The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2024-03-06 PL-SMA-2023-000046 Anne Celeste Opposition Testimony From: Anne Celeste To: Plannina Internet Mail Subject: Kim,Here is my corrected letter for the March 7 meeting--RE: BLACK SAND BEACH LLC(PL-SMA-2023-000046) Date: Tuesday,March 5,2024 4:20:10 PM Attachments: PUNALUU-LETTER TO COUNTY.docx It follows below and by attachment. Thanks for your help, Kim! Anne J Celeste PO Box 669 Pahala HI annejcelestena amail.com March 5, 2024 Windward Planning Commission County of Hawai'i Aupuni Center, 1o1 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, Hawai'i 96720 To the Members of the Commission: RE:APPLICANT: BLACK SAND BEACH LLC (PL-SMA-2023-000046) We oppose this development plan, because it would be devastating to the aina,the wildlife, and our people and their way of life. We respectfully request in no uncertain terms thatthe SMA be denied. We are grateful that County Planning Director Zendo Kim stated that his opinion can change afterthe public hearing because the residents of Kau are outraged. We believe that 95-99%are opposed. The community had no awareness of the SMA meeting. In the 5 days since the community learned of the county SMA meeting, Soo residents have rallied in protest... over 117o people have signed the petition opposing development...and many will show their opposition in a caravan to the county meeting March 7. If necessary,there are plans to bring the locals' brothers and sisters from the other islands, as at Mauna Kea,to stop this development. Our thoughts are below.We ask you to please save our beloved Punaluu. This development takes the heart of Kau, and destroys its quiet, natural wildness which is so important to the people of Kau. We live here for the quiet. We don't want a resort. It takes the last undeveloped area in all the islands, and one of the very last undeveloped beaches, and turns it into profit-making machine for foreign investors. There are other places to make money.There is only one beach.And when it is gone, it's gone. Please save Punaluu. We already lost beautiful beaches in Puna to Pele. Let's not lose this one. It takes a sacred, cherished land and desecrates it. Keep it safe for those who love it. These grounds are sacred—they are not to be desecrated to fill the pockets of foreign investors. The developer has already desecrated the bones of the ancestors, a great crime. The proposed development at Punalu'u would sacrifice many cultural, ecological and spiritual benefits for all Hawaii Island residents to enrich a very few people involved with the development. This land is for the people of Hawaii. Many families rely on these areas for food and cultural practices. We don't need another tourist attraction built byforeign investorsto makethem richer. Large developments and golf courses ruin marine ecosystems and promote eutrophication. These areas must remain pristine and not fall victim to the pollution that accompanies big resort business. We don't need a wellness center and condos.We need affordable housing. This plan will skyrocket prices of homes, making them unaffordable for locals. It will also escalate property taxes, making housing unaffordable for locals. When the Chinese developed Vancouver,the locals could no longer afford to live there. Chinese investors were allowed to purchase unbuilt condos before locals even had a chance. Chinese billionaires bought massive tracts of land. https://Qlobalnews.ca/news/z444a8o/this-ithis-ig8a-documentary-on-asian-investment-in- vancouver-shows-how-little-has-changed/ We need housing for residents, not for tourists.There are other places they can stay. Where will locals live when they lose their homes? The proposed development: i. Violates the Ka'u Community Development Plan(KCDP) Policy 6 The development of visitor accommodations "and any resort development should complement the character of the area;protect the environment and natural beauty; respect existing lifestyles, cultural practices, and cultural resources;provide shoreline public access; and provide affordable housing to meet demand created by the development" 2. Has no current Environmental Impact Statement: The EIS being used isjust a 2oo6"draft". We need to have a new EIS done before anything moves forward--to appropriately assess impacts today. 3. Has no wastewater management plan 4. Has no infrastructure plan S. Does not address the critical need to upgrade our substandard water fire-fighting capability.We don't want to be the next Maui. Kau is at danger from brushfires. We don't have adequate water storage to fight a fire. 6. Has no disaster mitigation plan The area has many potential threats: An active cinder cone, increasing quakes,the loss of ohia due to ROD, which means the dying forest no longer catches rain, causing more flooding, and with lack of bridge repair,there is a possibility that residents could not escape 7. Needs an updated shoreline assessment The storm of 2022 necessitates a reassessment of the shoreline setback. 