2009-08-28 TDIRECTORLUPAG - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

In addition the harbor was proposed to be expanded. And you canÓt see it here Î you can see the harbor here Î but it was proposed to be expanded to the south, and they were going to blast to the south to basically put in luxury slips that would have provided additional income, and the State had actually had plans for this project to help fund improvements for harbors on all of the islands in the State of HawaiÒi. So there was an economic reason for the proposed development plans. Unfortunately, this area is the second largest outflow of freshwater, which you donÓt see is that there is water flowing under the ground here. All on the cost of the leeward coast you have this. The largest is down at UmiÓs Well in Kealakekua Bay, but this is the second largest freshwater outflow from the coast. The USGS, the United States Geological Services, has done studies and has proven this. And so what is interesting is that the offshore water monitoring from the National Park is showing that there is a plume of polluted water thatÓs coming out from this area, which we believe is related to the sump where they are putting i treated once Î water from the Kealakehe Wastewater Treatment Plant further mauka. But we are not certain; it could be related to harbor activities as well. There was a study done in 2006 that Chris Yuen had asked to be done in response to a Supreme Court ruling, which said that the County had an affirmative duty to protect the near shore water quality of our island. That study, the findings of that study was that over the past 15 years near shore water quality along our coastline has deteriorated substantially, and that we are on the verge of environmental, extreme environmental degradation offshore. And these are supposed to be Class AA waters for 300 meters offshore, which means that the waters are not influenced by human activity. So obviously weÓve got a problem thatÓs developing here. I also wanted to point out that the Kona Community Development Plan process, there were 109 meetings that were held over about four months. In those meetings thousands of comments were taken. Working Groups were then formed by citizens and we basic comments into final themes. And one of the themes was protect, no development in the near shore area. Then we had some public charrettes where people actually were able to draw on maps. And the majority of people at those stated they did not want any development between Queen KaÒahumanu Highway and the coastline, recognizing the importance of this near shore area. ThatÓs another reason why I think that the proposed amendment has community support. Ms. Hecht has said that there had not been much public attendance as far as support of this particular amendment. But back in 2006 when this General Plan amendment was being proposed, there was huge community outpouring at County Council meetings against this. The reason that it passed was because the County Council refused to split the different General Plan amendments out, and so they had to vote on the whole thing all together. And so thatÓs how it got thrown in. Referring to Ms. AioliÓs (sic) testimony, there are, I actually have been a part of Na Wai Iwi Ola the halau, that has been using the Alaula beach area, which is not shown here -. WATANABE: Mr. Flaherty, can you -? FLAHERTY: Okay, IÓll summarize, IÓm sorry. LetÓs see if there is anything else I havenÓt missed. I guess thatÓs -. Oh, the one thing is regarding Geri Bell and as far as adjacent EXHIBIT E 9