The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCOM 1300.000 2006-2008Harry Kim Mayor Dixie Kaetsu Managing Director Barbara Kossow Deputy Managing Director County of Hawaii 25 Aupuni Street, Room 215 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720-4252 • (808) 9615211 • Fax (808) 9616553 KONA: 75-5706 Kuakini Highway, Suite 103 • Kailua-Kona, Hawaii 96740 (808) 329-5226 Fax (808) 326-5663 rv ca June 18, 2008 ~~ ~ c :~-~ - r - ~.• ~ ,_. _ Honorable Pete Hoffinann, Chairman - . - =x' and Members of the County Council County of Hawai `i '`~ ~- 333 Kilauea Avenue ~- Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Chairman Hoffinann and Members: Puna Community Development Plan As required by Chapter 4, Sec. 6-4.3(C), Hawaii County Charter, transmitted herewith for the County Council's consideration and action are the Planning Commission's letter and enclosures regarding the above-referenced matter. incerely, LHarry Kim (! Mayor Enclosures cc: Planning Department C ~~`II 3! 4~ (Note: The "Draft Puna Community Development Plan -March 2008" and the "Puna Community Development Plan Appendix Documents -March 2008" and corresponding compact disc are on file in the Office of the County Clerk." Gom-n Na ~ d ~ Ref. Ta Ref. Dc~#e • _ ~t ~N 19 ~$ County of Hawaii PLANNING COMMISSION Aupuni Center • 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Phone (808)961-8288 • Fax (808)961-8742 June 18, 2008 Pete Hoffinann, Chairman and Members of the County Council County of Hawaii 333 Kilauea Avenue, 2nd Floor Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Chairman Hoffmann and Council Members: Puna Community Development Plan Q *. ? ;~~ ~ t`~" ~ ~ F~-+ a-~_ t~ . ,,.. ~ ::: ~ ;, - - ~.._,, ~.. ~;_., -- ,..~ The Planning Commission conducted public hearings on May 6, 2008, May 22, 2008, and June 6, 2008, to review the draft Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) as submitted by the Puna Community Development Plan Steering Committee and its consultant, PlanPacific, Inc. At its meeting of June 6, 2008, the Commission voted to send a favorable recommendation of the Puna CDP to the County Council along with four proposed amendments by the Planning Director and three proposed amendments by the Commission. The Planning Director's proposed amendments are as follows: Section 2.3.3.d calls for a centralized sewage treatment plant and/or self- contained pumped septic systems for any development within a two (2) mile-wide corridor between the Wao Kele O Puna forest preserve and the ocean. This would impact the existing Department of Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL) Maku'u Farm Lots of approximately 868 acres containing 127 five-acre agricultural lots immediately makai of Highway 130, the proposed 640-acre DHHL Maku'u Residential subdivision planned for a total of about 758 lots mostly 20,000 square feet or less in size immediately mauka of Highway 130, the DHHL Maku~u Makai parcels consisting of approximately 500 acres primarily mauka of Beach Road and SE of Hawaiian Paradise Park, and the DHHL 100-acre Keonepoko Nui parcel makai of Hwy 130. This restriction would also impact the State's Keonepoko Farm Lots north of Kahakai Blvd. This proposal in the CDP would significantly increase the cost of building a home in these areas Hawaii County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer Pete Hoffinann, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 2 because the owner could not use a cesspool or a typical septic system, which has a holding tank and a leach field. The owner would need some type ofself-contained mini treatment plant. It is very unlikely that a centralized wastewater treatment system will be developed in this area, and this type of system is also very costly. The necessity of such requirements to protect drinking water is questionable. Current DOH rules do not allow new cesspools and septic systems within a 1000' radius of wells used for public drinking water. DWS has several wells, however, dating from before these DOH rules, which are surrounded by homes on cesspools, such as a well near Gilbert Carvalho Park in Hilo. The water in these wells is regularly tested and has not shown any microbial contamination. It is possible to create a similar aquifer protection area that would protect the source of water for the current DWS wells between the Ainaloa subdivision and Pahoa, and more wells that might be drilled in this general area, without causing problems for homebuilders on DHHL land. The DWS wells are located just mauka of Hwy. 130. Immediately mauka of these wells is a 5,127-acre State parcel that is part of the Puna Forest Reserve, and Wao Kele O Puna, owned by OHA. Under current plans, both would remain as natural areas. The Planning Director therefore recommends amending §2.3.3.d. to read as follows: By agency agreements and control of zoning and building permits, ensure that a corridor of the Puna watershed at least two miles wide ~~~ including the Wao Kele O Puna forest area and *-~~~~-~e--z~- "*~'~^~ct State lands mauka of Highway 130 between the Ainaloa subdivision and Pahoa is protected from uses that might contaminate groundwater. P~~--~~-t-~~-'~^~' ''' ^^'~~~"'^ vvv~u aa 1 e~7TSC~8 ~ r-re'~~hx~~t~'~'t1"~~-'~'-L acs ai' .-. ~ ~F ~T 7 7 .7.J ~- 7 ae~=e~e~'~'czr~vri }iiri~ ii'i~ ' •a,• ~7 ,.., ~,,~7 yr .~~. L~1Tt~rC~eC1--Te~~e w~.gt~~~~rC.YLTT~. 2. Section 2.1.3.d should be deleted as an action item since review of grading and grubbing permit applications by the State Historic Preservation Division is already required and additional review by the recently Pete Hoffinann, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 3 approved County of Hawaii Cultural Resource Commission will result in excessive delays in granting grading and grubbing permit approvals. This is likely to be viewed as over-regulation by a significant number of people resulting in a decline in voluntary compliance. 3. There is a significant potential problem in Puna because of large acreages that are zoned in a way that can allow further subdivision. There are, for example, more than 6,000 acres within large parcels of more than 50 acres that are currently zoned A-la. Potentially, these A-la zoned areas could result in 6,000 more lots being created in a region that will face severe challenges with the build-out of the existing lots. This is an issue that should be addressed by a comprehensive reduction in the potential zoned density. This means afollow-up rezoning action: the proposal in the CDP would not do the rezoning by itself. However, the proposal in the CDP would be too restrictive on property owners. For example, the owner of a 49-acre property would be limited to creating one additional lot and the owner of a parcel of less than five acres could not subdivide at all. This would make it impossible in many cases for subdivisions to allow conveyances to family members, which maybe the hope and expectation of many property owners. The Planning Director recommends amending §3.2.3.b, which allows small-scale subdivisions and is more favorable to the owners of smaller properties as follows: Downzone all Agricultural (A) zoned parcels in the State Agricultural District in Puna to a zoning that would allow subdivision to no more than nine additional lots per lot of record. Existing lots greater than 100 acres in size shall be down-zoned to A-10a. This does not apply to property already zoned to allow fewer lots. a~ ~~"~'~'~: --a F~-~.-e€--~ E--a-~~-ez --~-~Te~e~~-t- yes-s *~a~ ~-z ~v ~y=_ ~F n T 7 C -. i ~ ~H-~-~ u~-S~r~-~3-~-c~crc-rc~ -~~-e- -~--a-cr~.ror ~rrore ~ ~'e~I.TS~n'aTl~ --Gi'e-~~to i ~+ ~.~. . Pete Hoffmann, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 4 4. Correction to first sentence in the second paragraph on page 5-11: The second, and smaller, portion of the village center would bed at a presently undeveloped site on the other side of Highway 11 between the i~~Royal Hawaiian Estates and Ohia Estates subdivisions. The Planning Commission's proposed amendments are as follows: 1. That the Working Group papers and recommendations be included as an appendix for the purposes of information, establishing intent, and guidance on implementation for future decision making. 2. That the "Regional Town Center" and "Village Center" maps be corrected to show current zoning and recommended zoning changes. 3. That a "Native Hawaiian Implementation Committee" be formed, which may include representation from the Kanaka Council as well as from other groups. The Planning Director believes that Planning Commission proposed amendment no. 1 is already covered by the last paragraph on p. 5-17: "When implementing the actions listed in the following table, the Working Group and Working Paper report that addresses the relevant topic(s) shall be considered as a reference to provide greater specificity on the location, description, and intention of the proposed action." On Planning Commission proposed amendment no. 2, the Planning Director believes this has merit and the consultant and Planning Department staff will be working on these changes. On Planning Commission proposed amendment no. 3, the Planning Director can formulate an action item and suggest a location for it in the Plan if the Council would like to include this amendment. Pete Hoffinann, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 5 Enclosed for your favorable consideration is the draft bill adopting the Puna CDP along with the Planning Department's Background and Recommendation Report. We have also included a copy of the Puna CDP and supplemental working documents, and nine corresponding compact discs. For your information, transcripts of the hearings will be forthcoming shortly. Sincerely, Rodney Watanabe, Chairman Planning Commission cc: Planning Department-Kona Lincoln Ashida, Esq. P:bvpwin60\CDP\PUNA CDPIPC\BR&RL-C PCDP.doc COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT BACKGROUND AND REC011~NDATION INITIATOR: PLANNING .DIRECTOR PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN fPCDP) BACKGROUND The current General Plan for the County of Hawaii, adopted by the County Council in February 2005 and as amended on December 7, 2006, sets forth broad goals, objectives and policies. According to Chapter 15, implementation requires the translation of these broad statements to specific actions, a systematic evaluation ofprogress, and active community participation. The Community Development Planning program is intended to provide a forum for community input on growth management and the coordination of the delivery of government services to the community. As such, drafting and adopting a development plan is the first phase in an ongoing process intended to create a collaborative environment where community and government share responsibility for creating, implementing and updating community specific plans. A Community Development Plan should direct physical development and public improvements within a specific area. The Community Development Plan may contain detailed land use and zoning guide maps, plans for roadways, drainage, parks, and other infrastructure and public facilities, architectural design guidelines, planning for watersheds and other natural features, and any other matters relating to the planning area. The Puna CDP began with the selection of P1anPacific, Inc. as the primary planning consultant on June 14, 2005. The contract between the County of Hawaii and PlanPacific called for a Community Development Plan that is true to the Puna community by: • reflecting and embracing existing community values, • identifying and assessing key issues and concerns, • articulating a clear direction or vision for the future of Puna, and • providing an implementation process for achieving that vision. -~- In early 2006 the Planning Department began accepting applications from Puna residents for appointment to the Puna CDP Steering Committee and on June 6, 2006 the County Council confirmed the 11 citizens appointed by Mayor Kim to the Steering Committee. The Planning Department, in collaboration with the Department of Research and Development, recognized that broad-based public participation in the planning process is critical to the development of a plan that could be supported by a sufficient number of residents to ensure implementation of Plan. During the spring and early summer of 200b, over 130 small group meetings, engaging 1,062 residents and producing 3,394 individual comments and observations, were held throughout the Puna district. These meetings were held in people's homes, at community centers, neighborhood gathering places and other local venues. Trained volunteer facilitators invited participants to give their mana'o on how to make Puna's future the best it can be. Besides the 130 small group meetings and the several district-wide and local public meetings and work shops, citizens could weigh in on the Plan's development through written and oral public testimony at all Steering Committee meetings, anopen-subscription email listserv network, participation in Working Group meetings, and email and written comments and suggestions submitted to the Planning Department and planning consultant. The public could also keep abreast of the latest developments in the PCDP process by visiting the Hawaii County Resource Center's hcrc.info web site. The first district wide public workshop was held on July 22, 2006 at Kamehameha Schools' Keaau campus. Over the course of the nextl8 months several additional district-wide and local public meetings and work shops were held throughout Puna to form citizen working groups and to further solicit public comment and suggestions on primary issues and concerns. Working Groups made up of citizen volunteers were authorized by the Steering Committee and formed in late September and early October 2006. The Working Groups, although self-regulated, were tasked with generating reports on ten major topics that generally encompassed the thirteen elements of the General Plan. Their reports, which were submitted to the Steering Committee and planning consultant in February 2007, provided valuable local insight for the innovative and practical solutions in the PCDP that address the issues and concerns expressed by Puna residents. -2- Between July 2006 and March 2008 the Steering Committee met on more than 30 occasions taking public input, reviewing and commenting on the Working Group Reports and consultant recommendations, and refining the f nal content of the Draft Puna CDP, which they approved on March 6, 2008 by a unanimous vote of the Members present. The PCDP is organized into three overarching themes that correspond to the three top issues that face the Puna district, as identified in the public involvement process. The three themes include: 1. Malama I Ka 'Aina establishes how the contextual natural, historic and cultural features of Puna should be preserved; and respected. The goals, objectives and implementing actions under this theme address cultural and historic sites and districts; forest lands and unique geological features; scenic resources; and drainage, aquifers and coastal water quality. Significant implementing actions proposed under this theme include: • Creating Special Design Districts for Volcano Village, Pahoa Town, Kea'au Town and the Mountain View-to-Kurtistown area with detailed design standards that define their unique sense of place. • Enact a Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone (BRBZ) for the greater Volcano area that includes specific standards and supporting measures to ensure that perpetual connections between intact native forests in Volcanoes National Park and the nearby State forest preserves and natural area preserves are maintained and to abate the destruction of native forest and spread of invasive species. • Amending the grubbing and grading ordinance and/or the zoning code as necessary to protect native species and the geological and historic :features outside the BRBZ. • Establishing an Office of County Ecologist within the Planning Department to administer the new grubbing and grading and/or zoning code provisions and foster partnerships to provide public education and technical support for forest conservation. • The development and adoption of special zoning and development regulations for -3- the greater Kapoho area to take into account the problems associated with ongoing and catastrophic subsidence and property loss, pressure to develop lots for residential and commercial use, and increasing demand for access to the shoreline area for recreational use. 2. Growth Management addresses how the future pattern of human settlement and land use should be shaped to respect the natural, historical and cultural context and support the desired quality of life for Puna's residents. The goals, objectives and implementing actions under this theme address the land use pattern, agricultural and economic development, public service, social services anal housing, parks and recreation and renewable energy and energy efficiency. Significant implementing actions proposed under this theme include: • County support for land use entitlements and land assembly to facilitate village center formation and voluntary Land pooling projects by creating a "floating zone" in the County zoning code and initiating Special Permit or SLU district boundary amendments as needed. • Establishing general classifications of village centers (Regional Town Centers, Community Village Centers and Neighborhood Village Centers) that coincide with the needs and characteristics of specific locations. • Facilitating land use entitlements and other tools for the development of existing and fuhire village/town centers and special design districts by: '' - Approving commercial zoning or use permits for existing commercial uses in designated village/town centers that do not presently have appropriate entitlements; - Denying zone changes .for commercial or light industrial uses on sites that are not within designated village/town centers; and - Providing loan guarantees or making grants to community associations or partnerships for the development of necessary infrastructure for the village/town centers • Prohibit variances that allow subdivisions that rely on water catchment or roads -4- that do not meet subdivision road standards to a maximum of six lots, unless the subdivision results in lots averaging at least twenty acres in size, and averaging at least four times the minimum lot size allowed by zoning, up to an absolute limit of twenty lots. • Downzone all Puna Agricultural (A) zoned parcels in the SLU Agricultural district according to a specific schedule that would significantly reduce the potential number of new lots. • Develop acentrally-located, 24-hour, fiill-service medical facility, with trauma care, in Puna. • Develop permanent fire stations with emergency paramedical services at Hawaiian Beaches/Shores, Hawaiian Paradise Park, lower Volcano, and Mountain View. • Create, improve and expand Coastal Activity Areas, Community Parks, Linear Parks and Preserves at listed locations throughout Puna. 3. Transportation focuses on sustainable approaches to transportation to support the goals of the Malama I Ka 'Aina and Growth Management themes. The goals, objectives and implementing actions under this theme address mass transit and alternative travel modes, travel demand management and roadway connectivity and safety. Significant implementing actions proposed under this theme include: • More active promotion of van pool and ride-sharing alternatives with major employers and institutions such as UH Hilo and HCC. • Facilitation of telecommuting by developing a wireless communications network ~ that enables most Puna residents to gain free access to the Internet. • Prepare aCounty-wide Transit Master Plan to provide an overall framework for transit improvements while .incorporating user input from each district. • Provide park and ride lots at key regional site to promote commuter ridership on Hele-On. • Before 2012, plan and design the Puna Makai Alternate Road (PMAR) through an environmental impact statement. -5- • .Before 2017, construct atwo-lane PMAR that connects Kalali Drive in Hawaiian Paradise Park to either Highway 11 or Highway 130 in the vicinity of Kea'au. • Before 2012, DOT to make interim intersection improvements on Highways 11 and 130. • Construct the Highway 130 Shoulder Lane conversion project as a reversible lane to accommodate AM and PM peak periods. The Puna CDP includes an liplementation Table Iisting 107 primary actions and numerous sub-actions approved by the Steering Committee to achieve the stated goals and objectives in the CDP. The Implementation Table identifes lead and supporting implementation entities, a timetable for completing or initiating each action and, where applicable or available, estimated costs for each action. Most of the actions called for in the CDP require further action to take legal effect. All actions that call for further ordinances, such as the establishment of a BRBZ, revisions to the grading and grubbing ordinances, or future downzoning, for example, are in this category. RECOMMENDATION For the reasons cited above, as required by Chapter 1 S of the General Plan for the County of Hawaii, the Planning Director recommends that the Planning Commission send a favorable recommendation to the Hawaii County Council for adoption by ordinance for the Puna Community Development Plans. The accompanying draft bill is provided for your favorable consideration. However, the Planning Director recommends several changes to the Plan, which the Planning Director requests that the Planning Commission send on to the Council as recommended amendments, which are explained in the following paragraphs: 1. Section 2.3.3.d calls for a centralized sewage treatment plant and/or self contained pumped septic systems for any development within a two (2) mile-wide corridor between the Wao Kele O Puna forest preserve and the ocean. This would impact the existing Department of Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL) Maku'u Farm Lots of approximately 868 acres containing 127 five-acre agricultural Lots immediately makai of Highway 130, the proposed 640-acre DHHL Maku'u Residential subdivision planned for a total of about -6- 7581ots mostly 20,000 square feet or less in size innmediately mauka of Highway 130, the DHHL Maku'u Makai parcels consisting of approximately 500 acres primarily mauka of Beach Road and SE of Hawaiian Paradise Park, amd the DHHL 100-acre Keonepoko Nui parcel makki of Hwy 130. This restriction would also impact the State's Keonepoko Farm Lots north of Kahakai Blvd. This proposal in the CDP would significantly increase the cost of building a home in these areas because the owner could not use a cesspool or a typical septic system, which has a holding tank and a leach Feld. The owner would need some type ofself-contained mini treatment plant. It is very unlikely that a centralized wastewater treatment system will be developed in this area, and this type of system is also very costly. The necessity of such requirements to protect drinking water is questionable. Current DOH rules do not allow new cesspools and septic systems within a 1000' radius of wells used for public drinking water. DWS has several wells, however, dating from before these DOH rules, which are surrounded by homes on cesspools, such as a well near Gilbert Carvalho Parkin Hilo. The water in these wells is regularly tested and has not Shawn any microbial contamination. It is possible to create a similar aquifer protection area that would protect the source of water for the current DWS wells be#ween the Ainaloa subdivision and Pahoa, and more wells that might be drilled in this general area, without causing problems for homebuilders on DHHL land. The DWS wells are located just mauka of Hwy. 130. Irrunediately mauka of these wells is a 5,127-acre State parcel that is part of the Puna Forest Reserve, and Wao Kele O Puna, owned by OHA. Under current plans, both would remain as nahiral areas. The Planning Director therefore recommends amending §2.3.3.d. to read as follows: By agency agreements and control of zoning and building permits, ensure that a corridor of the Puna watershed at Least two miles wade ~J}::cc~ including the Wao Ke.Ie O Puna forest area and~~e-Qe~ean ~e t-h~a~~re~a~ State Lands mauka of Highway 130 between the Ainaloa subdivision and ' Pahoa is protected from uses that might contaminate -7- groundwater. '_'T= ----='_=~ ~`-'== ,d'==~.~,.,-., ~__.~ ~__..~~..,,. see s~ ea}s;-ems e~~ge--t~~~~-,- ~.,.. ~.. ,. _ _, a ~, _ ^ , , _.._ a ~~7 Cam., ~., _7___ ~~~1.: ... i. 7..:.-. ~-.E~3~Y~~A.= ~ ~e~fiSFe'CLY~~r9~e.^7'i-T_~'Vf'.~"~'rtR e'e.-'~~'~e~ ~2'3Z--~dd~~e~,de~Re~e~re~xt---s,~r~~-t~}e--ee~~dor t'~=-,.,...t., -~ -- r~q~eel--ts ~ t~-~e-eer3-t~-.i-wed--e-ewage-~.~ea t~e~-ter ~dfe~-s~e3~ ee~ta~~-e~~t~ed-e-emote-s~~s-~e~rs-~s~~er-te 2. Section 2.1.3.d should be deleted as an action item since review of grading and grubbing permit applications by the State Historic Preservation Division is already required and additional review by the recently approved County of Hawaii Cultural Resource Commission will result in excessive delays in granting grading and grubbing permit approvals. This is likely to be viewed as over-regulation by a significant number of people resulting in a decline in voluntary compliance. 3 _ There is a significant potential problem in Puna because of large acreages that are zoned in a way that can allow further subdivision. There are, for example, more than 6,004 acres within large parcels ofmore than SO acres that are currently zoned A-1a. Potentially, these A-la zoned areas could result in 6,000 more lots being created in a region that will face severe challenges with the build-out of the existing lots. This is an issue that should be addressed by a comprehensive reduction in the potential zoned density. This mealis a follow-up rezoning action: the proposal in the CDP would not do the rezoning by itself However, the proposal in the CDP would be too restrictive on property owners. For example, the owner of a 49-acre property would be limited to creating one additional Iot and the owner of a parcel of less than five acres could not subdivide at all. This would make it impossible in many cases for subdivisions to allow conveyances to family members, which may be the hope and expectation of many property owners. The PIanning Director recommends amending §3.2.3.b, which allows small-scale subdivisions and is more favorable to the owners of smaller properties as follows: Downzone all Agr.i.cultural (A) zoned parcels .%n the State -8- Agricultural District in Puna to a zoning that would allow subdivision to no more than nine additional lots per lot of recoxd. Existing Lots greater than I00 acres in size sha11 be down-zoned to A-10a. This does not apply to property already zoned to allow fewer lots. ~^ F~"~•~•~: "-"aC7'C..~. ~-~~~e r~' e~}~.T~ ~~.Cea7'fTL":2'TR1rSTJ'D-CZ'C~l'C'.'9 G~~2i'- ~~s~ 5--ae~es e~r~te~e--b~--.1~es~a-~ar~-a~~-tea d~3gie~i--tha~~ 3~v~e~--a~3~s~L- --~~e~re-z~t~~--a-t~,~--~e~ --~v ca~ca~ '-~ricaxi-~-a-e-des--~c-~--5r'~- 4. Correction to first sentence in the second paragraph on page 5-11: The second, and smaller, portion of the village center would be at a presently undeveloped site on the othex side of Highway 11 between the #faeaRoyal Hawaiian Estates and Ohia Estates subdivisions. -9- i 1 0 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN p,~ : C- t Sod ~Q,,1131 g~ MARCH 2008 DRAFT PV NA ~OMMV N ITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN MARCH 2008 Puna Community Development Plan Steering Committee Jon A. Olson, Chair Greg Braun, Vice-Chair Eddie Alonzo Stephanie Bath Barbara Lively Martha Lockwood Kim D. Tavares Frederick R. Warshauer Darren AhChong (former member) JoAnne Backman (former member) Shirley Pedro (former member) County of Hawaii Planning Department Staff Christopher Yuen, Director Larry Brown Ron Whitmore Consultant to the Steering Committee (PlanPacific, Inc.) John P. Whalen, FAICP, Principal Christopher Pramoulmetar Kenji Salmoiraighi Cover: The flower of the `ohi`a lehua tree, which is found from mauka to makai in Puna, and is a symbol of resilience and adaptability. PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 PROLOGUE oLELO HOAKAKA What we have in common is far greater than what separates us. We need to become teachers of generosity through our compassionate deeds, actions, and example. We need to address globalization, environmental changes, widespread poverty, and rapid human population growth. Existing political and economic models need to be re-conceptualized, transformed, and balanced. A cosmic sense of purpose and belief, coupled with critical and creative thinking will help us see the possibilities of the future. It's a kakou thing - we are all connected. Hawaiians have been here for (centuries]. The Po'e Kahiko, the People of Old, mastered environmentalism and sustainability. In these times, if we look back to the wisdom and ways of our ancestors, we could better move forward. 'E kuleana kakou! It's everyone's responsibility! Luana )ones, Puna resident TABLE OF CONTENTS This page left intentionally blank. PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Page 1.1 THE SETTING ..........................................................................................................................1-1 1.2 THE PLANNING CHALLENGE .................................................................................................1-4 1.3 ORGANIZATION OF THE PLAN .............................................................................................1-6 CHAPTER 2 MALAMA I KA'AINA 2.1 HISTORIC, CULTURAL, AND SCENIC RESOURCES ...............................................................2-3 2.1.1 GOALS ....................................................................................................................2-4 2.1.2 OBJECTIVES ..............................................................................................................2-4 2.1.3 ACTIONS .................................................................................................................2-4 2.2 NATIVE FORESTS AND GEOLOGICAL FEATURES ..................................................................2-5 2.2.1 GOALS ..............................................................................................................................2-6 2.2.2 OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................................................2-6 2.2.3 ACTIONS ............................................................................................................................2-6 2.3 AQUIFERS, COASTAL WATERS AND STORMWATER .................................................................. 2-8 2.3.1 GOALS ...............................................................................................................................2-9 2.3.2 OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................................................2-9 2.3.3 ACTIONS ............................................................................................................................2-10 2.4 SHORELINE AREA ...................................................................................................................2-10 2.3.1 GOALS ...............................................................................................................................2-12 2.3.2 OBIECTIVES ........................................................................................................................2-12 2.3.3 ACTIONS ............................................................................................................................2-12 CHAPTER 3 MANAGING GROWTH 3.1 LAND USE PATTERN ...............................................................................................................3-3 3.1.1 GOALS ...............................................................................................................................3-3 3.1.2 OBIECTIVES ........................................................................................................................3-4 3.1.3 ACTIONS ............................................................................................................................3-5 3.2 AGRICULTURE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ................................................................3-7 3.2.1 GOALS ...............................................................................................................................3-8 3.2.2 OBIECTIVES ........................................................................................................................3-9 3.2.3 ACTIONS ............................................................................................................................3-9 3.3 SOCIAL SERVICES AND HOUSING ........................................................................................3-11 3.3.1 GOALS ...............................................................................................................................3-12 3.3.2 OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................................................3-12 3.3.3 ACTIONS ............................................................................................................................3-12 3.4 PUBLIC SAFETY AND SANITATION SERVICES ......................................................................3-14 1 ' TABLE OF CONTENTS 3.4.1 GOALS ..............................................................................................................................3-14 ' 3.4.2 OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................................................3-14 3.4.3 ACTIONS ..........................................................................................................................3-15 3.5 PARKS AND RECREATION .................................................................................................... 3-15 3.5.1 GOALS ............................................................................................................................. 3-16 3.5.2 OBJECTIVES ....................................................................................................................... 3-16 3.5.3 ACTIONS .......................................................................................................................... 3-17 3.6 ENERGY SUSTAINABILITY .................................................................................................... 3-19 3.6.1 GOALS ............................................................................................................................. 3-19 3.6.2 OBIECTIVES ....................................................................................................................... 3-20 3.6.3 ACTIONS .......................................................................................................................... 3-20 CHAPTER 4 TRANSPORTATION 4.1 TRAFFIC DEMAND MANAGEMENT ....................................................................................... 4-2 4.1.1 GOALS .............................................................................................................................. 4-2 4.1.2 OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................................................4-2 4.1.3 ACTIONS ..........................................................................................................................4-2 ' 4.2 MASS TRANSIT ...................................................................................................................... 4-3 4.2.1 GOALS .............................................................................................................................. 4-3 4.2.2 OBIECTIVES ....................................................................................................................... 4-3 ' 4.2.3 ACTIONS ..........................................................................................................................4-4 4.3 ROADWAY NETWORK ......................................................................................................... 4-4 4.3.1 GOALS ............................................................................................................................. 4-5 4.3.2 OBIECTIVES ....................................................................................................................... 4-6 4.3.3 ACTIONS ..........................................................................................................................4-6 4.4 HIGHWAYS ........................................................................................................................... 4.4.1 GOALS .............................................................................................................................4-7 4.4.2 OBIECTIVES ........................................................................................................................4-7 4.4.3 ACTIONS ..........................................................................................................................4-7 4.5 NON-MOTORIZED TRAVEL AND SCENIC BYWAYS ............................................................. 4-8 4.5.1 GOALS ............................................................................................................................. 4-9 4.5.2 OBJECTIVES ....................................................................................................................... 4-9 4.5.3 ACTIONS ..........................................................................................................................4-9 ' CHAPTER 5 IMPLEMENTATION 5.1 NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES PROTECTION ....................................................... 5-1 ' 5.1.1 BIOSPHERE RESERVE BUFFER ZONE (VOLCANO AREA) ............................................................ 5-1 5.1.2 REVISED GRADING AND GRUBBING CONTROLS (DISTRICT-WIDE) ............................................ 5-2 5.2 VILLAGE CENTER FORMATION ............................................................................................ 5-3 5.2.1 ZONING DESIGNATIONS .................................................................................................... 5-3 5.2.2 CRITERIA FOR PROPOSED LOCATIONS AND BOUNDARIES ....................................................... 5-4 5.2.3 USE AND DESIGN STANDARDS ............................................................................................ 5-5 ' 5.3 IMPLEMENTATION TABLE .................................................................................................... 5-17 ' ii n PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES FIGURE 1-1: GENERAL LAND COVER MAP .................................................................................... 1-2 FIGURE 1-2: GEOLOGIC RISK ZONES RELATIVE TO POPULATED AREAS ..................................... 1-4 FIGURE 2-1: NATURAL AREAS UNDER FEDERAL OR STATE PROTECTION .................................. 2-2 FIGURE 2-2: PROPOSED BIOSPHERE RESERVE BUFFER ZONE ...................................................... 2-7 FIGURE 2-3: SHORELINE SUBSIDENCE IN KAPOHO AREA ............................................................ 2-11 FIGURE 3-1: ALISH AND IAL LANDS IN PUNA .............................................................................. 3-2 FIGURE 3-2: PROPOSED TOWN AND VILLAGE CENTER LOCATIONS .......................................... 3-6 FIGURE 3-3: OVERVIEW OF PARKS AND NATURAL AREA NETWORK IN PUNA .......................... 3-21 1 1 1 1 1 1 FIGURE 4-1: PROPOSED TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS IMPROVEMENTS ...............................4-11 ' TABLE 5-1: GENERAL USE AND DESIGN CRITERIA BY VILLAGE~OWN CENTER TYPE ................5-7 GLOSSARY 1 ... 1 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS This page left intentionally blank. iv PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 CHAPTER I NTRODV~TION 1.1 THE SETTING Puna's natural environment is dominated by volcanic activity, unique geological events ' and formations, and a variety of plant communities that provide habitat for native species. Eruptions of Kilauea and the nearby volcano Mauna Loa continue to shape the ecology of the region, and even the land itself. Rainfall is higher on the windward slopes of Kilauea, while the ' leeward slopes, extending into Ka`u, are relatively arid. The wetter side is covered by thick forests of `Ohi'a trees and Hapu'u tree ferns on all but the youngest of lava flows or cleared land. On the drier side, vegetation is more open, exposing the underlying geology. ' A distinguishing feature of Puna's native forest is its interaction with repeated, relatively recent lava flows, creating varied ages of forests underlain by different compositions of lava flows, ash and explosion deposits. This, in turn, enriches biodiversity, especially in older stands ' of forest, known as "kipuka", that have been isolated by younger lava flows. Some of the native animal and plant species present in Puna are endemic to Hawaii, ' found nowhere else in the world. In addition, Puna harbors many other native species, such as the Pueo (Hawaiian Owl), the `Amakihi, the `Apapane, and various insects, some of which are rare. ' Puna's unique lava tube caves are a notable geological feature and popular attraction. Kazumura Cave is recognized as the world's longest lava cave at nearly 40 miles. The lava caves are also important as natural habitats for endemic cave-adapted species of insects and , invertebrates. In addition, some of caves were used by ancient Hawaiians as burial sites for Ali`i (royalty) and others. ' Puna s geology and biological resources inspired reverence for the landscape by the original human inhabitants of Hawaii. By cultural tradition, Kilauea is the home of the goddess Pele, giving the volcano and its surroundings sacred status. Ancient Hawaiians recognized Puna as Pele's land, with human habitation subject to Pele's will. Maka`aina, or commoners, were free to relocate to other ahupua`a (the lands of another chief) when Pele reasserted her dominion over the land. A map dated 1826 indicates 24 ahupua`a located around the entire coast of Puna. 1 While human settlement from ancient times was concentrated in a 1- to 3-mile band near the , shoreline, mauka areas near the volcano and upper reaches of forest were visited for gathering as well as spiritual purposes. 1 Community Management Associates for the County of Hawaii ,Puna Community Development Plan Technical Report, 1995. ' 1-1 ' t 1 1 1 I NTRODUGTI ON Many of the ancient trails, which are still protected as public land or with traditional access rights, connect areas of natural beauty that have cultural significance. Even though the 19th and 20th centuries brought rapid physical and cultural changes, some of the trails lead to remote spots that are important for traditional gathering and other cultural practices. The areas they traverse include some stands of fairly intact native vegetation with little modern development, offering a glimpse to the past. ~C1Ct f1C' l'~C£LI!"L ' GAPVC{;ETATIDN Agriculture ~ ~~ - tJative Shrubs and Grasses _ NatrreTrees and f=orest Q ~Icm-Native Shrubs and Grasses - i~1cxFPJatiseTrees and Forest Sparse Yegetatkn - Weiland or Open lh:rter Extensive tracts of Puna's landscape were transformed when Western contact brought large scale resource exploitation and agriculture in successive waves. Sandalwood export began in 1790, reaching its peak between 1810 and 1825. After Hawai`i's first forestry law in 1839 restricted the removal of sandalwood trees, cattle ranching and coffee cultivation became the 1-2 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 leading commercial activities. By 1850, agriculture diversified with the cultivation of potatoes, onions, pumpkins, oranges, and molasses.2 Soon, sugarcane was in large-scale production. The dominant operation in Puna was the Puna Sugar Company, whose plantation fields extended for ten miles along both sides of Highway 11 between Kea`au and Mountain View, as well as in the Pahoa and Kapoho areas.3 Macadamia nuts and papaya were introduced in 1881 and 1919 respectively. Since the closure of the Puna Sugar Company in 1991, papaya and macadamia nut production have become the leading cash crops of Puna. About 97% of the state's papaya production occurs in Puna, primarily in the Kapoho area. The closure of sugar production in Puna potentially opened a large amount of agriculture land to a more diversified industry, although much of the former plantation land lies unused and covered predominantly by non-native trees, shrubs and grasses. A variety of growing conditions supports diversified agriculture in Puna. Presently, Puna produces at least 40 different agricultural products including cut flowers, fruits, vegetables, and livestock. While the district is generally a wet, warm climate, drier conditions at lowland areas such as Kapoho are ideal for cultivating papaya, whereas wetter, cooler conditions in the Volcano area are suitable for growing crops that cannot thrive in many other areas of Hawaii. Even the wettest of areas have produced well under greenhouse cover. Also, due to volcanic activity, the age of the soils varies considerably throughout Puna, with corresponding variations in inherent natural fertility and tendency to resist weeds. The recent pattern of residential development and population growth in Puna is the result of widespread land subdivision within the past half century. Between 1958 and 1973, more than 52,500 subdivision lots were created. Since that time, nearly 2,500 of these lots have been covered by lava flows or have been rendered unbuildable by shoreline subsidence, reflecting the risks of building on a landscape subject to volcanic and seismic hazards. Moreover, most subdivision lots are accessed by private, unpaved roads. The streets generally lack sidewalks and lighting, and do not meet current County standards in terms of pavement width, vertical geometrics, drainage and other design parameters. None of the subdivisions have central sewer systems and only a couple have private water systems. Most lots rely on individual catchment systems supplemented with private delivery trucks for potable water. Large sections of some subdivisions are off the power grid. Despite the natural hazards and rudimentary infrastructure and services in these subdivisions, build-out of the lots has been occurring, with the northeast quadrant of Puna and in the vicinity of Volcano experiencing the highest rates of population growth. Puna is experiencing the fastest rate of growth of all the districts in the County of Hawaii. The Census population count in 2000 for Puna was 31,335. In March 2007 the estimated population was 43,071, an increase of over 37% in less than 7 years. By 2030, the population is projected grow to approximately 75,000. Since only about one-quarter of the available lots have been developed at present, is clear that these extensive subdivisions present formidable challenges to z Hawaii 's Agricultural Gateway website, http://www.hawaiiag.or /history.htm s Hawaii Sugar Planters' Association, Plantation Archives, htto://www2.hawaii.edu/-speccoll/o ouna.html 1-3 t 1 NTRODUCTI ON the natural environment and the rational management of development and future population growth. 1.2 THE PLANNING CHALLENGE If Puna continues to develop at the present rate within the framework of the extensive subdivisions, there will be several types of significant, long-term consequences: • An increasing number of people and property improvements are being put at risk due to natural hazards. All of Puna lies within the three most hazardous geological risk zones: LFI, LF2 and LF3. About 6,400 subdivision lots lie in the highest hazard zone, LF1, and over 500 of these are exposed to additional risks from subsidence, tsunami and earthquakes. That 2,038 lots in the lower hazard zone LF2 have been covered or cut off by lava flows in recent decades underscores the hazardous nature of much of the district. T.;..,,.•n ~_~• r_P~i~Ql~al Risk 7,ones Relative to Populated Areas and Subdivisions 1-4 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN , Draft -March 2008 • Because Puna's subdivisions are so large and have few arterial streets, evacuation of residents on short notice in the event a lava flow, earthquake, tsunami or hurricane is a significant problem with serious consequences to public safety. The potential problem worsens as subdivision lots continue to develop and no infrastructure improvements are made. , • As more lots are developed, an increasing number of residents expect improved infrastructure. The cumulative impact of widespread use of cesspools on the quality of the aquifer and coastal waters is undetermined. Retrofitting infrastructure improvements is expensive, and not all residents are willing to either bear the cost or accept the transition from a "rural" setting to one that is more suburban. • Because subdivision lots were sold in their undeveloped state rather than with , dwellings, development has occurred in an uneven, "leap-frog" pattern, which makes it even more difficult to develop infrastructure and provide services to the population. Residents often must make long trips to employment, schools, shopping and other destinations to meet daily needs. • While most of these subdivisions are on agricultural-zoned lands, the actual use of , developed lots is predominantly residential. As in-fill residential development continues, it will be more difficult for existing small-lot agricultural uses to remain viable due to complaints from neighbors about nuisance effects of agricultural operations and potential increases in crop theft or vandalism. • Lot development adversely impacts the native forest in an obvious way when an entire lot is cleared of vegetative cover to make way for buildings and yards. But ' clear-cutting and pin-to-pin grading and grubbing of lots has subtler impacts, as well, such as: - Openings in the forest promote the spread invasive, non-native species. Non- ' native plants affect the forests by changing the soil chemistry and increasing shade, making it hard for native plants to compete and survive. - Fragmenting the forest creates "edge" habitat that further accelerates the decline of native organisms. - Fragmentation also changes the microclimate of adjacent forest (i.e., increased temperature and sunlight and decreased moisture in the understory), altering growing regimes for plants and the suitability of nesting sites. - Grading creates boggy areas devoid of vegetation, providing breeding habitat for mosquitoes, a vector for avian malaria, which further threatens the native bird , population. - Re-contouring of lots through grading and filling alters local drainage patterns and affect adjacent properties or rights-of--way. - Lot grading can lead to the collapse of an underlying lava tube, which in turn may expose a unique cave ecosystem or an ancient burial site or artifact. 1-5 INTRODUCTION 1 The combination of these challenges calls for bold planning initiatives to re-shape the pattern of future growth and development in a manner that is more in harmony with the natural setting and more supportive of a better, sustainable quality of life. These initiatives are embodied in the three main themes of this plan. ' 1.3 ORGANIZATION OF THE PLAN The Puna Community Development Plan is organized into three overarching themes that correspond to the top three issues that face the region, as identified in the public involvement process, including: • Public participation and County policy, as reflected in earlier planning efforts, including the draft Puna Community Development Plan in the early 1990's, the County of Hawaii General Plan (2005), the Puna Regional Circulation Study (2005), and the various community-based master plans produced for several of Puna's subdivisions and villages. • The 130 Small Group Meetings held throughout Puna in early 2006 to solicit issues, concerns and ideas at the "grass roots" level. • The two public workshops held in July and September, 2006, to provide background information on conditions and trends and potential tools to address issues, as well as to solicit additional comments and ideas from Puna stakeholders. • The analyses and recommendations in written reports prepared and submitted by the citizen-based Working Groups. • Comments received on the series of three Working Papers prepared by the project consultant to address each of the three themes, drawing from the reports of the Working Groups and the preceding planning efforts. • Deliberations and decisions by the Puna Community Development Plan Steering Committee in a series of meetings in September through December 2007 on preliminary goals, objectives and actions compiled by the project consultant, based on the results of the above work products. At its January 18, 2007 meeting the Steering Committee adopted the following vision statement to embrace the three themes and guide the direction of the plan: The Vision: Malama Puna A Mau Loa! Residents of Puna live in harmony with the 'aina while promoting a sustainable vibrant local economy, healthy communities, and a viable transportation system that is accessible, friendly and safe for now and future generations. The three themes of this plan are presented in the following order: 1-6 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 • Malama I Ka 'Aina establishes how the contextual natural, historic and cultural features of Puna should be preserved and respected. The goals, objectives and implementing actions under this theme address cultural and historic sites and districts; forest lands and unique geological features; scenic resources; and drainage, aquifers and coastal water quality. • Growth Management addresses how the future pattern of human settlement and land use should be shaped to respect that context and support the desired quality of life for Puna's residents. The goals, objectives and implementing actions under this theme address the land use pattern; agricultural and economic development; public services, social services and housing; parks and recreation and renewable energy and energy efficiency. • Transportation focuses on sustainable approaches to transportation to support the goals of the two above themes. The goals, objectives and implementing actions under this theme address mass transit and alternative travel modes, travel demand management and roadway connectivity and safety. 1-7 i INTRODUCTION This page left intentionally blank 1-8 1 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN ' Draft -March 2008 CHAPTER ~ ' MA LAMA I KA 'A I N A Despite the destruction of native forest and other resources that has occurred in Puna, and ' the potential for much more damage through land development in the extensive subdivisions, as described in Chapter 1, there remains a good opportunity not only to protect what is left, but even reverse some of the historical impacts. Puna contains vast acreage of largely intact natural area that comes under the protection of Federal and State regulations; for example: • The western portion of Puna is dominated by Hawaii Volcanoes National Park and the adjoining upper east Hawai i rainforest. The Park was designated by the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) as an International Biosphere Reservein 1980, reflecting its value for research and protection of evolutionary resources, and as a World Heritage Site in 1987, citing its , geological resources. • The State of Hawaii designated two areas adjoining the Park as Natural Area Reserves -- Kahauale`a and Pu`u Maka`ala -- meeting the same standards of resource quality and protective management as the Biosphere Reserve. • The State also manages several other forest reserves in Puna comprising 131,659 ' acres: Upper Waiakea Forest Reserve, Waiakea Forest Reserve, Ola`a Forest Reserve (Mountain View Section), Nanawale Forest Reserve, Malama Ki Forest Reserve, Keau`ohana Forest Reserve, and the recently acquired Wao Kele O Puna Forest ' Reserve.4 • The State Conservation District, which encompasses almost all of the above areas as well as some additional lands, is organized as a regulatory hierarchy under the ' jurisdiction of the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR). There are five subzones of the Conservation District, each intended to provide a degree of regulatory protection that reflects the intactness or relative significance of , the resources that are present in those subzones. About half of Puna's Conservation District is in the Protective Subzone, which is the most restrictive of the five subzones in terms of allowable uses. The remainder is in either the Limited Subzone, which is , designated for areas with potential high risk of natural hazard, or the Resource Subzone, which is generally applied to less intact forest reserves. • The Conservatian District also includes the submerged lands beneath coastal waters. , DLNR's Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands therefore addresses shoreline and a The Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve is owned by the Office of Hawaiian Affairs but managed by DLNR's Division of ' Forestry and Wildlife. 2-1 1 MALAMA I KA °AI NA near-shore issues and regulations. The Hawaii Department of Health (DOH) is responsible for monitoring and protecting the quality of the waters themselves under the authority of the Federal Clean Water Act. Figure 2-1: Natural Areas Under Federal or State Protection - Natural Area Reserve Q Community Development Plan Boundary - National Park Subdivisions - Forest Reserve iVlapr F#ighways -., t ~~... ~, e ~'"4 ruLO'~s H ? ~ i£ KEAA[i P. KI Rfl4 ii ins i E ~ NA% fAA YAItALR~i ~~ ft.~ L@£ttl2 AI PAKK \IRUnIR AVn- Mt I NIAI~ Vil'W V~'tA 15 I %".M1IIAV N4AliR_\ 11RK.ti A<1t AlR'XIf.1 . .... ~ AIHy\IA r. ~ / 1iIiMY,{YlJ1. ~ TiTATTS KA HN1 PAHUA~ ~ w, NI ~° TdTF\ T'ANtf <R)1 V - TRY(LUd ~,..YIM.LA~II. - v" ' y RnlAni-nmoxwn rw rP.~r+wnr+,r The remainder of Puna -about 56% of the entire land area of the district -lies predominately within the State Agricultural District and, to a lesser extent, in the State Urban and Rural Districts. The County has primary jurisdiction over land use and development in these Districts and can take proactive measures to protect resources in these areas, which encompass 2-2 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN , Draft -March 2008 former agricultural fields and pastures, early towns and villages, extensive partially developed subdivisions, and large tracts of native forest. While much of the natural environment and some of the cultural heritage of these areas has been altered and compromised, effective and timely intervention can do much to prevent further degradation and possibly even restore some of what has been lost or undergoing change. ' The theme of Malama I Ka `Aina encompasses all aspects of the natural and cultural environment, seeking to preserve and perpetuate not only the native forests and geological ' formations, but also pristine waters, unspoiled, star-lit skies, serene natural habitats, and vestiges of Puna's historic heritage. The following sections propose specific new regulatory, incentive, and educational programs to promote sustainable practices to preserve Puna's natural and ' cultural resources indefinitely. On a broader level, Chapter 3 will complement these proposals with measures to reshape Puna's development pattern and reduce the development potential of existing subdivisions. ' 2.1 HISTORIC, CULTURAL, AND SCENIC RESOURCES Only nine sites in Puna are listed on the Hawaii and/or National Register of Historic Places, but there are many other sites throughout the district that have been identified as having ' historic significance. Puna's coastal areas have relatively dense concentrations of historical, cultural, and burial ' sites. Burial sites and cultural artifacts are not uncommon on subdivision lots, although many are hidden in lava tubes, making them susceptible to destruction due to grading. While the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) plays a role in reviewing construction permits and State law requires that construction activity be halted in the event of discovery of archaeological remains, the effectiveness of these measures is limited due to a shortage of SHPD staff, lack of information about the location of sites, and weak inspection and enforcement mechanisms. Greater County-level involvement in this process could improve results. ' Puna's history is also evident in the architecture of its older towns and villages; namely, Kea`au, the Kurtistown-Mountain View corridor, Pahoa, and Volcano. Each of these places has a distinctive design character that reflects its history and location. Volcano presently has a small, legally recognized historic district, but otherwise there are no special design controls to preserve the design character of these towns. Of the four towns, Volcano and Pahoa have the greatest ' potential for designation as Special Design Districts, based on their existing fabric. Design controls for Kea`au and Kurtistown-Mountain View can be woven into the "floating zone" approvals for the village center designations for those places, which is discussed further in ' Chapters 3 and 5. Scenic natural settings are numerous in Puna, but they are, for the most part, protected by ' existing land use controls or public land agencies. Trails and scenic byways deserve special mention, since they are continuous visual experiences along a designated corridor and are particularly vulnerable to loss. Because they also serve a transportation function, they are addressed in Section 4.5 as well as below. 2-3 i li u MALAMA I KA ~AINA 2.1.1 Goals ' a. Structures and cultural sites that are significant to Puna's history and cultural traditions are preserved. b. The design character and natural setting of older communities that are representative of Puna's historic development are perpetuated. c. Areas of scenic and cultural interest are accessible to the public in a manner that does not detract from their aesthetic, natural and cultural value. ' d. Awareness and appreciation of the host culture is expanded. e. The native forests of Puna are revered as part of the native culture and are provided with permanent protection from degradation and loss. ' f. Tourism in Puna is compatible with historic and natural resources and not intrusive into the area's communities. ' 2.1.2 Objectives a. Create a County entity and adopt a process for identifying historic and cultural sites and advocating for their preservation and/or restoration within the County's permitting and approval processes. b. Adopt appropriate location-specific development standards and design guidelines for buildings, landscape treatment and public infrastructure for communities designated for Special Design District status. c. Protect cultural sites from destruction by development activity. d. Adopt "kanaka" building code standards to allow structures utilizing traditional Hawaiian building design and construction methods. 2.1.3 Actions ' a. Establish a County historic preservation commission, making the County eligible for Certified Local Government (CLG) status and Federal historic preservation funds. The purposes of the commission are to: - Provide historic preservation review and advice to the Planning Department, Department of Public Works and other County, State, and Federal agencies; - Receive preservation grants from government and other sources, such as the Historic Hawaii Foundation to encourage owners to inventory, preserve or restore historic and cultural features on their property; ' - Recommend to the State Historic Preservation Division on permit review criteria and candidate sites for listing on the Hawaii Register of Historic Places; - Assist in development of historic and cultural interpretation programs for sites that are planned for restoration, such as the Old Puna Trail historic corridor and Red Road scenic byway; - Advise the Departments of Planning, Public Works and Health on their permit approval recommendations; ' 2-4 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 - Notify development permit applicants about guidelines and standards for identifying and protecting cultural and historic artifacts and features. Prior to and during development projects, applicants should seek advice from the Departments of Planning and Public Works about permit approval requirements; - Assist the County and local organizations in planning and conducting cultural events; and - Request State funding for cultural sensitivity training and other educational programs appropriate for County employees, realtors, tour guides, and anyone involved with promoting or developing Puna lands. b. Initiate Special Design District detailed planning, design standards and review procedures for the following areas: - Volcano Village historic core and the separate Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone (see Section 2.3.3 a) ; - Pahoa Town; - Kea`au Town; and - Kurtistown-to-Mountain View corridor. Refer to Chapter 5 for implementation guidelines related to this action. c. Amend the County building code to add standards for structures utilizing traditional Hawaiian building design and construction methods. There may be certain limitations placed on the occupancy or use of these structures, such as for cultural purposes, accessory uses and/or occasional gatherings only. d. Amend the County grading ordinance to require consultation with the Historic Preservation Division and the aforementioned County Historic Preservation Commission prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 2.2 NATIVE FORESTS AND GEOLOGICAL FEATURES As mentioned in the introduction to this chapter, much of Puna's native forests and unusual geological features are protected by a network of Federal and State management and regulatory controls. However, there are several important areas and features that are exposed to significant impact from activities outside of these protected areas and require County initiatives to protect these resources: • Lava tubes and caves, some of which host endemic wildlife, extend throughout the district. Collapsed tubes and caves can also protect portions of forest from fires, enabling native vegetation to reach a climax condition. The destruction of such features could therefore disrupt the ecological system. • The upper Puna forests and segments of the lower Puna forest are among the finest and most well preserved of their types in the state. Some of these areas, however, are zoned for agriculture and urban uses and are therefore presently unprotected by regulation. 2-5 ' MALAMA I KA `AINA • The community of Volcano and surrounding subdivisions contain some of the most extensive areas of native forest and it is situated directly between the high-quality protected native forest areas mentioned in the introduction to this Chapter, thereby providing a critical linkage between these native habitats. Currently, much of this area is zoned for residential or agriculture use, without any additional regulatory control to prevent further subdivision or excessive land clearing. 2.2.1 Goals a. The connection between intact native forests in Volcanoes National Park and nearby State forest reserves and natural area reserves is preserved while allowing for more limited orderly development of the residential and agricultural areas in between. b. Destruction of native forest through development activity is abated. c. The spread of invasive species through abandonment of previously cleared areas is ' reduced. d. Residents, those employed in the real estate and construction industries, and the general public are made more aware of the value of the native forest, the threats to that ecosystem, and actions that can be taken to sustain the forest. 2.2.2 Objectives ' a. Adopt a Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone (BRBZ) and designate a BRBZ Advisory Commission to guide development within the region's native forest through regulatory measures and economic incentives. b. Adopt regulatory measures, educational programs and incentives to preserve remnants of native ecosystems in Puna subdivisions, especially remnants at lower elevations. c. Modify and enforce Chapter 10, Hawaii County Code (HCC), to prevent storm water ' diversion to other properties. d. Increase the County's role in helping to sustain the native forest, primarily through tax incentives, new regulations and zoning changes. ' e. Provide tax incentives to encourage more landowners to participate in programs to preserve native species and to remove invasive species. 2.2.3 Actions a. Enact a BRBZ, either separately or as an overlay district for the greater Volcano area, to include the following provisions and other supporting measures: ' - Standards for maximum land disturbance within the BRBZ; - A system to monitor the `Ohi`a forest canopy with the BRBZ; - A set of economic incentives designed to reduce forest clearance and the number of developable lots within the BRBZ and transfer development rights within or out of the BRBZ; ' - Mitigation standards and procedures that provide guidelines for the restoration and re- planting of disturbed areas; ' 2-6 1 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 - A study to mitigate localized flooding in ecologically friendly ways, such as using vacant, forested lots to absorb floodwaters (see also Action c. in Section 2.3.3).; - Use of "small-footprint" septic tanks to reduce lot grading; - An expert advisory committee to assist in developing standards, project reviews and public education programs related to the BRBZ; - Designation of unencumbered State-owned lands near Wright Road for either Natural Area Reserve or Forest Reserve status; - Amendment to the General Plan to recognize the purpose and intent of the BRBZ and designation of State-owned lands in the BRBZ to "Open"; - Prohibition of Ohana Dwelling Units within the BRBZ; and - Re-zoning agricultural- and residential zoned lots to an appropriate designation to prevent further subdivision. Refer to Chapter 5 for implementation guidelines related to this action. Figure 2-2: Proposed Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone :~ 0 a~ i z I~kles ,s : 1 - `r-i--~-rri {~ ~ rr~ ~~y r ;~_ ~.. ~,X._ k~2' Y _. ~' 3° p i ~ . i ~,.' ., is ;~ ~'/. YAK P~ Bu#fer Reserve Zone ~~1 ~ r r ,w,,,w,~..i,,,A,.-.r w..wrw~. 2-7 ' MALAMA I KA °AINA b. Amend the grubbing and grading ordinance and/or the zoning code to protect native species, geological and historic features outside of the BRBZ by preventing pin-to-pin lot grading, clearing and grading encroachments onto adjacent lots and water diversions into adjoining properties. The new regulations should provide standards for the preservation of native vegetation, review and public notice procedures for grading permits, and penalties for violations. Refer to Chapter S for implementation guidelines related to this action. c. Establish an Office of County Ecologist within the Planning Department to administer the new regulatory provisions and foster partnerships to provide public education and technical support for forest conservation, such as: ' - Assisting other County agencies such as Department of Public Works and Department of Parks and Recreation in their programs and facility planning and maintenance as they relate to native species habitat preservation; ' - Engaging in collaborative relationships with Federal and State agencies, educational institutions and non-profit organizations that conduct research or administer programs for the protection of native species habitat and the abatement of invasive species; and ' - Launching and sustaining a public education and outreach program to enlist community support and involvement in forest protection and to raise awareness of invasive species and practices that threaten the native forest. d. Provide indirect County support for native vegetation preservation via land conservation trusts by offering real property tax reductions for conservation easements and contributing County land, where appropriate, to a trust for native habitat management. e. Reduce the minimum lot size to qualify for the native forest preservation tax reduction and allow it in any zoning district. Enrollment of a lot in this program is voluntary, but it is binding and permanent, and attached to effective measures to prevent significant ' clearing or other adverse alterations of the forest cover. f. Encourage the County and the State to investigate and implement alternatives to the use of herbicides for weed control on public properties. 2.3 AQUIFERS, COASTAL WATERS AND STORMWATER The fresh water basal lens underlying Puna floats or flows on sea water and has been ' measured to reach up to 30 feet above sea level and has an estimated lens thickness of up to 1,200 feet. The aquifer, due to the porosity of the substrate and the extensive forested watershed, is believed to contain huge flows of high quality ground water even at very low elevations. ' The most extensive centralized water service area in Puna is the County's Ola`a- Mountain View system, composed of eleven service areas extending along the Highway 11 from the former Puna Sugar Company mill to the Ola`a Reservation Lots, and along Highway 130 to Kaloli Drive. The County also maintains smaller water systems serving the Pahoa and Kalapana areas. The Hawaiian Beaches subdivision is served by a private system installed by the developer. However, nearly all residents, including farmers, in other inhabited areas that are not ' presently serviced by water systems depend upon catchment systems to supply their water needs, including fire-fighting. 2-8 1 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 Water demand is likely to increase at a faster rate in lower Puna than in mauka areas because it is experiencing greater population growth and has a drier climate. To reduce delivery costs during dry periods, the aquifer at lower elevations, particularly in the presently undeveloped Maku`u area, could be tapped as a future source of potable water development. Therefore, it is important to maintain the water quality of that aquifer. One of the potential threats is the cumulative impact of additional individual wastewater disposal systems, especially cesspools, in the subdivisions that overlie the makai portion of the aquifer. As the aquifer approaches the coast, it is more likely to be susceptible to pollution from individual wastewater systems because of the relative proximity of groundwater to the surface. Close proximity of groundwater to the surface reduces the amount of filtration that can occur before effluent reaches the groundwater. The widespread distribution of individual wastewater systems and current Department of Health regulations combine to limit the areas where municipal potable water wells can be sited, despite the abundance of ground water. The near-shore environment may also be affected because of reduced filtration. All of Puna's coastal waters are classified as "AA" waters, meaning that they are regulated as the most unspoiled in Hawaii. State law mandates that Class AA waters "remain in their natural pristine state as nearly as possible with an absolute minimum of pollution or alteration of water quality from any human-caused source or actions."5 For this reason, wastewater disposal in the coastal zone requires special precaution. Polluted stormwater runoff is not a significant concern at present, although there are areas in Puna -specifically, Volcano-to-Mountain View and Hawaiian Acres-to-Orchidland -where stormwater has created persistent localized flooding problems in populated and agricultural areas. This appears be attributable to land use alterations. Due to complex drainage patterns on a lava landscape that lacks natural surface drainage systems, remedies for this problem would have to be studied from a localized drainage management perspective. 2.3.1 Goals a. Aquifers that could be used for future community wells in high growth lower elevation areas are protected from pollution by untreated wastewater disposal systems. b. Coastal waters maintain and increase their quality. There is a strategy to address storm water runoff and localized flooding problems. 2.3.2 Objectives a. Plan for future potable and irrigation water demand and preserve acontamination-free zone in the portion of the aquifer in lower Puna for future development as a potable water source. b. Improve wastewater treatment methods and standards in areas designated for future aquifer use and in coastal areas. c. Address the special challenges of managing storm water runoff on Puna's lava terrain on a watershed basis. 5 Hawaii Administrative Rules, Section 11-54 2-9 MALAMA I KA ~AINA 2.3.3 Actions ' a. Encourage State legislation to prohibit the use of cesspools as a means for wastewater disposal in areas below 1,000 feet Mean Sea Level, with the objective of protecting both water quality in coastal areas, as well as in the aquifer, particularly the portion underlying ' State-owned lands in the Maku`u area, where there is potential to develop the source for community potable water wells and agricultural irrigation purposes. b. Seek State Department of Health acceptance of small-footprint septic wastewater treatment designs; for example, those using drip irrigation or low-pressure pipe and double-tank no-leach field designs. Also, seek acceptance of clustered septic systems for wastewater treatment in village/town centers, clustered residential development and other ' special circumstances. c. Prepare watershed management plans for the Volcano-to-Mountain View and Hawaiian Acres-to-Orchidland areas to address localized flooding problems. ' d. By agency agreements and control of zoning and building permits, ensure that a corridor of the Puna watershed at least two miles wide between Wao Kele O Puna forest area and the ocean to the northeast is protected from uses that might contaminate groundwater. No wastewater discharge from cesspools, septic systems, or sewage treatment plants would be allowed within this corridor, nor would disposal of surface runoff. All development within the corridor through Maku`u and Keonepoko (Nui and Iki ahupua`a) ' would be required to utilize centralized sewage treatment plants and/or self-contained pumped septic systems in order to preserve the purity of the groundwater. e. In areas below 100 feet above Mean Sea Level, require all black wastewater disposal ' systems to be contained, pumpable units or be connected to a collective treatment facility. Explore the use of Special Management Area regulations to require this as part of permits for new development. 2.4 SHORELINE AREA Land use development in Puna's shoreline area is vulnerable to significant physical risk due to a couple of factors: • The lack of reef protection for most of the Puna shoreline allows significant wave energy to impact its coast and for noticeable shoreline overwash and retreat during ' storms to be realized, even where the coastline consists of elevated bluffs. Current Shoreline Setback (SLSB) rules and practices do not adequately take into account these natural processes, nor do they protect development, natural resources or public ' shoreline access. • The coastal areas of southeast Puna, as particularly evident in Kapoho, are subsiding at varying rates, up to as much as 0.7 inches per year. Extrapolated over a 50-year period -which is a reasonable lifespan for ahouse -the subsidence would be nearly 3 feet. As evidence of this phenomenon, many of the lots in the Kapoho area are already submerged. Adding to the risk, the continuing subsidence allows periodic storm waves to rush ever greater distances inland, depending on the slope and ' 2-~ o 1 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVEL00 PMENT PLAN Draft -March within the Vacationland Hawaii suou es and~pa celsWaves have exposure. Already es that are been observed to reach back to at least the theflective of the dynamic Chang Current coastal flood zone maps are often not r occurring in Puna, and the extent of actual wave wash hazard. o Area Figure 2-3: Shoreline Subsidence in Kapok 1 1 1 1 1 L _ f r car c~, .,-..- coastal trail alignments Im ortant coastal resources - bion ogical, historical and access a en leads to the loss of t and erosion. Traditionally, p le al ract~ce oft degradation or loss due to developme orary g p . etation naturally trac5s inland with shoreline erosio , moved inland as the shorelincoastaltveg ut contemp ecial Management Area (S~) trail segments. Similarly, maintained. Present p e factors into account. New unless the vegetation line is artificially take these Chang G1S can be applied as radices dO and Geographic Information Systems ( ) rules and review p technologies in remote sensing tools to improve the evaluation of historical data. 2-11 MALAMA I KA `AINA 2.4.1 Goals a. Exposure of development to the risks of shoreline subsidence and coastal flooding is reduced. b. Shoreline biological, historical and cultural resources are adequately protected. 2.4.2 Objectives a. Improve data collection and analysis related to present and historic changes in shoreline conditions and resources. b. Expand the scope of regulations and review procedures for shoreline development to consider dynamic and interrelated potential hazards to development. c. Strengthen the capacity of the County to identify important shoreline resources and evaluate development regulations and proposed developments in the shoreline area. d. Support actions consistent with the State of Hawaii Ocean Resources Management Plan. 2.4.3 Actions a. Draw upon coastal zone and geological expertise and technological resources in State agencies, the University of Hawaii, and the U.S. Geological Survey, as well as informed public comment, to expand and improve the database, reference material and interpretive skills at the County level for the review of shoreline area development proposals. b. Retrieve and record information on trails and historic resources in the coastal zone, including the research of old survey and plat maps and various records of the Mahele, Land Commission and Royal Patents. c. Conduct historical and biological surveys, either permit-by-permit or on a region-wide basis, to improve the quality of decision-making on SMA and SLSB applications and State Shoreline Certifications. Do not grant SMA permits to subdivide property when it is probable under current trends and projections that it will be submerged at high tide within 100 years. d. Take into account special subsidence and storm wave conditions found in Puna, as identified by research and informed public comment, in the determination of State Shoreline Certifications. e. Perform a collaborative study among County, State, Federal and University regulators and researchers to observe and delineate the limits of inland wave wash following each large storm and extra high tide event, and use these studies, in addition to informed public comment, to develop and implement refined flood zone maps. f. Develop and adopt special zoning and development regulations for the greater Kapoho area (Kipu Point to Pu`ala`a) to take into account the problems associated with ongoing and catastrophic subsidence and property loss, pressure to develop lots for residential and commercial use, and increasing demand for access to the shoreline area for recreational use. Request the State to make some of their Kapoho area accreted lands available for integrated solutions, including relocation/land exchange and new recreational opportunities. 2-12 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 CHAPTER MANAGING GROWTH Chapter 1 (Section 1.2) lists numerous reasons why unabated build-out of Puna's subdivisions would have very negative, if not potentially disastrous, consequences. Puna contains nearly 45% of the islands' total subdivided lots, a low build-out percentage, and the highest growth rate, all on a landscape that is exposed to the highest risk of volcanic and seismic activity. It would be prudent to reduce the risk to future residents and properties by transferring development rights on vacant lots in high risk zones to other, less hazardous locations elsewhere on the island. Within Puna, the vision is to reshape the development pattern by moving away from the sprawl effects of the existing subdivisions and toward the formation of village and town centers. Over the long term, this will improve the feasibility of developing supporting infrastructure for populated areas, give residents better access to public and commercial services, stimulate local employment opportunities, and reduce dependence on the automobile for transportation. It will also help preserve natural and cultural resources by limiting the spread of the development, as noted in the previous chapter Some village and town centers already exist in the form of older settlements that were built prior to the creation of the extensive subdivisions a few decades ago. There are opportunities to create new village centers within existing subdivisions that are experiencing higher rates of development, primarily on lands that had been set aside by the subdivider for community or commercial purposes. Tools such as "transfer of development rights" (TDR) and "land pooling" need to be employed to facilitate the development of housing in the village centers in order to make them viable communities. In addition, zoning maps should be reassessed and revised to greatly reduce the subdivision potential of larger undeveloped parcels throughout Puna. The zoning code should be revised to prevent increased density in a random fashion through the `ohana dwelling and additional farm dwelling permit process. Land pooling may offer expanded opportunities for commercial agriculture in subdivisions with small lots by creating larger parcels for agricultural production. While small lots can be used by residents to produce food for their own consumption, larger lots tend to support a wider range of commercially viable agriculture production because of economies of scale, reduced potential for real or perceived nuisance effects on immediate residential neighbors, and lower real estate values per square foot, when compared to small parcels. While more than half of its land area is zoned for agriculture, and Puna is a center for agricultural activity, current mapping systems present an unclear picture of the productivity potential of agricultural land in the district. There are three inconsistent mapping systems in 3-1 MANAGING GROWTH effect. The only system that has regulatory effect is Land Study Bureau (LSB) soil classifications, which are referenced in the State Land Use Law, Chapter 205, Hawaii Revised Statutes. This system is more than four decades old and reflects a pattern of plantation agricultural use that has dwindled to insignificance in Hawaii. There are no "A" or "B" lands in the entire district of Puna, which implies incorrectly that Puna's lands have lesser agricultural value. The State has not formally adopted a system to replace the LSB classifications, but the State Department of Agriculture has prepared maps depicting Agricultural Lands of Importance to the State of Hawaii (ALISH) that reflect more accurately than the LSB maps the value of lands to support diversified agriculture. ALISH maps are therefore used more often than the LSB maps when evaluating agricultural lands. The County's LUPAG adopted a similar, but not identical, mapping system for areas deemed to be Important Agricultural Lands (IAL.) While there is some correspondence between the ALISH and IAL maps, there is by no means an exact match (see Figure 3-1). Figure 3-1: ALISH and IAL Lands in Puna o ~s s ~o rANas ' .~ _ ~ ~, ~ --,~~. ~ ~ / ~~ ~__ }}} ~ y'' ~~~ - ~y~ t ~~ f ~- ~~ ~~ ~, ~, ~ , '~~ ,-~ w. : r~ 1 " 1, ~~/~ .r ~, ~. -ter ~ r.___~ _ _~.~~~ ....~...:.~. ursr~ 3-2 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 ALISH lands cover a total of approximately 75,596 acres in Puna, whereas IAL lands cover only about 51,653 acres. Moreover, the omission of ALISH lands from the IAL designation to create large "urban expansion" areas surrounding Kea`au and Pahoa when there is still much unused development capacity in Puna's subdivisions is hard to justify. It would be helpful to have a mapping system for agricultural lands that is relevant to Puna's agricultural activities so that they can be adequately preserved and planned for future use. The Puna Community Development Plan seeks to manage growth by: encouraging a more efficient, environmentally sustainable land use pattern; reducing the number of and rearranging previously-approved subdivision lots; requesting the County to change the zoning of lots now inappropriately zoned for present and future use and growth; promoting agricultural use and other "green" employment in the district; promoting the use of renewable energy; improving the delivery of social services and housing assistance; and providing the necessary public services, parks and recreation opportunities in a manner that supports community-building and an improved quality of life. 3.1 LAND USE PATTERN "Village centers" (or "town centers" for the larger settlements) are the model on which Puna's future land use pattern will be based, redirecting Puna's extensive subdivisions from their present course of sprawl development. Three types of village centers are proposed to provide varying levels of services based on location, size, and functional attributes. Regional village centers are located at Puna's largest existing urban settlements - Kea'au, Hawaiian Paradise Park, and Pahoa -and are meant to provide a wide range of services and amenities. Keaau and Pahoa already have a nucleus of region-serving facilities, so they take on more of the characteristics of a town rather than a village. Community village centers provide a more limited range of services in smaller existing urban settlements and subdivisions that are experiencing the greatest rates of population growth. Community centers are projected for Volcano, Mountain View, Kurtistown, Hawaiian Paradise Park, and `Ainaloa. Neighborhood village centers serve smaller or more remote communities with relatively small lot sizes. Neighborhood centers are projected for Glenwood, Orchidland Estates, Hawaiian Paradise Park, Hawaiian Beaches, Nanawale Estates, Leilani Estates, and Kapoho. The principal tools to reshape future land use in Puna include: (1) TDR to re-distribute development rights of subdivision lots that are located in high hazard zones or high-value native forests; (1) land pooling to form village centers and grow town centers while preventing sprawl development; (3) adjustments to County and State tax codes to discourage land speculation and provide tax relief for long-time homeowners and renters and to provide an incentive for removing development rights from property; (4) district-wide rezoning and tighter restrictions on variances from subdivision standards to discourage further subdivision of properties that are not within designated village/town centers; and (5) amendments to the County zoning code to discourage excessive lot clearance and speculative building practices. 3.1.1 Goals a. Puna retains a rural character while it protects its native natural and cultural resources. b. The quality of life improves and economic opportunity expands for Puna's residents. 3-3 ~ ~ MANAGING GROWTH c. Services and community facilities are more accessible in village/town centers that are 1 distributed throughout the region, including the underserved subdivisions that have been experiencing higher levels of development growth. d. Exposure to high risk from natural hazards situations is reduced. e. Inappropriate and disproportionate County zoning can be adjusted in order to maintain and increase the quality of life and to preserve valued natural and cultural resources in the district. f. Native vegetation, coastal and historic resources are provided new forms of protection. g. Reduced overall number of buildable lots in Puna. h. Incentives, disincentives, regulations and other methods are used to diminish land speculation in Puna. 3.1.2 Objectives ' a. Implement tools for re-shaping the pattern of future development to prevent further sprawl, such as land pooling and transfer of development rights. b. Develop a typology for existing and proposed village/town centers, including criteria for their location, scale, uses and design. c. Enhance the role of existing and new village/town centers by allowing expanded commercial uses, facilitating the development of farmers markets and community ' gathering places, opportunities for special needs housing, and infrastructure to support more compact development form and multi-modal travel. d. Create new village/town centers as necessary, in or near presently underserved ' subdivisions, beginning with those experiencing higher rates of population growth so residents of those areas will have community activities and more convenient access to services. 1 e. Target investments in public services and infrastructure to promote the development of village/town centers and, secondarily, to serve the peripheral subdivision areas. f. Limit the size of dwellings and accessory uses that are allowed in non-conforming, agriculturally-zoned subdivisions to discourage excessive lot clearance and speculative building practices. g. Identify a supporting role for the County in land assembly for the formation of ' village/town centers. h. Explore additional methods to protect native species habitat and historic features from development by use of economic incentives, development restrictions, and district-wide ' rezoning. i. Provide tax relief for properties whose development rights have been reduced through conservation easements, transfer of development rights and similar measures. j. Explore innovative methods to reduce property speculation, such as elevated tax rates associated with rapid resale, and/or district-wide rezoning. ' k. Where possible, reduce density and build-out within the district by various means including selective rezoning. 3-4 ' PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 3.1.3 Actions a. Adopt enabling legislation for a transfer of development rights program. , b. Provide County support for land use entitlements and land assembly for village center formation and voluntary land pooling projects by: - Creating a "floating zone" in the County zoning code that allows parcels in a land pooling project to be treated as a joint use development containing a mix of uses pursuant to a single site development plan; - Initiating a special use permit request or petition for a land use district boundary amendment for uses that would require such designations under State law; - Seeking an amendment to the State Land Use Law (Chapter 205, Hawaii Revised ' Statutes) that would enable the adoption of special "rural town/village" standards for locations meeting certain criteria in the State Agriculture District or State Rural District, subject to a review and approval process that is simpler than the present , method of boundary amendment; - Seeking State enabling legislation to allow County retention of lots that are in foreclosure for delinquent real property tax payments rather than having them auctioned for sale to the highest bidder, so that they can be used for relocation , purposes when other properties are acquired for future rights-of-way, public facilities, land assembly related to village/town center development, or other objectives of the community development plan; and - Extending technical assistance and advice to a community-based land pooling association concerning legal and financial aspects of land pooling as they relate to County or State legal requirements and tax policies. c. Establish the following general classifications and locations for village and town centers in Puna: - Kea`au, Pahoa, and Hawaiian Paradise Park shall serve as Regional Town Centers to provide a wide range of services for the Puna district; - Community Village Centers shall provide a more limited range of services in smaller existing urban settlements and in large subdivisions that are experiencing the greatest rates of build-out; namely, at `Ainaloa, Kurtistown, Mountain View, two or more locations in Hawaiian Paradise Park, and at Volcano; and ' - Neighborhood Village Centers shall be the smallest in scale and located in underserved remote communities and in subdivisions with relatively small lot sizes and significant rates of population growth. , Refer to Chapter S for more detailed implementation guidelines on this proposed action. d. Facilitate land use entitlements and other tools for the development of existing and future village/town centers and special design districts by: , - Approving commercial zoning or use permits for existing commercial uses in designated village/town centers that do not presently have appropriate entitlements, and for proposed uses at appropriate nearby locations, provided that the size and use , 3-5 MANAGING GROWTH of the expansion area conforms to the criteria applicable to the type of village/town center at that location; and - Denying zone changes for commercial or light industrial use on sites that are not within designated village/town centers. Refer to Chapter 5 for more detailed implementation guidelines on this proposed action. Figure 3-2: Proposed Town and Village Center Locations - (.tAAU 'P _ cuwn~AHrnttatacs ~~ ~CI~L~LC l'JCELt12 ~ eaak r! '"~~ ~ lNC}illMh4~1 Mb[,\fAf~WLR HAWAl1AN~Q7':~CIRs ~._ PARKS A;`Ij?Ili)KF~ `~- n~u,q~ GLENVFIN)1i • PS'1 p1A3 Y°. ND J~ ^ `. rnega ww+ rS J "u«a^ ~, E f i ~' KAla~umarulur.~ ~~ Y{fage CPr-ters I j--'`~ ~ Regional ~ Community i • Neighborhtxxl ^ FutureLocaiionSubject ~ ~ ~-~-' fo~r~~m~tnityRevie4v v~ 3-6 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 e. Facilitate land use entitlements and financing for the development of new village/town centers by: - Creating a "floating zone" for new village/town centers with pre-determined development standards based on village/town center type that can be applied to the village/town center once its location has been determined; and - Providing loan guarantees or making grants to community associations or partnerships for the development of necessary infrastructure for the village/town center. Refer to Chapter S for more detailed implementation guidelines on this proposed action. f. Amend the zoning code and/or apply district-wide rezoning to limit allowable building footprint on residential and agricultural-zoned lands, except for sites designated as village/town centers or for land pooling projects. g. Require County agencies to establish Level of Service standards for County infrastructure and services and report periodically on the degree to which these standards are being met in Puna and proposed steps towards meeting those standards, if they are not being achieved. h. Urge the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL) to conform to the goals and objectives of the Puna Community Development Plan (PCDP) with respect to the use and development of its lands. i. Reduce property tax assessments and payments to token amounts for properties whose development rights have been removed or significantly and permanently reduced by means of a conservation easement, transfer of development rights, land pooling or similar measure. j. Conduct a study on the impacts from subdivision build-out based on predictions related to: native ecosystems; potential potable water well sites; and flooding due to loss of forest. k. Require that notice of pending applications for special permits, variances and zoning changes be given to property owners within a greater distance from the affected site than is now required by law. 3.2 AGRICULTURE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Puna is primarily an agriculture district with high diversification of production. Even with the demise of sugar cane production in Puna, agriculture remains a viable economic land use, both for commercial export of products and for local consumption. With the transition in recent decades from plantation-based agriculture to smaller-scale, diversified agricultural operations, Puna faces several challenges. Below are those that the Puna Community Development Plan attempts to address in some way: • Rising land costs, especially within subdivisions where residential dwellings are the principal use, make it difficult for new farmers to acquire land for a viable agricultural operation. 3-7 ' MANAGING GROWTH • Despite an abundance of vacant subdivision lots for residential use, agricultural- , zoned lands continue to be further subdivided, primarily through a variance process from the provision in the subdivision code that requires a water system (sec. 23-84) and with variances from County-standard roads. Allowing a proliferation of such subdivisions creates more lots with poor infrastructure and adds residential growth in areas that already have more lots than can be served. Such subdivisions should be limited in scale. • Many areas formerly in sugar cane production and highly suitable for diversified crops are not available for small farming operations. • While Puna's high rainfall generally supplies agricultural needs through economical catchment, during dry spells growers need other water sources. Even if the lot is within a County water service area, there is inadequate capacity to provide for agricultural uses because the County lines are designed for domestic use only. ' • Small-scale, independent operations face several additional challenges: (1) finding efficient, cost-effective ways to get products to market, whether for export or local consumption; (2) acquiring and maintaining specialized equipment, facilities, and other infrastructure; (3) providing security to prevent pilferage of products; (4) securing labor assistance at the times when needed. There are opportunities, as well as challenges, for the growth of economic activity in ' Puna: • Agricultural tourism is emerging as part of a mix of attractions that draw visitors to ' Puna. With the rebirth of native Hawaiian culture and new appreciation for nature, Puna has established itself as a premier natural and cultural attraction, with Hawaii Volcanoes National Park as a main draw. Eco-tourism generates income by providing community-based services to visitors of natural and cultural sites in a way that ' protects and nurtures the natural and cultural systems, in a manner that is economically sustainable. • Given Puna's combination of resources and geographic location, new employment ' can be generated in other "green" industries, such as alternative energy research and development and natural resources management. ' • The development of village/town centers, as described in Section 3.1, will create new local employment opportunities and provide farmers with new local market venues for their products. These challenges and opportunities are addressed in the following goals, objectives and actions. 3.2.1 Goals a. Lands for agricultural use are preserved. b. Quality agricultural land is dedicated to agricultural use in perpetuity. ' c. Opportunities for diversified agriculture increase. d. Puna's agricultural production emphasizes environmentally-friendly methods. 3-8 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 e. Puna agricultural products represent an increasing local market share. f. There are more agriculture-related employment training and local job opportunities for youth. g. Local job growth is primarily in "green" industries such as agriculture, alternative energy, communications technology, eco-tourism and natural resources management. 3.2.2 Objectives a. Discourage urban growth and further subdivision on lands that have been identified as having potential value for agricultural use through appropriate zoning re-designations and new code provisions. b. Create larger lots for agricultural use in existing small-lot subdivisions through land pooling and other methods. c. Acquire unused agricultural lands to create opportunities for new farm operations. d. Discourage real estate speculation on agriculturally-zoned lands. e. Provide County tax incentives to promote and preserve agricultural use of lands that are currently or historically in agricultural use. f. Provide sites and infrastructure for farmers markets at County parks and proposed village/town centers. g. Form partnerships with local businesses and educational institutions to advance education and training in two sectors: - 'Green' sector, to include agriculture, alternative energy, resource recycling and recovery, and other related areas; and - The information technology sector. h. Support agricultural tourism with emphasis on events such as orchid celebrations, papaya festivals, locally-produced food festivals (i.e., "Taste of Puna".) i. Promote farm business such as local food stores and "farm stay" bed and breakfasts. These can be coupled with youth training programs for low income youth. j. Provide infrastructure support for youth education and job training in the technology and agricultural sectors. k. Protect quality agricultural lands, especially fallow agricultural lands, through purchase or lease by County, State or community land trust, and provide long term leases for community use. 1. Create new "green" employment opportunities in the agricultural, alternative energy, and natural resources management in Puna. 3.2.3 Actions a. Prohibit variances that allow subdivisions that rely on water catchment or roads that do not meet subdivision road standards to a maximum of six lots, unless the subdivision results in lots averaging at least twenty acres in size, and averaging at least four times the minimum lot size allowed by zoning, up to an absolute limit of twenty lots. There shall be no further variances to permit re-subdivision of lots created by such variances. Where 3-9 ' MANAGING GROWTH lots were created by previous variances allowing catchment, and the variance provided that further variances should not be allowed, enforce those provisions by denying further variances on such lots. b. Downzone all Agricultural (A) zoned parcels in the State Agricultural District in Puna as follows: - Lots of 100 acres or more to A-20a; - Lots of 50 acres or more but less than 100 acres to A-15a; t - Lots of 5 acres or more but less than 50 acres to a designation that would allow no more than atwo-lot subdivision; and ' - Lots of less than 5 acres to A-Sa. nations in the County of Hawaii General Plan ansion Area desi Rescind the Urban Ex c g p . LUPAG, except where they correspond to the recommended Village Center boundaries for Kea`au and Pahoa, as illustrated in Chapter 5. ' d. Seek State legislation to impose a higher conveyance tax rate and/or capital gains taxes on Puna properties that are re-sold within a short period, with exceptions for properties providing affordable housing. e. Seek State legislation to allow the County to hold onto properties that are in foreclosure due to property taxes in arrears rather than immediately auctioning them to the highest ' bidder in order to: d/ b ildi l i l Di e an or u ng; scourage specu at ve re-sa - - Allow the use of these properties in land pooling projects in nonconforming ' subdivision that would create larger lots committed to agricultural use; - Protect unknown natural and cultural sites or features; - For educational programs for agriculture, forestry and natural resources management; ' and - For use in community land trusts and land exchanges. f. Provide land and infrastructure for farmers' markets within village/town centers. g. Seek State legislation or rule-making to allow local agricultural producers to make direct sales to consumers at County-designated farmers markets at the 0.5% general excise tax ' rate rather than the 4.0% rate that applies to retail sales. h. Develop an agri/eco-tourism policy, including necessary zoning legislation. Provide County assistance and support for agri-tourism, emphasizing and prioritizing off-farm agri-tourism opportunities such as farmers markets, special events; restaurants specializing in local food products; and fusion of local agricultural products with cultural and arts events in Puna. As a second priority, the agri/eco-tourism policy would promote ' on-farm opportunities, but only where infrastructure exists, and not in private subdivisions with private roads. i. Develop business incubator districts in Kea`au, Pahoa and Mountain View where small 1 businesses can, for astart-up period of two to three years, occupy spaces at subsidized rent, share receptionist and other common support services and facilities, and have access to business mentoring, marketing skills training, and product promotion programs. 3-10 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 j. Promote use of the incentives offered by the designation of an Enterprise Zone within Puna to attract businesses to establish in the area and employ Puna residents. k. Support the partnership of the Hawaii Community College (HCC) and The Bay Clinic to establish a youth business center in Kea`au to develop entrepreneurial spirit in youth, increase employment options and job readiness, and increase college enrollment, with a focus on technology skills. 1. Support the development of a community-based organic farming operation and training facility in or near Puna, in cooperation with the University of Hawai i at Hilo (UH Hilo) and HCC. m. Develop job opportunities in Puna in renewable energy generation, especially solar power installations, but also bio-fuel crops and direct-use geothermal applications. n. Conduct a study to define and identify important agricultural lands in Puna, recognizing the district's unique soil and climate conditions and opportunities for diversified agricultural enterprises. o. Create a fund to purchase or receive identified important agricultural lands and facilitate the formation of a community land trust to manage those lands and leasing them for farming and agricultural support facilities. p. Create a real property tax exemption (perhaps 4 to 6 years) for farmers entitled to Federal crop loss insurance. q. Encourage organic farming and gardening by establishing a Puna agriculture scholarship with HCC and UH Hilo. 3.3 SOCIAL SERVICES AND HOUSING Social services include not only programs to provide assistance to special needs populations, but also health and medical facilities to serve the entire community. "Medical facilities", in this instance, does not apply to County emergency paramedical services, which are covered in the following Section 3.4. With a growing population, Puna clearly needs more social and health care services within the district. Yet, there are two major challenges to making them accessible to residents: • As a rural area with a rudimentary transportation system and dispersed population, it is difficult for residents in need to reach the services; and • Puna's high percentage of low-income residents tends to increase the need for social services, yet discourages private health care providers from locating in Puna due to insurance issues. Schools are also an important social resource, serving not only as educational institutions, but also as de facto community centers and recreation areas in rural areas where few other venues are available for meetings, events and organized or informal sports. Unfortunately, current policies of the Department of Education (DOE) do not favor smaller schools at dispersed locations, which would enable them to be more conveniently accessed by walking, bicycling, or at least a shorter vehicle trip. Also, the availability of school facilities after hours for community activities varies at the discretion of the school principal. Although County influence over public 3-11 I MANAGING GROWTH education and school facilities is quite limited, the Puna Community Development Plan can try ' to influence changes in DOE policies to better integrate schools within the fabric of Puna's communities. As mentioned above, Puna has a high percentage of lower-income residents, and the district is regarded as place of opportunity for affordable housing. The subdivision lots offer some of the lowest-price sites in Hawai i for owner-built housing. Approximately 85 percent of the island's Section 8 low-income rental housing certificate holders are Puna residents. ' Nevertheless, there are still many residents without adequate housing, and opportunities for retaining and expanding the stock of affordable housing are narrowing as land values rise in Puna and government housing subsidies shrink. New approaches are needed to respond to this challenge, such as stimulating the development of multi-family, self-help, and congregate housing. 3.3.1 Goals a. Puna residents have improved access to emergency medical care and preventive public health programs. ' b. Substance abuse, domestic violence and other social problems are reduced. c. Puna residents have increased access to assistance programs to develop, repair or rent affordable housing. ' d. Programs are available to assist those seeking housing in Puna. e. Public education is better integrated into Puna's communities. 3.3.2 Objectives a. Seek additional locations for medicaUsubstance . abuse/senior home care treatment facilities in both lower and upper Puna. b. Provide effective and readily accessible substance abuse treatment and prevention ' services within Puna. c. Provide transitional shelter and programs to assist homeless Puna residents in moving toward self-sufficient status. d. Support initiatives by DHHL to develop appropriate projects for housing and job opportunities for Native Hawaiians in Puna. e. Increase the availability of accessible and affordable housing through self-help programs, government assistance and innovative housing tenure arrangements, such as co-housing, limited equity cooperatives, and community land trusts. f. Increase opportunity for community involvement in public education. g. Urge the State to locate its community facilities, such as public schools, in designated village/town centers, and to design them in conformance to the criteria applicable to the type of village/town center at that location. 3.3.3 Actions a. Develop acentrally-located, 24-hour, full-service medical facility, with trauma care, in Puna. Expand existing County-funded van services to carry people from subdivisions to ' medical facilities. 3-12 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 b. Establish "one-stop centers" at Pahoa, Kea`au, Volcano, Mt. View, Hawaiian Paradise Park and Kurtistown to provide referrals, support and advocacy related to the following issues: - Substance abuse treatment and prevention; - Assistance for housing, special needs housing, homeless persons, and community development; - Teen pregnancy prevention birth control; - Child care and elder care options; - Transportation and service coordination; - Employment; - Serving clients with disabilities; - Domestic violence screening/abatemendprevention; - Access to medical services and complementary health services, including nursing programs for homebound clients; and - Access to clean water and education on catchment water. c. Build partnerships between the County and non-profit organizations to increase the range of social services and economic development opportunities. d. Seek State enabling legislation to allow homeowners and organizations such as Habitat for Humanity to do their own plumbing and electrical work on modest-sized dwellings in order to lower self-help housing construction costs. e. Offer educational programs, through the County Office of Housing and Community Development, to develop financial skills of renters who seek opportunities for home ownership, and to develop awareness of effective rental strategies for owners and tenants. f. Sponsor, through the County Office of Housing and Community Development, programs to increase homeownership opportunities, such as the Home Investment Partnerships Program for mutual self-help housing development and limited-equity cooperatives. g. Promote multi-family housing -especially for those with special needs, such as the elderly - in designated regional or community village/town centers. h. Provide low-interest loans, on a sliding scale according to household income, for the repair and renovation of existing housing. i. Amend building codes to allow occupancy of residential dwelling before final inspection and to facilitate bringing non-conforming structures up to the code effective at the time of their initial construction. j. Urge the State to increase local control over public schools in Puna by measures such as: - Changing the structure of school boards to provide greater local representation and decision-making; - Changing Department of Education (DOE) policy to allow smaller schools at more dispersed locations; and/or - Removing the cap on the formation of new charter schools. 3-13 1 MANAGING GROWTH See, also, Section 3.5, Action c, calling for community access to school facilities. 3.4 PUBLIC SAFETY AND SANITATION SERVICES Public safety and sanitation services in Puna have needed to adapt to the widely dispersed settlement pattern in the district and poor road conditions in most of the subdivisions. It is neither cost-efficient nor practical for the County to provide a sufficient number of police, fire and paramedical facilities with associated staffing and equipment to provide coverage to all populated areas with the response times that are typical of urban or most suburban areas. Therefore, County services are supplemented with community policing programs and volunteer fire stations, usually with at least some degree of County assistance in the form of training, equipment and/or personnel. ' While police and fire stations are essential community facilities, they do not necessarily need to be located directly within town or village centers. The most important criterion for locating these facilities is the response time to respond to emergencies within the service area. Consequently, direct access to a major highway is an advantage. At present, the police and fire stations at Pahoa and Kea`au are near the center of town, although the County is planning to ' replace these with facilities that are slightly outside of town on sites with direct highway access. As noted earlier, there are no public wastewater treatment systems in Puna. Similarly, ' there is no municipal house-to-house solid waste collection service. The County provides solid waste transfer stations located in Pahoa, Glenwood, Volcano, Kalapana, and Kea`au. Until recently, all solid waste was disposed in landfills. Following previous upgrades to the Kea'au solid waste transfer station the County upgraded the Pahoa, Glenwood, and Volcano facilities in ' late 2007 to support recycling, including an improved redemption center for bottles and cans, collection bins for scrap metal, mixed recyclables, and green waste. Adaptive strategies to improve public safety and sanitation services will need to evolve as Puna's population grows and the land use pattern is gradually reshaped into the village/town center model. 3.4.1 Goals a. All residents have an equitable level of service access to police, fire, and paramedical services. ' b. Free wireless Internet is available district-wide. c. Infrastructure investments facilitate the growth management strategy described in Section 3.1. 3.4.2 Ob~ectrves a. Provide additional locations for emergency services to reduce the response time to a ' larger percentage of residents. b. Improve and broaden communications access for a larger number of residents. 1 3-14 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 3.4.3 Actions a. Develop permanent fire stations at Hawaiian Beaches/Shores, Hawaiian Paradise Park, lower Volcano, and Mountain View, with emergency paramedical services. See, also, Section 3.3, Action a, relating to emergency medical facilities. b. Provide additional volunteer fire stations and expanded programs for training community emergency/readiness volunteers in all large subdivisions as suitable sites become available and the growth in the subdivision warrants. c. Provide free wireless Internet services to Puna's subdivisions, starting with those that lack cable service. Refer to Section 4.1 for related discussion and Action c. d. Provide more emergency call boxes along State highways. e. Encourage enhancement of cell phone service to expand coverage to more remote areas. f. Boost the Department of Environmental Management (DEM) recycling budget to develop an economy and to create more jobs related to recycling. g. Relocate the Kea`au and Pahoa solid waste transfer stations to sites more suitable to serve the major populated areas that they were intended to serve. h. Increase County resources to handle the abandoned/derelict car removal program. i. Provide public financial support for the development of utility and potable water connections, and wastewater treatment facilities, within approved village/town centers where they are desired by residents or needed to support planned and approved development. 3.5 PARKS AND RECREATION Puna contains most of Hawaii Volcanoes National Park, which is the premier nature park in the Islands. Added to the inventory of nature parks are the State-owned: MacKenzie State Recreation Area (13.1 acres), located between Pohoiki and Opihikao at the edge of the Malama- Ki Forest Reserve; Lava Tree State Monument (17.0 acres), located near the junction of Kapoho- Pahoa Road and Pohoiki Road; and the undeveloped Nanawale State Park (78.3 acres) site, located adjacent to Honolulu Landing along the Puna Coast Road between Kapoho and Hawaiian Shores subdivision. The County owns smaller shoreline parks: two undeveloped sites within Hawaiian Paradise Park; Isaac Hale Beach Park, located adjacent to Pohoiki Bay; and the nearby Ahalanui Park site, which was purchased in 1993 to replace the two former parks (Kaimu Beach Park and Harry K. Brown Park) that were destroyed by lava flows. There are few community parks in the district for active recreation. The largest public facilities are the County's Shipman Park in Kea`au and Pahoa Park, which includes a pool and a neighborhood center for meetings, programs and indoor recreational activities. The County maintains a gymnasium at Mountain View, outdoor basketball courts at Kurtistown and Hawaiian Beaches, and tennis courts at Kurtistown and Kea`au. 3-15 MANAGING GROWTH The Department of Education maintains recreational facilities at their schools in Kea`au and Pahoa and Mountain View, but these are primarily for use by students and not always available for general community use. There are also some recreational facilities that are owned and maintained by community associations. Some of the subdivisions contain undeveloped parcels that have been set aside for future community use, including parks. However, funds have not been available to develop significant facilities on them, either from private or public sources. Puna will clearly need to expand its parks and recreation facilities as the population grows. There is a particular need to develop community parks in underserved large subdivisions, such as Hawaiian Paradise Park, where development is occurring at a relatively fast pace. 3.5.1 Goals a. Puna offers a variety of public recreational areas, reflecting the beauty and diversity of the natural setting, and recreational programs for people of all ages and physical abilities that are not currently available. b. There is an equitable dispersal of parks and recreation facilities readily accessible to most Puna residents. c. The development of future parks supports the growth management goals, objectives and actions set forth in Section 3.1 of this plan. 3.5.2 Objectives a. Adopt the following classification for expansion and improvement of parks in Puna: - Camp Ground: An area with potable water and restroom facilities for overnight tent camping, which may be available on a permit or fee-for-service basis. - Coastal Activity Area: A shoreline recreational area that is accessed by a park or a public easement - Community Park: A recreational park or facility intended to be used primarily by 1 residents of the area that is owned and maintained by the County or by a private entity with unrestricted public access. - Linear Park: A recreational, non-motorized pathway (except motorized wheelchairs), ' which may be inter-connected or within aright-of-way of an existing or new roadway, and is separated from travel lanes and adjacent properties by a landscaped buffer, with occasional rest stops or viewing spots. - Preserve: A site with features of significant natural or historic value that provides minimal facilities for public visitation, such as interpretive signage, a walking trail and small parking area, and is maintained by a stewardship program. b. Encourage the collocation of schools, parks and senior centers to promote interactivity between community members of all ages. c. Identify lands to be used for parks in connection with subdivision interconnectivity. 3-16 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 3.5.3 Actions a. Consider expanding the Camp Ground at MacKenzie State Park to include public property south of MacKenzie. b. Improve and expand Coastal Activity Areas as follows: - At Ahalanui Beach Park: (1) accessibility improvements; (2) screened changing area next to showers designed to blend with natural surroundings; (3) repairs to parking lot surface; and (4) added picnic tables. - Consider hand-developed modifications to the tidepools east of Pohoiki Bay beyond the area known as "Shacks" for use as "keiki pools", but retain traditional fish-netting use. - Pursue development of a camp ground and/or ocean recreation park with potential boat launch ramp and marina facilities on State-owned accreted land at Cape Kumukahi, provided that Hawaiian burial sites are adequately protected and respected. - Consider acquisition and development of Honolulu Landing, Kapoho Crater (Green Lake) and Sand Hill. - Develop support facilities for the use of the State-owned park at Kehena Beach. - Encourage the development of a hiking and coastal trail and camp system to provide for pedestrian recreational opportunities. c. Improve and expand Community Parks as follows: - Develop new Community Parks in: • Hawaiian Acres, at three sites approximately 1) near the mauka terminus of Orchidland Drive, 2) between 6th and 7`h Roads and D and F Roads, and 3) near Fern Acres at the mauka end of E Road; The North Kulani Road area, between Ihope and Huina Roads; Glenwood, on makai side of South Glenwood Road; Nanawale Estates subdivision; Leilani Estates subdivision; Orchidland Estates subdivision; and • The mauka portion of Hawaiian Beaches subdivision. - Pahoa Regional Park: (1) Convert the existing fire station into a senior center with certified kitchen for congregate meals program and activities/dining room; (2) Repair pump and provide solar heating system and heat-retaining cover for swimming pool; (3) Provide art center and covered performance stage; (4) Provide children's museum and playground; (5) Develop skateboard park; (6) Provide sheltered picnic areas; (7) Build loop access road to lessen traffic on Pahoa main street; and (8) Provide lighted parking areas and walking paths linked to Pahoa village center. - Shipman (Kea`au) Regional Park: (1) Interior fencing and re-arranging parking layout to reduce safety hazard to children chasing balls; (2) More shade, seating, and picnic 3-17 ' MANAGING GROWTH tables for attendees at games and events; (3) Large pavilion for team and family activities; (4) Additional fields for football and baseball; and (5) Additional lighting and restrooms. Develop new gym at Shipman Regional Park or acquire the National Guard Armory for this use. - Develop a new Regional Park on a 20-acre parcel owned by Hawaiian Paradise Park Owners' Association at 16`" Avenue and Maku`u Drive. Improvements would include a swimming pool, a gym, field complex and community center. - Develop recreational programs to complement use of Cooper Center and Volcano Community Park in partnership with the Volcano Community Association. - Provide accessibility, playground and other improvements at Mountain View ' Community Park and A. J. Watt Gym. - Expand hours of operation and night lighting for some outdoor activities at regional and larger community parks to serve working adults and young retirees. ' - Develop a new senior center in Mountain View with a certified kitchen for a congregate meals program, room for activities and dining, restrooms, and van vehicle and staff. ' - Provide in each village center a recreational park and village green that is scaled and designed to fit the needs of the community that the village center serves. - To supplement Community Parks, make recreation facilities and meeting rooms at 1 public schools available for community use after school hours, whether through direct requests from a community representative to a school principal or a formal standing agreement between the County and the Department of Education. ' - Create small parks as part of right-of-way acquisition for new connecting road segments between subdivisions (see Section 4.3.) This may consist of lot remnants that are not needed for the right-of-way. d. Create and improve Linear Parks as follows: - When acquiring rights-of-way for constructing new roadways or improving existing major roadways, make provisions for parallel multi-use recreational trails with 1 appropriate landscaped buffers on either side and provide connections to other such existing or planned trails, to the extent possible. ' - Complete development of Old Volcano Trail as a pedestrian and bicycle pathway. - Acquire the former railroad right-of-way from Kapoho through Hawaiian Paradise Park and develop it for hiking, bicycling and horse-back riding. - Plan for the acquisition and development of the former railroad right-of-way from Hawaiian Paradise Park to Railroad Avenue in Hilo for bicycle, pedestrian and horse- back riding, provided that measures are taken to protect agricultural uses of adjoining lands. - Plan for public access along Old Government Road (coastal trail) as a bicycle and hiking trail with a natural and cultural resource interpretive program. e. Create and improve Preserves as follows: ~I ~! 3-18 ' PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 - For designated preserves, assess the appropriate level of site visitor usage and implement self-guided or steward-led interpretative tours through the site. ' - Improve conditions at Wai`opae Tidepools and the Marine Conservation District by: (1) Offering tax credits to nearby private landowners as incentive to convert existing cesspools, where they exist, to septic tanks with apump-out system; (2) Providing ' public sanitary facilities, including a toilet and trash receptacle; (3) Providing off- street parking that does not encroach into private lands; and (4) Providing permanent public access. , - Consider acquiring Green Lake and adjacent land for native plant/habitat restoration and a nature center with activities and interpretive programs for school-aged students and the general public. ' - Consider hiking trails through Nanawale Forest Reserve, provided that areas with intact native forest are adequately protected. - Pursue development of a passive cultural resources and ethno-botanical park in ' Hawaiian Paradise Park, to include the rock wall, native and introduced plants and exceptional trees. 3 ' .6 ENERGY SUSTAINABILITY Puna's energy demand continues to rise because of rapidly increasing residential development. The cost of installing and maintaining the electrical grid is very high because of ' weather, vegetation, and the relatively great distances from house-to-house. Many people live "off-the-grid"; that is, where dwellings, particularly in more remote locations, are not connected to the electrical power service provided by the local utility company, , Hawaiian Electric Light Company (HELLO). While many residences remain unconnected to the power grid, some choose to connect to the grid to supply at least a portion of their power needs or to provide back-up power. Solar power is cost-competitive with electricity provided by the ' utility company, so this is appears to be the most promising renewable source of power at present, especially when combined with the tax incentives for the installation of alternative energy devices and direct assistance to reach the lower-income homeowners or renters who ' could most significantly benefit from lower utility costs. The County can also play a direct role in the use of alternative energy and promotion of energy conservation by incorporating these features into the design of public improvements and by amending building codes. ' There are two power generation facilities in Puna. HELCO's Puna Steam Plant and the geothermal power generation source at Kapoho operated by Puna Geothermal Venture (PGV). It is unlikely that large-scale expansion of geothermal power generation within the eastern rift zone of Puna will occur within the time horizon of the Puna Community Development Plan. On the other hand, there is potential to capture excess heat for direct use in agricultural applications, if the PGV plant undergoes a modest pending expansion. ' 3.6.1 Goals a. Puna has made significant progress towards achieving energy self-sufficiency by 2020. 3-19 MANAGING GROWTH b. A significant percentage of Puna households continue to live completely or partially off ' the electrical power grid. c. Puna lowers its dependence on fossil fuel as an energy source, becoming a demonstration area for alternative sources, systems and fuels. ' d. There are incentives for the use of renewable energy sources. 3.6.2 Objectives ' a. Promote use of solar technologies, such as solar water heaters and photovoltaic power systems. b. Employ energy-efficient design standards for public building and residential ' development, including ventilation and cooling. c. Recognize, when establishing regulatory standards, that while energy efficiency yields long-term cost savings for low-income households, it may impose added initial construction cost on housing. Accordingly, reduced property tax assessments for self- powered homes and businesses should be implemented. 3.6.3 Actions a. Apply Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standards for public buildings, with a minimum goal of silver level. ' b. Investigate the use of ground-water cooling systems for public buildings. c. Require energy efficiency standards for larger residences. Applicable standards might include better insulation for the outer walls, low-emissivity windows and doors, reduction ' of roof heat gain, and use of energy-efficient appliances. d. Incorporate energy-efficient features into the construction of lower-cost homes with the use of public subsidies. e. Establish a Renewable Energy Research & Development fund with University of Hawaii at Hilo. f. Apply the Public Utilities Commission Public Benefits Fund to incentives to homeowners ' and landlords to retrofit dwellings for alternative energy devices and systems, using a sliding scale to provide greater subsidies to low-income households. The County may augment this with matching grants and low-interest loans. ' g. Negotiate a direct use of geothermal agreement for agricultural uses as part of any expansion of the capacity of the Puna Geothermal Venture plant. h. Promote biomass energy and fuel production using wood chips from exotic trees. i. Pursue the development of new renewable energy sources such as Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC), wave-energy generation and solar energy capture as the technology advances to make an investment in such a demonstration and production facility in Puna feasible. - To facilitate this, pursue an ocean energy subzone or enterprise zone designation for a section of coastal land in Puna, preferably on State land, in order to encourage ' research and production of ocean-based alternative energy systems and facilities. 3-20 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 - In addition to energy generation, cold water aquaculture and agricultural processing should be encouraged and accommodated, including refrigerated warehouse and processing facilities, hot-water treatment of agricultural products, and agricultural product washing and packing facilities. Figure 3-3: Overview of Parks and Natural Area Network in Puna Important Agricultural Lands (TALI and Agricultural Lands of Importance tq the State of Hawaii (ALISH} ® Proposed Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone Natural Area Reserve -Forest Reserve ~ National Park HILO L(rt.XiAit~ i'ICW /,.... RE.VAU SFr w~ ` ~ ' ~,; ' IAWAIIAOKA!„,. J~acif i_^ wean v ~ YARK O cMtCIt1UL.NU - -L ttAlLti O F• ~~ W /~~ IIA NIAN 6. PnRKSANU GKS f$TA R emon IPw+ ~ ~~,N~ 1,~,~. i. Ka{R1t1,TppBKgL' ,, , =ti O Pmitr>vrjPark Public t~rks Sc~rric Ccxricicxs Trai l Trafl ,4tlHnrt>Pnt To Be Detem~inrxl 3-21 MANAGING GROWTH This page left intentionally blank 3-22 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 CHAPTER TRANSPORTATION Sprawl development is increasingly evident in the travel patterns of Puna residents. At present, most of Puna's workforce commutes by personal vehicle to employment locations outside of the district, primarily to Hilo. Residents also make frequent trips to Hilo for shopping and services. About a quarter of the workforce carpools, but congestion is growing along Puna's principal corridors during peak commute periods. State highways are the primary transportation routes. Highway 11 between Kurtistown and Hilo and Highway 130 between Pahoa and Kea`au carry the greatest amount of traffic during peak commuting periods. Most roads in Puna's nonconforming subdivisions are privately owned, often in poor physical condition and not designed for through traffic. There are many missing connections between the road networks of adjacent subdivisions. The present circulation network, combined with the district's sprawl development pattern, results in a number of problems: • There is a lack of alternative routes for emergency access, especially when highways are blocked by a traffic crash or downed utility pole, or when there is a natural disaster such as a hurricane, tsunami, lava flow or earthquake that requires evacuation; • Highways become more congested during peak periods due to the lack of alternative roadways; • Highway intersections with substandard private streets are dangerous due to inadequate lighting or intersection controls, combined with high traffic speed along the highway; • It is difficult for the County's Mass Transit Agency (MTA) to operate an efficient Hele-On Bus service that offers a viable travel option for a large number of Puna residents, especially those in more remote areas; • There are few facilities for walking or bicycling, even in more built-up areas; and • It can be life-threatening to cross Highways 130 and 11 on foot. This is particularly true for youth, the elderly and the disabled. The Puna Community Development Plan seeks to promote more efficient and environmentally responsible travel by limiting demand for commuting and other trips; promoting mass transit and alternative travel modes; and providing alternate routes to reduce trip lengths and travel time. 4-1 TRANSPORTATION 4.1 TRAFFIC DEMAND MANAGEMENT ' The long-term remedy for the problem of commuter traffic is to transform the pattern of land use and economic activity to reduce the travel demand to Hilo and other destinations beyond Puna. Making this shift is a key goal of the Puna Community Development. Shorter-term ' relief from the crush of commuting traffic can be achieved by diverting some of this travel to mass transit and ride-sharing or by reducing peak period traffic volumes via telecommuting and staggered work hours. Communications technology can do much to reduce the need to travel, particularly in rural areas like Puna. For example, the provision of free wireless access to the Internet can enable more home occupations, provide back-up for emergency and everyday communications, ' and expand the spectrum of quality life experiences for Puna residents. County, State and/or Federal expenditures to provide free wireless access are justifiable as a means to avoid or defer at least some of the cost and environmental impact of making very expensive and extensive improvements to Puna's deficient roadway network. 4.1.1 Goals ' a. The percentage of single-occupancy vehicles during peak commute periods is reduced. b. The percentage of residents who commute to employment or travel for services outside of Puna is reduced. ' c. Reliance on fossil fuels for transportation is reduced. 4.1.2 Objectives ' a. Promote ride-sharing, van-pools, and car-pooling. b. Expand telecommuting opportunities. ' c. Provide more services and employment within Puna's village and town centers. d. Create new employment opportunities in Puna in order to reduce long commuting. 4.1.3 Actions a. Promote van pool and ride-sharing alternatives more actively by working through major employers and large institutions such as UH Hilo and HCC, which can offer incentives ' such as preferential parking for ride-share vehicles. b. Promote staggered work hours and telecommuting with major employers and institutions as a means to reduce peak period traffic, focusing on the following: ' - Researching and implementing telecommuting and staggered work hours for County and State employees; and - Researching feasibility of starting iTH Hilo classes no earlier than 9:30 a.m. c. Facilitate telecommuting by developing a wireless communications network that enables most Puna residents to gain free access to the Internet. Refer to related Action c in Section 3.4. 4-2 L PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 4.2 MASS TRANSIT Poor road conditions, combined with incomplete connectivity in the street system and a dispersed pattern of development, make it challenging to devise and sustain a viable mass transit system for Puna. The County's Hele-On bus operates aHilo-Pahoa route along Highway 130 five times a day, and aHilo-Ka`u route along Highway 11 once a day. These are long, circuitous routes that, while providing reasonably good coverage to more remote areas, also results in high operating costs and lengthy trip time that discourages ridership. While the 2000 Census indicated that less than 1% of Puna's workforce commuted by bus, ridership more than doubled after the County initiated a free fare service between Pahoa and Hilo in 2005. This demonstrated the potential demand for transit service that could be expanded with other improvements and initiatives, such as more convenient routes and schedules, marked stops, park and ride facilities, transit centers, and marketing programs. The County Mass Transit Agency (MTA) is currently planning significant system improvements by converting to a "hub-and-spoke" system, consisting of the following elements: • Large Hele-On coaches operating frequent runs on a shorter route between Hilo and a primary Puna "hub" at Kea`au and secondary hubs at Pahoa and other village centers near highways. • Paratransit vans to pick-up passengers who have called in from outlying areas to be brought to one of the transit hubs. • Central coordination by MTA of all paratransit services, including those operated by social service agencies for designated residents with special needs. • Park-and-ride lots at transit hubs and possibly other locations. 4.2.1 Goals a. Mass transportation options are increased for all Puna residents. b. Transit service and improvements reinforce and complement the development of village/town centers. c. A greater percentage of commuters use mass transit. 4.2.2 Objectives a. Convert the present Hele-On Bus routes and services to a "hub-and-spoke" system, with paratransit vehicles bringing passengers from outlying areas to Hele-On Bus hubs and also distributing passengers within the Hilo area. b. Coordinate County transit services with special needs paratransit services and school transportation. c. Provide park-and ride lots at key regional sites to promote commuter ridership. d. Strengthen County capability and resources to operate the transit system and increase ridership. e. Ensure that pedestrians can access bus stops safely. 4-3 TRANSPORTATION 4.2.3 Actions a. Prepare aCounty-wide Transit Master Plan to provide an overall framework for transit improvements while incorporating user input from each district. b. Improve transit service operations by: ' - Increasing transit service to a minimum of two additional runs during peak hours; - Establishing demand responsive transit in subdivisions; - Providing commuter express bus service from Pahoa to Hilo and Volcano to Hilo; ' and - Establishing chub-and-spoke transit system, in which transit circulators are teamed with trunk routes on major highways. c. Develop transit hubs at the following locations: - Kea`au (Primary Hub): In-town location near commercial centers or on State lands adjacent to the soccer fields; second site could include a new Mass Transit Agency ' (MTA) baseyard and headquarters; - Pahoa (Secondary Hub): On County-owned sites, either adjacent to Pahoa Community Center or on Highway 130 near Kahakai Boulevard where the new fire ' and police stations are planned; - Volcano (Secondary Hub): Either at Cooper Center or on other available land; and 1 - Mountain View or South Kulani (Secondary Hub). d. Provide park-and-ride lots at the transit hubs and within Hawaiian Paradise Park at one or two of the proposed village/town center sites, where the community-owned parcel could serve as a parking lot for commuters, as well as a location for farmers' markets. e. Provide express bus service for commuters from Pahoa to Hilo and Volcano to Hilo. Local buses or paratransit services could feed into selected stops in order to service broader areas. f. Develop a cooperative program with the Department of Education and private schools to provide student passes for the Hele-On Bus. ' g. Launch a public education campaign promoting transit services, tailoring them to target populations such as youth, commuters, and the elderly. h. Cultivate public/private partnerships, such as employer-sponsored bus passes. i. Expand the staff of the Mass Transit Agency to provide greater support for public relations, route planning and coordination, technical operations and fleet management. j. Investigate other incentives to increase ridership, such as continuance of free fare program, convenient bus ticketing systems, reduced monthly rates for residents and special needs populations, adding airport and post office service and tourist passes. k. Work with Hawaii Department of Transportation (DOT) in creating safe pedestrian ' conditions for using mass transit 4.3 ROADWAY NETWORK The principal routes in Puna are four State-owned highways, which are covered in the following section. Presently, the County maintains nearly 188 miles of roads in Puna, including 4-4 1 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 some that serve as collector roads and emergency access routes, as well as some local paved streets in a limited number of subdivisions. Roads within most subdivisions are privately-owned and maintained by community road maintenance associations. Most of the roads are narrow and lack paving, lighting, traffic control signs and drainage systems. In many sections, there is inadequate sight distance due to sharp curves or irregular road gradients. There is also poor roadway connectivity between most subdivisions, which means that one must take a circuitous route to travel from one subdivision to another. This, in turn, puts an additional strain on the highways and the few collector streets in the network. Of greater concern to public safety in an area prone to natural hazards, there are few alternative routes for emergency access and evacuation. The rapidly developing subdivisions whose principal access is Highway 130 are of particular concern. To help alleviate traffic congestion along Highway 130 during peak periods and provide an alternate route, the County of Hawaii General Plan and the Puna Regional Circulation Plan (2005) propose a Puna Makai Alternative Route (PMAR). However, these plans did not resolve the alignment and design for PMAR through Hawaiian Paradise Park (HPP). While the concept of a limited access parkway has merit, it would be very difficult to acquire right-of-way for this through a large subdivision such as HPP in a timely and cost- effective manner. Therefore, a shorter route through HPP is a more practical and less disruptive alternative to implement within the time-frame of this plan. 4.3.1 Goals a. There are adequate emergency and evacuation routes and connectivity throughout Puna's roadway network. b. Improvements are phased so that short-term actions support and lead toward projects that will take a longer time to implement. c. Roadways are pedestrian and bicycle friendly. d. Traffic congestion and traffic-related health risks are reduced. 4.3.2 Objectives a. Create alternative, redundant routes for existing Highways 11, 130 and 132 utilizing existing routes wherever possible. b. Develop PMAR along the general route shown in Figure 4-1, with the specific design and alignment to be determined based on an environmental impact study that identifies a project having the least environmental and socio-economic impact. c. Designate new connectivity points for local traffic and emergency and evacuation routes within the existing roadway network. d. Develop a phased implementation plan for coordinated actions by County and State transportation and public works departments. e. Improve appropriate "roads in limbo" that are used widely for public access. 4-5 1 TRANSPORTATION a 4.3.3 Actions a. Short Term (2008-2012) - Plan and design the PMAR alignment through an environmental impact statement process that meets Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) standards and therefore qualifies the project for FHWA funding; - Require building setbacks within HPP lots along the designated PMAR alignment, as necessary, to reserve the potential for a future PMAR extension through the remainder of HPP; - Establish emergency routes, using mostly existing road beds; - Include pedestrian and bicycling requirements in all projects; and - Create connectivity alignments between the following subdivisions: Hawaiian Acres and Fern Acres, Fern Acres and Kopua Farm Lots, Eden Rock and Fern Forest, ' Orchidland and Hawaiian Acres, Nanawale and Hawaiian Beaches/Shores, Hawaiian Beaches and HPP, Kea`au Agricultural Lots and a site adjacent to Kea`au Elementary School, Ohia Estates and Royal Hawaiian. These inter-subdivision roads should be staggered, low-impact, and multi-modal. The general locations are indicated as ovals in Figure 4-1. b. Medium Term (2012-2017) - Construct a two-lane PMAR roadway that connects Kaloli Drive between approximately 16th Avenue and 10th Avenue in HPP to either Highway 11 or Highway 130 in the vicinity of Kea`au; - Construct atwo-lane, unpaved, gated emergency access roadway between Kahakai Boulevard to HPP which can later be converted into a future extension of PMAR; and - Construct atwo-lane roadway between Nanawale and Kahakai Boulevard that can be ' used as both an emergency access route and a future extension of PMAR. - Study the need, desirability and feasibility of adding an alternative route between Pahoa and Highway 11 and between Highway 11 and Stainback Highway in the ' stretch between Glenwood and Kurtistown, as generally depicted on Figure 4-1. c. Long Term (2017-2030) - Construct Phase II segments of PMAR, as generally depicted in Figure 4-1. - Acquire additional right-of-way via land pooling, exchanges, and other means to extend PMAR through Hawaiian Paradise Park; - If increased traffic demand indicates, construct the PMAR extension through the remainder of HPP, as depicted generally in Figure 4.1, and convert the emergency access route from Kahakai Drive to HPP as a PMAR extension by removing the gate and paving the surface; 4.4 HIGHWAYS ' There are four highways within the district of Puna: 4-6 1 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 • Volcano Road (Highway 11), which provides access to and from Hilo, serves the upper Puna region, and connects Puna to Ka`u; • Puna Road (Highway 130), which runs from Kea`au to Kalapana-Kaimu, providing access from upper to lower Puna; • Kapoho Road (Highway 132), which spans between Pahoa and Kapoho; and • Puna Coast Road (Highway 137), which links Kapoho to Kalapana-Kaimu. All of these highways are under the jurisdiction of the State of Hawaii Department of Transportation (DOT). Generally speaking, these highways are designed to facilitate efficient vehicular travel according to standards that are based on operational characteristics, including speed limits, projected traffic volumes at various periods, and locations where vehicles enter and exit the highway. Pedestrian, bicycle, and mass transit travel have been typically secondary considerations, although Federal programs and funding are available to address the specific needs for these travel modes and incorporating them into the design and improvement of State highways. While the County does not have control over State highways, the Puna Community Development Plan urges DOT to integrate multi-modal travel, emphasize safety and traffic calming over efficient travel speed, and incorporate aesthetic features into the design and improvement of highways. 4.4.1 Goals a. Highways have design features that improve traffic safety and reduce collisions, particularly at intersections. . b. Highway design is more aesthetically pleasing and compatible with the natural and rural character of Puna. c. Increased County and community influence over highway planning and design decisions. 4.4.2 Objectives a. Make intersection improvements along highways that allow safer access from intersecting streets as a priority over traffic speed on the highway, giving preference to the use of roundabouts. b. Consider roundabouts as a means to control private driveway access to major highways with higher traffic volumes, such as Highway 130. c. Use native landscaping for highway improvements and connectivity points, emphasizing the retention of native vegetation. d. Incorporate traffic-calming features into highway design in preference to signage and signalization, where possible. 4.4.3 Actions All the following are recommendations to DOT. a. Short Term (2008-2012) 4-7 TRANSPORTATION - Make interim intersection improvements on Highways 11 and 130; ' - Reduce speed limit on Highway 130 to 45 mph between the Kea'au bypass and `Ainaloa Boulevard; - Conduct a study to determine the most efficacious way to create greater highway safety for all travel modes, including a cost benefit analysis for each studied method, and consideration of a wide range of traffic calming features, the use of frontage roads and various types of intersection controls; and - Implement the Shoulder Lane conversion project between the Kea'au Bypass and Shower Drive/Pohaku Drive as a reversible lane to accommodate AM and PM peak periods. ' b. Medium Term (2012-2017) - Increase capacity on Highway 130 between the Kea'au Bypass road and `Ainaloa Boulevard, utilizing the results of the study of highway safety alternatives described above; - Construct an exit right lane on Highway 11 below Kea`au Agricultural lots to Kea`au Village using the existing Old Volcano Road right-of--way; and - Create a right hand turn lane from Highway 132 onto Highway 130. 4.5 NON-MOTORIZED TRAVEL AND SCENIC BYWAYS Within Puna, bicycle and pedestrian facilities are very limited. Two multi-use trails of significant length are planned. One is the restoration and improvement of Old Volcano Trail, which roughly parallels Highway 11 for a length of about 14 miles between Kea`au and Volcano. The other is Puna Railroad Bikeway, which, as the name implies, follows the alignment of the former railroad and a portion of Railroad Avenue, and would extend between Kapoho and Hilo, traversing Hawaiian Paradise Park (HPP). The first project is now underway, but the second project requires acquisition of a substantial amount of right-of-way from private owners before it can proceed. When completed, these trails will offer not only a recreational opportunity, but also a safe and attractive route for alternative travel modes between populated areas and places of employment and commercial and community services. Scenic Byways are somewhat of a hybrid between a highway and a trail. Typically, they are not used for heavy vehicular traffic or primarily for utilitarian purposes. They incorporate pullover areas for vehicles at scenic spots and usually make provisions for bicycling or hiking. There also special design controls on signage, landscaping and other roadway features. Federal funds are available for corridors that are designated as a Scenic Byway. Puna's Highway 137 (Red Road) is a good candidate for this designation. Section 4.3 pointed out that lack of road connectivity between subdivisions discourages direct travel routes and impairs access in event of emergencies, but lack of connectivity is also problem within many of the internal subdivision street networks. In HPP, for example, the length of blocks between the mauka-makai collector streets is about one mile. This discourages walking and bicycling to make short trips from one block to another because there are no pathways that cut through the mile-long block to allow a more direct route. If village centers are 4-8 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 created within existing subdivisions, which is a central part of the vision of the Puna Community Development Plan, then there will be more local trips. Consequently, new routes need to be created within subdivisions to facilitate these shorter trips -not just by vehicle, but also walking and bicycling. If land pooling is used to create the village center, the. same process can be used to obtain rights-of-way for the new pathways. Alternatively, the subdivision owners' association could acquire 10-20 foot wide easements straddling lots line for these passageways, but County financial and/or legal assistance would probably be necessary to do this. 4.5.1 Goals a. There are safe walking and bicycling routes to schools, parks and bus stops. b. There are safe pedestrian crossings on Highways 130 and 11, particularly Highway 130. c. Puna has a network of contiguous scenic trails between and within subdivisions for walking, bicycling, and horseback-riding. d. Village/town centers incorporate walking and bicycling paths. e. Routes are designated and improved as scenic byways. 4.5.2 Objectives a. Implement a Safe Routes to School (SR2S) programs for all schools in Puna. b. Survey, acquire rights-of-way for, and develop historic trails for non-motorized travel, which may also be used partially as emergency vehicle or evacuation routes, when needed. c. Identify and develop improvement plans for scenic byways. d. Encourage the identification and preservation of historic trails throughout the district. 4.5.3 Actions a. Request that the State allocate in the State Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP) a larger share of Federal "flex funds" (i.e., the Section 402 program funds) for projects in Puna from highway capacity improvements to transit-related and alternative travel mode improvements, including pedestrian and bicycle safety. b. Allocate funding to the County Department of Public Works to make improvements such as sidewalk and crosswalks, traffic signage and acquisition of access easements based on recommendations of a safe routes to schools/parks assessment. A priority project is the construction of a walkway bikeway between Kea'au Agricultural lots and the Kea`au Elementary and High Schools. c. Invest in walkways, bicycle facilities, "park-once" lots, landscape improvements, themed signage programs and transit stops in approved village/town centers. d. Allocate additional funding to the County Police Department to consistently monitor traffic operations along safe routes to schools/parks and enforce against traffic code violations. e. Complete surveys, acquisition of right-of-way, maintenance agreements, planning and design, and construction for multi-purpose trails, including: 4-9 TRANSPORTATION - Old Volcano Trail, extending between points near Volcano and the Puna Railroad ' Bikeway; - Railroad Avenue (portions of which are known as Railroad Right-of-Way), extending between points near Kapoho and Panaewa; - Old Puna Trail (portions of which are known as Old Government Road or Beach Road), extending between points near Kapoho and Hilo; and - All coastal trails. Trails may also be used as emergency access routes, where appropriate. f. Improve Highway 137 (Red Road) as a scenic corridor by: - Requiring a 15-foot easement along the frontage of private properties along the corridor within which native and mature trees of non-invasive species must be retained, unless they are in poor health due to natural conditions, not due to malicious acts, and/or pose a threat to public health and safety; - Preserving Mango, Kamani, and Monkeypod groves and tree tunnels; - Providing property tax relief to owners who maintain the easement in the manner ' intended and State tax credits to those who replant easements with non-invasive plant material approved by the County; - Adding interpretive markers and small visitor parking areas at historical sites, such as the two Kehena sites listed in the General Plan; - Providing pullouts along the highway at intervals so that travelers can stop to enjoy the scenery without conflict with traffic in travel lanes; - Delineating and maintaining physical access to the shoreline at appropriate locations on the makai side of the road; - Minimizing tree pruning by using special, shielded cable for overhead utility lines or by undergrounding sections of the line; - Minimizing excessive lighting by limiting street lights to major intersections and informing residents along the corridor about how to reduce illumination of driveways; - Adding a restroom and emergency phone below Seaview before Kehena Beach; - Creating a simple walking trail on the lava and new parking area with restrooms on the State owned accretion land at the new Kaimu Beach; - Posting warning signs, where appropriate, in newly realigned sections; and ' - Covering old section of road with cinder soil to allow Naupaka to reclaim the land. 4-10 t PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 Figure 4-1: Proposed Transportation Corridor Improvements 1 1 a z.s s ~a NNIe:, ,__~ .. `'J Hlb hl~cai ~~~ rius~ ,, +~ ~ ''~OfdPunaTrail Fa fiib Mmtka„ ~` ~~~ TaNav~ 1t Gr 13C ~~ .~ TO h Op' 7 (0UC51f~ kFP} v "~ / Tr K2i<di~ ~~ ~`~. ~a~~ft~ ~~~~ ~ w ~a va€rort ~~~ t' r r 3 e ~~ Intersection Improvements --- Potential FxtensionlConneUlon - Phase t PM,+1R -~-- Phase ILPMAR StrErt connectors ---- Scenic Corridors -Trail - Scenic Ccxridor UnpavEd ____ Trail AliRrment °""ji°,;"'A"" ,""~",,,,,,~ To Be Detemiinec! Note: The ovals representing "Street Connectors" in the above map indicate the general areas where road connections between existing streets in adjoining subdivisions will be located, subject to a planning, site selection and design process involving the owners and residents of the affected subdivisions (see Section 4.3.3 a.) 4-11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TRANSPORTATION This page left intentionally blank. 4-12 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 CHAPTER IMPLEMENTATION The County shall create acommunity-based body to advocate for the implementation of the actions proposed in this plan. This chapter provides more detailed guidance for the implementation of key elements of the plan - i.e., strategies for the protection of natural and cultural features and the formation of village centers as a growth management tool. At the end of the chapter is a matrix that lists each of the actions set forth in the previous chapters, identifies the lead and supporting organizations responsible for implementing the action, and the estimated cost of the action, if it is a major capital improvement. 5.1 NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION 5.1.1 Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone (Volcano Area) Below are suggested provisions for regulating and monitoring uses and activities in the proposed Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone (BRBZ) that is described in Section 2.2, Action a. • Establish standards for maximum land disturbance within the BRBZ, including building footprints, impervious surface, and clearance of vegetation within setbacks. rights-of-way or easements for utility lines, roadways, driveways and trails with the objective of allowing reasonable use of property and structures while not diminishing the larger goal of protecting the natural resources and `Ohi`a canopy of the Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone District; • Develop a system to monitor the `Ohi`a forest canopy of the BRBZ to be used as a measure of success in conservation of the region's forest resources; • Adapt and develop a set of economic incentives designed to reduce forest clearance, reduce the number of developable lots, reduce total development rights within the BRBZ and transfer development rights within or out of the BRBZ; • Establish mitigation standards and procedures that provide guidelines for the restoration and re-planting of recently developed areas, including those that were disturbed by unauthorized activity; • Adopt an ordinance that would direct and fund the Public Works Director to commission a study to identify the flood paths and source areas in the BRBZ, and to design and recommend ordinance language to implement innovative ways to reduce the scale and impacts of flooding, including the acquisition of or rights to strategic vacant, forested lots to use for absorbing floodwaters; • Establish provisions for "small-footprint" designs for septic tanks to reduce the need for lot grading; • Create and appoint anine-member advisory committee with expertise in the area's ecology, natural areas, and history to assist in developing standards, project reviews and public education programs related to the BRBZ; 5-1 IMPLEMENTATION • Request, via County Council resolution, that the State Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) consider designating its unencumbered lands near Wright Road for either Natural Area Reserve or at least Forest Reserve status; • Amend the General Plan to recognize the purpose and intent of the BRBZ and acknowledge its role as part of an integrated Federal, State and County strategy to protect a unique natural resource of global significance; and • Re-zone agricultural- and residential zoned lots to zoning districts that closely match their present lot size to discourage further subdivision and development within the BRBZ. 1 5.1.2 Revised Grading and Grubbing Controls (District-wide) Below are suggested revisions to County grading and grubbing regulations to protect native forests and geological and cultural features. • Support ongoing vegetation mapping projects to identify areas where good quality native forest exists. When reliable mapping is available, establish protected areas of existing good quality native forest where grading, grubbing, and other land clearing ' would be limited to reasonably accommodate a homesite, some open areas for yards, gardens, or landscaping, and driveways, with preservation of a perimeter forested area. Allow additional clearing only for bona fide agricultural activities, and verify that agriculture is actually being conducted. • Support efforts by the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) to create a Geographic Information System (GIS) database of known archaeological and historical sites. Once the database is available, require implementation of protective measures, such as fencing, for all grading and grubbing in the vicinity of known sites, except where prior SHPD authorization has been obtained. • Require that applications for grading and grubbing permits contain the following property authorizations and certifications: - Written authorization of the lot owner and proof of ownership, such as a real property tax record or deed. - Certification by a licensed surveyor that: (1) the lot being prepared for development is the right Tax Map Key (TMK) parcel; (2) the proposed development area (size) is correct; and (3) all required building setbacks are outside of the planned site development prior to approval to begin site work. • Require that yards and native trees at other locations on the site that are designated for preservation be clearly staked or flagged prior to and during land preparation, clearing and construction, and that notice of the grading and grubbing work be posted on the property frontage, visible from the access road. • Establish stiffer penalties for violations of these grading and grubbing restrictions ' than for other types of zoning or grading violations because, while most of the latter types of violations can be corrected by remedial work, it is difficult to restore cultural 5-2 1 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 sites, unique geological features or native forests, especially the removal of a significant stand of mature trees. 5.2 VILLAGE/TOWN CENTER FORMATION 5.2.1 Zoning Designations Village and town centers are expected to include a mix of uses, including small-lot and higher density residential, retail and office commercial, service-type light industrial, and public and quasi-public facilities, such as schools, churches and parks. Some of the proposed centers already contain many of these "urban" uses, and even a limited amount of zoned area to accommodate expansion of these uses. Other proposed village centers -namely, those within most of the nonconforming subdivisions -have no urban-type zoning and little or no existing commercial activity or public facilities. Most of the larger subdivisions, however, contain community-owned lots that have been designated for community uses. While these lots provide a potential location for a Village center of suitable size, they lack the zoning -and usually the infrastructure - to fulfill this potential. Because the formation of village and town centers is a keystone of the Puna Community Development Plan's growth management theme, and many of the proposed village centers require land assembly and significant infrastructure improvements, the maps defining the location of the village centers are not meant to imply that the landowner(s) of the affected area may apply directly for re-zoning in the conventional way. Instead, the following approaches will be used for the zoning of villageltown centers: • All commercial, light industrial, residential and quasi-public uses within village centers shall be authorized under the "floating zone" method; i.e., where the village center zoning district is defined in zoning code, but is not applied to a specific parcel or group of parcels until an application is made for approval of the zoning map by the County. • The village/town center floating zone may supersede existing zoning designations, provided that the uses are located within the areas designated as village center. • The floating zone may also allow mixed use within a building and establish special, place-appropriate development and design standards, including for public facilities. • If the village center site is on land that is owned by an entity that owns at least 50 acres of land elsewhere in Puna, the intensity of uses in the villageltown center may be augmented by the amount of development potential that is transferred from nearby agricultural-zoned and residential-zoned properties that lie outside of the designated village center. Development potential will be measured by "Potential Dwelling Units" (PDUs); i.e., the number of dwelling units that could be developed on the agricultural-zoned or residential-zoned land under its zoning classification, as determined by minimum allowable lot area, assuming one dwelling per lot. 5-3 ' IMPLEMENTATION • More intensive residential development, including multi-family dwellings, within and ' in the immediate vicinity of village/town centers may be allowed by the transfer of development rights from other areas using a variety of mechanisms, including the process described above, land pooling, planned unit development and development agreements. • Public and quasi-public uses, such as schools, churches and community centers, may be developed within village centers without the transfer of PDUs. The development of such uses outside of a village center by Special Permit will be discouraged, unless there is a compelling reason to locate the facility in an outlying area due to its particular characteristics or circumstances. I • Existing buildings with existing commercial, industrial and residential zones in village/town centers may be repaired, replaced or expanded without a floating zone review procedure. However, vacant parcels and new buildings within these zoning districts will require review for compliance with the applicable floating zone standards. 5.2.2 Criteria for Proposed Locations and Boundaries The Puna Community Development Plan (PCDP) defines three types of centers - regional, community, and neighborhood -which differ in size and range of uses according to ' their intended function (see Table 5-1.) The maps toward the end of this chapter indicate the suggested locations for the village centers in greater detail, based on the following criteria: 1 • Size of the village/town center according to its intended type and purpose. Land areas need to be large enough to accommodate their intended purpose. Regional Town Centers are estimated to require more than 30 acres of commercial land use; ' Community Village Centers an estimated 10 to 30 acres; and Neighborhood Village Centers about 5 to 10 acres. In addition, there should be land available for community and residential uses within the village center. • Urban zoning and/or uses of an urban character. A State Urban District designation, existing commercial and/or residential zoning, and the visible presence of built form sometimes indicate at least an embryonic form of a village center. Within some of the non-conforming subdivisions, however, these conditions are lacking or minimal. • Public uses or facilities, especially those that people frequently visit. Where possible, village centers should either encompass or be located adjacent to existing community facilities such as churches, schools, parks, and community centers to promote convenient walking, bicycling and transit access to these uses. 1 • Consistency with an applicable community-based plan. The locations of proposed centers in Volcano, Orchidland and Hawaiian Paradise Park were identified in plans that were prepared by their respective community associations. 