Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMarch3,2017ShorelineSetbackDeterminationApplicationsPLANNING DEPARTMENT SHORELINE SETBACK APPLICATION FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY: SSD 201 7 Acce tance Date:_��-. t Website Posting Date: Determination Date: - Planning Commission Date: Ex iration Date: Planner Assigned: Instructions: File all information requested under Part A for processing the Determination of Applicability (§8-27.1), including signature page. Fill out Parts A and B if you know, due to proximity of the shoreline, that your parcel will require a Certified Shoreline Survey. If you are proposing a permitted structure or subdivision within the shoreline setback area fill in Part C. For applications involving a variance, complete Part D. A ' licantInformation Applicant: Princeville Hanalei Plantation LLC Mailing Address: A licani's Status: c/o Belles Graham Proudfoot Wilson & Chun, LLP 4334 Rice Street, Suite 202, Lihue, Kauai, Hawaii 96766 (Check one) Phone: Email: (808) 246-6962 mwg@Kauai-law.com Owner of the Property Lessee of the Property Q✓ Authorized Agent I (Holder of at least 75% of the equitable and legal title) Lessee must have an unexpired and recorded lease of five (5) years or more from the date of filing of this application. If not, Owner(s) must provide a Letter of Authorization. I Attach Letter of Authorization Transmittal Date: 12/29/2016 County Zoning District: RR-toioPBN Tax Map Key(s): (a) s-a ooa:o� 3 Land Area: t a.aa acres Nature of Development: (Description of proposed Apartment -Hotel and amenities NO PERMITS WILL BE ISSUED WITHOUT PLANNING COMMISSION ACCEPTANCE, EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN §8-27.8(c)(8) Part A Shoreline Setback Determination of Applicability (§8-271) Check all that apply, fill in applicable information. Any box checked must be accompanied by additional information, hoins and/or documentation. Properties Abutting the Shoreline 60 feet ❑✓ Project's approximate distance from shoreline: Properties Not Abutting the Shoreline Project's approximate distance from shoreline: Additional Information: ❑✓ Closest distance of improvement(s) from Shoreline is approximately 60 ft. ❑ Number of parcels and type of improvements (roads, buildings, structures) between Shoreline and this parcel: 1- 3rosns PLANNING DEPARTMENT SHORELINE SETBACK APPLICATION FOR OFFICIAL U5E"ONLY: SS 201 - Acce tance Date: Website Posting Date: Determination Date: Planning Commission Date: Expiration Date: Planner Assigned: 0 Topography (undulating, flat, slope, etc.) and ground elevation of subject parcel (Lowest and Highest elevations) Slope. The proposed structures associatetl with the apartment -hotel project are located at an elevation of 40 to 6o feet. `See attached Coastal Hazard Assessment. ❑✓ Shoreline Type (e.g. beach, dune, rocky, sandy with rocky outcropping, etc.) Sandy with rocky outcroppings; outer reef barrier. See attached Coastal Hazard Assessment. ❑ Artificially armored Shoreline If checked, what type of armoring (e.g. seawall, revetment, bulkhead): Breakwal I. ✓ Is the armoring permittediamborized? Yes elate of naves. Date of authorization (attach copy of authorization letter): Act 217, sLH 1967. ❑ Is property in coastal floodplain (if checked, what zone)? ❑ t Has this_prU.erty been su!�ect to coastal hazards in theast7 (If checked, Tease descri See attached Coatal Hazard Assessment. If the proposed stucture or subdivision is within the shoreline setback area then, please be aware that if the determination of a structure is approved, the Applicant shall agree in wrung that the Applicant, its successors, and permitted assigns shall defend, indemnify, and hold the County of Kauai harmless from and against any and all loss, liability, claim or demand arising out of damages to said structures from any coastal natural hazards and coastal erosion, pursuant to §8-27.7(b)(2). The requirements of the Subsection (b) shall run with the land and shall be set forth in a unilateral agreement recorded by the applicant with the Bureau of Conveyances or the Land Court, whichever is applicable, no later than thirty (30) days after the date of final shoreline approval of the structure under §8-27.8. A copy of the recorded unilateral agreement shall be filed with the Director and the County Engineer no later than forty-five (45) days after the date of the final shoreline determination and approval of the structure and the filing of such with the Director shall be a prerequisite to the issuance of any related building