HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016.9.2 DOC1 HCDP Summary of Community InputSteering Committee Review of Community Input, September 2016 Review Document 1 of 4
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP)
Review Packet Document #1 of 4:
Sorted Summary of Community Input
To be considered by the Steering Committee starting in September 2016
Note: From March 15 through June 15, 2016, the January 2016 Draft of the Hamakua Community
Development Plan (CDP) was available for public review and comment. This document
summarizes those comments here sorted by their corresponding sections of the CDP.
With the exception of the numbered CDP section headings and Community Objectives, and the
explanatory text in brackets, the text inserted below is public comment. These comments were
submitted at a CDP event, via email, or sent directly to the Planning Department.
The CDP Planning Team has preliminarily flagged comments for potential follow-up:
■ No Change: These comments do not require revisions either because they address issues
already covered within the January 2016 Draft CDP, are addressing issues outside the
scope of the CDP, or are inconsistent with established Community Objectives. (Included in
the Sorted Summary document, Review Doc. #1)
■ Minor Edits: These comments make suggestions for improving formatting or policy
wording, and are generally non -substantive edits to the CDP. (Included in Review Doc. #2)
■ Revisions: These comments are suggestions for improving the CDP that are consistent with
Community Objectives and therefore require Steering Committee review but not
necessarily committee deliberation. (Included in Review Doc. #3)
■ SC Deliberation: These comments address issues that require Steering Committee
deliberation. (Included in Review Doc. #4)
All the community feedback and the Review Packet, including the Summary of Comments
(Document #1), the Minor Edits (Document #2), the Proposed Revisions & Additions (Document
#3), and the Steering Committee Deliberations (Document #4) are located online at
www.hamakuacdp.info. This document is the Sorted Summary of Community Input, Document #1
Next Steps: Over a series of meetings, the Steering Committee will consider this input and make
final recommendations. All Steering Committee meetings are open to the public, and public
comment is always welcome.
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Table of Contents
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Table of Contents
TABLEOF CONTENTS..................................................................................................................................................... 3
SECTION1: INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................. 5
1.1 INTRODUCTION TO THE CDP................................................................................................................................... 5
1. 1.5 HOW DO I NAVIGATE THE HAMAKUA CDP�...........................................................................................................................5
1. 1.6 CDP SUPPORT DOCUMENTS........................................................................................................................................5
1.3 GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ACRONYMS USED................................................................................................... 6
1.3.1 GLOSSARY OF TERMS..........................................................................................................................................6
1.5 INTRODUCTION TO THE HAMAKUA PLANNING AREA................... ............................................................... 6
1.8.1 COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES.................................................... .............................................................................6
SECTION 2: APPLICABILITY......................................................................................................................................... 8
2.4 TYPES OF STRATEGIES............................................................................................................................ 8
2.5 CDP IMPLEMENTATION ROLESAND GUIDES..................... .............. ...... 8
SECTION 3: PREFERRED LAND USE & SETTLEMENT PATTERNS............................................................................................. 9
3.1 LAND USE & SETTLEMENT PATTERNS......... ........................................................................................... 9
SECTION 4: PROTECT AND ENHANCE NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES........................................................................ 20
4.2 PROTECT COASTAL RESOURCES..................................................................................................................... 21
4.3 PROTECT AGRICULTURAL LANDS &OPEN SPACE... ............. 22
4.4 PROTECT MAUKA AREAS & FORESTS..................................................................................27
4.5 PRESERVE SCENIC AREAS ANDVIEWSHED ............. .........................................................................28
4.6 PROTECT AND ENHANCE ECOSYSTEMS AND ATE RSHED............................................................................. 30
4.7 PROTECT AND ENHANCE CULTURAL ASSETS.....................................................................................................31
4.8 ESTABLISH AND MANAGE PUBLIC ACCESS AND TRAILS........................................................................................32
4.9 PRESERVING SACRED PLACES: WAIPI`OVALLEY AND MAUNA KEA............................................................................ 38
SECTION 5: STRENGTHEN INFRASTRUCTURE, FACILITIES, AND SERVICES.............................................................................. 47
5.1 COORDINATE INFRASTRUCTURE, FACILITY, AND SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS................................................................... 47
5.2 EXPAND AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPTIONS.............................................................................................................48
5.3 IMPROVE THE ROADWAY NETWORK ............................................................................................................... 49
5.4 FORMALIZE ALTERNATIVE ROUTES...............................................................................................................51
5.6 EXPAND MASS TRANSIT FACILITIES & SERVICES......................................................................................................51
5.7 IMPROVE WATER INFRASTRUCTURE...................................................................................................................... 52
5.8 IMPROVE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT FACILITIES............................................................................................ 52
5.9 IMPROVE EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS & HAZARD MITIGATION................................................................................ 54
5.10 IMPROVING PROTECTIVE SERVICES...................................................................................................................... 54
5.11 EXPAND HEALTHCARE & SOCIAL SERVICES............................................................................................................ 55
5.12 STRENGTHEN & EXPAND EDUCATION FACILITIES AND SERVICES............................................................................... 56
5.13 EXPAND PARKS & RECREATION FACILITIES........................................................................................................... 56
5.14 ENHANCE TELECOMMUNICATIONS & ENERGY INFRASTRUCTURE.............................................................................. 58
SECTION 6: BUILD A SUSTAINABLE, LOCAL ECONOMY...................................................................................................... 58
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Table of Contents
6.1 COORDINATE REGIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT................................................................................................ 58
6.2 STRENGTHENING LOCAL AGRICULTURE................................................................................................................. 59
6.3 EXPAND HEALTH AND WELLNESS INDUSTRY.......................................................................................................... 67
6.5 DEVELOP A PLACE -BASED VISITOR INDUSTRY......................................................................................................... 68
6.6 REVITALIZE LOCAL RETAIL & HAMAKUA'S TOWN CENTERS......................................................................................68
6.7 ENCOU RAG E G REEN INDUSTRIES..........................................................................................................................69
6.8 PRESERVE INFORMAL ECONOMIESAND LIVING OFF THE LAND.................................................................................. 70
MISC.COMMENTS...................................................................................................................................................... 70
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Table of Contents
Steering Committee Review of Community Input, September 2016 Review Document 1 of 4
`0 ka mea kupono `6ina ka mea kupono kanaka.
What is good for the land is good for the people.
m Introduction to the CDP
1.1.5 How do I navigate the Hamakua CDP?
■ Throughout the document, the reader is being referred to policy numbers and actions that appear in other
sections. There needs to be a way for the reader to locate those related policies and actions with ease. Perhaps
the final draft should include a listing by page number and/or section where the policy and action numbers are
primarily discussed? [Minor Edits: Format suggestion for Final]
1.1.6 CDP Support Documents
■ Finally in Appendix V4A (p. 204) "Liability Protection on Unimproved Public Lands," there is good news. Hawaii's
Legislature in 2014 made the liability protections in Act 82 (SLH 2003) permanent. This section in the Appendix
should be updated. For the details, see HRS §663-52. [Minor Edits: Appendix]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 1: Introduction
Steering Committee Review of Community Input, September 2016 Review Document 1 of 4
1.3 Glossary of Terms and Acronyms Used
1.3.1 Glossary of Terms
■ "Buy Local" - Definition needed. What's local (i.e.
support a local guy or a local product)? Where does
wholesale come from (ground or China)? [Minor Edits:
will add definitions]
■ "Revitalization" is a RED FLAG word - need clear definition &
parameters. [also relates to Policy 15 and Community Action 11 [Minor Edits: will add definition]
■ Need County definition of "rural" [Minor Edits: will add definition]
1.5 Introduction to the Hamakua Planning Area
i.&i Community Objectives
• Obiective 1: Protect, restore, and enhance watershed ecosystems, sweeping views, and open spaces from
mauka forests to makai shorelines, while assuring responsible public access for recreational, spiritual,
cultural, and sustenance practices.
• Objective 2: Protect and restore viable agricultural lands and resources. Protect and enhance viewscapes
and open spaces that exemplify Hamakua's rural character.
• Objective 3: Encourage community-based collaborative management plans to assure that human
activities are in harmony with the quality of Hamakua's unique natural and cultural landscape.
• Objective 4: Protect and nurture Hamakua's social and cultural diversity and heritage assets, including
sacred places, historic sites and buildings, and distinctive plantation towns.
• Objective 5: Direct future settlement patterns that are sustainable and connected. Honor Hamakua's
historic and cultural assets by concentrating new development in existing, walkable, mixed-use town
centers while limiting rural sprawl.
• Objective 6: Develop and improve critical community infrastructure, including utilities, healthcare,
emergency services, affordable housing, educational opportunities and recreational facilities to keep our
'ohana safe, strong, and healthy.
• Objective 7: Establish a rural transportation network that includes improving roadway alternatives to
Highway 19, expanding and improving the existing transit system, and encouraging multiple
transportation options.
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 1: Introduction
• Objective 8: Promote, preserve and enhance a diverse, sustainable, local economy.
• Objective 9: Encourage the increase and diversity of employment and living options for residents,
including living wage jobs and entrepreneurial opportunities that allow residents to work and shop close
to home and that complement Hamakua's ecology, rural character, and cultural heritage.
• Objective 10: Revitalize retail, service, dining, and entertainment centers that complement the
community's rural character and culture.
• Objective 11: Enhance and promote local and sustainable agriculture, farming, ranching, renewable
energy, and related economic support systems.
• Objective 12: Preserve traditional subsistence practices and encourage a reciprocity (e.g. bartering)
economy as a sustainable complement to Hamakua's resource-based economy.
• Objective 13: Promote appropriate rural tourism that welcomes guests for an alternative visitor
experience. Promote Hawai'i's host culture and Hamakua's heritage, including historic roads and
plantation towns, and festivals that celebrate our rich multi -cultural music, art, and agriculture.
Ambh� NO 1%
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 1: Introduction J=
2.4 Types of Strategies
1. "Land Use Policies"
2. "County Actions"
3. "Kokua Actions"
4. "Community Actions"
■ NHCC (North Hilo Community Council) viable, respectable, credible group to funnel community-based
projects through for coordination & consensus -building. [No Change — NHCC is listed and recognized
in the Community Action Guide — Will look for other areas in the Guide where NHCC may be added to
list of potential partners.]
■ GSI: connecting university students with local projects to increase their learning & connection to
community places & people. [No Change - may add to list of potential partners for Community
Action Guide] M6&
2.5 CDP Implementation Roles and rihd� X
■ Small, area -specific community groups need help "voicing" concerns toward action. [No Change]
■ Danger of Plan (CDP) being ignored. [No Change]
■ Appreciate distinctions in plan between State & County but disconnect in Policy to Action [No Change]
■ How do you "bridge the gap" between State & County in a way to support County Plans/Planners to be able to
facilitate actions/plans/projects? Need another level. [No Change]
■ How can we help as a community? [No Change: Refer to Community Action Guide]
■ How is the CDP enforced during review of development permits? County Code or Rule that speaks to that?
[No Change: Refer to General Plan, Ch. 16]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 2: Applicability
Steering Committee Review of Community Input, September 2016 Review Document 1 of 4
Pupukohi i holomuo
Unite to move forward
3A Land Use & Settlement Patterns
LUPAG - General
■ The green, open areas shown on pg. 40 for
Pauka'a indicate all residences on makai side of
Pauka'a Dr. is an open area ... same for the
adjacent residences on Kuikahi St. The green
areas should be redrawn to shown the existing
residential lots. Appears this situation may also
exist elsewhere along the coast. [No Change —
this is a misunderstanding of LUPAG Open
designation and intent.]
■ Any parcel less than 20 acres should not be
rezoned to "Important Agricultural Land." They
should be rezoned to "Rural" or left as they
currently are as "LDU". I own a 15 acre farm
which has not been able to be economically
sustainable over the 13 years we have owned it,
despite being certified organic and selling high
value products such as papaya, lychee, citrus,
bananas, avocados and other fruits and growing
Iamb meat. Expecting any parcel less than 20
acres to be an economically viable unit is
extremely dubious. [No Change: this is a
misunderstanding of the Agricultural LUPAG
designation.]
LUPAG — Papa`ikou
■ Like the LUPAG proposed changes in Papa'ikou
[No Change, supporting comment]
■ Papa'ikou Point should stay Ag as proposed on
LUPAG maps. [SC Deliberation: See LUPAG
revisions)
■ Papa'ikou Point near Mill Rd should be Urban
Residential since infrastructure is right there.
Landowner not clear about why the Ag -Urban
line was drawn along this road. [SC
Deliberation: See LUPAG revisions.]
■ 1 live in mauka Onomea and have a 26 acre
FARM where my family and I grow much of our
own food. We have animals and greenhouses
and many gardens with staple crops.
I would like to comment in SUPPORT of the
proposed LUPAG amendments that "adjust the
makai coastal agricultural areas between Mill
Road and makai of Kalaniana'ole School to
LUPAG Agricultural to be consistent with their
current County zoning and the State Land Use
Agricultural District." We MUST "protect
productive agricultural lands and their
associated open space assets within the coastal
and SMA lands makai of the Highway 19." [No
Change: supportive comment]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 3: Preferred Land Use & Settlement
Patterns
LUPAG — Laupahoehoe/Papa'aloa
Homesteads in Laupahoehoe are defacto rural;
but rural designation doesn't match. [SC
Deliberation: See LUPAG revisions]
TM K 3-5-004-054-000
Per our discussion, in the subject line is the TMK
for the parcel I mentioned to you. It's just 1.885
acres so it's not really a piece of land that could
be used for ag purposes.
If possible, I would like to see this parcel added
to the distinction for consideration of being re
ti
zoned to low density (yellow) on your pr
map. This parcel is just above Laupahoe
School. I think it would make a great lot
some smaller sized homes for teachers a
school. Finding housing is one of the chz
in attracting teachers to Laupahoehoe Sc
and this lot has the potential to help in c
solution for this issue.
Yes, I fully understand this is not a zoning
change, only a designation recommendation
change. [SC Deliberation: see LUPAG revisions]
(1) Parcel ID 3-5-004-003-0000\ 35-2120
Hawaii Belt Rd. law
(2) Draft of Hamakua Development Plan (CDP)
Thank you for the information provided. Having
been unable to attend the Community Meetings,
it helped us to better understand the current
CDP Process.
The subject property was purchased by my wife
and me in June, 1994 and we have resided on it
since that date. We plan to continue to do so for
the future.
The property/parcel is bordered; on the South,
by the year round Kihalani Stream (with thick
trees and vegetation) on the East and North, by
250'-350' inaccessible, vertical cliffs; and, on the
West, by the Hawai'i Belt Road. It is not
contiguous to any other properties.
The property consists of approximately 11.71
acres; with 6.2 acres maintained with 25 yr. old
macadamia nut trees, with modest annual
income; one acre planted in mixed/mature
tropical fruit trees; two and one-half acres in
home and lawn use; and, two acres in mixed
wooded growth, stream -gulch area.
The property is directly accessible by drive -way,
from the Hawaii Belt Road. It possesses
approved underground utilities -connection.
Importantly, the Mauka West areas of the
bordering Hi -Way contain the Laupahoehoe
Transfer Station, Swimming Pool, Library and
Laupahoehoe Charter School.
The property has always had dedicated
agricultural/conservation/homeowner usage, or
some combination thereof. There are no plans
to request changes of its usage.
I am writing to object to the 2016 Draft of the
Hamakua CDP, effectively rezoning/categorizing
all of our property status/use (LUPAG) as
"OPEN".
A "Rural" designation is more appropriate
/acceptable.
In summary, I/We do not concur with the re-
designation/rezoning/re-classification of all our
property to "OPEN". We desire to retain all
currently existing rights to our property,
including the ability to rebuild our home/garage,
in the unlikely event of a disaster: Hurricane,
Fire or Earthquake.... among others. Again, the
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 3: Preferred Land Use & Settlement
Patterns
LUPAG Category of "RURAL" would be more
appropriate, at least for some of the property, as
over one half is in Agricultural use.
I/we request that your team review our
concerns and revise the Draft CDP accordingly
[Continued conversation with commenter:]
[The] suggestion/ idea that it might be more
appropriate for our parcel to be designated
Open along the shoreline and Agricultural on the
mauka side, where the six acres of macadamia
nut trees are located, is reasonable. That
designation then would coincide with what is
reality and what has been the land's usage for
many years: with no plans/reason to change it.
We would view the Agriculture -Open
designation favorably and concur with its use in
the CDP Proposal document. [SC Deliberatio
See proposed revisions that LUPAG Open
designations remain consistent with 2005
General Plan] 00411rik
This is a CDP comment in addition to the
comments dated June 1, previously submitted
The following comments are related to:
1) Our request to retain our property's LUPAG
designation as Low Density Urban; NL
2) The IAL LUPAG designation proposed for our
property; and
3) Our request to make the "de facto Rural" uses
(created prior to statehood) for the 3
Laupahoehoe homestead lands, permanent by
changing the zoning from Agriculture to Rural
zoning for these homesteads.
In addition to the June 1 comments about
keeping our property designated as Low Density
Urban, I would like to note that urban uses
extend to the church on Kihalani Homestead
Road which is a commercial use (see parcel
outlined in red below; TMK 3-5-004-082).
The church is the logical buffer between Low
Density Urban (or Rural based on the zoning we
are requesting) and Agricultural.
With regard to the County's use of the terms
"Important Agriculture Lands" and "IAL",
Planning stated at the 5-25-16 meeting that no
COH procedures for selecting parcels for
submission to the State Land Use Commission
have been established. In the meantime
Planning stated that "County IAL" only means
current county zoning.
