Kahalu u Beach Park: Sequencing for Studies and Planning

Transcription

1 Kahalu u Beach Park: Sequencing for Studies and Planning April 11, 2013 DRAFT Table of Contents Assumptions... 1 Draft Sequencing... 3 Draft Scope for Coastal Studies Possible Regulatory Compliance Requirements Assumptions Context o Planning for Kahalu u Beach Park should not be done in isolation. o Consider the ahupua a from the mountain into the sea, including hydrology, wahi pana, caves, the network of archaeological and cultural sites in the area, the Ala Kahakai and other trails, existing and planned future uses for adjacent properties, etc. o The site history and mo olelo should be thoughtfully considered. o Coordinate with Kamehameha Schools and Kamehameha Investment Corporation. o Involve a full range of stakeholders, including kupuna, beach users, government agencies, etc. Sequencing o First, understand the natural, coastal ecosystems and processes as well as options for maximizing their long-term health o Concurrently, understand the archaeological and cultural resources as well as options for their preservation and restoration o Then, consider options for future uses: cultural, recreational, educational, economic, etc. Environmental Impact Requirements o A number of potential actions will likely trigger the need for both State (HEPA) and Federal (NEPA) Environmental Impact Statements (e.g., use of County land and funds, use of Federal funds, beach activity, Army Corps requirements, activity in a shoreline area and in proximity to historic sites, shoreline setback variance). o The primary purpose of environmental review is to assess potential environmental impacts (broadly defined) relative to alternative plans of action. 1

2 o Similarly, the purpose of a master planning process is to identify the relative benefits and costs of alternative plans of action relative to project goals and criteria. o Both processes require and are strengthened by public and stakeholder involvement. o Therefore, it may be most efficient to integrate the HEPA, NEPA, and site planning processes into a single, phased, participatory process. 11/8/13 CR Notes: Schedule does not include County permits (SMA) or permits that may be required by Army Corps of Engineers Confirm study of impacts of wall removal to be included in NEPA/HEPA technical studies Timeframe for #1 and #3 may be lengthened if extensive stakeholder process 2

3 Draft Sequencing 1. Scope Planning Process a. Prepare master scope of work b. Initiate NEPA/ HEPA process c. Gather and analyze scoping input NEPA Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare EIS HEPA EIS preparation notice (EISPN) & early consultation Public scoping & involvement National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C NEPA Regulations, 40 C.F.R ff HRS Ch. 343 HAR Kahalu u Beach Resort EA 2008 Gray s Beach EIS NEPA NOI HEPA EISPN Agency consultations Public meetings Written response to comment Cost Duration 7-10 mos $2,000 1 mo $5,000 3 mos $10, mos 3

4 2. Collect Baseline Data a. Conduct coastal studies HRS Ch. 205 & 205A Planning Department & Planning Commission Rules See below 1981 ACOE Beach Erosion Control Study 1992 Coastal Engineering Evaluation Shoreline Certification Identify coastal problems/ needs Rank alternative improvements Make coastal engineering recommendations Cost Duration Item 2 tasks concurrent (6 mos) $40,000 6 mos 4

5 b. Complete archaeological inventory (can be concurrent with Step 2.a.) HRS Ch. 6E HAR Chs Use past studies to summarize resources Conduct supplementary inventories as necessary Many studies & inventories previously done 1998 KIC Cultural Adv. Comm. Conceptual Plan for the Restoration of Kahalu u Comprehensive resource inventory SHPD-approved preservation, interpretation, and management plan Cost Duration $25, mos (3 mos for work + 3 for SHPD action) 1998 Kahalu u Beach Resort EA 2007 collection of mo olelo by Kepā Maly c. Conduct other necessary baseline studies Watershed hydrology, flora/ fauna inventories, traffic study d. Site Analysis Summarize constraints and opportunities 2009 Ala Kahakai NHT CMP Hydrological, biological, traffic, and other reports Report synthesizing outputs of 1 and 2: project scoping and baseline data collection $140,000 6 mos $15,000 2 mo 5

6 e. Confirm likely compliance requirements 3. Craft Detailed Master Plan for Coastal & Beach Park Infrastructure a. Bound planning in ecological, cultural, and regulatory context See preliminary list below Finalize list below Consider outputs of steps 1 & 2 Consider larger context, esp. KSBE/ KIC plans Confirmed list of anticipated regulatory compliance requirements Clear boundaries for the plan Cost Duration $2,000 1 mo $60,000 for steps 3.a. thru 3.d mos 3-6 mos for steps 3.a. thru 3.d. b. Confirm stakeholder vision c. Use baseline data and vision to establish goals, objectives, and criteria for assessing alternatives Engage stakeholders in process to confirm the vision for the park Engage stakeholders in participatory planning 1992 Kahalu u Beach Park Plan, Friends of Kahalu u Beach Park 1998 KIC Cultural Advisory Committee Conceptual Plan for the Restoration of Kahalu u by the Seashore 2005 County of Hawai i General Plan Confirmed vision Clear goals, objectives, and criteria 6