permit. §8-27.7(b)(6). PLANNING DEPARTMENT SHORELINE SETBACK DETERMINATION If Part A has been deemed that a Determination will be necessary, the additional information will be required for submission of this application. Part B Exemption Determination 0✓ A non-refundable processing fee of one hundred dollars ($100.00) shall accompany a request for determination. (§8-27.8(e)) ❑ Exemption 1 In cases where the proposed structure or subdivision satisfies the following four criteria: (A) In cases where the proposed structure or subdivision is located outside of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) `V' or `VE' flood zones; (B) The proposed structure or subdivision is located at an elevation which is thirty (30) feet above sea level or greater; (C) The applicant can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that the property is clearly adjacent to a rocky shoreline and that it will not affect or be affected by coastal erosion or hazards; and (D) The shoreline setback shall be sixty (60) feet from the certified shoreline which has been established not more than twelve (12) months from the date of the application for the exception under this section. ❑✓ Exemption 2 In cases where the applicant can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that the applicant's proposed structure or subdivision will not affect beach processes, impact public beach access, or be affected by or contribute to coastal erosion or hazards, excluding natural disasters. Factors to be considered shall include, but not be limited to, proximity to the shoreline, topography, properties between shoreline and applicant's property, elevation, and the history of coastal hazards in the area. ❑ Exemption 3 Those structures and uses found exempt in Table 3 (§8-27.7) (see pg. 5-6) Letter from the Department of Public Works stating that the proposed project does not constitute "Substantial Improvement," pursuantto §8-27.2 Pursuant to §8-27.3 the Kauai County Code, 1987 as amended, the Planning Department hereby certifies the proposed stmcture(s) or subdivisions) as exempt from those shoreline setback determination requirements established under §8-27.8. or -3- 3iosns EX�IIBIT "A" OWNER'S AUTHORIZATION I. OWNER. Name: OHANA HANALEI, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company Address: 8880 Rio San Diego Drive, Suite 345 San Diego, California 92108 Attention: Mr. Alex Hill, Executive Vice President Telephone: (619) 281-8573 Email: ahil][Cwohanare.coin With cc to: Mr. Eric Crispin, Vice President 745 Fort Street Suite 1450 Honolulu Hawaii 96813 Telephone: (808)218-6707 Email: cerispin@ohanare.com II. AUTHORIZED AGENTS. A. Name: Max W. J. Graham, Jr., Esq. Michael J. Belles, Esq. Ian K. Jung, Esq. Address: Belles Graham Proudfoot Wilson &Chun, LLP 4334 Rice Street, Suite 202 Lihue, Kauai, Hawaii 96766 Telephone: (808) 246-6962 Facshnile: (808) 245-3277 Email: mwg@kauai-law.com mjb(�U-kauai-law.com ilj@kauai-law.com B. Naine: Princeville Hanalei Plantation, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company Address: c/o The Resort Group LLC I100 Alakea Street, Suite 2500 Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 Attention: Mr. Jeffrey Stone, President Telephone: (808) 531-9761 Email: jstone(c�tlreresortgroup.com EXHIBIT "A" III. PROPERTY. Stark Lot (18.60 ac.) (formerly Land Court Application No. 1771) Hanalei, Kauai, Hawaii Kauai Tax Map Key No. (4) 54-004:013 (per.) Lot 4 (0.24 ac.) (formerly Land Court Application No. 1724) Hanalei, Kauai, Hawaii Kauai Tax Map Key No. (4) 5-4-004:013 (por.) V. AUTHORIZATION. The Owner hereby authorizes the Authorized Agents to act on the Owner's behalf and to file and process on the Owner's behalf any and all applications necessary to obtain govermnental permits relating to the Subject Property, including, but not limited to, the following: 1. Building permits, grading permits, use permits, variance permits, zoning permits, shoreline setback determinations, and Special Management Area permits issued by any department, agency, board or commission of the County of Kauai. 2. Permits issued by the Department of Health of the State of Hawaii. Permits issued by the Board of Land and Natural Resources ofthe State of Hawaii and/or the Department of Land and Natural Resources of the State of Hawaii, including shoreline certifications. 