\u201cWaterfalling Estate.\u201d<\/p>\n
That is the name that Scott Watson has given to a house he has built at Ninole, on the Hamakua Coast of the Big Island about 20 miles north of Hilo.<\/p>\n
Like most other houses with names, it is imposing. According to plans submitted to the Hawai`i County Planning Department, it includes:<\/p>\n
The plans also called for a helipad on the roof, but that was scratched out, with \u201comit\u201d written alongside it. Helipads are not something the Planning Department allows on single-family homes.<\/p>\n
On a clear day last July, however, not one but two helicopters left Hilo airport, flew up the coast to Ninole, and landed at Waterfalling Estate. One (operated by Blue Hawaiian) set down on a clearly marked helipad on the roof of the house. The other (owned by K&S Helicopters) landed on the driveway. And, as if to flaunt the violation in the Planning Department\u2019s face, the event has been memorialized in a seven-minute-long YouTube video.<\/p>\n
That may be one of the more flagrant violations associated with the development of the property owned by Watson and Laurie Fraser Robertson on a former mac nut orchard. It is not the only one.<\/p>\n
Instant Infractions<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n
Almost from the start, the county Planning Department was issuing notices of violation in connection with the Special Management Area Use Permit Assessment Application (SAA) Watson submitted in April 2008 for development of what was described as a \u201csod farm.\u201d A department inspector visiting the site in May noticed a \u201cnumber of violations on subject property including: grading of land greater than 1 acre in area, grading and digging within 40 foot of shoreline setback, construction of a paved driveway within the SMA, various cemented structures (unclear of proposed uses), land cuts with house and garage pads, utility trenches dug, no [Best Management Practices] implemented.\u201d<\/p>\n
That prompted then-Planning Director Christopher Yuen to issue a notice of violation in July, citing:<\/p>\n
Yuen noted that the Planning Department staff had issued a verbal stop-work order at the time of the inspection and that a written one had been issued the following day. To resolve the violation, Watson was required to correct the violations and pay a $1,500 fine, all of which were done by August 8. In the letter closing the file, Watson was warned by Yuen that future violations by Watson of Planning Department or Planning Commission rules \u201cwill be considered recurring and will be subject to an increased fine, up to a maximum of $100,000 per Special Management Area violation and $10,000 per Shoreline Setback violation. In addition, daily fines may be imposed.\u201d<\/p>\n
At the same time he paid the fine, Watson submitted a second SMA use permit assessment application, describing the nature of development\/activity as \u201ca turf farm with a single family residence.\u201d Total value was placed at $750,000. The objectives of the proposed project were said to be \u201cto raise sod and live on the farm.\u201d<\/p>\n
A Belated Permit<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n
It was not until October 2008 that Watson and Robertson received the SAA permit for their house, a tennis court, and \u201csod farm.\u201d With the estimated value of construction not crossing the threshold for a major SMA permit, Yuen approved the application \u2013 excluding, however, what was labeled on plans as a \u201cwest wing\u201d attached to the garage, which included a bedroom, \u201clunch room\u201d with kitchen, a game room, and office. This addition, wrote Yuen, \u201cfor all intents and purposes, reflects the construction of a second single family dwelling on the subject property, which is not permitted unless approval for an additional farm dwelling is first issued by this office.\u201d It could not be approved as a guest house, since it exceeds the zoning code limit of 500 square feet, he noted. Nor could it be approved as a detached bedroom, \u201csince it includes much more than simply a bedroom addition and is situated more than 50 feet from the main living area of the farm dwelling.\u201d<\/p>\n
Watson could apply for a second farm dwelling, but for this he would need to obtain an SMA Major use permit, Yuen noted, but \u201cwe do wish to explain to you that we have some reservations about any such attempt to apply for an additional farm dwelling since we simply can\u2019t justify such an approval based on the limited amount of agricultural activity involved in the turf farm that you proposed on this property.\u201d<\/p>\n
Watson received a building permit for construction of the main \u201cfarm dwelling\u201d in December of 2008. The value of the construction he placed at $1.5 million.<\/p>\n
An As-Built Pool<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n
Nothing further appears in Planning Department files until October 2011, when Watson submitted an after-the-fact application for an SAA permit for a \u201cproposed 10,000 square foot swimming pool.\u201d<\/p>\n
Although construction of the pool without a permit almost certainly involved violations of Planning Department rules, Watson\u2019s application was approved with no questions asked by current Planning Department director Bobby Jean Leithead-Todd.<\/p>\n
In YouTube videos too numerous to count Watson may be seen showing off the pool, which he says is probably the largest residential pool ever built. It holds 240,000 gallons, he says, and is 16 feet deep at its deepest point. A 30-foot water slide runs from the second floor level of his house down to the pool, which also sports two Jacuzzis, gas jets that light up the infinity edge, and three racing platforms. Along one side of the pool is what Watson says is a 15-car parking area.<\/p>\n
The building permit for the pool, which Watson finally received in March of this year, indicates that the cost of the project was $692,000 \u2013 more than twice the $300,000 figure cited in his SAA application to the Planning Department.<\/p>\n
Conservation District Issues<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n
One of the earlier documents in Planning Department files relating to this property is a boundary determination issued in 1999 by the state Land Use Commission. According to the map recording that determination, roughly a third of Watson and Robertson\u2019s property lies in the state Conservation District, which is tightly regulated by the state Department of Land and Natural Resources.<\/p>\n
The owners were reminded of this in Yuen\u2019s first letter to them, the Notice of Violation of July 2008. It was brought to their attention again in 2012, when the Planning Department responded to a question about the deferral of action on a subdivision request for the same property. \u201cThis application proposes to subdivide the property in the state Land Use Conservation District,\u201d wrote staffer Jonathan Holmes. \u201cThe subdividers will need to coordinate with the Department of Land and Natural Resources\u2019 Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands to ascertain the possible need to obtain a Conservation District Use Permit.\u201d<\/p>\n
A site map Watson submitted to the county showing the improvements suggests that much of the pool, a long stretch of a concrete drive, all of one constructed pond and part of another lie within the Conservation District. Further, the tree-cutting and grading that were apparently carried out in the Conservation District, at the makai end of the property, would also constitute Conservation District violations.<\/p>\n
Environment Hawai`i<\/i> asked Sam Lemmo, administrator of the DLNR\u2019s Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands, whether he had received any application for a CDUP. He said he had not. He did receive a complaint about possible Conservation District violations on the site in 2009, he said, but did not follow up because his reading of the map at that time suggested the department might not have jurisdiction.<\/p>\n
However, in a recent email to EH<\/i>, Lemmo indicated that his office had not closed the case. \u201cWe are looking at it,\u201d he wrote.<\/p>\n
Patricia Tummons<\/b><\/p>\n
Volume 23, Number 6 — December 2012<\/p>\n
environment hawaii scott watson ninole waterfalling estate hawaii county planning department helipad<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
“Waterfalling Estate.” That is the name that Scott Watson has given to a house he has built at Ninole, on the Hamakua Coast of the Big Island about 20 miles north of Hilo. Like most other houses with names, it … Continued<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[45],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-469","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-december-2012"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/469","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=469"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/469\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=469"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=469"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=469"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}