Sharing public comment (below) of Dr. Jonathan Scheuer to DPP regarding the inadequacy of Manoa Banyan Court Draft EA under state law.
-------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Comment letter on Mānoa Banyan Court Affordable Elderly Rental Housing--Draft EA (AFNSI) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2023 15:30:24 -1000 From: Jonathan Scheuer <[email protected]> To: [email protected] CC: [email protected], [email protected] Aloha, My comment on the proposed project and the adequacy of the Environmental Assessment under HRS 343 are based on serving three years on the O`ahu Island Burial Council (OIBC), including during the controversies which ensued when Kawaiaha`o Church disinterred hundreds of human remains for a building project which they assumed was outside the boundaries of their historic cemetery. It is also informed by serving for eight years on the state Land Use Commission, four as Chair, where we had to regularly rule on the adequacy of environmental review documents. No matter how laudable the goal of any project may be, it is necessary for it to comply with state environmental review law. The conclusion of the document that there will not be any Significant Impact is unsupportable based on information in the document itself. On Page 98 the EA notes that "The cemetery lands had been used for burials prior to the society’s purchase of the land since the earliest known Chinese grave in Hawaii dates to 1835 in the area of the Mānoa Chinese Cemetery". This indicates there are burials without headstones or other markers and no records to indicate the geographical location of such burials. Yet the document also indicates that an AIS - an Archaeological Inventory Survey - may only be done "if needed" (p. 158:): "The Proposed Action supports the objectives and policies for protecting scenic, natural, and historic beauty of the Project Site and surrounding area. The proposed design is intended to maximize the preservation of site resources, especially trees and natural features. No historic properties or archaeological resources have been identified on-site, however an Archaeological Impact Survey (AIS} will be implemented for all ground disturbing activities if needed. The timing and nature of the AIS will be based on consultation with SHPD." (error in name of AIS and bracket in original). The fact that the proposed project is on a cemetery property is sufficient basis to require an AIS be completed prior to determination of significance. The potential disturbance of hundreds of remains - if Kawaiaha`o is a precedent - would be clearly seen as significant. I will also add that the statement on page 126 that burials are unlikely to be found is unsupportable based on experience. the EA states that "Because the Project Site was previously used for small farms and lo’i fields, (see photos in Figs. 3-2 and 3-3) and has been unused for decades, it is unlikely that human burials are to be found." Burials have been found across the Kona moku of O`ahu in histioric fishpond walls below buildings, below sidewalks, below roads, and below agricultural fields. There is no supportable basis for the statement, and significant practical experience that the statement is incorrect. Based on the above I believe that the accepting agency must determine that the EA is inadequate under state law. A new EA or EIS should be prepared, only after completion of an AIS in consultation with the OIBC. Sincerly, Jonathan Likeke Scheuer, Ph.D. -- Jonathan Likeke Scheuer, Ph.D. Kahālāwai Consulting LLC
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Stay Informed! Updates to be posted here.Archives
March 2023
Categories |