4. Permits issued by the Land Use Commission of the State of Hawaii. OWNER: OHANA HANALEI LLC, a Delaware limited liability company i -2- EXHIBIT "B" I. II. APPLICANT'S AUTHORIZATION APPLICANT. "LAX PRINCEVILLE HANALEI PLANTATION, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company Address: c/o The Resort Group LLC 1100 Alakea Street, Suite 2500 Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 Attention: Mr. Jeffrey Stone, President Telephone: (808) 531-9761 Email: jstonegtheresortgroup.com AUTHORIZED AGENT. Name: Max W. J. Graham, Jr., Esq. Michael J. Belles, Esq. Ian K.Jung, Esq, Address: Belles Graham Proudfoot Wilson &Chun, LLP 4334 Rice Street, Suite 202 Lihue, Kauai, Hawaii 96766 Telephone: (808) 246-6962 Facsimile: (808) 245-3277 Email: mwgkkauai-law.com mjb@.kauai-law.com iki @kauai-law.com PROPERTY. Stark Lot (18.60 ac.) (formerly Land Court Application No. ] 771) Hanalei, Kauai, Hawaii Kauai Tax Map Key No. (4) 5-4-004:013 (por.) Lot 4 (0.24 ac.) (formerly Land Court Application No. 1724) Hanalei, Kauai, Hawaii Kauai Tax Map Key No. (4) 5-4-004:013 (por.) EXHIBIT "B" AUTHORIZATION. The Applicant hereby authorizes the Authorized Agent to act on the Applicant's behalf and to file and process on the Applicant's behalf any and all applications necessary to obtain governmental permits relating to the Subject Property, including, but not limited to, the following: Building permits, grading permits, use permits, variance permits, zoning permits, shoreline setback determinations, and Special Management Area permits issued by any department, agency, board or commission of the County of Kauai. 2. Permits issued by the Department of Health of the State of Hawaii. Permits issued by [he Board of Land and Natural Resources of the State of Hawaii and/or the Department of Land and Natural Resources of the State of Hawaii, including shoreline certifications. 4. Permits issued by the Land Use Commission of the State of Hawaii. DATED: APPLICANT: PRINCEVILLE HANALEI PLANTATION, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company �VU^itdl c'yc 'c b `nos L-'i%^C> .vofi� j By s Its rfn f fa c -2- I L<L NMV Edda iWOO ON IS NNIMOHS d3vN M�OH5 fft O S I F � f IT III III Pali Ke Kua, Kauai, Hawaii Kauai so,>U�Sa. malei Bay, Kauai, 'HawaiiFolot Kauai < l�tl ®h�F FILE TOO LARG E TO SCAN RECORD ON FILE AT PLANNING DEPARTMENT Bernard P. Carvalho, Jr. Mayor Wallace G. Rezente9, Jr. Managing Director PLANNING DEPARTMENT County of Kauai, State of Hawaii 4444 Rice Street Suite A-473, Lrhu`e, Hawaii 96766 TEL (808) 241-4050 FAX (808) 241-6699 MEMORANDUM To: File SSD-2017-33 Fr: Michael A. Dahilig ' Director of Planning u Date: 3/1/2017 Michael A. Dahilig Director of Planning Ka`Ama S. Hull Deputy Director of Planning 3 RE: Evaluation of Exemption Determination Request Applicant has requested a shoreline setback exemption determination pursuant to Section 8- 27.3(a)(2): In cases where the applicant can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that the applicant's proposed structure or subdivision will not affect beach processes, impact public beach access, or be affected by or contribute to coastal erosion or hazards, excluding natural disasters. Factors to be considered shall include, but not be limited to, proximity to the shoreline, topography, properties between the shoreline and applicant's property, elevation, and the history of coastal hazards in the area. In support of their request for exemption determination, applicant has submitted maps, and a 39- page "Coastal Hazard Assessment" prepared by Sea Engineering, Inc., not including appendices. Back round: The proposed proj ect received zoning and SMA approvals in the 1980's. However, the current proposed siting of the structures bear upon this determination evaluation. The request for a "Type 2" exemption is significant, whereby some of the elements of the project may be considered grandfathered in due to the existing and valid permits, the granting of this particular type of exemption would clear any question whether the shoreline setback process has been met in any type of form. From the materials submitted by Sea Engineering, Inc., the overall site's elevation ranges from 28 feet at the far western tip of the headland to greater than 60 feet. Its slope base below the coastal access path is a mixture of boulders, sand, and a clay bank. Previous borings taken on the bluff indicates stratum underlying the top of the ridge is composed of weathered rock and clay, sitting atop moderately to slightly weathered basalt, sitting atop medium hard to hard An Equal Opportunity Employer V:\201] Mas[ar Flles\Regulawry\ShoraW�e Retatod Appiwels\99D-201'/-33\M8M0-1 TOFIe RE Direotor Malysis MAD 0301 t� docz File Memo SSD-2017-33 Page 2 of 6 basalt. Hard basalt is present