HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-03-06 PL-SMA-2023-000046 Claudia Rohr Opposition Testimony 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