Regardless, policies and issues about IAL are part
of both the GP and the CDP. The IAL materials in
the GP and CDP are not limited to "County
IAL... i.e. zoning only" as discussed at the 5-25-16
meeting: but refer to State statutes and policies
as well. Examples include 4.3.2 of the draft CDP
"existing policy"; 4.3.3 Land Use Policy 4.3.3
"development and construction in Important
Agricultural Land shall be limited to agriculture;
and in the CDP rationale 4.3 that says "the
[LUPAG"] designates agricultural lands in the
Hamakua Planning Area to be preserved for
agriculture and open space". This is State IAL
wording.
Also, these County IAL policies are worded as
current, binding policy (in the case of the GP
already binding; and in the case of the CDP,
binding when approved by the Planning
Commission and the County Council). For
instance, Policy 4.3.3 would become law and be
binding on landowners upon approval of the CDP
regardless of the fact that there is no County
process under way to identify IAL designation to
the LUC. As I understand, at this time the State
and LUC pre-empt County law on the subject of
IAL. The County cannot legislate about the same
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 3: Preferred Land Use & Settlement
Patterns
IAL policies in State law without the LUC's and
State's permission. Also there is no State statute
listing IAL land uses; and the LUC has not
confirmed any of the county lands IAL under the
County Mandatory Designation program.
This situation puts landowners in a confusing
situation. Should a landowner conclude that
State IAL is already in force by virtue of the 2005
GP and may be further in force when the CDP is
approved? Would a landowner who disagrees
with a County IAL thus be subject to some kind
of statute of limitation? Is the County ready to
issue a binding opinion about whether a
particular parcel qualifies for list as State IAL
now? Or are the County IAL provisions intended
to become binding only when the State
completes its IAL process (even if the GP :46
CDP do not specifically say so)?
So my suggestion is that:
1. The County and CDP change the LUPAG "IAL'
designation wording to reference a "agriculture"
or "Ag" designation; and
2. The GP should be amended and a caveat
should be included in the CDP that any reference
to "IAL" or "Important Agricultural Lands" will
not be binding until the entire LUC IAL process is
completed and a State bill is passed to define the
land uses for Important Agricultural Lands. (the
other option being to remove the IAL references
in the GP and CDP) IRMW
I also think it is not too early to start thinking
about how to approach the designation of IAL
parcels to the LUC. In the June 1 comments I
submitted some suggestions about what the
designation process might include, the criteria
for designating a parcel IAL, and why our parcel
would not qualify for IAL. A couple other
comments about the designation process are:
*there are many reasons why the Laupahoehoe
Homestead lands should be re -zoned Rural (vs.
agriculture) which is, by definition, not IAL
*Planning assured us at the 5-25-16 meeting
that not all of the current LUPAG County IAL
would be designated as State IAL
*the State IAL includes criteria that would
exclude many Hawaii County agricultural parcels
from IAL
the experience of both Kauai and Oahu, so far,
has been that less than half of the agricultural
zoned parcels become State IAL (leaving the
other parcels to be subject to the current
agricultural zoning)
*despite the concerns of some in the public
about losing agricultural land to housing, there is
actually a good balance between agriculture and
development: for instance, Hamakua agricultural
zoning is 163,193 acres (not including open and
no zone/government land) while various housing
or commercial zoning takes up 687 acres (less
that 1% of the total ag and development zoning).
Since 2006 Hamakua has gained jobs; and
investments in the community have grown
source: Hamakua Agricultural Plan. see also
"Can Hawaii Feed Itself"
(http://www.hawaiibusiness.com/can-hawaii-
feed-itself/) and "The Coast is Clear"
http://www.hawaiibusiness.com/the-coast-is-
clear/
*The IAL designations should be for the "best
and most productive agriculturally zoned
lands... according to uniform standards and
criteria that are flexible, fair and acceptable."
source: Hamakua Agricultural Plan. (see other
criteria in the June 1 comments)
*Rural uses (small farms) are also productive
source: Hamakua Agricultural Plan; We are
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 3: Preferred Land Use & Settlement
Patterns
hoping that the County will soon change the
zoning for the 3 Laupahoehoe Homesteads from
County IAL to Rural since the County already
calls the Homesteads "de facto Rural"
*Small ag, while not IAL, can still contribute to
agriculture: my wife and I support agriculture
and practice agriculture on a small parcel with
niche crops which provide a small stipend (but
mostly exercise and satisfaction). We also
support our community and have a long history
of working for various causes including
environmental, transportation, and education
(including raising $450,000 to keep Laupahoehoe
School from closing while it was going charter).
The majority of our estate planning benefits
environmental and conservation organizations in
Hawai'i. [SC Deliberation: See LUPAG revisions]
For more input received regarding TMK
004:055 see:
536/Pagel.aspx
LUPAG —
Proposed LUPAG in Hakalau [this comment was
made related to protecting coastal resources]
[SC Deliberation: See LUPAG revisions]
Request revision to the Proposed
Hakalau/Wailea LUPAG Map for the reasons
below:
I attended the public meeting held in Pepe'ekeo
on May 11, 2016, and was distressed to learn
that the proposed LUPAG would revise the
current LUPAG at Hakalau Point, in conformity
with the current landowner's change of zoning
application to allow the Landowner to establish
a subdivision of residential homes for most of
the Hakalau Point property and to establish
industrial/commercial structures within the
remainder of the property.
As you are no doubt aware, the current LUPAG
establishes the entire Hakalau Point as
Industrial, and the entire parcel is, in fact,
currently zoned as Industrial. Although currently
zoned industrial, there is very little activity of
any type taking place on the property, nor has
there been significant activity over the course of
the prior several decades. Specifically, one of
the warehouses on the parcel is used by a
handful of farm workers who package ginger and
sweet potatoes in the warehouse. The other
warehouse located on the property, until very
recently, was used as a home/party-facility for
the son of the landowner. This second
warehouse is currently abandoned.
The proposed change in the LUPAG to recast
most of the nine acre parcel from industrial to
low density urban coincides with the
Landowner's request for rezoning the property
to residential, and is wholly inconsistent with the
priorities of the CDP as described in the
informational material that was handed out to
the assembled during the meeting.
In particular: With regard to the coastal lands
along the Hamakua Coast, the CDP states that
Objective Number 1 is to:
* Protect, restore, and enhance watershed
ecosystems, sweeping views, and open spaces
from mauka forests to Makai shorelines, while
assuring responsible public access for
recreational, spiritual, cultural, and sustenance
practices
As you may be aware, the Hawaii County
Public Access, Open Space and Natural
Resources Preservation Commission ("PONC")
has identified and targeted the Hakalau Point
property as one for protection and
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 3: Preferred Land Use & Settlement
Patterns
preservation through County acquisition. You
are probably also aware that the Hakalau Point
Property is the only one on the list for East
Hawaii, and that the mayor has approved the
property for acquisition.
The desire of the residents in and around
Hakalau, is that the County would establish a
memorial park at Hakalau Point to honor and
commemorate the legacy of those who lived
and labored at sugar plantations along the
Hamakua Coast. The park would provide a
quiet place for meditation, retrospection, and
spiritual thought.
Instead of performing as a steward, seeking to
protect this last remaining critically important
historic parcel of ocean front property along
the Hamakua Coast, (to be appreciated and
enjoyed by all the citizens and residents of
Hawaii County), the proposed LUPAG, rather,
assists the landowner in his efforts to rezone
this property for the purpose of constructing)
ocean front homes and industrial/commercial
buildings for his own economic benefit. If the
Landowner is successful in obtaining his
rezoning and subdivision, then the sweepin
views and access to Hakalau Point will be
1%
available only to those who purchase one of
his home lots on the property. a NL
In one of the brochures that was handed out
at the meeting, it was made clear in the CDP
that the residents of Hamakua want to do
several things, including:
* "Limit/halt multimillion dollar developments."
It seems pretty obvious that in changing the
LUPAG to allow some 75% of the nine acres of
Hakalau Point to be utilized for building seven
to eleven expensive ocean front homes is
inconsistent with the CDP goal of limiting
multimillion dollar developments along the
shorelines of the Hamakua Coast.
* "Caring for the'aina, reflecting community
values and environmental consciousness.
Promoting the private interests of the
landowner for the purpose of developing
ocean front homes and commercial activities,
in lieu of preserving Hakalau Point for the
people of Hawaii, does not seem consistent
with the desire to reflect the community
values for those priorities as set forth in the
CDP.
0fish�ing
"Oen space along all Hamakua Coast for and hiking"
By proposing to change the LUPAG to now
designate Hakalau Point as Urban, (which
wholly supports and conforms to the
landowner's request to rezone that same
portion of his parcel to residential), the
planners are undermining the goal of public
use and public access of Hakalau Point in favor
of restricting access and use of the property to
those favored homeowners and business
owners that end up owning and occupying the
Hakalau Point subdivided plots.
* "Preserve, restore, and enhance sweeping
open views of ocean and scenic view
outlooks."
As previously stated, by proposing to change
the LUPAG to designate most of Hakalau Point
as "low density urban", with the rest as
"industrial", the Community Development
planners will greatly assist the Landowner in
his efforts to subdivide the property for the
purpose of constructing several ocean front
homes, while simultaneously ignoring the
desire of the Hamakua residents and the
mission of the CDP, which instead advocate
for preservation Hakalau Point in order to
protect sweeping ocean front and scenic
views for the enjoyment of all the residents of
Hawaii County and the Hamakua Coast.
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 3: Preferred Land Use & Settlement
Patterns
In conclusion, and for the reasons set forth
above, it seems counter -intuitive and
inconsistent with the objectives of the CDP, to
revise the LUPAG at this time to change the
land use designation at Hakalau Point from its
current one of industrial to that of low density
urban. [SC Deliberation: see LUPAG
revisions]
■ Suggested changes to "Figure 12. Hakalau
/Wailea" rationale
#1 Suggested Change related to rationale for
"preferred land use"
Current description
"...due to the sites proximity to the ocean, this
parcel is no longer seen as suitable for heavy
industry and therefore the preferred land use
would be for it to be consistent with its Ad
neighboring land uses, which are designated
residential."
Suggestion
The fact that what was formerly UpCamp
Hakalau (mauka of Old Mamalahoa Hwy) is no,
a new subdivision seems a weak rationale for
determining that the makai land right beside the
bluff and the Bay should be valued as residential
also. In light of the community's input to the CDP
discouraging coastal bluff development, is there
room to reconsider that language in the next
draft? I understand the requirement to adhere
to the GP- dictated LUPAG Map designations but
do they have to be rationalized in this way in the
CDP when they don't track with the community
input to the CDP?
#2 Suggested Change regarding the concept of
revitalization" in Hakalau
Current description in Hakalau/Wailea rationale
it is the County's preferred land use for these
towns [old plantation towns] to be revitalized..."
Suggested change
It seems unrealistic that land that was formerly a
plantation town should be designated for
revitalization" as a town, without regard to what
is left of it or to what it has become. Unlike a
number of old plantation towns along the coast,
Hakalau was torn down, almost in total. A new
subdivision does exist above Mamalahoa Hwy,
but the place as a whole still has a rural
character. My concern is that revitalize" can be
used as part of a marketing narrative by
developers whether or not there's sufficient
reality to base it on. Is it necessary to use this
word? I don't see it used for any of the other
LUPAG rationale write ups for the other old
plantation town locations, save for Laupahoehoe
already existing commercial core.
#3 Suggested change regarding the presumption
of redevelopment"
Current description
TMK 2- 9- 002: 079 and 2- 9002081) are privately
owned and slated for redevelopment."
Suggestion
The statement "slated for redevelopment"
implies an inevitability in regards rezoning
approval that does not exist. Does that need to
be there?
Like "revitalize, the word "redevelopment"
implies that there is something present from
which to rebuild. That could be the case in such
places as Honokaa Town and some others, but
not so for Hakalau and its remaining
undeveloped land. And, here again, I don't see
the word being used in rationale for any of the
other old plantation town locations. In the
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 3: Preferred Land Use & Settlement
Patterns
interest of clarity, I would like to suggest either
"new development" or just plain "development."
[SC Deliberation: See LUPAG revisions. Also
note: the Hakalau subject area has existing legal
entitlements due to its existing zoning. The CDP
does not affect existing legal entitlements.]
■ More town center action near post office of
Hakalau - LDU Commercial. [No Change —
Supportive of draft — however — note that the
area around the post office is already LUPAG
LDU, and generally is surrounded by residential
neighborhoods. The parcels immediate to the
Post Office are zoned commercial. Revitalization
of these commercial parcels is likely more
affected by a lack of market demand and lack of
infrastructure and not related to LUPA
designations.]
■ 1 attended the SpeakOut on 'Aina - Coastal on
May 7, 2015. C_"N
I would like to object to the proposed LUPAG 11
map, found on page 54, and entitled Figure 12,
Hakalau/Wailea 2015. This proposed map
changes the zoning of TMK 29002079 and TMK %46
29002081 from industrial to Low Density Urban
with one small area remaining Industrial. The
properties in question are located in Hakalau, on
the site of the former Hakalau Sugar Plantation,
on the coastal cliffs overlooking Hakalau Bay.
Except for two cement structures that were
former warehouses, the property has been
vacant since the Plantation closed in the 1990's.
One building is leased to farmers for sorting
sweet potatoes and ginger; the other is used as a
residence.
39 residential lots make up the rest of Hakalau
makai of the highway. Of those 39 lots, 14 are
vacant and undeveloped. In fact, the subdivision
across the street which the same owner was
permitted to subdivide and sell off in 2004, after
12 years still has 6 vacant and undeveloped lots.
Clearly, there is no pressing need for the County
to approve another subdivision and sale of more
residential lots in the area.
Objective Number 1 of the Hamakua CDP is to..
protect, restore, and enhance watershed
ecosystems, sweeping views, and open spaces
from mauka forests to makai shorelines, while
assuring responsible public access for
recreational, spiritual, cultural, and sustenance
practices. The Plan further states that the
following strategy will be used in proposing
LUPAG changes:
Factor 1: Minimize new coastal development.
"To further this objective in guiding
development, a review of the current land uses
and designations in coastal areas was performed
and changes are being recommended in areas
not yet developed but have LUPAG designations
that guide future development to this coastal
area. Recommendations are made in these
undeveloped coastal areas to protect the
shoreline as open space and priority viewsheds
whenever possible. "
The proposed change of the LUPAG map of
Hakalau is not supported by the stated
Objectives of the Plan. In fact it is directly
opposed by Factor 1, Minimize new coastal
development. The owner of the properties has
filed a Request for Zoning Change in order to
develop a residential subdivision right on the
shoreline of this coastal property.
Since these properties are coastal, have
sweeping views and, except for the two
buildings, are open space, they should be
protected from development. Changing the
zonine to Low Densitv Urban would onlv result in
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 3: Preferred Land Use & Settlement
Patterns
■
the type of development the HCDP is designed
to discourage.
If the HCDP proposes a future zoning change of a
shoreline coastal property, it should not invite
development. If it is truly the objective of the
Hamakua Community Development Plan to
protect coastal lands from development no
changes should be proposed that favors a
developer. The properties in question are being
considered for PONC acquisition to permit a
park, owned by the people of Hawaii, to be
protected for future generations as open space.
Hopefully, the owner will agree to sell the
property to the people of Hawaii, through the
PONC acquisition process. [SC Deliberation]
Hakalau Point development - Houses & mixed
commercial/industrial on site - Proposed County
Preserved; want to use CDP as justification. [No
Change:- SC will deliberate on Hakalau LUPAG;
specific project applications proposed or under
review are outside scope of CDP]
LUPAG — 0'0
■ We would like to add our input to the Hamakua
Community Development Plan and the proposed
Land Use Planning changes that have been
suggested for the O'okala Village Community
area. IF
We have spoken with several people of O'okala
Village Area in regard to what they felt would be
most valuable for their community to create a
comfortable, safe, economically positive, family
oriented environment to live and thrive in. The
following are several needs and requests that
were brought up for consideration to add to the
quality of their way of life and provide a means
for the next generations to continue to
appreciate and respect the family and land of
Hawaii.
* One of the items that have been voiced many
times is the need for affordable homes.
Many have and are leaving the community of
their village in the hunt for affordable living.
Their desire is to remain in the villages they
grew up in and be close to family as they raise
their own children, but the opportunity to
purchase homes is miniscule. Affordable
housing could be a huge benefit to the
community and potentially add needed
support to the local school system.
* Along with the affordable housing situation is
the need for senior citizen or retirement
housing, including a type of facility for
providing health care. This could be either in
the form of intergenerational homes or
organized living centers for seniors. It is the
desire for the family to remain intact and
involved with each other on a daily basis.
Many of the seniors are having to go
elsewhere during their senior years because
necessary services are not available in the
village or close by. If these services were
available in the village the family unit would
have more stability and continue to profit
from the knowledge, wisdom and love the
senior generation has to offer.
* Within in both the affordable housing and/or
senior living areas there could easily be
created community gardens and orchards,
which would facilitate a revitalized self-
sufficiency from the land and add enjoyment
and a sense of pride to all those who would
participate, and possibly add to the revenue of
the family income by sales at a Saturday
market or small local community market.
* Along with the addition of the housing there
has been voiced a concern for the need to be
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 3: Preferred Land Use & Settlement
Patterns
able to work close to home. A type of mixed
use housing that would allow for expansion of
a small cottage industry, possibly with living
quarters on the upper floor and commercial
shops or services on the lower floors, could
add this beneficial potential to the community.