from 20 to 30 feet above MSL down through the deepest depths sampled. The Coastal Hazard Assessment addresses bluff stability in Section 2.5 (Coastal Land Forms). Section 2.5 of the report discussed the hard basalt core of the ridge line that extends 20-30 feet above mean sea level and is either the bluff face or emergent outcrops along the full length of the shoreline. Additionally, the location of the structures is in Flood Zone X which is determined to be outside of the 0.2% annual chance floodplain (500-year flood). The applicant applied for State certified shoreline, under Reference No. KA-412. A site visit occurred with DLNR representative Ian Hirokawa, DAGS representative Reid Sairot, Planning Department representatives Michael Dahilig, Ruby Pap, and Chance Bukoski. Members from the public included Caren Diamond and Rain Regush. The applicant's representatives included Chris Conger of Sea Engineering, Inc. and Hanalei Hamasura. During the site visit, the shoreline locafion previously proposed by the DLNR shoreline specialist, as a part of the 2013 shoreline certification application, was identified on the ground and verified by the State shoreline representatives. The shoreline location was discussed by the group and confirmed by the State team. Several encroachments were identified by the State team and require resolution prior to certification. The shoreline was rejected on the December 23, 2016 of the OEQC Environmental Bulletin due to the time requirement in the HAR that resulted incomplete document for the encroachments and is pending the application's resubmittal for easement documentation. The shoreline location as identified on the map for Reference No. KA-412 was the State's recommended location for the 2013 shoreline application, was identified on the ground during the site visit on May 25, 2016, and was verified on the map by the State Surveyor and State Shoreline Administrator as a part of the site visit as discussed in the State's letter dated December 12, 2016. The proposed shoreline locafion, as recommended by the State in 2013 and confirmed during the 2016 site visit is referenced for the highest was of the highest waves, where highest refers to distance mauka or the inundation extreme. The topographic map provides reference for elevations at the proposed improvements and the character of ground, including slopes and terrace locations. Comments from the public, particularly those received on February 22, 2017 raise several concerns regarding shoreline issues, coastal hazards, bluff stability and setback location. File Memo SSD-2017-33 Page 3 of 6 Discussion and Analysis: Given the above ordinance, a positive exemption determination mandates review whether the supporting documentation confirms the proposed structures will not: 1) affect beach processes; 2) impact public beach access; 3) contributes to or be affected by coastal erosion; or 4) contributes to or be affected by coastal hazards, excluding natural disasters. I. Affect Beach Processes The documentation reveals the location of the structures will not affect beach processes. In evaluating effects, the factors for consideration include: proximity to the shoreline, topography, properties between the shoreline and applicant's property, elevation, and the history of coastal hazards in the area. Although the documentation reveals structure proximity sixty (60) feet from the shoreline at its closest point, with no properties in between the structures and the shoreline, the documentation reveals a steep topographic basalt scarp leading with the lowest structures proposed thirty (30) feet above MSL. The topography leading to the high elevation of the structures compared to mean sea level places these structures in a manner whereby the Department agrees no beach processes would be affected as a consequence of construction. Any concerns related to construction impeding natural beach processes should remain allayed. Therefore, an exemption is warranted given this consideration. II. Impact Beach Access The proposed structures will not impact beach access. Again, in evaluating effects, the factors for consideration include: proximity to the shoreline, topography, properties between the shoreline and applicant's property, elevation, and the history of coastal hazards in the area. Previous owners of the property have provided a Grants of Easement, filed with the Land Court on September 25, 1984, identifying current public beach access easements as required under the existing SMA permit. These easements run mauka to makai through the