2008-06-20 TKONACDP - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Okay, I’m going to turn it over now to Michael, and he’s going to be discussing the relationship of the CDP to the General Plan. M. MATSUKAWA: Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members of the Commission. I don’t have a slide of my own on the Power Point, but I think my handout went to you. My purpose here is to try to bring you back to where it came from and why we are here this evening. The 2005 County Council had established a General Plan with certain goals and objectives for North and South Kona, and specifically charged the community with the task of translating those goals and objectives into more specific development plans for the community. And so the ideas that have been presented this evening, and are set forth in your booklet, are not new ideas; they are not new concepts that we as the Steering Committee just dreamed up on our own or the community had developed outside of the Council’s directives. So one of the Council’s directives includes some assumptions about the community, one of which was that there are sugar lands, not necessarily in Kona, but this was for the Island as a whole that sugar lands should be put into production to support certain kind of import replacement and value added products – this Plan does not propose to change that assumption, and it follows it; that the visitor industry and related industries will grow – that’s an assumption that this Plan also works on. Some of the goals and specific objectives in the County Council’s 2005 directive are quire specific – for example, follow the community noise standards. This is a brand new State concept regulatory system that is somewhat new to many people on this Island that there is a statewide community noise standard; for example, the Airport Advisory Committee just held their Kona Airport expansion and monitoring plans, and noise is a major factor. So this is how -, and we haven’t changed that assumption, either. And what this Plan does, it takes the more general statements and goals, and provides or translates, as the Council directed, into specific actions. I won’t go through a detail of my outline, but I’ll highlight some things. For example, in the economic element, the County Council had set as a goal that we recognize Kona’s natural beauty as a major economic asset; and this Plan purports to implement that strategy. It states to improve Kailua Village; and this Pan purports to do that. It states to encourage eco-tourism and to protect important agricultural lands; and this Plan purports to do that. In the area of energy, it talks about, like Ken mentioned, some options; and this Plan creates a strategy. One interesting note is that the Department of Water Supply is one of the largest consumers of electricity on this Island; and so there are recommendations for ways to reduce the consumption but still provide the service as a means to encourage the conservation of energy. In the area of environment and natural beauty, one of the important Council directives was to encourage watershed management projects and to review the grading ordinances for the County; and this Plan suggests a plan of action for that. In the area of historic or cultural resources, there was a listing of many sites and areas that the County Council wanted protection and preservation; and this Plan purports to do that and more, as outlined by Ken. On the area of natural resources and the shoreline, the County Council wanted to encourage the protection of watersheds, public access to the shoreline, trails; and this Plan does that with a healthy respect for the property rights of private landowners. And I might add in the area of natural resources, the Plan brings a different – I shouldn’t say different – introduces to the general public the notion that landowners, especially mauka landowners who own large tracts of land including the State of Hawaii, provide a service to the community. The Council recognizes EXHIBIT B 8