These shops could be used to promote the
local people and enrich their lifestyles, such as
a small market for selling of locally grown
produce and flowers grown in the community
gardens or individual properties, or their own
creative endeavors, such as an art gallery or
quilt shop, etc. Integrating offices for part
time dental and medical services, legal or
accounting needs in the mix of shops is a
practical and wanted possibility.
* One resident voiced the potential to house a
Regional Fire and/or Police facility as it is
centrally located on the Hamakua Coast. This
could significantly reduce response time for ,
emergencies which would create a more In
secure community life for the people.
* Several of the village residents suggested the
need to maintain local and safe access to the
historical fishing areas along the coast. A
desire for trails along the coastline, to enjoy
the beauty of the water and accommodate a
healthy lifestyle activity was also apparent.
* A suggestion that goes along with the quest
for a healthy lifestyle and the need for more
activities in the community was the
development of an additional park and
recreation facilities, possibly at the old O'okala
School.
* The idea of having a historical interpretive
center which would focus on the local history
and people, and share the peoples' rich
heritage was also brought up. This could be a
program that would greatly benefit by the
contribution and involvement of the senior
population. With their knowledge, memory
and respect of things past, they could inspire
and motivate the current and future
generations to keep the spirit of the island
traditions and civilization alive and active.
All of these suggestions would and could be
actualized under the current Land Use Pattern
Allocation Guide or LUPAG in the 2005 General
Plan. O'okala was granted one of the very few
Urban Expansion Areas along the rural
Hamakua Coast. This allows for a mix of high
density, medium density, low density,
14industrial, or industrial -commercial. O'okala
has been granted a generous area for Low
Density Urban expansion. To Change this
planning to what has been suggested in the
CDP would be to disallow the above desires of
the residents and could potentially send the
66�illage into a downward spiral eventually to
the community altogether.
Itis our request that the Land Use Pattern
Allocation Guide or LUPAG in the O'okala
Village area would not be revised. There is no
evidence that the planning methodology has
ever been abused in our Village area. If the
Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide or LUPAG
was to be changed to what the draft CDP plan
suggested for O'okala none of the items noted
by the residents would be reasonably
plausible! The planning process should remain
in such a way that it is beneficial to the people
of O'okala village, so that they may continue to
live and grow in an enhanced community,
which would be increasingly suitable for the
needs of the existing generations and the
generations to come. [SC Deliberation: See
LUPAG revisions]
General Land Use Comments
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 3: Preferred Land Use & Settlement
Patterns
■ Repeat "current and proposed" for LUPAG
[maps] and put on North/South/East/West.
[Minor Edit: format suggestion)
■ I.A.L. — Change County IAL name so it is not
confused with State IAL. [No Change: the CDP is
limited to designations used by its parent -
document, the 2005 General Plan — however the
issue is noted & forwarded to GP Comprehensive
Update Team.]
■ Don't think Hamakua is appropriate for heavy
industrial uses. [No Change: refer to LUPAG
Industrial designations proposed for various
areas such as Papa'ikou, Hakalau, Papa'aloa]
■ Allow more industrial/processing in each area
for farmers [This comment is also included in
Section 6.2 Strengthening Local Agriculture] [No
Change: See Policies 6 and 12; note that most
agricultural processing is already permitted use
of agricultural zoned land.]
■ Create community with low density with
community gardens, communal laundry,
kitchens, etc. [Revision: See New Proposed
Policies on Community Gardens/Kitchens]
■ Keep "development" in urban corridors
-keep 'aina-->'aina [NoChange— consistent
ith Draft]
■ Industrial uses should be evaluated on a case by
case basis &with local community approval and
7Ght mirrors the integrity of community
support. [No Change: sup ortive comment, se
: consistent with intent of CDP]
Policies 6, 12]
■ GP states heavy industry should not be placed inds its niche (particular crops,
next to residential - should be considered when other?)
evaluating industrial areas. [No Change:
supportive comment, see LUPAG
recommendations, Policies 6, 121
■ Hamakua not appropriate for heavy industrial
uses. [No Change: see Policies 6, 12]
■ Industrial changes along coast make sense to
remove. [this comment is also included in section
4.2 Protect Coastal Resources] [No Change:
supportive comment]
- Allow small industrial lands by these towns
- Build (centralized?) processing facilities for
communities -->package-->sell
-Need certified kitchens [This comment is also
included in Section 6.2 Strengthening Local
Agriculture] [Revision: See New Proposed
Policy on Community Kitchens]
■ Came to Hawai'i to get away from development
[No Change]
■ Future isn't about building for Mainland people.
[No Change]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 3: Preferred Land Use & Settlement
Patterns
■ Another way of thinking - instead of Ag vs.
Development. [No Change]
■ Needing a 1,000 foot buffer zone for beekeepers
is also very dubious. Where did this number
come from and what is it based on? Do you
actually have any data that supports this
distance? [Revision: see proposed policy about
zoning amendments for agricultural uses. Also
note: this commenter seems to have
misunderstood a discussion at the Ag Focused
Discussion meeting and assumed the CDP sets a
buffer zone for beekeeping. However, the 1,000
ft. minimum distance refers to the current
County zoning code, not a CDP policy]
■ Clearly there are issues between neighbors '
when it comes to honey bee hives. Here's an
example. I'll try to find another example from
Kauai that was particularly ludicrous and share
it with you. We know enough about honey bee
behavior to craft sensible regulations. No doubt
there need to be buffers, design restrictions, and
limits on the numbers of hives permitted where
there are denser populations, but the NL
regulations should be based on scientific
knowledge and not fear. [Revision: see proposed
policy about zoning amendments for agricultural
uses] 1W
■ That people/ developers are made to be
compliant with land regulations and building
codes in a way that forces them to be compliant
(jail if necessary) and not just paltry fines that
the developers of multi-million dollar houses
find easy to pay but then ignore! Specifically we
are referring to the "$24 million dollar" home
built by Scott Watson Developers in Ninole. This
was built by on a cliff, having 500 seat tennis
stadium & helicopter pad. They received fines,
but this did not stop the building. [No Change:
outside scope of CDP to mandate penalties
and/or incarceration for permit violations. ]
■ Agrovillages/hoods. [Revision: see revisions to
Policy 13 & 14)
Clusters closer to towns not out in middle of an
Ag area. [Revision: see revisions to Policy 13 &
14)
eral Aina Comments:
■ Building resilience for climate change -
reforestation, watershed planning, sustainable
agriculture. [No change: see Section 4]
■ Environmental fines should be applied - stiff, no
recourse. [No Change: outside scope of CDP]
■ Climate change considerations included in CDP?
Some actions point to need for research - look to
partner with UH. Erosion near the singing bridge
is a concern - tied to the mowing along roadway.
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and
Cultural Resources
[No Change: see Policies 22 and 23 — also,
additional climate change language may be
added to rationale. Also note- the Singing Bridge
is outside the Planning Area.]
■ 'Aina Mauna Legacy - (Look it up) DHHL
unfunded plan [Revision: will add program and
plan as potential resource/partner for watershed
and other natural resource protection for
Community Actions in Community Action Guide]
4.2 Protect Coastal Resources
■ Industrial changes along coast make sense to
remove [this comment is also included in Section
3.1.5] [No Change: supportive comment.]
■ How does mapping address sea level rise or bluff
failure/erosion issues? [No Change: See Policies
2, 14; and Section 4.2] IL sk
■ Shoreline setback - Coast should be public;
Rivers should be too- access; Language saying
"Have to have an access trail..." [No Change:
supportive comment of existing and proposed
policy — see Section 4.2]
■ No erosion control measures at Ninole
Development - Residential too close to
shoreline, houses will fall into ocean. [No
Change: comments support Policy 2; see also
Policies 21-23]
■ Ninole Coastal subdivision going into ocean. [No
Change: comments support Policy 2; see also
Policies 21-23]
■ Landslides along Hakalau coast (happened when
dry). [No Change: comment supports Policies 2,
and 22 regarding coastal hazards]
■ Shoreline setback should be top of cliff. [No
Change: see Policy 21.
■ Efforts to address coastline setback issue WAS
HELPFUL; top of pali designation. [No Change:
comment supports Policy 21]
■ Discussion with Chip Fletcher (UH Manoa) on sea
level rise & its effect on coastal stability. [No
Change: see Policies 22 and 23]
Enforcement provisions in SMA. [No Change:
see Policy 18. Comment non-specific about
enforcement issues.]
■ When did State Land Use Urban Designation
occur and when did County Industrial Zoning
happen? [No Change: these questions are
unfortunately not tied to a specific area —
impossible to answer for general area]
■ Is a moratorium on coastal development
possible until the studies have been done? [No
Change: County Council has the authority for
moratorium on change of zone decisions.]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and
Cultural Resources
■ [Re: Coastal] How do we ensure unpermitted
developments are not continued to be allowed
(Enforcement of Laws)? [No Change: unclear
that any coastal developments are unpermitted
—this is perhaps a misunderstanding of SMA
provisions? Note: single-family dwellings are
allowed in the SMA; SMA rules are developed
through Federal Coastal Zone Management
Program.]
be interpreted as a way to still subdivide
precious agricultural land with the promise of
farming. The present zoning as Conservation
and/or Ag20 MUST remain in order to preserve
the land- otherwise it will be developed with an
Ag Park as an "excuse". There will be homes that
have an option to farm in a community garden
space- who says the homeowners will
farm/garden and in the meantime there are
HOMES where there could be crops of food that
■ Coral bleaching in reef due to round -up sprayed will feed our island. These will be homes with
on land affects subsistence food sources. [No owners who drive cars that our traffic safety and
Change: see Kokua Actions 12-17 and
Community Action 8] bridges cannot handle. There will be people who
will need emergency room services and our ER is
Irs already more than at its maximum. There are
■ Section on Coastal Management —Special many consequences that I could mention but I
Management Area want to make my simple point- DO NOT change
o Does not cover Mauka and streams. [N the present County zoning.
Change: see Policy 23 regarding amendi
SMA boundaries (see HRS §205A-23).]
■ Issues regarding Monk Seal to Hawaiian Islands®
& Federal Gov't limiting access to critical habitat
areas along Hamakua coast where beaches are
less than 100 feet and issues regarding types of
fish and shellfish that can be harvested which
46h:
limits cultural practices. Add photos of harvest
of fish/birds/plants to poster boards to increase
thought process. [No Change: See various Aft
policies in Section 4; may add photos to final
draft as suggested.] S;
4.3 Protect Agricultural Lands & Open
Space
■ 1 am very concerned about the endorsement of
Agricultural Parks as I suspect that designation
(within the preserved makai coastal agricultural
areas) may be abused. I see the designation may
[No Change. This comment seems to be based
on a misunderstanding. First, the CDP does not
change zoning. Second, State and County
Agricultural Parks do not allow lessees to build
homes and occupy the land in residency. This
comment may have been directed towards the
community suggestion of encouraging agrihoods
on coastal agricultural lands.]
■ Agrihood = neighborhood housing development
based on farming. [No change: this concept is
possible via existing Planned Unit Development
or Cluster Plan Development regulations.
■ Everybody says protect ag but system isn't
working - works for bigger parcels but not for
smaller - In order to have successful ag, you
need ag knowledge & input from farmers - Need
large acreages available (like 500 acres) leased
at reasonable rates. [No Change: Out of scope
of CDP to ensure lease rates. Issue duly noted.]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and
Cultural Resources
■ Ag area mauka outside Waipi'o - Area needs
reliable water to farm - 10 acre parcels leased,
cannot live on - Aren't successful farming - Can't
even store equipment or tools. [No Change:
this comment may be referring to State leases
that do not allow residency on leased ag lands.
Outside of scope of CDP to stipulate private or
State agricultural lease terms. See proposed new
policy relating to increasing County ag capacity
to coordinate with State Dept. of Ag.]
■ How is Ag cluster going to work?
o Who determines where it could go?
o What is the center of a town?
o How does that impact traffic?
■
■
[Revision: on Ag Cluster revision Policy 13 & 14]
Promoting more visitor
lands helps to promote
[This comment is also h
Strengthening Local Ag
comment supports Poli
[No Change: The CDP does not change zoning.
Comment may also misinterpret Ag park rules
(see response above).]
■ Re: Non -conforming Ag Land use: How can we
ensure people don't misuse this and not have
stronger consequences? Small fines for big over-
steps is not acceptable. [No Change: enforcing
agricultural uses or administering punitive
measures for misuse is beyond scope of regional
CDP.]
■ Concern about lack of regulations regarding
vacation rentals on ag land. [No Change: See
olicy 31 on enforcing agricultural uses]
PLEASE do not change ANY of the zoning and be
■
extremely cautious of any encouragement for Ag
Parks. Please preserve Hamakua in AG so that
we have the land and open space for future
generations. Someday we may NEED to grow our
own food- if the planes and ships don't come,
we're on our own. Hamakua's rich soils can
sustain us but NOT if there are homes
everywhere!
Mahalo for your heroic effort to gather the
sentiments of the residents. Mahalo for
Ag is a business -->incentivize: water, real
property tax benefit -->revisit w/new definition
of rural; smaller lots, diversification, group
structures, controlled growing environment.
[No Change: comment is supportive of various
CDP policies. Note: new definition of Rural is
being considered at General Plan level.]
Concerned that ag lots are used for intended
purposes (i.e. not gentleman farms or vacation
rentals.
[No Change: the term 'gentleman farms' has
various meanings, many of which are not in
violation of ag land use rules; currently there are
no Vacation Rental regulations for County of
Hawaii; however, See Policy 31 on enforcing
agricultural uses]
executing the will of the people of Hamakua. Ag land should be used as intended. [No
Change]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and
Cultural Resources
■ Should not encourage farm land to be converted
to residential. [No Change]
■ Using ag land for non-ag purposes doesn't
support sustainable ag; it diminishes it. Things
are built & turned into vacation rentals which is
not ag-use of the land. Sometimes don't find out
about something being built until after it's done.
Need more notice of non-ag projects on ag land
so the community can be involved. [No Change:
See Policy 31 on enforcing agricultural uses]
■ Rules & Regulations toward vacation rentals on
ag land. [No Change: See Policy 31 on enforcing
agricultural uses] immehh,
■ We are 3 acres - more smaller ag parcels (ag 5)
■
■
■ Conflict between GMOs & organic - isolate
GMOs to protect organic farmer interests. [No
Change: the issue of municipalities (County)
regulating or banning GMO crops is currently
being taken up by the Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals and is beyond the scope of a regional
CDP.]
■ Availability of land for small farmers; Ability to
live on land you farm; Connection to the land
you farm is very important; Property
costs=Challenge. [No Change: issue noted]
■ Point of contact for ag leases? [No Change:
unclear if this question relates to County Ag
leases, State leases, and depends on specific
[No Change: Planning Area has smaller ag areas/parcels.]
parcels in various areas, particularly in mauka
homestead areas.]
Verify that the ag policies and preserving
sweeping views are not in conflict. Revision
Partner with NHERC on Resource Preservation
[note: comment was made in relation to
Agriculture Station] [No Change: Comment
noted — NHERC is a potential partner listed
repeatedly in the CDP.]
Need cohesive definitions between Tax &
Planning Departments about what is agriculture
& some way to enforce it. [No Change:
comment supports ag tax reform, see Policy 32]
County also tying up hundreds of acres of ag
land. [No Change: see Policy 115 as one way to
use County/State owned agricultural lands.]
■ Special permit process key/cornerstone to rural
economy (Flexibility should be built into the
process) [No Change: comment supports
Policies 6, 26, and 30.]
■ What should happen if the farm plan that
enabled a second farm dwelling to be built fails,
or is simply not being honored? The relaxing of
building permit requirements for ag accessory
buildings had good intentions but many
unanticipated, potentially negative
consequences. The regulations need to be fine-
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and
Cultural Resources
tuned! [No Change: for first comment see
Policy 31. For 2nd comment— it appears that
some individuals may be building ag accessory
buildings that are out of compliance with the
new rules, zoning setback requirements, etc.
Specific instances of noncompliance should be
reported to the Planning Department for
assessment and enforcement protocols. Note:
zoning rules, such as building setbacks, are still
applicable for ag accessory buildings and
violations can be reported to Planning Dept.]
■ Priority on understanding & responding to the
influx of invasive species especially as it relates
■
■
to food production.
-Attention to border/points of entry.
[No Change: comment supports Policy 45, 100,
Kokua Action 18, Community Actions, 9 and 44]
Need to live in balance with nature [this
comment was made at an Agriculture Station]
[No Change]
Water conservation - recommendations fdr,
farmers on irrigation
-Incentives for farmers to make efficient use of
water (maybe state grants to develop model
programs) [this comment is also included in
Section 5.7 Water] [Revision: see also Policy
116.]
■ Organic -only Zones. [No Change: this issue is
beyond the scope of a regional CDP — not legally
enforceable at regional level.]
■ Honey Bee — distance from boundary rule.
