2025-09-04 Testimony from Rebecca Chacko

Home

1 Verbai'Testimony 9/4/2025 SMA Application PL-SMA-2025-000070 Dustin& Eszter Hollenback TMK(3)3-2-003:001 Aloha, my name is Rebecca Chacko, my husband Justin Hertz and I are immediate neighbors. i. Our neighborhood is unique in that there are three property owners within approximately 6 acres of land. The 6 acres is bordered by Ka'aheiki stream, Waikolu stream, the Pacific Ocean and the Hawaii Belt Road. Within this small neighborhood, the actions of one neighbor have the potential of greatly affecting the other neighbors. ii. Of the 15 neighbors notified regarding this SMA Application, only us and one other neighbor will be substantially affected by the magnitude of the commercial agriculture proposed. iii. The applicant's property is technically a flag lot. However, the access to the property is not direct. There are a couple 90 degree turns on RU1, to access the applicant's property. Over the past 3 years and as recently as last month we have seen how challenging it is for large trucks carrying equipment or construction material or a 40-foot container to navigate the RU1 access. We can only imagine how disruptive it will be for us neighbors in the future, given the magnitude of construction and farming activity proposed. iv. The 6 acres was originally owned by a single family. It was divided into 3 parcels, one for each of the owners 3 adult children. Easements were established years ago that would not have greatly impacted family members living in close proximity. As time and circumstances changed in the children's lives, two of the parcels were sold. Now, 2 of 3 parcels are owned by non-family members. While conveyances at the time of sale established the rights of new owners,the impact of these conveyances within the neighborhood have come to light with the applicant's plan. We hope that alternatives will be explored. v. Over the past three years that we have lived here, we have not seen any attempt by the owner to test the viability of farming on their property. We have only seen yurt platforms, sheds, tents and other structures erected. The one beautiful rainbow eucalyptus tree they planted was cut down after it had grown about 15 feet. vi. Over the past 3 years we have not seen the owners develop the land in anyway that would have been progressive and logically expanded to the proposed level of commercial agriculture. We are concerned that this will be yet another project that is partly developed and then abandoned or unmaintained. vii. We request that the Planning Commission take steps to fully understand the unique topography of the applicant's property and confirm what we have been told regarding the extensive grading that would be required to bring the construction and farming plan to fruition. viii. On Friday August 29th we submitted our written testimony detailing application omissions, clarifications, and concerns. On Tuesday 9/2/25 (day before yesterday) the applicant relocated several structures, which now lay strewn across the length of their property. Here are photos that depict the structures relocated. Even a hurricane could not have created the current littering of structures on the property. ix. We do not know all the rules and regulations of land use in Hawaii. We rely on the Windward Planning Commissions knowledge and wisdom. We request a site visit to fully understand the unique topography of the applicant's property, a shoreline survey to fully evaluate the risks along this section „f thin I-lamaki,a shoreline, and that the Conservation District boundary on the applicant's property alon ' tlbe.s ►kS_/ to be clearly marked to validate the site plan submitted. Mahalo. Rebecci i' ka....R.. FILS COPY qlACM