2024-03-06 PL-SMA-2023-000046 Claudia Rohr Opposition Testimony

Home

From: Claudia Rohr To: WPCtestimony Cc: Kern.Zendo; Darrow,Jeff; Roy.Alex;Tiaoula.Suzanna L Subject: Testimony against SMA 2023-046,WPC meeting 2/7/24 Date: Wednesday,March 6,2024 6:13:31 PM Aloha- The SMA use permit application is incomplete. The Planning Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure require that the application for an SMA permit includes an AIS "completed pursuant to Department of Land and Natural Resources State Historic Preservation Division (DLNR-SHPD) rules." This application requirement must be satisfied under PC Rules, Rule 9-11(b)(4)(A) and BEFORE this first WPC meeting. (That was decided in the Hilo Projects, LLC etal v. the Windward Planning Commission circuit court appeal. The circuit court sent SMA 221 amended permit back to the Windward Planning Commission because of the procedural error). How did this happen? See admission , Background Report,pg. 10,paragraph 936 Archaeological Resources, in relevant part: A draft 2005 Archeological Inventory Survey (AIS) of the entire project site was conducted as part of the 2006 Draft EIS. The AIS found a total of 34 historic properties comprising of over 125 archeological features. Of these 34- sites, 14 were considered pre- contact sites including 5 burials, 2 habitation sites, 2 petroglyph sites, 1 heiau, 1 agricultural site, and 2 additional unknown sites. In preparation for this current project the applicant conducted an update to the 2005 draft AIS with an " Addendum Archeological Inventory Survey" for the Punalu' a black sand beach property which was conducted in March 2023. It was found that the proposed development and redevelopment activities will occur within previously disturbed portions of the project site and will avoid direct impacts to any of the previously identified historic properties. Staff notes that in July 2023, the Planning Department submitted the addendum to the AIS to the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD)for a Ch. 6E- 42 historic preservation review, and confirmation of reservation and buffer plans. The submittal was done prior to the submittal of the SMA application under the director of SHPD. To date SHPD has not responded to our initial request, and no correspondence from SHPD regarding the status of the review has been submitted to the Planning Department. SMA Planner, Alex Roy simply failed to upload the SMA use permit application into the SHPD's system. SHPD cannot "determine the effects of a project on significant historic properties", step three in the review process, until the project under review is submitted. HAR sections 13-275/284-7(a). The steps to be taken in SHPUs review process can be found here: h!Ws:Hdlnr.hawaii. ov�/shi2d/hrs-6e-8-6e-42-review-process/ Thank you for your service. Claudia Rohr 808-640-5976