[Revision: See proposed new policy on revising
the zoning code]
■ Swine production —One Thousand Foot
Boundary from property that is non-ag or
roadway possibly. [Revision: See proposed new
policy on revising the zoning code]
■ Permitted Uses ion ag lands]:
Ensure CDP permitted uses cover some uses
that are not commonly identified uses (like
tall tree borders around crops, which may
not be popular non-ag). 4.5.6 Community
Action says Comm. Ed. Residents on
windbreak alternatives
Detrimental to Ag — restricts an Ag practice
when it is not supportive of a windbreak,
while windbreaks are an Ag tool.
o Read Zoning Chapter 25.5-72 Permitted Uses
of Ag Land (in Appendix of CDP)
o Other conflicts where it states:
• Convert crop land to native forests
(refers to Federal partnership in
Appendix)
*Cites Native forests as assets
o Need to consistently support Ag and be
careful not to restrict Ag on Ag Lands with
some of these references
o [Revision: the wording /rationale of the
Community Action relating to windbreaks
can be refined to address residential (not Ag)
neighborhoods. NOTE: there is no County
policy in the CDP prohibiting windbreaks]
■ Right to Farm Ordinance — notifies residents of
Ag production ongoing in area
■ State has; County has some. [No Change:
Right to Farm Law covers County]
■ Some issues can be discussed between property
owners (i.e. Windbreak — County does not need
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and
Cultural Resources
to dictate it) [Revision: See revision relating to
this Community Action. Note: the CDP only
recommends windbreak education as a
Community Action, not a County Action — it is
not dictated or regulated in any way]
■ People who buy into Ag should not plan to
change/develop. [No Change]
■ Steering Committee challenged with conflict of
Ag and Development (or desire for view). [No
Change.]
■ Try to develop Community Actions, not policy
[Re: windbreak/viewshed issues] [Revision:
Note: the CDP recommends windbreak
education as a Community Action, not a County
Action — it is not mandated.]
[No Change: the findings of the recent 2015 Ag
Report are still being evaluated. This ag trend
may be addressed at the General Plan
Comprehensive Update]
■ Fallow lands — nothing being done with it. [No
Change: May be addressed under Policy 115]
Idoomw
■ County inherited some; County not land
managers; County leases it out
o County cannot lease parcels if they had oil
spills, etc.
[No Change: see Policy 115]
■ If it's zoned AG20 now, would zone change?
Need to clarify in CDP.
[No Change: the CDP does not rezone any land.]
■ Partnership suggestion: Board of Realtors -
Could they participate with discussions and
education of new/potential [ag] propertyX
owners? [Revision: Can add Board of Realtors
potential partners in Community Action]
■ How do you define sustainable Ag?
o State of Hawaii Definition — ■
o Language Very General
o Does not mean Organic
[Minor Edit: this question was asked during a
Focused Discussion and the bulleted answers
were provided. Will add State definition to ■
Glossary]
■ Was an economic analysis of farms done after
2015 Ag Report came out showing farm lot sizes
are 10 acres or less now, as a new trend.
o Because it is a common size, does it mean it
is an optimal size?
Im
County Ag Advisory Committee submitted to
Mayor's office on non -conforming housing. [No
Change: see Policy 31]
Need to think into future on what direction CDP
takes Ag in (i.e. back in 1900's or forward
w/outside of box idea) [No Change]
KSBE and State has a lot fag lands] [No Change]
Kokua Action for State to use Fallow lands
[Revision: See proposed new County Action and
Community Action for increasing coordinated
efforts between farmers, County Agriculture
Specialists and State Dept. of Agriculture—for
instance - to connect farmers with available
farm lands (County, State, and private lease),
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and
Cultural Resources
promote agricultural education, and implement
Policy 43, and Community Action 5.]
■ Everybody against growing the trees but it was
the largest investment since sugar & it provided
jobs. [No Change: forestry included as ag]
■ DHHL land is lease land
o Are those lease processes clear? [Revision:
see proposed new County Action and
Community Action as noted above]
■ USDA-NRCS Board – Contact Mayor Kenoi
■ Hamakua's depleted mauka forests need to be
restored to restore watershed vitality. [No
Change: see Section 4.6_]
o Some capacity issue with some of those
organizations. [No Change: issue noted.] CDP can speak to reforestation of mauka areas:
incentive to take cattle down to lower areas &
■ Community understand there are many types of reforest mauka areas.
agriculture. [No Change] [No Change: see Policy 39. For mauka areas
zoned as agriculture, the CDP cannot stipulate
4.4 Protect Mauka Areas & Fores the land cannot be used for grazing. This is a
highly controversial issue (reforestation vs.
■ CDP seems to assume all forestry as just mauka. mauka cattle grazing). Watershed education is
Would like to see recognition that forestry can key to better land management – see Section
and is practiced lowland. Be realistic about 4.6]
various land uses that take care of the 'aina.
(Depends on jurisdiction. Also, people's aspect —
want recognition.) [No Change: issue noted;
likely the CDP final draft will be reorganized in ■
format and wording may be revised around
forest issue – see revision to Section 4.4 header
above] X i% 1%
■ Any type of development in mauka areas should ■
be restricted. [Relates to CDP mention of
cultural/religious practices.] [No Change: see
Policy 39]
■ Lease 4 years; required to remove all trees & kill
new ones; first right of refusal to be biofuel;
trying to ship Eucalyptus out as quick as possible.
[No Change]
Forest corridors to restore watershed: 100ft
each side of gulches restores native species,
water quality. [No Change: see Policies 39, 42,
43, K6kua Actions 12, 14, 15.]
Forestry has lots of benefits for land
o Less run-off
o Native Habitat
o Producing Carbon
o But add a cow and get equal (or greater) tax
benefit
o Consider carbon sequestration as a tool
[No Change: See Appendix V4A, Focus Area:
Wao.]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and
Cultural Resources
■ "Support financial aid program that support ag" -
extend to forestry efforts. [No Change: forestry
is already included in agriculture.]
■ Does support for native species mean more
funding? Look to support the State Commission
(Kokua Action) [No Change]
■ What is KS plans post -eucalyptus? [No Change]
■ Ask DHHL to manage or actively use fallow land.
[Revision: See associated policy addition
regarding State and County coordination. Refer
to the DHHL'Aina Mauna Legacy Program here:
recognition that some practices (i.e. forestry) are
also taking care of'aina; also can reduce runoff.
[No Change: CDP references mauka, waterfall,
natural area, and gulch views in the viewshed
section. See also Policy 39, Kokua Actions 8, 10,
and 11.]
■ Enforcement - How & who will keep
accountability? Example: Viewsheds - Natural
pockets but land owners have their own rights
(i.e. privacy). [ No Change: See Community
Actions 6 and 7)
ML
■ Repeated use of terms (i.e. "sweeping views" &
other terminology that use the term "view" -
http://dhhl.hawaii.gov/po/beneficiary- don't get caught up with that word. [No
consultation/beneficiary-consultation- Change: this language was developed from
archives/aina-mauna-legacy-program/ ]
extensive community feedback, the adopted
CDP Vision and Values Statement, and the
adopted Community Objectives.]
ML
■ Eucalyptus trees need to be taken care of —what
is the plan? Just going to grow back? - KS land -
Fire danger. [No Change: Kamehameha has
their ag plan here:
http://www. ksbe.edu/land/our-ag-plan/.]
■ Bishop Estate - what's the plan for the
Eucalyptus? Long-term plan? Before & After;
Private land but County can find out. [No
Change: see above]
4.5 Preserve Scenic Areas and
Viewsheds
■ "View" or "Viewsheds" seems to be defined as
unimpeded ocean views. Would like to see
Road to Laupahoehoe Point viewplane is being
lost (trees blocking) - State probably has capacity
to fix/clear: need to coordinate. - A lot of other
views that could be opened on the Mamalahoa
Hwy. [No Change: comment supports Kokua
Action 9]
■
"No ... anything that blocks the view of mountains
and ocean" is unrealistic - related to forests:
before there were natural forests. [No Change:
this comment seems to be based on a
misunderstanding of policy]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and
Cultural Resources
■ Laupahoehoe scenic lookout - Plantings
(landscaping) are blocking view. Public Lookout
but Private Land - what can County do?
Viewplane next to scenic lookout be preserved
by keeping all plantings no higher than rooflines
- Kona ruling on private covenant was ruled in
favor of limiting plantings to roofline. [No
Change: comment supports K6kua Action 9]
■ Take coastal views into consideration when
permitting new construction. (i.e. Laupahoehoe
Point Lookout and control overgrowth that may
obstruct views) . . [No Change: comment
supports K6kua Action 9]
■
Viewsheds makai/mauka important in cultivating
holistic stewardship systems
-understanding interconnectedness of
mauka/makai regions. [No Change: commen
supports intent of Section 4]
i.e. Unimpeded view? When ag crop is tall trees
- (ulu; windbreaks)? [Revision: See proposed
revision.] %L 1% N
■ Would love to see viewplane video along coast
with houses superimposed along views - could
be done with drones/ultralights, etc. [No
Change: yes — this does sound like a good way to
map viewplanes — however it is beyond the
scope of the CDP]
Preserve scenic views & maintain them. [No
Change: Supportive comment]
■ In another section, our association is concerned
about the language in another section, which
would appear to contradict the first.
"Community Action 6: Educate residents on
scenic viewshed importance and alternatives to
tall, vegetative wind -breaks that impact
viewsheds."
We appreciate the desires to keep the Hamakua
coast attractive for residents and visitors alike.
However, we encourage you to consider that
trees and other tall stature vegetation are
indeed part of the viewshed in Hamakua, and far
from detracting from it, add to the scenic
qualities of this windward, moist and verdant
coast.
Trees, windbreaks and forests impart well
known environmental benefits, such as soil
stabilization, protection from high winds, and
carbon sequestration. In Hawaii, trees have been
planted for specific purposes, as fruit trees, to
provide timber products, and to protect from
drying and salt laden winds, among others.
These are important purposes from those who
live here, otherwise the trees would not have
been planted to begin with. With this in mind,
we ask that you consider revising the statement
to read:
"Community Action 6: Educate residents on
scenic viewshed importance, reducing impacts
to it as much as possible." [Revision: See
proposed revision of Community Action]
CDP section 4.5.6 Community Action has
extremely dubious language about "windbreak
alternatives." I doubt any of you have tried to
grow tree crops along the Hamakua Coast but I
can guarantee that it will not be accomplished
without the extensive use of windbreak trees. I
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and
Cultural Resources
would like to see all language suggesting the use
of "windbreak alternatives" as a viable option be
struck from this document. [Revision: See
proposed revision of Community Action]
4.6 Protect and Enhance Ecosystems
and Watersheds
■ Various rivers not cared for. [No Change: see
Policies 42, 43, 44, 39, 86, and K6kua Actions 12 -
19, and Community Actions 8-10.]
■ Watersheds are the continuity between Mauka--
>Coastal - Critters within need protection. [No
Change: see Policies 42, 43, 44, 39, 86, and
K6kua Actions 12-19, and Community Actions
10.] W40
42, 43, 44, 39, 86, and K6kua Actions 12-19, and
Community Actions 8-10.]
■ Watershed/re-forestry: mauka to makai
corridors (unbroken) to maintain & restore
waterways/clouds. [No Change: see Policies 42,
43, 44, 39, 86, and K6kua Actions 12-19, and
Community Actions 8-10.]
Aff
ddvoomok
■ Big Island Invasive Species Partnership—to be
mentioned in plan. [No Change: see Policy 45
and Community Action 9]
■ Though County doesn't have direct jurisdiction,
County Roads & Highway Division and
Environmental Management Divisions can help
stop spread of invasive species.
■ Invasives - should have a "white list" - what Should it be a County responsibility or should it
should be brought in, up to individuals to showbe a community/volunteer responsibility (i.e.
why something should be brought in. Black list trees in right of way handled by County or
is limited. [No Change: difficult to mandate volunteers) [No Change: see Policy 45 and
absolutely but see Policy 45 and Community Community Action 9]
Action 9] 1% x
■ Who do we contact if there is a pollutant in
■ More assistance with invasive species, too few stream that impacts available animals/plants
staff. [No Change: see Policy 45 and Community (i.e. opae, hiiwa, etc.) in stream?
Action 9]o Who do we contact?
o K6kua Action item = State
o Stream diversion not County jurisdiction; it's
■ Invasive species help. [No ChanSe: see Policy 45 State
and Community Action 9]
■ Streams & springs dry in Hamakua - Watershed
restoration needed. [No Change: see Policies
[No Change: this question was addressed at a
Focus Discussion —State DLNR jurisdiction.]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and
Cultural Resources
■ Pesticides/Herbicides are a concern because of
the residue in soil and runoff in streams to
oceans that affect marine life and beneficial
insects as well. [No Change: see Policies 42, 43,
44, 39, 86, and K6kua Actions 12-19, and
Community Actions 8-10.]
■ Does support for native species mean more
funding? Look to support the State Commission
(K6kua Action) [No Change: Additional funding
would likely be needed]
What category does Rat Lungworm fall under?
[No Change: See Community Action #9 and
Community Action #44] sm
4.7 Protect and Enhance Cultural Asse"
■ No recognition of historic areas in the land use
■ Uncover historic site on the Hilo side of Maulua
gulch: train infrastructure. [Revision: can add
train infrastructure remnants to language of
Policy 51.]
■ Why do places have the names they do? History
& Stones, Connection. [No Change: this could
relate to Heritage Corridor signage - see Policies
46, 47, K6kua Action 11, and Community Actions
11, 12.]
Hamakua has little Heiaus, what's next?
Uncover & preserve sugar plantation history;
increase sense of place, community, character.
[No change: see Policies 46, 47, K6kua Action 11,
and Community Actions 11, 12.]
policies. [No Change: See sections 3.1.3 Existing Add moku/ahupua'a names/boundaries
Policy and 4.7.2 Existing Policy for extensive -capture mo'olelo of place. [Revision: propose
State and County regulations on protecting revision to Community Action 11]
historic sites and structures, CDP Policies 46, 47,
K6kua Actions 20-21, and Community Actions
■ Any type of development in mauka areas should
be restricted. [Comment relates to CDP mention
of cultural/religious practices — this comment is
also included in Section 4.4 Mauka Forests] [No
Change: see Policy 39]
■ Approval and development of Hakalau - PONC
for a sugar plantation heritage park. [No
Change: PONC consideration and development
of site is ongoing]
■ Happy with what is here in this section of the
CDP (heritage & history). I hope it happens. [No
Change: Supportive comment]
■ Signs at district/moku boundaries [This comment
is also included in Section 6.5 Develop a Place -
eased Visitor Industry] [Revision: will add
"moku/ahupua'a" signage to Policy 48 -
Supports Community Action 11, 12]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and
Cultural Resources
Hawaiian Cultural Center & Community
Center/Space
-Talking with Heritage Center +
-Goal: Central place for visitors
-Intro
-Maps (points of interest) - send out;
connect
-Corridor to Coast/Waipi'o Valley
-Community-Owned & Operated: Independent
model & co-op away from corporate; each group
take care of itself
-Started with Kickstarter: $20K for 1yr
operating
-Place-based
-All Activities in-house --> $$ stays in-house
-Reducing some regulations & costs [This
comment is also included in Section 6.5 Develop
a Place -Based Visitor Industry] [No change: 161
Supports various policies in Section 4.7 and 6.5]
Recognizing historical significance of old sugar
mill sites that may or may not be visible. Trails
may provide access to viewing historical
remnants [This comment is also included in
Section 4.8 Establish and Manage Public Acces
and Trails]. [No Change: see Policy 48 re: Public
Access and Trail program that would assess
inventory and develop priority of sites — see also
Policies 9, 50, K6kua Action 24, and Community
Action 15.] X2
Policy/guidelines for
cultural/spiritual/sustenance practice?
-Pros & cons for both
-People can take advantage
[No Change: existing regulations protect Native
Hawaiian cultural practices come from State
Constitution Article 12 Section 7.]
4.8 Establish and Manage Public Access
and Trails
■ Public access is #1 issue of the district (Wailuku
to Waipi'o). Must strongly state this in the plan.
[No Change: See Policy 48 — the foundation
policy for Section 4.8; see also Policies 16, 49-53,
70, 73, K6kua Actions 22-24, and Community
Action 15.]
■ The following comments focus on Section 4.8
"Establish and Manage Public Access and Trails."
I understand that the current draft strives to be
concise while relying on the background
rationale and details to be supported in the
Appendix. I agree with that approach as long as
the level of detail in the abbreviated version of
the plan is sufficient to support the
recommendations, and the reader knows where
to find further explanations.
* Generally, the January 2016 draft does a good
job of highlighting the main policies and
actions for Public Access. However, there is
noticeably more detail in support of Policy 48,
than in Policies 49-53. This is inconsistent,
and the other policies would benefit from brief
supportive statements. [No Change: this
critique is noted however, Policy 48 is a
program policy with 10 elements listed, unlike
policies 49-53, which are much simpler policies
not detailing a comprehensive program. These
policies seem to have adequate rationale listed
for each — please refer to pages 100-102 of the
Rationale document. See below for other
revisions to this section.]
* Policy 48 Element 10 should read, "....required
of landowners," not "....required by
landowners." [Minor Edits: revise as
suggested]
* Similar to Policy 52, Policy 50 would benefit
from references to the HRS sections that
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and
Cultural Resources
support this policy, i.e., HRS Sections 115-5
and 46-6.5. [Minor Edits: to add citations]
* The explanation for Policy 51 would be clearer
if the phrase, "best adapted to trail use," were
restated as "best adapted to non -motorized
trail use." [No Change: this recommended
revision stipulates a restriction to non -
motorized use and that was not the intent of
the policy. Roads -in -limbo and government
roads are still public roads with access rights to
the public. Road restrictions relating to
motorized uses would need to be established
by another mechanism and are best
determined on a case-by-case basis.]
* Policy 52 is an important policy but needs to
be supported by more information. How will
public access potentials be assessed,
documented, and protected and by whom?
How and who will ensure that this policy
becomes more than just good intentions.
[Minor Edit: Policy 52 is based on existing HRS
Section 171-26 relating to State -Owned lands.