8. Has no burial treatment plan Were archeological studies done? 9. Did not grant residents due process. We were not made aware of critical developments. Many residents thought that the plan had been discontinued. . We never heard about the County meeting until Feb 29, 2024—onlY7 days ahead— we were blindsided We were not informed of the developer's Dec 15 2023 filing forthe SMA The developer's plan was not communicated to the entire community,the community was allowed almost no information, no input, and no answers to their questions .There was no meeting priorto approval of this development so thatthe people of kau could express their deep concerns aboutthe devastating impactthis development will have. . In addition,the Planning Director Zendo Kim has recommended approval—before we were even allowed input! io. How will this impact local fisherman who depend on the waters for their food and income? Already tourist cars fill their beach. How is their ramp access protected? ii. The beach is already at capacity on most days, often with 300 people. The developers' plan can easily bring boo overnight tourists plus Soo day tourists to the beach.That's l000 people in addition to the 300 that are there now, for a total of 1300 on the beach. The beach is only 3 acres, maximum.That's 433 people per acre. To bring this home,that's 1o8 people per one-quarter acre,the size of a typical home lot. Imagine 1o8 people on your housing lot! Already the public toilets are over-crowded. Beach capacity should be limited. 12. The existing infrastructure cannot support the influx of tourists 13. Tourists don't care about the aina. This will further destroy the beach. They litter,they regularly get too close to the turtles,take the black sand, and snap selfies. 14. The development further endangers critical habitat for dwindling protected turtles. Already hatchlings don't make it to the water due to disorientation from lights. Imaginethem getting trampled by tourists snapping selfies on their way to the shore. 15. The planned resort also contains a Nesting site for the Federally and Internationally protected Endangered Hawksbill Turtle, Hawaiian Monk Seals as well as the Endangered Hawaiian Nene Geese . Allowing a resort would be devastation to the ecosystem forthe residing wildlife. 16. The developer is not pono with Punaluu nor the people of Kau—We cannot trust her word. Please see that this developer cares almost nothing for our community and is manipulative, making people think she will help til she gets in. 1. She excavated the graves of the ancestors, strewing their bones all over, exposing them to the sun, a great disrespect to Hawaiians and locals. z. She has gone ahead and developed the site without SMA approval . She has appropriated an extra parking area by the beach without approval, cutting down trees and stripping it of its wild vegetation. . She has cut down a great deal of vegetation on the site 3. She has cheated locals already .Guy Enriques explained atthe rally how Eva Liu promised to develop the water system 3 years ago so it could handle brushfires. So Guy helped her—he told her how to be successful. She took that information from Guy, but she never did her part. After3 years she has done nothing-- upgrade our substandard water system. But she did sell pizza atthe beach for her own pocket. .An excavation contracted did a great deal of work for her and she never paid him. Instead, when he was done, she fired him. He's pursuing the large payment he is owed. 4. We believe she is poisoning the springs by using Round-Up around the pond and elsewhere 3.7. The developers'values clash with those of Kau residents For ancient Hawaiians, land cannot be owned, it must be stewarded and conserved. For foreign investors, land is to be exploited. For locals,these lands are sacred. For investors they are portfolio holdings. 18. We believe that Kau residents are 95-99%opposed to this plan i9. The plan offers almost nothing the way of community benefit Let's develop a vision of how this could invest in Kau, not developers' bank accounts: This site could instead be developed with Low-cost housing, a critical need Atech school to help Kau youth with post-high school training in technology, culinary arts, mechanics, welding, carpentry, HVAC, accounting. A community garden where people can grow their own food in sustainable ways, learning skills like permaculture The focus of this site is more appropriately conservation, even by a developer Any plan should offer: Large conservation areas all along the beach to protect this treasure Tourist education on how to respectthe aina, and how Hawaiians stewarded these lands. 20. This development may become a vehicle for unrestrained foreign investment. This is what happened in Vancouver, Canada. It no longer supported residents but was taken over foreign investors and tourists. Local real estate prices were very low compared to those in China. There the development went far beyond what was first approved, and created a mini- Hong Kong in the cherished beautiful, natural area of Granville Island. Ultimately, locals were driven out by high real estate prices, and the area became a vehicle for organized crime and money-laundering. We ask you to please deny this SMA since these critical concerns have not been addressed. Sincerely, Anne Celeste