5-4 1 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 Land owned by a community or subdivision association. Several subdivisions and communities have land that is owned by either a community association or the County that offers an opportunity to develop and use as part of a center. Availability of vacant private lots for development of clustered housing or new pathways. Groups of adjacent vacant lots in nonconforming subdivisions may sometimes be incorporated into a potential village center or be used to create improved access to the village center from surrounding lots. The use of vacant lots minimizes the displacement of homeowners and reduces complications in land assembly. Ease of access to village center from surrounding populated areas. Village and town centers should have convenient to access to travel routes. The larger town centers generally need to be located near, but not necessarily directly on, highways. Smaller village centers may be located at some distance from highways, but there should be convenient walking and bicycling, as well as driving, routes to the village center for the people living in the communities that the village centers support. The maps shown in this chapter are not meant to be precise or strictly interpreted, but rather as guidelines for reviewing the requests for village center floating zone designation, at which time the boundaries will be fixed. 5.2.3 Use and Design Standards Land uses, design themes and architectural and site design standards for each village/town center will be determined through the floating zone site approval process. Table 5- 1provides guidance on the scale, uses, and general site and design characteristics for three types of town village centers. Some existing locations are proposed for possible Special Design District treatment, as noted in Section 2.1.3, Action b. A Special Design District would provide more detailed design guidance on the development of village centers that exhibit historic development patterns that define a unique "sense of place." The strongest candidates for Special Design District designation in Puna, in relative order, are: Volcano Village presently has a small, legally recognized historic district. According to a 1993 inventory by the Hawaii State Historic Division, Volcano has a high concentration of historic structures, mostly residential dwellings. Most of these are outside of the designated historic district. The inventory can serve as a basis for establishing both the boundaries of the Special Design District and the design parameters for development within it.s A major decision to make, with the involvement of affected property owners and residents, is the extent to which the demolition, renovation and addition to existing historic dwellings will be controlled by design standards, and what those standards will be. In addition design standards for new developments need to be identified and described. s Boone Morrison Architects, Inc., for the Department of Land and Natural Resources, Historic Preservation Division, Volcano Village Historic Building Inventory, 1993. 5-5 IMPLEMENTATION Landscape standards are also appropriate for Volcano, although issues related to lot clearance could also be addressed in regulatory controls other than the Special Design District. • Pahoa Town has a main street -the former highway route before the construction of the by-pass road -that still retains much of the original ' streetwall of plantation-era structures, as well as some significant stand-alone buildings. Most of the uses are commercial or civic. There has been no historic structure inventory on the scale or level of detail as the Volcano inventory. Some ' of the older buildings in Pahoa appear to be in deteriorated physical condition. Also, Pahoa does not enjoy the same level of prosperity as Volcano, so a low- interest loan program for businesses and building owners would probably be 1 needed to complement a Special Design District. The County has acquired a large tract of land within Pahoa Town, which presents a significant opportunity for community revitalization and a possible catalyst for economic activity. • Kea `au Town also has roots as a plantation town, but has lost many of the buildings and other physical features of that era. Nevertheless, it retains some of the character of an older rural town with the informal arrangement of i buildings and scale, roof forms, exterior materials and colors of buildings. It also includes some notable landscape features, including mature canopy trees and the line of towering roadside palms between Ola`a Community Center and Kea`au ' High School. As noted earlier, since most of the land in Kea`au is held by a single owner (Shipman Estate), there is an opportunity to carry an integrated design theme throughout the town without necessarily adopting a Special Design 1 District. The landowner has retained planning and design consultants who are presently engaged in developing design guidelines. • Mountain View-to-Kurtistown is a corridor that includes small settlements dating from plantation days and earlier that have been historically connected to Volcano and Kea`au by transport routes. There are still some buildings and small areas where there is evidence of an historic development pattern. A limitation is that Highway 11 bisects Mountain View, which makes it difficult to preserve the design integrity of an older settlement. The more generic design guidelines for Community Village Centers, in addition to some direct measures -such as relocating Mountain View Elementary School away for the highway, as recommended by one of the Working Groups -may be a more effective strategy for this corridor than Special Design District designation. 1 5-6 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 Service Area Population Typical Uses Commercial Land Area Commercial Floor Area Other Uses Design Character Access Table 5-1 General Use and Design Criteria by Village/Town Center Type Reginnal Tnwn ('antPr C'nmmnn;ty V;llaaa ('Pntar lvo;..t,t,.,~t,.,.,.t v:n.,,.o ro...~.. 20,000 to 50,000 residents 7,000 to 15,000residents 3,000 to 6,000 residents More than 40 tenant spaces for full range of retail and 20 to 40 small tenant spaces 5 to15 small tenant spaces personal services, repair for retail and personal for convenience retail and shops and other light services, repair shops personal services industrial uses More than 30 acres 10-30 acres Up to 10 acres Up to 250,000 squaze feet Up to 150,000 square feet aggregate, but no tenant aggregate, but no tenant Up to 50 000 square feet spaces larger than 50,000 spaces larger than 25,000 , s uaze feet. s uare feet. Neighborhood park, Regional park; schools (all Community pazk, elementary elementary school, multi- rades communi hall, g )' ty or middle school purpose meeting room or theater; outdoor events azea; , community center and (minimum) place to bed-and-breakfast homes outdoor events area; bed- congregate or post and small inns; elderly or and-breakfast homes and community notices; outdoor others cial needs housin 1~ g> small inns; elderly or other events area (e.g., bazbeques transit hub; medical facility special needs housing; transit and farmer's markets); small with emergency room; stop; medical clinic; wallting bed-and-breakfast homes; police and fire station; and bicycling paths. transit (or pazatransit) stop; walking and bicycling paths. connections to walking and bic clip aths. Vernacular architecture that Informal vernacular respects the historic context , azchitecture that utilizes and scale of the community; light industrial uses on natural exterior materials and Informal vernacular periphery to avoid building earth-tone colors and respects the context and , architecture that is small in forms or activities that scale of the community scale and reflects a rural conflict with the pedestrian- , especially where historic residential ambience, using oriented character in the structures are present such natural exterior materials and Town Center core; small , as in Volcano Village and earth-tone colors. repair shops in Town Center the older area of Mountain core subject to View erformance/desi n criteria. . Access to one or more paved Access to one or more paved Access to a paved road, roads; commercial or public roads; commercial or public except that there should be uses without direct driveway uses without direct driveway no direct access or visibility access to Highway 11 or access to Highway 11 or from either Highway 11 or Highway 130. Highway 130; no "drive- " Highway 130; no "drive- thru commercial use. thru" commercial use. 5-7 t 1 1 1 1 1 IMPLEMENTATION Kea`au Regional Town Center The Kea`au Town Center consists of two parts. The area bounded by Highway 11 and the Highway 130 By-Pass, including the original plantation village, for uses that are oriented primarily to residents of the Kea`au community itself. The exceptions are the middle and high school and the post office next to Kea`au Shopping Center, which are region-serving facilities. Most uses of a regional orientation - e.g., Shipman Park, the areas already zoned for commercial and light industrial uses, and proposed new police, fire, transit, and medical facilities -are to be located north of Highway 11 to provide convenient vehicular access. The area designated for community-oriented use is 597 acres, approximately 24% of which has been zoned and/or developed for commercial, residential and public/quasi-public use. The area for region-oriented uses covers 331 acres, approximately 50% of which is now zoned or developed for commercial, industrial or public use. Nearly all of the designated village center is within the State Urban District. There is no community-based plan for Kea`au, but the principal landowner, Shipman Estate, has a master plan that indicates not only the development of the area within the designated village center, but, in the long-term, much of their land beyond. Control of most of the land by a single owner facilitates the planning and development of the proposed village center. `'" Keaau Regional VC '~; ~-`~ r ~~ ~ ~. ~ M~ ~~ +'r I.~~» ...~ •, ~ ` ~ ,' ~ i nro~k ~; .,I ~~ \~ ~' \ • ~~ -4C • ~~, Communtit~ Uses a MIK Z /' `o on os } i ' ~ • ~''. ~. •< ~ Re~iona) ~ses ~ ~ ~ a _ • ii l~ `'~ :_. ,t e~ r i ~~1 s r.' a~ " i' • ~'"~ ,.~'~`~'~ ~CommercialZone ~'~~~ ~ ~ _ -Industrial Zone « `"~ ~ Residential Zone (F F ~ 5 ~ , „F( ~ other Zone ~ ~ ~ ~ SLU Urban TMK Parcels 5-8 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 Pahoa Regional Town Center Like Kea`au, Pahoa's village center is divided into two parts. The northern portion straddling Highway 130 at the intersection with the Bypass Road is intended for regional uses and services - e.g., areas already zoned for commercial and light industrial uses; proposed new police, fire, and ambulance facilities; and a proposed transit hub. The area straddling Pahoa Village Road from `Apa`a Street to the intersection of Kapoho Road and Pahoa-Kalapana Road, is intended to contain uses that are oriented primarily to residents of the Pahoa community itself. The exceptions are the post office in the center of town and the intermediate and high school at the southern tip of town, which are region-serving facilities. The area designated for community-oriented use is 280 acres, approximately 66% of which has been zoned and/or developed for commercial, residential and public/quasi-public use. The area for region-oriented uses covers 78 acres, approximately 16% of which is now zoned or developed for commercial, industrial or public use. Nearly all of the designated village center is within the State Urban District. The County has recently acquired a 50 acre parcel near the center of town, which presents a good opportunity to expand the regional park and provide other facilities to stimulate the development of the town core. ~ .~ ~. :_.~ ' ~~~, t ,, -- ~' ..:. Pahoa Regional VC .-- .;~,. ~ h I ~~% ', Rcssiona~ (,,,~ses ~~ ~ py~ to !..,,,. ~ t'ommercaal lone ~,ommunitt~ ~ industrial Lotm Residential Zone ~ses -Other Zone 1 M~ ~~ SLIT Urban ~~ ~ o oxs oo- ,~° 7'M1C Parcles 5-9 li ' IMPLEMENTATION Hawaiian Paradise Park Regional Town Center and Village Centers Hawaiian Paradise Park contains 8,804 parcels; 99% of which are 1 acre or less in size. The subdivision is also developing at a relatively rapid rate because of its proximity to Hilo and affordability of parcels. Six 40-acre areas of land were set aside by the original subdivider for I potential future community and commercial uses. Three of these 40-acre areas have been identified for development as a town or village center. The sites are distributed in a triangular pattern to optimize their accessibility throughout the subdivision. All are adjacent to one of the principal mauka-makai streets in the subdivision. The site closest to Highway 130 is designated as a Regional Town Center, primarily because of the high rate of growth in this quadrant of the subdivision. Land pooling and transfer of development rights to encourage a greater clustering of residential use near this town center is encouraged. The other two sites are designated for the development of a Community and Neighborhood Village Center. The latter is 20 acres in size. The intention in the future is to have all service and community uses located within either the town center or one of the two village centers to reserve outlying properties for ' residential and agricultural use, create activity centers for community and commercial uses, and to promote greater efficiency in travel and infrastructure development. t 5-10 1 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 Volcano Community Village Center As suggested by the Volcano Community Association, the village center in Volcano is split into two locations. The larger of the two sites, along the Old Volcano Highway between Haunani Road and Wright Road, is within the historic core of Volcano. It is roughly 43 acres and entirely within the State Urban District. Portions of this site have County commercial zoning, but the community association's Vision 2020 Update proposes the creation of a Rural Commercial (CR) district with specific design guidelines to respect Volcano's historic character. The description of the CR zoning resembles the criteria for a village center. The second, and smaller, portion of the village center would be at a presently undeveloped site on the other side of Highway 11 between the Maunaloa Estates and Ohia Estates subdivisions. This portion of the village center is intended for more service-oriented businesses. While this site does not contain historic structures, businesses should not be prominently visible or have direct vehicular access to Highway 11. Instead, access to the second portion of the village center would be via a parallel right-of-way remnant of the Old Volcano Highway. ~ \ . _ __~ ~ ~ 1, Volcano Community VC ~ - ~ ~ Kilo-..~ea Rd . - a4- ~ ,. ~ ®4 ~r~rt ~~,-~ - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M ~e _ ~Haweit ~~~~~ ` Rd ih 8Cne1~ ~) ~' ~ ~ a+ ~. 1 1 J I f 1 I i ~. ~ ~tr~~ .. r ~. t ~ . ..... -~._. ~ ~ ~... ~ i ... r ` ~ , _ _ ~ +l .~ 1 ~§r ~ }~ 1 t ~ ~ - 4 _ t - 1 .. - --_ N -__. ~ ' ' - .4.. ~ ~ _ _ - ~ ~ ~ i ~ _ = ~ _ + -Commercial Lone ~ - =_ ~ -Industrial zone ~ ~ -- ~ [ ] Residential Zone ~ __ ~ ~ - # - _. - (hher Zone 1 ~ t _ ~ I l l ~ i ~;Il Itl~f'~ j~ ~~ SLU Urban Q ^r o7s c,• "°`~ 1 TMKParcles ~ c !.tM ~ 5-11 IMPLEMENTATION Mountain View Community Village Center Mountain View already has acommercial-zoned area of more than 3 acres, so its village center is focused on this existing core. The area shown for the village center in the map below is approximately 85 acres and encompasses the existing elementary school, community park, ' Historical Mountain View Theater, A.J. Wyatt Gym and some relatively small residential lots, as well as the commercial core. Highway 11 runs through the village center, providing access from the east and west. Lauko Road runs perpendicular to Highway 11, with the intersection near the middle of the village center. Measures to make crossing Highway 11 safer in this area should be considered, such as a bypass route or signal-controlled crosswalk. ' Some have proposed the relocation of Mountain View Elementary School so that the facility can be converted into a senior community center. Ideally, the new school location would ' be closer to the community park, gym, and small-lot residential area. Having the school closer to the gym and park, would make the community more walkable, with more convenient and safer access for frequent users. Mountain View Community VC ~,, r• ' r1 rchotd . ~ . • Rd.. ' ~ ', i _...~„vann '~. ~, ., . x ~~ ~ ~~~ ~,.~ r-L~ o aw ea> 1~~; ~ !~~ ~. ~' • .„ ~ G.... , -Commercial Zone Industrial Zone ,... Residential Zone - Olher"Lone ~~ ~~SLU Urban ', TMK Parcles Kurtistown Communit Villa a Center Y g ' The Kurtistown Community Village Center, which is aligned along Highway 11, encompasses approximately 35 acres. Approximately 15 acres or 44% of the area is already ' 5-12 1 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 developed. Roughly half of the designated area lies within the State Urban District A little more than 15 acres is zoned for residential use and is occupied by single family dwellings. Approximately 9.5 acres is zoned for commercial use. The largest parcel, at nearly 7 acres, is owned by the County. As part of the village plan, a controlled crosswalk or a by-pass route should be considered in order to make it safer and more convenient to cross Highway 11. ~~_ .r~. , -- ~., ~' t ~ "''~ U„,.~._.-~._ ~ ~ i _ } ~,~ ~ 1 s, -' ; -r Kttrtistown Community VC ,fir t •all • i~~~\ rp ` r _..._.,...,... -,~ nV (~'48ltiale7l}paj ~t1 ~ ~ --~..._ r ,~J/ ilt'~ r i a 4a. ai .... ,._~ . ,. ~ ~ ~ --- ~` t ~i ~_ ti~ ~ ..~ ~ i0 250 Opp 1,009 +s _.. _~. N t r i -Commercial "Lone i -Industrial Zone ' ~ Residential "Lone a ® Other zone ~~ ~ sLU Urban TMK Parcles `Ainaloa Neighborhood Village Center The `Ainaloa Community Association owns three 8.25-acre sites distributed evenly throughout the subdivision. Two of the sites are vacant. The most central of these is suggested as the site for the village center. The site consists of two parcels -one 5.5 acres and the other 2.75 acres -separated by a road. The typical lot size in the subdivision is 0.275 acres. All of the lots immediately surrounding the proposed village center are vacant, so the village center could conceivably be expanded without displacing homeowners. Primary access to the village center would be Tree Fern Drive, Ginger Lane, and Rainbow Drive. These streets, like all the others in `Ainaloa, provide access to the center of the subdivision from the two main paved roads that span the outside edges of the subdivision. 5-13 IMPLEMENTATION 1 1 i 1 1 i 1 1 1 As part of the formation of the village center, it would be useful to consider the creation of a pedestrian way that could also be used for bicycles to provide better access to the village center. The potential alignment is illustrated in the map below. The pedestrian way could be created by acquiring a 5-foot to 10-foot wide easement from properties along their common boundaries. Ainaloa Neighborhood VC ~~,-~ j 1 j ;~ 0 I mr l ~~~..-.scci ~` ~. mi fi ~-Ic/ w ~ _ ,,~i C ~ °' J '31 ~ ~ c: , N m is lS ' a c __.. ' m! ,>, C7 `m ~ ~ _._ m to ,~........~.~ _. ,tn' i ! _ ? --- ~... Proposed Bike! ' i ' ' ~~ Pedestrian Path -Commercial Zone -- - -Industrial Zone Residential Zone '. ' -Other Zone --~ ~. ~ .: SLU Urban F«~ ' TMK Parcles iow i Hawaiian Beaches Neighborhood Village Center The Hawaiian Shores Community Association owns nearly 12 acres at the entrance to the subdivision across the street from the Keonepoko Elementary School. The largest of the association's parcels already contains a 2,304 square foot building, presumably used as a community center. The combined area is suitably sized and situated for a village center. Access to the center would be provided along A`ama Street, Kahakai Boulevard, and Naha Wele. Four vacant parcels across A`ama Street totaling 2.19 acres could be acquired for expansion of the village center. The entire site is within the State Urban District. 5-14 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 ~ ~~ ~; ~- I:-; ,.,..~.. ~,_ c ..d ~ ~ ~~ y! ~ ~~ ..-t \.. i ,. ~ • fv ~ Flawaiian Reaches Neightxxlxxid VC ~ , ~ ~~ i ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~yy~ak8i BMd •~~ ~~ • ~ •~ m +y 7 •~,, JSJIa y` • n m ~ `~ ~~ P r ~. 'm r r r r r r r - Cll('nmerclal Zone -Industrial Zone - ~~~~'. Residential Zoix -Other Zone ~~ ~-, j~~~SLUI7rban ~ 1." ~ no eoo •. ~ o _. 1'MK Parctes Orchidland Neighborhood Village Center , The Orchidland neighborhood village center location was identified by the community association to be "located along Orchidland Drive from Highway 130 to halfway between 34th ' and 35th Avenues", which encompasses 15 parcels and an area of about 16 acres. The area is outside the State Urban District. ~' :: d ~ ,:: .. q~ . t• `, Ckrhidland Neighborhood VC 3 W ~' ~ I i ~ Commercial Zone '. ~ hWustrial Zone '. Re.+irllential Zoiu ~ ' ~ ..~ SLU LJrtwm N" ~ ~ o be r, ~ ~`n° ._.. TMK P:ucles 5-15 1 ' IMPLEMENTATION Nanawale Neighborhood Village Center ' The Nanawale Community Association owns a 23.23-acre vacant parcel at the center of the subdivision that is adequate to serve as a neighborhood village center. Access to the parcel is provided for on all four sides of the parcel. The only special use permitted within the subdivision is a church school facility located in the northwest corner of the subdivision. The majority of parcels within the subdivision are less than a quarter acre in size. The road network through the subdivision is extensive making the proposed village center accessible and convenient. The proposed village center lies within the State Urban District. t 1 ,, __ __ . ~ f i ~ r _ 5-16 1 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 5.3 IMPLEMENTATION TABLE The Implementation Table on the following pages identifies, for each of the proposed actions in the Puna Community Development Plan, the organization(s) responsible for taking the lead or supporting role for implementation, the projected timeframe for implementation, and the estimated cost, in 2007 dollars, of implementing the action, if it is a major capital improvement project. In some cases, the cost could not be determined until further planning work and feasibility study has been completed to better define the scope of the project. Those instances are noted by "TBD" (to be determined.) A key to the organizations referenced in the table is below. Where organizations are co-equal partners in a role, they are separated by a comma. Where one has relatively greater responsibility or authority, they are separated by a diagonal line. Key to Acronyms in Implementation Table BD County of Hawaii Building Department CA Community Association (or subdivision homeowners' association) CC County of Hawaii Corporation Counsel COU County of Hawaii Council DBEDT State of Hawaii Department of Business, Economic Development & Tourism DHHL State of Hawaii Department of Hawaiian Home Lands DLNR State of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources DOE State of Hawaii Department of Education DOT State of Hawaii Department of Transportation DPW County of Hawaii Department of Public Works DWS County of Hawaii Department of Water Supply EMPL Employers (referring to large institutions) FED Federal agencies (various, depending on function) FIN County of Hawaii Department of Finance HCC Hawaii Community College HELCO Hawaii Electric Light Company HFD County of Hawaii Department of Public Works-Building Division HFDC Hawaii Housing Finance & Development Corporation HPD County of Hawaii Police Department DEM County of Hawaii Department of Environmental Management DPR County of Hawaii Department of Parks and Recreation LEG Hawaii State Legislature MTA County of Hawaii Mass Transit Agency NGO Non-governmental organization (non-profit community association, etc.) OHCD County of Hawaii Office of Housing & Community Development PD County of Hawaii Planning Department PUC State of Hawaii Public Utilities Commission R&D County of Hawaii Department of Research and Development UH University of Hawaii at Hilo When implementing the actions listed in the following table, the Working Group and Working Paper report that addresses the relevant topic(s) shall be considered as a reference to provide greater specificity on the location, description and intention of the proposed action. 5-17 1 1 1 IMPLEMENTATION Res nsibil Timetable Esk Cost Section Action Item Lead Su ortin 2008.12 2013.17 2018.30 51,000 200 MALAMA I KA'AINA 2.1.3 Historie, Cultural, and ~ccruc Resources _ A Establish a coun historic reservation commission COU PD X Initiate Special Design District designations for the following (B) areas: Volcano Village PD COU X Pahoa Town PD COU X Kea`au Town PD COU X Kurtistown-Mountain View corridor PD COU X (C) Amend the county building code for traditional Hawaiian DB COU/PD X buildin desi nand construction methods (D) Amend the county grading ordinance to require consultation with the Historic Preservation Division and County Historic COU PDW/PD X Preservation Commission _ 2.2.3 Native Forests a~dGeo# 1calFeaturc~ A Enact a BRBZ Desi n District COU PDIDPW X (B) Amend County code to protect native species, geological COU DPWIPD X and historic features outside of the BRBZ (C) Establish an office of County Ecologist within the Planning COU PD X De artment (D) Provide County support for forest preservation by offering COU FIN,DPW X X X real roe tax reductions and contributin land (E) Reduce the minimum lot size to qualify for the native forest COU FIN X reservation tax reduction and allow it in an zonin district (F) Investigate alternatives to herbicides for weed control on DOT,DPW DOE, DPR,DLNR X ublic lands 2.3.3 A ui[ers and Coastal Waters (A) Encourage State legislation to prohibit the use of cesspools as a means for wastewater disposal in areas below 1,000 LEG DOHIDLNR X feet Mean Sea Level (B) Seek state Department of Health acceptance of small- footprint septic wastewater treatment designs and clustered LEG DOH X se tic s stems (C) Prepare watershed management plans for the Volcano-to- Mountain View and Hawaiian Acres-to-Orchidland areas to DPW DW/PD X address localized floodin roblems (D) Ensure that a corridor of the Puna watershed at least two miles wide between Wao Kele 0 Puna forest area and the LEG DOHIDLNR X ocean is reserved for future otable water use (E) Require blackwater wastewater disposal systems to be contained or connected to a collection system in areas PD DOH, DPW X below 100 feet Mean Sea Level 2.4.3 5horetine Area (A) Expand and improve database, references and skills at pD UH,DBEDT,FED X Coun level to review shoreline ermit a lications (B) Research and record information on trails and historic DLNR PD X resources (C) Conduct historic and biological surveys for review of shoreline permit applications and certifications and prohibit PD,DLNR NGO X SMA ermits for subdivision of ro ernes likel to be 5-18 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 Res onsibili Timetable Est. Cost Action Item Section Lead Su ortin 2008.12 2013-17 2018.30 51.000 2007 u nderwater in 100 ears (D) Take into account subsidence and storm waves in shoreline DLNR PD X certifications (E) Study storm wave and high tide patterns to develop refined FED,UH,DLNR DPW X coastal flood zone ma s (F) I mplement special zoning and development controls for pD UH,DBEDT,FED X Ka oho area to address subsidence issues _ MANAGING GROVfTH 3.1.3 band Use Pattern (A) Adopt enabling legislation for a transfer of development COU CC X ri hts ro ram (B) Provide county support for land use entitlements and land assembly for voluntary land pooling projects by: Creating a "floating zone" in the County zoning code PD CA X Initiating a special use permit request or petition for land use PD LUC X X boundary amendment Seeking amendment to State Land Use Law to enable "rural PD LUC X townivillage" standards Seeking State enabling legislation to allow County to retain PD FIN X lots delinquent in real property taxes Extending technical assistance and advice to community- CC, FIN NGOs X X X based land oolin associations (C} Establish the following general classifications for village and PD CA X town centers: Re Tonal, Communi and Nei hborhood (D) Facilitate land use entitlements and other tools for the development of existing and future village/town centers and special design districts by: Approving commercial zoning or use permits for existing PD COU X commercial uses in designated village/town centers Denying zone changes for commercial or light industrial use PD COU X X X on sites that are not within desi Hated villa a/town centers (E) Facilitate land use entitlements and financing for the development of new villageltown centers by: Creating a "floating zone" classification for new village/town PD CA X centers Providing loan guarantees or grants to community COU FIN X X associations or artnershi s for infrastructure develo ment (F) Amend the zoning code and/or apply district-wide rezoning to limit allowable building footprint on residential and COU PD X a ricultural-zoned lands (G) Require County agencies to establish and report on Level of COU PD,DPW,HFD,HPD , X X X Service standards for infrastructure and services DWS,DPR (H) Urge the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL) to COUILEG DHHL X conform to the oals and ob'ectives of the PCDP (I) Consider fixing the real property tax assessments of COU FIN X voluntaril enrolled roe owners J Conduct stud on the im acts from subdivision build-out PD DLNR, DW X (K) Require wider notice of pending applications for special permits, variances and zoning changes PD COU X 5-19 i IMPLEMENTATION Res nsibili T imetable Est. Cost Section Action Item Lead Su ortin 2008.12 2013.17 2018.30 s1,0~ 2007 3.2.3` A 'culture and F,conomic Llevelopment (A) Limit water system and road standard variances for new PD COU X subdivisions on a ricultural-zoned land (B) Initiate down-rezoning of lands in Agricultural zoning districts PD COU X to discoura a further subdivision into small lots (C) Rescind Urban Expansion Areas on the LUPAG, except COU PD X where the corres and to desi Hated villa a centers (D) Seek State legislation to impose higher conveyance andlor LEG FIN X ca ital ains taxes on short-term roe re-sales (E) Seek state legislation to allow the county to hold onto properties that are in foreclosure due to property taxes in PD FIN X arrears rather than immediately auctioning them to the hi hest bidder (F) Provide land and infrastructure for farmers' markets within R&D DPW X X vill a/town centers (G) Seek State authorized lower General Excise Tax rate on LEG R&D X local a ricultural roducts sold at Coun farmers markets (H) Develop an agri/eco-tourism policy, necessary zoning and other County assistance farmers markets, special events, R&D PD X restaurants specializing in local food products, and similar romotions of local a riculture (I) Develop business incubator districts in Kea'au, Pahoa, and R&D DBEDT/DP X X Mountain View (J) Promote use of the incentives offered by the designation of R&D DBEDT X X X an Ente rise Zone (K) Support the HCC-The Bay Clinic partnership to establish a ' UH NGO DBEDT, R&D X outh business center in Kea au , (L) Support the development of acommunity-based organic UH R&D X farmin o eration and trainin facilit in coo eration with UH (M) Develop job opportunities in Puna in renewable energy R&D DBEDT X X eneration (N) Conduct a study to define and identify important agricultural PD R&D X lands in Puna (0) Create a fund to purchase or receive identified important R&D FIN X a ricultural lands (P) Create a real property tax exemption (perhaps 4 to 6 years) COU FIN X for farmers entitled to Federal cro loss insurance (R) Encourage organic farming and gardening by establishing a Puna agriculture scholarship with HCC and UH Hilo UH LEG/COU X X X 3.3.3 Social ~;ervkes and Housin (A) Develop a centrally located full-service medical facility NGO LEG/DOH X X X based on a non- rofit model (B) Establish "one-stop" social services assistance centers at NGOs DSSH, OHCD X X various locations (C) Build partnerships between the County and non-profit COU NGO OHCD R&D X X X or anizations for social services and economic develo ment , , (D) Seek State enabling legislation to help lower self-help LEG COU/OHCD, DB X housin construction costs E Offer educational ro rams to develo financial skills of OHCD HFDC X X X 5-20 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 Action Item Res onsibili Timetable Est. Cost Section L ead Su ortin 2008.12 2013.17 2018-30 ;1,000 2007 renters and rental strate ies for owners and tenants F S onsor ro rams to increase homeownershi o ortunities OHCD HFDC X X X (G) Promote multi-family and special needs housing in villa eltown centers HFDC/OHCD PD X X X (H) Provide low-interest, sliding-scale loans for housing repair and renovation OHCD COU X X (I) Amend building code to allow occupancy of residential dwellin before final ins ecton COU BD X J) Ur a the State to increase local control over ublic schools LEG COU X X 3.4.3 Public Safety and Saniltation Scrr°Ices (A) Develop permanent fire stations at, Hawaiian Beaches/Shores, Hawaiian Paradise Park, lower Volcano, COU HFD X X and Mt. View (B) Provide additional volunteer stations in subdivisions as sites become available and rowth warrants HFD NGOs X X X C Provide free wireless intemet services COU,LEG FED X X D Provide more emer enc call boxes alon State hi hwa s DOT X (E) Encourage enhancement of cell phone service to cover remote areas LEG PUC X (F) Boost Department of Environmental Management recycling bud et COU DEM X X X G Relocate Kea`au and Pahoa solid waste transfer stations DEM X (H) Increase County resources to handle abandoned/derelict car removal COU DEM X X X (I) Provide public financial support for infrastructure develo ment within a roved villa a/town centers COUIFED DW X X 3.5.3 riles snd R~cFeatian (A) Consider expanding the Camp Ground at MacKenzie State Park to include ublic roe south of MacKenzie DLNR DPR X 450 (B) Improve and expand Coastal Activity Areas as follows: r~~ t,- Ahalanui Beach Park DPR COU X 925 Consider modifications to tidepools beyond "Shacks" for use as "keiki pools" DLNR X 185 Pursue development of a camp ground and/or ocean recreation park with potential boat launch ramp and manna DLNR LEG X TBD facilities at Cape Kumukahi Consider acquisition and development of Honolulu Landing, DLNR, DPR, Kapoho Crater and Sand Hiii COU DPR, DLNR X TBD Develop support facilities for Kehana Beach State Park DLNR DPR X TBD Encoura a develo ment of hike/cam coastal trail s stem DLNR, DPR NGO X TBD (C) Improve and expand Community Parks as follows: Develop new community parks in Hawaiian Acres, Glenwood, Nanawale Estates, Leilani Estates, Orchidland DPR COU X TBD Estates, and Hawaiian Beaches subdivision Various improvements to Pahoa Regional Park DPR COU X X X 3,750 Various improvements to Shipman (Kea'au) Regional Park DPR COU X X X 3,300 New regional park and various improvements at Hawaiian Paradise Park DPR COU X X X 9,400 Develop recreational programs for Cooper Center and Volcano Communi Park DPR COU X 5-21 IMPLEMENTATION Res nsibil T imetable Eat. Cost Section Action Rem Lead. Su ortin 2008.12 2013.17 2018.30 51,000 2007 Provide improvements at Mountain View Community Park DPR COU X and A. J. Watt Gym 185 Expand hours of operation at regional and larger community DPR COU X parks Develop a new senior center in Mountain View DPR OHCD X 185 Provide in each village center a recreational park and village DPR NGOs COU X X green , TBD Make recreation facilities and meeting rooms at public DOE DPR,NGOs X schools available for community use after school hours Create small community parks as part of right-of-way acquisition for new connecting road segments between DPW NGOs X X subdivisions (D) Create and improve Linear Parks as follows: When acquiring rights-of-way for constructing new roadways or improving existing major roadways, make provisions for DPW,DOT COU X X parallel multi-use recreational trails Complete development of Old Volcano Trail as a pedestrian DPW COU X and cycle pathway Acquire former railroad right-of-way from Kapoho through Hawaiian Paradise Park for hiking, bicycling and horse-back DPW DLNR X riding Plan for acquisition and development of the former railroad right-of-way from Hawaiian Paradise Park to Railroad DPW DLNR X Avenue in Hilo Plan for public access along Old Government Road (coastal DLNR DPW X trail as a bic cle and hikin trail (E) Create and improve Preserves as follows: Assess appropriate level of site visitor usage and implement DLNR DPR X self-guided orsteward-led tours Improve conditions at Wai'opae Tidepools DLNR LEG X 600 Consider acquiring Green Lake and vicinity for native habitat DLNR LEG X TBD restoration and nature center Consider hiking trails through Nanawale Forest Reserve DLNR X 300 Pursue development of passive cultural/botanical parkin DLNR DPR X TBD Hawaiian Paradise Park 3.6..3 E:nct' ~~Y (A) Apply LEED standards for public buildings, with a minimum BD COU X oal of silver level B Investi ate round-water coolin for ublic buildin s DBEDT DPW X C Re wire ener efficienc standards for lar er residences BD COU X X (D) Incorporate energy-efficient features into the construction of OHCD HFDC PUC X X X lower-cost homes with the use of ublic subsidies , (E) Establish a Renewable Energy Research & Development UH DBEDT/R&D fund with UH-Hilo (F) Apply the PUC Public Benefits Fund to retrofit dwellings for alternative energy, with sliding scale to reach low-income PUC COU,OHCD X X X households (G) Negotiate a direct use of geothermal agreement for agricultural uses as part of any expansion of the capacity of HELCO,PUC R&D X the Puna Geothermal Venture lant 5-22 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 Action Item Res nsibit Timetable Est. Cost Section - L ead Su ortin 2008.12 2013.17 2018.30 . ;4;000 2007 (H) Promote biomass energy and fuel production using wood chi s from exotic trees pUC DBEDT,R&D X X X (I) Pursue new renewable energy sources (OTEC, wave energy, solar capture) as technology advances pUC DBEDT,R&D X X Pursue and ocean energy or enterprise subzone R&D DBEDT,PD X Pursue other applications besides energy capture (e.g., a uaculture and a ricultural roduct washin R&D DBEDT X X TRANS PO RTATlO N 4.1.3 rnffic Demand'111ana ement (A) Promote VanPool and ride-sharing alternatives more active) DOT R&D,EMPL X (B) Promote staggered work hours and telecommuting with ma or em to ers and institutions DOT,000,UH EMPL X (C) Facilitate telecommuting by developing free Wi-Fi reception in Puna COU,LEG FED X X TBD 4.2.3 >Ma~s Transit A Pre are a coun -wide Transit Master Plan MTA FED TBD (B) Improve transit service operations by: MTA FED Increasing transit service to a minimum of two additional runs during peak hours MTA FED X 1,200 Establish demand responsive transit in subdivisions MTA FED X TBD Provide commuter express bus service from Pahoa to Hilo and Volcano to Hilo MTA FED X TBD Establish chub-and-s oke transits stem MTA FED X TBD (C) Develop transit hubs at the following locations: Kea'au (Primary Hub) MTA FED X TBD Pahoa (Secondary Hub) MTA FED X Volcano (Secondary Hub) MTA FED X Mountain View Seconda Hub MTA FED X D Provide ark-and-ride lots at transit hubs and HPP MTA FED X X (E) Provide express bus service for commuters from Pahoa to Hilo and Volcano to Hilo MTA FED X (F) Develop a cooperative program with public and private schools to rovide student asses for the Hele-On Bus MTA DOE,LEG,NGOs X (G) Launch public education campaign promoting transit services MTA NGOs X X X (H) Cultivate public/private partnerships, such as employer- s onsored bus asses MTA NGOs, EMPL X X X (I) Expand MTA staff to provide greater support for transit o erations COU FIN,MTA X X (J) Investigate other fare/ticketing incentives to increase ridershi MTA FED X ' ' (K) Work with DOT in creating safe pedestrian conditions for usin mass transit MTA DOT X X 4.3.3- vadwa Network (A) Short Terre (2008-2012) Plan and design PMAR alignment DPW DOT X Require building setbacks in HPP for potential PMAR extension pp DPW X Establish emer enc routes usin most) existin road beds DPW NGOs X 5-23 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IMPLEMENTATION Res naibll T imetable Est. Coat Section Action Item Lead Su in 2008.12 2413.17 ZOt&30 X1,000 200. Include pedestrian and bicycling requirements in all projects DPW NGOs X Create connectivity alignments between various DPW NGOs X subdivisions (B) Medium Term (2012-2017) Construct atwo-lane roadway between Kaloli Dr and Keaau DPW NGO X 19,200 Construct unpaved two-lane roadway between Kahakai Blvd DPW DLNR,NGO X 4,400 and HPP Construct atwo-lane roadway from Nanawale to Kahakai DPW NGO X 4,000 Blvd Study needlfeasibility of Pahoa-Hwy 11 and Hwy 11- DPW DOT X Stainback Hi hwa alternative routes (C) Long Term (2017-2030) Construct Phase II segments of PMAR DPW DOT X 33,500 Acquire additional right-of-way through HPP to extend DPW DOT X 1,700 PMAR If traffic demands, construct PMAR extension through HPP DPW DOT X 23,000 to connect to Kahakai Boulevard 4.4.3 wa (A) Short Term (2008-2012) Intersection improvements on Highways 11 and 130 DOT LEGIFED X 5,500 Reduce speed limit on Hwy 130 to 45mph (Kea'au Bypass DOT LEGIFED X to Ainaloa Blvd) Detemtine most effective ways to improve highway safety DOT LEG/FED X for all travel modes Implement the Hwy 130 shoulder lane conversion project between Keaau Bypass and Shower Drive and consider DOT LEG/FED X 6,500 usin the 3~d lane as a reversible lanefor eak eriods (B) Medium Term (2012-2017) Increase capacity on Hwy 130 between bypass road and DOT LEGIFED X 28,000 Ainaloa, based on optimal safety Construct a right exit lane on Hwy 11 below Keaau Ag lots to DOT LEGIFED X Keaau Village using the existing Old Volcano Rd ROW Create a ri ht hand tum lane from H 132 onto H 130 DOT LEGIFED X -i.5.3 dnFl4~ ~avt4 ~ SeenLc was (A) Request that the STIP allocate a larger share of federal "Flex COU DOT,FED X X X funds" to transit-related and altemative travel modes (B) Allocate funding to DPW for safe routes to schoolslparks COU DPW X X X im rovements, with Keaau im rovements as a riori (C) Invest in pedestrian-, bicycle- and parking-related COU DPW X X X im rovements in a roved villa eltown centers (D) Allocate funding to the HPD to monitor traffic operations COU HPD X X X alon safe routes to schoolsl arks (E) Complete surveys, acquisition of right-of-way, maintenance agreements, planning and design, and construction for multi- DPW,DLNR COU,LEG X X 10,700 u ose trails (F) Designate and improve Highway 137 (Red Road) as a DOT DPW X X 1,100 Scenic B a 5-24 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 GLOSSARY Action - A specific recommendation, such as a project or program, intended to implement a policy or achieve an objective. Community Village Center - An area intended for public/civic uses, or community-oriented commercial uses and some higher density residential development within or immediately surrounding the village center. Density -The ratio of the number of dwelling or rental units to the gross land area of gross land area. Development Agreement - A written agreement for specified periods of time between the County, any governmental entity or agency made a party thereto, and any person having a legal or equitable interest in real property for the purpose of vesting the right to develop such property in accordance with laws, ordinances, resolutions, rules, and policies of any governmental entity or agency made party to the agreement in effect at the time such agreement is executed, and for the purpose of delineating development requirements that may include, but are not limited to, affordable housing, design standards, water allocations, dedications of real ar personal property, on-site and off-site infrastructure and other development related improvements and government services, which shall be approved by resolution of the County Council and executed by the Mayor on behalf of the County. Emergency Access -Unpaved public or private roadways that are accessible to the public only during an emergency when the normal roadway infrastructure is closed or an emergency evacuation is necessary Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) - An informational document prepared in compliance with Chapter 343, Hawaii Revised Statutes, and/or the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) that discloses the environmental and social impacts of a proposed action on the community and state, measures proposed to minimize adverse effects, and provides alternatives to the action. Goal - A desired outcome expressed in simple terms that describes the desired end state. Important Agricultural Lands - LUPAG designation for lands with better potential for sustained high agricultural yields because of soil type, climate, topography, or other factors. Important agricultural lands were determined by including the following lands: - Lands identified as "Intensive Agriculture" on the 1989 General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide Maps. - Lands identified in the Agricultural Lands of Importance to the State of Hawaii (ALISH) classification system as "Prime" or "Unique." - Lands classified by the Land Study Bureau's Soil Survey Report as Class B "Good" soils. There are no Class A lands on the Island of Hawaii. - Lands classified as at least "fair" for two or more crops, on an irrigated basis, by the U.S.D.A. Natural Resource Conservation Service's study for suitability for various crops. - State agricultural parks. ' IMPLEMENTATION Kanaka -Hawaiian term for "people", which in modern context is shorthand reference to ' "kanaka maoli", meaning to people who trace their ancestry to the period prior to Hawai'i's contact with the West. Keiki -Hawaiian term for "children" or "child". Land Pooling - A technique whereby a group of neighboring landowners enter into a partnership for the unified planning, servicing, and subdivision of their lands; with the project costs and benefits shared among the landowners. ' Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) -The LUPAG Map in the County of Hawai i General Plan indicates the general location of various land uses in relation to each other. ' L.E.E.D (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) - A certification program that confers awards for buildings that conserve resources such as energy, water, and open space. Makai -Hawaiian term for "towards the sea." Mauka -Hawaiian term for "inland, upland, towards the mountain." Mixed Use -Aland use pattern that integrates compatible residential, commercial, industrial, office, institutional, or other land uses. Neighborhood Village Center - An area intended for public/civic uses, or small scale neighborhood oriented commercial uses. The commercial uses are of a small scale and are ' intended to serve the needs of the village residents. Off-the-Grid -Buildings that are not connected to the public utility electrical system. These structures typically use on-site renewable energy sources, such as solar panels or wind turbines ' to generate their own electricity. Objective - An objective is a desired endpoint that leads toward accomplishing a goal. Open Space -Undeveloped land or water body which is free of structures and equipment, except for those that are ncidental to the land's open space uses. Open space may include the following: flood protection, creating a sense of special separation fro incompatible land uses, areas for agricultural operations, passive recreation, active recreation, conservation uses, or historical site preservation. Park-Once Lots -Parking lots that serve several uses within convenient walking distance, reducing the necessity to drive in order to make short trips between the uses. Pedestrian Way -This is a public right-of-way through a block between lots for pedestrian ' traffic. The right-of-way has a maximum width of twenty feet and may also be used as a utility easement. Policy - A deliberate plan of action to guide decisions and achieve rational outcomes. Potential Dwelling Units -The number of dwelling units that can be developed on a piece of property based on the zoning classification. ' Regional Town Center - A concentrated area intended for mixed use, higher density residential, retail, commercial employment, and/or regional one-of-a-kind facilities such as major civic, medical, education, and entertainment facilities. ' ii 1 PUNAGOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Draft -March 2008 Ride Share (Van Pooling) -Transportation of more than one person for commute purposes in a motor vehicle, with or without the assistance of a commuter matching service. Right-of-Way - A strip of land acquired by reservation, dedication, prescription, or condemnation and intended to be occupied by a street, trail, water line, sanitary sewer, and /or other public utilities or facilities. Roads in Limbo -Roads over which there is a jurisdictional dispute between the County and the State of Hawaii concerning responsibility for repair, maintenance and operation. The problems resulting from this dispute are documented in a 1989 study by the State of Hawaii Legislative Reference Bureau's titled Roads in Limbo: an Analysis of the State-County Jurisdictional Dispute. Transfer of Development Rights -The transfer of allowable dwelling units or other development unit from one parcel of land to another, in exchange for open space. iii PUMA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Appendix Documents Small Group Meeting Results Working Group Reports Consultant Working Papers Rte: C• 13oa CBi 1131 $~ March 2008 • Puna Community Development Plan Community Involvement Documents r March 2008 • Table of Contents The sections listed below are separated by tabbed dividers. Pages are not listed below because the page numbering of the original documents is preserved. SECTION I. Small Group Meeting Results Narrative Summary by Hawaii Community Resource Center Graphic Summary by P1anPacific, Inc. SECTION II. Working Group Reports Land Use Working Group Growth Management Preserving Land, Air, and Water Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone Village Centers/Design Districts Natural Resources Infrastructure (Medical Facilities only) Cultural and Historic Preservation Alternative Energy Agriculture Parks and Recreation Transportation New Alternative Corridors Mass Transit Existing Roadways Social Services • • • Small Group Meeting Results • • Section I Small Group Meeting Results umma of Ideas -Puna Communit In ut S ry y p This document provides a brief summary of the main themes that emerged from over 3994 ideas generated at 130 public meetings held between March to June 2006. All of the ideas were entered verbatim into the database, analyzed and sorted by appropriate themes. The full list of idea is available on the project website: www.hawaiiislandplan.com Sustainable Island Development - "Enable islanders to satisfy their basic needs and enjoy a better quality of life without compromising future generations. " Puna residents wants to aim and act for a greater community self reliance and self- sufficiency by importing less goods and creating more local products. Participants would like to see development of local organic agriculture and incentive to promote "Green" businesses that balance the elements of ecology, economy and community. Participants expressed strong desire to limit their dependence on imported fossil fuel by encouraging support for alternative and renewable energy development such as: wind, solar, geothermal, biomass, bio-diesel, cellulose ethanol and hydrogen for their electricity and transportation needs. From educational perspective, residents would like to see more research and programs that advocate sustainable island practices. Economic Prosperity More Local Jobs and Options Puna community members would like to see more encouragement and development of • locally based small to medium sized businesses to create viable livelihood opportunities in Puna. Participants mentioned for more options in local shopping areas and restaurants to minimize the current driving time. Pun residents would also like to see more incentives and opportunities to promote plausible vocational training to expand the skills of our citizens, especially the youth. Agriculture Participants emphasized the value of preserving agricultural lands and diversifying agricultural activities to promote local self-sufficiency and agricultural sustainability. They are expressing strong desire to promote and encourage organic farming, diversified agriculture, and minimize the use of toxic fertilizers and chemicals. Arts, Culture and Heritage in Puna Puna residents would like to see a quality cultural and educational facility that celebrates communities' sense of uniqueness. A place filled with cultural, historical and artistic activities for the youth, visitors, malihinis and kamaaina. Residents of Puna also expressed their desire in preserving rural small town ambiance and historical buildings by creating a special design district for town of Volcano. Furthermore, many participants mentioned the importance of keeping special access and fishing rights along the beautiful and rugged coastline. Environment and Natural Resources Malama'Aina -Care, Respect and Stewardship of Our Land and Ocean • Puna Community Development Plan -County of Hawaii - HCRC Puna residents are very interested in preserving the natural beauty of their region. They regard malama aina as imperative values to the local culture and lifestyle. Majority would like to protect the shoreline and limit the negative impacts of development. Several participants mentioned that more conservation areas should be established to protect natural resources. Invasive Species Participants would like to see more prompt and effective expansion of invasive species programs and protocols to control the spread of coqui frog. Many express their strong desire to eradicate coqui frog, but without the introduction of another alien species. Bulldozing, Grading and Grabbing of Native Forest Residents are alarmed by the clear cutting of native forest in many parts of Puna. They would like to see rigorous enforcement or creation of better regulation & permitting process for grading and grubbing application. Many participant favors low impact clearing by encouraging better information dissemination regarding native flora and fauna to the property owner, bulldoze operators, and real estate agents. Recreational Facility and Parks Many residents in Puna feel having adequate recreational facility and parks for all age are a top priority. A place for children, youth, adults, elderly and pets to interact and stay active with playgrounds, sports field, pavilions for community events with picnic tables and BBQ's. Improving existing parks (Pohoiki/Kapoho) along the coast with restrooms and showers were also important to the participants while creating additional areas for camping and hiking. There were strong preferences expressed to building a large multi- purpose gymnasium in Pahoa town that will be accessible to everyone. Land Use, Planning and Development Community Center -Village Center Puna resident would like to see more community centers that are walkable with park, schools and locally owned shops to provide the basic needs and services for the participant without having to drive long distance in an automobile. Participants expressed the need for more community based economic development by having small village center that stays true to the Puna's uniqueness and creating more gathering place for residents to interact, shop, work, learn and play. Growth Management Limiting uncontrolled growth and developments were the top priority for the participants. They would like to see more growth management tools to slow down or stop any more development until proper infrastructures are put in place to accommodate the population explosion. Transportation -Road Improvement, Mass Transit, Biking, etc. General Improvement of Roads, Traffic Lights & Alternate Route Participants would like see more road improvements for safer driving environment and easing current traffic woes. Widening hwy 130 to four lanes or more merge lane from Puna Community Development Plan -County of Hawaii - HCRC subdivision; and providing additional route to Hilo along lower Puna to manage the traffic flows were some of the top priority for the citizens of Puna. Many participants expressed the need for having more traffic lights at accident prone intersection along hwy 130. Mass Transit -Public Transit The participants support the further development of an affordable, frequent, efficient and reliable public transportation system with defined stops and times with shelter to protect people from the rain. They mentioned a variety of transportation modes, including light rail, car pool, and small shuttle buses powered by alternative fuel that would link the subdivision to park & ride facilities along the hwy 130 for better accessibility. Alternative Transportation -Walking, Bike Paths, Hiking Trail, Horse Path, etc. Resident expressed a strong preference for creating more opportunities for getting around without the dependence of a car. They would like to see more sidewalks, bike paths, and hiking trails. In general, resident would like to see multi-modal transportation corridors that can accommodate everyone -including, youth, seniors, pedestrians, horses, bikes, buses, rail and cars. Public Facility and Services Government, Police, and Fire Station Improving local government decision making capabilities and ensuring more effective resource allocation were top priorities for the meeting participants. They would like to . see more transparency in government activities and better communication among all levels of government and the communities they serve. From a planning perspective, residents would like to see more planning decisions made at the local level. Furthermore participants expressed a dire need for more community oriented police and fire stations and expanded services around Puna. Medical Facility - 24 hours Emergency Care Access to quality comprehensive local health care facility with 24-hour emergency room is the top priority for the resident of Puna. They would like to see support for development of local medical facility, much like the health unit in Waimea or Kau, to support the growing population of Puna. Many participants suggested the need for emergency medical evacuation service. Education Providing better educational opportunity for the future generation by improving existing schools and providing better support for local Charter schools were some of the top priorities for the participants. Social Issues Affordable Housing & Assisted Living Facilities There are dire need for affordable land, rental and housing options for lower income family, elders and younger generations in Puna. Participants expressed concerns of losing young people because they won't be able to live in Puna, if current price escalation Puna Community Development Plan -County of Hawaii - HCRC continues. Encouraging investments to create affordable Kupuna/elderly housing with several stages of assisted living facilities were some of the top concerns for the participants. Drug Prevention & Better Rehabilitation Program Further effort to combat drug abuse, especially "Ice", by prevention, education and having better rehabilitation center to help addicts get back into society was a top priority for participants. Public Utilities Energy Improving and developing clean alternative and renewable energy industries were some of the top priorities for the meeting participants. They would like to see lower electricity cost by limiting their dependence on imported fossil fuel such as low grade diesel and coal. Puna resident would like to see incentive to encourage development of renewable energy industries to create more local jobs and embrace energy efficiency measures in all aspect of planning. Waste Management and Recycling Participants would like to see further improvement in waste stream management by following the 4 R's -reduce, reuse, recycle and restore. They would also like more expansion of transfer stations and having a more environmentally friendly sewer system. Water Some participants would like to see better water access through improvements of current water spigot locations and more water main line in subdivisions. On contrary, residents in Volcano area would not like to see any development of county water system to manage growth and maintain the rural ambiance. C7 Puna Community Development Plan -County of Hawaii - HCRC Transportation Public Facilities & Service s Land Use, Planning 8~ Development Recreational Facilities & Parks ~ Social Issues a~ ~ Economic Prosperity Public Utilities -Energy, Water 8~ Waste Environment 8~ Natural Resources Arts, Culture 8~ Heritage Sustainable Island Development 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Number of Ideas Agriculture • Section II Workin Grou Re orts g P P (Prepared by Puna Residents) r~ U Puna Community Development Plan Agriculture Working Group FINAL REPORT (draft) ISSUES Food security is the all encompassing issue regarding expansion of Puna agriculture in aresource-sustaining and community-empowering way. Food security is, and has always been, an issue of great importance for any community. In the case of the Hawaiian archipelago, where Puna is unique in having such large areas of agricultural land, food security takes on special meaning due to geographic isolation. While `food security' is not addressed in detail in this report, all of the issues discussed serve to emphasize the vulnerability of food security in Puna and all of these islands. The issues identified in this report are from the Working Group's `Principal References': small group meetings, the research and discussions of the working group, and the County General Plan. Prime among issues for all of the principal references, is cost, tenure, and uses of agricultural land. The County General Plan identifies the price of agricultural land as "one of the major problems that needs to be addressed to facilitate the expansion of agriculture." • The Principal References are in agreement that integral to utilizing essential agricultural land for expansion of Puna agriculture to supply local markets is the availability of agro- food infrastructure and skilled land stewards. In contrast to the General Plan, the small group meetings and the working group input place more importance on the ability of local farmers and local land to supply local markets -Puna residents place high importance on local agriculture. The Agriculture Working Group goals, objectives, and recommendations are based upon the broad premise that `preserving agricultural land' will best be accomplished by economic opportunity -- for individual entrepreneurs to be able to derive a decent livelihood from farming on that land and supplying local markets. The above notwithstanding, the Working Group also clearly recognizes that for the situation in Puna, in addition to healthy market competition, there is a clear need for local government action and leadership. The County Government has a primary responsibility for removing obstacles to local economic opportunity, so that local agriculture will be competitive and able to supply local markets. It is also a matter of fulfilling public trust that the County Government lead in a community commitment to the stewardship of essential agricultural land. • 3/24/2008 3:30 PM Puna Community Development Plan Agriculture Working Group FINAL REPORT (draft) Essential agricultural land Essential agricultural land, as referred to in this report, is land currently zoned agricultural and that currently is or has previously been used for agricultural production (including flower greenhouses, plant nurseries, sugar plantations, lo~i, fruit and nut orchards, vegetable crops, coffee and other tree crops, and livestock grazing); and that contributes to maintaining a critical land mass important to agricultural operating productivity. This land is essential for Hawaii Island agriculture to be capable of supplying local markets. Categories of essential agricultural land` in Puna identified by the Agriculture Working Group with high and .immediate potential are: 1. Former cane land: This tends to be the best land in Puna, with varying depths and qualities of soil. Some of this land has been converted to other agriculture (including grazing and forestry). More areas of former cane land, often overrun with invasive species, remain uncultivated. 2. Pahoehoe and a'a lava fields: Production capability is generally limited to tree crops and/or hydroponics. Several acres of lava fields are currently, or have been over the past 50 years, in production (e.g., papaya, macadamia, floriculture). Some of these lands are now overrun with invasives. There are lava fields with no mechanical disturbance, that are overrun with invasives (`albizia', `ironwood', etc.), and with limited ohia forest. Finally, there are scattered tracts of lava fields with healthy populations of ohia and/or hapuu that have had no mechanical disturbance. 3. Other land: Previously, but not now, in crops, e.g., former coffee farms around Mountain View. Some of this land has been converted to other agriculture (including grazing and forestry). Still other land has been overrun by invasive species. An additional category of land the WG recognized has substantial native forest and high quality soil that has never been mechanically cleared. Two view points emerge regarding whether this should be considered essential agricultural land. First, one perspective is that, regardless of soil qualities, all areas, large and small, of ohia and hapuu, should be left undisturbed, so as to be protected from the type of clearing and destruction of forest resources that has become common throughout Puna. * The task of quantifying land is beyond the resource capabilities of the Working Group. 3/24/2008 3:30 PM 2 Puna Community Development Plan Agriculture Working Group FINAL REPORT (draft) A second perspective is that, regardless of current plant cover, land with high quality soil and suitable growing conditions needs to be zoned so that it is available for a community striving to sustainably reduce food imports. Land in Volcano zoned A30 is notable in this regard, especially for the potential to produce temperate climate fruits and vegetables. A final consideration in what can be considered essential agricultural lands regards areas under the authority of the Hawaii State Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. These areas would include various soil types and other growing conditions. For these areas to be identified and zoned as essential agricultural land by the County requires that DHHL request such zoning. During this Working Group's meetings, Puna residents with homes and farms on DHHL property explicitly and firmly stated a positive interest in DHHL land being identified essential agricultural land as part of a strategy for expansion of Puna agriculture to supply local markets. See Recommendation: 3 Subdividing and zoning sprawl There are many parcels in Puna zoned A1, A3, or A5, consisting of about 10 acres and more. This is sprawl, not agriculture, waiting to happen. Many of these parcels are essential agricultural land. If subdivided into multiple, one, three, and five acre parcels, a large amount of essential agricultural land will be irreversibly lost from agricultura{ use, including open space and environmental services. {n Hawaii County, zoning and subdivision regulations, as well as property tax policy, inflate prices for agricultural land, putting the land at risk of being irreversibly lost for agricultural uses. This happens due to market speculation unrelated to the agricultural potential of that land or to markets for agricultural products (see next section). By complicity, Hawaii County zoning and subdivision regulations are causing an irreversible loss of essential agricultural land from agricultural uses, and, at the same time, impeding economic opportunity for individual entrepreneurs to derive a decent livelihood from farming in Puna. It is the County Government's responsibility to enact and enforce regulations that decougle the price of essential agricultural land from the price of land dedicated to non- agricultural uses. Policy reform must be employed as a positive force for local land stewardship and also make a contribution toward removing impediments to local economic opportunity in agriculture. See Recommendations: Sand 4 Relationship between rezoning and the price of agricultural land The Hawaii County General Plan states that "agricultural land values have risen beyond their value for agricultural purposes." The General Plan also identifies increasing land values as a major impediment to the expansion of agriculture, even as expansion of agriculture is also given as a goal of that Plan. • 3/24/2008 3:30 PM Puna Community Development Plan Agriculture Working Group FINAL REPORT (draft) To achieve the goal of expansion of agriculture, County policy and subsequent action must not continue to contribute to agricultural land prices rising beyond the value of the land for agricultural purposes. Significant in the determination of price for any land are expectations regarding potential future benefits to be derived from that land such as monetary reward, aesthetic appreciation, or lifestyle satisfaction. Recent research has analyzed how prices of agricultural land are impacted by agricultural returns and zoning of agricultural land. The research has provided strong evidence that agricultural "land prices reflect not only the uses of land, but the potential uses," specifically the value of the option of future income "from [non-agricultural] land development." This research demonstrates that when there appears to be an option or opportunity in the future to sell agricultural land for irreversible land conversion, the value of agricultural land is inflated beyond the returns achievable through agricultural use. A broad~implication of the research is that non-agricultural factors, rather than farm income, have been the primary cause of farmland conversion. The dramatic increase in the price of agricultural land in Hawaii County in recent years has been due to expectations of benefits unrelated to agricultural production on the land. Creation of expectations about an option or opportunity in the future to sell agricultural land for irreversible land conversion is what has happened in this county, as speculative investors have observed that irreversible land conversion is so easily done by rezoning. Agricultural land prices in Hawaii County have been inflated by a de facto policy revealed through the practice of indiscriminate rezoning. So long as non-agriculture speculation continues to determine market price of essential agricultural land, that price will continue to be higher than local agriculture can pay. Needed, sooner rather than later, is unambiguous zoning and subdivision policy that, in print and in practice, does not abide arbitrary irreversible conversion of agricultural land. When proactively and consistently implemented, this policy must change expectations regarding land use options so as to create a clear differentiation between the market price of land to be used for agricultural purposes and the market price of land to be used for non-agricultural purposes. This differentiation will in turn make agricultural land more affordable for farming and contribute to the expansion of agriculture in the County. Key References "Farmland Conversion: Perceptions and Evidence," Nicolai V Kuminoff and Daniel A. Sumner. 2002. "Modeling Farmland Conversion with New GIS Data," Nicolai V Kuminoff and Daniel A. Sumner. 2001. American Agricultural Economics Association, Chicago. "Agricultural, Land Values and the Value of Rights to Future Land Development" in Land Economics, 77(1), pp.56-67. 2001. A.J.Plantinga and D.J. Miller. See Recommendations: 4and 5 3/24/2008 3:30 PM 4 Puna Community Development Plan Agriculture Working Group FINAL REPORT (draft) PRINCIPAL REFERENCES The Agriculture Working Group relied on three principle reference points in developing these objectives, goals, and recommendations. These reference points are: ideas from the small group meetings, the Hawaii County General Plan, and the research and discussions by and among members of the Working Group. Hawaii County General Plan The Agriculture Working Group Recommendations, drawing on ideas from small group meetings, are in agreement with the broad policies stated in the General Plan for expanding agriculture. However, there is scant evidence that any of these policies have been implemented; It is this need for action to comply with the General Plan that the Working Group first brings attention to. To narrow the wide gap between `good ideas' and initiative, it is necessary for the County Government to commit to unambiguous proactive involvement in the expansion of agriculture on the island. See Recommendation: 1 The General Plan states, "...increasing land values is one of the major problems that needs to be addressed to facilitate the expansion of agriculture...Although the prospects for agriculture are encouraging, there are problems that need to be overcome before the potential can be realized. These problems include, but are not necessarily limited to: • land cost, cost/availability of water, cost/availability of transportation, cost of labor, marketing, developing and maintaining quality standards, and disease and pest control... One of the most pressing problems faced by today's agricultural industries is their ability to attract Iabor...There is also a demand for a greater number of personnel with technical and professional agricultural training." Regarding both access to land and agricultural training, the General Plan is in agreement with the other principle reference points. The small group meetings and the Agriculture Working Group identified access to (cost and availability of) essential agricultural land as especially critical for Puna. Furthermore, regarding labor, among members of the working group (most of whom are directly involved in farming) there was considerable agreement with there being a need for better opportunities for local entrepreneurs to gain the training and skills to take up farming and associated work. See Recommendations: band 7 3/24/2008 3:30 PM Puna Community Development Plan Agriculture Working Group FINAL REPORT (draft) Small Group Meetings The Agriculture Working Group sorted into themes the small-group-meeting input related to food and agriculture (see attached table). A theme that emerges over all others is seen in the `development' ideas. This theme reflects understanding of a connection between land, food, people, and community. Furthermore, a clear preference is expressed for local, wholly sustainable farming; and for more than farming. Farmers markets are identified as important for distribution of local food supply. The General Plan does not address these `development' issues. The next theme, `zoning', is essentially focused on using the zoning code to prevent irreversible loss of land to non-agricultural uses. On this issue, the General Plan, supported by zoning regulations, provides a framework that, `on paper', is in agreement with this community input. However, as previously indicated, this 'on-paper' framework is not at all well-implemented `on-the-ground.' The Puna community, as represented in the small group meetings, attaches high importance to retaining agricultural land for agricultural purposes (including open space, aesthetic, and environmental services). There is an expressed desire to avoid irreversible conversion of land to non-agricultural uses. This high importance is based on assuring that local land and local farmers are able to supply local markets As used in this report, "wholly sustainable agriculture" refers to agriculture that meets the needs of the present without compromise of the economic or ecological capability of • future generations to meet their own needs; and "local markets" are markets within the Puna District, as well as all of Hawaii Island and the entire Hawaiian archipelago. See Recommendations: land 4 • 3/24/2008 3:30 PM Puna Community Development Plan Agriculture Working Group FINAL REPORT (draftl AGRICULTURE -ideas from 130 small group meetings Certified kitchens (county supported) for legal market vendors Extended hours for farmers' market to twice weekly & until noon Encourage sustainable agriculture through tax incentive, farmers markets, etc. Center promoting local Puna agricultural products Promote preserve agricultural lands & activities Preserve & enhance truck farming in Volcano Encourage agricultural based light industry/high tech in Puna a special Hemp cultivation area in Puna to grow multi purpose alternative crop for oil, clothing, integration of UHH into economic & agricultural development of Puna self-sufficiency in food production Subsidized food production & commercial kitchens for the community Large organic farming community as food source arboretum featuring edibles that is free to public/work trade Legalize industrial hemp to replace sugar cane Edible landscaping throughout Puna Grants for home improvments or Ag. Farming Support our local farmers products legally grow cash crops (cannibis) in Puna with permit/stamps-county get tax revenue-18 & Diversified agriculture (preserve ag land) sugar cane, soy beans, corn, hemp, noni, awa, haw- Safe agriculture-more organic be able to be safe living next to agriculture land Incentives for organic & sustainable agriculture-permaculture composting toilets, compost piles & worm bins Incentives to plan trees especially food producing trees 008 3:30 PM • E a 0 > ~. m c "~ N 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 a~ E rn ~ ~ o .~ .~ N N C 1 ~ .c ~ O 1 Puna Community Developmen Agriculture Working Group FINAL RET (draft) E ~' c AGRICULTURE -ideas from 130 small group meetings ~- ~ 0 'o '~ ~ ~ "O N ~ N N C C~ O Road Hawaiian agricultural farms Legalize the sale of raw dairy Sustainable agriculture & forestry Subsidize food tree nursery , Government land lease for diversified agriculture w/incentive More emphasis to promote self-sustaining community without need to import food & timber Encourage people to grow their own food-support local farmers for Sustainabilitv of the Island Support Agri-tourism Maintain & expand agricultural opportunities & efforts within the community, particularly Encourage local farms/farm coops, community gardens Encourage local self-sufficiency, sustainable goods & services Assistance for small farms (existing farms) Trv to preserve & enhance farming as a profitable land use in Volcano greater community self sufficiency by importing less goods & creating more local products Small estate farming & processing Identify & encourage agricultural areas for food production (organic) Develop Farm co-ops-Organic, Hydroponics & Fisheries Encourage sustainable farming practices, seed savings local sustainable agriculture instead of agriculture for export thru land use laws & any other Encourage & support local food supply More areas for farmers markets/flea market Better cafeteria food All people eating fresh organic produce grown in community gardens Enforce agricultural use on ag zoned areas 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3/24/2008 3:30 PM $ Puna Community Development Plan Agriculture Working Group FINAL REPORT (draftl AGRICULTURE -ideas from 130 small group meetings Oppose conversion of Ag land to other designation Keep agriculture lots in Puna area Protect aq zone land from re-zoning for non-ag development Leave Ag. Land for agriculture Ag/residental (combined) classification mixed w/ag/conservation for zoing of current ag 2 -ag5 Keep Ag. Zoning for Hawaiian Acres Majority of Puna lots stav ag. Ag. Zoning priority for lower Puna Preserve good agricultural land Preserve good agricultural land Address the Environmental impact the papaya industry has in Puna Retaining Forest w/agriculture that compliments forest environment (avoid adding invasive Phase out all toxic chemicals used in agriculture Promote non-toxic farming & gardening & designate "no spray" areas GMO free Puna GMO free Puna Maintain rural without GMO GMO free Puna Legalize local building materials such as Bamboo E ~ o ~ v~ o ~ ~ ~ a i c o c }. "O Q) N N C 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 C~ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TOTAL = 67 46 12 4 4 008 3:30 PM . `m t O 1 Puna Community Development plan Agriculture Working Group FINAL REPORT (draft) GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Goals for Puna Agriculture 1. Local livelihood opportunities based on wholly-sustainable agriculture supplying local markets. 2. Rewarding individual agricultural enterprise. 3. Community land stewardship commitment. 4. Enhanced green infrastructure and a clean rural landscape. Achieving the forgoing Goals will require, among other things, the County Government to take targeted, proactive, and positive measures to expand, and ensure the sustainability of, agriculture in Puna. Objectives Action is required on these policy targets: land, infrastructure, entrepreneurs, access. Policy outcomes must include, but not be limited to: 1. Statutory designation of essential agricultural land; with establishment of and rigid adherence to robust standards and criteria regarding changing zonin4 of any parcel of essential agricultural land. 2. Development of complementary infrastructure: communications, farm-to-market roads, Bost-harvest handling and processing, and value-addin4 capacity. 3. Development of human capital through training of skilled and capable agricultural entrepreneurs; and 4. Achievable and equitable access, for skilled and capable agricultural entrepreneurs, to agricultural land and complementary infrastructure. In addition to the above policy outcomes, associated beneficial outcomes include agricultural lands serving as open space and providing environmental services. t 3/24/2008 3:30 PM 10 Puna Community Development Plan Agriculture Working Group FINAL REPORT (draft) Recommendations to Hawaii County Government 1. Prioritize land-use, fiscal, and economic-development policy outcomes compatible with expansion of local agriculture to supply local markets and sustainable stewardship of essential agricultural land. 1.1. Economic opportunity for expanding agriculture in Puna to the benefit and empowerment of families and communities in Puna. 1.2. Sustained ability for Puna residents to steward and rely on agricultural lands in the District for the purpose of supplying local markets and to the overall benefit of the wider Puna Community; 1.3. Agricultural lands, now idle and often overrun with invasive species, brought into production with wholly-sustainable, market-driven, economically- competitive agriculture; 1.4. Development and continuous enhancement of agricultural production, marketing, and business management skills through formal and informal education; 1.5. Public and/or private investment in `agricultural parks' or equivalent. Contiguous parcel(s) of essential agricultural land of quantity and quality suitable for qualified farmers to reside and operate in shared proximity, to generate co-location benefits: enhanced security, availability of electricity and water, shared use of specialized machinery, swapping work, etc. 1.6. Public and/or private investment in processing, transportation, and distribution infrastructure to supply local markets with local produce. 1.7. Partnerships with others -- notably University of Hawaii-Hilo, Hawaii Community College, state and federal agencies, non-profit organizations, and industry groups. 2. Implement valuation reform and tax relief for agriculture" 2.1. Review `comparable safe' valuation, as currently used in Hawaii County, regarding its inflationary impact on market prices for agricultural land (see `Issues' section). 2.2. Investigate alternative valuation methods, for example, based on total land area, land class, and/or zoning size designation (A1, A5, A10, etc). 2.3. Discount taxation on agricultural land when, and only when, associated with long-term (20 year minimum) dedication to agricultural use. 2.4. Apply extreme tax penalties for premature withdrawal and subdivision of land that has been dedicated to long-term agricultural use; with the only exception being cases of family hardship. "Tax relief for agriculture is a policy established in the General Plan, page 14-18, 14.2.3 "Policies", item (o). 3/24/2008 3:30 PM 11 Puna Community Development Plan Agriculture Working Group FINAL REPORT (draft) • 2.5. Discount taxation of facilities complementary to local agriculture supplying local markets. For example, a `tax holiday' for afacility -- new and purpose-built or newly upgraded specifically -- for distribution, processing, and/or storing local produce that will supply local markets. 2.6. Discount taxation of land with tree cover of noninvasive species; with this consideration especially directed to native forests, tree farms, and forest plantations. 2.7. Lower the motor vehicle registration fee for `Farm vehicles'. 3. Establish and vigorously implement an essential agricultural land policy 3.1. Identify individual and contiguous parcels for designation as essential agricultural lands. 3.2. Set and tightly adhere to standards and criteria that restrain subdivision of essential agricultural land and/or changes to zoning of essential agricultural land away from agricultural uses. 4. Enact and vigorously implement rezoning and subdivision amendments that shift options in favor of agriculture versus sprawl on parcels of essential agricultural land, especially parcels zoned A1, A3, and A5. 4.1. Prohibitions: 4.1.1. further subdivision that will result in more than two separate parcels 4.1.2. further subdivision that will result in new parcels of less than three acres (before: one 10-acre parcel zoned A3; after: two parcels zoned A3, both 3 acres or more). 4.2. Incentives: 4.2.1. rezone to larger acreage those parcel(s) otherwise dividable by more than two parcels. (before: one 5-acre parcel zoned A1; after: one 5-acre parcel zoned A5) 4.2.2. combine and rezone two or more contiguous parcels (before: five 1-acre parcels zoned A1; after: one 5-acre parcel zoned A5). 5. Develop Farmers Markets (in Puna, as part of island-wide Hawaii County Farmers Markets) 5.1. Identify and zone, fit sites for three full-service, high-volume modern farmers markets in Puna. 5.2. Approximately equidistant locations, with access for producers and buyers: 5.2.1. Mountain View (`old village'/mauka side) 5.2.2. Pahoa (at or near intersection of Highways 130 and 132) 5.2.3. Hawaiian Paradise Park (25th and Kaloli; 20-acre site zoned commercial) • 3/24/2008 3:30 PM 12 Puna Community Development Plan Agriculture Working Group FINAL REPORT (draft) 5.3. Co-locate markets with mass transit `hubs' where appropriate/possible, to create synergy. 5.4. Put in place basic infrastructure (water, roads, electricity, communications, etc). 5.5. Leverage private investment in the farmers market sites. 6. Establish `Puna Agriculture Scholarship' (Hawaii Community College). 6.1. Purpose: To pay tuition, fees, and cost of textbooks and supplies, for one year for a Puna high-school graduate enrolled as a first-year Agriculture student at Hawaii Community College. 6.2. Funding: Approximately $3,000 per year; from County annual appropriation and/or private contributions. 7. Establish `Sustainable Agriculture Research and Development Fund' (University of Hawaii-Hilo) 7.1. Purpose: Seed funding to leverage public and private investment that will enable local agriculture to supply local markets. 7.1.1. Market research and development to identify and satisfy local agricultural market preferences and requirements; 7.1.2. Production research and development to make optimum use of land, infrastructure, and local human resources to enable wholly sustainable local agriculture to supply local markets; and 7.1.3. Local promotion of local agricultural products that fulfill local market preferences and requirements. 7.2. Funding: Portion of property tax collected on all parcels zoned in the `Agriculture District' in Puna; with a target of approximately $50,000 or more per year seed money to attract matching funding from UHH and/or others in the community. Responsibility for implementing recommendations The Hawaii County Government -- County Council and Mayor's administration -- has principal responsibility for implementing these recommendations. Potential obstacles to implementing the recommendations: A considerable counter-force may come from opposition by landholders and speculators who stand to gain financially from sprawl-creating zoning and subdivision. As agriculture is expanded, there will be an increased need to prevent conflict between agricultural activities and residential land-use; for example, the so-called `nuisance' impact of farm operations on nearby non-farm residents. The General Plan addresses this issue, in part, with buffers between land zoned for agricultural uses and land zoned for non-agricultural uses. Pressures brought from both of the above, and possible other factors, can be expected to give rise to political opposition to legislative proposals required to implement the recommendations. • 3/2412008 3:30 PM 13 Alternative Energy Puna Community Development Plan Agriculture Working Group FINAL REPORT (draft) . Link to other Working Groups Puna is a rural community. Agriculture is now, and for decades has been, a main feature of the district. Thus, the outcomes of any planning and development in the community will -whether by design or by default -- have some interface with agriculture. The Agriculture Working Group, through its internal discussions, and through discussions with other Groups, became aware of close links across the various Groups. This relationship is evident throughout the above discussion of issues, goals, and objectives, and in the development of recommendations. In particular, the topics of these four working groups always have, in Puna or anywhere else, a very close link with agriculture. / Economic opportunity: this is the basis of Agriculture Working Group Goal 1. / Land use: the zoning and subdivision issues identified by the Agriculture Working Group have extensive overlap with Land Use. / Natural resource protection: Agriculture interfaces with natural resources directly and indirectly on a wide geographic (non-point source) basis. / Transportation: this is critical for the movement of agricultural products from production to local markets, as well as easy consumer-accessibility to farmers markets. These two working group topics have a more narrow relevance to the discussions about agriculture in the context of Puna Community Development: / Alternative energy: the rapidly escalating interest in bio-fuels from crops, as well as the peculiar energy requirements of agriculture link it closely to alternative energy. / Public services and infrastructure: as indicated at Recommendation 1.6, infrastructure is a critical need for developing the capability of Puna agriculture to serve local markets. Agriculture Working Group Members Jane Adams Hank Banquer Ben Hopkins John Keleahuna Anne Kettering Jack Lockwood Kenny Parrish Kim Tavares Rick Warshauer James Weatherford (coordinator) • 3/24/2008 3:30 PM 14 • Puna Community Development Plan Alternative Energy Working Group February 15, 2007 Abstract Energy Efficiency is the key words from the Alternative Energy Working Group. The Working Group set goals and objectives and formed recommendation for the County of Hawaii for Puna. The overall recommendation is for the County of Hawaii and Puna residents to work towards a clean, green, and energy efficient Puna. This can be accomplished in the short-term by promoting Solar Water Heating, Solar Power, Energy- wise appliances, and educating our residents. In the long-term the promotion ofbio-fuels and building using LEED or other build green standards can lower the overall use of fossil fuels in Puna and the County of Hawaii. Background The residents of Puna experience some of the highest cost of electricity in the United States. These residents are seeking alternative energy sources to defray the cost of electricity and protect the environment by using renewable energy. Residents are seeking clean and responsible energy use. Green and Clean! Recurring themes in the 130 small group meetings were clean renewable energy, energy independence, energy efficiency, development of bio-fuel, safe geothermal plant, and to research of underground utilities. The working group discussed the preliminary themes of the working groups, set goals and objectives and developed recommendations. The working group limited their goals and objectives to items related to alternative energy choices. It left the choices of where to develop and what to develop to the Land Use, Economic Opportunity, and Agriculture working groups. Whereas the working group recommends lowering the use of fossil fuels by decreasing the number and need of trips to Hilo, the working group left the "how-to" to the Transportation and Land Use working groups. The development of a sustainable Puna community was left for the Land Use working group. Understanding that 60% of the State's fossil fuel consumption is on vehicle transportation, this working group focused instead on energy use in homes, business, and public infrastructure leaving the lowering of fossil fuel usage in vehicles to the transportation working group. The working group believes that renewable energy will increase economic opportunity in Puna by creating a new industry; furthermore agriculture rich lands will be kept in agriculture .production. • Alternative Energy Working Group, February 15, 2007 Page 1 of 5 • The working group was formed in September 2005 and charged with creating goals, objectives and recommendation from the input of the 130 small group meetings. The Alternative Energy group met monthly to develop their goals, objectives and recommendations. The group was coordinated by Kai Larsen and then by Liz Salfen. Meetings were held at Jon Olsen's home, Kalani Oceanside Resort and at Pu'ula United Church of Christ. All members were reminded of meetings by telephone calls and e-mails. Members communicated through personal conversations and a-mail. Goals and Objectives The goal for the Puna Community Development Plan Alternative Energy Working Group was to express the desire of the community that Puna and Hawaii County becomes an efficient and effective energy consumer and the that the Puna district and Island reach sustainability. The objective of the Working Group was to educate ourselves and our community in the importance of lowering our dependence on fossil fuel. Lowering our dependence is beneficial to Puna and the island. We encourage the County of Hawaii to take the lead in creating pilot projects to make Puna the most energy efficient district. Puna is unique because many residents are highly motivated in making alternative living choices to protect our environment. Recommendations 1. Solar Development: The sun is a free source of energy and for relatively a modest amount of money almost every house in Puna could use the sun to heat their water. The electric company concurs that water heating is the biggest source of energy use in the home. A new solar water heating system cost approximately $5,000.00 We recommend that the County of Hawaii use the County of Maui as a model to create a program of low interest loans to install Solar Water Heating. We recommend that the County of Hawaii move towards a policy that all new construction will use solar water heating. We recommend that all new County of Hawaii construction and renovation projects in Puna be built Green using a (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) LEED Green Building Rating System or similar model. We recommend that the County of Hawaii join other municipalities in the "Million Solar Roofs" campaign. There are several funding sources akeady available to residents of Puna to help with the cost of the solar water system. We recommend that the general public be educated in "how these programs work" so that more individuals will choose solar. Two identified sources are (1) the Federal Government and the State of Hawaii give solar heating tax credits; and (2) the Office of Housing and Community Development also funds low interest loans for home improvements and solar heating is an acceptable cost. 2. Create Revolving Fund: Alternative Energy Working Group, February 15, 2007 Page 2 of 5 The working group recommends that the County of Hawaii start a revolving fund to help fund residents who wish to make energy efficient improvements to their homes. The fund could help purchase new Energy STAR appliances, solar water heating, etc to help individuals lower the use of the grid. Since people would pay into the revolving fund, initial funding would be needed. The working group recommends using the Geothermal Asset Fund to initially fund this project. 3. Education: The working group realizes that education begins with us. We can all do our part in making Puna more energy efficient. Education is the key. We can do the following to help our community: 1. Solar heating 2. Choose energy efficient appliances 3. Convert all light bulbs to energy efficient bulbs 4. Recycle and use recycled products. 5. Reduce reliance on fossil fuels 6. Ride and promote mass transit 7. Promote ride sharing, car pool, or van pool programs 8. Choose green friendly products such as paint, wood, 9. Refrain from using Styrofoam. Think Green products or bring a beverage cup from home. 10. Better use of packaging and making producers responsible for their own waste. For example, computer manufactures should have recycle program for old computers. The County should produce an education marketing campaign that promotes energy-wise choices. The County should model good efficient use of energy in their building projects, supply purchases, and vehicle purchases. 4. Energy Efficiency: The working group supports the creation of incentives for energy efficient design such as LEED or other similar standards. Seattle Washington has some model incentive programs to promote Green Building. The working group believes that competition will entice builders to build Green. The working group recommends that all free standing County and State building projects meet the standards for energy efficient designs such as LEED or similar standards. The new Fire, Police, and Recreation building being planned for Puna should meet LEED or similar standards for energy design. Over head Street lights should be solar powered. Any needed signage at the new Pohoiki Recreation Park should be lighted by Photovoltaic Lighted Kiosk like the Hilo Bay Front Kiosk. Alternative Energy Working Group, February 15, 2007 Page 3 of 5 5. Clean Renewable Energy Development: The working group recommends that the County of Hawaii should require all new proposed power generating plants to be an "alternative energy" solution such as wind, OTEC, or bio diesel. We would prioritize the development of clean renewable energy in the following order: Solar Generated Power: Develop, promote, and encourage residential, business, and government use of Solar Generated Power. The County of Hawaii should encourage (require) electrical and plumbing contractors receive training is installing solar or off-grid systems. The working group recommends that if individuals or business desire to build off grid, the County Planning and Building department should consider all plan that meet design and safety standards. Bio-fuel (Bio Diesel, Palm Oil, Ethanol, Jatropha, or any other viable source): The working group recommends that bio-fuel alternatives be developed. There are many new and expanding technologies of bio fuel, we recommend that the County of Hawaii promotes and funds pilot projects in the Puna area. The working group believes that with Puna's rich agriculture land, the County along with private industry develop a pilot project to create bio-fuel. These projects would also promote economic opportunity for the residents of Puna. O-TEC- With our powerful sea we would like to see an OTEC plant in Puna. The working group felt that the land between Hawaiian Shores and Hawaiian Paradise Park would be an ideal location for an OTEC plant. The OTEC plant has been such a success in Kona in both energy efficiency and employment we would encourage the development in Puna. Relationship to Previous Plans and Public Involvement The County of Hawaii General Plan, adopted by ordinances in 2005, sets the land use and community development policy for the County of Hawaii. The plan states that "Puna's energy demand continues to rise because of rapidly increasing residential development." The working group agrees with the plan and recommends the residents of Puna and the County of Hawaii make alternative energy choices to lower the use of grid power. In the 130 small group meetings there were comments regarding grid power. Some wanted more power, phone, and cable lines within the subdivision. With the growth of Puna in the past few years many of the subdivisions are seeing an increase in the power grid system. Comments for underground utilities were also mentioned but the working group felt that underground utilities were too costly. In the 1995 Puna Community Development Plan the consultants suggest specific recommendations for Puna. The working group concurs with the early Puna Community Development Plan. Alternative Energy Working Group, February 15, 2007 Page 4 of 5 Public involvement in the 130 Small Grou Meetin s con p g curs with the recommendations of the Alternative; Energy Working Group. Many individuals asked for renewable, alternative energy choices, increased solar power, and a sustainable community. t • Alternative Energy Working Group, February 15, 2007 Page 5 of 5 Culture & Historic Preservation • Puna Community Development Plan Final Working Group Report February 15, 2007 Prepared for: The County of Hawai i 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, HI 96720 This report was prepared by: Na Pua Ho' omalu The Culture and Historic Preservation Working Group • Malia Brown • Keola Downing • Faye Hanohano • Lei Ilae • Arthur Johnsen • Luana Jones Participating Members • Working Group Facilitator Clive Cheetham Additional Web Membership Kim Tavares • Paul Campbell • Timothy Sheffler • Pam Hanor • Raj Sambhriya • Henry Kepa'a • Greg Trifomovitch • Emily Naeole • Rob Tucker Ana Kon Vernal Pe'a Lindsay Lawrence Pedro Delan Perry Jennifer Perry Prema Qadir Steering Committee Liaison Na Pua Ho' omalu -Final Report The PCDP Working Group for Culture and Historic Preservation Mission Statement OUR MISSIONIS TO ENSURE COMMUNITYINPUT FOR THE CREATION OF THE PUNA COMMUNITYDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND • TO ENHANCE CUL T URAL A N'ARENESS FOR AND INCREASE THE PROTECTION OF THE CULTURAL AND HISTORIC ANTIQ UITIES, ARTIFACTS, AND TRADITIONS OF PUNA. Na Pua Ho'omalu -Final Report • The PCDP Working Group for Culture and Historic Preservation Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph.D. Page 2 of 12 Na Pua Ho' omalu -Final Report The PCDP Working Group for Culture and Historic Preservation Na Pua Ho'omalu -The Blossom of Protectors With the completion of this first part of the Puna Community Development Plan process, we can see the input of the people of Puna blooming and becoming a part of the beauty of Puna. The protection of the Ancient Traditions and Practices of the original people of Puna is our best plan to sustain this very unique and precious place for the future. We want to open a new relationship between the Kupuna and all the people who live in Puna today, and the Hawai' i County government. We must all work together as the protectors of the culture and traditions of the ancient people of Puna. We live here and we must take on this responsibility to care for the Aina and all the culture and tradition of the people who lived here before us for tomorrow and the future. In our Working Group Report, we recommend that the County establish an important new part of County government: a Puna Cultural Council. The • members of this Council can become the stewards who create decisions for today and for the future generations of Puna yet to come. They can and must protect and perpetuate the Culture and Historic Traditions of Puna. Many significant cultural and historic sites throughout the District of Puna are often forgotten. These important places must not be neglected or a great loss will be forwarded to the generations that will follow us. We must prevent this tragic loss if we want to preserve the treasure of our Hawaiian heritage in Puna. Na Pua Ho' omalu has determined that we are not the appropriate body to either reveal or make recommendations concerning the important cultural and historic sites in Puna. Many of these sites still have undisturbed antiquities and archeological remains. The Puna Cultural Council should make any decisions concerning these sites. That is why we feel the urgent need for the County Council to establish the Puna Cultural Council to insure protection of all the many sites in Puna with knowledge and respect for the ancient traditions of the Hawaiian People. Na Pua Ho'omalu -Final Report The PCDP Working Group for Culture and Historic Preservation Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Dowsing, Ph.D. Page 3 of 12 Na Pua Ho' omalu -Final Report The PCDP Working Group for Culture and Historic Preservation With the help of the Puna Cultural Council, the County can make proper decisions about the protection of our community heritage in cooperation with those people who know best what the complex Hawaiian traditions require for all antiquities and archeological finds in Puna. They will also be instrumental in. developing ongoing learning opportunities to enhance the level of public awareness for the culture and historic preservation issues of Puna. Our Working C3roup has chosen to base our report on the IGOR format. Issues, Goals, Objectives, and Recommendations We have prepared a concise list of equally important recommendations that we feel will work best to insure that the Puna Community Development Plan is implemented in a manner that respects and protects the ancient traditions and sacred sites of this very special place. Working with t:he people of Puna, the County can promote a genuine • cooperative effort that shall help strengthen and unify all our efforts to make Puna a better community for tomorrow. Ho'oponopono means: "A deep and profound cleansing". This practice was often conducted at a large family gathering to "clear the air" where there was misunderstanding. Breathing in the seven."Ha" or sacred breaths of air, before the Pule form and process of Ho'oponopono, makes things right by allowing for everyone to simply express their own personal truth. This is also what this F'una Community Development Plan process is doing. We are coming together to share our Mana' o about what kind of future we want to see for Puna. We live here together, and the more we make our responsibility to the Aina personal, the better off we all will be. While our members were gathering experiences and information from the Kupuna of our neighborhoods, Auntie Minnie said that, we should all take the time and efi:ort to make it our own responsibility to protect the very Ahupua' a where we live. This simple idea reflects how the Hawaiian people of old knew ho~,u to take care of the Aina through their daily actions. Na Pua Ho'omalu -Final Report The PCDP Working Group for Culture and Historic Preservation Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph.D. Page 4 of 12 Na Pua Ho'omalu -Final Report The PCDP Working Group for Culture and Historic Preservation Many people do not even know the name of the Ahupua' a where their neighborhood was built. These land designation names had special meaning in and of themselves, which can lead us to a greater understanding and respect for our Aina. Again, a Puna Cultural Council could guide the people who live here to know about and care for each Ahupua' a within the District of Puna. In an area of concern beyond the direct responsibility of the Culture and Historic Preservation Working Group of the Puna CDP, we encourage the County to establish a Puna Community Council for both upper and lower Puna. In the future, the County may be able to work much more successfully with the people of our District, by taking the time to gather input from the people living in the communities of Puna, when making decisions about "Life in Puna"! Because the natural resources, the culture, and the environment of upper and lower Puna are so distinctly different, we suggest that two Community Councils (or at least two divisions of a unified Community Council) be • established. The people, who are working to make improvements and changes to life in these communities, should also live in the area where they are making decisions about. We sincerely wish to thank Mayor Harry Kim, the County Planning Department, the County consultant for this project, and all the many people who have done so much work to bring us up to where we are today. Our efforts are only a fine polish to the many years of work already performed in the past. We found very little disagreement with the earlier documents, but have attempted to enhance all that work with our own contributions and recommendations. Rather than list various antiquities, artifacts, and special locations, we endorse the concept of a Puna Cultural Council. This body would be separate from and very different to the Puna Community. Councils for upper and lower Puna. It would be the body of exceptional people who would make the decisions dealing with cultural and historic preservation issues based on their special knowledge and experience here in Puna. The Kupuna that our members talked to suggested that the members of the Puna Cultural Na Pua Ho'omalu -Final Report The PCDP Working Group for Culture and Historic Preservation Prepared by Dr. Keola C. A. Downing, Ph.D. Page 5 of 12 Na Pua Ho' omalu -Final Report T:he PCDP Working Group for Culture and Historic Preservation Council shoulal be residents of this area who have lived here for at least twenty-five years. This is a consideration that we have to consider very carefully. In this way, certain sacred locations and special archeological finds can be kept secret and. protected from public disclosure. We can protect these areas for the future that might otherwise be desecrated or damaged by people who know no better. In our appendix, we have made available space for inclusions of various documents, lists of locations, and drawings from previous efforts to protect the known cultural and historic locations in Puna. We also call upon the county to establish new protocols to insure the protection of those sights which are still undisturbed today. We also call upon the County to establish an actual County Department of Antiquities and Aesthetics. This new department would be responsible for working in cooperation with the Puna Cultural Council, for example, to protect access to long established areas for hunting and gathering. We must find a way to protect this ancient tradition of sharing the bounty of the land for the generations of people to come in the future. The Council could also establish protocols for dealing with the inadvertent archeological finds, sacred locations, and revealed Iwi. The Council could also identify for preservation, the beautiful and significant trees and other traditionally recognized examples of all the natural resources along Puna's shorelines, hala groves, and special locations. Malama Puna A Mau Loa Respectfully submitted by: Dr. Keola G.A. Downing, Ph.D. Coordinator for Na Pua Ho' omalu The Culture and Historic Preservation Working Group Of the Puna Community Development Plan Na Pua Ho'omalu -Final Report • The PCDP Working Group for Culture and Historic Preservation Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph.D. Page 6 of 12 Na Pua Ho' omalu -Final Report The PCDP Working Group for Culture and Historic Preservation Issues, Goals, Objectives, and Recommendation Statements 1. Hawaiian Culture & Values • Issue: There is a significant lack of cultural awareness in Puna. • Goal: i Increased cultural awareness among all the people in Puna. • Objective: More cultural learning opportunities at County parks and facilities, and area schools. • Recommendation: We recommend that the County Council propose and enact legislation to establish a Puna Cultural Council as an integral part of County governance. Na Pua Ho'omalu -Final Report The PCDP Working Group for Culture and Historic Preservation Prepared by Dr. Keola C. A. Dowoiag, Ph.D. Page 7 of 12 Na Pua Ho'omalu -Final Report The PCDP Working Group for Culture and Historic Preservation 2. Historic Sites and Buildings • Issue: There is a significant disturbance of and damage to historical and cultural sites in Puna. • Goals: • Cultural awareness among County Officials, the Commercial Work force, and the general population. • There are protocols for the protection of undisturbed cultural and historic sites. • Objective: Provide training programs to improve cultural sensitivity • among County officials and workers, the commercial workforce, and the general population of Puna. • Recommendations: • We recommend that the County encourage and/or require participation in cultural sensitivity training programs. This would include opportunities for appropriate County employees, Realtors, tour guides, and other members of the commercial workforce and the general population. • These programs shall be developed in cooperation with the Puna Cultural Council. The County shall establish protocols for identifying and preserving cultural & historic artifacts and incidental finds. Na Pua Ho'omalu -Final Report The PCDP Working Group for Culture and Historic Preservation Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph.D. Page 8 of 12 Na Pua Ho~omalu -Final Report The PCDP Working Group for Culture and Historic Preservation 3. Educational Programs • Issue: There is a need for more cultural awareness and sensitivity in County governance and the general population of Puna. • Goal: Abundant cultural education opportunities are available for the populace of Puna. • Objective: • Insure that Community Kapuna (elders), Makua (parents), and Opio (youth) participate in cultural learning events. • Recommendation: We recommend that the County establish and facilitate frequent cultural learning events, which emphasize Life Skills, Malama Aina, Chants, and Genealogies, etc Na Pua Ho'omalu -Final Report The PCDP Working Group for Culture and Historic Preservation Prepared by Da Keola G. A. Downfog, Ph.D. Page 9 of 12 Na Pua Ho' omalu -Final Report The PCDP Working Group for Culture and Historic Preservation 4. Governance: • Issue: There is a degradation of the beauty and unique quality of life in Puna. • Goal: Restore methods to protect and enhancement of the beauty and Unique qualities of "Life in Puna." • Objective: Establish a County Department of Antiquities and Aesthetics! • • Recommendations: • We recommend that the County Planning department require applicants for building permits, zoning changes, special permits etc. to first visit the Department of Antiquities and Aesthetics for an orientation procedure prior to any development approval. • We recommend that the Department of Antiquities and Aesthetics be required to consult with the Puna Cultural Council in the development of their orientation program and recommendations. Na Pua Ho'omalu -Final Report The PCDP Working Group for Culture and Historic Preservation Prepared by Dc Keola G. A. Downing, Ph.D. Page 10 of 12 Na Pua Ho' omalu -Final Report The PCDP Working Group for Culture and Historic Preservation Suplimentary Statement ofA Primary Recommendation Outside of the scope of our Working Group Na Pua Ho' omalu has resolved to recommend that the County of Hawaii should establish new Community Councils for Puna as an integral part of County governance. We therefore propose to the County the following recommendation. • The County Council shall propose and enact legislation establishing two Puna Community Councils, mauka and makai, as integral parts of County Governance. The council members will be selected by their respective neighborhoods. • Na Pua Ho'omalu -Final Report The PCDP Working Group for Culture and Historic Preservation Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Doweiog, Ph.D. Page 11 of 12 Na Pua Ho' omalu -Final Report The PCDP Working Group for Culture and Historic Preservation Meeting Record of Attendance # First Last Member Geographical 2006 2007 Name Name since Area cone coiza coca um czm ocios ouzz ozios 1. Malia Brown 10/16 Leilani x 2. Deborah L. Chang 11/13 Hamakua x 3. Clive Cheetham 10/23 Koa'e x x x x x x x 4. Keola Downing 10/16 Hawaiian Parks x x x x x x x x $. Faye H:anohano 10/16 Kanihiku Hmesteads g 6. Lei Ilae 11/13 Mokuhulu/ Kaimu x 7. Arthur Johnsen 10/16 Puna Palisades x x x x x $. Luana Jones 11/13 Top of Pohoiki Road x x x x x x x 9. Ana KOn 11/13 Mokuhulu/ Keahiakala x 10. Vernal Pe'a Lindsay 10/16 Kaimu-MakenaHomesteads x x x x x x 11. Lawrence Pedro Jr. 11/13 Hawaiian Homes x x 12. Delan Perry 10/23 Kapoho x x x x x 13. Jennifer Perry 10/16 Kapoho x x x x x x 14. Prema Qadir 11/13 Hawaiian Parks x x 15. Kim Tavares 10/16 Fern Forest x x Na Pua Ho'omalu -Final Report The PCDP Working Group for Culture and Historic Preservation Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph.D. Page 12 of 12 • t Infrastructure (Medical Facilities) Infrastructure Working Group (IWG) Puna Community Development Plan Recommendation for Medical Facilities STATEMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES: On November 29, 2006, the IWG met and adopted the following objective: Seek additional locations for medical facilities in both lower and upper Puna The following recommendation was written to address this objective STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND INTENT: As indicated in the Puna survey report, healthcare is a major issue with Puna residents. Recent newspaper press would have us believing that the issue is really about the doctor shortage. While this may be true, it is an accessibility and facilities issues as well, particularly given the issue of traffic patterns related to highway #130. The only current provider in lower Puna and upper Puna (if you count Kea'au) is Bay Clinic. Counting Kea'au as "upper Puna" is a bit of a stretch. In discussion with Bay Clinic staff, we learned that fourty-percent of all the patients seen are in the Pahoa clinic and the current facility does not lend itself to further expansion. IF the Kea'au fire station moves across the highway to Shipman property, the Kea'au. clinic might expand into the fire station facility next door. Our research and investigation has come up with the following conclusions: 1. The need for more basic health service capacity in upper and lower Puna district (Mountain View, for example, and the Pahoa area) is clear to everyone who has investigated the issue. The increased capacity is already needed ASAP. 2. The population already underserved stands at about 35,000 and is predicted to nearly double in the next 15 years. This increase will be most concentrated along an already inadequate and treacherous highway through lower Puna between Kea'au and Pahoa. 3. Land for such a new facility is available from four sources: a. Privately owned (too expensive) b. Shipman Company (focused primarily on development in the Kea'au area) c. County of Hawaii d. Hawaiian Homelands The last two seem affordable alternatives in upper and lower Puna. However we have expressed our reservations elsewhere about the County land in Pahoa. Final Recommendation and Supporting Documents Medical Facilities.doc Page 1 of 14 There are three reasonable alternatives for ownership and operation of any new health care facilities. They are: 1. HHSC; occupied) for the near future in expanding its capacity in Hilo and likely to go first to Kea'au for any expansion outside of Hilo. This could be a good thing, provided they build another more expanded hospital. As the population grows, another hospital will be needed. They would have more room to grown in Kea'au and will be closer to Iboth lower and upper Puna. 2. The Bay Clinic Inc; occupied for the near future in internal reorganization and planning to develop a new facility in Hilo. The lease on the current location is not being renewed. 3. A new non-profit corporation developed specifically to create new facilities in upper and lower Puna. Of these three, onl~,r the last seems to be the option to develop new capacity most quickly. RECOMMENDATION Build new facilities in upper and lower Puna. Included in these facilities will be expanded services. Rather than figurinc~ out the services needed and developing a plan, we went looking for other organizations that have similar services who serve a similar population: We came upon the Waianae Coast Comprehensive Health Center (WCCHC) located on Oahu. This organization has a thirty year history of ever expanding services to meet the needs of the community. (See Exhibit 1, pages 5-8.) It serves a primarily low income, Native Hawaiian patient population with a mission to serve the residents of this community irregardless of their ability to pay for services. Puna has significant Native Hawaiian population. While the income level in Puna might not be as low as the population sE:rved by WCCHC, it is similar. The Center incorporates western healing and Native Hawaiian healing practices into an integrative model of care. A possibility for a third component exists for Puna -namely holistic medicine. Additionally, WCCHC operates their own academy for training healthcare workers. this is an added bonus in that it will provide job training and employment opportunities in Puna. With one or more satellite facilities, both and upper and lower Puna could be served (including Volcano). • Final Recommendations and Supporting Documents Medical Facilities.doc Page 2 of 14 RELATIONSHIP TO PREVIOUS PLANS AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT 2005 General Plan and Other Written Plans This recommendation supports the County of Hawaii General Plan edict to reduce traffic on highway #130. With comprehensive facilities fewer people will be traveling to Hilo for medical care. Additionally, there is an emergency care component in the plan that will take some of the pressure off of the Hilo Hospital ER. With a training facility, residents will train and work in Puna as well. Currently, most training programs are in Hilo (namely Hilo C.C. and UH). The UH medical school is planning reinstitute it's resident training program on the Big Island. This facility could be one of those training sites. CDP Public Input from 130 Small Groups This recommendation supports the following themes and objectives produced by the Small Group meetings -namely more and expanded healthcare facilities in Puna. Potential Obstacles for Implementation The single biggest obstacle to making a beginning is land acquisition. In our discussions with Shipman, they are more focused on commercial development. They do envision a medical center on their property, but currently, want to work with Hilo Hospital and/or Bay Clinic. We evaluated the county land in back of Pahoa, but it is considered by some to be too close to hazardous lava zones. It turns out Hawaiian Homelands is a substantial land holder in both upper and lower Puna (including Volcano). WCCHC facilities originated on Hawaiian Homelands property. We think the same thing can happen in Puna. They have significant land holdings that are not directly on highway #130. We have been told, "secure the land first and the rest will follow". We know how much land we will need based on the Waianae model. Primary Responsibility for Carrying Out Recommendation The responsibility for caring out this recommendation will rest primarily with an expanded committee that needs to work with Hawaiian Homelands to secure the property, to develop a consultative relationship with WCCHC. It should b noted that we attempted to hold at least one video conference with them. Due to the recent earthquake the county facilities were not available for use. • Final Recommendation and Supporting Documents Medical Facilities.doc Page 3 of 14 The composition of irhe committee should be made up of interested Puna citizens (including Native Hawaiians), representatives of the Hilo office of the State Department of Public Health, interested physicians, nurse practitioners, physician's assistants, mental healthcare workers, and business people. MEETING RECORD: Infrastructure Working Group Meetings: See Exhibit 2 (pages 9-14) Puna Projects Operi House Kea'au Elementary-December 2, 2006 At this event we haci some preliminary discussion s Hawaii Homelands as well as Shipman Email Loa of Contributors/Correspondents on Recommendation Ruth Ota, State Dept of Public Health 12/14 - 12/19 Judy Akamine, Hilo office, State Dept of Public Health 12/19, 12/22 • Final Recommendations and Supporting Documents Medical Facilities.doc Page 4 of 14 • Exhibit 1 Web site: http://www.wcchc.com/main.htm ~~~#1'~ , _._.._... Since 1972 t • Prunary Caze r bdedual Sertises Specialty Nl~edu: use ~-. ,,~ Dental v e ivice s Health Mgrt~ Coumil i Health ~ 1Vl anagetx><ertt 7[7hana Flixna J U}JSLtIlQ:C ~ Utilizatiam Mgtrt Abuse Treatrnent /'r Social " Services ~;' ~ Aeventi ~~ Healthy ' Nutrition .' Community Agent ies - Fundine Final Recommendation and Supporting Documents Medical Facilities.doc Fatle~exry Medruie Integrative Healtlvcan Be haviora} ve r ~' \ He altlve aye \ t 3 peosel~zed Case '~ hdutia~mer¢ Community Agencies - Servs es Page 5 of 14 • THE CENTER The Waianae Coast Comprehensive Health Center is a private non-profit, community- owned and operated healthcare facility that serves a primarily low income, Native Hawaiian patient population with a mission to serve the residents of this community irregardless of their ability to pay for services. This Center has grown over its past twenty-nine year history to include four satellite clinics and services approximately 22,000 clients annually. It is interesting to note that ninety percent of the Health Center's users have income levels at or below 200% of the Federal poverty level and more than fifty percent live well below the Federal poverty line. The Health Center is one of the largest provider of primary healthcare to the Medicaid population in the State of Hawaii and has served as a model primary care facility. The Center incorporates western healing and Native Hawaiian healing practices into an integrative model of care. This Health Center treats a unique patient population with a myriad of medical issues including high risk pE:rinatal, Native Hawaiians, and chronically ill patients. The Waianae coast is one of the few remaining places on the Island of Oahu that remains relatively untamed and untouched. The majesty of its beauty moves the human spirit into a realm of tranquility and peace-an intangible component of healing that oftentimes gets overlooked. The Health Center provides an all-encompassing healing aspect that cannot be iterated on a spreadsheet or mapped out on a revenue projection. The mantra of any medical facility and, for that matter, any medical practitioner is to "...do no harm..." Consequently, the medical care given at the Waianae Coast Comprehensive Health Center treats the entire human being-both body and soul. 2001 DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Waianae Coast Comprehensive Health Center and its proposed projects are investments not only in the future of healthcare that will improve the overall health and wellness of a community, but it is also an investment in the future of opportunities both educationally and professionally in the residents of the community. The Health Center could become an originator of fresh ideas and an incubator of training future professionals. Thus, the outcome of this investment in this Health Center could not be measured on a pragmatic scale. This Health Center is currently seeking capital funding for a major project representing a carefully considered planning process involving broad-based community input. The new facility to be built will combine the latest in medical technology without altering the "Native Hawaiian ambiance" of the facility. The proposed project is a two-story, multi-purpose medical building of approximately 10,000 square feet. This building will include women's and children's healthcare services, primary Final Recommendation and Supporting Documents Medical Facilities.doc Page 6 of 14 i care, and specialty services, which currently operate in sub- ` standard, crowded, and scattered clinical space. The Health Center is 20,000 square feet short of facility space at the present time to efficiently perform its basic family medicine function. Additional facilities will be required within the next two years to deliver planned service expansion and maintain a competitive position to retain the Health Center's patient base. The cost projection is approximately $3M. Donor Information Contributions to the Health Center, atax-exempt organization under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, may be deductible for computing income and estate taxes. Please consult your tax advisor. Event 8 Classes WAIANAE HEALTH ACADEMY Job Fair & Open House • Wednesday, August 31, 2005 10:00 AM - 2:00 PM. (Apply Now for Fall 2005) HIV /AIDS COUNSELING ~ TESTING Services available in the Preventive Health Department Testing is FREE and anonymous. For appointments call Bryan Talisayan at 808-306-5006. SATURDAY PEDIATRIC CLINIC Makai Clinic (Main Center) will be extending clinic hours from 9: 00 AM - 3:00 PM. Rotating Pediatricians: Dr. May Okihiro, Dr. Kelli-Ann Voloch, and Dr. Viia Sehgal For appointments call 696-7081 -ask for the Makai Clinic. r~ Final Recommendation and Supporting Documents Medical Facilities.doc Page 7 of 14 Types of Staff . Behavioral Health Providers • Department Heads • Employees • Healthcare Providlers • Leadership Team Name Joseph W. Lapilio III Lyle Kaloi Aulani Ahmad Ginger Fu+ata Christine Jackson Steve MaclVlillan Merrie Aipoalani Gerard K. AkaH:a, M.D. Kauila Clark Paul Flores Daniel H. Gomes Anthony Guerrero, Jr. Herbert Hew Len Denice K. Ke~liikoa Maralyn Kurshals Wayne Sue:hiro Medical Providers • Emergency Medicine • Family Practice • Internal Medicine • Nurse Practitioners • Pediatrics • Preventive Medicine • Dentistry ~joard o~ Director's 2005-200( Board Position Profession President Owner Naki'iku Consulting Services First Vice President Social Worker Queen Lilioukalani Children's Center Second Vice President N / A Third Vice President Community Building Facilitator Queen Liliuokalani Children's Center Secretary Program Manager Honolulu Comm. Action Program / Oahu Headstart Treasurer Chief Operating Officer The Estate of James Campbell Member Office Manager /Chief of Staff Representative Mike Kahikina Member Medical Director The Queen Emma Clinics Member President & Consultant Kauila Enterprises Member N / A Member N / A Member Vice Chairman First Hawaiian Bank Member N / A Member Director of Development Waikiki Community Center Member Community Facilitator Good Beginnings Allicance -- Partnership for Hawaii's Keiki Member Vice President & Area Manager First Hawaiian Bank r-~ ~J • Final Recommendation and Supporting Documents Medical Facilities.doc Page 8 of 14 • Exhibit 2 SUMMARY of MEETINGS- PUBLIC SERVICES and INFRASTRUCTURE 10-4-06 Pahoa High Community Gathering, volunteers joined various Work Groups. Define the need for community input regarding the potential future of Puna. 10-11-06 Attended, Presentation done by County Person regarding process. 10-25-06 Goals needs of the community, Roads Large Community Facility/Regional Centers (Village Center) Emergency Facilities- Hospitals, Emergency Air transportation Substance Abuse Treatment Centers Schools and Community Centers Potential Disasters Hurricanes Tsunami's Earthquakes Fire Floods Lava Flow Geo Thermal Blow-outs War/Terrorist act Chemical Crisis/Bio Chemical accident Links needed for each Center ROADS are critical to.our community. Water Supply Utilities Discussion, regarding need for expert/informed input on areas of concern. List potential speakers for specific areas of need: Urgent Care/Medical facility (24/7) HHSC, Tom Driscoll American Red Cross-Disaster Services. Yoline or Barney Geothermal Expert Police/Fire Departments Water Dept. Helco Mayor Kim Process of requesting speakers must follow protocol, inquiry to be done on how this can • be done. Final Recommendation and Supporting Documents Medical Facilities.doc Page 9 of 14 • 11-11-06 Why are we here/our concerns /ideas and brainstorming: Health care facilities (5) Hurricane Shelter & Recovery Recruitment & retention of Professionals for Health Care facilities (2) Look at the demographics feasibility of establishing a Health Care facility Solid waste m<~nagement, disposal, health implications-Resource Recovery Ways to make Transit alternatives a part of Public Facilities Planning Medical Facilities closer to Puna residents (3) (ROADS/ Gridlock) Water- farmers are especially hurt by lack of water Disaster Services Hilo Medical Center (Hospital) is OVER LOADED most of the time Internal Organization Barbara Pedro is primary contact person Notes/summary of activities will be done by Barbara, Fran will cover when Barbara is not present. Facilitators- Fran and Liz Meetings to be held on Wednesdays or Thursdays (6-8 pm) At Keaau Family Health Center Direct calls and a-mails to Barbara Resource People/Agencies Health & Hospital Corp. Shipman Red Cross Civil Defense Bay Clinic Police Fire Mental Health Drug Addiction Rehabilitation Programs National Guard NOTE-Would be good to a-mail Social Services Work Group, especially when a guest is invited to attend that may be of interest to them. .7 GOAL- Reasonably focused statement of what we want. A Hospital in Puna by 2015 between Glenwood and Puna. A Hurricane/Disaster Shelter to be used for any type of disaster (between Kurtistown anti Mt. View) Objectives/ Recommendations: Adequate Healthcare providers in the community. What can be done f'or the present clinics? Consider- Regional Health Care Centers that include shelters in the event of a disaster. • Final Recommendation and Supporting Documents Medical Facilities.doc Page 10 of 14 Recruitment & Retention of more people to join the Work Group- creation of a Poster. Top Three: 1. Medical Facilities for the Upper and Lower Puna District 2. Expansion of Educational Opportunities 3. Police, Fire and Public Disaster Services Note: So many areas of concern, limited time and resources group selected three major concerns, data taken from Puna CDP Working Group Resource Packet. 11-29-06 Review of flyers, where to place them-various locations throughout the community Question-Puna was promised an Emergency Clinic following the Dana Ireland murder, What happened/ Where is it ? (Time Line Questions- Contacting Liz arranging for Speakers.) Health/Medical Center(sL Emergency 24/7, explore 2 centers vs. 1 Puna (upper/lower) area size and the potential increases in population. Waianae Coast Comprehensive Health Center (follow their model) Queens Medical Center (Makuu Homestead area) . Kaiser Permanente Disaster Preparedness and Emergency Sheltering Civil Defense American Red Cross Police and Fire Departments Fire Department- What is the status of the Pahoa Fire Department ? Will the new Fire House include a training center? Is there adequate access to water to fight fires? Ocean, well water or community pools. Do we have access to 4-wheel drive ambulances? Are there Helipads available for emergency transport needs? Are there agreements with private agencies to assist in emergency situations? Upcoming meeting at the Open House-12-2-06- lets work together to meet with organizations there, to get as much information as possible. Lets explore meeting with the Hawaiian Homes, to discuss possible land to be used in the Makuu area for a Medical center- similar to the Waianae Coast Comprehensive Center, we could also explore requesting help from the Queen Emma Foundation to assist in this endeavor. Time line- so much to do in so little time Creation of rough Draft is due @ 2/15/07. Rumors of an extension of the timeline. • Final Recommendation and Supporting Documents Medical Facilities.doc Page 11 of 14 12-3-06 Fire Department is planning ahead and we support their efforts to build new fire station on #130 along with the Police Dept.. U. S. Geological Survey, Hawaiian Volcano Observatory was able to provide an abundance of data regarding past events. Our group can project future needs based on past events of seismic and volcanic activity. W.H. Shipman Ltd. presented their future plans and expressed their willingness to work with the existing Hawaii Hospital Corporation. W.H. Shipman has designated an area that could be used for a hospital at some time in the future. (This plan seems to be dependent on an extension to Hwy. 130, creating a larger 4-way) intersection where Hwy. 130 and Hwy.. 11 currently meet , a large shopping center and business district and a large residential community.) Department of Hawaiian Home Lands- provided maps of the area illustrating what is designated for residential use and what is available for other uses. They were open to discussion about designating land for a Medical facility. They acknowledged that their program worked with Waianae Coast Comprehensive Center in the past. They shared that at least twice in the past they were approached regarding a Medical facility in the Makuu area, and that they are open to the idea and recognize the need. 12-13-06 ~ • Medical/Urgent Care facilities in both upper and lower Puna Medical Costs/Medical Needs Appropriate compensation for services rendered High Tech vs. Low Tech (medical) care Explore past, Block Nursing Program (PHN's) Desired capabilities of the medical centers being considered- Drug Rehab, Prenatal Care, X-Ray, Lab/Blood work, Urgent Care, Specialty centers such as oncology and asthma/respiratory care. (etc. as needed) The needs and wants of Upper Mountain View/Volcano and Glenwood are not necessarily the same as those of Lower Puna. Desire of quality accessible medical care could be seen as a need and desire of all. Disaster Services Police and Fire The plans for the new Police and Fire Department in Pahoa is to be built to exceed the current needs. Major obstacle at this time is the septic system. Volunteer (Subdivision) Fire Departments may need to have paid Professional staff to man the stations. What agreements exist between Police, Fire, Civil Defense in the event of an emergency. How do they communicate? Our Work Group recommends that the County gear-up to include both a Satellite System and a Hamm Radio system. In the event of a disaster (of any size) communication is critical! Adult Education . Final Recommendation and Supporting Documents Medical Facilities.doc Page 12 of 14 • 12-28-06 Discussion- contributing factors in the shortage of MD's Lack of Medical facilities, lack of Doctors-Why? MD's want their children to have a quality education. Education available here include: the Public schools, the Charter School system and Private schools. Concerns expressed that due to the low standard of education provided on the Big Island that that is why doctors do not stay here. (Maybe we should survey the Doctors who are here and who have left to know the answer to this question.) Prep questions for next meeting where we will have two presenters - Principal of the Adult Education Program, and Bill Walters from W.H. Shipman Ltd. 1-3-07 Two Speakers Bill Walter and Lenny Paik Mr. Walter from WH Shipman shared maps of the area and portions of their long range plans for the Keaau area. Mr. Walter shared-Puna residents want to remain rural. With the population growth occurring as it is now, Puna needs to develop services where they are needed. Keaau is in the perfect location for the infrastructure to expand to meet and provide many of these needs. Discussion about the needs and costs to develop: roads, water, waste water systems and housing. WH Shipman, Ltd. wants to do the best they can and are trying to look at what the long range wants and needs of the community are. Shipman has owned the land for 125 years and they are committed to being able to keep pride in their actions and to keep things beautiful. One of their visions include a clinic with 3 or 4 MD's who can provide medical care, cases that have a more urgent need can be sent to Hilo Medical Center (feeder system) Hilo Community School for Adults, Lenny Paik shared about the programs currently available on the Big Island and their flexibility to expand to meet the needs of the community. We support the continued promotion of the Hilo Community School for Adults and their use of Satellite Centers in the Pahoa, Keaau(and Mt. View) areas. We recognize the need for more Academic Advancement Programs and encourage the expansion of the Trade Schools throughout our Community. 1-17-07 Michael J. Mihora, CEO Bay Clinic spoke with about their plans. At the moment they have no firm plans for further expansion. When it is vacated, they may take over the Keaau fire station. They are busy trying to find another facility it Hilo as their lease at ~' Final Recommendation and Supporting Documents Medical Facilities.doc Page 13 of 14 the current site is not being renewed. They are also working hard at being more financially solvent. Note: Mix-up in meeting dates and attendees due to illnesses, family demands and the death of a friend. The remainder of the month of January, and February no meeting notes were available for this report. Most communications done by email. • • Final Recommendation and Supporting Documents Medical Facilities.doc Page 14 of 14 Land Use doc 02 15 07 VC-DD REPORT.doc • Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) Land Use Working Group Village Centers/Design Districts Subgroup ~f irr 1~ s • Report Due: 2/15/07 • 1 doc 02 15 07 VC-DD REPORT.doc Village Centers/Design Districts Subgroup Table of Contents Introduction I. Goals II. Objectives III. Recommendations IV. How Recommendations Address: A. Relationship to recommendations and statements in 2005 General Plan and other previously written plans B. Relationship to public input received in CDP process C. Community Resistance or Potential Obstacles D. Who should be primarily responsible for carrying out the recommendations . V. Meeting records, dates, locations VI. Contributors • 2 doc 02 15 07 VC-DD REPORT.doc Village Centers/Des><gn Districts '....I felt, perhaps more keenly than ever before, just what it meant to be avillager--someone whose welfare is of interest (sometimes of unwelcome interest) to one's neighbors--but always to matter. It was a warming thought--to be part of a small, living community, 'members of one another', so closely linked by ties of kinship, work and the parish boundaries, that the supposed unhappiness of one elderly woman affected all. " From Village Diary, by Miss Read INTRODUCTION The most commented theme subcategory in the 3394 ideas gathered at the first 130 small group meetings was "Community Center -Village Center" (205 ideas). The Puna CDP summarized community input in this subcategory as follows: "Puna residents would like to see more community centers that are walkable with park, schools and locally owned shops to provide the basic needs and services for the participant without having to drive long distance in an automobile. Participants expressed the need for more community based economic development by having small village centers that stay true to Puna's uniqueness and creating more gathering places for residents to interact, shop, work, learn and play". The concept of "Village Centers" is the primary focus of this report. Many participants stated their wish to guide commercial development to preserve the character and history of the affected community. The "Design district" guidelines concept is a method to achieve their wish and is a secondary focus of this report. I. GOALS ("Desired outcomes") A. Report Goal #1: To encourage and support communities in our rapidly growing Puna region that wish to enhance existing or establish new village centers (VCs) and gathering places where residents can obtain basic goods and services without traveling long distances. Communities will continue to grow. In the process, neighbors can take initiative to address their distinct desires, and preserve and enhance the character of their community by having a voice in the village centers form of commercial development. The alternative is accepting what developers independently decide. B. Report Goal #2: To encourage and support communities in Puna to seek ways to guide development and preservation of structures and settings that is environmentally responsible and reflective of Hawaiian history and culture. Design planning is an established tool for "smart growth"; therefore design district processes should be available to interested community associations wishing to achieve a common vision. Note: The Census population count for Puna District from 2000 was 31,707. Per John Whalen, Principal of Plan Pacific, Inc. the 2006 Puna District population was 38,500. Mr. Whalen's population projection for 2030 is 75,000. Population growth creates impacts on a community's services such as emergency, transportation, elderly, youth disabled etc. Planning for the growth now by implementing Village Design Districts will provide a fair and functional process for smart growth. • 3 doc 02 15 07 VC-DD REPORT.doc ~- rx. a t~ ~ mac; ~ ~'~` c g'~ ; ~'~~. ~ ~' .~ ~ ~ , °°~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ,~ .~ ~- g~ ~ ~~ C Ity ~ ~ ~ ' T ~ {~ • e ~ ' 4 p~~ ~ ~ ~,1 ~ s~ ~ t,) +~ W " ~ ~.~ J v- ~ ?~ ~~ ~~ "~ 4 ~~ ~~~: f::.,•: ~~ ~` ~~ •: fi . ~ ~; P:::.'. ~ ~ ~ . » - .l ~ ..- ~ ~ ~ a.:: ~ ~_ ~. ~ Y ~. ~ ~~ ~~' • i _~ 4 4 • doc 02 15 07 VC-DD REPORT.doc • II. OBJECTIVES ("How to meet goals") A. Objective #1: Communities will begin to consider supporting creating village centers with scope and size suitable for their immediate and surroundings areas. County planning resources will facilitate community efforts to achieve thoughtful commercial planning results. Currently the County of Hawaii General Plan, Land Use Commercial Development (~ a.3.a Standards) does provide descriptions of three basic types of village centers with general parameters as an initial reference point: There are three basic types of shopping centers: (a) Neighborhood Centers • Provide: Convenience goods, e.g., foods, drugs, and personal services. • Major Shops: Supermazket and/or drug store. • Number of Shops: 5 to 15. • Acreage: 5 to 10 acres. • Approximate Mazket: 3,000 people. (b) Community Centers • Provide: Convenience goods, plus "soft line" items, such as clothing, and "hard line" items, such as hazdwaze and small appliances. • Major Shops: Vaziety or junior department store. • Number of Shops: 20 to 40. • Acreage: 10 to 30 acres. • Approximate Market: 15,000 people. (C) Regional Centers • Provide: Full range of merchandise and services. • Major Shops: Full size department store. • Number of Shops: 40. • Acreage: over 30 acres. • Approximate Market: 50,000 people. B. Objective #2: There will be Puna-wide community input, and encouragement and support of the County Planning Department and other departments as necessary to accomplish development of cohesive design district processes and guidelines. C. Objective #3. Communities will examine their own community cultural, social and economic history and goals when deciding whether to pursue design district status and guidelines. III. RECOMMENDATIONS A. Recommendation #1: County Council should effect a moratorium on all subdividing and any rezoning that would allow development until the Puna Community Development Plan is completed. Special permit requests should be subject to public notice and review, affected community associations' acceptance, and approval by the (to be created) Puna Communities Council. B. Recommendation #2: Communities should first consider the following general criteria and situations as they pertain to their area when exploring village center possibilities: Set back off highway 5 doc 02 15 07 VC-DD REPORT.doc Acreage based on population density Enterprise zone Access to water, sewer, electric Roads (into & out of) Hazards awareness Proximity to historic/established community areas Sufficient municipal parking Ecological, agriculture and archaeological considerations Impact on community quality of life C. Recommendation #3: Communities should consider a list of village center "people focused" possible attributes when exploring village center possibilities in their areas. A list of attributes has been compiled and suggestions as to each attribute's suitability for each type of village centers are offered below: 1. Neiahborhood Villaae Center (NVCI - example: Orchidland a. 5-10 acres b. 3,000 population c. 5-15 shops such as convenience (prefer Mom & Pop type), food, drugs, personal services VC Possible Attributes: Community Flavor- mandatory vs. 7-11 strip mall type flavor Meeting space/community center- in every neighborhood desired Social Opportunities- to talk story such as places for chance meetings like central post office box location, neighborhood bulletin boards, community pavilion mandatory Desian District-Maybe too small to institute Design District, on the other hand, Volcano Village good example of where it could work Farmer's Market-may be of too big a scale to have in NVC but a few stores w/ outside product stands should be allowed General Store-may be too big for NVC but small mom & pops more desirable, depends what you mean by General Store Bankina-NVC may be too small to support small bank branch but at least one ATM should definitely be provided in NVC Food-NVC should definitely make provisions for small food establishments such as small mom & pop type like BBQ Chix shops but no major fast food establishments such as Taco Bells should be allowed in NVCs Green centers- like a small neighborhood park where you could have neighborhood BBQ and covered gathering space should be part of every NVC People pedestrian friendly shall definitely be an attribute of any village center regardless of size; the most important subattribute of a Village Center being pedestrian friendly is for the village to be safe for pedestrians and should have adequate sidewalks and crosswalks Small scale accommodations- such as B&B's don't necessarily have to be located in NVC but should be allowed in neighborhoods as long as they meet the normal, "Special Use" zoning requirements Healthy activities- like walking and biking should be allotted for within every NVC by the use of tree shaded walks, benches and bike parking Hawaii-Big Island feel design- with height restrictions, environmental building standards, visual guidelines and native landscaping etc should be mandatory for any village center 6 doc 02 15 07 VC-DD REPORT.doc Multi-family housing_ may not be appropriate except for live/work units above small shops in NVC Medical facilities- like a few small doctor/dentist offices should be allowed-within NVC Cultural opportunities- may be more appropriate in large village centers but small neighborhood coffee shop could be venue for cultural opportunities within NVCs Smart parkins- i.e. parallel in front w/larger parking lot in ancillary locations should be part of NVC such as in Honomu Transit centers- need to be considered as part of NVC so that commuters could also have easy access to neighborhood stores and services County. State & other public services -may be of too small scale to have in every NVC Public restrooms- not necessary to provide in every neighborhood but nice if they are as part of park Live/work concept -like plantation villages should definitely be part of neighborhood village centers such as Papaikou Security/Neighborhood Watch/Positive police response= shall be part of every neighborhood village center Education centers/opportunities- would be nice in every neighborhood but may not have facilities, therefore should be relegated to CVC Leaacv- and prepare for future generations should be part of every NVC, therefore p-ots of land should be set aside for specific uses like parks, community services Open space preservation- big & little ways should also be part of every NVC, for example, preserve some green buffer zone and wildlife habitat in every neighborhood Encourage tax $ to stav in area- by encouraging local businesses to thrive vs. big box stores in every NVC Business improvement area- see if can get designated federal dollars to help set infrastructure in place for dedicated community Village Centers as antidote for sprawl and traffic congestion Li htin -appropriate to the area shall be part of every Neighborhood Village Center, i.e. that is minimally invasive to the environment--lighting that will ensure safety but not pollute the nighttime sky for telescope viewing should be utilized Small business- friendly and conducive atmosphere should be promoted in NVC by limiting big box competition 2. Community Village Center (CVCI -example: Volcano a. 10-30 acres b. 15,000 people c. 20-40 shops such as convenience, soft line, hard line & small appliances VC Possible Attributes: Community Flavor- mandatory vs 7-11 strip mall type flavor Meeting space/community center- mandatory fora Community Village Center Social Opportunities- to talk story such as places for chance meetings like central post office boxes location, neighborhood bulletin boards, community pavilions & gardens, mandatory Design District-medium sized Village Center should definitely consider having mandatory Design District Guidelines to make sure all the buildings in the CVC look cohesive and of the area rather than imported Subway, for example type buildings Farmer's Market -definitely appropriate in Community Village Centers because will have critical mass to support market. For example, Maku'u Farmer's Market 7 doc 02 15 07 VC-DD REPORT.doc General Store-definitely appropriate here, e.g. Ace or True Value Hardware, J. Hara's Bankino-small bank branch should definitely be provided in Community Village Center, for example BOH and is' Hawaiian in Pahoa--but needed also in Mt. View Food-medium sized food establishments such as coffeeshops, plate lunch establishments that reflect the community should be allowed in CVC Green centers- should also be part of every community village center; village greens should be the size to have a couple of ball fields, dog park, recreation activities, a covered gathering space etc. People pedestrian friendly- shall definitely be part of any village center regardless of size--the most important subattribute of a Village Center being pedestrian friendly is for the village to be safe for pedestrians and should have adequate sidewalks and crosswalks Small scale accommodations- such as B&B's don't necessarily have to be located in CVC but should be allowed w/I the community as long as they meet the normal, "Special Use" zoning requirements Healthy activities- like walking and biking should be allotted for within every Community Village Center by the use of tree shaded walks, benches and bike parking Hawaii-Big Island feel design- with height restrictions, environmental building standards, visual guidelines and native landscaping etc should be mandatory for any village center Multi-family housing- may be more appropriate such as live/work units above small shops in CVC Medical facilities- like a few small doctor/dentist offices and maybe a small but not too large clinic should be allowed within CVC Cultural opportunities- in small to medium sized venues such as coffee house size up to small theater should be considered for CVCs Smart parkina- i.e. parallel in front w/larger parking lot in ancillary locations should be part of CVC such as in Honoka'a Transit centers- need to be considered as part of CVC so that commuters could also have easy access to community stores and services, i.e. medium sized stores, services near bus stop County. State & other public services- such as small scale Police substation should be considered as part of CVC Public restrooms- nice to provide as part of Community Village Centers Park Live/work concept- like plantation villages should definitely be part of community village centers such as Papaikou Security/Neighborhood Watch/Positive police response- shall be part of every community village center with possible mini police substation and security video cameras Education centers/opportunities -would be nice in every community, therefore should be mandated in CVC Legacy_ and prepare for future generations should be part of every CVC, therefore plots of land should be set aside for specific uses like parks, community services Open space preservation- big & little ways should also be part of every CVC, for example presence a medium sized green buffer zone and wildlife habitat in every community Encourage tax $- to stay in area by encouraging local businesses to thrive vs. big box stores in every CVC Business improvement area- See if can get designated federal dollars to help set infrastructure in place for dedicated Community Village Centers as antidote for sprawl and traffic congestion doc 02 15 07 VC-DD REPORT.doc i Liahting_ appropriate to the area shall be part of every Community Village Center, i.e. that is minimally invasive to the environment--lighting that will ensure safety but not pollute the nighttime sky for telescope viewing should be utilized Small business friendly- and conducive atmosphere should be promoted in CVC by limiting big box competition 3. Regional Villaoe Center (RVC) -example Kea'au a. > 30 acres b. 50,000 population c. > 40 shops, full range of merchandise & services VC Possible Attributes: Community flavor- mandatory vs 7-11 strip mall flavor Meetino space/community center- mandatory, at least one for Town Hall type meetings Social Opportunities- to talk story such as places for chance meetings like post office boxes, neighborhood bulletin boards, community pavilions & gardens mandatory Design District-having a design district for the Regional Village Centers will enhance the sense of place and cohesive architectural design will unify the community and could only increase property values; for example Waimea vs. Walmart/Hilo Farmer's Market- definitely appropriate here; for example, Kea'au Farmer's Market General Stores- may get sized out by larger stores in Regional Village Center • Banking-Regular size bank branches as well as alternatives such as Credit Unions should be provided in Regional Village Centers such as Kea'au Food-Large food establishments such as McDonalds, Pizza Hut should be and are already allowed in Regional Village Centers such as Kea'au Shopping Center Green centers such as W.H. Shipman Regional Park should be part of every Regional Village Center; the green centers to be considered should be of the recreation complex size. People pedestrian friendly- shall definitely be part of any village center regardless of size; the most important sub-attribute of a Village Center being pedestrian friendly is for the village to be safe for pedestrians and should have adequate sidewalks and crosswalks. Small scale accommodations- such as B&B's don't necessarily have to be located in RVC but should be allowed in the region as long as they meet the normal "Special Use" zoning requirements Healthy activities- like walking and biking should be allotted for within every Regional Village Center by the use of tree shaded walks, benches and bike parking. Hawaii-Biel Island feel design- with height restrictions, environmental building standards, visual guidelines and native landscaping etc should be mandatory for any village center Multi-family housing: definitely appropriate in RVC especially live/work units above small shops Medical facilities- including small clinic/hospital should be allowed, planned for and mandated within RVC Cultural opportunities- in medium to large sized venues such as small theater to large auditorium should be considered for RVCs Smart parking- i.e. parallel in front w/large parking lot in ancillary location should be part of RVC such as in Hilo 9 doc 02 15 07 VC-DD REPORT.doc Transit centers- need to be considered as part of RVC so that commuters could • also have easy access to community stores and services, i.e. large sized stores, services near bus transfer station like Ala Moana County, State & other public services- shall definitely be provided in "second city" offices of RVC Public restrooms- nice to provide as part of RVC but will most likely be in multiple places such as public buildings Live/work concept- like plantation villages should definitely be part of regional village centers such as Papaikou Security/Neiahborhood Watch/Positive police response- shall be part of every be part of every community village center with possible mini police substation and security video cameras Education centers/opportunities- mandatory in every RVC so that one doesn't have to travel great distances for education LegacLr- and prepare for future generations should be part of every RVC, therefore; plots of land should be set aside for specific uses like parks, community services Open space preservation- big & little ways should also be part of every RVC, for example preserve a large green buffer zone and wildlife habitat in every region Encouraae tax $- to stay in area by encouraging local businesses to thrive vs. big box stores in every RVC Business improvement area- see if can get designated federal dollars to help set infrastructure in place for dedicated Regional Village Centers as antidote for sprawl and traffic congestion Lighting_ appropriate to the area shall be part of every RVC, i.e. that is minimally invasive to the environment--lighting that will ensure safety but not pollute the nighttime sky for telescope viewing should be utilized. Small business friendly- and conducive atmosphere should be promoted in RVC . by limiting big box competition D. Recommendation #4: In general, light industry would not be encouraged in the core of the village center. Noise, space, visual characteristics and air quality impact should relegate much of light industry away from the core of a village center or to a separate location. The; General Plan should continue to identify appropriate locations for light industry subject to smart planning principles and allow appropriate special permits where the industry's impact does not conflict with the level and type of other development planned. Suitable design considerations are needed when the light industry facility is situated in a design district. E. Recommendation #5: Communities should consider their area location, population base with build-out, general characteristics and geographical situation in relation to other Puna neighborhoods when exploring scope and size of village centers. Using these criteria, op tential general locations in Puna are listed below and a suggested type of village center for each. These may be appropriate for servicing that immediate and surrounding area and reducing congestion and long distance driving. 1. Kea'au -Regional Village Center 2. Pahoa -Regional Village Center 3. Hawn Shores/Beaches -Neighborhood Village Center 4. Kaimu to Opihikao -Neighborhood Village Center w/ Black Sand, Kehena, Kaimu, Puna Beach Palisades, Seaview, Royal Gardens as catchment or feeder areas 5. Nanawale -Neighborhood Village Center 6. Leilani Estates -Neighborhood Village Center 10 doc 02 15 07 VC-DD REPORT.doc 7. Glenwood -Neighborhood Village Center w/ Fern Forest, Orchid Isle Estates, Eden Roc & Aloha Estates as catchment or feeder areas 8. Kurtistown -Community Village Center w/Hawaiian Acres as a catchment or feeder area 9. Mt. View -Community Village Center w/Pacific Paradise Mt. View Manor, Eden Roc, Fern Acres, Hawaiian Acres, Aloha Estates, Ola'a Scenic Lands, Hawaiian Island Paradise, Hilo Acres, Pacific Paradise Development as catchment or feeder areas 10. Orchidland -Neighborhood Village Center 11. HPP -Community Village Center 12. Volcano -Community Village Center w/ Royal Hawaiian, Ohia Estates, Volcano Village, Hawaiian Orchid Island, Mauna Loa Estates & Volcano Golf & Country Club as catchment or feeder areas 13. Ainaloa -Community Village Center w/ Tiki Gardens & Hawaiian Acres as catchment orfeeder areas 14. Kapoho -Neighborhood Village Center Continue to page 12, Figure 2 • • 11 ~ ... r ~+ ~` K~d~] ~.'t St~7 ~. i i~ f ~,'~ l ~. _~,~~;xr_ Ni1~, ~ W .- ~_. A.._~ Comrr~unity,E~vel~prnent Plan (Pa ~, Lang! lJse Working +Group ° Village CentersJ[3esign Qistricts Suiagroup oN Report to Steering Committee 2JI5/~{?t}7 __ _ 0 ~ Legend n V1t1aQe Centers d l+iis~htft3~r#ec~d: -~ - ~-1 ~ Asia ~ ^n '~~ Ct3i179#fl~;I~~y: ¢' O .r ~:,'Y -.,,4 _ P~~l9LJ~ 5$nr~d, '~~~VitiJ ~ #1 ~ ~ j, __ =i ~~~ ~c~ i`--~_JJ rr~a1}}~~}~~y^ P~u~BtK}n ~~71lW: "',7V~SeiJo ~ f R~~ Qtt10C ~~ _ 1dj L~ile2 .~~ ~1~l~ ca}'f~vrrrl `8 @f ~tUtdE]"t~* s~~ N • • • doc 02 15 07 VC-DD REPORT.doc F. Recommendation #6: Commercial zoning for village centers should be allocated based on the goals of the community, population and general criteria in III.B. Note: Commercial zoning deficiencies in Puna were depicted in the 1992 Community Development Plan Technical Report: Puna has 2.84 acres per 1,000 population yet the islandwide ratio is 10.77 acres per 1000. G. Recommendation #7: Wherever infrastructure is unavailable for needed commercial development of village centers the county will support infrastructure alternatives that satisfy the needs for development and public health and safety, ie solar energy and well or catchment water systems that meet health and safety standards. H. Recommendation #8: If stakeholders or area residents desire to have a village center or design district they should notify county planning authorities_ The county should prepare and make information available about collaborative community driven planning processes (including design warranted variance requests) and how to initiate them to ensure community desires are implemented. I. Recommendation #9: A Puna district-wide set of broad design ,guidelines should be established and adopted in the General Plan that applies to all Puna design districts to ensure development and preservation efforts are locale based and consistent with Hawaiian characteristics. Individual communities should then be able to create specific design guidelines for voluntary compliance or seek regulatory design standards if so desired. Both commercial and residential areas can consider using the design district concept to provide a workable and positive direction to achieve development and community identity goals. J. Recommendation #10: Create a Puna Communities Council, that with the assistance of a planning consultant will do the following in Puna related matters: • review proposed General Plan changes and rezoning requests • be involved in creating county design district processes • assist in development of Puna wide broad design district guidelines • have first tier approval authority for community based new (regulated) design district p~osals and subsequent guideline revision requests • have first tier approval authority for ~ecial permit requests K. Recommendation #11: County design district processes and guidelines should conform to state law (Act 119, SLH 1973) which requires counties to adopt urban and rural design plans based on: 1. Land Use 2. Pedestrian and vehicular circulation 3. Public and private community services 4. Historic sites 5. Significant land and water features 6. View and vistas 7. Basic concepts of environmental and architectural character 13 doc 02 15 07 VC-DD REPORT.doc L. Recommendation #12: The following key questions should be considered by . communities to explore their design district potential (condensed from a guide written by John Whalen):: 1. What distinctive characteristics or historical sites in their community do they wish to preserve or enhance? 2. What are the existing or desired focal points for community activity? 3. Would the design guidelines apply to residential as well as commercial and public buildings? 4. What features should be preserved or enhanced? 5. What features are incompatible with the desired character of the village? 6. What should be the guidelines for infill development? 7. Is it possible (or necessary) to prohibit undesirable uses? 8. Would there be regulatory controls or voluntary guidelines? 9. If regulatory controls, would there be specific, prescriptive design standards or more general design principles coupled with a design review process? 10. Who would be responsible for design review and decisions? 11. If the guidelines are voluntary, how will they be promoted? M. Recommendation #13: The county should take necessary steps to process community association approved design district proposals to completion when submitted for Puna communities as long as they meet current existing laws and standards and the intent of the CDP. IV. HOW RECOMMENDATIONS ADDRESS: • A. Relationship to recommendations and statements in 2005 General Plan and other previously written plans • County of Hawaii General Plan, Land Use Commercial Development (14.3.4 Standards . Types of basic village centers used in this report are excerpted frorn this plan. • Hawaiian Paradise Park Community Master Plan (draft)IZEV. 2005 SECTION II LAND USE PLAN 2.1 OBJECTIVES OF THE LAND USE PLAN. This community supports a village center approach as shown in its plan below. The major development theme that is a change to the plan of the original developer of the subdivision is the addition of mixed-use areas which may include light industrial and commercial development. It is central to the Plan that the rural theme of the original developer should be preserved. It is recommended that., as property is developed, a green border of approximately 10 feet be left along the side and back bouindazies to provide habitat for birds and wildlife. It is further recommended that general landscaping preserve native plants such as the ohia tree. In the developer's original plan there were several 20-acre parcels set aside for commercial development although none have ever been zoned for that purpose. It is proposed in this Master Plan that three. of those 20-acre parcels be designated as "Village Centers" and zoned for mixed use. The HPP community envisions each Village Center as a small neighborhood shopping and professional ser~~ces center surrounding a village green. Typical commercial establishments would be small food stores, fruit and vegetable outlets, variety stores, hardware stores, small clothing stores, professional offices, small restaurants, branch banks. We encourage the development of residential walkup apartments of no more than two stories in height to meet the needs of the elderly or for families just starting out. The village greens could be used for entertainment or 14 doc 02 15 07 VC-DD REPORT.doc farmer's market type of activities as well as just a large green space for relaxation, lawn sports and recreation. • VCA (Volcano Community Association) Lona-Ranee Plan Revision Year 2007 VILLAGE CORE DESIGN GUIDELINES. This plan's intent would preserve Volcano's visual character by employing protective zoning and design guidelines: Goal 1: Preserve the forested environment by reducing, or mitigating the amount of forest which would have to be removed for any development: 1. Encourage the sharing of access roads and parking especially for contiguous commercial development. 2. Explore ideas such as a transfer of parking requirements, which would allow businesses to avoid removing forest for parking by the establishment of a village parking lot on already cleazed lots, appropriately located and designed. 3. Continue to lobby the County to defer enforcement of the requirements for curbs, gutters, and sidewalks. 4. Encourage the preservation of the native landscape and the replanting of unused or vacant cleazed lands with native species. 5. Strongly encourage the utility companies to share the same poles to prevent the proliferation of overlapping pole lines; and encourage underground utilities wherever possible. 6. Encourage the installation of underground utilities in commercial corridors. 7. Work to enforce litter laws in the Volcano Community. Goal 2: Preserve the historic structures and, in future construction, the flavor and feel of the core area of the Village: 1. Encourage the establishment of a new zoning category, "CR -Rural Commercial," to include an amended set of permissible uses, setbacks, minimum lot size, etc. 2. Encourage the establishment of a set of design guidelines for Rural Commercial, which would contain: restrictions on use, and stipulations for buffers, setbacks, lighting and building height; considerations of landscape elements, roof line, building materials, issues of compatibility with surrounding uses and structures, appeazance, colors, etc. 3. Encourage the preparation of a design workbook for Rural Commercial zoning based on the existing structures in the Village to act as a guide for landscaping, site planning, designing and building commercial structures that would merely be suggestions of how structures could look in order to be well-integrated into the community; and the creation of a community design review committee, which would be available for consultations about the design guidelines. 