This policy directs the Planning Department to
evaluate all public -owned land within the
Hamakua Planning Area for public access
potential prior to disposition, lease, or
transfer. Further HRS citation will be addedto
the CDP.] '1k IML
* It is unclear why Laupahoehoe Boat Ramp is the
only specific location singled out in the policies
when there are other locations within Hamakua,
and North and South Hilo Districts, which have
been identified as having exceptional public
access value. Brief justification needs to be
added to Policy 53. Won't reconstruction of the
Laupahoehoe Boat Ramp require K6kua Action
from the State Legislature, among others? [No
Change: Please refer to the rationale for Policy
53 on page 103 of the Rationale document.
Note: regarding the question of who is
responsible for reconstructing the Laupahoehoe
Boat Ramp —while it originally was constructed
by the Army Corps of Engineers, the boat ramp is
a County CIP item and is listed as a County action
in General Plan Policy 13.3.5.3.2(a).]
■ Laupahoehoe Boat Ramp repair should not be a
high-priority item. [No Change: this opinion does
not seem to be shared by the majority of the
North Hilo community.]
No beach access parking on Mill Road unless
residents wish to open driveways for parking,
hampers access for emergency vehicles. [No
Change: see Community Action 27]
Mediation with landowners of public access on
how to meet their needs and the needs of those
trying to access the ocean. [No change:
supports Community Action 27]
Raw
Rezoning should allow/require public access.
[No Change: supports existing policy; see also
Policy 50, and K6kua Action 24.]
■ Recognizing historical significance of old sugar
mill sites that may or may not be visible. Trails
may provide access to viewing historical
remnants. [This comment is also included in 4.7
Protect and Enhance Cultural Assets] [No
Change: see Policy 48 re: Public Access and Trail
program that would assess inventory and
develop priority of sites — see also Policies 9, 50,
K6kua Action 24, and Community Action 15.]
■ Public access program needs to educate the
public on the location of the access. Locations
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and
Cultural Resources
should be properly signed/marked. [Revision:
see Policy 48]
■ Plan or agreement with landowners for County
to be liable for public access on private property.
[No Change: see Policy 48 — note, it is more
appropriate that the users themselves be liable
for their public access use as opposed to the
landowner or County.]
■ Informing Landowners that they have public
access on their property.. [No Change: see
Policy 48 — also note: generally public access
information is reflected on deed documents
when purchasing property]
with time. [No Change: Specific Accesses as
named can be evaluated and added through
implementing Policy 48]
■ Letting non -profits know about public access
locations to assist with cleanup. [Minor Edit: see
Community Action 15]
AOL
AMW
■ Important - Residents need access and use of
Laupahoehoe boat ramp. [No Change: supports
Policy 53]
Kids don't have much to do - need access to
trails — alternatives. [No change: See new
proposed policies and Section 4.8]
■ Papa'ikou Mill: Public right of way 24/7. [No
Change: Acquiring public access to Mill Beach is
a legal matter between County and property Trail behind Minit Stop reopened for hiking or
owners; See also Community Action 27.] biking to Laupahoehoe Point. [No Change:
Specific Accesses as named can be evaluated
14111h� no and added through implementing Policy 48]
■ Use of old rail lines as right of ways for hiking
biking. [Revision: See also Policy 51.]
■ Old Mamalahoa Hwy [comment came from
■ Better maintenance/signage of public acce Public Access SpeakOutStation]. [No Change:
areas. [Revision: See Policy 48.] Specific Accesses as named can be evaluated
and added through implementing Policy 48; see
also Policy 73]
■ Suggestion: "Friends of Public Access" needs to
be created to address illegal dumping,
maintenance of trails, etc., responsible waste
diversion and management. [Minor Edit: see
Community Action 15]
■ Access issues are always a concern. Park
development at Haina Landing - historic
Pa'auhau Mill Site: is clean up necessary? Comes
■ More access mauka, makai through roadlands
with permit. [No Change: supports Policies 48-
52]
■ Too many ball fields, not enough trails [this
comment also included in 5.13 Expand Parks &
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and
Cultural Resources
Recreation Facilities] [No Change: supports
Section 4.8, Policy 103, Community Action 38,
and Kokua Action 23]
■ Community lacking walking/biking trails.
Increase width of bike lanes on Hwy. Trails
would increase overall health of people within
the community. Add parks with walking trails.
Would increase safety for pedestrians and
bicyclists. [this comment also included in 5.3
Improve the Roadway section] [No Change:
supports Section 4.8, Policy 103, Community
Action 38, and Kokua Action 23]
■ Allow expansion of Ala Kahakai Trail in Hamakua.
■ In permit approvals, require lateral public access
along top of cliffs to maximize the public transit
corridor. [No Change: comment supports
existing shoreline setback/SMA policies; see also
CDP Policy 50]
■ Rural transportation network for non -vehicle
transportation. Bike & hiking trails - we would
exercise if there were some place to go! [this
comment is also included in section 5.13
Recreation] ] [No Change: supports Section 4.8,
Policy 103, Community Action 38, and Kokua
Action 23]
Protect and re-establish historic trails in Educate public on PONC. [No Change: PONC
Hamakua. [Revision: see proposed Kokua Action representatives can provide educational
to explore expansion of Ala Kahakai Trail] presentations to CDP Action Committees upon
request]
■ Connect Ala Kahakai Trail with East Hawaii.
[Revision: see proposed Kokua Action to explore County Public Access & Trail Program would be
expand Ala Kahakai Trail] great island -wide.
a: 4L -Could be resource for tourists so they know
1W 1W what they can access
■ Bring international tourism through pedestrian, -So many trails/roads but no records.
hiking and bicycle trails. This comment is also [No Change: supports Policy 48]
included in Section 6.5 Develop a Place -Based
Visitor Industry] [No Change: supports Section
4.8, Policy 103, Community Action 38, and Kokua
Action 23]
■ County acquire (possibly thru PONC) - trail
leading to Kukuihaele Breakwater and trail/road
to Kukuihaele Lighthouse. [No Change: Specific
Accesses as named can be evaluated and added
through implementing Policy 48]
■ 2 Separate O'okala trails up mauka (umi koa).
[No Change: Specific Accesses as named can be
evaluated and added through implementing
Policy 48]
■ Hazards block access on trails
-Is there any "groundtruthing" to see what is
actually there? [No Change: access evaluation
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and
Cultural Resources
and management (including maintenance)
would be accomplished under Policy 48]
■ Hard to find where the trails are
-Not a lot online
-Visitor info
[Revision: see new revised Kokua Actions for
trails, also addressed by Policy 48]
■ Good to have facilities - water, restrooms
[regarding public access areas]. [No Change:
Specific access facilities can be evaluated
through implementing Policy 48]
Learning how to walk.
again [relating to trail
revised policy for walk
addressed by Policy 4f
Public access roads ne
-Know carrying capaci-
-Some were walking ti
cars
-Need to be maintains
during emergencies) -
-In Waipi'o, the streams are like roads.
[No Change: Accesses can be evaluated and
addressed by Policy 48] MF
Brochures & Videos informing visitors of special
places that are hard/dangerous to access.
-Be general about protecting & perpetuating
these places
*Know how to act if visiting. [Revision: see
new revised Kokua Actions for trails, also
addressed by Policy 48]
— 1411111111F
41"W"hat does access mean for maintenance?
-Scheduled hours?
-Dates closed that public is informed about?
[Revision: see new revised Kokua Actions for
trails, also addressed by Policy 48]
■ Share responsibility maintaining remote areas
-Pack in/out *Accountability: know
consequences
-Stay on trails *Accountability: know
consequences. [No Change: specific terms of
accesses would be addressed by Policy 48]
What is public vs. private when it comes to
access?
-historic trails
-laws
-highways act
[Revision: see new revised Kokua Actions for
trails, also addressed by Policy 48]
Use of trails
-difference between access to home or
resources & tourism (i.e. horseback rides)
-balance in sharing access (i.e. beach/shoreline
in Waipi`o) [this comment is also included in
section 4.9] [No Change: specific terms of
accesses would be addressed by Policy 48]
Overall, things need to be defined
-How do we make certain places accessible in
clear & defined way? [Revision: see new
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and
Cultural Resources
■
■
revised Kokua Actions for trails, also addressed
by Policy 48]
How to measure setback & corridors from cliffs?
-Currently not very clear. [this comment was
made regarding public access in relation to
current issues of access in Planning Area — not
specific to proposed CDP shoreline setback
policy] [Revision: Shoreline setback /top of cliff
language at Policy 19 and 21 proposed revision]
People whose yards extend towards cliff build
fences
-Should be reprimanded for blocking access. [No
Change: suspected violations of shoreline
setbacks and/or public accesses should be
reported to Planning Department for inspection
assessment, and enforcement protocols]
Should increase information boards at trailheads
-If certain trails get a lot of traffic, should be a
ranger on hand to inform 1%;
-When trails get heavy traffic, people start going
off -trail & onto private property
-Info Boards:
*Map
*Info pack of what is in area, no-go zones, what
is on the trail so they know what they saw.
[Revision: See Policy 48.
■ Walking Trail along Hamakua Ditch? [Revision:
proposed Community Action regarding ditch trail
access]
■ Healthy initiative as part of trail development
o "Wellness" [Revision: See Policy 103 and
new policy relating to walking paths at
parks.]
■ Use railroad right-of-ways as walking/biking
trails. [Revision: old train infrastructure
language added to Policy 51, see also Policy 48]
■ Why is Bishop Estate/Kamehameha Schools the
only private landowner listed for Kokua Action
22 or 23? It is unclear which Kokua Action is
being referred to here. [No Change: these
comments seem to misunderstand Kokua
Actions 22 & 23. Kokua Action 22 is directed at
the State Legislature to amend an HRS; Kokua
Action 23 is directed at Bishop Estate,
Kamehameha Schools, and the State of Hawai'i
to encourage increasing access to former sugar
cane roads for non -motorized trail access,
"where feasible and appropriate."
%mmal 1W
In general, the Kokua Actions need clarification.
Are the parties listed in bold the only partners
needed? Kokua Action 24, which is supported by
HRS §171-26, should be distinguished from
Policy 52 (HRS §46-1.5). [Minor Edit: Clarify
language of Kokua Action 24 to match source
HRS § 171-26.]
■ Encourage universities, high schools, young tech
students, etc. to be involved in GIS Land Surveys
as a focused study and data compiling with
multiple resources such as drones and satellite
mapping. [regarding public access]. [No Change:
The Planning Dept. will continue to forge
partnerships with local educational institutions]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and
Cultural Resources
■ "Friends of Public Access" keep area safe &
clean. Prevent illegal dumping. [Minor Edit: see
new proposed Community Action regarding
illegal dumping and edit to Community Action 15
on public access -focused community groups]
■ Community-based action from the 'Ahualoa
Community Association via board member, Pete
Sparks
-Opened trails -->Complicated due to private
property on trails that existed. [Minor Edit: see
proposed revision to Community Action 15
regarding community public access groups.]
■ County needs way to meet community halfway
on needs of public access, acquiring &
maintaining ongoing management of area.
[Minor Edit: see proposed revision to
Community Action 15 regarding community
■ Info on any sale of valley lands should be timely,
clear and accurate. [No Change: sale is outside
scope of CDP; however see Policy 54]
■ What are the implications of the changes that
could come with the sale of Bishop Museum's
lands? [No Change: sale is outside scope of
CDP; however see Policy 54]
■ State Legislature introduced resolution
legislation naming the Alliance as the group to
work with Bishop Museum HCR 162. [Minor
Edits: Alliance will be identified in CDP]
■ Partnership - i.e. Gov't & NGO (like Nature
Conservancy) to determine possible future. [No
k�nnge: ownership of Waipi'o is outside scope
DP;see Policy 54_]
public access groups.]
■ -MAMA (Mauka Makai Access Hamakua Ag Plan)
N -I
still intact & able to mobilize if have reason to &
wants to be heard. [No Change: will add
reference to Community Action Guide_]
How can Waipi'o manage the threat to the valley
of things like dengue, etc.? (Tourists bringing
threats into valley). [No Change: Jurisdiction for
communicable disease is through Vector
Control, State Dept. of Health]
Xit .. Change "Current Tools" -> Non -conforming uses
4.9 Preserving SacredP C aipl o are allowed but regulated. [No Change:
Valley and Mauna Kea Comment is unclear on intent]
■ Pohaha i Ka Lani - Waipi'o Valley. [No Change:
will add reference in Community Action Guide]
■ In other places, people got together, purchased
the lands & put it in a trust to assure perpetuity.
Maybe that can happen here - either privately, in
partnerships, or by the State. [No Change: See
Community Action 2 on land trust and Kokua
Action 7 on land banking]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and
Cultural Resources
■ Maybe we can set up a lending bank/loan fund
to be accessed by the people who work the land
& want to buy from Bishop Museum (the land
they already steward). [No Change: See
Community Action 2 on land trust and Kokua
Action 7 on land banking]
■ Leave decision up to the people of the valley.
[No Change: supports Community Actions 16-20]
■ State to support such efforts above, encouraging
partnerships with residents.
-Figure way for $$ earned to stay in the valley.
[No Change: See Policies 55, 59 and Section 6]
■ Sewage management is an issue.
-Can look at organic means to address it.
[Revision: see new proposed County Action
regarding new wastewater policy for Planning
Area]
■ Hamakua District Development Council
considered a scenic route along the rim of the
valley part of Mud Lane Road. [No Change:
supports Policy 57]
■ When plantations closed and a resort
development was proposed for Kukuihaele,
there was a setback discussed so that buildings
would not be seen. [No Change: supports Policy
54 and Community Action 18 regarding rim
setback issues.]
If [Bishop] museum is supported by County and
State, they might not have to sell. [No Change:
sale is outside scope of CDP; however see Policy
54]
■ [Bishop] Museum holds the "footprints." [No
Change: See Policy 54]
How can we empower KS to protect the
resources? [No Change: Comment is unclear
about how empowerment is hindering
Kamehameha Schools' ability to protect
resources]
■ Recognize innovative ways to deal with invasive Waipi'o Heritage Center & Lookout
pests (i.e. apple snails=escargot). [No Change:
See Community Actions 9 & 44]
Vk J
lqoww
■ Collaborative efforts for an action plan. [No
Change: refer to the Community Action Guide]
■ Does Policy 60 restrict structures in Public Open
Space? [No Change: Policy 60 directs
developing the Waipi'o Valley Heritage Center—
comment is likely referring to PONC rules
restricting structures]
Waipi'o Cultural Center
-People get experience without having to tread
upon it. [No Change: supports Policy 60]
Waipi'o "Rim Lookout" - good idea (Mud Lane
access point). [No Change: supports Policy 57]
■ What can be done if using PONC funds? [No
Change: research of PONC funding/rules is
ongoing]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and
Cultural Resources
■ Waipi`o Valley Heritage Center is a good idea
o Maybe as orientation to visitors (half an
hour or so)
o PONC funds might restrict the use of
property
o Buildings might need to be located
elsewhere.
■
[No Change: supports Policy 60]
How will the infrastructure be addressed to
accommodate Heritage Center? [No Change:
supports Policy 60]
[Re: Heritage Center] We have been discussing
the infrastructure needs for many years. [No
Change: supports Policy 60, new proposed
County Action on infrastructure policy]
Outside information might conflict with the
information being shared through the ranger
program. [No Change: see Policy 60, and also
revised Kokua Action on trail information to
DLNR]
■ There is congestion at the top for parking and
the facilities at the look -out. [No Change: see
Policy 60]
■ Tourists don't necessarily want to go down; we
may be able to entertain them and provide
information. [No Change: supports Policy 60]
■ Different groups have provided funding for the
brochures that are handed out by rangers. [No
Change: see Policy 60]
■ Discussion about toll booth to recover costs.
[No Change: fees could be part of implementing
Policy 54—would require Council action.]
■ Consider a look -out being moved farther up
where the buildings cannot be viewed from the
Valley. [No Change: supports Policy 54 and
Community Action 18 regarding rim setback
issues.]
■ Large trees in front of bathroom facility blocking
view. [No Change: supports Policy 41]
Trees also stabilize the pali. [Comment related to
Waipi'o Valley scenic lookout] [No Change]
Alliance has been discussing using the viewing
site for the Heritage Center as well — might not
be limited like the Rice Property. [No Change:
supports Policy 60]
Scenic route might improve business to
Honoka`a. [No Change: Supports Policy 57]
■ Heritage Center to educate visitors and house
museum contents. [No Change: supports Policy
60]
■ Heritage Center should be at the old look -out
site. [No Change: supports Policy 60]
■ Hamakua sugar created the old look -out site.
[No Change: supports Policy 60]
■ Tapping into cultural heritage --> Create package
deal--> Passing Thru-->Guided tours by local
Aunties & Uncles
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and
Cultural Resources
■
-Mauna Kea, Waipi'o, Waterfalls, etc.
-Use of technology [No Change: Supports Policy
60]
Culture Center as a Visitor Center
- Help small businesses
-Get out info, maps: we can develop points of
interest
-Work with Heritage Center. [No Change:
Supports Policy 60]
Hawaiian Cultural Center & Community
Center/Space
-Talking with Heritage Center +
-Goal: Central place for visitors
-Intro
-Maps (points of interest) - send
connect
-Corridor to Coast/Waipi'o Valley WEL
-Community-Owned & Operated: Independent
model & co-op away from corporate; each group
take care of itself
■ Scenic route may benefit workers commuting to
hotels. [No Change: Supports Policy 57]
■ How do we manage the "overuse" of the valley?
Possibly having to limit access? [No Change]
■ Waipi'o Valley Access: Even understanding
residents' desire to limit access, it would be good
to be able to continue public access (for
excursions, hiking, visiting, enjoying nature, etc.).