parcel, and also along the base of the basalt scarp up the Hanalei River. As mentioned above, shoreline certification remains in question due to an identified encroachment (namely a rock retaining wall) where pedestrian access currently takes place. As this evaluation hinges upon whether the "proposed structures" will impact public access, the Department agrees the structures proposed on the site plan do not impact or impede the existing public beach access. Any concerns related to construction blocking beach access should remain allayed. Therefore, an exemption is warranted given this consideration. File Memo SSD-2017-33 Page 4 of 6 III. Contributes to Coastal Erosion The proposed structures will not contribute to coastal erosion. Again, in evaluating effects, the factors for consideration include: proximity to the shoreline, topography, properties between the shoreline and applicant's property, elevation, and the history of coastal hazards in the area. Per the report, the site's slope base below the coastal access path is a mixture of boulders, sand, and a clay bank. Above the path, the site's underlying stratum is erosion resistant and sits beneath all the proposed structures. Boring data clearly identifies the character and location of this stratum, which extends higher than the Base Flood Elevation identified by FEMA. Moreover, the report documents a lack of marine or riparian erosion on the landward side of the foot path. As such, there is no evidence of coastal or river processes eroding the slope where the proposed structures will sit on the bluff. Furthermore, Section 2.3 of the report documents the significant spatial buffer between the documented coastal erosion on the shoreline and the location of the proposed structures. This lateral gap along with the stable geological formation is well removed from the erosion actions and accompanying coastal beach processes. The geotechnical integrity of the emplaced lava flows beneath the proposed project has been raised through public comment. Although the erosional processes related to mass failure are prevalent throughout the island given the volcanic origins of the Hawaiian Chain, the analysis required is whether the structures would be affected by or contribute (i.e. exacerbate) the already present risk. Given the public comment, we have evaluated portions of the report that analyze the basic character of the terrestrial stratum. As mentioned above, the primary substrate, basalt, is erosion resistant and underlies all the proposed structures. The report also shows no evidence of marine or riparian erosion on the upper slopes, adjacent to the proposed structures. Therefore, the Department believes the underlying geologic integrity of the area is generally stable, and proper engineering can insure the structures are anchored to this primary substrate, as would be required under structural engineering codes. As this evaluation hinges upon whether the "proposed structures" will either be affected or contribute to coastal erosion, the Department agrees the proposed structures would not exacerbate existing conditions related to already -occurring coastal erosion any affects to the structures are not beyond what would be baseline risk for any comparable inland structures and similar environmental conditions (i.e. houses built on a basalt scarp). Any concerns related to the structures increasing the rate of coastal erosion or having particular susceptibility to erosional mass failure remain allayed. Therefore, an exemption is warranted given this consideration. IV. Contributes to Coastal Hazards The proposed structures will not contribute to the areas susceptibility to coastal hazards. Again, in evaluating effects, the factors fox consideration include: proximity to the shoreline, topography, properties between the shoreline and applicant's property, elevation, and the history of coastal hazards in the area. File Memo SSD-2017-33 Page 5 of 6 The report discusses the coastal hazards identified by the U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS), a Federal agency specializing in geologic and hazard documentation. The USGS, and the report, identify and discuss the following coastal hazards: tsunami, stream flooding, high waves, storms, and, sea level, and seismic effects. As Section III, above, discusses erosion, those hazards are not discussed in this section. In addition, the report also addresses the FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Map, administered by the State Flood Plain Management Office, documentation of previous