Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sma Exemptions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission concurs with Planning Department: Four Seasons awning replacement exempt from SMA permit
Summary
Pulama Lānaʻi requested and the Commission recommended concurrence with a Planning Department determination that proposed awning and non‑structural restaurant exterior work at the Four Seasons Lānaʻi Resort qualifies for a Special Management Area exemption under HRS 205A (categories F and O). The motion passed unanimously.
Get email alerts on the Sma Exemptions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pulama Lānaʻi requested a Special Management Area (SMA) exemption for non‑structural renovations at the Four Seasons Lānaʻi Resort restaurant, including removal of an existing retractable awning and installation of a new electrical retractable awning, vertical weather screens, wood cladding on support posts and associated lighting and sprinkler adjustments. Planner Robin Liles told commissioners the parcel sits within the SMA but is not adjacent to the shoreline and lies outside the projected Erosion Hazard Line for a 3.2‑foot sea‑level‑rise scenario. Liles explained the work falls under HRS Chapter 205A exemption categories (F: repair/maintenance/interior alterations and O: non‑structural improvements to existing commercial structures).
Applicant Dr. Keiki‑Pua Dancil told the Commission the submission included photos and that Pulama coordinates construction schedules with Four Seasons management to minimize guest impacts. Commissioner Erin Atacador asked whether the work would occur overnight; Dancil replied it would not and would be performed during standard construction hours. The Commission then voted to recommend concurrence with the Department’s SMA exemption determination. Commissioner Negus Manna moved the recommendation; Michelle Fujie‑Kaauamo seconded. The motion carried unanimously. "We will authorize the Planning Director to proceed with the issuance of an SMA exemption," the staff recommendation summarized in the meeting record.
Why it matters: SMA determinations limit review requirements for shoreline‑adjacent or coastal projects and protect coastal resources. The Commission’s concurrence means the project proceeds under an exemption path rather than through an SMA minor or major permit review, but the transcript records operational clarifications (timing, coordination with resort management) and application timeline (application Feb. 22; April hearing cancellation; May hearing placement).