4. Explore the creation of a Special Design District, which would set new standards in the commercial corridor. • Qrchidland Community Design Plan 2007. This plan's purpose and vision reflects the desire of the community to define its commercial development parameters: Prepazed by members of the Orchidland Estates (OLE) community to guazantee its residents and lot owners a strong voice in future development and to ensure control over its destiny through ongoing communication with residents and lot owners and dialogue with potential developers and the County of Hawaii. Further, the plan seeks to protect the natural beauty of OLE and to uphold the community's vision of Orchidland Estates as a peaceful, desirable, rural and agricultural community. It sets guidelines for commercial development consistent with a Neighborhood Center-style design to prevent strip mall-type development while providing basic, essential goods and services to community members, thus mitigating reliance on Highway 130 as a lifeline to necessary services. • Puna Community Development Plan -Prepared by Community Management Associates, Inc. for The County of Hawaii Planning Department - October 1995 15 doc 02 15 07 VC-DD REPORT.doc This report encourages creating village design guidelines for Pahoa, Kea'au, Mountain View . and Volcano in cooperation with their residents. It also recommends developing a con~rrtunity-based planning process to plan preservation, restoration and redevelopment in those areas and new towns with similar traditional character and pedestrian scale. Puna Community Development Plan: Technical Reference Reuort - Prepared by Community Management Associates, Inc. for The County of Hawaii Planning Department -January 15th, 1992 (Copy currently available to borrow at Hawaii County Department of Research and Development. Secl:ion 9.3 Commercial Land Use &Zonine acknowledges commercial zoned land deficiency in Puna in 1992 and the failure to plan adequately for population-center based commercial services in the following excerpt: "The:re has been no planning for location of commercial centers in the subdivisions. Highway by-pass patterns around existing commercial centers have often been placed between existing town centers and emerging population centers in the subdivisions (i.e. Volcano, Mt. View, and Pahoa)--physically alienating existing towns from subdivisions. This pattern further encourages the primary economic relationship to Hilo which is already stressing the capacity of the main roadways. (The 1982 SMS survey showed that subdivision residents tended to by-pass Puna towns on their way to Hilo, while town dwelllers did more of their shopping in the towns.) There is increasing pressure for strip development along collector roads and by-passes, as population centers shift without comprehensive planning for balainced land uses integrated into areas convenient to residential centers." W.H. Shipman Ltd's Keaau develoument plan: Article, Hawaii Tribune- Herald July 16, 2006: Shipman's 30-50 year long-range development plan for portions of its 16,000 acre Puna landholdings is in the beginning stages. It includes full scale community objectives: homes, a 32 acre shopping center, government facilities, public services, and park space. Assisted by its planning consultant, Shipman officials explain how they are involving the surrounding communities in the initial outreach phase: "Trips were made to lower Puna neighborhoods to meet with landowners and Native Hawaiian elders. Members of the business community, public and private school representatives, Hawaii County planners, and emergency service providers also were invited to comment. The objective is to have affected parties help guide the development process, which won't be final until con-imunity approval is secured." Hawaii Rural Lands Use Workshops/Hawaii Rural Development Council final report to State Land Use Commission: Page 23, (Round Two East Hawaii). The need to empower community voices in the process of moving towards healthy and vibrant rural districts was emphasized in all sessions. East Hawaii participants called for the following to "Empower Local Residents": 1. People-oriented, people-driven local activities 2. Municipalities or community boards; localized government (commissions) 3. Town councils &/or neighborhood boards 4. Preservation support, e.g., oral histories, art grants • Pahoa Village Zonine Proposal, )ulv 2006. Prepared by Mainstreet Pahoa Association, Inc. This zoning proposal map is the association's effort to suggest an appropriate mix of zoning and access roads suited to the community's needs, goals and vision. B. Relationship to public input received in CDP process: Community input indicates overall strong desire for and support of new or improved community-based village centers in conjunction with sensitive development practices. • 16 doc 02 15 07 VC-DD REPORT.doc Community input also clearly favors a means to preserving existing rural village themes and continuing the theme with new town in-scale development. From this, we can derive there is significant public interest in the purpose of design districts and design guidelines. C. Community resistance or potential obstacles Infrastructure needs will be an issue for all development projects. For the PCDP John Whalen recommended that the "Public Facilities & Infrastructure Working Group" focus on planning of facilities for basic infrastructure (water, waste disposal, and police and fire facilities) and the "Transportation Working Group" address facilities for travel (fie highways, streets and so on). D. Who should be primarily responsible for carryin~ out the recommendations Recommendations adopted by ordinance or included in the General Plan will be the responsibility of the county zoning and planning departments and county council. V. MEETING RECORD - DATE5. LOCATIONS 10/18/2006 Meeting at HPP library Rob Tucker, Erica Johnson, Cathi Lux, JoAnne Backman, Jonathan Kawamura, Skip Bethea, Robin Wright, Pat Conant 11/2/2006 Meetin at Ola'a Communit n r ' g y Ce to ,Kea au Erica Johnson, Cathi Lux, Robin Wright, Skip Bethea, Sue Heinz, Jonathan Kawamura, Rob Tucker, Dwight Stevens 11/16/2006 Meeting at Mt. View Gym, Mt. View Cathi Lux, Robin Wright, Ken Killam, Erica Johnson, Jonathan Kawamura 11/30/2006 Meeting at Mt. View Gym, Mt. View Jonathan Kawamura, Robin Wright 12/15/2006 Meeeting at Mt. View Gym, Mt. View Elfin Sand, Jonathan Kawamura, Cathi Lux, Robin Wright, Rob Tucker, Erica Johnson 12/28/2006 Meeting at McDonalds, Kea'au Jonathan Kawamura, Robin Wright 1/4/2007 Meeting at Ola'a Community Center big room, Kea'au Cathi Lux, Robin Wright, Erica Johnson, Kirstie Goen, Kent Killam, Sue Heinz 1/18/2007 Meeting at Ola'a Community Center side room, Kea'au Cathi Lux ,Kirstie Goen, Kent Killam, Sue Heinz, Erica Johnson, Robin Wright, Jonathan Kawamura, Anne Svaty 17 doc 02 15 07 VC-DD REPORT.doc • 1/24/2007 Meeting at Ola'a Community Center side room, Kea'au Kirstie Goen, Sue Heinz, Robin Wright, Jonathan Kawamura, Anne Svaty VI. Contributors: Estimated effort --130 hours meetings time and 150 hours additional time totaling 280 hours. Skip Bethea Kirstie Goen Sue Heinz Erica Johnson Jonathan Kawamura Kent Killam Cathi Lux Elfin Sand Anne Svaty Rob Tucker Robin Wright • 18 • PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN LAND USE -GROWTH MANAGEMENT MISSION. In accordance with the Puna Community Development Plan the mission of the Land Use/Growth Management working group is to provide recommendations to Hawaii County regarding land use in order to manage the large projected population growth in Puna in the near future. The broad goals in our recommendations are to retain Puna's rural and agricultural character, preserve and improve the quality of the natural environment and provide high standards of livability and economic opportunity for its residents. DISCUSSION. The working group understands that significant population increase in Puna is nearly inevitable. The purpose of our recommendations is to manage the population increase with respect to where it is located (e.g., density) and how it is supported by infrastructure at the residential level as well as the county infrastructure level. We are preparing for the day when Puna is "filled up." That is, when nearly all land parcels in Puna are occupied under whatever zoning regimes exist between now and then. What will the "look and feel" of Puna be then? Will it be many small house lots with houses less than a hundred feet apart everywhere (the side of a square 15000 square foot house tot is less than 125 feet)? Or will it be a relatively dispersed population with several intensively developed areas? The vision of the Growth Management working group is for the latter outcome which is consistent with most of the "'aina-malama" and other statements received by the county in the recent comment gathering phase of the CDP. In order to establish a basic direction our recommendations are further grounded in the three goals expressed in Hawaii County's 2005 General Plan, section 14.1.2. These goals are next discussed in the context of growth management and specific policies and standards, as described in section 14.1.3,4, are noted in our specific recommendations. HAWAII COUNTY 2005 GENERAL PLAN GOAL #1. Designate and allocate land uses in appropriate proportions and mix and in keeping with the social, cultural and physical environments of the County. Many, many of the specific comments solicited in previous community meetings called for maintenance of a rural and agricultural character in Puna. Very few advocated significantly increased development and those that did emphasized current urban areas for the purpose of more local job and shopping opportunities. Our working group also believes a rural and agricultural character should be maintained in most of Puna. While agriculture will be further discussed, it should be noted here that our concept of "rural" is essentially a low density of residential dwellings or no dwellings at all. Therefore, throughout our recommendations we specify alive-acre minimum parcel in many areas of concern that touch upon • population density. But a realistic policy of retaining a primarily agricultural character in Puna requires, in our judgment, a complementary policy of focused intensive development in good contiguity to currently intensively developed locations. Many people prefer the closeness of urban/ suburban neighborhoods. Job and business development opportunities grow in a physically close environment. In well planned developments environmentally low impact infrastructures become development requirements. From a rural preservation point of view there are many good reasons to support well focused and well planned intensive development. Also, in accordance with this goal, we provide recommendations for areas such as transportation and industrial land use in the context of growth management. HAWAII COUNTY 2005 GENERAL PLAN GOAL #2. Protect and encourage the Intensive and extensive utilization of the County's Important agricultural lands. While there are technical descriptions of very "important" agricultural lands, our working group feels that agriculture, including food, nursery, forestry, native woodlands and conservation, is both historically and currently the best and highest use of nearly all of Puna's land area. Even rough and otherwise unpromising land in Puna can produce significant agricultural products or can be conserved as natural areas expressing Hawaii's unique native environment. For the longest range impact and sustainability, and to not put unrealistic expectations on the powers of the County, we emphasize commercial agriculture. As a working definition, commercial agriculture either provides some or all of a household's income or can demonstrate significant agricultural investment that could provide income in the future, such as forestry. There are numerous other non-commercial agricultural activities that the County might support which may be addressed by other CDP groups. However, for the purposes of growth management and land use consistent with the expressed comments of the people, agriculture as a livelihood must be protected and supported. HAWAII COUNTY 2005 GENERAL PLAN GOAL #3. Protect and preserve forest, water, natural and scientific reserves and open areas. Population growth will broadly and potentially negatively impact all the areas specified in this goal. In our working group's recommendations we focus on supporting agriculture and significant building standards, especially affecting water quality in the Puna aquifer. Similarly, maintaining a relatively low population density by sustaining the minimum five acre parcel size for any new subdivision reduces impacts on all these resources. • LAND USE -GROWTH MANAGEMENT GOALS & RECOMMENDATIONS GOAL #1: Prevent population sprawl and scattered development OBJECTIVES: • All intensive development must be physically adjacent to existing intensively developed areas or in a small number of well placed new urban expansion zones such as the Orchidland Drive expansion zone. • Guide non-intensive growth into existing subdivisions rather than create new subdivisions; support this guidance with funding mechanisms for infrastructure improvements in substandard subdivisions. RECOMMENDATIONS: • Focus all intensive development in areas that are already intensively developed (i.e., Kea'au, Pahoa, Volcano). In new intensive developments require integrated communities supporting residences, schools, services and recreation either within or adjacent to the new subdivision. • Create and seed funding mechanisms such as self-sustaining revolving loan funds to encourage upgrading existing large subdivisions to better standards of livability, safety and reduced environmental impact. • Excluding all current subdivisions and improved properties rezone A-1a zones in Puna to A-5a. • Increase county staffing to increase code enforcement activity; increase county initiative for prosecution of the most obvious nonconforming uses, particularly along major roadways. DISCUSSION: This is perhaps our most fundamental goal in managing Puna's future population growth. As noted in the working groups' mission, our definition of rural character is a low population density. A definition of population sprawl is intensive residential development not associated with any other intensively developed area. Conjoining intensive development with current urban zones, encouraging growth in existing subdivisions rather than creating new subdivisions and enforcing a five acre minimum in agricultural zones offers the best possibility of retaining a rural and agricultural character in Puna. • The 2005 General Plan policy 14.1.3(j) "encourage urban development within existing zoned areas already served by basic infrastructure, or close to such areas, instead of scattered development" directly supports these recommendations. Our working group believes that we need to send a clear message to the executive branch that obvious non-conforming land uses, from ad-hoc car lots, junkyards, fast food stands, chicken grills, satellite dishes and the like, need to be prosecuted as a matter of standard county business rather than requiring a formal citizen complaint as the basis of action. We support budget increases for additional county personnel to carry out this enforcement, particularly as we found that investigations from 2003 are still not complete. While down-zoning A-1 a zones to A-5a may be difficult for the county, allowing continued one-acre dwelling parcels in othervvise low density rural areas results in essentially suburban sprawl and is decidedly inconsistent with maintaining the rural character of Puna. The best example of such inappropriate zoning is the large A-1 a area east of Kalapana as it is embedded in A-5a and larger zoning. Inevitably such areas become only residences and are never developed for agriculture. Therefore maintaining large areas of undeveloped property in the A-1 a category is inconsistent with maintaining the rural and agricultural character of Puna. GOAL #2: Maintain subsurface water quality OBJECTIVE: Eliminate residential sources of groundwater pollution RECOMMENDATIONS: • No cesspools allowed for any new building • Require septic system or composting toilets for single family residence • Require aerobic wastewater treatment or composting toilets for new dwellings within 1000' of drilled wells or SMA areas • Require aerobic wastewater treatment or composting toilets for new intensive (less than 1 acre) development • Prepare an Environmental Assessment to estimate wastewater contamination of the Puna aquifer comparing septic systems versus aerobic systems as a function of expected increased population. • • DISCUSSION; Increasing population has a clear impact on groundwater quality (in areas less blessed with rainfall than Puna, it also has an impact on groundwater availability). We are concerned that Puna's highly draining subsurface structure very quickly moves minimally treated wastewater into our aquifers. With towns and villages typically drilling wells for high volume water usage water quality will decline as population increases. In addition, while better than cesspools, septic systems offer a relatively low level of treatment. Therefore, for areas of intensive development full aerobic wastewater treatment (or composting toilets) should be required. GOAL #3: Maintain high residential Infrastructure standards for subdivisions and building permits OBJECTIVES: • No new substandard parcels less than five acres • Reduce physical, social and environmental impacts of inadequate residential infrastructure RECOMMENDATIONS: • All new subdivisions and residential building permits for parcels below five acres must meet all county standards for building with no variances for wastewater, drainage, road, water and other requirements • Begin anon-punitive assessment of non-permitted dwellings for property taxes. • Increase county staffing to increase code inspection and enforcement activity DISCUSSION: The County should alleviate the impact of speculative and haphazard building by insuring that smaller parcels are up to county infrastructure requirements. Create consistent expectations for developers by consistently enforcing standards. It must be noted that the continued tolerance of large numbers of unpermitted buildings, of whatever quality, creates disrespect for the construction principles underlying the building code and the County itself as the enforcers of the code. • Just as some people feel that they are not getting a fair return on their tax dollar, having some citizens escape valuation of their homes entirely seems even less fair. There are any number of reasonably well built unpermitted dwellings that contribute nothing (via property taxes) to support the roads, parks, police and fire, civil defense, etc. that they depend on. Nonetheless, for the purposes of taxation, assessment should be disassociated from punitive actions such as red-tagging a dwelling. GOAL #4: Manage highway usage resulting from increased population pn~ssure. OBJECTIVES: • Increase safety by focusing on improved intersection controls • Decrease congestion on Hwy 130 by providing alternative routes RECOMMENDATIONS: • Add safety improvements such as longer merging lanes and stop lights at subdivision intersections to Hwy 130 • Add alternate types of transportation routes (bicycle, small motor bikes) parallel to existing and new routes • Alternative access routes between Puna and Hilo are the best long term solution to manage growth. The Transportation Working Group is considering detailed proposals and we will defer to their recommendations as to how alternative routes should be implemented. DISCUSSION: It is doubtful that any highway widening project in any urban area has ever resulted in long term reduction of traffic congestion unless population growth does not occur. Every projection indicates Puna will have significant population increases. Eventually alternatives to simple highway widening must be sought, as Honolulu is demonstrating at this time with its proposed guided rail system. Until significant job and shopping opportunities exist in Puna, automobile commuting to Hilo will be a fact of life. While buses and bicycle transportation may be addressed by other working groups, it is the firm recommendation of this group that removing traffic from Highway 130 to alternate routes mauka and makai provides the best hope of significant congestion alleviation for a longer term than widening. • • Alternate corridor routes should be selected for optimum access from the larger subdivisions into Hilo but development should be phased to accommodate funding realities and to work with the subdivisions on routing. The initial stages may not involve taking of subdivision property but should emphasize establishing the best routing over the long term to handle the significant increase in traffic that will occur in Puna. r GOAL #5: Maintain Integrity of zoning as reflected in property taxation and allowed activities. OBJECTIVE: Parcel usage and property taxation should reflect parcel zoning RECOMMENDATIONS: • Develop standards defining commercial agricultural activity for purpose of assigning property tax rates • Adjust tax rates to confer advantage on commercial agricultural and conservation land use. Per http:!lwww.hawaiipropertytax.com, current tax rates per $1000: Improved Residential - $8.10; Agricultural - $8.35; Conservation - $8.55; Homeowner - $5.55, mitigate against agricultural and conservation land use. By contrast, residential property is the most expensive type for the county to support, requiring roads and schools for instance. • Move parcels in agricultural zones that do not demonstrate commercial agricultural activity into a residential property tax bracket. • Support taxation at (reduced) conservation zoning rates in exchange for owners agreeing to land banking or conservation easements for significant periods of time such as ten years. Include penalties for early withdrawal. No significant alteration of the conserved property would be allowed other than removal of invasive and other non-native plants and planting of native species. DISCUSSION: Our working group found it very surprising that commercial agriculture and conservation property is taxed at higher rates than residential property. The benefits of commercial agriculture in retaining rural character, creating jobs and maintaining continuity with the history and culture of Puna, should be supported by the property tax rates. On the other hand, the pressure of substantial population growth is placing ever larger demands on the county to provide infrastructure and services. Therefore residential land uses must shoulder much more of the costs that they themselves are creating. • However, for the purpose of taxation, commercial agriculture must be distinguished from hobby farming (a small number of trees or grazing animals, trivial investments) and backyard gardening by such criteria as a business license in an agricultural business, significant investment in agricultural assets or actual or projected (such as forestry) ability to produce income, thereby demonstrating long term intent. GOAL #6: Provide for long term future job oppoRunitles and Industrial services availability while minimizing Impact on rural and agricultural character by industrlal zoning a slgnlficant amount of appropriately located land whhln Puna. OBJECTIVES: . Prevent spot commercial and industrial development to avoid sprawl and inappropriate mixed uses • Confine larger-scale commercial and industrial development to planned areas often characterized as "parks" or in conjunction with existing intensive development. • Insure that a useful amount of industrially zoned land with good proximity to infrastructure and population resources is allocated in several locations in the Puna district. RECOMMENDATIONS: • Define industrial/commercial zoned areas that are physically associated with current Urban zoning but have minimal impact on residential use. • Define industrial/commercial zoned areas in larger acreages for development into planned industrial parks. A possible example is the Hawaiian Homelands property behind the proposed Pahoa fire station. The state and county should encourage partnerships with private investment to achieve this goal. • Disallow any industrial/commercial zoning or special use permit in any location substantially separated from other intensive uses to reduce sprawl unless such properties are part of a large planned development that will itself concentrate industriaUcommercial land uses in one location. • Investigate such locations as the large geothermal power plant leasehold, Pahoa mauka, DHHL and State of Hawaii properties for f ~J J ~~ possible industrial parks. • Insure that no strip development occurs along major roads; eliminate any existing illegal commercial development • Maintain high standards of safe access and green belt setback for all commercial development adjacent to primary highways to minimize traffic safety risks and visual impact. Shipman Industrial Park in Kea'au is a good example of a well planned park. • Insure meaningful buffer space between industrial development and residential or agricultural areas. DISCUSSION: Today's reality is that Hilo contains a large amount of commercial and industrially zoned land while Puna contains relatively little. A major aspect of managing growth in Puna is to make available significant amounts of land for commercial and industrial development. However this development must be implemented in ways consistent with good land use planning practices and, even more importantly, the maintenance of the essential rural and agricultural character of Puna. The expected result should be increased availability of goods, services, investments and jobs in Puna. GOAL #7: Minimize rezoning by restricted application of Special Use Permits OBJECTIVE: • Avoid rezoning as much as possible consistent with clear public interests • Utilize Special Use Permits RECOMMENDATIONS: • No special use permit shall be issued that substantively contravenes the 2005 General Plan, PCDP recommendations or generally accepted planning practices. • • Insure that any special use permits are issued based on broad community interests, rather than only the interests of the property owner. • All special use permit applicants must demonstrate substantial public need or public interest relating to issues such as safety, public infrastructure or education to justify issuance of a permit for nonconforming uses. • Insure that substantial and broad community input be part of any Special Use Permit application DISCUSSION: Rezoning should be severely restricted across the board, both as the the PCDP is in development and once it is in place consistent with these recommendations. Instead we favor an increased use of carefully considered Special Use Permits in order to evaluate the benefit to the community for a specific nonconforming use. We are generally opposed to rezoning which will allow current and subsequent owners to do anything whatsoever that falls within the altered zone's conforming uses. A Special Use Permit can have significant conditions and restrictions compared to a rezoning. In addition to demonstration of public interest we strongly recommend an extended and geographically increased notification process in order to get as much community input as possible as part of the permit process. Even if there is a clear and overriding public interest for issuance of a permit, good planning practices and community input should still be fully considered and applied to the issuance of the Special Use Permit. GOAL #8: Increase knowledge of natural dangers In Puna OBJECTIVE: Property purchasers and builders must be informed of the natural dangers inherent in building in Puna RECOMMENDATIONS: • Require informational form specifying lava, tsunami and subsidence issues of property location as part of land purchase and building permit processes with signed acknowledgment of understanding. • Indemnify County from any damages resulting from purchasing land or buildings impacted by lava, tsunami or subsidence. DISCUSSION: Our group strongly recommends that without exception all land acquisitions and building permits require a signed statement stating the specific lava and flood zone or any other known dangerous conditions of the property in question, therefore unequivocally indicating knowledge by the owner of any dangers they may face. • GOAL #9: Reduce or eliminate property speculation ("flipping") OBJECTIVE: Reduce or eliminate incentives for property speculation and resulting excessive price increases RECOMMENDATIONS: • Impose significantly higher conveyance fee for short term ownership (we suggest less than two years) unless genuine hardship demonstrated or dwelling meets criteria for affordable housing. • Require building permit far sale of property that can be reasonably construed as having a dwelling. • Support affordable housing, either through funding mechanisms for low income or first time buyers, subsidies to affordable housing projects, or other programs to encourage such housing. DISCUSSION: The practice of purchasing, then rapidly turning over a property for profit, leads to distortions in land prices in the direction of unaffordability for most local people. Our state and county policies must support the goal of affordable home ownership for the purpose of residency rather than turning a quick buck. Some, perhaps most, of the growth in Puna will come from locally born children. Maintaining or encouraging a speculative climate through laws and policies regarding land and dwelling sales will only make it more difficult for them to become home owners in the future and impair their ability to remain in Puna. Any additional conveyance fees collected should be earmarked to support affordable housing. • • Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone BIOSPHERE RESERVE BUFFER ZONE SUBGROUP RECOMMENDATIONS LAND USE WORKING GROUP 9FEB07 The Nature of the Volcano Reaion. The area surrounding the summit of Volcano exhibits a special natural history and dynamic landscape. Both have fostered a very strong cultural significance for the region by the original human inhabitants of Hawaii. This significance has extended well beyond the arrival of the first European visitors and the plethora of settlers and changes that followed. The geology and biological resources of the region inspired the Hawaiians' reverence for the landscape, which was visited but not lived in. The eruptions and landforms of two of the world's most active volcanoes, Kilauea and Mauna Loa, have defined the nature of this exquisite landscape. Various aged lava flows, ash and explosion deposits underlie and help define its ecology. The Kilauea summit divides the mountain into wetter windward and drier leeward slopes. The wetter side is covered by thick forests of `ohi'a trees and hapu'u tree ferns on all but the youngest of flows or cleared land. On the drier side of Kilauea, vegetation tends to be more open, exposing the underlying geology to view. The variety in conditions and age is reflected in the richness of the biology. These special natural resources have been inspiring awe and appreciation for many centuries. They were the basis for creating the Hawaii Volcanoes National Park in 1916. These natural and cultural features have received broader international recognition for Hawaii Volcanoes National Park as an International Biosphere Reserve in 1980 and as a World Heritage Site in 1987. The Biosphere Reserve status reflects Hawaii Volcanoes National Park's global importance in evolutionary resources and in the protective management of its resources, and the • World Heritage Site status highlighted its geological resources. Two adjoining State designated Natural Area Reserves, Kahauale'a and Pu'u Maka'ala, meet the same standards of resource quality and protective management. In between these designated and protected pieces, and constructed upon the same natural resources, lies the Volcano area community, an area with its own early 20th century historic resources. History and Land Use. Following the deposition of the Hawaiian Kingdom, succeeding governments began a process of disposing of lands in the Volcano area. About the same time, the assembly of Hawaii Volcanoes National Park began nearby, including some of the wetter forests of Kilauea and later a disjunct portion of Mauna Loa wet forest (the "Ola'a Tract"). The Volcano area lands that were sold were used primarily for vacation residences and small farms. Subsequent subdivision into smaller vacation lots began as mountain houses for local residents. Deep ash soils and adequate rainfall were ideal for farming of a variety of crops and later cattle. By the mid-1950's, the small settlement next to the National Park had expanded into extensive areas of farms and house lots, all platted over the existing forests. Also following World War II, roads for extensive subdivisions were cut into the forests away from the main settlement area. These huge subdivisions were designed not for local vacation homes or expanding the community, but rather for large- scale real estate sales to land investors, primarily from off-shore. Lot sizes varied, but most were ahalf-acre or less, and most were far from any stores, power lines or main roads. Periodic subdivision of individual lots has continued on a piecemeal basis to the present. In about 1967 the County of Hawaii designated land use zones in Volcano and other areas for the first time. Large and small lots alike were zoned residential or agriculture, irrespective of lot size, land use or natural resource content. The consequences of both the subdivisions and zoning actions have recently become evident as recent wanton forest clearing has caught community attention. From their beginniings, the National Park and Volcano area community have had interconnected history and economies. Expansion of park budgets over the years has provided increasing employment for Volcano area residents, and some of the park's visitors shop and stay in Volcano establishments. Hawaii Volcanoes National Park has now become one of the larger visitor attractions in Hawaii. In recent years this considerable visitor flow has stimulated significant exposure to and sales of Volcano real estate, for retirement and resettlement homes next to a premier National Park, and also as an ever-increasing resale commodity driven by and for off-island speculators. Land sales prices and property taxes have been rapidly elevating. Instead of formerly built farm houses or cottages nestled into the forest, recent construction features clear-cutting and re-contouring of lots, and architecture inappropriate for the neighborhoods. Volcano has become the venue for others' money making. Adverse Consequences of Unplanned Development Development of uinplanned, scattered subdivisions has created problems of expensive yet reduced public: services. The conversion of prime agricultural and natural resources lands to residential use has been squandering their values as native forest areas that connect and buffer the International Biosphere Reserve (National Park) and adjoining State Natural Area Reserves. A lack of adequate controls in the past has allowed the rampant development of Hawaii's limited and valuable land and natural resources for short-term gain for the few, while it now is resulting in long-term loss and values of our State's limited natural resources. The Volcano area is a prime example of this wide- spread problem. Clearing of native forest results in invasion by alien weeds and permanent loss of native tree canopy. The fragmentation and urbanization of Volcano's • forests, carried out to the maximum extent as defined by its existing zoning and subdivisions will degrade the ecology of both the International Biosphere Reserve and the adjoining StatE: Natural Area Reserves. This plus potential, rampant development of the area is likely to diminish the attractive qualities of one of the largest visitor magnets in Hawaii. The existing zoning in the Volcano area bears little and inconsistent resemblance to the arrangement of lots and applied land use patterns. Volcano has the largest concentration of small lots in Puna, many of them on Agriculture zoned land. The Volcano area currently has 5303 lots which can be used to construct residences. Its current zoning of larger parcels could expand this number to nearly 8700 house lots. The `ohana dwelling permit process could extend the number of houses capable of being constructed to a very much larger number. Past and current practices allow, simply by ministerial actions, the continued approval of subdivisions and `ohana permits. Landowner applications are what drive the system, given Volcano's existing zoning and lot layout, not any plan for development. Many of these applications are from new landowners outsidle Volcano, mostly offshore, and they result in speculative construction and offshore sales, rather than a community's normal growth. For those Volcano residents who have lived here for the quiet, natural values of the region, there exists a building crisis. For the native forest of the area, there is a threat of disruption and loss. Volcano is suffering from the simple build-out response to the over abundant amount of land zoned for residential use and the very large numbers of small lots. Unchecked, the resulting urbanization will fragment and ultimately destroy the forest of the area and place a sizeable urban center within the middle of the priceless region that includes the contiguous National Park and State Natural Area Reserves. The ongoing and 2 anticipated construction removes and fragments `ohi'a forest. International studies on forest fragmentation demonstrate loss of natural diversity. The natural connections between the large protected areas that connect to Volcano will be altered at a much greater scale. The role that the Volcano forests have in the functioning of both the national park's ecosystems and those throughout this region is very important. For example, native birds and insects often transit between the protected forest areas, utilizing Volcano's `ohi'a forest canopy in between, and native plants are dispersed back and forth across these forests. Regionally, much of the best native `ohi'a forest lies within and next to Volcano, a reflection of its underlying geology and overall pattern of rainfall. The `ohi'a forest is finite. Even at lower levels of build-out, the National Park will be increasingly isolated from the richer wet forests to the northeast. The adverse outcomes can be much reduced. Current land use regulations that have defined this area cannot change what has been created previously without significant changes in local land use policy and practice. The latter is the only way to alter the inevitable trajectory of degradation of forest cover and quality of life in the Volcano area. The Required Solution: a Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone Hawaii Volcanoes National Park is a special place with special resources, as recognized by its designation as both an International Biosphere Reserve and World Heritage Site. The quality of life in this Biosphere Reserve (BR), the State Natural Area Reserves and in the Volcano area are linked to the degree of development of Volcano, and this development is accelerated by the increasing visitor draw to the Park. Therefore, it seems logical that a program and policy to guide and reduce the scale of Volcano development could benefit the irreplaceable qualities of both natural and inhabited areas. Maintaining the area's attractive natural qualities benefits of both the BR and the Volcano community, as it helps to preserve the economic engine that is built around the flow of visitors to Hawaii Volcanoes National Park. All of Hawaii County benefits from protecting this natural and economic treasure. Worldwide, some BR's have around them buffer zones created to plan the growth and employment opportunities with surrounding communities. The buffer zones protect the resources and culture of both the BR and the communities. Volcano can do so as well if the community and County government are sufficiently motivated and united to do so. They could designate and regulate a Special Design District or similar County planning tool to be the buffer zone. Creation of a Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone adjacent to the existing BR (the National Park) is a logical way to protect both the biological qualities of the National Park's wet forests, those of the two adjacent State Natural Area Reserves, and the quality of life for Volcano residents and visitors. At the same time it can demonstrate how a faulty and obsolete subdivision layout can be redirected to work for its residents. Once designated by the County, the Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone can be nominated to the international body (National Commission for UNESCO) for formal adoption into their program. Goals of the Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone 1. The primary goal of the Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone (BRBZ) is to retain the generally forested nature of the BRBZ as it develops, so as to retain the natural resource qualities that are desired by its residents and are needed to protect the adjoining Biosphere Reserve and State Natural Area Reserves from excessive 3 degradation due to deforestation and other adverse consequences of urban-type build-out. 2. Another primary goal includes guiding the development activities and extents of the BRBF area so that the Biosphere Reserve core area (Hawaii Volcanoes National Park) and adjoining Pu'u Maka'ala and Kahauale'a State Natural Area Reserves are not isolated biologically from each other by the intervening BRBF (the larger Volcano community). 3. These goals should also retain the quality of life desired by Volcano residents within this BRBZ. Objectives of the Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone The objectives arE: two-fold, to set up a Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone with an advisory commission, and to begin and continue the process of installing and implementing measures to operate it. Many of these measures will be amendments to existing code provisions or new ordinances. The objectives of delineating and operating a permanent Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone are as follows: 1. Within one: year of adoption of this Puna Community Development Plan, Hawaii County shall designate a Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone (BRBZ) boundary and create an area of no less than 7, 000 acres within the greater Volcano community as a BR6~'_ Special District or equivalent category for land use regulation. The attached outline of the BRBZ defines its actual perimeter and area (7,000-10,000 acres) which is to be added to the LUPAG and Zoning maps. 2. Within the same one year, Hawaii County shall designate anine-member Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone Advisory Commission to be the interface between the Volcano community and the County agencies that establish and implement the regulations of the Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone. Its recommendations shall be passed on to the Mayor, appropriate County Departmeintal Directors, the Planning Commission, and the County Council as relevant rrieasures are considered by these bodies. Its membership of nine Volcano area residents shall be appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the County Council, and shall include two biologists well-experienced in Hawaii ecology, firoo residents familiar with planning issues and process, and a member of the Volcano business community. 3. Within the same one year, Hawaii County shall pass an ordinance prohibiting any further subdivisions or'ohana dwelling permits within the BRBZ and any up- zoning of hand within the BRBZ that does not have a favorable recommendation from the E~iosphere Reserve Buffer Zone Advisory Commission. 4. Within the same one year, the Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone Advisory Commission shall recommend and Hawaii County shall consider for adoption the first portion of a specialized set of regulations and incentives designed to encouragE; the retention of native forest canopy, to reduce the overall building density within the BRBZ, and to redistribute building density to better meet the residents' needs than do the current zoning designations. 5. By the end of the second year and on the anniversary of every succeeding year, Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone Advisory Commission shall report to the Hawaii County Planning Commission, the County Council and the Mayor on the successes and statutory needs of the Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone for the succeeding year. The Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone Advisory Commission 4 shall include in their annual report the amount of `ohi'a tree canopy lost or gained from all actions during the reporting year. The primary objectives of the regulations and incentives that are to apply within the BRBF are as follows: 6. To reduce the degree of loss of native `ohi'a forest canopy as the build-out of the Volcano community ensues. Monitoring the year-to-year amount of `ohi'a forest canopy shall be used as a measure of consistency with this objective. 7. To reduce the overall building density in the BRBZ. 8. To redistribute existing density into areas that meet the needs of Volcano residents over those of outside development markets or landowners. 9. To reduce incentives for land speculation in order to allow a planned redirection of land use and natural resource protection. 10. To develop innovative and effective measures to achieve the aforementioned objectives while maintaining the quality of life for residents of the BRBZ. Specific Recommendations for the BRBZ 1. Amend the Hawaii County Code (HCC), Article 7 (relating to Special District Regulations), to add sections that will establish and manage a Special District called the Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone District as per Objectives 1-5 above. This will include the establishment of a Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone Advisory Commission to act as the interface between the Volcano area community and the Hawaii County agencies affected by the operations of the Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone District. 2. Pass an ordinance that would direct the Planning Director not to accept or process applications for subdivisions (including for consolidation/re-subdivision), additional farm dwelling or `ohana dwelling permits within the Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone District. The only exceptions would be applications for subdivision (including for consolidation/re-subdivision) that had received a positive recommendation from the Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone Advisory Commission. 3. Pass an ordinance that would direct the Hawaii County Finance Department to establish procedures that will allow property owners within the Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone District to receive a permanent, low tax assessment in exchange for establishing a permanent restriction prohibiting any construction or development of their dedicated parcels. Instruments to establish this prohibition shall include Conservation Easements (as delineated in Hawaii Revised Statutes Chapter 198), non-retractable deed restriction, or similar measure. The collective reduction in taxes paid should be reflected in the reduction of County services for the collective avoided development in the District. 4. Pass an ordinance that would direct and fund the Planning Director to commission a study to develop procedures to legally institute the processes of "Transfer of Development Rights" and "Land Pooling" within the Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone District and to investigate other measures to redistribute development type and density. 5. Pass an ordinance that would direct the Planning Director not to accept or process applications for changes of zone within the Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone District that would increase the building density or allowable uses above those allowed in residential and agricultural zones. The only exceptions would be applications within the context of Transfer of Development Rights and/or Land Pooling, and which had received a positive recommendation from the Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone Advisory Commission. 5 6. Pass an ordinance that would direct the Hawaii County Public Works and Planning Departments to prohibit any mechanical land clearing or removal of healthy `ohi'a trees within required building site yard areas of properties within the Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone District, except for a single fifteen-foot wide driveway access. This ordinance should include a $10,000 fine (each, per violation) for violating owners and equipment operators, and an efficient process to collect the fine. These fines would be directed into a fund to be set up for purchasing property rights within the Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone District. 7. Pass a Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone District general construction ordinance which would establish standards for maximum building footprint, impervious surface, vegetation clearance and land surface disturbance within the buffer zone district with the objective of allowing reasonable use of property and structures while not diminishing the larger goal of protecting the natural resources and `ohi'a canopy of the Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone District. 8. Pass an ordinance that would phase out the currently required (and destructive) leach field septic system design and instead, Hawaii County Public Works and Planning Departments should accept alternative and experimental septic system effluent disposal methods using asmall-footprint design that are approved by the State Department of Health. 9. Pass an ordinance that would direct and fund the Planning Director to commission a study to develop procedures to allow small-scale development that does not require a change of zone. These procedures should include Use Permit, Special Permit, Planned Unit Development, and similar current and/or not yet codified procedures. For all measures, resulting permits shall not run with the land. The goals would be to allow needed small-scale development in areas of predominantly agricultural and residential zoning without encouraging land speculation that is associated with up-zoning. 10. Pass an ordinance that would direct and fund the Public Works Director to commission a study to identify the flood paths and source areas in the Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone District, and to design and recommend ordinance language to implement innovative ways to reduce the scale and impacts of flooding, including the acquisition of or rights to strategic vacant, forested lots to use for absorbing floodwaters. 11. Pass a County Council resolution to ask the State Department of Land and Natural Resources to reassess their unencumbered lands east of Wright Road and convert them to Natural Area Reserve or at least Forest Reserve status. These lands are contiguous with Ola'a Forest Reserve, and share its same forest resource values. 6 • • ~ • Volcano Area Community Support for Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone Concept and Values The Volcano Area community (VAC) has long shown great interest in the issues of community development and community/natural resource values. Preparation of the "Volcano Vision 20/20 Plan" reflects considerable public input and long hours of preparation over several years. It was updated some years later, and its recent update, the "VCA Long Range Plan 2007", was recently passed at the Volcano Community Association annual meeting on 27JAN2007. Consistent within each iteration of the plan is the strong appreciation of the natural resources of the Volcano area, particularly its forested nature, the quiet lifestyle and the strong sense of community felt by the residents. Goals include; • "Support economic activities that are well planned and that maintain the rural forested atmosphere that currently exists in the Volcano area." • "Protect and conserve our natural resources and natural beauty from undue exploitation, encroachment and damage." • "Promote the prudent use and management of the Volcano area's unique, fragile and significant environmental and natural resources." • "Maintain and improve the existing "Environmental Quality" of the Volcano area." • "Support economic activities that are well planned and that maintain the rural forested atmosphere that currently exists in the Volcano area." • "Create an inventory of features and items of historical and cultural importance to include but not be limited to sites, archaeological remains, homes and • homesteads, trails, plants, interiors, photographs, letters, books, etc." • "Establish a system of non-motorized multi-use trails that would connect Volcano neighborhoods, other communities, and provide access to the National Park." The most recent version, "VCA Long Range Plan 2007", includes an addition to the previous document's advocacy for a historic design district for the oldest portions of early Volcano's many historic buildings. This addition includes the larger-scale Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone concept. Collectively, the goals express: • "Reduce the housing density allowable under the current zoning designations to limit clearing of `ohi'a forest." • "Preserve the forested environment by reducing or mitigating the amount of forest which would have to be removed for any development." • "Preserve the historic structures and, in future construction, in flavor and feel of the core area of the Village." When the Puna Community Development Plan was announced in Volcano in early 2006, the Volcano Area community came out enthusiastically to provide input to the series of sixteen small group meetings. At these meetings over 350 comments were provided to express their values, desires and what they did not want to see happen in Volcano. They were surprisingly consistent in what was said. These comments have been copied from the Puna-wide set of small group meeting comments, and are included as an appendix to this submittal by the Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone Subgroup of the Land Use Working Group. Collectively, many of these comments express: • Treat development in the area of Volcano and near the National Park and other forest areas differently so as to protect the forest and various aspects of Volcano's quality of life. Protect the Biosphere Reserve. • Preserve native forest, wildlife and green space; prevent clear-cutting of lots. • Reduce the impacts of development upon these resources and quality of life. 9 • Reduce the impacts of alien species upon these resources and quality of life. • • Put the land first; pay attention to natural resources. • Initiate immediate 15-yr. moratorium on subdivision so as to allow time for corrective planning for Volcano. • Change zoning designations and reduce the potential density of Volcano. • Keep the types and scale of commercial activities small. • Use incentives, moratoriums and various tools to limit growth. • Encourage relinquishment of development rights by tax breaks and other economic means. • Slow development to allow corrective planning for the Volcano area. • Restrict lot clearing, lighting, waste-water disposal to reduce impacts of home building on the forest and quality of life. • Make sure building and zoning codes are sensitive to environment. • Use tax/other incentives to protect historic buildings, forest and reduced density. • Utilize special design district to protect the forest and historic nature of Volcano. • Make County aware of uniqueness of our community by its proximity of HVNP. • Limit visitor related facilities and businesses; promote cottage industry and agriculture. • Incorporate alternative transportation into community development, including pedestrian, bicycle and buses. • Control speculation. • Identify the flood paths and find ways to reduce scale and impact of flooding. • Protect `ohi'a forest to preserve and perpetuate native forest birds. • Set % of clearing allowed in the forest, need balance for every development. • • Commercial development in sync with cultural significance of the area, HVNP. • Direct and consolidate locations of service/commercial facilities into appropriate areas. • Rigorous enforcement of permits for grubbing/clearing. • Promote alternative energy and recycling. • Separate values of Volcano from speculative real estate values. Various meetings following the small group meetings have discussed development problems and alternatives within the context of the Puna Community Development Plan. Periodic mention of both in the context of the Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone (BRBZ) occurred in Volcano Community Association meetings and in two fliers published with the Volcano community newsletter. Development impacts and scale were high on the minds of Volcano citizens when they requested a meeting with County representatives on 8JAN2007. The BRBZ concept was presented to a group of 43 community members as a Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone Subgroup of the Land Use Working Group, and considerable interest in the Volcano development problems and concept were expressed at the meeting and thereafter. As mentioned, the Volcano Community Association annual meeting on 27JAN2007, included another presentation of the development projections for Volcano and the potential alternatives in the BRBZ approach, which was endorsed by the membership present. Not readily documented are the hundreds of emails and conversations within the Volcano community that have discussed all the foregoing, including the BRBZ approach to limit the degree of impacts of development within the Volcano area upon its natural resources, the Biosphere Reserve and community quality of life. • 10 3/9/2006 Volcano C.C. AG Encoura a Ito row their own food - su ort local fanners for Sustainabili of the Island 3/9/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Preserve our native forest and habitat 3/9/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Continue to artner with Volcano National Park to facilitate focus on our uni ue environment 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave AINA Make coun aware of uni ueness of our communi b its roximi of HVNP 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Make Volcano a s ecial desi n district - reserve native forest 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave AINA Tax incentive for low im act lot clearin 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave AINA Volcano autonom in develo in communi covenants to control reservation of environment 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Draina a enforcement for lar a aved areas 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Buffer communi next to HVNP/more rotective zonin closer to ark Fed. Assistance is available 4/7/2006 Mauna Loa Estates - Volcano AINA Preserve Volcano as a buffer for HVNP, not an entry to park. Buffer (county enforced) should be a reservation zone -native forest 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Limit ma'or residential develo ment 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave AINA Limit land clearin based on home foot rint 3/18/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA No new subdivisions 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave AINA Chan a zonin desi nations and reduce the otential densit of Volcano 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Restrictions on land clearin on residential land 3/30/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Re uire all commercial buildin to have a se tics stem 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Pro a Owners must kee art natural de endin on size of lot 4/7/2006 Mauna Loa Estates - Volcano AINA Re ulate %clearin of residential lots and buildin foot rint 3/9/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Invasive s ecies control 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Make sure buildin and zonin codes are sensitive to environment 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Increase varie of rec clin in volcano 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Define the needs of the International biosphere reserve and make it law that it supersedes the needs of the eo le 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Preserve and enhance native forest habitat 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave AINA No clear cuttin of lots 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave AINA Protect forest wildlife 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave AINA Environmental education with "Wiki" website 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave AINA Rain forest buildin code 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave AINA All rofit activities a % for conservation and/or education 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave AINA Permittin rocess for cuttin an native trees/severe rainforest mans ement 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave AINA No increase of commercial zonin and denial of s ecial use ermits 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave AINA Stron em hasis and ublic awareness of International Bios here Reserve and World Herita a Site 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave AINA A ressivel reserve reen s aces 3/18/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Preserve the rain forest 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave AINA Implement statutes to make Volcano a legal example of a sustainable native rainforest in balance with people, construction and native animals to complement the HVNP which is an international Biosphere Reserve 11 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave AINA Preserve native forest -limit bulldozin /clearin -revision of radin / rubbin ordinances 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave AINA Make Hawaii Coun "native forest dedication" available to ro erties with residential zonin 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave AINA Identi the flood aths and find wa s to reduce scale and im act of floodin 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Moratorium on an new subdivisions in Volcano 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Provide incentives for reservin native trees and native ve etation such as tax break 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Sto clearin ristine native forest fora .Land 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Protocols develo ed to control invasive s ecies 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Promote landsca in with natives ecies 3/30/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Exterminate co ui fro s 3/30/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA More ri orous ro rams for invasive s ecies control 3/30/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Im roved rec clin in Volcano 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Preserve native )ants, not invasive ones, created forest buffer zone between ro erties 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Res and more uickl to invasive s ecies 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Protect Ohia forest to reserve and er etuate native forest birds 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Tax incentive for residential lot owners to reserve native forest 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Necessa ercenta a of communi ke tin natural state 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Moratorium on continued destruction of forest 4/7/2006 Mauna Loa Estates - Volcano AINA Frame the context HVNP - bios here, UNESCO to show wh this area is so s ecial 4/7/2006 Mauna Loa Estates - Volcano AINA List Coqui as noxious species and lobby the state so that land owners can deny access to property for control 4/7/2006 Mauna Loa Estates - Volcano AINA law to enforce the building set back so that half is preserved by removal of invasive species/preserve native ve etation 4/16/2006 Volcano AINA Preserve habitat for native )ants, birds and wildlife 4/16/2006 Volcano AINA Restoration incentives for reen s ace 4/16/2006 Volcano AINA More national arks ace in Volcano 4/16/2006 Volcano AINA Kee our native forest. Sto bulldozin 4/16/2006 Volcano AINA Set % of clearin allowed in the forest, need balance for eve develo ment 4/16/2006 Volcano AINA Increase res onse, control and eradication of invasive s ecies 4/16/2006 Volcano AINA Financial/tax incentive for forest restoration with natives ecies\ 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Make public/tourism facilities and transportations use alternative energy to improve air quality for eo le and environment 3/30/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Environmental) friend) ublic trans ortation 4/7/2006 Mauna Loa Estates - Volcano AINA Commercial parking lots should be landscaped with native plans trees and provide pedestrian walkwa s 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave AINA Commercial develo ment be in s nc with cultural si nificance of the area -HVNP 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave AINA Rainforest reservation info iven b buildin de t to all buildin a licants 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave AINA Coun s onsored environmental education ro ram for adults usin outreach via farmer market 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Clear cuttin lot not considered an im rovement 3/30/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA At sale of roe ,recommendations on invasive s ecies, clearin leavin native )ants • i • f 4/2/2 Volcano C.C. AINA better rec clin o tions in ~no - 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. AINA Mandatory orientation/education -living with our environment prior to grubbing permit (make it part of disclosure before bu in 4/7/2006 Mauna Loa Estates - Volcano SID Focus on identifying and clarifying the community's sense of the uniqueness and importance locally and loball 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave SID Business stewardship programs for new/existing businesses to promote responsible sustainable ractices 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. SID Educational components that include environmental quality protection of historic sites, natural resources, native- lans and animals 4/11/2006 Hawaiian Acres C.C. PLAN Find a wa to kee commercial develo ments in scale with the small towns the are occu in 4/16/2006 Volcano PLAN Discoura a further develo ment of lar a scale business 4/16/2006 Volcano PLAN Restoration incentives for reen s ace 4/16/2006 Volcano PLAN More national arks ace in Volcano 4/16/2006 Volcano PLAN Kee our native forest. Sto bulldozin 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave PLAN S ecial desi n district for commercial area 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Moratorium on an new subdivisions in Volcano 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. P N Tax incentive for residential lot owners to reserve native forest 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Moratorium on continued destruction of forest 4/7/2006 Mauna Loa Estates - Volcano PLAN law to enforce the building set back so that half is preserved by removal of invasive species/preserve native ve etation 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Make sure buildin and zonin codes are sensitive to environment 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave PLAN No clear cuttin of lots 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave PLAN Rain forest buildin code 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave PLAN Permittin rocess for cuttin an native trees/severe rainforest mans ement 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave PLAN A ressivel reserve reen s aces 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave PLAN Preserve native forest -limit bulldozin /clearin -revision of radin /rubbin ordinances 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave PLAN Make Hawaii Coun "native forest dedication" available to ro erties with residential zonin 3/9/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Preserve our native forest and habitat 4/16/2006 Volcano PLAN Limit rowth with moratoriums and other tools and incentives - re uirement of Green Built 4/16/2006 Volcano PLAN Limit number of homes 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Encoura a relin uishment of develo ment ri hts b tax breaks and other economic means 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Never relax buildin setbacks no variances ;increase them relative to size of lot 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Identi and enforce existin zonin laws re B8~6 + vacation rentals 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN More restrictions on zonin chan es on lots next to residential lots 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Direct and consolidate locations of service/commercial facilities into a ro riate areas 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Control Develo ment 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Pro a Owners must kee art natural de endin on size of lot 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Limit roe s eculation/absentee landlords 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Sto sellin land to outside develo ers that remove resources from communi 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Ri orous enforcement of ermits for rubbin /clearin 13 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Create moratorium on lar er ro erties bein subdivided 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Issue ermits for residential lots onl to owner occu ant 3/30/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Re uire all commercial buildin to have a se tics stem 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Chan a zonin to reduce no. of buildin son lot an limit subdivision rocess on existin lots 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Initiate immediate 15yr. Moratorium on subdivision so as to allow time for corrective planning for Volcano 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Act to decrease the current rate of bulldozin on rivate land 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Serious conse uences when ermits are i nored 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN 1.1 acre minimum lot size 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Native trees of certain size need ermit for cuttin 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Ex iration clause on develo ment ermit 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN No clear cuttin on residential lots and leave a ercenta a of buffer increase set back 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Restructure tax code -conservation/ag. Lower rates then resort/commercial and industrial -gold course are not a . 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN No new commercial zonin , no more residential subdivisions, minimal size lot 10,000s /ft 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Restrictions on land clearin on residential land 3/30/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Control commercial development location; light pollution; minimize environmental impact; provide services to Volcano Communi 3/30!2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN 5B restriction on lot clearin such as a ercenta a of lot size 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave PLAN A moratorium on new subdivisions in order to allow time to determine a desirable growth rate fro the community in relation to infrastructure, services, environmental impact and commercial develo ment 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave PLAN Chan a zonin desi nations and reduce the otential densit of Volcano 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave PLAN Native forest now zoned as a .Land should be evaluated for o en zonin b means of tax incentives 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave PLAN Limit land clearin based on home foot rint 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Limited develo ment 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Limit ma'or residential develo ment 3/9/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Re-think zonin / ossible moratorium on zonin chan es until local Ian is develo ed 3/9/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN More re ulation on the act of bulldozin 4/16/2006 Volcano PLAN Kee ro ert cost and rents on ar with income local! 4/16/2006 Volcano PLAN Moratorium on future subdivisions until infrastructure is in lace 4/16/2006 Volcano PLAN Create ade uate setbacks alon main hi hwa to "hide" develo ment 4/7/2006 Mauna Loa Estates - Volcano PLAN Re uire forest buffer between commercial and residential 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. SID Develo Self Sustainin Renewable Ener develo ment -Solar, Wind, Biomass, etc. 3/9/2006 Volcano C.C. ALT Increase all alternative trans ortation the bus, van, etc. service for workin eo le and students 3/9/2006 Volcano C.C. ALT Make Volcano Bike Friend! 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. ALT Make public/tourism facilities and transportations use alternative energy to improve air quality for eo le and environment 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. ALT Pedestrian walkwa sand bike aths on main roads • i ~ 3/11/2 Volcano C.C. ALT More ublic trans ortation 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave ALT Old Volcano road closed to vehicular traffic -Pedestrians and Bic cles onl 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave ALT Increase ublic trans ortation 3/18/2006 Volcano C.C. ALT Safe edestrian & bikewa s 3/18/2006 Volcano C.C. ALT Batte o erated communi shuttle service to commercial areas or services 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave ALT We are the health state, mandate bike aths, walkin aths, hikin trails and maintain it 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave ALT Desi Hate uses for Volcano - Keaau trail, i.e. no motorized vehicles 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. ALT Side walks on Haunani and Wri ht roads + Old Volcano H 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. ALT Im rove ublic trans ortations and encoura a car oolin 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. ALT Health, trans ortation, recreation, ublic safe should be built with Volcano values stem in mind 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. ALT Shuttle or share ride from Volcano to Hilo 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. ALT Walkin bic cle aths on ma'or roads 2 lane roads 3/30/2006 Volcano C.C. ALT Si nificant im rovement on Public Trans ortation 3/30/2006 Volcano C.C. ALT Environmental) friend) ublic trans ortation 3/30/2006 Volcano C.C. ALT Bike aths, bike racks and swimmin ool 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. ALT Walkwa s connectin existin businesses 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. ALT Sidewalk from charter school to Coo er Center at least 4' wide 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. ALT More non vehicular athwa and mass ublic trans ortation 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. ALT More fre uent bus service 4/16/2006 Volcano ALT Better Mass Transits stems 4/16/2006 Volcano ALT Bike aths/foot aths and skateboard and more multi- u ose trails 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. PARK Buffer communit next to HVNP/more rotective zonin closer to ark Fed. Assistance is available 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. PARK Mechanism for land owners to donate o ens ace to communi 4/16/2006 Volcano GOV Limit rowth with moratoriums and other tools and incentives - re uirement of Green Built 4/16/2006 Volcano GOV Moratorium on future subdivisions until infrastructure is in lace 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. GOV Sto sellin land to outside develo ers that remove resources from communit 4/7/2006 Mauna Loa Estates - Volcano GOV Make Volcano a Special Permit area so that development is regulated based on the community's sense of identit 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. GOV Communi review before commercial develo ment -exam le -historic corridor 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave GOV Implement a design district for the Volcano area to regulate forest clearing and other property im rovements 3/9/2006 Volcano C.C. GOV Let each communi develo local tans-Volcano mi ht have different ideas then Pahoa 4/16/2006 Volcano GOV Financial/tax incentive for forest restoration with natives ecies 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. GOV Provide incentives for reservin native trees and native ve etation such as tax break 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. GOV Define the needs of the International biosphere reserve and make it law that it supercedes the needs of the eo le 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. GOV Provide incentives for reservin native trees and native ve etation such as tax break 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Control Develo ment 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Encoura a relin uishment of develo ment ri hts b tax breaks and other economic means 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Initiate immediate 15 r. Moratorium on subdivision so as to allow time for corrective tannin for 15 Volcano 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Allow individual communities to develo inde endentl from coun 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Count tax breaks for historic reservation of buildin sand financial incentives for lot consolidation 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Re uest Coun and State to reduce total develo ment densi in Volcano 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Develop and adopt a design district that would reduce impact of development on Volcano -buffer zone 2 natural reserves 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Make Volcano a s ecial desi n district - reserve native forest 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Kee Volcano the wa it is 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Maintain roe values thru uni ueness and uali of life in Volcano 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Villa e s ecial desi n district 3/30/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Exce t for local services discoura a rowth between mile 24 and national ark 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Communi review before commercial develo ment -exam le -historic corridor 4/16/2006 Volcano COM Discoura a further develo ment of lar a scale business 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Encoura a the a ro riate small scale cotta a Indust 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Home row businesses and no new franchises 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Encoura a communi centric business -small communi based instead of bi commercial centers 3/30/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Control commercial development location; light pollution; minimize environmental impact; provide services to Volcano Communi 4/7/2006 Mauna Loa Estates - Volcano COM Desi Hate and ac uire ublic areas in subdivisions ad'acent to Volcano Villa e 3/18/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Preserve the character of Volcano Villa a/Small scale enter rises/no national franchises 3/18/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Villa a to remain as is 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave COM Minimal commercial develo ment - no franchises 3/9/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Discoura a "Chain Stores and Hotels" -Protect local businesses like B & B and A riculture 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Educate newcomers re ardin tradition, Volcano values 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Preserve small town feel of Volcano we need to realize we cannot have all amenities of lar a cit 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Balance our uali of lives with tourism needs 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Mainstreet ro ram in Volcano to identi uni ueness 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave COM S ecial desi n district for commercial area 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave COM Communit Develo ment instead of tourist oriented 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave COM Make coun aware of uni ueness of our communi b its roximi of HVNP 3/18/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Preserve the character of Volcano Villa a/Small scale enter rises/no national franchises 3/18/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Villa e-to remain as is 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave COM Minimal commercial develo ment - no franchises 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave COM Implement a design district for the Volcano area to regulate forest clearing and other property im rovements 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave COM Desi Hate wildlife corridors and histo corridors that cannot be develo ed includin buffers 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave COM Desi Hate "Ki uka" in the communi as o en zonin 3/21/2006 Nanawale Pu'ula Natividad COM Retain "count " feelin ...not become a rich eo le's land 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. COM No desi nation of land for hotels or resorts • i • 3/22/2 Volcano C.C. COIVI Maintain roe values tl~i ueness and uali of life in Volcano - 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Villa e s ecial desi n district 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. COM No tour buses in Volcano Villa e 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Encoura a owners of historic buildin to maintain resent desi n 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. COM No franchises in Volcano 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. COM A communi association that states values for Volcano 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Local historic homes and buildin committee to reserve sites 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Limit B & B's 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Limited commercial: medical, harmac , as station and food store 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Limit visitor related facilities and businesses 3/30/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Increase commercial area in Volcano Villa a onl in Old Volcano road with historic architectural s les 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. COM U date and revise Volcano 20/20 Ian Volcano is uni ue! Should not be lum ed into Puna CDP 4/7/2006 Mauna Loa Estates - Volcano COM Se arate values of Volcano from s eculative real estate values 4/7/2006 Mauna Loa Estates - Volcano COM Revise and resize Volcano's zonin to drasticall reduce the otential buildin denai 4/7/2006 Mauna Loa Estates - Volcano COM Identi historic buildin sand collect and record local histo in a Volcano Villa a Museum 4/7/2006 Mauna Loa Estates - Volcano COM Make Volcano a Special Permit area so that development is regulated based on the community's sense of identit 4/7/2006 Mauna Loa Estates - Volcano COM Encourage locally owned small businesses in existing historic buildings. Discourage franchises, articular) fast food 4/16/2006 Volcano COM Discoura a further develo ment of lar a scale business 4/16/2006 Volcano COM Desi n uidelines on buildin that match the Volcano histo 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave COM No increase of commercial zonin and denial of s ecial use ermits 3/9/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Volcano to have preschool -12th grade charter school which reflects the 'Volcano's Character -Focal oint for the communi 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Encoura a communi centric business -small communi based instead of bi commercial centers 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. COM Count tax breaks for historic reservation of buildin sand financial incentives for lot consolidation 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. COM romote uidelines for architecture and land use such as buildin covenants 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. COM No new commercial zonin , no more residential subdivisions, minimal size lot 10,OOOs /ft 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. ECON Encoura a the a ro riate small scale cotta a Indust 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. ECON Extended hours for farmers' market to twice week) and until noon 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave ECON More local communi owned businesses 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave ECON functional sho in develo ment 3/18/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Commercial area at uar near transfer station 3/18/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN Commercial area limited to old Volcano Rd 3/18/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN No new subdivisions 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave PLAN Guidance b ermittin rocess on house foot rint based on lot size 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. PARK More reen infrastructure -walk able native forest throu hout the communi 17 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. PLAN romote uidelines for architecture and land use such as buildin covenants 3/30/2006 Volcano C.C. PARK Bike aths, bike racks and swimmin ool 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. PARK Health, trans ortation, recreation, ublic safe should be built with Volcano value s stem in mind 4/16/2006 Volcano PARK Create more recreational facilities for kids and adults 3/30/2006 Volcano C.C. PARK More recreational facilities 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. PARK Condemnation of small lots to make a reen belt 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. PARK Well develo ed ark to serve all a es 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. PARK Green buffers between residential and commercial lots 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave PARK Environmental arks for ouths 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. ECON Encoura a the a ro riate small scale cotta a Indust 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. ECON Encoura a communi centric business -small communit based instead of bi commercial centers 3/9/2006 Volcano C.C. ECON Su ort A ri-tourism 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave ECON T to reserve and enhance farmin as a rofitable land use in Volcano 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. ECON Assistance for small farms existin farms 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. ECON Maintain and expand agricultural opportunities and efforts within the community, particularly vegetable farms 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. ECON Balance our uali of lives with tourism needs 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave ECON Native forest now zoned as a .Land should. be evaluated for o en zonin b means of tax incentives 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. ECON Direct and consolidate locations of service/commercial facilities into a ro riate areas 3/9/2006 Volcano C.C. ECON Explore the feasibility of sustainable economies; minimal ecological footprint (balancing economic, social and environmental criteria 3/9/2006 Volcano C.C. AG Encoura a Ito row their own food - su ort local farmers for Sustainabilit of the Island 3/9/2006 Volcano C.C. AG Su ort A ri-tourism 4/11/2006 Hawaiian Acres C.C. AG Creat ag/residental (combined) classification mixed with ag/conservation for zoing of current ag 2 -ag5 subdivisions 4/16/2006 Volcano AG More em hasis to romote self-sustainin communi without need to im ort food and timber 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave AG T to reserve and enhance farmin as a rofitable land use in Volcano 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave AG Promote non-toxic farmin and ardenin & desi Hate "nos ra "areas 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. AG Assistance for small farms existin farms 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. AG Maintain and expand agricultural opportunities and efforts within the community, particularly vegetable farms 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. AG Encoura a local farms/farm coo s, communit ardens 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave EDU Rainforest reservation info iven b buildin de t to all buildin a licants 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave EDU Re uire trainin of heav a ui ment o erators in low im act land clearin techni ues 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave EDU Coun s onsored environmental education ro ram for adults usin outreach via farmer market 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave EDU Business stewardship programs for new/existing businesses to promote responsible sustainable ractices 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. EDU Clear cuttin lot not considered an im rovement 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. EDU Educational components that include environmental quality protection of historic sites, natural resources, native lans and animals • ~ • 3/30/2 Volcano C.C. EDU At sale of roe , recom~tions on invasive s ecies, clearin leavin native )ants - 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. EDU Increase education and sensitivi of lace in Volcano 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. EDU Mandatory orientation/education -living with our environment prior to grubbing permit (make it part of disclosure before bu in 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave EDU Environmental education with "Wiki" website 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave EDU All rofit activities a % for conservation and/or education 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave EDU Stron em hasis and ublic awareness of International Bios here Reserve and World Herita a Site 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. EDU Promote landsca in with natives ecies 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave EDU Environmental arks for ouths 4/16/2006 Volcano EDU Provide $ to educate o ulation about sustainable lifes le 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. ENG Encoura a alternative renewable ener 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. ENG Develo Self Sustainin Renewable Ener develo ment -Solar, Wind, Biomass, etc. 4/16/2006 Volcano ENG Financial incentives to develo renewable ener ies and industries 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. GOV Coun tax breaks for historic reservation of buildin sand financial incentives for lot consolidation 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave GOV Tax incentive for low im act lot clearin 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave GOV Volcano autonom in develo in communi covenants to control reservation of environment 3/18/2006 Volcano C.C. GOV Coun enforce zonin laws 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave GOV Self sustainabili and not be de endent on coun services 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. GOV Draina a enforcement for lar a aved areas 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. GOV Control of s eculation 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. GOV Allow individual communities to develo inde endentl from coun 3/30/2006 Volcano C.C. GOV Permanentt redistrict Golf Course subdivision into Puna district 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. GOV Create Villa a Communi Cor s to re ulate V.V. activities 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. GOV Return enou h tax $ to Volcano to take care of local roblems and issues 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. ~GOV Strict olicin of ille al B & B's 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. GOV Prevent conflict of interest b ublic fi ures in land develo ment 4/16/2006 Volcano GOV Tax enal and disincentives fors eculators and ive kamaiina discount -tax break or more 3/30/2006 Volcano C.C. GOV More ri orous ro rams for invasive s ecies control 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. GOV Res and more uickl to invasive s ecies 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. GOV U date and revise Volcano 20/20 Ian Volcano is uni ue! Should not be lum ed into Puna CDP 4/16/2006 Volcano GOV Kee roe cost and rents on ar with income local) 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. GOV Incentive to maintain land areas i.e. remove invasive s ecies, rovide reen waste ick u ,etc. 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave MICR Better noise abatement 3/18/2006 Volcano C.C. MICR Ban on loud ATV's and other nois vehicle enforce noise ordinances 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. MICH Enforceable noise ordinances 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. MICR No li ht ollution 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. MICH Re lace cut Ohia trees 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. MICH Control feral cats and rohibit feral cat feedin stations 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. MICR Limit li ht ollution 19 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. MICH Limit outdoor illumination to minimum safe uidelines 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. MICH Create and enforce leash laws and nuisance noise re ardin do s 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. MICH Limit B & B no noise, li ht ollution enforcement 3/9/2006 Volcano C.C. PARK More local, ade uate recreation facili for social activi 3/9/2006 Volcano C.C. PUB Ade uate Fire, Police and Medical Facilities 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. PUB Increase olice resence!! 24/7 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave PUB Functional service develo ment 3/18/2006 Volcano C.C. PUB Basic services such as small health center 3/18/2006 Volcano C.C. PUB Low rise senior housin 3/18/2006 Volcano C.C. PUB Immediate care facilit 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave PUB Have small medical clinic in villa a or close b 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. PUB Provide restrooms for visitors 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. PUB Incentive to maintain land areas i.e. remove invasive s ecies, rovide reen waste ick u ,etc. 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. PUB Pharmac or dru store or service rovidin nc dru s 3/30/2006 Volcano C.C. PUB Police Station 3/30/2006 Volcano C.C. PUB Coun manned fire station 3/30/2006 Volcano C.C. PUB medical, dental, harmac series in communit and lab 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. PUB Full time Count Fire De t and Police 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. PUB Communi Health Clinic 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. PUB Allow uali low rise, low im act senior retirement and care facili 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. PUB better rec clin o tions in Volcano 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. PUB More olice resence 4/16/2006 Volcano PUB Create a affordable local health care clinic with emer enc and re ular visits 4/16/2006 Volcano PUB Local Police station -faster res onse 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. PUB Increase varie of rec clin in volcano 3/30/2006 Volcano C.C. PUB Im roved rec clin in Volcano 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave ROAD Too much traffic 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave ROAD Minimize im act of traffic 4/16/2006 Volcano ROAD Im rove existin /create new infrastructure for trans ortation and multi ur ose trails 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave ROAD No coun water and no streetli hts 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave SID Every decision for development should take into account the natural history of area: the flow of water, drainage, open land, weather patterns, air quality, lava tubes, native intelligence, and disclosure of s iritual inhabitants 4/7/2006 Mauna Loa Estates - Volcano SID Commercial develo ment: ocket laza rather than stri develo ment 4/16/2006 Volcano SID More em hasis to romote self-sustainin Communi without need to im ort food and timber 4/16/2006 Volcano SID Provide $ to educate o ulation about sustainable lifes le 3/9/2006 Volcano C.C. SID Encoura a Ito row their own food - su ort local farmers for Sustainabili of the Island 3/19/2006 Volcano Maile Ave SID Promote non-toxic farmin and ardenin & desi Hate "nos ra "areas 4/16/2006 Volcano SID Financial incentives to develo renewable ener ies and industries 20 • • - 3/11/ Volcano C.C. SID Re ulations on chemical reserve uali of land and air 3/19/ Volcano Maile Ave SID Self sustainabili and no a endent on coun services 4/6/2006 Pahoa - La'akea SID Bull's e e communities with services in the center and a reen belt 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave SID Guidance b ermittin rocess on house foot rint based on lot size 4/16/2006 Volcano SOC Provide housin for retired seniors assisted livin facili 4/16/2006 Volcano SOC Provide more o ortunities for under rivile ed kids 3/18/2006 Volcano C.C. SOC Low rise senior housin 3/9/2006 Volcano C.C. WTR No coun water in Volcano 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. WTR Make sure no coun water in future in Volcano 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave WTR No coun water and no streetli hts 3/11/2006 Volcano Maile Ave WTR Volcano is only gateway community to a national park without a strip mall due to lack of potable water, therefore No Water 3/18/2006 Volcano C.C. WTR No Coun Water 3/22/2006 Volcano C.C. WTR No i ed water ast Akatsuka nurse 3/24/2006 Volcano C.C. WTR No coun water 3/30/2006 Volcano C.C. WTR Public waters stem for control of rowth 3/30/2006 Volcano C.C. WTR No coun water 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. WTR No coun water 4/2/2006 Volcano C.C. WTR No coun water 4/16/2006 Volcano WTR No coun water/utilities in Volcano 3/9/2006 Volcano C.C. CTR Su ort local arts 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. CTR Art uild in Volcano reflectin s irituali of area and sense of lace 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. CTR Educate newcomers re ardin tradition, Volcano values 3/11/2006 Volcano C.C. CTR Mainstreet ro ram in Volcano to identi uni ueness 3/31/2006 Volcano C.C. CTR Increase education and sensitivi of lace in Volcano 21 Natural Resources Preservation & Protection • Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Working Group Recommendations Final Report v.2oo70221-1 Statement of Goals The vision of the Natural Resources Preservation & Protection working group is to preserve and protect the ecologically significant natural resources of Puna from depletion or destruction in the wake of a quickly growing population and lengthy development boom in a sustainable manner for future generations; and to expand public awareness regarding the goals and objectives, along with implementation measures to achieve stated goals.' • . 'See "Living with the Native Forest Bird Community in Puna District and Volcano Region", Paul Banko 20070205; p. 33. -1- Forest Leveled in Fern Acres Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Major Contributors and Report Editors Bidleman, Bett (group contact-1) Brezinsky, Laura Conant, Pat (group contact-2) Golden, Kathleen & Peter Goodrich, Mary & Ken Hedrick, Hannah Leialoha, Julie Lepes, Marta Marohnic, Jillian Siracusa, Rene Tavares, Kim (steering liaison) Ware, Diane Warshauer, Rick Other Involvement /Supporting Documents & Resources Banko, Paul Cheetham, Clive Greenough, Diana Lively, Barbara (for Bob Jacobson) Mattos, Bobby Palmer, Sherry Price, Jon Scheffler, Tim Taylor, Dan Big Island Invasive Species Committee Community Development Hui of Fern Forest Board of Directors Kopua Farmlots Invasive Species Committee Maui Invasive Species Committee Photos: Cover page: Fern Acres, Puna; Laura Brezinsky - 2005 Over-Dozing and Development Trends: Greater Volcano Area; Mary & Ken Goodrich, Diane Ware - 2007 Endemic Clermontia hawaiiensis in bloom, native to Fern Forest, Puna; Kim Tavares Other Involvement /One or two meetines, other Email list subscribers Bath, Stephanie & Roy Burgess, Sara Chang, Deborah Dorsey, Herb Downing, Keola Drury, David Kobsa, Ann Lee, Kimo Levin, Andy Levin, Nicolette Qadir, Prima Mermel, Jeffrey Squassoni, Paul Van Overbeke, Bettie (unnamed others) Meetings Year Month Day 2006 September 30 2006 October 09 & 23 2006 November 06 & 20 2006 December 02 (Open House), 04 2007 January 17, 20, 26, • 2007 February 6, 12, 13, 14, 15 -2- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Contents Photo Index .......................................................................................... 5-6 Objectives ................................................................................. 7 Summary of Urgent Issues ........................................................................ 7 Potential for Resistance to Recommendations ............................................. 9 Recommendations ................................................................................. 10 A. Pause up-zoning until Puna CDP is an ordinance. B. No further up-zoning or subdividing of land with significant native forest species. C. Adopt a Native Forest Protection Ordinance and create a County Forester position. D. Revise COH Code Chapter 10 Erosion & Sedimentation Control to include contingencies for Native Forest Preservation. E. Education - Develop a strong education and outreach presence that includes: - Programs ................................................................................. 10 1) Plant Inventory Mapping Project 2) Native Species Restoration & Salvage & Protect from Damage and Theft 3) Invasive species awareness 4) Website with learning materials and tests 5) County Environmental Sustainability and Stewardship Program - Partnerships ........................................................................ 11 1) Reach out to community groups and organizations 2) New service industry of certified contractors & consultants 3) Community & specialized councils 4) Existing network of natural resources managers 5) Hawaii Island Board of Realtors - Gathering Places ......................................................................... 12 1) Resource centers for activities, Internet access, printed materials, digital media and reference libraries etc., promoting sustainability & good land stewardship practices. F. Native Vegetation Preservation Areas Mapping .................................... 12 G. Identify and Support Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone dedication .................. 13 H. Support and improve existing governmental incentive programs .................. 13 1) Revise Code Chapter 19 Article 8 Section 19-59 "Native Forest Dedication" 2) Develop and Implement a Conservation Easement Policy 3) Develop a Puna Land Trust • • r~ u -3- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 • I. Community Empowerment, Village Design Centers .................................... 13 J. Explore wise TDR opportunities ...................................................... 14 K. Puna Community Council & Puna Natural Resources Council ................... 14 L. Lobby DLNR for Rezoning from Ag to Native Forest ............................ 14 M. Disallow or Limit Speculation Building ............................................. 14 N. Create a New County Natural Resources Department & Invasive Species Coordinator Position .................................................................... 15 NRWG Detail Documents 1) Recommendations for a Native Forest Protection Ordinance ...................... 16 2) Erosion & Sedimentation Control for Native Forest Preservation .................. 22 3) Native Vegetation Preservation Areas Mapping ....................................... 25 4) Create a New County Natural Resources Department and an Invasive Species Coordinator Position ................................................ ............ 27 5) Hapu'u and other Native Species Natural Resources Management .................... 30 6) Centers For County Information Dissemination, Civic Uses, Cultural and Environmental Education ............................................................... 32 Supporting Documents (attached) 1) "Living with the Native Forest Bird Community in Puna District and Volcano Region", prepared by Paul Banko, 20070205 (attached here) .......................... 33 2) Summary of comments on natural resources from 130 small group meetings ...... 40 Other Puna CDP 2007 References • 1) "Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone -Puna CDP Land Use Working Group - Subgroup report" (included on NRWG final report CD) 2) "Preserving Land, Air and Water -CDP Land Use Working Group - Subgroup report" (included on NRWG final report CD) 3) "Agricultural Lands Working Group report" (included on NRWG final report CD) -4- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Over-Dozing and Development Trends: Greater Volcano Area; Mary & Ken Goodrich, Diane Ware Note: See full-sized original photos on CD provided to County Planning and Contributing Group Members Buffer.jpg (see page 20) New spec house built on 9000sq/ft lot with forested buffer, preserving more of the natural resources. Dozed_over lot line.jpg (see page 26) Two small lots dozed over lot lines (Currently no permit required for this type of clearing). No_Privacy.jpg (see page 26) Dozing to property line reduces privacy. Over the_line.jpg (see page 24) Four contiguous lots dozed pin-to-pin and onto next lot. • • • -5- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Over-Dozing and Development Trends: Greater Volcano Area; Mary & Ken Goodrich, Diane Ware Note: See full-sized original photos on CD provided to County Planning and Contributing Group Members Pin to~in_2.jpg (see page 24) Lots dozed pin-to-pin. Neighbor improvises to insure privacy. Loss of natural topography, forest and native species habitat. Urban_Density.jpg (see page 21) Two houses 15 feet apart on separate lots resulting in urban style density. Four contiguous lots = 1+ acre dozed pin-to-pin (no grading and grubbing permit required at this time). Wrong_lots_dozed.jpg (see page 31) 2 wrong lots dozed pin-to-pin, houses built and subsequently disassembled. Erosion and sedimentation issues. Loss of forest. (Currently no grading and grubbing permit required). 3_acres.jpg (see page 31) Fern Forest 3 acres cleared pin-to-pin. -6- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Objectives (Note: These objectives were based on input and themes derived from 130 small group meetings conducted across the Puna District and subsequent input.) ^ Develop a strategy to minimize clear-cutting of naturally forested parcels in order to preserve and protect native ecosystems. [Rec.# All] ^ Pursue effective means to control invasive species. [Rec.# N, C, D, E, F, G] ^ Promote sustainable living and environmental-friendly policies through outreach and education. [Rec.# E] ^ Investigate the feasibility of creating environmentally sensitive codes. [Rec.# H] ^ Create incentives to maintain open space and ecological and biological diversity. [Rec.# All] ^ Identify important landscapes, native ecosystem areas an geological features that support native wildlife for protection. [Rec.# F] ^ Define the International Biosphere Reserve buffer zone to protect natural resources within it from development. [Rec.# G] ^ Promote coastal and shoreline protection [Rec.# N, E] ^ Identify important ecological area protection strategies to maintain the connectivity of open space and forest canopy which serve as wildlife corridors. [Rec.# All] Summarv of Urgent Issues The County should add natural resources preservation and protection to the list of elements that make up the General Plan. We recommend the County add a section to the General Plan called "Cultural, Historic and Natural Resources Preservation". The group has many recommendations regarding the preservation and protection of natural resources. They were formed by members with the staying-power to stick with it, who found time to work numerous hours, weaving together all the issues expressed by incoming sources. This report was accomplished by meetings, in between meetings via email, telephone conversations and by piggybacking on other working groups and communities' regular meetings. The answers are not all here, but many important issues are addressed. It was not possible for the group to cover every concern Puna residents expressed at length, rather its focus is on a limited number of urgent needs. Generally, all issues are wrapped up in the long term vision to develop an ever-present outreach and education arm of County government and more community involvement. It includes suggestions for a new decision making process for planning, and a new look at regulating or managing the natural resources of Puna. It strives to result in 100% participation in good stewardship and wise land management practices, to sustain the natural -7- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 resources of Puna indefinitely, and it urges County support to help provide adequate facilities where outreach presentations and activities can be held or staged, close to the communities and people. Recommendations are thought to be consistent with the 2005 Hawaii Country General Plan with regard to Natural Resources, as follows: "The natural resources of the island of Hawaii are the physical, and environmental assets that are recognized as useful, valuable and desirable. These natural resources include, but are not limited to, the land, water, air, flora, fauna, soils, geologic features, geothermal steam, climate, wind, sunshine, ocean waters and shoreline. Some of these resources are finite and irreplaceable." 2 • Our recommendations for preserving native forestlands will protect fauna, flora, soils and mitigate local and global warming emissions. Puna is unique in that it is the only district in the State of Hawaii that still has intact low elevation native forest. Among the flora and fauna in Puna, are several "Endangered Species": Hawaiian Hawk (I' o), Hawaiian Goose (Nene), Newell's Shearwaters, Storm Petrels and the only bat, the native Hoary Bat. Others defined by former PCDP documents such as the Blackburn's Sphinx Moth and the Hawaiian Monk Seal are also species of limited number and sometimes seen in Puna. Many native forest birds, some endangered, depend on the connectivity of Ohi'a canopy. Therefore, we feel the "best use" of native forest land is to preserve as much of it as humanly possible. Refer to Pacific Islands -Endangered Species documents, here: Hawaiian Hawk, http://www.fws.gov/pacificislands/wesa/io.html Hawaiian Goose, httR:://www.fws.gov/pacificislands/wesa/nene.html Hawaiian Hoary Bat, http://www.fws.gov/pacificislands/wesa/hrybatindex.html Blackburn's Sphinx Moth, http://www.fws.gov/pacificislands/wesa/sphinxmoth.html The Hawaii Big Island Plant Cluster Recovery Plan httpa/www. fws.gov//pacificislands/wesa/bi~iplantidx.html The big challenge for Puna citizens and Hawaii County is to reconcile the goal of forest preservation as stated in the general plan with non-conforming antiquated subdivisions; "Those z See hyperlink below to Hawaii County General Plan, Natural Resources and Shoreline, 8.1, Introduction and Analysis. http://www.hawaii-county.com/la/gp/2005/BNaturalResources.pdfand on CD with this report. -8- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 subdivisions, which when approved, met all then-existing regulations, but are inadequate by current market, land use or environmental standards.'" 3 It is our contention that many of the subdivisions in Puna were 1) erroneously zoned eg. native forest as Ag or Residential, 2) responsibility for infrastructure was not planned or assumed by the county, 3) there was no consideration of value or measures taken for the preservation of significant native forest, 4) the large area of subdivisions along Highway-11 and Highway-130 create a large void between forest reserves eg. Waiakea and Wa' o Kele o Puna and mauka the Ola' a and the Kahauale' a Natural Area Reserve. Without forested stands of Ohi' a canopy connecting these reserves, wildlife corridors between them will be lost. This loss of connectivity is one impetus for our recommendations to preserve native forest, as much as possible, in existing subdivisions, while protecting property rights to clear a reasonable amount of forest for a residence4. Potential for Resistance to Recommendations • Increased costs-These recommendations will increase costs of land development by imposing fees for on-site inspections by the county, and review of plot plans and land disturbance permits. Developers will also have to absorb the cost of preparing the above documentation. • Restrictions on private property rights-Currently, owners of one acre or less can remove all vegetation from their lots without penalty. These proposed recommendations will regulate removal of native forest and penalize violators through fines and delays in building permits. • Increased government regulation-Some citizens may be opposed to these recommendations because they believe it intrudes on private decision making. They may argue that preservation of native forest should be restricted to public lands and should not be a concern on land already designated for industrial or private development. Alternatively, enacting these recommendations will generate many new types of service industry opportunities, more jobs for qualified people, and more opportunities to qualify for the new jobs. It wouldn't be fair to say that everyone listed as participants here were in total agreement with this finished document, however there was very little negative feedback from email lists or any other discussions made known to this group. The educational outreach promoted in this report encourages broader participation in the future to improve the public's understanding of the fragile environment these recommendations attempt to maintain and preserve. a See "The Challenge ofNon-conforming Subdivisions", provided by John Whalen htt~/lwww hawaiiislandplan com/ librarv/documentslislandwide/plannina-informationallchallenee%20of%20non- conforming%20subdivisions.pdf and on CD with this report. a See map above; also see "Living With the Native Forest Bird Community in Puna District and Volcano Region", prepared by Paul Banko for the Puna CDP report, p.33. • • -9- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Recommendations A. Instigate a temporary halt on all up-zoning and subdividing until the Puna CDP becomes ordinance. B. Establish an immediate moratorium on up-zoning and subdividing of parcels with significant native forest species on private lands. An example of plant species includes: akia, Clermontia, Ilex, kolea, lama, ohe, ohia, olapa, pilo, mauka, kolea, kopiko, nanu or na'u, and many others whose range has been reduced significantly by less appropriate types of agriculture, development lacking infrastructure, and subsequently invasive species, scrap metal and other large litter items and reduced chance for recovery. C. Adopt a Native Forest Protection Ordinance for private and public lands in Puna and create a County Forester positions D. Revise and expand Hawaii County Chapter 10, Erosion & Sedimentation Control Ordinance to include contingencies for native species preservation: 1) Stop pin to pin grubbing and grading. 2) Stop grading trespass over adjacent boundary lines. 3) Stop grading and building on the wrong property. 4) Establish guidelines for forested buffer zones and setbacks. Requiring a minimum buffer zone coinciding with building set-back areas will protect the • property rights of neighboring landowners by controlling the spread of invasive species and creating a visual and anti-noise buffer as well as preventing trespass and damage from dozers clearing over property lines. 6 E. Education - Develop a strong education and outreach presence that includes 1) new programs, 2) partnerships between government and citizens, 3) community gathering places. Provide easy access to County-required training in minimizing forest destruction for builders, contractors, dozer and heavy equipment operators, workshops and classes in native and invasive species identification, both in classroom and in the field, hands-on classes in propagating and planting of native plants, workshops in control and removal of invasive species, tours of homes and agricultural lands which preserve forestlands, training and classes in agro forestry, and a permanent place to do this. Programs 1) Plant Inventory Mapping Project -utilize students, volunteers and trainees. ' 2) Native species restoration & salvage -prevent over-harvesting and damaging of resources, promote renewable practices through educations. 3) Invasive species awareness 5 See NRWG Detail Documents #1): "Recommendation for a Native Forest Protection Ordinance"; p. 16 6 See NRWG Detail Documents #2): "Erosion and Sedimentation Control for Native Forest Preservation"; p. 22 • ~ See NRWG Detail Documents #3): "Native Vegetation Preservation Areas Mapping"; p. 25 s See NRWG Detail Documents #5): "Hapu'u and other Native Species Natural Resources Management"; p. 30 -10- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 4) Develop a website based on the mission statement of the Puna Community Development Plan, "Malama Puna a Mau Loa, Preserve and watch over Puna forever". a) Fill the site with appropriate learning materials for natural resources preservation and protection, study materials for certifications and for new home builders with respect to valuable natural resources present on the land. b) Promote environmental stewardship, including Hawaiian sustainability practices. Native forest ecology, identification and control of invasive species, building in the forest9, benefits of minimal dozing, agro-forestry (www.agroforestr~oin). c) Inform landowners and public about existing incentives for forest dedication and conservation, and to facilitate a learning and certification process for new industry demands that will result from implementing some NRWG recommendations. 5) Establish and implement a County environmental sustainability and stewardship education program.10 Prevent over-harvesting and theft of resources, encourage renewable practices and better regulation" Partnerships 1) Reach out to community groups and organizations. Offer presentations to community associations such as Lion's Club, Rotary Club, property owners/subdivision associations, builders and contractor's associations and unions. 2) Provide field learning opportunities through volunteer programs and other partnerships, to encourage and support the new service industry call for certified natural resources contractors & consultants. 3) Develop and support a Puna Natural Resources Council, for facilitating public input with relation to natural resources, as well as a Puna Community Council to network special interest councils and to interact in decision making and planning. (see item K). 4) Partner with existing network, state, federal and non-governmental orgs, and environmental groups such as the Big Island Invasive Species Committee, Malama o Puna, Outdoor Circle, Sierra Club, The Nature Conservancy, and the orchid and tea societies for funding, resources and knowledge to support the 9 See example: Volcano Community Association brochure - "Building in the Forest" at: http://hawaiiislandplan.com/punabackground.asp and on CD with this report. io See Other Puna CDP 2007 References #2): "Preserving Land, Air and Water Subgroup Land Use WG" on CD with this report. " See NRWG Detail Documents #5): "Hapu'u and other Native Species Natural Resources Management"; p. 3C • • r ~I J -11- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 implementation of educational programs, fostering a grassroots conservation ethic to enhance the management of Hawaii's natural resources. 5) Create a partnership with the Hawaii Island Board of Realtors to include in DROA disclosure information regarding any new County native forest preservation guidelines or regulations affecting lots intended for building. In addition, DROA documents to include tax incentives available for preservation of native forest, such as Chapter 19, Article 8, Section 19-59 of the Hawaii County Code -Native Forest Dedication Program. Supply realtors, architects and building and landscape contractors with pamphlets and brochures which will educate them and their clients in sound land preparation and building practices. Gatherin Places 1) Provide infrastructure to develop environmental learning resource centers for activities, programs, classes, Internet website, printed materials, digital media and reference libraries etc., promoting sustainability and good land stewardship practices. ' a) Public infrastructure in the way of community gathering centers, buildings, offices and meeting halls are far and few between across Puna. Those that exist are or will soon be inadequate, not having enough space or seating for large • crowds, some without electricity or kitchens. b) A successful outreach program is needed right away, and a place to stage field trips and outings from, conduct classes or research in, store data and documents safely in, meet at, etc., is key in getting a good outreach program off the ground. Mountain View, for example, would attract a great number of people who would otherwise not go to such events. The County should find a way to provide the communities gathering and meeting spaces. With certified kitchens and lots of rooms, it could also serve many other needs of the community and the County. F. Direct Hawaii County to inventory and map significant native forest species on private lands, including existing subdivisions. An example of significant native forest species includes: akia, Clermontia11, Ilex, kolea, lama, ohe, ohia, olapa, pilo, mauka, kolea, kopiko, nanu or na'u, and many others. is The County will compile this information to create a unified process to address preservation of a portion of these native forest lands thorough the planning and building permit process. Lots within areas mapped as native forest would be evaluated at the beginning of the permit process, by native forest professionals such as those now used in the Native Forest Dedication Program. The land owner would pay for the evaluation, or the fee could be included in a higher permit fee. A determination would be made on the amount of forest to be left undisturbed in accordance with existing codes/ordinances 'z See photo, p.15. i3 See NRWG Detail Documents #3): "Native Vegetation Preservation Areas Mapping"; p. 25. -12- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 relating to native forest preservation. Lots under two acres would be required to leave a vegetation buffer equal to building setbacks. Lots larger than two acres would allow for clearing a building site area for up to 0.25 acres. Variances for sustainable home- agriculture plans would be possible. G. Establish a Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone and boundary, officially recognized by Hawaii County, to protect and preserve the natural resources of Hawaii Volcanoes National Park, which has a United Nations International Biosphere Reserve designation14. The Volcano Community Association supports the expansion of the Biosphere Reserve to ultimately include Kahauale'a and Pu'u Maka'ala State Natural Area Reserves. H. Support and expand on existing County, State and Federal incentive programs for the preservation and management of native eco-systems on public and private lands.ts 1) Native forest dedication program -Revise criteria for the County native forest dedication program to include one-quarter acre and larger parcels, if they are unbuilt upon and with intact and contiguous acres of native species.16 It is to allow vacant small lots to be saved as buffer lots. Many folks in small-lot subdivisions have more than one lot, used as buffers, but now pay high taxes on them. Also, when inherited, they are likely to be sold and built on. Therefore, if the owners dedicate the lots to conservation (by relinquishing building rights), then they should get permanent tax breaks. 2) Conservation easements - Establish a Puna or County-wide conservation easement policy into Hawail County code. This policy would allow owners to donate undeveloped lots to • non-profit conservancies or governmental organizations. Lots would have significant conservation value, e.g.: forest, wetlands, endangered species habitat, beaches and scenic areas in accordance with IRS regulations on what can be protected by conservation easements. These lots would be assessed at a lower tax rate. Encourage the County to work with land trusts and government to find and design innovative funding and tax incentives for purchasing rights of selected properties. These would be used to help affect measures to reduce density and to protect the forest buffers. 3) Land Trusts - A Puna land trust of some kind could be the repository and managing body for Puna open space inventories. Tax exemptions could be given as an incentive to dedicate land to the land trust, for example. Lands condemned because of natural hazards could be banked here. Trading lands or affording the opportunity for property owners who are destined to have their lands condemned for their safety or for the greater good, may be able to find satisfactory land in the land bank at the land trust in return. I. Community Boundaries -Empower local communities in Puna to define their boundaries and create guidelines to address future growth and the preservation of local natural resources. This could include the creation of Village Design Districts or Special Design is See Other Puna CDP 2007 References #1): "Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone Subgroup Recommendations Land Use Working Group 9FEB07" on CD with this report. is See "Government Incentive Programs for Tree Planting or Forest Management on Private Lands in Hawaii" http:/Iwww.state.hi.us/dlnr/dofaw/LAP/landowner%20assist%20table ndf and on CD with this report. i6 See COH Code Chapter 19 Article 8: Section 19-59 "Native Forest Dedication" on CD with this report. -13- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 i ~~ ~~ Districtst~. J. TDR's -Facilitate and implement, through County jurisdiction, Transfer of Development Rights to target commercial growth out of native forest and transfer it into areas designated for commercial development within village centers.18 K. Puna Councils - Create a citizens advisory council for community based input to Hawaii County government. A "Puna Natural Resources Council" could fulfill much of its own recommendations, or at least play a major role in its implementation. Residents want more voice in the County decision making processes for Puna. A network of Councils is suggested by various groups as a means to keep the community involved to implement the plans. Natural resources group supports the concept too. A Puna Community Council is much needed, potentially facilitating the growing network of special interest councils. L. Reclassify "Ag" forest lands to "Native Forest" -Lobby DLNR through the County of Hawaii to reclassify land use designations of parcels with significant native vegetation. This would ensure permanent protection of these forest areas as watershed, wildlife habitat and climate protection. M. Disallow or Limit Speculation Building -Require residency for a specified duration (one or more years minimum) for an approved building permit. Implement stiff fines for non- compliance. Control growth and protect, preserve and manage natural resources by limiting the number of spec-buildings until prohibiting them becomes possible. We maintain that speculation building is the basis for rampant growth, increased strain on the infrastructure and lack of consideration for natural resource preservation and community diversity. Speculation building leads to inflated home prices; therefore, making housing unaffordable for many people and leads to a boom-bust cycle of land speculation. There are numerous pin to pin cleared lots with high-priced and unsold speculation houses. Speculation building impacts residents and the local economy with higher property taxes, higher incidence of foreclosure properties and decreased quality of environment. Furthermore, when two to four contiguous small lots are clear cut, the possibility for erosion and sedimentation problems are increased exponentially. Grading and grubbing a number of contiguous small lots which do not currently require a permit can have equal impact on forest, soils, flooding and spread of invasive species as larger land areas requiring a permit. Because of this we have other recommendations in this report to require grading and grubbing permits on all size lots. See photos. t9 zo zt "See: VCA Long-Range Plan, revision year 2007; Volcano Community Association, on CD with this report,. alang wit the former version, "Volcano Vision 2020" (also found here): http:J/hawaiiislandplan.com/punpast.asp is See "Transfer of Development Right (TDR) in Practice" http:J/www.hawaiiislandplan.com/ library/documents/islandwide!plannin~- informational/transferable%20develo~ment%20riQhts%20overview.pdf and on CD with this report. i9 Rec. # A: "Instigate a temporary halt on all up-zoning and subdividing until the Puna CDP becomes ordinance." 20 See NRWG Detail Documents #1): "Recommendation for a Native Forest Protection Ordinance"; p.16. zi See NRWG Detail Documents #3): "Native Vegetation Preservation Areas Mapping"; p. 25. -14- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 N. Create a New C n ou ty Natural Resources Department and an Invasive Species Coordinator Position22. People, agriculture and natural resources suffer from harmful invasive pest species. Current regulations by state and federal agencies are in place to protect the mainland from pest species that might be leaving Hawaii. Similar protective measures are needed to protect the unique natural resources of Hawaii and the quality of life for Hawaii's people. This will be acost-saving measure in the long run, preventing new harmful pests from taking hold of our serene evenings as Coqui frogs do, comfortable harvesting and enjoyable outdoors recreation as little fire ants, stinging nettle caterpillars and vespula wasps (yellowjackets)23 also do. These and many other pests have adverse effects on our quality of life. Preventing new pest infestations will be less costly than extensive control. • u~ac~ time we ~ose anot~ier Hawaiian ~~ant or Mira, in our forest, we ~ose a ~iving ,part of our ancient cu~ture. " - Nainoa 7"~iom,pson, Navigator of Ho~eu~e'a. zz See NRWG Detail Documents #4): "Create a New County Natural Resources Department and an Invasive Species Coordinator Position"; p.27. zs See PCDP-NWRG Report CD > Resource Docs > Invasive Species > Species Info > Animals, two documents: 1) "Vespula_Honolulu Star-Bulletin.pdf° and, "'Tis the Season to Say Goodbye to Yellowjacket Wasps.pdf' -15- Endemic Clermontia hawaiiensis in bloom, native to Fern Forest, Puna Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Recommendation for a Native Forest Protection Ordinance STATEMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES: At the November 6, 2006 meeting of the NRWG, the group agreed that subgroups would work on developing a list of recommendations. The following recommendation was written to address Objective A, "Minimize the removal of native vegetation."za STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND INTENT: No current regulation of Hawaii County has been effective in minimizing the removal of native vegetation from lands within the County's jurisdiction. Although Chapter 10 of the Hawaii County Code contains guidelines on grading and grubbing, those regulations pertain to erosion and flood control, not to protecting native forest. The intent of this recommendation is to address that omission. As noted in the NRWG Grading & Grubbing recommendation, large and small scale clearing of the island's native forests impact more than the area cleared. Native plants and animals on surrounding properties are also affected as the rainforest is fragmented and edge habitat increases. Fragmentation with its associated edge-effects increases predation rates on birds in • affected forest by allowing easier access by predatory animals. Furthermore, fragmentation changes the microclimate of adjacent forest (temperature, sunlight, and moisture in the understory), altering growing regimes for plants and suitability of nesting sites. The opening in the forest helps spread invasive species like kahili ginger and albizia. Areas devoid of vegetation collect standing water and increase breeding habitat for mosquitoes, a vector for avian malaria, further impacting birds in surrounding forest. The clearing of forest in one property cannot help but impact the integrity and quality of the forest in neighboring properties as well. Development on the Big Island in recent years has accelerated and been accompanied by much clearing of native forest, with little regard for the cumulative effect on the island's ecosystems. Some property owners are uninformed about the value of the native vegetation on their lots. Others are speculators who will never live on the property and bulldoze the land pin-to-pin as a matter of expediency. It can be human nature not to recognize the value of things until they are gone. Let's not allow this to happen~with our diminishing rainforest. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Native Forest Protection Ordinance for private and public lands within the jurisdiction of Hawaii County. The purpose of the ordinance is to mitigate the impact of future development on native forest through enforceable regulations and improved public awareness. The creation of a staff position of County Forester will be required to administer the ordinance. za Objective "A" was later expanded to read: "Develop a strategy to minimize clear-cutting of naturally forested parcels in order to preserve and protect native ecosystems". -16- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 • Applications for commercial, agricultural, or residential development which necessitate disturbing the land will require a plot plan, certification that boundary markers have been surveyed, and an application for a land disturbance permit (aka gradinglgrubbing permit). Exceptions that do not require a plot plan, certified markers, or a land disturbance permit will be listed in the ordinance. Other than these exceptions, no land may be bulldozed or excavated without an approved land disturbance permit. An on-site county inspection will be required before applications are approved. After approval, the land disturbance permit must be posted on the property within public view. Upon enactment, no waiver of the ordinance's requirements will be granted without submission to a public hearing process. Procedures for the hearing process, to be stipulated in the ordinance, will include notification to communities who may be affected by the proposed development, or to the public at large. The public will be granted an opportunity to participate and to receive feedback on their concerns. To offset the removal of native forest which the County determines unfeasible to preserve, the ordinance will include a provision to establish a "Native Forest Bank" to which developers will contribute. The Native Forest Bank will be used to purchase native forest to be held in reserve, or to restore and preserve deforested land. Enforcement • Developers will show on their plot plans: intended use of the land; what areas are to be graded or grubbed; and how the remaining forest, if any, will be protected from construction hazards during development. Applications for land disturbance permits will include certification of boundary markers to prevent errors in disturbing land that has not been approved for development. The County will provide a checklist to developers on factors to be considered (e.g., flood protection, selection of building sites to minimize destruction of native forest; restrictions on clearing of land within building setbacks). Before approval of the land disturbance permit, the property will be inspected by a County representative. The approved permit must be signed by the County Forester and the landowner authorizing the work to be done. A copy of the permit and approved plot plan must then be posted on the property within public view. The permit and plot plan must show the area to be cleared and whether native forest will be removed. Any developer who disturbs land in violation of the ordinance will be subject to stiff fines proportionate to the amount of land disturbed. A moratorium will be placed on the issuance of any future County building permits to the developer until fines are collected and other reparations are made as stipulated by the County Forester, who may require the developer to replant the damaged land or contribute a sum to the Native Forest Bank equal to the cost of purchasing or restoring other native forest land. -17- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 • Public Education Component Prior to implementation of the Native Forest Protection Ordinance, a concerted effort will be made by local and state government, working with community representatives, to promote the value of preserving native trees and vegetation throughout the county. State trust funds, organizations such as Kaulunani25 and non-profits like the Nature Conservancy may be contacted as potential funding and advisory sources. The Mayor's Arborist Advisory Committee and the Maui County Arborist are additional resources for assistance in promoting the ordinance. State and federal agencies such as USGS, UH and DLNR may also be approached for assistance in recommending buffer zones for forest preserves, and defining areas where native forest is abundant or requires special consideration for protection. Brochures and other reference materials for landowners will be created, suggesting voluntary methods builders can take to preserve native forest; for example, contracting timber harvesters to salvage trees that must be cut down, rather than discarding them as waste. Upon adoption, information about the ordinance will be posted in all county buildings. Brochures and posters will be provided to island nurseries, building supply and home improvement businesses. The County Forester's duties will include advising county employees whose duties may be affected by the ordinance. The Forester will hold regular workshops at county demonstration sites or community centers, and exhibit methods for preservation, maintenance and restoration of native forest. A primary objective of the County Forester position will be to cultivate a positive environment throughout the county toward natural resource preservation. RELATIONSHIP TO PREVIOUS PLANS AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: 2005 General Plan and Other Written Plans This recommendation supports the County of Hawaii General Plan edict that coastal waters off Puna "remain in their natural pristine state as nearly as possible with an absolute minimum of pollution or alteration of water quality from any human-caused source or actions." By regulating the removal of native forest during future development, the Native Forest Protection Ordinance promotes water quality through improved erosion control. The General Plan also cites "unspoiled vistas and traditional sites of natural beauty" as "an important asset for eco-tourism." By placing value on native forest throughout the County, rather than restricting preservation to a few special places, the Native Forest Protection Ordinance fulfills the intent of the General Plan to retain the overall natural beauty of the land. A side-benefit of on-site inspection before the issuance of land disturbance permits may address another concern of the General Plan: identification of underground lava tubes: Discovery before is Kaulunani Community and Urban Forestry Program: http://www.kaulunani.or~/index.htm; Hawaii State Dept. of Land and Natural Resources: http:!/w~vw.state.hi.us/dlnrfWelcome.html. -18- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 development begins that an area is hazardous could serve to protect the County from liability for approving building and grading permits. The ordinance also supports the goal of the previous Puna Community Development Plan in 1995, which recommended that land use patterns be integrated to preserve the health of forests. Through oversight by the County Forester of all lands within the jurisdiction of the County, the ordinance supports the overall health of its forest, regardless of zoning. Community-initiated plans, such as the Hawaiian Acres and Volcano master plans, are also served by the ordinance. The Hawaiian Acres Community Association plan urged its homeowners to take greater responsibility in reporting violations of grading permits. The posting of land disturbance permits informs communities when grading has been authorized and alerts them when violations are taking place. The "Volcano Vision 2020" 26 is likewise supported in its objective to "protect and conserve natural resources and natural beauty from undue exploitation, encroachment, and damage." Another Volcano vision, "partnerships among community stakeholders," will be encouraged by the process of creating this ordinance through the combined efforts of government, non-profit, and volunteer citizens groups. CDP Public Input from 130 Small Groups This recommendation supports the following themes and objectives produced by the Small Group meetings. Theme: Grading/Grubbing Ordinance (1) Objective: Produce a strategy to minimize clearcutting on new lots. (A) The Native Forest Protection Ordinance is a grading/ grubbing ordinance with teeth. It requires a plot plan, on-site inspection and land disturbance (aka grading and grubbing) permit before any development occurs on land within the jurisdiction of Hawaii County. If the ordinance is violated, final approval of the building permit is denied until fines are collected and other reparations are made, holding accountable speculative investors who carelessly destroy native forest. The ordinance is a strategy that minimizes clearcutting on new lots through regulation and oversight by the County Forester. Theme: Environmental/Sustainability Education (3) Objective: Create educational programs about the environment and sustainable living. (C) Implementation of the Ordinance will require the county to hire a County Forester, whose responsibilities will include organizing workshops and exhibits for the public and commercial sector on environmentally sustainable practices (e.g., preservation, maintenance and restoration of native forest). z6 See: VCA Long-Range Plan, revision year 2007; Volcano Community Association, on CD with this report, alang wit the former version, "Volcano Vision 2020" (also found here): http:~`lhawaiiis]andplan.con~/punRast.asp -19- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Potential Obstacles for Implementing Resistance to the proposed ordinance will most likely come from those with the following concerns: • Increased costs-The ordinance will increase costs of land development by imposing fees for on-site inspections by the county, and review of plot plans and land disturbance permits. Developers will also have to absorb the cost of preparing the above documentation. The County will have the additional cost of supporting the hiring of an Forester to administer the ordinance. • Restrictions on private property rights-Currently, owners of one acre or less can remove all vegetation from their lots without penalty. The ordinance will regulate removal of native forest and penalize violators through fines and delays in building permits. • Increased County responsibilities-Some County officials and employees may object to the increased responsibility of administering a new ordinance. • Increased government regulation-Some citizens may be opposed to the ordinance because they believe it intrudes on private decision making. They may argue that preservation of native forest should be restricted to public lands and should not be a concern on land already designated for industrial or private development. Primary Responsibility for Carrying Out Recommendation Upon enactment of the ordinance, the County will be responsible for hiring a County Forester as administratnr_ New spec house built on 9,000 sq/ft lot with forest buffer preserving more of the natural resources. • -20- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 C7 Two houses 15 feet apart on separate lots resulting in urban style density. Four contiguous small lots = 1+ acre, dozed pin- to-pin (no grading and grubbing permit required at this time.) MEETING RECORD: Natural Resource Working Group Meetings-Preliminary work in Natural Resources Working Group meetings on September 30, October 9 and 23, November 6 and 20, 2006. Puna Projects Open House -December 2, 2006 Email Log of Contributors/Correspondents on Recommendation Bett Bidleman (all dates) Pat Conant 1/15/07 Kathleen Golden 12/4/06, 1/10/07 Debbie Hecht 1/12/07 Hannah Hedrik 1/3/07, 2/7 Ann Kobsa 1/19/07 Jillian Marohnic 1/29/07, 2/12, 2/13 Athena Peanut 2/4/07, 2/6 Rene Siracusa 1/11/07, 1/19, 2/13 Kim Tavares 1/3/07, 1/7, 2/5 Diane Ware 1/10/07, 1/29, 2/6 John Whalen 1 /22/07, 2/5 -21- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Erosion and Sedimentation Control for Native Forest Preservation Background Currently overlooked in the Hawaii County grading and grubbing guidelines is the effect of large- and small-scale clearing on the integrity of the island's native rainforest. Clearing impacts not only the area cleared, but also the native plants and wildlife on surrounding properties by further fragmenting the remaining rainforest, creating more "edge" habitat than before. Fragmentation and associated "edge-effects" increase predation rates on birds in affected forest b allowin easier access b redato animalsZ~ 28 cats rats mon oose.... Furthermore Y g Y p rY ~ ~ g ) ,. fragmentation changes the microclimate of adjacent forest (temperature, sunlight, and moisture in the understory), altering growing regimes for plants and suitability of nesting sites29 so Openings in the forest help spread weeds like the aggressive kahili ginger and banana poka31, and creation of boggy areas devoid of vegetation increases breeding habitat for mosquitoes, a vector for avian malaria, further impacting birds in surrounding forest. The clearing of forest in one property cannot help but to impact the integrity and quality of the forest in the neighboring properties as well. Impetus For Change Development on the Big Island in recent years has accelerated, and we are seeing much clearing of native forest, often, it seems, with little regard. Some of the property owners are absentee and don't think or know to instruct their contractors to be observant of native vegetation. Others are speculators who will never live on the property and bulldoze in misguided anticipation of a buyer's wants. It can be human nature not to recognize the value of things dear to us until they are gone. Let's not allow this to happen with our diminishing rainforest. Gone should be the days when a lot is erroneously bulldozed, either in full or into the property lines, and the horrified owner is told there is no recourse because nothing of value was removed. Because what happens in one property impacts its neighbors, and because, without guidelines, the better side of human nature does not always present itself, we propose to include the consideration of native forest preservation in "Erosion and Sedimentation Control" Chapter 10 of the Hawaii County Code. Z' Robinson, S. K., F. R. Thompson III, T. M. Donovan, D. R. Whitehead, and J. Faaborg. 1995. Regional forest fragmentation and the nesting success of migratory birds. Science 267:1987-1990. 28 Andren, H. and P. Angelstam. 1988. Elevated predation rates as an edge effect in habitat islands: experimental evidence. Ecology 69: 544-547. 29 Harris, L. D. 1984. The fragmented forest. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. 206 pp. so Laurance, W. F., S. G. Laurance, L. V. Ferreira, J. M. Rankin de Merona, C. Gascon, and T. E. Lovejoy. 1997. Biomass collapse in Amazonian forest fragments. Science, 278:1117-1118. st Mooney, H.A., and J.A. Drake (eds.). 1986. Ecology of biological invasions of North America and Hawaii. Springer-Verlag, New York. 321 pp. -22- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Summary and Spirit of Changes The motivation in this submission is simply to try to protect Hawaii's precious native forest and its inhabitants without undue infringement on property owners. Small measures imposed to protect the forest will curtail destructive clearings that an owner may undertake. Larger fines for forest damage in one's own and in neighboring properties will encourage a more careful consideration of existing native stands and of property lines. Small Measures, Large Fines: Forest Buffer Zone If every lot were to preserve a buffer of native forest around its edges, then an entire developed subdivision could support a grid of canopy that would provide some continuity to the forest. Even though it is not ideal, a grid work of native canopy is better than a total interrupt. Furthermore, introducing a property owner to the existence of native plants, albeit through regulation, may be all that is needed to awaken his appreciation of their beauty and value, and he may willingly preserve them. This "forest buffer zone" can be defined to coincide with the lot's building setback (with exception of a 15 ft wide driveway access). Regulations for enforcement of the Forest Buffer Zone would include the following: • There must be no clear-cutting of vegetation within the Forest Buffer Zone without a permit. • Application for permits to clear-cut within the zone must be accompanied by certification of the property road frontage pins and proof of property ownership. • Prior to inspection, the proposed clearing area must be flagged to ease the job of the inspector. This will also serve as guidelines for bulldozer operators. • Permits for clear-cutting within the zone will be issued if County-recognized inspection of the zone determines that the zone contains no native vegetation. • Minimum fine for buffer zone violation on own property is $2000. Fine increases with severity of damage. • Minimum fine for destruction of vegetation on neighboring property is $5000, at least $1000 of which will be given to neighbor suffering the damage, for use in reforestation with native plants. Fine increases with severity of damage. • Permits for clear-cutting must be posted on the property road frontage for all to see. Permits will state whether they were issued by default or because no native plants were identified. The Forest Buffer Zone is a minimum preservation measure, targeting smaller lots (under 2 acres). Larger lots, though subject to this regulation, would fall more within the purview of the proposed "Native Forest Protection Ordinance". The proposed County Forester would oversee the inspection of Forest Buffer Zones32. The application fee for buffer zone cutting permits could be priced to cover the additional salary. 3z See NRWG Detail Documents #1): "Recommendation for a Native Forest Protection Ordinance"; p.16. -23- • • • -24- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 • Native Vegetation Preservat><on Areas Mapp><ng Hawaii County's unique native vegetation such as its rainforests, dry land forests and coastal vegetation have been heavily impacted by the injudicious subdivision of land. Recent accelerated clearing and building has exacerbated the losses. In order to mitigate further fragmentation of this natural resource in residential districts, a proposal to develop Native Vegetation Preservation Areas as a designation in the zoning section of Chapter 25 of the County Code is advocated. The zoning designation would put restrictions on the use of mechanical clearing and the allowable cleared area of residential lots within the Native Vegetation Preservation Areas, thus providing for some connectivity of native vegetation between lots. This is especially desirable in order to preserve the tree canopy. The Native Vegetation Preservation Areas would be determined and mapped by consulting with conservation biologists and other experts from agencies such as: 1) Biological Resources Division of the US Geological Survey 2) District Biologist at the Division of Forestry and Wildlife in the State Department of Land and Natural Resources 3) Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry in the US Forest Service 4) Geography department at University of Hawaii at Hilo The resulting GIS maps could then be easily overlaid by the current TMK map layer showing affected lots and the mapped forest category. The Real Property Tax Office would then notify in writing all of the affected property owners of the changes in the zoning designation. A statement from the Planning Department advising that new land clearing and building permit requirements were in effect would be included. To obtain a building permit within a Native Vegetation Preservation Area a land clearing permit and its satisfactory inspections would have to be completed first. The land clearing permit application would have to provide a legible plot plan drawn to scale, showing north direction; all property lines and recorded easements; locations of proposed structures and existing structures and the distances between them and property lines; all street names bordering the property; location of private driveway and the distance from centerline of the private driveway to nearest front corner; location of water catchment tank and sewer system where applicable33; and all required yard areas (setbacks). Proof of ownership, TMK, name and address of property owner and any heavy equipment operator involved in the clearing would need to be included. A minimum fee of $500 would be assessed. No mechanical clearing would be allowed within the required yard areas (setbacks) excluding a maximum 12 ft. wide driveway. For lots of 20,000 square feet or less, the maximum lot coverage by structures, water catchment tanks, and sewer systems could not exceed 40%. A minimum of 40% of the lot (including 3s www.co.franklin.wa.usiplanning -Franklin County in Washington State has many similarities to Hawaii County. There is one county seat with all towns and villages being unincorporated. Therefore only one zoning plan and one planning department regulate the entire county. Olympic National Park is entirely within Franklin County and ocean • or inlets surround the county on three sides. -25- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 • setbacks) would be kept in native vegetation. The remaining area could be used as yard or garden. For larger lots appropriate use designations would be formulated. An inspector would visit the site prior to clearing to determine if all staking and flagging were consistent with the application. If satisfactory, a land clearing permit would be issued. The permit would have to be conspicuously posted on the street frontage. The permit would be valid for 60 days. At the completion of the clearing, a final inspection would be ordered. If the final inspection was satisfactory, a building permit application could be filed. If the final inspection was not satisfactory, an immediate stop order would be issued to prevent a building permit application from being filed. The property owner and any heavy equipment operator would be assessed a combined fine of no less than $5000 for the first violation and $10000 for each subsequent violation. Violations would have to be corrected where possible and all fines paid before a building permit application could be filed. By requiring land clearing permits to be ~~~ ~~ ,~. *~ issued by the Planning Department any Ik t y , confusion with grubbing and grading requirements by Public Works would be avoided. ~, Dozing to property line reduces privacy. Two small lots dozed over lot lines. Currently no permit required for this type of clearing. • -26- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Create a New County Natural Resources Department and an Invasive Species Coordinator Position Invasive species are a serious threat to the economy of Hawaii County. They impose adverse affects on agriculture, human health and native species. These are three priority interests of the people of Puna. The County should have a new position, "County Invasive Species Coordinator". This position would be responsible for coordinating education programs, educating County staff and the public about invasive species in Hawaii County, and budgets to promote state-wide invasive species awareness programs developed by agencies already involved, such as: CGAPS/Coordinating Group on Alien Pest Species34. and BIISC/Big Island Invasive Species Committee35. Examples of past CGAPS educational campaigns include "The Silent Invasion" 36 and "Don't Plant a Pest". Currently BIISC is running a campaign called: "What's in Your Backyard?". Annual or bi-annual events are helpful but a more constant approach is urgently needed today. Invasive Species Awareness Education & Prevention Pro rg ams Controlling new pest species (flora or fauna) from becoming established and preventing new pests from arriving are primarily jobs of the Hawaii Dept. of Agriculture (HDOA). It regulates certified nurseries that export plants off-island, but have not to-date made any attempts to regulate movement of infested plants within the County. Since the County of Hawaii does not have power to regulate such nurseries, it should put resources into educating the public about the dangers of invasive species. Moving potted plants, plant materials, soil etc. from infested areas to uninfested areas on the same island should be prevented, and the County could be instrumental in making this happen, through education. County employees and the public need to know which species are invasive, which are not, when and where to look for them, and what to do when they are found. Everyone should know what native plants should be spared and how to spare them while clearing for a building site. Puna is the only low elevation district in the State that still has native forest in it. We should all work to keep the natural Hawaiian legacy that we still have. Encourage Nurseries and Landscapers to Voluntarily Comply by Rewards and Penalties The County should promote a program to encourage nurserymen and landscapers not to buy, sell or use invasive plants or plants infested with other invasive species such as little fire ants, stinging nettle caterpillars or coqui frogs. Participants could be awarded in some way, while those that spread invasive species could be penalized. Those that violate the "aliens free" requirement would no longer be able to advertise their nurseries as having "clean plants" for sale. Such programs have akeady been instituted on Maui37 and Oahu to stop the sale of invasive sa Coordinating Group on Alien Pest Species is amulti-agency partnership to coordinate more effective protection for Hawaii's economy, environment, health, and way of life from harmful alien pests. http://www.hear.org/cgaps/ ss Big Island Invasive Species Committee: htt~//www.hear.or /be iisc/; CD Resources dots > Invasive Species > Organizations (various documents). 36 CGAPS press releases: http://www.hear.org/cgaps/#pressreleases 37 http://www.hear.org/mist/malamaikaaina/ -Maui Invasive Species Committee (MISC), Contact Joylynn Paman, Public Relations & Education Specialist • • • -27- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 • plants. The County of Hawaii should actively promote a program like this here, so that it takes some responsibility for reducing the movement of invasive plants and the invasive animals that get spread on plants when they are sold. An Example Solution: Pest-Free Nursery Certification and Awards, Penalties for Non-compliance (Proposed Pilot Program) o Pest-Free Establishment -Monthly inspections for invasive species at nurseries, greenhouses, gardens, wholesale and retail establishments at-risk, come up clean for six or more consecutive months (for a specific species or list of species) receives a Pest-Free Establishment Certificate and Right to Labeling (date range specific). o Rapid-Response Champion - When a problem requires rapid response, the affected establishment will consult with authorities or experts immediately for help. The problem gets solved before spreading anywhere else. When pest species are found during isolated incidents or on previous inspections but not found or detected on three subsequent visits, establishment will qualify for this award. o Rapid-Response Novice - If follow through occurs, even if not immediately successful, Novice awards are appropriate. A merit award for trying is sometimes all • it takes to keep on trying, and to eventually succeed. Some efforts will take many attempts or steps to redeem a status back to "Pest-Free". o Willfully Infested -Impose substantial fines and business closure if invasive species are repeatedly found and cited, and/or when they become a problem on neighboring properties, and not addressed by the source, or owner thereof. Examples of willfully infested non-compliance include: Coqui frogs and coqui infestations, including eggs and juveniles found/heard. Plant species identified by Hawaii Dept of Ag (HDOA) as Noxious Weeds found. Plant species having a high Hawaii Weed Risk Assessment (WRA) score found. Unidentified plants found to be invasive as by HDOA and WRA. Uncooperative establishments (refuse to participate in inspections or control). o Ports of Entry -Lobby for airport and dockside inspections of all inter-island and international transports carrying cargo, luggage personal effects and people to Hawaii County. Mandate Compliance in Some Cases While education is the most friendly approach to prevention and control of pest species, sometimes enforcement is necessary. When it comes to health and well-being, and when safety for residents and visitors is a concern, the County should have some authority. It should do everything it can to help prevent pest species from affecting the quality of life on this island. -28- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 o Prevent little fire ants from reaching Kona -The Hilo and Puna agriculture trade is already severely impacted by the painful effects of repeated little fire ant stings. Measures should be taken to prevent devastation to the Kona coffee trade. o When large invasive trees (like albizia) exist near buildings, the County should have the authority to remove them or to demand the tree be destroyed and safely removed at the expense of the land owner. o The County should explore ways to tax the industries that tax our quality of life and increase the need for improved infrastructure, like tour helicopters and car rentals. o Biological security measures should be improved to include inspections on all incoming persons, vessels and vehicles, before allowing new modes of transport to the island, such as a superferry. The County must insist on more inspections of persons and effects at the airports and on ocean going vessels. Adding superferry traffic to this mix is untimely, since inspection levels are already below what's needed today. o The County should call for an EIS to get all the facts on how a superferry will affect Hawaii county, and strongly oppose, or legally prevent the superferry from landing on this island based on those findings or the lack thereof. Public infrastructure is also clearly lacking today, for residents. It should be significantly improved before inviting volumes more people daily from other islands, with personal vehicles that will ultimately carry new pests throughout the islands. Internet Link Resources , BIISC -Big Island Invasive Species Committee http://www.hear. org/biisc/ CGAPS -Coordinating Group on Alien Pest Species (Hawaii) http://www.hear.org/cgaps/ CTAHR -College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources http://www.ctahr.hawaii. edu http://www. ctahr.hawaii. edu/coqui/index.asp DLNR -Hawaii State Dept. of Land and Natural Resources http://www. state.hi. us/dlnr/ HDOA -Hawaii State Dept. of Agriculture http: //www.hawaiiag. org/hdoa/ HISC -Hawaii Invasive Species Council http://www. state.hi.us/dlnr/dofaw/HISC/ MISC -Maui Invasive Species Committee http://www.hear.org/MISC/ WRA -Weed Risk Assessments for Hawaii and the Pacific Islands http://www.botany.hawaii.edu/faculty/daehler/wra/ -29- Natural Resowces Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Ha u~u and other Native S ecies Natural Resources Management P P Tree ferns, ohi'a trees and strands of maile are among the most sought after native forest resources in Puna. All of these plants take several decades to grow, before they have any real commercial value. They are commonly harvested by people trespassing onto vacant forested lots, and then sold on the open market for quick cash. At the shoreline, resources like limu, opihi, reef fish and sea turtles are nearly depleted, for lack of a conservation plan and unchecked over harvesting. a) The County should have a natural resources management plan that includes harvesting regulations and limits, effective monitoring methods, and have the ability to produce species inventory lists, harvesting and species distribution and population data. b) The County should enact and enforce ordinances to prevent illegal harvesting of natural resources, prosecute trespassers, have a certification program for legally harvesting natural resources. It should initiate a regulatory process to track natural resources in the commercial marketplace, and the people who market them. For example; to qualify to transport or sell hapu'u and ohi'a parts, one should be certified as a commercial marketer of natural materials, or be the owner of the property where the materials came from. A certificate of origin could be issued on those plants that will be removed for a building site, upon approval of the grading or grubbing permit. It would list species and quantify the number of individual plants covered by the permit. That certificate would stay with the materials when they are moved, all the way to the end user, similar to a shipping bill of lading. For commercial marketing, certification should come from a governmental agency such as the County Forester or State Division of Forestry and Wildlife after completing some kind of training and successfully passing a test. The certificate would give the bearer the right to cut down, move and commercially market natural materials harvested from the land or sea by legal means. Only certified persons would be allowed to commercially handle natural resources. c) County natural resources management ordinances and management plans will implement significant outreach and education programs for more effectiveness. Educational materials should be available to teach anyone how to harvest "pono", sustainable in the right way, so it will still be around to 100 years from now for others to use. Many residents in Puna are interested in a long term resource management plans for the district. Puna could have a natural resource management plan, and that would create meaningful, interesting new jobs for residents. DLNR could help in the formulation of such plan, since much of the land that needs protection shares borders with lands managed by DLNR. • -30- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Additionally, education and a management plan would go a long way to preserving resources for use by people without depleting them. Certifying people to have sustainable harvesting practices will help a lot, and good natural resources management will guarantee that those resources will be here a hundred years from now, for future generations to enjoy. More examples, opihi, reef fish, other ocean resources (other than salt and water) all need urgent protection, and strict enforcement. Propagating native plants so there are always more, is another good education and outreach project that should be happening in all neighborhood in areas where native plants grow. • • -31- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Centers For Coun Information Dissemination Civic Uses, Cultural and Environmental Education • A permanent place for outreach and education to operate within the community is important for many purposes. • Proposed centers would also be good culture & history centers for visitors. • A community building could facilitate getting other important information to people who need it, in a convenient way. • They would serve as an emergency shelter during disasters, and be there for the community whenever they need it. Examples: Facilities would help volunteers and County staff to promote along-term, wide range of educational opportunities for its new and long time residents. A network of outreach centers or community centers throughout the district would help drive important knowledge home to everyone who needs it. Providing communities with places to get information by way of meetings, classes, literature distribution, computers for interactive online certifications, etc. is key to successful outreach. The Puna CDP process is evidence that Puna does not have adequate public meeting places, a leading cause for community segmentation to smaller circles. People who plan to develop property would find resources to explain the importance of selecting a proper house site on large forested lots, the dangers involved with traveling through or living in that area, how to avoid flooding or diversion of water onto neighboring properties, how to purify water so it is safe, and so on. A good portion of the population, including some County staff and other people who make or implement land use decisions, are working without adequate research or data. Educating County employees and the public about natural resources management will go a long way towards making it Puna a wonderful place to live, indefinitely. The most important data, confirmed vegetation inventories, is not available for most privately owned land and some public land in Puna. While there are satellite and aerial photo images of the Puna district, they do not tell us for certain what flora and fauna exist on any given area. Data that is available is the best possible computer rendition of what it understands the photography to represent, based on limited actual data. A district wide mapping project is necessary to generate baseline information for land use planning from the office. Bad decisions are being made even in the most protected areas. Choosing the right course of action is contingent upon many variables including topography, geology, biology, etc., and most people need guidance through the process. The more input any project can attract, the better. Educating residents and County employees about the environment, natural resources and laws that protect them with relation to development and/or preservation, is an urgent need. -32- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Living with the Native Forest Bird Community in Puna District and Volcano Region Prepared by Paul Banko 5 February 2007 Introduction The purpose of this summary report is to help citizens of Puna District plan community growth and land use with the goals of maintaining native biodiversity and minimizing the decline of native wildlife populations. The focus here is on bird populations, because they have been surveyed more completely and because people can manage their properties in ways that can benefit native birds. Background and Statement of Problem The native forest bird community of Puna District and the Volcano region (including Keauhou and Kulani and hereafter referred to collectively as "Puna") represents but a remnant of the rich diversity of species that occurred there historically (within the last 150 years). Five songbird species and a flightless rail have disappeared -not only from Puna but from the planet altogether (Table 1). Of the remaining 13 species, seven are considered endangered or threatened and populations of most are declining in Puna and other areas of Hawaii (Table 2). Nevertheless, citizens of Puna have the privilege of seeing more native bird species in their yards than residents in any other region of the state. The question, however, is whether residents of Puna are willing to develop their communities in a way that allows native birds and their habitats to persist long into the future. Habitat Requirements and Ecology of Native Songbirds Endangered songbirds of the Puna region are confined to `ohi`a (Metrosideros polymorpha)-koa (Acacia koa) habitats in Keauhou, where residential development is not planned. The remaining native songbirds depend upon the `ohi`a forest that covers primarily young lava flows. Their feeding behavior and mobility are key aspects of their ecology that bear on community planning. First, consider those species that tend not to move far during the course of their lives. The most sedentary species are `elepaio and `oma`o, both of which find their food on a variety of native trees and shrubs below the `ohi`a canopy. `Elepaio eat only insects and spiders, which they catch on the wing during short dashing flights or glean from leaves and branches while hopping through the foliage. `Oma`o also glean insects and spiders from the foliage of `ohi`a and other trees, but native fruits are more frequently eaten. High diversity of plant species is especially important for `oma`o, because different species of trees and shrubs tend to produce fruit during somewhat different times, thereby yielding a more steady food supply than just one or two plant species. Similarly, `elepaio benefit from plant diversity because different insects tend to associate more with particular plant species, resulting in a broader range of prey available. It should not be difficult to understand, therefore, that high plant diversity is essential to birds such as `elepaio and `oma`o, which tend to occupy a relatively small patch of habitat and do not venture far from home. Although high native plant diversity benefits all native bird species, those that move long distances to find nectar can survive even in habitats where few species other than `ohi`a are common. Both `apapane and `i`iwi tend to move to areas where nectar from `ohi`a lehua is • • • -33- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 abundant; however, only `apapane reside or travel into lower Puna forests in recent decades. `I`iwi may have disappeared from lower elevations in part because they are more susceptible to avian malaria, but their tactic of defending rich nectar resources, may also put them at an energetic disadvantage when habitats become marginalized by forest fragmentation and reduction of `ohi`a canopy cover. Defending nectar resources maybe unsustainable where large tracts of forest become fragmented into smaller plots that are then cleared or thinned for houses and yards. Another factor that may have contributed to the decline of `i`iwi in the lowlands is the relative scarcity of caterpillars, which are major foods of nestlings of `i`iwi and all other forest songbirds. `Apapane, on the other hand, are more generalist feeders and can potentially provision their young with a variety of insects and spiders gleaned from `ohi`a and other plants. Preliminary results of some studies indicate that caterpillars are more abundant at higher elevations, where introduced species of parasitoid wasps that attack caterpillars are less abundant. Movement patterns of `amakihi seem intermediate compared to those of the sedentary species (`elepaio and `oma`o) and mobile species (`apapane and `i`iwi), and their very versatile feeding behavior allows them to persist in the better fragments of native forest habitat and even some residential areas. The reproductive capacity of `amakihi and `apapane, which have the most general diets and versatile feeding behaviors, are an important factor in their widespread distribution and abundance. The time they require for egg incubation and chick rearing is shorter than the other species, reducing their exposure to predation and storms and allowing them more time to produce a second brood or to nest again if their first nest fails. `Amakihi and `apapane cope better than other native songbird species with disease infection because they reproduce at a high rate, they feed on a variety of common insects and nectar, and they can use an assortment of habitats. Threats to Native Forest Songbirds A variety of threats have caused the decline of native songbirds over the historical period. Among the first challenges to native bird populations were rats. The Polynesian rat arrived first by way of Polynesian voyaging canoes, while The Norway rat and black rat arrived much later on western ships. In addition to preying on native birds and their nests, rats degraded and transformed habitats by consuming many kinds of native seeds, seedlings, insects, and land snails. Other predatory threats followed, including cats, which readily became feral (independent of humans) and spread rapidly throughout Hawaii. Mongooses also spread quickly into many habitats and played an important role in reducing ground-nesting birds. Ants were among the earliest and most damaging of alien pests to arrive in Hawaii. Hawaiian insects had evolved in the absence of ants, which made them especially vulnerable later to ant predation. Impacts were especially severe in the lowlands. Long-time residents of lower Puna may well imagine the potential magnitude of ants on ground-dwelling creatures of all sorts, having witnessed the spectacular irruptions oflong-legged ants near the coast during the 1970's and 1980's. • -34- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Other insect pests also spread as western-style agriculture developed and trade flourished with continental cities. Insects were imported to protect sugar cane and other crops from damaging caterpillars and other pests, and some of these biocontrol agents spread into native forests. The most damaging of these introductions were tiny parasitoid wasps, whose larvae attacked caterpillars that were ravaging crops and, in native forests, feeding birds. Another important threat to birds arrived early in the 1800's in the form of the mosquito. Although avian pox virus may have had a long history in Hawaii, the arrival of the mosquito provided a vector for transmitting avian malaria, a disease which powerfully afflicts birds in low and mid elevation forests of Puna and elsewhere. Many foreign songbirds have been imported to Hawaii. The few species that spread into native forests and other introduced animals, such as the coqui frog, pose competitive threats to native birds. Competition also occurs among native and alien plant species, and some aggressive woody species, such as strawberry guava, can form virtually impenetrable thickets where native forests have been disturbed by introduced pigs or other activities. Many ornamental plants, such as miconia, also have the capacity to replace native trees and shrubs, if not controlled early during their invasion. Native forests in Puna have been invaded by a host of weedy species, and few native birds will likely adapt to changing conditions as their habitats are transformed. Although many threats face native forest birds, none is so serious or long-term as forest fragmentation and thinning. Reduced availability of food and shelter due to forest degradation • impoverishes birds, encumbers their daily struggle with alien invaders, and may force them to leave their home range in search of better habitat. Mitigating Threats to Forest Birds Continued development in Puna does not have to result in the loss of all the remaining native forest bird species, but people will have to decide to share their common habitat. There are some measures that might allow at least the most versatile bird species to continue to live in Puna: 1) Maintain and enhance forest habitat. This is probably the greatest challenge facing property owners because people need some open space for their homes and gardens. Nevertheless, everyone can help native birds by minimizing the removal of native trees and shrubs on their property and by planting native trees and shrubs that provide food and shelter to birds. There are many native trees and shrubs that provide important resources to birds, including: `ohi`a, koa, mamane (Sophora chrysophylla), `olapa (Cheirodendron trigynum), naio (Myoporum sandwicense), kolea (Myrsine lessertiana), kawa`u (Ilex anomala), kopiko (Psychotria hawaiiensis), pilo (Coprosma rhyncocarpa), mamaki (Pipturus albidus), haha (any of the Clermontia or Cyanea species), `a`ali`i (Dodonaea viscosa), `ohelo (Vaccinium spp.), `akala (Rubus hawaiiensis). However, planting these and other native species would have greater benefit to birds when neighbors and whole neighborhoods coordinated their plantings to increase the abundance and diversity of plant species. 