[No Change: supports CDP approach]
■ Use of trails
-difference between access to home or
resources & tourism (i.e. horseback rides)
-Started with Kickstarter: $20K for ■
operating
-Place-based
-All Activities in-house --> $$ stays in-house
-Reducing some regulations & costs [This
comment is also included in Section 4.7 Protect
and Enhance Cultural Assets]
[No Change: Supports Policy 60]
Waipi'o Valley Public Access & Tourism
■ Gate at the top to assure that people that do go
down have had an orientation of "do's and
don'ts". [No Change: relates to Policy 60 in
support for Ranger/Education program]
-balance in sharing access (i.e. beach/shoreline
in Waipi'o) [this comment is also included in
section 4.8] [No Change: See Policy 48 ]
hmmmbl 1W
Concern about the safety of public access and
how lots of things connect to that. [No Change:
See Policy 48]
■ Current toilet facilities are disgusting and
represent ourselves poorly, especially to visitors
(at the lookout.) [Revision: Add language to
County Action Policy 100 for improving restroom
facilities at lookout]
■ Keep Waipi'o protected as it is & allow public
access, even if it gets sold. [No Change: supports
Policy 54]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and
Cultural Resources
■ The valley can easily support a well -thought out
visitor experience. [No Change: supports Policy
61]
■ County and/or State should fund the portable
toilets by the beach and located on K.S. Land to
support public access to the beach. [No Change:
issue noted.]
■ Big Picture: Need to think about connection of
Waipi'o Valley to Mauna Kea in a resource -
minded perspective. Management should be
allocated according to community resource use.
[No Change: Issue Noted. However - Waipi'o
Valley and Mauna Kea are unique from each
other in that Waipi'o Valley is privately owned
and Mauna Kea is conservation lands]
■ Waipi'o Valley has several ancient Hawaiian
trails that are well-documented on historic
maps. The County should work with State DLNR
- Na Ala Hele to determine whether any of these
publically owned trails (per the Highways Act of
1892) should be earmarked for public use. I
realized this will require many considerations:
community sentiments, flood plains, kuleanas,
current land uses. Note: The historic maps show
trails outside of kuleana boundaries. [Revision:
supports Policy 48 #10, and new trail proposed
K6kua Actions.]
■ Ranger Program: Could use 2 P/T ranger
positions in addition to the current 1 F/T
position.
-Continued collection of crucial info is very
important.
-COH & public need to understand the role &
responsibilities of the ranger positions. [No
Change: supports Policy 60]
■ What are the "legal" consequences of un-
advisable actions of visitors? Accountability
issues/Enforcement
*Weddings (large wedding gatherings)
*4 -Wheel Drive (2 -Wheel)
*Camping
[No Change: might relate to Policy 48 regarding
Public Access Program — unclear if this question
is about illegal activity in the Valley or primarily
directed at negative impacts from large groups
of visitors.]
■ Need to understand the roles & responsibilities
of ranger positions. [No Change: supports Policy
L60]
■ There should always be "guided tours" by local
families with roots for visitors of the valley. - It
could be used to subsidize maintenance of
roads, river, farmers, etc. [No Change: could
relate to Section 6.5]
■ Shoreline squatting a big problem & a health
issue. [No Change: issue noted]
■ Shouldn't be any access to Hi`ilawe Falls. [No
Change: This could be confirmed or established
through implementing Policy 48]
■ Public access ends at end of County Road. [No
Change: see next point]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and
Cultural Resources
Gate at end of County Road, not just signage.
[No Change: this is outside County jurisdiction
and may be up to private owners]
Beach access goes through private property. [No
Change: see Policy 48 regarding public access
program — part of program would be to identify
access points and provide appropriate signage.]
■ Road to beach drives over significant cultural
sites. [No Change: see Policy 48 regarding
public access program]
[Waipi'o] Maintenance to the beach road by
community and have parking not on the beach
[No Change: see Policy 48 regarding public
access program — part of program would b
appropriate signage for accesses and parking
Are there considerations for limiting access
recreational/natural resource area but not a
residential/farm area.
Waipi'o Valley Agriculture & Stream Comments
■ Ha 'Ola funding to purchase equipment for
stream maintenance at final stages. [No
Change: however, CDP team will try to add
updated information to final CDP as needed]
eing funding for equipment maintenance
ther costs for stream maintenance is
ed. [No Change: supports Kokua Action 27]
■ Permitting process for standardized stream
during heavy rains? Any liability issues? [No
Chane: access can be closed temporarily in
emergencies — outside the scope of CDP]
No public restrooms in the valley, no running ■
water, no facilities. [Revision: see proposed
County Action policy regarding wastewaterift
infrastructure.]
Carrying capacity to the valle
o Hanauma Bay example of legally restricting
access.
[No Change: example of Hanauma Bay not
applicable to Waipi'o Valley. Restricting
access is not as feasible in areas where there
is a diverse mix of uses and owners. Waipi'o
Valley has residences, farms, businesses,
cultural practitioner usage, and is the portal
to DLNR Trails; whereas Hanauma Bay is a
maintenance has been challenging. [No Change:
supports Policy 56]
Not all of the problems with the stream are
flood -related. [No Change: however, note that
Kokua Action 28 refers to specific funds that
were allocated for flood damage]
Access to the water is as important to taro farms
as access to the land. [Revision: see new
Community Action on Ditch; for Ag water see
Policy 116]
■ Importance of taro to sustaining culture and
families. [No Change: supports Policy 55, Kokua
Action 25 & 29]
■ Lands should be set aside for taro growing as a
priority over other types of agriculture. [No
Change: supports Policy 55, Kokua Action 25 &
29]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and
Cultural Resources
■ Department of Agriculture manages the ditch,
measure water that is wasted and divert it to
Waipi'o. [Revision: see new policy on Ditch
improvements; for Ag water see Policy 116]
■
Waipi'o is a place where we can grow wet land
taro. [No Change: supports Policy 55, K6kua
Action25 & 29]
■ Debris comes down if the ditch is not
maintained. [Revision: see new Community
Action on Ditch, and Ag water, see Policy 116]
■ Lessees be responsible to malama (take care of)
rivers. [No Change: supports Policy 56, Policy
44, and Community Action 19.]
■ Stream maintenance is the issue, not just 11
emergency response. Need continuing &
policies to enable it. Permitting process needs
to change. [No Change: supports Polic 56,
Policy 44, Community Action 19]
■ Critical for the current residents/farmers
speak with "one voice" before actions can
proceed. [No Change: see Community Actions
16-20] x 'J
■
Waipi'o taro farmers, Paola o Waipi'o, Waipi'o
Circle (Waipi'o Valley Stakeholders Alliance).
[No Change: supports Policy 55, K6kua Action25
& 29 — will add Alliance to CDP]
■ We should pay attention to Waipi'o's productive
past as a template for today;
-Prior to 1800's, there were 20,000 (pa?) living in
the valley servicing the surrounding areas, all the
way to Puak6; thriving community. [No Change:
comment consistent with supporting Waipi'o
agriculture]
■ Re -test the fallow lands (closer to shore) to see if
salt content has diminished enough for
production. [No Change: This can be done by
the parcel owners or farm lessees]
■ At one time, Waipi'o Valley was able to support
20,000+ residents as well as feed the rest of the
island during times of drought & famine.
Chief Hi'ilawe spoke of "sharing" Waipi'o Valley
with visitors from other islands (the person of
the place creating its own visitor industry).
We've actually regressed in a number of ways in
our attempt to "protect" this special place. We
need to understand the rhythm of the valley and
work it rather than try to control it. [No Change]
During our monthly Waipi'o Taro Farmers
Association meeting last night, it was discussed
amongst several of the Taro Farmers attending
the recent CDP Honokaa meeting, that we insert
into the CDP, language (where appropriate)
stating that 'river maintenance work shall be
coordinated with Traditional Waipi'o Taro
Farmers Association watershed section leaders'.
While through the Waipi'o Valley Stakeholders
Alliance, we've since collaboratively formed a
Stream Maintenance committee, some in the
Association felt that the recognition should be
inserted into the CDP for longevity reasons.
[Minor Edit: — will add reference to CDP]
■ Hard to farm with higher land value prices. [Re:
Waipi'o] [No Change: See Sections 4.9 and 6.21
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and
Cultural Resources
■ Farmers have been working to purchase
equipment. [No Change: See Sections 4.9 and
6.21
■ [Waipi'o] Farmers are continuing to support
their families and perpetuate the value — not
only sustenance but LIFE! [No Change: See
Sections 4.9 and 6.21
Waipi'o Valley Access Road Comments
■ Road to the valley should not be improved to the
point of unrestricted access; should be open to
residents and open for special tours (i.e.
educational, school, etc.) [No Change: Access
road is already restricted to 4x4 only; no plans to
loosen that requirement]
■ Not make Waipi'o Road so accessible that
everyone can access valley; keep access limited.
[No Change: access road is already restricted tq
4x4 only; no plans to loosen that requirement]
■ Waipi'o Road hugs the cliff and maybe impacted
from mauka development causing debris and
runoff. [No Change: See Policy 54 on developing
rim development setbacks] % N
in
■ Buses have a hard time navigating. [Re: Waipi'o
Valley Lookout area] [No Change: Development
of the Waipi'o Valley Heritage Center Policy 60
could address this issue]
■ [Waipi'o] Alliance discussed traffic management
with other property owners. [No Change: see
Policy 60 under Community management]
■ Plan for road repair is ready to go out to bid. [No
Change]
■ Traffic not familiar with the road; education is
part of it. How do we enforce things? [No
Change: see policy 60 under Ranger program]
■ Can we put something in about the safety of the
[Waipi'o] access? [No Change: currently DPW is
handling access road improvements]
■ People are renting cars; not all the information is
provided in other languages. [No Change: see
policy 60 under Ranger program]
■ If not enough funds for road improvements,
prioritize bad spots, place signage for how many
cars can pass. [No Change: currently DPW is
handling access road improvements]
Potential turn -outs on the road. [No Change:
currently DPW is handling access road
improvements]
When residents are trying to evacuate, the top is
crowded and blocking evacuation. [No Change:
supports Policy 90]
■ During last tsunami, they did stop people further
down the road to prevent blockage. [No Change:
supports Policy 90]
■ County Ordinance to restrict road to farmers and
residents only? [No Change: The access road is a
County owned public road — restricting access to
farmers and residents is not legal on a
permanent basis.]
■ Possibility of groups acquiring the road or
portion of the road. [No Change: The access
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and
Cultural Resources
road is a County owned public road and is
unlikely to relinquish it due to the mix of uses in
the Valley (private farms, DLNR trails, etc.)]
■ Has a geological survey been done to look at the
stability of the road? [No Change: currently
DPW is handling access road improvements]
Stability of road would require a lot of studies
and we don't want it closed because of the
findings. [No Change: currently DPW is handling
access road improvements]
Consideration for cutting the bank and moving
road inland and work with land owners along the
route. [No Change: currently DPW is handling
access road improvements] 100006.
Consider a [road] maintenance action in CDP.
[No Change: currently DPW is handling access
road improvements]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and
Cultural Resources
Steering Committee Review of Community Input, September 2016 Review Document 1 of 4
A'ohe hang nui ko olu'io.
No task is too big when done together
5.1 Coordinate Infrastructure, Facility,
and Service Improvements
■ Promote private enterprise to build
infrastructure. [No Change]
■ 5.1.3 Policy 62: Lacks mention of sidewalk along
Lehua Street from Mamane to health center.
[Revision: See revisions to Policy 72]
■ Create a special district & special improvement
area for Honomu, along with plan for sewer
system. [Revision: see proposed infrastructure
policy; special district for Honomu could be
pursued under community Action 1 and Policy
63. Note: further infrastructure analysis is
ongoing via the General Plan Comprehensive
Update process.]
■ No sewer system in Honomu
o Waste water treatment plants needed for
many commercial facilities, maybe also for
public restrooms.
o The water meter should be an indication of
the amount of waste water needed.
0 2005 Clean Water Act— Update coming soon
o Infrastructure for waste water is the biggest
impediment to the affordable housing crisis.
[This comment is also included in 5.2 Expand
Affordable Housing Options] [Revision: see
proposed wastewater policy; special district
for Honomu could be pursued under
community Action 1 and Policy 63. Note:
further infrastructure analysis is ongoing via
the General Plan Comprehensive Update
process.]
■ Urban Zones with existing infrastructure need to
stay Urban. [No Change: No urban zones, such
as residential or commercially zoned lands, are
changed in the CDP.]
■ Acknowledge the assets of Honoka'a system to
implement things like public restrooms. [No
Change: could be addressed as part of
Community Action 1, Policy 63, Policy 123]
■ Infrastructure in Kapehu camp was way ahead of
its time with HUD and Dept. of Housing
o Might serve as a template.
[Revision: see proposed wastewater policy;
Kapehu Camp system is being researched and
may be an appropriate model for small-scale
systems.]
■ Wastewater is something that County can get
done! [Revision: See new proposed wastewater
policy]
■ Wastewater and the way that we do waste water
may not be the best - Other smaller systems,
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 5: Strengthen Infrastructure, Facilities,
and Services
decentralized for our areas. [Revision: proposed
wastewater policy]
■ How does County tie in to DHHL infrastructure?
[No Change]
■ Cannot put in a laundry facility [Honomu]
because of wastewater requirements. [Revision:
see proposed wastewater policy; special district
for Honomu could be pursued under community
Action 1. Note: further infrastructure analysis is
ongoing via the General Plan Comprehensive
Update process.]
■ Infrastructure innovations - Power & sewage (i.e.
Kaua'i & Northern California capturing methane,
harnessing it without needing pipeline. 4
[Revision: see proposed infrastructure policy]
Development provisions of zoning code.]
■ Grow own food; affordable housing, power, self-
reliance [portions of this comment are also
included in section 6.8 Preserve Informal
Economies and Living Off the Land] [Revision:
See proposed policy on Accessory Dwelling Units;
see also Policy 65, K6kua Action 47, Community
Action 25]
Am
■ Affordable housing for working professionals
such as doctors, nurses, contractors, teachers,
etc., to provide Human Resources to
communities in need of these services. [Revision:
See proposed policy on Accessory Dwelling Units;
see also Policy 65, K6kua Action 47, Community
Action 25]
5.2 Expand Affordable using tions
■ Affordable housing. [Revision: proposed policy
on Accessory Dwelling Units; see also Policy 65,
K6kua Action 47, Community Action 25] ■
■ People want better access to coast, opportunity
for affordable housing along coastline (i.e. Tiny
houses, agrihoods, etc.) [No Change: see above;
this comment is inconsistent with Policy 2 —
which limits new coastal development and
HRS205A-2(c)(3)(D).]
■ Agrohood = neighborhood housing development
based on farming. [No Change: can be
developed under Policy 13 or under existing
Planned Unit Development or Cluster Plan
Affordable housing for blue collar people; self-
help projects. [Revision: See proposed policy on
Accessory Dwelling Units; see also Policy 65,
K6kua Action 47, Community Action 25]
Lack of affordable properties/rentals
-limited income for home purchase. [Revision:
See proposed policy on Accessory Dwelling Units;
see also Policy 65, K6kua Action 47, Community
Action 25]
■ Affordable Housing:
Market value is really high ($350K -$420K),
unaffordable to average local family unit.
[Revision: See proposed policy on Accessory
Dwelling Units; see also Policy 65, K6kua Action
47, Community Action 25]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 5: Strengthen Infrastructure, Facilities,
and Services
■ Make progress on affordable & senior housing
opportunities. [Revision: See proposed policy
on Accessory Dwelling Units; see also Policy 65,
K6kua Action 47, Community Action 25]
■ Explore specific tweaks to zoning code that
would make it more cost effective for developers
to create affordable homes, multi -unit homes, or
inter -generational homes to rent or sell at
affordable prices. [Revision: See proposed
policy on Accessory Dwelling Units; see also
Policy 65, K6kua Action 47, Community Action
25]
■
■
Need to work with developer to lower
construction cost to aid availability of
housing.
-Residential housing village should be
allowed/considered.
-Multi-generational use houses - expo
current'Ohana housing to allow for n
kitchen. [Revision: See proposed po
Accessory Dwelling Units; see also Po
K6kua Action 47, Community Action
Housing Crisis
o Where will affordable housing take place if
no zoning changes?
[Revision: See proposed policy on Accessory
Dwelling Units; see also Policy 65, K6kua Action
47, and Community Action 25]
■ Infrastructure for waste water is the biggest
impediment to the affordable housing crisis.
[Revision: See proposed sewer policy, Policy 65,
K6kua Action 47, and Community Action 25]
5.3 Improve the Roadway Network
■ Traffic improvements at Pinky's intersection. [No
change: supports K6kua Action 49]
■ Walking/ biking paths along the old highway—
seems like it we should make safety a priority so
people can improve their health via walking/
biking. [No Change: supports policy 68 and
41 policy 75, K6kua Action 50]
■ INFRASTRUCTURE: The Hakalau and Kolekole
bridges are soon to require drastic overhauling
and are already in urgent need for rebuilding.
The Umauma Bridge is costing so many
additional millions of dollars and too much time
for rebuilding because some historic group
decided to put "history' above safety and cost
effectiveness. We are winding up with the 100
year old Umauma Bridge being "recovered and
supplemented" rather than a more safe
approach to a newly built bridge. Safety is more
important than history in this situation. This
Umauma experience should not be duplicated
for the Hakalau and Kolekole Bridges repairs/
rebuilding. [No Change: see Policy 69; however,
DOT and the historic registry and its associated
rules are outside scope of County regional CDP.]
