Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-03-05 PL-SMA-2023-000046 Dr. Gina McGuire Opposition Testimony From: Gina McGuire To: WPCtestimony Subject: Written Testimony for Windward Planning Commission, PL-SMA-2023-000046 Date: Tuesday, March 5,2024 4:27:49 PM Attachments: McGuire Testimony Punaluu.docx Aloha nui, am submitting (attached)written testimony in regards to the Windward Planning Commission agenda item for March 7, 2024: New Business Applicant: Black Sand Beach LLC (PL-SMA-2023-000046). am writing as an individual and not on behalf of an organization. My contact information is: Dr. Gina McGuire PO Box 247 Mountain View HI 96771 gina.mcguire@dri.edu (808)896-6253. Mahalo foryour consideration of mytestimony and please don't hesitate to reach out if you have any questions. Me ka oia i o, Gina PUBLIC RECORDS NOTICE: In accordance with NRS Chapter 239, this email and responses, unless otherwise made confidential by law, may be subject to the Nevada Public Records laws and may be disclosed to the public upon request. Dr. Gina McGuire PO Box 247 Mountain View HI 96771 (808-896-6253) gina.mcguire@dri.edu Aloha nui, I would like to provide testimony in regards to the proposed Special Management Area permit (PL-SMA-2023-000046) for development of the Black Sand Beach LLC residential and commercial community. I am providing expertise in my capacity as specialist in the intersections of coastal and community health in Hawaii (focus of my PhD) from both ecological and cultural lens. I provide this expertise as an individual, un-connected to an organization. I have worked as an ethnographer and GIS analyst for cultural assessments and as a research ecologist here in Hawaii for the last five years and am a lifelong resident of Hawaii Island. This proposal is not in alignment with several county and state policies and is not in the best interest of community and ecological heatth. Incompatibility of SMA with Existing Ka`u CDP The current Ka`u Community Development Plan' asks for "a community-based approach to redeveloping Punalu`u" (pg. 85), one that encourages the development of a "visitor industry that is in harmony with the character of the area and environmental and social goals of residents" (Policy 147, GP 2.3(c), 14.7.5.9.2(a)). Examples given include facilities that offer educational experiences and recreational activities (Policy 148, GP 14.7.3(h)) and the "development of small family: or "bed and breakfast" type visitor accommodations (Policy 149, GP 14.7.5.9.2(b)). A main goal is to increase the number and diversity of income sources for residents (objective 11) in ways that "complement Ka`ifs ecology and culture" and support "Ka`u-appropriate growth" (objective 12). Based on these community-self determined and County-backed policies and objectives, Black Sand Beach, LLC is not the appropriate entity to develop at Punalu`u. Their vision to emplace 225 residential and short stay units (unclear ratio of residential to short stay units provided), village and wellness center(pool and tennis courts),retail uses, and rehabilitation of the golf course (closed in 2019 due to hazardous volcanic-driven air quality conditions), ARE NOT in alignment with documented community goals, vision, or needs. Coastal Impact The SMA repeatedly cites its distance from the shoreline as a mitigation for many of the perceived ecological impacts on the nearshore and coastal ecosystem. However, demonstrated ridge-to-reef and immediately-adjacent-coastal-development-linked impacts are well documented and backed with scientific evidence, especially here in Hawai`i2. 'Ka`u Community Development Plan.2017.Ordinance No.2017-66. https://www.hawaiicounty.gov/home/showdocument?id=304234&t=6377999140513 70000 2 Carlson,R.R.,Foo, S.A.,and Asner,G.P.2019.Land use impacts on coral health:a ridge-to-reef perspective. Frontiers in Marine Science 6.DOI: 10.3389/f nars.2019.00562. Foo, S.A.and Asner,G.2020.Impacts of remotely sensed environmental drivers on coral outplant survival. Restoration Ecology.DOI:10.1111/rec.13309 Potential for Increased Stormwater Runoff The Hawaii Clean Water Branch platform shows recurring brown water advisories for the Punalu`u coastline, linked to heavy rain events that result in stormwater runoff. This runoff incudes potentially overflowing cesspools, sewer, manholes, pesticides, animal fecal matter, dead animals, pathogens, chemicals, and associated flood debris (Hawai`i CWB). These events pose threats to human health and to the nearshore and freshwater ecosystems of Punalu`u. Under projected climatic change these high intensity rain events are expected to increase'. Increasing the number of anthropogenic, low-permeable surfaces through development and increasing the amount of human-generated waste alongside anticipated high-frequency and high-intensity rain events poses great risk to the linked human community and nearshore environment health. Increased Photopollution Photopollution is well-documented to have detrimental impacts on shore species including seabirds' and sea turtles. In particular, Punalu`u