2) Reduce disease transmission from mosquitoes. After taking a blood meal, female mosquitoes lay their eggs in standing water. Discarded containers (e.g., cans and bottles), old tires, roof gutters that are full of leaves, or anything else with a little water (mosquitoes prefer stagnant over fresh) should be removed or modified to prevent mosquitoes from laying their eggs. -35- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Feral pigs in the forest create many mosquito breeding sites by eating out the starchy core of fallen tree fern trunks, leaving a trough that holds rainwater. Removing feral pigs from our forests not only reduces breeding opportunities for mosquitoes, it slows the spread of weeds where the soil has been disturbed by pig rooting and wallowing. 3) Keep cats indoors. Cats kill native birds even when they are not hungry. A national program to keep cats from damaging wildlife populations advocates that pet cats not be allowed to roam freely out-of--doors and that feral cats not be sustained in colonies (see http://www.abcbirds.org/cats/ and http://www.state.hi.us/dlnr/dofaw/cats/index.htm). 4) Be alert for invasive species. Being alert and reporting the appearance of alien weeds and pests in your neighborhood will help slow their spread. Report weeds and pests to the Invasive Species HOTLINE (961-3299). For additional information see the Big Island Invasive Species Committee webpage (http://www.hear.org/biisc/). Beyond Songbirds In addition to songbirds, development plans for Puna should also consider impacts on `A`o, nene, `io, and pueo. Although the `io nests in trees, the other three species are ground-nesters, making them particularly vulnerable to mongooses, cats, and dogs. Nene nest at the Shipman Estate, where they are protected, and are spreading to other coastal sites in Puna. Nene pose special problems to wildlife managers because they are easily attracted to lawns, gardens, and roadsides, exposing them to pet attacks and car strikes. To make matters worse, nene can habituate to people, especially when they are fed. Although they are endangered, `io are thriving in Puna because they have adapted to new foods, such as rodents, and because they make use of many kinds of wooded habitats and even farm lots. `A`o can be confused by bright lights as they fly inland after sunset to tend their nests or when they return to feed at sea. Young `a`o maybe most at risk when they take their first flights from the nest. Controlling lights from houses and street lamps is feasible, however, as people on Kauai have learned. • -36- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Table 1. Species of endemic Hawaiian birds that have become extinct in Puna and elsewhere in Hawaii during the past 150 nears. Hawaiian Name Family (or Comments Common Name Subfamily) Scienti tc Name Moho Rallidae (rails, A small flightless bird; rare when westerners first Hawaiian Rail gallinules, coots) visited Puna; probably fed mainly on insects Porzana sandwichensis (possibly also land snails) found on the ground and low- rowin lants `O`o Meliphagidae. A spectacular bird in plumage and voice; caught Hawaii `O`o (honeyeaters) by Hawaiians for its yellow feathers; fed mainly Moho nobilis on nectar from `ohi`a lehua and other native lants Kioea Meliphagidae Rare when westerners first visited Puna; little Kioea known about this species but fed mainly on nectar Chaetoptila from `ohi`a lehua and other native plants an usti luma `O`u Fringillidae Probably extinct but still listed as endangered; `O`u (finches); once one of the most abundant and widespread Psittirostra psittacea subfamily species in the Hawaiian Islands; used its parakeet- Drepanidinae like bill to feed on fruits of `ie`ie and other native (Hawaiian plants; this species traveled widely during the year hone cree ers in its search for fruits `Akialoa Drepanidinae Relatively widespread and common until at least Lesser `Akialoa 1900; used its extraordinarily long, thin, decurved Hemignathus obscurus bill to extract insects from their hiding places in leaves and wood and from under bark and to take nectar from lobelias and `ohi`a lehua Hopue Drepanidinae Restricted historically to koa forests of Keauhou Greater Koa-Finch where it specialized on the green (unhardened) Rhodacanthis almeri seeds of koa for its diet • • -37- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 r • • Table 2. Species ~f endemic Hawaiian birds that are still found 1n Puna. Hawaiian Name Family Comments Common Name Scienti is Name `A`o Procellariidae Threatened; this seabird nests in burrows in a few Newell Shearwater (petrels, forested sites that are inaccessible to mammalian Puffinus auricularis shearwaters) predators in Puna; it calls at night as it flies to and newelli from its nestin area Nene Anatidae (swans, Endangered; this vegetarian goose species is Hawaiian Goose geese, ducks) adapted for life in grass and shrubland habitats Branta sandvicensis where it nests; mongooses, cats, and dogs are serious threats but some are also killed accidentall b motorists `Io Acciptridae Endangered; this small hawk is a versatile habitat Hawaiian Hawk (eagles, hawks) and feeding generalist; it favors `ohi`a forests Buteo solitarius where it feeds on rodents, small birds, spiders, and insects Pueo Strigidae (typical This endemic race of the continental short-eared Hawaiian Owl owls) owl is widely distributed in Hawaii; it inhabits Asio flammeus forests, shrublands, and grasslands where it hunts sandwichensis for rodents, insects, and occasionally, small birds; nests on the ound `Alala Corvidae (crows, Restricted historically to the Volcano area; now Hawaiian Crow jays) surviving only in captivity; fed on native fruits, Corvus hawaiiensis insects, and a sand nestlin s of others ecies `Elepaio Monarchidae Once abundant in Puna but sharply declining in `Elepaio (monarch recent decades and increasingly restricted to Chasiempis flycatchers) higher elevations; versatile feeder that catches a sandwichensis variety of insects on the wing while sallying out from understory perches and gleaning from leaves and branches; highly territorial and sedentary, requiring a rich diversity of native understory trees and shrubs `Oma`o Turdidae Once common throughout Puna but increasingly Hawaii Thrush (thrushes, concentrated in higher elevations containing rich Myadestes obscurus shamas) diversity of native understory trees and shrubs (a small alpine population also exists on Mauna Loa); feeds on wide variety of native fruits and insects; sedentary but some range-shifting observed `Amakihi Fringillidae Widespread and locally abundant (the little Hawaii `Amakihi (finches); Common, widespread green bird -not to be Hemignathus virens subfamily confused with mejiro or Japanese white-eye); a Drepanidinae generalist feeder on insects and nectar; makes (Hawaiian versatile use of its rather ordinary, thin somewhat honeycreepers) bill to capture small to large prey and obtain nectar from `iihi`a lehua and other plants; relatively sedentary but moves moderate distances in response to changing availability of `ohi`a lehua nectar -38- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 `Akiapola`au Drepanidinae Endangered; once common and widespread in `Akiapola`au Puna but now restricted to upper Keauhou forest Hemignathus munroi and Kulani areas; a specialist that uses its extraordinary bill to hew wood and flake bark to extract insects; relativel sedenta Hawaiian name? Drepanidinae Endangered; once common and widespread in Hawaii Creeper Puna but now restricted to upper Keauhou and Oreomystis mana Kulani area; feeds only on insects but has less s ecialized bill and behavior than `akia ola`au `Akepa Drepanidinae Endangered; once common and widespread in Hawaii `Akepa Puna but now restricted to upper Keauhou and Loxops coccineus Kulani area; feeds only on insects with slightly crossed, s ecialized bill and behavior `I`iwi Drepanidinae Widespread and abundant in Puna until recent `I`iwi decades but now restricted to upper Keauhou and Vestiaria coccinea Kulani area; feeds on nectar mostly from `ohi`a lehua and insects with very long, decurved bill; moves long distances in response to changing availabili of `ohi`a lehua and mamane nectar `Apapane Drepanidinae Widespread and abundant in Puna (the little red `Apapane ~ and black bird that everyone hears and sees); a Himatione sanguinea generalist that feeds on nectar mostly from `ohi`a lehua and insects with relatively ordinary, thin bill; moves long distances in response to changing availabili of `ohi`a lehua and mamane nectar • t -39- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Summary of comments on natural resources from 130 small group meetings A review of the 3,3.94 comments from the 130 small group meetings and subsequent input was accomplished in order to extract comments & reoccurring themes related to natural resources preservation and protection. About ten percent of the 3,394 comments and subsequent input included references to natural resources preservation or protection. Some were directly related to specific resources and others indirectly related. Actual comments give much more detai1.38 Times Referenced Themes extracted from 3,394 comments 3 Air Quality 17 Biosphere Reserve Buffer 4 Density Reduction 29 Environmental Education 123 Forest Protection 6 Geology 41 Invasive Species 2 Land Trusts 7 Municipality 30 Native Species Habitat 7 Natural Beauty 11 23 Ocean Resources Open Space 2 Permit Process 2 Recycling 3 Set backs/ Buffers 1 SoiUGroundwater Contamination 1 Special Management Areas 22 Sustainable Island Development 8 Water Resources (fresh water) 7 Zoning 349 Comments related to Natural Resources These comments fell into one or more of three general themes: 1) Land use planning, 2) Regulation & enforcement, and 3) Education. 38 See Table 1 at the end of this document -40- Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Table 1. 349 Comments Extracted from 3,394 Comments from 130 Small Group Meetings & Subsequent Input ACTION Category Issue Idea COHsort Education Action Environmental Education All profit activities pay % for conservation and/or education AINA Education Action Environmental Education Make Puna cleaner -greater effort on litter and clean up AINA Education Action Environmental Education Develop community events centered around conservation and recycling AINA For education, people should be educated on how rewarding Education Action Environmental Education conservation /preservation is NRWG Education Action Environmental Education Educate people on how rewarding conservation/ preservation is. Email Require course completion certificates to developers of native forest Education Action Environmental Education properties Email Education Action Environmental Education Environmental education with Wiki website AINA County sponsored environmental education program for adults using Education Action Environmental Education outreach via farmer market AINA Athree-pronged approach should be used: education, incentive Education Action Environmental Education packages and regulation. NRWG Use three-pronged approach: education, incentive packages, Education Action Environmental Education regulation. Email Education Action Environmental Education Educate and enforce laws for not clear cutting lots for landowners AINA Mandatory orientation/education -living w/ our environment prior to Education Action Environmental Education grubbing permit (make it part of disclosure before buying) AINA Land buyer edu programs, real estate agents too, regarding invasive/native plants/animals/forest communities lot clearing part of Education Action Environmental Education permitting process AINA Land buyer & realtor edu programs regarding invasive/native/plants/animals/forest communities lot clearing part of Education Action Environmental Education permitting process AINA Recommend pamphlets/education material be distributed by building Education Action Environmental Education department. Email Improve school systems/environmental education Education Action Environmental Education (restoration/preservation) AINA Develop an online educational resource study guide and/or actual field Education Action Environmental Education based program. Email Education Action Environmental Education Educate public on impact of tree cutting on erosion and flooding. Email Education Action Environmental Education Educate public on tree clearance /erosion /flooding NRWG Education Action Environmental Education Environment WKSHPS Education Action Environmental Education Cleaner environment AINA Education Action Environmental Education Pahoa cleaned up (street and sidewalks) AINA Education Action Environmental Education Visitor center in Pahoa to educate visitors on protecting local AINA 41 Natural.Rces Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 environment Hawaii also has invasive species issues, so more specifically it is Education Action Environmental Education needed on topics such as clear cutting and forest preservation. NRWG At sale of property, recommendations on invasive species, clearing Education Action Environmental Education leaving native plants AINA Education Action Environmental Education Anti litter program in schools AINA Pamphlets should include who to contact if assistance is needed to Education Action Environmental Education relocate them. Email Pamphlets should include pictures and descriptions of native plants, Education Action Environmental Education their preferred habitat, how to preserve, Email Education Action Environmental Education Promoting good stewardship of land, air & water WKSHPS Planning/Building Permit Require certified, professional surveyors to locate outermost extent of Regulation Action Process proposed grubbing/grading of any native forest lot. (or just any lot?) Email Planning/Building Permit Regulation Action Process Rigorous enforcement of permits for grubbing/clearing AINA Regulation Action Land Use Zoning Limit impact of growth, minimum lot size, avoid clear cutting AINA Regulation Action Land Use Zoning Density Reduction/Corrective re-zoning WKSHPS Regulation Action Land Use Zoning Density reduction, corrective rezoning WGRPS Regulation Action Land Use Zoning Reduce building densities WKSHPS Regulation Action Land Use Zoning RE-designation of lava risk AINA Regulation Action Land Use Zoning Land Use Zoning WKSHPS Zoning codes contain lists of permitted uses Suggest permitted uses Regulation Action Land Use Zoning for various zones, especially agriculture and conservation (open?) NRWG Regulation Action Land Use Zoning Develop new approval guidelines, possibly new zoning classifications Email Regulation Action Land Use Zoning Work should be done on zoning instead. Refer: J. Whalen NRWG Hold a panel discussion before the working groups to brainstorm how Regulation Action Land Use Zoning we can effectively change zoning at the county and state levels. Email Reclassify zoning codes specific to subdivisions in native forest, especially if prior recommendations are not suitable to all Puna Regulation Action Land Use Zoning subdivisions. Email Regulation Infrastructure Biosphere Buffer Bio-diversity AINA Define the needs of the international biosphere reserve and make it law Regulation Infrastructure Biosphere Buffer that it supercedes the needs of the people AINA Make county aware of uniugeness of our community by its proximity to Regulation Infrastructure Biosphere Buffer HVNP AINA Volcano adjacent to VNP -must preserve the ecosystem of this area Regulation Infrastructure Biosphere Buffer with specifi emphasis as international biosphere reserve AINA 42 Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Take care of zone as though it were a national park, but with a human Regulation Infrastructure Biosphere Buffer population. Email Implement statutes to make Volcano a legal example of a sustainable native rainforest in balance with people, construction and native animalsto compliment the HVNP which is an internatinal biosphere Regulation Infrastructure Biosphere Buffer reserve AINA Create a "Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone" that puts watersheds at top Regulation Infrastructure Biosphere Buffer of protection list Email Frame the context (HVNP-biosphere, UNESCO) to show why this area Regulation Infrastructure Biosphere Buffer is so special AINA Regulation Infrastructure Biosphere Buffer More national park space in Volcano AINA Strong emphasis and public awareness of international biosphere Regulation Infrastructure Biosphere Buffer reserve and world heritage site AINA Regulation Infrastructure Biosphere Buffer Biosphere reserve buffer zone WGRPS Biosphere reserve background in Brief: http://www.georgewr ight.org/ Regulation Infrastructure Biosphere Buffer mab.html# Anchor-47857 Email Regulation. Infrastructure Biosphere Buffer Hawaii Biosphere Reserve WKSHPS Buffer community next to HVNP/more protective zoning closer to park Regulation Infrastructure Biosphere Buffer (Fed Assistance is Available) AINA Continue to partner w/ Volcano NP to facilitate focus on our unique Regulation Infrastructure Biosphere Buffer environment AINA maintain create buffer to NP, biosphere reserve with eye to connectivity Regulation Infrastructure Biosphere Buffer in the maintenance of biodiversity AINA Preserve Volcano as a buffer for HVNP, not an entry to par. Buffer Regulation Infrastructure Biosphere Buffer (county enforced) should be a preservation zone -native forest AINA Regulation Infrastructure Land Trusts Community or conservation land trust AINA Regulation Infrastructure Land Trusts help set up land trust AINA Volcano autonomy in developing community covenants to control Regulation Infrastructure Municipality preservation of environment AINA Regulation Infrastructure Municipality Special Design District WKSHPS Regulation Infrastructure Municipality Village design district WGRPS Regulation Infrastructure Municipality Preserve Uniqueness WKSHPS Regulation Infrastructure Municipality Preserve unique character WKSHPS Regulation Infrastructure Municipality Volcano special design district WKSHPS Regulation Infrastructure Municipality Volcano Village Design WKSHPS More conservation and agriculture easement to protect our rural Regulation Infrastructure Natural Beauty landscape AINA Regulation Infrastructure Natural Beauty Bring natural beauty back to our country side AINA Regulation Infrastructure Natural Beauty Keep the Big Island natural and beautiful AINA 43 Natural ces Preservation and Protection Recommendations Puna CDP 2007 ~ • • Regulation Infrastructure Natural Beauty Preserve the natural beauty of Puna AINA Protect significant trees of beauty (e.g., mango trees on Red Road, Regulation Infrastructure Natural Beauty large coconut trees, Kamani trees, monkey pod trees). Email Regulation Infrastructure Natural Beauty Stop cutting of trees at mango road AINA Regulation Infrastructure Natural Beauty Keep Puna country looking save the trees AINA Require built in buffers, green space and binding covenants to reduce Regulation Infrastructure Open Space clearing of native forest lots AINA Regulation Infrastructure Open Space Aggressively preserve green spaces AINA Regulation Infrastructure Open Space green belts AINA Regulation Infrastructure Open Space Land Preservation WKSHPS Regulation Infrastructure Open Space More protected open spaces and conservation areas AINA Regulation Infrastructure Open Space Assurance of open space be environmentally responsible AINA Protect open spaces/ wilderness and acquire more protected/reserved Regulation Infrastructure Open Space area (like steam vents) AINA Regulation Infrastructure Open Space Funding source for purchasing land for green space AINA Regulation Infrastructure Open Space Preserve open spaces look down and see green, not concrete AINA Create laws that allow for designation. of lands as open space (tax Regulation Infrastructure Open Space breaks, incentives) for ever AINA Regulation Infrastructure Open Space Protect open spaces -save native trees AINA Regulation Infrastructure Open Space Open Space Preservation WKSHPS Preservation expansion and acquisition of public lands -more for Regulation Infrastructure Open Space conservation AINA Regulation Infrastructure Open Space Save our rural areas -protect open space AINA Regulation Infrastructure Open. Space More nature AINA Regulation Infrastructure Open Space Plenty of open space AINA Regulation Infrastructure Open Space Open space protection WGRPS Regulation Infrastructure Open Space Open Space Protection WKSHPS Regulation Infrastructure Open Space Preserve open space AINA Regulation Infrastructure Open Space Hold on to vacant space. Plant native vegetation -peace and quiet AINA Regulation Infrastructure Open Space Old Volcano Trail WKSHPS Regulation Infrastructure Open Space Trail, Bike Paths WKSHPS Regulation Infrastructure Open Space Trails Devl & Protection WKSHPS Regulation Infrastructure Recycling Recycling Programs WKSHPS Regulation Infrastructure Recycling Recycling WKSHPS Reward/acknowledge property owners for "doing the right thing" re Regulation Infrastructure Set backs /Buffers boundary areas and setbacks. Email Rewards should be provided for doing the right thing in terms of Regulation Infrastructure Set backs /Buffers boundary areas and setbacks. NRWG 44 Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Law to enforce the building set back so that half is preserved by Regulation Infrastructure Set backs /Buffers removal of invasive species /preserve native vegetation AINA Regulation Infrastructure Special Management Areas SMAs (Special Management Areas) shouldn't be just for coastal areas. Email Regulation Infrastructure Sustainable Island Development Use ecological health to assess all 13 elements of the General Plan AINA Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation • Infrastructure Sustainable Island Development Infrastructure Sustainable Island Development Infrastructure Sustainable Island Development Infrastructure Sustainable Island Development Infrastructure Sustainable Island Development Infrastructure Sustainable Island Development Infrastructure Sustainable Island Development Infrastructure Sustainable Island Development Infrastructure Sustainable Island Development Infrastructure Sustainable Island Development Infrastructure Sustainable Island Development Infrastructure Infrastructure Infrastructure Infrastructure Infrastructure Infrastructure Infrastructure Infrastructure Infrastructure Infrastructure Resource Resource Resource Resource Resource Sustainable Island Development Sustainable Island Development Sustainable Island Development Sustainable Island Development Sustainable Island Development Sustainable Island Development Sustainable Island Development Sustainable Island Development Sustainable Island Development Sustainable Island Development (Fresh) Water Resources (Fresh) Water Resources (Fresh) Water Resources (Fresh) Water Resources Every decision for development should take into account the natural history of area: the flow of water, drainage, open land, weather patterns, air quality, lava tubes, native intelligence, and disclouser of spiritual inhabitants AINA Enviro friendly public transportation Farmers market Growth Management Growth Management Strategies Healing habitat All decisions based on malama aina Malama the aina Malama the aina Put the land first -pay attention to natural resources Natural Resources protection Establish permitted uses for various zones, especially in agriculture and conservation zones. Minimize polluting activities Define peak population and keep infrastructure and growth within bounds of peak pop -preserve the aina Preserve what we got but function better Protect the aina Intelligent Rural Planning Agriculture Sustainable Sustainability (off grid) Sustainable Island Development Recommend permitted uses for various zones, especially in agriculture and conservation zones. Hawaii Drought Plan 2005 Fix flooding in Paradise Park -Shower Road County, State, Feds should repair dangerous dam by Psyzk Road or re- route to avoid flooding in any popluated area Flood concerns on PEAR need to be addressed AINA WKSHPS WKSHPS WKSHPS AINA AINA AINA AINA AINA WKSHPS Email AINA AINA AINA AINA WKSHPS WKSHPS WKSHPS WKSHPS Email WKSHPS AINA AINA AINA Identify the flood paths and find ways to reduce scale and impact of (Fresh) Water Resources flooding AINA 45 • • Natural ces Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 • • Regulation Resource (Fresh) Water Resources Wastewater Recycling WKSHPS Regulation Resource (Fresh) Water Resources Water WKSHPS Regulation Resource (Fresh) Water Resources Find and protect watershed areas AINA Regulation Resource Air Quality Watch our air quality/ocean quality (cruise ship dumping) AINA Make public/tourism facilities and transportations use alternative energy Regulation Resource Air Quality to improve air quality for people and environment AINA Regulation Resource Air Quality Smog inspection AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Address the environmental impact the papaya industry has in Puna SID Require permits to push over any native trees larger than a certain size Regulation Resource Forest Protection (by species) etc. -could fit into a biosphere initiative. Email Rewrite building codes to establish value of native forest and encourage Regulation Resource Forest Protection keeping native trees and other plant species. Email Rainforest preservation info given by building dept to all building Regulation Resource Forest Protection applicants AINA Regulated natural buffer zones with penalties to bulldozing/grading Regulation Resource Forest Protection companies AINA More consciousness and higher standards for development for clearing Regulation Resource Forest Protection of land AINA Require built in buffers, greenspace and binding covenants to reduce Regulation Resource Forest Protection clearing of native forest lots AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Natural Area buffer zones WKSHPS Regulation Resource Forest Protection Promote/create required native plan/trees buffer zones of land AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Regulate bulldozer activities by permit process Email Regulation Resource Forest Protection More regulation on the act of bulldozing AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Stricter bulldozing laws, tax credits for saving native trees AINA Preserve native forest -limit bulldozing/clearing -revision of Regulation Resource Forest Protection grading/grubbing ordinances AINA Regarding bulldozing - ag-3 or greater lots must have certificate of need or similar documentation before bulldozing greater than 1 acre, stiff fee Regulation Resource Forest Protection if violated AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Stop the bulldozing of kapu lands AINA Public works feels that Chapter 10 is the wrong vehicle to address clear Regulation Resource Forest Protection cutting because it is concerned only with flood control. NRWG Regulation Resource Forest Protection Prohibit clear-cutting of native forest for orchards/farming. Email Regulation Resource Forest Protection No clear cutting forest lots AINA Restrict clearing of native forest to'/. acre of any lot in native forest Regulation Resource Forest Protection dedicated areas Email 46 Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Regulate footprints to require some % native forest preservation -limit Regulation Resource Forest Protection clear cutting AINA Differentiate between desirable species and invasive species in Regulation Resource Forest Protection recommendations regarding clear-cutting and forest preservation. Email More consciousness and higher standards for development for clearing Regulation Resource Forest Protection of land SID No clear cutting on residential lots and leave a percentage of buffer Regulation Resource Forest Protection (increase set back) AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Clear cutting lot not considered an improvement AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection No clear cutting of lots AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Clear Cutting WKSHPS Regulation Resource Forest Protection Stop clearing pristine native forest for agriculture AINA Set % of clearing allowed in the forest, need balance for every Regulation Resource Forest Protection development AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Regulate % clearing of residential lots and building footprint AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Limit land clearing based on home footprint AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Property owners must keep part natural (depending on size of lot) AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Property owners should keep at least 10% of their foliage AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Volcano land clearing regulations commercial & residential WKSHPS Regulation Resource Forest Protection Environmental restrictions on clearing of land AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Restrictions on land clearing on residential lots AINA Encourage consolidation of lots to make larger, contiguous, native Regulation Resource Forest Protection forest dedications Email Regulation Resource Forest Protection License bulldozer operators. Email Regulation Resource Forest Protection Prohibit bulldozing on land that has not been previously bulldozed. Email Retaining forest with agriculture that compliments forest environment Regulation Resource Forest Protection (avoid adding invasive species) AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Keep our native forest, stop bulldozing AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Rain forest building code AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Require landowners to file certificates of need before cutting forest. Email Perhaps land owners should be required to file certificates of need Regulation Resource Forest Protection before cutting forest. NRWG Make Hawaii county native forest dedication available to properties with Regulation Resource Forest Protection residential zoning AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Preserve and enhance native forest habitat AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection limit deforestation especially papaya farms AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Stop destroying and start respecting and regenerating our forests AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Less destroying forest AINA 47 • , • ' n R mm ndations Puna CDP 2007 Natural Ices Preservation and Protectio eco e ~ Regulation Resource Forest Protection Save our ohia forest AINA Protect in perpetuity -state, county, forest (closed canopy tracts) in Regulation Resource Forest Protection Puna AINA Determine location of high quality forests in Puna. Laura Brezinsky is a Regulation Resource Forest Protection contact for a forest group working on this. Email All native woods (koa, milo, kamani, traditional native hardwoods) forest Regulation Resource Forest Protection replenished through govt seedling give away AINA Grading/grubbing -must be enforced and fine owners/bulldozer Regulation Resource Forest Protection operator for violations AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Change grading and grubbing ordinance AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Review grading/grubbing ordinance (Chapter 10). NRWG Grub/grade/land development needs to be regulated to preserve trees Regulation Resource Forest Protection & habitat AINA Grading/grubbing -real estate contract disclosure of permit Regulation Resource Forest Protection requirements AINA Make grants available to residents and farmers for native landscape/habitat protection, invasive species control, restoration and Regulation Resource Forest Protection education projects Email Regulation Resource Forest Protection Prohibit livestock grazing on designated forest land. Email Regulation Resource Forest Protection Continuous forest canopy -preserve viewshed in volcano AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Restoration incentives for green space AINA Require owner/representative presence on site during grubbing and Regulation Resource Forest Protection grading Email Regulation Resource Forest Protection Grubbing, Grading, Excavating Regulation Revisions WKSHPS Regulation Resource Forest Protection During land clearing, leave more native trees AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Ban clearing on entire properties by bulldozers AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Bulldozer operator training in conservation issues/permits AINA Heavy equipment operators should share in responsibility, possibly Regulation Resource Forest Protection losing licenses when they do grading without a permit. Email Require training of heavy equipment operators in low impact land Regulation Resource Forest Protection clearning techinques AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Tax incentive for low impact lot clearing AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Tax credit/incentive to donate to land preserves AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Tax incentive for residential lot owners to presence native forest AINA Expand/enhance existing county property tax incentives to preserve Regulation Resource Forest Protection native forest on private lots AINA Ways to preserve forested land, incentives tax trust conservancies, Regulation Resource Forest Protection exemptions dedication AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Tax incentives for residential lot owners to preserve native forest AINA 48 Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Provide incentives for preserving native trees and native vegetation Regulation Resource Forest Protection (such as tax break) AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Financial /tax incentive for forest restoration with native species AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Maybe tax incentives for leaving native forest. NRWG Regulation Resource Forest Protection Offer tax incentives for not cutting down native forest Email Regulation Resource Forest Protection Hire more building inspectors, possibly including community volunteers. Email If no pre-inspection occurred, a set number of plants can be determined for each area, regardless of what was growing on the violated land Regulation Resource Forest Protection before grading or grubbing Email I would like to see old growth Kipuka forests identified and the owners Regulation Resource Forest Protection offered multiple options for forest conservation AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Set limitations on the amount of land that can be developed on each lot. Email Laws protecting ohia trees from being bulldozed, stop developers from Regulation Resource Forest Protection clearing the rainforest AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Moratorium on continued destruction of forest AINA Where are the high-quality forests in Puna? - Laura B works w/ lowland Regulation Resource Forest Protection forest group. NRWG Add a native forest/residential or native resource/residential category Regulation Resource Forest Protection with its own grading and grubbing regulations. Email Establish value of native forest and write building codes to encourage Regulation Resource Forest Protection keeping trees. NRWG Protect native ohia forest from clearcutting in the subdivisions (ex. $10K Regulation Resource Forest Protection fine for cutting down oak in California) AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Protect Ohia forest to preserve and perpetuate native forest birds AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Preserve the forest plants and trees AINA Preserve native plants, not invasive ones, created forest buffer zone Regulation Resource Forest Protection between properties AINA Responsibility of developers to retain native forests and report ancient Regulation Resource Forest Protection sites AINA Rescue/salvage plants that are slated for clear cutting. Allow for public Regulation Resource Forest Protection notice so plants can be retrieved AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Reduce acreage for already existing "native forest dedication." Email Regulation Resource Forest Protection Increase penalties and fines for overgrading. Email Regulation Resource Forest Protection Require a separate permit for actual site work Email Regulation Resource Forest Protection Require permits/details on transporting bulldozers from site to site Email Permitting process for cutting any native trees/severe rainforest Regulation Resource Forest Protection management AINA ~ ~9 • • Natural l~ces Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 i Require planning permit & plot plan approvals on all native forest Regulation Resource Forest Protection residential and agricultural lot developments and building sites Email Denial of final approval on building permit until over graded or over Regulation Resource Forest Protection grubbed land has been replanted with native species. Email Require dozer operators to have permits to move heavy equipment Regulation Resource Forest Protection (with specific requirements/restrictions) Email Regulation Resource Forest Protection Require permits to remove old ohia (or ohia of a certain diameter). Email Regulation Resource Forest Protection Preserve the rain forest AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection No new roads WKSHPS Regulation Resource Forest Protection Rainforest Preservation WKSHPS Regulation Resource Forest Protection Replace cut ohia trees AINA Gather research, sources and data to show compelling reasons for preserving our natural resources and changing zoning and/or Regulation Resource Forest Protection legislation. Email Regulation Resource Forest Protection Stop destroying and start respecting and regenerating forests SID Example, cone-acre lot in Leilani Estates might have a replanting Regulation Resource Forest Protection requirement of 30 ohia and 40 hapu'u. Email Law to enforce the building set back so that half is preserved by Regulation Resource Forest Protection removal of invasive species/preserve native vegetation AINA Create special districts: "conservation agriculture, " "native forest Regulation Resource Forest Protection residential. Email Increase stewardship of native forest and coastline, more land for Regulation Resource Forest Protection conservation AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Adjust tax structure for forest vs. pasture. NRWG Regulation Resource Forest Protection Adjust tax structure for forest v. pasture. Email Tax break for minimizing grading/grubbing area to'/4 acre or less from Regulation Resource Forest Protection any lot 3 acres or smaller. Email Legal protection for ohia trees even in subdivision need fine/inspection - Regulation Resource Forest Protection keep a portion of land un -bulldozed .AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Save the trees AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection protect the trees AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection Strong tree ordinance AINA Regulation Resource Forest Protection More tree planting AINA There is confusion between the agriculture designation and the rural Regulation Resource Forest Protection designation. NRWG Regulation Resource Forest Protection Clarify difference between agriculture and rural zoning designations. Email Regulation Resource Forest Protection Make Volcano a special design district -preserve native forest AINA Regulation Resource Geology retain land forms AINA 50 Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Regulation Resource Geology Preserve Volcano risk areas AINA Regulation Resource Geology Redefine geothermal subzones /other geothermal issues WGRPS Regulation Resource Geology Geothermal Asset Funds WKSHPS Regulation Resource Geology Geothermal WKSHPS Regulation Resource Geology Geothermal Asset fund WKSHPS Regulation Resource Invasive Species Develop and execute an Albizia eradication plan AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species Coqui control on vacant land AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species Coqui eradication AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species Coqui eradication AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species Destroy coqui AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species Eradicate coqui frogs AINA Eradication of coqui without bringing in foreign (insect/animals/reptiles) Regulation Resource Invasive Species beings AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species Exterminate coqui frogs AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species Kill coqui frogs AINA List coqui as noxious species and lobby the state so that land owners Regulation Resource Invasive Species can deny access to property for control AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species More coqui frog control AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species Support for coqui control and other invasive species AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species Fewer coqui AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species Coqui control AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species Noise control w/ coqui frog AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species Coqui frog control AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species Eradicate coquis AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species Coqui frog control AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species Develop and execute statewide coqu eradication AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species .Coqui eradication AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species Kill coqui frogs AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species Coqui control AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species More involvement with coqui frogs AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species Coqui frog control AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species Coqui eradication (or at least control) AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species Coqui frog control -eradication AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species Coqui frog control AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species Eradicate fruit flies AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species Albizia control/eradication if possible AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species More rigorous programs for invasive species control AINA Regulation Resource Invasive Species Deal propmtly and effectively with invasive species AINA • _ • • Natural ces Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 Regulation Resource Invasive Species Respond more quickly to invasive species Regulation Resource Invasive Species Regulation Resource Invasive Species Regulation Resource Invasive Species Regulation Resource Invasive Species Regulation Resource Invasive Species Regulation Resource Invasive Species Regulation Resource Invasive Species Regulation Resource Invasive Species Regulation Resource Invasive Species Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat Internal affairs to report to mayor, stricter regulations on invasive species and create better accountability Invasive plant animal species task force Control eradicate exotics (species) especially invasive noxious weeds Increase response, control and eradication of invasive species Invasive species control Protocols developed to control invasive species Manage the spread of invasive species Bring back miconia eradication Pests control cockroaches, mosquitoes, rats Strengthen enforcement of grading regulations by increasing fines, Strengthen enforcement of grading regulations by denial of final approval on building permit until fines are paid 3 million dollar fine for every lot parce pin to pin Institute land use policy to preserve natural habitat Preserve native plants, not invasive ones, created forest buffer zone between properties Require lot development - a percentage of native plants must remain Necessary percentage of community kept in natural state Promote landscaping with native species Botanical and native plantings Botanical enhancement Preserve habitat for native plants, birds and wildlife Protect the native plants Landscaping for new development should include native plants and trees Natural Area Buffer zones Protect natural habitats Protect native habitats Require more natural and cultural resource assessments based on currently known data, other research and in some cases, more intense ground surveying, prior to grubbing or grading. More nature sanctuaries Tighten building permit process Preserve our native forest and habitat Revenue from fines would pay for pre-inspections. Tax incentives and fines, overseen by a county or community task AINA AINA AINA AINA AINA AINA AINA AINA AINA AINA Email Email AINA AINA AINA AINA AINA AINA AINA AINA AINA AINA t AINA WKSHPS AINA AINA Email AINA Email AINA Email Email 52 Natural Resources Preservation and Protection Recommendations ~ Puna CDP 2007 force. Change method of assessing land, so that each parcel is valued on its Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat own merits, and not on those of neighboring lots. Email Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat Change tax structure Email Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat Protect forest wildlife AINA Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat Wildlife corridors -maintain and create green space AINA Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat Make sure building and zoning codes are sensitive to environment AINA Change zoning so that grading/grubbing ordinance applies to more than Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat flooding issues and to smaller acreage. Email Change zoning so that grading/grubbing ordinance requires pre- Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat inspection before issuing grading permit. Email Change zoning to include new designation of native forest-residential Regulation Resource Native Species Habitat with its own grading and grubbing regulations. NRWG Regulation Resource Ocean Resources Watch our air qualitylocean quality (cruise ship dumping) AINA Closely review all coastal development -look closely at what the Regulation Resource Ocean Resources development does to the environment SID Regulation Resource Ocean Resources Stop development of coastline -preserve what we have for everyone AINA Regulation Resource Ocean Resources A mandatory coastal set back of 500 meters AINA Ferry safe during whale season (sonar detection to stop ferry when Regulation Resource Ocean Resources whales present) AINA Regulation Resource Ocean Resources Protect ocean (clean beaches) AINA Enforce cruise ships to have self contained waste systems (no Regulation Resource Ocean Resources dumping) AINA Regulation Resource Ocean Resources Shoreline Access WKSHPS Regulation Resource Ocean Resources preserve the shoreline AINA Regulation Resource Ocean Resources Shoreline Access WKSHPS Regulation Resource Ocean Resources SMAs (Special Management Areas) shouldn't be just for coastal areas. Email Shipman to clean up arsenic on cane land and require soil testing Regulation Resource Soil Contamination before permit AINA • • • Preserving Land, Air & Water (Subgroup) Puna Community Development Plan iPreservin and, Air, and Water Subgroup Report Primary Contact Hannah Hedrick, 968-7013, hedrickhneca(niaol.com Major contributors Athena Peanut, 965-8183, medicinetalk(~yahoo.com Bettie Van Overbeke, 965-7773, bettievo@msn.com, "Strategies for Retaining Open Space on Highway 137" and "Preserving Land, Air, and Water" Bett Bidleman, bett~c~bidleman.net, "Native Forest rotection Ordinance" (Natural Resources WG eport-Source document for related content below) Rick Warshauer, Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone subgroup WG, frwvolcano cr,hotmail.com, 967-7476 Contents Paula Kekahuna, kekahuna(alocalnet.com, James Weatherford and others from the Agriculture WG Kim Tavares, kimtavares@yahoo.com, Steering Committee, and Natural Resource Protection WG Pat Conant, pat.conant~cuhawaii.gov, w 974-4140, h 967-7346 Larry Brown communications, lbrown@co.hawaii.hi.us Chris Yuen documents forwarded by Larry Brown Marisa Furfaro, mfurfar~cUpbrhawaii.com Lyn Howe, lynhowe 1946 cr~yahoo.com Rene Siracusa, renesiracusa@hotmail.com Major Contributors and Contents, p 1 General Land Use Issues, p 2 Preserving Land, Air, and Water Subgroup Goals, p 3 Recommendations for Actions During PCDP Process, p 3 Recommendations and Priority Actions, pp 4-8 Support viable existing programs to preserve trees and open space and to establish planting corridors Include Actions Below to retain open space on Highway 137, ocean side corridor (example) Recommendations for Preserving Land, Air, and Water Native Forest Protection Ordinance Appendices, pp 9-16 I. PLAW Meetings and Selected Communications Reflecting Efforts to Collect and Incorporate Community Input II. Resources and Processes Related to PLAW Report III. Background Information and Requests Related to PLAW Report IV. Open Space Preservation Committee, Save Our Land Citizen's Committee V. Depleted Uranium Testimony from Resource Anson Chong • -1- ~I~lission: "~I~IaCamczAina» I. General Land Use Issues Development of unplanned, scattered subdivisions in the 1950's and 60's created tens of thousands of lots without adequate energy, water, or waste disposal systems and accessed only by poor-quality private roads. Similar deficiencies in energy, water, waste disposal, and transportation facilities plague the community gathering places, commercial sites, and village centers that have arisen haphazardly. . The large-subdivision formats in places such as Volcano, Fern Forest, and Hawaiian Paradise Park preclude proper community design and function. All of these deficiencies have contributed to serious infrastructure shortcomings, including a crisis in health care services. Air quality is becoming the world's number one health issue. Private development, monoculture agriculture, government agencies, greed, and ignorance of the consequences have decimated much of Puna's rainforest. This suicidal destruction is compounded by the world's most active volcano, which pours forth tons of volcanic carbon sediment daily. We know that the fossil fuels we burn to move along our modern roadways contribute heavily to deadly carbon dioxide build up, but the incredible dangers posed by depleted uranium in various forms on the island are just beginning to be discussed and examined. Immediate action to maintain and plant trees along public and private road easements, in urban areas, and on public and private lands is essential not only to our comfort, but to our survival. If we can't breathe, nothing else matters! • Current speculation building proposals risk destruction of the very qualities that are being promoted to lure people to "luxury" living on a fragile ecosystem and inadequate infrastructure at all levels. The conversion of prime agricultural and natural resource lands to residential use has been squandering their real values. A lack of adequate controls has caused the development of Hawaii's limited and valuable land and natural resources for short-term gain for the few, while resulting in long-term loss and values of our State's limited natural resources. Lack of proper stewardship of the land, air, and water, significantly diminishes human resources. The Preserving Land, Air, and Water Subgroup therefore recommends that the PCDP require that all development be guided by the impact on the quality of land, air, water, and human resources. Placing sustainability above the economic considerations that currently control decision-making would contribute greatly to recognition of the Island of Hawaii as the "Land of Aloha," a major healing destination This PLAW Subgroup report incorporates by reference the sustainability recommendations included in the reports of the Growth Management and Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone subgroups of the Land Use Work Group. The PLAW Subgroup endorses the goals, objectives, and recommendations of other land-use-related work groups that emphasize planning based on sustainability. The infrastructure deficiencies described in Work Group reports reflect opportunities to devise remedies to move away from the current "development" paradigm in favor of a "sustainable paradigm," such as conserving energy, employing alternative power sources, improving water catchment systems, etc. We urge the PCDP to propose bold and forward-thinking solutions that reflect the living "aloha" spirit of "pono"-right relationship with self, others, and the aina. -2- • II. Preserving Land, Air, and Water Subgroup Goals 1. Contribute to a clear, concise, well-illustrated, "living" Puna Community Development Plan (PCDP) that perpetuates community values and collaboration in all proposals impacting the land, air, and water 2. Ensure a PCDP that is "of, by, and for the people" by empowering future generations to make the best decisions for the aina 3. Focus on simple, "doable" activities that benefit the land and its stewards 4. Identify resources to assist in focusing on culturally appropriate approaches, including awareness of the interconnected topics of po' okela (economy), malama aina (ecology), and ho' ohanohano (social equity and cultural heritage) 5. Include provisions in the PCDP to improve, rather than restrict, housing and land use opportunities for residents desiring sustainable living, with special consideration for Hawaiians, the natural stewards of the aina (See California's legal alternative housing exception in rural areas) 6. Ensure that Working Groups have authentic roles as full partners in anon-hierarchical and participatory structure that facilitates ongoing Community participation in implementing the PCDP, including identifying and acquiring funding 7. Amend and/or revise the 2005 General Plan elements related to Land Use to reflect a strong . stewardship ethic 8. Ensure adherence to protective land zoning and prohibit amendments that would lessen protection for culturally and scientifically significant land, agricultural land, and/or conservation land, except in cases of extraordinary community need III. Recommendation for Actions During PCDP Process Take the following actions to sustain a focus on sustainability while the PCDP is approved and while subsequent implementation actins are in process 1. Temporarily "pause" up zoning that would permit non-agricultural development on agricultural lands, subdividing parcels for higher density, or expansion of military establishments. 2. Identify and support legislation related to using State and DHHL land to help bolster our infrastructure and roadways Prohibit speculation building, especially on agricultural lands and in rural areas o Require residency by the owner of record for 6 months o Prohibit resale of property for 2 years, except in demonstrated cases of extreme hardship 4. Support retaining and implementing the November 20061egislation prohibiting smoking in the workplace and expanding coverage to additional areas, such as beaches 5. Develop appropriate penalties for clearing properties pin to pin o For landowners, delay initiation of the building permit application for 18 months o For bulldozer operators, suspend their license for 18 months -3- 6. Enforce laws that prohibit theft of precious natural resources from private and public lands, with appropriate exceptions for native gathering rights (regulated by the State of Hawaii) 7. Require permits to transport significant amounts of cut maile, hapu'u, `ohi'a, and other precious natural resources 8. Work with the Department of Public Works, Parks and Recreation, and Exceptional Tree Ordinance/Arborist Advisory Committee to establish rules that mandate replacement, preferably on the site or within close proximity, of trees that are cut down. 9. Develop a strategy for getting the County Council to pass within 18 months (or sooner) an ordinance related to forest preservation and planting (see Native Forest Protection Ordinance recommendation below) IV. Recommendations and Priority Actions A. Support viable existing programs to preserve trees and open space and to establish planting corridors Rationale: Maintaining, preserving, and restoring forests, trees, and foliage are key to sustainability and to preserving land, air, and water. Implementing existing programs would help to sequester carbon dioxide, stabilize soil, prevent erosion, entrap sediment, retain soil via root systems (example: palm • trees at ocean edge), and maintain the natural beauty of Puna. Implementation: See Bi111231, Hawaii County Council 1-4-07, to add to Chapter 25, Article 6, Hawaii County Code 1983 (2005 Edition), "Division 6. Scenic Corridors," which delineates criteria and procedures for establishing and initiating scenic corridors. B. Include the actions below in strategies for retaining open space on Highway 137, ocean side corridor Action: Establish 15-foot planting easements on road frontage of private lots Action: Encourage retention of native and large standing trees (excluding invasive species such as strawberry guava, albizzia, gunpowder, etc) Implementation: Provide tax credits and commendation awards. 1. Award tax credits based on square footage in planting easement deducted from the lot size. 2. Provide recognition through landscape commendation awards given to owners who retain trees, which could be referenced if the property is listed for sale. 3. Extend the above incentives to property owners who replant easements already cleared, preferably with native species, and stipulate without using invasive species, as designated in Weed Risk Assessment at http://www.hear.org/wra/#what to~lant. 4. Instruct the departments of county planning and building to provide property owners with lists of recommended native and food trees suitable for planting at roadside easements (see website above) Action: Establish a law requiring the 15' mauka/makai boundary line to be kept open, ungated, and unfenced to guarantee access to the shoreline Rationale: From Kaimu to Pohoiki, all the land makai of coastal road Highway 137 is in the SMA. These properties, mostly privately owned and undeveloped, have provided trails and footpaths that -4- have been used for subsistence fishing and traditional gathering places for many decades. Properties currently being developed are usually fenced and gated. Continuation of this practice will soon block access to the shoreline and deny the original people their traditional hunting and gathering rights. Action: Establish markers and small visitor parking areas at historical sites, such as the two Kehena area sites listed in the General Plan. Neither site is marked, and an adjacent property owner is using one of the areas as an extension of his lawn. Action: Create vista pullouts along Hwy 137 so tourists and residents can safely view the beautiful scenery Action: Mark and retain easement paths to the ocean from Hwy 137 by measuring the width of the Red Road and doing a rough mapping Action: Reduce width of tree cutbacks needed to accommodate power lines Rationale and example: HELCO requires that trees be removed on the power-line side of the road in coastal Hawaiian Homelands development; the set back on the other side of the road is much less than 50 feet. Friends of the Red Road got HELCO to use "special" wire to save the tree tunnels and tree-lined roads in Kehena Beach Estates. Action: Identify a few special places at which to bury power lines along Highway 137 Rationale: Buried power lines would improve safety, avoid dangerous salt build up, prevent storm damage, and preserve the natural scenic beauty of the area, so valuable to residents and to expanding an eco-tourism industry. • Action: Preserve mangos, Kamani groves, and monkey pod tree tunnels. Action: Limit street lights to areas where they are essential for safety, such as at major intersections with Hwy 137, and educate coastline residents about how to reduce illumination of driveway lights on private land C. Recommendations for Preserving Land, Air, and Water Track and provide comments on proposals related to Land Use, including, but not limited to: A. Proposals for commercial development and/or zoning; village centers, etc; B. Ordinances to change State Land Use and LUPAG to ensure consistency with the PCDP; C. New or existing ordinances or rules that need to be enacted or amended; and D. Budgetary items related to operational and CIP requests to implement PCDP priorities Prohibit commercial development along Highway 11 from the 15 mile mark to Volcanoes National Park Build a new school in Mountain View away from the highway. Potential locations are being explored; others locations should be sought. Convert the current school to a community center serving neighboring communities from Glenwood to Hawaiian Acres. Provide incentives for organic agriculture, such as establishing sustainable agricultural parks and programs in which land owners can offer unused portions of -5- their usable agriculture land to interested individuals. (Example: In Mountain View, many farmers and landowners are retired, so lands are overgrown. People interested in agriculture could help developers with approval to build on productive agricultural lands to come into compliance with zoning requirements. The County could help by offering tax breaks to cooperating landowners.) Reevaluate (and, where desirable, revise) existing codes and then require adherence, with no possibility of "after the fact" rezoning Require, without exception, that grubbing/grading permits be submitted with the building permit Impose a 10-year waiting period for reapplication for those who do not submit grubbing/grading permits with the building permit Maintain or create zoning codes to provide disincentives for buying land with the intent to subdivide and resell (Proposals for provision(s) need to deal separately `zoning' and `subdividing,' because they are in different chapters in the County Code.) Develop a strategy for getting the County Council to pass an ordinance within 18 months or sooner to reasonably limit the amount of a residential, urban or agricultural lot that can be cleared of native forest or preferred species Rationale: The importance to Puna of protecting native vegetation areas and areas of cultural value has been emphasized at dozens of PCDP-related meetings and via hundreds of communications. While planting should be encouraged, native forests and other native vegetation types cannot be restored or reconstructed by planting. Preserving remaining native forest areas and removing the numerous alien plants that are degrading them must be a priority. Actions: A. Include in the ordinance a specific variance or use permit that would allow requests for clearing a greater area for bona fide agricultural purposes. 1. Notify property owners adjacent to the property that the owner is applying for a grubbing/bulldozing/building permit with a variance to the tree ordinance. 2. Require the owner to post in several visible locations a copy of the application for a grubbing/bulldozing/building permit with a variance to the tree ordinance, with a 30-day period for community response. The posted tree map submitted with permit applications by the land owner can be used by neighbors to report lack of adherence with the variance, if granted. 3. Owners giving false information on an application will not be allowed to resubmit on application for one year. 4. Bulldozer operators who violate the tree ordinance will lose their license for one year. B. Require a grading plan and permit for all lots greater than 10,000 square feet. C. Require property owners to indicate on a Tax Key Map all trees meeting protection criteria (such as measuring trees at four feet above the ground) and then to submits a grubbing/bulldozing/building permit describing the exceptions, with specific reasons for wanting to cut specific trees D. Prepare a map of the best remaining native vegetation in lower to mid Puna (where the threat is the greatest and the remainder is the least) and make it available to county officials to use to prioritize specific areas to protect. E. Lobby appropriate agencies to move forward with developing a map Require environmental education, via programs and print materials, prior to approving permits to clear land, cut and/or transport precious natural resources, etc -6- Rationale: Combining tourism and the environment would create jobs to protect the land, air and water resources and to teach others to respect and appreciate the environment. Local folks could be hired to interpret the scenic points, monitor hiking/biking trails for visitor safety and trash dumping prevention, remove invasive species, properly landscape the roadsides, replant to the greatest extent possible, propagate desirable plants, etc. Action: Develop an ordinance to create an outreach department within County government that educates anyone looking for or required to have some knowledge about the land, air, and water, especially prior to breaking ground on unspoiled land. Potential Funding Source: Create a tourist and/or vehicle tax, or get more "infrastructure" funds from various State sources. The more eco-tourists we attract, the more bathrooms and other facilities we will need. Providing tax credits and incentives to everyone who saves trees is unlikely, unless revenue is generated elsewhere to balance the tax losses. DBEDT should be able to support sustainable new businesses. USDA-NRCS has qualified staff and sometimes even funding to accomplish long-term goals across landscapes. Adopt Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone Subgroup Recommendations Adopt the Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone recommendation to amend the Hawaii County Code (HCC), Article 7 (relation to Special District Regulations), to add sections that will establish and manage a Special District called the Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone District, including establishing a BRBZ Advisory Commission. Adopt other sustainability and land-use related recommendations. (Complete document available from Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone Work Group.) Adopt the Preserving Natural Resources Work Group Recommendation for a Native Forest Protection Ordinance Adopt a Native Forest Protection Ordinance for public and private lands within the jurisdiction of Hawaii. The purpose of the ordinance is to mitigate the impact of future development on native forest through enforceable regulations and improved public awareness. The creation of a staff position of County Arborist will be required to administer the ordinance. Adopt other sustainability and land-use related recommendations. (Complete document available from Preserving Natural Resources Work Group.) Support Land-Use Related Village Centers/Design Districts Subgroup Recommendations that Address Impact on Natural Resources Support the Village Centers/Design Districts Subgroup recommendations related to planning community-based commercial development (village centers), using guidelines that address appropriate scale and balance impact on the community's natural resources. Incorporate the Following Specific Activities into PCDP Recommendations A. Limit subdividing AG land in lava zones 1 and 2 1. Prohibit subdividing Ag lands into parcels smaller than 5 acres 2. Establish percentage limits on clear cutting that can be done on AG and urban land parcels 3. Require evaluation by a Forester or other professional government employee when special permits and variances are requested 3. Create A'apuaha based planning to coordinate water flow and sheet flow during heavy rains common to the area 4. Ease building codes to allow for "lighter" buildings, such as structural bamboo. B. Mitigate threats to forest birds 1. Learn how to share the habitat of forest birds. 1r u -7- 2. Minimize the removal of native trees and shrubs and plant native trees and shrubs that provide food and shelter to birds 3. Educate neighborhoods on how to coordinate their plantings to increase the abundance and diversity of plant species. C. Require land use plans to incorporate requirements related to trees for oxygen production 1. Require parks to have trees, in addition to grassy areas. 2. Provide guides to prevent "over trimming" of trees in parks and county lands 3. Provide property tax credits to reward reforestation efforts with native and preferred species on private and commercial lands. D. Honor the original intention of CZM and SMA legislation to protect the natural beauty of the land E. Prohibit expansion of military bases on the island and all military activities that impact negatively on the land, air, and water 1. Prohibit use of depleted uranium in any form on the island (see resource list) 2. Develop legislation to have Hawaii designated as a Nuclear-Free Zone 3. Prohibit designation of additional bombing or live ordinance sites on this island 4. Prohibit acquisition of additional land on this island for military use F. Conduct air quality testing with oxygen readings at grade school to monitor contaminants, including car exhaust from roads Rationale: Testing at schools would serve as an indicator for air quality throughout Puna. G. Prohibit destruction of unique geological features such as spatter cones, pit craters, and lava tubes and collapsed lava tubes and provide incentives for protecting these features 1. Do not allow permits, even on private land, to destroy or significantly alter these features 2. Provide a tax credit for the footage occupied by these features, since it cannot be developed H. Broaden the mail-out notification distance required for a zoning change application to prevent undue influence by a small group of people who might benefit from a decision that impacts a larger area • -8- Appendices I. PLAW Meetings and Selected Communications Reflecting Efforts to Collect and Incorporate Community Input A. After its formation at the initial meeting of the Land Use Work Group, members of the Preserving Land, Air, and Water subgroup met primarily in conjunction with other meetings s+#sLarid Use WG meetings (dates available from Rob Tucker) Steering Committee meetings (Hannah Hedrick participated in all except October 19) o January 18th, 2007, 5:30 pm, Kea'au Community Center o December 14th, 2006, 5:30 pm, Ola'a Community Center o November 15th, 2006, 6:30 pm, Kea'au Community Center. o October 19th, 6:30 pm, Kea'au Community Center o September 20th, 6:30 pm, Ola'a Community Center o August 16th, 6:30 pm, Ola'a Community Center, 18-585 Kea'au-Pahoa Road ~-PCDP community group meetings (Hannah Hedrick and Kim Tavares participated in most of them) o Puna Projects Open House, December 2, 2006, the third district-wide event for the Puna CDP, featuring an "open house" format with a variety of presentations and information on private and public projects in Puna o Puna Second Regional CDP meeting, September 30th, 2006, the second district-wide event for the Puna CDP, featuring a presentation by Puna CDP consultant P1anPacific o Puna First Regional CDP meeting, July 22nd, 2006, the first district-wide event for the Puna CDP, featuring presentations of previous input and small group work to further refine community issues, visions and goals o Puna small group meetings, April through June 2006, to solicit broad based citizen input to the Puna CDP process o Puna District Kick-off meetings, winter 2006 meetings at Nanawale, February 22; Hawaii Paradise Park, February 24; Keaau, February 28 (Hedrick attended); and Volcano, March 3 (Hedrick attended) +~County Council hearing on storage facility rezoning request •~Monthly meetings of the Community Development Hui of Fern Forest (see letter) +~•Monthly meetings of Neighborhood Place of Puna ~4Periodic meetings of Tobacco-Free Big Island partnership +{~VOlcanO Community Association meetings Outcomes: The outcomes of these meetings are reflected in dozens of emails B. Each person expressing interest in the PLAW was contacted about three scheduled meetings: 1.October 11, 2007 Chaired by Bettie Van Overbeke, 965-6673 Attended by Athena Peanut, 965-8183; Dawn Burke, 965-1159; Eric Steffey, 640-8292; Lorriene West, 965-0930; Herb Dorsey 965-6673 The meeting focused on issues along Hwy 137 corridor. Outcome: Recommendations were developed around retaining trees as the single action that would go furthest to meeting sustainable goals, including Strategies for Retaining Open Space on Highway 137 ocean side corridor and Sustainable Land, Water, Air -9- 1~ J • • 2. Late November, home of Athena Peanut, Seaview (Jackie Medley, Hannah Hedrick, Athena Peanut) Outcomes: I. Identified topics and elements for the report, in addition to preserving trees II. Developed a strategy for communicating with and soliciting input from additional communities of interest via presentations at various meetings, request for an "open house" at which work groups could exchange ideas and support one another, requesting a listserv to facilitate communication 3. December 14`h Steering Committee Meeting, Olaa Community Center, Keaau (Athena Peanut, Hannah Hedrick, Kim Tavares, members of other work groups interested in PLAW concepts Outcomes: Given the fact that the SC was unable to organize a WG "open house" to facilitate communication among WGs, PLAW leaders requested development of a listserv. Subsequently, two listservs were developed by John Schinnerer. These meetings reflect less than 10% of the mechanisms participants used to contribute to the report. Members exchanged dozens of emails related to developing the report and communicated with dozens of "external" agencies and individuals. C. Community Development Hui of Fern Forest Letter of Support for PCDP February 8, 2007 From: Norman Cabaluna, President Community Development Hui of Fern Forest To: Puna Community Development Plan Steering Committee Members John Whalen, Plan Pacific, Inc. Larry Brown, County of Hawaii Planning Department Stephen McPeek, County of Hawaii Research & Development Dept. Alex Frost, County of Hawaii Research and Development Dept. Re: Recommendations to the Puna CDP Aloha, The Community Development Hui of Fern Forest board of directors wishes to provide the following information, in hopes that it will help CDP planners develop a good plan for the future of upper Puna. Fern Forest is one of the substandard Puna subdivisions developed in the late 1950's. It was carved from 300-500 years worth of quality native flora that provides habitat for native birds and insects on the southeast slope of Kilauea volcano. It is situated between 3,000 and 2,000 feet elevation. The land area of Fern Forest is roughly 8,500 acres. It contains about 2,600 A-3a classed parcels, and 45 miles of road. Most of the roads are still bare rock today, with the look and feel of riverbeds, although potholes are filled with gravel several times per year to make them easier to travel. The two main roads off the highway are now fully paved. Captain's Drive, or Ala Kapena, is the main entrance to the subdivision. It begins at the Old Volcano Trail at the end of South Glenwood Road. The second entrance is Kahauale'a, and it begins at Highway-11, by Akatsuka Orchid Gardens. This community shares borders with Royal Hawaiian Estates and Hawaiian Orchid Isle Estates at the mauka end, Kahauale'a State Natural Area Reserve and Wa'o Kele O Puna Forest Reserve on the southern border, Eden Roc to the east, and five miles of the Old Volcano Trail along its northern boundary. -10- The community is typical by Puna standards, including people of all ages, backgrounds, lifestyles and professions. Many residents work at Hawaii Volcanoes National Park, some work nearby in agriculture or the visitor industry, still others work at home and some people don't have jobs. The population seems to have doubled since the 2000 census, and will probably double once more inside of another decade. Many people moving here these days are young adults who have or will have children to raise, educate and feed. Most people who have lived here a long time, raising their children here in the forest, are now becoming grandparents. The next generation of Fern Forest kids are here, and most have no interest in leaving home. Instead, we are looking for ways to improve the quality of life here, so they can stay. Our young generation is interested in having more and better educational facilities closer to home.. Our adults would like to see more essential services like medical clinics and better bus transportation. Everyone needs more community gathering places, and everyone wants more farmers markets and certified kitchens, so we can buy, sell and trade with our neighbors for fresh goods and economical services, locally. While we strive to develop our own community lot for the betterment of our residents, we still look to government for support for regional infrastructure improvements. The greater Mountain View area at large is important to regional planning. We believe that it is a good central location for development in upper Puna, since it is centrally located and already has commercial zoning (albeit, along the highway). It could use a large community gathering place that will encourage us out of our own neighborhoods to mingle with our neighbors from Eden Roc, Kopua Farmlots, Fern Acres, Hawaiian Acres, Mountain View (proper) and elsewhere. Specifically, we are looking at the Mountain View school campus. This campus would make a great community gathering place for all neighborhoods from Glenwood to Kurtistown. We recommend that the County explore ways and places to build a new K-12 school in Mountain View, off the highway, and also to plan for a community college for agriculture, culture and historic preservation and natural sciences in the area some day. To accomplish this, we ask the County to work with the State to convert the current Mountain View school property to a Neighborhood Place for upper Puna. In addition to this, we agree with sentiments and recommendations that we've heard about from CDP participants, such as: We support the PCDP Land Use recommendations for Preserving Land, Air and Water, and the Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone, and CDP Agricultural Lands working group recommendations. We support the PCDP Natural Resources working group recommendations for a Forest Protection Ordinance, tighter regulations for grubbing and grading, and a revision of the special permit process. We do not want County water lines to our community. We are opposed to excessive street lighting. We are opposed to new commercial development along Highway-11 from mile marker 15 to Volcano. We need more bus routes and a secure, multi-purpose (farmers market) park-and-ride location, between Glenwood and Hilo, and routes between Glenwood and Mountain View. -11- We support the General Plan recommendation for a new fire station in Glenwood, or we would be supportive of a new fire station in Mountain View if it were combined with other county services (police, vehicle licensing, etc.). We would be happy to work with Puna CDP Transportation working group initiatives to suggest appropriate connectivity and alternative corridor options. We would also be happy to participate in discussions with State and County officials involved with the development of the Old Volcano Trail and the Pu' o O' o trail, since both trails are attached to or accessed by Fern Forest roads. We'd like to see a bigger & better post office in Mountain View. Commercial development in Mountain View should include financial institution outlets so that money can be deposited into accounts without having to go to Hilo or Captain Cook. Bank machines only work in one direction. Very few Fern Forest residents travel to Hilo on a daily basis. Most highway traffic generated by Fern Forest residents is related to getting to or from school in Mountain View and Keaau. We believe that the County should tax tour helicopters per flight to finance basic infrastructure to the communities that endure their noise and intrusion several times a day. Thank you for this opportunity to provide input and recommendations from the Community • Development Hui of Fern Forest, anon-profit organization since 1991. Sincerely, Norman Cabaluna, President Community Development Hui of Fern Forest D. Statement in weekly group email from Hale Lokahi/BILAC, sent to around 100 people who attend services at the Volcano Village site: The mission, Malam'Aina, resonates our BILAC song E nalima Nana, a malama 'aina. Hannah invited those interested to read the report and provide input. There is special concern about adopting the Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone and about preserving unique geologic features, such as spatter cones and lava tubes, at the same time also preserving native species, especially trees along highways and lot lines. II. Resources and Processes Related to PLAW Report Open Space Preservation Committee and Save Our Land Citizens' Committee recommendations and priorities, including biannual payments (March and September) to the Public Access, Open Space, and Natural Resources Preservation Fund (see appendix) 2005 General Plan re Puna (dlc, 1-2-06); full text at http://www.hawaii- county. com/la/gp/2005/main.html 1995 Puna Community Development Plan (not adopted by ordinance) "The Puna Community Is Asking For Answers from the Department of Public Works," with information on flood control projects, a new grubbing and grading ordinance, and protection for archeological and cultural sites, burials, and provisions for vegetation Larry Brown email with responses from Chris Yuen and others ~ "Recommendations for a Native Forest Protection Ordinance" -12- Tobacco-Free Big Island resources, http://www.tobaccofreebi~island.or~, including treatment • resource list, information on policy, treatment, and prevention +i4 Volcano Community Association, "Building in the Forest" and "Preliminary Resource List" Warshauer, Rick, 967-7476, "Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone: A Starting Point," items 1-10, VCA Voice, January 2007 Resources Related to Native Forest Protection Ordinance, Bett Bidleman http://www.mnstac.or /g_RFC/preservationordguide htm describes the process for creating a tree protection ordinance. http://www.ci.Pasadena.ca.us/publicworks/PNR/TreeOrdinance/default asp (includes permit forms, native tree lists, protected tree lists-public trees, landmark trees, specimen trees). Defines what native trees are protected, diameters (at least 8") and location on lots. http://www.californiaoaks.orb/ExtAssets/TreeProtOrdK Greele~pdf ("Tree Protection Ordinances-Can They Work?") http://www.Sonoma-county.org/prnld/docs/zonin /ag rticle 82 htm#zc26-82-010: Sonoma County, CA tree protection ordinance. http://www.co.marin.ca.us/depts/CD/main/mcbds/pln~/devproj/dev-98/981116tree html Draft Native Forest Protection ordinance prepared as part of the implementation program for the Marin Countywide Plan (adopted January 1994). http://www.fultonecd.or~ :Fulton County Tree Preservation Ordinance, Georgia "Some Considerations for Promoting Forest Protection Practices in Puna," prepared by Hawaii County consultant John Whalen. III. Background Information and Requests Related to PLAW Report 1995 Puna Community Development Plan • The 1995 Puna Community Development Plan, completed by a consultant secured by the County of Hawaii but not adopted by ordinance, includes recommendations for land use and design, some of which are related to preserving open space and thereby preserving land, air, and water. Coastal environmental quality, including pollution, is emphasized. "Open space" is specifically referenced in a recommendation for the County of Hawaii to collaborate with subdivision associations and property owners to find means to compensate landowners if open space designations are desired which "take" the use of whole parcels or significantly lower values and use for which there are investment-backed expectations (see "Take Issues," below). Recommendations related to development, specifically around Keaau, ask for "ample area for buffers and retention of natural areas to maintain apark-like environment:" 2005 General Plan The more recent General Plan, adopted by ordinance in 2005, states that "The land, water, air, sea, and people shall be considered as essential resources for present and future generations and enhanced through the use of economic incentives (2, ECONOMIC, Policies, 2, 3). Courses of Action in several chapters include specific actions related to Land Use. The table of "Historic Sites" (6-1) is followed by support for establishing Hawaiian Heritage Corridors (6.5.1.2. (a). "Natural Beauty Sites (7-1) designates "Grove of Mangoes (Pohoiki Road) as an "Exceptional Tree," adopted by ordinance. In particular, the 10 recommended actions in "Recreation" are relevant to Land Use. Chapter 14 contains helpful extensive Land Use data, with tables on zoning and LUPAG designations. District profiles for agriculture, commercial development, industrial, multiple residential, single-family residential, and resort uses, are delineated. • -13- Unfortunately, neither the recommendations in the 1995 PCDP nor the Courses of Action in the 2005 General Plan emphasize the importance of preserving land, air, and water in the proposed plans for agriculture, commercial development, industrial, multiple residential, single-family residential, and resort uses. Of even graver consequences for planning efforts to date, the2005 General Plan lacks district profiles and Courses of Action for "Open Space" and "Public Lands." "Taking" Issues Because of its broad implications for all recommendations related to land use, the PCDP Steering Committee and Work Groups should address the "taking" issue related to the limits of land use regulation. [Caution and note from Larry Brown communication--The summary of the land use regulatory system below does not cover all situations and exceptions. Chris Yuen's March 2006 paper at http://www.co.hawaii.hi.us/plannin /g_Land Use Regulatory System.pdf on the Hawaii Land Use Regulatory System explains the basics of the issue of "takings" in the United States. ] Although the use of land is highly regulated, a land use regulation that goes too far can be considered a taking of private property, and the government then has to compensate the landowner. A series of U.S. Supreme Court decisions govern the law of takings. Generally, a regulation can greatly reduce the value of property without being a taking. Courts have sustained down zonings that decreased the value by as much as 95%. But a regulation that deprives the owner of all "economically viable use" of the property will be considered a taking. The denial of a landowner's request for a rezoning will . generally not be a taking, unless the property has no economically viable use under its existing zoning. The U.S. Supreme Court has also put limits on the kinds of conditions that can be attached to a land use approval. Conditions must be related to the impact of the land use change: there has to be a "rational nexus" between the land use condition and the problem. For example, it would be illegal to make an applicant pay for the re-roofing of the County Building as a condition of a rezoning to allow a shopping center: there is no "nexus" with any impact created by the shopping center. . There must be a "rough proportionality" between any condition and the impact of the project. For example, making the developer of a small residential project pay for a new fire station would violate "proportionality." . The state and county can change land use approvals that have already been given. For example, the County Council has the power to "downzone" a property to allow much less development. At a certain point, however, the rights under existing approvals become "vested" and the government cannot take them away without paying compensation. In Hawaii, rights vest when the landowner has made substantial investments in good faith reliance on the final discretionary permit. For example, a project that has zoning, but still needs an SMA permit, is not "vested" because it has not received its final discretionary permit. If the project only needs a building permit, and the owner has spent money on architect's fees, then it has "vested" because the building permit is not discretionary. "Environmental Industry" Concept (Kim Tavares) We need to develop an ordinance to create an outreach department within County government that educates anyone looking for or required to have some knowledge about this great land, preferably prior to breaking ground on unspoiled land. Let's create a new industry (the environment) and lots of new jobs for local folks who could interpret the scenic points, monitor hiking/biking trails for visitor safety -14- and trash dumping prevention, remove invasive species, landscape (properly) the roadsides, replant to the greatest extent possible, propagate these plants so more of them can be planted, etc. Create some (new) kind of tourist and/or vehicle tax, or get more State funds from various outlets. Don't forget that bathrooms will be needed along the~way. If tourism & the environment are combined, jobs are created that take care of the land, air and water resources (environmental workforce), and teach others to appreciate it all (and use it properly to sustain the growing local populations of residents and visitors without dependency on barged in supplies), then won't a lot of other objectives just fall into place? The natural resources group would likely support and help most of these land use issues result in good recommendations in the final report. The weak part of this so far is the lack financial support or plan to generate revenue. Handing tax credits and incentives out to everyone who saves trees is not likely to happen, unless revenue is generated somewhere else, to balance the tax losses due to incentives and credits. A higher quality visitor experience (that costs more too), could be a source. DBEDT should be able to support all kinds of sustainable new businesses, if we take that frame of mind as a district. USDA-NRCS has qualified staff and sometimes even funding to make some really good things happen for the long term, across landscapes. IV. Open Space Preservation Committee, Save Our Land Citizen's Committee Private Properties Recommended for Purchase • Kawa Bay Hihiu, Kamoa parcel-Mauumae Beach • Waipio Lookout Point • Cape Kumukahi • Puapua'a • • Pohue Bay • O'oma (makai of Queen • Keei Beach • Maulua Gulch Kaahumanu Highway) • Punalu'u Beach Park and adjacent • Keamuku lands- Mahukona, Kamano, Kou, • Queen Emma Estate-coastal Properties to be acquired through Partnerships • Cibolo Bay Park Area) • Botelho Ranch • Kealakehe Regional Park • Makalawena • SC Ranch • Kahena Ditch Road • Old Kukuihaele Quarry and • KK Ranch • Lalamilo Farm Lots- Waimea Breakwater Keanakolu Koa Forests • Forest Reserve Honaunau and • Hokuula Battleground • Ka Lae/ South Point South Kona • Kahoe • Cohen (Lapakahi State Historical • Ka'u Coast • Ka'u Forest Reserve Park Area) • North American Properties: • Gordy (Lapakahi State Historical • Puu Oo Ranch Piihonua Kaapana,Olelo Moana, Kaohe Park Area) • Ka'u-Great Crack (southwest Rift • Kamoa point • Ninole- K'au, of the Kilauea Volcano) • Reish (Lapakahi State Historical • South Kona Forest Reserve, Prepared by Save Our Land Citizens' Committee; contact Debbie Hecht (Coordinator) at 989 3222 or hecht.deb~wgmail.com V. Depleted Uranium Testimony from Resource Anson Chong, former State Senator, former Foreign Service Officer (AID) with Secret Security clearances, former member, 25th Infantry Division, and former Aide Senator Daniel Inouye. Member, Appeals Board, Big Island PO Box 711388, Mt: View, Hawaii, 96771, (808) 968-8347, Cell: (808) 640-4395, ansonchong_~cr~ pobox. com Date: Feb 2, 2007 9:22 AM Subject: URGENT: HB 1046 & HB 1575 re: DEPLETED URANIUM To: repevans~ci),capitol.hawaii.gov, rephar(ticapitol.hawaii.gov_, i -15- Aloha, members of the Public Safety and Military Affairs Committee, Rep. Green and the ~Cnembers of the Health Committee. As a former foreign service officer (AID) who served in three hot wars, including the SE Asian war back in the late 60s, I can tell you how our government was somewhat lackadaisical in the handling of agent orange, the effects of which are still being felt by surviving American military who served in that war. I see, now, the possibility of this same attitude with regard to use of depleted uranium (DU) munitions. It appears that the military is not considering the strong possibility that DU munitions, as was the case with agent orange, may be a serious health threat to military personnel handling it as well to civilian populations where it us used. Some of the preliminary data strongly suggest that substantial numbers of returning American military personnel who served in the first Iraq war are already manifesting serious health problems that may have been due to exposure when handling DU munitions and also to DU dust when they went into Iraqi positions they just destroyed with those munitions. ._ For the above reasons, I strongly suggest that you schedule a hearing for both HB 1046 and HB 1575. Both provide health screening tests for all returning veteran who may have been exposed to DU. The bills also establish a task force to study the health effects of depleted uranium exposure and require an environmental study of storage and disposal of DU munitions on Oahu. I would suggest that they be amended to include storage and disposal of such munitions on the Big Island. DU exposure can be a serious health threat to military personnel who handle DU munitions and to ivilians wherever it has been used. ~. Of particular interest to those of us on the Big Island is the possibility of DU munitions being used at the Pohakuloa training site for live-fire exercises. If such munitions are used here, the concern is that DU dust from such tests would blow onto civilian populated areas such as Waimea, Honokaa and Hilo. The above referenced bills would be a good first step in protecting our local people on this island as well as military personnel who may not be aware of the possible dangers in handling DU munitions: • 16 Parks & Recreation • PARKS AND RECREATION WORKING GROUP • Steering Committee Representative: Greg Braun Liaison: Ericia Johnson Group member and temporary contact (till March 20): Emeline Paterson, 443-4304, ej .paterson@gmail. com • • Parks and Recreation Working Group Report Vision: A variety of recreational areas, reflecting the beauty and diversity of the lands of Puna and its people, shall be open and easily accessible to all. With active community involvement and state/federal cooperation, the Parks and Recreation Department will offer facilities and programs that promote individual mental and physical well-being for all ages and physical abilities, foster community unity and problem-solving and encourage community safety and stability. Methodoloay: The working group: • Surveyed Puna projects in development and existing facilities and their condition • Studied the small-group responses and the visions and plans provided; • Conducted additional polling to capture comments from young adults, working adults and families with young children. ["If the excerpts are incomplete or inappropriate feel free to expand your research." Guide to the Working Groups • Compared data gathered with the County of Hawaii General Plan and the County 5-acre per 1000 standard; • • Compiled improvement suggestions; • Analyzed and prioritized potential new sites; and • Developed specific policy and program recommendations to achieve the vision. ["Throughout the creation of the CDP's communities will be invited to provide input into the creation of policies as well as to identify implementation actions...." Puna: Steering the Course " -Second Puna Regional Workshop, 9/30/06 handout) Definitions as used by the working ~rou~ Recreational area - a county-owned and parks and recreation department managed location for visitor recreational use Facility -any built structure within a recreational area used by a visitor Program - an activity or series of activities offered or sanctioned by the parks and recreation department for visitors . Visitor -any individual -resident or tourist - using a recreational area Stewardship Program -individuals organized within a county program for construction, maintenance, monitoring and interpretative activities Organizing Committee -individuals organized within a county program for acquisition, funding, maintenance, programming, outreach and coordination and facilitation of volunteer efforts • 2 Summarv of Findings: 1. The County does not meet the 5-acre per 1000 resident standard. (See Appendices: A) 2. Existing facilities need major improvements. 3. The majority of Puna residents have few to none of the recreational opportunities they desire: the available recreational areas are not adequate in number, not diverse in offerings, and not accessible to the majority of residents 4. Vandalism is a significant problem that needs to be addressed through a multi- faceted initiative 5. The community must assume on-going, active responsibility through specific programs to support the County's efforts. 6. Active county/state/federal joint-management and inter-agency cooperation at the county level is essential. Obstacles Calling for Polic~Strategy Changes: While the small-group discussions resulted in specific requests, left unaddressed were the obstacles to achieving these results. 1. Underlying the responses from the small-group sessions is a common theme of requests for more varied offerings for all people regardless of age, yet according to the County Master Plan, programming and therefore facilities are centered on youth team sports. In addition, many facilities are co-managed with the Department of Education with school use receiving priority. Existing policies • leave the majority of Puna residents unserved. 2. Over the years and again in the 2005 County Master Plan, there are recommendations to "encourage" the state of Hawaii to take actions. Missing is a real effort in joint-management. 3. The threat of vandalism directly impacts offerings -design as well as provision. More pro-active strategies are needed. 4. Addressing the costs of acquisition, development, and maintenance is a major issue. In the past, the State has turned over land to the County only to have the County return the land to the State when unable to fund development. 5. The on-going role/responsibility of the community is undefined. The working group concluded that basic policy/strategy changes and new initiatives are an essential base, not an addition, to the small-group requests and are presented as the first goal. Goals for Puna Parks and Recreation 1. Ensure uniform excellence, on-going community involvement and environmental and facility protection through new policies and initiatives. 2. Comply with the standard of 5 recreational acres per every 1000 residents in Puna providing nature parks both coastal and interior, tiered (neighborhood, community, regional, & district) community parks, and linear parks (non- • motorized pathways, bike paths, and trails). 3. Provide recreational activities to meet the variety of interests, abilities, and ages of Puna residents including adequate services to seniors and other age groups. 4. Assure the parks of Puna are adequate for the population they serve, including adequate restrooms, adequate picnic tables, adequate shelters, and accessible at all times of day and all types of weather, with lighting, and located in every part of the district. Objectives Action is required on these areas .public/private partnerships, acquisition, development, service, education and respect. 1. Establish clear standards, definitions, policies and procedures and initiatives to enable on-going cooperation between stakeholders. 2. Meet the 5-acre/1000 resident standard through new acquisitions and joint management to provide recreational areas that are diverse in type and location. 3. Set timelines and benchmarks for development. 4. Assure services are adequate for all ages especially for seniors and those of limited physical abilities. 5. Provide educational opportunities 6. Put in place initiatives that build respect for the land and cultural heritage, sensitive to rights of all, and respectful of the facilities provided for all. r~ U • 4 Recommendations: A. Policy Initiatives for Public/Private Cooperation 1. Adopt principles to ensure uniform excellence: a. Recreational areas and facilities will support the spirit of ohana by providing for the needs of the multi-generational family* b. Facilities will be safe and clean, will adequately meet visitor needs and will respond to the changing needs within the community c. Facilities will be aesthetically pleasing, reflecting the natural setting and cultures to strengthen a sense of place and community d. Recreational areas that are or contain natural or historical preservation areas will have interpretative signage and programs to educate visitors to be enthusiastic stewards of the land e. Recreational areas, whenever possible, will incorporate recycling programs and other environmentally-friendly measures £ Programs will be cost-effective and innovative opportunities for casual as well as organized use g. Programs will include a range of offerings from passive through very active for all age groups regardless of physical ability h. Sites and programs will be culture-, community- and neighbor-friendly i. Programs will provide opportunities to learn, engage in and advance • recreational skills and will incorporate safety training and environmental and culturally-sensitive practices Justification: The current mission statement, "Service is our game. Satisfaction is our aim," does not provide all stakeholders with a shared knowledge of purpose and standards. The starred principle recognizes the particular role the ohana plays in visitor gatherings in Hawaii. The remaining principles are ones commonly espoused by park and recreation departments nationwide (Google search: "park and recreation + mission"). Cost: Publication and dissemination of these principles 2. Establish a permanent volunteer organizing committee with staff oversight whose mandate shall be assistance to the Parks and Recreation Department in coordination and facilitation of volunteer efforts in outreach, acquisition, funding, maintenance, programming and monitoring. Coordination and facilitation of volunteer efforts and outreach should: a. Provide on-going support in planning and acquisition and outreach. b. Assume organizational responsibility for a stewardship program c. Collaborate with the Na Ala Hele program and community groups to inventory, plan and implement trail and bikeway systems d. Collaborate with traditional Hawaiian community to protect sensitive sites and coordinate stewardship activities • • Justification: A permanent organizing committee will enable diverse, coordinated and uniformly excellent opportunities by providing common and continuing support for all park and recreation areas. The "Guide to the Working Groups (10-4-06)" states "Working Groups are free to continue meeting beyond the completion of the CDP. It is hoped that they will evolve into implementation groups once the plan is adopted." Cost: Staff time for committee oversight 3. Establish a strong volunteer stewardship program to include, for example, site monitoring, pathway building and maintenance, interpretative activities, and outreach. Justification: Programs such as "Adopt-a-trail" typically provide construction and maintenance. Non-profit "Friends of the Park" fill a variety of stewardship roles for a specific park. The organizing committee would take as an example the excellent work being done by the Friends of the Zoo and supporters of the Cooper Center to create a stewardship program, with training and coordination, to provide a variety of services in all recreational areas. Cost: The organizing committee would take on organizational responsibility for the program. The National Parks' Rivers and Trail program could provide additional start-up organizational skills. UH facility and local experts could provide specialized interpretative skill training. 4. Ado t olicies of openness to all and the authority of the County for approval P p and oversight of private efforts undertaken on its behalf. Provide guidelines for securing approval and oversight. Justification: All stakeholders participating in the funding and continued support of recreational areas and offerings must have a clear understanding that all such areas and offerings are available for general use. The County should be responsible for the approval and supervision of all such private activities undertaken on its behalf and stakeholders must be provided with clear guidelines for securing approval and oversight. Cost: Publication and dissemination of these policies. Provide functional definitions and strategies for types of parks Justification: Functional definitions assist all stakeholders in planning co- coordinated offerings in recreational areas and allow for greater community ownership. a) Provide tiered functional as well as acreage definitions for intra- and inter-community recreational areas. For example, a neighborhood recreational area, 0-10 acres, may be a bike-to, walk-to gathering area for informal recreational activity with few parking spaces reflecting neighborhood preferences through the addition of small department- sanctioned, but often volunteer-financed and maintained components (e.g., demonstration garden, tot-lot facilities, or off-leash dog area.) A community recreational area, 10-20 acres and generally a subdivision site, links • 6 neighborhoods and might offer a variety of components, e.g., larger gathering areas, simple sports fields, more parking, a tot lot, a community building. While facilities and programs would be available to all, subdivisions could coordinate offerings. A regional recreational area, 20-40/50 acres would offer more parking and additional transportation links and larger specialty components such as sports facilities adequate for league play with provision for ohana/fan participation. A district recreational area, 50+ acres must be able to adequately provide for heavy visitation from all communities within the district while maintaining provision for solitary or ohana use and protecting the environment. b) Specialty recreational areas that are unique in character require more innovative approaches to their programming: Linear parks: non-motorized pathways (excepting motorized wheelchairs). To some degree, interconnecting throughout Puna these pathways maybe adjacent to existing or new roadways on right-of--ways, or accompanying roadways or through greenbelts often with side extensions to provide view areas and/or sitting. Usually linear parks are made possible through conservation easements or subdivision/industrial park agreements. The exception would be the once existing old railroad right of way which could be acquired through condemnation to connect HPP with Kea'au and Hilo. Justification: While people agree that exercise is good for health and wellbeing, most people who have to get in their cars to exercise often do not. Moreover, neighbors easily circulating through their communities enhance neighborhood security and encourage community unity and stability. Further, cycling, walking and running should be encouraged for the betterment of health and to remove more motor driven traffic from our roads. Preserves: sites of significant natural or historical nature with appropriate signage and steward program monitoring. The Parks and Recreation Department would assess the viability of site visitor usage and implement self-guiding or steward-led interpretative tours through the preserves where possible. Other site visitor usage would be clearly defined by the Department. Justification: Particular areas must be protected both from development and improper use or over-use by the public. Camping Sites: areas with available water and restroom facilities. Often fee- based with a subcontractor providing services. Justification: informal camping related to other activities occurs throughout Puna but most particularly on the coast. For example, sites along the red road are often host to fishing families. Yet, despite FEMA environmental impact concerns regarding fecal matter in coastal waters, no toilet facilities are available. The County, in cooperation with the State, should assure that adequate and safe camping recreational sites with composting toilets and parking are available and that heavily-used sites are monitored. Turnouts: roadway pullouts at view areas with parking and interpretative signage, and emergency phones and composting toilets where no such facilities are available within a reasonable distance. • Justification: Tourists stopping on limited width roads with narrow or non- existent shoulders present a hazard to themselves and others. Coastal Activity Areas: water access areas for various recreational purposes. Justification: The County must balance very real concerns over land viability (lava, earthquake, subsidence, tsunami) and county liability with the need to preserve and protect coastal lands and to make these lands available for recreational use. In the face of increasing population, the County cannot espouse a concern for allowing traditional activity and egress without providing adequate facilities to support such activities with minimal environmental damage. There are very inadequate boat ramps and marina services in Hawaii County, the nearest marina services are in Kailua-Kona more than 100 miles by auto and 150 miles by sea. B. Prioritized Projects The working group determined priorities by considering: • Small-group and additional polling responses • Projects already begun • Cost-effectiveness • Predictable community or special-interest support • Precedent for future *The working group urges flexibility to take into consideration unique opportunities that • may occur during the 10-year period.] 1. Enhancements to the Isaac Hale Memorial Park Planning Considerations: At the time of this report conflicts with swimmer/boat access have yet to be resolved. The working group urges accommodation with the Smiths and/or Ms. Kahueonalani Kupihea (perhaps through conservation easements) to provide shore access separate from the boat ramp. The tidepools beyond "Shacks" could be hand-developed as keiki pools separate from surfing and boating while retaining the traditional fish-netting traditions. Given the high use experienced now and expected in the future, the working group urges continual assessment of the adequacy of facilities. Justification: The project is already underway and community support has been built. The enhancements are judged to be low-cost. 2. MacKenzie Park and the state and county property south of MacKenzie. Planning Considerations: • Create a joint management team state/county to plan for historical and environmental preservation/protection and to provide improvements to facilities, general park monitoring & camping permit regulation. • Consider expanding the camping area but within specific areas. • Convert the existing rough entrance to the south end into a maintained gravel or asphalt entrance road with aturnaround/drop-off point and handicapped/ emergency parking only below and regular parking adjacent to the red road above. Awell-graded walking path would connect upper and lower areas. Restroom facilities would be added to this south area. • Develop a stewardship component for monitoring and on-going interpretative programs • Plan and hold an opening with interpretative activities led by local experts. Justification: Property is held by State Parks &Recreation, DLNR, and the County. Undeveloped areas are unmonitored and subject to misuse and environmental damage, yet it is one of the most spectacular coastline areas. Portions of the King's Highway remain with a flat beach area and walkway underneath palm trees. With adequate access and picnic tables, the area is ideal for all ages and a certain tourist stop. Since the land is owned, development costs would be limited. No action would result in continuing misuse and environmental damage. 3. Green Lake. Planning Considerations: • Land acquisition with the provision that it be developed as a nature park with native plant/habitat restoration, interpretative activities and other stewardship. • Develop a nature center with activities for school-aged students and the general public. • Utilize existing school programs and summer conservation program for restoration and stewardship activities. Justification: Green Lake provides an opportunity to create a nature park that is not coastal but is within the widely-used coastal recreational area. Rich in legend, it offers the possibility ofnature-walking trails within a restored habitat. Financing opportunities for both acquisition and development might be the geo-thermal fund and 2% money. The property owner is known to have expressed a desire that the land become a nature sanctuary. Private funding/non-profit support and student school and summer program contribution would be sought for plantlhabitat restoration. 4. Hawaiian Paradise Park ("HPP") 20 acre park Planning Considerations: • 9 The county consider the HPP park project a precedent for county/community cooperation in a larger substandard subdivision Develop a facilities based park on a donated parcel within HPP to include all forms of recreation including swimming pool and tennis courts Pursue additional HPP community donations of land within the subdivision for field activities in different areas of the subdivision Aggressively pursue development of a passive cultural resources and ethnobotanical park on the HPP 31 acre parcel to include the rock walls native/introduced plants and exceptional trees which currently does not enjoy protection from development Consideration must be given to non-motorized travel to and from the park and several properties are near the old railroad right of way. Justification: The need is apparent. HPP is willing to donate some land and should be encouraged to donate more than just 20 acres in their donation. A passive resource park would go very well on a 31 acre parcel which has a turn of 20th century village foundation remains. HPP is the largest subdivision in Puna with over 8,800 buildable lots and is the largest growing subdivision in the state. Potential population will rival Hilo in the future and is now estimated to be approximately 10,000. There are no developed parks within the boundaries of HPP meaning each resident seeking recreation must travel between 10 to 20 miles. 5. Linear Parks: • Complete development of Old Volcano trail as a pedestrian and cycle pathway as soon as possible • Acquire rights of way and develop the old Railroad Ave. (railroad right of way) with access (hike, bike, horse) from Kapoho to HPP • Consider acquisition and development of the old right of way for the railroad from Railroad Avenue in Hilo to HPP through condemnation if necessary. 6. Pahoa Village Center Park Planning Considerations: • Create a park within amulti-venue village center. Multiple venues, e.g., Senior Center, Gymnasium, Art Center, Performance Stage (covered), Children's Museum would join the Pool, Community Center, and Skateboard Park. An economical "backpacker hotel" might be considered. • Create a loop access road to lessen traffic on the main road through Pahoa. • Share combined parking areas with landscape breaks and sheltered picnic tables and establish easy, well-lit walking paths to main street businesses • Transfer the current Pahoa fire station to a senior services facility when the new fire station is built. Provide adequate staffing, a van and a certified kitchen • Provide a park, accessible from the various venues with an easy interior loop suitable for elderly/tot use, an exterior walking loop, tot lot. 10 Justification: The County towns 56 acres. The Senior Center is needed and the gymnasium cannot be located next to the new fire station. Continuing to locate venues in the same area with provision for traffic, parking and walking access provides ample opportunity for multi-generational activities. Private/public fundraising would be done for the venues and landscaping would be provided in part by local plant associations/societies and school programs. Other Projects: Red Road Scenic/Recreation Corridor County Master Plans have separated individual recommendations. The working group urges the county to consider it as one corridor requiring partnership with the state, landowners, and tour van operators. Additionally, the county is urged to work with transportation to provide safe pull-outs, and walking and bike lanes where available in the right-of--way. Specific suggestions include: adding a restroom and emergency phone along route below Seaview before Kehena Beach, creating access, a simple walking trail on the lava and new parking area with restrooms on state owned accreation land at the new Kamu Beach [tour companies should be involved in the process and share in the costJ, posting appropriate warning signage were appropriate, in newly realigned sections: covering old sections of road with cinder soil to allow naupaka to reclaim road, and providing interpretative signage • *Cape Kumukahi: Support and actively pursue the development of a major water recreation park with ocean access and potential boat launch and full scale marina on state accretion land. The state and county needs to provide access and water related activities in Puna as well as the rest of the county. Any activity must be at a distance from Hawaiian burial sites. *Note: The working group believes that ample community and initial non-profit support exists and that the majority of the land can be made available from the state. However, large development costs would be required to develop this beach/marina park. The working group urges the County to begin active consideration of this potential and to explore means to fund development costs. Finding funding sources should elevate the priority of this project, but not at the expense of other projects, improvements, services, and initiatives. Nanawale Forest Reserve, Sand Hill, and Honolulu Landing have potential for future development as the Puna population continues to increase. This is a priority for acquisition and development if funding can be found perhaps using the 2% money. Additional items from small group reports: Many of these requests are specialty components and should require an active partnership with a non profit group. For example, the ATV Riders of Hawaii, 808 MX/ATV and DLNR made possible the dirt bike park and the dirt bike and ATV racing track. 11 Horse stable, ice skating rink, local arcade, motor cross track, jet ski areas in the ocean, raceway, shooting range, theater in Volcano community, weight and fitness center, more public tennis courts, water park, movies, ATV park, gym in upper Puna, animal park, bike park, hula center B. Improvements to Existing Parks: Pahoa Pool Resolve pump/power outage problems. Provide solar system for heating and consistently use an easy on/off covering for heat retention in Pahoa pool. Expand the hours in the morning, evening, and weekends for working adults. Leave message on answering machine when pool is closed. Ahalanui Park Construct handicapped entrance to the hot pond at the pond entrance closest to the walkway, provide screened changing area near shower -make out of more natural material to blend with surroundings, fix and maintain parking lot surface and provide more picnic tables Shipman Park Improve interior fencing and parking to eliminate danger of cars backing into children chasing balls, provide more ohana/fan support (shade, coverings, benches, picnic tables), construct a large pavilion for team/family activities, add additional fields for football and baseball, provide additional lighting and more restrooms as use requires. Waiopae Tidepools Partner with the private sub-division to help provide restrooms and trash relief. Provide parking that doesn't use private land. There needs to be water quality monitoring. Work with other county agencies on a requirement that new construction owners must convert to a septic system with a pump out system -possible with tax credit. Mountain View Gym Upgrade buildings Shipman Beach Shorten access and maintain trail Kahakai Beach Park Continuing support for improvements Other comments from small groups and community plans: Develop recreational activities to complement Cooper Center activities and plans Enhance recreational activities that integrate the Volcano community Monitor and address the recreational needs of all subdivisions (using the HPP park development as a possible model) 12 Keaau Beach -establish, restore mauka & makai access(Haena, paki, and Papai) Pavilion across from Hirano store -expand C. Services 1. Senior Services- provide more hours and encourage involvement of young retirees while providing adequate care for the indigent elderly. [Puna seniors 5,886; Island senior population grew 65% over last ten years. Source Parks and Recreation, Senior Services) a) Pahoa Senior Center conversion of the existing fire station with a certified kitchen; provision of a van; staff -2. (See also above: A,6 Pahoa Village Center Park) b) Mountain View -complete facility with a certified kitchen and restrooms provision of a van; staff -2. 2. Diversity & Access a) Work with Public Works (right-of-ways), Land Use, local subdivisions, communities, and individuals to create linear parks (See above, A, S, b) b) Provide a diversity of recreational areas and programming for passive to active activities for individuals of all ages and abilities c) Provide lighting and expanded hours for working adults • d) Provide covered shelters e) Provide heating for the Pahoa Pool D. Building community, shared knowledge and respect for the aina 1. Develop amulti-faceted stewardship program (construction/maintenance, monitoring, and interpretation) with comprehensive training including local knowledge and tradition. 2. Schedule interpretive programs, demonstrations and knowledge-sharing activities. 3. Use signage and monitoring by the stewardship program in undeveloped and land- bank areas and in nature preserves 4. Support stewardship monitoring with local police activities 5. Involve the neighboring community in specific community-support activities and continually assess their needs and concerns 6. Use the stewardship program to develop outreach to the schools 7. Involve school programs and summer youth conservation programs. 8. Provide opportunities and grant-funded work for students to enhance appreciation of recreational sites. 9. Seek funding for student-created oral-history projects with public presentations 10. Develop a memorial or commemorative program to add community value to site assets 13 Appendices: A. 5 acres/1000 person standard & usability 1992 2005 2007 2010 Puna Population 20,781 36,351 42,591 (1990 census) (projected) Total acreage 124.2 166.25 Developed/acreage lost to lava flow -26.4 Acreage developed <''/z 28.22 1992 total acreage/acreage developed January 1992 Puna Community Development Plan: Technical Reference Report; population figures 2005 General Plan, 2007 acreage figures Parks and Recreation Department spreadsheet The January 1992 Puna Community Development Plan: Technical Reference Report (hereafter, "92-TRR") States "...the County Council had taken the position that the island's total county and state park acreage (both developed and undeveloped) does meet the 5-acre:1,000 population standard" but concluded that "...Puna does not have adequate developed recreational space to meet the needs of its residents."'(92-TRR, p. 118). 2005 County of Hawaii General Plan a) In referring to the Hawaii Volcanoes National Park: "The facilities are readily accessible for passive and active recreation." Yet admission to the park is not free. The National Park should be considered an important supplement to but not a part of Puna parks. b) "...programs are centered around team sports for young people." Facilities, most often are limited to those that support team-sports programming. Even these provide few if any facilities (shade, coverings, benches, picnic tables) for ohana/fans. Many young people do not participate in team sports. Most residents are not in the youth-team sports category. c) "School activities take precedence over public use at joint-use facilities." Other facilities such as the Pahoa pool do not offer hours available for working adults 14 d) "Cool and rainy weather requires covered or indoor recreational areas." Many adults find the Pahoa pool unusable in winter. B. Meeting Record The working group's meeting records are complete containing minutes and original meeting flip chart sheets, handouts, and emails. Seven full meetings were held with additional working meetings and one meeting with Senior Services representatives. Minutes were provided promptly. A majority of members attended the full meetings and names of attendees were recorded Members represented town, subdivisions and community. There was no representative from Upper Puna. Steering Committee representative Greg Braun continually made appeals for participation from these areas. • A 15 Puna Community Development Plan Social Services Working Group 2/9/07 RECOMMENDATIONS While the Social Services Working Group recognizes that there are many areas in which social services are needed (see Section Three), the two areas that were considered most important throughout the series of small meetings were housing and substance abuse treatment. In keeping with the wishes of the people attending the small community development meetings, the Social Services Working Group has developed the following goals and objectives: Goal To work towards an increase in social services in Puna that address housing and substance abuse prevention and treatment. Objectives • To improve quality of life for Puna residents by providing effective and accessible substance abuse treatment and prevention services. • To increase availability of accessible and affordable housing for all Puna residents. Section One: Substance Abuse Treatment and Prevention Recommendations in order of priority 1. Increase prevention education around substance abuse. 2. Support existing strategic plans developed by substance abuse agencies serving the Puna district, such as the Healing Our Island 2004 Hawaii Island Meth Initiative. 3. Create additional residential treatment homes, especially for women and children. 4. Support programs that emphasize family involvement. 5. Create a One Stop Center to provide linkages, support and advocacy related to substance abuse treatment and prevention as well as the other issues listed below in Section Three: Additional Issues That Need to Be Addressed. o Although the concept of a One Stop Center may sound elaborate or expensive, it need not be. It could be as simple as harnessing an existing office space and coordinating its use amongst multiple providers that offer the services listed. 6. Form partnerships with public and private organizations such as but not limited to the Big Island Substance Abuse Council (BISAC), Hui Ho'ola, Salvation Army Family Intervention Services, Lokahi Treatment Centers, and Ohana Ho'opakele to increase prevention education and treatment for substance abuse. Section Two: Housing Recommendations in order of priority 1. Support the County of Hawaii Consolidated Plan 2005-2009 -The three big sections covered are housing and special needs housing, homeless, and community development. a. Specifically support the Community Alliance Partners (CAP) Logic Model Big Island Strategic Plan on Homelessness. 2. Increase affordable housing for people with low income, people with disabilities and the elderly including rental and ownership opportunities. 3. Create a One Stop Center to provide linkages, support and advocacy related to housing as well as the other issues listed below in Section Three: Additional Issues That Need to Be Addressed. Puna CDP -Social Services Working Group -Recommendations -Page 1 of 27 4. Encourage the maintenance and rehabilitation of the existing housing inventory to maintain the viability of existing communities. 5. Support the development of alternative housing ownership strategies which provide options for low-cost and more accessible home ownership. This includes offering educational programs targeting financial skills to increase opportunities for home ownership, as well as education on effective rental strategies for owners and tenants. 6. Form partnerships with public and private organizations such as Habitat for Humanity, Hawaii County Economic Opportunity Council (HCEOC), and Hawaiian Homelands to develop affordable housing and rental units. 7. Encourage planning for multi-family residential areas near future commercial centers in the existing subdivisions to provide transportation and housing options for residents who cannot or do not wish to be auto-dependent. 8. Encourage more lease held housing development options for non-profit organizations. 9. Examine the feasibility of utilizing community land trusts to acquire and hold land for the benefit of a community and provide secure affordable access to land and housing for community residents. Section Three: Additional Issues That Need to Be Addressed Recommendations in order of priority During the course of holding regular meetings and requesting community input, the Social Services Working Group received much feedback about the following issues that need to be addressed in addition to the two main issues that arose from the Puna CDP Small Groups: 1. Create a One Stop Center to provide linkages, support and advocacy related to the following issues: • o substance abuse treatment and prevention; o housing and special needs housing, homeless, and community development; o teen pregnancy prevention/birth control; -need to increase effective education efforts o child care options -these need to increase o transportation and service coordination; o employment; o serving clients with disabilities; o domestic violence screening/abatement/prevention; o access to medical services for all residents; o access to clean water and education on catchment water; o coordination with a One Stop Center in Puna so homebound clients can also access that One Stop Center through initiatives such as the Block Nurse Programs (BNPs), Navigator Programs, or Home Visiting Programs like the Neighborhood Place of Puna. This will encourage maximum self-reliance and minimum use of costly professional services; early intervention and treatment; prevention and recovery rather than long-term treatment; and coordination and integration of services rather than fragmentation and specialization. 2. Encourage the development of accessible social activities, especially for youth and seniors, including securing appropriate facilities as well as increasing the accessibility to community centers. This can include facilities that may be recently vacated or unfinished. For example,. the soon to be vacated Pahoa Fire Station could be used as the Senior Center. 3. School facilities should be made available to the community for recreation and other • compatible uses during after school hours. Puna CDP -Social Services Working Group -Recommendations -Page 2 of 27 Section Four: Justification Justification for recommendations and source of information used is documented in our Working Group minutes of seven meetings held on 10/27/06, 11/7/06, 11/20/06, 12/8/06, 1/5/07, 1/26/07, and 2/9/07 at the Neighborhood Place of Puna (see minutes attached). The minutes describe our review of the Puna CDP Small Group Meetings from March-June 2006, and results of our interviews with community experts, community members, and our reviews of various documents such as the County of Hawaii General Plan, the Puna Community Development Plan, the County of Hawaii Consolidated Plan, the CAP Logic Model Big Island Strategic Plan on Homelessness, etc. Our draft recommendations were e-mailed to various community groups such as the Puna Round Table and Community Alliance Partners, and were also posted on the Puna Community Development Plan website for community input. Section Five: Obstacles Potential obstacles for implementing the recommendations include but are not limited to lack of financial resources, lack of infrastructure, insufficient coordination with the public and private agencies and Hawaii's high cost of living. Additional barriers specific to substance abuse include the need to redirect funds from treatment to prevention, change overly restrictive Department of Health codes, building codes, and zoning, as well as the "not in my backyard mentality". Limited health insurance coverage for substance abuse treatment, mental health services and behavioral health should not affect treatment plans which must be based on the individual's needs. Providers need to explore multidisciplinary treatment addressing interdependent issues such as substance abuse, domestic violence, and housing. Additional barriers specific to housing include the lack of education around financial issues such • as managing credit and home ownership, the availability of land for lease or sale, and the lack of available and affordable rental units. Potential tenants are faced with long wait lists for rental assistance, and many potential landlords are no longer willing to accept subsidies for housing. There is no centralized place to access rental housing information, availability and financial assistance. Attachments: 1. Meeting minutes 2. Interview letter and questions 3. Names of organizations consulted to create these recommendations • Puna CDP -Social Services Working Group -Recommendations -Page 3 of 27 Puna Community Development Plan Social Services Working Group Meeting Minutes 11 /7/06 Participants: Mary Hyslop, Neighborhood Place of Puna, mhyslop(cD.hotmail.com, 965-5550 Lucille Chung, Queen Lili'uokalani Children's Center, Ichung(a~glcc.org, 935-9381 Ke'ala Lee Loy, Kamehameha Schools, keleeloyCc~ksbe.edu, 982-0699 Nadia Ranne, Goodwill Industries of Hawaii, nrannet~hiaoodwill.org, 961-0307 ext. 1410 Guests: Barbara Lively, Steering Committee Liaison Location: Neighborhood Place of Puna • Barbara shared her perspective on the CDP and the subcommittee process. We discussed the priority areas identified last meeting, noted that the input is not all inclusive, discussed honoring the input, and agreed that this process is driven by the input but it is not the limiting factor. Barbara is the Steering Committee Liaison and can be reached at 982-5496 home or blively77t~yahoo.com • Last meeting we identified the major areas that came out of the CDP process as: o Substance abuse treatment and prevention o Housing ^ Homelessness • Affordable housing ^ Affordable housing for elderly ^ Assisted living facilities • Last meeting we identified the providers we want to contact who have expertise in these areas. Today we drafted aletter/talking points and assigned contacts to be made to get their input to report back to the group, as well as to invite them to be a guest or join our subcommittee. • Barbara suggested asking them about plans or recommendations on long term growth and future trends. We could phrase a recommendation such as: "In 2015, the population will be _, so service needs to be at this level...."., which would be the base or minimum. She also reminded us about community assets such as schools, churches, community centers, etc. An example of something that did not result as a priority but clearly has merit is the lack of day care in Puna. • We envisioned One Stop Centers for social services which would help address access issues and much more. • Lucille brought the GIS Public Data disk, operating budget 1, and six year capital improvement program which she picked up from the County offices. • We also started to brainstorm list of Puna providers who could provide valuable input as they are in the community making referrals or wishing there was a place they could refer to. These include but are not limited to: o Arc of Hilo o Mental Health o Pahoa Health Center o Food pantry -Catholic Charities o Puna Narcotics Anonymous 969-6644 - We can get input from the people that . have been through substance abuse issues and are either in or working on Puna CDP -Social Services -Page 4 of 27 recovery. We will ask the facilitator to get input from the participants who have . been there -input from the other side of the table. Mary will leave a note for them. Providers we will contact who have expertise in these areas: SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT AND PREVENTION Ma Lucille Ke'ala Nadia BISAC - Dr. Z, Likeke Hui Ho'ola Lokahi Treatment Goodwill Center - 969-9292 Carry Causey, Director Grant Community Salvation Army Boys & Girls Club Faith Against Drugs - Mental Health Family Intervention Vern Services Pahoa Weed & Seed About Face Bill Kenoi Puna Narcotics Pu'u Kanalu in Hilo Anon mous 969-6644 HOUSING • homeless shelters, assisting living, senior living, affordable housing, Ma Lucille Ke'ala Nadia OHCD -Jeremy County Housing - Ed Office of Social East Hawaii Coalition Ministry, Car AVan - for the Homeless - Carol I nacio Steve HCEOC -Mary Catholic Charities - Office of Aging, Julie Senior Living -Alan Parker Big Island Housing Foundation - 969- 3327 • Below is the Draft Letter/Talking Points we created as a tool to guide our contacts with these agencies. It can be e-mailed or simply used as talking points. • A separate draft of this letter will be distributed via a-mail for the subcommittee to make any further revisions before dissemination. • Each subcommittee member is responsible for reporting back to the group the information they obtained from these contacts. We will also invite our contacts to join us during our meeting as applicable. • We can a-mail information prior to our next meeting so we can review ahead of time. • Next meeting is Monday 11/20 8:30 am at the Neighborhood Place of Puna • NOTE: Our first meeting was held on 10/27/06 with Debra Chang present. Minutes are not available. • • Puna CDP -Social Services -Page 5 of 27 DRAFT LETTERITALKING POINTS Aloha, We are a subcommittee of the Puna Community Development Plan process focusing on social service issues. Our goals are to be able to provide the CDP with some recommendations related to social services for the future of the district of Puna that truly reflect Puna's voice. The CDP process has identified the following as priority areas related to social services: • Substance Abuse Treatment and Prevention • Housing o homelessness o affordable housing o elderly housing o assisted living facilities We are conducting a needs assessment to determine what the needs are, what services are already being provided, and what your recommendations are in relation to your area of expertise. We need your assistance by providing answers to the following questions as they relate to the priority area of (substance abuse treatment and prevention, or housing): 1. What services do you offer in Puna? 2. Who do you serve in Puna? Who is your target population? What part of Puna do they come from? General overview is fine. Available demographic information is helpful. 3. What is your capacity for servicing Puna? If none, do you have any plans for servicing Puna? 4. Do you have a location(s) in Puna? If so, how much staff do you have servicing Puna? 5. Where do you see a lack of services in Puna in relation to substance abuse treatment and prevention? 6. What recommendations do you have for Puna in relation to substance abuse treatment and prevention, or housing? 7. Please provide names of individuals or agencies that you think may be helpful for us to contact in this process. We meet twice a month and will complete our recommendations by February. Please let us know if you would be interested in participating in one or all of our meetings. We greatly appreciate your input! Mahalo! Mary Hyslop, Neighborhood Place of Puna, mhvslop(a~hotmail.com, 965-5550 Lucille Chung, Queen Lili'uokalani Children's Center, Ichung(a)alcc.ora, 935-9381 Ke'ala Lee Loy, Kamehameha Schools, keleeloy(c~ksbe.edu, 982-0699 Nadia Ranne, Goodwill Industries of Hawaii, nranne _hiaoodwill.ora, 961-0307 ext. 1410 Puna CDP -Social Services -Page 6 of 27 Puna Community Development Plan Social Services Working Group Meeting Minutes 11 /20/06 Participants: Mary Hyslop, Neighborhood Place of Puna, mhyslop(c~hotmail.com, 965-5550 Lucille Chung, Queen Lili'uokalani Children's Center, Ichung[@alcc.orq, 935-9381 Ke'ala Lee Loy, Kamehameha Schools, keleeloyCa)ksbe.edu, 982-0699 Vicki Linter, Arc of Hilo, vlinterCa~hiloarc.ora, 935-8535 ext. 203 Sasha Payao, HCEOC Right Track Program, 965-6440, sasha payao(~notes.k12.hi.us Nadia Ranne, Goodwill Industries of Hawaii, nranne ~higoodwill.org, 961-0307 ext. 1410 Location: Neighborhood Place of Puna • Reminder of the major areas that came out of the CDP process as: o Substance abuse treatment and prevention o Housing ^ Homelessness ^ Affordable housing ^ Affordable housing for elderly ^ Assisted living facilities • Review of providers we are contacting who have expertise in these areas: o Ke'ala: contacts were made but no response yet. o Lucille: Completed OHCD. o Mary: Completed Pahoa Weed and Seed, and HCEOC for housing and substance abuse. o Nadia: no contacts or reponses yet. Will contact Billy Kanoi to get information on county substance-abuse meeting taking place today and tomorrow. SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT AND PREVENTION Ma Lucille Ke'ala Nadia BISAC - Dr. Z, Likeke Hui Ho'ola Lokahi Treatment Goodwill Center - 969-9292 Carry Causey, Director -Contacted but no res onse et Grant Community Salvation Army Boys & Girls Club Faith Against Drugs - Mental Health Family Intervention Vern Services Pahoa Weed & Seed About Face Billy Kenoi - DONE -Lon Brown Puna Narcotics Pu'u Kanalu in Hilo Anon mous 969-6644 • • • Puna CDP -Social Services -Page 7 of 27 HOUSING • homeless shelters, assisting living, senior living, affordable housing, Ma Lucille Ke'ala Nadia OHCD -Jeremy County Housing - Office of Social East Hawaii Coalition DONE -Jeremy Ministry, Car AVan - for the Homeless - Carol Ignacio - Steve Contacted but no res onse et HCEOC -DONE - Catholic Charities - Office of Aging, Mary Finley Julie Senior Living -Alan Parker Big Island Housing Foundation - 969- 3327 -Contacted but no res onse et • We also started to brainstorm list of Puna providers who could provide valuable input as they are in the community making referrals or wishing there was a place they could refer to. These include but are not limited to: • o Arc of Hilo o Mental Health o Pahoa Health Center o Food pantry -Catholic Charities o Puna Narcotics Anonymous 969-6644 - We can get input from the people that have been through substance abuse issues and are either in or working on recovery. We will ask the facilitator to get input from the participants who have been there -input from the other side of the table. Mary will leave a note for them. • Other areas related to social services to at least list in our document. Please think about what other issues we can add to this list _of barriers: o Transportation, child care, employment, disabilities, birth control, domestic violence, childcare, access to medical, • CAP Logic Model Big Island Strategic Plan on Homelessness -goes into the state housing plan for the next 10 years. Can recommend to follow this and/or point out specific strategies that we want to emphasize for our recommendations. • Sasha: youth just did a brainstorming session on this ...issues that came up include parent involvement, homelessness, runaways, transportation, violence, bullying, having a youth center and much more -Youth Summit committee. has it. Will get it, is prioritized. Will let the youth know we are doing this and let them know they can participate. They may be interesting in seeking donations could be a youth service project for the kids. • Sasha: Feedback from homeless people - Houeless versus homeless. Appreciating food pantry. Wishing for a bag of concrete or a tarp; assistance to build a catchment; need for can openers if we give canned goods; -important to have their voices in this process -they know what their needs are more than we do. They need a lot more than what community service organizations are trying to do. Puna CDP -Social Services -Page 8 of 27 • 70% of people do not have access to nightly baths because they don't have access to water. • We are going to make recommendations for the plan in this subcommittee rather than trying to solve the problem. We need to find ways to bring attention and resources to address these problems. • Places where showers are available: o Kona: The Friendly Place o Hilo: Under His Wings o Puna: along time ago there were $0.25 for a shower near Luquin's o Discussion of possibility of building showers at the new water spigot on the highway. Would need to have bathrooms too. County owned. o Showers at the Pahoa pool will not be made available. You must swim in order to use shower. o Some schools used to let the kids shower on campus. Can this be a bullet point recommendation rather than up to the principal. It is built, there is water, there is a janitor, etc. Let the kids shower in the morning. Goes right along with providing them breakfast so they have a good start to their day. o Showers are empty and ready to be used. Don't leave it punitive. Find innovative ways to make this work. o Hotels remodel and donate linens and soap to shelters. Can they donate to schools. Can be washed in home economics class, special ed class that is learning how to do laundry, ARC of Hilo, etc. o Larger issue is access to water. • Discussion of subdivisions cracking down on tarps and ticketing residents, even those with homes in construction. They tack on fees to dues and can put a lead on the property. • Homeowner/landowner rights -less punitive restrictions on those whose homes are in development, easing of rules by community associations, vacant landowners not maintaining their land and affecting neighbors catchment tanks due to trees reaching over the roofs, • Transportation is a big piece related to accessing social services. If they can't get there, they are not going to use it. A recommendation can be that agencies provide transportation, that they have a transportation plan. Agencies need to plan how clients will access the services. o Gas vouchers, taxi coupons, mileage reimbursement HIGHLIGHTS OF RESPONSES TO OUR QUESTIONS SO FAR - to be updated at each meetina - brina copies of vour resorts to the meeting to distribute to members for review 1. What services do you offer in Puna? a. Substance Abuse i. HCEOC -Right Track -drop out prevention program related to substance abuse b. Housing i. HCEOC - Weatherization program -problem -cannot get contractors. Utility assistance, food bank, Head Start, employment and training, immigration services, GED testing and placement, senior services, transportation. ii. • u • Puna CDP -Social Services -Page 9 of 27 2. Who do you serve in Puna? Who is your target population? What part of Puna do they come from? General overview is fine. Available demographic information is helpful. a. Substance Abuse i. b. Housing i. 3. What is your capacity for servicing Puna? If none, do you have any plans for servicing Puna? a. Substance Abuse i. HCEOC -Right Track -offices in Pahoa and Keaau, one person in each b. Housing i. - 4. Do you have a location(s) in Puna? If so, how much staff do you have servicing Puna? a. Substance Abuse i. b. Housing 5. Where do you see a lack of services in Puna in relation to substance abuse treatment and prevention? a. Housing i. OHCD -Puna could use educational programs targeting financial skills. There are people in Puna who make enough money to own a home but do not have the skills to manage, save and use credit wisely. Having these skills would afford them the opportunity to put them on track to home ownership. ii. OHCD -There is a need for overnight homeless shelters in Puna. iii. OHCD -There are churches in Puna who feed the homeless b. Substance Abuse i. 6. What recommendations do you have for Puna in relation to substance abuse treatment and prevention, or housing? a. Housing i. OHCD -Developers develop affordable housing or affordable rental units. b. Substance Abuse i. 7. Please provide names of individuals or agencies that you think may be helpful for us to contact in this process. a. Housing i. OHCD -Hawaii Island Community Development Corporation -Keith Kato 969-1158. Involved in elderly housing. b. Substance Abuse i. 8. Comments related to SUBSTANCE ABUSE: a. HCEOC -Lorraine Godoy emphasized prevention over treatment because people are not lining up to get treatment and generally only seek treatment if mandated -there are beds open at this time. b. Empty beds tend to be moms and babies, or dads and kids. c. Focus on prevention. Many substance abusers need to hit rock bottom before getting motivated to access treatment services. d. Family involvement is very important as this may give substance abuser motivation to access treatment to keep family together Puna CDP -Social Services -Page 10 of 27 9. Comments related to HOUSING: a. HCEOC -Puna 70% of structures are not legal. Especially important is water and wastewater treatment. b. OHCD -brochures -Big Island Homeless Resource Guide (A guide to agencies and services that assist the homeless in their transition to stable housing. Created by Community Alliance Partners [CAP]. Updated 3/10/06) c. Children who are raised in families that own there own homes tend to do better and have healthier families. d. Self-help housing -helping each other build on weekends -some youth from school in carpentry class volunteered and Idved it. e. Discussion of giving back for use of facilities, such as work exchange or something -add value -not just a handout. f. Would be nice for them to add a few showers to the Pahoa Community Center that they are remodeling now. • Agenda items for next meeting: o Report back on new information gathered o Report back on other social services related issues o Decide if we are including all or specific strategies of CAP Logic Model Big Island Strategic Plan on Homelessness into our recommendations. ^ Mary will a-mail it to all. o Report back on ideas of guests to invite as guest speakers or to join the subcommittee. ^ Vicki to contact Care A Van. • Next meeting is Friday 12/8 12:00 pm at the Neighborhood Place of Puna -brown bag lunch meeting Puna CDP -Social Services -Page 11 of 27 Social Services Puna Community Development Plan Social Services Working Group Meeting Minutes 12/8/06 Participants: Mary Hyslop, Neighborhood Place of Puna, mhyslop(p)hotmail.com, 965-5550 Vicki Linter, Arc of Hilo, vlinter(a~hiloarc.org, 935-8535 ext. 203 Nadia Ranne, Goodwill Industries of Hawaii, nranne(a~hiaoodwill.ora, 961-0307 ext. 1410 Unavailable: Lucille Chung, Queen Lili'uokalani Children's Center, Ichuna(a~alcc.ora, 935-9381 Ke'ala Lee Loy, Kamehameha Schools, keleeloyCa~ksbe.edu, 982-0699 Location: Neighborhood Place of Puna We did an initial brainstorm of our Goal, Objective, Recommendation format that is due February 15, 2007 (see below). During our next meeting we will continue to edit this document. It can be shared with providers who have expertise in these areas to get their input and revisions. The hope is that this format will solicit feedback specific to recommendations. Anyone can review and a-mail feedback to Nadia to be incorporated into master document. ************************************************************************************************************* DRAFT Goal To work towards an increase in social services in Puna that address housing and substance abuse prevention and treatment. Objectives • To improve quality of life for Puna residents by providing effective and accessible substance abuse treatment and prevention services. • To increase availability of accessible and affordable housing for all Puna residents. Recommendations -substance abuse treatment and prevention • Increase prevention education around substance abuse • Create additional residential treatment homes, especially for women and children. • Support programs that emphasize family involvement in interventions??? -Ask substance abuse providers. Recommendations -housing • Build senior, low income and disabled housing in the lower and upper Puna. • Support the Big Island Strategic Plan on Homelessness. • Create a One Stop Center in Puna -broaden scope of information and referral services through the Neighborhood Place of Puna • Improve access to water • Offer educational programs targeting financial skills to increase opportunities for home ownership. Puna CDP -Social Services -Page 12 of 27 • Form partnerships with Habitat for Humanity to develop affordable housing and rental units. • Reduce homelessness... • Increase affordable housing, assisted living, and elderly housing... • Improve existing housing... • Encourage the maintenance and rehabilitation of the existing housing inventory to maintain the viability of existing communities. • School facilities should be made available to the community for recreation and other compatible uses during after school hours. • Encourage planning for multi-family residential areas near future commercial centers in the existing subdivisions to provide transportation and housing options for residents who cannot or do not wish to be auto-dependent. • Support the development of alternative housing ownership strategies which provide options for low-cost and more accessible home ownership. Additional Comments Increase education around teen pregnancy prevention • Encourage the development of social activities. • One Stop Center for social services to address access issues • Increase child care options SUMMARY OF CONTACT REPORTS VICKI • Vicki interviewed person with a disability in Pahoa and The Arc of Hilo Executive Director Mike Gleason. • Mike has worked at Oregon State Correctional Facility and has experience working with people with disabilities less severe than developmental disabilities. He is working on a program to expand vocational training to Puna with Habitat for Humanity. This is a vocational training project recycling construction materials. Has a business plan already and is looking for land in Puna. • Would be nice to have one phone number where a person can call to find out about accessible building, senior or low income buildings. One place to find out about subsidized housing opportunities and to get on a single wait list -rather than each person having to look for and sign up on their own in various parts of the community. • Arc offers housing for people with disabilities and for people that are low income. It is managed through Day Lum properties. Last month they had three openings. Can be very quick to get in from waiting list. Vicki to work on marketing opportunities and to announce at Puna Roundtable meetings. • More input from Arc of Hilo: o Prevention: vocational training opportunities for students/people at risk in Puna area is something we plan to provide; special needs people, which can include current abusers or people at risk for substance abuse. o We plan to expand our vocational training to help students of the local schools with special needs by providing them with skills which lead to jobs and will hopefully help them avoid substance use. When you build self esteem with a job Puna CDP -Social Services -Page 13 of 27 you can help them from turning to self medication for depression. We are currently working with DOE to help get vocation training in schools in the Puna area. It is in the concept stage now but could happen fairly quickly. o Within 2 years we hope to have vocational training around recycling construction materials, working with Habitats for Humanity. We will be a collection point for usable construction materials; re-use or left-overs that are new. Contractors can donate materials; we will establish a re-sale store creating jobs and training in the store. There will be further opportunity for vocational training while using the materials in actual construction jobs. Habitats for Humanity is interested in using our vocational training to help with creating pre-fab walls, fixing up existing homes, etc. We have completed a business plan, and are looking at a site location. o The definition of special needs is broad, but with the focus on people with disabilities. Our Board is seeing more that as "community builders" we have to broaden our focus. You can't isolate and separate services anymore; like medicine; you have to integrate western and eastern methods. o Mike told me about his extensive experience at Oregon State correctional facility; seeing learning disabled vulnerable folks going in and out of jail. Families need support; especially around alcoholism and domestic violence.. o Housing: The Arc of Hilo has a goal to provide 72 units low income housing in Puna; priority to elderly and disabled, looking for 5 acres of land; get the government out of the way! Somewhere near new shopping center; want to purchase fee simple; could use government or lease land but that's harder; maybe the county land in Pahoa next to swimming pool. o Wishes for Puna: ^ Accessible transportation ^ Attract more social activities ^ Small venues, but we need a place for a larger gathering place with more capacity ^ Two routes into Puna for emergencies ^ Pahoa gym; ^ don't think they will really release the grant in aid money but they need it; for everyone including people with disabilities. • Vicki also interviewed Debbie, a person with a disability. Needs or wishes for Puna: o Accessible transportation o More activities (like the pool) o Accessible places to walk o Accessible stores on the main street o More involvement and awareness with the community, not necessarily with disability groups but more of an awareness and involvement with one's own community. Ex: community center is for elders, free lunch doesn't feel open for the public to use; the pool feels more open. • Pool is great; accessible welcoming feeling. Spring Jam was great; why not have that 4 times per year. Events outdoors open to public for free; accessible; place for this is needed in Puna! More community development instead of or in addition to commercial development!! Should be located in Pahoa; each subdivision has a longhouse, but what is there in Pahoa Town, except the Community Center; something outdoors like the big bandstand in Hilo, near the pool would be great! • Library is so small that if you are in a wheelchair you can hardly move around; very small and cramped; ramp is too steep in front; bathrooms are too small. Puna CDP -Social Services -Page 14 of 27 • Capacity for serving Puna; unlimited! Starting out small with ADH and PA; getting the word out; we're growing and will probably not be in present location for long; where can we go? Where are there other accessible buildings? Puna is really big; it goes back to awareness; what is a developmental disability? So many people come by the office to ask us what we do? Lower Puna has more people to serve but may not know who we are or what we do or how to get here? Our Capacity to serve depends on awareness! Who we are, what we do, who we serve; as well as who would want to work in this field in their community and earn a good living as well as giving back to their own community. • Ideas for Puna: o Support groups for parents of children with disabilities o More accessible housing o Visitable houses o Parks and Rec for people with disabilities o Walking trails/ par course/ all accessible FROM KE'ALA VIA E-MAIL • We want to get in touch with participants of the Roundtable discussion in Volcano that was Nov 20-21 to address these issues. Nadia will ask Grandee on Tuesday. • NADIA • Office of Aging: Feedback included comments about the elderly needing better supportive facilities such as medical in Puna, as well as looking at supportive housing services brought to the community and Alan Parker gave an example in Hamakua. • Faith Against Drugs commented that housing needs to support those on welfare and people with disabilities as their financial assistance income is not enough to house them. Transportation was also stated as an important issue. • Made numerous attempts to contact Billy Kanoi and East Hawaii Coalition for the Homeless. Next meeting is Friday 1/5/07 8:00 am at the Neighborhood Place of Puna • Puna CDP -Social Services -Page 15 of 27 . Puna Community Development Plan Social Services Working Group Meeting Minutes 1/5/07 Participants: Mary Hyslop, Neighborhood Place of Puna, mhyslop(a~hotmail.com, 965-5550 Vicki Linter, Arc of Hilo, vlinter(a~hiloarc.org, 935-8535 ext. 203 Lucille Chung, Queen Lili'uokalani Children's Center, Ichuna a(~.glcc.ora, 935-9381 Nadia Ranne, Goodwill Industries of Hawaii, nranne(a~higoodwill.ora, 961-0307 ext. 1410 Unavailable: Ke'ala Lee Loy, Kamehameha Schools, keleeloy aC~.ksbe.edu, 982-0699 Location: Neighborhood Place of Puna The following are our draft recommendations that will be made available to the public for comments with a deadline of January 20. Comments should be e-mailed to Nadia Ranne at nrannet~higoodwill.org. RECOMMENDATIONS Goal • To work towards an increase in social services in Puna that address housing and substance abuse prevention and treatment. Objectives • To improve quality of life for Puna residents by providing effective and accessible substance abuse treatment and prevention services. • To increase availability of accessible and affordable housing for all Puna residents. Recommendations -substance abuse treatment and prevention 7. Increase prevention education around substance abuse. 8. Support existing strategic plans developed by substance abuse agencies serving the Puna district. 9. Create additional residential treatment homes, especially for women and children. 10. Support programs that emphasize family involvement. 11. Create a One Stop Center in Puna -broaden scope of information and referral services through the Neighborhood Place of Puna 12. Form partnerships with public and private organizations such as Big Island Substance Abuse Council (BISAC), Hui Ho'ola, Salvation Army Family Intervention Services, and Lokahi Treatment Centers to increase prevention education and treatment for substance abuse. Recommendations -housing 10. Support the County of Hawaii Consolidated Plan 2005-2009 -The three big sections covered are housing and special needs housing, homeless, and community development. • a. Specifically support the Community Alliance Partners (CAP) Logic Model Big Island Strategic Plan on Homelessness. Puna CDP -Social Services -Page 16 of 27 11. Increase affordable housing for people with low income, people with disabilities and the elderly including rental and ownership opportunities. 12. Create a One Stop Center in Puna -broaden scope of information and referral services through the Neighborhood Place of Puna 13. Encourage the maintenance and rehabilitation of the existing housing inventory to maintain the viability of existing communities. 14. Support the development of alternative housing ownership strategies which provide options for low-cost and more accessible home ownership. This includes offering educational programs targeting financial skills to increase opportunities for home ownership, as well as education on effective rental strategies for owners and tenants. 15. Form partnerships with public and private organizations such as Habitat for Humanity, Hawaii County Economic Opportunity Council (HCEOC), and Hawaiian Homelands to develop affordable housing and rental units. 16. Encourage planning for multi-family residential areas near future commercial centers in the existing subdivisions to provide transportation and housing options for residents who cannot or do not wish to be auto-dependent. 17. Encourage more lease held housing development options for non-profit organizations. Additional issues that need to be addressed (not prioritized yet) 4. Increase education around teen pregnancy prevention 5. Encourage the development of accessible social activities, especially for youth and seniors. For example, use the soon to be vacated Pahoa Fire Station as the Senior Center and increase the accessibility to community centers. 6. Create a One Stop Center for social services to address access issues 7. Increase child care options 8. Transportation 9. Employment 10. Disabilities 11. Birth control 12. Domestic violence 13. Access to medical services 14. School facilities should be made available to the community for recreation and other compatible uses during after school hours. 