Photo: David Brotchie HA‘IK Ū STAIRS DRAFT EIS JULY 2019
EIS SCHEDULE March 2019 June 2019 July 2019 Dec. 2019 DEIS Review Publish DEIS Prepare FEIS Publish FEIS • DPP & BWS • June 23, 2019 • Manage DEIS • Target Dec. 2019 Review public comments (estimated) • NB Presentations • HRS 6-E letter of (July) • Targeted outreach • 60-day legal concurrence challenge period • 45-day comment received from period ends Aug 7 SHPD 2 6/18/19
Chapter 1: Chapter 2: Summary Purpose and Need Chapter 4: Chapter 3: Environmental Project Settings and Description Impacts Chapter 5: Chapter 6: DRAFT EIS Plans and Policies Alternatives Chapter 7: Chapter 8: Parties Consulted References Vol III & IV: Public Vol II: Appendices Comment and Response Letters 3
Flora/Fauna Archaeology (Hui K ū Maoli (Keala Pono) Ola) Historic Cultural Architecture (Keala Pono) (Chapman) CONSULTANT STUDIES Economic Noise (Y. (Plasch Econ Ebisu) Pacific) Structural (Nakoa) 4
BWS OBJECTIVE TO ELIMINATE LIABILITY It is not in BWS’ core mission to manage a recreational facility, yet they carry liability for Ha‘ik ū Stairs. BWS can eliminate its organization’s liability for Ha‘ik ū Stairs by: 1) Completely removing Ha‘ik ū Stairs 2) Conveying the property and Ha‘ik ū Stairs structure to another public agency or private interest 5
PROPOSED ACTION & ALTERNATIVES PROPOSED ACTION IS ALTERNATIVE OPTION REMOVE HA‘IK Ū STAIRS TO KEEP STAIRS • The EIS Chapter 3, Project • EIS provides equal Description describes consideration of an Alternative removal of Ha‘ik ū Stairs. that retains the stairs. • Extraction of all modules • The Conveyance Alternative is (front and back stairs). thoroughly described and Platforms and structures evaluated in EIS Chapter 6, to remain in place. Alternatives. • EIS Chapter 4, Environmental Impacts evaluates the action of removal. 6
EIS ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED • BWS maintains ownership. No-Action • No additional repairs, condition would degrade. • Ongoing liability exposure. Costs detract from BWS core mission. Partial • Remove approx. 1,000 feet of stairs up to first landing platform. • Cost-effective solution to reduce liability to BWS from Ha‘ik ū . Removal • Ongoing liability - Hikers could still trespass in from Moanalua Valley. • Convey Ha‘ik ū Stairs and underlying land to public/private entity. Conveyance • Requires legal access route and managed access plan. • Allows BWS to divest liability and focus on their core mission. 7
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT DISMISSED DISMISSED BWS would • BWS would own Ha‘ik ū Stairs and Third Party own land, have underlying parcel. ongoing liability, Operator • A qualified third-party entity would and divert operate and manage the stairs. resources from core mission. DISMISSED • BWS would subdivide the stairs corridor Added cost & from larger TMK and transfer to a qualified delay. Whole Subdivision public entity, or sell to a private buyer. parcel transfer • A qualified third-party entity would more efficient. operate and manage Ha‘ik ū Stairs. No BWS plans for rest of land. 8
HRS 6-E Significant Historic Property HISTORIC PRESERVATION Effect with Mitigation Preservation or Removal/ Documentation 9
ECONOMIC AND FISCAL IMPACTS Projected impacts to City and State over No- a 21-year Analysis Period • BWS cost $4 million Action NO-ACTION • No construction costs • Security costs continue Proposed • BWS cost $942,000 PROPOSED ACTION Action • Cost of full stair removal PARTIAL REMOVAL • Cost of partial stair removal Partial • BWS cost $190,000 Removal CONVEYANCE • Expenditure by agency is $800,000 to improve access route. Cost to be reimbursed by operator. Convey- • Operator pays for stair restoration. • Income $1.2 million • Hiking operation revenues offset City ance costs. • Tax revenues to State. 10
HA‘IK Ū STAIRS PARCEL IS LAND LOCKED Ha‘ikū Stairs CONVEYANCE ALTERNATIVE: 6 POTENTIAL ACCESS ROUTES 11 Moanalua
Loli‘i Moanalua Street Valley WCC CONVEYANCE ALTERNATIVE: Proximity to Residences POTENTIAL Landowner Input Traffic and ACCESS Public Facilities Parking ROUTES Safety Concerns Ha‘ik ū K ū neki Po‘okela Road Street Street 12
CONVEYANCE ALTERNATIVE: 1) HA‘IK Ū ROAD 2) K Ū NEKI STREET CANDIDATE POTENTIAL 3) PO‘OKELA ACCESS ROUTES STREET 13
RANKING CRITERIA Landowner discussions ACCESS ROUTE Impacts to -Traffic and parking RANKING community -Proximity to residences Availability of public facilities Safe, feasible path to stairs 14
HIGHEST RANKED ACCESS ROUTE: PO‘OKELA STREET 15
EIS PATHWAY EIS Preparation Notice (April 2017) • After publication of the EISPN, the project team met with over 30 agencies, elected officials, and community groups. Draft EIS (June 2019) • K ā ne‘ohe Neighborhood Board • Landowners (DOT, DHHL, DLNR) • State and City Agencies (DPR, DES, Corporation Counsel, OCCL) • Community Groups • Elected officials (Mayor, CM Anderson, Council Chair, State Senators, State House Reps) Final EIS (December 2019 est.) • Follow up with community groups, agencies, elected officials, and stakeholders are planned after publication of the FEIS. • EIS Accepting Authority, Department of Planning and Permitting (DPP) Recommendations to BWS Board (Early 2020) 16
COMMENT PERIOD June 23, 2019 - August 7, 2019 SUBMIT A COMMENT https://hbws.me/haiku 17
CONTACTS Jeff Overton Kathleen Pahinui Principal Public Information Officer 111 S. King Street, Suite 170 630 South Beretania Street Honolulu, HI 96813 Honolulu, Hawai ʻ i 96843 (808) 523-5866 (808) 748-5319 haikustairs@g70.design haikustairseis@hbws.org 18
THANK YOU 19
PREFERRED POTENTIAL ACCESS ROUTE ( PO‘OKELA STREET) 20
PREFERRED POTENTIAL ACCESS ROUTE ( PO‘OKELA STREET) CONCEPT NOT TO SCALE 21
PREFERRED POTENTIAL ACCESS ROUTE ( PO‘OKELA STREET) 22
PREFERRED POTENTIAL ACCESS ROUTE ( PO‘OKELA STREET) 23
Recommend
More recommend