coastal flood hazards. The County of Kauai's Erosion Study, produced by the University of Hawaii, was also reviewed as part of the report. In sum, these documents and the report discussion represent all coastal hazards as identified by Federal, State, and County agencies. Data informing these documents and reports includes all previous storms and hurricanes, tsunamis, extreme wave events, erosion, stream flooding, and sea -level rise. Base Flood Elevation, as identified by FEMA is based on the highest flood elevation of all previous events and tsunami modeling results for the site. Current Base Flood Elevations for the site range from +10 It to +14 It MSL, which is 16 ft to 47 ft lower than the proposed structures, and lower than the upper reaches of the hard basalt core of the ridgeline. In addition to these coastal hazards, the Sea Engineering report also analyzes potential effects of sea -level rise at the site based on NOAA projections. The location of the proposed structures, high on the terrace at elevations 30-60 feet above mean sea level, as significantly higher than any previously recorded tsunami run-up elevations. Additionally, as mentioned above the location of the structures is in Flood Zone X, which is determined to be outside of the 0.2% annual chance floodplain (500-year flood). When reviewing this project for impacts of sea level rise, the proposed structures are well removed from any projected impacts of up to a 6 foot sea level rise. This area is also well removed from the coastal hazards assessed by the USGS Atlas, The Coastal Hazard Assessment addresses the bluff stability in Section 2.5 (Coastal Land Forms). The hard basalt core of the ridge line extending 20 to 30 feet above mean sea level is exposed as the bluff face along with the emergent outcrops running the full length of the shoreline. Per the report, this stratum is erosion resistant and sits beneath all the proposed structures. Boring data clearly identifies the character and location of this stratum, which extends higher than the Base Flood Elevation identified by FEMA. Moreover, the report documents a lack of marine or riparian erosion on the landward side of the foot path, which is to say there is no evidence of coastal or river processes eroding the slope upon which the proposed structures will sit. As such, bluff failure does not pose a hazard that may affect the subject proposal. As this evaluation hinges upon whether the "proposed structures" will contribute to or be affected by coastal hazards, the Department agrees the proposed structures would not exacerbate existing conditions related to the baseline state of risk to coastal hazards currently characterizing the area, and any affects to the structures are not beyond what would be baseline hazard risk for File Memo SSD-2017-33 Page 6 of 6 any comparable inland structures under similar non -coastal environmental conditions (i.e. houses rained upon, wind damage, etc. and not storm surge or tsunami). Any concerns related to the structures increasing the area's risk to coastal hazards or having particular susceptibility to coastal hazards remain allayed. Therefore, an exemption is warranted given this consideration. Cone lusion: After a review of the Exemption Application for a Shoreline Setback Determination, as well as the comments received by the public, the Department finds the following: • The proposed structures uali for Exemption No. 2 given the following: 1) It will not affect beach processes; 2) It will not impact public beach access; 3) It will not contribute to an increased rate of coastal erosion; and 4) It will not contribute to increasing risk and susceptibility to coastal hazards, excluding natural disasters. Therefore, pursuant to my authority as Director under Section 8-27.3(a)(2), Kauai County Code the applicant has demonstrated to my satisfaction the proposed structures will not affect beach processes, impact public beach access, or be affected by or contribute to coastal erosion or hazards, excluding natural disasters, and shall be exempted from Article 8-27, Kauai County Code. Furthermore, given DLNR's rejection of the shoreline certification application given the encroachment sitting makai of a basalt face, the shoreline certification line as proposed including areas predominantly consisting of stable basalt faces, and the predominant underlying substrate's basalt composition, the Department would be inclined to consider evidence suggesting the shoreline's consideration as a "rocky shoreline" pursuant to Article 8-27, Kauai County Code.