COM 1076.000 2018-2020 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Mori, Ashley From: Janice Glennie <palmtree7@hawaiiantel.net> :4ag=T Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2020 10:16 PM v= To: Planning Internet Mail U 3. �-0 �-'==-ry ' Subject: Leeward Planning Commission: Deny Kona airport amendments Re: Hawaii Leeward Planning Commission, Agenda item #3 Aloha commissioners: I'm testifying on behalf of the Surfrider Foundation's Kona Kai Ea chapter. Our mission is to protect and enjoy our oceans and waterways. Our concern with the proposed zoning code changes are the vast impacts they will have on our state's waters and other natural and cultural resources, especially if those changes include a hotel and conference center. As environmental attorney David Kimo Frankel wrote in his testimony to you and the planning director regarding this proposal: "The Kona coastline should remain free from urbanization to the maximum extent possible." In fact, that's what 90% of thousands of Kona Community Development Plan stakeholders said at years -long charettes and hearings that ,led to the creation of the KCDP which is County law. Keeping development mauka of the highway protects water quality and scenic vistas — points also resoundingly agreed upon by residents during each of the landmark development battles and decisions our community fought for and won over several decades — some within a stones' throw of the airport. Protected public lands like `O'oma — a conservation -zoned treasure whose protection was won after 20 years of community struggle— sit adjacent or less than a mile from airport. ' O' oma is now, thankfully, protected as a county park, but because of lack of management funding, its natural resources are threatened. This is also true of Kekaha Kai State Park, which is on the airport's north boundary. And this is true of many others. Yet, oddly, we're discussing the possibility of building a hotel in that area despite not knowing how big it might be and what impacts it will have. Why would we risk such precious resources when many hotels have occupancy as low as 10% and are only sometimes full during a brief seasonal window? Wouldn't it be better to focus on more immediate public needs and support existing accommodations built on resort -zoned lands instead of changing County code to accommodate hotels where they aren't allowed? There are huge costs associated with urbanizing the Kona coastline, many whose dollar values are hard to determine. Potable water is precious. From where will this project obtain it? Toxic runoff onto nearshore reefs that feed our people and economy and keep Hawaiian culture alive is also a threat. And wastewater treatment is the bogey man of West Hawaii. How will this extra development affect those critical resources — resources whose value is incalculable? Kona isn't like most " major" airports. We're no Denver or San Francisco. We're a dead end facility, and it's safe to say many people like it that way. Short intentional layovers don't happen here, and relatively few occur due to weather or other issues. This rare "need", as it's called, doesn't seem dire enough to throw millions of taxpayer dollars away to build and maintain when our financial resources have been ravaged by covid-19 and recent past volcanic eruptions. Frankly, we see this plan as a nose under the tent of coastal, hotel development. After tremendous sacrifice and hard-won success stopping so many huge development debacles, residents have a hard tim that more of the same aren't the focus of the powers -that -be when this is one of the first la i 1 A6 2 5 2020 ff13 5 4 0