15. Improve access to water Justification for recommendations and source of information used is documented in our subcommittee minutes. The minutes describe results of our interviews with community experts, community members, and our reviews of various documents such as the County of Hawaii General Plan, the Puna Community Development Plan, the County of Hawaii Consolidated Plan, the CAP Logic Model Big Island Strategic Plan on Homelessness, etc. These recommendations were e-mailed to various community groups such as the Puna Round Table and Community Alliance Partners, and were also posted on the Puna Community Development Plan website for community input. Potential obstacles for implementing the recommendations include but are not limited to lack of financial resources, lack of infrastructure, insufficient coordination with the public and private agencies, and Hawaii's high cost of living. Additional barriers specific to substance abuse include the need to redirect funds from treatment to prevention. Additional barriers specific to housing include the lack of education around financial issues such as managing credit and • home ownership, and the availability of land for lease or sale, insufficient resources for Puna CDP -Social Services -Page 17 of 27 • MINUTES • Reviewed County of Hawaii Consolidated Plan 2005-2009 -The three big sections covered are housing and special needs housing, homeless, and community development. o Specifically support the CAP Logic Model Big Island Strategic Plan on Homelessness. • Mary is attending a meeting at BISAC today and will ask if there a strategic plan to address substance abuse issues exists. • Brandee Menino of OSM announced our work and how to provide feedback to the Hawaii Island Substance Abuse Roundtable Meeting on 12/21/06. We have not received any feedback yet. o Nadia will ask her for an a-mail list to send the draft recommendations too. • Continued to add and revise recommendations. Prioritized each area. Developed text for justification. • Mary will a-mail the recommendations to community members to get additional feedback such as members of the Puna Round Table and to the Community Alliance Partners through their secretary Julie. • Mary will coordinate with John Schinner to post these draft recommendations on the CDP website to make it available for community input with a deadline of January 20 for comments. Our final recommendations are due on February 15. • • We don't know if substance abuse is included in the General Plan. • Toby Hazel arrived to participate in the meeting. • Toby suggested we talk to Emergency Response System staff to get their input and gave an example of coordination done after Katrina. • Toby suggested we speak to Harold Burgado in Parks and Recreation. She has been to some other meetings and noticed that other groups did not include their resources or input. She made an appointment for 10:00 on Jan 10. She gave the example of requesting that the Pahoa Fire Station become a senior center once vacated. She also said the recreation center is user unfriendly and could be changed by having a person from the Senior Employment Program working there. On the weekends only one event can happen. Added to our additional recommendations - For example, use the soon to be vacated Pahoa Fire Station as the Senior Center and increase the accessibility to community centers. Toby focused on accessible activities and nutrition. Next meeting is Friday 1/26/07 2:00 pm at the Neighborhood Place of Puna • Puna CDP -Social Services -Page 18 of 27 Puna Community Development Plan Social Services Working Group Meeting Minutes 1 /26/07 Participants: Mary Hyslop, Neighborhood Place of Puna, mhyslop _hotmail.com, 965-5550 Vicki Linter, Arc of Hilo, vlinter(c~hiloarc.orq, 935-8535 ext. 203 Ke'ala Lee Loy, Kamehameha Schools, keleeloy a(~.ksbe.edu, 982-0699 Nadia Ranne, Goodwill Industries of Hawaii, nranne anhigoodwill.org, 961-0307 ext. 1410 Unavailable: Lucille Chung, Queen Lili'uokalani Children's Center, Ichunq(t~glcc.org, 935-9381 Location: Neighborhood Place of Puna • Reviewed comments received and revised recommendations (see below). • Our final recommendations are due on February 15. Subcommittee members will review this final draft and bring final edits to our last meeting on 2/9/07 where they will be finalized. • Subcommittee members will a-mail Nadia or bring to next meeting the names of the organizations or individuals we consulted with to create these recommendations. RECOMMENDATIONS -DRAFT Goal To work towards an increase in social services in Puna that address housing and substance abuse prevention and treatment. Objectives To improve quality of life for Puna residents by providing effective and accessible substance abuse treatment and prevention services. To increase availability of accessible and affordable housing for all Puna residents. Section One: Substance Abuse Treatment and Prevention Recommendations in order of priority 13. Increase prevention education around substance abuse. 14. Support existing strategic plans developed by substance abuse agencies serving the Puna district, such as the Healing Our Island 2004 Hawaii Island Meth Initiative. 15. Create additional residential treatment homes, especially for women and children. 16. Support programs that emphasize family involvement. 17. Create a One Stop Center to provide linkages, support and advocacy related to substance abuse treatment and prevention as well as the other issues listed below in Section Three: Additional Issues That Need to Be Addressed. 18. Form partnerships with public and private organizations such as but not limited to the Big Island Substance Abuse Council (BISAC}, Hui Ho'ola, Salvation Army Family Intervention Services, Lokahi Treatment Centers, and Ohana Ho'opakele to increase prevention education and treatment for substance abuse. • • r~ ~J Puna CDP -Social Services -Page 19 of 27 • Section Two: Housing Recommendations in order of priority 18. Support the County of Hawaii Consolidated Plan 2005-2009 -The three big sections covered are housing and special needs housing, homeless, and community development. a. Specifically support the Community Alliance Partners (CAP) Logic Model Big Island Strategic Plan on Homelessness. 19. Increase affordable housing for people with low income, people with disabilities and the elderly including rental and ownership opportunities. 20. Create a One Stop Center to provide linkages, support and advocacy related to housing as well as the other issues listed below in Section Three: Additional Issues That Need to Be Addressed. 21. Encourage the maintenance and rehabilitation of the existing housing inventory to maintain the viability of existing communities. 22. Support the development of alternative housing ownership strategies which provide options for low-cost and more accessible home ownership. This includes offering educational programs targeting financial skills to increase opportunities for home ownership, as well as education on effective rental strategies for owners and tenants. 23. Form partnerships with public and private organizations such as Habitat for Humanity, Hawaii County Economic Opportunity Council (HCEOC), and Hawaiian Homelands to develop affordable housing and rental units. 24. Encourage planning for multi-family residential areas near future commercial centers in the existing subdivisions to provide transportation and housing options for residents who cannot or do not wish to be auto-dependent. • 25. Encourage more lease held housing development options for non-profit organizations. 26. Examine the feasibility of utilizing community land trusts to acquire and hold land for the benefit of a community and provide secure affordable access to land and housing for community residents. Section Three: Additional Issues That Need to Be Addressed Recommendations in order of priority 16. Create a One Stop Center to provide linkages, support and advocacy related to the following issues: o substance abuse treatment and prevention; o housing and special needs housing, homeless, and community development; o teen pregnancy prevention/birth control; -need to increase effective education efforts o child care options -these need to increase o transportation and service coordination; o employment; o serving clients with disabilities; o domestic violence screening/abatement/prevention; o access to medical services for all residents; o access to clean water and education on catchment water; o coordination with a One Stop Center in Puna so homebound clients can also access that One Stop Center through initiatives such as the Block Nurse Programs (BNPs), Navigator Programs, or Home Visiting Programs like the Neighborhood Place of Puna. This will encourage maximum self-reliance and minimum use of costly professional services; early intervention and treatment; prevention and recovery rather than long-term Puna CDP -Social Services -Page 20 of 27 treatment; and coordination and integration of services rather than fragmentation and • specialization. 17. Encourage the development of accessible social activities, especially for youth and seniors, including securing appropriate facilities as well as increasing the .accessibility to community centers. This can include facilities that may be recently vacated or unfinished. For example, the soon to be vacated Pahoa Fire Station can be used as the Senior Center. 18. School facilities should be made available to the community for recreation and other compatible uses during after school hours. Section Four: Justification Justification for recommendations and source of information used is documented in our subcommittee minutes of seven meetings held on 10/27/06, 11/7/06, 11/20/06, 12/8/06, 1/5/07, 1/26/07, and 2/9/07 at the Neighborhood Place of Puna (see minutes attached). The minutes describe our review of the Puna CDP Small Group Meetings from March-June 2006, and results of our interviews with community experts, community members, and our reviews of various documents such as the County of Hawaii General Plan, the Puna Community Development Plan, the County of Hawaii Consolidated Plan, the CAP Logic Model Big Island Strategic Plan on Homelessness, etc. Our draft recommendations were e-mailed to various community groups such as the Puna Round Table and Community Alliance Partners, and were also posted on the Puna Community Development Plan website for community input. Section Five: Obstacles Potential obstacles for implementing the recommendations include but are not limited to lack of financial resources, lack of infrastructure, insufficient coordination with the public and private • agencies, and Hawaii's high cost of living. Additional barriers specific to substance abuse include the need to redirect funds from treatment to prevention, change overly restrictive Department of Health codes, building codes, and zoning, as well as the "not in my backyard mentality". Limited health insurance coverage for substance abuse treatment, mental health services and behavioral health should not affect treatment plans which must be based on the individual's needs. Providers need to explore multidisciplinary treatment addressing interdependent issues such as substance abuse, domestic violence, and housing. Additional barriers specific to housing include the lack of education around financial issues such as managing credit and home ownership, the availability of land for lease or sale, and the lack of available and affordable rental units. Potential tenants are faced with long wait lists for rental assistance, and many potential landlords are no longer willing to accept subsidies for housing. There is no centralized place to access rental housing information, availability and financial assistance. Attachments: 4. Meeting minutes 5. Interview letter and questions 6. Names of organizations and/or individuals consulted to create these recommendations Next and final meeting is Friday 2/9/07 12:00 pm at the Neighborhood Place of Puna • Puna CDP -Social Services -Page 21 of 27 Puna Community Development Plan Social Services Working Group Meeting Minutes 2/9/07 Participants: Mary Hyslop, Neighborhood Place of Puna, mhyslop ~hotmail.com, 965-5550 Vicki Linter, Arc of Hilo, vlinter(a~hiloarc.org, 935-8535 ext. 203 Ke'ala Lee Loy, Kamehameha Schools, keleeloyCa).ksbe.edu, 982-0699 Nadia Ranne, Goodwill Industries of Hawaii, nranneta7.higoodwill.org, 961-0307 ext. 1410 Unavailable: Lucille Chung, Queen Lili'uokalani Children's Center, Ichung a(~glcc.org, 935-9381 Location: Neighborhood Place of Puna • Reviewed recommendations, made edits and finalized. • Created list of Names of organizations consulted to create these recommendations • Discussion of who and how to submit our recommendations. Documentations says submit to Consultant, Steering Committee, and the Planning Department. John Whalen is the consultant. Send via a-mail? Nadia can send via a-mail, hard copy, on disk, etc. • Attempted to contact Barbara Lively, Steering Committee Liaison to find out how these recommendations and attachments should be submitted. Minutes say she can be reached at 982-5496 home or blively77Ca~yahoo.com. Home number was not successful. Attempted to contact her at Bob Jacobson's office 961-8263. • Can contact Deborah Chang, Puna CDP Coordinator, 961-8288, ext 254, dchang~co.hawaii.hi.us • Called Liz who advised us to a-mail the documents to her. Puna Community Development Plan Working Group: Social Services RECOMMENDATIONS While the Social Services Working Group recognizes that there are many areas in which social services are needed (see Section Three), the two areas that were considered most important throughout the series of small meetings were housing and substance abuse treatment. In keeping with the wishes of the people attending the small community development meetings, the Social Services Working Group has developed the following goals and objectives: Goal To work towards an increase in social services in Puna that address housing and substance abuse prevention and treatment. Objectives • To improve quality of life for Puna residents by providing effective and accessible substance abuse treatment and prevention services. • To increase availability of accessible and affordable housing for all Puna residents. Puna CDP -Social Services -Page 22 of 27 Section One: Substance Abuse Treatment and Prevention Recommendations in order of priority 19. Increase prevention education around substance abuse. 20. Support existing strategic plans developed by substance abuse agencies serving the Puna district, such as the Healing Our Island 2004 Hawaii Island Meth Initiative. 21. Create additional residential treatment homes, especially for women and children. 22. Support programs that emphasize family involvement. 23. Create a One Stop Center to provide linkages, support and advocacy related to substance abuse treatment and prevention as well as the other issues listed below in Section Three: Additional Issues That Need to Be Addressed. o Although the concept of a One Stop Center may sound elaborate or expensive, it need not be. It could be as simple as harnessing an existing office space and coordinating its use amongst multiple providers that offer the services listed. 24. Form partnerships with public and private organizations such as but not limited to the Big Island Substance Abuse Council (BISAC), Hui Ho'ola, Salvation Army Family Intervention Services, Lokahi Treatment Centers, and Ohana Ho'opakele to increase prevention education and treatment for substance abuse. Section Two: Housing Recommendations in order of priority 27. Support the County of Hawaii Consolidated Plan 2005-2009 -The three big sections covered are housing and special needs housing, homeless, and community development. a. Specifically support the Community Alliance Partners (CAP) Logic Model Big Island Strategic Plan on Homelessness. • 28. Increase affordable housing for people with low income, people with disabilities and the elderly including rental and ownership opportunities. 29. Create a One Stop Center to provide linkages, support and advocacy related to housing as well as the other issues listed below in Section Three: Additional Issues That Need to Be Addressed. 30. Encourage the maintenance and rehabilitation of the existing housing inventory to maintain the viability of existing communities. 31. Support the development of alternative housing ownership strategies which provide options for low-cost and more accessible home ownership. This includes offering educational programs targeting financial skills to increase opportunities for home ownership, as well as education on effective rental strategies for owners and tenants. 32. Form partnerships with public and private organizations such as Habitat for Humanity, Hawaii County Economic Opportunity Council (HCEOC), and Hawaiian Homelands to develop affordable housing and rental units. 33. Encourage planning for multi-family residential areas near future commercial centers in the existing subdivisions to provide transportation and housing options for residents who cannot or do not wish to be auto-dependent. 34. Encourage more lease held housing development options for non-profit organizations. 35. Examine the feasibility of utilizing community land trusts to acquire and hold land for the benefit of a community and provide secure affordable access to land and housing for community residents. Section Three: Additional Issues That Need to Be Addressed Recommendations in order of priority • Puna CDP -Social Services -Page 23 of 27 During the course of holding regular meetings and requesting community input, the Social Services Working Group received much feedback about the following issues that need to be addressed in addition to the two main issues that arose from the Puna CDP Small Groups: 19. Create a One Stop Center to provide linkages, support and advocacy related to the following issues: o substance abuse treatment and prevention; o housing and special needs housing, homeless, and community development; o teen pregnancy prevention/birth control; -need to increase effective education efforts o child care options -these need to increase o transportation and service coordination; o employment; o serving clients with disabilities; o domestic violence screening/abatement/prevention; o access to medical services for all residents; o access to clean water and education on catchment water; o coordination with a One Stop Center in Puna so homebound clients can also access that One Stop Center through initiatives such as the Block Nurse Programs (BNPs), Navigator Programs, or Home Visiting Programs like the Neighborhood Place of Puna. This will encourage maximum self-reliance and minimum use of costly professional services; early intervention and treatment; prevention and recovery rather than long-term treatment; and coordination and integration of services rather than fragmentation and specialization. 20. Encourage the development of accessible social activities, especially for youth and seniors, including securing appropriate facilities as well as increasing the accessibility to community centers. This can include facilities that may be recently vacated or unfinished. For example, the soon to be vacated Pahoa Fire Station could be used as the Senior Center. 21. School facilities should be made available to the community for recreation and other compatible uses during after school hours. Section Four: Justification Justification for recommendations and source of information used is documented in our Working Group minutes of seven meetings held on 10/27/06, 11/7/06, 11/20/06, 12/8/06, 1/5/07, 1/26/07, and 2/9/07 at the Neighborhood Place of Puna (see minutes attached). The minutes describe our review of the Puna CDP Small Group Meetings from March-June 2006, and results of our interviews with community experts, community members, and our reviews of various documents such as the County of Hawaii General Plan, the Puna Community Development Plan, the County of Hawaii Consolidated Plan, the CAP Logic Model Big Island Strategic Plan on Homelessness, etc. Our draft recommendations were e-mailed to various community groups such as the Puna Round Table and Community Alliance Partners, and were also posted on the Puna Community Development Plan website for community input. Section Five: Obstacles Potential obstacles for implementing the recommendations include but are not limited to lack of financial resources, lack of infrastructure, insufficient coordination with the public and private agencies and Hawaii's high cost of living. Additional barriers specific to substance abuse include the need to redirect funds from treatment to prevention, change overly restrictive Department of Health codes, building codes, and zoning, Puna CDP -Social Services -Page 24 of 27 as well as the "not in my backyard mentality". Limited health insurance coverage for substance abuse treatment, mental health services and behavioral health should not affect treatment plans which must be based on the individual's needs. Providers need to explore multidisciplinary treatment addressing interdependent issues such as substance abuse, domestic violence, and housing. Additional barriers specific to housing include the lack of education around financial issues such as managing credit and home ownership, the availability of land for lease or sale, and the lack of available and affordable rental units. Potential tenants are faced with long wait lists for rental assistance, and many potential landlords are no longer willing to accept subsidies for housing. There is no centralized place to access rental housing information, availability and financial assistance. Attachments: 7. Meeting minutes 8. Interview letter and questions 9. Names of organizations consulted to create these recommendations • ~J Puna CDP -Social Services -Page 25 of 27 Attachment 2 -Interview Letter Aloha, Who do you serve in Puna? Who is your target population? What part of Puna do they come from? General overview is fine. Available demographic information is helpful. 10. What is your capacity for servicing Puna? If none, do you have any plans for servicing Puna? 11. Do you have a location(s) in Puna? If so, how much staff do you have servicing Puna? • We are a subcommittee of the Puna Community Development Plan process focusing on social service issues. Our goals are to be able to provide the CDP with some recommendations related to social services for the future of the district of Puna that truly reflect Puna's voice. The CDP process has identified the following as priority areas related to social services: • Substance Abuse Treatment and Prevention • Housing o homelessness o affordable housing o elderly housing o assisted living facilities We are conducting a needs assessment to determine what the needs are, what services are already being provided, and what your recommendations are in relation to your area of expertise. We need your assistance by providing answers to the following questions as they relate to the priority area of (substance abuse treatment and prevention, or housing): 8. What services do you offer in Puna? 12. Where do you see a lack of services in Puna in relation to substance abuse treatment and prevention, or housing? 13. What recommendations do you have for Puna in relation to substance abuse treatment and prevention, or housing? 14. Please provide names of individuals or agencies that you think may be helpful for us to contact in this process. We meet twice a month and will complete our recommendations by February. Please let us know if you would be interested in participating in one or all of our meetings. We greatly appreciate your input! Mahalo! Mary Hyslop, Neighborhood Place of Puna, mhysloota'~_hotmail.com, 965-5550 Lucille Chung, Queen Lili'uokalani Children's Center, Ichuna(cD.plcc.org, 935-9381 Ke'ala Lee Loy, Kamehameha Schools, keleeloyCa~ksbe.edu, 982-0699 Nadia Ranne, Goodwill Industries of Hawaii, nranne(a~hiaoodwill.orp, 961-0307 ext. 1410 Puna CDP -Social Services -Page 26 of 27 • Attachment 3 Names of organizations consulted to create recommendations. 1 About Face 2 Arc of Hilo 3 Bi Island Housin Foundation 4 Bi Island Substance Abuse Council BISAC 5 Catholic Charities 6 Child and Famil Services 7 Count of Hawaii Prosecutor's Office 8 De artment of Human Services -Child Welfare Services 9 DLIR Work lace Develo ment Division 10 East Hawaii Coalition for the Homeless 11 Faith A ainst Dru s 12 Goin Home Reinte ration Initiative members 13 Goodwill Industries of Hawaii 14 Grant Communit Mental Health 15 Hawaii Count Council 16 Hawaii Island HIV/AIDS Foundation 17 Hawaii Island Substance Abuse Round Table 18 Hawaii Count Economic O ortunit Council HCEOC 19 Hiccu Circus 20 Hui Ho'ola DASH 21 Kamehameha Schools 22 Keone oko Elementa School 23 Kokua Counselin Services 24 Le al Aid Societ of Hawaii 25 Lokahi Treatment Center 26 Mainstreet Pahoa 27 Nanawale Communit Association 28 Nei hborhood Place of Puna 29 Office for Social Minist 30 Office of A in ,Senior Livin -Alan Parker 31 Office of Housin ahd Communit Develo ment OHCD 32 Pahoa Famil Health Center 33 Pahoa Hi hand Intermediate School 34 Pahoa Weed and Seed 35 Parents Attentive to Children PATCH 36 PARENTS, INC. 37 Planet Puna 38 Pu'u Kanalu in Hilo 39 Puna Interfaith Alliance 40 Puna Narcotics Anon mous 41 Puna Round Table members 42 Queen Lili'uokalani Children's Center 43 Rota Club of Hilo Ba 44 Salvation Arm Famil Intervention Services 45 The Bo sand Girls Club of the Bi Island 46 The Institute for Famil Enrichment TIFFE 47 Youn Life Parent Pro ect ~J r Puna CDP -Social Services -Page 27 of 27 Transportation • Puna Community Development Plan Final Report February 15, 2007 Prepared for: County of Hawai' i 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, HI 96720 Prepared by: Transportation Working Group Existing Roadways Task Partnership Members (in alphabetical order) ^ Yen Chin ^ Keola G.A. Downing ^ LuanaJones ^ Prema Qadir New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Members (in alphabetical order) ^ Bobble Allcen ^ Stephanle Bath • Bryan Christ • Keola Downing Prema Qadir Judy Stenger Elizabeth Weatherford Mass Transit Task Partnership Members (in alphabetical order) Bob Bogle Toby Hazel • Melissa Knott • Margaret Levy-Dohanos • Mary Marvln Porter • Llz Salfen • Frankie Stapleton • James Weatherford o Steering Committee Liaison: Stephanle Bath o Community Liaison: Liz Salfen o Working Group Coordinator: Prema Qadir * Puna CDP Transportation Working Group Task Partnership Coordinator l~ u Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW TABLE OF CONTENTS OVERVIEW Page I. THE ALOHA SPIRIT 03 II. PUNA CDP TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP MISSION STATEMENT 04 III. TASK PARTNERSHIP MISSION STATEMENTS 05 IV. BACKGROUND: COMMUNITY ISSUES 06 V. BACKGROUND: TRANSPORTATION ISSUES 07 VI. PREVIOUS DEVELOPMENT PLANS 08 VII. PUNA CDP TRANSPORTATION TASK PARTNERSHIP THEMES 09 VIII. MEETING RECORDS OF ATTENDANCE 10 IX. CONCLUSIONS 13 EXECUTIVE SUMMARIES: 15 • X MASS TRANSIT TASK PARTNERSHIP 16 . XI. NEW ALTERNATIVE CORRIDORS TASK PARTNERSHIP 19 XII. EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP 25 XIII. PUNA CDP TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP 27 XIV.STEERING COMMITTEE LIAISON 33 XV. OVERVIEW APPENDIX 37 TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORTS A. MASS TRANSIT TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT B. NEW ALTERNATIVE CORRIDORS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT C. EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT E lauhoe mai na wa'a; i ke ka, i ka hoe; i ka hoe, i ke ka; pae aku i ka'aina "Paddle together, bail, paddle; paddle, bail; paddle towards the land. If everybody works together the work will be done quickly." • 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2!14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 2 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW I. The Aloha Spirit At one of our Puna CDP Transportation Working Group community presentations, we were inspired by a reminder from Brad Kurokawa, Deputy Director of Planning for the County of Hawai' i. Near the end of our meeting, when asked if he had any advice for the Puna CDP Working Groups, Brad said one word: "ALOHA!" The Aloha Spirit is the coordination of mind and heart within each person. A kahai - kindness to be expressed with tenderness L okahi - unity, to be expressed with harmony 'O lu'olu - agreeable, to be expressed with pleasantness H a'aha'a -humility, to be expressed with modesty A honui - patience, to be expressed with perseverance -- by Hawaii's treasured kupuna, Auntie Pilahi Paki Its deeper meaning is the joyful (oha) sharing (alo) of life energy (ha) in the present (alo). -- by Serge Kahili King, 1990 ALOHA is the law of the land. Aloha is mutual regard and affection and extends warmth in caring with no obligation in return. .• Aloha is the essence of relationships in which each person is important to every other person for collective existence. .• Aloha is to hear what is not said, to see what cannot be seen and to know the unknowable. Within the Puna CDP Transportation Working Group, we attempted to approach every transportation issue with aloha for ALL of the people of Puna and every inch of the land. The Aloha Spirit Law http~llwww geocities com/-olelo/alohaspiritlaw html ;...~~~. 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir r ~ U C7 • Page 3 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW II. Puna CDP Transportation Working Group Between September 2006 and February 2007, the Puna CDP Transportation Working Group addressed short-term and long-term intermodal facilities for travel by pedestrians, bicycles, wheelchairs, mass transit and motorists in the District of Puna on the Island of Hawaii, aka Big Island. Vision Statement We envision a sustainable, environmentally and culturally safe and aesthetically pleasing land transportation system throughout the District of Puna, which supports aloha for all of the people and all of the aina. Mission Statement The Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) Transportation • Working Group is made up of citizen volunteers. Our mission is to expand on the PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN public involvement process; maintain transparency and sustain community involvement in the Plan's development; create a forum for local expertise and knowledge to be gathered; and create a mechanism that allows for citizen input. The Puna CDP Transportation Working Group identified and addressed the highest priority transportation issues in the District of Puna. Of particular concern is environmental justice in accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Americans with Disabilities Act. This report contains our recommendations fora "balanced, equitable, well-connected, safe system that integrates not only vehicular travel, but also transit, biking, walking and other transportation measures," as stated in the Puna Regional Circulation Plan. • 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 4 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW III. Task Partnership Mission Statements In October 2006, the Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group divided into 3non-prioritized task partnership subgroups, as follows: Puna CDP Transportation Working Group Task Partnerships A. Existing Roadways Task Partnership B. New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership C. Mass Transit Task Partnership Each task partnership addressed questions posed by the County of Hawai' i and its Consultant, as per the "Guidelines -Transportation Working Group." Task partnerships evaluated the data produced in the "3,394 Ideas from 130 Small Group Meetings," reviewed previous planning documents, including the Puna Regional Circulation Plan, and collected public input to identify and address the highest priority issues facing the people of the District of Puna. Following, are the mission statements for each of the Puna CDP Transportation Working Group Task Partnerships: Our mission is to ensure the development of caring, safe and efficient movement of people and goods along environmentally green and aesthetically pleasing existing roadways in the District of Puna. Our mission is to ensure community input for the development of safe, green, aesthetically pleasing and efficient corridors now and into the distant future, in a culturally respectful way, while preserving and sustaining the native resources of Puna. Our mission is to increase mass transit options for all Puna residents and travelers, with the goals of having fewer cars on thoroughfares in Puna and providing connectivity for everyone to destinations islandwide. 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir • • • Page 5 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW IV.Background: Community Issues Transportation issues were the MOST often mentioned ideas in the 3,394 ideas collected from 130 small group meetings. TABLE 4.1 • •~ •-. • 1 • • ~- • # of % of # Group Code Category/Theme Ideas Total 1 Transportation TRAN ROAD, MAS, ALT, 680 20.0% LIGHT, LWR, 4LANE 2 Public Facilities & Services PUBL D, EDU, GOV, ME 569 16.8% O 3 Land Use, Planning & PLAN CC, GM 448 13.2% Development 4 Recreational Facilities & Parks REC PARK, GYM 369 10.9% 5 Social Issues SOC HALE, DRUG 332 9.8% 6 Economic Prosperity ECON OP, AG, TR 282 8.3% 7 Public Utilities -Energy, Water & UTL ENG, WTR, WST 221 6.5% Waste g Environmental & Natural AINA MALAMA, BUZ, INV 21 5 6.3% Resources 9 Arts, Culture & Heritage CTR CH, KAI 1 53 4.5% 10 Sustainable Island Development SID SR 125 3.7% Total: 3,394 100% Note: "Many of the categories were highly interconnected and some of the ideas were assigned to more than one category within the database. For the purpose of simplification, the above chart assigned each idea to a single issue and sub-category." Source: "Puna Community Development Plan Small Group Meeting Resource Book" 07021 3 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 6 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW V. Background: Transportation Issues 680 (or 209 of the 3,394 ideas from the 130 Small Group Meetings, mentioned by Puna residents, were TRANSPORTATION ISSUES, followed by Public Facilities & Services, Land Use Planning & Development, Recreation Facilities & Parks, Social Issues, Economic Prosperity, Public Utilities -Energy, Water & Waste, Environment & Natural Resources, Arts, Culture & Heritage and Sustainable Island Development. Source: "Puna Community Development Plan Small Group Meeting Resource Book" TABLE 5.1 •:1 •• • .- • 1 • • ~ • • NEW ALTERNATIVE EXISTING ROADWAYS MASS TRANSIT CORRIDORS ~ TRAN-ROAD: 204 General road improvements ~ TRAN-ALT: 125 ~ TRAN-MAS: 131 ~ TRAN-LIGHT: 120 More sidewalks, bike, Better public Traffic lights & street multi-mode trails transportation system lights ~ TRAN-LWR: 57 ~ TRAN-4LANE: 43 Create an alternative road Make Highway 130 4- lower Puna-Hilo lanes Total:3671deas Total:1821deas Total: 1.31 Ideas [367 - 680 = 54%] [182 _ 680 = 27%1 [1 31 _ 680 = 19%1 54% or 367 of the 680 27% or 182 of the 680 19% or 131 of the 680 transportation ideas were transportation ideas were transportation ideas were related to IXISTING related to NEW related to MASS TRANSIT ROADWAYS. ALTERNATIVE CORRIDORS. issues in Puna. The most frequently mentioned transportation ideas were related to EXISTING ROADWAYS, followed by NEW ALTERNATIVE CORRIDORS, followed by MASS TRANSIT. ~J 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview • Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 7 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW VI.Previous Development Plans Transportation issues were addressed variously in the Puna Community Development Plan (PCDP95, 1995), the Volcano Vision 2020 Development Plan (1996), the County of Hawaii General Plan (Feb. 2005), the Hawaiian Paradise Park Master Plan (Sep. 2005) and the Puna Regional Circulation Plan (Nov. 2005). Following, is a comparison of coverage in each of the specified development plans. TORT F f, 1 1 # Mentions 3,3941DEAS FROM 130 SMALL GROUP MEETINGS PCDP95 1995 WP 1996 GP 2005 HPP 2005 PRCP 2005 1 225 More arks/facilities for all a es - - - - - 2 206 Communi centers/villa a centers X X X X O 4 163 Local 'obs, sho in & entertainment o tions - - - - - 5 147 Better re resentation & trans arenc O O O O O 6 146 Growth mana ement tools X - X - O 7 140 125 Medical facili in Puna Education - O X - O O - X - - 1 122 Preserve, rotect, re enerate the environment - - - - - 13 114 More olice & fire rotection O X X - - 14 99 Affordable housin & land, es eciall for seniors O X O - - 15 90 Preserve local culture & character - Desi n District - - - - - 16 80 More renewable & alternative ener - - - - - 17 72 Water for and a ainst Count water - - - - - 18 69 Limit/reduce de endence on im orts fuel, Dods - - - - - 19 68 Su ort local farmers/sustainable a riculture - - - - - 20 62 Dru revention, rehabilitation ro rams - X - - - 21 61 Waste mana ement and rec clin - - - - - 23 53 Im rove Pahoa m - - - - - 24 49 Bulldozin - Chan a rubbin / radin ordinance - - - - - 25 44 Invasive s ecies -control, mana e, eradicate - - - - - 27 35 Coastal access, rotection and fishin ri hts - - - - - 28 25 More outh vocational trainin - - - - - Note: Trans ortation ideas are indicated b bolded text. ~ PCDP95 = Puna Community Development Plan, 1995 4 WP =Volcano Vision 2020, 1996 4 GP =County of Hawaii General Plan, Feb. 2005 4 HPP =Hawaiian Paradise Park Master Plan, Sep. 2005 X =Issue addressed O =Issue partially or indirectly addressed Source: Hawaii Island Plan Slide Show Presentation -Slide #40 http://www.hawaiiislandplan.com/ library/documents/puna/rm1-iohnw- A PRCP = Puna Regional Circulation Plan, Nov. 2005 presentation7-22-06.pdf 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 8 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW Vil~ Transportation Task Partnership Themes After reviewing the "3,394 Ideas from 130 Small Group Meetings," the Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group decided to split into 3 task partnership subgroups to address the 680 transportation issues. Each task partnership engaged in a facilitated process to identify and prioritize transportation themes, as follows: • TABLE 7.1 .~.~ ~~ •~• ~~~ 1. SAFETY along 1. EMERGENCY 1. Increase transit existing roadways in response capability RIDERSHIP. Puna. for Puna. 2. Enhance 2. Traffic CONGESTION 2. AESTHETICS of new local/regional at major intersections along alternative corridors in Puna. CONNECTIVITY. t 3. Implement Highway 130 and 3. SAFETY along new improvements that Highway 1 1. alternative corridors support LAND USE 3. QUALITY of existing in Puna. goals. roadways in Puna. 4, CONNECTIVITY and 4. Develop cost 4. CONNECTIVITY of EFFICIENCY effective County and State alternatives along ALTERNATIVES and roadways throughout new corridors in increase FUNDING Puna. Puna. Increase transit OPPORTUNITIES for RIDERSHIP. * County Mass Transit Agency (MTA). * Puna Regional Circulation Plan Section 7-1 For each of the above categories/themes of transportation issues, the Puna CDP Transportation Working Group Task Partnerships compiled the relevant Issues, Goals, Objectives and Recommendations (IGOR), which follow this project overview. 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir • Page 9 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW XVIII. Meeting Records of Attendance The Puna CDP Transportation Working Group held meetings between September 30, 2006 and February 3, 2007. Members of Task Partnerships met during this same period to collect information, which was used to prepare the task partnership reports, at the end of this document. Most of the work of the Puna CDP Transportation Working Group was accomplished in face-to-face working group and task partnership meetings. In between our face-to-face meetings, the working group communicated through an Internet discussion forum sponsored by Yahoo! Groups. Our records, including message archives, text documents, spreadsheets, images, hyperlinks and a calendar, can be made available to the CDP Consultant for review at the following Web Address: Puna CDP Transportation Working Group htto:/ /aroups.yahoo.com/group/Puna-CDP-Transportation e-mail Address: Puna-CDP-Transportation-owner@yahoogroups.com In accordance with CDP guidelines, our meeting records provide: Name, Geographical Location, Telephone Number and a-mail Address for each attendee. [see Overview Appendix for Meeting Records of Attendance for the Puna CDP Working Group and the Task Partnership subgroups]. 16 of 55 (29%) subdivisions in Puna, listed in Table 8.1 (next page), were represented by at least one person attending at least one or more Puna CDP Transportation Working Group and/or Task Partnership meetings. Meeting Records of Attendance are included in the Overview Appendix A. 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 10 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW Meeting Records of Attendance continued... TABLE 8.1 ' ~~ ~ Source: Puna Regional Circulation Plan Table 5.5 -Page 5.5 Source: Miscellaneous 1. Ainaloa* 24. Lanipuna Gardens 2. Aloha Estates 25. Leilani Estates* 1. Kaimu Makena 3. Black Sand Beach 26. Maku' u Ag Lots Homesteads 4. Eden Roc 27. Maku' u Farm Lots 2. Koa' e 5. Fern Acres 28. Mauna Lani Lots 3. Kurtistown* 6. Fern Forest 29. Maunaloa Estates 4. Maunalani Lot 7. Glenwood 30. Nanawale Estates* 5. Mokuhulu/Kaimu 8. Hawaii Island 31. Nanawale Farm 6. Mountain View* Paradise Ranch 7. Pohoiki* 9. Hawaiian Acres* 32. Ohia Estates 8. Royal Gardens* 10. Hawaiian Beaches, 33. Ola'a Scenic Lands Parks & Shores* 34. Orchid Isle Estate 1 1. Hawaiian Holidays 35. Orchid Isle Estate 2 Estates 36. Orchid Land* 12. Hawaiian Orchid Isle 37. Pacific Paradise 13. Hawaiian Paradise Development Park* 38. Pacific Paradise 14. Ho'onanea Gardens 1 5. Hilo Acres 39. Pacific Paradise Mtn. 16. Kalapana Seaview View Manor Estates* 40. Pahoa Agriculture 17. Kaniahiku Village Park* 18. Kaohe Homesteads 41. Puna Beach Palisades 19. Kapoho Beach Lots 42. Royal Hawaiian 20. Kapoho Papaya 43. Tangerine Acres Farms* 44. Tiki Gardens 21. Kea'au Ag Lots 45. Vacationland Hawaii 22. Kehena Beach 46. Volcano Village* 23. Ko ua Farm Lots 47. Wa' a Wa' a * Bolded text indicates subdivisions where attendees of the Puna CDP Transportation Working Group and Task Partnership meetings reside. • 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/ 14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 11 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW Meeting Records of Attendance continued... TABLE 8.2 u • • • ' WORKING -~ - • Task Partnershi Meetin Attendance DISTRICT OF PUNA MEEOTING ATTENDANCE IXISTING ROADWAYS ALTERNATIVE CORRIDORS MASS TRANSIT # SUB-DIVISION # Percent # Percent # Percent # Percent 1 Ainaloa 1 3.70% - - 1 7.14% - - 2 Hawaiian Acres 1 3.70% - - 1 7.14% 1 37.50% 3 Hawaiian Paradise Park 8 28.63% - - 6 42.86% 6 37.50% 4 Hawaiian Parks 4 14.81% 2 50.00% 2 14.29% 4 25.00% 5 Kala ana Seaview 1 3.70% - - - - - - 6 Ka oho Pa a a Farms 1 3.70% - - - - 1 6.25% 7 Kurtistown 1 3.70% - - 2 14.29% - - 8 Leilani Estates 1 3.70% - - 1 7.14% 1 6.25% 9 Mountain View 1 3.70% - - 1 7.14% - - 10 Nanawale 2 7.41 % - - - - 2 12.50% 11 Orchidland 1 3.70% 1 25.00% - - - - 12 Pahoa 1 3.70% 1 25.00% - - - - 13 Pohoiki 1 3.70% - - - - - - 14 Unknown 1 3.70% - - - - - - 15 Volcano 2 7.41% - - 1 7.14% 1 6.25% Total: 27 100% 4 100% 14 100% 16 100% 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 12 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW IX.Conclusions The following conclusions were drawn from analysis of the "3,394 Ideas from 130 Small Group Meetings" and the prioritized Transportation Task Partnership Themes. A. Transportation issues account for 20% of the issues identified in the "3,394 Ideas from 130 Small Group Meetings." [Page 6 -Table 4.1 ] B. More than half (54%) of the transportation issues identified in the "3,394 Ideas from 130 Small Group Meetings," are associated with existing roadways, followed by new alternative corridors at 27%, followed by mass transit at 19%. [Page 7 -Table 5.1 ] C. "General road improvement" was the MOST frequently mentioned idea (204 mentions) in the 680 Transportation Ideas from the "3,394 Ideas from 130 Small Group Meetings." [Page 8 -Table 6.1 -Line 3] D. "Make Highway 130 4-lanes" was the LEAST frequently mentioned idea in the 680 Transportation Idea (43 mentions) from the "3,394 Ideas from 130 Small Group Meetings." [Page 8 -Table 6.1 -Line 26] E. "Better public transportation system" and "More sidewalks, bike, multi-mode trails" were addressed in ALL of the previous development plans under consideration, including: Puna Community Development Plan (1995), Volcano Vision 2020 (1996), County of Hawai ~ i General Plan (2005), Hawaiian Paradise Park Master Plan (2005) and the Puna Regional Circulation Plan (2005). [Page 8 -Table 6.1 -Lines 8 & 9] F. "Create alternate road lower Puna -Hilo" was *not* addressed in either the Volcano Vision 2020 plan or the Hawaiian Paradise Park General Plan. [Page 8 -Table 6.1 -Line 22] 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:1 9 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir • • • Page 13 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW G. The Puna Regional Circulation Plan is the first and only previous development plan under consideration which addressed the "Make Highway 130 4-lanes" issue. [Page 8 -Table 6.1 ] H. Connectivity, safety and aesthetics are the predominant themes across all of the Puna CDP Transportation Working Group Task Partnership subgroups. [Page 9 -Table 7.1 ] Although multi-modal transportation was not indicated as a predominant theme in any of the task partnership subgroups prioritized themes, many recommendations include references to accommodating buses, bikeways and pedestrian paths on existing roadways and new alternative corridors. [Page 9] J. In the January 2007 issue of PUNA NEWS, under the headline "HPP Ohana News," da neighbors wrote: "HPP, as the largest subdivision in Puna, is under-represented on these working groups." [see January 2007 and February 2007 articles in the Overview Appendix B] 07021 3 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 14 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW EXECUTIVE SUMMARY What we have in common is far greater than what separates us. We need to become teachers of generosity through our compassionate deeds, actions, and example. We need to address globalization, environmental changes, widespread poverty, and rapid human population growth. Existing political and economic models need to be reconceptualized, transformed, and balanced. A cosmic sense of purpose and belief, coupled with critical and creative thinking will help us see the possibilities of the future. It's a Kakou thing - we are all connected. Hawaiians have been here for over 3,500 years. The Po'e Kahiko, the People of Old, mastered environmentalism and sustainability. In these times, if we look back to the wisdom and ways of our ancestors, we could better move forward. 'E Kuleana Kakou! "It's Everyone's Responsibility!" LuanaJones Puna CDP Transportation Working Group Existing Roadways Task Partnership 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir • • Page 15 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW X. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Mass Transit By Frankie Stapleton Mass Transit Task Partnership Coordinator Literally every document on or inquiry into the needs of the District of Puna, in fact, the Island of Hawaii, puts lack of transportation options and an overwhelming need for mass transit as a top priority if not THE top priority. This task partnership recognizes improvements in recent years in the delivery of mass transit services to Puna's population but sees a major disconnect between County and State officials' views of mass transit and those expressed and expected by the public early in the 21st Century. Our members tried to approach this disconnect objectively while synthesizing hundreds of publicly expressed transportation issues to develop comprehensive recommendations for inclusion in the Hawaii County General Plan for Puna. The recommendations included in the Mass Transit Task Partnership report call for major adjustments within Hawaii County's Mass Transit Agency, daunting expansion and enhancement of MTA infrastructure, routes, schedules, and services, rebirth of a practically defunct Transportation Commission, and addition of a Transportation Department CEO to oversee and coordinate all publicly funded transit options in Hawaii County. All the recommendations are fully grounded in public input and results of past County-funded studies of present and future needs of the people of Puna. Our investigation found two areas that previous studies did not address: • Consideration of up to 18 years olds and their transportation needs, and :• Puna's coastal population from Kapoho to Kaimu/Kalapana. Neither the 2000 U.S. Census nor the Rural Paratransit Study of Puna and Kona had population figures or other information about people from Kapoho to Kalapana. This report tries to address their needs. Although our working group sidestepped prioritizing Existing Roadways, Mass Transit, and New Alternative Corridors -- our way of communicating the extreme emphasis we 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 16 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW Mass Transit Task Partnership Executive Summary continued... feel should be placed on all three categories of transportation needs -- the fact is that a comprehensive inventory will show the vehicles are here, many of them sitting idle or underutilized for long periods of time in various obscure corners of the county. Their immediate utilization could buy time for the implementation of other traffic management relief strategies. What would it take? Doubling the number of mechanics working for MTA, which has a staff of six? Contracting with•Roberts Hawaii for more drivers which would provide more jobs, not to mention connectivity to employment and education destinations for the people of Puna? What's the problem? Putting the mass in transit seems like it would give some relief to two major problems facing Big Islanders: lack of transportation options/congested highways and lack of employment opportunities! With the increased income from County real property taxes, even 2 percent of the county budget would provide enough to hire more, possibly even double the number, MTA employees. MTA contracts with Roberts Hawaii for its drivers and Roberts doesn't have problems hiring drivers. Its SCHOOL bus drivers that companies have a hard time keeping because responsible, conscientious employees need more than a job working 2 hours in the early morning and 2 hours mid-afternoon. Four years ago, Pahoa High School students surveyed their and Keaau High School's student body, gathering input from more than 160 students. Approximately 75 percent of those surveyed said they would use the bus. Their findings were written up in an excellent report (Appendix H) by Bryan Juan, then a sophomore at PHS, and the students advocated with local officials to get additional bus services for Pahoa. A total of three roundtrip runs were added to the Pahoa-Keaau-Hilo bus schedule which students said they appreciated. "But these runs are not as effective as needed," Juan stated in his 4-year-old report. MTA's Brown today says those buses are packed. Ironically, Pahoa High representatives are to meet with Brown on Feb. 12, 2007 to try to get a midday bus for the Pahoa-Hilo run for students who need to commute for high school work internship programs, community college courses, and the early-release seniors with jobs in town. This should beano-brainer. 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir • • ~~ Page 17 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW Mass Transit Task Partnership Executive Summary continued... Why is such a schedule not already in place? This is representative of the disconnect mentioned earlier between officials and the public. Have there been county budget requests for more bus drivers to serve oft-expressed needs? Pahoa High School students have been geared up for some time to build their own bus pullout and shelter at the school, utilizing a 525,000 appropriation from Hawaii County Council. If high school students can work together to investigate important issues and problem-solve for their community in a responsible way, why can't elected officials and the adult population of Hawaii County do the same? The Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group Mass Transit Task Partnership has put its best effort into presenting as objective and comprehensive a picture of the transportation needs of the people of Puna in this report. Mahalo nui loa for this opportunity. Malama pono, Frankie Stapleton, Coordinator, Mass Transit Task Partnership February 8, 2007 . 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 18 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW XI.EXECUTIVE SUMMARY '-~~~ ~~$~' New Alternative Corridors ~; .. By Keola G.A. Downing, Ph.D., Coordinator ='`~`r New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Ho ~ oponopono Me Ke Aloha! The idea of New Alternative Corridors in Puna has been a heated subject for many years. The reality of being at a point of time when action must be taken brings up the deepest feelings of all the people who are involved. We have to work together in the Spirit of Aloha, to enhance the quality of our projects. This Aina is very sacred and we are so privileged to be living in such a special location on our planet. After much thought and listening to many people share their ideas, I feel it only fitting that I bring my own vision for a possible future of Puna forward. I can see a beautiful roadway from the Hilo Pier to Kalapana and Kaimu. This new roadway crosses the beautiful and fertile fields of the W. H. Shipman properties bringing residents home from work on a slightly slower and more pleasant route than the hustle and bustle of Highway 130. As we travel through Hawaiian Paradise Park, there are no direct connections to the new roadway, which is hidden within a corridor of native growth and stone walls to separate the roadway from the surrounding residential areas. Greenscaped modern roundabouts prevent traffic congestion at major intersections within Hawaiian Paradise Park and provide safe, no left turn solutions to within the residential areas. Modern roundabouts are a proven traffic calming devise that dramatically reduce traffic crashes - as much as 90 percent. After we pass through the entire HPP subdivision, the new roadway opens out across the State Agricultural land between HPP and Hawaiian Beaches. There at the center is another modern roundabout in the middle of a new Puna Enterprise Zone. From that point many destinations are available. You can head mauka toward the Maku' u 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir ~J • • Page 19 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) • TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Executive Summary continued... Cultural Center or Makai to the new OTEC East. The new branch of the National Energy Laboratory of Hawaii Authority could be built makai of Railroad Avenue on State Land opened up for the development of high tech research on the East side of Hawai' i Island. New jobs are increasing as the research facilities become more fully integrated. Business opportunities for fish farming, crab and lobster production, as well as new high tech organic gardens offer many kinds of new business growth in Puna. Of course the new corridor splits at the same roundabout, allowing for one leg to head off to the Hawaiian Beaches subdivision and on to Kalapana. Still another roadway heads to Keonepoko School, which connects then to the Nanawale and Leilani subdivisions. Actually all points further toward Kaimu can all use this route in case of lava inundation or Tsunami. As a long extended parkway through the open space crossing from the subdivisions to Hilo town and between neighborhoods in lower Puna the new roadways . are beautifully landscaped and the bring pride to the hearts of all the citizens of Puna. The other view that comes to my mind is the Historic Railroad Avenue Corridor. We are so fortunate that Mr. Bill Gates decided to build the beautiful campus for the Puna High Tech Institute in the Kapoho Research Park adjacent to the Green Lake Eco Park and Monorail Terminal. I never seem to tire taking the quiet and Eco-friendly monorail when I have to go to Hilo to meet someone at the airport or attend a meeting, dinner, or special event. We sometimes even take the Punarail System to go swimming at Pohoiki Beach Park. It's still free these days with the promise from the builders that as long as we are paying taxes in Puna we don't have to pay for our ride on the Punarail System. The County & Private Sector Partnership (CPSP) has turned out to be a big boost for the development of Puna as the Clean Energy -Research Center for the State of Hawai' i and the world. Many people who visit here describe their experience of the Eco-Tourism, the cultural programs at the Maku' u Cultural Center and many other locations in Puna, the most rewarding part of their stay on the Big Island of Hawai' i. Many more people will live in Puna than live here now, but the green spaces and the clean and exciting new health centers and exercise parks keep everyone centered on wellness. Harry Kim's dream of a World Peace Center on the Big Island has really made our island one of the most important parts of the International Peace Movement. • 070213 Transportation Working Group Finat Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 20 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Executive Summary continued... Our students can go far toward integrating their education and finding jobs, so that they can achieve great things in the future. School to Work has become reality and all together we find success at every level. People are happy to stay in Puna most of the time. There are jobs here and educational opportunities as well. People work, play, and seldom leave our special part of Hawai' i Island. As the new corridors of Puna have connected and opened up the empty spaces between our subdivisions, prosperity has blossomed and the dreams of the Puna Community Development Plan have prepared our infrastructure to handle our needs for the future. In a bold new way, we have become closer together and much stronger as community than ever before. Working together we can achieve all our dreams and make a stable sustainable home for our children for seven generations forward into the world that will someday be their responsibility to care for. New Alternative Choices for Puna's Future ~~ 4 gw~w,o tN-a~rer t ~ l j 5.' 1 . a ~w~w,a i.M wr~M , t .. . c a~ .+.........ica+n rr~...~~ ,.° f t R IYnsAr R4rrw ~114700nU111t11YY 5 __. _.~ LK ~GtI a ¢y ++.rw ~ • w.e.r. [~er.q~.. rww ~s.af. ~Mrw11Y1br~ Iq~Iwwv nl ~.._ ` ' . ill ~. i ._ ~ ,~ 3 ' ~ , t `~ 1 ;~ .~ ~~ . _, ~ ..~~~~, • ~;~ `-. y ;; ~, ,~~~ ti ~~ ~ ~%'" . •~ +~` al1NAMernMive CafrldW C110icas For Pww'a Falwe C. N4W Il7IHJ11r[ 10/1fflN11R,~ `~' `r~ a ltie~~aD. V.`y J.IY~enHYHYY/-~I ~J~! ~ 1 ~ ~ i N M~COwI~Yfr -~-;-~-- 4~~ ,ao„a~.,o,~.~ A'' jun. .~* ` 7 a as ~ s '~ A ~"~ '- ~ `_°~ ~~. ; ~.. _~~_ .~ ~ . ,~? f,at~}t"~»ijj~i. 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 21 of 47 • • • Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Executive Summary continued... The image shows some of the many ideas that came to our Task Partnership for inclusion into our report. This should give the reader an idea of how many new concepts people are willing to consider when it comes to New Alternative Corridors. Although not all of these ideas may be affordable for immediate construction, over time many of them may become a reality. As the population increases, certainly some of these corridors may become necessary to handle increased traffic congestion. I also believe that a light monorail or a grade separated guided Bus-way system will be also be a good solution for our Mass Transit needs for the future. Ample Geo-Thermal power can provide electricity for these new projects. • Malama Puna A Mau Loa! • 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 22 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW New Alternative Corridors An Alternative View Respectfully submitted by Bobbie Alicen New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Member Hawaiian Paradise Park A new highway or thoroughfare between Hilo and Pahoa is based on the assumptions of Puna residents' need to travel to Hilo frequently, our use of the automobile for almost all of our transportation needs and the continuation of affordable fuel. Long range planning should not be based on those assumptions. Nowhere can we find an example of aloes-density growing population area of almost any size that is auto-dependent (everywhere is) and has solved "traffic problems" in any long-term or even medium-term way by building more major roadways. Traffic problems are not solved by adding more roadways. The speculation development in response to merely the decision to build roadways will cause the roadways to be outdated, over capacity and congested as soon as they open. Traffic problems are solved by finding ways to take traffic off the roads. The root cause of our traffic problems is our patterns of land use. We become accustomed to assuming that the "fix" for traffic issues is more highways, instead of looking at how we might adjust land use patterns that will lessen peoples' needs to travel over distances. Building a major thoroughfare into Puna goes against the massive empirical evidence of what adding roads actually does. Namely, a major roadway to Pahoa or beyond will promote more vehicular traffic (and population growth, build-out, subdivision etc.) and, usually sooner than later, congestion on new and existing roads. At the onset of the PCDP, there was significant input from the many small group meetings about slowing the pace of growth and development in an effort to maintain the feel of the rural nature of Puna. Much of that came from people living in HPP, Ainaloa, Beaches/Shores, down to Kapoho and Kalapana. Developing more major roadways into Puna now would invite a more rapid pace of growth now. Putting new road building on the back burner would permit more time and resources toward working on improving and making mass transit more accessible and toward the development of the village centers that would provide work, shopping and services nearby Puna residents, thus decreasing highway traffic. 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir • • Page 23 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW "New Alternative Corridors - An Alternative View" continued... The roadways proposed by the New Alternative Corridors subcommittee will increase traffic problems, encourage automobile dependency, and keep the land use Hilo centric. The proposal of two one-way roadways that join HPP on either side and cross on HPP roads is unsafe and not viable, routing high-volume traffic on residential streets that are homes of children and elders, of 20-foot pavement width, shoulderless, with lots of driveways and no sidewalks, three full stops one mile apart, and 25 mph speed limit. It is doubtful that this plan could handle significant volume from 130, and if it did, it would not be done safely. The proposed "scenic drive" on Beach road will become another Ali'i drive. There is no assurance that zoning will not be changed to permit development that would be spurred by a through road along the coast. To make roadways safer and reduce the number of automobiles on the roads, the first two areas where the PCDP should concentrate our resources should be on: expanding mass transit to reach all riders and be consumer friendly, encouraging consumer use, and building village centers that provided needed jobs, goods and services in Puna, including a hospital. There is a need for an alternative emergency evacuation route. The HPPOA Master Plan provides for a dirt road from the Pahoa area to Hilo that connects with HPP and travels on the HPP roads without any changes to them. The road would be gated on either side of HPP. Such a gated dirt road was recently built by the county in response to the needs of the people in Waikoloa. (It was written up in the Hawaii Tribune-Herald of January 24, 2007 on page A3. URL: htto://www.hawaiitribune- herald com/articles/2007/01 /24/local_news/Ioca106.txt) 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 24 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW XII. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Existing Roadways By Yen Chin Existing Roadways Task Partnership Member Aloha, When we began to address the question of how to improve conditions on the Existing Roadways of Puna the interconnected nature of our investigation immediately became apparent. Not only do elements pertaining directly to existing roads tie closely together, but we quickly appreciated how the elements of existing roadways interlock with the work of other Transportation Task Partnerships and beyond. Therefore, it is necessary to view this report as an integral whole that must somehow blend with other integrated wholes. As we attempted to deepen our research we encountered barriers that caused us frustration and ultimately renders this report less than it could have been. The State DOT refused to release crash data, which greatly compromised our ability to study safety. The PCDP protocols resulted in a two month delay in receiving traffic volume data from DOT. When we finally received those data, they proved to be virtually useless because in critical ways they presented a nonsensical picture of the traffic patterns in Puna. We present our findings with the caveat that we have done our work while accepting as true the premise that fuel for automobiles will continue to be available at reasonably affordable prices into the foreseeable future. Given the situation in the global economy, this premise may prove entirely incorrect. If gasoline falls into short supply or rises to a price that makes current private transportation patterns impractical, much of what we recommend here will no longer remain valid. Such a scenario will cause traffic volumes to greatly decrease both because existing residents will have to relocate or find alternate means of transportation and because new development in Puna will halt. Safety is by far our number one priority. The recent growth in subdivisions--particularly in lower Puna--has greatly increased the volume of traffic on the main arterials. Moreover, the design of entry and exit features of Highways 130 and 1 1 falls woefully short of the requirements of current usage. These two factors combine to make it increasingly difficult for drivers to drive with aloha. The resulting frustration encourages them to respond aggressively and introduce higher risk to the roadways. The smaller 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir • • • Page 25 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW Existing Roadways Task Partnership Executive Summary continued... margins for error also increase the hazard presented by people who drive while impaired. Calming traffic thus represents our number one solution for the safety problem. We favor lowering the speed limit and introducing greenscaped modern roundabouts to effect this change even as we acknowledge that these strategies will exacerbate our number 2 priority, congestion, unless done in conjunction with other solutions like building a Puna Makai Alternate Route. Improving visibility along the main arterials would also contribute greatly to improving road safety. Realigning intersections and adding streetlights and better reflectors on the road surfaces would accomplish this. Studying congestion revealed a set of complex relationships. Traffic volumes on the main arterials can be reduced by developing commercial and light industrial centers in Puna that reduce the need for residents to travel to Hilo to satisfy their needs. However, such centers create points of congestion which need to be addressed in ways that facilitate such development by not overburdening them with infrastructure costs while requiring them to bear a fair share of those costs. Though the traffic volume data cannot be deemed totally accurate, they do reveal a distinct and dramatic increase during peak hours. If this peak could be spread out over a longer period of time, the pressure to expand the capacity of existing roadways would lessen. However, the "simple" solution of staggering work hours in Hilo is not so simple to accomplish even if it could be accomplished with little economic consequences. Our number 3 priority has to do with the quality of roadway. This priority includes aesthetics but extends well beyond pretty appearances. It represents how we as humans interact with the aina, and it would have the number one priority had the two items above not been so critical. Puna residents overwhelmingly voiced a desire to maintain the rural quality of the district. This desire can stand in stark opposition to current residential growth trends and need for Puna to develop its own economic base that depends less heavily on Hilo. However, we believe that this apparent contradiction can be amicably resolved if we adopt a different model for development, a model that does not give dominance to the bottom line of a profit and loss statement when decisions get made. Lastly we contend that we need to address issue of connectivity among subdivisions and existing roads. This involves making existing right-of-ways passable once more and incorporating selected private roads into the County system. 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 26 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW XIII. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Transportation Working Group By Prema Qadir Transportation Working Group Coordinator "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." -- Margaret Mead This executive summary is dedicated to Bonnie Goodell, Planner. 1. Mass Transit Recommendations for Immediate Consideration: a. To increase mass transit ridership, expand the Hele-On Bus schedule to increase the number of buses during peak travel periods. 2. New Alternative Corridors Recommendations for Immediate Consideration: a. To provide redundancy during the planned construction of the Highway 130 expansion to 4-lanes, make the Railroad Right-of-Way drivable from Hilo to Kapoho. b. To provide non-motorized travel with an alternate route, during the planned construction of the Highway 130 conversion of the Shower shoulder lane to a travel lane, designate the Railroad Right-of-Way as a bikeway and pedestrian trail, which is gated on both sides of Hawaiian Paradise Park to prevent motorized traffic from entering. Note: Gate can be unlocked by arrangement for Fire, Police and EMS access. 3. Existing Roadways Recommendations for Immediate Consideration: a. To alleviate traffic congestion along Highway 1 1 and Highway 130, during morning and evening work and school rush hours, create a Puna Traffic Control and Enforcement Unit with professionally trained traffic supervision 07021 3 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir • • • Page 27 of 47 • • • Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW personnel. (see Existing Roadways Report, Safety: Law Enforcement). Similar arrangements have proven to be significantly constructive on Haili Street in Hilo. Assign traffic control and enforcement personnel to supervise rush hour traffic at the following locations: i. Highway 11 and N. Kopua/S. Kopua ii. Highway 11 and N. Kulani/S. Kulani iii. Highway 130 (morning rush hour): Ainaloa, Orchidland, Paradise and Pohaku/Shower. iv. Highway 130 (evening rush hour): the merge lane near Opukahaia (across from Human Society), Kaloli, Paradise and Maku~u. b. To decrease traffic hazards due to flooding in Mountain View, pave the roadway between the 12 mile and 13 mile markers -going from Highway 1 1 to Old Volcano Road. [see Existing Roadways Report: Section 1 -Safety: Roadway Design. c. To eliminate flooding, pave the roadway at the intersection of Highway 1 1 and Old Volcano Road. [see Existing Roadways Report -Section 4: Connectivity of County & State Roads d. To support the proper merging of traffic near the intersection of Highway 130 and Opukahaia Road (across from the Humane Society), improve roadway merging conditions with appropriate signage for merging 2 lanes into one lane. e. To decrease traffic hazards at Kahakai Blvd. and Highway 130, install reflectors along the Kea~au-bound off-lane to improve the sight distance for Pahoa-bound traffic making left-turns from Highway 130 onto Kahakai Blvd. f. To assess the frequency and severity of traffic crashes at major intersections along Highway 1 1, Highway 130 and Highway 132, obtain State DOT traffic crash data. g. To ensure comprehensive coverage, establish asister-program to the North Hawaii Outcomes Project (NHOP) [http://www.nhop.org] to assess the health status of Puna in terms of death rates from motor vehicle related crashes due to causes other than impairment by intoxication, i.e. inadequate roadway intersection design (left-turns, lane merging, blind spots); negative driving behaviors (speeding, road rage, tailgating, etc.); inadequate roadway design (inadequate grading, paving, guardrails, signage, road surface marking, 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 28 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW reflectors, street lighting, etc.), unsafe roadways (illegal vending on roadways, left-turns, blind spots, poor nighttime visibility). h. To improve efficiency, accountability and an integrated transportation system in Puna, consolidate the County of Hawai i transportation functions into a single islandwide intermodal research, planning and development department. i. To facilitate an intermodal transportation system in Puna Mauka (Upper Puna) and Puna Makai (Lower Puna), restrict bicycles, Hele-On Bus, Mass Transit Authority Feeder buses, cars/light trucks), hikers, motorcycles, motor bikes, pedestrians, heavy trucks and wheelchairs as indicated in Table 13.1. - Proposed Allowable Uses for Existing Roadways in Puna. TABLE 13.1 Proposed Allowable Uses for Existing Roadways in Puna Transportation Highway 11 & Railroad Right- Government PMAR Mode Highway 130 of-Way* Beach Road (Upper & Lower) Bicycles Yes Yes Yes Yes Buses: Hele-On Yes No No Yes Buses: Feeder No Yes Yes No Cars Yes No Yes Yes Hikers n/a Yes Yes Yes Motorcycles Yes No Yes Yes Motor Bikes Yes No Yes Yes Pedestrians Yes Yes Yes Yes Heavy Trucks Yes No No No Wheelchairs n/a Yes Yes Yes * Railroad Right-of-Way could be quickly adapted for feeder bus connectivity between subdivisions in Puna Makai. 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir • • • Page 29 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW 4. Modern Roundabouts: a. To eliminate traffic crashes due to left-turns and the anxiety produced from navigating left-turns, construct Modern Roundabouts at major intersections along Highways 1 1, 130 and 132. b. To produce the following outcomes, construct Modern Roundabouts at major intersections along Highways 1 1, 130 and 132. i. less traffic congestion along Highway 130 ii. less anxiety making left-hand turns onto Highway 130 iii. less pollution due to stopping and starting iv. less expense due to the fact that the Federal Government provides for 100%funding for construction of modern roundabouts. v. dramatic reduction in the number of intersection traffic crashes, particularly traffic crashes that occur as a result of making left-hand turns. vi. fewer pedestrian and driver fatalities and injuries vii. decrease in overall property damage due to slower speeds inside of modern roundabouts. r~ 07021 3 Transportation Working Group final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 30 of 47 Photo: A Modern Roundabout in Springfield, Illinois Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW 5. Recommendations for the Puna CCP Process As a participant, facilitator/recorder, Task Partnership Coordinator, Working Group Coordinator and attendee of meetings at various levels of the CDP process, I experienced the CDP process in several different ways, which afforded me the opportunity to see the process from as many perspectives. Following are recommendations for the County of Hawai' i, as it continues to expand the CDP to other geographical districts of the Big Island: a. Public Input: i. Inform the Puna community about the CDP process and Working Group recommendations by making the Puna Community Development Plan Working Group reports available for public review (County Planning Department, public/school libraries, community centers, churches, Public Access TV, etc.) for stakeholders in all of the subdivisions listed on Page 1 1 -Puna Sub-divisions. ii. Collect feedback about the Puna Community Development Plan from individual stakeholders (not just large landowners and community associations). iii. Update the stakeholders, periodically, in town hall meetings in schools, churches, community associations, Internet, a-mail, newspaper, etc. b. Provide working groups with basic management resources, e.g. meeting record of attendance forms, meeting agenda forms, meeting minutes forms, membership roster forms, final report template, etc.. c. Conduct technology seminars to help working group participants make the best use of the Internet and emerging technologies, computer software (e.g. ArcExplorer GIS program and Adobe Acrobat) for group communications and work flow. d. Distribute copies of the regional circulation plans to working group members early in the process and conduct workshops to review most significant aspects. e. Designate Steering Committee Liaisons as the Working Group Coordinators to make the chain of command more effective and efficient. f. Identify guest speakers early in the CDP process to ensure that working groups have access to the people who can provide technical information. g. Everyone involved in the CDP process, most importantly steering committee 07021 3 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir • ,rte u Page 31 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW liaisons and working group coordinators should receive meeting facilitation training. h. Anyone who wants to join a CDP working group and/or task partnership should be required to attend a minimal number of working group/task partnership meetings to guarantee meaningful consensus. i. Create "moderated" web-based discussion forums, such as Yahoo! Groups, for each working group to facilitate consistency in record keeping and provide access to management resources that help groups to organize -message archive, document storage, Internet hyperlinks, graphics and images, calendar, database, etc.. Example: Puna CDP Transportation Working Group Discussion Forum http: / /groups.vahoo.com /group / Puna-CDP-Transportation j. Organize a Working Group Summit or Open House, during the second half and/or the third quarter of the working groups tenure, to provide an opportunity for CDP participants to identify content overlap, conflict between working group recommendations, overlooked issues and obstacles to an integrated- sustainable implementation plan. 07021 3 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 32 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW XIV. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Steering Committee Liaison By Stephanie Bath Puna CDP Transportation Working Group ALOHA! Having the privilege of participating in the ongoing PCDP process as the steering committee liaison to the transportation working group will be a memory that will not easily be forgotten. We are such a diverse community. Geographically our district stretches from the mountains to the sea. We include rainforests, agricultural communities and a recognized biosphere. We share our roads and unique natural resources with visitors from around the world. In this process all are equal. It matters not the color of our skin, whether we live paycheck to paycheck or are of monetary wealth. Knowledge acquired through life experience is equal to that received in the most affluent of doctorate programs. All ideas are considered valid. We are the people of Puna. I have come to appreciate those who serve us in County government. I can not emphasize this enough. I am especially grateful to Harry Kim, our mayor, who has arranged his administration in a way that has supported CDP processes. For years decisions about what happened in the Puna district were made by those living outside of it. Now we have been given the opportunity to communicate our desires and be party to implementing them. Trust in our local government is being restored. People have entered into the CDP process with hope that the County is genuine in having the people come up with a workable plan that we can live with. Some enter cautiously, but they have come and joined in the PCDP process. What we are in the process of compiling is not only a plan that we can live with now, it is one that visualizes preserving Puna forever, "Malama Puna a Mau Loa". Things are constantly in motion. Change comes. It is here in Puna. Malahinis arrive. That is the nature of our Island home. That is its history. As we face the challenges of the PCDP process, as we remember that it is for all, as we are patient and tolerant of one another, as we listen with our hearts, and as we live the Aloha that is the reason so many choose to remain, I have faith that blessings will rain down upon us in ways we only imagine. Through this process I have witnessed people attend thel 30 Small Group Meetings to share their concerns and wants. Out of these meetings came a sense of the values of what is important to the Puna community. These values have been a foundation on which we 07021 3 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir • • Page 33 of 47 • • • Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW Steering Committee Liaison Executive Summary continued... are building. We have had larger gatherings with County representatives from the mayors' office, planning department, research and development and other departments. John Whalen, the consultant from Plan Pacific, has supported us is our efforts. We have formed community working groups and task partnerships. In our transportation working group we have focused on the task of creating efficient and safe transportation options. These are options that include multimodal roadways that are environmentally compatible. They will include bikeways and Para transit bus routes. The task partnership reports go into details on this. We envision that the implementation of this plan will include the values of our community. It will honor the wants of our communities to preserve and respect the natural resources. Cultural and historical sites will be protected. Many hard working Puna residents have and are burning the oil lamp late. They have shared their time, talents, personal resources, knowledge and wisdom with one another as we identify the issues and challenges Puna has relating to transportation issues. Transportation is such a large area for us to explore. It has such an impact on the land and natural resources. It can serve a community's lifestyle gently or it can negatively and irreversibly impact a community. Working Groups are currently submitting their reports to the Steering Committee. We, along with John Whalen and the County Planning Department, will review the issues and community input given thus far. The PCDP will continue to come together. Public input will continue. Communities will be kept informed about what has been done. I suggest that reports be posted on the Internet. It would also be beneficial to have copies available at libraries both as reference documents and copies to check out. As the process continues it would be wise to hold "town meetings" in all communities to share what participants so far have come up with. More input will be given. It is critical for the public to remain involved. This is our community development plan. It is our plan for the future. Those who have lived in Puna more than a few years have seen the change in traffic and roadways as our population increases. Highway 130 has become dangerous and inefficient during peak travel times. I have heard that some people don't want more roadways. They don't want connectivity between communities. Others say its o.k. provided it's not in their front yard or backyard. It is o. k. to condemn another's land to widen a highway, but it's not o.k. to do it in their neighborhood. A small population wants wider faster roads. They refuse to look at alternatives to single occupancy automobile commuting. Others are riding the Hele-on bus. There are also people that have parked their cars and trucks and have taken up cycling. They plead for safe clearly marked bicycle 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 34 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW Steering Committee Liaison Executive Summary continued... lanes. (Children are unable to safely bicycle to school.) With gas prices rising, more and more motorcycles are out on the roads. Statistics have shown that traffic lights where people make left hand turns have been hazardous to bikers and cyclists alike. Alternatives such as roundabouts are being explored. Motorized scooters are becoming a more common sight on our roadways. Small model scooters do not have the power to stay with traffic flows and are often seen riding on shoulders where cyclists ride and pedestrians walk. These situations are part of the challenges we have faced and are facing in the PCDP process. If we as a community do nothing, things are not likely to improve. In fact, they may get worse. Highway 1 1 has not reached the level of danger and inefficiency of Highway 130. As population density increases it will. Now is the time to come up with a PCDP with viable solutions that our County Council will support. It is clear that some will be more greatly impacted than others as the PCDP process is implemented. I personally experienced the PEAR (Puna Emergency Access Road) and the impact it has had in our community and our formerly quiet neighborhood. We were never consulted as a community when this road was planned or built. Things change. The County has learned from past errors. They want to hear our solutions to the challenges we face. They want to support our vision for the future. I find this very refreshing! As you read/have read the Trans-WG report you will see the three areas of importance as identified through public input. They are: Existing roadways, Mass transit and New Alternative Corridors. All are of equal importance. As we have focused on the elements of each area I have found that they compliment one another. The PCDP process has not been a perfect one. We are all learning and the CDP process improves as we live it. What we learn can be applied to future CDP processes such as in Kau. What Puna plans will affect Kau. There have been some observations that I think are important to mention in this summary. General Observations of Concern 1. Throughout the CDP process I have heard people concerned that Puna people will come up with a plan we can embrace and then the County Council will not adopt it due to personal agendas. 2. I have witnessed people attend Working Group (WG) task partnerships and express ideas and concerned and not come back. As I followed up, I was told it was because they felt other members did not address their concerns and wants. Some folks were encouraged to become active again and did. I do not know how many did not. 07021 3 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir • • Page 35 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW 3. I have witnessed community members that have approached our WG with well thought out and detailed solutions and plans. Their plans use the pronoun, "we" as they present. Who "we" is was never clearly defined. 4. Many people in Puna can not afford computers and/or internet access. Some choose not to participate in the computer facet of living because they don't have basic computer skills, keep getting booted off of dial up or just don't have the desire to join the technological age. The concern here is that the WG's have relied heavily on internet for communication with each other. This is exclusive. 5. Family life and lifestyles disallow for some to participate in evening meetings. (Examples: bus riders due to schedules, those who don't drive after dark, families with small children, those who don't have reliable transportation or can't afford gas to attend meetings if they do). 6. Some have come with individual agendas. The impression given is that their involvement in the process is for self serving reasons. They are not interested in looking at the collective issues and solutions of Puna for our future. (i.e.: they don't care how communities such as Kau or Kapoho evacuate if the major highways are blocked). 7. Some come with a plan that will possibly solve transportation issues. The solutions impact communities outside of their own. The communities impacted have not been as a community informed about the recommended plan. Some residents I have spoken with are not aware of the possibilities being discussed for their community's future. 8. There are residents that have not attended meetings whose input is not reflected in the reports. If people do not write to us or attend meetings we have no way of hearing their wants. 9. Some do not want to plan. They think that if we do any connectivity or improvements more people will come. They think that if we do nothing it will keep people from coming into communities, thus preserving what we have. These have been observations I have made coupled with input I have gotten from the public as a steering committee member. There are undoubtedly more concerns I have neglected to mention. For the most part I have gotten positive responses to the PCDP. I am so grateful to see how the people of Puna are working together. We are hopeful that the recommendations of this transportation working group will be well received, merged with other working groups, built upon and embraced by the people of Puna, planning commission, County Council and Mayor Kim. 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/ 14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 36 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW XV. OVERVIEW APPENDIX APPENDIX A -Meeting Records of Attendance APPENDIX B - HPP Ohana News 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir • • • Page 37 of 47 Puna Communit De~ ment Plan CDP) Y p ~ TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVfEW APPENDIX A -Meeting Records of Attendance TABLE # MEETING RECORD OF ATTENDANCE -DATA Table 1 5.1 & 1 5.2 Puna CDP Transportation Working Group Table 1 5.3 & 1 5.4 Existing Roadways Task Partnership Table 1 5.5 & 1 5.6 New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Table 1 5.7 & 1 5.8 Mass Transit Task Partnership 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir • Page 38 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW TABLE 15.1 Meeting Record of Attendance Puna CDP Transportation Working Group # First Name Last Name Member Geo ra hical Area 2006 2007 Since g p 09/30 10/07 10/16 11/20 12/18 01/29 02/03 1 Bobbie Alicen 06/11/28 Hawaiian Paradise Park - - - - P - P 2 Ste hanie Bath 06/09/30 Hawaiian Acres L L L L L L L 3 Bob Bo le 06/09/30 Hawaiian Parks P F/R F/R R P - 4 Yen Chin 06/10/07 Orchidland - P - P - - - 5 B an Christ 07/01/16 Hawaiian Paradise Park - - - - _ _ _ 6 Joseph Dal mple n/a Hawaiian Paradise Park - - - - _ _ _ 7 Keola Downin 06/10/07 Hawaiian Parks - P P T T T T 8 David Fukumoto 06/10/16 Kurtistown - - P P - - - 9 Mark Hauanio 06/09/30 ? P P - - - _ _ 10 Tob Hazel 06/11/20 Nanawale - - - p _ _ _ 11 Luana Jones 06/10/16 Pohoiki - - P P _ _ _ 12 Jonathan "Hoku" Keawe 06/10/16 Mountain View - - - - _ _ _ 13 Melissa Knott 06/09/30 Hawaiian Parks S S - - S P - 14 Mar aret Le -Dohanos 07/01/09 Ka oho Pa a a Farms - - - - _ _ p 15 Jack Lockwood 06/09/30 Volcano P - P P _ _ _ 16 Martha Lockwood 06/11/20 Volcano - - P P - - - 17 Jon Olson n/a Leilani Estates - - G P - - _ 18 Ma Marvin Porter 06/09/30 Hawaiian Paradise Park P P P P P - - 19 Prema Qadir 06/09/30 Hawaiian Parks P P C/T C/T/F C/T C/T C/T 20 Liz Salfen 06/09/30 Hawaiian Paradise Park L L L L - L L 21 Frankie Sta leton 06/09/30 Nanawale P P P T T T T 22 Jud Sten er 06/11/20 Ainaloa - - - p _ _ _ 23 Jackl n S monds 06/10/16 Kala ana - Seaview - - - - _ _ _ 24 Rob Tucker n/a Pahoa - - - - G - G 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/ 14/2007 4:1 9 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 39 of 47 • • ~ • P na ommunit De~ ment Plan CDP u C y p ( ) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW TABLE 15.1 CONTINUED Member 2006 2007 # First Name Last Name Since Geographical Area 09/30 10/07 10/16 11/20 12/18 01/29 02/03 25 Elizabeth Weatherford 06/09/30 Hawaiian Paradise Park P P P P P - - 26 James Weatherford 06/09/30 Hawaiian Paradise Park P P C C C - - 27 Robin Wri ht n/a Hawaiian Paradise Park - - - - - - - Total Attendance: 11 12 14 16 11 7 8 L =Liaison C =Coordinator F =Facilitator R =Recorder S =Scribe P =Participant T =Task Partnership Coordinator G =Guest TABLE 15.2 Meeting Locations Puna CDP Transportation Working Group Meetin # Date Time Venue Location Meetin #1 Se tember 30, 2006 08:30 m - 12:00 pm Pahoa Hi h School Pahoa Meetin #2 October 7, 2006 05:45 m - 09:15 m Hawaiian Acres Communit Association Hawaiian Acres Meetin #3 November 16, 2006 06:00 m - 09:00 m Ola'a Communi Center Kea'au Meetin #4 November 20, 2006 06:05 m - 09:00 m Ola'a Communi Center Kea'au Meetin #5 December 18, 2006 06:00 m - 09:00 m Ofa'a Communi Center Kea'au Meetin #6 Janua 29, 2007 06:00 m - 09:00 m Kea'au Communit Center Kea'au Meetin #7 Februa 3, 2007 10:00 m - 03:00 m Kea'au Communit Center Kea'au 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir • Page 40 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW TABLE 15.3 Meeting Record of Attendance Existing Roadways Task Partnership # First Name Last Name r M G hi l A S nce eograp rea ca 11/16 12/05 12/12 1 Yen Chin 06/10!07 Orchidland - P P 2 Keola Downin 06/10/07 Hawaiian Parks - P P 3 Luana Jones 06/10/16 Pohoiki P P P 4 Prema Qadir 06/09/30 Hawaiian Parks C C C Total Attendance: 2 4 4 C =Coordinator P =Task Partnership Member G =Guest TABLE 15.4 Meeting Locations Existing Roadways Task Partnership Meetin # Date Time Venue Location Meetin #1 November 16, 2006 10:00 am - 01:00 m Luana Jones' Home Pohoiki Meetin #2 December 7, 2006 11:30 am - 04:00 m Luana Jones' Home Pohoiki Meetin #3 December 12, 2007 01:00 m - 04:30 m Luana Jones' Home Pohoiki 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 41 of 47 • • • • -Puna Communit DeV~o ment Plan (CDP) Y p TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW TABLE 15.5 Meeting Record of Attendance New Alternative Corridors Task Partnershi Member 20 06 2007 # First Name Last Name Since Geographical Area 11/28 12/05 12/12 01/09 01/16 01/23 01/30 1 Bobbie Alicen 06/11/28 Hawaiian Paradise Park P P P - P P - 2 Ste hanie Bath 06/09/30 Hawaiian Parks P P - P P P - 3 B an Christ 07/01/16 Hawaiian Paradise Park - - - - P P P 4 Keola Downin 06/10/07 Hawaiian Parks C C C C C C C 5 David Fukumoto 06/10/16 Kurtistown - - - - - - - 6 Jonathan "Hoku" Keawe 06/10/16 Mountain View - - - - - - - 7 Martha Lockwood 06/11/20 Volcano - - - - - - - 8 Jon Olson n/a Leilani Estates - - - G - - - 9 Ma Marvin Porter 06/09/30 Hawaiian Paradise Park - G - - G - - 10 Prema Qadir 06/09/30 Hawaiian Parks F F P - - P P 11 Robin Wri ht n/a Hawaiian Paradise Park - - G - - - - 12 John Schinnerer n/a Hawaiian Paradise Park - G - - - - - 13 Jud Sten er 06/11/20 Ainaloa P P P - - P - 14 Elizabeth Weatherford 06/09/30 Hawaiian Paradise Park S S S - - - P Total Attendance: 6 8 6 3 5 6 4 C =Coordinator F =Facilitator S =Scribe P =Task Partnership Member G =Guest 07021 3 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 42 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW TABLE 15.6 Meeting Locations New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Meetin # Date Time Venue Location Meetin #1 November 28, 2006 06:00 m - 09:00 m Kea'au Communit Center Kea'au Meetin #2 December 5, 2006 05:45 pm - 09:00 pm Kea'au Communit Center Kea'au Meetin #3 December 12, 2006 06:30 m - 10:00 m Kea'au Communit Center Kea'au Meetin #4 Janua 9, 2007 05:30 m - 08:00 m Kea'au Communit Center Kea'au Meetin #5 Janua 16, 2007 05:40 m - 09:30 m Kea'au Communit Center Kea'au Meetin #6 Janua 23, 2007 05:30 m - 09:30 m Kea'au Communit Center Kea'au Meetin #7 Janua 30, 2007 06:20 m - 08:00 m Kea'au Communit Center Kea'au 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/ 14/2007 4:7 9 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 43 of 47 • • ~ • mmunit De~ ment Plan CDP Puna Co y p ( ) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW TABLE 15.7 Meeting Record of Attendance Mass Transit Task Partnership Member 2006 2007 # First Name Last Name Since Geographical Area 11/11 11119 01/09 01/16 01/24 01/28 1 Ste hanie Bath 06/09/30 Hawaiian Parks P P - - - - 2 Bob Bo le 06/09/30 Hawaiian Parks P - P P - P 3 Lar Brown n/a Count of Hawaii - - - G - - 4 Tom Brown n/a Coun of Hawaii - - - G - - 5 Jose h Dal m le n/a Hawaiian Paradise Park - G - - - - 6 Keola Downin 06/10/07 Hawaiian Parks P P - P P - 7 Tob Hazel 06/11/20 Nanawale - - P R P - 8 Mar aret Lev -Dohanos 07/01/09 Ka oho Pa a a Farms - - P P P P 9 Jack Lockwood 06/09/30 Volcano - - - - - - 10 Melissa Knott 06/09/30 Hawaiian Parks P - P P - P 11 Jon Olson n/a Leilani Estates - - G - - - 12 Ma Marvin Porter 06/09/30 Hawaiian Paradise Park P P P P - - 13 Prema Qadir 06/09/30 Hawaiian Parks F F - - - - 14 Jennifer Salfen n/a Hawaiian Paradise Park - - - - G - 15 Liz Salfen 06/09/30 Hawaiian Paradise Park P P - - P P 16 Sa er Salfen n/a Hawaiian Paradise Park - - - - G - 17 Frankie Sta leton 06/09/30 Nanawale C C C C C C 18 James Weatherford 06/09/30 Hawaiian Paradise Park P - - - - - Total Attendance: 9 7 7 9 7 5 C =Coordinator F =Facilitator S =Scribe P =Task Partnership Member G =Guest 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 44 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW TABLE 15.8 Meeting Locations Mass Transit Task Partnership Meetin # Date Time Venue Location Meetin #1 November 11, 2006 05:00 m - 07:00 m Hawaiian Acres Communit Association Center Hawaiian Acres Meetin #2 November 19, 2006 02:40 m - 05:00 m Ola'a Communit Center Kea'au Meetin #3 Janua 9, 2007 Frankie Sta leton's Home Nanawale Meetin #4 Janua 16, 2007 01:15 pm - 05:00 m Kea'au Public Libra Kea'au Meetin #5 Janua 24, 2007 03:00 m - 06:00 m HCEOC Pahoa Meetin #6 Janua 28, 2007 02:30 m - 05:30 m Pu'ula Church Nanawale 07021 3 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 45 of 47 • • ~ Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW APPENDIX B -HPP Ohana News Community Representation in the Puna CDP Process The following articles are examples of how one community, the Hawaiian Paradise Park Home Owners Association, organized to participate in the Puna CDP process. HPP Ohana News -January 2007 by da neighbors The Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) process Working Group phase is now underway. Citizen volunteers are meeting in working groups to plan and draft recommendations for Puna's future. HPP, as the largest and most populous subdivision in Puna is under-represented on these working groups. • You can make adifference -get involved! For example, the "New Alternative Corridors" sub-group of the Transportation working group is drafting plans for new roads through HPP and they need more of our input. Visit the Puna section of the CDP web site at http://hawaiiislandplan.com/puns.asp and go to the Working Groups section or call the Puna CDP hotline at 935-3975. HPP Ohana News -February 2007 by da neighbors The Puna Community Development Plan's grass roots working groups will complete their proposals in mid-February. They cover many areas, such as cultural preservation, transportation, land use, energy, parks, infrastructure and services. You can learn about the groups at http:!/hawaiiislandplan.com/punaworkinggroups.sap. The meeting schedule is the first link. Or call 982-8820. This process needs our attention because the result will change our lives. Well, we know that things are going to change around here, anyway. But the county committed to follow the final plan in its decision making, so we want it planned thoughtfully. Many creative ideas are arising in the grass roots working groups. For example, some ideas being considered in the transportation groups would place major public roadways through HPP. There's an idea for a Puna Parkway between the backs of l Ooh and 1 1 th. There are . 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 46 of 47 Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP FINAL REPORT OVERVIEW APPENDIX B - HPP Ohana News continued ... proposals for 5cn ~ 5cn 25~h streets, and yet; the final plan isn't even written. Everyone still has a voice, until the final Puna Community Development Plan is adopted. Find a working group of interest to you; learn what their thoughts are; add your own. Until next month, a hui hou! The views and information offered above are reported by volunteers; the column does not reflect policies or opinions of the HPPOA Board of Directors or its staff. • 070213 Transportation Working Group Final Report Overview . Created on 2/14/2007 4:19 AM -Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 47 of 47 Existing Roadways (Subgroup) If you want the truth to stand clear before you, never be for or against. -- Seng Ts'an • Puna CDP TRANSPORTATION Existing Roadways Mission: To ensure the development of caring, safe and efficient movement of people and goods along environmentally green and aesthetically pleasing existing roadways in the District of Puna. • RECOMMENDATIONS FOR EXISTING ROADWAYS IN THE DISTRICT OF PUNA February 15, 2007 • Prepared for: County of Hawaii Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, HI 96720 Prepared by: Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group Existing Roadways Task Partnership • Prema Qadir, Coordinator • Yen Chin • Keola G.A. Downing • LuanaJones Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION I. PRIORITY #1: SAFETY 1. Intersection Safety 04 2. Driver Safety 06 3. Roadway Safety 07 4. Roadway Design 07 5. Law Enforcement 1 1 II. PRIORITY #2: TRAFFIC CONGESTION 1. Morning and Evening Rush Hour 12 2. Development/Commercial Activity 1 3 3. Roadway Design 14 III. PRIORITY #3: QUALITY OF EXISTING ROADWAYS 1. Roadside Amenities 1 5 2. Roadway Aesthetics 1 5 IV. PRIORITY #4: CONNECTIVITY OF COUNTY & STATE ROADWAYS • a. Old Pahoa Road 1 7 b. Kahakai Blvd. 18 c. Government Beach Road 18 d. Railroad Right-of-Way 19 e. Shower Drive 21 f. 40th Avenue 21 g. Old Volcano Trail 22 V. QUESTIONS POSED BY THE CONSULTANT 23 VI. APPENDIX A. Safety of Highway 130 by Luana Jones 27 B. Public Input 28 • 070215 Existing Roadways Report Revised on 2/24/2007 5:04:33 PM- Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 2 of 28 Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT INTRODUCTION MISSION STATEMENT Our mission is to ensure the development of CARING, SAFE and EFFICIENT MOVEMENT of PEOPLE and GOODS long environmentally green and aesthetically pleasing existing roadways in the District of Puna. A. 680 Transportation Ideas from 130 Small Group Meetings: • 54% IXISTING ROADWAYS (367 Transportation Themes) i. 204 TRAN-ROAD Transportation Ideas ii. 120 TRAN-LIGHT Transportation Ideas iii. 43 TRAN-4 LANE Transportation Ideas • 2796 NEW ALTERNATE CORRIDORS (182 Transportation Themes) i. 125 TRAN-ALT Transportation Ideas ii. 57 TRAN-LWR Transportation Ideas • 1996 MASS TRANSIT (131 Transportation Themes) s. Existing Roadways Task Partnership Themes (in order or priority): 1. SAFELY of existing roadways 2. Traffic CONGESTION at major intersections 3. QUALITY of existing roadways 4. CONNECTIVITY of County and State roadways In this report, the Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group Existing Roadways Task Partnership identifies the Issues, Goals, Objectives and Recommendations (IGOR) for existing roadways in the District of Puna, Hawai ~ i. 070215 Existing Roadways Report Revised on 2/24/2007 5:04:33 PM- Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 3 of 28 • L` • Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT I . SAFETY ~~T i 1. INTERSECTION SAFETY PRIORITY #1 ALONG ROADWAYS IN PUNA a. Intersection Safety b. Driver Safety c. Non-motorized and Pedestrian Safety d. Roadway Safety e. Roadway Design f. Law Enforcement a. INTERSECTION SAFETY ISSUE #1: The major intersections along Highway 1 1 and Highway 130 are unsafe, due to inadequate merge lanes and/or inadequate turning lanes. i. GOAL: Major intersections along Highway 1 1 and Highway 130 are safe for merging and left-turns, including but not limited to the following intersections: 1. Highway 1 1: a. Kopua Road & Highway 1 1 b. Kulani Road & Highway 1 1 c. Old Volcano Road & Highway 1 1 d. Opukahaia Road & Highway 130 (across from the Humane Society) 2. Highway 130 (Kea'au -Pahoa Road) a. Shower Drive & Highway 130 b. Pohaku Road & Highway 130 c. Kaloli Drive & Highway 130 d. Orchidland Road & Highway 130 e. Paradise Road & Highway 130 f. Maku' u Road & Highway 130 g. Ainaloa Blvd. & Highway 130 h. Pahoa Village Road, aka Old Pahoa Road & Highway 130 i. Malama Market entrance road j. Kahakai Blvd. & Highway 130 k. Leilani Estates Entrance 070215 Existing Roadways Report Revised on 2/24/2007 5:04:33 PM Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 4 of 28 Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT 3. Highway 132 (Pahoa - Kapoho Road) 4. Nanawale Estates Entrance ii. OBJECTIVE: Eliminate left-turns at major intersections in Puna. iii. RECOMMENDATIONS: Modern Roundabouts, Video Surveillance and/or Roadway Realignment: 1. Modern Roundabouts: Construct greenscaped modern roundabouts and/or install traffic signal lights as a LAST resort at major intersections in Puna: • Kopua and Highway 1 1 .• Kalani and Highway 1 1 Shower Drive & Highway 130 Pohaku Road & Highway 130 • Kaloli Drive & Highway 130 .• Orchidland Road & Highway 130 Paradise Road & Highway 130 :• Maku ~ u Road & Highway 130 • Ainaloa Blvd. & Highway 130 .• Pahoa Village Road (Old Pahoa Road & Highway 130) • Malama Market entrance road • Kahakai Blvd. & Highway 130 :• Leilani Estates Entrance :• Nanawale entrance road .• Kehau Road and Railroad Ave. a. Conduct a study of the major intersections along Highway 1 1, Highway 130 and Highway 132 to determine the feasibility of constructing modern roundabouts and traffic signal lights (as a last resort) to ensure safe merging and left-turns. b. The County/State DOT is advised to apply for 100% Federal funding for Modern Roundabout construction. Consult with Eric Worrell, P. E, Federal Highway Administration -Hawaii Division. [Telephone: 808-541- 2700 ext. 304, a-mail address: Eric.Worrell@fhwa.dot.gov] 2. Video Surveillance: Install video surveillance devices at the above major intersections to document traffic incidents (traffic crashes, stalled vehicles, load spillage affecting one or more lanes of traffic) along Highway 1 1 and Highway 130. 070215 Existing Roadways Report s Revised on 2/24/2007 5:04:33 PM- Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 5 of 28 Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT 3. Roadway Realignment: Most of traffic crashes on Highway 130 occur as vehicles are turning onto Highway 130, most specifically left-turns. An alternative to construction of modern roundabouts is roadway realignment. Three (3) major streets that could be re-routed to create 3 intersections, instead of 6. These intersections would be: a. Re-route Ainaloa Boulevard to Maku'u Drive b. Re-route Paradise Drive to Orchidland Drive c. Re-route Malama Market to the old Kahakai Boulevard Note: See Appendix A for full report. b. INTERSECTION SAFETY ISSUE #2: The intersection at Highway 132 and Nanawale Blvd. is very dangerous, according to Greg Braun, Puna CDP Steering Committee Liaison, Parks & Recreation. Furthermore, he writes: "Many traffic crashes occur there. Nanawale Blvd. comes out to the Hwy on an angle and people turn in front of on-coming traffic all the time or cruise through the stop sign into traffic. These are county roads so this intersection can and should be realigned. A roundabout?" i. GOAL: Roadway access to the Nanawale Estates subdivision is safe for turning traffic. ii. OBJECTIVE: Eliminate traffic crashes at the intersection of Highway 132 and Nanawale Blvd... iii. RECOMMENDATIONS: Realign the roadway at Highway 1 1 and Nanawale Estates and construct a modern roundabout. 2. DRIVER SAFETY a. ISSUE: Drivers are making roadways unsafe by speeding, driving while intoxicated and driving aggressively or without patience. b. GOAL: Potentially lethal driving behaviors (e.g. speeding, driving under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs, road rage, tailgating, etc.) are non-existent along roadways in Puna. c. OBJECTIVE: Driver education courses emphasize prevention of potentially lethal driving behaviors and law enforcement is increased. d. RECOMMENDATIONS: i. County of Hawaii and State of Hawaii mandate roadway safety as a top priority, including re-evaluating the effectiveness of the driver education program and hiring more law enforcement officers in the district of Puna. ii. Reduce maximum speed limit along Highway 130 from 55 mph to 45 mph. • 070215 Existing Roadways Report Revised on 2/24/2007 5:04:33 PM- Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 6 of 28 Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT 3. ROADWAY SAFETY a. ROADWAY SAFETY ISSUE #1: Illegal roadside vending distracts driver attention and creates unsafe entry/exit from roadways in Puna. i. GOAL: Illegal roadside vending is non-existent along roadways in Puna. ii. OBJECTIVE: Existing roadside vending laws are enforced. iii. RECOMMENDATIONS: County officials should issue fines against vendors who violate County laws for roadside vending. b. ROADWAY SAFETY ISSUE #2: Posted speed limits do not compliment commercial land use development along roadways in Puna. i. GOAL: Posted speed limits are correctly applied commensurate with commercial development along roadways in Puna. ii. OBJECTIVE: County and State transportation authorities routinely review posted speed limits in conjunction with commercial development along roadways in Puna. iii. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. County and State transportation engineers conduct surveys to . guarantee that posted speed limits are correctly applied to roadways in Puna. 2. Reduce maximum speed limit along Highway 130 from 55 mph to 45 mph. c. ROADWAY SAFETY ISSUE #3: There are no dedicated routes for non-motorized traffic, i.e. bicycle lanes and pedestrian sidewalks along Highway 11 and Highway 130. i. GOAL: Dedicated lanes, along Highway 1 1 and Highway 130, accommodate non-motorized traffic (bicycles and pedestrians) and buses. ii. OBJECTIVE: Highway 1 1 and Highway 130 safely accommodate non- motorized traffic, i.e. bicycles and pedestrians. iii. RECOMMENDATIONS: State DOT conducts a study to determine how to modify Highway 1 1 and Highway 130 to accommodate non-motorized traffic, i.e. bicycles and pedestrians. 4. ROADWAY DESIGN a. ROADWAY DESIGN ISSUE #1: State Department of Transportation (DOT) traffic crash data is inaccessible to the residents of Puna and federal, state, county 070215 Existing Roadways Report , Revised on 2/24/2007 5:04:33 PM- Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 7 of 28 Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT authorities who need it most to evaluate and correctly determine appropriate measures to prevent traffic fatalities, injuries and property damage along .roadways in Puna. i. GOAL: State Department of Transportation (DOT) shares traffic crash data with citizens, local agencies and county, state and federal government units who need it most to evaluate and correctly determine appropriate measures to prevent traffic fatalities, injuries and property damage along roadways in Puna. ii. OBJECTIVE: State DOT collects complete, accurate and timely traffic crash data to assist decision makers to identify and predict safety problems and to measure the effects of safety countermeasures, in a timely fashion. 1. motor vehicle traffic-related fatalities/injuries 2. motor vehicle traffic-related injuries/injuries 3. overall fatality rate and occupant fatality rates by vehicle type (ATVs, cars, vans, SUVs, pick-up trucks, industrial trucks, etc.) 4. speeding-related fatalities/injuries 5. pedestrian fatalities/injuries 6. large truck-related fatalities/injuries 7. roadway departure fatalities/injuries 8. intersecxion-related fatalities/injuries 9. night-time visibility-related fatalities/injuries 10. rainy weather-related fatalities/injuries 11. senior citizen driving-related fatalities/injuries 12. left-turn-related fatalities/injuries 13. tourist-related fatalities/injuries (unfamiliarity with Hawaii roadways) iii. RECOMMENDATIONS: County Department of Public Health institutes a statewide public health surveillance system, linked to the County/State GIS, to correlate motor vehicle crash data with medical data to develop a better picture of motor vehicle fatalities/injuries and to conduct research that will produce methods and tools for predicting future traffic crash problems and the safety consequences. • 2. According to the North Hawaii Outcomes Project (NHOP) [Web Address: http://www.nhoa.orq], more than half of the traffic fatalities on the Big Island are caused by impaired driving behavior related to intoxication from alcohol and prescription/illegal drugs. The County and State should launch a NHOP sister-program to address motor vehicle crashes, which are caused by issues other than reckless and impaired driving 070215 Existing Roadways Report Revised on 2/24/2007 5:04:33 PM- Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 8 of 28 Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT behaviors (i.e. speeding, road rage, tailgating and roadway design. 3. Initiate a State study to facilitate a transportation strategy on how to best integrate existing data into "user-friendly" formats to support more effective decision making: a. identify current state practice with regard to sharing data b. provide an analysis of the Guillen decision in terms of its probable impact on data sharing. Pierce County v. Guillen, Slip Docket No. 01-1229 (2003) [Web Address: http: / /www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions /02pdf/O1- 1229. d c. conduct a survey to document, summarize, and report the stated reasons for sharing and not sharing data with particular attention to the relationship of state tort liability statutes to state practice d. document best practices of various states in presenting data in an effective manner to decision makers and achieving data-driven decision making e. create guidelines for best practices in data sharing and protecting state and local agencies from liability exposure. 4. State DOT should apply for National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) [Web Address: http:/Iwww.nhtsa.dot.aovl] grants to fund maintenance and analysis of a traffic crash database. 5. Install video surveillance at hazardous intersections along Highway 1 1 and Highway 130 to monitor traffic incidents on the Internet. 6. Create a Citizen's Voluntary Transportation Reporting System (CVTRS) program, which will establish and maintain a traffic crash database. 7. Construct a citizen's voluntary traffic crash reporting system Website, where residents can post traffic incident reports. b. ROADWAY DESIGN ISSUE#2: Poor and/or inadequate grading, paving, guardrails, signage, road surface markings and street lighting contribute towards unsafe traffic conditions, including but not limited to blind spots and flooding, along roadways in Puna. 070215 Existing Roadways Report i Revised on 2/24/2007 5:04:33 PM- Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 9 of 28 Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT i. GOAL: Roadways in Puna have adequate grading, paving, guardrails, signage, road surface markings for motor vehicles, bicycles and pedestrian traffic, reflectors, street lighting and drainage to ensure safe driving conditions. ii. OBJECTIVE: Grade; pave; replace/install guardrails, signage, road surface markings, reflectors and street lighting wherever blind spots exist and/or flooding occurs. iii. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Assess and prioritize the need for grading, paving, guardrails, signage, road surface markings for motor vehicles, bicycles and pedestrian traffic, street lighting and drainage along roadways in Puna and then schedule the work in order of priority. 2. Pave the roadway between the 12 Mile and 13 Mile markers in Mountain View -going from Volcano Highway 1 1 to Old Volcano Road, where the road washes out due to flooding. Contact: Kathy Patton, Hilo Coffee Mill, 968-1333. c. ROADWAY DESIGN ISSUE #3: Poor and/or inadequate design of merge lanes, left-turn lanes, sight distance visibility (day time, night time and during rainy weather) adversely affect traffic safety along roadways in Puna. i. GOAL: Merge lanes, left-turn lanes, sight distance visibility (day time, night time and during rainy weather) facilitate safe driving conditions along roadways in Puna. ii. OBJECTIVE: 1. Extend the length of merge lanes and left-turn lanes. 2. Clear obstructions limiting sight distance. 3. Day time signage improvement: One-foot high letters, i.e. white letters on green background. 4. Night time signage improvement: Road surface reflectors should be installed to provide for visible indicators of turning lanes, highway shoulders and intersection locations: a. Yellow indicates turning lanes and separation on-coming traffic. b. Red indicates intersection warning and no-entry areas. c. White indicates highway shoulder. iii. RECOMMENDATIONS: The County, in conjunction with the State DOT, should make an assessment of ALL roadways in the District of Puna to determine where merge lanes, left-turn lanes. and sight distance problems exist and then 070215 Existing Roadways Report Revised on 2/24/2007 5:04:33 PM- Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 10 of 28 Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT schedule roadway improvements, with highest priority given to Highway 130, Highway 1 1 and Highway 132, as per the stated objective. 5. LAW ENFORCEMENT a. ISSUE: Law enforcement is incapable of monitoring and enforcing, violations of posted speed limits and potentially lethal driver behaviors (e.g. speeding, driving under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs, road rage, tailgating, etc.) along roadways in Puna. b. GOAL: Law enforcement is monitors and enforces violations of posted speed limits and potentially lethal driver behaviors (e.g. speeding, driving under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs, road rage, tailgating, etc.) along roadways in Puna. c. OBJECTIVE: Increase police personnel in the District of Puna. d. RECOMMENDATIONS: i. Install speed-monitoring Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) at appropriate highway locations to monitor traffic flows and Changeable Message Signs (CMS) to inform motorists of traffic conditions, current speed. • ii. Install police-monitored Webcams along Highway 1 1 and Highway 130 to protect citizens, enforce the law and monitor traffic patterns and document traffic incidents. iii. Establish a Citizen's Voluntary Transportation Reporting System (CVTRS) program to: 1. Build a database of traffic incidents to inform the Police Department of traffic enforcement violations along roadways in Puna. 2. Produce information that can be used in Traffic Court to aid in convictions of violators. 3. Inform the public about dangerous locations, where traffic violations most frequently occur. 4. Document traffic warrants, which are necessary to justify mitigation of serious intersection problems. Note: The CVTRS program should be made accessible to the public on the Internet. The public should be informed of the call-in telephone number, which should be posted on strategic road signs along roadways in Puna. 070215 Existing Roadways Report Revised on 2/24/2007 5:04:33 PM- Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 11 of 28 • Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT II.TRAFFIC CONGESTION PRIORITY #2 ALONG ROADWAYS IN PUNA a. Morning and Evening Rush Hour b. Land Use Development/Commercial Activity c. Roadway Design • Recognizing that roadway congestion can be positively or negatively impacted by factors such as increased connectivity, alternative routes and improved mass transit, the Existing Roadways Task Partnership recommends the following to reduce traffic congestion. 1. MORNING AND EVENING RUSH HOUR CONGESTION a. ISSUE: Peak demand exceeds roadway capacity on Highway 130, especially at bottlenecks in traffic flow, during morning (Hilo-bound) work rush hour and evening (Pahoa-bound) work rush hour. Peak demand also exceeds roadway capacity near schools, due to school buses and vehicles dropping off students at the start/end of the school day. b. GOAL: Roadway capacity along Highway 130 accommodates peak demand for every hour of the day. c. OBJECTIVE: Decrease peak traffic demand and/or increase roadway capacity on Highway 130, particularly at the following high traffic congestion locations: i. Across from the Humane Society on Highway 130, where the road narrows from two lanes to one lane. ii. Corridor between Ainaloa Blvd. and Shower Drive. iii. Road A in Pahoa at Malama Market and Orchidland Drive. d. RECOMMENDATIONS: i. Construct an alternate route through Puna Makai (Lower. Puna) that will carry some of the traffic that now travels Highway 130. ii. Widen Highway 130 in one or more of the following ways: • 070215 Existing Roadways Report Revised on 2/24/2007 5:04:33 PM- Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 12 of 28 Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT 1. Construct a divided highway with a densely greenscaped median, similar to the portion of Highway 1 1, between the Highway 130Kea ~ au Bypass and Macadamia Road (Mauna Loa Macadamia Visitor Center, Hilo, HI). 2. Construct a reversible middle lane that will carry a second lane of traffic northbound during the morning rush hour and southbound during the evening rush hour. iii. Expand the current mass transit system (Hele-On Bus Schedule) throughout Puna. iv. Promote ride sharing during peak periods. v. Develop and promote ride sharing throughout Puna. vi. Develop economic opportunities in Puna that will reduce the need for traveling to Hilo for jobs, services and shopping. vii. Stagger work hours in Hilo. 2. TRAFFIC CONGESTION DUE TO DEVELOPMENT/COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY a. ISSUE: Future development, build-out of existing subdivisions, and new commercial activity in Orchidland, Ainaloa, Maku' u Farmer's Market and the Malama Market (Road A in Pahoa) cause severe traffic congestion near and/or along Highway 130. b. GOAL: Adequate roadway capacity supports the inevitable future development, commercial activity and projected population growth in Puna for the next 20 years. c. OBJECTIVE: Limit unsound growth of future development, build-out of existing subdivisions, and new commercial activity. d. RECOMMENDATIONS: i. Reopen the connector roadway from Malama Market to Highway 130. ii. Require that any new land use development/commercial activity, along roadways in Puna (specifically Highway 1 1 and Highway 130), build appropriate improvements to affected roadways to ensure safe traffic patterns in the area. iii. Invoke a system similar to Local Improvement Districts or HELCO SSPP to secure payments from developers to pay for roadway improvements associated with new land use development and commercial activity along roadways in Puna, specifically Highway 1 1 and Highway 130. 070215 Existing Roadways Report Revised on 2/24/2007 5:04:33 PM Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 13 of 28 Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT 3. TRAFFIC CONGESTION DUE TO ROADWAY DESIGN a. ISSUE: There is no uniformity of ingress and egress to Highway 1 1 and Highway 130 from feeder routes, resulting in congestion and traffic crashes due to dangerous left-turns, highway entry/exit, merging lanes and bottlenecks. b. GOAL: Continuous traffic flow and elimination of traffic crashes. c. OBJECTIVE: Lengthen left-turn lanes and highway entry/exit merge lanes to prevent traffic congestion along Highway 1 1 and Highway 130, including but not limited to the following locations: i. South end of Keaau Bypass (across from the Humane Society). ii. Shower Drive to Kahakai Blvd. iii. Reduce the posted speed limit on the Keaau to Pahoa corridor from 55 mph to 45 mph. iv. .Mountain View to Glenwood, including Kulani Road, Kopua Road and N. Peck Road. d. RECOMMENDATIONS: i. Legislate County oversight for State DOT planning and implementation of all new roadway construction and improvements to existing roadways in Puna. ii. Change the STIP to add and prioritize new roadway construction and roadway improvements of Highway 130 and Highway 1 1 to achieve better ingress and egress. iii. Adopt a policy of always including roundabouts as an available option, whenever assessing existing intersections for changes or improvements and planning for new intersections. 070215 Existing Roadways Report Revised on 2/24/2007 5:04:33 PM- Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 14 of 28 Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT III. QUALITY PRIORITY #3 ALONG ROADWAYS IN PUNA: a. Roadside Amenities b. Roadway Aesthetics 1. ROADSIDE AMENITIES a. ISSUE: Call boxes for emergency services, cellular phone towers, free public Internet access (Wi-Fi) and public restrooms are non-existent along Highway 1 1 and Highway 130. b. GOAL: Rest stops at regular intervals along Highway 11 and Highway 130 provide connectivity to emergency services, eco-friendly restrooms and free Internet connections and Wi-Fi for emergency and public use. c. OBJECTIVE: Include roadside amenities as a requirement for all roadway improvements to Highway 1 1 and Highway 130. d. RECOMMENDATIONS: i. County and State DOT should form a partnership to make major corridors much more than just physical roadways by constructing public rest stop facilities, which offer access to the Information Superhighway. iii. Provide telephone call boxes, cell phone towers and Wi-Fi access. iv. Reduce student commuting to Hilo Town by building telecommunication centers at remote bus terminals, which would facilitate access to the Information Super Highway on the physical highways throughout the District of Puna. v. Provide lockable bike racks and air pumping stations for bicycles. 2. ROADWAY AESTHETICS a. ROADWAY AESTHETICS ISSUE #1: Roadside trash and abandoned vehicles are an 070215 Existing Roadways Report Revised on 2/24/2007 5:04:33 PM- Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 15 of 28 Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT eyesore along roadways in Puna. b. GOAL: Beautiful views along roadways in Puna -free of eyesores such as trash and abandoned vehicles. c. OBJECTIVE: Clean-up roadways of trash and abandoned vehicles. d. RECOMMENDATIONS: i. Increase and enforce the penalty for littering and abandoning vehicles on roadways. ii. Create a County program, which offers free cargo nets at first violation warning ticket for unsecured loads that are headed to the transfer stations. 3. ROADWAY AESTHETICS ISSUE #2: Lack of and/or destruction of indigenous and non- invasive flora diminishes the beauty of roadways in Puna. a. GOAL: Greenscaped roadways beautify the view plane and increase safety by separating opposing lanes of traffic on major roadways in Puna. b. OBJECTIVE: Separate opposing lanes of traffic and plant native, indigenous and non-invasive flora in the medians and along the shoulders of roadway right-of- ways to reduce visual tension and serve as a green buffer between residential locations and the highway. c. RECOMMENDATIONS: i. County and State DOT should develop partnerships with the public to achieve greenscaped roadways that beautify the views of motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians. ii. Establish greenscaping roadway projects to decrease noise pollution impacting adjacent residential areas and beautify the environment. 070215 Existing Roadways Report Revised on 2/24/2007 5:04:33 PM- Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 16 of 28 Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT. IV. CONNECTIVITY PRIORITY #4 ALONG ROADWAYS IN PUNA a. Old Pahoa Road b. Kahakai Boulevard c. Government Beach Road d. Railroad Right-of-Way e. Shower Drive f. 40th Avenue g. Old Volcano Trail 1. CONNECTIVITY OF COUNTY & STATE ROADWAYS. The important use of existing roadways to help connect subdivisions in Puna and provide alternate access routes between Upper Puna and Lower Puna is hampered by impassable roadway conditions and/or barred access, along the following roadways: a. OLD PAHOA ROAD: i. ISSUE: Old Pahoa Highway is closed at Malama Market and Highway 130. ii. GOAL: Old Pahoa Highway is accessible for right-hand turns from Highway 130 into the Malama Market. iii. OBJECTIVE: 1. Provide access to Malama Market Place and the new U.S. Post Office with aright-hand turn only exit from Highway 130. 2. Provide a new entrance to access to Pahoa Town at Highway 130 and Kahakai Blvd. iv. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Close Road A at Malama Market Place in Pahoa Town. 2. Create a new entrance to Pahoa Town at Kahakai Blvd. 3. Reopen Old Pahoa Road for limited access into Malama Market. 4. Limit access from Highway 130 onto Old Pahoa Road for right- hand turns into Malama Market and the new U.S. Post Office. 5. Convert the Road A triangle into a public park with public restrooms. 070215 Existing Roadways Report Revised on 2/24/2007 5:04:33 PM- Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 17 of 28 • Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group • EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT b. KAHAKAI BLVD: i. ISSUE: Kahakai Blvd. is closed, mauka of Highway 130. ii. GOAL: At the intersection of Highway 130 and Kahakai Boulevard, the new entrance into Pahoa Town is an aesthetically pleasing greenscaped 4-way modern roundabout offering a safe ingress and egress to/from Pahoa Town from every direction. iii. OBJECTIVE: 1. Re-open Kahakai Blvd. mauka of Highway 130. 2. Construct a 4-legged modern roundabout at Kahakai Blvd. and Highway 130 to reduce traffic crashes at this documented dangerous intersection. 3. At the intersection of Kahakai Blvd. and Old Pahoa Road, construct a small modern roundabout. iv. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. The County should partner with the State DOT to determine the • feasibility of constructing modern roundabouts as a means to dramatically reduce traffic crashes at major intersections along Highway 11 and Highway 130. 2. Build the first modern roundabout of the Kea~au-Pahoa corridor at the intersection of Highway 130 and Kahakai Blvd. 3. The State DOT should apply for 100%financing from the Federal Government for this dangerous intersection. c. GOVERNMENT BEACH ROAD: i. ISSUE: Government Beach Road is impassable between the following point(s): Kahakai Blvd. to Maku~u and Shower Drive to Hilo. ii. GOAL: Government Beach Road serves as a "scenic coastal byway' connector route between Kapoho and Hilo. iii. OBJECTIVE: Transform Government Beach Road into a "scenic byway' and emergency evacuation route*. • *In the event of a hurricane disaster it is likely that Highway 130 would be littered with a forest of utility poles, possibly rendering it impassable to all traffic. Under such circumstances, Government Beach Road would provide redundancy from Kalapana to Hilo. iv. RECOMMENDATIONS: The County, in cooperation with the State DOT, 070215 Existing Roadways Report Revised on 2/24/2007 5:04:33 PM- Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 18 of 28 Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT should apply for Federal "scenic byway" funding to: 1. Pave Government Beach Road from Kapoho to Hilo, without the destruction of any significant trees with sensitive regard for the historic preservation of the Old Puna Trail. 2. Re-open impassable sections of Government Beach Road between: a. Hawaiian Parks and Hawaiian Paradise Park b. Hawaiian Paradise Park to Hilo 3. Repair the coastal portion of Government Beach Road that is now blocked off between Maku~u Drive and Paradise Drive. This area is currently used for pedestrian travel only, but could be re- opened after repair of a short portion of the roadway along the coastal cliff where the County of Hawaii parcel is currently used for whale watching, fishing, and light recreational use. 4. The entire scenic byway should be declared "restricted access" for passenger vehicles, mini-vans, paratransit buses, bicycles and pedestrians only, with a posted and enforced speed limit of 25 mph. d. RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY (ROW): i. ISSUE: Portions of Railroad Avenue are impassable between Kapoho and Shower Drive. ii. GOAL: Railroad Avenue serves is a multi-modal pastoral experience, isolated from the manifestations of commerce and advertising, even when the road passes through populated areas from Kapoho to Hilo. iii. OBJECTIVE: Re-open Railroad Avenue at the following locations: 1. Kapoho to Hawaiian Shores 2. Hawaiian Beaches to Hawaiian Paradise Park 3. Shower Drive to Railroad Avenue in Hilo iv. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Pave and improve Railroad Avenue from Kapoho Road to Hawaiian Shores, clearing any blocked or impassible areas of the roadway along that route. 2. Construct a connector roadway extension of Kehau Road, from the Nanawale subdivision to Railroad Avenue. 070215 Existing Roadways Report Revised on 2/24/2007 5:04:33 PM- Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 19 of 28 • t • Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT 3. Construct a greenscaped modern roundabout at the intersection of Kehau Road and Railroad Avenue. • ~ ~ ~r~ 2 Hw"~ HONOL,U U' ' r. ~~ 41 ~,t.r~ ..• A ~~ :~~r, SrWIWLw CgiarrwHpt` I.wi 1 ~f ^ OtNt'e('gmr~v~tlon 5uti®ar Ir.i/s L ~+ GoYt bud` Uod SOId Ptpu TF~1 Raitrod Avg Zb~Hr~ - rrwewwa~ ~- SMA • WhmwtWw Owpt. ',~~ • a«~dnr.n~.in~ry 1 ~~~~ f ~~~ KAHUWAt ~.,. . N u Ae~ruv~jr ---~ dKalwwai ~IYwd.Wr~ rrr+++b Kr~rnrw ~" ~~ Kart .:..:: 4. Improve and pave Railroad Avenue from Hawaiian Beaches to Hawaiian Paradise Park, clearing any blocked or impassible areas of the roadway along that route. 5. Improve and pave Railroad Avenue from Hawaiian Paradise Park to the existing Railroad Avenue on the Hilo side of the W. H. Shipman properties at Milo Street. 6. We endorse the Railroad Avenue Multi-Purpose Pathway, the Old Volcano Trail and the Safe Routes to School (SR25) program. Note: This would complete the route along the former Railroad easement connecting Hawaiian Paradise Park and Hilo. Although Railroad Avenue no longer exists as a railroad easement across ~~ J 070215 Existing Roadways Report Revised on 2/24/2007 5:04:33 PM- Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 20 of 28 Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT • W. H. Shipman land, the use of the grade improvements and railway roadbed itself would be less expensive than construction of a new roadway. 7. The County should construct a rock wall along the roadway from Hawaiian Paradise Park to the existing Railroad Avenue on the Hilo side of the W. H. Shipman properties at Milo Street to protect the current W.H. Shipman properties from agricultural theft. 8. The entire Railroad Avenue multi-modal corridor should be declared "restricted access", exclusively for passenger vehicles, mini-vans, paratransit buses, bicycles and pedestrians, with a posted and enforced speed limit of 25 mph. e. SHOWER DRIVE: i. ISSUE: Shower Drive is a dead end roadway. ii. GOAL: An extension of Shower Drive to 17th Avenue facilitates connectivity for Puna Makai traffic, from the bottom of Hawaiian Paradise Park (by way of Kaloli Drive and/or Shower Drive) to the subdivisions mauka of Hwy 130. iii. OBJECTIVE: Improve access from Makai portions of Hawaiian Paradise • Park to the subdivisions mauka of Highway 130. iv. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Improve and extend Shower Drive to 17th Avenue. 2. Construct a modern roundabout at the intersection of Shower Drive and Highway 130, providing a safe intersection and access to Pohaku Drive and mauka subdivisions. f. 40th AVENUE: i. ISSUE: Flooding occurs in several locations along 40~h Avenue, which prevents through-traffic connecting to Highway 1 1. ii. GOAL: From Highway 130, Pohaku Drive provides connectivity to 40~h Avenue. An extension of 40~h Avenue completes connectivity to Highway 11. iii. OBJECTIVE: Improve Pohaku Drive to 40~h Avenue making any needed improvements to allow traffic from Hwy 130 or areas makai of that highway to travel toward Hwy 1 1. iv. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Improve and pave Pohaku Drive and 40~h Avenue toward its 070215 Existing Roadways Report • Revised on 2/24/2007 5:04:33 PM- Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 21 of 28 Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT terminus just past Pualani Street. 2. Extend 40th Avenue (across two parcels) connecting with Highway 11. Note: Portions of both Pohaku Drive and 40th Avenue require important flood control measures to ensure traffic flow during heavy rains. g. Old Volcano Trail: i. ISSUE: Old Volcano Trail requires improvements to construct amulti- modal bike and pedestrian pathway. ii. GOAL: Old Volcano Trail provides a pristine multi-modal bike and pedestrian pathway. iii. OBJECTIVE: Clear and improve degraded portions of Old Volcano Trail. iv. RECOMMENDATIONS: Develop a County program to make improvements along the Old Volcano Trail, in partnership with area residents and trail enthusiasts. • • 070215 Existing Roadways Report Revised on 2/24/2007 5:04:33 PM- Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 22 of 28 Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT . vii. Questions posed by the Puna CDP Consultant 1. Should Highway 130 be expanded to 4 lanes? If so, between what points? This question may no longer valid because it appears that the State DOT may already be in the process of condemning land along Highway 130. However, we still chose to answer the question. According to the data collected at the 130 Small Group Meetings, the breakdown of transportation issues was, as follows: TABLE 7.1 130 Small Group Meetings - 680 Transportation Issues CATEGORY MENTIONS* TRANSPORTATION IDEAS* %TOTAL IDEAS TRAN-ROAD TRAN-LIGHT TRAN-4LANE 204 120 43 General Road Improvements Traffic lights & street lights Make Highway 130 4-lanes 30% 18% 6% Source: Hawaii Island Plan Slide Show Presentation Slide #9 http //www.hawaiiislandolan com/ library/documents~ounairml-iohnw-presentation?-22-06 odf While transportation issues were the MOST frequently mentioned ideas in the "3,394 Ideas from 130 Small Group Meetings," widening of Highway was the LEAST mentioned transportation issue. There is enough feedback on both sides of this issue to warrant inclusion in this report. A significant number of stakeholders say: "No! Highway 130 should *not* be expanded to 4 lanes." They feel that expanding Highway 130 to 4 lanes with signalized intersections will increase traffic congestion and do nothing to enhance commuting efficiency. "Make Highway 130 4-lanes" was the LEAST mentioned transportation idea in the "3,394 Ideas 070215 Existing Roadways Report Revised on 2/24/2007 5:04:33 PM- Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 23 of 28 Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group • EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT from 130 Small Group Meetings." It was never previously addressed in a community development plan, prior to the Puna Regional Circulation Plan (PRCP). [see Puna CDP Overview Page 8] Legislative Aid, Barbara Hale, informed members of the Puna CDP Transportation Working Group that the State is already condemning property along Highway 130, in preparation for widening to 3-lanes (between Shower Drive and Kea'au Bypass) - a short-term fix and 4-lanes (between Shower and Ainaloa) -along-term transportation plan. If this is true, then the State has violated the trust of Puna residents, as expressed in the "3,394 Ideas from 130 Small Group Meetings," previous community development plans and informal polling. [See Page 8 -Table 6.1 -line 26). If the State DOT moves ahead with plans to widen Highway 130, then the best that the Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group Existing Roadways Task Partnership can do would be to recommend that the State project be constrained within design specified, below. Therefore, we recommend: a. To the extent that Puna relies upon Hilo for jobs, shopping, services and entertainment, then Puna will experience transportation problems that will result in increased capacity on roadways between Puna and Hilo. If a 4-lane highway is forced upon residents of Puna, then the State is encouraged to guarantee safe -access • lanes. We expect that the number and severity of traffic crashes will increase due to a greater distance that traffic must necessarily travel to cross and/or execute left-turns on Highway 130. b. Reconstruct Highway 130 as a 4-LANE DIVIDED HIGHWAY between Kea~au and Pahoa with wide shoulders for expansion to 6 lanes in the future and with deceleration off- lanes, acceleration on-lanes, left turn stacking lanes. c. Construct a greenscaped median (just like the section of Highwayl 1 -between Kea'au and Macadamia Road), equaling at least the width of 2 traffic lanes, to buffer traffic flow between opposing lanes, reduce noise pollution and improve night time visibility. d. Transform Highway 130 into a boulevard, under County of Hawaii jurisdiction. e. Reduce the maximum posted speed limit on Highway 130 from 55 mph to 45 mph. f. Engineer the widening plan to accommodate adequate land area for the construction of greenscaped Modern Roundabouts at the major intersections along Highway 130 to guarantee: ae less traffic congestion along Highway 130 fi less anxiety making left-hand turns onto Highway 130 e~ less pollution due to stopping and starting ~- less expense due to the fact that the Federal Government provides for 100% • 070215 Existing Roadways Report Revised on 2/24/2007 5:04:33 PM- Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 24 of 28 Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT . funding for construction of modern roundabouts. fi dramatic reduction in the number of intersection traffic crashes, particularly traffic crashes that occur as a result of making left-hand turns. e~ fewer pedestrian and driver fatalities and injuries oti decrease in overall property damage due to slower speeds inside of modern roundabouts. Note: Wherever modern roundabouts are impractical, install traffic signal lights as a last resort. 2. Is the Puna Regional Circulation Plan still valid? The Puna Regional Circulation Plan is still valid and should be expanded upon to include the additional concerns raised in the Puna Community Development Plan. The Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group endorses the Puna Regional Circulation Plan "five key problems that affect transportation and quality of life," as follows: ~ Redundancy and emergency bypass routes do not exist. ~ The District has the highest five-year total motor vehicle fatality rate of all Hawai' i County districts. ~ The District is a rapidly growing area. ~ Equal access to transportation in not provided. ~ Existing land use patterns distance residents from jobs, services and schools. 070215 Existing Roadways Report Revised on 2/24/2007 5:04:33 PM- Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 25 of 28 • • Modern Roundabout, Springfield, Illinois Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT 3. Is there broad agreement in the community with the Puna CDP Transportation Working Group recommendations? "Consensus = an opinion held by all or most; general agreement." Broad Consensus: The Puna CDP Transportation Working Group is not a broad representation of Puna residents; therefore, we recommend that the County make every effort to present the Puna Community Development Plan to a greater cross section of stakeholders, including Native Hawaiians, other non-white people, low- income residents, renters, youth, senior citizens and disabled citizens in ALL communities, which will be impacted by CDP implementation. 2. There are 3 roadways for which the Puna CDP Transportation Working Group sought consensus: a. Highway 130: There appears to be consensus that Highway 130 should remain a 2-lane roadway. However, since the State DOT appears to be moving forward with the first phase of widening, i.e. converting the Shower shoulder lane into a travel lane, then a minority felt that it is important to make recommendations on how the project should be managed. b. Railroad Right-of-Way: There appears to be consensus that the Railroad Right-of-Way should be restricted to non-motorized travel. Note: Buses traveling at regular intervals could help to increase security for bicyclists and pedestrians. c. Lower Puna PMAR: There were significant hurdles in balancing multiple and competing stakeholder objectives. There is broad agreement that a Puna Makai Alternate Route is needed below Highway 130 from Hilo to Kapoho, however, there is resistance with respect to the access to and alignment of the Puna Makai Alternate Route through Hawaiian Paradise Park from the HPP Home Owners Association board of directors and individuals whose property may exist in potential pathways for new alternative corridors. 070215 Existing Roadways Report Revised an 2/24/2007 5:04:33 PM- Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 26 of 28 Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT APPENDIX A Safety of Highway 130 Submitted by Luana Jones December 27, 2006 Aloha, During the course of my campaign, this topic was discussed at length. Apparently, there are over a dozen streets that feed into Highway 130, as well as driveways of residences along the 10 mile stretch from Keaau to Pahoa. It is the only thoroughfare in lower Puna This two lane highway serves a population of about 15,000 that is rapidly increasing, with a large percent of residential lots, yet to be occupied. There are constant accidents; so much so, that traffic information is difficult to obtain from government agencies (probably for fear of lawsuits). With limited connecting roads, when accidents occur, commuters are at astand-still, sometimes for hours. Based on the assumption that it will take many years before Hwy. 130 is expedited, and alternate routes established, our • discussions focused on what could be done immediately to make Hwy. 130 safer. The expedition of Hwy. 130 through clover interchanges, coupled with alternate routes to Hilo, as well as attaching roads for use during emergencies (accidents, etc.) would be sufficient, and yet retain the quality of life in Puna. Most of the accidents on Hwy. 130 occur as people are turning off or on to the highway (mostly left turns). Because there are so many streets feeding into Hwy. 130, we detected 3 major streets that could be re-routed to create 3 intersections, instead of 6 streets feeding into the highway. These intersections would be: • Re-route Ainaloa Boulevard to Makuu Drive • Re-route Paradise Drive to Orchidland Drive • Re-route Malama Market to the old Kahakai Boulevard The safety of Hwy.130 would be greatly promoted by combining these major roads and installing traffic lights until such time that these intersections can be expedited through interchanges. Currently, the land along the re-routing of roads appears to be vacant. The safety of Highway 130 is a priority need in the Puna Makai District! Without our immediate attention, we will all have personal honor stories to tell. Two of my grandchildren almost died in an accident at the Makuu intersection on their way to school on a recent rainy morning. We need police directing traffic at strategic intersections (i.e. Ainaloa Blvd. & Paradise Drive) during peek-hours to reduce accidents and make Hwy. 130 safer. The efforts to make Hwy. 130 safer needs be implemented immediately. P. 0. Box 2092 -Pahoa, HI 96778 - (808)938-0021 070215 Existing Roadways Report i Revised on 2/24/2007 5:04:33 PM Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 27 of 28 Puna Community Development Plan Transportation Working Group EXISTING ROADWAYS TASK PARTNERSHIP REPORT APPENDIX B Public Input The following documents can be provided upon request. 1. Roundabouts: a. All About Roundabouts b. "Roundabouts as Context Sensitive Solutions," by Ken Sides, P.E., AICP c. Public Testimony Supporting Roundabouts, by Prema Qadir d. Response to the Action Care Team, by Brannon Morioka, State DOT 2. a-mail Testimony: a. HPP is a Fire Trap, by Erhard C. Autrata, b. Nanawale Estates Roundabout, by Greg Braun • c. Kahakai Blvd. and Highway 130 Traffic Crash Victim Testimony d. NO OTHER access. I find it terrifying! 3. News Articles: a. "No Systematic Approach to Traffic Analysis," by Mike Leidermann b. "State 'Protecting' Traffic Information," by Mike Leidermann c. Spotlight on the Motor Vehicle Crash Reduction Group 4. Alternat ive Proposals: a. Complimentary Ideas for Puna Makai, by James Weatherford b. Puna Parkway Proposal, by Rob Tucker c. Puna Parkway Proposal Comments, by James Weatherford d. Land Use Recommendations, by David Fukumoto e. Do we need a Puna Makai Alternate Route, by James Weatherford • 070215 Existing Roadways Report Revised on 2/24/2007 5:04:33 PM- Prepared by Prema Qadir Page 28 of 28 New Alternative Corridors (Subgroup) ~J "Addressing" Puna's needs will require collective and collaborative effort by people living in the CDP planning area, landowners and other stakeholders, planning professionals, and agency representatives. -The CDP • Puna CDP TRANSPORTATION New Alternative Corridors Mission: To ensure community input for the development of safe, green, aesthetically pleasing and efficient corridors now and into the distant future, in a culturally respectful way, while preserving and sustaining the native resources • of Puna. The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa Submitted Bv: New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Coordinator Dr. Keola G.A. Downing, Ph.D. Task Partnership Theme Catagories The New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership has determined to build our final report around Theme Categories. These Theme Categories were boiled down from many different areas of interest and concern to the basic requirements of greatest importance to insure a viable future for Puna. Listed below are our prioritized results. 1. Emer enc Res onse • g Y P 2. Aesthetics 3. Safety 4. Efficiency For each of these four Theme Categories, we have completed a thorough process to identify: • Issues & Problems • Goals • Objectives • Recommendations New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report • Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 2 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa We have reviewed the 2005 Puna Regional Circulation Plan (PROP) to insure that our effort either is built on the findings of that document, or further adds to the information and recommendations that will enhance previous work. Our input can be used to make sure that as many good ideas as possible are considered before this important project becomes law. It is very important to consider the development of New Alternative Corridors to plan for the ongoing development and growth in the Puna District. We feel that this is the only reasonable way to improve the Emergency Response, Aesthetics, Safety, and Efficiency of the roadways and the movement of people and communications throughout the Puna District today and into the future. New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 3 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa NEW ALTERNATIVE CORRIDORS TASK PARTNERSHIP OVERVIEW Problems Encountered • The public has experienced difficulty in finding an authentic source for Traffic Crash Information. • The public needs clarity concerning the ownership of the former Railroad Right of Way Easement. • The public needs to know what kind of process the State and County governments will use to improve existing roadways and/or build new roadways and corridors that will cross the Existing Puna Subdivisions. • The public needs to know how the State and County governments shall purchase and take on the liability for the Private Non Standard Roadways in the Puna subdivisions. • The public needs to know how the State and County governments shall compensate owners for any Homes and Properties that will require condemnation through the right of eminent domain. Infrastructure Changes Need To Be Made Now It is very important to start making infrastructure improvements now, rather than in the future when the subdivisions of Puna become more fully occupied with new residents. At full build out conditions, the population of Puna will exceed Hilo and other surrounding areas. None of the subdivisions in Puna can expect that traffic flow through their residential neighborhoods can be completely avoided. Safety and Emergency evacuation alone require increased connectivity within and between all Puna subdivisions. New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report • Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 4 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Punta A Mau Loa This unpopular concept is almost certainly inevitable. It is unrealistic to plan for the Isolation of any Puna Subdivision. Connections to other subdivisions and locations like Pahoa Town, new Village Centers, and New Commercial Developments in Puna, require the construction of Muli- Modal pathways. These new pathways will enhance the connectivity, safe walking and bike path space, as well as the introduction of New Feeder Bus Transit Routes within and between all Puna subdivisions. In order to build a practical and efficient Puna for the future, we will need to understand that: "Change will have to happen!" Our work on the Puna Community Development Plan must be to improve the possibilities of a better future rather than to ignore the realities that are coming on very strong and very fast. The Puna Community Development Plan will enable us to deal with the future development of our neighborhoods, including major changes to the infrastructure within the private subdivisions. All our planning must proceed with a concern for what life will be like after the future expansion of our population happens. That is our overall goal and responsibility. We hope to achieve that end with the understanding and support of all the community residents who are currently living in the Puna District. Resistance to change and misunderstandings about what new possibilities can do to improve the way we live and move about in Puna needs to be avoided as much as possible. County educational programs and projects that are directed at keeping the public informed about new changes to the infrastructure of Puna is vitally important to success. Damage to the quality of life and the rural nature of the existing residents is something that can be avoided by planning for the future. Improving infrastructure, including Village Centers, ample New Commercial Opportunities, and New Alternative Corridors through the new ordinances to be legislated by our County and State governments in the Puna Community Development Plan will achieve this important goal. New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 5 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa Note: There has been considerable discussion about the differences of opinion concerning the need for New Alternative Corridors and/or the upgrade of Hwy 130 to four lanes of traffic as well as any .new construction of roadways throughout the District of Puna. The comments concerning disagreement with the stated concepts of building new roadways and improving existing roadways will be included in the appendix of our Task Partnership Reports, or in the Full Transportation Working Group Report. We have made every effort to afford interested people an opportunity to share their Mana' o with the greater Puna community by inclusion of their ideas in the appendix of our reports. • New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 6 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa Mass Transit on New Alternative Corridors The Public Mass Transit System, will need New Alternative Corridors and Multi-Modal Pathways to connect Puna residents to County: • Hele-On Bus and Communication Hubs • Mass Transit Stations located off the major highways at Regular Intervals along all the New Corridors and New Feeder Bus - Transit Routes • Secure Park and Ride facilities located adjacent to Mass Transit Stations and all New Corridors • New County Bus Stop Shelters at dedicated locations along Hele- On Bus & Feeder Bus-Transit Routes • Public Bathrooms and Free Internet Wi-Fi access at Transportation Hubs • Subdivision Village Centers • Public facilities beyond the Puna District (i.e. Public beaches, parks, stadiums, and meeting places) These basic infrastructure changes in our District will be very important to reduce the Single Occupancy Vehicle commutes to and from Hilo town by residents of Puna. Both New Alternative Corridors and New Commercial Zoning and Development in Puna are very important to keep Puna residents in Puna. This will help to reduce the flow of traffic on our existing and new roadways. New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 7 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa We will also, however, need greater capacity in both Mass Transit and new roadway construction to insure that our infrastructure remains able to handle the increased flow of traffic from the greater number of people who will be living here. New ways of traveling to and from Hilo town as well as Pahoa and the new Village Centers must involve the development of these New Alternative Corridors, and New Multi-Modal Non-Motorized Pathways that provide connectivity between and through the existing population centers of the Puna District. It is crucial that our work enables the residents of Puna to agree to and be encouraged by different ways of moving about, other than by single occupancy automobiles. Although this can be difficult to promote, it must be a high priority learning process that people can support and buy into. Failure to achieve this will result in traffic problems and increased safety and emergency response issues that will make our future bleak. We can make all of these important infrastructure changes work toward a better future for everyone. By helping our population understand that in time there will absolutely be a necessity for constructing new infrastructure throughout our whole District, we can continue to save Puna's Greenspace and the rural atmosphere of our District as a rare and wonderful place to work and live. Compensation for affected homes and properties Extreme loss due to the required condemnation of certain homes and properties requires extreme measures of compensation. We must insure by ordinance that those people who are affected by the corrections to bad planning in the past be completely compensated at 150% market value for their homes and their property. People will also need to be compensated for their psychological suffering at the loss of their individual dreams. Those who will be affected badly by changes in our infrastructure have done nothing wrong. Poor planning in the years gone by has caused this New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 8 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan i New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa untenable situation to result. This will be very costly for everyone, but full compensation for those who are affected will help to make the required sacrifice by people who are displaced easier to accept. It will serve no one in Puna for these changes to be slowed down by lengthy litigation. Special latitude must be given to the County's consideration for new parks, ball fields, school locations, and electric and water utility improvements as well as civic centers for County government operations in the affected areas of Puna. Special benefits must be given to areas that are greatly impacted by any of the New Alternative Corridors and New Commercial Developments to insure their cooperation. A win/win plan must prevail if we are to successfully move forward toward the acceptance of the Puna Community Development Plan. Summary Work on the New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership has been difficult. It has been my experience that much of that difficulty is centered on the distaste that most people have toward any change. Although there are many voices and ideas in Puna, the overall consensus is that "Something has to give!" We cannot expect to live a good and productive life style in the future, if we do not plan now for the rapidly increasing expansion of our population. Roadway capacity is already critically overwhelmed during certain times of the day. Traffic crashes continue to be a severe problem for all of us, and a horror for those directly involved. Safety and evacuation issues will only become worse in the future if we do not take steps right now to make the necessary changes to our roadways and infrastructure. Our only hope to preserve the rural lifestyle that. we enjoy today in Puna is to plan for the coming increase in the population, support changes that will New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 9 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa resolve problems caused by that increased population and work together for the future of our District. The State should partner with the County to establish new Enterprise Zones for Puna Commercial Development on County and State agricultural land adjacent to the New Alternative Corridors. This must include three phase electric utility service and County water supply. The agricultural land that offers the least potential for agricultural use should be used whenever possible. The State and County, working together, should correct the vast areas of agriculturally zoned property that is clearly being used for residential homes and has been incorrectly zoned since the beginning of the development of our Puna subdivisions many years ago. It is time to fix our problems in Puna! Where original subdivision plans called for commercial zoning within planned Village Centers or where new plans for Village Centers are proposed, those properties should be quickly re-zoned and re-developed for new commercial activity within the Puna District. This will encourage people in Puna to stay close to home for their jobs, where they go to school, as well as where they go to enjoy dinning, entertainment and shopping. Zoning corrections are long overdue and should be made with New Alternative Corridors for Traffic and Communications always in mind. A successful plan for the movement of people and communications throughout the Puna District can only be achieved with an integration of Existing Roadways, New Alternative Corridors, and Mass Transit. All three of these important factors must be equally dealt with at the same time, and in a well- integrated way to achieve the success we require. New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 • • • Page 10 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa New Alternative Corridors I-G-O-R Statements Issue A Brief Statement of the Issue Goal A desired outcome expressed in simple terms, describing the desired End State Objective An action that indicates how an aspect of the Goal can be accomplished Recommendation A statement about how to initiate or complete an Objective, i.e. a Policy, Project, or Program New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 11 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa Category 1 - Emergency Response Issue #1 There is way too much traffic on Highway 130 & Highwayll. Goal • Less traffic on Hwy 130 & Hwy 11 Objective • Create New Alternative Corridors for existing highways Recommendations • Get drivers out of cars & reduce the need for highway commutes • Build New Alternative Corridors • Get Riders into Mass Transit • Car Pool • Develop Village Centers with Commerce, Services, & Goods _ New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 12 of 47 • The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa Issue #2 The County of Hawai i has no autonomy over many roadways in Puna. Goal • Limited State Control over highways and roadways on Hawai' i Island Objective • Increase County influence over State DOT Decisions r~ Recommendations • Propose and Enact Legislation requiring County Council approval in matters of State Highway decisions • Request that the Governor increase Big Island representation on the S.T.I.P. (This should be based on current & potential growth rates, the massive size of the this island, and the per capita fatalities on the Big Island. • New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 13 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan • New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa Issue # 3 Virtually all the communities in Puna have a lack of connectivity between subdivisions. Goal • Adequate emergency & evacuation routes and connectivity throughout Puna Objectives • Identify potential emergency & evacuation routes • Improve existing roadways • and/or build new corridors as needed Recommendations • Conduct an emergency and evacuation route study to determine the best routes • Implement findings ASAP • To include but not be limited to: • Open and improve Government Beach Road • Create a New Corridor adjacent to Wao Kele 'O Puna from Ainaloa to Volcano • Open and improve Rail Road Avenue New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report • Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 14 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa • Create a Puna Mauka to Komohana & Hilo Hospital New Corridor • Create a Kalapana to Hilo New Corridor • New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 15 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa Issue # 4 Virtually all communities in Puna have a lack of connectivity between subdivisions. Goal • Create more connectivity between Puna Subdivisions Objective • Identify "Planned but Un-built" connector roadways & determine where other additional connectivity is also needed Recommendation • Fund & implement connectivity * See section 10.3 & 10.3.1 of the Puna Regional Circulation Plan of 2005 New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 16 of 47 • U • The Puna Community Development Plan • New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa Issue # 5 Traffic crashes, downed utility poles, and impossible blockages on the main roadways, hampers emergency response. Goal • Eliminated Traffic Crashes on main roadways (i.e. Hwy130 & Hwy 11) Objective • Improve Traffic Safety • Recommendations • Lengthen Left Turn lanes, Right Turn lanes, and Merge lanes to be consistent with "Best Practice" • Construct "Modern Roundabouts" at each major intersection from Kea'au to Pahoa along Hwy 130 wherever possible • All new highway construction & widening should require underground Utilities -New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 17 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa _C___ategory 2 -Aesthetics Issue #1 Many people cannot enjoy Government Beach Road as a "Scenic Byway", because it is impassible by car in certain locations. Goal • Government Beach Road is a beautiful dirt or paved "Scenic Byway" accessible by car and all modes of transportation for everyone to enjoy. • Objective • Open impassable sections of Government Beach Road but prevent the Ali' i Drive nightmare of over development. Recommendation • Maintain current zoning and restrict further development on Government Beach Road. * Note: Puna Trail Historic Corridor Committee documentation is included in the appendix. New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 18 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa Issue # 2 Subdivision concerns over inter-subdivision connectivity reduces opportunities for aesthetically pleasing new roadways. Goals • Conscious and sustainable Green Connectivity within and between subdivisions in Puna Objective • New Connectivity Roadways are located in Green Belts & Open Space Recommendation • The County shall acquire Park & Open space land for new connectivity * (Use of the 2% open space funding is a possibility.) New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 19 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corrid r T o s ask Partnershilp Filnal Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa Issue # 3 There is a lack of bike, pedestrian, bridal, and non-motorized pathways. Goal • Plentiful pedestrian, biking, bridal and non-motorized pathways within and between subdivisions in Puna Objective • Develop Old Volcano Trail, Railroad Avenue, as well as mauka and makai trails in the subdivisions. Identify any new needs for trails. Recommendations • All future road improvements should include bike and pedestrian pathways. • Require green space and walkways for all new roadways and major upgrades for existing roadways. • Bury utilities and use utility easements for bike and pedestrian pathways. New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 20 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa Issue # 4 There is a risk of loosing community values with the loss of green space and aesthetics along the highways. Goals • Responsibly landscaped roadways • Green median buffers between opposing traffic lanes and the outside perimeters of the highway Objectives • Improve safety of roadways by installing green buffers between opposing lanes. • Bury utilities along all new and improved roadways Recommendation • Enforce all existing green buffer requirements and add vegetation buffers for all new roadways in Puna. New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 21 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa Issue # 5 Poor planning and unsound growth is damaging the aesthetics in Puna. Goal • Conscious planning with full enforcement and accountability to future generations Objective • Develop "walking to" Village Centers to avoid single occupancy vehicle life styles. Recommendation • Provide 3-phase electricity and County water service for subdivision approved Village Centers, to protect our aesthetics in the neighborhoods while providing light commercial opportunities within walking distance of residential locations. New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 • • • Page 22 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan • New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa Category 3 -Safety Issue # 1 The County of Hawai i has no autonomy over many roadways in Puna and cannot address safety issues. Goal • The County has autonomy over all the roadways on the Big Island concerning safety decisions. • Objective • The County Council shall legislate autonomy for all safety decisions concerning the roadways in the District of Puna Recommendation • The County Council shall propose and enact legislation that would require County Council approval in matters of roadway safety issues on all roadways on the Big Island. • New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 23 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnershi Final Re ort P P Malama Puna A Mau Loa Issue # 2 There is a pervasive single occupancy vehicle based lifestyle in Puna causing excessive traffic. This problem is made worse due to limited transportation alternatives. Goal • Puna has less traffic, and less traffic crashes. Objective • The County shall expand the Mass Transit system, Ride Sharing programs, as well as opening secure Park and Ride and Kiss and Ride locations throughout • Puna at appropriate locations. Recommendation • The County Council should Endorse Mass Transit, providing educational programs to encourage greater use of the Big Island Mass Transit systems. New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report • Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 24 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan • New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa Issue # 3 People in Puna on horseback, walking and riding bicycles have no safe dedicated multi-modal pathways. Goal • People walk, bike and ride their horses to Village Centers and other destinations on dedicated multi- modal pathways. * See section 9 PRCP -Safe Routes to School (SR2S) Program. Objectives • The County shall create dedicated Multi-Modal Pathways throughout Puna. *See section 9 of the PRCP • The Multi-Modal Pathways shall not be limited to schools only, but would serve the general neighborhood connectivity and support the concept of Village Centers. Recommendation • The County Council should adopt section 9 of the PRCP and apply the same concepts for dedicated Multi-Modal pathways to the proposed Village Centers within various subdivisions. New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 25 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnershi Final R • p eport Malama Puna A Mau Loa Issue # 4 Only one way in and one way out of both upper and lower Puna does not allow for redundancy or safety throughout Puna. * See section 8-1 PROP Goal • Traffic moving safely on New Alternative Corridors is providing redundancy, connectivity, and emergency access for all of the residents of the Puna District. Objective • • Create New Connectivity between all the subdivisions of Puna, sharing the responsibilities for safety throughout the entire District. Recommendations • The County Council shall adopt a concept of connectivity between subdivisions in upper Puna. *See section 10-6 PROP • The County Council shall adopt a unified upper Puna Mauka Alternate Route (PMAR). • New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 26 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan • New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa • The County Council shall adopt a unified lower Puna Makai Alternate Route (PMAR). • Initiate a referendum project to determine the preferred alignments through the affected subdivisions of both Upper and Lower Puna. C New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 27 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa Issue # 5 There are too many traffic crashes on Highway 11 and Highway 130 due to the problem of the ingress and egress of traffic from feeder roadways. Goals • There are new "No Left Turn" Corridors between the Kea' au Bypass and the Leilani subdivision. • There are new "No Left Turn" Corridors between Kea'au and Volcano. Objectives • The County shall use all safe traffic methods to establish "No Left Turn" Corridors. • These methods shall include but not be limited to installation of modern roundabouts, frontage roads, and other traffic management improvements. Recommendation • The County Council shall propose and enact legislation for appropriate new "No Left Turn" Corridors for all areas of the Puna District where dangerous intersections impact the safety of driving conditions. New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 • • ~~ Page 28 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa Issue # 6 Safety factors due to: • roadways blocked by downed utility poles • non separated opposing lanes of traffic • traffic interruptions due to public and school busses stopping along the roadways • left hand turns onto and off of the major highways Goal • There are very safe roadways in Puna, which have eliminated traffic crashes by updated roadway design, improved enforcement of highway laws, and reduced speed limits. Objectives • The State and County shall improve the design of the major highways with all safety issues addressed. • The State and County shall create a landscaped median area between opposing lanes of traffic on major highways. • Busses (school and public) shall not stop the flow of traffic on the major highways New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 29 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnershi Final Re ort P P Malama Puna A Mau Loa • Left terns shall be eliminated at dangerous intersections on major highways. Recommendations • The County Council shall seek new Private, State, and Federal partnerships for safety improvements along major highways in Puna. • The County Council shall propose and enact legislation to restrict both public and school busses to stopping only at dedicated off-road bus stops along major highways. • The County Council shall propose and enact legislation to create new "No Left Turn" Corridors along major highways in Puna. New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 30 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa Category 4 -Connectivity and Efficiency Issue # 1 There is too much traffic on Highway 11 and Highway 130 reducing efficiency. Goal • Traffic in Puna travels at a constant flow efficiently moving people and goods throughout the entire Puna District. • Objective • Reduce the volume of traffic on Hwy 11 and Hwy 130 by creating both upper and lower New PMAR Corridors and improving Highway design on existing roadways. Including Highways 11, 130, & 132 Recommendations • The County Council shall propose and enact legislation to repair and /or create new connecting roadways and New Alternative Corridors including upper and lower PMAR routes. • The County Council shall take ownership and liability for all improved and/or newly created roadways in Puna. • New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 31 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnershi Final R p eport Malama Puna A Mau Loa Issue # 2 There is a lack of efficient travel routes in Puna • Between all subdivisions • Between Puna and Hilo • Between Pahoa and Volcano Goals • Every subdivision has ample Multi-Modal pathways to address every kind of modality for moving people from: • Homes to Village Centers • Between one subdivision and another • Between residential areas, and commercial areas • And between Puna population centers and Hilo. Objectives • Develop new efficient Multi-Modal pathways for walking, biking, and Feeder Bus transportation between residential areas and Village Centers, within and between Puna's subdivisions, and between those subdivisions and major bus routes. • Increase the Mass Transit system opportunities between Pahoa, Hawai' ian Paradise Park, Kea' au, Volcano, and Hilo town. New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report • Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 32 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa Recommendations • The County Council shall propose and enact legislation creating dedicated Multi-Modal connectivity between subdivisions, Village Centers, and bus stops along major highways. • The County Council shall use tax dollars from the subdivisions to purchase and improve substandard roadways in Puna's subdivisions. • The County Council shall purchase all new and improved roadways in Puna and they shall assume the liability and maintenance for those roadways. New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 33 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa Issue #3 School and public busses stop on highways and disrupt traffic flow reducing efficiency. Delays in removing traffic crashes also disrupt traffic flow and reduce efficiency. • Children commuting to and from schools in their own cars or with their parents cause traffic congestion. • Slow response to traffic crashes causing long delays on highways. Goals • All busses move with the flow of traffic stopping only at designated "off roadway" bus stops. • Student passes for public busses and tax incentives for parents of school bus riders encourages the use of school busses to and from school. • Television cameras and emergency call boxes at regular intervals along the major highways provide fast and efficient emergency service notification. • Special roadway crash teams have improved the speed and efficiency of roadway crash removal. Objectives • Create designated "off roadway" bus stops New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 34 of 47 • The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa • Offer incentives to use public and school busses for commutes to and from schools in Puna. • Install cameras and call boxes to improve emergency response. • Franchise emergency roadway response teams in a Public/Private partnership to increase the efficiency of clearing roadways to prevent unnecessary roadway congestion after any auto crashes. * Note: This would include special teams to deal with downed utility poles. Recommendations • The County Council shall propose and enact legislation making stopping of any bus on major highways a traffic offence. • The County Council shall develop a Program of Hele- On Bus passes for students. • The County Council shall develop and fund a Program of tax incentives to encourage parents to send their children to and from school on school busses. • The County Council shall propose and enact legislation to establish and fund a County and Private Sector Partnership to improve traffic crash clean up on major highways. • New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 35 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa Issue # 4 The County has no autonomy over many Puna Roadways, including Government Beach Road and certain private roads, reducing efficiency of travel throughout the Puna District. Goals • All roadway efficiency issues on the Big Island of Hawaii are controlled by County rules and regulations. • In the case where State laws supersede County laws, the County Council has a mandatory review process before approval of those laws. Objectives • The County shall obtain ownership of all new and/or improved roadways in Puna. • Any roadway that the County shall obtain will convey the liability for that roadway. • The County shall partner with the State to improve existing roadways and the construction of new roadways in Puna. Recommendations • The County Council shall propose and enact legislation which will establish a Program for obtaining and taking on the responsibilities for New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 36 of 47 • • • The Puna Community Development Plan hi Final Re ort New Alternative Corridors Task Partners p p Malama Puna A Mau Loa existing roadways which are needed for Puna circulation projects. • The County Council shall propose and enact legislation, which will establish a Program to construct New Alternative Corridors to deal with the infrastructure needs of the future populations of Puna. r~ • New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 37 of 47 f The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa Issue # 5 There is a severe lack of Multi-Modal pathways to encourage walking, biking, and alternative transportation opportunities. Goal • Throughout Puna Multi-Modal pathways are used for walking, biking, and riding Feeder Busses both within and between subdivisions and neighborhoods in Puna. Objective • By way of referendum within existing neighborhoods . and subdivisions, establish the location and priority for adequate Multi-Modal pathways to allow for efficient movement from residential areas to Village Centers as well as between neighborhoods and subdivisions. Recommendation • The County Council shall develop and fund (particularly with Private Sector Grants, as well as State and Federal aid programs) new Multi-Modal pathways for walking, biking, and alternative modes of transportation within and between the neighborhoods and subdivisions of Puna. New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report • Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 38 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan i . New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa Issue # 6 There is a severe lack of connectivity between and within Puna subdivisions. Resistance to New Alternative Corridors passing through and connecting between subdivisions reduces the opportunities for efficient travel throughout Puna. Goal • Every subdivision and neighborhood is connected together with Multi-Modal pathways for walking, biking, and equestrian access as well as ample Para- transit and Feeder Busses to the Mass Transit System Bus Hubs. Everything is greenscaped with low impact and low care foliage reflecting the rural nature • of Puna. Objectives • Create Multi-Modal pathways connecting all the neighborhoods and subdivisions. • Establish connecting Feeder Bus routes that create new connecting corridors between and within neighborhoods and subdivisions. Recommendations • The County Council shall propose and enact legislation to purchase private roadways within the subdivisions that currently have remaining substandard roadways. i New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 39 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa • The County shall partner with the State to obtain Private Sector Grants as well as Federal Grants and Subsidies to build Multi-Modal pathways within and between neighborhoods and subdivisions providing more efficient travel throughout Puna. New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 40 of 47 • • ~J The Puna Community Development Plan final Re ort New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership F p Malama Puna A Mau Loa Issue # 7 There is a resistance to creating New Alternative Corridors across the subdivisions and.neighborhoods of Puna. This problem is based on issues of trust and reduces efficient movement between the neighborhoods and subdivisions in Puna. Goals • Strong community support for changes that will eventually enhance the efficient movement of people between residential areas and new Village Centers. • • By creating referendums to determine the will of the people, trust in the new changes has become fully supported by the affected communities Objectives • The County shall build trust in the Puna Community Development Plan, by insuring that the public has direct input now and in the future from the public in the areas where new connectivity plans are to be carried out. • To insure that everyone is heard from, an independent survey or referendum from all landowners and renters in the affected areas shall be established to determine the best routes for the New Alternative, Corridors between and through all subdivisions of Puna. New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 41 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa Recommendations • The County Council shall propose and enact legislation to guarantee homeowner compensation for the "taking" of any property. • Owners of homes and properties that are condemned for the construction of New Alternative Corridors shall be compensated at the rate of 150% Market Value for the loss of their homes and properties. • All effort shall be made to find federal funding to pay for the impact funds for the compensation to these homeowners and landowners. • New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 42 of 47 • The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa Consultant Questions 1) Should a Puna Makai Alternate Route (PMAR) be created? A Puna Makai Alternate Route (PMAR) should be the highest priority construction project for changes to the infrastructure of lower Puna. Completion of a PMAR will: a. Connect subdivisions that were once connected by the former Railroad, and Government Beach Road, but are no longer adequately connected • b. Relieve traffic congestion on Highway 130 ~. improve traffic capacity and efficiency in Lower Puna d. Create an alternative emergency evacuation route for makai residents of Puna e. Provide a new alternative route for an expanded Mass Transit system including all School bus traffic f. Offer the possibility for alternative multi-modal pathways within and between the existing subdivisions of lower Puna g. Decrease fuel consumption and vehicle emissions for travel within and between the subdivisions of Lower Puna, Kea' au, and Hilo. • New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 43 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa 2) Where should a Puna Makai Alternate Route (PMAR) be created? Considering funding restrictions, at least one new alternative corridor, somewhere about halfway between Highway 130 and Government Beach Road would, I believe, best serve all the residents of Lower Puna. Additionally a new Multi-Modal non-motorized pathway should be created for pedestrian, equestrian, and biking connectivity within and between the subdivisions of lower Puna, which could possibly be placed along the former Railroad Right Of Way easement and existing roadways. Engineering discovery will determine the most advantageous alignment for the construction of a PMAR through open areas outside the subdivisions. Within the subdivisions, final alignment for New Alternative Corridors on existing roadways or as new roadway construction between existing roadways should be determined by a referendum of the residents in those subdivisions directly affected. This must include both landowners and renters who live in these areas. Modern roundabouts should be constructed at the intersections affected by a PMAR at Maku'u Dr, Paradise Dr, and Kaloli Dr, (as well as a possible Shower Dr extension connecting with the PMAR). This should reduce safety problems and allow for both traffic-calming effects along these feeder roadways, and smooth traffic flow on the new PMAR. Should a Puna Makai Alternate Route (PMAR) go through Hawaiian Paradise Park? The largest source of congestion on Highway 130 is the traffic to and from Hawaiian Paradise Park. Construction of a PMAR would reduce that congestion by offering another roadway for residents of Hawaiian Paradise Park and people living east of that subdivision to travel to and New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 44 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa from Kea' au and Hilo. This would reduce the number of car crashes at the busy intersections of all the feeder routes in Hawaiian Paradise Park and Highway 130 and would also provide new connectivity between the .subdivisions. Creation of emergency ingress and egress through the subdivisions throughout Puna is vital. Proposals were made for a PMAR that would come only to the Hilo edge of HPP, and would connect to a gated emergency access at that point for crossing HPP. Residents residing east of Hawaiian Paradise Park all the way to Kalapana will also need emergency access for more private emergencies as well. We must consider all kinds of personal emergency situations not addressed in Civil Defense Planning. A locked gate on either side of HPP would delay emergency access, for example, when a mother in labor or an EMS vehicle racing from Pohoiki • needs to get to Hilo Hospital. There is a great difference between a gated access that can be opened in times of a Natural Disaster or a Civil Defense emergency evacuation, and a private individual needing to move from Hilo to Kalapana or the other way around, to quickly help a loved one in need. If you receive a phone call that your house is on fire, you need to get there from wherever you are as quickly as possible. An open PMAR will provide greater safety and faster response time. The PMAR Corridor provides new connectivity for all the subdivision residents who live four to six miles away from Highway 130. Our public transit vehicles, like busses and taxis, should not have to reduce fuel efficiency by traveling all that distance in order to connect to a roadway to or from the airport, harbor, or business center of Hilo town. These new Corridors should also provide a County water supply main, three-phase electric utility for Village Centers, and a "high bandwidth - • New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 45 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa fiber optic -communication line" to include access for lower Puna on to the information super-highway. Park and Ride facilities with free Wi-Fi centers and public bathrooms should also be constructed in the open spaces outside of the subdivisions adjacent to the new PMAR. For the good of all the people living in lower Puna, construction of a PMAR and it's alignment through Hawaiian Paradise Park appears to be both important and inevitable. Naturally, there is a level of disagreement with this concept among some of the residents who will be affected in both Hawaiian Paradise Park and other subdivisions. The County should, however, hold referendums within those subdivisions that are affected to allow for the best potential agreement concerning, the size, speed limit, and the alignment of the new alternative corridors crossing the affected neighborhoods. Of particular importance is the full and fair compensation for any homes and property, which must be condemned by, right of emanate domain in order to achieve these vital • infrastructure improvements. 