January 21, 2007
The Honorable Mufi Hannemann
Mayor City and County of Honolulu
530 South King Street, Room 300
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
Dear Mayor Hannemann:
SUBJECT: “Sunset on the Beach”
Compliance with Environmental Laws
Thank you for your letter of January 18, 2007, in response to our letter
of October 26, 2006, regarding issues involving the City and County of
Honolulu’s compliance with our environmental laws. However, while we
are appreciative of your response, we do not believe that you have
addressed all of the issues and concerns raised in our October 26, 2006
letter.
Therefore, we again ask that you respond to the following:
I. MINOR SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT
You state that, after careful consideration, you directed the Department
of Parks and Recreation to apply for a Minor Special Management Area Permit
(Minor SMA) to “ensure that the City and the ‘Sunset on the Beach’ event
are in full compliance with Chapters 23 and 25, Revised Ordinances of
Honolulu (ROH).” You indicate that this permit was approved on January 5, 2007.
It is clear from your actions that you concur with our assessment that the
“Sunset on the Beach” events and activities constitute “development” as defined
in Section 205A-22, and a SMA permit is required. However, as we noted in our
previous letter, the activities include food booths, seating for spectators,
and erection of a movie screen, huge platform, and other equipment (including
what appear to be huge and bulky concrete hurricane tie-downs). Furthermore,
this is not a one-time event. The event is repeated over and over again in the
same location, presenting an opportunity for negative cumulative impacts on our
recreational resources. As we previously pointed out, Chapter 25 states that
such adverse effect shall include, but not be limited to, the potential cumulative
impact of individual developments, each one of which taken in itself might not
have a substantial adverse effect, and the elimination of planning options.
In addition, we hereby request a copy of the required detailed cost breakdown for
the structures and activities associated with “Sunset on the Beach.” As you may
know, if a project exceeds $125,000 a Major, not a Minor, SMA permit is required.
In addition, there must be a ruling, in writing, that the activity and structures
will not have negative impacts on the SMA. Therefore, because the DPP issued a
minor SMA permit, the detailed cost breakdown and the written determination must
be in the SMA file. We request that you ask the DPP to make both of these documents
available to us. We would like to pick them up on Monday January 24, 2007) at the
DPP office, 7th floor, Fasi Municipal Building.
II. CHAPTER 343, HAWAII REVISED STATUTES (HRS)
You state that the Department of Planning and Permitting (DPP) “reviewed the
event’s compliance with Chapter 343, Hawaii Revised Statutes, and determined that
it is exempt under that department’s exemption list.” Please provide us with the
exemption number, and a brief statement of how you believe the use/activity falls
into this exemption category. We will then be able to check with the Office of
Environmental Quality Control, to ensure that it has been properly published in
accordance with their regulations.
III. CHAPTER 23, REVISED ORDINANCES OF HONOLULU (ROH)
Finally we have reviewed your determination that these structures are exempt
from Chapter 23, ROH, as “minor additions to publicly owned ocean recreation
facilities” within the 100-foot shoreline setback area. While we understand
that certain “minor additions” may be exempted, we do not believe that you
responded to our concerns regarding standards adopted under rules pursuant to
HRS Chapter 91, which generally prohibit within the shoreline area any construction
or activity which may adversely affect beach processes, public access along the
shoreline, or shoreline open space. It is our view that while beach processes,
and to some degree public access, may not be adversely affected, there is
undoubtedly an adverse impact on the shoreline open space. Especially during
the daylight hours, the huge stage platform painted black), highly visible screen
scaffolding, and huge concrete “tie-downs” are unquestionably an eyesore and
thereby detract from the natural beauty of Waikiki Beach and the “shoreline
open space.” Therefore, we again request a response to this issue and concern.
We are glad that you, as Mayor, have made an effort in this case to see that
City agencies are no longer operating in violation of our environmental laws.
However, without our complaint and request for investigation, these activities
and structures would most likely still be operating without required permits.
Therefore, we believe it is important for you to let us know how you intend to
ensure that such blatant violations do not reoccur in the future. As we
previously stated, by ignoring the rules and holding events without proper
permits, it makes it difficult for the average citizen to understand why he
or she should comply with the law when the City, even if it is for “a truly
wonderful leisure time experience” violates the law. After all, it is the
City that is charged with the responsibility to administer and enforce our
laws, and it is therefore of primary importance that the City be in compliance
itself.
Your timely response to our inquiry will be greatly appreciated.
Sincerely Yours,
Carroll E. Cox
President, EnviroWatch, Inc.
cc: Tesoro
City Council Zoning Committee
|