7 d. Assess alternatives and select preferred alternatives NEPA Code and Regulations HRS Ch. 343 & HAR Consider options, including those identified in the 1992, 1998, & 2008 plans Consider questions raised in 2008 Master Plan 2008 Kona Community Development Plan 2008 Kahalu u Beach Park Conceptual Master Plan KSBE/ KIC plans Rank alternative improvements Identify preferred mix of improvements Cost Duration e. Develop detailed implementation work plan Conduct benefitcost analysis Draft work plan Vet draft with key stakeholders Work plan for permitting, design, & construction, including steps, priorities, phasing, responsible parties, costs, funding sources, etc. $5,000 1 mo 7

8 f. Draft Preliminary Master Plan & Draft EIS Prepare Draft EIS NEPA Code and Regulations HRS Ch. 343 & HAR Prepare Preliminary Master Plan, including work plan & financing plan Preliminary Master Plan Draft EIS Cost Duration $135,000 3 mos 4. Solicit Stakeholder and Community Comment on Preliminary Master Plan 5. Prepare Draft Master Plan Public Review & Comment Prepare Final EIS NEPA Code and Regulations HRS Ch. 343 & HAR Prepare Draft EIS, including assessments of potential impacts: cultural, infrastructure, noise, air, flora/ fauna, traffic, etc. Incorporate comment to prepare Draft Master Plan and Final EIS Agency consultations Public meetings Written response to comment Draft Master Plan & Final EIS $10,000 2 mos $30,000 3 mos 8

9 6. Solicit Public Comment & Complete NEPA/ HEPA Process 7. Prepare Final Master Plan 8. Implement the Master Plan & Work Plan Public Comment NEPA Record of Decision/ HEPA determination of acceptability Solicit public comment Complete NEPA/ HEPA process Incorporate comment to prepare Final Master Plan Finalize and implement Financing Plan NEPA Record of Decision/ HEPA determination of acceptability Cost Duration $5,000 2 mos Final Master Plan $10,000 2 mo TBD Ongoing Implement work plan, including permitting, design, & construction ESTIMATED TOTAL $494,000 9

10 Draft Scope for Coastal Studies 1. Year-long study of oceanographic and shoreline conditions, possibly including: Site conditions: wind, waves, tide, coastal processes Topographic and bathymetric surveys Shoreline certification, as appropriate Geological/ foundations studies Oceanographic and beach processes evaluations Engineering designs Economic evaluations Environmental assessments Climate change impact assessment 2. Identification and description of coastal problems and needs, possibly including: Beach improvements to provide more recreational sandy beach and increased protection for backshore park facilities Coastal engineering recommendations to guide planning of backshore park improvements 3. Identification of alternative improvements for addressing coastal problems and needs, possibly including Offshore breakwater Revetment Groin Seawall rehabilitation CRM wall repair/ enlargement Beach replenishment & stabilization 4. Assessment and ranking of alternative improvements 5. Recommendations for improvements to be implemented 10

11 Possible Regulatory Compliance Requirements Statute Agency Possible Compliance Requirements National Environmental Protection NEPA compliance (EA/EIS) Act (NEPA): 42 USC 4321 Hawaii Environmental Impact Statements: HRS Ch. 343, HAR Ch Hawaii Office of Environmental Quality HEPA compliance (EA/EIS) Federal Principles and Guidelines for Water and Land Related Resources Implementation Studies Clean Water Act: 33 USC ACOE ACOE, EPA, Hawaii Department of Health Conformance with guidelines when conducting studies DOH Water Quality Certification Wastewater controls Department of the Army permit Rivers and Harbors Act: 33 USC ACOE 403 Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Western Pacific Regional Conservation and Management Fishery Management Act: 16 USC Council (WPRFMC) Marine Mammal Protection Act: 16 ACOE USC State Land Use: HRS 205 OCCL, DLNR Conservation District Use Permit (land is in the urban district, but any activity seaward of the shoreline may require a permit) Coastal Zone Management (CZM): 16 USC , HRS Ch. 205A, County Planning Commission Rule 9 Hawaii County Planning Department Office of Planning, DBEDT Certified shoreline and possible shoreline setback variance SMA permit Endangered Species Act: 16 USC National Historic Preservation Act: 16 USC 470; Hawaii Historic Preservation: HRS Ch. 6E, HAR Chs Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail County General Plan US Fish and Wildlife Service SHPD Hawaii County Planning Department CZM Federal Consistency Review Historic resource management plan Compliance with plan Likely uses are consistent with status as Natural Beauty site, major resort area, and Courses of Action (c): Improve facilities at Kahaluu Beach Park and (i): Protect the marine life at Kahaluu Bay. 11

12 Statute Agency Possible Compliance Requirements Kona Community Development Plan Hawaii County Planning Department Likely uses are consistent with Action PUB 7.2i: Develop a strategic management plan for upgrading facilities at Kahalu u Beach Park County Zoning: HCC Chapter 25 Hawaii County Planning Department Proposed uses are likely allowable in the Open zone County Floodplain Management: Hawaii County Department Compliance with building HCC Chapter 27 County Building Codes: HCC Chapters 3 (Signs), 5 (Building), 9 (Electricity), 17 (Plumbing) of Public Works Hawaii County Department of Public Works requirements in flood zones Compliance with building requirements 12