provides one of the only remaining nesting habitats for the endangered Hawaiian hawksbill sea turtle (honu`ea). Loss of nesting habitat, predation, and poaching have reduced hawksbill turtle populations to critically low levels (NPS 2020). Artificial lights have been shown to attract and disorient nesting females and hatchlings, leading them away from the water where they become stranded and die (NPS 2020). The SMA notes that hawksbill turtles "sometimes" nests at Punalu`u (pg.10), attempting to downplay the significance of this site in the reproductive biology of this species, when sources show that fewer than 20 females nest a year(NPS 2020). This is a reflection rather, of the number of nesting females and the quality of their nesting habitats'. This problem of increased light pollution, on behalf of predominantly non-resident visitors, is not addressed in the SMA,nor can it be mitigated. The language that the SMA uses to talk about endangered, highly valued species and places in Hawaii exhibits a disregard on behalf of the developer for the land and people of Ka`u. Inappropriate Coastal Management Area In their designation of lands for conservation purposes, the SMA states that "the Applicant has not yet determine(d) the best method towards committing these lands towards preservation, but at the very least, it could be accomplished as a conservation easement, with proper resource management that also takes into account coastal recreational and cultural practices" (pg. 8). Historically, privatized and government driven conservation has led to the forced removal and long-term separation of Native peoples from their traditional gathering grounds (both here in Hawaii and across Indigenous worlds)'. This is an ongoing issue on island even with "friendly" organizations such as the National Park(e.g. Kalapana) which have restricted through their policies,Native Hawaiian access and use. It is insulting and unacceptable to vision conservation- 'Fandrich,K.M.,Elison Timm,O.,Zhang,C.,and Giambelluca,T.W. 2021.Dynamical downscaling of near-term (2026-2035)climate variability and change for the Main Hawaiian Islands.JGR Atmospheres.DOI: 10.1029/2021 JD035684 a Friswold,B.,Idle,J.L.,Learned,J.,Penniman,J.,Bolosan,T.,Cotin,J.,Young,L.,and Price,M.R.2023.From colony to fallout:artificial lights pose risk to seabird fledglings far from their natal colonies.Conservation Science and Practice.DOI: 10.1111/csp2.13000 5 Meagher,K.M.2020.Monitoring of the Critically Endangered Hawksbill Sea Turtle on Hawaii Island.Thesis. University of Hawaii Hilo. 6 McGuire,G.2023. Indigenous Ecology on an`Oiwi Coast.Dissertation.University of Hawaii Manoa. based management on Native coasts without a plan based on ecologically driven, evidence-based management alongside socially just stewardship. "There are several discrepancies in the documented of the size of this proposed area, on pg. 8 of the SMA referring to 29.52 acres, pg. 1 referring to 42-acre coastline management and conservation area. The County's own agenda for March 5th has a discrepancy for this area: "dedication of a portion of coastline as a conservation area on an approximately 147 acres portion of a larger 434-acre project site within the Special Management Area." Non-compliance of SMA cultural site disturbance plan There are significant cultural sites that cannot be relocated, and will undeniably be impacted by the development(either directly or in close proximity to the development). These include three loko i`a(fishponds), a loko wai (anchialine pond, home to threatened and endemic `opae ula (Halocaridina rubra)), extensive archaeological sites that can't be moved such as the Ninole Complex, Heiau Lanipao, walls, and large burial cysts and complexes. This data is drawn from several spatial layers: the SHPD historic sites database, TNC fishponds layer, and DLNR layer of anchialine ponds. The SMA admits that "the proposed development will likely impact some cultural resources during and after construction, such as sub-surface structures, midden, artifacts or unmarked burials" (pg. 91). While the plan identifies mitigation strategies such as presence of a cultural monitor and archaeologist present during ground disturbance, it is not up to the developers to decide acceptable levels of risk without a burial treatment plan in place. There is no plan provided for the post-construction detriment that increased development may cause to these sites. According to Hawaii State Law the determination of whether previously identified (already known as heavily present in this area)Native Hawaiian burial sites that appear to be over 50 years old should be preserved in place or relocated is dependent on the Ka`u Burial Council (HRS § 6E-43; HAR § 13-300-24(a)). In addition to the initial construction-phase disturbance, there is no doubt that increased non-lineal descendent(visitor) interaction with these sites will have profound effect on their integrity. Decision on this application should not be made without a full assessment of a burial treatment plan and mitigation plan,which are alluded to