual himself and the families, this is something real hard for me. So doing a site visit down there is something that I want to look at and decide at that point because this is our heritage. This is what we need to understand. Once you take that away, it’s gone; it will never be replaced. I live up in North Kohala. There is a lot of cliffs up there, and it’s hard for the people to go down there. They’re living off the land. They’re living off the ocean. But guess what. Those families that were living on Parker Ranch had the pleasure of going down to that bay in gathering for the family, raising the family beside the meat and the pork that they have on the ranch. This is something to supplement their livelihood. This is what we are talking about right now. It’s not about development. People can come inside, develop everything. But guess what. They shut down the ocean, with the livelihood for the locals is gone. And you walk along that coast, these two ladies are talking about, all the way down, you’ve got a cliff all the way down, there is no sandy area we can throw net. I’ve been there. I went down to the ocean on the coastline on that site, and there is no sandy area or rocky area we can throw net; it’s deep. So my question is this: What are we looking at as Commissioners? Are we looking at to make the people richer or are we looking at survival for our families that live on the island? Cost of living is not going down; it’s going up. And the only way you can survive is through the ocean and the mountain. So you’ve got two choices: Support your family or kill your family. But why I’m using that phrase is, go to Costco, there is a lot of chemicals in those food. Because right now, you know, I can sit here, because I’m 73 right now and I don’t have that much long to live. But what about the young generation? This is where we as commissioners need to understand what we are saying and what we are doing is for our ‘ohana-s that are coming about. You all know, you have families, and it’s their livelihood that is in jeopardy right now. Thank you. UNGER: Further, further discussion? KEALOHA: Yeah, I personally feel more comfortable deferring the decision until we had a site visit as well, and get firsthand gearing of the various issues on property. UNGER: Commissioner Carr Smith. CARR SMITH: I agree. I commend the applicant for the due diligence that they performed at the detail involved, but I’m also more comfortable, even though I’m familiar with the area, to have a site visit with this in mind. I also am happy with the Director’s list of unresolved issues and the things we need to talk more about; the density, the negative effect on the trails, the habitat for the green sea turtle, the shoreline setback and public access and the width on the floating public access, all of those are really valid things to talk more about. UNGER: Further discussion? \[None.\] Roll call? 41 EXHIBIT B JACKSON: Thank you, Chair Unger. So just to clarify, the motion is to continue the hearing to th the February 15 meeting where a site visit will be conducted of the property and then a hearing commencing in the afternoon — UNGER: Correct. JACKSON: — is that correct? Great. Thank you. Commissioner Nobriga? NOBRIGA: Aye. JACKSON: Commissioner Carr Smith? CARR SMITH: Aye. JACKSON: Commissioner Church? CHURCH: Aye. JACKSON: Commissioner Kaholo? KAHOLO: Aye. JACKSON: Commissioner Kealoha? KEALOHA: Aye. JACKSON: Okay, and Commissioner Shimaoka is excused? Is — UNGER: Yes. JACKSON: — he returning? Okay. UNGER: No, he is not. JACKSON: All right. The motion carries, five-zero. UNGER: Thank you. Thank you, applicants, members of the public. And the discussion will continue next month, and before that then we will plan, we’ll work with the County and have a site visit before our next meeting. Thank you. UNIDENTIFIED PUBLIC MEMBER IN THE AUDIENCE: Excuse me, what I understood her th to say is that you are going to have the site visit in the morning of the 15, and then have a meeting, or do whatever you are doing now in the afternoon. That’s what she said. JACKSON: Yeah, let me just clarify one thing. So in anticipation of holding a site visit, because we had received a lot of testimony requesting a site visit, and to keep the application on schedule, 42 EXHIBIT B we did have to put the site visit on the February agenda and published already. There are State mandated publication deadlines, and therefore we put it on the agenda, it was published in the paper. And now that the Commission has determined, yes, that there will be a site visit, it will be th held at 10:00 a.m., February 15. We’ll meet on the sandy beach fronting Lava Lava Beach Club, and then the site visit will be conducted for the Commission. There will not be public testimony taken at that time because the visit has to be recorded in order for transcripts to be created, so we ask that the public provide testimony later that afternoon. We’ll be meeting here in this room, that will start at 1:30, and then at that time we’ll take public testimony again, and the Commission will consider the applications. th CHURCH: Is that the 18? Is that what you said? th JACKSON: The 15, yeah, it — th UNGER: February 15. JACKSON: — should be a Thursday. \[Inaudible questions from the audience.\] The public can go to the site visit, yes. UNIDENTIFIED PUBLIC MEMBER IN THE AUDIENCE: \[Inaudible\] lineal descendants and kia‘i? JACKSON: Anybody from the public can attend the site visit. It’s open to anybody. UNIDENTIFIED PUBLIC MEMBER IN THE AUDIENCE: Who is hosting the site visit? JACKSON: Staff will be hosting the site visit for the Commission. UNIDENTIFIED PUBLIC MEMBER IN THE AUDIENCE: Staff, Planning Department staff. JACKSON: Yes. So the Commission, the purpose of the site visit is to help orient the Commission to the property, so they’ll be asking staff, you know, where is this feature, where is this proposed building going to be placed, and then we’ll be responding to the Commission. Like I said, it’s not real open discussion because we have to record it for transcript purposes. UNIDENTIFIED PUBLIC MEMBER IN THE AUDIENCE: \[Inaudible\] some cultural practitioner, some lineal descendant up the place \[inaudible\] only the developer they are going to talk about what they are going to place on the place. JACKSON: No, it will not be the developers; it will be the Planning staff. UNIDENTIFIED PUBLIC MEMBER IN THE AUDIENCE: Planning staff. JACKSON: Yeah. Okay? UNIDENTIFIED PUBLIC MEMBER IN THE AUDIENCE: May I ask a question? 43 EXHIBIT B UNGER: I think we should move forward right now, but we, the staff will be here after the meeting and also throughout this next month to answer, for there’s going to be a lot more questions, and so, yes, let’s continue this discussion. Well, let’s do one more question, and then — UNIDENTIFIED PUBLIC MEMBER IN THE AUDIENCE: \[Inaudible\] visit but site at 10:00 a.m. \[inaudible\] please \[inaudible\] to go visit the site at sunset, because they move their things onto the beach in the evening for dinner but they remove after that. So when you see that site at 10:00 a.m., \[inaudible\] at sunset. Please. UNGER: I’ll defer to staff who set the schedule, but it sounds like our schedule is pretty set in regard to the timeframe. JACKSON: Yes, the site visit has already been set for 10:00 a.m. It will be very difficult to have a site visit at sunset. \[Inaudible comments from the audience.\] UNGER: Thank you very much. We will continue the discussion next month. And we do have some more business on the agenda, is that correct? Okay. HO HALL: I have a question for the Commission actually real quick. Would you guys want to have, you know, in fairness I guess, we could have one descendant and then one person from the applicant so that you will have, be able to ask questions on site of them. I think it would be, it’s something to think about, but maybe staff could then, you know, make arrangements to have at least one person from each side, and then, you know, answer your questions at the site would be probably more beneficial for you guys, you know. NOBRIGA: Getting Ku‘ulei down there would be beneficial. HO HALL: Yeah, so if you guys wanted to invite Ku‘ulei or, yeah. UNGER: Thank you. Let’s, we can make those arrangements then. The discussion ended at 1:28 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Noriko Sauer, Secretary Leeward Planning Commission 44 EXHIBIT B