2019-01-03 Public Testimony Transcript - Piilani Partners SMA 18-070

Home

facility like this, you're just following. You're following the money. You're following a bad precedent in moving forward, and I just am completely opposed to putting out more plastic pollution that this planet does not need. And, I thank you guys for hearing my testimony. Mahalo. ROHR: Hello? [Testing microphone.] I'm Claudia Rohr. I just want to say, how do you put into perspective what everyone is saying? How, why is this under your authority to consider this? You're charged with considering the secondary impacts of this project which everyone is saying is extinction. You've done, been done a disservice. The Planning Department is administering the application before you. They did a very poor job. After going into the Planning Department three times and raising my voice, I finally got the file for the original GP Amendment Ordinance 91-72 yesterday at 4:15. I sent it to you at 10 o'clock. In that folder was a feasibility study done in 1990 where the Planning Director was ordered, or was directed by the County Council to do a feasibility on the GP Amendment that Suisan wanted, requested. That feasibility study came up with it's inappropriate to have Industrial zoning on that land which lies between the Ho`olulu Park Complex and the Wailoa River recreation area. The Background Report, which I also sent you, is on that GP Amendment, has numerous agency comments against Industrial use in that area, including the DLNR Land Division in charge of the State park. I didn't see anything from them this time. Did the Applicant actually send them notice? Did the Planning Department ask for their comments? I think the disservice was the non -disclosure of that feasibility study in the Background Report. You didn't provide—or the Planning Department fell down on its responsibility for open disclosure and non -biased recommendations. The EA. The analysis of environmental review. I sent you the form. No boxes are checked. Yet, an intrical part and a pre -requisite to this property development is extending the public sewer line under the County -owned land, a 174 feet down Pi`ilani Street. This is not simply a sewer hookup. There is no listing on any exemption list for extension of a public sewer line under County land, and if you think there is, that means it's a potential trigger, and the procedure is to send out requests saying we would like to exempt this action under Chapter 34. Agency, please give your opinion of this exemption. They didn't do that. There's no record. You're open for a lawsuit just based on the recommendation you gave to the County Council to forwarding it with recommendations for approval. You should send this back to the Planning Department for a redo and an EA before this goes any further and you waste taxpayers' dollars, because you will be sued. How many people in this room believe that? An extension of the public sewer is not a minor action or a minor thing that can be exempted. You must consider the whole project including the sensitive area which is the aquifer they are planning on drilling into. HO: Aloha, Commissioners. My name is Nelson Ho. I am a Sierra Club member, and I fully support what Cory Harden as our executive committee leader, leadership said about this proposal. I, too, am opposed to the Piilani Bottling Plant proposal and the basis for my concern is the plastics waste. And, I'd like to just again note there are four plastic bottles here that the Commissioners are using—five, thank you, Chair. And, I also would like to note that there are numerous foam cups here. There's a whole stack next to the coffee maker over there, and I think that the County itself can do better. And, I think you're hearing from the public that we want the County to do better. We want there to be wise choices made by the leadership here, and I fully EXHIBIT C 12