3) Should both the PMAR and the 4-lane expansion of Highway 130 be done or just one or the other? From my point of view, it appears that at some time in the future both construction of PMAR and the possible expansion of Highway 130 will be needed. It will be far better to deal with this infrastructure need now than to wait till the situation becomes much worse in the future. To address both the cost and the hardship to area residents during the time of construction, a possible solution would be to take the following steps toward that end. a. First improve the existing 2-lane Highway 130, as per the Existing Roadways Task Partnership report. Of particular importance would be the construction of modern roundabouts as a safety feature at all the dangerous intersections along Highway 130 where possible. New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report • Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 46 of 47 The Puna Community Development Plan New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Malama Puna A Mau Loa b. Eliminate or reduce the number of Left Hand Turns along the Kea' au to Pahoa corridor by County ordinance, using either modern roundabouts or frontage roadways to achieve that end. ~. Construct the PMAR through open areas, as determined by engineering requirements, cultural surveys of the construction areas, and agreement for the purchase of the required properties with landowners. d. Make the selection from an engineer-approved list of choices for the PMAR alignment through neighborhoods by referendum within the affected subdivisions. * A limited access PMAR alignment between existing roadways within Hawaiian Paradise Park would appear to have the least impact on the whole community. e. After the measures listed above are completed, then conduct a study of traffic conditions to determine whether additional alternative corridors and/or additional traffic lanes on Highway 130 are justified. New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Final Report Prepared by Dr. Keola G. A. Downing, Ph. D. On February 2, 2007 Page 47 of 47 Appendix • C7 ,~ ti , cA.r wa .. _;,.ca s ...wti: y Z REF:HP-AMK ,•.~~,~ `_ _ .` ~s~/ ;~ ~`~~: f STATE Of HAWAII OEPAR7MEN7 Of LAND AND PiATURAL RESOURCES risr;a~c aafsFave,r~oti o~~is~oh KOk~hQ~PwP 9uiUinp. ROOM 555 S.-' KrrotJ~ 8ar9vr0 <~peW. N~•.N 96767 SEP 1 9 2000 Mr. Norman Olesen, Executive Assistant Mayor's Office, County of Hawaii 25 Aupuni Street Hilo. Hawaii 96720-4252 Dear Mr. Olesen: yif. ~! nl.~OrNr t ,aNr,a cgAt+<t•Cxaor BC ARC C~ LJJ•C AMC NAr VMy aESC:AC ES CfYV»FJ AO~A-~C aESOwCLS OCA'.NG AMC Oa: E/W RECP(~nON CONSLAYA`:ON µC AC SOVACiS CN~CRC W EN T CCN\[tiAMC(5 FO0.I1'RV Ah~ W117~~E ~:SfJWC O4ESERLA'~Ch S'A'EVARKS 1NA•EP RESO .fCC MMAG E4(4! t_OG NO: 26161 DOC NO: 0009PM10 SUBJECT: Contemplated Improvements to Extension of Highway 137 (Old Government Road} in the Wa'a Wa'a Area Subdivision Kahuwai, Halepuaa, Kanekiki, Puna, Hawaii Island TMK: 1-4-03;various Thank you for your letter of September 5, 2000, which followed up your phone conversation with our Hawaii Island archaeologist, Patrick McCoy, that same day about the County's contemplated improvements to the extension of Highway 137 (the Old Govemment Road) north of the Lighthouse Road. Your letter and the attached enclosures indicate that the County is considering using residual funds from a special Federal grant to pave a 1.6 to 1.7 mile long section of the existing dirt road- Our Honolulu office was unaware of the planned improvements until we began receiving a flood of letters from concerned citizens opposed to the project. We were initially under the mistaken impression that the project in question was the proposed improvements to the Kapoho-Kalapana Beach Road section of Highway 137. Our office had earlier provided comments on this project to SSFM International, Inc. (Don Hibbard to Ron Sato June 19, 2000). The Hawaii Tribune Herald article of August 4, 2000 that you enclosed with your letter quotes you as having said that the Federal government must fist approve the project and determine v~hethe~ or not an environments! assessment is needed. The use of Federal funds, However, clearly triggers the Section 106 compliance process of the National Historic Preservation Act. This act requires Federal agencies to take into account the effects of their undertakings on historic properties, prior to the beginning of the undertaking. Thus, the federal agency which awarded the funds is obligated io comply with Section 106, and can have the County act on their behalf on some matters. Your letter indicates that the County will comply with Federal requirements. The first step of the compliance process is io determine if significant historic sites are present, which would be eligible for inclusion on the Nations! Register of Historic Places. You indicate • Oelson Page 2 that the road paving will not alter the trees along the road, or apparently go outside the current road corridor (which is fined with walls and has pre-European contact to 1800s Hawaiian historic sites in parcels along the road). Thus the area of impact seems to solely be the existing road corridor. jNote: This means no stockpiling or turning around outside the road corridor.] We also believe the road itself may qualify as a historic site, being older than 50 years in age. This needs to be evaluated. if the road is significant, then paving it wilt have an impact -altering its character. Consultation with interested parties would be a required part of the federal agencies responsibilities in such a situation. Clearly, there are a large number of interested parties. if the County should decide not to use Federal funds, it is our opinion that proposed project woulu stuff t,ave ro oe reviewed under Chapter 6E-8 as a County undertaking, even EY~ough paving may not require an SMA permit, wsth a very similar historic preservation process resulting. In conclusion, we believe that the proposed project will require historic preservation review, either through the Section 106 process if Federal funds are used, or Chapter 6E-8 if the project is funded with County monies. No construction should occur until that review process is concluded In response to your questions about the Section 106 process we mailed you a copy of the new regulations on September 11, 2000. If you should have any more questions or comments please contact Patrick McCoy (692-8029). Aloha, ,, ~~ .r T!'iSifOTHY E. JOHNS, Chairperson and State Historic Preservation Officer PM:amk c. Senator flame! K. Inouye Representative Patsy Mink Senator Andrew Levin Mike and Irene Kubica Bob Davis Sheryl Kelso M. Stammen Ann Kobsa • Section # 7 Page 1 The Puna Trail Historic Corridor Hawaii, HI • NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION: The first humans are thought to have reached the shores of the Hawaiian Islands in the 4th or 5th century a.d. Their voyaging canoes were filled with the plants and livestock necessary for the establishment of a rich agrarian lifestyle, allowing them to thrive in this lush and varied landscape. While the Hawaiians evolved a unique culture over the centuries, the landscape and the daily rhythm and pace of village life probably changed slowly until European contact at the turn of the 19th century. Even though the 19th and 20th centuries brought rapid physical and cultural changes, some out-of--the-way corners of the island have retained many of the distinctive characteristics of the "Old Hawaii". One such area is the Puna Trail Historic Corridor (PTHC), a 3.7 mile section of the coastal Old Government Road (OGR) and the surrounding area in the Puna district of east Hawaii. The OGR was an important transportation link between the major popula- tion center of Hilo and the southern half of the island prior to the emergence of an inland road as the major route in the late 19th century. Although much of the OGR has either been abandoned or been replaced by modern highways, the PTHC contains a relatively intact portion of the OGR that is still used as a vehicular roadway. A trip on this road through the Puna Trail Historic Corridor is a step back to the late 19th and early 20th centuries and offers a glimpse of even earlier times. The present road and its corridor, when compared to the paved roads, fields and modern subdivisions which abut it, reflect the changes that occurred as the culture and lifestyle of Old Hawaii was replaced by the modern world. Its mix of old and new provides a unique historical overview of changing transportation and land use patterns in Hawaii. HISTORICAL DESCRIPTIONS OF THE AREA Missionaries, explorers and early travelers through the area often described the unique landscape they encountered, inspiring them to poetic writing. One could well read Isabella Bird's 1881 description of this area and believe it was written today. After rid- ing over the "hideous scene" which was the 1840 Nanawale lava flow [see below], she describes entering the forest. "Beyond this desert the country is different in its features from the rest of the island, a green, smiling land of Beulah, varied by lines of craters covered within and without with vegetation. For thirty miles the track passes under the deep shade of Coco palms, of which Puna is the true home; and from under their feath- ery shadow, and from amidst the dark leafage of the breadfruit, gleamed the rose-crim- son apples of the eugenic, and the golden balls of the guava. I have not before seen this exquisite palm to advantage, for those which fringe the coast have, as compared with these, a look of tattered, somber, harassed antiquity" (Bird 1881:243). The pres- ent-day traveler feels the same sense of wonder in the scenery and can take refresh- • Section # 7 Page 2 The Puna Trail Historic Corridor Hawaii, HI ment from the ripe fruits of the trees that line the road, as did Isabella Bird back in the 1880's. The first written account of this area was by the missionary, William Ellis, in 1822-23, who arrived from the south. "Our way now lay over a very rugged tract of country. Sometimes for a mile or two we were obliged to walk along on the top of a wall four feet high and about three feet wide formed of fragments of lava that had been collected from the surface of the enclosures-which these walls surrounded. We were, however, cheered with a beautiful prospect; for the land, which rose gradually towards the moun- tains, afew miles to the westward of us presented an almost enchanting appearance. The plain was covered with verdure; and as we advanced, a woody eminence, probably some ancient crater, frequently arose from the gently undulating surface, while groups of hills, clothed with trees of various foliage, agreeable diversified the scene. The shore which was about a mile to the eastward of us, was occasionally lined with the spiral pandanus, the waving coconut grove, or the clustering huts of the natives. At half past four we reached Kahuwai, where we sat down and took some refreshment, while Makoa was engaged in bringing the people of the place together. About 150 assembled around the door, and were addressed...After conversing some time, we traveled in an inland direction to honoruru [i.e. Honolulu Landing], a small village situated in the midst of a wood, where we arrived just at the setting of the sun" (Ellis 1963:210-211). Henry Walsworth Kinney in The Island of Hawaii documented a trip through the area in 1913. "Where the road from the station runs into the road to Pohoiki at a right angle, a road continues northward through Koa`e, a particular{y pretty Hawaiian viNage, and extends for about a mile, when it continues as a good trail onto the beach, where be- yond towering sand hills, lies Honolulu which consists of only a couple of huts" (Kinney 1913:83). John T. Faris wrote in 1929 in his book Paradise of the Pacific, "C1ose to the lava flow of 1840 is the village of Kapoho, site of one of Hawai`i's famous public schools and center of a little region full of scenic marvels. One road leads to the beginning of a walk nearly a mile through a dense tropical jungle of guava and coconut and mango trees. Beneath the trees dank rotting vegetation hides pitfalls for the unwary. Some of the ground crossed over changed its level many feet during a recent disturbance in Kilauea. Unex- pectedly the trail brings up against a precipice lapped by the waters of the Warm Spring, a basin large enough for a good swim, fiNed with water of intense blue. To this natives long ago used to go and marvel at the phenomenon of the rise and fa11 of the water in a time with the Pacific tides several miles distant " (Faris 1921:321). Note: this was no doubt written describing the road from Kapoho across the east rift zone of K'ileaua to Kula Pond. The description no longer fits the walk he took as the area is now covered • s Section # 7 Page 3 The Puna Trail Historic Corridor Hawaii, HI by the 1960 Kapoho lava flow, but his description of the road corridor accurately repre- sents the section of the Old Government Road north of the lava flow as it still is today. In 1960, George Jordan Berry wrote for the Honolulu Star Bulletin, "Along the rugged volcanic cliffs of Puna's undulating seacoast Nature has designed an extravagant sam- pling of true South-Sea Island beauty. Lush green forests of pandanus trees extend across flow after flow of ancient lava, sheltering a moist matting of ferns and tropical exotics beneath. Coconut groves grow wild along every mile. Large clearings are lava fields not yet old enough to permit the forest to close over and create new acres of un- imaginable beauty. The old Hawaiian villages still remain - Pohoiki, `Opihikao, Kalapana and the others. They were visible spots along the ancient seacoast trail around the 200 mile perimeter of Hawai`i's namesake island. The roads are narrow, often unpaved, but with it all delightfully rural, quaint, picturesque. Everywhere is green, .dank, rank, exotic. Modern Puna is only a time extension of ancient Puna. The old kuleana fences still delineate useful property divisions. The old `apana (district) churches still bring the religion of the missionaries to each village cluster. Puna is reas- suringly Hawaiian in every fine old historical sense of the word." More recently, from Country Roads of Hawaii comes this, "..the shore road enters the Cindy Dupuis, a present day poet, writes, "When quitely walking through this green tun- nel of mango trees lined with terrace wall, one can tangibly imagine a time and people planting and harversting the riches stretched along its sides: gifts of mango, avocado, ulu, coconut, mountain and rose apple, kukui, kava, hau, ginger and so much more. Today it is a rare sanctuary that one may witness the nest and flight of an `lo (Hawaian hawk), or Pueo (owl); it is a remaining refuge for the sentiments of wilderness and cutural ancestry. This tranquil place brings a busy mind to standstill, reminding us what is true of ourselves, as dappled light traverses the shadows through an ocean wind whispering, of the untouched." tropical forest through a tunnel of giant mango trees, hanging vines, bird's nest ferns, coconut palms, pandanus, and every other species that Puna has to offer. Drive slowly and savor the experience. The road is unpaved, rough in places, but easily passable in a sedan. Where the road comes closest to the shore, you have arrived at Honolulu Landing. Stay a while before venturing back to the civilized world." (Wenkam,1993) HISTORICAL DESCRIPTIONS OF THE ROAD In Barbara Lass's Reconnaissance Survev alona the Old Government Road, she traces the course of the OGR. "It originally extended from Hilo, through Waiakea, across the current airport and National Guard Reservation, and then south along the coast of Puna and Ka`u, a few miles south of Kalapana the road became only a foot path which never- theless continued further into Ka`ii. The road essentially followed the coast, but it was Section # 7 Page 4 The Puna Trail Historic Corridor Hawaii, HI laid out in a straight line so that in some places it cut across long points of land and was actually two to three miles from the shoreline. In the early 1930's, Hudson (Alfred E. who conducted an archeological survey of the entire coast of East Hawaii and identified 85 sites between Hilo and Cape Kumukahi) noted that the section of the road between the airport and Hilo had been destroyed but that most of the rest of the road could still be followed, in particular, the section between Ha`ena and Kapoho [containing the PTHC] was in `excellent condition"' (Lass 1997:14-15). Russell Apple (National Parks Regional Historian for the Pacific) in his book Trails: From Steppingstones to Kerbstones, classifies Hawaiian trails from A to C. Foot trails built prior to the early 1.9th century were classified as A trails. During the time period between 1820 and 1840, some trails were changed for horse travel by removing the paving stones and adding curbstones. These are classified as AB trails. New trails de- signed for horse travel and having more direct routes (B trails) were constructed during the same time period. Trails that were widened during the period 1841-1918 to accom- modate two horses side by side, and/or straightened in order to connect two points are classified as C trails. The construction of the C trails resulted in the demise of many coastal settlements that were located on long promontories of land being cut off from the main route of travel, probably including the coastal villages located in the Puna Trail Historic Corridor. The Old Government Road (which also continues north of Hawaiian Shores and Beaches) is what Apple calls a C trail (Apple 1973). The section of the Old Government Road being considered in this application was once part of that early road system. Lass summarizes the history of improvements and repair; "the Old Government Road was probably preceded by a traditional coastal foot trail. This trail could have been modified for use by horses (i.e., was an AB trail) prior to the first written reference to the Old Government Road in 1869. That some sort of trail or road already existed in 1869 is clear. Work was done on the Old Government Road, including the section of road within the corridor considered here, from 1869 into the 1890s. After 1875 this work apparently consisted almost entirely of repair and maintenance. Prior to 1875 some major road construction seems to have been done, and it is likely that the Old Govern- ment Road was constructed as a C trail/road in the late 1860s and/or early 1870s" (Lass 1997:24). Emmett Cahill in The Shipmen's of East Hawaii confirms that by the mid to late 1870's the Old Government Road was being used for horse travel: "Willie Shipman and his wife rode from Hilo to Kapoho along the coastal road" (Cahill 1966:153). In 1875, H. M. Whitney in a Hawaiian guide book traced the path of the road from Hilo "by way of the beach" to Ha`ena [located just north of the PTHC], and continued south of there still paralleling the coast (Whitney 1875:79). • • Section # 7 Page 5 The Puna Trail Historic Corridor Hawaii, HI State Department of Interior road records from 1881, quoted J. F. Jordan, Road Super- visor Hilo & Puna Districts, who said that the road was not in good condition because it had not been worked on in the past six years. After a consultation with Shipman (a large land owner) and others regarding maintenance of the Old Government Road, they suggested only cutting the brush back, removing stones from the roadway (Lass 1997:21). "In 1887 C. N. Arnold (Chief Road Superintendent for Hawaii Island) wrote that the lower road had "recently been put in good repair" but that some additional re- pairs would be needed between Kea`au and Kapoho [including the PTHC section of the road]. However, Arnold also said that because the road was really `only a bridle path' the repairs would consist only of cutting brush, removing loose stones, and filling any soft spots. This correspondence clearly .indicates that the Old Government Road was a horse trail which in the late nineteenth century was being maintained but was no longer being improved or significantly modified" (Lass 1997:21). The Old Government Road is still the only transportation route along this stretch of coastline and residents, fisherman, gatherers, farmers, weekenders, as well as tourists pass through this corridor. While much has changed on other stretches of the OGR, the section within the Puna Trail Historic Corridor remains in a condition recognizable in the PRESENT DAY DESCRIPTION: numerous writings of the past. Pavement and utility lines have not claimed this coastal corridor for the modern world, and the legacy of Old Hawaii is evident through the na- tive and cultural forests, animal enclosures, but foundations, canoe sheds and stepping- stone trails. Here, through the sounds of surf and swaying trees, the cry of an `io can still be heard, the scent of hinano, fragrant flower of the male hala, perfumes the air. The jungle, lava and ocean vistas transcend time, and the slow pace of change here is re- flected in the stability of the mood evoked by the landscape throughout recorded history. The section of the Old Government Road contained within the Puna Trail Historic Cor- ridor runs for 3.7 miles between the Hawaiian Shores subdivision to the north and the edge of the 1960 Kapoho lava flow to the south. For years, the County of Hawaii has maintained the road by periodic grading and laying of red cinder or crushed stone. It varies in width between about 10' and 20'. Six short sections are paved, ranging from 20 to 100 feet; these cover several small but steep hills. (1) 0.0 miles: North of the corridor, in the modern residential subdivisions of Hawaiian Shores and Hawaiian Beaches, most of the vegetation from the OGR to the sea cliffs has been cleared. As one enters the PTHC from the north the paved road ends and na- tive hala (pandanus) trees arch over the road. ~~ ~J Section # 7 Page 6 The Puna Trail Historic Corridor Hawaii, HI (2} 0.2 miles The ocean breaks over a beach of large water-worn boulders at Honolulu Landing (Honolulu means `protected bay'), site of a former village and canoe landing having many cataloged archeological sites. The old village's interconnecting rock walls can still be seen, as well as a large grove of tall, old coconut palms, a common sign of former Hawaiian shoreline habitation sites. The landing had a black sand beach, [most likely] formed after lava flows from the nearby 1840 Nanawale eruption entered the sea, and was used as a port-of-call for ships mainly taking on local agricultural products such as `awa (Piper methysticum or kava), coconut, and coffee. In 1924 the shoreline subsided during a series of earthquakes, leaving only large boulders in place of the black sand and ending the use of the area as a landing. This is the only place along the PTHC that the road drops down to sea level (Clark 1985:33). Today, people use this place to picnic, fish and collect `opihi (a limpet). (3) 0.3 miles The road climbs the northern margin of the 1840 lava flow up a short, steep paved hill and enters a forest of ironwood, `vhi`a (endemic Metrosideros poly- morpha), and guava trees. The forest covers the 1840 `a`a lava flow that began along the east rift zone of Kilauea volcano and then flowed to the sea, destroying the coastal village of Nanawale. From this area south to the end of the PTHC one can spot `io (the federally-listed, endangered Hawaiian hawk} hovering above the trees on the ocean wind. (4) 0.7 miles: High rock walls begin on the side of the road, probably dating to the late 19th or early 20th century. (5) 0.7 miles: Two littoral cones called Sand Hill (or Pu`u `One) are visible through the ironwoods trees next to the sea cliffs. Three 150-250 foot high cones were originally formed here when the 1840 lava flow entered the sea. The sea has since claimed one and the other two have been reduced to 50-75 feet. The cones and surrounding iron- wood forest from this point are on the State's Nanawale Forest Reserve. There are two access roads to the cones. (6) 1.1 miles: The ironwood forest ends at a hala grove where a steep, short paved hill descends the south edge of the 1840 lava flow and Wa`a wa`a subdivision begins. This area is composed of lava flows 750-1500 years old, making it one of the oldest sub- strates below the rift zone of Kilauea volcano. Much of Wa'a wa`a was part of the Chow cattle ranch before it was subdivided in the 1950's. Ten foot tall cane or elephant grass grows along the side of the road in many places. The lots along the road are sparsely populated, few houses are visible from the road and the native hau (indigenous hibiscus tree) and hala/`ohi`a forest is coming back, so that the area largely retains the premod- ern feel of the PTHC. • • • Section # 7 Page 7 The Puna Trail Historic Corridor Hawaii, HI (7) 1.2 miles: This is a short strip along the road where the ocean comes into view at Nanawale Bay beyond low growing vegetation comprised of century plants and naupa- ka kahakai, or beach naupaka. This is an indigenous, low growing shrub with succulent leaves that occurs on undisturbed coastlines. (8) 1.8 miles: A hau grove begins with a dip in the road. It is named the "Hau Grove of Kaukukala" on an 1890 map. The road travels through the most mauka part of the forest. (9) 1.9 miles: Towering mango trees begin to line the road, forming an almost unbroken cathedral-like ceiling for the remaining 1.8 miles. These majestic trees are covered with epiphytic, indigenous bird's nest ferns and hanging vines. The mature mango trees that line the road from this point to end of the PTHC are over 100 years old, Malama O Puna, anon-profit environmental organization, cataloged 354 of these trees for submis- sion into the County Arborist's Exceptional Tree Program. They were accepted into the program in 2002 and are protected by County Ordinance. The surrounding corridor is native/cultural forest and is still utilized as a place to gather such things as fruits and nuts, fiddlehead ferns, and awapuh`i (a ginger). At dusk, the `dpe`ape`a (federally-listed, endangered Hawaiian hoary bat) may occasionally be seen flapping through the trees. (10) 1.9 miles: Volunteer Fire Department, 10 Bravo on the mauka (inland) side of the road. (11) 2.1 miles: A short paved hill onto a 200-400 year old `a`a flow, marks where the ahupua`a (traditional Hawaiian land division) of Kahuwai begins. The entire ahupua`a is owned by Bishop Estate's Kamehameha Schools. The hau forest comes up to the road again at this point and an old heiau (religious structure) is visible right next to the road on the mauka side at the top of the hill. The substrate in eastern Kahuwai is an older pahoehoe lava flow (750-1500 years) covered over by a younger debris and `a`a flow. This configuration may allow fresh water to run between the flows to the ocean. On the shore are ancient ruins of the village of Kahuwai. This village was visited by the mis- sionary William Ellis in 1822-23 and later by other missionaries and explorers. Mauka of the road were once the agricultural portion of the village and a hala/`ohi`a forest, now a papaya field leased by the County. There is a buffer zone between the field and the road, so that the forest along the road remains unbroken save for two access roads to the fields. Rock walls, dating from the late 19th or early 20th century line the road in many places and walls from old Hawaiian ruins -animal enclosures and home founda- tions are visible. (12) 2.4 miles: A road accessing the ruins of the ancient village of Kahuwai heads to the coast. This road is no longer open to the public. Kahuwai (lit. water tender -possibly Section # 7 Page 8 The Puna Trail Historic Corridor Hawaii, HI because of the configuration of the geological substrates mentioned above, allowing fresh water to flow to the sea) was a large coastal village as late as the 1820's when visited by the missionary William Ellis, though the population had declined to just a few people by the 1880's. Since that time, the 200 or so acres surrounding the village makai (ocean side) of the OGR has been relatively undisturbed. The village complex includes many cataloged archeological sites such as, .canoe sheds, house platforms, heiau, food storage areas, an imu kanaka (a place to burn the bodies of kapu violators) that is located right on the side of the OGR, and extensive raised trails that were most likely to have been used by `ali`i (chiefs) (Carse 1984). (13) 2.7 miles: Another coastal access road leads through a tunnel of dense, overarch- ing hau trees to sea cliffs, a sea arch, tide pools and Driftwood Beach, a pocket of sand that has been thrown up over low cliffs by high waves. (14) 2.8 miles: This is the northern border of the ahupua`a of Halepua`a. Makai are large private parcels that are mostly owned by groups of Hawaiian families and some of which have residential structures and small-scale agricultural plots. A second segment of the Nanawale Forest Reserve lies mauka of the road, a strip of private land exists between the road and the reserve here but the reserve abuts the road further south. This portion of the reserve consists of a hala/`ohi`a forest, part of which was once used for the agricultural complex of Halepua'a. Remnants of rock walls of several types can be seen in this area. Freestanding walls which may have been kuleana boundaries probably date from the mid-19th century or later, after the introduction of cattle. Smaller walls indicative of enclosures used for pigs may have been built earlier. (15) 3.2 miles: An ancient trail to the ocean paved in places with beach stones and in some areas raised and fortified with rock walls, is still in use. The current property line follows the ancient trail (TMKs 1-4-003 and 037) from the road to a former canoe launching site and village of Wai`ele, where there are rock enclosures, a large coconut grove and a stranded beach. (16) 3.7 miles: The dark green forest ends and the pavement begins just a few hun- dred feet from the edge of an undulating, sparsely-vegetated lava flow with several striking cones that are being quarried for cinder. Dating from 1960, this lava eruption truncated the lush forest corridor at the former site of the village of Koa`e which was crushed by a shower of cinders up to 6 feet deep, and flowed over the village of Kapoho further to the south. • • • Section 8 Page 1 The Puna Trail Historic Corridor Hawaii, HI NARRATIVE STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: Explain the significance of the property. (The quality of significance in history, archi- tecture, archeology, engineering, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that posess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, work- manship, feeling and association, and (Criterion A) That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history. This is being submitted under the category of "Historic District", sub category of "Cultural Landscape" The Old Government Road (OGR) and the Puna Trail Historic Corridor (PTHC) through which it meanders contain a wealth of information about Hawai`i's rich past. As a place significant in Hawaiian legends and rich in archeological sites, this area is also a place of importance in the ethnic heritage of Native Hawaiians. A trip through the PTHC takes one on a journey through time. Many different stages in the evolution of transportation and land use patterns are evident. The broad historical changes in agricultural, reli- gious, maritime and recreational activities in rural Hawaii are all reflected in the current appearance of the corridor. The historical significance in combination with the relative conservation of the natural environment serves as an embodiment of Old Hawaii that is increasingly rare on these islands and in these times. CULTURAL CONTEXT The value placed on the Puna Trail corridor in Hawaiian culture is revealed by the rever- ence with which a former monarch, Hawaiian Majesty Kalakaua (King David) described the area in 1888: "Between Cape Kumakahi, the extreme eastern point of the island of Hawaii, and the great lava flow of 1840, which burst forth apparently from a long subter- ranean channel connecting with the crater of Kilauea, and went down to the sea at Nan- awale over villages and groves of palms, is a small historic district which, notwithstand- ing the repeated volcanic disturbances with which it has been convulsed in the past, the chasms with which it has been rent, and the smoke and ashes that have shut out the light of the sun and driven its people to the protection of their temples, still possesses many fertile nooks and natural attractions. Within a few miles of each other, not far inland, are a number of extinct craters; but the rains are abundant in Puna, and spring is eternal, and the vegetation grows rank above hidden patches of lava, and is constantly stretching and deepening its mantle of green over the vitreous rivers of Kilauea and the lower and lesser volcanic vents clinging to its base like so many cauterized ulcers." (Kalakaua 1972) • Section 8 Page 2 The Puna Trail Historic Corridor Hawaii, HI Hawaiian legends enrich the history of the area with stories of how the volcano god dess, Pele, created the most prominent local landmarks, including Cape Kumukahi [vis- ible from the southern border of the PTHC] and Kapoho. According to the legend, "Pele and the Chiefs of Puna," a hdlua (traditional sled race) track at Kapoho was the site of a contest between Pele (who did not reveal her identity) and the chief Kumu-kahi. "Kumu-kahi was a chief who pleased Pele. According to the legends he was tall, well built, and handsome, and a great lover of the ancient games. Apparently he had known Pele only as a beautiful young chiefess; for one day, when he was playing with the people, an old woman with fiery eyes came to him demanding a share in the sports. He ridiculed her. She was very persistent. He treated her with contempt. In a moment her anger flashed out in a great fountain of volcanic fire. She chased the chief to the sea, caught him on the beach, heaped up a great mound of broken lava over him, and poured her lava flood around him and beyond him far out into the ocean." Thus the traditions say Cape Kumu-kahi, the southeast point of the island Hawaii, was formed. Here kings, chiefs, and priests have come for ages to build great piles of lava • rock with many ceremonies. The natives call these "funeral mounds" and name them after the builders, although the persons themselves were seldom placed underneath in burial" (Westervelt 1916). "When Hawaiians, who had been ill, recovered, they frequently vowed to make a `jour- ney of health.' This meant that they came to the place now known as Hilo Bay. There they bathed by the beautiful little Coconut Island, fished up by the demi-god Maui. There they swam around a stone known as Moku-ola (the island of life). Then they walked along the seashore day after day [passing through the PTCH on the route that preceded the OGR] until they were below the volcano of Kilauea. They went up to the pit of Pele, offered sacrifices, and then followed an overland path back to Hilo. It was an ill omen if for any reason they went back by the same path. They must make the "journey of health' with the face forward. Hopoe (the dancing stone), Kapoho (the green lake), and Kumu-kahi were among the places which must be visited. They all have their Pele legends" (Westervelt 1916). While many changes are evident in both the historical record and the landscape itself, there is a feeling of timelessness about the place. One of the last great stands of the good pu hala is still found here, treasured by weavers from all over the State. The re- mains of the former villages of Koa`e, Kahuwai, Honolulu Landing, and other archeologi- cal sites scattered throughout the PTHC are a constant reminder of the people and • • Section 8 Page 3 The Puna Trail Historic Corridor Hawaii, HI culture that inhabited this area for over a millennium before western contact. Many potentially important archeological sites remain to be investigated and little documenta- tion has been done regarding the ethnobotanical value of the remaining coastal forest that covers this area. As one of the few remaining cultural areas within Hawaii that has changed relatively little in modern times, this area is a vital part of the ethnic heritage of Native Hawaiians. TRANSPORTATION From the legends, we know that this corridor was important in serving as a pilgrimage route past sacred sites. It surely also served the local population for daily travel. Ac- cording to Friends of the William Ellis Trail, "important Hawaiian trails are historic sites equal in importance to famous heiau, battlefields and residences of important chiefs". They provided a transportation network for hundreds of years and were essential in connecting villages, canoe landings, agricultural lands, water holes and fishing sites. Hawaiian trails "provide an opportunity to obtain a grasp of natural as well as cultural • history..Also on view is a complete assortment of Hawaii's endemic, indigenous and exotic plants. In addition, one can find all the plants used for food, medicine, and adorn- ment since the Islands were first settled by the Hawaiians" (1974:1-2). The present road evolved from the Old Puna Trail. It has been widened, realigned and straightened over the years but has continually provided the coastal route from what is now Hawaiian Shores to Kapoho. According to Kepa Maly in his study for the Depart- ment of Land and Natural Resource's Historic Puna Trail-Old Government Road (Kea`au Section , [located just north of the PTHC] western contact in the early 1800's brought changes to the trails for newer methods of travel (hoofed animals and wheeled carts). By the mid 1800's these trails became the Government Roads or "Ala Nui Aupuni". The Old Government Road we are considering here was a segment of the main Government Road in the Puna district. (Please refer to Map #1, an 1841 map by Charles Wilkes of the United States Exploring Expedition.) There was another modified alignment in 1875 (J. M. Lydgate's survey) which remained in effect, under periodic maintenance, until about 1895, at which point the coastal areas were virtually abandoned as the population moved to the agricultural zones further inland and the new Kea`au-Pahoa Highway was constructed. Throughout this time, the Old Government Road in Puna connected small coastal communities, provided the residents access to schools and churches, and was the thoroughfare between Hilo and Ka`u. (Maly 1999:5-6) Pu`ula Chapel, formerly called Koa`e Chapel was located on the Old Government Road,directly north of what is now Papaya Farms Road. It was built in the mid 1800's • Section 8 Page 4 The Puna Trail Historic Corridor Hawaii, HI by the Lyman, Shipman and Eldert families on land donated by the Kaulupali family and later relocated to Nanawale after the 1960 Kapoho lava flow rendered it inaccessible to its parishioners. According to Pastor Bob Woods, church service used to be held once every two weeks for two days. Churches were originally located close enough so that everyone could reach the church by foot in less than a day. The Old Government Road would have been used by families traveling along the coast to reach Koa`e (Pu`ula) Chapel. Chester S. Lyman in his book entitled Around the Horn to the Sandwich Islands and California 1845-50, wrote about his trip around Puna, accompanied by Titus Coan, pastor of Haili Church. He described stops at meeting houses and churches along the coastal road from Hilo to Kapoho, the southern part of Pastor Coan's Diocese. They stopped at Koa`e and met with 200 to 300 inhabitants of the area for a blessing and feast (Lyman 1875:94-96). O.P. Emerson in his 1890 article, "A Sabbath in Puna" also describes the trip from Hilo to Captain Eldart's in Pu`ula. He confirms the bad state of the road in the 1880's by mentioning that Puna is 21 1/2 miles from Hilo, "But one-half and more of the way is easily three time[sic] the length of the rest by the watch, and that • make[sic] it about 40 miles does it not?" (from Maly 199:133). In the Boundary Commission Testimonies of 1873-1909, there are at least 38 instances where `Government Road' is used as a landmark to define boundaries of ahupua`a or other plats between Cape Kumukahi and Kea`au. This indicates the prominence of the road as a landmark around the turn of the 20th century. One example from the testimo- nies is the sworn testimony of Kam?ahele as he described helping D. B. Lyman survey the ahupua`a of Kahuwai. "I was born at Kahuwai, Puna, Hawaii at the time of going after sandalwood at Ohaikea. Have always lived there and am a kamaaina of the land. I went with D. B. Lyman when he surveyed the land. It was some years since. I do not remember how long. Kapou (now dead) was the kamaaina who pointed out the boundaries at that time, and the land was surveyed to the boundaries pointed out. Kapou was a middle aged man, and was the konohiki of the land. I knew part of the boundaries before, but had never been all around the land with the kamaaina, and had the boundaries pointed out to me. The land of Halepuaa bounds this land at the shore on the Puna side, and the boundary be- tween them is at a place called Kaa. Kapahee's purchase on Halepuaa bounds it there, mauka of that Kanalaeole's land bounds it. We surveyed across the land from one side to the other at Gov't road, and surveyed up Hilo side along boundary of Waawaa. Place called Ponelu is the boundary at shore between this land and Waawaa, thence the • • Section 8 Page 5 The Puna Trail Historic Corridor Hawaii, HI boundary runs mauka along Pakaka's purchase on Waawaa to Gov't. Road, and mauka to place called Kawakahikukui. There we returned to Gov't road and surveyed up old trail in middle of land to Keakeo a point at lava flow of 1840. There we surveyed across the land to boundary of Nanawale on Hilo side of this land, and built a pile of stones there on boundary. The land of Waawaa ends a little mauka of Pakaka's purchase, and then land of Nanawale bounds this land on the Hilo side, at place called Keakuapio (?). Where the old trails from Nanawale and this land join, and from this point to Heakeo the trail is boundary of this land. At Heakeo we surveyed across land to boundary of the land of Kanekiki to Hau Grove called Mawe (?). Part of Hau was covered by lava flow. We built a pile of stone on the boundary. The land of Halepuaa ends way makai of lava flow. From Heakeo (Keakeo)? We surveyed up old trail on boundary between this land and Nanawale across the lava flow to a place on the Hilo side of the flow called Naakiolaola, where the old trail from the Hilo side of Nanawale joins this road; thence mauka the land of Nanawale is the road, and the land of Kahuwai lays on the Puna side of road and land of Waiakahiula on Hilo side to place called Kawaimaohiohi, the mauka end of this land. There used to be water there, and Maohiohi is now growing there: We • surveyed to a stone and marked it; at this point the land of Nanawale again spreads out and cuts this land off. We surveyed across to the land at place called Pahoa to cocoa- nut tree called Kanahua, and marked the tree. I do not remember whether we sur- veyed across the land anywhere between Heakeo and Waimaohiohi or not. Manamana owned a piece of land at he mauka end of Kahuwai. This land held ancient fishing rights extending out to sea. Kahula went with us when we surveyed the land." In addition to land transportation, Honolulu Landing has provided a transportation port by sea on an otherwise rocky and inhospitable coastline. This canoe landing site was used by Hawaiians, as were others in Kahuwai, Wai`ele and Wa`a wa'a where stone walls of canoe sheds are still present. Later, in the mid 1800's through early 1900's, ships anchored at Honolulu Landing to load `awa, coconut and coffee. Subsidence of the coastline due to an earthquake in 1924 has made conditions unfavorable for boats, so there is currently no landing site in this area. LAND USE Agriculture The PTHC reflects the general pattern of changing land use in Hawaii. From pre- contact days through the present, the predominant use has been agriculture, the evolu- tion of which is reflected in the variety of vegetation types along the road. Native and cultural forests dominate in Halapua'a and the Kahuwai complex area, reflecting both r~ the Section 8 Page 6 The Puna Trail Historic Corridor Hawaii, HI pre-human state of this area as well as the legacy of the native Hawaiian agricultural system in the form of many naturalized fruit trees, while modern agribusiness dominates in the mauka section of Kahuwai. Scattered throughout the area are market farmers and families who cultivate small plots of mixed crops. One can see both the legacy of historic ranching activity and the resiliency of the native forest in the presence of cane grass fields giving way to, hala/`ohi`a forest in the Wa`a wa`a area. According to Martha Yent and Jason Ota in theirArcheological Reconnaissance Survey of Nanawale Forest Reserve, Halepua`a Section, the section adjacent to the road is a good example of changing land use over time. Evidence of the agricultural system that preceded western contact is apparent in this area. Mounds and depressions were used for planting of sweet potato, breadfruit, banana and taro, to ensure proper moisture and nutrient levels in the rocky volcanic soil. There are also remains of small rock wall enclosures which may have been pig pens, possibly adjacent to home sites. Evidence of more recent activities such as ranching is represented by larger enclosures for cows, free standing walls which could represent kuleana boundaries (post 1850), and rows of trees, including mango and avocado, that were probably planted in the early 20th centu- ry. Examples of all of these are within the road corridor and many of the larger rock wall enclosures and tree plantings can easily be seen from the road (Yent & Ota 1982:16). Yent and Oda conclude that the archeological remains in the area represent "a cultural pattern found in Puna but it is a pattern which has not been fully described, delineated spatially, or interpreted adequately. Halepua`a is important as a remnant of this cultural pattern, especially as the surrounding lands are rapidly being lost to papaya fields and residential subdivisions. The remnant at Halepua`a is also important in the context of the Kahuwai Village Complex located just north of Halepua'a. The Kahuwai Village Complex site is coastal and includes canoe landing sites and structures while Halepua`a is just mauka and is an example of an agricultural complex. Thus, the two site areas considered together incorporate both marine and agricultural resources being utilized in the traditional Hawaiian cultural pattern for the Puna vicinity." They recommend the preservation of the section of Halepua`a adjacent to the road "as a significant remnant of a cultural pattern" and because it "is also valuable in expanding the cultural picture for this Puna coastline. The high number of coastal villages in this vicinity implies a large population which would have required an extensive subsistence agricultural system to support the population" (Yent & Ota 1982:16). Around the village sites of Kahuwai and Halepua`a are evidence of Hawaiian cultural plantings. Coconuts, `ulu (breadfruit), avocado, mango, `plena (native turmeric), pia • • Section 8 Page 7 The Puna Trail Historic Corridor Hawaii, HI (Polynesian arrowroot), `awapuhi (native ginger), hau, `awa (kava), and kukui (candle nut) are among the trees and plants that were cultivated by Hawaiians. Later came cattle ranching, papaya farming and homesteading. Kepa Maly conducted an interview with John Ka'iewe Jr. on July 16, 1998. He was born at Kea'au in 1929. In speaking about the Old Government Road and other trails, John notes that the mango trees which line the road were purposefully planted by his family and others who traveled the trails. The trees provided shelter, and in season, man- gos were always appreciated by those who traveled the trails. (Maly 1999:133) To this day, the people who travel the road gather mangos as well as other food such as, nuts, ferns, avocados, `ohi`a `ai (mountain apple), and `ulu from the forest bordering the road. Religion The changing pattern of religious practice throughout Hawai`i's history is represented in the archeology and written history of the PTHC. Remains of pre-contact heiau sites, where Hawaiian religious ceremonies were held, are present throughout the area, most notable near the Kahuwai Village Complex, Pu`u Kuki`i Heiau and the ceremonial burial mounds at Cape Kumukahi, the latter two located immediately south of the corridor. Some of the written history of early missionary activities along the corridor was dis- cussed under transportation. After meeting houses and churches were built around the mid 1800's, the road played a central role in residents' access to them, as the coastal trail likely did for access to heiau in pre-contact times. Recreation and Scenic Significance Recreation for pre-contact Hawaiians in this area included holua (sledding over a rock course on a wooden sled), swimming, and possibly canoe races. Kula Pond was a popular swimming hole until it was covered by lava in the 1960 flow. Today, fishing, hik- ing, biking, shellfish and seaweed collecting, swimming in large tidepools, whale, dol- phin and sea turtle-viewing, and sightseeing all occur within the corridor. As detailed previously, the scenic beauty of the PTHC has been an inspiration to many people throughout history, recorded in the 19th century writings of King Kalakaua to the present day. The current County of Hawaii General Plan sets standards for listing sites and vistas of extraordinary natural beauty which should be protected. Six places along the PTCH are listed; Honolulu Landing, Kapela Bay (black sand beach at Kahuwai), shoreline view of Hilo and Puna (from Kahuwai), viewpoint and tidal pool at Makaukiu • Section 8 Page 9 The Puna Trail Historic Corridor Hawaii, HI Point, Kahuwai), mango grove along Kapoho-Honolulu Landing Road, and the 1960 Kapoho lava flow. NATURAL HISTORY Geology The area is a patchwork of lava flows of differing ages ranging from the Wa`a wa'a flows of 750-1500 years old located in the central section of the PTHC to the 46 year old Ka- poho flow. The first recorded distruction of a village by a lava flow in Hawaii occurred ~on Sunday June 3, 1840. It buried the village of Nanawale just at the time people were gathered for church. "According to the Reverend Titus Coan, the intense night glow from molten rock and burning forest could be seen from 100 miles at sea. People 40 miles away could read by the light of the lava" (Hazgett 1966:91). This flow left 3 littoral cones 150-250 feet high. Erosion has since claimed one and reduced the remaining two to 50-75 feet, but they remain as conical mounds of black sand on the cliff's edge. The 1960 eruption destroyed the village of Kapoho with lava flows and buried the village of Koa`e in several feet of volcanic pumice. Kula Pond, a popular warm spring, was also covered by lava, as was the surrounding jungle, leaving only isolated hills, islands in the barren lava landscape. The 1960 flow is currently being colonized by native ferns and `Shi`a trees, as well as non-native species, offering a glimpse of the process of post- volcanic forest succession. On a cloudless day, it affords an open vista of the distant peaks of Mauna Loa and Mauna Kea. Biology The forest that runs along the coast from the 1960 lava flow to Hawaiian Shores is one of the last native/cultural littoral forests of its extent in the entire state of Hawaii. In some areas inland of the road the land is dominated by native forest consisting of some of the best remaining examples of native Hawaiian hala/"ohi`a forest in Hawaii. In places along the coastline, the forest grades into indigenous littoral forest dominated by pure stands of hau and hala. Hala/`ohi`a forest and coastal littoral forest dominated by hau and hala have been almost completely eliminated from most areas where they used to occur in Hawaii. Stands remain on Kauai, north shore Oahu, and Maui. Many areas are threatened, and few are as relatively isolated and undisturbed as the stands along this coastline. • ~~ Section 8 Page 8 The Puna Trail Historic Corridor Hawaii, HI The forest on both sides of the road supports the federally-listed, endangered Hawaiian hawk (`io) and bat (`ope'ape'a), the rare Hawaiian Owl (pueo) various rare insects and two species of native birds that come down the mountain to feed in the day, the `amakihi and the `apapane. The flora include many native species, several of which are endan- gered. The federally-listed endangered Hilo beach grass (Ischaemum byroni or mau`u kai) occurs here in better condition than anywhere else in Hawaii. The PTHC contains large stands of hala, `ohi`a, kdpiko, kolea, lama, `akia, hau, endemic and indigenous trees which are becoming increasingly rare in the coastal regions of our islands as land is cleared for agriculture and housing. CONCLUSION The Puna Trail Historic Corridor and its historical context exemplify the broad patterns in Hawai`i's historical development, in particular the changing transportation and land use patterns. Apart from the historical aspects of this portion of the Old Government Road, it is the physical experience of traveling on the old roadway that brings back the unique feeling of Old Hawaii. Throughout the islands, coastal areas have been largely stripped of the native/cultural forests for subdivisions and commercial farming, and historic trails and roadways have mostly been paved over or fallen into disuse. Thus, this corridor ofFfers a rare opportunity to directly experience a remnant of Hawai`i's history. The PHTC is also an area rich in natural history, offering a demonstration of the reciprocal interactions between humans and the local environment over time. The unusual lava landscape is literally an outdoor museum for the ongoing process of land formation, col- onization, and succession. The native/cultural littoral forest is one of the last of its kind and extent in the entire state of Hawaii and the endangered species that reside here are dependent on these remaining fragments of habitat. The preservation of the Puna Trail Historic Corridor as a "Cultural Landscape" will help to ensure that future genera- tions will be as fortunate as we are today to experience this journey back in time. • MAP OF THE PUNA TRAIL HISTORIC CORRIDOR ~~ t~"j0`~ Ft(7NOLUL -~ ~'~- Conservation Land ~ Z ^ DLNR's Conservation Subzone .. Cw't Be+ac6 Road (Old Puna 7taiq 2&3 Railroad Avernu ~ ~~, ~~5 4, «» unpavedRwds F__~__-- ~ ,~ j1~~A~i ~1±A~k .~ s1uA . r~iunt~~i,~a~s. ~ ~~~h ~s , r `, ~$~<~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ,sl; • dies of tVatucai eeauty ,~ ~` [ 1 ~ dasc.~s~, ~r < ....~ . ~. - ............. sMA 1 W A'A W A'A ~~~~d,(y... K A ~I _~ . ~ H~ t .;9.~ ~O E ~~n psmn wiai wa's5.... Maknukiu N ........ Ancient Yrllage 1-i of Kahuwai 4!! Inch - tma bet {'~ A T '~ ~Pw »Y KQamwtu ~~. SMA Spou6~.t~d t ~ Koa'e - -+ _ _,,, per. -..- (~ .r.a ,a. Kapoho ~'' ) ~ • • • • Puna Parkway An Alternative Route A I i m ited access, moderate speed, scenic route for a more sustainable future. The parkway proposed here is a lower speed, scenic route which would provide Puna with an emergency evacuation route, less taffic congestion and would further the goals of passenger safety, sustainabity and lower dependence on fossil fuels. t In approaching the subject of a new route through Puna Makai .and consulting with authors of other proposals I was presented with the monolithic and fierce opposition to any route passing through Hawaiian Paradise Park. When I consider the cement trucks, containers, SUVs, flatbeds, sedans and overloaded Ford rangers jostling at speed for position on Highway 130 the thought of such a road passing near my home would be appalling. In talking with some HPP residents however I find that the opposition is not monolithic and is more toward the nature and manner of such a new route. If the worst fears of the residents could be addressed in some manner then acceptance by most, but likely not all, HPP property owners might be possible. This is an honest attempt to address those fears and to meet the goals of our Community Development Plan to think forward and look for solutions that contribute to broad based community hopes and goals. • Methods and locations for transiting HPP and Kahakai Blvd. are shown and the impact on property owners has been minimized as much as possible. This parkway is buildable and would have minimum impact on resident during the course of construction. It also has features intended to serve future generations. Aloha, Rob Tucker f~ ~ {~ Pahoa4Hl 96778 D Il Co.S ll ~ ~ o Jan. 9,.2006 What is a Parkway? A parkway is a general designation of a special type of limited-access highway in some parts of the U.S. and Canada. Like all limited-access highways, parkways are designed particularly for through traffic. Many parkways are restricted to noncommercial traffic and cars. Trucks, trailers, and the like are banned. Historically, the term "parkway" has often implied that the road was designed specifically with a naturalistic or manicured landscaping of the median and adjacent land areas meant to suggest a pastoral driving experience, isolated from the manifestations of commerce and advertising, even when the road passes through populated areas; for this reason commercial traffic is excluded. Many parkways have signature road signs with special emblems that suggest a thematic driving experience and increase the sense of isolation from civilization in the vicinity of the road. General features of the Puna Parkway -No Commercial traffic allowed. -45 mph speed limit. -Heavy passenger vehicles are restricted. -Bus and emergency vehicle access. -High efficiency passenger vehicles preferred. -Bike & scooter paths. Walking & riding trails. -No additional roadside development. -Simple roundabout interchanges w/ HPP (3). -Simple roundabout interchange w/ HS-HB (1 ). -No loss of existing roads in HPP. -Minimal to no disruption during construction. -Minimal taking of land. 12 lots lost. -No power poles or transmission lines. -Lower cost of construction. -Terminus to Puainako and airport and Pahoa. -Adequate space to add light rail someday. -Scenic views of Puna coast, Ag and forest land. -Improved emergency response • How could a Parkway affect sustainability? "Hawaii has one of the highest rates of per capita oil consumption in the world. Our rate in Hawaii is twice that of the U.S. average; four times the average of Europe and 28 times that of China. Moreover, oil not only fuels our transportation and electricity-generating plants, it also fuels the airplanes that fuel our tourist-based economy and the ships that bring in almost all of our food and consumer goods. Un- or insufficiently mitigated oil supply shortfalls will hit Hawaii much harder than almost any other place in the world." http://starbulletin.com/2006/12/10/editorial/special3. html A parkway can be a specialized instrument for developing and encouraging more efficiency and alternatives in transportation. It is not difficult to assume that the V-8 gasoline engine may not be practical or common in 20 years. Hybrid and alternatively fueled vehicles are entering the market and finding acceptance. We are entering a period of transition for the American transportation model. Our planning for a new route into Puna should plan on that. Is it smart, or sustainable, to continue building roads for larger and faster vehicles? • The new vehicle designs are smaller, lighter weight and travel most efficiently at lower speeds than current average vehicles. In crash tests they are at a serious disadvantage. People are afraid to drive them at high speeds in heavy traffic. That is one reason why a limited access parkway can be an incentive for citizens to invest in more fuel efficient and alternatively fueled vehicles. The Puna Parkway would also include a separate two lane roadway for bicycles and small cc scooters as well as sufficient space for addition of a future light rail system. Within living memory the citizens of Pahoa primarily traveled to Hilo by rail. If gas prices get high enough we may well do so again. The parkway concept would provide a much higher degree of passenger safety than current roads provide. How would access be limited /regulated? I propose that access be limited beyond a ban on commercial vehicles. All trailers and open trucks with exposed cargo should be disallowed. Overladen vehicles and poorly secured cargo are a hazard to be avoided on a parkway. All vehicles over a specific gross weight should be disallowed. I would suggest 6,000 Ib. gvw. A parkway is not a highway or truck route. • To provide an incentive for fuel efficiency and carpooling a system of fuel rating stickers could be used where high efficiency and alternative fuel vehicles would be allowed with a single driver (a "P1" sticker on the bumper). Less efficient vehicles would require vehicle occupancy of 2, 3 or 4 depending on how gas guzzling they are rated by their manufacturers. If the goal was to be 30 mpg many new cars could meet that. A car with 16 mpg would require 2 occupants ("P2" ). Regarding Hawaiian Paradise Park........ Why between 10th & 11th? If there is need for such a parkway it has to go somewhere. 15th Ave. has been suggested a number of times because it intersects various potential village center acreage. However a parkway would consume sufficient land to reduce the village centers to half their current size. Any village center developments should be proximate to but separate from the parkway. Park & ride areas should be provided adjacent to the village centers and bus routes could access them via the roundabouts. A parkway location of mid block between 10th & 11th would result in all residents of HPP being no more than 11 blocks from a thoroughfare. This location also creates the potential for 100% of HPP residents to be a maximum of 1.5 miles of a bus route - a distance that can covered by walking, bicycling or motor scooter fairly easily. HPP residents would no longer be completely dependent on automobiles. How to compensate property owners? Federal highway moneys are, at this moment, engaged in numerous en{argements and additions to the nation's transportation system in every state. 1n many or most mainland instances every expanding mile is in fully developed cityscape. Acquisition of land is a hugh expense. A Puna Parkway would have less costly land acquisition because over half the route is currently in undeveloped agricultural or state lands. For this reason the potential for the rate of compensation to be "good" to developed landowners is substantially enhanced. Compensation should be paid for all affected land and structures, permitted or not. The path of the Puna Parkway through HPP directly impacts approx. 250 of 8,800 property owners. Only twelve {ots would be completely acquired for construction of the roundabouts. The other 238 +/- properties would retain their avenue frontage, driveways and front half of their land. Many of these lots are undeveloped. Some of the developed lots have their homes near their avenue and would retain their homes. Other property owners, with homes located on the rear half would relocate or replace their homes. Is this a major impact on HPP? You bet it is. Has the shear impact been minimized? It has. Should the affected property owners be compensated fully and completely? Of course they should. Might they even benefit financially from this. I hope they do. Some landowners might actually better be able to afford building a nice home on 1 /2+ acre than they could otherwise. Will other owners be affected? Yes. A case could be made that improved, controlled transportation might even improve property values for all. Those more distant from the parkway would likely not be as affected except for having improved choices on how to come and go. • • • • How the Puna Parkway would transit various areas ~ 250`•I ~~ ^. ~ 'i `~° ~, - '~ A~ R520I ~,, ^~pp " _-- .. ..._._.-- ....-f_. ~' i _..._.-J _._ _ ,~~. - - "F=-y ~ ='~' .Speed a.•i ~ ~ 35 ~.•, ,~,~1~ Limit _, aszol , , ,. 20:: ff 250`x! ' , ~ ;. =~ ' ~~~ ! „ ,: ~ ~ ~`, 'i ° 1 ~ '~ 1 ~ 'i ~:? r ~ 1 ~ ~ ~~ ... ., ~', ; ,'~ Speed ' t •' 35 ' k _: -~ , Lunn ~ ~ "2 _j , ~ f 250`~f t, ~ i ^ : , ,1 ,, , 'i : , , ~,~ ,, ,.~ , ^; :, ,i :; Speed ~ ~ :1 ' ^? ~ ~ 45 ~ ~ ^ ~ ~ Limit ~ ~ l ~ '!s~ ~ ~ HPP Transit (between 10th & 11th) Transiting Hawaiian Paradise Park mid block would result in minimal removal of existing homes. The rear half of each lot would become parkway resulting in RS20 zoned lots. The location between 10th & 11th would mean that no street in HPP would be more than 11 blocks from main road access. Three intersections would be required. Four full lots at each intersection would be lost to the parkway - a total of twelve. During construction 100% of HPP driveways would be unaffected . Parkway would have high stone wall barriers the full length of transit through HPP for aesthetics, sound barrier and security. Kahakai Transit Transiting Kahakai Blvd. would require no loss of homes. Some Ag land and the simple roundabout intersection could be constructed with minimal disruption. A Park & Ride area would be adjacent to the interchange. Parkway would have stone wall barriers the full length of transit to allow views of forest and agricultural fields and to prevent agricultural theft. No side road access would be permitted. State Land / Shipman Transit Transiting Shipman Ag lands and state forest land would provide spectacular rural and natural views. This is what a parkway is about. An appreciation of Puna open space would be enhanced. Puna Parkway would have stone wall barriers the full length of transit to allow views of forest and agricultural fields and to prevent agricultural theft. No side road access would be permitted. Why so wide a corridor? A Puna Parkway would be serving the area 100 years or more into the future. The potential is for Puna to have a quarter million residents someday. There is also potential for oil to be a much more expensive fuel. We are now trying to unravel a serious lack of planning from 50 years ago. We need to avoid a lack of planning which now would be overcome again by development. The 250' wide corridor provides future generations with options we do not now enjoy. Could it be 200' wide? Perhaps. Why now? It could easily take fifteen to twenty years to accomplish this or any other route. The current rate of growth shows our current transportation system being overwhelmed in the approaching future. At this time there are fewer residents to impact than there will be a few years from now. The longer we wait the more costly and disruptive road building will become. How many homes would be replaced or relocated? A simple survey of the proposed route shows that approx. 85% of the existing homes could remain. They are. built relatively close to the avenues. Approximately ten exisitng homes appear to be in the proposed parkway right of way or roundabout intersections. These could be moved fairly easily Approximately fifty would remain on smaller lots with minimal disruption. Why not a mauka route? A mauka route through Puna might also be necessary or desirable. How to interchange with Hilo? It would be advisable for the Puna Parkway to branch into more than one terminus in Hilo. I would suggest Puainako and the Airport. This proposal is, however, part of the Puna Community Development Plan and the Hilo area would best be addressed by Hilo. How to interchange with Pahoa? It would be advisable for the Puna Parkway to intersect Highway 130 at or near the Pahoa traffic light. This would serve both Pahoa and the communities from the Kapoho route and Kalapana route. What happens with Highway 130? Highway 130 would remain the primary state and truck route into Puna. What happens in emergency evacuations? The Puna Parkway would be open to all traffic in an emergency or to divert traffic in the event Highway 130 was closed. The Puna Parkway would operate without traffic lights and would not be disabled in a power outage. At all times the parkway would be available to ambulance, fire, police and other emergency services. In a serious tsunami event it could. even function as an emergency runway for aircraft. Complementary Ideas for Puna Makai Submitted via a-mail: January 28, 2007 by: James Weatherford, Ph.D. P.O. Box 2017 [15-1888 6th Avenue (Hialoa), Hawaiian Paradise Park] Kea'au, Hawaii 96749 808-982-5549 Ala Puna Makai 1. Scenic parkway: Macadamia Road to HPP and HPP to Keonepoko 2. Restricted access 3. Multi-modal 4. Align at 25tH, 15tH, and Stn in HPP 5. Multiple, (545mph) routes across HPP 6. Two lanes for licensed passenger motor vehicles (cars and motorcycles) 7. North bound car and motorcycle traffic enter HPP at Stn 8. South bound car and motorcycle traffic enter HPP at 25tH 9. One bus-only lane enter/exit HPP at 15tH This scenic parkway would . / provide an alternate route from Puna Makai to South Hilo / take daily, non-truck, peak traffic from HPP that is now a major portion of Highway 130 congestion / provide adequate capacity for daily, non-truck, peak traffic Keonepoko to South Hilo / disperse, rather than concentrate, traffic in HPP / align with HPP areas already zoned by the County and set aside within the HPP community for village center use (recreation, education, commerce, light industry) / function as an emergency evacuation route from Keonepoko and HPP / make public transit a viable mobility choice for daily peak and non-peak travel between Hilo and Puna / complement a proposed bikeway/walkway along Railroad Avenue / discourage sprawl / contribute to green infrastructure • 1 Complementary Ideas for Puna Makai 1. Scenic Parkway, Keonepoko to Macadamia Road A new highway, like Highway 130, with unrestricted access does not present a practical option for enhancing mobility choices. Any new motor vehicle road from Keonepoko to South Hilo should have restricted access and be multi-modal. The possibility of a Puna makai route across Hawaiian Paradise Park (HPP) has raised community concerns regarding road width, and the speed of cars and trucks traveling through residential areas. Multiple, narrower routes across HPP -for example, on 25th, 15th, and 5th -rather than a single full-width corridor going through HPP, would avoid concentrating traffic on one street. Despite myths to the contrary, there is not a single standard for road construction so that Federal funding is lost if that single standard is not applied. The US Department of Transportation encourages and funds `flexible design' and 'context sensitive design.' This means, for example, that lane and shoulder widths can be narrower than the `standard' observable on Highway 130. A scenic parkway from Macadamia Road to HPP and from HPP to Keonepoko would accommodate two lanes for licensed passenger motor vehicles (cars and motorcycles), and one lane for buses. This parkway would be complementary to anon-motorized bike-way and walking path along Railroad Avenue. It is a matter of practicality to align Ala Puna Makai with the streets (25th, 15th, and 5th) in HPP where there is land zoned and delegated to community/village center use (recreation, education, commercial, light industry). Traffic entering HPP from the parkway would be distributed to destinations within HPP, and to the respective north or south bound streets for traversing HPP and then exiting HPP onto the parkway. A bus-only lane would enter/exit HPP at 15th. Car and motorcycle traffic would enter HPP at 5cn when north bound and at 25th when south bound. Once within HPP, car and motorcycle drivers would choose their route to destinations within HPP and beyond (Hilo, Pahoa, Orchidland, etc). A major portion of the traffic that now congests Highway 130 originates in HPP. There is no demonstrated need for afour-lane Ala Puna Makai between Keonepoko and HPP. This would be more road than is necessary to service daily peak traffic or for an emergency evacuation route. A four-lane highway through HPP is not needed and is not desirable. Restricted access between Keonepoko and HPP, or between HPP and Macadamia Road, would not encourage sprawl. 2. Hwv 11 and Hwv 130 at existing widths and for keeping trucks off the scenic aarkway Widening Highway 130 does not offer a sustainable solution to traffic congestion in general, or increased mobility in particular. Highways 130 and 11 now link commercial areas along two routes: Pahoa-Keaau-Hilo and Pahoa- Keaau-Volcano. A corridor from Hawaiian Beaches to Hilo, via HPP, would not link these commercial areas. With trucks (one ton or larger) using only Highways 130 and 11, a scenic parkway, including routes across HPP, can be narrower than would be the case with mixed traffic. Truck traffic would enter HPP from Highway 130 to serve commercial development within HPP and for local residential deliveries. 2 3. Roundabouts on Hi hwa 130 and on the ni P rkw H w ii n P r i P q y Sce c a av at a a a a ad se ark Roundabouts, as compared to signal lights and stop signs, are safer. There are fewer overall collisions for autos, pedestrians, and bicycles. The collisions that do occur are less severe, with reduced incapacitating injuries and fewer fatal collisions. There is less delay at intersections with roundabouts, resulting in shorter travel times and less fuel consumption. The operation and maintenance cost for roundabouts is lower than for signal lights. Intersections with roundabouts consume no electricity and continue to operate during electrical power failure. Roundabouts contribute to positive aesthetics, with greenscape instead of overhead wires. 4. Guided Buswav in conjunction with a Scenic Parkway A guided busway provides the operating features of grade-separated rail systems using lower-cost, more flexible bus-transit technologies, and allows the passenger to use just one mode of transport for an entire trip. The need to transfer from one bus (or mode) to another is known to be a deterrent to increasing mass transit ridership. Where busways have been used, the result has been increased bus ridership, reduced delays to buses, reduced peak bus journey times and reduced peak traffic flows. A guided busway has off-road fixed tracks, consisting of concrete troughs. Buses travel along a concrete track and can enter and exit normal roads and the busway at multiple points. Small wheels are fitted near the front of the bus. These wheels run along guides on either side of the track, with the effect of assisting steering of the bus. . A single-lane guided busway allows bus traffic in both directions at the same time, with buses passing at designated locations (e.g., HPP). L` S-Ql~h -4--- ~~~ Slip +~netMrry- w~.~n a ~-~ anar ~e~6~sr ~~~ 2~tl't Awlr ~ and Trarel on Ra~~i More ,CKII! rM~t ~ ~artt~ ~~ ~~ , ~~~~ • •, • 4 Comment: Flexibilit in Hi hwa Desi n Submitted by: James Weatherford, Ph.D Februaryl3, 2007 Introduction An issue of concern raised in the previous planning exercise, Puna Regional Circulation Plan (PRCP), is the need to minimize tiie width of any Puna Makai road and make this corridor something other than a desolate tract of pavement, concrete, and steel. Some early feedback during that process on this general idea indicated that the 12 feet lanes and the 12 feet shoulders, as well as the dimensions of other elements, are required as a condition for Federal funding. This is not the case -far from it! The following is based on the publication "Flexibility in Highway Design", from the Federal Highway Administration, US Department of Transportation (available at htto://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/flex ). The objective here is to get this information out in a manner that allows folks to grasp the range of flexible alternatives that are available. To that end, the points below draw heavily on direct quotes, as well as paraphrasing and summaries. At a few places comments are included on the direct relevance of particular • points to our Puna situation. Should anyone care to confirm precise details, the document is readily available and quite readable; and 1 am available to work through the document with anyone to explain how the information in this brief was extracted. Key Points Regarding Road Design, in Contrast to a Road like Highway 130. / Use of Federal funding for holistic, locally adapted road design is acceptable, even encouraged. / Widths of lanes in traveled ways can be less than 12 feet. / Road shoulders can be less than 12 feet. / The total right of way can be reduced to less than 100 feet. / Speed along a section of a road (i.e., within HPP) can be reduced using multiple means. / Negative impacts on aesthetics and the natural environment can be reduced / Positive impacts on aesthetics and the natural environment can be achieved. / Negative neighborhood impacts can be reduced. / Positive neighborhood impacts can be achieved. / Safety on a road can be enhanced. / Roundabouts provide for new, safer, more efficient intersections. / Provision for pedestrian mobility is equally important to provision for vehicular traffic / Multi-modes and mobility choices can be integrated into a corridor. ~J James Weatherford, Ph.D 13 February 2007 Adapt Design Criteria to the Situation 1. Design exceptions are acceptable. Exceptions have been applied in many places, as described in the case studies in the document. These exceptions can be used to slow speed, reduce right of way width, and reduce other impacts to space immediately adjacent to a roadway. 2. The "Levels of Service" described that conform to established PRCP values and guidelines are: / "B. Reasonably free flow, but speeds beginning to be restricted by traffic conditions." / "C. In stable flow zone, but most drivers are restricted in the freedom to select their own speeds." 3. Among four types of road-building options detailed, "Resurfacing, Restoration, Rehabilitation (3R)" is the one that would seem to have potential for the portion of corridor traversing Hawaiian Paradise Park. 4. Design criteria established are generally more flexible for 3R projects than for reconstruction projects. The Puna Makai road within HPP can be built substantially narrower than the 100 feet right of way previously discussed. 5. In the design of cross-section elements and dimensions, a number of factors need consideration, including those below. Notes in italics relate the consideration to our Puna situation. /Volume and composition (percent trucks, buses, and other vehicles) of the vehicular traffic expected to use the facility. (For the Puna Makai road, there is limited use by the largest trucks; and these trucks could be prohibited altogether, with Highway 130 designated as a `truck route'. Bus traffic is also excluded because the bus lane is physically separated from vehicular traffic.) /The likelihood that bicyclists and pedestrians will use the route (For the Puna Makai road, bicyclists and pedestrians are on the multi-use lane physically separated from vehicular traffic.) / Climatic conditions (e.g., the need to provide storage space for plowed snow) (This is not an issue in Hawaii.) /The presence of natural or human-made obstructions adjacent to the roadway (e.g., rock cliffs, large trees, wetlands, buildings, power lines). (This consideration offers some, but not overriding, constraints. Outside HPP there are no buildings or power lines; and large trees, wetlands and cliffs are limited along the entire corridor.) /Type and intensity of development along the section of the road being desi ned (Residential and li ht • g . g commercial development exists within HPP, and restricted access, or no development, exists along the nearly the entire corridor outside of HPP.) 6. The definition of "visually attractive and unobtrusive" is the degree to which horizontal and vertical alignments have been integrated into surrounding natural and human environments (i.e., minimal excavation). 7. A holistic approach to design that integrates a road into its surroundings is what separates the outstanding project from one that merely satisfies basic engineering design criteria. 8. Much of the physical impact of horizontal and vertical alignment can and should be alleviated. 9. Landscaping, separate bikeways, and separate pedestrian walkways all serve to allow the width of the travel lanes to be reduced, and the cross section to still accommodate traffic, to the betterment of the physical environment. 10. Extensive use of native low-level plantings in median and along perimeters helps define the road edges and lessen physical and noise impact on adjacent properties. Cross Section 11. The width of travel lanes decreases as design speed also decreases -narrower lanes for slower speed roads. 12. Specific local circumstances, rather than `one size fits all' determine lane width: / lanes 10 ft (3.0 m) wide on low-speed facilities and / lanes 9ft (2.7 m) wide on low volume roads in rural and residential areas. Roundabouts 13. Roundabouts are addressed very favorably as a "new intersection design concept", and a superior alternative to the traditional T, four-leg, and multi-leg intersections. 14. These alternatives to the use of traditional traffic signals for intersections improve both safety and efficiency for pedestrians and bicyclists, as well as motor vehicles. 2 James Weatherford, Ph.D 13 February 2007 • 15. Modern roundabouts are different from rotary or traffic circles; and are designed to slow entering traffic and allow all traffic to flow through the junction freely and safely. 16. Modern roundabouts reduce delay and increase safety. 17. Average delay at a roundabout is estimated to be less than half of that at a typical signalized intersection. 18. Perhaps the greatest advantages of roundabouts are their design and aesthetic aspects. They can be distinctive entry points into a community. The central island offers an opportunity for a variety of landscape designs. Shoulders and Clearways 19. The portion to the right of the actual traveled way, the "roadway edge", provides even greater degree of flexibility. 20. The shoulder, or clear zone, minimum width is 1.8 m (6 ft) and maximum width is 3.6 m (12 ft). 21. Grass (or other groundcover) surfaces on top of compacted earth (rather than pavement or cement) can be used on a clear area. Grass/groundcover surface has aesthetically appeal and provides natural storm water drainage. 22. The shoulders and clear areas on the Puna Makai road are not a hazard to pedestrians and bicyclists on the physically separated off-street facility -maximum-width shoulders are not necessary. 23. Rural arterials can have 2.4 m (8 ft) shoulders. Pedestrians 24. Safe and efficient accommodation of pedestrians along the traveled way is equally important as the provisions for vehicles. 25. Sidewalks can be from 0.6 m (2 ft) wide to 2.4 m (8 ft). 26. A sidewalk 1.525 m (5 ft) wide [within HPP] achieves, and exceeds, ADA compliance. 27. One case study describes a project with sidewalks and planted strips between the sidewalk and traveled way -- where no sidewalks or plantings had been. This allowed residents to walk between their homes and local commercial facilities and interact with each other much more easily, fostering a higher (not lower!) level of community spirit. Roadside Planting 28. Objectives of landscape design include planting vegetation that / will be an aid to aesthetics and safety / will aid in lowerino construction and maintenance costs • / creates interest, usefulness, and beauty for the pleasure and satisfaction of the traveling public 29. Good landscape design mitigates nuisances associated with traffic and helps a roadway achieve a better "fit" with its surroundings. Two concerns regarding impacts that come to mind in the context of flexible alternatives that are available. First, the building of a road will kill trees within, and near to; the roadway project. Some of these trees will be desirable species, notably ohia lehua; and some wi-I be noxious and/or invasive species, such as `albizia' and others that are a threat to the desirable trees. A basic principle that can and must be adhered to is: more trees are planted than are removed. Furthermore, all trees planted can and must be of desirable type(s) [indigenous, native, and/or non invasive]. The outcome is an increase in the number of, and the associated positive impacts of, desirable trees, as well as a reduction in the presence of invasive trees. Next, the issue has been raised regarding negative impact in the form of destruction of lava stone walls. Rather than reducing the presence of these fine structures, the project is an opportunity to increase the incidence of lava stone walls in Puna. From my observation, these walls will be in keeping with the tradition of road building on this island going back several hundred years before 'European contact'. Lava walls, along with Ohia Lehua, are an appropriate motif for the road and the community - to the extent of lava wall and Ohia Lehua on each of the outer edges of the right of way for the full length of the Puna Makai road from Hawaiian Beaches to Hilo. 3 James Weatherford, PhD 13 February 2007 nt B : "David Fukumoto" <david.f fukubonsai.com> Comme y @ Cc: "Bob Arthurs" <bobarthurs@earthlink.net> Date: Wed Jan 31, 2007 6:39 pm subject: Re: Land use recommendation by DWF (affecting transportation) ALOHA! Since our private group's recommendation #1 relating to land use was formally introduced at the Land Use working group meeting on Saturday, January 27, I've received some solid feedback and will be modifying our group's recommendation #2 regarding "Hilo-Puna Alternate Roads" as follows: 1) MODIFIED PMAR: No change; to go from Hilo Pier to the mid-point between Keaau and HPP for a major Keaau-Hwy 130 interchange, then between Keaau Heights and Orchidland to a Volcano Hwy 11 intersection in Kurtistown. 2) KULANI-TO-UPPER HILO: No change; to go from Kulani to Stainback to Kupalau in upper Hilo and continuing to Hilo Hospital. Another leg goes from the Modified PMAR Kurtistown intersection to Stainback so both upper and lower Puna get a more direct route to Hilo Hospital. Based on feedback, THERE ARE MAJOR CHANGES REGARDING THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE PHASE II ROADS CONNECTING MODIFIED PMAR TO HAWAIIAN PARADISE PARK, ORCHIDLAND ESTATES, HAWAIIAN ACRES, AND AINALOA! 3) HAWAIIAN PARADISE PARK. There is very strong support for a connector road from Modified PMAR along the former railroad easement toward HPP which then turns makai on Shipman land down to Kaloli Point to hook up to Beach Road. This portion would be funded by public funds with the justification that Beach Road is a public road and the public would have better access for recreational activities. Public funding would also be used to build connector roads up to NINE HPP ROADS INCLUDING BEACH ROAD, 3RD, 7TH, 11TH, 15TH, 19TH, 23RD, 27TH, AND SHOWER DRIVE. (The earlier recommendation was to hook up ONLY 5 roads with 4 more later. There were several suggestions to hook up all nine from the start to disperse traffic for lower impact on any of these roads.) There was good support for speed plateaus every 1/4 mile as traffic calmers and for the HPP board to 1) establish the speed limits, 2) modify this concept to utilize combinations of other roads, and 3) keep the HPP roads private to retain control. UNLIKE ANY OTHER HPP PLAN PROPOSED SO FAR, THERE WAS ESPECIALLY STRONG SUPPORT BECAUSE THERE WOULD BE NO NEED FOR ANY HPP PROPERTY CONDEMNATIONS AS EXISTING HPP EASEMENTS ARE LARGE ENOUGH! The major negative was an objection to giving the public access to Beach Road. However, there was acceptance that if the public was not given access, that there would be no justification for the use of public funds and that HPP would then have to negotiate directly with Shipman and finance and build the connector and collector roads. I think we • have the basis for an acceptable HPP solution, thank all who made input, and invite further suggestions to continue to improve this concept. I request that the residents and officers of Hawaiian Paradise Park consider this a conceptual idea for them to modify and negotiate further directly with Hawaii County or their elected representatives. Good luck and best wishes! 4) HAWAIIAN ACRES - ORCHIDLAND PARKWAY. THERE WILL BE HUGE CHANGES BASED UPON GREAT FEEDBACK THAT MAKE SENSE!!! There is support for a major alternate highway to Keaau-Pahoa Highway 130 and agreement that instead of going through the 1-acre HPP lots, that it go through the larger 3-acre lots for lower per lot impact, fewer lots impacted, with the benefit of bringing water and utilities to an area where these are not currently cost-effective options. THE MAJOR CHANGE: ROAD WOULD GO THROUGH THE BOUNDARY OF HAWAIIAN ACRES AND ORCHIDLAND WITH ROUGHLY ONE ACRE OF EACH 3-ACRE LOT ON EACH SIDE ACQUIRED UNDER EMINENT DOMAIN CONDEMNATION FOR A LARGE SCALE EASEMENT. Reasons: 1) It would allow Orchidland's board to authorize hook up of those roads that currently are connected to Keaau-Pahoa Hwy 130 to establish an ideal efficient grid through Orchidland. 2) It would allow Hawaiian Acres to reevaluate their position and allow relatively easy hook up of B, C, D, E, F, and G if they agree, allow hook-up of some, on not allow hook-up of any. 3) Condemnation of one out of a three-acres would still result in a highly useable 2-acre lot. 4) The widest possible easement width is very desirable to allow heavy green-belting to off-set highway noise, potential security problems, and highway pollutants. 5) If the highway were fully only in Orchidland, the highway would split Orchidland into two sections. 6) If the highway was fully only in Orchidland, Hawaiian Acres would have a harder time hooking up. IF HAWAIIAN ACRES HOOKS UP, IT WOULD BE A MAJOR STEP TOWARD CREATING PUNA MAUKA ALTERNATE ROAD(S) AS IT WOULD MAKE IT POSSIBLE FOR FERN FOREST AND THE MAUKA SUBDIVISIONS TO ALSO HOOK UP. There seems to be strong support that each subdivision's board be empowered to make the decisions on behalf of their subdivisions. ANOTHER MAJOR CHANGE! TOWARD THE AINALOA END, BEND THE HIGHWAY TO GO THROUGH THE BORDER OF AINALOA AND HAWAIIAN ACRES TO INCORPORATE SOME OF THE EXISTING PUNA EMERGENCY ACCESS ROAD (PEAR). This will remove the major drawback that this Hawaiian Acre-Orchidland Parkway would split Ainaloa. By bending the routing, Ainaloa stays as a contiguous subdivision. The altemate highway would continue to be a major access road to the 750- 1,000 acre Pahoa Community, Business, and Industrial Park proposed mauka of Pahoa Town. The highway would continue to connect to Kalapana Road. This would give Leilani, Nanawale, Kalapana, Hawaiian Beaches, and others in lower Puna a major altemate 55-mph divided highway. ANOTHER MAJOR CHANGE! ON THE VOLCANO HIGHWAY END, IT WOULD CONNECT TO THE LOWER END OF OLAA ROAD, THEN VEER TO DIRECTLY CONNECT TO MODIFIED PMAR! From this connection with Modified PMAR, lower Puna would be able to: 1) turn left on Volcano Highway 11 to go to Volcano, Kau, and South Kona. 2) connect to the Kulani-to-upper Hilo Alternate Road to connect to upper Waiakea (Kupalau Road) and on to Hilo Hospital. 3) turn into Volcano Hwy 11 to go to Kam School, Keaau, Shipman Industrial Park, or Hilo. OR 4) continue on Modified PMAR to the Keaau-Pahoa Interchange. From there, turn toward Pahoa or continue on into Hilo via PMAR. CONCLUSION: THIS WEEK HAS BEEN HECTIC!!! Additional direct feedback is invited to my private email: david.f@fukubonsai.com I am trying to complete the lengthy detailed presentation for this "Hilo-Puna Alternate Roads" which will be my private group's recommendation #2 with at least three large maps to better illustrate the concepts presented. The recommendations will one day be posted on Fuku- Bonsai's Puna website and made available in PDF files. The current Transportation group posting system does not easily allow posting PDF files. If you would like a direct copy, please email me a request directly. MAHALO FOR THE GREAT FEEDBACK! My group has gotten input from many and we've been working on these concepts for many years. We've teamed a lot and have done our best to find solutions to benefit as many people as possible with the least amount of impact as possible. I do not make public eminent domain condemnation recommendations lightly as I fully understand the impact on each property owner. If you will be negatively impacted by my recommendations, linvite you to call me at my home or private office at 966-7668 or to visit me at Fuku-Bonsai. I'll try to explain the many factors that went into the recommendations and perhaps may be able to find ways to reduce the impact. I'll also be available to assist to assure that you will be fairly compensated for the loss. I sincerely apologize if you are amongst those that will have negative impacts from my recommendations. Prema, I request that you repost the initial email below for the benefit of those who had not seen it. Hope to complete "Hilo-Puna Alternate Roads" recommendation in PDF within a week. -~-David W. Fukumoto FUKU-BONSAI CULTURAL CENTER & HAWAII STATE BONSAI REPOSITORY PO Box 6000 {17-856 Olaa Rd), Kurtistown, Hawaii 96760 Phone (808) 982-9880; FAX (808) 982-9883; URL: www.fukubonsai.com General Fuku-Bonsai email: sales@fukubonsai.com David W. Fukumoto, founder & president Personal email: david.f@fukubonsai.com Home and private office phone (808) 966-7668 G COMMENT BY: Erhard C. Autrata 2007 JAN 9 PM 4:25 HPP is a Fire Trau Scientists predict El Nino for the coming year. This means no rain and a greater possibility for brush fires. Brush fires have happened in the past in Puna. With the population explosion in HPP and only one way out (highway 130) we may have a real problem. Can you imagine almost 8,000 cars trying to exit HPP at the same time during such an emergency? The highway will already be full of traffic with people from Pahoa and lower Puna. I believe we should continue Shower Drive to the ocean with all the roads in HPP leading to it and one road going to HIIo and another branching off to Keaau. Even if this proposed road were only a cinder surface for the beginning, it would ease traffic from highway 130. The emergency might come earlier than you think. It only takes about 2 to 4 weeks to dry up when there is no rain. Erhard C. Autrata Hawaiian Paradise Park • • New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership Appendix Update • A No Left Turn Corridor and Modern Roundabouts For inclusion with the Appendix Record • ~. ~1~~ I~~ft 'I'ur~ ~~~~~.~>~ Mod.~>~~ ~ta~nc~~lb~utS During the months following the Puna Community Development Plan Working Croup Reports, a great deal of discussion has developed around the potential and greater understanding of Modern Roundabouts. This may well be the best solution far the terrible traffic crash problems on State Highway 130, Highway 11 and Highway 132. Modern Roundabouts will also serve to prevent traffic crashes on the proposed Puna Makai Alternate Route (PMAR) and many other locations in the Puna District. Modern Roundabouts would be a very simple way to improve the existing dangerous intersections along the Hwy 130 corridor between Keaau and Pahoa. The best practice would be to simply declare the entire corridor a "A No Left Tnrn Zone". This would make a fundamental change in the way that people enter and exit Hwy 130. This would surely reduce the deaths, and catastrophic injuries along Hwy 130 and improve the safety ofthe intersections with neighborhood feeder roadways as well. As a lane separated "No Left Tarn Zone", people who today make left turns on to and off of Hwy 130 from their private driveways and businesses, would only be allowed "Right Tnrn In & Right Tarn Ont" access to Hwy 130 along the corridor. Frontage roads were not recommended by the Transportation Working getup and would require a large acquisition of private property and possj'bly even require the destruction of many homes that are too close to the existing Hwy 130 to allow their conshvction. This is not a realistic solution to the dangers on the Hwy 130 corridor from Keaau to Pah~. On the other hand, a "A No Left Tnrn Corridor", would allaw a possible solution to this important problem. From Kahakai Blvd to Shower Dr, five of the seven proposed intersections are "Three Way Interaectioes"! This would allow the use of special Modern Roundabouts that would include a "mini by-pass" of the roundabout to allow for the continuous flow of through traffic outside the Modem Roundabout. P'~a~t btt 1Ciei-`itat Nc~ La!'t 11t~ Zcare Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) Transportation Working Group Final Report New Alternate Corridors Task Paa~tership - Appeigdi~. ~~ ( • ( • t +~rw~+r w~. ~wr.~r. Puna Community Development Plan (GDP) Transportation Working Clroup Final Report New Alternate Corridors Task Partnership Appendix 3 Tht~ee way R.+~t~ndab0ut w~i#h bypasls lAaes • Text time people will realize that the inclusion of this modern traffic calming practice will enhance the safety and average travel time between Pahoa and Keaau during heavy traffic hours. Regular traffic along the corridor, at any hour, would only add a few minutes to the trip. The small increase aftravel time by the daily use of Hwy 130 by people who work at either end of the corridor, would be a small price to pay for such a significant increase in safety and the reduction of the deaths and catastrophic injuries we see today, It is possible that with the construction of these important intersection improvements and the establishment of "A No Left Turn Corridor" the efficacy of Modern Roundabouts will clearly be established as the best practice far all new intersections in Puna. We can see that Modern Roundabouts could be effectively used to implement both the Malcai and the Mauka PMAR roadways that would greatly increase the safety, traffic calming improvements, and increased connectivity between oue subdivisions. This would help to connect residents in Puna with each other and keep more people aiTHwy 130 and Hwy 11. With careful use of this poeven technology we can only expect that we might indeed be better prepared for new residents moving to Puna to enjoy our rural lifestyle. Requests welre repeatedly made to come up with a drawing that could clearly explain how Modern Roundabouts could help us meet the future needs of our district. The image below shows some of the many suggestions made 13'om the people who spoke to members of our New Alternative Corridors Task Partnership during the Working Crroup process. We hope that everyone will consider the possibility that the Coutrty in cooperation with State and Federal agencies can develop some of these goad ideas. That was the whole poim of doing a "Community Development Plan"! Many places in the mainland, for example, have established rules that require the use of Modern Roundabouts unless and until they are proven to be less effective than traffic lights or stop sign intersecNans. Puna Community Development Ptah (CDPj Transportation Working firoup Finat Report New Alternate Corridors 'Task Partnership - Appettdi€~ • • i Addition:~l I~Tgw Alternate ~'orridor Ali~n~cnt~ ~ IVlodern Roundabout Location Suggcstion~ frorl~a the Public LEGEND 1 A. Improve Hwy 130 B. Improve Hwy 11 C. Makai Alternative Route to Hilo D. Stainback Hwy Improvements E. Bus Improvements i F. Park & Ride G. Paratransit System H. SR25 I. Old Volcano Trail J. Railroad Multi-Modal Pathway K. Beach Rd Improvements L. New Modern Roundabout Intersections M. Kulani Intersection N. New Connector Routes Mauka ~.~c~uu C ~ 4Lx. ~.H~+..m. a,W.wK '+`M arr•, x, +~co.."..a. d SFan6~Mt Firh' L ~ ihry i~9 Rcun+J~hart _. Nnpnxar~rNi b~sa6iom E D t~cxrorw ~ Kub++tntrnecgm e- ~ »•,; "*' a CIS Hey G9fM~df3Pir Rcw~ ~ 1 ~ 2 +q•.+K+a AY+.r. ~ ~~ fro M+nr1#SSMS~t+Rt3t ..,,.. are. ar«r. Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) Transportation Working Group Final Report New Alternate Corridors Task Par(nership Appendix 4 Mass Transit (Sub group) Civilization exists • by geological consent, subject to change without notice. -- Will Durant Puna CDP TRANSPORTATION Mass Transit Mission: To increase mass transportation options for all Puna residents and travelers, with the goals of having fewer cars on Puna thoroughfares and providing connectivity for everyone to • destinations islandwide. _ L~ PUNA CAP MASS TRANSIT TASK PARTNERSHIP Report to Puna CDP Transportation Working Group February 8, 2007 Mission statement: To increase mass transportation options for all Puna residents and travelers, with the goals of having fewer cars on Puna thoroughfares and providing connectivity for everyone to destinations islandwide. Hawaii County has made strong, commendable moves in its mass transit commitment for the Big Island population in the last few years. The Mass Transit Task Partnership sees that commitment as a solid foundation for major expansion and responsible, coordinated connectivity of Hawaii Island's transportation services through the County of Hawaii Mass Transit Agency, with immediate and long-term planning for the people of the District of Puna and the island, visitors, commerce, and Earth's precious, precarious environment. Community stakeholders and hard facts from previous studies have identified the expansion of mass transit among the top priorities of Big Island needs (see Appendices and Sources). Since the completion of the Puna Regional Circulation Plan and the Rural Paratrnnsit Study for Puna and Kona, both finalized in 2005, urgency for the need to implement possible solutions to the nightmares of Big Island traffic congestion and road safety have gained momentum. The unparalleled increase in fuel costs in recent years adds even greater pressure f or mn jor improvement and enhancement of the county's mass transportation services. Adding to the gravity of the local situation is the lack of adequate, alternate thoroughfares into and out of the geologically unique District of Puna. The 2005 General Plan for Hawaii County recognizes the influx of people to the District of Puna since 1990, reporting an unsurpassed 51 percent increase in population. The General Plan projects the district's population will outpace that of South Hilo, the most populated district, in a little more than a decade, attributed primarily to the availability of relatively inexpensive plots in "bare bones" subdivisions created in the 1960s and 1970s. The district, bigger in size than the Island of Oahu, has two major highways, many substandard roads, and the fewest public facilities and capital improvements of any district in Hawaii County. The General Plan labels the majority of Puna roads "inadequate by present standards" and calls for "the use of a variety of mechanisms to provide the necessary infrastructure in nonconforming subdivisions," (Appendix A, 9.5.1.2 and 13.2.5.1) "beginning with the major roads providing access into the more densely populated subdivisions." Local transportation problems of congested and unsafe roads, lack of community infrastructure and multimodal accommodations, and the ever-rising costs of maintaining a private vehicle are compounded by the global issues of our nonsustainable dependence on fossil fuels, damage to the environment, and the accelerating warming of Planet Earth due to the "greenhouse effect." Rather than paving Puna's 40-plus subdivisions' roads, these task partners suggest providing access to the subdivisions through the use of smaller buses, "feeder" routes bringing mass transit into the neighborhoods, reducing auto dependency and • traffic con estion and rovidin connectivit for Puna residents 9 p 9 Y and visitors. Obviously, this plan would necessitate a ma jor ad justment, a real ground shift (magnitude 10) in the approach of Hawaii County administrators and legislators to mass transit on the Big Island. But we believe the recommendations contained here can provide sustainable, responsible solutions to short-term and long-range transportation problems locally while doing our part to help reverse global repercussions of our fossil fuel addiction. Both the Regional Circulation Plan and the Rural Paratransit Study noted the lack of coordination in public transportation services here and our inquiry only expanded on that factor. The public, through the MTA, has bought paratransit vehicles, buses large and small, vans, even taxis that have been turned over to n variety of public and private agencies, with little oversight and no • official coordination of public accessibility to the vehicles or transportation services their taxes paid for. The County needs to conduct an islandwide inventory and comprehensive listing of all publicly funded vehicles assigned to the Mass Transit Agency (33-40?), the Hawaii County Economic Opportunity Council (fleet of 26, Appendix E), the Parks and Recreation Department's Coordinated Services for the Elderly (fleet of 27, Appendix E), the YMCA, the Center for Independent Living (1), the state's VanPool, private taxi and bus companies, and any other agency in Hawaii County, public or private. That inventory, it is believed, will surprise, many and could be used more effectively in a newly created County Transportation Department responsible for coordinating and overseeing all publicly funded mass transit services for the • island; with top priority being the expansion, enhancement, and improvement of the Hele-On bus system. (That is not to sa Y HCEOC, CSE, CIL, and the YMCA would give up their vehicles but public awareness and access to .these agencies' transportation services needs coordination.) Scheduling and public accessibility to those special needs transit service providers would eventually be coordinated, monitored and regulated through the computerized NOVUS transportation system software (or similar updated program). Crucial to the improvement and enhancement of the Hele- On bus system is the establishment of feeder routes into neighborhoods and subdivisions that can connect at regional hubs with express buses to further destinations. The smaller, shuttle- type, paratransit buses should be utilized for feeder routes and the larger coaches (recent acquisitions from Honolulu Transit) would be used for the express runs between the MTA hubs. However, this arrangement would go nowhere if the Hele-On • schedules were not expanded to hourly, from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. weekdays, and include weekend and holiday schedules. Other recommendations include posting signs marking all bus stops, providing bus shelters, park-and-ride sites, and greater accessibility to MTA routes, maps and schedules. And, putting these recommendations into near-future practice, Puna District could serve as a pilot study of expanded, enhanced mass transit services islandwide. Inclusion of a buslane should also be provided in the planning and construction of any Puna Makai Alternate Rond. In the course of this study, some saw the need for upping the CEO of county transit services to a "cabinet-level" position in the Mayor's Administration as well as the establishment of a citizen advisory commission for transportation. Imagine the surprise to learn a County Transportation Commission already • exists. And To Brown administrator o the Coun Mass Transit m f ty Agency, said his position is treated as n cabinet-level advisor to the mayor. However, the nine-member Transportation Commission had five vacancies (now down to four) and had not met officially for possibly two years due to the lack of a quorum, according to Administrator Brown. He added that the commission is primarily used to license taxis. The County website states the commission's purpose is "to regulate passenger carrying motor vehicles such as sampan buses, taxis and other vehicles exempted by the Public Utilities Commission, and to serve as an advisory commission on mass transit and other transportation-related matters." (Appendix K). Our recommendation is to heighten the public profile of this Transportation Commmission and make its primary purpose that • of serving as the proactive public advisor to County officials on mass transit and other transportation-related matters. Another recommendation is to make providing the mass transit needs of the public the top MTA priority rather than the delivery of paratransit services for those with special needs (see Appendix J). One unfulfilled transportation need that had little mention in previous reports is that of children. John Snplan, East Hawaii head of Student Transportation for the Department of Education, said the private bus companies contracted by the DOE are "leaving children by the side of the road" because there is a chronic shortage of bus drivers (Appendix I). Island parents and teachers have expressed concerns about intimidation of their children and threatening behaviors of some students on school buses. Students themselves have asked the county administration for. expanded and improved public transportation (Appendix H). i And the reduction in highway congestion on school holidays gives everyone a realistic understanding of the numbers of students being driven by private auto to and from schools. MTA's Brown said Hele-On should not compete with private industry and he stated he is opposed to bus stops at schools for that reason. However, many students are unable to take part in after-school tutoring, sports or other activities due to lack of transportation. And large numbers of students are home-schooled or attend charter and private schools with no bus services. While the Punn Regional Circulation Plan calls for encouraging children to walk and ride bikes to school, East Hawaii has a rainforest environment with more than 100 inches of rainfall a year (Appendix C, 5.5.1.1). . So this report sees young people not only representing a large, untapped market for mass transit services today but young bus riders grow up to become adult users of mass transit • tomorrow. Regarding the massive infusions of funds these plans would require, the political climate leading up to the presidential election of 2008 could be very advantageous to efforts to secure federal funding, especially for a pilot project in such an undeveloped, unique district that could prove the viability of an islandwide mass transit system. The County budget allocates a miserly 1.76 percent to mass transit and that needs to be increased. According to former Puna Councilman Gary Safarik, $3,150,000 in federal funds was requested for a new MTA baseyard and was awaiting approval in the FY 2007 federal budget. Perhaps an inquiry to newly elected U.S. Rep. Maizie Hirono could inform us of the outcome of that funding request. Within the state and county, Hawaii Island's political a ends is in the hands of veteran le islators State Senators 9 9 Russell Kokubun and Lorraine Inouye who have committee assignments that could support Big Isle mass transit projects, and Puna Councilman Bob Jacobson, a nominee to the National Association of Counties' Steering Committee on Transportation. These lawmakers could also steer the stakeholders in this process toward funding opportunities, both public and private. State Rep. Fay Hanohano and Puna Councilwoman Emily Naeole are newly elected and could have pivotal roles in lining up support with their legislative partners to secure state and county funding for mass transit in Puna and islandwide. Additionally, the Kokua Free Bus Service established in 2004 should be phased out and private investment in long-range rail or busway plans should be explored. • Who will need to implement these recommendations? Primarily, Hawaii County administrators and legislators, the public, the county Department of Public Works, state and federal legislators, MTA, HCEOC, CSE, YMCA, Hawaii County Transportation Commission, community associations, Nn Leo O Hawaii and other media. And where would resistance to these recommendations come from? Legislators representing districts other than Puna, some county and state officials, private transit providers, a minority of subdivision residents. For the purposes of Puna Community Development Plan and its Transportation Working Group, this task partnership has conducted a comprehensive study of transit issues and requests for services voiced by hundreds, if not thousands, of Puna residents as well as reviewed relevant past studies and reports. • ISSUES 1. Crowded, hazardous roads 2. Lack of transportation options 3. Ever-increasing transportation costs, including vehicle maintenance, insurance, dependence on fossil fuels, and damage to Earth's environment 4. Lack of public transit coordination among governmental, quasi- governmental non- profits, and private transportation providers 5. Lack of bus accessibility and connectivity in Puna District and • islandwide A. Lack of bus routes in and between Puna subdivisions and neighborhoods B. Lack of bus service to island airports, harbors, resorts C. Lack of buses on weekends, holidays 6. Lack of safe bus stops and shelters 7. Lack of signage, maps, schedules for public 8. Lack of park & ride sites for bus passengers, carpooling, ride sharing 9. Lack of public education regarding mass transit, carpooling, paratransit, ride sharing, VanPool, the special transportation services of HCEOC, CSE and other social service a envies and the ositive effects on Earth's 9 - P environment created by vigorous use of mass transit 10. Puna's large numbers of unemployed/underemployed 11. Large numbers of uninsured/underinsured motorists 12. Growing elderly and youth populations and other non-drivers 13. Lack of adequate police supervision in traffic-impacted areas 14. Minimal funding for MTA in County budget (1.76% of 2005- 2006 County budget) 15. Little public knowledge of short- or long-term MTA plans • 16. Many substandard roads in Puna 17. Pedestrians, those in wheelchairs, and bike riders are forced to travel in dangerous automotive traffic areas due to lack of sidewalks or safe paths in Puna GOALS (Prioritized 1/24/2007) 1. Delivery of safe, dependable, accessible transportation for Puna residents and visitors; Re; Issues 1, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16, 17 • 2. Improve transportation coordination between MTA and all quasi-governmental and private organizations utilizing publicly funded mass transit vehicles (HCEOC, CSE, Share-A-Ride, paratransit, VanPool, taxi companies) for the optimum delivery of transportation options for all citizens, including those with special needs, from Puna subdivisions and neighborhoods to destinations of employment, health, commercial, social, cultural, and recreational services; Re: Issues 2, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 15, 16, 17 3. Increase and augment public transportation planning to make it more responsive to community needs; Re: Issues 2, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 15, 17 • 4. Enhance public knowledge and understanding of immediate global and local toll/costs of fossil fuel consumption AND the benefits of alternate modes of transportation. Re: Issues 1, 2, 3, 8, 11, 14, 15, 17 5. Provide safe transportation options within and between Puna subdivisions and neighborhoods Re: Issues 5, 6, 8, 16, 17 ~~ J 6. Reduce numbers of fossil-fueled motor vehicles on Puna roads and highway by promoting mass transit and environmentally conscious alternatives Re: Issues 3, 4, 9, 14 OBJECTIVES 1. Increase MTA ridership by improving citizen access to safe, dependable transportation through enhanced, increased, and expanded MTA routes, scheduling and connectivity within Punn District and islandwide Re: Goals 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 2. Increase public support of MTA funding and services by launching multifaceted public education campaigns for sustainable transportation options including mass transit, rural paratransit, ride sharing, park and ride sites, car and van pooling Re: Goals 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 3. Alleviate conditions having negative socio-economic impacts on all Puna citizenry, providing sustainable connectivity to the full spectrum of Hawaii Island's community services for the young, the elderly, and commuters Re: Goals 1, 2, 3, 4 • 4. Reduce production of greenhouse gases and other human "footprints" impacting our planet's environment and inhabitants; help retain Puna's rural character Re: Goals 3, 4, 6 RECOMMENDATIONS 1. A top priority for transportation is the creation of a comprehensive, convenient, sustainable mass transit system in Puna, as a pilot for the rest of the island. The County of Hawaii should expand and enhance mass transit accessibility and connectivity, frequency of bus runs, routes and schedules, maps and multimedia signage, and coordination of transportation services to the nonexclusive benefit of the i entire population of district and island. By the beginning of fiscal year 2008, shift MTA top .priority from delivery of paratransit service for populations with special needs (duplication of transit provided HCEOC, CSE and other social service agencies) to delivery of mass transit services for the entire population of the District of Puna and the Big Island; Frequency and connectivity of MTA buses, their schedules and routes should be substantially increased over present schedule within a year (at least doubled). The bus system (including paratransit services) should be professionally monitored and regulated with fully automated computerized software such as Trapeze NOVUS or comparable state-of-the- art transit scheduling program. And the frequency, connectivi schedules and routes should be ad'usted tY- J over time to best serve Puna's growing population; Create a position for a Transportation CEO with grant-writing expertise who would be the top coordinating authority for optimum utilization of all publicly funded transit vehicles and would work in responsible partnership with the MTA director and public or private agencies providing transit services with publicly funded vehicles as well as a fully- leveraged Public Transportation Commission; Purchase and implement suitable Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) program in the next fiscal year. 2. The County should expand MTA services through increased and improved planning, coordination, and funding by federal, state and private grants, expansion of the transportation/MTA allocations in County budgets, and nurturing private and public partnerships. By Sept. 1, 2007, the County will inventory the total numbers, types, and conditions of vehicles purchased with MTA and other public funds (federal, state, and county), and identify the government agencies, companies and corporations, both public and private, to which the vehicles are assigned; Develop a higher profile for Hawaii County's Transportation Commission so the public is aware of its mission, goals, plans, and public meetings. Adjust the purpose of the Transportation Commission to make serving as public advisor on mass transit needs (to include MTA, paratransit, pedestrian/bicycling) the commission's top priority. Consider expanding the commission to 12 members to include three students representing .East Hawaii, West Hawaii, and Kohala/Hamakun. Regulating "passenger-carrying motor vehicles... exempted by oversight of the Public Utilities Commission" should not be the top priority of this citizens' advisory commission. Routinely provide a public record of the minutes of the commission's meetings no later than 30 days following the meeting. 3. Provide feeder services utilizing smaller MTA buses or paratransit vehicles beginning with four populated zones in Puna District, delivering riders to hubs at Pahoa, Kea'au, Volcano, and Hawaiian Paradise Park/Orchidland. Feeder routes would connect at hubs to larger (coaches) buses that would function as express buses along Hwys. 11 and 130 between Volcano, Pahoa, Kea'au and Hilo. Express buses would not stop for passengers on the highways between hubs as those riders would be picked up and delivered by the zone feeders. This major shift in MTA service should be implemented as soon as possible (by the end of this calendar year?), with temporary accommodations serving as collector hubs as the funding, planning and construction of the MTA hubs gets underway. 4. The initial hubs should be built and located adjacent to Hwys. 11 and 130 but outside the villages of Volcano, Pahoa, and Kea'au, and the Orchidland/Hawaiian Paradise Park subdivisions. The Kea'au and Volcano hubs would also be the MTA connectors/collectors for buses from Hilo and Ka'u. Proposed sites for hubs are: Pahoa: Included in the current planning for the proposed Puna Municipal/Regional Center, near the yet-to-be constructed Fire Station off Hwy. 130 near Kahakai Blvd. Kea'au: On state lands adjacent to soccer J fields (old NG Armory area?) as part of a "superhub" that would include the new MTA baseynrd and headquarters Volcano: In the area adjacent to Hwy. 11 and Wright Road (State land?) Orchidland/Paradise Park: On the makai (HPP) side of Hwy. 130 opposite Orchidland Drive (undeveloped HPP properties) 5. Puna geographic zones to be served by the initial feeder shuttles connecting to hubs would include (but not be limited to these as bus stops): Hawaiian Beaches-Shores-Park/Pahoa village/Nanawale Estates/lower Leilani Estates, feeding into Pahoa hub Volcano village/Glenwood/Mt. View/Kurtistown/Hawaiian Acres/Kamehameha School/Shipman Industrial Park/Keaau village, feeding into Kea'au and Volcano hubs Kapoho/Vacationland/Ahalanui Park/Opihikao/Kalapana Seaview Estates/Kaimu/Black Sands Beach subdivision/mauka Leilani, feeding into Pahoa hub Pohaku Drive/Hawaiian Paradise Park/Orchidland/Tiki Gardens/Ainuloa/Makuu Market/Hawaiian Homes, feeding into Pahoa and Kea'au hubs 6. Provide a convenient, island-wide bus ticketing system utilizing "Smart Cards" and offering reduced monthly rates for residents, tourist "passes" (in manner of EuroRail, BART, etc.), and providing free and reduced passes for qualifying residents based on income (through each resident's social service agency). Phase out Kokua service incrementally over 2 years but expect to continue to subsidize MTA as needed to provide desired levels of service, primarily through federal transportation funds. Initiate public/private partnerships that reward carpooling and other ride sharing with such inducements as preferred parking sites, discounts for fuel and automotive costs, and the like. 7. Launch and maintain public education campaigns detailing mass transit services, with heavy emphasis on youths ages 8-18 (i.e. contests for designs of maps, websites, radio jingles, TV public service spots, public access TV and other media coverage, etc., special instruction and grants for teachers and churches to promote use of mass transit in compatible science, social studies, and other lessons). Cultivate public/private partnerships promoting reduction in vehicular traffic and environmental pollution (Aloha Aina campaigns). 8. Develop immediate, mid- and long-range Mass Transit plans reflecting Puna CDP recommendations. For the mid- and long terms, acquisition of vehicles minimizing use of fossil fuels, the study of busway or rail and implementation of one or the other, and cultivation of private development partnerships are recommended. (For example, in the long term, a "safari" nature parkway from Kaimu to Kapoho to Hawaiian Beaches-Shores-Park targeting the eco-tourist market could be developed in County partnership with a private consultant such ns Disney who Chris Hemmeter brought in to create the multi-modal transit system at the Waikoloa Hyatt.) 9. Recommendations for mass transit expansion and enhancement support goals and objectives of the other Puna Working Groups: Agriculture: Provide transportation services that would deliver workers to and from agricultural • em to ers as well as consumers to and from farmers' P Y markets; Alternate energy: Provide an immediate means of minimizing Hawaii's dependence on fossil fuels; and, in the long term, as the County purchases buses fueled by alternate energy technologies, provide another market for geothermal production of electricity or hydrogen (See Appendix L, Honolulu Advertiser article, Feb. 5, 2007); Cultural and historic preservation: MTA planning should be integral to the eco-tourism market and would be monitored to make sure no culturally or historically sensitive areas are threatened by any construction. According to the 2005 General Plan, "The presence of historic sites and the cultural integrity of the communities increase the potential for • eco-tourism which can help support cultural appreciation and understanding"; Economic opportunity: Provide transportation for the expansion of job opportunities for Puna residents, employees and employers, students seeking higher education and access to technology centers, economic development of small local businesses, and consumers of all kinds of products and services; Land use: The establishment of feeder routes and express bus services will help to manage growth that "facilitate the creation of village/town centers for community gathering places to shop, work, learn, live and walk while preserving open space and promoting the uniqueness of Puna"; Natural resources: Expansion of mass . transit would provide more sustainable options for Puna residents economical) , environmental) and • Y Y socially; Parks and recreation: Enhancement of mass transit will provide connectivity and accessibility to recreation centers that would promote activities for all ages, strengthening families and communities; Social services: The delivery, accessibility, and reliability of social services for Puna residents would be greatly increased with the proposed, responsible additions to the county mass transit system. Consultant questions 1. How can people be encouraged to use buses? • --By making the Hawaii County Mass Transit Agency a true mass transit system, with safe, marked access at marked bus stops, shelters, and hubs; schedules and routes that connect Puna people with islandwide destinations, including airports, in a responsive, timely manner (hourly routinely, half-hour for peak times and routes); --Provide maps, signs and shelter at all bus stops, printed pocket schedules with maps at public locations; --By locating park and ride facilities in high profile locations for the 40-some subdivisions and neighborhoods in Puna; --By providing timely connectivity within the district and throughout the island; --By expanding the bus schedules to include weekends and holidays; --To have a single "hotline" number to call for information and • connectivit #o the island's entire transit services network• Y - --Providing GPS-based live computer displays at hubs to show bus location and projected arrival time; --To educate the public as to the global and personal costs of single occupant vehicles (SOV) and to promote the use of mass transit as the #1 means of "saving the aina;" --To paint all the transit vehicles with the same Hele-On colors (NOT looking like school buses for Special Ed students) and the use of petroglyph icons for buses and other MTA vehicles on the same line so people who do not read English can utilize the system confidently; --To use the media, health care providers, senior citizen centers, churches, social service agencies, etc., to publicize the paratransit services targeting those with special needs; --To negate the image of mass transit as being for low-income, • needy people with campaigns showing the Mayor, the Governor and other political lenders, celebrities, cultural leaders, sports stars, school principals, etc. riding the buses and/or in media public service spots; --To sponsor contests and grants that will promote young people's development of the mass transit habit and to encourage teachers and parents to use mass transit for broadening their children's world; --To provide storage area for passenger carry-ons; --Make the buses and/or shelters hotspots for wireless computers; --To phase out totally free "Kokua" services for everyone but provide monthly "Smartcards" with no or reduced fees for welfare clients, students, and frequent users; --Increase vehicle tax to discourage use of SOVs and supplement mass transit funding (a "green" tax). 2. How can the bus schedule become more user-friendly? --To ex and routes into subdivisions and throw hout P 9 neighborhoods, with express service between the towns; --To run hourly from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. at least weekdays, with half-hour runs for peak routes and times; --To expand the weekend and holiday services and provide connectivity to make possible an islandwide roundtrip any day of the year; --To require MTA drivers to stop for any person waiting at a posted bus stop; --To mark every bus stop and post relevant schedules at each shelter and at every possible stop; --To post islandwide bus schedules in public and commercial locations in all the towns and high traffic locations (post offices, state and county offices, schools, churches, restaurants, utility companies, community bulletin boards, recreation and senior centers, etc.) and make available pocketsize bus maps/schedules at the same places as well as at MTA hubs and shelters. The MTA • coordinated transit services "hotline" phone number should be printed on all such schedules; --Create an easily downloaded, printable version of the MTA routes and schedules on the County MTA website; include 6P5- based live computer displays of buses on their routes; provide online feedback forms. 3. What would encourage people to use spark-and-ride facility? --Providing free parking, security for the vehicles and safety for people making connections there (locate in high profile areas, use of security guards, surveillance cameras, Webcam, the like) --Hourly or half-hour bus service --Feeder buses in subdivisions and neighborhoods serving park & ride sites; --Secure, sheltered bike racks; --A website for eo le wantin to connect or car oolin ride- P p 9 f P 9, sharing; --Restrooms, MTA ticket dispensers, MTA route maps and schedules; --Increasing costs for single-occupant vehicles. Appendices and Sources Appendix A -The 2005 County of Hawaii General Plan http://www.hawaii- county.com/la/gp/2005/main.html Appendix B - Excerpts from the 2005 County of Hawaii General • Plan that are particularly relevant for Puna http://www.hawai i islandplan.com/punageneralplan.asp Appendix C -Puna Regional Circulation Plan Final Report, November 2005 http://www.hawaii- county.com/info/puns/PunaRCP/Appendices_NOVEMBER 2005.pdf Appendix D -Puna Regional Circulation Plan ,March 2005 http://www.hawaii- county.com/info/pupa/PunaRCP/Appendices_MARCH 2005.pdf Appendix E -Rural Paratransit Study for Puna and Kona, Island of Hawaii August 2005 http://www.lyonassocintes.com • Appendix F - PRCP Community Survey Results, May 2004 Appendix G -Hawaii Island Plan Puna Community Input, Summary of Ideas from 130 Small Groups and Demographics http://hawai i islandplan.com/punainputideasummary.asp Appendix H - Pahoa High School Survey and Report, Bus System in Puna, 2003-2004 Appendix I - Schoolbus issues, communiques Appendix J -Tom Brown responses of January, 2007 re: Puna Regional Circulation Plan Goals for Transit Development, bus ridership figures, MTA vehicle information, interviews, sketch • of bus shelters Appendix K -Transportation Commission, County of Hawaii Website Appendix L - Hawaii County Mnss Transit website http://www.hawaii- county.com/mass transit/transit_main.htm Appendix M -Mass Transit Task Partnership Report: Priorities Appendix N -Honolulu Advertiser article of Feb. 6, 2007 on geothermal energy Appendix O -Statewide GIS Program Zoning and TMK data, Puna subdivisions' existing developed and existin undevelo ed lots rovided b PlanPacific 9 p .p Y via emai I January 2007 Appendix P -Real Property Tax General Information (Revised 6/06) www.hawai ipropertytax.com Appendix Q -Responses to consultant questions Appendix R -Map: Proposed Puna MTA Hubs, Express and Feeder Routes Appendix 5~ - - Puna CDP Mass Transit Task Partnership meeting dates and attendance • Meetin #1 -- Nov. 11, 2006, 5-7 .m. at Hawaiian Acres 9 p Community Center Attendance: Frankie Stapleton, Stephanie Bath, Mary Marvin Porter, Prema Qadir, Keola Downing, James Weatherford, Bob Bogle, Melissa Knott, Liz Salfen Meeting #2 -- Nov. 19, 2006, 2:40-5 p.m. at Olaa Community Center 'in Kea'au Attendance: Frankie Stapleton, Stephanie Bath, Prema Qadir, Keola Downing, Mary Marvin Porter and her friend, Joseph, Liz Salfen Meeting #3 -- Jan. 9, 2007 at Stapleton home in Nanawale Estates Attendance: Frankie Stapleton, Margaret Levy-Johanos, Toby Hazel, Jon Olson, Mary Marvin Porter, Bob 6ogle, Melissa Knott r~v U Meeting #4 -- Jan. 16, 2007, 1:15-5 p.m. at Kea'au Public Library Attendance: Frankie Stapleton, Margaret Levy-Johanos, Toby Hazel, Bob Bogle, Melissa Knott, Mary Marvin Porter, Keola Downing, MTA director Tom Brown, County planner Larry Brown Meeting #5 -- Jan. 24, 2007, 3-6 p.m. at HCEOC Bldg. in Pahoa Attendance: Frankie Stapleton, Margaret Levy-Johanos, Keola Downing, Liz Salf en, Sawyer Salf en, Jennifer Salf en, Toby Hazel Meeting #6 -- Jan. 28, 2007, 2:30-5:30 p.m. at Puula Chuch in Nanawale Est. Attendance: Frankie Stapleton, Margaret Levy-Johanos, Liz Salf en, Bob Bogle, Melissa Knott PROPOSED PUNA BUS SHELTERS OR STOPS W/SIGNAGE This list represents many of the locations Puna residents have expressed for the siting of MTA bus shelters/bus stops. MTA director Tom Brown also asked for such a list. While the Transportation Working Group does not expect the county to be able to place shelters at ALL the listed sites in the short term, this does represent generally where the feeder routes should go ASAP (and as many shelters as current funding and construction demands allow) and, in the long term, where bus stops/shelters need to be located by 2010 if Hawaii County truly wants to support mass transit. Volcano Post Office • • Pii auna Drive Ka'u? m ( ) Volcano Store Laukapu Road Keonelehua Road Kilauea Road Haunani Road Kalanikoa Road (starting at west end) H i nano Road Maile Ave. Kalanihonua Road Wright Road (3, starting from west end) Cooper Center (bus stop w/signage) Pearl St. Ruby Ave. Jade Ave. Nahelenani St. Keone Ave. Alii Anela St. Alii Koa St. Alii Kane St. Adjacent Akntsuka Orchid Glenwood Road (3) Glenwood Park (bus stop with signage) LehuananiRoad Maunakea Road Oshiro Road Pszyk Road Mt. View County Park North Kulani Road at Ihope North Kulani Road at Ana Road Kulani Road and Hwy. 11 South Kulani Road at 1 Road So. Kulani at Pikake & Puhala So. Kulani at Pikake & Plumerin Ala Loop & Hwy. 11 Hawelu Rd. & Hwy. 11 Opposite Assembly of God Church on Hwy. 11 Kuauli & A Roads 8 Road and Kea St. 8 Road and C (Hwn. Acres Comm Center) Near Kurtistown Post Office Huina Road Olaa Road Kamehnmeha School entrance Kuaaina Road Akaakai St. Paahana St. Ipuaiwnha St. Old Volcano Road in Kenau Kenau Senior Center Kenau Shopping Center (bus stop w/signage) Kenau Public Library Shipman Gym or Puna Hongwanji Kenau Loop Kipimana St. & Melekahuiwa E. Kipimann St. Shipman Road Milo St. Ohe St. Kikania St. Kenau High School Shipman Park Opukahaia St. Pohaku Drive Shower Drive & HPP Road 2 Shower Drive & 26th • • • Kaloli, Paradise and Mnku'u at least at ever mailbox stand y Orchidland Drive and 40th Orchidland Dr. & Hwy. 130 Aulii St. Ainaloa Drive Makuu Market Ka Ohuwalu Kahnkai Blvd. (stops w/signage at each community built shelter) Puni Makni Puni Mnuka Coastal Parkway New Pahoa Shopping Center Apan St. Lanu Way Nanawnle Homestead Rd. (ad jncent Pahoa Post Office) Old Gov't Road nt Pnhoa 7-11 • Pahoa Rec Center/Swimming Pool parking lot (stop w/signnge) Across Pnhoa HCEOC Bldg. Pahoa High School Naele Road & Hwy 132 Naele Rd. & Halelo Place Tangerine Road Hoopili St. Lehualnni Place Nanawnle Blvd. & Hwy 132 Nanawnle Blvd. & Kehau Rd.(Nnnawale Community Center) Intersections of~ Nanawnle &Senview Roads Senview & Seadrift Roads Seadrift & Flower Roads Flower & Pakalana Roads Pnkalana & Kapuna Roads Kapuna & Ginger Ronds Ginger &Maunakea Roads Maunakea &Lehua Roads Lehua &Kapuna Roads Kapuna &Nanawale Blvd. Kaululaau St. and Hwy. 132 Kaniahiku & Hwy. 132 Lava Tree State Park parking lot Old State Geothermal parking lot Pohoiki Rd. & Hwy. 132 Pohoiki Rd. & Kahuwai Hwy 132 &Leilani Ave. Knhukai Kumukahi &Leilani Leilani & Hinalo St. Pahoa Bypass &Nanawale Homestead Road (HAAS road) Puu Lena 4 C • orners intersection Papaya Farm Lots Rd & Hwy. 137 Kapoho Beach Road Moani St. & Hwy 137 Kapoho Kai Drive. Kalani Honua entrance Kalihikai St. Mapuana Ave. E. Pohakupele Loop W. Pohakupele Loop Oliana Drive Moana Kai Pali/Laau Loke St. Kamakoa St. Ole Ole St. Kaimu cu) de sac at Uncle Robert's & Black Sand DriveIn Ahia Road Kaimu Chain of Craters Road Painted Church Oneele Road Upper Leilani Ave. Kaupii St. Malama St. Kahukai St. & Leilani • • Consultant Working Papers Working Papers (Prepared by Puna CDP Consultant, PlanPacific, Inc.) • • Working Papers (Prepared by Puna CDP Consultant, PlanPacific, Inc.) • • Introduction to the Working Papers Three Working Papers are being prepared to lead toward the preparation of the draft Puna Community Development Plan (CDP). Each of the Working Papers addresses a cluster of topics corresponding to each of the three major themes that had been identified in the preceding public involvement process, including: • Public participation and County policy, as reflected in earlier planning efforts, including the draft Puna Community Development Plan in the early 1990's, the County of Hawaii General Plan (2005), the Puna Regional Circulation Study (2005), and the various community-based master plans produced for several of Puna's subdivisions and villages. • The 130 Small Group Meetings held throughout Puna in early 2006 to solicit issues, concerns and ideas at the "grass roots" level. • The two public workshops held in July and September, 2006, to provide background information on conditions and trends and potential tools to address issues, as well as to solicit additional comments and ideas from Puna stakeholders. • The analyses and recommendations in written reports prepared and submitted by the citizen-based Working Groups. The three Working Papers are being presented in the following order: • Working Paper #1, Elements of a Growth Management Strategy, considers the past • and projected development pattern that has been shaped by the nonconforming subdivisions and explores strategies and methods to influence the rate and pattern of development growth to respond to concerns expressed in the prior public involvement process. Because growth management sets the framework for the CDP, this topic is presented first. • Working Paper #2, Malama I Ka Aina, addresses conditions, issues, approaches and methods related to the protection and/or enhancement of natural and cultural resources, including forest lands, unique geological features, agricultural lands and activity, cultural sites, scenic areas and vistas, recreational sites and parks, and water quality of aquifers and coastal waters. • Working Paper #3, Moving People, Conserving Energy, will focus on sustainable approaches to transportation system and building design, including ways to promote mass transit and alternative travel modes, reduce the demand for long commuter trips, improve roadway connectivity and safety, promote the use of renewable energy sources, and design new or retrofit existing buildings and facilities for greater energy efficiency. This topic is presented last in order to allow added time for public participation in a transportation study being conducted by a CDP subconsultant. The ideas presented in these Working Papers are intended to stimulate thinking and raise awareness about solutions that could be applied in Puna, drawing in part from approaches that have been tested elsewhere and from emerging methods and technologies. They are meant to be building blocks for the preparation of the draft CDP, although the specifics of these ideas may change as the result of comments received before the public workshop to be scheduled latter this year to present the draft CDP. Working Paper #1 Growth Management • Working Paper No. 1 Elements of a Growth Management Strategy 1. The Challenge of Non-Conforming Subdivisions Background • Between 1958 and 1973, more than 52,500 subdivision lots were created in the district of Puna, Island of Hawaii. Since that time, nearly 2,500 of these lots have been covered by lava flows, resulting in a net of about 50,000 lots. Most of these lots are accessed by unpaved roads. The paved roads lack sidewalks and lighting and do not meet current County standards in terms of pavement width, vertical geometrics, drainage and other design parameters. None of the subdivisions have central sewer systems and only a couple have private water systems. Most lots rely either on individual wells or, more commonly, catchment systems supplemented with private delivery trucks for potable water. Large sections of many subdivisions are off the power grid. At the time these subdivisions were approved, the Puna district was sparsely populated and, with the exception of a sugar plantation and asmall-scale visitor attraction at the volcano, which had not yet been developed as a national park, there was little economic activity in the area. Shortly after the approval of the first of these subdivisions, Hawaii was admitted as the 50th state. That event, coinciding with the advent of jet travel, spurred increased investment in the Islands. To prevent the excesses of land speculation, Hawaii adopted the first State Land Use Law in the nation. Most of the Puna district was placed in either the Conservation District or the Agriculture District when formal boundaries were established in 1964, and this served to abate the number of subdivision applications somewhat. However, it wasn't until the County adopted a subdivision ordinance in 1973, setting more rigorous lot size and infrastructure standards, that large subdivisions with minimal services were effectively discouraged. The creation of these subdivisions presents a significant challenge to the management of development growth and the provision of basic public services in Puna for several reasons. • As more lots are developed, an increasing number of residents expect improved infrastructure, such as paved roads, power lines, centralized water supply and wastewater management. Yet, retrofitting these improvements is expensive, and not all residents are willing to either bear the cost or accept the transition from a "rural" setting to one that is more suburban. C. • Because Puna's subdivisions are so large and have few arterial streets, evacuation of residents on short notice in the event a lava flow, earthquake, tsunami or hurricane is a significant problem with serious consequences to public safety. The potential problem worsens as subdivision lots continue to develop and no infrastructure improvements are made. -1- • Because the subdivision lots were sold in their undeveloped state rather than with dwellings, development has occurred in an uneven, "leap-frog" pattern, which makes it even more difficult to develop infrastructure and provide services to the population. Residents often must make long trips to employment, schools, shopping and other destinations to meet daily needs. The following sections look at the factors that have been influencing the rate and pattern of development growth in the nonconforming subdivisions to gain an understanding of where these challenges are the greatest. Figure 1: Nonconforming Subdivisions, by Date Established and Sub-Region `~< . Subdivisions are in shading, ,,'I with the date of creation +~+ ~ Solid line is the Puna ,,,,~rM°' Community Development Plan boundary Dashed lines indicate sub- regions used for the preparation of the Puna ~ Community Development ` ~"~'"' Plan o ~ ~ .~,~.~ ~~~~ ' ~ !T~" ~ 4...... Volcano FM+u.aa 4` ti l ~~~. - ,,,~ ~~ Puna Makai ~ ~,~ ~J • -2- Influences on the rate of subdivision lot development In the first decade or so following the creation of the non-conforming subdivisions, lot sales were fairly brisk, but there was little lot development. As recently as the 1970 Census, the recorded population of the Puna District was only 5,154 residents, most of whom lived in the older settlements of Kea`au, Pahoa and Volcano. The lack of infrastructure, combined with a slow local economy that was transitioning from a plantation base and offered few employment opportunities, probably dampened the rate of development in the nonconforming subdivisions in the early years. During the 1970's decade, the former plantation villages of Kea`au and Pahoa experienced population declines, but the population of the Puna District rose to 11,751 by the 1980 Census. Most of the population growth occurred in the nonconforming subdivisions, especially Hawaiian Paradise Park and Hawaiian Beaches. By 1990, the population had risen to 20,781, which is a 76% increase. By 2000, the reported population was 31,335, representing a 51% increase from the previous Census. While this might suggest that the rate of development in the subdivisions was beginning to "level off', 4,521 building permits for new dwellings in Puna were issued between the beginning of January 2000 and the end of October 2006, resulting in a surge of development and an estimated population of 43,071 in Puna by March 2007.1 This represents an annual average population growth rate of 6% compared to the 4% annual average of the previous intercensal (1990-2000) period. These population figures are probably conservative, since there are indications that both the resident population and the number of dwellings may be • under-reported by the Census and County building permit and real property tax records.2 Figure 2: Resident Population Growth in Puna 1970-2000, by Area 35,000 30,000 25,000 ~ 20,000 b ..., 15, 000 10,000 5,000 0 1970 1980 ^ Remainder of Puna ^ Volcano ^ Pahoa ^ Keaau ^ Mountain View-Kurtistown Puna Waena Subdivsions ^ Puna Mauka Subdivsions ^ Puna Makai Subdivisions 1990 2000 Census Year Source: U.S. Census Bureau Puna Waena =Hawaiian Paradise Park, Orchidland, Ainaloa, Puna Mauka =Hawaiian Acres, Fern Forest, Eden Roc Puna Makai = Nanawale, Leilani, Hawaiian Beaches Remainder of Puna =Smaller settlements and other subdivisions that are not named above. Some subdivisions were not enumerated separately until the 1990 or 2000 Census. • t See Appendix A for the methodology used to estimate population from building permit records. a Community Management Associates, Inc., Puna Community Development Plan Technical Report, January 1992, pp. 62-63 -3- The rate of development in the nonconforming subdivisions appears to be influenced • by several factors: • Puna's rural, semi-tropical setting holds allure for many visitors to Hawai `i who wish to retire or are looking for a lifestyle change. With the decline of sugar and agriculture in the late 1970s and early 1980s and a stronger national economy, Hawai`i's tourism flourished. As more people visited Hawaii, many decided to become residents. The lots in Puna's subdivisions are among the most affordable properties in the Islands on which to build asingle-family dwelling. While land values in the County of Hawaii have increased over the years, the rise has not been as steep as in other parts of Hawaii. Between 1980 and 1990, Hawaii County saw a 58.7% increase in the median single-family home value. The State saw a 107% increase in the same timeframe. • For many Hawai `i residents, Puna offers the "last chance" to own property and a home in the Islands. In addition to visitors, the relatively low land prices also attract buyers from other parts of Hawaii who are willing to relocate and accept a lower standard of infrastructure support for the chance to own asingle-family home. • The rate of growth is affected by short-term economic cycles, both in Hawai `i and on the Mainland. Puna has few residents who have moved here from other countries in recent decades. As the U.S. and local economies prosper and interest rates remain low, building activity in Puna increases. These conditions have prevailed in recent years. • Ouer the long term, the rate of growth is influenced by investment in infrastructure and in the creation of employment opportunities within Puna and in nearby areas, especially Hilo. In general, the greater the amenities for residential living and the greater the possibilities for employment, the more likely it is that more houses will be built in Puna. Influences on the pattern of subdivision lot development It is clear from the graph in Figure 2 that most of Puna's population growth in the past several decades has occurred in the nonconforming subdivisions, especially in Puna Waena, which includes the subdivisions of Hawaiian Paradise Park, Orchidland, and Ainaloa. Hawaiian Beaches, located in Puna Makai, has also contributed to a significant share of population growth. To discern the factors that influence the pattern of development growth in the subdivisions,~Geographic Information System software was used to test hypothetical factors by applying them retroactively to see how well they predicted the development growth • -4- • pattern over the past several decades. This process suggests that the pattern is not influenced by a single factor, but instead by a combination of the following factors. s Access to paved highways and roads increases the likelihood of development. More than half (54.7%) of Puna's subdivision lots are within one-half mile of a major State-owned highway, and the greater share of these have access to Highway 130. These lots have a greater tendency to be occupied by dwellings than those that are more distant from a highway. The distance factor is mitigated somewhat if a more remote lot has convenient access to a well- maintained paved subdivision road with a direct connection to a highway. For example, the three privately-owned mauka-makai roads in Hawaiian Paradise Park and Kahakai Boulevard in Hawaiian Beaches provide good connections to Highway 130 from lots that are at the makai ends of those two subdivisions. By comparison, many of the lots in the mauka subdivisions have less favorable road connections to Highway 11. • Smaller lots are more likely to be developed than larger ones. Lot sizes in Puna's nonconforming subdivisions range in size from about 8,000 square feet to several acres. The subdivisions with smaller lots tend to have a greater degree of development. There may be two reasons for this. First, smaller lots are generally more affordable, since there is less land area; and second, the smaller lots are more likely to be located closer to the ocean and/or to established urban settlements where services are available. The second of these reasons, then, is linked to other factors that influence the development growth pattern. • Proximity to Hilo increases the likelihood of development. Puna serves largely as a bedroom community to the city of Hilo. Many Puna residents commute to Hilo for employment, for access to services and resources, and for shopping and entertainment.4 The northern boundary of the Puna District is less than 10 road miles from Hilo. The center of Kea`au is only 8 miles from Hilo International Airport. The subdivisions located at the northern end of the Highway 130 corridor -Hawaiian Paradise Park, Orchidland and Ainaloa -attract residents who wish to have convenient access to Hilo. Access to private or municipal water increases the likelihood of development. Most of the nonconforming subdivisions were developed without centralized water systems so that lot owners must rely on individual wells or water catchment systems, combined with water deliveries and access to emergency spigots during drought conditions. Hawaiian Beaches, Vacationland and Kapoho Beach Lots, all of which have a relatively high percentage of developed lots, are the only major residential subdivisions with access to a centralized water system. Elsewhere, municipal water service is available at scattered locations served by the Kea`au -Mountain View, Pahoa, Kalapana and Kapoho systems. County water mains extend along Highway 11 and Highway 130, so subdivision lots that s The testing process was used to construct a model to project the future development growth pattern based on current trends that is shown in Figure 3. The methodology is explained in Appendix B. a The commuting pattern is reflected in U.S. Census data, as well as in a survey of Puna residents who participated in the July 2006 public workshop for the Puna Community Development Plan. -5- are close to these highways can gain access to municipal water at relatively reasonable cost. Lower volcanic /seismic hazard increases the likelihood of development. The effects of the Kilauea volcano, including exposure to VOG, can be felt by everyone in the Puna District. The greatest risk to human habitation, however, lies along the East Rift Zone and lands to the south. Approximately 44% of Puna's subdivision lots in Puna lie within hazard zones 1 or 2, which are the areas that are exposed to the greatest potential of volcanic and seismic hazard. The remaining subdivision lots lie in hazard zone 3. Aside from implications for public safety, hazard zone 1 and 2 classifications also adversely affect an existing or prospective owner's ability to obtain a loan and insurance for developing their lot, especially for residential purposes. Proximity to an older urban settlement increases the likelihood of development. The villages of Kea`au, Pahoa and Volcano were established prior to the nonconforming subdivisions and have included, from their beginnings, some community and/or commercial uses. All are conveniently located adjacent to a major highway. Since Kea`au and Pahoa have even more strategic locations at the juncture of major highways, they developed as regional service centers to a greater degree than Volcano. Today, these three villages continue to provide services and function as activity centers for the nearby subdivisions, in part because the subdivisions themselves do not contain designated areas or adequate facilities to accommodate community services. However, the subdivision lots that are closer to the older villages are desirable locations for residential development because of the relative proximity of these services. Proximity to developed lots increases the likelihood of development. There is a tendency for a vacant lot to develop when it is adjacent to at least one developed lot. In this case, "adjacent" can mean a lot that is directly across the street (but not a highway). The apparent explanation for this is that people like the sociability and feeling of security that comes with neighbors when they choose a site for their residence. Those who prefer a greater degree of privacy may prefer a relatively remote location in one of the subdivisions with larger lots or less development. Nevertheless, since the typical Puna subdivision has a lot size of at least one acre, it is possible to achieve a measure of privacy with a combination of building setbacks and screening walls and/or landscaping while still having some proximity to neighbors. The development pattern suggests that this is the condition that most prefer. Proximity to the shoreline increases the likelihood of development. Visual and physical access to the shoreline holds much appeal in Hawaii's residential real estate market. The two subdivisions whose lots are within one-half mile of the shoreline - Kapoho Beach Lots and Vacationland Hawaii -are those that have seen the greatest percentage of lot development. Two larger shoreline-fronting subdivisions -- Hawaiian Beaches and Hawaiian Paradise Park -also have a relatively high percentage of developed lots. Although some of the dots in Hawaiian Beaches and Hawaiian Paradise Park are more than a few miles from -6- the shoreline, the paved mauka-makai roads within the subdivisions improve accessibility to the shoreline. 