but not currently laid out in the SMA (HAR § 13-300-2, HRS § 6E-2). Restriction to previously disturbed areas is not justification for reduced impact and is reliant on the integrity of the construction that occurred in 1988. Previous archaeological surveys documented heavy disturbance and destruction of cultural sites including petroglyphs and walls during historic land clearing'. There is a legacy of disregard for cultural sites in this locality (and particularly within the spatial extent of this development)that cannot be ignored or justified as acceptable, as this SMA does. The SMA uses words such as 'should' rather than 'will'when referring to the approval of a burial treatment plan and long-term protection/preservation measures prior to project implementation (pg. 29). County acceptance of this proposal would represent willful acceptance of the loss and detriment to Hawaiian cultural sites in one of the last cultural kipuka(refuges) within the state and on- island. 'Tulchin,Todd,David Shideler,and Hallett H.Hammatt 2006 Archaeological Inventory Survey of the Approximately 430-Acre Sea Mountain at Punalu`u Resort,Punalu`u,Wailau,and Nmole Ahupua`a,Ka`n District, Island of Hawaii TMK: [3]9-5-019:011,015,024,026,030-031;9-6-001:001-003,006,011-013;9-6-002:008, 037-038,053.Report for Group 70 International,Honolulu,HI,from Cultural Surveys Hawaii,Inc.,Kailua,HI. Safety In addition to the expected ecological, cultural, and community-level effects of this proposed development, there are profound implications for human safety that have not been addressed. Fire While the SMA discusses their plans to update the pre-existing fire and water infrastructure, there are no plans included for meaningful fire prevention such as fuel loads reduction. The developer states that "the property contains numerous invasive species that are present island- wide and which would be difficult to eradicate or even control", instead stating the goal is to "avoid introducing new invasive species" (pg. 10). This demonstrates a lack of commitment to care for the wildland urban interface (WUI) of the development area. Recent lessons from the loss of life and infrastructure in Lahaina show that the overlap of invasive grass species with built infrastructure, combined with inadequate evacuation plans can be catastrophic. There are no mention of evacuation routes and/or contingencies in the SMA. There is one road that provides access to the highway. Coastal Inundation I am attaching below a map of the passive flood zone (green) and the coastal flood zone (orange) under a projected 3.2 ft sea level rise. (Please access the interactive map at the link here). This area encompasses a significant portion of the proposed development area. Projected coastal flooding has multiple impacts for human safety including exacerbation of previously mentioned stormwater runoff, groundwater and cesspool/sewer infiltration, and loss property. The SMA acknowledges recurring histories of tsunamis and shoreline inundation in the area, but rather uses these events as impetus to develop previously impacted areas rather than as a true safety consideration. rX © a €- + Legend `a Passive Flood Zone SLR3.2hill _ r t O • Coastal Flood Zones w SLR32 penaw'e eo. saps e i0(o SN Mountain Op gOGoll Course Ninole 150 rust Cencer trgal Contea Ear 0 300 600h Report Abuse Esri,NASA,NG&USGS Esri Community Maps Contributors,O OpenSt .. Layer citations: • Coastal Flood Zones with 3.2 feet of sea level rise—Tetra Tech, Inc. for The State of Hawaii 2018 Hazard Mitigation Plan, Hawaii Emergency Management Agency • Sea Level Rise Under Passive Flooding with 3.2 feet of sea level rise—University of Hawaii Coastal Geology Group Closing Thoughts The Environmental Precautionary Principle (EPP) establishes a need to act in favor of environmental protection when there is uncertainty' (Akins et al. 2019). Akins et al. described the need to expand beyond the EPP to a universal precautionary principle (UPP) "which recognizes people's connection to the land, and elevates community, cultural, and economic wellbeing as equally important values alongside environmental concerns" (2019, 1). Aside from cleaning up the disastrous outcome of a previously failed development project,this SMA does not provide substantial entrepreneurial, residential, environmental, or cultural benefit to the people of Ka`u. If a universal precautionary principle were applied in this situation, I know that this development would not be approved. Who benefits from this development? It is not the environment, the people of Ka`u(if so, very, very few), or the ancestral and cultural sites. I humbly ask that the County take into account their own and associated state policies and objectives currently in place to protect and support these communities when making a decision on this SMA. Mahalo nui, r 1 tw Dr. Gina McGuire s Akins,A.,Lyver,P.O.B.,Alroe,H.F.,and Moller,H. 2019.The Universal Precautionary Principle:New Pillars and Pathways for Environmental,Sociocultural,and Economic Reslience. Sustainability 11.DOI: 10.3390/sul 1082357.