■ Plantation? Ownership? (Road) [No Change]
■ Traffic improvements at Mill Rd & Hwy 19
intersection. [No change: supports K6kua Action
49]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 5: Strengthen Infrastructure, Facilities,
and Services
■ Road Safety: Maintaining/clearing road debris on
side easements; guard rails in areas where there
is a steep embankment; caring for pot holes;
parked cars on roadways; children playing in
roads unsupervised by caregivers. [No Change:
see Section 5.3 on Improving Roadways]
■ Increase or add shoulder for bicyclists on Hwy
[No Change: supports policy 68 and policy 75,
Kokua Action 50]
■ Roads in limbo - How to ensure that public is able
to access these roads. Concern is that adjacent
landowners are allowing them to become
overgrown to the point that it is inaccessible. [No
Change: see Policy 70]
■ Understand Blair Rd access - gate restrictions.
[Revision: see addition of Blair Road reference to
Community Action 27]
VW 1111k
Why don't we have highway rest stops, picnic
■ Community lacking walking/biking trails. areas? [No Change: not currently feasible]
Increase width of bike lanes on Hwy. Trails
would increase overall health of people within
the community. Add parks with walking trails. Highways should be required to have rest stops.
Would increase safety for pedestrians and[No Change: not currently feasible]
bicyclists [this comment also included in 4.
Nhb.,
Establish and Manage Public Access and Trails]
[No Change: supports policy 68 and policy 75,
Kokua Action 50]
■ When increasing shoulders, precautions must b
taken to prevent falling debris. Maintain trees on
Old Mamalahoa Hwy to allow for alternate path. —
Historic bridges not useful if can't be seen - only
costs taxpayers more money to maintain or
rebuild. [No Change: see Policy 69; however,
DOT and the historic registry and its associated
rules are outside scope of regional CDP.]
[No Chane: supports Policy 73]
■ County should listen & take action on obstructed
roads
-Homestead Roads [No Change: for Roads in
■ Options for non -motorized transportation (i.e. Limbo roads, see Policy 70; otherwise blocked
shoulder lanes). [No Change: supports policy 68 public roads need to be reported to DPW.]
and policy 75, Kokua Action 50]
■ Clear middle & sidelines & median reflectors are
■ Clean shoulder and bike lane. [No Change: very helpful, especially at night & in the winter
supports policy 68 and policy 75, Kokua Action when it rains heavily. [No Change: see Policy 75]
50]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 5: Strengthen Infrastructure, Facilities,
and Services
■ Priority of bridge safety. [No Change: Supports
Policy 69]
■ Road/street/highway lighting
-A lot of the lights don't have shields (so no
directed lighting). Light is allowed to go off to
the side & not directed to the
road/street/highway.
-Suggestion: Use LED lighting and/or put shields
on existing lighting. [No Change: new COH LED
streetlight conversion program ongoing.]
■ Mill Road - Access + Ownership. [No Change:
supports Community Action 27]
■ DPW, please manage HWY easements and stop
moving mulch. [No Change]
■ Can we restore the Hamakua Heritage Corridor
along the Highway: plant/encourage sugar cane
under the HELCO lines (mauka side) wherever
feasible to retain character and prevent spread of
fiddlewood and albizia? [No Change: supports
Policy 47]
<an
ety, such as another crosswalk in Honoka'a is
other factor to consider. [Revision: propose
w Honokaa 'Complete Streets' type of
provementproject - sidewalk, crosswalk, and
destrian improvements in downtown
Honokaa.]
■ Having clear center and sidelines and median
reflectors are very helpful. [No Chane: see
Policy 75]
4r"�% _
■ Gated roads - Homestead: COH-DPW not
responding to complaints; government roads
should be accessible (Pa'auilo Mauka) [No •
Change: DPW often does respond to government
roads being blocked — comment unfortunately
does not specify which road is being blocked for
CDP Team to follow-up.]
■
■ Roads or County Roads that Private Property
Owners have gated
o Restrictions on access to public land
o Sign says "End of County Road" — Can we get
more County Policing in Ag Lands? [this last
comment is also included in Section 5.10
Improving Protective Services] [No Change:
for Roads in Limbo roads, see Policy 70;
otherwise blocked public roads should be
reported to DPW.]
County to take over jurisdiction of Mamane
Street. [Revision: See above]
4 Formalize Alternative Routes
Some of our mauka roads close from high water
during storms. We need alternative routes or
redesigning current access. [No Change: see
Policy 73 and 74]
Stranded between gulches. [[No Change: see
Policy 73 and 74, see also Kokua Action 51]
5.6 Expand Mass Transit Facilities &
Services
■ Pepe'ekeo bus stop need covered area and
easement from makai side of community
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 5: Strengthen Infrastructure, Facilities,
and Services
Kaha'opea St. [No Change: supports Policy 76-
77, Community Action 28]
■ Bus stop at Pepe'ekeo Hwy area. [No Change:
supports Policy 76-77, Community Action 28]
■ Who's responsible for bus stops? [No Change:
County Mass Transit]
■ Mass transit options being considered? Train?
-Maybe something the tourist industry could
support for residents?
-Bus? Hop on/off? [No Change: see section 5.6]
5.7 Improve Water Infrastructure
■ Catchment vs. County water when county water
is inaccessible due to disaster [No Change]
■ Water Issues:
Well at Ahualoa drilled and 12" pipe being built
to bring water to Honoka'a. On Jack's property,
15,000 gallon tank. He gave an acre to State to
have it be built there. [No Change]
■ Plan to disallow catchment? [No Change: there
is no plan to prohibit catchment usage.]
• Water conservation - recommendations for ■
farmers on irrigation
-Incentives for farmers to make efficient use of
water (maybe state grants to develop model
programs) [this comment is also included in 4.3
Preserve Agricultural & Open Space] [SC
Deliberation: propose policy for Ag Water —
Including Ditch — State grant Programs to help
farmers use water efficiently; see Policy116]
■ Complete construction of water infrastructure at
site near Tex Drive -Inn. [No Change: water
infrastructure improvements in area are ongoing]
What is County's role in delivering clean water
and a way for people who grow produce to
access clean water?
o There are known incidents of water diversion
to produce. [Revision: propose new
Community Action for Ditch management;
see Policy 116, K6kua Action 69]
Water quality very important
o Will impact Hamakua Ag
o Can County provide water? EPA can give
funds to help this. Have we looked into it?
o Maybe County viewpoint on who provides
water needs to change (policy 116)
Revision: propose new Community Action
for Ditch management; see Policy116], K6kua
Action 69]
Potable water and commercial kitchens
o Honoka'a: Mac Nut Factory in Haina for sale
o Where will co-op go to wash produce/goods
Revision: propose new Community Action
for Ditch management; see Policy116], K6kua
Action 69]
5.8 Improve Environmental
Management Facilities
■ Waste diversion and reduction. [No Change:
supports Section 5.8]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 5: Strengthen Infrastructure, Facilities,
and Services
■ Community Compost Depot: Drop off at/by
transfer stations. [No Change: supports Policy
81, Kokua Action 75]
■ How to recycle workshops (County Zero -Waste &
Recycle Hawai'i). [No Change: supports Policy
81, Community Action 29]
■ Big properties' 'opala (trash) - responsible?
Accountability. [No Change]
■ Green waste in Pa'auilo - There's nowhere to go.
We have to throw it away (truckloads) if we don't
make our own compost. [No Change: supports
Policy 82]
■ Concern about ag & vegetation waste (i.e.
cuttings) - no recycling facility in North Hilo; have
to go down into Hilo. Should have more facilities
in this area. [No Change: supports Policy 82] 1
■ Recycling access - carbon footprint by driving.
[No Change: supports Policy 81, 83, 84, 85, an
Community Action 29]
■ Pa'auilo needs its own recycling station. It's no
cost effective to drive/haul. Need mulcher for
organic mulch. Place to put bottles and cans in
Pa'auilo. [No Change: supports Policy 82]
■ Add more green waste recycling. [No Change:
supports Policy 82]
■ Need a mulcher for ag waste. [No Change:
supports Policy 82]
■ Recycling center not available in each community
(i.e. Pa'auilo needs a simple bin at each transfer
station). [No Change: supports Policy 82]
■ Mulcher. [No Change: supports Policy 82]
■ Increase access to organic compost & mulch (in
each region)
-Process highway & road -trimmings for compost
[No Change: supports Policy 81, 82, Kokua
Action 75, Community Action 29]
■ Food Compost Depots: locations near/at transfer
station. [No Change: supports Policy 81]
■ Dept. of Environmental Management needs to
stop moving mulch! [No Change]
Littering: We clean up a lot of trash on our road
ourselves. [Revision: Add new Community
Action to encourage community groups to
identify and report illegal dump sites and
littering. Consider raising social awareness
through media tools (e.g., Facebook group
"Opala in Paradise.") See more on how to report
littering and dumps sites here:
http://www. hawaiizerowaste.org/i nfo/il legal -
dumping/ ]
■ Littering prevention efforts - Friends of the park,
community service groups, work with Dept. of
Environmental Management. [Revision: issue
noted, new proposed Community Action; See
also
http://www. hawaiizerowaste.org/i nfo/il legal -
dumping/ ]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 5: Strengthen Infrastructure, Facilities,
and Services
■ Target (the Store) uses office employees' food
waste to make some of the compost they sell.
[No Change]
5.9 Improve Emergency Preparedness &
Hazard Mitigation
■ CERT teams need help with mapping area. [No
change: issue noted: CERT is encouraged to seek
mapping assistance through County Civil
Defense]
■ Isolation due to flooding. [No Change: see Policy
73, 93]
Central and spaced out food storagE
disasters; community food storage.
This could be handled at the neighb
Isolation/Sinkhole/Disaster/Commu
relying on rumor to know what cour
roads - information meeting to mak
available; radio announcements anc
coverage very spotty; when is relief b.
Change: supports Policy 91, 92]
Community food storage; flood wastes isolation.
[No Change: see Policy 73, 93 regarding
emergency access and flooding]
communities? How and when to access service?
How to get word out about service? [No Change:
issue noted; see section 5.9 and 5.10]
■ At a minimum, have a paramedic stationed at fire
station(s). [No Change: not currently feasible]
1
5.10 Improving Protective Services
■ Ambulance/paramedic/firefighter services in
rural areas; skeptical about implementation of
services that are needed to save lives. HMC has
an air ambulance on standby 24/7 - what's the
accessibility to this service for rural
Increase police visibility; maintaining roads &
easements are clear; guard rails at "drops/ditch";
general ground & stream pollution &
enforcement (improper/illegal disposal of
chemicals, car removal, dumping); protect &
support aina. [No Change: supports Policy 94-95
and section 5.8; see also
http://www. hawaiizerowaste.org/i nfo/il legal -
dumping/ ]
Managing Community Crime Issues (burglaries,
theft, and noise pollution); increase police
presence/visibility & personal interaction with
residents (not just driving by but getting to know
the community) [No Change: supports Policy
94-95]
■ Community police officers & student resource
officers work long hours to build relationships
with community members. How can we
continue to keep these officers in our
communities beyond their 5 -year agreement?
[No Change: supports Policy 94-95]
■ Vandalism, tourists - need control. [No Change:
supports Policy 94-95]
■ Need more fire stations. My insurance wouldn't
cover the total value of my home & property.
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 5: Strengthen Infrastructure, Facilities,
and Services
They didn't count the volunteer fire station in
Pa'auilo. [No Change: supports Policy 95-97]
■ Is the volunteer fire station active? [No Change:
See Policy 96]
■ Can we get more County Policing in Ag Lands?
[No Change: see Policy 94-95] ■
■ Does plan reference Community Partnership with I
Neighborhood Watch - Farm Watch? [No
Change: supports Policy 94-95]
■ Use of Pepe'ekeo substation. [No Chan e:
supports Policy 95]
5.11 Expand Healthcare & Social
■ STRONG COMMUNITIES: support for assisted
living facilities and related health care facilities
for elderly. Essential, because if you view the
current demographics of Hamakua, majority of
population is over 65. [No Change: see Policy
98, Kokua Actions 54-56, Community Action 46 ]
goo
■ Since the start of the process, things have
changed. One is related to the growing elderly
population and the need for assisted living and
clinics close to where they currently live. Clinics
and assisted living centers are not specifically
mentioned as examples of "health" related
facilities, however, it is suggested that these be
included since assisted living facilities are not
necessarily referred to as "health" facilities.
Additionally, the notion that larger is better does
not apply to rural areas, and clinics that can serve
urgent care and those routine health care needs
■
that do not require a medical center (HMC), can
be very effective, timely in service, and lower
cost to build/operate. Too, as people get older,
driving longer distances becomes more difficult.
Clinics closer to population centers would be
easier to access. [No Change: see Policy 98,
Kokua Actions 54-56, Community Action 46 ]
Create strong relationships, business
opportunities with farmers and hospitals, health
care facilities (i.e. birthing center, elder care,
etc.). [No Change: see Policy 98, Kokua Actions
54-56, Community Action 46]
Laws for drug addicts that require rehab - but
programs that develop skills - would help to
change things. [No Change: see Policy 98, Kokua
Actions 54-56, Community Action 46]
Health care & transportation for elderly. [No
Change: see Policy 98, Kokua Actions 54-56,
Community Action 46]
Need to help our homeless & drug addicts - come
up with a plan. [No Change: see Section 5.2 and
Section 5.11— Note: health issues are largely
handled by State of Hawai'i]
Need core group to promote health & wellness
(mental health, diabetes, etc.) - rural areas get
little attention.. [No Change: see Section 5.11—
note: health issues are largely handled by State
of Hawai'i]
A resident participated in "Talk Story," yet
refuses to participate any further because does
not see references to his input (especially
regarding Senior Care) - disengaged from process
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 5: Strengthen Infrastructure, Facilities,
and Services
and feels things were left out. [No Change: see
Policy 98 re: aging in place, in-home care visits,
meals -on -wheels, etc., and K6kua Actions 54-56,
Community Action 46.]
■ Explore economic growth that mirrors the
integrity and character of Honoka'a town. For
example, Elder care residential & treatment
facilities (as we have 50 -bed hospital here and
■
■
elderly population.) [This comment is also
included in Section 6.3 Expand Health and
Wellness Industry] [No Change: see Policy 98 re:
aging in place, in-home care visits, meals -on -
wheels, etc., and K6kua Actions 54-56,
Community Action 46.]
Look into Aging In Place in Zoning. [Revision: s
Policy 98 re: aging in place, in-home care visits,
meals -on -wheels, etc., and K6kua Actions 54-56,
Community Action 46 — see also proposed new
policy regarding revising'ohana dwelling rules]
Public/private partnership for a health clinic. [No
Change: see Policy 98, K6kua Actions 54-56,
Community Action 46]
Connecting university students with elders in the
community through intergenerational programs
such as child/elder care; elder auditing of college
classes to create strong and lasting bonds within
the community. Sustainability policy UH system.
[No Change: see Policy 98, K6kua Actions 54-56,
Community Action 46]
Lack of coordination between services in the
community to provide consistent services or
health care. [No Change: see Policy 98, K6kua
Actions 54-56, Community Action 46]
5.12 Strengthen & Expand Education
Facilities and Services
■ Programs to motivate youth and worthwhile to
consider doing. [No Change: see Policy 117,
K6kua Action 72, Community Action 47]
Programs that allow youth/young people to
explore & discover their niche in life & keep them
here; teach them a skill. [No Change: see Policy
117, K6kua Action 72, Community Action 47]
Asset of K-12, also have college available in
[No Change]
d Parks & Recreation
Easier process to obtain camping permits from
County. [Revision: NOTE: Camping permit
process currently under assessment at Dept. of
Parks and Recreation — see proposed new policy
regarding Parks & Recreation department
coordination between the park facilities/park
recreation programs and their website and
outreach to the community, including camping
permits, etc.]
■ Community Center accessible 24/7: Calendar
online; PayPal deposit. [Revision: see proposed
new policy regarding Parks & Recreation
department coordination between the park
facilities/park recreation programs and their
website and outreach to the community,
including camping permits, etc.]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 5: Strengthen Infrastructure, Facilities,
and Services
■ Papa'ikou Community Center Roof/Center needs
to be painted/fixed. [No Change: supports
Policy 101]
■ Roof/ gutters/ termites:
Honokaa- lower and upper field concession roof/
gutters/ termites
Honokaa pool- roof/ gutters
Pa'auilo- annex roof/ gutters/ termites
Papa'aloa- gym and annex roof/ gutters/ termites
Honomu-termites
Papa'ikou- gym/ community center roof/ gutters/
termites. [Minor Edits: will add specific facilities
to be added to Policy 1011
■ Need space for recreation activities like regional
park - space to bike, jog, etc. - Utilize open space
for community to gather. [No Change: Policy
103, and K6kua Actions 23, 38, 50, 61]
■ New volleyball area next door like Keaukaha!