2. Current Conditions and Projected Trends Where things stand Puna today serves largely as a bedroom community; i.e., most of the people who reside in Puna commute to the County seat Hilo for employment, supplies, and services. While about half of the lots in the nonconforming subdivisions meet the minimum lot size (1-acre) standard for the State Agricultural District, the real use of many, if not most, of the developed lots is purely residential. Yet, there is active agricultural use on many of the lots, primarily the production of fruits and ornamentals for export. Puna's climate, availability of relatively affordable agricultural lots, and proximity to Hilo's transportation terminals sustain the growth of this activity. At present, there is little direct conflict between adjoining residential and agricultural uses because most subdivisions still have a high percentage of undeveloped lots (see Appendix A.) Nevertheless, most of the subdivisions have lots with narrow frontages of 150 feet or less, so as infill development occurs, the subdivision takes on a suburban residential character, albeit with substandard streets and facilities. Projection of current trends Infill development is occurring unevenly throughout the district. In general, as noted above, subdivision lots that have better access to paved streets and highways, to municipal water lines, and to services, are filling out at a faster pace than the more remote subdivision lots. The factors influencing the rate and pattern of development growth in Puna were formulated into a model to project how the district might build out in future years if current trends continue. Figure 3 shows a time sequence of the projected development pattern that reflects the density of development by color-coding the developed lots according to lot size; i.e., pale yellow-green represents agricultural lots of 20 acres or more and successively "warmer" colors in the yellow-to-red range represent dwelling lots of correspondingly diminishing lot size. The emerging pattern in Figure 3 indicates the likelihood of more intensive development bordering either side of the Highway 130 corridor extending frbm Maku`u to Kea`au. By 2030, the current trends scenario also projects that most of the remaining vacant lots in Volcano and Hawaiian Beaches will be developed with dwellings. Alternatives to the current trends scenario Current trends may be affected or shaped by growth management policies. For Puna, two types of policies have been proposed in previous plans: • The County of Hawaii General Plan designates "urban expansion areas" adjoining the State Urban District of the towns of Kea`au and Pahoa. The 7- Figure 4 Projection of Current Trends in Lot Development through 2030 Lot Size (in acres) ~ o.oo-.so 0.51 -1.00 1.01 - 3.00 3.07 -20.00 20.01 and up • ~' .~ftr - s ~ 3 ~ } ~ .,~,~. ~ \ ~ t" ''''''~~} L ~~~~ ~ ~ yY ~ „,.`~~pp'~ ~+~, ~', Y'~i. 'f,L: X ., • • purpose of the urban expansion areas is to direct future urban development to locations close to existing infrastructure systems and services where an urban settlement pattern is already established. According to the General Plan, the urban expansion area "allows for a mix of high density, medium density, low density, industrial, industrial-commercial, and/or open space designations".5 In contrast, the lot pattern, land use designations and infrastructure support allow for little diversity of land use or density in the nonconforming subdivisions, most of which are zoned for agricultural use, despite the prevalence of low-density residential use. Both the draft Puna Community Development Plan (1995) and the Puna Regional Circulation Study (2005) call for the creation of new."village centers" within existing nonconforming subdivisions.s The Circulation Study recommends this as a means to reduce the demand for the local trips that add to the congestion of Puna's highways. The General Plan also calls for the establishment of small neighborhood commercial areas within existing nonconforming subdivisions, and designates locations within Hawaiian Paradise Park, Orchidland and Hawaiian Beaches for this purpose.? Both policies have limitations and face challenges as an approach to managing or reshaping development growth in the nonconforming subdivisions: • Urban expansion areas are appropriate locations to satisfy Puna's need for higher-density housing, including special needs housing (e.g., for the elderly or • disabled). The nonconforming subdivisions cannot accommodate this demand very well because they lack suitable development sites with the necessary zoning and access to infrastructure and services. Essentially, the urban expansion areas and the vacant lots in nonconforming subdivisions serve. very different housing markets. For this reason, housing development in the urban expansion areas would not be likely to compete with or significantly dampen development activity in the nonconforming subdivisions. Urban expansion areas are also suitable locations for expanded commercial and light industrial development and regional community facilities. Both Kea`au and Pahoa already function largely as regional centers in that respect. On the other hand, if all of these uses are concentrated in these two towns, then there is less demand for the formation of proposed "village centers" within the nonconforming subdivisions. New village centers within the nonconforming subdivisions would not necessarily affect the rate of development of vacant lots throughout the subdivision, but they would be likely to stimulate earlier residential construction on the lots in the immediate vicinity of the village center, thereby influencing the development pattern in the subdivision. First, the commercial uses in the village center would require supporting infrastructure improvements that could also benefit nearby lot owners. Second, the availability of new services within convenient distance s County of Hawaii General Plan, page 14-7. • s Puna Community Development Plan (October 1995 draft), pp. 3-21 and 3-22; Puna Regional Circulation Study (November 2005) County of Hawaii General Plan, page 14-26. -9- would attract potential residents. Thus, the creation of a village center can influence the pattern, if not the rate, of development in the subdivision. However, this would not prevent the eventual development of the remaining vacant lots that are farther from the village center, unless there is a land pooling or transfer of development rights program. This is discussed in Section 4. New village centers cannot form spontaneously within existing subdivisions. In addition to the general lack of sites with adequate supporting infrastructure and necessary zoning, the lot ownership and street pattern can be a deterrent. A few subdivisions contain parcels under single or community ownership that could be developed as village centers, but land assembly or even street realignment may be necessary in some instances if a subdivision owners' association wishes to form a village center. In addition, some form of government assistance or involvement by a nonprofit organization may be necessary to attract commercial investment to a village center. This, also, is discussed in Section 4. To develop an effective growth management strategy out of these policies, and to see that these policies are complementary rather than competing, a variety of implementation tools described in the following sections can be put to work. 3. Discouraging Further Subdivision and Speculation Further subdivision activity in Puna -unless on a very limited scale, and primarily in urban areas -would exacerbate the significant growth management problem that this district already faces. From their inception, the lots in Puna's nonconforming subdivisions were regarded more as a commodity than as a site for actual residential or agricultural use. Speculative activity has increased the value of lots, which is not necessarily to the benefit of those owners who wish to use their lot for agricultural activity. It also makes the purchase of lots less affordable to people who see Puna as perhaps their last opportunity for homeownership in Hawaii. The following measures are recommended to abate further subdivision and real estate speculation in Puna. District-wide re-zoning The County of Hawaii organizes its agricultural zoning regulations into districts based on minimum allowable lot size, as follows: Zoning District Minimum Lot Size Comment AG-la 1 acre Prevalent in Puna Waena and Puna subdivisions with smaller lot sizes FA-2a 2 acres Not ap lied in Puna AG-3a 3 acres Prevalent in Puna Mauka subdivisions AG-5a 5 acres Prevalent on lar er tracts throu hout Puna AG-l0a 10 acres Prevalent on larger tracts throughout Puna AG-20a 20 acres Prevalent on larger tracts throughout Puna AG-#a >20 acres Not applied in Puna; used on very lar a tracts of lands (e.g., ranches) Nearly 13,000 acres of Puna's AG-1 zoning district include lots that are at least 2 acres in size, which means that they could be further subdivided according to the zoning regulations. Approximately 8,870 acres of the AG-1 zone consists of lots that are larger • • • - 10- than 20 acres. Each of the other agricultural zoning districts that are applied to Puna confers similar subdivision potential. In all, more than 36,000 acres of agricultural-zoned land in Puna have the potential to be further subdivided under present zoning designations. To some extent, the availability of a large number of existing vacant lots in the nonconforming subdivisions has probably deterred the subdivision of additional agricultural lands. New subdivisions must comply with current subdivision standards for infrastructure, which is a cost that would no doubt be reflected in the sales price of the lot. Some buyers may be willing to pay the added cost for the improvements, but a substantially lower price for an existing lot would probably be more attractive to most people who are looking for property in Puna. Nevertheless, this cost advantage does not necessarily apply to smaller new subdivisions that do not require major infrastructure improvements; for example, the subdivision of a lot into two or three smaller lots that share the same existing road frontage. When taken individually, these smaller scale subdivisions may not seem to leave much imprint on Puna, but on a cumulative basis, they can add significantly to Puna's development "sprawl" pattern. District-wide rezoning to achieve a closer match between existing lot sizes, and the maximum lot size allowed by the various agricultural zoning districts would prevent widespread subdivision in Puna. If an owner wished to subdivide for certain purposes - such as to settle an estate by conveying parcels to heirs, or to lease a property for a particular agricultural activity -then they could make a case to do so by requesting re- • zoning for an agricultural zoning designation that would allow them to subdivide into smaller lots. Unlike subdivision, re-zoning requires public hearings and the approval of the Planning Commission and the County Council, so it undergoes a greater degree of review. Figure 4 shows what such adistrict-wide zoning map would look like. The table below provides the number of agricultural-zoned acres and lots that would be affected by the re-zoning. RE-ZONE TO: FA-2 AG-3a AG-5 AG-l0a AG-20a to AG-2000a AG-la lots 356 350 182 50 80 acres 758 1202 1094 652 8 870 ~ AG-3a lots 274 74 182 w acres 681 986 7 960 AG-5a lots 109 289 ~ acres N 1498 18 701 AG-l0a lots 50 acres 6 473 AG-20a lots 151 acres 27 181 Figure 4 also proposes that the present AG-la zoning for the Hawaiian Beaches • subdivision be changed to the County's RS-10 (Residential) zoning district. This is recommended because Hawaiian Beaches is the only of Puna's nonconforming subdivisions -11- in the State Urban District that is still in a County agricultural zone. The typical lot size in Hawaiian Beaches is 12,000 square feet, which is far below the minimum lot size for the AG-1a district. Hawaiian Beaches is also one of the most developed subdivisions and the predominant use is clearly residential rather than agricultural. Figure 4: Re-Zoning to Mateh F.Yictinar T.nt C;ten Another approach, either in combination with or in lieu of down-zoning, would be a "one-time subdivision" provision in the County Code, similar to those of the counties of Kauai and Maui, which allows a property to be subdivided only once, according to a sliding scale for minimum lot sizes, depending on the size of the original lot area. First adopted in 1972, Kaua`i's Agriculture District regulations incorporate measures that are designed to carry out the purpose of limiting subdivision of agricultural lands and restricting the number of units that can be built. The key regulation is a sliding scale limiting the number of lots that can be created in subdividing a parcel of Agriculture land. The sliding scale is structured to allow some residential development on each existing parcel, but to discourage wholesale development of large acreages. There are two additional limitations. First, contiguous parcels under single ownership as of 1972 are treated as a single lot for subdivision purposes. For example, contiguous parcels of 200 and • • -12- "One-time" subdivision of agricultural lands 300 acres owned by a single corporation as of 1972 would be treated as one 500-acre parcel when calculating the number and minimum size of lots that could be created through subdivision. Second, an agricultural lot may be subdivided only once. In 1998, Maui County adopted a sliding scale regulation for agricultural lands that is in some ways more limiting than Kaua`i's. In addition, Maui has stricter limits on the number of dwellings that may be built on a lot. If the County of Hawaii were to adopt a "one-time subdivision" regulation, it would probably apply to all agricultural lands on the island, since this is an issue that cuts across several districts, not just Puna. On the other hand, the re-zoning of agricultural lands, as described in the previous section, could be limited to just the Puna district. Disincentives to speculation in building and re-sales As mentioned earlier, many of the original buyers of lots in Puna's nonconforming subdivisions were probably speculating on future value of the real estate, and this motivation probably persists with many subsequent lot buyers. Speculative strategies take different forms. The simplest strategy is to realize gain on a vacant lot without making any property improvements by purchasing it when prices are relatively low and re-selling it during a peak demand period when prices rise. Another strategy seeks to optimize re-sale value by building a dwelling on the lot, then re-selling it to a buyer who is looking for a permanent or second residence or a rental income property. Part of a successful speculation strategy is to buy the property at a low price, preferably at less-than-market value. One source is through the auction of distressed properties that are in foreclosure due to loans or property taxes in arrears, but it requires some sophistication and advance research for a prospective buyer to come out ahead in these auctions. The County plays a passive role in this process by auctioning properties that are in foreclosure due to non-payment of property taxes. Between 1990 and 2006, approximately 1,1231ots in Puna were auctioned in such foreclosures. About half were sold to buyers of multiple lots, most likely for speculative re-sale and/or building. This practice contributes to the growth pressure and land price inflation in Puna. If the County held rather than immediately auctioned these properties, the properties could be used as land- swaps for acquiring needed public rights-of--way, sites for public facilities, or for land pooling to rearrange the development pattern in a subdivision, which is discussed in Section 4. To enable the County to take this approach, State legislation is required.8 • Another means to discourage speculation, which also requires State legislation, is to impose a higher conveyance tax rate on agricultural and residential properties that are re- sold within a short period, with exceptions for properties providing affordable housing. The State Legislature has considered several bills of this kind in recent sessions, but none have been adopted. In the 2007 Legislative Session there was a measure (HB252, HD1, SD1) that would have increased the conveyance tax rate on the purchase of residences that are ineligible for homeowner's property tax exemption; i.e., "investor" properties. While the bill did not pass, it remains active for consideration in the 2008 Legislative Session. a This is based on an informal, oral opinion given by Bobby Jean Leithead-Todd, then Deputy Corporation Counsel for the County of Hawaii, in an interview dated March 30, 2007. -13- Informed buyers also play a part in discouraging speculation if they are purchasing with the intention to use the lot for their own agricultural and/or residential purposes. Many of the original lot buyers may have intended to build a home on the property some day, perhaps even to engage in some type of agriculture. However, disclosure requirements for real estate transactions at that time were minimal compared to what is required today, and buyers would often purchase a lot "sight unseen". Some buyers had the mistaken perception that the County is obligated to improve the streets and infrastructure in the nonconforming subdivisions, even though these facilities are privately-owned. Others may have purchased a lot with a dwelling, not realizing that there was no building permit for the dwelling or that it was not built according to the approved plan or to code. To assure that a prospective buyer is fully informed, the seller should be required to disclose the condition, ownership and maintenance responsibility for the roads and other infrastructure, and the buyer should acknowledge and accept that neither the County nor the State assume responsibility for bringing privately-owned infrastructure up to current standards. Also, the seller should be required to show evidence of a building permit for all structures on the property prior to closing on the sale. State enabling legislation is necessary to implement these disclosure requirements. Code enforcement Code enforcement is directed toward illegal rather than nonconforming (i.e., legal "grandfathered") uses. Concerns about code enforcement that were raised in previous planning efforts for Puna and the recent Working Group reports focus on dwellings built without permits and unauthorized commercial uses along major roadways. As mentioned earlier, it is widely believed that many dwellings in Puna were built without building permits. In a rural area such as Puna, where development is very spread out and road access to some remote areas is quite difficult, building activity may go undetected by County inspectors or even other residents in places where there are no immediate neighbors. Also, temporary structures or facilities that do not meet a conventional definition of "dwelling" are sometimes used for habitation. As a practical matter, enforcement to remove dwellings in less visible and accessible areas is difficult, especially since many of these dwellings have no utility connections and can easily be re- built if they are a relatively simple or "temporary" structures. It is generally a more complicated process to achieve effective enforcement against zoning code violations that do not involve permanent structures. This applies also to unauthorized commercial uses along highways that occur in parked vehicles or temporary vending stands, even though they are readily visible. The first thing to determine is whether the illegal activity is on private property or within the public right-of--way. If the activity occurs within a public right-of--way, it is most likely a violation of the County's traffic code, in which case a police officer rather than a zoning inspector is responsible for issuing the citation. Hiring additional zoning inspectors to gather evidence certainly plays a part in improving code enforcement, but there are special challenges when no permanent structures are involved. As part of "due process" the inspector must give the violator written notice that allows a reasonable time to correct the violation before penalties are imposed. If there are no structures, the notice could demand an immediate "cease and • - 14- • desist". Since there are no permanent structures, it is easy to comply with this order, but it is just as easy to repeat the violation, perhaps even at a different location. There are ways to address the problem of repeated violations in the enforcement regulations, but it can require a great deal of vigilance by inspectors if the violator is persistent. Often, persistent violators exercise their rights through the appeal process, which demands the additional time and expense of litigation and court costs. In egregious cases, the County may get Court permission to impose a lien on the property or deny licenses and other County permits to collect accumulated fines and achieve code compliance. Despite the challenges, hiring additional zoning inspectors and legal staff for more effective code enforcement against illegal dwellings and unauthorized commercial uses along the highway would be worth the investment for the County to meet the goals of growth management and public safety. As recently pointed by the Planning Department to the State, unaccounted new dwellings and undercounted residents lead to misrepresentation of the actual growth pressures in Puna and the projected need for new facilities, such as schools.9 As for unauthorized commercial uses on Puna's highways, the traffic hazards they pose are part of a growing highway safety concern. 4. Promoting the Formation of Village Centers At present, the term "village center" represents a general concept that is not well- defined. Previous references and planning efforts suggest that village centers vary in size and range of uses, depending on the need and context. Also, while the focus is on • community-serving commercial and public uses, such as schools and parks, it has also been suggested that village centers include clustered and/or special needs housing. This is partly to promote a more "walkable" community, with access to mass transit, as well as to provide a wider range of housing opportunity. It is useful to begin with some general principles to define the location and form of village centers. Defining the types and locations for town centers and village centers The typology proposed below expresses a hierarchy for village centers that is based on location, size and functional attributes. It is meant to follow the recommendations of the Land Use/Village Centers Working Group report. Reinforce the role of Puna's two largest existing urban settlements - Kea`au and Pahoa - as Regional Town Centers to provide a wide range of services for the Puna district. • Identify Community Village Centers to provide a more limited range of services in smaller existing urban settlements and in large subdivisions that are experiencing the greatest rates of build-out. • Facilitate the development of smaller-scale Neighborhood Village Centers in underserved remote communities and in subdivisions with relatively small lot sizes and significant rates of population growth. • 9 Letter from Christopher J. Yuen, Planning Director, County of Hawaii, to Laura Thielen, Director of the Office of Planning, State of Hawaii, Apri120, 2007. -15- Below is a more detailed description of each type of village center. The Land • Use/Village Centers Working Group report recommended that specific types of uses - e.g., "big box" stores and "fast-food" franchises - be excluded from most village centers. This concern can be addressed by legally-defensible design restrictions, such as limitations on floor area and vehicular access. Limited visibility and access from major highways will discourage big chain stores and franchises, which depend heavily on "drive-by" customers. Type Regional Town Center Community Village Center Neighborhood Village Center Ainaloa, Kurtistown, Mountain (Potential): Hawaiian Beaches, Locations Kea`au, Pahoa. View, Hawaiian Paradise Park Orchidland, Nanawale, Leilani, Kapoho Glenwood an area (no more than two locations), , , between Kaimu and Opihikao and Volcano. , and Hawaiian Paradise Park.lo Service Area 35,000 to 50,000 residents 7,000 to 15,000 residents 3,000 to 6,000 residents Po ulation More than 40 tenant spaces for Typical full range of retail and personal 20 to 40 small tenant spaces for 5 to15 small tenant spaces for Uses services, repair shops and other retail and personal services, convenience retail and personal li ht industrial uses repair shops services Land Area More than 30 acres 10-30 acres 5-10 acres Commercial Up to 250,000 square feet Up to 150,000 square feet Floor Area aggregate, but no tenant spaces aggregate, but no tenant spaces Up to 50,000 square feet lar er than 50 000 s uare feet. lar er than 25 000 s uare feet. Regional park; schools (all Neighborhood park, elementary grades); community hall, Community park, elementary school, multi-purpose meeting theater; outdoor events area; or middle school, community room or (minimum) place to bed-and-breakfast homes and center and outdoor events area; congregate or post community Other Uses small inns; elderly or other bed-and-breakfast homes and notices; outdoor events area special needs housing; transit small inns; elderly or other (e.g., barbeques and farmer's hub; medical facility with special needs housing; transit markets); small bed-and- emergency room; police and fire stop; medical clinic; walking breakfast homes; transit (or station; walking and bicycling and bicycling paths. para-transit) stop; connections aths. to walkin and bic clin aths. Vernacular architecture that Informal vernacular respects the historic context and scale of the community; , architecture that utilizes light industrial uses on natural exterior materials and Informal, vernacular periphery to avoid building earth-tone colors and respects architecture that is small in Design forms or activities that conflict the context and scale of the scale and reflects a rural Character with the pedestrian-oriented community, especially where residential ambience, using character in the Town Center historic structures are present, natural exterior materials and core; small repair shops in such as in Volcano Village and earth-tone colors. Town Center core subject to the older area of Mountain erformance/desi criteria. View. Access to one or more paved Access to one or more paved roads; commercial or public Access to a paved road, except roads; commercial or public uses without direction that there should be no direct Access uses without direction driveway access to Highway 11 access or visibility from either driveway access to Highway 11 or Highway 130; no "drive- Highway 11 or Highway 130; or Highway 130. thru" commercial use. no "drive-thru" commercial use. • io Hawaiian Paradise Park may have a Neighborhood Village Center in the makai area in addition to the two • Community Village Centers in the mauka area of that subdivision. -16- • • • Figure 5 Village and Town Center Locations, by Type Village Centers Regional Community ~ Neighborhood ~ Community Development Plan Boundary ~ [.ovation Subject to Site Plan Review Subdivisions ~ Future Loction Subject to Community Association initiative Major Highways The circles on the above map indicate village or town centers whose locations are relatively fixed, based on the present use pattern, zoning and/or a use designation made by deed covenant or subdivision master plan. Indicators of "present use" include public facilities such as parks and schools and residential density of more than 4 dwellings per acre, as well as commercial and light industrial uses. Indicators of zoning include State Urban District designation and Special Permits, as well as County zoning classifications for commercial, industrial and residential use. The identified sites for village centers in -17- Hawaiian Paradise Park are examples of designations made by deed covenant and a • subdivision master plan, even though there is little or no evidence yet of actual village center formation at these locations. Figure 5 indicates with a rectangular symbol several sites for potential neighborhood village centers whose precise locations have not been determined by the affected subdivision owners' association in a master plan or other document. Land pooling can be used to assemble the land area for the village center, as discussed in the following section. The site for the proposed neighborhood village center in the Kaimu-Opihikao vicinity (represented by an encircled "x") would not necessarily require land assembly or approval by an owners' association, but would require site review and approval by the County. Voluntary land pooling An association of lot owners in a nonconforming subdivision can undertake a direct role in forming a village center within their subdivision, while at the same time addressing the problems created by the sprawl development pattern and substandard infrastructure, by forming a limited liability partnership to perform a land pooling, also known as "land readjustment." Land pooling is a method whereby the ownership of scattered or irregular plots of land is pooled, roads and main infrastructure are built, and the land ownership is then re-allocated into new plots, either by subdivision or by condominium property regime. Land pooling can be used as a tool if the subdivision contains insufficient space for necessary rights-of--way for road or other infrastructure improvements or lacks a suitable • site for a designated "village center" and/or community facilities such as a park or school. Professor Frank Schnidman, an internationally recognized expert on land pooling who has advised numerous subdivision associations and municipalities throughout the U.S. and abroad on the mechanics and procedures for a land pooling project, investigated the feasibility of applying land pooling to Puna's nonconforming subdivisions based on a pilot study of a section of Hawaiian Paradise Park. Appendix C provides a summary of the pilot study, including background information, a description of the two "village center" scenarios, and the comparative results of these scenarios. As noted in Appendix C, Hawaiian Paradise Park contains community-owned parcels that have already been set aside for community facilities, and adjoining privately owned parcels that have been reserved for possible future commercial use. Each of these parcels is large enough to accommodate the formation of a Community Village Center, including some higher density housing, as well as community and commercial uses. For this reason, the pilot study considered two scenarios: one that expands the scope of village center by using land pooling to cluster housing near the village center while leaving outlying land area in larger-lot agricultural and preservation use, and another that contains the village center to two adjoining 20-acre lots owned by the community association and the original subdivision developer, and intensifies the use of the village center. The first scenario draws from the example of a subdivision near Portland, Oregon that went through land readjustment to cure conditions similar to those in Puna. In the Oregon case, the subdivision was organized into two overlay zones: one for "rural • - 18- residential" and other for "woodlots", intended for timber production. 11 In Puna, the latter could be "agriculture" rather than "woodlots". In the rural residential zone, several houses were clustered within an area formerly occupied by a single original lot, up to the maximum density to support the use of septic systems for the dwellings. In the woodlot zone, residents were required to meet certain timber production standards in order to live in that area. At the same time, the taxation rate of this land is at the forest value, not the more expensive residential rate. As adapted to Puna, properties in the agricultural overlay zone would qualify for a lower property tax rate for dedicated agricultural lands. The rural residential lands would be assessed at comparable residential values and the pay the residential tax rate; however, owner-occupants in the rural residential zone would still qualify for the County's homeowner's property tax reduction. Figure 6 C7 Scenario t (top rendering) consists of a 40-acre village center with commercial uses, a community center and village green, a neighborhood park, elderly housing and an elementay school. Housing is clustered around the village center (up to 4 units per acre) so that larger lots farther from the village center can be preserved for agricultural use. Scenario 2 (bottom) maintains the lot sizes for dwellings throughout the subdivision, but intensifies uses in the village center by increasing commercial uses and adding multi-family housing. ii Nelson, Arthur C. with J. Richard Recht. "Inducing the Residential Land Market to Grow Timber in an Antiquated Rural Subdivision," Journal of the American Planning Association, Autumn 1988, p. 535. - 19- Few Puna subdivisions have the same opportunity as Hawaiian Paradise Park to form a village center on existing parcels because typical parcel sizes are relatively small andlor are not community-owned. Land pooling is a method to assemble a site for a neighborhood village center in those subdivisions. As in the example of Hawaiian Paradise Park, the use of land pooling can also be expanded to rearrange the lot pattern to cluster housing near the village center and keep outlying land areas as larger tracts for agricultural or preservation purposes. During Professor Schnidman's visit, he met with the Volcano Community Association to discuss how land pooling, combined with conservation easements held by a land trust, can also be used to acquire and preserve tracts of forest. The tools, procedures and elements for a successful land pooling project for these various purposes will be provided in a report to be submitted by Professor Schnidman as a resource manual for community associations and the County. The role of the County, State and Federal governments The County, State and Federal governments can support land pooling projects for the formation of new village centers and the enhancement or expansion of existing village or town centers in a variety of ways: The County can provide commercial zoning or use permits for existing uses that do not presently have appropriate entitlements, and for proposed uses at appropriate nearby locations, provided that the size and use of the expansion area conforms to the criteria applicable to the type of village center at that location. Conversely, the County can (and should) deny Special Permits and • zone changes for commercial or light industrial use on sites that are not within designated town and village centers. If the area of the existing use, proposed expanded use, or proposed new village is outside of the State Urban District and exceeds the maximum of 15 acres to qualify for direct County approval, then State Land Use Commission (SLUG) approval is necessary. The County can assist by joining with the landowner in the Special Use permit request or the petition for a land use district boundary amendment. As an alternative, the County can consult with the State about establishing a "floating zone" provision in the State Land Use Law (Chapter 205, Hawaii Revised Statutes) that would enable the adoption of special "rural town/village" standards for locations meeting certain criteria in the State Agriculture District or State Rural District, subject to a review and approval process that is simpler than the present method of boundary amendment.12 Other counties besides Hawaii would probably be interested in such a provision because there are many older rural settlements throughout the islands in the Agriculture District, such as former plantation camps, which are nonconforming. In many ways, this older iz Chapter 205, HRS, already allows lands in the State Agricultural District to be consolidated and replatted into lots than are smaller than 1 acre, provided that there is no overall increase in the number of lots and the County determines that the existing lot pattern creates "economic hardship." (See Section 205-5.) However, this does not clearly allow the type of rural village that actually exists throughout Hawaii and could be a model for re-platting Puna's nonconforming subdivisions. -20- • • form of rural settlement is preferable to the sprawling pattern of large-lot "agricultural" subdivisions, yet the regulatory process discourages this approach. • The County can revise zoning and development codes, as necessary, to conform to and implement the use and design criteria described for each of the village center types, and for village centers that are proposed for Special Design District treatment. The County can facilitate the development of apedestrian-supportive environment in existing town and village centers by investing in walkways, bicycle facilities, "park-once" lots, landscape improvements, themed signage programs and transit stops in the town/village center. The State and Federal governments can also assist by providing financial support for these facilities and by avoiding highway improvements within town/village centers that conflict with these pedestrian- and transit-oriented goals. The County can encourage the State to locate its community facilities, such as public schools, in designated village centers, and to design them in conformance to the criteria applicable to the type of village center at that location. Of particular interest are the criteria used by the Department of Education (DOE) to design the size and select the location for new schools. At present, these criteria favor large schools at Urban District locations next to major roads. Unless these criteria are modified, it is very unlikely that new elementary schools will be built within nonconforming subdivision, even if village centers are formed. ~ The County can retain lots that are in foreclosure for delinquent real property tax payments rather than having them auctioned for sale to the highest bidder (see page 13), so that they can be used for relocation purposes when other properties are acquired for future rights-of--way, public facilities or land assembly related to village center development. As mentioned earlier, State legislation is necessary to enable this. • The County and the State can provide technical assistance to community organizations and partnerships of existing landowners of a subdivision who wish to assemble lots for the site of a village center by means of land pooling or transfer of development rights. This would include legal and financial advice that is related to County or State legal requirements and tax policies, although the community association or partnership would be responsible for hiring their own legal counsel and financial advisors for the implementation of a land pooling project and/or development of a village center. • The County, and perhaps the State, can provide loan guarantees, assist in securing loan guarantees, or make outright grants to community associations or partnerships for the development of necessary infrastructure for the village center. In Scottsdale, Arizona, for example, the city offers owners' associations of substandard subdivisions loans or grants of up to $20,000 per lot to fund improvements.13 • Alternatively, the Federal government can make loans and loan guarantees available to incorporated subdivision owners' associations through the U.S. is Salveson, David and Douglas Porter. "The Ungrateful Dead," Planning, May 1996, Vol. 62, Issue 5, p8. -21- Department of Agriculture's Rural Community Assistance Corporation. The State might also be able to provide loans and loan guarantees, but State legislation would be necessary to establish and identify the source of this fund. Most likely, it would be administered by the Hawaii Housing Finance & Development Corporation (HHFDC). The Federal and State governments have greater fiscal capability to assist in this way than the County because of their greater borrowing capacity. The County, with the agreement of the community association, could declare a village center site in a nonconforming subdivision as a "blighted area", which would designate it as a redevelopment area. This route has been taken in other jurisdictions with such subdivisions in order to fund major infrastructure improvements. i4 It is unclear, however, whether this would yield significant benefits in a Puna subdivision, since there are no State or Federal monies available for redevelopment areas, except for those areas under the jurisdiction of the Hawai i Community Development Authority, where State bond financing and grants are available for infrastructure development. The disadvantage of this approach is loss of regulatory authority over land use and development by the community association and the County government. Urban Expansion Areas in Pahoa and Kea`au Regional Town Centers The County of Hawaii General Plan designates "urban expansion areas" adjacent to Pahoa and Kea`au. At Pahoa, the designated expansion area encircles the existing town. At Kea`au, the designated expansion area lies to the west of the existing town. These designated urban expansion areas are generally consistent with the description of Pahoa and Kea`au as "Regional Town Centers". The General Plan expresses the policies for these two towns as follows: • [There shall be] centralization of commercial activities in Pahoa Town rather than along the Pahoa By-Pass • Expanded commercial services to the needs of population growth in the Puna District shall be encouraged in Kea`au, zs The prospect of expanding Pahoa and Kea`au as envisioned in the description for a Regional Town Center is enhanced by the land ownership pattern. Last year, the County acquired a 50-acre tract in the center of Pahoa Town and is beginning the process of preparing a master plan for the area. Uses will probably include some new public facilities, but the physical arrangement of these uses to promote a walkable community, transit access and compatibility with the historic form of Pahoa Town will be just as important as the uses themselves. One of the limitations of Pahoa is its location in a volcanic risk zone 1. This may make it more difficult to attract investment and secure insurance. In particular, Federal 141bid. is County of Hawaii General Plan, p.14-26 -22- • funds to assist new housing construction and mortages may not be used in volcanic risk zones 1 and 2.is At Kea`au, the land within the urban expansion area is held by a single owner, Shipman Estate. This makes it more convenient to prepare a master plan for the urban expansion area and phase its development in a coordinated fashion. The landowner is presently engaged in the master planning process. Since zone changes are needed to implement the urban expansion, the County can regulate the amount and phasing of the expansion. Care should be taken that the amount of commercial development in these two towns does not increase too quickly or on such a scale that it absorbs all of the demand for these uses and services in the region and impedes the development of the smaller village centers. For this reason, a market study should be prepared before land use entitlements for these urban expansion areas are approved. 5. Adopting Special Design and Development Standards Identifying locations and objectives for special design or historic districts In the previous section, certain design and use controls are suggested for all designated town and village centers. While these controls would shape the scale and character of development to fit the village center typology in the context of Puna, they would still be somewhat generic rather than place-specific. In some of Puna's established town/village centers, the built form exhibits characteristics that uniquely reflect that place's history and/or natural setting. These qualities can be preserved and perpetuated by adopting, in the County zoning code, a Special Design (or Historic) District designation for those places. Each potential Special Design District has different characteristics. For this reason, the designation of the Special Design District should start with an inventory and a set of objectives. The inventory would identify: • Public places, focal points for community activity; Distinctive landscape features -water bodies, land forms; • Distinctive street trees, stands of trees and other plantings; • Prominent views to be preserved or enhanced; • Historic structures or other sites; • Building scale, type, exterior materials; • Patterns or groupings of structures, and their placement in relation to the street; • Distinctive architectural or streetscape details, including typical street cross sections and fixtures. • The inventory should include a map, supporting photographs and relevant data on structures and street conditions. is Interview with Ed Taira, County of Hawaii Office of Housing and Community Development, June 8, 2006. See also, County of Hawai i Resolution No. 314-94, adopted November 16, 1994. -23- The next step is to identify objectives for the proposed Special Design District, • addressing the following considerations: 1. Would the design guidelines apply to residential as well as commercial and public buildings? If so, broad support for the guidelines among the residents is essential. Strict architectural design standards and/or a design review process for personal residences can meet with objection. It may be necessary to have more flexible standards and/or incentive programs for residential uses in order to develop support for the design guidelines (see #6 and #9, below.) 2. What features should be preserved or enhanced? This can be determined based on the inventory. 3. What features are incompatible with the desired character of the village? This, again, can be identified in the inventory or in examples taken from elsewhere. 4. What should be the guidelines for in~ll development? What should new development look like? This may vary according to the location within the Special Design District. For example, if the development site is adjacent to a group of buildings with a distinctive design character, it would be particularly desirable for the new building to respect the scale and other design qualities of its neighbors. 5. What is an effective way to prohibit or discourage undesirable uses? Categorical prohibition on uses such as "fast food establishments" and "national chain stores" would have difficulty withstanding a legal challenge. Nevertheless, village design standards can either discourage such establishments or modify them to the point that greater reduces their "corporate identity" and visual incompatibility with the village setting. For example, it is possible to prohibit "drive-thru" facilities, limit the amount of floor area for an establishment, restrict the size and type of signage, and control facade treatment. 6. Should there be regulatory controls or voluntary guidelines? Regulatory standards are the better way to achieve compliance, but they have great difficulty being adopted if broad community support is lacking. It may be necessary to rely partially or completely on voluntary guidelines, combined with a public education program and/or incentives (see #9, below.) 7. If regulatory controls, would there be specific, prescriptive design standards or more general design principles coupled with a design review process? Specific and detailed design standards are usually appropriate only when there is a very strong and well-defined existing design character in a district. Examples would be the historic districts of Honolulu's Chinatown and Maui's Lahaina. Where architectural styles are more eclectic or represent various historical periods, more general design standards are usually applied. The latter allow more flexibility, which also results in more subjectivity in the design review process (see comments below.) 8. Who would be responsible for design review and decisions? If design standards , are adopted formally and have legal effect, some official body must be designated responsibility for making decisions or recommendations on design. Typically, there is a body appointed by the local government whose members have particular expertise in the planning and design professions and/or historic -24- preservation. In most cases, this body makes only a recommendation to the Planning Director, who makes the final decision. 9. If the guidelines are voluntary, how will they be promoted? Voluntary guidelines can be effective if there is a strong public education program to support them. Not only should all landowners and business tenants be aware of them, but also realtors who are selling or leasing property in the district. The existence of such guidelines, in fact, is often a strong selling point for a prospective business or homeowner. Guidelines can also be promoted through community and business associations. Malama o Manoa, for example, is a residential community organization that has widely disseminated a design guidebook for positive effect. The National Trust for Historic Preservation's Main Street program has been an effective means for organizing support for design guidelines among businesses in many towns and villages. Another approach is to couple the design guidelines with aloes-interest loan program for design-complying renovations or additions as an incentive to property owners. • The strongest candidates for Special Design District designation in Puna, in relative order, are: Volcano Village, which presently has a small, legally recognized historic district. According to a 1993 inventory by the Hawai i State Historic Division, Volcano has a high concentration of historic structures, mostly residential dwellings. Most of these are outside of the designated historic district. The inventory can serve as a basis for establishing both the boundaries of the Special Design District and the design parameters for development within it.l? A major decision to make, with the involvement of affected property owners and residents, is the extent to which the demolition, renovation and addition to existing historic dwellings will be controlled by design standards, and what those standards will be. In addition design standards for new developments need to be identified and described. Landscape standards are also appropriate for Volcano, although issues related to lot clearance could also be addressed in regulatory controls other than the Special Design District. This will be discussed in Working Paper #2. Pdhoa Town, which has a main street -the former highway route before the construction of the by-pass road -that still retains much of the original streetwall of plantation-era structures, as well as some significant stand-alone buildings. Most of the uses are commercial or civic. There has been no historic structure inventory on the scale or level of detail as the Volcano inventory. Some of the older buildings in Pahoa appear to be in deteriorated physical condition. Also, Pahoa does not enjoy the same level of prosperity as Volcano, so a low- interest loan program for businesses and building owners would probably be needed to complement a Special Design District. As noted earlier, the County has acquired a large tract of land within Pahoa Town, which presents a significant opportunity for community revitalization and a possible catalyst for economic activity. 17 Boone Morrison Architects, Inc., for the Department of Land and Natural Resources, Historic Preservation Division, Volcano Village Historic Building Inventory, 1993. -25- Figure 7 Potential Volcano Village Special Design District • Kea `au Town, which also has roots as a plantation town, has lost many of the buildings and other physical features of that era. Nevertheless, it retains some of the character of an older rural town with the informal arrangement of buildings and scale, roof forms, exterior materials and colors of buildings. It also includes some notable landscape features, including mature canopy trees and the line of towering roadside palms between Ola`a Community Center and Kea`au High School. As noted earlier, since most of the land in Kea`au is held by a single owner (Shipman Estate), there is an opportunity to carry an integrated design theme throughout the town without necessarily adopting a Special Design District. The landowner has retained planning and design consultants who are presently engaged in developing design guidelines. • Mountain View, which contains some buildings in a small area where there is evidence of an historic development pattern. A limitation is that Highway 11 bisects the village, which makes it difficult to preserve the design integrity of an older settlement. The more generic design guidelines for Community Village Centers, in addition to some direct measures -such as relocating Mountain View Elementary School away for the highway, as recommended by one of the Working Groups - is probably a more effective strategy for Mountain View than Special Design District designation. • • • -26- diaarie evitdGg (tsltLJ Caaatneliaa Dale) - t880a ~ 1910s 1940s ~ TAIK Panueb lR405 - V92Qs ~ Myor d,8t"u+Xs • Reducing the number of developable lots Some jurisdictions that contain nonconforming subdivisions reduce the number of developable lots by various means. For example, in Florida's Golden Gate Estates, which is the largest nonconforming subdivision in the U.S., covering 175 square miles, the County government increased the minimum lot size for a dwelling to 2.25 acres. Since the original lots are 1.25 acres in size, two adjoining lots would be necessary to build.18 Other local governments with such subdivisions, such as Anne Arundel County, Maryland, have required owners of two or more contiguous lots to combine them to meet the minimum lot size requirement.ls Often changes to the minimum lot size requirements are based on a determination that supporting infrastructure is inadequate; for example, the lack of a centralized potable water system or the poor road access. Given the amount of development that has occurred in some of Puna's nonconforming subdivisions, an attempt to impose retroactively a highly rigorous minimum lot size standard for dwelling use would probably meet with political resistance and legal challenge. It would be more feasible to increase minimum lot size standards in more remote subdivisions with the poorest infrastructure conditions, greatest exposure to natural hazards (e.g., subsidence, tsunami inundation, volcanic and seismic activity), and lowest percentages of developed lots. A caution is that the County cannot deny a landowner reasonable economic use of a property without exposure to a claim of "regulatory taking." In Calvert County, Maryland, • for example, the county commission, in an attempt to preserve former farmland from development tried to place moratorium on building permits for dwellings on nonconforming subdivision lots while it decided on a longer-term preservation strategy, including mandatory lot consolidations, but a circuit court overturned the moratorium. The county then decided on less drastic measures, such as: imposing stricter limits on lot clearance; requiring engineering certification for building in certain potential hazard conditions; and eliminating the small-lot exemption for storm water management requirements.20 The county also adopted an impact fee on new dwelling permits to fund the construction of schools. Limiting dwelling size The bulk of Puna's residential population growth is occurring in the nonconforming subdivisions, most of which are in the State Agricultural District and a County agricultural zoning district. Under the State Land Use Law, conventional dwellings are not a permitted use. Only "farm dwellings" - i.e., dwellings that are accessory to an agricultural use -are allowed. Nevertheless, this particular provision of the statute did not come into effect until 1976.21 All subdivision lots in the State Agricultural District that were created prior to that date for residential purposes are considered nonconforming, so they do not need to comply with the farm dwelling requirement. Consequently, many of the dwellings that are being built in Puna's agricultural-zoned subdivisions are clearly not related to agricultural use. Some -especially those of more recent vintage -are quite large and resemble a house that la Salveson, David and Douglas Porter. "The Ungrateful Dead," Planning, May 1996, Vol. 62, Issue 5, p8. 19 Ibid. • 20 Ibid. 21 Act 199, Session Laws of Hawaii, 1976. -27- might be found in a typical large-lot suburban tract, except without the paved roads and • other supporting infrastructure that are usually provided in suburban subdivisions. The nonconforming status of these lots under State Land Use Law does not preclude the County from taking other measures to discourage suburban-type development in agricultural subdivisions whose infrastructure systems were not adequately designed for that purpose. One approach is to limit the building footprint for dwelling use and accessory uses on agricultural-zoned lots. The City and County of Honolulu, for example, limits this coverage to 5,000 square feet, as represented by the diagram in Figure 8. Figure 8 Limitations on Dwelling Coverage on Agricultural-Zoned Lots on Oahu Area within polygon no larger than 5,000 sgft. C~ Source. Land Use Ordinance, Chapter 21, Revised 'onolulu A limitation of this kind does not deny the lot owner the right to build a dwelling, but it does help to keep the scale of new development more in line with a rural setting that lacks the infrastructure support for the suburban development pattern that is emerging in Puna. The dwelling coverage restriction could apply, in a limited way; for example, only to lots that are within the State Agricultural District and/or lack frontage on a paved street. It could also be linked as an incentive to initiate a land pooling project by applying the restriction only to lots that do not participate in the project. Dwellings within a designated village center could also be exempted from the dwelling coverage restriction, unless there is a Special Design District requirement that otherwise limits the scale of new dwellings. 6. Other Supporting Actions Growth management is not just about limiting the rate and form of development, but also about providing services, financial assistance and appropriate employment opportunities to improve the quality of life for existing and future residents of Puna. • -28- Exterior angles no greater than 180'° • Community and emergency services As suggested in Section 4, community support facilities should generally be located within or adjacent to designated town and village centers. Following are some comments about particular types of community support facilities. Schools Schools are a particular important community asset. They serve not only as educational institutions, but also as de facto community centers and recreation areas in rural areas where few other venues are available for meetings, events and organized or informal sports. One of the Working Groups, in fact, recommended that the existing Mountain View Elementary School be relocated to a site on the other side of Highway 11 and that the present building be adaptively reused as a community center. Unfortunately, as mentioned earlier, current policies of Department of Education (DOE) do not favor smaller schools at dispersed locations, which would enable them to be more conveniently accessed by walking, bicycling, or at least a shorter vehicle trip. Also, the availability of school facilities after hours for community activities varies at the discretion of the school principal. For these reasons, it would be useful for the County, perhaps with the assistance of elected State officials representing Puna, to work toward a formal, standing agreement for community access to school facilities that would apply regardless of a change in school principals. Also, as discussed earlier, the County should • try to influence a change in DOE policies concerning the size and location of schools so that at least some new elementary schools are located within a designated village center in a nonconforming subdivision where steps have been taken toward forming that village center. Social services The Social Services Working Group recommended the creation of a One-Stop Center to provide referrals, support and advocacy related to the following issues: • Substance abuse treatment and prevention; • Assistance for housing, special needs housing, homeless persons, and community development; • Teen pregnancy prevention birth control; • Child care and elder care options; • Transportation and service coordination; • Employment; • Serving clients with disabilities; • Domestic violence screening/abatement/prevention; • Access to medical services, including nursing programs for homebound clients; • Access to clean water and education on catchment water. These issues involve several agencies, so not all direct services need to be available • on-site, but the space, facilities and staffing for the Center would be provided by County -29- and/or State funding. Non-profit as well as public agencies that provide social services and counseling would be encouraged to participate by supplying the resource information. Since the Center would be a resource for the entire region, it would optimally be located in either or both of the Regional Village Centers (Kea`au and Pahoa). Two of the Working Groups recommended that existing public buildings -the Mountain View Elementary School, mentioned above, and the Pahoa Fire Station, to be replaced by a new facility - be converted for use as senior centers, offering facilities for a congregate meals program and various activities. County emergency services While police and fire stations are essential community facilities, they do not necessarily need to be located directly within town or village centers. The most important criterion for locating these facilities is the response time to respond to emergencies within the service area. Consequently, direct access to a major highway is an advantage. At present, the police and fire stations at Pahoa and Kea`au are near the center of town. The County is planning to replace these with facilities that are slightly outside of town on sites with direct highway access. The Kea`au fire station will serve as Batallion Headquarters for Puna and include rescue and HazMat companies. Due to long distances between inhabited areas and poor road conditions throughout much of Puna, the County needs to supplement the Pahoa and Kea`au police and fire stations with other measures to provide adequate coverage and promote prevention. For example, the Police Department develops community partnerships, such as Neighborhood • Watch programs with subdivision associations and the Pahoa Weed and Seed program. The Fire Department provides equipment, training, and some paid staff positions for volunteer stations in more populous subdivisions, such as Hawaiian Paradise Park, Hawaiian Beaches and Ainaloa. To serve the Volcano area, the County depends on the fire station at Kilauea Military Camp (KMC). These, however, are interim measures. Following are proposals made by both the County and Working Groups to improve coverage: • Develop a new fire station to replace the KMC facility in order to shorten response time to Volcano and its nearby subdivisions and communities in the mauka area of Puna. • Develop a permanent fire station at Hawaiian Paradise Park, which is Puna's most populated subdivision with one of the greatest development growth rates. • Provide additional volunteer stations in subdivisions as suitable sites become available and the growth in the subdivision warrants. Health care services The only current medical provider in Puna is The Bay Clinic, Inc., a nonprofit organization that operates out-patient clinics in Pahoa and Kea`au. About 60 percent of their patients are seen at the Kea`au clinic, with the remainder at the Pahoa clinic.22 There is no emergency room at these clinics; the nearest is at Hilo Hospital. 2a The source of this and other information about Bay Clinic is an interview with Bay Clinic staff, as reported in • the Public Facilities and Infrastructure Working Group report submitted in February, 2007. -30- The lack of adequate medical and emergency care facilities to serve Puna's growing population is one of the top concerns expressed in small group meetings and the two regional workshops in the early stages of the CDP public outreach process. The Public Facilities and Infrastructure Working Group assessed several possibilities for improving access to medical emergency care in Puna: • Bay Clinic's Pahoa facility does not lend itself to expansion, but the Kea`au clinic could possibly expand into the adjoining fire station to provide emergency care when the County replaces this facility with a larger fire station nearby. • The Hawaii Health System Corporation (HHSC), an entity of the State of Hawaii, and the operator of Hilo Hospital, might expand with a facility in Kea'au, although the focus at present is expansion in Hilo. • The alternative favored by the Working Group is modeled on the Wai`anae Coast Comprehensive Health Care Center on Oahu. This approach would involve a two-step process: (1) Forming anon-profit organization and securing acapacity- building grant from the Hawaii Community Foundation, the Weinberg Foundation or other private or public funding source for initial planning and organization; and (2) Seeking State assistance in the form of grants-in-aid and/or the dedication of public land for the development of the facility. The Working Group suggested Department of Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL) properties at Maku`u as a potential location, noting that DHHL also has land in Volcano that could be developed as a satellite clinic. It happens that another nonprofit organization, the Volcano Health Collaborative, was created in 2005 to focus the healthcare needs in the Volcano-Glenwood community. The organization has completed a needs assessment phase and is exploring alternatives for the location of a clinic.as Providing special needs housing and housing assistance Puna is already regarded as place of opportunity for affordable housing. The subdivision lots offer some of the lowest-price sites in Hawaii for owner-built housing. According to the County Office of Housing and Community Development, approximately 85 percent of the island's Section 81ow-income rental housing certificate holders are Puna residents.24 Because Puna plays a critical role in providing affordable housing, it is important to support measures to maintain sound housing stock, increase low-cost home ownership and opportunities for affordable rental housing, such as: • Promoting lower-cost self-help housing construction by seeking State enabling legislations to allow homeowners and organizations such as Habitat for Humanity to do their own plumbing and electrical work; • Offering educational programs, through the County housing agency, to develop financial skills of renters who seek opportunities for home ownership, and to develop awareness of effective rental strategies for owners and tenants; • zs Volcano Health Collaborative Update, Apri12007. 2a Interview with Ed Taira, County of Hawaii Office of Housing and Community Development, June 8, 2006. -3I- • Sponsoring, through the County Office of Housing and Community Development, programs to increase homeownership opportunities, such as the HOME Investment Partnerships Program for mutual self-help housing development and limited-equity cooperatives; • Promoting multi-family housing-especially for those with special needs, such as the elderly - in designated Regional or Community Village Centers; and • Providing low-interest loans, on a sliding scale according to household income, for the repair and renovation of existing housing. Centralized water systems Water system development is an important tool for shaping and directing the rate and type of development. Based on comments during the Small Group process, the break- out group discussions at the two CDP workshops, and statements and plans submitted by community associations, it appears that there is support for water system development to replace catchment systems in the more rapidly developing subdivisions in Puna Waena (e.g., Hawaiian Paradise Park, Ainaloa, Orchidland), and to expand access to the existing Mountain View-Ola`a system to support agricultural uses. There appears to be little or no support for public water systems in the "Central Corridor" subdivisions extending from Volcano through Hawaiian Acres. To support a growth management strategy for Puna, the following policies are suggested for the development of centralized water systems: • Investigate and develop additional groundwater sources in the Ola`a area to increase capacity to support agricultural uses and the development of designated Village Centers at Mountain View and lower elevations. • Provide County financial assistance to extend public water system service to lots that rely on catchment systems in subdivisions that lie mostly below 800 Feet MSL in elevation, provided that the owners' association has approved a plan to develop a Village Center within the subdivision. [See, also, suggested wording for County assistance for the formation of Village Centers in Section 4.] • To maintain the integrity of water quality in aquifers that can potentially be developed as future potable water sources, there should be additional restrictions on cesspools as a method for wastewater disposal. This matter will be discussed in Working Paper #2. Creating employment opportunities in Puna Much of Puna's economic activity is rooted in the district's considerable natural assets -particularly the climate and soils to support agricultural production, and the scenic, cultural and natural attractions to support tourism. These will continue to be important generators for employment, but there is also potential to build on natural assets to diversify and expand employment opportunities. As population increases, the lack of local opportunities will hasten the transformation of Puna into a "bedroom" community. Even worse, this will leave many residents, including youth, without hope of finding gainful -32- employment due to the time and cost of commuting. Following are promising opportunities for creating employment and job-readiness in Puna, using a combination of Federal, State and County and private sector resources, programs and initiatives: • Develop business incubator districts in the Regional Town Centers where small businesses can, for astart-up period of two to three years, occupy spaces at subsidized rent, share receptionist and other common support services and facilities, and have access to business mentoring and job training programs, and product promotion programs. • Promote use of the incentives offered by Puna's designation as an AZ Area Enterprise Zone to attract businesses to establish in the area and employ Puna residents. Develop a "direct-use" area for enterprises that use geothermal resources, which may include; (1) agricultural applications, such as greenhouses and aquaculture, (2) research and processing applications, such as a University of Hawaii laboratory, lumber kiln, laundromat, fruit or fish drying, and community kitchen; and (3) industrial applications, such as soil sterilization of potting media and thermoblock. • Support the partnership of the Hawaii Community College and The Bay Clinic to establish a youth business center in Kea'au to develop entrepreneurial spirit in youth, increase employment options and job readiness, and increase college enrollment, with a focus on technology skills. • Develop facilities for renewable energy generation, such as Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC), solar and wind power, and capturing steam generation from existing geothermal wells. • Promote bio-fuel production in Puna. • Facilitate tours that feature Puna's unique agricultural businesses, such as orchids/anthuriums, papaya, noni, and other tropical fruit, and geothermally- heated aquaculture. -33- Appendix A Inventory of Subdivisions Total % Year Subdivision Developable Developed Est. Lots Lots (2005) Notable Event Kapoho Beach Lots Hawaiian Orchid Isle Fern Forest Hilo Acres Fern Acres Hawaiian Acres Orchidland Estates WaaWaa Royal Hawaiian Estates Hawaiian Paradise Park Ainaloa Nanawale Farm Lots Maunaloa Estates Ohia Estates Eden Roc Hawaiian Island Paradise Acres Olaa Scenic Nanawale Estates Leilani Estates Orchid Isle Estates Aloha Estates Pacific Paradise Development Hawaiian Beaches Parks Shores Glenwood Tiki Gardens Vacationland Hawaii Black Sands Beach Kehena Beach Estates 1-2 Volcano Village Pacific Paradise Mt. View Manor Kalapana Sea View Estates 1-4 Lanipuna Gardens Puna Beach Palisades 1-3 213 52.6% 1954 205 17.6% 1958 2,585 4.3% 1958 48 2.1% 1958 1,996 11.0% 1958 4,001 11.3% 1958 2,506 17.6% 1958 177 13.6% 1958 Hawaii 1,660 3.7% 1959 admitted as 8,804 21.2% 1959 state 3,550 11.4% 1959 8/15/1959 85 21.2% 1959 1,016 25.5% 1960 721 13.7% 1960 1,921 3.5% 1960 446 4.0% 1960 412 40.0% 1960 4,235 9.1% 1960 2,197 16.0% 1960 Hawaii State 904 2.2% 1961 Land Use Law 1,812 2.5% 1961 enacted 206 9.7% 1961 7/11/1961 3,892 34.6% 1961 150 16.0% 1962 Land Use 853 6.0% 1962 District 297 40.4% 1963 boundaries 912 5.2% 1963 established 193 20.7% 1964 6/1963 - 811964 1,018 30.9% 1968 County 596 9.7% 1971 subdivision 941 4.3% 1971 ordinance 117 9.4% 1973 adopted 151 22.5% 1973 8/1973 Source: County of Hawaii building permit and real property tax data files • • • -34- Appendix B Methodologies Estimate of March 2007 Population The population of Puna in March 2007 was estimated as follows: The number of new dwellings was based on County building permit records, cross-checked by real property tax records. The starting point was building permits for dwellings issued from the beginning of January 2000 through the end of October 2006. It was assumed that all dwellings were built and that their earliest occupancy of dwellings occurred 6 months after the issuance of the building permit. 2. To estimate average household size for the new dwellings, the average household size reported for Puna in the 1980, 1990, and 2000 Census were reviewed. These data revealed along-term trend toward decreasing average household size, at a rate of 0.18 persons between 1980 and 1990, and 0.20 persons between 1990 and 2000. This trend was projected into an average household size for the years 2001 through 2006. 3. The projected average household size (2.596 persons) was then multiplied by the total number of households reported in the 2000 Census, plus the added households in the new dwellings that were assumed to be built and occupied as of March 2007. Projected Development of Vacant Lots To project the pattern of development on vacant subdivision lots, several tentative influencing factors were identified, with a rating system for each, then tested by applying these factors and ratings retroactively to see how well they predicted the outcome of the actual development pattern in 2005. The predictive factors and ratings are described below in STEP 1. STEP 2 is the time sequencing; i.e., the application of a predicted growth rate over five-year increments. STEP 3 distributes the "likely-to-build" lots within these five-year periods according to three scenarios: one that assumes that all of the future growth will occur on existing subdivided lots; another that assumes that some future development will occur in the "urban expansion areas" designated in the Hawaii County General Plan, which will lessen development in the nonconforming subdivisions; and the third that assumes the formation of village centers in nonconforming subdivisions to achieve a more clustered settlement pattern. STEP 1: LIKELY-TO-BUILD RATING A. Parcels that are developable as residential or residential agricultural • Zones Ag 1, 3, 5, 10, 20 FA 1, 2,3 RA 0.5 -35- RM 2 RS 10, 15, 20 • Pitt Code 100 200 500 800 900 Less streets, trails, forest reserves • Developed Parcels are parcels that have (Pitt Code of 100 AND a Building Value > $0.00) OR (Pitt Code of 500 AND a Building Value >$10,000 AND a Building Exempt Value > $0.00) B. Road Proximity (ROAD_PROX) • Parcels within 0.5 miles of a major highway 5 • Parcels between 0.5-1.0 miles from a major highway 4 • Parcels 1.0-1.5 miles from major highway but adjacent to paved road 3 • Parcels 1.5-2.0 miles from major highway but adjacent to paved road 2 • Parcels 2.0 - 4.0 miles of a major highway 1 • Parcels >4.0 miles of a major highway 0 C. Lot Size (LOT_SIZE) • Parcels with a lot size < 1 acre 3 • Parcels with a lot size > 1 acre, and < 3 acres 2 • Parcels with a lot size > 3 acres 1 D. Proximity to Hilo (PROX_HIL) • Parcels within 12 miles from Hilo 3 • Parcels > than 12 but less than 20 miles from Hilo 2 • Parcels 20 miles or more from Hilo 1 E. Water Service (WATER_SR) Proximity to parcels with water service either County or Private • Parcels that have water service 3 • Parcels within 100 feet of a parcel with water service 2 • Parcels within 0.5 miles of a parcel with water service 1 • Parcels >0.5 miles of a parcel with water service 0 F. Volcanic/seismic Hazard (VOL_HAZ) • Parcels that are >50% within Lava Hazard Zone 3 4 • Parcels that are >50% within Lava Hazard Zone 2 2 • Parcels that are >50% within Lava Hazard Zone 1 0 G. Proximity to Village Center (VIL_CTR) A village center is being defined as the area designated as Moderate Density Urban by the Hawaii General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) map. The village centers of Kea`au, Pahoa, and Volcano Village were chosen specifically because they contain public facilities such as community center, police, or medical as well as residential. • r~~ -36- • Parcels within the 1 mile regional center 3 • Parcels within 1-5 miles of a regional center 2 • Parcels within 5-10 miles of a regional center 1 H. Proximity to Developed Lots (PROX DEV) Lots that are directly adjacent to or directly across the street (not highway) from existing developed lots have a greater tendency to develop. • Parcels that are adjacent to or across the street from a developed lot 3 • Parcels that are within 50 feet of an existing developed lot 2 • Parcels that are within 100 feet of an existing developed lot 1 I. Proximity to Shoreline (PROX SHOR) • Parcels > 0.5 miles from shoreline 2 • Parcels 0.5 miles or more from shoreline 1 Total Score (TOT_SCR) A summation of all build-out criteria scores by TMK • Attribute: TOT_SC; summation of build-out scores without the lot size score • Attribute: TOT_SC_LS; summation of build-out scores including lot size STEP 2: TIME SEQUENCING Mean Number of Building Permits for New Dwellings per Year ( ) • Calculate mean number for period 2003 through 2005. • Calculate mean annual rate of increase for 2000 through 2005. Projected Number of New Dwellings in 5-Year Increments to 2030 • Calculate projected number of new dwellings from 2006 through 2010 by multiplying mean annual number by 5, then by mean annual increase in rate. • Calculate number of new dwellings for succeeding 5-year increments through 2030. • Compare results with General Plan projections and adjust accordingly, if a large discrepancy exists. STEP 3: APPLY RESULTS TO CURRENT TRENDS GROWTH SCENARIO Distribute the projected number of new dwellings for each 5-year increment among the lots, starting with the lots with the hi hest rating. If, after reaching the maximum number of dwellings for the 5-year period, it is necessary to split a number of lots that share the same rating, distribute the new dwellings on those lots proportionately among the Tax Map Plats - e.g., if only 60% of the lots rated "15" are to projected to have new dwellings within the 5-year period, they are to be distributed are follows: l~J TMK Plat # # Lots Rated 15 Lots w/in Period 1 120 72 2 78 47 3 39 23 -37- • As indicated above, fractions are to be rounded to the nearest whole integer. Apply color-coding to all lots with dwellings (both existing and projected within applicable 5-year period) according to lot size, as follows: • Lots less than 0.5 acres -rust brown • Lots at least 0.5 acre but less than 1 acre -orange • Lots at least 1 acre but less than 3 acres -deep yellow • Lots at least 3 acres but less than 20 acres -light yellow • Lots 20 acres of larger -pale yellow-green Produce a series of maps, using the above color codes showing the following build- out at each 5-year mark from 2000 through 2030. General Plan LUPAG Scenario Determine the number of dwellings that could be developed within the "urban expansion" areas surrounding Kea'au and Pahoa at an average density of 4 units per gross acre. Produce maps showing the following two sub-alternatives for build-out by 2030, applying the same methodology as above, and using the rust-brown color code for the urban expansion areas: Sub-alternate #1: Deduct the number of new dwellings to be built in the urban expansion areas from total number of new dwellings by 2030 and reduce the number of dwellings to be distributed among the subdivision lots; i.e., the lot rating "cutoff' will be higher than in the Current Trends Forecast. Sub-alternate #1: Reduce the number of new dwellings by 2030 to be distributed among the subdivision lots by only one-third while maintaining the build-out assumption for the urban expansion areas; i.e., a hybrid of the Current Trends and GP forecasts, resulting in a large increase in development. Village Centers Scenario Determine the number of dwellings, at an average density of 4 units per net acre, that could be developed within one-half mile of the center of Pahoa and Kea`au, and one-quarter mile of the Volcano post office and hypothetical "village centers" in the portions of HPP, Orchidland/Ainaloa that are currently the most "built-out" (i.e., near Highway 130 -see General Plan LUPAG for guidance on locations). As in the GP Sub-alternate #1, deduct the number of new dwellings to be built in these "village centers" from total number of new dwellings by 2030 and reduce the number of dwellings to be distributed among the subdivision lots; i.e., the lot rating "cutoff" will be higher than in the Current Trends Forecast. Produce a map showing the build-out by 2030, applying the same methodology as above, and using the rust-brown color code for the Village Centers. • -38- • A endix C IMP Hawaiian Paradise Park Land Pooling Pilot Study Description of Study Area The pilot study area is located in the northwest section of the Hawaiian Paradise Park subdivision (see attached location map.) The study area encompasses 1,977 lots, each approximately one acre in size, and two centrally-located, adjacent 20-acre parcels. The entire area is located in the State Agricultural District and County zoning is Ag-la (agriculture, 1- acre minimum lot size.) Non-agricultural uses are allowed under a Special Permit process. Since the subdivision was created prior to June 4, 1976, the County allows permits for dwellings on the lots without having to meet the criteria for "farm dwelling." Selection of Study Area Hawaiian Paradise Park was selected for the pilot study for several reasons: 1. Several factors, such as proximity to the Highway 130 corridor and Hilo, have made Hawaii Paradise Park a particularly attractive location in the Puna district for residential development. Lots in this subdivision, particularly within the study area, are being developed at a faster rate than most other subdivisions in Puna. This trend is projected to continue. If the subdivision • continues to build out as projected, residents will perceive a decline in the quality of their living environment; i.e., the attractive features of a rural setting will erode, yet the subdivision will continue to lack the amenities that are associated with most modern suburban communities, such as paved roads, centralized water systems, community facilities and neighborhood commercial services. 2. While the rate of development has been high, there is still potential to re- shape the pattern of this development since more than half of the lots are vacant and uncommitted to imminent development by pending building permits. Land pooling could be a mechanism to re-shape the development pattern if, as an incentive for lot owners to participate, it is associated with a plan to provide infrastructure improvements -namely, paved streets and a central water system - as well as community amenities such as a park, school and commercial services within walking distance of a substantial number of residences. 3. By deed restriction, one of the two 20-acre parcels is designated for "community uses", such as a park, school or community center. The adjoining 20-acre parcel was originally set aside for future commercial development. While neither of these types of uses is permitted as a principal use under present land use and zoning designations, they could potentially be developed under the Special Permit process or by amending the State Land Use and zoning designations The Hawaiian Paradise Park Master Plan (2005) envisions these two adjoining parcels as one of several "village centers". Therefore, the pilot study will serve to test the viability of the "village center" • concept. -39- While there is no central waters stem at resent within the study area and • 4 y P most of the streets are unpaved, access to a County water main is relatively close (Highway 130), the right-of--way widths and alignments of the subdivision's street grid make it possible to improve the streets to a standard that is recognized nationally as meeting basic safety criteria while following a "low-impact design" approach. This approach also results in relatively low improvement costs. The Stakeholders The principal stakeholders in the pilot study are the lot owners, as represented primarily by the Hawaiian Paradise Park Owners' Association (HPPOA.) HPPOA also owns the 20-acre parcel designated for community uses. The other 20-acre parcel, originally set aside for future commercial use, is owned by Sheila Watumull, widow of the developer of Hawaiian Paradise Park. The County and the State are indirect or passive stakeholders in the pilot study, since they may be called up to provide administrative, technical, regulatory or financial assistance to implement a land pooling project, if such a project appears to be desirable and feasible. Alternative Scenarios for the "Village Center" The Hawaiian Paradise Park (HPP) Master Plan (2005) describes the village center as follows: The HPP community envisions each Village Center as a small neighborhood • shopping and professional services center surrounding a village green. Typical commercial establishments would be small food stores, fruit and vegetable outlets, variety stores, hardware stores, small clothing stores, professional offices, small restaurants, branch banks. We encourage the development of residential walkup apartments of no more than two stories in height to meet the needs of the elderly or for families just starting out. The village greens could be used for entertainment or farmer's market type of activities as well as just a large green space for relaxation, lawn sports and recreation. One of the potential obstacles to this vision is that there may to be resistance in the community to the idea of clustering dwellings around a village center. The following observation was made in the 1997 update of the Hawaiian Paradise Park Master Plan: - The community does not support the concept of multiple dwellings on a single building lot. Therefore, a strategy of building restriction needs to be sought. However, it is unclear whether this comment was made in reference to the village center concept or simply to the idea of allowing additional dwellings on lots at random throughout the subdivision. Other comments by the community suggest that there is broad support for providing services, including transit, within convenient walking distance; e.g.: - The residents want to build a sustainable community where public and private services and jobs are available. • -40- - The community wants village centers where public services and private sector jobs are available. The transportation system should include a pedestrian, bicycle and electric vehicle friendly trail and roadway system. - The community wants a residential area within the village center where seniors can reside within easy reach of services without the use of automobiles. - The community wants a shuttle service between small village centers, school and recreational areas and a connection with whatever mass transit system is developed linking other areas, such as Hilo, Kea'au or Pahoa. The above preferences cannot be realized unless more dwellings are clustered in a village center by shifting the latent development potential from outlying vacant lots. A larger population in the village center will enable more children to walk (or bicycle) to school or a park, and more people of all ages to walk (or bicycle) to services. This, in turn, will make the provision of services more viable. For example, it would be difficult to establish even a small food store in a village center that has no visibility from a major thoroughfare and is in the middle of a large-lot subdivision where dwellings are scattered. However, if the village center contains a reasonable number of potential walk-in customers, a small food store might develop and survive because many customers are willing to pay a slight premium for goods in exchange for the convenience of a more accessible store. There are two potential scenarios for the development of a village center - . one uses land pooling to shift future housing development from outlying lots to properties closer to the pair of 20-acre parcels where community facilities would be located; the other scenario intensifies the development potential of the two adjoining 20-acre parcels by providing only higher density housing and commercial uses on these lots, but leaving the development potential of other lots in the study area intact. Alternative 1: Clustered housing within a village center To define "walking distance", the village center boundary will encompass the area within one-quarter mile from the perimeter of the two adjoining 20-acre parcels. Empirical studies have shown that most people are willing to walk a maximum of one-quarter mile to a destinatign, which represents a typical walking time of 5 minutes. Beyond that distance, the percentage of people who are willing to walk drops off at an increasing rate. Consequently, the one-quarter mile distance is used as arule-of--thumb for transit and urban planning. There is no "magic threshold" for the population of a viable village center, but comparable "off-highway" rural towns and villages elsewhere in Hawaii that offer the types of services described in the HPP Master Plan contain a population of approximately 500 - 2,500 residents.25 To provide a stronger base for the village is "Off-highway" rural towns and villages, in this context, means settlements whose commercial and civic • "centers" are not visible from a State highway. Pertinent examples are Haiku, Maui; Kilauea and Hanapepe, Kauai; and Laupahoehoe and Hawi, Hawaii. Most of these towns have populations at the -41- center, the pilot study will assume a resident population at the higher end of this range in the HPP village center by the "build-out" year 2030. It should be noted that community and commercial services are also likely to be used by people living beyond the village center boundary, including HPP residences makai of the study area. Supportable community and commercial elements of the village center would most likely have the following characteristics: 1. A public elementary school with an enrollment of between 300 to 500 students, occupying approximately 13 acres.2s 2. A ±7-acre neighborhood park adjoining the school, serving also as a playground during school hours. 3. A commercial center with approximately 50,000 square feet of tenant space organized around a village green, and with approximately 170 parking spaces, three loading spaces, and bicycle parking facilities.27 The village green may be used for open farmers' markets and community events. 4. An elderly housing project consisting of approximately 100 units with an average size of 800 square feet each, 110 parking spaces, and a community building of approximately 15,000 square feet. A portion of the village green will be designated as a community garden for the residents of the elderly housing. 5. Transit service, with a bus stop located on Okika Avenue, between the school- • park grounds and the commercial-elderly housing area. Assumptions Concerning Infrastructure Improvements The infrastructure design and cost estimates for development of the village center concept will assume the following: 1. The centralized water supply system will be based on a modified version of the "barebones design" proposal contained in Chester Lao's "Water Supply System Based on Wells for Hawaiian Paradise Park Subdivision, Puna District, Hawaii". Cost estimates will be updated. 2. The road improvements will be based on the attached Figure 1, showing cross-section designs for collector streets (e.g., Kaloli Drive) and local access streets (presently unpaved.) Improvements for the local access streets will extend only to the lot frontages within the village center. 3. There will be no centralized sewer system in the village center. Instead, dwellings, commercial and community uses will be served by septic tanks and other individual wastewater treatment systems. Department of Health regulations allow densities of up to one dwelling per 10,000 square feet of lot lower end of the 500-2,000 range. Pahoa and Kea`au are not examples because their "centers" form ~rimarily alongside or at the juncture of highways. e For comparison, current enrollments at Pahoa, Kea`au and Mountain View Elementary Schools are 339, 743 and 419, respectively. . 27 For comparison, the floor area of Kea`au Village Market is 27,400 square feet. -42- area, which means that four dwellings would be allowed on each of the village center dwelling lots. For purposes of comparing costs, if water supply and road improvements extended throughout the study area, there would be a total of 168,8741inear feet of improvements, of which 21,7681inear feet would consist of roads that are presently paved, but not necessarily constructed to the standard shown on the attached cross section for collector streets. If improvements were made only in the designated village center where the housing would be clustered through land pooling, and along Kaloli Drive, which provides access to the village center from Highway 130, there would be a total of 25,166 linear feet of improvements, of which 6,0341inear feet are represented by the presently paved Kaloli Drive. The cost of making improvements throughout the entire study area is therefore roughly 6 to7 times greater than the cost of limiting these improvements to the village center. As can be seen in the following section, if land pooling were to be implemented to redistribute all new dwelling units in the study area to the village center, then by 2030 most (59°Io) of the dwellings in the study area would have direct access to the road and water system improvements. Re-distribution of the Development Pattern The approach used in this land pooling study is to "shift" the potential development of a single dwelling from undeveloped lots outside of the village center boundary to a lot within the village center, up to a maximum of four dwellings per lot in the village center. The maximum was determined by the Department of Health standard for the use of septic tanks. It was assumed that, if there is an active building permit for a lot outside of the village center, that lot will be developed with a dwelling, even if it is not presently occupied by one. The attached Figure 2 map shows what the resulting pattern of dwellings would be in the study area in 2030 if the land pooling were implemented. Below is a table that estimates the population in 2020 and 2030 within the village center and in the outlying rings, if the land pooling were to be implemented throughout the entire study area. The village center population in 2030 does not increase as much as one might expect, and the population outside the village center actually declines slightly, because of the long-term trend toward decreasing average size of household.28 Year Within the Village Center Outside of the Villa a Center Total Pilot Study Area Dwellin s Po ulation Dwellin s Po ulation Dwellin s Po ulation 2020 838 1 952 778 1 812 1 616 3 764 2030 1 175 2 450 778 1 665 1 923 4 273 It should be noted that the total projected number of dwellings and population in 2020 and 2030 in the pilot study area remains the same, whether land pooling is ~~ zs Based on a projection of past trends, the average household size in 2020 is 2.33 persons; in 2030 it is 2.14 persons. The assumed ratio for the 100 elderly units in 2030 is 1.5 persons per household. -43- implemented or not. Land pooling merely shifts the projected increase in dwellings and population to the village center from lots outside of the village center. The projected number of dwellings in the village center by 2030 is close to achieving the maximum "build-out" potential of 1,188 dwellings, so it is likely that the ultimate population of the village center will be about 2,500 and the study area population about 4,350. Alternative 2: "Village Center" confined to two 20-acres lots only In this scenario, the "village center" would be confined to the combined 40 acres of the two, adjoining 20-acre lots. "Walking distance" would be defined as in Alternative 1, to include 297 one-acre lots surrounding the village center. By 2030, all of these lots, as well as almost all other one-acre lots in the study area, are projected to be developed, resulting in a significant increase in population outside of the designated village center. The combined 2030 population of village center and the surrounding 297 one- acre lots would be approximately the same as that of Alternative 1, except that greater housing density would be developed within the 40-acres village center to offset the reduced density on the one-acre surrounding lots. There would also be an increase in commercial space, as well as some light industrial space to create additional employment opportunities. An elementary school, playground and village green would be provided, but each with a small footprint than in Alternative 1. Below is a summary description of the village center: 1. A public elementary school with an enrollment of between 300 to 500 students, occupying approximately 10 acres.29 2. A ±2-acre neighborhood playground adjoining the school. 3. Approximately 100,000 square feet of commercial and light industrial tenant space organized around a village green, and with approximately 335 parking spaces, 8 loading spaces, and bicycle parking facilities.30 The village green may be used for open farmers' markets and community events. 4. An elderly housing project consisting of approximately 100 units with an average size of 800 square feet each, 110 parking spaces, and a community building of approximately 15,000 square feet. A portion of the village green will be designated as a community garden for the residents of the elderly housing. 5. Approximately 875 additional dwellings, in a variety of forms, including single-family clusters and multi-family buildings of no more that 2 stories. 6. Transit service, with a bus stop located on Okika Avenue, between the school grounds and the commercial-elderly housing area. z9 For comparison, current enrollments at Pahoa, Kea`au and Mountain View Elementary Schools are 339, 743 and 419, respectively. 30 For comparison, the floor area of Kea`au Village Market is 27,400 square feet. • t -44- It is acknowledged that the above development pattern is presently not permitted by the deed restrictions that encumber the 20-acre parcel owned by HPPOA, so Alternative 2 assumes that the parties to this restriction will agree to remove it. Assumptions Concerning Infrastructure Improvements The infrastructure design and cost estimates for development of the village center concept will assume the following: 1. The centralized water supply system will be based on a modified version of the "barebones design" proposal contained in Chester Lao's "Water Supply System Based on Wells for Hawaiian Paradise Park Subdivision, Puna District, Hawaii". Cost estimates will be updated. 2. The road improvements will be limited to those on the perimeter of the village center, the portion of Okika Street that bisects the viilage center, and Kaloli Drive, extending from the makai edge of the village center to Highway 130. 3. A centralized, but privately-operated sewer system will be provided in the village center. Because no improvements will be provided beyond the village center, it is assumed that, if lot owners fronting these streets desire to have paved roads and access to a centralized water system, the cost will be financed as a separate project. As mentioned previously, the cost to provide these improvements throughout the study area is very high on a per-unit basis due to the size of the lots. Perhaps income from the development of the HPPOA-owned village center lot could be used to help defray a portion of those costs. Distribution of the Development Pattern Unlike land pooling, Alternative 2 would not affect the development pattern or population growth outside of the village center. Projections based on past trends indicate that almost all of the one-acre lots in the study area as likely to be occupied by dwellings by 2030. Below is a table that estimates the population in 2020 and 2030 within the village center and in the outlying portion of study area. Year Within the Village Center Outside the Village Center Total Pilot Study Area Dwellin s Po ulation Dwellin s Po ulation Dwellin s Po ulation 2020 300 699 1 666 3 881 1 966 4 580 2030 300 642 2 199 4 705 2 499 5 167 • -45- Figure 1 Proposed Cross-Section Design for Streets in HPP Village Center LOCAL STREETS Sidewalk Buffer Buffer V Pavement Buffer Swale Buffer wJtJ" A{~Qef~llg W eheDtee 23 Of fhB OantY flod9a frMa mtnimun eigh4of-wary+r~t~ 10rm1n4r if~061r in 8n apY~u# dF~'~Ct i4'.90 feet w1h • twement .~du- d 2D feat 7hla e~mple iiceeeporetea taw Impact Ot»~ NW ti6o tlw mtntmum ~~af-+rryt widlt-• COLLECTOR STREETS (Kaloli Drive) Sidewalk Buffer Buffer I Pavement -~ ice Buffer Lafte I r~ Swale Buffer I ~~ g' S' 2fl' 4" 1Q" 10' 1' 6fl' ~ tv G~ xr or fha County fksda, the midmum el~td-way +wtiMh fer cotiacbr Nraer in an ap~tt.e~ aMhlct 1r eo feat wth a paveita~r; wdlh W 20 last 7tra marepa trraoiparatea a tacycia Ier+a and Low Impact t]eaig~ l1~) Iota tlra mtiinum rM~tcf~y +Mdlh. • `~ u -46- • • • ,~ ~, ~I Ir ~~~ ~~~I~ `~~J_ 1T~ ;,i ~: ~ 1_, ~~ --r~- - ~z I ,~ ~I~j -~ I-:- 1 I ~~, ~I~'; ~! 1 ~!~ a m - . -~ ~.~, 4,. ~~ ~1 ~_ - I - ~I L . ...~'. I I w, ~~[~ Figure 2 Village Center Scenario #1 f ~r l III L1~ ~`, ~' `11h ,ti`~~l I ~ I', ~ ~,~ ~~ ~~ r r7 "'~!1 ~~ r'T'~ ~ ~~ ~ ~;:°, J, ~~ ~]lllj J ~ J ~~r ~ 1 I~ j 1 ~r `'_1~ r, ~~~ Lr i!~. ~~ t rt Kaloli Dr. i }t+{ F+I -I+F F41~- II~ I NEIGH~BORHOO.D PARK I' ~ ~ ~ -~ ~_ ~ T j ~ r ~ I L__ I I ~ -',_ J~ ___ i ~ ~ ~-- ENTARY I S L- ' 11 I - ',, ;, G- _~ IL_ _~ - i ~~ I ~ III '~, .~~ ~ ~ll ff f,~ l ul ~~ ~{~- ~~~~ ~I~ 4~ ~J 4?~ 'til -~ ~- ~ ~ ~~-~ l ~`Lli .' ?~ I _. - - f OI~IIMERCIAL CENJIE ISIT VILLAGE GREEN Pi I I OMMUNIT $ENTER ~ I E DER _ O~!$1_ G ~_ ~~~~~ I ~~I~'~h' F+!l ill ~ , I~} Ir ~ O+F++ff~ i}~+++I~+[i _ I ~ =,, I 1 ~ I ~ 1~ ~til ~ ~ I I 1 ~ ' - L i `I I l,~ 1 ~~ ~ ~ i 1 ~~~ T~ ~~ ~ Ilti ~ T ~ l ~ ~ ~: ~ 1 ~ ~ II ;, TTY 4 l~l~ fr~ I ~~ Lr' ~Il I~~, L~ ` 1 ~1 ~ ~ ~r~ i~ r 1 4 ~ . l~J ~zl~ ~~~ >, ~~' . ~ IJ' -~I~-- ,, ~~ f'~ :::-- ~Y Ir_ I~ ', a `~ 1 ~NI~. ~, - - L o ~~ 1 I ,,,. - I._.T _. x~ I ~', "~t.. . ~- ~;~ ~~_ ~ ~~ ~ ~J ~~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~1 -47- u a 0 c C Figure 3 Village Center Scenario #2 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Kaioli Dr. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U TI- U IN ~ PLAYGROUND a c C ' ^ T EN ~ S DD ~~ ~~~ t~ PARKING C M N R VILLAGE GREEN ~ 1~51T a~ L O MMUNI ENTE ~~tf US G ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ }~-~ r~ ~~ ~J -48- Working Paper #2 Malama I Ka 'Aina Working Paper No. 2 Malama I Ka `Aina 1. Developing a Green Infrastructure Plan a. Description of Resources Puna's most renowned physical feature is the active volcanic caldera of Kilauea, which also defines the region's dynamic landscape. Eruptions of Kilauea and the nearby volcano Mauna Loa continue to shape the ecology of the region, and even the land itself. Rainfall is higher on the windward slopes of Kilauea, while the leeward slopes, extending into Ka'u, are relatively arid. The wetter side is covered by thick forests of `Ohi'a trees and Hapu'u tree ferns on all but the youngest of lava flows or cleared land. On the drier side, vegetation is more open, exposing the underlying geology. A distinguishing feature of Puna's native forest is its interaction with repeated, relatively recent lava flows, creating varied ages of forests underlain by different compositions of lava flows, ash and explosion deposits. This, in turn, enriches biodiversity, especially in older stands of forest, known as "kipuka", that have been isolated by lava flows. Some of the native animal and plant species present in Puna are endemic, found nowhere else in the world. Appendix A provides the references for those that are listed by the federal government as Endangered Species. In addition, Puna harbors many other native species, such as the Pueo (Hawaiian Owl), the `Amakihi, the `Apapane, and various insects, some of which are rare, if not listed as Endangered. Puna's unique lava tube caves are a notable geological feature and popular attraction. Kazumura Cave is recognized as the world's longest lava cave at nearly 40 miles. The lava caves are also important as natural habitats for endemic species of insects and invertebrates. In addition, some of caves were used by ancient Hawaiians as burial sites for Ali`i (royalty). • Puna's geology and biological resources inspired reverence for the landscape by the original human inhabitants of Hawaii. By cultural tradition, Kilauea is the home of the goddess Pele, giving the volcano and its surroundings sacred status. Ancient Hawaiians recognized Puna as Pele's land, with human habitation subject to Pele's will. Maka`aina, or commoners, were free to relocate to other ahupua`a (the lands of another chief) when Pele reasserted her dominion over the land. A map dated 1826 indicates 24 ahupua`a located around the entire coast of Puna.l While human settlement from ancient times was concentrated in a 1- to 3-mile band near the shoreline, mauka areas near the volcano and upper reaches of forest were visited for gathering as well as spiritual purposes. ~ Community Management Associates for the County of Hawaii ,Puna Community Development Plan Technical Report, 1995. -1- Many of the ancient trails, which are still protected as public land or with traditional access rights, connect areas of natural beauty that have cultural significance. Even though the 19th and 20th centuries brought rapid physical and cultural changes, some of the trails lead to remote spots that are important for traditional gathering and other cultural practices. The areas they traverse include some stands of fairly intact native vegetation with little modern development, offering ,a glimpse to the past. Extensive tracts of Puna's landscape were transformed when Western contact brought large scale resource exploitation and agriculture in successive waves.. Sandalwood export began in 1790, reaching its peak between 1810 and 1825. After Hawai`i's first forestry law in 1839 restricted the removal of sandalwood trees, cattle ranching and coffee cultivation became the leading commercial activities. By 1850, agriculture diversified with the cultivation of potatoes, onions, pumpkins, oranges, and molasses.2 Soon, sugarcane was in large-scale production. The dominant operation in Puna was the Puna Sugar Company, whose plantation fields extended for ten miles along both sides of Highway 11 between Kea`au and Mountain View, as well as in the Pahoa and Kapoho areas.3 Macadamia nuts and papaya were introduced in 1881 and 1919 respectively. Since the closure of the Puna Sugar Company in 1991, papaya and macadamia nut production have become the leading cash crops of Puna. About 97% of the state's papaya production occurs in Puna, primarily in the Kapoho area. The closure of sugar production in Puna opened a large amount of agriculture land to a more diversified industry. Presently, Puna produces at least 40 different agricultural products including cut flowers, fruits, vegetables, and livestock. A variety of growing conditions supports diversified agriculture in Puna. While the district is generally a wet, warm climate, drier conditions at lowland areas such as Kapoho are ideal for cultivating papaya, whereas wetter, cooler conditions in the Volcano area are suitable for growing crops that cannot thrive in many other areas of Hawaii. Even the wettest of areas have produced well under greenhouse cover. Also, due to volcanic activity, the age of the soils varies considerably throughout Puna, with corresponding variations in inherent natural fertility and tendency to resist weeds. b. Consequences of Subdivision and Land Development The earliest periods of settlement following Western contact were in the plantation towns, named above, and in Volcano. The pattern and rate of development in these settlements and their immediate environs have been influenced largely by agricultural activity. Volcano, however, has also attracted the development of vacation homes, bed-and-breakfast establishments, and full-time residences for retirees, those whose employment is related to the proximity to z Hawai is Agricultural Gateway website, http•ll~vww.hawaiiag.or~/historv.htm a Hawaii Sugar Planters' Association, Plantation Archives, htt~1/www2 hawaii edu/-speccolUn nuna html i • -2- • • • Figure 1 Land Cover in Puna Source: Hawaii Gap Analysis Program, County of Hawaii GIS data Legend 0F~ Snbdi 14lajar Roads GAP VEGETATION AEtienttoae Ueveloped Native Shrubs and Grasses Native inxs and Forest Non-Native Shrubs and Grasses Non-Native '[tees aad Forest Sparse YeBctation Wetlmd ar open. Niah r A 0/ Estimated Percentages of Land Cover in Puna 12% 10' ^ Developed ^ AgrlCllltllT'2 0 ^ Native Shrubs and Grasses ^ Native Trees and Forest ^Nou-Native Shrubs and Grasses ®Non-Native Trees and Forest ^ Sparse Vegetation ^ Wetland or Open Water -3- Volcanoes National Park, or those who are willing to commute a long distance for the appeal of living in a unique environment.4 As mentioned above, agricultural activity, especially sugarcane cultivation, made widespread alterations to the natural land cover. The evidence can still be seen in the Figure 1 map, showing not only existing areas of agricultural use, but also the traces of past use in where former fields, timber areas or grazing lands are now covered predominantly by non-native trees, shrubs and grasses. Land platting and zoning that open the way to potential future residential development have even greater implications for land disturbance. Working Paper #1 analyses the conditions and trends in the extensive non-conforming subdivisions that created more than 50,000 lots throughout Puna during a 15-year period from 1958 to 1973. While most of these subdivisions are on agricultural-zoned lands, the actual use of developed lots is predominantly residential. Since only about one-quarter of the lots have been developed to date, the full impact of these subdivisions on land cover and other natural and cultural resources has not yet been felt. Nevertheless, residential development has been occurring on these lots, even though most lack access to supporting infrastructure and many are in physical hazard areas. Some of the impacts related to land development for residential use are quite obvious; for example, where entire lots are cleared of native forest to make way for buildings and yards. Other impacts are more subtle. For example, lot grading can lead to the collapse of an underlying lava tube, which in turn may expose a unique ecosystem or an ancient burial site or artifact. Clear-cutting and pin-to-pin grading and grubbing of lots for development have impacts that extend beyond the site itself, such as: • Openings in the forest promote the spread invasive, non-native species (see list in Appendix C.) Non-native plants affect the forests by changing the soil chemistry and increasing shade, making it hard for native plants to compete and survive. • Fragmenting the forest creates "edge" habitat that threatens the native bird population by allowing easier access by predatory. animals (e.g., cats, rats and mongoose).5 • Fragmentation also changes the microclimate of adjacent forest (i.e., increased temperature, sunlight and moisture in the. understory), altering growing regimes for plants and the suitability of nesting sites.s • a The Land Use/Biosphere Reserve Working Group report, authored by Frederick Warshauer, provides a good overview of Volcano's development history and dynamics. s Robinson, S. K., F. R. Thompson III, T. M. Donovan, D. R. Whitehead, and J. Faaborg. "Regional Forest Fragmentation and the Nesting Success of Migratory Birds." Science 267:1987-1990. 1995. Also, Andren, H. and P. Angelstam. "Elevated Predation Rates as an Edge Effect in Habitat Islands: experimental Evidence." Ecology 69: 544-547. 1988. s Harris, L. D. The Fragmented Forest. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. 1984. 206 pp. Also, Laurance, W. F., S. G. Laurance, L. V. Ferreira, J. M. Rankin de Merona, C. Gascon, and T. E. Lovejoy. "Biomass collapse in Amazonian forest fragments". Science, 278:1117-1118. 1997. -4- • Grading creates boggy areas devoid of vegetation, providing breeding habitat for mosquitoes, a vector for avian malaria, which further threatens the native bird population. • Re-contouring of lots through grading can alter local drainage patterns and affect adjacent properties or rights-of--way. The compaction of a lava tube may also interrupt the function of the lava tubes to act as a natural drainage system that carries excess storm-water to the coast. Land development presents a particular threat to the sustainability of native forest and habitat in the community of Volcano, which encompasses both the village and its nearby subdivisions, for a variety of reasons: • Most of Puna's relatively intact native forest lies between the 3,400 to 5,000 foot elevations, where the Volcano community is situated (see Figure 1.) Many of the lots in these subdivisions are still undeveloped, so there are still large stands of native forest within them. • The Volcano community is contiguous to Volcanoes National Park and two state Natural Area Reserves, where the native forest is protected. Potential lot development in Volcano and its subdivisions would remove and fragment the forest, resulting in loss of natural diversity. For example, native birds and insects often transit between the protected forest areas, utilizing the remaining forest canopy within adjoining urbanized areas as passageways. This, in turn, disperses native plants back and forth across these forests. • The Volcano community has a high concentration of small lots that could be developed for residential use, even if agriculture-zoned. The Volcano area ` currently haS over 5,3031ots which could be used to construct residences. Under current zoning, larger parcels could be subdivided to increase this number to nearly 8,700 house lots. The `ohana dwelling permit process could expand the potential number of dwellings even more. The Volcano highway approximately defines the contact zone between the older Mauna Loa forests and the younger, less diverse, Kilauea forests. Most of this younger forest below Volcano community has been removed by land disturbance, so what remains within the Volcano community is particularly important to the ecology of the region. Without the contact zone, the National Park will be increasingly isolated from the richer wet forests to the northeast. The smaller the lot size, the more likely that a greater proportion of the Iand area of the parcel will be cleared for development where zoning allows residential use. Lot size also influences the likelihood that an agricultural-zoned parcel will actually be used for agricultural purposes. Of the parcels zoned agricultural in Puna, approximately 34,000, or 68%, are one acre or less in size (see Table 1.) Very few are being used for agricultural purposes. According to county property tax records, only 346 parcels less than one acre in size are declared for the agricultural use dedication. • -5- Table 1 Agricultural-Zoned Subdivisions in Puna Consisting of Lots One Acre or Less in Size Subdivision Name Number of Lots Hawaiian Paradise Park 8,804 Nanawale Estates 4 235 Hawaiian Beaches Parks and Shores 3,892 Ainaloa 3,550 Leilani Estates 2,197 Eden Roc 1,921 Aloha Estates 1 812 Ro al Hawaiian Estates 1,660 Kala ana Sea View Estates 941 Black Sands Beach 912 Orchid Isle Estates 904 Tiki Gardens 853 Pacific Paradise Mountain View Manor 596 Hawaiian Island Paradise Acres 446 Ola`a Scenic Lands 412 Pacific Paradise Develo ment 206 Kehena Beach Estates 193 Puna Beach Palisades 151 Glenwood 150 TOTAL 33,835 NOTE: Two subdivisions, Kalapana Vacation Lots and Royal Gardens, were destroyed in lava flows. A number of factors discourage agricultural use on small lots: While it is possible to conduct certain types of commercially-viable agricultural on small lots (e.g., nurseries), the scale of the operation is limited by the lot size, which can make it difficult to compete with larger operations growing the same products. Also, the lot usually must also accommodate a dwelling on the premises, which further constricts the space available for agricultural use. • Small lots tend to have immediate residential neighbors. The sights, sounds and smells of agriculture are often perceived as a nuisance by residential property owners. Even with agricultural zoning and "right-to- farm" provisions, the pressure on agricultural users to contain secondary effects of operations, such as overspray and noises, in response to complaints by neighbors adds to the challenges that a small agricultural producer encounters while trying to maintain a viable operation. • • Perhaps of greatest significance, real estate economics discourages agricultural use on small lots. It is increasingly difficult to purchase a small lot in Puna for agricultural use because the competing market demand for residential use of these lots has escalated sales prices for land, -6- • even though Puna's nonconforming subdivisions generally lack infrastructure support for residential use. For example, the March 2002 median sales price for a vacant lot in Puna was $7,375. By March 2004 the price had risen to $14,700, and by March 2005 it was $32,500. Land value varies greatly depending on the lot size and its location. In Hawaiian Paradise Park, for example, the current asking price for a vacant 1-acre lot in the mauka portion of the subdivision is $48,000, while a 15,000 square foot lot along the coast is $250,000. c. Hierarchical Network of Protection Puna's natural resources come under a hierarchical network of federal, state and county regulations. Below is an overview of this regulatory regime, starting with the most protected areas. Hawaii Volcanoes National Park was established August 1, 1916 to protect and preserve 377 square miles of Hawaii's natural resources. Much of this area is within the Puna CDP area. The park remains the leading tourist attraction of the island where visitors can learn about Hawaii's delicate ecosystems, Pele (the Hawaiian volcano goddess), and discover earth's destructive and creative powers. The Park's global importance has been recognized by the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) with a designation as an International Biosphere Reserve in 1980, reflecting its value for research and protection of evolutionary resources, and as a World Heritage Site in 1987, citing its geological • resources. UNESCO defines these designations as follows: • A Biosphere Reserve is a representative ecological area with 3 mutually reinforcing functions: conservation, sustainable development and logistic support for scientific research and education. Collectively, all biosphere reserves form a World Network linked by exchanges of experience and knowledge.8 World Heritage is the designation for places on earth that are of outstanding universal value to humanity and as such, have been inscribed on the World, Heritage List to be protected for future generations to appreciate and enjoy. 9 Biosphere Reserve designation differs from National Park and other kinds of protected natural area designations, In the former, the three functions of conservation, research and sustainable development have equal importance; in the latter, conservation is the primary concern, with research and sustainable development a secondary consideration. Nevertheless, some of the areas surrounding the Volcanoes National Park Biosphere Reserve enjoy varying degrees of regulatory protection by the State of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR). ' ~ Honolulu Advertiser, Apri125, 2005 • http://the.honoluluadvertiser,com/article/2005/Apr/25/in/In03p.html s http://www.unesco.org/mab/faq br.shtml#difference s http://whc.unesco.org/en/108#world heritage -7- Two adjoining state-designated Natural Area Reserves, Kahauale`a and Pu'u • Maka'ala, meet the same standards of resource quality and protective management as the Biosphere Reserve. The state also manages several other forest reserves: Upper Waiakea Forest Reserve, Waiakea Forest Reserve, Ola`a Forest Reserve (Mountain View Section), Nanawale Forest Reserve, Malama Ki Forest Reserve, Keau`ohana Forest Reserve, and the recently acquired Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve.10 In total, these forest reserve comprise 131,659 acres. In addition, DLNR's State Parks Division owns and manages Lava Tree State Monument and Mackenzie State Recreation Area. The state Conservation District, which encompasses almost all of the above areas as well as some additional lands, is organized as a regulatory hierarchy. There are four subzones of the Conservation District, each intended to provide a degree of regulatory protection that reflects the intactness or relative significance of the resources that are present in those subzones. Natural Area Reserves, for example, are located in the Protective Subzone, which is the most restrictive of the four subzones in terms of allowable uses. About half of Puna's Conservation District is in the Protective Subzone. The remainder is in either the Limited Subzone, which is designated for areas with potential high risk of natural hazard, or the Resource Subzone, which is generally applied to less intact forest reserves. The Conservation District also includes the submerged lands beneath coastal waters. The Hawaii Department of Health (DOH) is responsible for monitoring and protecting the quality of the waters themselves under the authority of the federal • Clean Water Act. The Conservation District is one of four land use districts created by the State of Hawaii Land Use Law, Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 205. The three other districts are Agricultural, Rural, and Urban (see Figure 2.) The State of Hawaii Land Use Commission (LUC) administers boundary amendments for the land use districts and requests for special use permits within the Agricultural and Rural Districts that involve land areas greater than 15 acres. The County of Hawaii General Plan makes more detailed, if not parcel- specific, designations for land use in the Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG). This is meant to be a guide for zoning maps and future changes to those maps. There are several notable inconsistencies between the LUC district maps, the LUPAG and the county zoning maps as they apply to Puna. About 1,672 acres that the county has zoned for agriculture are within the LUC's Conservation or Urban districts. Some of these lands have been identified by either the state or the county as having agricultural importance, as will be explained below. When considering boundary amendments from the Agriculture District to another district or a special use permit application, the LUC is mandated to consider the impact on agricultural lands. Chapter 205 mentions only the Land Study Bureau (LSB) soil classifications "A" and "B" as having agricultural value, but these are more io The Wao Kele O Puna Forest Reserve is owed by the Office of Hawaiian Affairs but managed by • DLNR's Division of Forestry and Wildlife. -8- • • • Figure 2 State Land Use Districts in Puna -9- Figure 3 General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide for Puna ty Dew Flan Barry ~ Easter~e kgrie~e i ~_ ~; Deteci Places t Aral Laad~ Majat ~~ CanserT.*stion - T1,r I.aaci Use P'ar~m. GsadeMap is tea ~ ~ ~ h~ediona. Frosty [Trbau 2005 Camt~! afHawaii Ge~al ' ~.. ~~, jj~ Ply. I~e zom~ce a~ ~hc 6an~uies ae ~ 1989 Hatr~u Caa Plaamiag i3t6aa D I" = 2! mik 61oeEobt maps In~ix~trial -10- • • C7 than four decades old and reflect a pattern of plantation agricultural use that has dwindled to insignificance in Hawaii. There are no "A" or "B" lands in the entire district of Puna, which implies incorrectly that Puna's lands have lesser agricultural value. The state has not formally adopted a system to replace the LSB classifications,, but the state Department of Agriculture has prepared maps depicting Agricultural Lands of Importance to the State of Hawaii (ALISH) that reflect more accurately than the LSB maps the value of lands to support diversified agriculture. ALISH maps are therefore used more often than the LSB maps when evaluating agricultural lands. The county's LUPAG adopted a similar, but not identical, mapping system for areas deemed to be Important Agricultural Lands (IAL.) As can be seen in Figure 4, there is some correspondence between the ALISH and IAL maps, but by no means an exact match. ALISH lands cover a total of approximately 75,596 acres in Puna, whereas IAL lands cover only about 51,653 acres. It is not clear why the IAL map includes lands in the Mountain View area that the ALISH map omits. Neither of these maps are completely consistent with LUC district boundaries. About 733 acres of ALISH lands and about 29 acres of IAL lands are within either the LUC Conservation District or Urban District. d. Limitations of Data • As apparent from the above discussion, there are inherent difficulties in attempting to define, classify and map natural resource areas and in linking these maps to effective regulatory strategies. One of the big challenges in Puna is the lack of reliable, detailed data. Another challenge is the dynamic condition of natural resources, which are subject to continual change. Finally, there is the challenge of classifying resources in a manner that has meaning for a regulatory approach, if not to the degree of rigor, comprehensiveness and accuracy that would be preferred for a scientific study. In order. to protect resources before they are lost, it is often necessary to act on incomplete data. Following are some observations about the data limitations for the general types of resources that are the focus of this Working Paper and how this relates to the preparation of a proposed action plan for preservation: Forest Cover: The map in Figure 1 is based on satellite imagery data that were collected and interpreted by the Hawaii Gap Analysis Project at the University of Hawai'i.11 The level of generalization in this analysis is far from ideal, but satellite imagery remains the best method of mapping vegetation in large areas where ground surveys could require much time and be complicated by accessing parcels under private ownership. More complete inventories of Puna's forests were conducted in the ~~ The data set was produced from automated classifications of Landsat ETM+ imagery acquired from between 1999 and 2003. The data acquired has a 30-meter per pixel resolution making the distributions of land cover generalized but useful in locating large groupings of vegetation. (Hawaii Biodiversity and Mapping Program) -11- Figure 4 Agricultural Land Classifications in Puna L.e~nd ~ ~ ~~ Q census I~i~isMOd ) sre 1dmli~ed hyr #~e Stam of 0 P~an~g D~aa~s ~ ~~ at Ag~lwlmre ~ H ! L4~i.lubr+sec~iua w. R ~x'~a~tnd tiedsj aee identified by the C'~Y ~ ~ IU1l. Hswsil fieaersi Pin Land tlse ' i~rs+a arse. sa Iams is Prm nbr are ciasdeed as 'r4" Ar 'B" in N I ~ w a ib! I~ ~ Bitl6t' II MEI~YQd s ric~tuyde s .:,~ -t ~_ ~ . Ial1i ae0<ffi: ~ 4 $ Eisasii Statewide ©g~~ MiBa • • -12- 1980's using a combination of aerial photo interpretation and ground surveys of transects to validate the photo interpretations.12 However, these data are now old, and the inventory omitted most of the subdivided private lands outside of the Conservation District. Figure 1 is useful for identifying areas to be protected by regulatory measures, but it is not accurate enough to be applied at a small parcel level for the review of a grading plan, for example. Agricultural Land: "Agricultural land" is difficult to classifying because many variables are involved. ALISH was an attempt to consider physical suitability for a wide variety of agricultural activities, including unique crops of cultural value, as well as other indicators such as land use patterns and proximity to potential irrigation sources. As noted in Figure 4, there are discrepancies between the ALISH and IAL designations, but this can be resolved if these two designations are viewed as a combined set rather than mutually exclusive classes. While the ALISH and IAL systems have limitations, they are more relevant than the LSB classifications and both enjoy official recognition. Eventually, these maps may be replaced or supplemented with new soil maps for the Island of Hawaii that are being prepared by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.13 • Cultural Resources: Sites that have been listed on the Hawai i Register of Historic Places are identified on a map and described in terms of their physical characteristics and significance. The Register, however, by no means includes all sites that have historic significance. Obtaining a more complete, reliable inventory is hampered by several factors. First, many cultural sites, including human burial remains, have not been discovered because they are subsurface or otherwise not readily visible. Second, there is reluctance to display the location of discovered cultural sites on a map unless there are adequate measures in place to protect the site from destruction, desecration or pilferagg. Third, the value of some sites relates more to the qualities of a place and the written or oral history associated with it rather than to a specific site that can be delineated on a map. Fourth, many sites with physical form, such as structures, are in deteriorated condition or only partially remaining. The accumulation of information about cultural and historic sites is therefore an on-going discovery process, often occurring in conjunction with development activity. This is important to bear in mind when formulating a strategy for the preservation or recovery of historic and cultural sites, as will be discussed in Section 5. e. Elements of a Green Infrastructure Plan for Puna "Green Infrastructure" has been defined as: is The forest mapping project was led by Jim D. Jacobi, Ph.D., U.S. Geological Survey, Pacific Islands Ecosystem Research Center. 1sUSDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service website, htto:/hvww.hi.nres.usda. ov/soilproeress.html -13- ...the physical environment within and between our cities, towns and villages. It is a network of multi-functional open spaces, including formal parks, gardens, woodlands, green corridors, waterways, street trees and open countryside. It comprises all environmental resources, and thus a green infrastructure approach also contributes towards sustainable resource management.14 As applied to Puna, a Green Infrastructure Plan would also include geological and cultural resources, since the sustainability of the natural environment is so closely linked to the region's cultural history and dynamic geological conditions. The following sections discuss the major elements and proposed components of a Green Infrastructure Plan - Malama I Ka `Aina -for Puna. The map in Figure 10 illustrates how the green infrastructure can be viewed as a network of physical linkages. 2. Protecting Native Forests a. Develop a Strategy While trees and forests have some value, it is the forests where `Ohia and other native plants are predominant that have greatest value in Puna. These native forests, which are habitat for numerous rare and endangered species, are vulnerable to land development and invasion by aggressive introduced species. For this reason, several Working Group reports proposed strategies, including regulatory measures, focused on protection and preservation of the native forest. Recognizing that there are varying degrees of forest quality and species characteristics, the aims for the preservation strategy would be to: • Encourage the removal of invasive species; • Allow reasonable removal or reduction of introduced species; • Restrict the removal of native species; and • Promote the propagation of native species. Some other factors to consider in developing an effective strategy are: • Allowance needs to be made for grading on small lots and lots that are in agricultural use so that the owner is not deprived of reasonable use of the property. • Regulations should take contacts into account; e.g., if surrounding lands are covered by relatively intact native forest, restrictions on lot clearance should be stricter. • Timber operations in the Agriculture District need to be more effectively regulated in locations where nearby native forests are highly sensitive to disturbance. 14 Green Infrastructure website, http://www.greeninfrastrueture.eul?section=006.002&pa~e=39 -14- • While the Department of Public Works administers the.. gradin g ordinance, this agency does not show an inclination to regulate forest protection as part of the scope of its responsibilities. The Planning Department is a more likely agency to assume this responsibility, but it will need specialized staff to do so. • Given the county's limited ability to monitor activities in remote areas, it will be essential to form partnerships with other public and non-profit entities in the protection of forest lands and the promotion of good forestry practices through public education and outreach. b. Enact Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone and Re-zoning in Volcano As noted in Section 1.b., the Volcano area plays a critical role in the protection of the native forest because of its adjacency to high quality forest habitat and existing protected areas. The designation of Volcanoes National Park as an International Biosphere Reserve identified only a core area for protection. UNESCO recommends that local governments establish a buffer area and a transition area around a designated Biosphere Reserve to provide added protection of the resource.ls This is partially fulfilled, as mentioned in Section l.c., by the two state Natural Area Reserves that lie adjacent to Volcanoes National Park. However, there are other contiguous areas that remain unprotected, notably the Volcano community, where current zoning designations permit a substantial potential for additional subdivision and land development. The key strategy to provide better forest protection in the Volcano area, based on a recommendation of one of the Working Groups,ls is the establishment of a special "overlay" district in the Volcano area called the "Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone" (BRBZ). An overlay district ~is a zoning designation that is superimposed on an underlying use district in order to enact additional development standards to protect the identified special resource. In this instance, the special resource is the native forest. Figure 5 is an aerial photo showing the boundary of the proposed BRBZ and its relationship to the forest cover and existing built-up areas and platted lands. The provisions of the BRBZ overlay district would include the following: Standards for maximum land disturbance within the BRBZ, including building footprints, impervious surface, and clearance of vegetation within rights-of--way or easements for utility lines, roadways, driveways and trails. The standards for private lots may vary slightly according to the use allowed in the underlying zoning district. Appendix D provides an example of standards that would be appropriate for the BRBZ. • Mitigation standards and procedures that provide guidelines for the restoration and re-planting of recently developed areas, including those that were disturbed by unauthorized activity. See Appendix D for an is UNESCO website, http://www.unesco.org/mab/faq br.shtml#zones is Land Use Working Group/Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone Sub-Group -15- • ~J example. Effective enforcement also requires penalties for non-compliance, but this is already provided in the county's zoning code. Several initiatives are recommended to complement the BRBZ overlay zone: Stricter standards for lot clearance may necessitate other regulatory changes. For example, the county should accept "small-footprint" designs for septic tanks, subject to approval by the state Department of Health as an alterative to horizontal leach field systems that require extensive grading. Examples of alternative systems are shown in Figure 13. • It would be helpful to appoint an advisory committee composed of residents of the BRBZ area, planning/design professionals and biologists with expertise in various aspects of the area's ecology to assist in developing standards and review procedures for the overlay zone, and -16- Figure 5 Proposed Boundary of Biosphere Reserve Buffer Zone continue in an advisory capacity after the BRBZ is adopted. The advisory committee could also assist in community education and outreach on an on-going basis. The state Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) should seriously consider designating its unencumbered lands east of Wright Road for either Natural Area Reserve or at least Forest Reserve status. These lands are contiguous with Ola'a Forest Reserve, and share the same forest resource values. The County Council could adopt a resolution to make that request to DLNR as a supporting measure for the BRBZ. • The General Plan should be amended to recognize the purpose and intent of the BRBZ and acknowledge its role as part of an integrated federal, state and county strategy to protect a unique natural resource of global significance. • Re-zoning ofagricultural- and residential zoned lots to zoning districts that closely match their present lot size would discourage further subdivision and development within the BRBZ. Proposed district-wide re- zoning of agricultural lands was previously proposed in Working Paper #1, which also includes a map showing the affected areas and the corresponding proposed zoning designations. Figure 6 shows the BRBZ area in more detail and includes potential changes to residential zoning designations and a preliminary area for commercial zoning to establish the Volcano Community Village Center. The boundary of this commercial district follows the description in the 2007 revision of the Volcano Long- Range Plan.17 c. Limit Lot Clearance Elsewhere Native forest cover extends beyond the protected federal and state areas and the proposed BRBZ, although the canopy cover tends to be more open and is interspersed with introduced species to a greater degree. Still, these remnants of native forest have ecological value and serve as transit areas for native species. The strategy for these areas, therefore, is to preserve a grid of native forest canopy to provide some continuity to more intact forest areas. While a patchwork pattern is not ideal, it is preferable to complete removal of the remnants. Following are elements of the strategy: Amendments to either the grading ordinance or the zoning code to prohibit the mechanical removal of native species within any required building setback area on a lot that is 2 acres or less in size, except for required access driveway(s). Exceptions should be made for commercial- and residential-zoned parcels within a designated village center other than Volcano, which would come under the BRBZ. 17 Volcano Community Association, Volcano Long-Range Plan (Revision 2007), Item 5 under "Economic Interests. -17- Figure 6 Potential Re-zoning and Forest Reserve Designation in Volcano Suggested Agricultural Rezoning (by acres) 20.00 or Greater = AG-20a - AG-2000a - 10.00 to 19.99 = AG-l0a - 5.00 to 9.99 = AG-Sa '`' ~ 3.00 to 4.99 = AG-3a 2.00 to 2.99 = FA-2 Suggested Residential Rezoning (feet is thousands) 14.99 and below = RS- IO 15 to 19.99 = RS-15 20 and above = RS-20 Q Prelim. Commercial 7_.one Major Highway Other TMK - Possible Forest Reserve 4 0 0.25 05 7 A i~Wes e t • • - 18 - • • On lots that are larger than 2 acres, applicants for grading permits'would be required to submit a site plan indicating native trees of a certain size (e.g., with trunk diameters of 6 inches in diameter) that are within the "buildable area" (i.e., the lot interior exclusive of required setbacks.) Reasonable standards should be adopted to allow agricultural use of the properties that are zoned for agriculture use, especially on lands identified as ALISH or LEI, (see pages 11 and 12 for descriptions and map.) Figure 7 illustrates a sample conceptual site plan. Figure 7 Conceptual Plan for Clearing a Site for Agricultural Use . _ _ , Road May be cleared for . _ _ . ~ ~RI~.t+~~;..~. - . , . ~ building • U ^ +~~#~~~ ~ + ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ^ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ 1 1 1 l I ~ ALI~H1lAL lands - Clearing allowed for ~ agricultural use only ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ i . ,` Qi '•~ .~ .• , . ` Remnant native forest -19- All applications for grading permits should have the written authorization • of the lot owner and proof of ownership, such as a real property tax record or deed. To promote compliance with the approved grading permit, resources proposed for protection should be clearly visible. Required yards and native trees at other locations on the site that are designated for preservation should be clearly staked or flagged prior to and during construction. Also, a notice of the grading work should be posted on the property frontage, visible from the access road. • Stiffer penalties should be required for violations of the grading restrictions than for other types of zoning or grading violations because, while most of the latter types of violations can be corrected by remedial work, native forest is difficult to restore, especially the removal of a significant stand of mature trees. • Timber operations involving the harvesting and/or removal of native trees should be regulated in the agricultural zone with the same degree of scrutiny as they are in the state Conservation District. This means that a forestry management plan and environmental assessment should be required for the timber operation, including a sustainable yield analysis and reforestation and restoration plan. • The regulatory review process has a secondary purpose of raising public awareness of the value of native species and the distinction between native and invasive plants. This is discussed in the following section. e. Improve Enforcement, Partnering and Public Education The above proposals for regulatory measures create significant new responsibilities for the county in protecting native habitat in areas outside of the state Conservation District. To assume this role, the county will need to build its capacity to (1) administer the regulations, (2) provide public education and outreach, and (3) develop partnerships with other public agencies, educational institutions and non-profit organizations dedicated to natural resource protection and research, technical assistance and land preservation. Following are recommendations to build that capacity: Create an office of County Forester, which would oversee the administration of native forest protection ordinances and regulations and foster partnerships to provide public education and technical support for forest conservation. This office would most likely be located in the Planning Department, but County Forester staff could also assist other county agencies, such as Department of Public Works and Department of Parks and Recreation, in their programs and facility planning and maintenance. • -20- • Build artnershi s with other a encies and ro rams P P g p g to supplement county investment in forest protection. While staff salaries for the County Forester office would be locally-funded, public agencies such as DLNR's Kaulunani unit18 and non-profit organizations such as the Nature Conservancy are potential sources of supplemental program funding, free technical assistance and education materials. State and federal agencies such as U.S. Geological Survey, University of Hawaii and DLNR's Division of Forestry and Wildlife can provide in-kind assistance by recommending criteria and methods for reviewing site plans and identifying forest buffer areas that require special consideration. Technical assistance can also be provided by the several programs that are countering the threat of invasive plants, such as the Hawaii Invasive Species Council, Horticultural Weeds, Coordinating Group on Alien Pest Species (CLAPS), Hawaiian Ecosystem and Risk project (HEAR), Invasive Species Communities, Weed Risk Assessment Project, Cats Indoors, Big Island Invasive Species Committee (BIISC), and Hawaii Association of Watershed Partnerships (HAWP). • Launch a public education and outreach program to enlist broad community support and involvement in forest protection. Educational materials such as brochures, posters and other reference material need to reach both targeted audiences and the broader public. A brochure directed to construction contractors and property owners might suggest • voluntary methods to promote sustainability of native forest; for example, contracting a timber harvester to salvage native trees to be cut down to make way for an approved development, rather than discarding the wood as waste. A brochure or poster intended for the broader community might raise awareness about the threat of invasive species and be posted or distributed through island nurseries, building supply and home improvement businesses. The Mayor's Arborist Advisory Committee and community associations can assist in promoting community awareness by providing forums for public workshops by the County Forester at demonstration sites or community centers. f. Employ Land Trusts and Conservation Easements • In the BRBZ, where the goal is to keep undisturbed as much intact `ohia canopy forest as possible and reduce the potential housing density allowable by the current zoning designations, regulatory measures can be augmented by direct purchase or dedication of land development rights in exchange for tax benefits to the owners: Sometimes the acquisition is in fee simple; other times it may be a conservation easement, reflected as a deed restriction.ls This is facilitated by the establishment of a Volcano Community Land Trust, a non-profit entity to which easements and titles to property are transferred after they are acquired. Below are actions that the Trust may undertake to fulfill this role: 18 See DLNR Division of Forestry & Wildlife website: http://www.kaulunani.ore/index.htm is The relevant state statute is HRS, Chapter 198. -21- • Establish itself as an Internal Revenue Code Section 501(c)(3) or (c)(6) charitable organization; • Fund-raise from local, state, national and international individuals, organizations and governmental entities for the purchase of undeveloped parcels at either fair market value or a negotiated price that would include a tax deduction to the seller; • Acquire undeveloped parcels through the use of these funds or through gift by owners; • Deed-restrict these acquired parcels to prevent future development, with the ability to enforce the restrictions belonging to the Land Trust and/or to a government entity; • Sell deed restricted parcels to an adjoining land owner to merge the parcels with the adjoining lot and to provide for their maintenance as part of the purchaser's own land ownership, with the restriction running with the land that will prevent any development on the parcel; • Recycle funds received from the sale of the deed restricted parcels to purchase additional parcels for deed restriction and transfer to adjoining owners. In addition, the Trust may retain interim ownership of selected parcels that can be used for education or training purposes, or for the transfer of selected parcels at reduced or no cost to other not-for-profit or governmental entities who will provide • the desired level of maintenance and care of these deed restricted parcels. The county already offers real property tax reductions for the dedication of native forest areas. The Trust could review the current provisions and propose amendments, if necessary, to increase incentives for private property owners to dedicate a conservation easement. Another approach that the Trust could consider is land pooling, or a limited transfer of development rights program, to allow development rights on a property with high-value forest to be transferred to another property where the forest is already degraded. This does not reduce overall development density in Volcano, but it rearranges the development pattern to minimize the impact on forest lands by preserving larger, contiguous tracts of land. It may also be possible to interest the existing Hawaii Island Land Trust in getting active in Puna rather than establish a new organization. This would reduce the costs and time involved in completing the legal work and building the institutional capacity during the start-up period. 3. Promoting Appropriate Agricultural Use a. Adjust Land Use Controls on Agricultural Lands The ALISH and IAL designations discussed in Section 1c and shown in Figure 4 do not have direct regulatory effect. There is no assurance that these lands -22- • • will be protected for future agricultural use, or even made available by landowners for agricultural use. Competing potential uses tend to raise the real estate value of the land and/or cause the landowner to be reluctant to dedicate it for long-term agricultural use. This, in turn, discourages agricultural producers, whose investments in site preparation, irrigation, planting, and supporting infrastructure for the business require long-term commitment of the land. Most ALISH and IAL lands, except for small portions in the Conservation District, are within the state Agriculture District. Intensive, large-scale urban uses are not allowed in the Agriculture District, and it is less likely that a Special Permit for an urban-type use would be granted on a site with ALISH or IAL designation. Nevertheless, State Land Use Law allows land subdivisions with lots as small as one acre in the Agriculture District. It is very difficult to maintain a viable agriculture use on a lot of that size. The owner of such a small lot is much more likely to develop the property solely as a residence, with little or no related agricultural use. This is clearly the predominant pattern in developed portions of non-conforming subdivisions that contain these small lots (see Table 1.) County zoning can be more restrictive than the State Land Use Law with respect to minimum lot size and allowable uses. Working Paper #1 suggested district-wide re-zoning of agricultural lands to match existing lot size (see Figure 4 of Working Paper #1) as an approach to manage development growth, but it is also is a means to encourage agricultural use in a couple of ways: Subdivision of larger agricultural properties would be discouraged because the owner would need to obtain re-zoning before being able to subdivide the land into smaller parcels. The entitlement process for a zone change entails not only more time and expense, but also the requirement of public hearings and discretionary decisions by the Planning Commission, the County Council and the Mayor. Subdivision applications, on the other hand, require only an administrative decision and there is no public hearing. Larger agricultural-zoned parcels tend to have a lower assessed valuation per acre than do smaller agricultural-zoned parcels, which reduces the tax liability for the owner and producer, especially when combined with the county's property tax reductions for dedicated agricultural land. The relationship between land parcel size and assessed valuation per acres is shown in Figure 8. Smaller agricultural-zoned parcels tend to be valued primarily for their use as a residential site, for a number of reasons discussed on page 6. Larger parcels tend to be viewed more for their agricultural value. This relationship is apparent in county records for properties whose owners applied for agricultural dedication for real property tax assessment purposes, indicating that the greater the parcel size, the greater the likelihood that its agricultural value approaches or even exceeds its market value.2o • 20 County of Hawai i Department of Finance, data records of 1,879 parcels in Puna District that applied for agricultural dedication for real property tax assessment purposes, 2006. (Excel spreadsheet) -23- Figure 8 Parcel Size and Assessed Valuation of Agricultural-Zoned Land $12,000 $10,000 $8,000 Q m a c 0 ~ $6,000 A v m w w m w Q $4,000 $2,000 $0 1 acre and below 1.01 to 2.99 3.00 to 4.99 5.00 to 9.99 10.00 to 19.99 20 and greater Lot Size in Acres The county can also encourage the preservation of ALISH or IAL lands by removing ambiguous county policies concerning future land use in such areas. A notable example is in the vicinity of Kea`au, where the General Plan LUPAG designates an "urban expansion area" that covers over 2,900 acres. Much of this land area is designated ALISH (see Figure 9.) The IAL designation does not apply in this instance, probably because it would create an internal inconsistency in the LUPAG, but the ALISH designation is a good indicator of the agricultural value of this former plantation land. Kea`au presently contains about 635 acres of undeveloped land in the Urban District, which is more than sufficient to fulfill its intended role at a Regional Town Center. Therefore, it is recommended that the General Plan be amended to remove the Urban Expansion Area designation in the vicinity of Kea `au from the LUPAG. Land pooling in nonconforming subdivisions can preserve or promote agricultural use by creating larger parcels in areas that are more remote from planned village centers. As shown in the pilot study of Hawaiian Paradise Park (HPP) in Working Paper #1, Appendix C, land pooling is a technique that can be used to form a village center by clustering housing on lots near the center. In the process, land pooling leaves outlying lots undeveloped. These lots can then be sold or leased to adjacent lot owners who wish to expand agricultural operations or • • -24- Fi re 9 General Plan-Designated Urban Expansion Area in Kea`au Relative to ALISH Lands • - State Land Use Code URBAN Agricultural Lands Important to the State of Hawaii provide a buffer between their existing agricultural operations and nearby residence. The typical one-acre lots in HPP are quite small for a feasible agricultural use. At present, the few agricultural operations that exist in HPP often enjoy the temporary "buffer" of adjoining undeveloped lots that are owned by others. However, as more lots in HPP are developed for residential use, it will be increasingly difficult for agricultural users to maintain operations without nuisance complaints from neighbors. While a "right-to-farm" ordinance21 can provide some zi A good example of a "right-to-farm" ordinance is in El Dorado County, Colorado, http:/Iwww.co.el- dorad o. ca. us/Plan ni ng/Ordinances/ 1713. ndf -25- Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide Important Agricultural Lands Major Highways Urban Expanison Area ~ Community Development Plan Boundary protection for agricultural practices from unreasonable nuisance complaints, it is questionable whether there will be sufficient political will in the future to apply the "right-to-farm" standards in a subdivision such as HPP, where most lots will probably be dedicated to residential rather than agricultural use, unless land pooling is implemented. b. Enhance Marketing Opportunities A big challenge for small agricultural operations is to get exposure and reliable markets for their products. Direct sales to consumers are even more beneficial because this cuts out the mark-ups taken by middlemen. For products that require immediate consumption, this can also reduce or eliminate transportation and packaging costs. There are two major opportunities for increasing exposure and direct sales in Puna: 1. Puna hosts a large number of visitors to Volcanoes National Park and other natural attractions of the area throughout the year. Puna's unique agricultural businesses -such as cut flowers, orchids and anthuriums; papaya, noni and other tropical fruit; and geothermally-heated aquaculture - are a visitor attraction in themselves. Some agricultural businesses have already benefited from this exposure, especially those that have visibility along major highways or that advertise in tourist publications. But a coordinated program of tours that feature these unique agricultural operations could bring even wider exposure and increase both direct sales and exports. The private sector already provides this to some extent, but subsidies from state and/or county sources could make these tours possible at a nominal price, most likely increasing the number of visitors and the volume of sales. At the very least, the state could fund a pilot project to test whether the subsidy would be off-set by gains in excise and income tax revenues. 2. Working Paper #1 recommends the enhancement of existing and establishment of new village centers throughout the region. The county, state or community association could provide a site for farmers' markets in these village centers to enable direct sales to consumers. This would yield multiple benefits: - Producers, by cutting out the middleman, gain price control, regular cash flow, and a reliable outlet. Also beneficial are the direct customer feedback on produce and prices and reduced costs for transportation and packaging. This is especially valuable for new, small-scale or organic producers who cannot provide the quantity required by supermarkets. Markets in dispersed village centers make it possible for producers to attend several markets on different days, enhancing business stability. - Consumers get direct contact and feedback with producers and access to fresh food. Consumers can also learn more about the production and origin of their food, and suggestions on how to cook and prepare fresh ingredients. -26- - The environment benefits by the reduced food miles, attendant vehicle pollution, noise, and fossil fuel use. There is also a reduction in packaging and increased potential for organic or pesticide-free produce. - The community gains because markets bring life into the village centers, encourage social interaction, and stimulate locally-based business, including retail stores near the farmers' market.22 The state could provide additional assistance by allowing local producers to sell their goods at county-designated farmers' markets at the 0.5% general excise tax rate (for wholesalers) rather than the 4.0% rate that applies to retail sales. While the state usually resists changes to the general excise tax, this proposal would have relatively limited impact on revenues while providing the several benefits cited above. Also, since other counties sponsor farmers' markets, the benefits would be state-wide. c. Pursue New Opportunities: Bio-Fuels and Indirect Geothermal Use There are two energy-related opportunities for agricultural development in Puna: the production of bio-fuels and indirect use of geothermal steam. 1. There is growing interest in producing bio-fuels in Hawaii, where the combination of growing conditions, legislative incentives and rising costs for fossil-based fuels increases the economic attractiveness of these operations. Crops that can be grown in Hawaii, such as sugarcane, generally provide a more reliable source of ethanol than most crops that can be produced on the mainland. Because of this, high fuel prices, energy dependence and environmental concerns, the State of Hawaii has provided incentives for bio-fuel production. In 2006, alternative fuel standards enacted by the Hawaii State Legislature went into effect that set a goal to provide 10% of highway fuel demand from alternate fuels by 2010; 15% by 2015; and 20% by 2020.23 Also, state legislation requires that 20% of net electricity sales come from renewable energy by 2020, and includes bio-fuels as a renewable energy source.24 Tandem to these measures, the Legislature also enacted number of tax and other incentives, including an investment tax credit for bio-fuel producers. In Puna, fallow sugarcane lands near Kea`au may be a particularly suitable site for bio-fuel production because of proximity to the port of Hilo. 1. Strongest agriculture-related candidates for the "direct-use" of geothermal resources in the Kapoho area include greenhouses and aquaculture. There is more limited potential for developing fruit or 22 For example, retail stores near a farmers' market in Winchester, Hampshire, UK, reported an increase in sales of 30% on market days. httn://www.hants.gov.uk/scrmxn/c27700.html 2a Relevant legislation is Act 199, Session Laws of Hawaii (SLH) 1994 and Act 240, SLH, 2006. za Act 95, SLH ,2004. -27- fish drying operations, a lumber kiln, and facilities for soil sterilization of potting media.ze 4. Providing Recreational Parks, Trails and Scenic Corridors a. Existing Park System The following functional classification system for public parks and recreation areas is based on recommendations of the Parks and Recreation Working Group: • Camp Ground: An area with potable water and restroom facilities for overnight tent camping, which may be available on a permit or fee-for- service basis. • Coastal Activity Area: A shoreline recreational area that is accessed by a park or a public easement • Community Park: A recreational park or facility intended to be used primarily by residents of the area that is owned and maintained by the County or by a private entity with unrestricted public access. • Linear Park: A recreational, non-motorized pathway (except motorized wheelchairs), which may be inter-connected or within aright-of--way of an existing or new roadway, and is separated from travel lanes and adjacent properties by a landscaped buffer, with occasional rest stops or viewing spots. • Preserve: A site with features of significant natural or historic value that provides minimal facilities for public visitation, such as interpretive signage, a walking trail and small parking area, and is maintained by a stewardship program. Functional classification recognizes that recreation includes a wide array of activities for people of all ages, and that facilities design needs to reflect the type of intended activity and the appropriate treatment of the physical setting. For example, community parks intended for active recreation are optimally located in population centers, whereas the location of campgrounds, coastal activity areas and preserves is highly dependent on a site's natural qualities and features. b. Expand and Improve Park System Listed in Table 1 are proposed expansions or improvements to the park system, again based on Working Group recommendations. Highlights of the proposed improvements to the park system, in general order of priority are as follows: • Community parks should be located in all designated Community Village Centers (i.e., Ainaloa, Kurtistown, Mountain View, Hawaiian Paradise Park, and Volcano), as well as in the two Regional Town Centers (Kea`au, Pahoa). At present, both Kea`au and Pahoa have county park facilities, but the latter site should be expanded into a regional park, similar to zs County of Hawai i Department of Research and Development, 2006 communication. -28- Shipman Regional Park at Kea`au. Some of the Communit Villa e Y g Centers already have recreation facilities, if not "parks" per se. The two nonconforming subdivisions designated for village centers - Ainaloa and Hawaiian Paradise Park -lack public parks and public recreation facilities. Given the amount and pace of development in these two subdivisions, development of public parks in both should get high priority. Smaller community parks would also be desirable in all designated Neighborhood Villages Centers (i.e., Hawaiian Beaches, Orchidland, Nanawale, Leilani, Kapoho, Glenwood, an area between Kaimu and Opihikao, and the makai area of Hawaiian Paradise Park.) Hawaiian Beaches already has a park that was dedicated to the county, but it contains minimal facilities. c. Develop Recreational and Scenic Corridors The state's Bike Plan Hawaii (2003) and Na Ala Hele program identify a few existing and many proposed bikeways and hiking trails in Puna. Of particular note is the status of longer routes: • Old Volcano Trail, which follows an alignment approximately parallel to Highway 11 for a length of about 14 miles, is a state-owned right-of--way that is planned for restoration as amulti-purpose recreational trail. The county has received funding for the survey of a 30-foot right-of--way that can be restored. Issues that still need to be decided are: (1) whether the trail should be paved or have a more natural surface, (2) whether a portion of the trail (especially at the mauka end) might be also used as an emergency access route, (3) how to fund the improvements, and (4) who will maintain the trail. The Old Railroad Right-of--Way, which extends from Panaewa to Kapoho for a length of about 12 miles, much of which is under private ownership. Landowners of the proposed first 6-mile phase of development of a multi- use recreational trail along this alignment are W. H. Shipman, Ltd., and Hawaii Electric Light Company, both of whom expressed concerns about safety, liability, security and maintenance related to the proposed trail. The national Rails-to-Trails Conservancy, whose western regional director participated in the planning for the proposed Old Railroad Trail in Puna, is an excellent resource for finding solutions to these landowner concerns.as The alignment of Old Government Road or Old Puna Trail roughly follows Puna's eastern coastline. It traverses a lava landscape that was described as "literally an outdoor museum for the ongoing process of land formation, colonization, and succession", that also passes near many sites of cultural value?