Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Commission defers Turtle Bay stream‑channel permit after questions on cultural review and ownership changes
Loading...
Summary
The state Commission on Water Resource Management deferred a resubmitted Stream Channel Alteration Permit (SCAP‑6438.3) for a bridge/culvert at Turtle Bay after commissioners asked the new owner for a fuller presentation on cultural consultation, EIS applicability and hydraulic analyses. Staff had recommended approval with conditions; the commission voted to defer pending a consolidated presentation by the applicant.
Chair Dawn Chang opened discussion on item B1, a resubmittal of Stream Channel Alteration Permit SCAP‑6438.3 originally issued in May 2022, and staff presented a recommendation for approval with conditions.
Dean Ueno of the commission’s Stream Protection and Management Branch told commissioners the package includes exhibits cited in the May 2022 submittal, Division of Aquatic Resources and US Fish and Wildlife Service comments, a hydraulic and scour analysis (River Focus), floor/funnel and water‑quality surveys (ACOS), State Historic Preservation Division comments, and an expanded review of traditional customary practices and the cultural impact assessment (CIA) incorporated in the FEIS. Staff said the applicant had supplied evidence that plans previously under DPP review are now approved and that conditions identified in earlier reviews have been addressed in the resubmittal.
Commissioners repeatedly pressed the applicant and consultants to identify precisely which traditional and customary resources and activities would be affected, and to show where those resources are documented in the CIA/FEIS. Staff and the consultant cited the CIA/FSEIS (2012/2013) and interview findings (reporting 40 flora/fauna and 32 marine species identified in interviews) and characterized the Oʻio/stream reach as a tidally influenced, brackish estuarine environment.
Darren Flanagan, representing the applicant, and consultant Harley Myers (Wilson Okamoto) said the project team has continued outreach with lineal descendants, archaeologists and community groups despite the hotel’s cultural advisory committee having been disbanded. Engineering consultants (River Focus, Sea Engineering) described hydraulic and flood analyses, including scenarios that combined the 100‑year flood with high tides and sea‑level rise; they told the commission modeling showed minimal upstream hydraulic impact under even extreme downstream conditions.
Commissioners and members of the public pressed three recurring points: (1) whether the 2013 final supplemental environmental impact statement remains applicable to the new ownership and whether design/density have changed; (2) whether the applicant’s coordination with cultural stakeholders is demonstrably ongoing and documented; and (3) requests for updated sea‑level rise/flood modeling tied directly to the permit footprint. Staff acknowledged that the submittal presented an excerpted package and agreed to bring fuller documentation when requested.
After discussion, a motion to defer consideration of SCAP‑6438.3 until the applicant provides a consolidated slide presentation addressing the commission’s questions was moved, seconded and carried by voice vote. The chair announced the motion passed (transcript indicates a stated tally of six commissioners in favor; the record includes confusion over the exact tally that staff and commissioners attempted to reconcile immediately afterward). The commission asked the applicant to return with a single, comprehensive presentation addressing changes since the original FSEIS, the specific cultural resources at issue, updated hydraulic/flood analyses and a clear timeline for community engagement.