~ Despite the implication of its name, Old Government is not entirely under public ownership. The state's Na Ala Hele program manages a segment north of Hawaiian Paradise Park and the county maintains a paved portion between Hawaiian Beaches and Papaya Road, • zs Rails-to-Trails Conservancy, http://www.railtrails.org/whoweare/index.html 27 Na Pua Ho`omalu, Cultural and Historic Preservation Working Group Report, Appendix, p. 8. -29- but there are other portions under private ownership or under unclear title. All of the trail projects described above need a detailed land survey, design, and management plan before improvements can be built. For Old Volcano Trail, the survey work is in progress. The two other trail projects will also require title research and some means to obtain public access to the right-of--way use, whether by fee acquisition, easement or license agreement. The county can support this effort with the following: • The county can leverage available federal and state funding sources with matching assistance for title research, land surveys, acquisition of access rights, and improvements. • As survey, title, and physical condition information is compiled, the county should enter the data into the county's geo-database. • The county can publish and continually update a public access brochure that includes mauka as well as shoreline trails. • The county can require applicants for Special Management Area, subdivision and other land development permits to provide land surveys and title searches for portions of trails that cross the affected parcel and even require the dedication of such trails under existing state 1aw28. • Urge the state, through County Council resolution and support of the Mayor, to assume jurisdiction of these trails through the Na Ala Hele program either before or after improvements have been made. One of the Working Groups29 recommends that Highway 137 (Red Road) be designated as a scenic corridor, along with several specific improvement measures that are listed in Table 1. Federal funds, via the state Department of Transportation, are available for these improvements under the Scenic Byways program. There is some likelihood that Highway 137 closely follows the alignment of an ancient trail. The possibility of restoring remnants of this trail and other sites of cultural interest should be investigated as planning for the scenic byway progresses. d. Organize Community Partnerships The proposed park system expansion is ambitious, so volunteer assistance by community organizations and individuals can help achieve this goal, given limited county and state resources. A Puna Community Council, if such an entity is created by the county, could in turn assist the Department of Parks and Recreation in organizing, coordinating and facilitating volunteer efforts, such as: 28 Relevant statutes are HRS, Section 46-6.5, as amended, and HRS, Section 205A. 2s Land Use/Preserving Land, Air & Water Working Group -30- • Providin on- oin su ort in lannin and ac uisi i g g g pp p g q ton and community outreach; • Assuming organizational responsibility for a stewardship program, to include, for example, site monitoring, pathway building and maintenance, interpretative activities, and outreach; • Collaborating with the State Department of Land and Natural Resources' (DLNR) Na Ala Hele program and with community groups to inventory, plan and implement trail and bikeway systems; • Collaborating with traditional Hawaiian practitioners to protect sensitive sites and coordinate stewardship activities. Table 1 Proposed Expansions and Enhancements to the Park System 1 e Pro osed Ex ansion/Enhancement Camp • Consider expanding camping area at MacKenzie State Park, including public property south of Grounds MacKenzie. •At Ahalanui Beach Park: (1) Accessibility improvements, (2) Screened changing area next to showers designed to blend with natural surroundings, (3) Repairs to parking lot surface, and (4) Added picnic tables. Coastal • Consider hand-developed modifications to the tidepools beyond "Shacks" for use as "keiki pools", Activity but retain traditional fish-netting use. Areas • Pursue development of an ocean recreation park with potential boat launch ramp and marina facilities on State-owned accreted land at Cape Kumukahi, provided that Hawaiian burial sites are adequately protected and respected. • Consider ac uisition and develo ment of Honolulu Landin and Sand Hill ^ Expand county facilities at Pahoa into a Regional Park by making various improvements: (1) Convert existing fire station into a senior center with certified kitchen for congregate meals program and activities/dining room, (2) Repair pump and provide solar heating system and heat- retaining cover for swimming pool, (3) Art center and covered performance stage, (4) Children's museum and playground, (5) Skateboard park, (6) Sheltered picnic areas, (7) Loop access road to lessen traffic on Pahoa main street, and (7) Lighted parking areas and walking paths linked to Pahoa Village Center. • Provide County assistance for the development of active recreation and community facilities, including a gym, field complex and community center on at least one of the 20-acre parcels owned by Hawaiian Paradise Park Owners' Association. .Improve Shipman Regional Park by providing (1) interior fencing and re-arranging parking Community layout to reduce safety hazard to children chasing balls; (2) more shade, seating, and picnic Parks tables for attendees at games and events; (3) large pavilion for team and family activities; (4) additional fields for football and baseball; and (5) additional lighting and restrooms. • Develop new gym at Shipman Regional Park or acquire the National Guard Armory for this use. • Develop recreational programs to complement use of Cooper Center and Volcano Community Park in partnership with the Volcano Community Association. • Provide accessibility, playground and other improvements at Mountain View Community Park and A. J. Watt Gym. • Expand hours of operation and night lighting for some outdoor activities at regional and larger community parks to serve working adults and young retirees. • Develop a new senior center in Mountain View with a certified kitchen for a congregate meals program, room for activities and dining, restrooms, and van vehicle and staff. • To supplement Community Parks, recreation facilities and meeting rooms at public schools should be made available for communit use after school hours, whether throu h direct re uests -31- e Pro osed Ex ansion/Enhancement from a community representative to a school principal or a formal standing agreement between the Count and the De artment of Education. • When acquiring rights-of--way for constructing new roadways or improving existing major roadways, make provisions for parallel multi-use recreational trails with appropriate landscaped buffers on either side and provide connections to other such existing or planned trails, to the extent possible. ^ Complete development of Old Volcano Trail as a pedestrian and cycle pathway. Linear ^ Acquire the former railroad right-of--way from Kapoho through Hawaiian Paradise Park and Parks develop it for hiking, bicycling and horse-back riding. • Plan for the acquisition and development of the former railroad right-of--way from Hawaiian Paradise Park to Railroad Avenue in Hilo, provided that measures are taken to protect agricultural uses of adjoining lands. .Plan for public access along Old Government Road (coastal trail) as a bicycle and hiking trail with a natural and cultural resource inte retive ro am. • For designated preserves, assess the appropriate level of site visitor usage and implement self- guided or steward-led interpretative tours through the site. .Improve conditions at Wai`opae Tidepools by: (1) offering tax credits to nearby private landowners as incentive to convert existing cesspools, where they exist, septic tanks with a pump-out system; (2) providing a public sanitary facilities, including a toilet and trash receptacle, (3) providing off-street parking that does not encroach into private lands. Preserves 'Consider acquiring Green Lake and adjacent land for native plant/habitat restoration and a nature center with activities and interpretive programs for school-aged students and the general public. ^ Consider hiking trails through Nanawale Forest Reserve, provided that areas with intact native forest are adequately protected. • Pursue development of a passive cultural resources and ethno-botanical park on the 31-acre parcel in Hawaiian Paradise Park, to include the rock wall, native and introduced plants and exce tional trees. • Improve Highway 137 (Red Road) as a scenic corridor by: (1) Requiring a 15-foot easement along the frontage of private properties along the corridor within which native and mature trees of non-invasive species must be retained, unless they are in poor health due to natural conditions, not due to malicious acts, and/or pose a threat to public health and safety; (2) Preserving Mango, Kamani, and Monkeypod groves and tree tunnels; (3) Providing property tax relief to owners who maintain the easement in the manner intended and State tax credits to those who replant easements with non-invasive plant material approved by the County; (4) Adding interpretive markers and small visitor parking areas at historical sites, such as the two Kehena sites listed in Scenic the General Plan; (5) Providing pullouts along the highway at intervals so that travelers can Byway stop to enjoy the scenery without conflict with traffic in travel lanes; (6) Delineating and maintaining physical access to the shoreline on the makai side of the road; (7) Minimizing tree pruning by using special, shielded cable for overhead utility lines or by undergrounding sections of the line; (8) Minimizing excessive lighting by limiting street lights to major intersections and informing residents along the corridor about how to reduce illumination of driveways; (9) Adding a restroom and emergency phone below Seaview before Kehena Beach; (10) Creating a simple walking trail on the lava and new parking area with restrooms on the State owned accretion land at the new Kaimu Beach; (11) Posting warning signs, where appropriate, in newly realigned sections; and (12) Covering old section of road with cinder soil to allow Naupaka to reclaim the land. ~~ ._.J • -32- • Figure 10 Green Infrastructure Network for Puna ® lmparaot. Asricnk~ual Lands (IAI.) and Agxicuh~nai Lands of 7mpo~taoce to the State a~Hawau (AI1SI~i) Ptapa~sed $ia~e B.es~c=e Hnffe: Z,aoe - IZafiaal Arcs Reseeve Tra~7 - National P~ Scenic Ca~ido~s ~ Cam~mmity IJc~elnpmmt Plan Ba~mdary r------; Subdivisions Facest Reserve (~ P'roQosed Puic Iaige ~-____-= -33- # Pablic Pa:ks O PraQosed Pa$c Small Majae Hi~wags • 5. Protecting Cultural and Geological Features Hawaiians organized land use and settlement within the moku (or region) of Puna by ahupua'a, whose boundaries are shown in Figure 11. Written historical accounts from the early 19th century report that human settlement from ancient times was concentrated in a 1- to 3-mile band near the shoreline, but the population began to decline from the 1830's for over a century. The green dots in Figure 11 represent known archaeological (or "pre-Contact" sites), which are concentrated in the shoreline area. Red dots represent historic "post-Contact" sites, showing how settlement began to extend mauka. While ancient Hawaiians lived primarily near the coast, geological features in mauka areas also have cultural significance. As mentioned in Section l.a, lava tube caves were used by ancient Hawaiians as burial sites. Also, the volcano itself has sacred meaning in Hawaiian culture. One of the difficulties in protecting burial sites from desecration is that their locations are deliberately hidden. There are no above-ground indicators, such as grave markings or headstones. Sometimes, when discovered, artifacts from cultural sites may be pilfered. They may also be uncovered and/or destroyed inadvertently during construction. Grading activity is particularly a potential threat to cultural and unique geological features. a. Build County-level Capacity The Cultural and Historic Resources Working Group recommended that the County take on responsibilities that presently reside with the state through the Department of Land & Natural Resources, Historic Preservation Division, and the Hawaii Tourism Authority. Since the county has a much smaller revenue base than the state, it is very unlikely that the county can adequately fund these all of these activities, particularly the creation of a new department on antiquities and aesthetics. Instead, the county may be able to complement and supplement to some degree what the state is charged to do. For example, the county could strengthen the grading ordinance to protect cultural features (see below.) Also, the county could establish a historic preservation commission, making it eligible for Certified Local Government (CLG) status and access to Federal historic preservation funds.30 The counties of Maui and Kauai established historic preservation commissions that receive funding under the CLG program. Following are some of the activities that a county historic preservation commission could undertake: Provide historic preservation advice to the Planning Department and other agencies. so For more information on this program, see http://www.hawaii.gov/dlnr/hpd/hpcl~.htm • -34- • Receive preservation ants from overnment and other sources such as ~' g Historic Hawaii Foundation to encourage owners to inventory, preserve or restore historic and cultural features on their property. • Recommend to the state Historic Preservation Division candidate sites for listing on the Hawaii Register of Historic Places. • Assist in development of historic and cultural interpretation programs for sites that are planned for restoration, such as the Old Puna Trail historic corridor and Red Road scenic byway (see Section 4.b.) • Notify applicants for development permits about guidelines and standards for identifying and protecting cultural and historic artifacts when planning development projects and undertaking construction. • Assist the county and local organizations in planning and conducting cultural events. • Request state funding for cultural sensitivity training and other educational programs for appropriate county employees, realtors, tour guides, and other members of the commercial workforce. b. Enact Special Controls on Grading Listing a site on the Hawaii Register of Historic Places does not necessarily guarantee its protection, as evidenced by the recent discovery that a heiau in Kona • that had been listed on the Register was destroyed by grading activity. Section 2.c recommends revisions to the grading ordinance that would limit the clearance of native vegetation on lots. As noted earlier, cultural and geological features are usually not as easy to identify as vegetative cover because they are typically under the surface or screened by ground cover. However, limiting the extent of allowable grading will reduce the risk that these features will be destroyed. Also, the establishment of a county historic preservation commission could build a knowledge base about cultural sites within the county to provide advice on how to review grading plans and conduct development activities to further reduce the potential loss of cultural and geological sites. c. Enact "Kanaka" Building Code Standards Indigenous Hawaiian architecture developed in response to the challenges of the natural environment, including the volcanic/seismic risk zones found in Puna. These were generally structures with broad bases and lighter roofs consisting of either rock walls or wood frames for the bottom portion and thatch of different native grasses and leaves for the roof. The county could follow the lead of Maui County, which has amended its Building Code to add standards (sometimes referred to as the "Kanaka Code") for structures utilizing traditional Hawaiian building design and construction methods and materials. There are certain limitations on the use of these structures -for example, they are not intended to permanent habitation -but occasional use for • -35- community activities is acceptable.31 The express purpose of the Kakaka Code is to (1) promote cultural, environmental, and historic preservation; (2) energy efficiency; (3) economic development; (4) aesthetic beauty; and (5) public safety. Structures of a traditional design would be appropriate in parks and other gathering places in Puna, especially at sites with recognized cultural value. Figure 11 Ahupua`a and Archaeological and Historic Sites si For details, drawings and limitations on use, see: http•/lwww co maui hi us/departments/Public/pdf/IHAStructures pdf • • -36- Blue line represents Puna CDP boundary White lines represent ahupua`a boundaries Green dots are identified archaeological sites Red dots are identified historic sites 6. Protectin A uifers and Coastal Waters g q a. Background Conditions Up to 85% of the rain that falls on Puna is absorbed almost immediately by the highly permeable volcanic ground. These rocks have moderate porosity and very high permeability. Freshwater from rainfall permeates down to an underground aquifer that sits on top of a saltwater layer. The estimated sustainable yield of this aquifer is 740 million gallons of water per day. Due to subsoil porosity and direct runoff, an estimated daily average of 1 billion gallons of freshwater flows into the sea.32 In part due to this flushing action, offshore waters are classified by the state Department of Health (DOH) as "AA", where the highest water quality standards for coastal waters apply. Puna's aquifers are classified into several hydrologic units.33 Most of the reliable water sources are found at lower elevations. Test wells dug at elevations ranging from 312 feet to 1686 feet have found substantial water reservoirs.34 It is estimated that the freshwater lens for these low-elevation aquifers is over 700 feet thick. There are existing known high-level aquifers located at Mountain View (elevation 1650 feet) and Glenwood (elevation 2800 feet), but more exploration wells are needed to determine the true extent of these reservoirs. Some shallow • groundwater sites have been found perched on ash beds or dense lava flows near Kurtistown and Volcano Farm Lots, but their sporadic locations and irregular flows render them inadequate for major water source development. b. Plan for Future Water Demand Puna's relatively high annual rainfall supplies most residences with water via catchment systems. Many also store delivered water from tankers and/or purchase bottled water. However, residences and businesses that are hooked into County or private water systems run the risk of water contamination from both point (septic/cesspool) and non-point sources (farms). County and private systems use wells that tap water from the underground basal lens. Effluent containing parasites, bacteria, viruses, or chemicals can leach into well waters and be distributed to consumers. Some areas are served by county or private water systems. The county's water systems serve the areas of Kalapana, Pahoa, Kapoho and Kea`au-Mountain View, of which the latter is the largest service area. The total average consumption of these combined systems is 1.2 million gallons per day (mgd). Private water systems serve the Hawaiian Beaches subdivision and some agricultural users in a2 Puna Community Development Plan Technical Report, op. cit.. sa County of Hawaii Department of Water Supply, Hawaii County Water Use and Development Plan • Update, January 2006. sa County of Hawaii Department of Water Supply, Central Puna Water Master Plan, 1999. -37- Maku`u, and areas east of Kea`au. In addition, there are several private wells in • Hawaiian Paradise Park. Based on projected growth patterns (see Working Paper #1), future water demand is likely to be greatest in Puna Waena, particularly in the subdivisions between Kea`au and Pahoa. These are also the subdivisions where rainfall is lighter than at higher elevations, so that catchment systems are a less reliable source of water supply. Therefore, more lot developers in these subdivisions may be inclined to either drill their own on-site well or tap into the county system, if this option is available. Since there are no collective wastewater treatment systems in these subdivisions, even though lot sizes are as small as one-quarter acre in some of them, wastewater disposal is via an individual septic system or cesspool on the lot. Clearly, the collocation of a water well for domestic use and a cesspool on a relatively small lot poses a potential health risk, especially in view of the porosity of the substrate. Nevertheless, water quality in wells that serve fewer that 25 individuals is not monitored or regulated. For this reason, in addition to the value of the lower elevation aquifer as a potential future potable water source, it is important to consider the long-term and cumulative impact of wastewater disposal in this area of Puna. c. Improve Wastewater Treatment Standards As of 2006, the state Department of Health (DOH), Wastewater Branch, • recorded 1,582 septic systems and 1,753 cesspools for a total of 3,335 individual wastewater treatment systems in Puna. These records extend only as far back as 1992, when DOH began regulating the installment of individual wastewater treatment systems. It is likely that there are many more that were installed prior to 1992, and that are installed annually without proper authorization. Individual wastewater systems can degrade potable water quality if they leak or fail. Failures or leakages can especially occur during times of intense rain and flooding. Puna's highly permeable soils do not offer much natural filtration before leaking effluent reaches streams, groundwater and, eventually, coastal waters. Presently, DOH allows cesspools for a single dwelling on a lot that is at least one acre in size. A second dwelling on the lot is required to provide a septic tank. DOH officials say that incidents of cesspool failure or well contamination from cesspools are very rare in Puna. They say that the aquifer "flushes out" the septic waste, diluting the effluent and transporting it to the ocean, where it then dissipates quickly due to the steep drop off of ocean floor off-shore. DOH now prohibits new cesspools within 1,000 feet from the shoreline or below the 100-ft elevation, whichever is the greater distance from the shoreline. This actually covers more land area than the present SMA boundary, so it would be better to retain the present requirement if the intent is to limit the extent of cesspools. Present regulations also prohibit cesspools within a 1,000-ft radius of a community well, which is defined as a source that is used by 25 individuals or more. -38- • As the number of new homes grows and the population continues to expand, it is vital that a better management strategy is created to deal with the cumulative impact of individual wastewater systems, especially in subdivisions with smaller lots closer to the coast and aquifers that have potential for future potable water source development. Below are recommended standards for the county to adopt as a requirement for the issuance of building permits for new habitable structures: • Prohibit cesspools below 800 feet MSL and within 1,000 feet of identified potential community well sites, as illustrated in Figure 12. • Accept smaller-footprint septic system designs, as illustrated in Figure 13. • Due to the rural nature of the area it does not make economic sense to have large central treatment plants with extensive sewer lines. Also, currently accepted septic systems with horizontal leaching fields consume a large amount of lot area and require much grading, which other elements of the proposed CDP hope to avoid. Instead, smaller-footprint, more eco-friendly individual systems, as illustrated in Figure 13, can be used on individual dwelling lots. Clustered treatment systems (Figure 14) would work well in the existing and proposed village centers of Puna. It should be noted that this photo illustrates a cluster system with much larger capacity than would be necessary for the community and neighborhood village centers recommended for Puna. Table 2 outlines the advantages and disadvantages of these alternate wastewater systems. d. Develop a Watershed Management Plan Puna's variable lava terrain creates some special challenges for stormwater management: • While the region overall has a gentle slope, the undulating surface left by lava flows and ash deposits makes it difficult to define the course of a drainageway. Small changes to the surface from natural or human activity can make a big difference in the flow of surface water.35 This, alone, is reason for adopting special limitations on grading in Puna. • While the lava soils are generally porous, eroded ash deposits from Mauna Loa and soils compacted by extensive bull-dozing create an impermeable layer that leads to drainage problems. • Notable localized flood conditions occur in the Volcano-to-Mountain View area and in the Hawaiian Acres-to-Orchidland area. The 1995 Puna Community Development Plan Technical Report provides detailed descriptions of these conditions and difficulty of resolving the problems with traditional approaches such as drywells, retention basins and diversion channels. • as See pages 20-23. -39- Alternative approaches to stormwater management through land conservation and forestation should be explored in more depth as a viable strategy for the identified problem area that may be more cost-effective than public works construction. This approach could also be applied to all of Puna's nonconforming subdivisions as a preventive measure. The scope would therefore embrace a very broad area of Puna, consisting of several watersheds, and involve federal, state, and county agencies, major landowners and community associations. Figure 12 Proposed Aquifer Protection Area Relative to Existing and Potential Well Sites and Developed Areas Proposed Aquifer Ptntection Area _. _ ._ 800 ft Elevation Contour • Private Well 2005 Development • County Well Community Development Plan Boundary ~{- Potential Weil Major Highways Y ~ ~~~ ~~ ..~ `~" ~ • O~ Fili.O ~ 3 ' n _ a '4y4'G RJ d ) •, Cr f r ~% „ ~ x 2 ,i Y rj',. t ~r ,S f -y ~' r ~ .`I~. Kl • .^'P ~ ,x~~' ~~ ~~. vd~^'b Bvr '~ - C ~" ~. ~: {bM• ~ ~ M1 , - ~tSi:l.)fp ~ QI ~ ~ ~ ~ ~,,i ji t._~ , ,.: ~ ~ . , r~ ~ •r+ 7j.',. ~y~ fl r {. i ~f4 ~ ~` \~/ ay r t `r ~ " •- ~~ ` ' ~ ^ "14 .. ~ -,.w. • • -40- Fi re 13 Individual Wastewater Systems with Small Footprint • Low Pressure Pipe Wastewater System Source: Texas agricultural Extension Service, httn://texasextension.tamu.edu/ Figure 14 Clustered Septic Systems for Village Centers • -41- -~- Drip Irrigation or Trickle System Source: http://www.southernwatersolutions.com/ Table 2 Descriptions of Alternative Wastewater Treatment Systems Process ~ Advantages Disadvantages Drip Irrigation or Trickle System Wastewater is separated into settling tanks, filtered, and then pumped through aloes-pressure system out into 1-inch diameter, flexible plastic tubing with small openings. The tubes are buried two feet apart and are 10-12 inches underground, dispensing wastewater every two feet. Low Pressure Pipe Wastewater System Wastewater is sent into separation tanks that divide the solids from the liquids. Using aloes-pressure system, the lighter fluids are pumped out of the settling tank and into tubes that are near the root layer of the soil. Clustered Septic Systems Multiple producers send their wastewater to a shared treatment facility. The combined system treats the waste more thoroughly than an individual system and the overall operating costs are shared between all of the users. • Burying the tubes in 10- 12" of soil puts them right at the roots of the plants; the most biologically active zone • The small openings in the tubes dispense the waste over a large area, instead of a more concentrated location • Less Expensive than most alternative systems • Works on a variety of soil sites ^ The least expensive of the nonstandard designs ^ Works in a variety of soil and slope conditions ^ The low pressure design prevents clogs in the system and is more environmentally friendly than the traditional design ^ Allows for denser development where places would otherwise be limited to setbacks between well sites and wastewater systems. ^ Can decrease the threat of well-water pollution ^ Can remediate existing problem sewers ^ Focuses the wastewater runoff into a single area ^ Public spaces such as parks can be built above the clustered treatment sites ^ An opportunity for a higher level of effluent treatment than normal individual systems • More expensive than traditional designs • More difficult to design, install, and maintain • The small openings in the tubes can become clogged after multiple years of use • More expensive than traditional designs • Does not work under all soil conditions • More difficult design, installation, and maintenance • Ownership issues and long-term maintenance questions • More expensive • Higher annual operation and maintenance costs • Increases a centralized amount of pollution • Opens land up for development that may not previously been available • • • -42- • A ppendix A Endangered Species Present in Puna Source: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Pacific Division, website Birds: `Akepa, http://www.fws.gov/pacificislands/wesa/akepa html `Alala, http://www.fws.~ov/pacificislands/wesa/alala.html Hawaiian Hawk, http://www.fws.aov/pacificislands/wesa/io.html Hawaiian Goose, http://www.fws. ov/pacificislands/wesa/nene.html Hawaiian Stilt, http://www.fws.~ov/pacificislands/wesa/aeo.html Hawaii Creeper, http://www.fws.gov/pacificislands/wesa/creephi.html `O'u, http://www.fws.gov/pacificislands/wesa/ou.html Mammals, Reptiles, Arthropods, and Invertebrates: Hawaiian Hoary Bat, http://www.fws. ov/pacificislands/wesa/hrybatindex.html Green Sea Turtle, http://www.fws.~ov/pacificislands/wesa/ernturtindex.html Hawksbill Sea Turtle, http://www.fws.~ov/pacificislands/wesa/hawksturtindex.html Blackburn's Sphinx Moth, http://www.fws.gov/pacificislands/wesa/sphinxmoth.html Plants: See Hawaii Big Island Plant Cluster Recovery Plan, http://www.fws.gnv/pacificislands/wesa/bi~iplantidx. html The above site displays a map indicating the recovery areas. • -43- Appendix B Hawaii Gap Analysis Project Definitions of Land Cover The land classifications used for the map are in agreement with the National Vegetation Classification System (NVCS). Thirty seven classes were merged to create the eight generalized classes shown on the map. Open `Ohi`a Forest -Native Shrubs and Grasses: Native Coastal Vegetation Native Coastal Vegetation Deschampsia Grassland `A`ali`i Shrubland Bog vegetation Native Dry Cliff Vegetation Native Shrubland/ Sparse `Ohi`a Native Wet Cliff Vegetation Open Ma`o Shrubland Uluhe Shrubland -Native Trees and Forest: Closed Hala Forest Closed Koa- `Ohi`a Forest Closed `Ohi`a Forest Closed Pouteria (`Ala`a) Koa Forest Mamane/ Naio Native Mesic to Dry Forest and Shrubland Native wet Forest and Shrubland `Ohi`a Forest Olopua-Lama Forest Open Koa-Mamane Forest Open Koa- `Ohi`a Forest -Non-Native Shrubs and Grasses: Alien Grassland Alien Shrubland Uncharacterized Shrubland -Non-Native Trees and Forest: Alien Forest Kiawe Forest and Shrubland Uncharacterized Forest -Agriculture:* Agriculture -Developed: High Density Developed Low Density Developed -Sparse Vegetation: Uncharacterized Open-Sparse Vegetation Very Sparse Vegetation to Un- Vegetated -Wetland or Open Water: Water Wetland Vegetation *The Agriculture and Developed classifications are not accurate with the State Land Use system in relation to zoning. Rather, the classifications on the map were derived from satellite imagery and the determining factor involving the Agriculture and Developed classes in urbanized areas was amount of reflective surfaces, such as rooftops, driveways, and asphalt. Those areas greater than four pixels were labeled as Developed and less than four pixels Agriculture. • • -44- A endig C PP Plants Listed as Invasive Species in Hawaii Source: State of Hawaii, Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR), Division of Forestry and Wildlife (DOFAW), February 2007. http://www.state.hi. us/dlnr/dofaw/hortweeds/specieslist.htm In boldface are the eight most undesired invasive plants on the Big Island. • • Species (Family) Common Name Other names Acacia confusa (Fabaceae) Formosan koa Aneiopteris evecta (Marattiaceae) mule's foot fern giant fern mountain rose, coral bells, Antiaonon leptopus (Polygonaceae) Mexican creeper confederate vine, chain-of--love, hearts-on-a-chain Ardisia crenata (Mvrsinaceae) Hilo holly hens eyes, Ardisia crisps, Ardisia crenulata Ardisia elliptica (Mvrsinaceae) shoebutton ardisia Ardisia humilis, Ardisia solanacea, Ardisia squamulosa Artabotrvs hexapetalus (Annonaceae) climbing ylang-ylang lanalana Arthrostema ciliatum arthrostemma Arthrostemma latifolia, (Melastomataceae) Arthrostemma fragile sprengeri fern, foxtail Asparagus densiflorus (Liliaceae) asparagus fern asparagus, Asparagus sprengeri Re el Asparagus setaceus (Liliaceae) climbing asparagus fern Plumosa, Asparagus plumosus Baker, Protasparagus plumosus Azolla (all species) (Azollaceae) mosquito fern ferny azolla Bocconia fructescens plume poppy Buddleja davidii (Buddlejaceae) orange-eyed butterfly summer lilac, buddleia bush Buddleja madagascariensis butterfly bush smoke bush, buddleia (Buddleiaceae) Philippine tea, Carmona Carmona retusa (Boraginaceae) Fukien tea microphylla, Ehretia buxifolia, Ehretia micro h lla Casuarina (all species) ironwood Australian pine, she-oak, (Casuarinaceae) beefwood, toa Cestrum diurnum (Solanaceae) day cestrum makahala, Chinese inkberry Cestrum nocturnum (Solanaceae) night cestrum night-blooming jasmine, 'Ala- aumoe, kupaoa, onaona-iapana Chrysophvllum oliviforme satin leaf caimitillo; Chrysophyllum (Sapotaceae) monopyrenum Cinnamomum burmannii (Lauraceae) Padang cassia cinnamon tree -45- Species (Family) Common Name Other names Cissus nodosa (Vitaceae) grape ivy Citharexvlum caudatum (Verbenaceae) fiddlewood juniper berry Citharexvlum sninosum (Verbenaceae) fiddlewood Citharexylum quadrangulare Clerodendrum buchanani (Verbenaceae) pagoda flower lau'awa, Clerodendrum fallax, C. speciosissimum Clerodendrum chinense (Verbenaceae) glory bower Clerodendrum philippinum, Clerodendrum fragrans Clerodendrum macrostee~ium (Verbenaceae) (no common name) Clusia rosea (Clusiaceae) autograph tree copey, Scotch attorney Coccinia ~randis (Cucurbitaceae) ivy gourd scarlet-fruited gourd Conocarpus erectus (Combretaceae) buttonwood sea mulberry button mangrove , Cortaderia iubata and Cortaderia selloana (Poaceae) pampas grass Cotoneaster nannosus (Rosaceae) cotoneaster Crvntosteeia (all species) ~Asclepidaceae) rubber vine, India rubber vine (includes Cryptostegia grandiflora and Cryptostegia mada ascariensis) Cunaniopsis anacardioides ~Sapindaceae) carrotwood Delairea odorata (Asteraceae) German ivy Senecio mikanioides, Italian ivy, African ivy, Cape ivy, climbing roundsel Dillenia suffruticosa (Dilleniaceae) shrubby simpoh Duranta erecta (Verbenaceae) golden dewdrop duranta, pigeon berry, Duranta repens Eichhornia crassines (Pontederiaceae) water hyacinth Elaeaenus umbellata (Elaea~naceae) oleaster autumn olive Erie~eron karvinskianus (Asteraceae) daisy fleabane Mexican daisy Eriobotr~jabonica (Rosaceae) loquat Japanese medlar Ficus cf. platypoda (Moraceae) Port Jackson fig (local name) (this plant is commonly referred to in Hawaii incorrectly as Ficus rubi inosa) Ficus microcarna (Moraceae) Chinese banyan Malayan banyan, Ficus retusa, Ficus nitida Fuchsia boliviana (Onagraceae) fuchsia lady's eardrops • • • -46- • • Species (Family) Common Name Other names Fuchsia magellanica (Onagraceae) hardy fuchsia lady's eardrops, earring flower, kulapepeiao Fuchsia paniculata (Onagraceae) fuchsia Lady's eardrops Furcraea foetida (Aeavaceae) Mauritius hemp maguey, Furcraea gigantea Grevillea robusta (Proteaceae) silk oak she oak, he oak, silver oak, kahili flower, spider flower, haiku-ke'oke'o Hedvchium coronarium (Zin~iberaceae) white ginger butterfly lily, ginger lily, garland flower, 'awapuhi- ke'oke'o Hedvchium flavescens (Zineiberaceae) yellow ginger cream ginger, 'awapuhi- melemele Hedvchium e-ardnerianum Zin 'beraceae kahili ginger Heterocentron subtrinlinervium (Melastomataceae) pearl flower Hiptaee benghalensis (Malpighiaceae) hiptage Hvdrilla verticillata (Hvdrocharitaceae) hydrilla water thyme, Florida elodea Jasminum fluminense (Oleaceae) jasmine Jasminum azoricum Kalanchoe delagoensis (Crassulaceae) chandelier plant Kalanchoe tubiflora, Bryophyllum tubiflorum, Kalanchoe uerticillata Kalanchoe vinnata (Crassulaceae) air plant life plant, 'oliwa ku kahakai, Bryophyllum pinnatum, Cot ledon innata Lantana Camara (Verbenaceae) Lantana lakana, mikinolia-hihiu, sage Lemna (all species) (Lemnaceae) duckweed Leptospermum scoparium (Mvrtaceae) New Zealand tea manuka Ligustrum lucidum (Oleaceae) tree privet broadleaf privet Lieustrum sinense (Oleaceae) Chinese privet hedge privet, small-leaved privet Lonicera iaponica (Canrifoliaceae) Japanese honeysuckle honekakala Medinilla cuminerii (Melastomataceae) medinilla Medinilla venosa (Melastomataceae) medinilla Melaleuca quinquenervia (Mvrtaceae) paperback cajeput tree Melastoma candidum (Melastomataceae) Indian rhododendron Melastoma malabathricum, Malabar melastome -47- Species (Family) Common Name Other names Melastoma sanguineum (Melastomataceae) fox-tongued melastoma Melia azedarach (Meliaceae) Chinaberry pride-of-India, margosa tree Miconia calvescens Melastomataceae miconia velvet tree, purple plague Montanoa hibiscifolia (Asteraceae) tree daisy Naias (all species) (Naiadaceae) naiad pondweed Nvmphaea (all species) (Nvmphaceae) water lily " Ochna thomasiana (Ochnaceae) Mickey Mouse plant ochna, Ochna kirkii Olea europaea (Oleaceae) olive 'oliwa Passiflora laurifolia (Passifloraceae) yellow granadilla yellow water lemon, bell apple Passiflora mollissima banana poka Pennisetum setaceum (Poaceae) fountain grass Pennisetum ruppelii Philadelphus karwinskvanus (Hvdrangeaceae) mock orange philadelphus, syringa Photinia davidiana (Rosaceae) photinia Stranvaesia davidiana, Cotoneaster frigidus Pimenta dioica (Mvrtaceae) allspice Pimenta officinalis Pimenta racemosa (Myrtaceae) bay-rum malagueta, bay tree, Pimenta acris Pinus patula (Pinaceae) Mexican weeping pine jelecote pine, patula pine, pino triste Pistia stratiotes (Araceae) water lettuce Pittosporum pentandrum (Pittosporaceae) mamalis Pittosporum undulatum (Pittosporaceae) Victorian box Victorian laurel, orange pittosporum Pittosporum viridiflorum (Pittosporaceae) Cape pittosporum Platvicerium bifurcatum (Polvnodiaceae) elkhorn fern common staghorn fern Psidium cattleianum (Mvrtaceae) strawberry guava waiawi-'ula'ula Pvracantha angustifolia (Rosaceae) firethorn Rhodomvrtus tomentosa (Mvrtaceae) rose myrtle downy myrtle • • • -48- • • • ' Species (Family) Common Name Other names Rubus (all species) (Rosaceae) blackberry, raspberry thimbleberry, brambles, ohelo ele ele Ruellia devosiana (Acanthaceae) Ruellia Salvinia (all species) (Salviniaceae) floating fern Schefflera actinophvlla (Araliaceae) octopus tree Brassaia actinophylla, umbrella tree Schinus molle (Anacardiaceae) pepper tree California pepper tree Schinus terebinthifolius (Anacardiaceae) Christmas berry Brazilian pepper, wilelaiki, nani-o-hilo Senecio mada~ascariensis fireweed Solandra maxima (Solanaceae) cup-of--gold golden cup, chalice vine Spathodea campanulata (Bie~noniaceae) African tulip tree fountain tree, fire bell S~haeropteris cooperi (Cyatheaceae) Australian treefern Cyathea cooperi Sphagneticola trilobata (Asteraceae) wedelia Wedelia trilobata Stapelia gi~antea (Asclepiadaceae) carrion flower starfish flower, Zulu-giant, giant toad plant Tamarix (all species) (Tamaricaceae) ? Terminalia catappa (Combretaceae) tropical almond Indian almond, false kamani, kamani-haole Tetrazygia bicolor (Melastomataceae) (no common name) Thunbereria grandiflora (Acanthaceae) Bengal trumpet blue trumpet vine, large- flowered thunbergia Thunbereia laurifolia (Acanthaceae) laurel-leaved thunbergia Tibouchina herbacea (Melastomataceae) cane tibouchina glorybush Tibouchina urvilleana (Melastomataceae) glorybush princess flower, lasiandra Uleg europaeus gorse Verbascum thapsus (Scrophulariaceae) common mullein woolly mullein, velvet plant -49- Appendix D Sample Forest Protection Development Standards Excerpt from Portland (OR) Municipal Code, Section 33.465, Pleasant Valley Natural Resources Overlay Zone 33.465.150 General Development Standards The standards of this section apply to all development in the Pleasant Valley Natural Resources overlay zone except utilities subject to Section 33.465.155, rights-of--way subject to 33.465.160, land divisions and planned developments subject to Section 33.465.165, resource enhancement projects subject to Section 33.465.170, trails subject to Section 33.465.175, and mitigation subject to 33.465.180. Standards A, B and E through L apply to new development. Standards C, D and E through L apply to alterations to existing development. All of the applicable standards must be met. Modification of any of these standards requires approval through Pleasant Valley resource review. A. The maximum disturbance area allowed within the Pleasant Valley Natural Resources overlay zone on the site is determined by subtracting all portions of the site outside the Pleasant Valley Natural Resources overlay zone from the number listed in Table 465-1. Table 465-1 Maximum Disturbance Area Allowed RF Zone R7 Zone Maximum Disturbance Area 3,500 s . ft.~l ~ 5,000 s . ft. ~l~ "' Subtract the amount of area on the site outside the Pleasant Valley Natural Resources overlay zone from the number given in the table. B. The disturbance area must be set back at least 50 feet from the edge of any identified wetland or from the top-of--bank of any identified stream or water body within Pleasant Valley Natural Resources overlay zone; C. For alterations to existing development, one of the following must be met: 1. The disturbance area does not exceed the limitations of Table 465-1; or 2. If the existing disturbance area exceeds the limitations of paragraph 1 above, then the existing disturbance area may not be expanded; D. The proposed development must be set back at least 50 feet from the edge of any identified wetland or from the top-of--bank of any identified stream or water body within the Pleasant Valley Natural Resources overlay zone; E. Native trees may be removed within 10 feet of any proposed structures, or within 5 feet of driveways. In no case will the combined total diameter of all the 6-inch or greater trees cut exceed 225 inches. Trees listed on the Portland Nuisance Plant List or Prohibited Plant List are exempt from this standard and may be removed; F. All vegetation planted in the Pleasant Valley Natural Resources overlay zone is native and listed on the Portland Plant List. Plants listed on the Portland Nuisance Plant List or Prohibited Plant List are prohibited; • C • -50- G. Erosion control must conform to the Erosion Control Technical Guidance Handbook, City of Portland, Bureau of Environmental Services, and to Chapter 24.70, Clearing, Grading, and Erosion Control of Title 24, Building Regulations. All development between November 1 and Apri130 of any year which disturbs more than 500 square feet of ground requires wet weather measures described in the Erosion Control Technical Guidance Handbook; H. The minimum front and street building setback and garage entrance setback of the base zone may be reduced to any distance between the base zone minimum and zero. Where a side lot line is also a street lot line, the side building and garage entrance setback may be reduced to any distance between the base zone minimum and zero; I. The maximum front building setback is the minimum front building setback of the base zone. On a lot with more than one front lot line, this standard applies to the front lot line that is farthest from Pleasant Valley Natural Resources overlay zone; J. Fences are allowed only within the disturbance area; K. Exterior lights must be spaced at least 25 feet apart. Incandescent lights exceeding 200 watts (or other light types exceeding the brightness of a 200-watt incandescent light) must be placed so they do not shine directly into the Pleasant Valley Natural Resources overlay zone; and L. Mitigation is required as specified in Section 33.465.180. 33.465.155 Standards for Utility Lines The following standards apply within the Pleasant Valley Natural Resources overlay zone to new utility lines, private connections to existing or new utility lines, and upgrades of existing utility lines. All of the standards must be met. Modification of any of these standards requires approval through Pleasant Valley resource review. A. The disturbance area for private connections to utility lines is no greater than 10 feet wide; B. The disturbance area for the upgrade of existing utility lines is no greater than 15 feet wide; C. New utility lines must be within aright-of--way; D. No fill or excavation is allowed below the ordinary high water mark of a stream; E. The Division of State Lands has approved any work that requires excavation or fill in a wetland; F. Native trees more than 10 inches in diameter may not be removed; G. Each 6- to 10-inch diameter native tree cut must be replaced at a ratio of three trees for each one removed. The replacement trees must be a minimum 1~anch diameter and selected from the Portland Plant List. All trees must be planted on the applicant's site. Where a utility line is approximately parallel with the stream channel, at least half of the replacement trees must be planted between the utility line and the street channel; and H. Mitigation is required as specified in Section 33.465.180. -51- 33.465.160 Standards for Rights-of--Way The following standards apply to rights-of--way within the Pleasant Valley Natural Resources overlay zone. The standards in Subsections A. through F. apply to improvements within the right-of--way. The standard in Subsection F. applies to dedications and expansions of the right-of--way. All of the applicable standards must be met. Modification of any of these standards requires approval through Pleasant Valley resource review. A. Where the right-of--way crosses a stream, the crossing must be by bridge. B. No fill or excavation may occur within the ordinary high water mark of the stream. C. The Division of State Lands has approved any work that requires excavation or fill in a wetland. D. Any work that will take place within the banks of a stream must be conducted between June 1 and August 31, or must be approved by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. E. Mitigation is required as specified in Section 33.465.180. F. The following rights-of--way are allowed in the Pleasant Valley Natural Resources overlay zone. All other rights-of--way are prohibited: 1. Streets that are shown on the Pleasant Valley Street Network Plan; « 2. Common greens; and 3. Pedestrian connections. 33.465.165 Standards for Land Divisions and Planned Developments The following standards apply to land divisions and planned developments in the Pleasant Valley Natural Resources overlay zone. All of the standards must be met. Modification or adjustment of Subsections A. through C. is prohibited. Modification of Subsections D. through F. requires approval through Pleasant Valley resource review. A. New lots are prohibited in the Pleasant Valley Natural Resources overlay zone except as follows: 1. Each new lot must have at least 3,500 square feet of area outside of the Pleasant Valley Natural Resources overlay zone; or 2. A new lot for an existing house may be created when all of the following are met: a. There is an existing house on the site that is entirely within the Pleasant Valley Natural Resources overlay zone; b. The existing house will remain; and c. The portion of the new lot that is within the Pleasant Valley Natural Resources overlay zone is no larger than required to contain the existing house, minimum required setbacks, garage, a 12-foot wide driveway and an open area of 20 feet by 20 feet. B. New disturbance area is prohibited in the Pleasant Valley Natural Resources overlay zone. • u -52- C. Area within the Pleasant Valley Natural Resources overlay zone that is outside of new lots and outside of the right-of--way must be placed entirely within environmental resource tracts. D. The following rights-of--way are allowed in the Pleasant Valley Natural Resources overlay zone. All other rights-of--way are prohibited: 1. Streets that are shown on the Pleasant Valley Street Network Plan; 2. Common greens; and 3. Pedestrian connections: E. Rights-of--way are subject to 33.465.160. F. New utility lines, private connections to utility lines, and upgrades of existing utility lines are subject to 33.465.155. G. The standards of Subsection 33.465.150 E. through K. must be met. 33.465.170 Standards for Resource Enhancement Projects The following standards apply to resource enhancement projects within the Pleasant Valley Natural Resources overlay zone. All of the standards must be met. Modification of any of these standards requires approval through Pleasant Valley resource review. A. There is no disturbance of any identified wetland, stream, or water body; B. There is no excavation, fill, or change in the topography of the resource area; C. No native vegetation listed on the Portland Plant List is removed; and D. No structures are proposed. 33.465.175 Standards for Trails The following standards apply to trails within the Pleasant. Valley Natural Resources overlay zone. All of the applicable standards must be met. Modification of any of these standards requires approval through Pleasant Valley resource review. A. All trails must be set back at least 50 feet from the tops-of--bank of streams or the boundary of a wetland except as designated in the Pleasant Valley Park and Trail Plan; B. Disturbance may not occur within 10 feet of native trees six inches or larger in diameter; C. Mitigation is required as specified in Section 33.465.180. D. No fill or excavation may occur below the ordinary high water mark of the stream; and E. The Division of State Lands has approved any work that requires excavation or fill in a wetland. 33.465.180 Standards for Mitigation The following standards apply to required mitigation. All of the standards must be met. Modification of these standards requires approval through Pleasant Valley resource review. -53- A. Size of mitigation area. Mitigation must occur at a 2:1 ratio of mitigation area to proposed disturbance area; B. Location of mitigation area. 1. Generally. Mitigation must occur in the Pleasant Valley Natural Resources overlay zone on the site where the disturbance occurs, except as allowed by B.2, below; 2. Rights-of--way and utilities in the right-of--way. If the disturbance is associated with aright-of--way or utility in the right-of--way, the mitigation must occur in the Kelley Creek watershed. C. Invasive vegetation. Invasive vegetation must be removed within the mitigation area; D. Required plants and planting densities. One tree, three shrubs, and four other plants are required to be planted for every 100 square feet of mitigation area. Plants must be selected from the Portland Plant List; E. Plant diversity. If more than 10 trees, shrubs or groundcover plants are used to meet the above standard, then no more than 50 percent of the trees, shrubs or groundcover plants may be of the same genus. If more than 40 trees, shrubs or groundcover plants are used, then no more than 25 percent of the plants may be of the same genus; F. Plant size. Trees must be a minimum ranch caliper or bareroot unless they are oak or madrone which may be one gallon size. No more than ten percent of the trees may be oak or madrone. Shrubs must be a minimum of one gallon size or bareroot. All other species must be a minimum of four-inch pots; and G. The requirements of Section 33.248.090, Mitigation and Restoration Planting must be met. t -54- Working Paper #3 Mobility & Energy • Working Paper No. 3 Mobility and Energy Conservation 1. Background a. Traael patterns and the transportation system On the ground, Puna's present development form exhibits characteristics of a rural community - i.e., relatively low-density development amid a scattering of small farms and towns. Yet, a parcel map of Puna reveals the potential for extensive sections of Puna to develop as a large-lot suburban area. The emerging pattern is already evident in aerial photos of subdivisions such as Hawaiian Paradise Park. It is also increasingly apparent in the travel characteristics of Puna's residents. Over 97% of Puna's workforce commutes to work by personal vehicle.' For over 90%, the commute time is 10 minutes or longer, and for 21% the commute time is 40 minutes or longer. Hilo is the primary place of employment for Puna residents, as well as the location for shopping and services. About 24 percent of the workforce carpools, but congestion is growing along Puna's principal corridors during peak commute periods. Primary transportation routes are the Volcano Road (Highway 11), which provides access to Hilo and serves ~xpper Puna; the Puna Road (Highway 130), which serves lower • Puna from Kea`au to Kalapana-Kaimu; the Kapoho Road (Highway 132), which connects Pahoa to Kapoho; and the Puna Coast Road, which links Kapoho to Kalapana-Kaimu. During peak commuting periods, traffic volumes are highly concentrated along these routes -- especially Highway 11 between Kea`au and Hilo and Highway 130 between Pahoa and Kea`au -because there are no alternative routes to Hilo and connections between roads in adjacent subdivisions are poor or non-existent. Roads within the nonconforming subdivisions are privately-owned and maintained by community road maintenance associations. Some associations have mandatory maintenance fees while others are voluntary. Typical road maintenance fees range from $60 to $150 per year per lot. Most of the roads are narrow and lack paving, lighting and traffic control signs.2 • These road conditions, combined with poor connectivity in the street system and a dispersed pattern of development, make it challenging to devise and sustain a viable mass transit system for Puna. The county's Mass Transit Agency (MTA) operates the Hele-on bus, whose service is available to the general public at fares ranging from $0.75 to $2.25. In 2005, the county initiated a free fare service between Pahoa and Hilo that more than doubled ridership (see Figure 1.) Less than 1% of the workforce commutes by bus, but Puna residents with special needs, such as the elderly, disabled and/or those with low- income are vitally dependent on transit and paratransit services for mobility. Table 1 lists paratransit services that are provided by programs to serve people with special needs. A 1 U.S. Bureau of Census, 2000 Census of Population. a Townscape, Inc., for County of Hawai i Planning Department, Puna Regional Circulation Plan, 2005. -1- 2005 study estimated that only 20% of the need for paratransit services was being met islandwide, with a probable higher rate of unmet demand in Puna.3 Figure 1 Hele-on Ridership on Pahoa and Ka`u (Volcano) Routes, 2003 to 2007 120,000 100,000 --- -_ -_ -._ __ - _ - _ __ _. -- __ ®Ka'u (Volcano) Route ^Pahoa Route y 80,000 - - - _ _ -- L d ~_ 0 60,000 -_ __ _ _ __ _- - L Z 40,000 ~ . ~ ~ 20,000 _ - _- ___ _ - _ _ • ~ 0 2003-5 2004-5 2005-6 2006-7 Fiscal Year Table 1 Transit and Major Paratransit Services Operating in Puna O erator a of Service Mass Transit Agency, Fleet of 43 buses, most with wheelchair lifts, provides service along Hele-on bus fixed routes. There are five round-trips per day on the Pahoa-Hilo route and two round-tri s er da on the Volcano-Hilo route. Hawaii County Economic Operates fleet of 26 vans islandwide to provide transportation Opportunity Council services for low-income people. Riders must be registered with the agency and schedule trips in advance. In 2005, 483 of the re 'stered riders lived in Puna or Ka'u. Parks and Recreation Van service for people 60 years and older who lack access to Department, Coordinated conventional transportation due to disability or income. Serves Services for the Elderly primarily Hilo, with limited service in other districts. In 2005, program there were 175 registered riders living in Puna. Priorities are to provide access to: medical care, resource agencies to qualify for benefits or services and essential sho in . a Lyon Associates for the County of Hawai i Mass Transit Agency, Rural Paratransit Study for Puna and Kona, Island of Hawaii. August 2005. • -2- • At present, there are few physical provisions for bicycle and pedestrian travel anywhere in Puna, even within older settlements, although there are plans to establish a network of bikeways throughout the district (see Appendix A.) The longer of these proposed bikeways are incorporated into the recreational trail system described in Working Paper #2. The dispersed pattern of development discourages walking and bicycling for short trips. Working Paper #1 proposes the formation of village centers to encourage the location of services and frequent destinations within more convenient walking and bicycling distances for residents of nonconforming subdivision, but it requires along-term effort by many property owners to implement this more compact development pattern. Figure 2 Existing Hele-On Bus Routes Community Development Plan Boundary ~•"`• Existing Bus Routes Major Highways O village Center Other Roads 6 Propoesed village Center Subdivisions t`.X. ~ ^4~ ~ h ~ 1 s~ ~~ HRU ~ +~ 'r„" .y ' V' P, • r~ 7 r VVV '~'Ir &3~ .; 1 ~s '~ ~`~yt ~ ~ ~ kth,~. . v , J K&1AU r ~ j . ~ i J•~ . F . ~~ IIAMIVANMW1111E - ~« ~ ~ ~` •.1, ,r . ~ 1MMtIAM~ ~~ NAXUTAX .a ~ A~ ~ .. u4+MM+q lSIAIES ~ ~; PAIiQA _ ~ "J . T `yCYf'AIWD I(NM1TpIN64AU it r ' ~. ( ~ n tS 1 `> , ~~-. t ~~ ~ ~_~ ~ ..~ ~ /•rAlfb ._. -3- A significant concern for all modes of travel in Puna is roadway safety. Puna has the highest five-year total motor vehicle fatality rate of all the districts on the island.4 Pedestrians and bicyclists are also at risk. Table 3 Motor Vehicle Accidents in Puna, 1990 and 2000 Number of Major Traffic Accidents f N b Roadway Fatal Injury Only Property Damage Only Total Number of Persons Killed er o um Persons injured 1990 2000 1990 2000 1990 2000 1990 2000 1990 2000 1990 2000 Kahakai Blvd. 1 0 7 12 8 7 16 19 1 0 11 14 Pohoiki Rd. 0 0 5 4 2 1 7 5 0 0 10 12 Hwy.ll 5 3 79 42 81 44 165 89 5 3 165 89 Hwy. 130 2 1 '114 53 98 36 214 90 2 1 197 95 Hwy. 132 1 0 17 13 12 4 30 17 1 0 30 23 Hwy. 137 0 0 2 3 5 0 7 3 0 0 5 6 Total 9 4 224 127 206 92 439 223 9 4 418 239 Source: Hawaii County t'olace Department b. Energy use and infrastructure Puna has been known as a district where people live largely "off-the-grid"; that is, where dwellings, particularly in more remote locations of the nonconforming subdivisions, are not connected to the electrical power service provided by the local utility company, Hawaiian Electric Light Company (HELLO). While many residences in remote locations still remain unconnected to the power grid, the rate of new residential service connections in Puna over the past two to three decades has outpaced the number of new dwellings (see Figure 2), suggesting that owners of many existing dwellings are choosing to connect to the grid to supply at least a portion of their power needs or to provide back-up power. There are two power generation facilities in Puna. HELCO's Puna Steam Plant and the geothermal power generation source at Kapoho operated by Puna Geothermal Ventures (PGV). The PGV facility has a rated capacity to generate 30 megawatts (MW) of baseload power, making it the second most significant firm source of power on HELCO's islandwide network.5 HELCO's transmission lines follow the corridors of Highways 11, 130 and 132, with spurs leading to substations the Hawaiian Beaches and Ainaloa subdivisions. The a Puna Regional Circulation Plan, p. 6-3. a Hawaiian Electric Light Company, Inc., Integrated Resource Plan, 2007-2026, PUC Docket No. 04-0046, May 2007 • -4- • most recent segment is a 138kv transmission line connecting the PGV geothermal facility at Kapoho to the Kea`au substation. While larger-scale development of geothermal power for export has been proposed in past years, several factors discourage this: • Public opposition from residents living in proximity to potential geothermal sources; from those concerned about impacts to the natural environment; and from those who object based on cultural practices and beliefs. • The costs and environmental impacts associated with the development of infrastructure necessary to develop the source and export the power, particularly an interisland cable. • The inefficiencies and "line loss" related to the transmission of power a long distance from the source. • For these reasons, it is unlikely that large-scale expansion of geothermal power generation within the eastern rift zone of Puna will occur within the time horizon of the Puna Community Development Plan. On the other hand, there is potential to capture excess heat for direct uses, such as greenhouses, pasteurization of potting media, biodiesel production and lumber kilns. A recent study conducted for the county Department of Research and Development found that development of such indirect uses was technically feasible but, at least for the time being, economically unattractive.s The principal barrier is lack of access to the excess heat generated by the PGV facility. 2. Limiting demand for commuting and other trips a. Expand telecommuting opportunities Advances in the telecommunication network have allowed for greater flexibility in the workplace. It offers several advantages for Puna residents, such as: • Greater flexibility in work hours. • Reduced time spent driving and commuting. • Greater employability and access to education for marginalized groups, such as mothers and fathers with small children, the handicapped and people living in remote areas. • Fewer vehicles on the roads and therefore reduced impacts on the natural environment. • Telecommuting is by no means a panacea for traffic congestion during peak commuting periods. Flexible job locations would work well for certain small business owners, part-time workers, and others who are able to perform work that requires little direct supervision, such as data analysts, events coordinators, researchers, grant writers, college students and telephone answering service providers. Internet access and videoconferencing can also employed to some extent for students. However, studies indicate that most home-based telecommuting is only partial, with time split between home s Okahara & Associates for County of Hawaii Department of Research and Development, Feasibility Study, Geothermal Direct Use, Kapoho lPohoiki Area, February 2007 -5- and other workplace. Over half of all telecommuters work at home 1 to 3 days per week; the average total time worked at home is 18.6 hours per week.' Also, many jobs - especially in the service sector -require the employee to be physically present. Studies have also pointed out that there are both advantages and disadvantages of telecommuting, as summarized below: Table 4 Advanta es and Disadvanta es of Telecommutin Benefits Disadvantages .Flexible schedules .Feel isolated .Less distractions .Lack of access to data and files • Increased productivity, more efficient • Communications .Helps the environment .May breed resentment from coworkers • Less stress • Hardware costs, personal expenses .Improved quality of life .Not available for meetings or when • Good working conditions problems arise .Reduced facility costs .Retain valuable em to ees Currently, wire-based access to high speed internet network for telecommuting purposes in Puna is limited to the areas served by the Hawaiian Telcom and Roadrunner (cable) networks. An alternative will soon be offered as part of a contract between Sandwich Isles Communications and the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL) to provide broad-band width, high-speed communications access to all DHHL lands in the state. DHHL lands in Puna are at Maku`u, Keonepokanui, and Ola` a. Though the network is being built for DHHL lands, Sandwich Isles indicates that it is possible for other users to connect to their network.8 As of July 2007, the Hilo portion of this fiber optic network is almost completed. Once this segment is finished, the network will continue south towards Pahoa. The route will follow an off-highway alignment from Hilo to Kea`au. At Kea`au, the network will run parallel alongside Highway 130 until it reaches Pahoa. Several of the existing and proposed village centers of Puna will be within five miles of the fiber optic line. These developments include: Orchidland Estates, Hawaiian Paradise Park, `Ainaloa, Nanawale Estates, and Lelani Estates • Long-term, Sandwich Isles will add a spur along Highway 11 towards Volcano to connect to DHHL lands in the Ola`a area, but only when DHHL starts developing that area. When the Ola`a fiber optic line is completed, the village centers of Volcano, Kurtistown and Mountain View will be within five miles of the network. Access to broadband internet service does not necessarily depend on any of these wire-based networks. Wireless local area networks (commonly known by the brand "Wi-Fi") are also commercially available. Wi-Fi operates over radio waves, so radio towers would need to be constructed at strategic, high elevations. With respect to Puna, a benefit of this ' U.S. Department of Transportation, Transportation Implications of Telecommuting, April 1993. • a Telephone interview, 7/19/07. -6- system is that wires do not have to be laid over seismically active areas that could become cut off during an earthquake or lava flow. Several small towns and rural communities around the world have begun creating their own Wi-Fi networks. The larger service providers do not have the financial incentive to create these networks, so government entities are subsidizing their construction. These systems are promoted as a way to increase job opportunities and expand technology into rural areas. The U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Development program provides several types of loans and grants for financing rural telecommunications infrastructure: • The Traditional Telephone Loan program consists of hardship, cost of money, and guaranteed loans that finance voice telephone service with capability for broadband service using digital subscriber loop (DSL) technology. • The Broadband Access Loan program provides loans for funding the costs of construction, improvement, and acquisition of facilities to provide broadband service to eligible rural communities. • The Distance Learning and Telemedicine program brings electronic educational resources to rural schools and improves health care delivery in rural areas. • The Community Connect Grant program provides financial assistance to eligible applicants that will provide currently unserved areas with broadband service that fosters economic growth and public safety services. • Due to the high cost of creating a Puna-wide Wi-Fi network, it would be more feasible to locate Wi-Fi reception areas within existing and planned village centers. Wi-Fi transmitters could be constructed at public facilities such as schools or community centers. These "hotspots" have the potential to attract even greater numbers of people to the village centers and to promote higher density development. The service should either be subsidized by the federal or county government or paid through a modest user fee. b. Promote ride-sharing, van pools, car pooling The state Department of Transportation (HDOT) administers programs to encourage more efficient commuting by vehicle: HDOT contracts with Vanpool Hawaii to provide air-conditioned, vans and sport utility vehicles for 7 to 15 passengers. Monthly costs vary based on the daily round trip miles and type of vehicle. The driver gets to keep the vehicle to use on weekends and after commute hours, in exchange for picking up riders and collecting fee. Insurance and maintenance costs are included in the fees. Vanpoolers share the costs of parking and gas. • HDOT matches commuters for ride-sharing. SchoolPool is a type of ride-sharing program that is co-sponsored by the Department of Education and is designed specifically for the transportation of school children by their parents or guardians. Presently, there are no Vanpool originating from Puna. Availability of the Vanpool and ride-sharing alternatives should be more actively promoted to Puna's commuters by • working through major employers and large institutions such as University of Hawai `i at -7- Hilo and Hawai `i Communit Colle e, which can offer incentives such as preferential • y g parking for ride-share vehicles. c. Provide more services within Village Centers Working Paper #1 identifies several existing and proposed Village Centers to provide Puna residents -especially the increasing number of those living in the nonconforming subdivisions -with more convenient access to services (see Table 5.) Table 5 7Tcna 'r~r~ .G'amrir~Pa within vi~~asl'P. ~P.11f:P.Y'C Type Regional Town Center Community Village Center Neighborhood Village Center Kurtistown `Ainaloa (Potential): Hawaiian Beaches, , , Orchidland, Nanawale, Leilani, Locations Kea`au, Pahoa. Mountain View, Hawaiian Paradise Park (no more than Kapoho, Glenwood, an area between Kaimu and Opihikao, two locations), and Volcano. and Hawaiian Paradise Park s More than 40 tenant spaces for 20 to 40 small tenant spaces for 5 to15 small tenant spaces for Typical full range of retail and.personal retail and personal services, convenience retail and personal Uses services, repair shops and other repair shops services li ht industrial uses Commercial Up to 250,000 square feet aggregate, but no tenant spaces Up to 150,000 square feet aggregate, but no tenant spaces Up to 50,000 square feet Floor Area lar er than 50 000 s uare feet. lar er than 25 000 s uare feet. Regional park; schools (all Neighborhood park, elementary grades); community hall, Community park, elementary school, multi-purpose meeting theater; outdoor events area; or middle school, community room or (minimum) place to bed-and-breakfast homes and center and outdoor events area; congregate or post community small inns; elderly or other bed-and-breakfast homes and notices; outdoor events area Other Uses special needs housing; transit small inns; elderly or other (e.g., barbeques and farmer's hub; medical facility with special needs housing; transit markets); small bed-and- emergency room; police and fire stop; medical clinic; walking breakfast homes; transit (or station; walking and bicycling and bicycling paths. para-transit) stop; connections aths. to walkin and bic clin aths. Development and expansion of these Village Centers will have several types of impacts on travel patterns in Puna: • Commercial services for everyday shopping or other personal needs will be in closer proximity to a larger number of residents. While this may not significantly reduce the number of vehicle trips, the average length of those trips will be shorter. • Parks, schools, community centers and similar facilities will be closer to more people who use them, especially the young, elderly or lower-income people who are not able to drive themselves. This will encourage more walking, bicycling and transit trips, provided that there are also safe and convenient facilities for these modes to and within the Village Centers. s Hawaiian Paradise Park may have a Neighborhood Village Center in the makai area in addition to the two Community Village Centers in the mauka area of that subdivision. • • -8- Village Centers will be places of employment, as well as services. To the extent that these jobs are filled by Puna residents, this will reduce the length and. number of commuting trips. The impact on peak commuting period traffic would be greatest along the Highway 11 corridor between Hilo and Kea`au and along Highway 130 between Kea`au and Shower Drive at Hawaiian Paradise Park (see Figure 3.) Figure 3 Projected 2030 Traffic Volumes on Principal Corridors • ,~ ~.;^ ,,l` w +~ ~ ,' f rer~ur ~ ~ ~ r~o+M~rc+` ,\ ~ ~ ~ '' s' ;~( t >~ ~.~.. . + ` \ ~~ r~ '~ ~ ~~ eewroe~~ \ . \~ ~~ .~ R,'• Source: Puna Regional Circulation Plan, 2005 d. Create new "green" employment within Puna • Working Papers #1 and #2 identify several opportunities to create or expand employment opportunities in Puna, mostly through use of the region's natural assets. As noted in Working Paper #2, Puna is already a major producer of tropical flowers and fruits. Volcanoes National Park already draws large numbers of "eco-tourists". Below are several opportunities to expand on "green" and energy-related employment: • Biomass Production: Former sugarcane lands in the Kea`au could be put back into cultivation to produce plant biomass for conversion to biodiesel or ethanol fuel. Other potential sources for biofuel production include palm oil, and Kukui nut. Additionally, there is ongoing research into turning algae into a biofuel. If this technology continues to advance, there could be opportunities for algae farms along the Puna coast. • Direct Use of Geothermal: As mentioned in Section l.b., a recent county study concluded that direct use of excess geothermal heat for greenhouses, pasteurization of potting media, biodiesel production and lumber kilns is only -9- Village Centers Scenario 1.74 times greater than 2000 Current Trends Scenario 2.18 times greater than 2000 marginally feasible. However, this assessment could change if another stable source of heat other than the PGV facility is identified and a source of public subsidy for astart-up period can be found.lo Organic Produce: With four large retail outlets planned for locations on Oahu and Maui, the entry of Whole Foods Market is expected to be a major boon to organic farming throughout the state. The Big Island's Hamakua Springs Country Farms will be one of Whole Foods' providers.ll Mala 'Ai 'Opio (MA'O) Farms in Wai`anae is a good example of a successful non-profit organic farming venture that could be replicated in Puna. MA'O not only provides employment, but also training for underemployed youth (see Appendix D.) Agricultural and Eco-Tourism: Tours that feature Puna's unique agricultural products, such as tropical flowers and fruits, not only increase direct sales, but also expose visitors to unfamiliar produce, such as rambutan, durian and cheremoya, which in turn expands export sales. In 2004, the value of agricultural tourism on the Island of Hawaii was estimated at over $12.5 million, up 42% from four years earlier.12 Local farms also supply the bed-and-breakfast inns that attract eco-tourists to Volcanoes National Park and other sites of natural and cultural interest. The Hawaii Tourism Authority offers grants of up to $50,000 to businesses and organizations to undertake projects and events to stimulate this niche market. A recent grantee was Big Island Farm Bureau, which was awarded $25,000 to hold an agricultural festival.ls Enterprise Zone Incentives: Virtually the entire populated area of Puna is within the state-designated Enterprise Zone (EZ). Businesses within an EZ that make at least half of their gross annual income from agriculture or alternative energy development and increase the number of full-time employees by at least 10% by the end of the first year and an average of 10% annually in the following six years are eligible for the following incentives: - Full exemption from the General Excise Tax (GET) for up to seven years. The GET exemption applies only to gross revenues from EZ-eligible business categories within an EZ. Licensed contractors are also exempt from GET on construction done within an EZ for an EZ-qualified business. - An 80% reduction of state income tax the first year. This reduction goes down 10% each year for the remaining six years. - An additional income tax reduction equal to 80% of annual Unemployment Insurance premiums the first year. - Three-year exemption from any increase in property taxes resulting from new. construction by EZ firms at their EZ sites. • Federal Sources: The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), whose state headquarters is located in Hilo, offers an array of grants and loans for rural economic and agricultural development (see Appendix E.) Many of these 10 Okahara & Associates, op. cit., p. ii. u httpa/www.hamakuasprin~s.com/ is Hawaii Agricultural Statistics Office, http•//www nass.usda gov/hi/speccron(a~tour.htm is Hawaii Tourism Authority, County Product Enrichment Program, http://www.hawaii- count~com/rd/2007 ~Io 20CPEP°Io20Agx>lication%20Packet~I 20for~l 20Distribution.pdf .7 L~ -10- r~ ~_~ 3. programs are available only to non-profit organizations. In some instances, they are available through afederally-fund non-profit organization, the Rural Community Assistance Corporation14 Promoting mass transit and alternative travel modes The most important long-term measure to promote transit ridership, walking and bicycling as modes of travel is to reshape the development growth pattern of the region along the Village Center model, so that more people can live closer to services and places of employment. In the meantime, steps can be taken to support those travel modes in the near term and anticipate and facilitate the gradual transformation of the land use pattern. a. Expand and improve delivery of transit services The county Mass Transit Agency (MTA) is presently implementing several measures to expand and improve transit service in Puna by converting to a "hub-and-spoke" system as follows: • The larger Hele-on coaches will operate more frequent runs on a shorter route between Hilo and a Puna "hub" at Kea`au. There will also be secondary hubs at Pahoa and Volcano. • MTA is acquiring a fleet of 18-passenger 4-wheel drive vehicles to operate paratransit services for the general population in areas beyond the hubs, where roads are typically unimproved. Passengers will call to schedule apick-up. Paratransit vans will be available at the hubs to take passengers disembarking from the Hele-on bus to their destinations. • MTA will schedule pick-up appointments for paratransit passengers and coordinate the Hele-on service with the paratransit operations provided by the Hawaii County Economic Opportunity Council, the Coordinated Services for the Elderly, and other smaller programs for riders with special needs through the computerized Trapeze NOVUS program or similar software. • Intermediate Hele-on stops are being considered along the routes between the hubs at park-and-ride locations. MTA is presently in the process of identifying suitable park-and-ride sites. • MTA expects to have the hub-and-spoke system in operation by late Spring 2008. It will be further refined as vehicles are added to the fleet and other supporting infrastructure, such as the park-and-ride lots, are developed. Proposed sites for the hubs and park-and-ride lots, shown in Figure 4, are: • Kea `au (Primary Hub): In-town location near commercial centers or on state lands adjacent to the soccer fields; second site could include a new MTA baseyard and headquarters. is http:/1www.rcac.ore/doc.aspx?142 -11- • Pahoa (Secondary Hub): On county-owned sites, either adjacent to Pahoa Community Center or on Highway 130 near Kahakai Boulevard where the new fire and police stations are planned. • Volcano (Secondary Hub): Either at Cooper Center (with the permission of the Volcano Community Association) or on state land near Old Volcano Highway and Wright Road. Additional recommended locations for park-and-ride lots are: • Hawaiian Paradise Park, at one or two of the proposed Village Center locations, where the community-owned parcel could serve as a parking lot for commuters, as well as a location for farmet~s' markets. • Kurtistown, at Mea `ulu Street, which would serve cammuters living in Puna Mauka subdivisions, Kurtistown and Mountain View. Figure 4 Proposed Transit Hubs, Park-and-Ride Lots and Paratransit Service Areas ""~" Proposed Bus Route Paratransit Areas ~ ~ Community Developtrcenf Plan Boundary Hubs Primary Paratransit Areas Major Highways • Yltage Center ~ Hubs Secondary Other Raads O Propoesed Village Center Park and Ride Subdivisions • • ~.,. ~~~~ D 25 S 40 ., ~-..w,.,.r.......r..... -12- Other recommended measures to improve and expand transit service are: • Develop acounty-wide Transit Master Plan to provide an overall framework for transit improvements. • Launch a public education campaign promoting transit services, tailoring them to target populations such as youth, commuters, and the elderly. • Cultivate public /private partnerships, such as employer-sponsored bus passes. • Expand the staff of the Mass Transit Agency to provide greater support for public relations, route planning and coordination, technical operations and fleet management. • Investigate other incentives to increase ridership, such as convenient bus ticketing systems, reduced monthly rates for residents and special needs populations, and tourist passes. b. Create safe routes to schools and parks • • The Department of Education (DOE) contracts private bus companies to provide transportation for students in Puna. However, there are limits to the value of this service: • DOE reports that the service in East Hawaii has been unreliable due to a chronic shortage of bus driversls • Parents, teachers and students have reported disciplinary problems on school buses, which are difficult to control when the sole adult on board is the driver. • Many students are unable to take part in after-school tutoring, sports or other activities due to lack of transportation. • Large numbers of students attend charter and private schools with no bus service. Improvements to MTA transit service could supplement the DOE bus service and provide more options for students. This could be accomplished by a reduced or free fare service for students, with reimbursements to MTA from DOE and private or charter schools via a voucher system. Even with improved bus service, however, there need to be safer, more convenient walking and bicycle routes to frequently used public areas, especially schools and parks. Often, these facilities are collocated and are used by people of all ages at various times of the day and week, not just when school is in session. Accessibility to these facilities by pedestrian and bicycle routes is particularly important for the young people who most commonly use them, since they are not able to drive themselves to these locations. Some school complexes in Hawaii have undertaken on-the-ground inventories and assessments to identify safety problem areas and strategies and projects to make routes safer and more convenient. Funding is available through Healthy Hawaii Initiative, a program of the is Communication from John Saplan, Department of Education coordinator for student transportation in East Hawaii to the Puna CDP Transportation -Mass Transit Working Group, 2006. -13- Department of Health, and the Federal Highway Administration, via Hawaii Department of Transportation. is Table 6 lists the indicators for a safe routes program. Often, relatively simple physical or operational modifications can be made to make routes safer, such properly marked crosswalks with crossing guards at peak periods, improved signage, or brightly painted berms to separate the pedestrian path from a travel lane. Following are minimal features that should be incorporated in all roadway improvements that involve identified walking and bicycling routes to schools and parks: • Improve roadway shoulders in roadway construction and maintenance projects. • Provide bicyclelpedestrian paths as part of new roadway connection projects. Table 6 Key Indicators of Safe Routes to Schools Program Outcome Objectives Behavior of • Increase numbers of children walking to and from school Increase numbers children of children bicycling to and from school • Im rove skills for walkin and bic clip safel Behavior of • Reduce the numbers of vehicles arriving and departing school at morning drivers drop-off and evening pick-up times • Decrease speed of vehicles in and around school area Prevent aggressive driving behavior (e.g., not yielding to pedestrians) • Decrease number of drivin tri s b arents and len h of commute Community • Improve the quality of walking environment: number and usefulness of facilities sidewalks and bike lanes • Safely design intersections (lights, crosswalks, etc.) Crashes and • Reduce the number of traffic crashes involving children walking or biking to Injuries and from school • Decrease severity of injuries to children from traffic on their way to and from school • Reduce the number of conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians bicyclists which would be likel to lead to crashes (i.e. "near misses") Community buy- .Increase the diversity of people involved in SR2S efforts in • Heighten the level of commitment and energy displayed by collaborators • Develo arent enthusiasm about allowin their children to walk or bike Environmental • Decrease level of air and noise pollution in school area Reduce land devoted quality to arkin and drop-off/pick-up areas Health, • Provide children with activity of daily living (ADL) which contributes to Responsibility physical and mental health. and • Reduce public health concerns related to juvenile obesity. Empowerment • provide opportunity for empowerment of children taking a responsible and active role in their own transportation needs. • Provides children choice of flexible transportation schedule that accommodates after-school activities. 'b See ht~•//www healthyhawaii com/about/about start living healthy/about start livine healthy.htm and httn:/Jsafetv.fhwa.dot. e'ov/saferoutes/fy09proiection.htm u • -14- c. Increase the amount of funding for enhancing alternative travel modes The above proposals for improving transit and creating safer routes to schools and parks will require a lot more investment than the county presently has available to spend. Federal subsidies are available for a portion of operational costs, including the purchase of transit vehicles. Also, federal money can be appropriated for transit-related capital improvements, such as baseyards and park-and-ride lots. Most federal funds come through the state Department of Transportation (HDOT), which identifies planned uses of federal money for projects in the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). Other sources of funding can be tapped through various public agencies and private organizations. Following are recommended actions to increase funding from existing available sources: • Request that HDOT allocate in the STIP a larger share of federal "flex funds" (i.e., the Section 402 program funds) for projects in Puna from highway capacity improvements to transit-related and alternative travel mode improvements, including pedestrian and bicycle safety. • Request that the Department of Education and private schools allocate or increase funding for school buses, crossing guards and improvements to school routes for walking and bicycling. • Supplement public funding for safe routes to schools and parks with voluntary fundraising efforts by associations of school parents, staff, students and area businesses and service organizations and charitable foundations. Funding could be used for hiring a coordinator, purchasing incentives, printing newsletters, or for managing community and school participation. In order to receive tax- deductible donations, which are important to charitable donors, a bike advocacy or safe routes to school group needs to be affiliated with anon-profit agency or school. • Allocate local funding to the county Department of Public Works to make improvements such as sidewalk and crosswalks, traffic signage and acquisition of access easements based on recommendations of a safe routes to schools/parks assessment. • Allocate local funding to the county Police Department to monitor traffic operations along safe routes to schools/parks and enforce against traffic code violations. To accelerate progress, the county should also consider additional local funding. The options are fairly limited because the county depends primarily on real property taxes for revenue, and the largest share of this revenue is spent to provide basic public safety and emergency services. For transportation improvements, the county is authorized to levy a motor vehicle weight tax and a gasoline tax, both of which they already use. Last year, the County Council increased the motor vehicle weight tax and allocated two-thirds of the additional revenue to the repair and maintenance of county roads. The other third of the increase went to transit improvements. The Council declined to raise the gasoline tax, -15- although the County of Hawaii has the lowest gasoline tax rate of all the counties in the state.17 Another opportunity for the County Council to raise local revenue for transportation improvements is to levy a surcharge of up to 0.5% on the Hawaii General Excise Tax, which the State Legislature authorized in 2006.18 Revenue from the surcharge may be used for the following purposes: (1) Operating or capital costs of public transportation systems, including public roadways or highways, public buses, pedestrian paths or sidewalks, or bicycle paths; and (2) Expenses in complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 Accordingly, it is recommended that the County Council consider the following measures to increase funding for enhancement of transit and alternative travel modes in Puna: • Increase the gasoline tax to a level commensurate with other Hawaii counties. • Enact a surcharge of up to 0.5% on the Hawaii General Excise Tax. 4. Promoting the use of off-grid renewable energy sources Puna lacks the physical conditions suitable for hydro-electric or wind power generation, except for small applications at specific locations. In Puna, solar-generated power has greater potential. a. Promote use o f solar technologies Solar powered street fixtures have the potential to provide adequate street lighting without the cost of monthly electricity bills or extensive wiring. These models employ the same bulbs that are used in existing street light fixtures and provide the same light intensity. They contain a moderately sized photovoltaic panel and protected electrical box that stores the battery and other electrical equipment. The batteries retain enough power to keep the lights running throughout the night. Additionally, the lights can be programmed to provide high levels of light during peak travel time and lowered amounts throughout the night, decreasing light pollution. Solar panels can also be attached to bus stops and other structures that have more moderate lighting needs. These arrays have a higher start-up cost, but in the long-term pay for themselves through lowered electrical bills. In addition, the self-contained units do not require any long trenching of electrical wires, so they are ideal for rural settings. As noted in Section 1.b., many homes in Puna are not connected to HELCO's electrical power grid or use it only for back-up power. Given the rural nature of the area, renewable energy is already widely accepted and utilized by Puna residents. C~ 17 The County of Hawaii gasoline tax is $0.088 per gallon, compared to $0.165 in Honolulu, $0.18 in Maui and $0.13 in Kauai. la The relevant citation is Section 46-16.8, Hawai i Revised Statutes. -16- Figure 5 Use of Solar Technology for Public Facilities Off-grid systems allow users to save money on utility bills while providing enough energy for their home's needs. Photovoltaic panels (or "solar panels") can be adjusted to fit an individual building's needs and come in several shapes and styles including: raised flat panels, metal-appearance panels, or shingle-style panels. Figure 6 Residential Applications of Solar Energy Above: Metal-style Solar Panels (photo courtesy of http://www.uni-solar.com) Left: Solar Shingles (photo courtesy of www.geology'y.wisc.edu/~jmbahr/shin~les.JPG) If the photovoltaic (PV) panel is independently connected to the house and off the electrical power grid then it will require a battery backup. If the house is hooked into the electrical grid then anet-metering system can be set up. By law, the electric company is -17- Solar panels for street lamps (left) and bus shelter (above) Photos courtesy of httn://www.solarli~htin .com and http://www.oksolar.com required to provide the free installation of net-metering boxes upon request.19 These systems allow the solar producer to feed energy back into the electrical grid when the home is not using the energy. The electric company buys the electricity from the producer at a wholesale rate. The use of PV panels for residential application is already cost-competitive with conventional utility service in Puna. In 2005, PV modules were selling at $5.20 per watt.20 According to the U.S. Department of Energy, an installed cost of $9.70 per watt is the breakeven point where residential utility rates are $0.20 per kilowatt-hour. HELCO's residential electricity rates are at $0.29, so PV panels are well belbw the breakeven point in Puna. Currently, the state and federal governments offer several tax incentives for renewable energy production (see Appendix C.) These rebates and other financial enticements are aimed at expanding the use of renewable energy production in homes, businesses, and government offices. The current popular rebate programs cover technology such as solar water heaters, photovoltaic panels, and compact fluorescent light bulbs. While these tax incentives are attractive for many homeowners, more direct financial assistance is needed to reach the lower-income homeowners or renters who could most significantly benefit from lower utility costs. In 2006, the state established a Public Benefits Fund administered by the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to promote energy efficiency through subsidies for investments in energy conversation installations and improvements.21 As of January 2009, this fund will replace similar programs administered by the public utility companies, such as HELCO, that are funded by revenues from ratepayers. Fund administration was transferred to the PUC to remove the perceived conflict between the utility's desire to generate revenues and its motivation to implement energy-efficient measures that decrease sales and defer the need for additional generating plant investments. Based on this change, the following is recommended to promote the installation of PV panels in residences for low-income people in Puna: • Urge the Public Utilities Commission to target revenues in the Public Benefits Fund for the installation of devices to generate heat and electrical power from natural sources in residences occupied by low-income households. b. Employ LEED standards for buildings The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) is an internationally recognized certification program established through the U.S. Green Building Council. A LEED certification indicates that a building meets certain benchmarks for design, construction, and operation in ways that reduce the use of natural resources while providing for healthier working environments and protecting the integrity of surrounding ecosystems. The certification process focuses on five key areas of human and is Hawaii Revised Statutes, Section 269-101 z° Hawai i Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism, Photovoltaic Electricity in Hawaii , January 2006. zi Act 162, Session Laws of Hawaii 2006. -18- environmental health: sustainable site development, water savings, energy efficiency, materials selection, and indoor environmental quality. LEED criteria relevant to Puna: • On site renewable energy production • Water use reduction/ Water-efficient landscaping • Re-use of construction materials • Construction materials made from recycled products • Increasing natural lighting • Low emitting construction materials • Alternative transportation The amount of "green" construction methods that a project employs determines the level of certification for the project. There are four certification levels for LEED: Certified, Silver, Gold, and Platinum. Project checklists for LEED Certified Schools and LEED Certified New Construction are in Appendix B. Nation-wide, green building methods increase the overall construction costs of a project by an estimated 2% to 5%.22 Because material costs are higher in Hawaii, the increased cost locally is likely to be in the 6% to 8% range. While this represents a significant increase in the amount of up-front construction costs, the added costs pay for themselves within 10 to 15 years through reduced energy and water bills.23 Over time, the savings accumulate to the benefit of the building's owner or tenant. The current Model Energy Code exempts many new residential homes and does little to encourage energy efficient design. To encourage more energy efficient structures, the county should: • Employ LEED construction standards for the public buildings in Puna a minimum goal of Certified level. Impose higher energy efficiency standards on residences larger than 2,000 square feet in floor area. Applicable standards might include better insulation for the outer walls, low-emissivity windows and doors, reduction of roof heat gain, and use ofenergy-efficient appliances. Imposing these regulations only on larger homes would avoid higher initial cost burden on the construction of owner-built homes for people who can least afford it. However, energy-efficient features should be incorporated into lower-cost homes, as well, if public subsidies are available. c. Concert power grid system to alternative energy sources over long-term ~.J Due to a surplus of the baseload and peak power generation on the Island of Hawaii that ties into Hawaiian Electric Light Company's electrical power grid, HELCO has no immediate plans to significantly expand the total output. Over the long-term, however, 22 U. S.. Green Building Council (LEED): http:Uwww.us b~ c.org za U.S. Department of Energy: http://www.eere.enerev.eov -19- existing fossil fuel-based generation plants could be replaced by sources of renewable energy if these sources can provide a reliable supply of baseload power. The current electrical production capacity for the Puna Geothermal Venture (PGV) plant is 30 megawatts (MW), which is enough to supply around 30,000 homes with their electrical needs. This alone makes Puna a net exporter of electrical power. In 2001 PGV received permission to double its total capacity output to 60 MW. However, HELCO has said that it will probably not need to add this much additional generation capacity from the Puna area until at least 2020 because there is already a comfortable margin of extra generation capacity and the HELCO has greater need for power sources on the west side of the island where the demand is growing at a faster pace.24 Over the past couple of years, HELCO and PGV have been negotiating to increase PGV capacity by 8 MW, to a total of 38 MW, but no final agreement has been reached. If a purchase agreement is consummated, it should also include some provision for the use of excess heat by the direct=use enterprises identified in the recent county-sponsored feasibility study. These enterprises would benefit the Puna community, whereas the export of more power does not. Another potential baseload energy source is Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC), although this prospect is very long term. OTEC is the process of turning seawater into electrical energy. The Natural Energy Laboratory Hawaii Authority (NELHA) on the Kona coast of Hawaii has been conducting experiments using this technology since the 1970's. Although briefly suspended during the 1990's, this technology is making a comeback as a way of offering clean energy production. Through this process, solar radiation is converted into electrical power. The ocean is divided into various thermal layers, with the warmer layers resting at the surface and the cooler layers at deeper depths. OTEC pumps the colder water up to the surface to interact with the warmer water. In order for the conversion process to work, there must be a temperature difference of at least 36 degrees Fahrenheit between the cooler and warmer waters. • Warm water is pumped from the ocean surface (typically within the top 35 feet). • Cold water is pumped from deeper depths (more than 2000 feet). • Warm water is sent into a heat exchanger that boils another fluid (typically ammonia) into steam. • The steam propels a turbine that generates electricity. • Cold water is sent through a condenser that turns the steam back into a liquid (preserving the ammonia for future use). • The warm water and cool water are discharged back into the ocean. 24 http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com (February 5, 2007) t -20- Figure 7 Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC) Process Ev~soratnrs - To v~tRSq ~dtwat .~~,;::- ~~~ ~~ Diagram courtesy of httnJ/www.nrel.tov OTEC offers several useful additional applications: • Because the deep seawater this is used is largely free of impurities and becomes desalinized in the OTEC process, it can be bottled and marketed as a high-end bottled drinking water, as the company Deep Ocean Hawaii does off the Kona Coast, or it can be used as a tap water source for the county's water supply system. • Because the cold water that is drawn during this process is rich in nutrients - much more than the warmer surface water - it can be diverted into pools and used for several forms of aquaculture; e.g., (1) cultivation of cold water fish such as salmon and lobster, (2) cultivation of the health supplement Spirulina and (3) preservation of live fish in the colder water. In 2006, the company Ocean Engineering & Energy Systems signed an agreement with NELHA to construct a 1.2 Megawatt facility at Keahole Point on the Kona Coast. The cost of construction is estimated to be 10 to 15 million dollars. Though this system will not likely provide residential power, it will be used for further research of ocean thermal energy conversion and in the commercial production of hydrogen.25 In summary, following are recommended strategies that involve Puna in reducing HELCO's reliance on fossil-fuel generating plants over the long-term: • Provide incentives (described in Section 4) to reduce energy consumption and reliance on the HELLO grid as a primary source of electrical power. • zs Natural Energy Laboratory Hawaii Authority (NELHA) - htt~:/Jwww.nelha.or~ -21- • As modest additions to the PGV geothermal plant are negotiated with HELCO, make provisions for direct-use applications of excess heat (see Section 2.d.) that support new enterprises in Puna. • Promote the production of biofuels (see Section 2. d.) as an energy source. • While it does not seem feasible at this time to make the significant infrastructure investment required for an OTEC facility in Puna, pursue this option over the long term as the technology advances beyond the research and development phase and demonstrates its value as a viable source of energy production. 5. Improving roadway connectivity and safety Alternatives for improving roadway connectivity and safety have been considered in three different efforts related to the Puna Community Development Plan preparation since 2005: The Puna Regional Circulation Plan (PROP), published in November 2005zs; The CDP Transportation Working Group (TWG) report, submitted in February 2007; and Traffic counts, analyses, presentations and an interim report prepared by Wayne Yoshioka of PB Americas, Inc. for the County. t The shorthand references to these sources in the following sections will be PRCP (Puna Regional Circulation Plan), TWG (CDP Transportation Working Group), and PB (PB Americas). The PB effort was terminated before final recommendations were made. However, the traffic counts collected and analyzed by PB Americas are provided in Appendix F. Below is a discussion of the key issue areas with respect to roadways, making reference to the observations and recommendations contained in the three above reports and presentations. a. Relieve present and projected traffic congestion on Highways IZ and I30 All three sources recommend mass transit enhancements and a variety of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures to mitigate the volume of peak period commuter traffic on Puna's principal, heavily-traveled highway corridors. These measures are outlined and discussed in Sections 2 and 3 of this Working Paper. Beyond that, however, the three sources.. also recommend measures to make physical and operation changes to these two highways to increase their capacity. PRCP proposes widening Highway 130 to four lanes between Pahoa and Kea`au in "affordable increments." TWG proposes widening Highway 130 either to allow a landscaped median or a reversible middle lane to accommodate peak period traffic in the peak direction of flow. PB's preliminary recommendations suggest the need to widen Highway 130 to four lanes, but leaves open the option to dedicate lanes for transit or high-occupancy vehicles. PB also suggested some other alternatives to increase capacity on Highway 130, such as the construction of frontage zs Townscape, Inc. for the County of Hawai i Planning Department, Puna Regional Circulation Plan, December 2005. A -22- • roads to reduce the number of driveway connections and street intersections with the highway. The State of Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT) has jurisdiction over Highways 130 and 11, so the CDP has not direct control over how these corridors may be modified to accommodate the present and projected traffic demand. However, the land use policies -particularly the proposed creation of village centers and additional employment in Puna -and population projections should be a useful guide to HDOT planners. HDOT has engaged a consultant to conduct a planning study for the Highway 130 corridor in which the recommendations of the PRCP, TWG and PB, as well as other options to increase highway capacity, can and should be explored with broad community involvement. b. Improve vehicular and pedestrian safety on principal highways A key problem identified in all three sources is highway safety for all travel modes, especially in the section of Highway 130 between Pahoa and Kea`au and along Highway 11 were it passes through built-up areas such as Mountain View, Kurtistown and Kea`au. The problems occur primarily along intersections where there is inadequate intersection control for turning vehicles and crossing pedestrians. Between intersections, there are non- existent or inadequate provisions for safe pedestrian and bicycle travel. The latter is a problem throughout Puna's street system, not just the highways, but the local street conditions are discussed separately in Sections 3b and 3c of this Working Paper. • All three sources recommend intersection improvements at several locations along Highways 130 and 11 and a reduction in posted speed limits along some stretches of highway, focusing particularly on Highway 130. The PRCP and PB lean toward signalization as the preferred option for intersection control, and PB also suggested the possible use of frontage roads to reduce driveway access and intersections, but the TWG strongly prefers the use of modern roundabouts at intersections. The latter should be given serious consideration in HDOT's Highway 130 planning study. c. Design streets and highways to support multi-modal travel All three sources also proposed a network of long routes throughout the district that are designated for non-vehicular travel, including hiking, bicycling and horse-back riding. While these are intended primarily as recreational trails, segments of them can also be convenient walking or biking routes through subdivisions for relatively short trips. If village centers are formed within these subdivisions, this may, over the long term, reduce some of the pedestrian and bicycle trip demand along and across major highways. PB proposed the concept of "shared street" for Puna's subdivisions, recognizing that most of the street rights-of--way are too narrow to accommodate separated bicycle lanes and sidewalks. This concept was been used widely since the 1970's in The Netherlands, whose term for this is "woonerf" (Dutch for "living yard".) The woonerf seeks to change the perception that the motorist has priority by incorporating traffic-calming features in the street design to slow vehicular speed and thus create a safer environment for pedestrians and bicyclists. Such traffic calming features may include curved, narrow travel lanes; tree plantings; and street furniture. The woonerf lacks sidewalks, curbs, and gutters. The main • -23- travel way is intentionally blurred so vehicles have to travel at slower speeds. Vehicle speeds are typically reduced to an average of 8 to 15 miles per hour. While the woonerf may be an attractive concept, it will be difficult to implement this approach in Puna for several reasons. First, the streets within virtually all of Puna's subdivisions are arranged in a grid pattern and are straight in their horizontal alignment and their narrow rights-of--way leave little room for meandering traffic lanes. Second, since most of the subdivision roads were constructed directly over the irregular lava terrain, they have dips and rises which may tend to slow traffic somewhat but also create poor sight distances, putting pedestrians and bicyclists traveling in these streets potentially at greater risk. Third, the blocks in the subdivision road systems are generally very long, often a mile or greater, which discourages pedestrians and bicyclists who tend to seek "short cuts" to reach their destination. Finally, most of the subdivision streets are privately-owned, so any modifications to them require the approval of the community association that maintains them. Despite these challenges, there are some opportunities to promote multi-modal travel in Puna through street design and acquisition of new rights-of--way: • Design all new highway and street improvements to incorporate pedestrian and bicycle travel. For local streets, the "shared street" (or woonerf) design concept may be applicable in some instances, such as within or near village centers. • Develop long trails for non-vehicular traffic (e.g., Old Volcano Trail, Railroad Right-of--Way, Old Puna Trail) as a loop system with connections to existing or • proposed major village centers to promote their use for short walking and bicycling trips as well as recreational activity. • Acquire easements straddling subdivision lot boundaries near proposed village centers in order to create shorter pathways for pedestrians and bicyclists where blocks are quite long. d. Develop the Puna Makai Alternate Route(PMAR) All three sources agreed on the need for PMAR as an alternate route to Highway 130, and eventually, the section of Highway 11 between Kea`au and Hilo. Existing and projected traffic data indicate that the most immediate need is to provide an alternate route for the traffic between the Hawaiian Paradise Park (HPP) subdivision and Highway 11 near Kea`au. Each of the three sources made differing recommendations with respect to the proposed alignment and design of PMAR. The TWG, as well as some other Puna residents who have been closely following the CDP process, expressed a preference fora "parkway" concept for PMAR. They have also stated that PMAR should be a high priority project that is needed as soon as possible. The difficult challenge is identifying and acquiring aright-of--way through HPP. The most expedient approach would be to acquire and develop one of the existing streets in HPP for the PMAR alignment, but there are many downsides to this option. Take 15th Avenue, which is approximately at the middle of HPP, as an example: • There are 2431ots fronting 15th Avenue, 66 of which are developed. Presumably, these are homes whose sole access is via a driveway connecting to 15th Avenue. • -24- Eventually, there could be 243 driveways connecting to 15th Avenue. Typically, parkways do not have direct-access private driveways because this defeats the purpose of a parkway to provide a scenic route that is relatively free of conflicting traffic movements. • To convert 15th Avenue to a parkway would require the acquisition of properties along the right-of--way, including any related improvements. Using real property tax assessed values (2007); acquisition of all 243 properties with their respective buildings would cost $20,984,500. This is a conservative estimate, because actual fair market value is usually higher than assessed valuation. In addition, there are improvement costs for the parkway conversion. • The right-of--way acquisition process can be lengthy and contentious, even if only a one or a few landowners are involved, but the likelihood of difficulties and controversy greatly increases when numerous small property owners are affected, especially if the properties are used as a personal residence. An alternative to improving 15th Avenue as a parkway would be to acquire a new right-of--way mid-block location somewhere between 16th Avenue and 10th Avenue along the rear of lots that front the streets on either side. This is essentially the recommendation of the PRCP. The advantages of this option are as follows: • This would minimize, if not completely avoid, the displacement of dwellings and other major improvements. All of the properties are about 320 feet in depth from their road frontage to the rear property line. While it would have to be • confirmed by detailed aerial photo analysis or ground survey, it is most likely that buildings are located closer to the road frontage of the properties, leaving the rear of the properties undeveloped. This is not to say, however, that there is no economic use of the rear of the lots. Some agricultural uses, for example, may be affected. Acquiring a 40-foot right-of--way straddling the rear boundaries of these lots would require only 20 feet of each property's 320 foot depth. Also, the right-of- way would include a portion of one of the properties owned by the HPP community association. Assuming no major improvements are affected, the estimated acquisition cost is greatly reduced. The combined real property assessed valuation (2007) for the right-of--way is $789,527. • The right-of--way for the parkway would be free of connecting driveways. HPP residents would gain access to the parkway via the intersecting mauka-makai streets, which are spaced a mile apart. The acquisition of right-of--way for the new PMA.R parkway could occur incrementally. In the first phase, the PMA.R could extend into HPP only as far as Kaloli Drive, the first major mauka-makai street. This would affect only -lots, but would provide the needed connection to give HPP's 8,8001ots access to PMAR. In the second phase, the PMAR right-of--way could be extended across the remainder of this alignment through HPP to a road that connects to Hawaiian Beaches and Nanawale subdivisions, crossing Kahakai Boulevard. In the meantime, this future connecting road through State-owned land could be used only as an emergency access route, leaving it minimally mproved - i.e., with cinder surface rather than pavement -and gated at the edge of HPP to prevent through traffic on • HPP's unimproved private streets on a daily basis. -25- e. Provide other alternative routes and emergency access routes • While PMAR is clearly seen as the most important new alternate route to establish in Puna because of the existing and projected traffic generated by Puna's makai subdivisions, all three sources also recommend new alternate routes to connect Puna makai to the mauka area of Hilo, and relieve traffic on Highway 11 between Volcano and Kea`au. As indicated in the PRCP and PB analyses, however, the cost of developing these new road segments is prohibitively high. Therefore, additional alternate routes to provide connections between mauka areas of Puna and Hilo should get secondary priority. All three sources also cite the need for between connections between Puna's subdivisions. This is a complex issue for several reasons. First, almost all of the streets in these subdivisions are privately owned. Therefore, road owners' associations of adjoining subdivisions would have to come to an agreement on a connection, not just the design and location of the connection, but also a means to cover the cost of construction and maintenance. Second, the many of the private streets within the subdivisions are constrained by variety of problems, such as poor surface conditions, narrow rights-of--way, poor sight distances and periodic flooding. The opportunities for connection may therefore limited by the availability of reasonably functional streets at either end. Third, the owners of lots fronting streets designated for connection to an adjoining subdivision may object to through traffic. While these owners also benefit from improved access, the impact of increased traflic may in their view outweigh this benefit. The PRCP and PB analyses confronted these problems, but were unable to • determine specific connections that meet with community consensus. The TWG proposed County acquisition of private subdivision roads and their improvement to County standards, which would be extremely costly and potentially quite disruptive to subdivision residents during the construction period due to the extent of work that would be required. It seems the most feasible approach under the circumstances is to provide an incentive for the owners' associations of adjoining subdivisions to identify proposed street connections by offering County financial and legal assistance to construct and maintain the street connections, possibly in combination with some other community benefit, such as a neighborhood park, along the connection. All three sources also identify the need for emergency access routes, not only for emergency vehicles, but also for evacuation in the event of a natural disaster, and as a back-up route in case one of the principal highways is closed due to an accident or repair work. However, the definition of "emergency access route" has been somewhat inconsistent or unclear, and this has led to some controversy. For example, the Puna Emergency Access Route (PEAR) through `Ainaloa and Hawaiian Acres that was paved and improved by the County a couple of years ago, is open at all times, and is indistinguishable for an alternate route, which in turn is source of complaints from residents who live along this route. All three sources recommend that emergency access routes be designated on existing roads, road beds, and trails, leaving unclear the distinctions about right-of--way ownership, type of surface improvement and access limitations. For clarity and consistency, it would be helpful to apply the term "emergency access route" only to rights-of--way that are available at times of actual emergency. These routes are, most typically, unpaved and may be gated and/or privately owned. -26- • • • Appendix A Bike Plan Hawaii Projects Project Length Cost Bike No. Facility Location Type Juris. Class. (mi.) Estimate Plan Priorit 29b Railroad Avenue Bikeway Path C/P C 5.6 $2,160,000 I Kaaahi Rd. / RR Ave (end)- Hawn. Paradise Park 30a RR Avenue Bikeway connection to Kea`au Path C C 0.5 $193,000 I schools RR Ave Bikewa -Kea`au B ass 32 Kea`au- Pahoa Road SSR S C 2.4 $781,000 I Kea`au B ass Road-Shower Drive 35 Old Volcano Trail Path S B 12.5 $3,220,000 I Vol. Hwy-Glenwood Rd.-Kahikopele- Puhala-Olaa Rd. 29c Railroad Avenue Bikeway Path C/P C 6.8 $2,623,000 II Hawn. Paradise Park -Hawn. Beaches Subdivision 30b Various local roads and off-road paths Path C/P C 2.0 $772,000 II Kea`au Town 31a Old Kea`au- Pahoa Road SSR S C 1.1 $358,000 II Volcano H -Kea`au- Pahoa B ass 31b Old Kea`au-Pahoa Road Remnant SSR C/S? B 0.5 $25 000 II 33 Shower Dr/PohakuDr/Olaa/40th SSR P/C C 5.4 $1,758,000 II Kaaahi Road-Volcano Hw 34 Paradise Acres - 9 Rd / C Rd / Kulani Rd. SSR P/C C 5.6 $1,823,000 II 9 Road-Volcano H near Mountain View 36a N: Puna Corridor--Makai SSR P/C C 4.2 $1,367,000 II along Paradise or Makuu Drive Hawaiian Paradise Park-Kea`au-Pahoa Rd 36b North Puna Corridor--Mauka SSR P/C C 3.7 $1,204,000 II Kea`au-Pahoa Rd-11 Rd 36c North Puna Corridor--D Rd/Rose Street SSR P/C C 4.1 $1,335,000 II 9 Rd-Pikake St 36d S. Glenwood Rd. -Fern Forest Path P/C C 4.6 $260,000 II Volcano Hwy. - S. Glenwood Rd.-Old Volcano Trail 37a Ala Hele O Puna (going north) SSR C C 6.1 $1,985,000 II Hawaiian Beaches Subdivision- Hawn. Paradise Park 37b Ala Hele O Puna (going south) SSR C C 5.2 $1,693,000 II Hawn. Beaches Subdivision-Jct. Pahoa- Ka oho Rd 38 Kahakai Blvd. (mauka-makai corridor) SSR C C 4.0 $1,302,000 II Railroad Avenue-Pahoa schools com lex 39 Ag Road/Kehau Road SSR C C 3.8 $1,237,000 II Railroad Ave (Waiakahiula)-Nanawale Blvd to Pahoa-Kapoho Rd 40 Pahoa-Kapoho Road SSR C A 7.2 $26,000 II Volcano Hw -Pahoa Coast 41 Lighthouse Road SSR C C 1.6 $521,000 II Pahoa-Ka oho Rd-Kumukahi Li hthouse 44 Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road SSR C A 15.0 $55,000 II Pahoa-Ka oho Rd-Kea`au-Pahoa Rd 45 Old Kala ana H Remnants Path C? C 4.5 $1736,000 II 46 Pahoa -Kala ana H SSR C A 9.0 $33 000 II -27- Pro'ect No Facility Location Type Juris. Class. Length Cost Bike plan . (mi.) Estimate priorit Kapoho-Kalapana Beach Rd-Kea`au- Pahoa Rd 47a Volcano Highway[Mamalahoa Hwy SSR S A 23.2 $85,000 II Kea`au- Pahoa Bypass-Hawaii Volcanoes Natl. Park 47b Volcano Village Collector Roads, Shoulder SSR C B 1.6 $79,000 II Im rovements Wri ht Rd., Haunani Rd. 29d Railroad Avenue Bikeway Path C/P C 6.5 $2,507,000 III Hawn. Beaches -Kapoho-Kalapana Beach Road 37c Koae Access Path C C 0.8 $309,000 III Railroad Path/Kaaahi Rd-Ala Hele O Puna 42 Pahoa-Kapoho Powerline Trail Path C/P C 2.8 $1,080,000 III Pahoa-Ka oho Rd-Pahoa-Kala ana Rd 43 Kapoho-Kalapana Ridge Trail Path C/P C 8.1 $3,125,000 III Off Pahoa-Ka oho Rd-Kamoamoa Hmstds Type Jurisdiction SSR -Signed Shared Roadway C -County S -State P -Private Classification (suitable for use by) A -Advanced bicyclists B -Basic bicyclists C -Children • u -28- • on r ~ • ~l ~ 1 i Appendiz B LEED Standards Checklist for Public Schools and New Buildings Source: U.S. Green Building Council (LEED) - httn://www.usgbc.or~ Credit Modifications to NC v2.2 h.,w~ #ro•ba9. 4rdimcneahon Crrtrni Crrwmaw.esa# Cawfa..i+rier+{ree lfYt Gals 1 ytA S:wlea:larr. 1 G.er# OeveiapraerSt tlevaryr grad CwRmswgCa ~cri~aly t q.•. a I ~. 4 ~ i ~# ~ 1 b<•<aa t vrea~ 1 o.•. a ~ ~.•,... t a.•. a.r ELLY pavo{o[fisls~fL ProLacL SS gaeiwsnaall![ 7 RW S2 S6L! ppyljlppNp}{. YtYM12! OplLt SOV~Ii ~ R.F t.t StarRalNltlr 00e1p1, KhNMty 4-arrllDl 7 R<iS i1 StOIrIaM!'{ar asaaln. 6711JRpy CA1K1Ci 1 R<r. a MCail IttlWq fttelt. rsan--fmar 1 p<ie 18 {1ReR faNstd ~ffE6t, t5pCt 9 p<da a ~ F iapte.~•t1l,4, q•>.fa-r Plr• ! Jd.~ Ilse a# #r.>titary 1 w Cr MN tlce. ,. 7 ,. ~<.+ i ~ c,<a, tt Qi.tir>! Reuse tASi+Iv+75A6 a# saa, F).eaa t Read 1 i... i _.. _. _~~ cma, to 9ulArag RerraSr<.. MliMi+ t0f/K of fsearg Nhd-, F)wxs B Rmf 1 1 ..._. ~ _. .. ~ crea,ln Bastalraq Reuse. fw.i>tst 5Y.6 0# fnamsr Nu.-9trur:frNEeaiceti+ 1 _._ ~ .. 1 _. Crtl.2t (,`sR#rti};jCrIWY#f .^.~y-...-.... aTfO,#S~, i i ~.~ .._ e,m,ee ceaw#ras:fionw••L.lwngwrawN.Di.e.tzs'f{ t ~ roe,:, c Rttlawsd Rtwaae; SPldN 9X # t . _ ~ . .. c,.e, s: Rlsawc! Rwtpe: sulc+t~r to9r, t 1. __ .. ~ _ a:.w at plcYdld GaSSSIHRi, SPlCRY tOt6 PC..P t 1 ~ c...r..: RlaYa{!'i{ GCSI#!r/. 90sCKw 20X PC . N 1 1 ~ Crod+S.t RlpiO{1!P MatRllYl. ~09L A#MirRiCllSilC LOt:l1M 1 t ( cro•~ f.a RlploStla {alisR{all. 01 `!96 F;lovB. 5Px M!~'ls1M 440lgf t 1 C.<d,c glpOy Rsrtewrple YWlrWS t ~ j CRsir CeffMRd{i4iQCtl a1G O• ra Y >r/;. • H Rkv ~-: raaw t pir>;antaw #W i+ar{u.raa•rrre .' Fr.Y<a t EaariaaraawoA.f Taiacco Smakc IETS! CbratraaS ~;K r~...ya RiYYi#atynt AalYG~i{iatP~rabrtrlr~. e,e•, r Qrldaar Nr 04pslry LbMaai#oreaag { '= l1CEN!!d VlrRLliBa#r # .. cw +st Caat#ltruetAen MO YIPlars. LirtYr! CanltLa(tva i c,.er>r t:aStllrultipl li-#~ iNrtiOletwft{'SlaM S•4aR! L1CltIWr1C!' 1 cro•, r.t # crow a.a t cro•, ws t C+edr 1.a ~ Crod~S t Crodr G.1 ~ C,ad+s.x iMaa:nY Caaa7asl Caftrsla4iYyr # craa+l7 knlfaw [aaMammnNlr CtartAst iSeaya 1 Cao7tr• lYbOf fr..i CasraaR:Y: "~ # cr.e, ne QryR~.f M Y.~w•. tJie..a t~ aG~. oT ~,. 1 t [iSRSawgXLWSl~[aYtalf7~S~uSe! 2 ~ May Y'1'wlSliasf ,, # 1 Ld~f NYGla1CM~M~IaM,~Wra{a~['l4SBlML./~RB" } _6..1_........,1 ! al ae cY u.i n.o # _., o.•a tr 5M.>mrC#nelYnt WtOaugwl. RaluC! !X 6496 9 _.. .....-. v.•SU ll{!{lflN90WSIi LaaMlaiW~R.lb PellO~l L»l Cf Tf41f1yigPo9n , 7 4 ~t rs.•ta {aaraowLLV01al!!tlVWllr TIOlCfrrl!#Op8!! t w.•.:a ris0lr lil9 ReiluWan 2096 Rla+e.'Oar 7 1 R.ia is i17Rer a•e RS JIaGtton 30X Raert^Ren 1 `__f_ ~:,wa<• psmMglAUtlf stM {LlOUaN!{t.2l9ti ii/L11106-1 9 ~t bN.v k - '.f ~.•-~ ? w<,<~af h<atge {txaa•naerN~ Bae43ng !yaem• C.as..misra,w.g {[ir•laaaara ErergF PeS'blrrsaeC ~ _ t.~ ~ . -' ~. heroaa FaaaWrraa#a1R!{rigaraa» . c..•e a ak.•s a,t L7p4iSaac~ Erw.rgl Psrfolaaa~ns t0 ~ 1 '~... _ .__, _ `-" -. b.aa3 :fi11iltK'N{CO/An{{l Y09SYllj 9 -; ~ a••ea EnlSSrrrraA RaR~#p!rlnt Nrnsplrralnt 1 # rnwa McitwtrlnYM1L i VofilolRln t ; _ { w.r.• 6rarlr#POarls t aC pr AAa Wr dam ~ 1 C,vi+t.l Misaovlinn Mfr OaliOn an te9carentenEg. ! croe,r L#.ED /Seeredi0ed {4arfelaasaaLL -- . #b1elrRn ar addi4rrn to reprrrwraants .. _ # ~ o-<aa a 71ss 7Gfar6ot M n #rlSflhlSO hod LEED for New Construction v2.2 Registered Project Checklist Project Name: - Project Address: Yes ? No i •. Prereq 1 Construction Activity Pollution Prevention Required Credit 1 Site Selection 1 Credit 2 Development Density 8 Community Connectivity ~ 1 Credit 3 Brownfield Redevelopment 1 Credit 4.1 Alternative Transportation, Public Transportation Access 1 -29- A t Credit 4.2 Altemative Transportation, Bicycle Storage & Changing Rooms 1 Credit 4.3 Alternative Transportation, Low-Emitting &Fuel-Efficient Vehicles 1 Credit 4.4 Alternative Transportation, Parking Capacity 1 Credit 5.1 Site Development, Protect or Restore Habitat 1 Credit 5.2 Site Development, Maximize Open Space 1 Credit 6.1 Stormwater Design, Quantity Control 1 Credit 6.2 Stormwater Design, Quality Control 1 Credit 7.1 Heat Island Effect, Non-Roof 1 Credit 7.2 Heat Island Effect, Roof 1 Credit 8 Light Pollution Reduction 1 Yes ? No Credit 1.1 Water Efficient Landscaping, Reduce by 50% 1 Credit 1.2 Water Efficient Landscaping, No Potable Use or No Irrigation 1 Credii 2 Innovative Wastewater Technologies 1 Credit 3.1 Water Use Reduction, 20°I° Reduction 1 Credit 3.2 Water Use Reduction, 30% Reduction 1 _ -. Prereq 1 Fundamental Commissioning of the Building Energy Systems Required Prereq 2 Minimum Energy Performance Required Prereq 3 Fundamentai Refrigerant Management Required *Note for EAci: All LEED for New Construction projects registered after June 26'h, 2007 are required to achieve at least two (2) points under EAc1. ~] Credit 1 Optimize Energy Performance 1 to 10 °/ N B 'Id' 3 5°/ E i fn Buildin Renovations ~ Credit 2 Credit 3 Credit 4 Credit 5 Credit 6 Yes ? No 10.5 ° ew ui mgs or o x s i g g 14% New Buildings or 7°1° Existing Building Renovations 17.5% New Buildings or 10.5% Existing Building Renovations 21 % New Buildings or 14% Existing Building Renovations 24.5% New Buildings or 17.5% Existing Building Renovations 28% New Buildings or 21 % Existing Building Renovations 31.5% New Buildings or 24.5% Existing Building Renovations 35% New Buildings or 28% Existing Building Renovations 38.5% New Buildings or 31.5% Existing Building Renovations 42% New Buildings or 35% Existing Building Renovations On-Site Renewable Energy 2.5% Renewable Energy 7.5°1° Renewable Energy 12.5% Renewable Energy Enhanced Commissioning Enhanced Refrigerant Management Measurement 8 Verification Green Power 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 to 3 1 2 3 1 1 1 continued... r, u • • -30- • • Yes ? No Prereq 1 Storage & Collection of Recyclables Required Credit 1.1 Building Reuse, Maintain 75% of Existing Walls, Floors & Roof 1 Credit 1.2 Building Reuse, Maintain 100% of Existing Walls, Floors 8~ Roof 1 Credit 1.3 Building Reuse, Maintain 50% of Interior Non-Structural Elements 1 Credit 2.1 Construction Waste Management, Divert 50% from Disposal 1 Credit 2.2 Construction Waste Management, Divert 75% from Disposal 1 Credit 3.1 Materials Reuse, 5% 1 Credit 3.2 Materials Reuse,10% 1 Credit 4.1 Recycled Content, 10% (post-consumer +''/2 pre-consumer) 1 Credit 4.2 Recycled Content, 20% (post-consumer +'/: pre-consumer) 1 Credit 5.1 Regional Materials, 10% Extracted, Processed & Manufactured Regionally 1 Credit 5.2 Regional Materials, 20% Extracted, Processed & Manufactured Regionally 1 Credit 6 Rapidly Renewable Materials 1 Credit 7 Certified Wood 1 Prereq 1 Minimum IAQ Performance Required Prereq 2 Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) Control Required Credit 1 Outdoor Air Delivery Monitoring 1 Credit 2 Increased Ventilation 1 Credit 3.1 Construction IAQ Management Plan, During Construction 1 Credit 3.2 Construction IAQ Management Plan, Before Occupancy 1 Credit 4.1 Low-Emitting Materials, Adhesives & Sealants 1 Credit 4.2 Low-Emitting Materials, Paints & Coatings 1 Credit 4.3 Low-Emitting Materials, Carpet Systems 1 Credit 4.4 Low-Emitting Materials, Composite Wood & Agrifiber Products 1 Credit 5 Indoor Chemical & Pollutant Source Control 1 Credit 6.1 Controllability of Systems, Lighting 1 Credit 6.2 Controllability of Systems, Thermal Comfort 1 Credit 7.1 Thermal Comfort, Design 1 Credit 7.2 Thermal Comfort, Verification 1 Credit 8.1 Daylight 8 Views, Daylight 75% of Spaces 1 Credit 8.2 Daylight & Views, Views for 90% of Spaces 1 • Innovation 8 Design Process 5 Points -^. Credit 1.1 Credit 1.2 Credit 1.3 Credit 1.4 Credit 2 Yes ? No Innovation in Design: Provide Specific Title Innovation in Design: Provide Specific Title Innovation in Design: Provide Specific Title Innovation in Design: Provide Specific Title LEED®Accredited Professional Certified: 26-32 points, Silver: 33-38 points, Gold: 39-51 points, Platinum: 52-69 points 1 1 1 1 1 -31- Appendix C Financial Incentives for Renewable Energy Production Description Amount Authority Hawaii State Tax Credit Solar Thermal Energy HRS §235-12.5 Single 35% of actual installation or $2250 Multi-family 35% of actual installation or $350 per unit Commercial 35% of actual installation or $250,000 Hawaii State Tax Credit Photovoltaic System HRS §235-12.5 Single 35% of actual installation or $5,000 Multi-family 35% of actual installation or $350 per unit Commercial 35% of actual installation or $500,000 Federal Tax Credit Solar Water Heater, PV, and other Solar Tech. Individual 30% of actual or $2,000 (can combine two credits; 26 USC § 25D eg. Solar water heater and PV) CommerciaUIndustrial 30% of actual installation 26 USC § 48 Utility Company Rebates Solar Water Heaters H.E.L.C.O. Residential $1,000 Commercial $125 per deferred Kwh, plus $.05/kwh for retrofits and $.06/kwh for new construction • -32- A endix D PP Case Example of MA'O Farms Project in Wai`anae, Oahu Mala 'Ai 'Opio (MA'O) Farms in Wai`anae, Oahu is an example of a project that could work in Puna by tapping existing federal, educational institution, foundation and private sector resources.27 Wai`anae`s socio-economic profile is similar to Puna's. MA'O was formed in 2001 by the non-profit Wai anae Community Re-Development Corporation to train and employ out-of-school youth from the Wai anae community in organic farming production, marketing and food handling and preparation. Initially funded by a $125,000 three-year grant from the USDA Community Food Project, the project has already grown into the largest USDA-certified producer of organic fruit and vegetables on Oahu and is poised to become the largest in the state. Following are highlights of the project: • Since the farm started, MA'O has trained about 20 interns who spend 10 months learning both the technical and entrepreneurial sides of farming and get a small stipend and a lot of good food in the process. More than 500 Waianae intermediate and high school students have participated in agricultural classes put on by MA'O. • MA'O's core educational partners are the University of Hawaii Native Hawaiian Leadership Project and Leeward Community College. The project has also received hundreds of hours of technical and business planning consultation from Yale University School of Management, Stanford University Haas Center for Public Service, Chaminade University and leaders of successful nonprofits. Yale and Chaminade have also awarded cash grants to the project. • Additional grants to MA'O for leadership training have come from Office of Hawaiian Affairs ($73,800), Hogan Family Foundation ($50,000), Pew Charitable Trusts ($25,000) and Goldman Sachs Foundation ($25,000). In 2003, MA'O opened Aloha 'Aina Cafe, which is a community gathering place with healthy food and nutrition information, as well as a market and restaurant outlet. The cafe is a venue for the 'Ai Pohaku Workshop, which is a hands-on, culturally based program that nurtures youth and strengthens families through traditional Hawaiian practices centered on the culture, traditions, and values of the kalo plant. It also serves as a venue for the Wai anae Organic Agriculture Center, which is a partnership with Leeward Community College (LCC) to expand organic agriculture, support local farmers, and provide training activities in Wai anae. MA'O operates four mini-markets staged at the Aloha 'Aina Cafe, Wai anae Comprehensive Health Center, Kaiser Permanente Health Clinic, and Leeward Community College and participates in farmers markets at Kapiolani Community College and other locations on Oahu. It also provides organic produce to Kokua Market and two well-known restaurants in Honolulu. Most recently, it negotiated an agreement to provide produce to Whole Foods Market. • 27 For an overview of the project, see http://starbulletin.com/~rint/`?fr=/2005/06/27/news/storv4.htm1 and http://www. ventures. vale. edu/docs/2005%20conference/plans/Waianae. pdf -33- Appendix E U.S. Department of Agriculture Programs for Rural Development Loan/Grant Single Family Home Safe, well-built, Families and Buy, build, improve, repair Rural areas Direct loan. Ownership. Section affordable homes for individuals. or rehabilitate rural home with 502 Rural Housing rural Americans. Apply to Rural as the applicant's populations of Direct Loan Development. permanent residence. 20,000 or less. Single Family Section To help very-low- Families and Repair or replace roof, Rural areas Direct loan 504 Housing Repair & income applicants individuals winterizing, purchase or with and grant. Rehabilitation Loan remove health and who currently own repair of heating system, populations of Single Family Section safety hazards or to their home. Apply structural repair, and 20,000 or less. 504 Housing Repair & repair their homes. to Rural water and sewage connect Rehabilitation Grant Development. fees, and similar uses. Single Family Home Assist eligible Families and Purchase new or existing Rural areas Loan Ownership Section 502 applicants in buying individuals. home. with guarantee. Rural Housing their homes by Apply to lender. populations of Guaranteed Loan guaranteeing loans 20,000 or less. made by private lenders. Section 502 141utual Individual homes Families and Construction of a new Rural areas Direct loan. Self-Help Home built by a group of individuals. Apply home, in part by the with Ownership Loans applicants, with to Rural applicant under populations of construction Development. Loan supervision. 20,000 or less. guidance from anon- applications are profit organization. processed on an individual basis for each participating famil . Mutual Self-Ilelp Assist lower income Non-profits and Technical assistance to Rural areas Grant. Technical. Assistance families in building public bodies. qualify and supervise small with Grant their own homes. groups of families to build populations of each other's homes. 20,000 or less. Rental Housing for Safe, well-built, Individuals, limited New construction or Rural areas Direct loan or Families and Elderly affordable rental profit and non- substantial rehabilitation with loan Direct Loans and Loan housing for very-low- profit of rental housing. populations of guarantee. Guarantees income individuals organizations. For 20,000 or less. Section 515 and families. guarantees, apply Section 538 to intermediary lender; for direct loans, apply to Rural Develo ment. Section 533 Housing Repair and Public bodies and Operation of a program Rural areas Grant. Preservation Grant rehabilitate housing non-profit which finances repair and with owned or occupied by organizations. rehabilitation activities for populations of very-low- and low- Apply to Rural single family and small 20,000 or less. income rural Development. rental properties. families. Community Facilities Provide essential Public bodies, non- Build facilities and Rural areas Direct loan or Direct and Guaranteed community facilities profit purchase equipment for fire with loan Loan Program for rural organizations, and and rescue, populations of guarantee, Community Facilities communities. Indian tribes. telecommunications, 20,000 or less. grant. Grant Program Apply to Rural schools, libraries, hospitals, (Faith-Based and Development. etc. First Res onder) Section 514/516. Farm Safe, well-built Individuals, public New construction or N/A Direct loan Labor Housing Loans affordable rental and private non- substantial rehabilitation and grant. and Grants housing for farm profit of rental housing. workers. organizations. Apply to Rural Development. • -34- • Other Rural Development Housing Programs Section 523 Rural Housing Self-Help Site Loans Limited to private or public nonprofit organizations that will provide sites solely for self-help housing. Section 524 Rural Housing Site Loans This program provides Government funding for a public or private non-profit organization to buy and develop building sites, including the construction of access roads, streets, and utilities. Sites developed under this program may be sold to individual households, non-profit organizations, public agencies, and cooperatives who provide financial assistance for housing to low- and moderate-income families. Section 509 Housing Application packaging Grants This program provides government funds to tax-exempt public agencies and private non-profit organizations to package applications for submission to Rural Housing Programs. Packagers assist very low- and low-income applicants with the application process by prescreening, making preliminary eligibility determinations, ensuring the application is complete, and helping the applicant understand the program. Section 515 Rural Rental Housing (including congregate housing and group homes; and rural cooperative housing.) Section 538 Guaranteed Rental Housing Guaranteed loans for development of multi-family housing facilities in rural areas of the United States. Loan guarantees are provided for the construction, acquisition, or rehabilitation of rural multi-family housing. Section 521 Rental Assistance Program Provides an additional source of support for households with incomes too low to pay the subsidized (basic) rent from their own resources. The program pays the owner of amulti-family housing complex the difference between the tenant's contribution (30 percent of adjusted income) and the monthly rental rate. Rural Community Development Initiative The Rural Community Development Initiative (RCDI) program provides grants to qualified intermediary organizations that will provided financial and technical assistance to recipients to develop their capacity and ability to undertake projects related to housing, community facilities, or community and economic development. Rural Business www.rurdev.usda.~ov/rbs/index.html • Business and Create jobs and Industry stimulate rural Guaranteed economies by Loans (B&I providing financial Guar.) backing for rural businesses. Rural Business Enterprise Grants R( BEG) Businesses. Apply through Federal or State chartered banks, credit unions, savings & loan associations. Most legal business purposes except production agriculture. Include acquisition, start- up and expansion of businesses that create Finance and facilitate the development of small and emerging private business enterprises. Public bodies, private non-profit corporations, and federally recognized Native American tribal groups. Apply to Rural Development. Buy and develop land, establish a revolving loan fund, construct buildings, plants, equipment, access streets and roads, parking areas, utility and service extensions, and rural distance learning networks. All areas except cities Grant. of more than 50,000 and their contiguous and adjacent urbanized areas. Intermediary Finance business Relendine facilities and Proeram (IRP) community development projects in rural areas. Public bodies, non- profit corporations, Native American tribes, and cooperatives. Apply to Rural Development. Community development projects, establishment or expansion of businesses, creation or saving of rural jobs. Population Loan/Grant All areas except cities Loan of more than 50,000 guarantee and their contiguous and adjacent urbanized areas. Rural areas and incorporated places with populations of less than 25,000. Direct loan. -35- Rural Economic Development Loans(REDLi Rural ~ Economic Develomnent Grants Rural Cooperative Development Grants Valueadded Producer Grants (VAPG) ~y{ . ' Rural Business Opportunity Grants (RBOG Finance economic development and job creation in rural areas. Uses Rural Utilities Service-financed electric and telephone utilities. Apply to Rural Development. Direct loan and revolving loan fund grant. Establish and operate centers for cooperative development to improve the economic condition of rural areas through the development of new cooperatives and improving operations of existing Non-profit corporations and institutions of higher education. Apply directly to Rural Development National Office. Assist independent agricultural producers to enter into activities that' add value to their crops. Independent producers, farmer and rancher cooperatives, agricultural producer groups, and majority- controlled producer- based business ventures. Apply to Rural Development Business startups or expansion projects that create rural jobs. Establish operating centers for development of rural cooperatives. Planning purposes such as conducting feasibility studies or business plans; or as working capital to help start the operations of a venture. Rural areas and places with populations of 2,500 or less. No population Grant. restriction. No population restriction. Grant. Finance technical assistance for business development planning in rural areas. All areas except cities of more than 50,000 and their contiguous and adjacent urbanized areas. t Grant. Renewable Finance the purchase Agricultural producers Construction or All areas except cities Grant. Energy and of renewable energy and rural small improvements, purchase of more than 50,000 Enerey systems, and make businesses. and installation of and their contiguous Efficiencv energy improvements. equipment, energy audits, and adjacent Grant permit fees, professional urbanized areas. Program service fees, business lans feasibilit studies. Other Rural Development Business and Cooperative Programs and Special Initiatives Biomass Research and Development Initiative Finance the research and development of biomass based products, bicenergy, biofuels, and related processes. Public bodies, non- profit corporations, Indian tribes on Federal or State reservations, and cooperatives with members that are primarily rural residents. Institutions of higher education, National laboratories, Federal or State research agencies, private sector entities, and non-profit organizations. Technical assistance, leadership training, establishment of business support centers, economic development plans. Research and development of biomass based products,bioenergy, biofuels, and related processes. No Grant. Applicants must meet population specific selection criteria. restriction. Grants are awarded on a competitive basis. A minimum of 20 percent cost sharing requirements apply, and may be up to 50 percent depending on nature of project. Cost share must come from non-Federal sources. - Cooperative Development Technical Assistance Program - Grants to Assist Small, Minority Producers (SMP) • -36- • - Research on Rural Cooperative Opportunities & Problems - Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural Areas - National Sheep Industry Improvement Center - Agriculture Innovation Center Program (AIC) - 1890 Land-Grant Program - Bio-based Products and Bio-enemy Program - Army's Armament Retooling & Manufacturing Support - ARMS Loan Guarantee Program - Hawaii Rural Development Council (National Rural Development Partnership) - Empowerment Zones and Enterprise Communities (Moloka'i) - Kauai Rural Champion Community - National Centers of Excellence Program - Rural Community Advancement Program - Rural Economic Area Partnership Pro>rram (REAP) Zones Community Development Technical Assistance Community Food Projects Competitive Grants Program h ttp:/lwww•.csrees.usda.EOV/fo/fundview.cfm?fonum=1080 Community Food Projects should be designed to (1): (A) meet the food needs of low-income people; (B) increase the self-reliance of communities in providing for their own food needs; and (C) promote comprehensive responses to local food, farm, and nutrition issues; and/or (2) meet specific state, local, or neighborhood food and agriculture needs for (A) infrastructure improvement and development; (B) planning for long-term solutions; or (C) the creation of innovative marketing activities that mutually ::'' benefit agricultural producers and low-income consumers. • Rural Infrastructure www.rurdev.usda.~ov/rus/index.html Pro am Ob'ective A licant Uses Po ulation Loan/Grant Water and Waste Provide Public entities, Indian Build, repair, and improve Rural areas, cities, Direct loan Disposal Grants infrastructure tribes, and non-profit public water systems, and and towns with up to and grant. and Loans for rural areas. corporations. Apply to waste collection and treatment 10,000 population. Rural Development. systems. Also other related costs. Water and Waste Provide Public entities, Indian Construct, repair, modify, Rural areas, cities, Loan Disposal Loan infrastructure tribes, and non-profit expand, improve water supply and towns with up to guarantee. Guarantees for rural areas. corporations. Apply to and distribution systems, and 10,000 population. Rural Development. waste collection and treatment systems. Also other related costs. Solid Waste Provide Non-profit Provide technical assistance Rural areas, cities Grant. Management technical organizations and and training to reduce and towns with up to Grants assistance public bodies. Apply to pollution of water resources 10,000 population. and/or training Rural Development. and improve management of to help solid waste facilities; reduce communities solid waste in streams. reduce the solid waste stream. Rural Broadband The deployment Legally organized The construction, acquisition, Eligible rural Direct loans Access Loan and of broadband entities providing or and improvement of communities with a and loan Loan Guarantee service to proposing to provide broadband transmission population of 20,000 guarantees. Program eligible rural broadband service in facilities and equipment; land inhabitants or less. communities. eligible rural and buildings used in The community communities. Cannot providing broadband service; cannot be located in serve more than 2% of and the refinancing of a standard the telephone Telecommunications Program metropolitan subscriber lines debt. statistical area. installed in the U.S. • -37- • Rural Electrification Hardship Loans Rural Electrification Municipal Rate Loans Rural Electrification Treasur Rate Loans Rural Electrification Guaranteed Loans Rural Telephone Bank Distance Learning and Telemedicine Grant and Loan Pro~*ram Provide Non-profit and financial aid cooperative through direct associations, public and guaranteed bodies, and other loans for electric utilities. Contact and USDA-RUS telecommunicat Administrator, STOP ions services. 1510, 1400 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20250-1510. Generation, bulk transmission Rural areas. facilities, and distribution of electric power. Enhance 911 emergency service, digital switching equipment, fiber optic cable, along with traditional main system telecommunications service. Direct loan or loan guarantee. Development Incorporated entities, and deployment including municipal of advanced corporations, on a for- telecommunicat profit or not-for-profit ion services basis, that operate throughout rural schools, rural America libraries, health care to improve clinics and ather education and organizations that health care. operate educational or health care facilities. Equipment for classrooms: cameras, video monitors, computers, and LAN. Also for physician consultation, radiology, x-ray scanners, and digital microscopes. Rural areas. Direct loan andlor grant. Other Rural Development Utility Programs - High Ener~y Cost Grant Pro~`l~am - Technical Assistance and Traininlr Grants (TAT) - Rural Water Circuit Rider Techncal_.Assistance Grants - Emergency Community Water Assistance Grants - Weather Radio Grant Prol;ram - Rural Public Television Digital Transition. Grant Pro~-ram - Local Dial-Up Internet Grant Program http://www. usda. Gov/rus/water/tat~.htm -38- • Appendix F Traffic Data from PB Americas North of Shower Drive, July 17-19, 2007 Northbound Tuesday July 17. 2007=3317. 15 minute drons , . ~ :00 0 0 0 0 174 190 141 95 90 59 32 23 :15 0 0 0 1 200 160 136 93 66 52 36 25 :30 0 0 0 120 197 177 130 76 61 47 34 17 :45 0 0 0 197 182 158 120 108 53 24 28 21 Hourl Total 0 0 0 318 753 685 527 372 270 182 130 86 PM Peak 1615-1715 (769), PM PHF=0.96 Southbound Tuesday July 17.2007=7641.15 minute drons :00 0 0 0 0 376 444 377 241 180 169 108 52 :15 0 0 0 1 432 387 306 215 150 115 79 51 :30 0 0 0 148 365 437 303 194 142 136 56 64 :45 0 0 0 380 458 383 256 222 134 127 56 51 Hourl Total 0 0 0 529 1631 1651 1242 872 606 547 299 218 PM Peak 1645-1745 (1726), PM PHF=0.94 Both Directions sdav. July 17.2007 Total I 0 1 0 1 0 1 847 12384 12336 11769 11244 I 876 I 729 I 429 I 304 * Wednesday July 1R_ 2007=14430. 15 minute drons 6 10 7 5 36 107 241 422 283 320 253 219 159 217 195 168 184 159 131 110 90 65 33 28 15 7 7 18 55 129 374 458 300 267 264 218 213 202 188 189 204 140 126 110 58 69 48 28 8 6 13 24 95 201 415 448 310 282 250 218 216 216 204 174 203 155 133 104 63 54 39 21 6 6 10 43 85 175 382 377 291 231 233 176 204 180 205 171 188 137 114 84 56 36 36 17 35 29 37 90 271 612 1412 1705 1184 1100 1000 831 792 815 792 702 779 591 504 408 267 224 156 94 AM Peak 0645-0745 (1710), AM PHF=0.93 PM Peak 1215-1315 (850), PM PHF0.98 • * ~11-...~....c~7.... L.L. 1Q 9/1M-1db9~ 1G minlrtn rlrnnc f 33 21 8 7 4 21 47 100 ~ ~ 122 138 165 r 208 .~. 222 207 285 277 395 390 312 215 215 115 112 55 30 16 8 9 12 13 56 113 171 146 180 168 213 220 260 331 393 406 401 242 200 150 95 51 23 18 7 5 6 17 70 115 128 149 155 197 236 215 241 344 421 368 322 206 178 119 68 53 21 9 15 10 7 34 100 131 176 160 166 197 213 209 287 384 447 273 295 204 154 105 66 46 107 64 38 31 29 85 273 459 597 593 666 770 884 851 1073 1336 1656 1437 1330 865 747 489 341 205 AM Peak 1145-1245 (868), AM PHt=0.9Z NM i'eaK 1bSU-7 i3U ~ Ibb4), rm rnr=u.ys * Wednesda ,Jul 18, 2007 142 93 75 121 300 697 1685 2164 1781 1693 1666 1601 1676 1666 1865 2038 2435 2028 1634 1279 1014 713 497 299 * 7h..~...1.... 1..1.. 10 9AA7_19C17 1 G mini rto itrnnc 6 5 9 13 36 91 252 365 287 293 261 194 204 215 161 150 170 168 8 7 12 22 44 115 327 425 308 296 224 216 200 209 195 193 198 202 6 10 10 24 94 172 423 414 326 278 248 196 221 179 203 192 187 175 13 8 11 34 74 186 358 399 261 255 218 193 217 225 190 186 183 158 33 30 42 93 248 564 1360 1603 1182 1122 951 799 842 828 749 721 738 703 AM Peak 0700-0800 (1603), AM PHF=U.94 F'M t'eaK 7L3U- issu ~bb[~, rm rnr=u.ya * Th....-.1.... Ld.. 1D 9(lA7_11/lAG 1G minntn rlrnnc 28 22 23 11 9 16 44 95 137 133 158 184 211 214 255 287 370 444 29 22 20 12 15 18 55 104 125 157 149 193 218 200 231 319 368 415 30 7 10 5 14 18 90 130 126 145 189 217 222 225 274 329 424 416 24 16 12 8 9 16 94 116 146 144 178 238 217 244 287 383 445 333 111 67 65 36 47 68 283 445 534 579 674 832 868 883 1047 1318 1607 1608 AM Peak 1145-1245 (889), AM PHF=U.93 Nm reaK -ibsu-i isu ~~ ~ciS~, rm rnr=u.~i * Thursda ,Jul 19, 2007 144 97 107 129 295 632 1643 2048 1716 1701 1625 1631 1710 1711 1796 2039 2345 2311 • • Northbound South of Ainaloa Blvd., July 17-19, 2007 Tuesda ,Jul 17, 20 07=4353, 15 min ute dro s :00 100 98 138 138 147 146 129 116 65 38 22 :15 108 114 120 124 151 124 95 78 47 37 30 12 :30 150 108 137 111 126 156 85 72 38 22 22 14 :45 146 134 122 134 145 121 97 64 42 31 23 15 Hourl Total 504 454 517 507 569 547 406 330 192 128 97 53 AM Peak 1145-1245 ( 3841. AM PHF=0. 64 PM Peak 1645-1745 (5711. PM PHF=0. 92 Southbound Tuesda ,Jul 17, 20 07=4191, 15 minu te dro s :00 120 101 118 127 162 177 132 99 82 58 45 19 :15 120 144 128 131 157 157 135 61 74 41 34 11 :30 94 131 147 150 148 142 117 89 47 41 23 19 :45 91 122 137 172 154 180 109 73 74 33 21 11 Hourl Total 425 498 530 580 621 656 493 322 277 173 123 60 AM Peak 114 5-1245 ( 370). AM PHF=0. 77 PM Peak 170 0-1800 ( 6561. PH F=0.91 ~oth Directions Tuesdav. July 17, 2007 Total I 929 I 952 I 1047 I 1087 I 1190 I 1203 * Wednesday, July 18, 2007=8545,15 minute drops 899 I 652 I 469 I 301 I 220 I 113 10 4 5 2 13 38 95 155 157 184 128 130 132 130 143 133 141 133 86 93 62 47 23 16 6 4 5 9 19 47 127 185 161 130 156 121 142 159 155 147 157 109 98 67 52 52 20 14 7 11 4 9 29 62 173 189 176 168 164 135 128 127 148 133 155 124 93 80 48 46 24 7 7 1 5 23 33 63 145 138 148 153 144 149 154 123 147 135 141 125 106 62 44 34 16 7 30 20 19 43 94 210 540 667 642 635 592 535 556 539 593 548 594 491 383 302 206 179 83 44 AM Peak 0645-0745 (674), AM PHF=0.89 PM Peak 1600-1700 (594), PM PHF=0.95 * Wed nesd a ,J ul 18, 2 007= 6839 ,15 minu te dr o s 13 6 4 0 2 13 35 48 78 75 90 103 124 114 130 119 177 164 130 101 72 38 42 18 15 3 0 4 2 7 40 73 82 91 99 109 96 102 112 121 170 155 135 91 64 51 31 17 10 4 3 0 4 24 47 84 90 82 106 101 122 112 106 155 185 158 140 100 65 31 27 18 9 5 3 6 7 23 64 93 86 88 85 97 123 124 117 138 181 114 100 86 58 50 22 20 47 18 10 10 15 67 186 298 336 336 380 410 465 452 465 533 713 591 505 378 259 170 122 73 M Peak 1 145- 1245 (439 ), AM PH F=0.8 9 P M Pe ak 1 600-1 700 (713) , PM PHF =0.9 6 " Wednesday .lulu 1R_ 90(17=FR39 15 minutes rirnnc '~ ''~', 77 38 29 53 109 277 726 965 978 971 972 945 1021 991 1058 1081 1307 1082 888 680 465 349 205 117 * ThurSdav_ July 19. 2007=8097. 15 minnta rlrnnc _ 8 ,. ~ 2 3 ., .. 6 . 10 42 71 ,~ 154 154 145 126 143 133 200 200 177 188 152 9 6 7 5 26 44 126 189 187 157 134 123 219 185 205 213 193 188 3 9 3 10 34 53 178 149 159 140 160 111 169 167 189 183 208 4 3 2 3 15 21 73 155 163 156 173 135 124 161 185 193 191 187 0 23 19 16 36 91 212 530 655 656 615 555 501 682 737 787 764 776 344 r+m rGaK Vo3V-U/3U 1n/UJ, HM Ytit'=U.tSy I'M Y@8K 14UU-lSUU (/S/), NM F'FIF=0.96 * ThUrSdav. July 19. 2007=4?43.15 minutes rlrnnc "~,h;. 11 6 5 3 3 9 37 56 _ 76 68 86 96 105 59 79 105 141 164 19 11 4 4 4 9 25 60 72 71 94 117 74 61 76 100 118 118 12 7 7 3 1 19 57 85 81 104 85 114 51 83 74 113 116 0 7 2 6 2 7 27 66 78 85 78 97 130 67 72 92 110 159 0 49 26 22 12 15 64 185 279 314 321 362 457 297 275 321 428 534 282 Traffic Counts at Pa'ahana and Volcano Hwy sn~9nn7 s~a5.7•as am • lr u C7 • LOS Year-End Summary Unsignalized Crossings • • AM Peak PM Peak LOS Dela LOS Dela Keaau-Pahoa Rd/Opukahaia St Unsignalized Keaau-Pahoa NB Left A 9.2 B 14.2 O ukahaia EB Left/Ri ht F 308 F 70.1 Keaau-Pahoa Rd/Transfer Station Driveway Unsignalized Keaau-Pahoa SB Left F 755 A 9 Transfer Station WB Left/Ri ht F F 88.9 Keaau-Pahoa/ Shower Dr/ Pohaku Dr. Unsignalized Keaau-Pahoa NB Left A 8.7 B 13 Keaau-Pahoa SB Left B 13.2 A 9.2 Pohaku EB Left/Throu h/Ri ht F F 168.1 Shower WB Left/Throu h/Ri ht F 1410 F 44.2 Keaau-Pahoa/Pohaku PI Unsi nalized Keaau-Pahoa NB Left A 8.7 B 13.3 Pohaku PI EB Left/Ri ht F 373.1 F 105.9 Keaau-Pahoa/Kaloli Dr Unsi nalized Keaau-Pahoa SB Left B 10.8 B 10 Kaloli WB Left/Ri ht F 224.2 F 482 Keaau-Pahoa/ Pohaku Circle Unsi nalized Keaau-Pahoa NB Left A 8.3 B 10.8 Pohaku Circle EB Left/Ri ht C 19.5 D 28.7 Keaau-Pahoa/Orchidland Dr Unsi nalized Keaau-Pahoa NB Left A 8.7 B 12.3 Orchidland EB Left/Ri ht F 56.6 F 286.5 Keaau-Pahoa/Paradise Dr Unsi nalized Keaau-Pahoa SB Left A 9.1 A 9.4 Paradise WB Left/Ri ht D 25 F 101.7 Keaau-Pahoa/Aulii St Unsi nalized Keaau-Pahoa NB Left A 8.5 B 10.3 Aulii EB Left/Ri ht D 27.2 D 33.9 Keaau-Pahoa/Makuu Dr Unsi nalized Keaau-Pahoa SB Left A 10 A 8.9 Makuu WB Left/Ri ht F 117.5 F 366.8 Keaau-Pahoa/Ilima St Unsi nalized Keaau-Pahoa NB Left A 8.5 A 9.8 Ilima EB Left/Ri ht C 21.1 C 22.5 Keaau-PahoalAinaloa Blvd Unsi nalized Keaau-Pahoa NB Left A 8.7 B 10.2 Ainaloa EB Left/Ri ht F 262.6 F 98.7 Keaau-Pahoa/Ka Ohuwalu Dr Unsi nalized AM Peak PM Peak LOS Dela LOS Dela Keaau-Pahoa SB Left A 8.9 A 8.4 Ka Ohuwalu WB Left/Ri ht C 17.8 B 13.9 Keeau-Pahoa/Kaluahine PI/Ni Aulani St Unsignalized Keaau-Pahoa NB Left A 8.5 A 9 Keaau-Pahoa SB Left A 8.8 A 8.3 Ni Aulani EB Left/Throu h/Ri ht B 13.1 B 13.5 Ni Aulani WB Left/Throu h/Ri ht C 21.1 C 15.3 Keaau-Pahoa/Old Pahoa Rd Unsi nalized Keaau-Pahoa NB Left A 9 A 9.5 Old Pahoa EB Left/Ri ht F 80.8 F 113.7 Keaau-Pahoa/Kahakai Blvd Unsi nalized Keaau-Pahoa SB Left A 8.7 A 8.7 Kahakai WB Left/Ri ht F 67.2 C 24.9 Keaau-Pahoa/Nanawale Homestead Rd Unsignalized Keaau-Pahoa NB Left A 8 A 8 Keaau-Pahoa SB Left A 8.2 A 7.8 Nanawale EB Left/Throu h/Ri ht C 18.5 C 15.5 Nanawale WB Left/Throu h/Ri ht B 14.4 A 9.7 Keaau-Pahoa/Unnamed Unsi nalized Keaau-Pahoa NB Left A 7.9 A 8 Keaau-Pahoa SB Left A 8.1 A 7.8 Unnamed EB Left/Throu h/Ri ht B 13.9 B 13 Unnamed WB Left/Throu h/Ri ht B 14.1 B 13.2 Signalized Crossings AM Peak PM Peak LOS Dela LOS Dela Keaau-Pahoa/Shower Dr/Pohaku F 392.5 F 82.4 Keaau-Pahoa NB Left B 15.2 D 43.3 Keaau-Pahoa NB Throu h/Ri ht F 124.4 E 77.1 Keaau-Pahoa SB Left D 44.8 B 13 Keaau-Pahoa SB Throu h/Ri ht E 73.8 F 92.3 Pohaku EB Left/Throu h/Ri ht D 48.4 D 47.9 Shower WB Left/Throu h/Ri ht F 1306 E 60.3 Keaau-Pahoa/Kaloli Dr E 69.3 C 24.5 Keaau-Pahoa NB Throu h/Ri ht D 41.2 C 34.1 Keaau-Pahoa SB Left D 38.5 C 31.6 Keeau-Pahoa SB Throu h A 3.9 B 14.3 Kololi WB Left/Ri ht F 253.9 D 44.6 Keaau-Pahoa/Orchidland Dr B 19.8 F 110 • • • • • AM Peak PM Peak LOS Dela LOS Dela Keaau-Pahoa NB Left C 34 D 39.8 Keaau-Pahoa NB Throu h B . 12.1 A 6.1 Keaau-Pahoa SB Throu h/Ri ht C 25 F 177.2 Orchidland EB LeftlRi ht C 34.9 D 42.5 Keaau-Pahoa/Paradise Dr C 20.6 C 20.1 Keaau-Pahoa NB Throu h/Ri ht C 23.2 B 19.3 Keaau-Pahoa SB Left C 34.4 D 45.8 Keaau-Pahoa SB Throu h A 4.7 A 9.6 Paradise WB Left/Ri ht D 42.9 D 43.1 Keaau-Pahoa/Makuu Dr C 25.1 C 21.9 Keaau-Pahoa NB Throu h/Ri ht C 26.7 C 23.8 Keaau-Pahoa SB Left D 40.9 D 47.8 Keaau-Pahoa SB Throu h A 4.2 B 14.2 Makuu WB Left/Ri ht D 53.1 C 27.8 Keaau-Pahoa/Ainaloa Blvd C 31.8 C 24.3 Keaau-Pahoa NB Left D 38.8 D 38 Keaau-Pahoa NB Throu h A 4.2 B 10.7 Keaau-Pahoa SB Throu h/Ri ht D 39.7 C 26.5 Ainaloa EB Left/Ri ht D 50.5 D 42.1 • Weekly Event Counts • Jul-30-OT 04:13pa Froe-YAiNDA DIVptSIFIEO Bi0o33HtS T-880 P.Ot f-83t ~eM+aC~~Traffic Exec ve Weekiv Event Counts ~ai~lats~-~ oaa.~s: Site: [ ~I P uaxory ~P Input A 1 -North bound. - Added t:t 6otais. (i) ~ B: 0 - tMUSed or unknown. - F.~kdea tram totals. (Oj Survey Duratlan: 10:a7 Monday, AprA 09, 200'! ~ 11~251tforlday, April 1B, 2007 Fits: C:tDocumetlta srrld r~sleke3 sE416JIp20a7.ECa (Base} iderrUfler: U0593BW81r<C5B-LS [IN(~6] (cpNiacoom 180e104 Atgorifhm: Event Count Data type: Axle sertaors - S (Gaunt} proflN• Fllber daw: 10:07 MotlcillY. APn~ ~r ~'r ~ 1i:T3 Mallday. April 16r 2007 Name: Faetory detauR pnXle Scheme: COlmt events dhAded by two. Units: Non metric (tt, r~ tkls. mph, ~~ bon} In profile: Events =19888 ! 19988 (100.00'16} ~_~ t • Jul-80-Ot /4:IIp8 FrorYAMtsOA OIYE~IFIEB /3/3331115 1-151 P.08/13 F-136 • ~~ """•SYI'L YIfKkAl~vent~l6 8118: 8119$ 631.OM Dt,6Cflpti0a: MC8A131~ Y ~P FNtor faYm: 10:07 Mand~-- ~ ~. fAOT ~ f t~[5 Yoed~y, Aprlf 18, m07 Sahartte: Cotnt t8 d"iYided by QB~D. • 14:m Tm! Rid s3a~ Hsi tat a~ Aws.y. s Os ~' 10 npx 11 7Yps a2 ups 33 uyae it ~ is ups I 1 - 3 1 - 7 eons 0000-0100 * 5 ifl 9 10 24 33 E 8.5 15.2 0100-0200 w t 11 5 6 28 15 I 6.8 11.7 0200-0300 ' 1S 2 4 5 14 9 1 6.5 9.2 OSOO-0400 * 4 10 9 5 28 16 I 8.3 11.2 0400-0500 * 2? 20 10 19 20 12 f 19.0 16.9 0300-0800 S4 50 57 4S 32 24 I 51.5 43.7 0600-0700 * 383 415 421 SB9 9B S2 - •02,0 293.0 D700-0800 • 9331 8ti< 96Sc Y02< 143 69 1 itS.S< 626.bC Ot00-0900 303 132 234 151 s00< 314<I 180.3 172.7 0900-1000 a 161 92 300 122 188 110 I 118.5 128.7 10D0-1100 11 102 I01 93 87 110 107 I 79.2 91,9 1100-12oD 83 100 42 113 135 166 305 I 100.6 130.6 1200-1900 S4 B9 105 111 304 144 14911 201.6 124.! 1900-1400 307 96 142 109 229 127 230 I 116.5 118.6 1100-1500 169 153. 124 255 270 234 133 I 159.4 145.6 2500^1600 174[ 1Sl 139 145 143 1471 134 I 150.4 147.6 1600-3700 163 161 158 160 lYOt 1'{I 321 f iW.4 131.9 2700-3100 159 1771 168< li6G 176 135 126 I i73.2< 162.i< 1800-1800 253 112 103 11B 173 122 131 1 131.6 130.3 1900-2400 86 79 7t 79 125 122 70 I 88.6 99.1 2000-3100 63 48 62 61 67 72 b4 I 60.8 62.9 2100-8200 51 ST 60 48 80 38 42 I 59.2 56.6 2x00-2500 24 31 t6 44 S8 45 23 I 34.8 98.1 2900-2400 36 26 21 22 46 29 15 1 1 26.2 25.0 sotals 1 0700-1900 * 2542 2147 2390 2356 1778 1 1109 12956.4 2101.7 0600-2200 *' 3109 3808 3002 9017 2137. 1637 12967.0 2603.3 0600^0000 • 8166 2875 3068 9121 2191 1675 1 3033.0 2666.4 0000-0000 r 3280 3978 3163 3211 231? 1784 ( 3133.5 2772.6 71~t >?eat • 0700 0700 0700 0700 0800 I 0800 I • 935 942 963 842 240 114 I A! 9aak 1500 1700 1700 1700 1600 1500 I 2200 I 174 177 168 185 180 147 149 I + 1io daka. • Jul-80-07 04:1Ow Fro6-TAWIDA DIYEIG4IFIHD t00~8641b T ObD P.04/18 F-088 Wt~kly Event Coutrt,~ YlhektyEvort~ 8>~: aare3 ~a.orl nescriprwn. ~csedup setup time: io:ar Y, ~ oe, >~ ~ ~ ~:as ~aa>rir. ~ ~s, ~o~ schema: Courrt events d~lrided M fJMlO. s~ so. wrd m. ~ sat san 7-v. AoOS 16 1lps 17 31Pc 18 IIOz 19 ayr 20 apr Yi >~ 23! ll~x 1 - 5 1 - 7 0000-0100 5 = « « * i * I 5.0 b.0 0100-0200 5 = * • * * * ~ 5.0 S.0 pa00-0300 6 s • * _ * « I 6.0 6.0 0300-0400 3 ` * + * * * I 3.0 3,p 0400-0500 20 * s : * _ I 20.0 20.0 OS00-0600 46 * * * + * + ( 46.d 46.0 0600-0700 429 * « * _ " I 423.0 923.0 p700-0600 915< » * * * « * I 915.0< 915.0< 0600-p900 139 * * • « I 339.0 139.0 0900-1000 108 » _ * " " * I 108.0 108.0 1000-1100 92 « * * * f 92.0 92.0 1100-3200 42 « ' * _ « * I 42.0 42.0 isoo-laoo * _ _ _ r * 14p0-1500 = w ' * « x • I * _ lspo-isoo * * * f _ ieoo-1700 * ~• * I * i~op-leoo * « * I * 1600-1900 x « w x « w l r ^ 1900-2000 « * * _ • « * I « 2000-2100 « * * * • * s r r „ 8100-2200 « * w * « + I . " 2400-2300 * * : _ + _ + I * * x300-2400 s'o!a] s * • « • + w I t « _ . 0700-1900 • _ * I x I . * 0600-2200 * * • * , * I x s 0600-0000 * * « • r w r l * • 0000-0000 w « s . • x I . * ~Ix Pest o70a x « * 1 I 915 * « s w = _ illl Y~at • a x w . * I r r w w w « *~ * - Yo datz • • • • Jul^80-01 04:20a~ FrartAiNDA DIVERSIFIED 601493!415 t^0lf1 P.05/13 F-l33 NiNi~NEwrttd9 - Sits: Ensrliag 'RPSti [alt.3 st61 Mt:t3etup fac3oey anlup . Mpcrt A; 1- NorM bound. - Arldad to 3oWs. {t) B: d - lJntraed Oi' ur-known. - EaaoludsA ~o+n tofala. (0} S~f1YCy !]oration: 18:18 Monday. J4pril 09, 2001 ~' 11:18 HAotrday, ApN 16.2007 File: C:{pooumerlts sttd ai618Apr2007.EC0 {Base) Iden9Ner: U1008TVG Mt ~6-I.5 (MC6fij (c)4Aiaooorn 190CW4 Aigprittxll: Event t:Otiflt p a t type: ~ Jo w -t} Axis iCrlsors - 3apara~e tf ~ y ~ ~ F~RY~ {NCR: y ~ ~ .~y~ ~t~1~ MOt~! ~ ~I L1.Yl ~' 7~~1~ if ~ ~a ~,ry• t+brpw: Facaory defauk prods SohsmQ: Gourtt wards dFrided b!- Ma. U-Nts: Non metric (ft, mi, Ns, rt~h, Ib. 30q} M profile: Evwus ^ 48717 J 46718 (100.00%} u • Jul-91-07 D4:209s Fra-TIIYtiDA DIVERSIFIED 61349/15 7-958 P.@8/14 F-148 ]Mee~civ Eirsn't Counts w.ak~r-es s>xe: SIts3 atis.txr Dacciiptia4l: P 4- a9Wp I=i719i'tN11~ 70k181loetd4ly, AprA 83, ZR87 =~+ t1:f3 Mondh/, llpd1 16, 2007 Scher: CowM e+rents t#rAdsd by two. Aida z+sl Mbd 99m Fsi ~ sdn 1lv/~ragar i~nr 09 npr 1a 3pr 11 uyc ss apr 19 afpuc 1/ ~' 15 ~ 1 - B 1 - 7 0000-0100 * 32 26 39 43 89 1 134 I 95.0 60.5 0100-0200 ' 12 13 13 20 51 60 I 14.5 28.7 0200-0300 - 10 13 11 18 42 59 1 13.0 25.5 6500-0400 * 21 2? 29 24 44 98 1 2l.3 29.8 0400-0800 * 56 66 42 56 4/ zl f 55.0 47.5 0500-0600 - 101 91 106 103 85 19 1 100.3 89.2 0600-0900 * 240 289 229 259 202 143 I z16.8 221.0 0700-0800 * 4894 1860 4421 4761 335 221 1 460.54 399.71 0800-0900 * •22 400 378 429 428 31.2 I 407.3 384.8 0900-1000 * 349 353 334 382 516< 366 I 354.5 383.3 1000-1100 70 341 337 305 398 d91 411<I 288.2 334.7 ilo0-3200 a90 382 904 328 367 444 352 1 334.2 959.6 2200-1900 321 400 977 329 424 459 449 I 370.2 394.1 1300-1400 355 336 38a 389 424 398 !35 I 375.4 987.1 3400-x600 500 470 _ 441 53p 548 383 45111 497.8 479.7 1500-1600 511 453 444 479 56? 459 418 1 490.8 475.9 1600-1?00 4B2 1101 $73< 533 6031 441 316 i 566.0 521.4 1700-1800 SP64 498 55B 5864 591 460 116 I 567.04 530.11 1800-1900 465 505 91@ 4!3 54@ 1990 316 I 478.2 462.3 1900-2000 306 339 920 333 393 513 296 I 338,6 328.9 2000-1100 213 261 145 19I 262 244 216 I 294.8 234.1 3100-2200 177 378 201 iTi 222 130 172 I 189.8 193.0 Y200-2300 75 93 1.47 226 210 186 105 i 130.2 134,6 2300-2100 58 62 9S 69 134 238 61 1 82.6 87.9 soeais I I 0700-1900 * 5235 5084 5072 5747 5366 I 4559 15290.1 5117.8 0600-1200 x 6233 6109 5996 6865 4340, 5380 16240.0 6095.8 0600-0000 * 644@ 6351 6191 7229 6684 5549 16412.8 6318.3 0000-0000 * 6640 6581 6431 7489 1042 5410 16654.8 6599.4 ]1M P/ak * 0700 0700 0700 0700 0900 I 1000 t * 439 486 442 475 516 lil I F!i 91~7c 1700 1600 1600 1700 1600 1800 i 1900 { 596 640 571 586 609 499 451 i * - 17e data. r~ 1~1JJ `_J • • Jul-30-07 04~EDp0 FrarTNl10A DIYERSIFIOD 018003U(0 T-050 P.OT/13 F-030 VYeekhl EI/ent Cou[tts ws~tyEva5b68 Etta: sila03 6t6.ON t7oswtpuo~: O~CSst~r - ~P filON'tinw: 10:18 OltorWny, ApAt 04, 290'! ~a ! 4hd MoatlaY, ApriR 18, 2A87 8dtatn5:: CairSt everts dMded by tiwo. 1bo Tas lied inn 1*ri Bst 4S~n ar:y~ S 18 Aps 17 l-pr SO 71pr 20 ~ s0 7-pr 21 ~e s5t ~ 1 - 8 1 - 7 ons oooo-Diva 23 • _ _ ( * ( a3,o 23.0 0100-0200 16 * * ' • * ( 16.0 16.0 0200^0900 ? - • _ _ = I 7.0 1.0 o3eo-o4oo az ' - * I xa.o 2a.o 0400-0800 a5 « * _ " * t 45.0 45.0 OS00~0800 95 r = . . r ( 95.0 95.0 Q600-0700 2b1 r _ ( 251.0 251.0 0700-0800 {~ _ ~' * I iSS.Q< 468.0< 0800-0800 a0? • . r r . I X02.0 402.0 09001000 384 * + * I 38f.0 384.0 1000-1100 367 • _ * _ * • ( 267.0 367.0 1100-1800 134 * * * * * * ( 134.0 33d.0 1200-1900 r x • ( 1aG0-1600 r r r - r =( * r 1300^1600 * ` . . r ~ * . 16001700 - + _ : • -w ~ r ( „ 1700-1800 . r w r w r( * r 18001900 * • ` * + • ( r 5900-5!000 w r w . * • r ~ * St000-2100 * * _ * x x r( w r 22002300 + x r • ( w x 2300-2400 r • w • r r l w r ~~s I I OT00-1900 . r r * r r . ~ * _ Ob00-Y200 r , r I r x Oi00-0000 - r . • . r * ( * „ 0000-0000 r r . w + ( * + Alt SiMk 0700 + w = • . I r l 43~ r . r . * - I f7l ywyt • w r r * . I . ( w r . * r „ = 5 • _ Fo e~ata. • Jul-30-Oi 44:YOps FrorTAtNDA 014ERSIFIED 660033805 T-050 840/13 F-l36 Nte~ount Traffic Exgcutive 1N~ekiv Event Cg~Ms +~~r.~: site: Input A: input B: Sunryr puration: File: identifier. Atporithm: Datsl type: t?rotiis: i-iker Wne: Nanw: Schsme: units: to profile: usliNi tt~lU1 (sta3 sell 1T tamer setup f - tlorth bound. -Added to totsis. (13 0 - Unused a uNcrtoum. - Eaock~ded from totals. (0} 11:00 Monday, April 09.2007 ~ f f:121Ronday, Aprit 16, 2007 C:1Dacurrtenb Ex~d ityecourNslsite3 stlldApr20W.EC0 (Base? U029CIiA9Gi MC68-L5 [MG'SSJ (c~aocom 190at04 Event Count Axle sensors - (Court) 11:00 lilortday, ApNI 09, 2007 ad 19:12 Monday. April 16, Y00T Factory default profile Count everts divirbd by two. Plan metric (1t, m~ tYs, mph, ~. tort) EverKs = 3985'1 ~ 3ses1(foa.oox+} • • • • J Jul-80-07 04:20pa FtorYAMAOA 014ERSIFIEO Bg88814{5 Weoicly E~tt Coten~ waeklyEveM-66 ! sRa3 at1.ON [>el~ip0on: MGSetltp f4urbry ~P Fllar tone: 11:00 Otonday, Aprli 087, 4G07 >~s 11:12 BAott4tap, Apra 1ti, TOOT Schane>: COUI{t ereMa di~idled by trio. 7-050 P-08/18 F-89B Ifoo roe lhd !pv F:ei tat taa lverage o 09 71px SO llpr 11 Ilpr 12 >~ 18 apr 14 lips ib ayt i - S i - 7 Haar I 0000-0100 * 19 21 28 42 61 110 I 27.5 46.8 0100-0200 12 26 4 21 39 38 i 15.8 23.3 0200-0300 19 10 12 15 20 32 i 12.8 17.2 0300-0400 * 15 22 1T 15 21 20 I 17.3 18.3 040D-0500 42 73 49 51 23 31 I 58.8 49.8 OS00-0600 ' 110 227 102 92 23 54 I 107.8 84.7 0600-0700 343 249 299 261< T3 133 I 300.5 235.0 0700-0800 * 468< a79t 44E43t 237 127 197 i 412.3< $QB.K 0800-0900 * d59 340 385 299 178 279 I 345.8 906.7 4800-1000 * 346 297 283 194 248< 33$ ( 280.0 281.0 3000-2100 * 311 286 286 165 22I 374i<I 262.0 274.2 1100-1200 298 306 352 304 199 61 355 I 291.8 267.9 s200-1300 347 365 379 318 293 t0i 168<1 320.4 353.0 1300-1400 339 362 371 357 210 380 419 I 327.0 346.9 1400-1500 369 915- 347 352 304 380 404 I 366.2 373.8 1500-1600 435 507< 458 l30 343 366 392 l 431.0 416.1 5600-1700 436 453 474! 5351 S20< 358 403 I 480.0! 431.6! 5700-1800 46K 466 472 469 424 412! /20 { 459.0 446.7 1800-1900 435 482 390 414 439 400 368 1 436.0 421.1 1900-1000 308 295 30B 320 304 324 278 i 307.0 306.0 2000-1500 208 262 215 210 209 253 218 - 220.8 225.0 2100-2400 175 148 174 183 216 189 149 I 179.2 175.4 2200-2500 82 79 107 143 190 1.47 73 i 308.0 108.6 2900-2100 57 S3 63 75 118 92 S9 I I 73.6 ?9.9 retain 1 1 0700-1900 * 4931 d675 9581 3td9 9512 4415 { 4111.4 4267.8 0600-2200 4985 5671 5593 4439 4358 5187 1 5418.9 5209.2 0600-0000 * 6117 58/3 5811 l687 4597 8313 1 1600.5 5391.1 0000-0000 Y 6329 6142 6023 4928 1184 5598 1 5835.3 5626.8 A1! >teak * 0700 0?00 0700 0600 0400 1000 I + 965 479 468 281 228 376 + iq1 ?eat 1700 1500 1600 1600 2600 2700 I 1200 I 464 SOT 474 515 920 412 468 1 • - Ne dike. • Jul-30-OT 04:20p~ FrarYAIGDA DIVERSIFIED A00933/415 i-l50 P-10/19 F-l38 V,,,Yeeldn Evelltt G4wnts tNecktyEve~86 &iEe: sNe3 st1.ON Desc~igtior: tiRCSetup faQtory setuR F'Obor time: 'E1:t1t1 tlAO~ly, App D~> 24107 ~ i1:1211oe~xy. apNt t6, w07 Sdt~ne: Court events d~trided by two. _ Moa 'Yao FYd 'lAlt is3 Sit Bt~II a,~rigis 16 71pr 17 Ales 18 Apr i9 Apr 20 3pr 21 Apr AZ ]tpr 1 - 5 1 - 7 ~' I 0000-0100 17 • • * * * I 17.0 17.0 0100-0200 11 * * * * 1 11.0 11.0 0200-0900 13 * * ~ { 13.0 19.0 0300-0400 17 * * » * * I 17.6 17.0 040Q-0800 40 * * * * 1 x{0,0 40.0 OSOD-0600 111 * * * * * 1 111.0 111.0 0600-0700 269 * * * * « ! 269.0 269.0 0700-0800 423t * * • * { 42#.0c aa3.oe Oe00-0400 341 * * * * * * 1 342.6 391.0 0900-1000 393 * * * * _ { 333.0 833.0 1000-1100 286 • * • * * ! 286.0 286.0 1100-1200 66 * * ' * i 66.0 B6.0 12Da-laoo « « _ * * x x i 1300-2400 * + * * • • ! * 1400-1300 * r- * * * « * { * ~ 1500-1600 * * * { 1600-1700 * * * * • ! * w 1700-1600 * * « * I * * 1600-1900 * « : * x : x ! • * 1900-2000 « * : « « * I * * 2000-2100 * * * • * ! « « 21oD-2zoo « * * * { « a2oD-2aoo * - * * * « i « * 2500-2400 * * * * * « • , w Sotali ~ 0700-1900 * * • * * ~ * * 0600-2T00 " * * * ~* I * a 0600-0000 * * « t x ! * 0000-0000 * * * * « ! * { iM Ptak 0700 • * x w « { 429 * x • t x * { I R~ F~ik x " • • s * * ( « * * . . * * i • - !i0 dill. • t Jut-89-9T 94:tip~ Fros-YAWDA DiVfRStFtt:O pg88i4t5 '~ - ourt~ Traffl~ Exec~~ve ~. a rk~ C T-980 P.[i/t3 f-986 $~: (slta3 s12] FAY ~P - (ntput A: 1 -North bound. -Atktc~d to talats. (1J input R: 0 - Unused or unknoam. - FJCdude~i hom totals. (o} BufYey gyration; 11:00 tulondaY, Agrit 09r 2007 ~ 11:t).'- ~AOlfasy,14pN81Q 2D07 ITtle: G:lAocumentsa-Kt 9t21Bagpft007.EC0(Regul~ IOetNfller: Ut123Mt=211 MC56-1.5 [MCb6j (c}Nlkxooom 190ct04 AlgoritAttt: t~lren! Gount E~ type: Nde ~sors - Sepatata (tom For fllne: 11:00 tMondsy~ Apri109, 2007 as ttdi5 Monday, I1pN1116, 2007 : Factory deteult profile ~Iretne: Coum sver-ts diVis~d by two. tMib: Non metric (ft, mi, ftfa, mt~-. ~, ~) Ih prolit~: Events =35158 /35158 (100.00911 • ,lul-SO-B7 04:iiam FrarYAMWDA DIVERSIFIED 6010336416 T-060 P.12l18 FA36 ~veiayEveot-86 siAs; ,ioe~ etz.or4 De;;uxiptior~ F~aa:dory ~P Filter drrra: 19:00 Monday, Apt11 OSI, 26167 ~ 11 ~ Nooday, Nx~ 18,2007 Sicbet»e: CotHtl events: divided ~ 01R~, >stou suw trod, 7hm rii Sae S±m Svaragrs 09 Agr SO Apr 11 Apr 12 Apr 13 Apx It itps 18 » 1 - 5 1 - 7 Roar I 0000-0100 * 23 12 22 2S 70 66 1 20.5 36.3 Oi00-0200 * 13 13 9 16 33 26 I 12.8 18.3 D200-0300 8 10 7 4 33 17 t 7.3 13.2 0800-0100 * 14 12 12 8 I8 12 1 11.5 12.7 0400-0500 * 31 38 Z9 32 32 ST I 32.5 29.8 OS00-0600 * T3 67 69 55 34 39 ( 66.0 56.2 aaroo-0700 291 32D 288 33s 124 93 I 3D3.0 239.0 0700-Dena * 429 457< tese 40f< 190 149 { 443.8< 351.bt 0800-0900 t41< 366 376 371 289 229 I 388.5 345.3 OY00-1000 * 323 299 311 319 34X 917<I 513.0 319.0 1000-1100 * 277 262 249 255 293 289 I 259.5 270.0 1i00-1200 228 269 297 299 268 266 301 1 260.2 266.7 1200-1900 282 259 316 310 361 285 325 I 305.6 305.4 1800-1400 314 309 332 286 340 268 286 l 320.6 308.0 1400-1500 40lt 4290 422< 394 367 906 28? ( 903.6 373.3 1500-1600 370 378 420 419 477< 287 33511 412.B< 388,7 1600-1700 396 367 416 461< 917 337< SO1 I 112.2 384.9< 1700-1800 360 41S 381 369 9?1 290 286 I 379.2 353.1 1800-1900 320 325 297 312 346 299 288 [ 920.1 312.7 1900-2004 202 219 202 227 237 180 215 I 217.4 213.7 2000-21DO 151 136 lab 143 180 134 266 I 151.4 151.6 2100-2200 121 1a0 12a 128 144 139 107 1 129.0 127.3 2200-2800 47 71 81 85 99 190 e9 { 75,6 81.0 2900-z400 31 37 43 a4 101 89 39 1 I 31.2 59.9 Soul! I f 0700-1000 " 4221 4285 4208 4298 3456 3387 1 4218.3 397$.7 0600-2,700 • 1006 5077 4994 63?2 4043 3967 1 5019.1 4703.3 0600-0000 * 5114 5201 5123 5367 1272 1055 { 5145.9 !899.2 0000-0000 * 5276 5353 3271 5507 4492 4232 1 5296.4 5005,6 Att•PSak • 0800 0700 0700 0700 0900 I 0900 I * 441 4S7 48S 404 34S 317 1 sec a.ak 1400 1400 laoo 16Da 2soo 1600 I lsoa I 404 428 n22 461 a~~ 397 935 I * •• tro data. • • Appendix G PEAR Response Memo From: Gerald Takase [mailto:gtakase@co.hawaii.hi.us] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:19 PM To: roy_takemoto@co.hawaii.hi.us; 'McClure, Bruce' Cc: 'Brown, Larry'; 'Whitmore, Ron'; 'Kurokawa, Brad'; 'John Whalen ' Subject: RE: Questions-PEAR Participation in Decision-Making 1. Who was delegated the task of informing the Hawaiian Acres community of the proposed PEAR project? I don't know if anyone was formally delegated the task of informing the Hawaiian Acres community, we worked with both the Hawaiian Acres Community Association, as well as the Hawaiian Acres Road Maintenance Corp., as well as Councilman Jacobsen. Between those three entities, we thought they were getting the word out to the community. How was this done? I don't know if this was done by signs or letters. When was this done? Unknown, I would assume before the meetings. Was there follow up by the County to ensure it was done? I don't believe there was any followup by the County, but there were about 30 people present at the community association meeting. 2. Were subdivision landowners involved in the route selection process? I don't know, I was not involved in the route selection process. If yes, what evidence does the County have of this? If not, what is the reason they were excluded when the PEAR utilizes privately owned roads? I don't know that they were ever excluded 3. If an easement agreement for use of Hawaiian Acres roads is being considered or in force, were Hawaiian Acres landowners informed of the proposed easement and invited to give input on the terms of easement agreement? The easement agreement was developed by the County of Hawaii, it was a standardized agreement, and passed out to the Road Maintenance Corp and Councilman Jacobsen to distribute, I don't recall any feedback on the easement agreement, if the owners agreed, they signed. If yes, when, how, and by whom, and what documentation is available to verify this? 4. If not, who was given the task of informing Hawaiian Acres community landowners of the easement agreement? The Road Maintenance Corp. and Councilman Jacobsen. 5. If the Hawaiian Acres Community Association (HACA) was the entity designated to contact Hawaiian Acres landowners on behalf of the County, was a document drawn up with the specific tasks expected of HACA? NO Did the County follow up with HACA to ensure that landowners were informed with accurate information about PEAR issues? No, we never followed up individually with the owners, we distributed the easement agreement for all owners to review. 6. Who represented the landowners during the drafting and review of the terms of the easement agreement? No one, each owner was free to review the document on their own and decide whether they would agree. When was this done? N/A u 7. Did any Hawaiian Acres landowners review the current easement agreement and express dissatisfaction with the terms of the agreement? Not to my knowledge. Were measures taken to deal with concerns relating to the easement agreement? No concerns were expressed. By whom? NIA When? N/A 8. To date, how many landowners, and who, signed this agreement or pending agreement? We have 5 grants of easements from the following parties: Robert/Julie Jacobsen; Donald/Devra Reeves; JeromelCarol Siebenrock and Harold/Marilyn Haymore. I would hope you are not going to use the names to harass these individuals. 9. How did they become aware of this easement agreement? Through the Hawaiian Acres Road Maintenance Corp or Councilman Jacobsen Route Selection 10. Who selected the route? Don't know 11. How was the route selected? Don't know 12. What was the reason Ainaloa Blvd. was selected instead of Orchidland Dive? It was the shortest route? Route Leal Status 13. What State, County, or other laws are being used to justify the PEAR? FEMA funds were used to build the road, Real Property common law is used to justify the roadway. 14. Is the connector lot classified as a roadway or a lot? While it is a connector lot is being used as a roadway, if that use ceases, it could probably still be used as a houselot. 15. Is the Hawaiian Acres section of the PEAR owned by Hawaii County? The County has grants of easements, which allow the County to use it. If not, who owns it? The road is still owned by the 4000+ owners of the Hawaiian Acres Community. 16. What does the County perceive to be its legal right to the PEAR? Through the Grants of Easement 17. If the County does not own the road, does the County currently have a legally filed easement agreement in State land court between themselves and the landowners of Hawaiian Acres? If yes, what is the case number and the date this agreement became legal? If not, is there a pending case? What is the case number and date filed? We have filed grants of easements with the owners stated above, there was no case ever • • filed 18. Were there ever any legal decisions made in Hawaii State land court or elsewhere regarding the status of the PEAR acquisition by the County or relating to an easement agreement? NO If there are, what are the case numbers? N/A 19. What were the results of any land court decisions relating to the PEAR? N/A Project Timing 20. When did the County begin the Hawaiian Acres PEAR project? Refer to DPW 21. When did the County legally take ownership of the "connector lot" between Ainaloa and Hawaiian Acres? Deed was recorded on 7/1/2003 22. What is the date that the bulldozers began work relating to the PEAR project? When did dozing begin on the connector lot? Refer to DPW Project Funding 23. How was the PEAR funded? With grants? With Federal, State, and County funds? Where can the documents relating to funding of this project be obtained and reviewed? Refer to DPW 24. What ualified the Coun to receive fundin for this ro'ect? Refer to DPW q ty g p J Accountability 25. Can the County be held legally accountable for the environmental impact and any injuries or property damage resulting from the PEAR because the PEAR remains open for non-emergency use? Potentially the County is now liable for maintaining the road Transparency 26. Does the County have a comprehensive file on the PEAR project that is easily accessible by the public? Each office probably maintains file with information that is pertinent to its area, I don't know of any overall PEAR file I would like to add one more question. Is the County refering to CTP principles 3 and 9 when they reflect on the HA PEAR? I don't know what CTP principles 3 and 9 are. •