Tennis courts after. [Minor Edits: add volleyball
reference to Policy 1001
■ Provide a safe, level footpath around the
perimeter of the Papa'aloa ballpark for elder
community to exercise & walk. [SC Deliberation:
propose policy & Community Action for P& R to
evaluate what park facilities can add designated
level footpaths around existing parks for seniors -
see also Policy 103, and K6kua Actions 23, 38, 50,
■ Too many ball fields, not enough trails. [No
Change: Policy 103, and K6kua Actions 23, 38,
50, 61]
■ Need to renovate Papa'aloa gym + annex + tennis
courts. [Minor Edits: see new additions to Policy ■
101] X 1% 1%
■ Need enforcement of dog + motorbike rules at
parks. [No Chane] 1W
■ Who to call with immediate concerns w/facility
(i.e. lights on, doors open, etc.)? [No Change: see
new policy on improving outreach with P&R]
61]
Rural transportation network for non -vehicle
transportation. Bike & hiking trails - we would
exercise if there were some place to go! [this
comment is also included in section 4.8] [No
Change: see Policy 103, and K6kua Actions 23,
38, 50, 61]
Funding for Laupahoehoe Pool -
Maintenance/improvements - Use of pool is
increasing. [No Change: see Policy 101]
Our gym makes it more possible to be healthy
without the expense of driving to town (which
lowers the level of cash you need to be happy),
Build a new, taller place for volleyball (For actual
user numbers call Flo Pua). [Minor Edits: add
volleyball reference to Policy 100]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 5: Strengthen Infrastructure, Facilities,
and Services
■ Playground for kids. [No Change: supports Policy
100]
■ Papa'aloa gym needs renovating (to Keaukaha
gym height). [Minor Edits: see new additions to
Policy 101]
■ Public park areas along coast. [No Change]
'
■ Plan for lifeguards at beaches with heavy use. E louhoe mai nd woo; i ke kd, i ko hoe; i ko
[No Change] hoe, i ke kd; poe oku i ko 'dino.
Everybody paddle the canoes together;
5.14 Enhance Telecommunications & boil and paddle, paddle and boil,
Energy Infrastructure < and the shore is reached.
■ Lack of cell phone coverage and InterneNservice
o Build more towers or alternative technolo 6.1 Coordinate Regional Economic
by
that provides better reception. evelopment
[No change: see Policy 106, K6kua Action 63]
Public/private committee to explore economic
Working with Council Members of getting Wi-Fi.
development and activities of rural communities.
[No change: see Policy 106, Kokua Action 63]
1% 1% -
in
Rural areas also need connections to
broad band/Wi-Fi. [No change: see Policy 106,
K6kua Action 63]
[No Change: see Community Actions 40-43]
■ Livable Wage (i.e. Travel nurse makes more than
a permanent nurse). [No Change: see
Community Action 46]
■ What other economic development
opportunities are there besides ag & small
business? What other INDUSTRIES can come
about? How can we use the open spaces? No
Change: see Policy 117, K6kua Action 72,
Community Action 47]
■ Communication - How can Hamakua
communicate better? Inter -district or intra-
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 6: Build a Sustainable, Local Economy
district? (i.e. To the rest of the island/state vs.
within Hamakua. Start with Hamakua and move
towards island/state.) How to facilitate new How much taro would you need to grow to get
economy (post -plantation)? [No Chane]
an incentive? [No Change: specific terms of tax
incentives will have to be determined by Finance
Dept. in developing new policy and would need
■ Ulupono as a resource for local/pono. [No to be approved by Council in a public process to
Change] amend Chapter 19, Article 6 of County Code.]
■ Support community growth - no commercial
growth. [No Change: aiming for absolutely no
commercial growth is inconsistent with
Community Values and Vision and Community
Objectives – Strengthening a Local, Sustainable
Economy seems preferred ]
■ Relationships between small towns, eco -tourism,
and industry might have been in a previous plan.
[No Change: noted]
■ We are particularly encouraged by the policy
intent to: (pg. 92, section 6.2.2)
Acourage and support the expansion of
agriculture, including forestry and the
macadamia nut industry. (GP 14.2.4.7.2) Support
the development of a native hardwood industry.
(GP 2.4.3.2 (c)); see also (GP 2.4.4.2 (e))."
Our Association supports all types of healthy
productive forests and related forest industry,
both native and non-native. We would like to
■ County's responsibility is to provide the zoning to
let private enterprise help to provide jobs. [No
Change]
NNEW
■ Ask university students to be a part of this via
their "schools" or "programs" so that they can do —
good and meet their educational goals ■
(internships/residency). [No Change]
X 'i
6.2 Strengthening Local Agriculture
■ Make "micro" incentives for smaller taro patches.
Community taro gardens, neighborhood taro
patches (20 years is mind boggling!) [No Change:
See Policy 55 – this tax credit for taro production
is intended to preserve taro lands "in perpetuity'
to protect productive taro lands; it is not
intended to promote small-scale taro -growers in
general.]
suggest the following, more broad statement, by
removing the word "native":
"Encourage and support the expansion of
agriculture, including forestry and the
macadamia nut industry. (GP 14.2.4.7.2) Support
the development of a hardwood industry. (GP
2.4.3.2 (c)); see also (GP 2.4.4.2 (e))." [No
Change: supportive comment]
Draft CDP mentions financial incentives for
growing specific crops (i.e. taro, etc.) Why not
incentivize broader agricultural production and
forestry to promote good use of ag land? (More
general incentives for farmers, foresters, etc.).
[No Change: taro -specific policies were
developed by a separate entity – the Taro
Security and Purity Task Force funded by the
State, other ag incentives can be found at: Policy
32.]
■ Buy local [No Change: supports Policy 112,
K6kua Actions 66, 67, Community Action, 43]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 6: Build a Sustainable, Local Economy •
■ Hawaii Agricultural Land Use Baseline - check it if
you haven't already. [No Change: noted]
■ Hard to be economically sustainable & do ag. [No
Change]
■ Expand or looking at incentives to address value
added ag processing. [SC Deliberation: see
proposed commercial/community kitchens
policy]
■ Be able to live on your farm land in an
economical way. [No Change]
■ Lower Hamakua Ditch
I see no mention of one of the most significant
resources of Northwest Hamakua, the Hamakua
Ditch system. It is absolutely vital to my
agriculture operations and for many of my
neighbor's livelihoods. A clean, safe and reliable
source of irrigation water is paramount. It upsets
me that some people want to leave the ditch
open for "aesthetic"/"historical" purposes, but
the true historical intent of the ditch is to support
agriculture. In fact, only a handful of peopl
actually get to see the flowing ditch except
where it traverses a persons private property.
We could greatly expand ag opportunities
because of this ditch water resource. However, I
worry constantly of the possibility of
contaminated water applied to crops or
consumed by livestock. My educational
background is in Aquatic Ecology. It is well known
that the leading source of e -coli contaminated
crops comes from irrigation water. One incidence
of illness or death from this could devastate the
reputation of all Hamakua ag products for years.
The State has or had funds to contain this water
in pipes within the ditch. A compromise could be
to contain the ag water in pipes submerged in
the ditch while water flows over it for aesthetic
purposes. Please move forward with securing
safe and reliable lower Hamakua ditch irrigation
water.
[Revision: see proposed community action
regarding Ditch; See also Policy 116, K6kua
Action 69]
I appreciate all the hard work of all those
representatives and stake holders who are
coming together to improve the Hamakua
community and region.
Perhaps I have missed it but, in my review of the
community development plan on the web site I
do not see the plan for the Hamakua Ditch. I live
in a community of small farmers downstream of
Honoka'a town and am a rate payer for ditch
water together with some of my neighbors. As
far as I know we have never been consulted
regarding what the agricultural community in my
area would advise regarding the ditch. You may
recall that sometime after 2006 millions of
dollars in federal funds were granted to enclose
the ditch water flow in an high density
polyethylene (HDPE) pipe primarily for flood
mitigation. Despite winning a successful
competition for a $3,000,000 federal grant
bolstered by 130 letters of support from local
farmers and supporters a small group of
community members along with their attorneys
successfully hijacked efforts to enclose the flow
on their property due to its "historical
significance" (read property value asset). Federal
funding was lost for the ENTIRE project! The
agricultural community which is admittedly not
politically powerful suffered from this loss.
The current open ditch configuration causes
excessive siltation that fouls irrigation
equipment, increases evaporative losses and
leads to significance losses through open ditch
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 6: Build a Sustainable, Local Economy
leakage into the ground water. The open ditch
configuration also increases contaminated water
runoff into the ditch from upstream animals
including feral pigs, rats and livestock. The
Hamakua region is a known reservoir of
leptospirosis, a rare but severe disease which is
likely under diagnosed. Our own late P. Quentin
Tomich studied the endemic presence of
leptospirosis in Waipi'o Valley rodents and found
a prevalence rate above 20% in some common
species (Pac Sci 33:257). Leptospirosis is carried
in the urine of rats and mongoose and may
contaminate open waterways through those
vectors. To our knowledge no one has studied
the safety of the ditch water for food crop
irrigation and aquaculture despite the obvious
risks due to its open configuration. Regardless,
there is a high probability that piping the ditch
water in HDPE would improve microbiologic
safety for downstream rate payers and farmers.
What is also clear is that enclosing the ditch
would vastly reduce the maintenance costs on
the ditch and vastly improve the reliability of the
irrigation water source which frequently has to
be shut off for repairs. A few land owners
claimed that they would maintain the ditch
through the few linear feet that the ditch ran
through their property but that begs the
question of what benefit that has on the rest of
the greater than 95% that remains to the tax
payer to maintain.
Ironically the ditch was not improved and
enclosed due to the lobbying of a very few who's
claim was that the ditch was an historic land
mark. The problem is that the primary original
function of the ditch in 1910 is the very same as
the primary current function of the ditch today
and that is to sustain the local agricultural
community. The primary function of the ditch
and the farming community that it supports
should not fall prey to late arriving agenda of a
few people who have failed to take into
complete account the reason the ditch exists in
the first place.
Some of my neighbors and I have the following
concerns:
1. We are not aware that the people who
actually pay for the water service of the
Hamakua Ditch were adequately represented, if
they were represented at all, in prior decisions to
halt improvements to the ditch over the howls of
a few vocal stake holders who appear to be
politically and legally powerfully connected.
2. We are doubtful that the aggregate costs to
the tax payers, the ditch rate payers, the local
agricultural efforts and, to the community at
large have been factored into the decision to
NOT enclose the ditch water and we strongly
urge those estimates to be included the next
time this issue comes up politically.
3. We are concerned about the health safety of
the ditch water if not enclosed especially for food
crop farming and we advise that health safety be
strongly considered in leaving the ditch open.
We wonder if not currently being performed,
whether the ditch water should be analyzed at
intervals by the Department of Health for
coliforms, leptospirosis and other contaminates
they deem appropriate.
4. Operation of the Hamakua ditch is
intermittent, the maintenance is spotty and
poorly funded and, excessive siltation from its
open configuration leads to lost agricultural
productivity which could be dramatically
improved by HDPE pipe installation.
If the Hamakua Community Development Plan is
going to be a serious effort that adequately
represents the interests of the agricultural
community, they will support enclosing the
Hamakua ditch water flow for the economy and
safety of all concerned.
[Revision: see proposed community action
regarding Ditch; See also Policy 116, K6kua
Action 69]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 6: Build a Sustainable, Local Economy
■ AGRICULTURE: Farmers won't continue to farm
unless they be profitable. Need to assure access
to several low cost commercial kitchens that
farmers can use to produce value added
products cost effectively and safely while
complying with health regulations. [Revision:
see proposed revision to Community Action 44
commercial /community kitchens policy]
■ Section 19-57 and 19-60 of Real Property Tax
Code
Can the CDP support a wide range of agricultural
endeavors by supporting retention of Sections
19-57 and 19-60 of the Real Property Taxes Code
(enacted 1981)? Section 19-57 provides a tax
incentive for owners and lessees to retain
agricultural zoning and to develop and use thei
land "on a continuous and regular basis" for an
agricultural use. The tax incentive under Section
19-57 is only available for the parts of an
agricultural zoned property that are actually used
for agriculture; and includes a roll back provision
if the agricultural use is discontinued. Section 19-
60 of the Code also provides for a tax incentive
for 10 -year dedicated agricultural use and
primarily applies to larger agricultural purs ' s.
Section 19-57 was enacted, among other
reasons, to address the reality that agricultural
zoning (while typically requiring 5, 20, or more
acres) actually includes many parcels that are
much smaller due to the way agricultural lands
were subdivided before the enactment of the
Planning and Zoning Codes. Section 19-57
provides the following benefits to Hawaii Island
which, in turn, justify the tax incentive:
*incentivizes smaller parcels (not necessarily
classified as IAL) to remain in agricultural use as
opposed to being re -zoned and or used for non-
agricultural purposes;
*incentivizes owners of Section 19-57 land to
accept the use restrictions that affect "ag" zoned
parcels;
*discourages agricultural lots from becoming
non-contiguous by mitigating those factors in a
mixed-use environment which eventually make
farming non -feasible such as rising land values
and conflicts of "quiet use" between residential
owners and farmers (noise, use of chemicals,
etc.);
*promotes local food, livestock, and timber
sufficiency and production for parcels that might
otherwise stand fallow;
*recognizes that even a small Section 19-57 "ag"
operation can provide the foregoing benefits,
and combined with the other non -dedicated
users can provide these benefits on a significant
scale in the aggregate.
Participation in the Section 19-57 program is not
without sacrifice and investment. Each of the
participants enrolled under Section 19-57 have
had to:
*purchase agricultural land (in recent times at a
premium) that often does not have the amenities
of residential neighborhoods;
*invest money to develop their agriculture
including clean-up of debris and rock fields,
remediation of arsenic contamination from sugar
cane production, amendment of substandard
soil, grading, building fences, and creating plots
for agriculture;
*conduct farming operations that require
significant financial outlay for tools, equipment,
fertilizers, supplies, etc.;
*tending to farming activities on a daily basis;
*establishing a channel for distributing
production;
*accepting the restrictions of living on
agricultural land.
Working a small farm is not an easy task.
Since 1981 when Section 19-57 was enacted,
thousands of families have agreed to provide
these benefits of small-scale agriculture and
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 6: Build a Sustainable, Local Economy
invest their money to create small-scale
agriculture based on their reliance on the
County's representation that any agricultural use
within Section 19-57 would allow them to receive
a small tax incentive. Today about 10,000
families are in the Section 19-57 program.
The Section 19-60 program is fundamentally
different than the Section 19-57 program in that
it targets large commercial farming operations;
offers a more generous tax incentive; has
different goals than the Section 19-57 program
(see above); and enrolls about 500 businesses.
Essentially Section 19-60 rewards larger farms
with an incentive for maintaining industrial -size
agricultural operations. It is worth considering
that both Section 19-57 and 19-60 were enacted
in 1981. This shows that the County viewed these
two programs as being different and equally
justified. Both programs provide public benefits;
and both have provisions to address nonIL
-
compliance and rollback. Also, both programs are
probably equally "dedicated" since Section 19-57
program farmers tend to continue their
agricultural operations for many years.
A Bill (317) has been introduced which if enacted
would establish a 3 or 5 year dedicated incentive
while simultaneously phasing out Section 19-57.
Upon phase-out the Code would be left with two
tax incentive measures that differ primarily by
the length of the dedication but not otherwise.
Bill 317 would disqualify at least 500 Section 19-
57 farmers from the Bill 317 program based on
acreage criteria alone. Also, because the Bill 317
program is modeled on the "industrial -oriented"
Section 19-60 criteria, it would likely disqualify
many other small scale Section 19-57 farmers
based on administrative decisions about their
scale of production. And during the transition
period Bill 317 would phase out the incentive for
Section 19-57 farmers that could force more
Section 19-57 farmers off their land or out of
agriculture.
The CDP should support k6kua policies such as
the Section 19-57 and the Section 19-60
programs which support a wide range of
agricultural endeavors and preserve the
agricultural nature of the Hamakua Coast.
The Section 19-57 program has gotten some bad
press because a few people have been accused
of "gaming" the system by "taking advantage of
the agricultural exemption without growing
crops" according to some commentators (West
Hawaii Today, November 18, 2014). In fact this
appears to be the only criticism of Section 19-57
when the other benefits are considered. But even
if some people in the Section 19-57 program
have acted irresponsibly does this justify
repealing the entire Section 19-57 program for all
10,000 families in it now? That would be like
taking away drivers licenses from everyone
because a minority of drivers are irresponsible.
To list a few points about how small-scale
agriculture is typically regarded:
*Acreage: small parcels can produce specialized
products (example coffee, niche crops and even
forestry, if the right timber is grown), especially
when a plot is too steep or rocky for other crops.
CTAHR supports this kind of micro -farming. USDA
recognizes farms as including operations as small
as 1 acre. Bill 317 would disqualify farmers who
have timber operations on less than 10 acres
even for lucrative exotic woods; and would
disqualify pastures that are less than 10 acres
that can also make a contribution to island
agriculture.
*Income: Department of Agriculture defines
farming as $1000.00/year gross or less; Section
19-57, as written, includes subsistence farming or
charitable donations of produce: which would be
very justified on Hawaii Island given the high cost
of food and the lack of sustainable food
production. Any farmer providing food for Hawaii
is providing a public benefit. Also, USDA reports
"more than one-quarter of farms have no sales in
a typical year" and are still regarded as "farms".
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 6: Build a Sustainable, Local Economy
Yet Bill 317 sets a strict threshold of $2000 net
per year under penalty of disqualification. Small
scale farmers are sometimes forced to work at
other jobs to support the farm and do not "make
a living" with farming: this does not mean they
are not making a contribution to agriculture that
benefits the community.
If Bill 317 is further considered by the Council, we
think that land that is already enrolled in the
Section 19-57 program should be grandfathered
and left in that regime with the same
requirements and the same tax incentives as long
as the land is used "on a continuous and regular
basis" for an agricultural use. This is only fair to
the thousands of families who have purchased
agricultural parcels (especially small ones) with
the intent to farm; who have invested their
money to improve their property; who have,
accepted the restricted uses allowed on
agricultural lands; and who have made the I-hd
productive, all in reliance on the Section 19-57 IL
program
Both Section 19-57 and
programs that work well and are justified. They
should be left alone. [No Change: note -the C
does not advocate for removing Section 19-57 or
Section 19-60; also, any changes to the tax code
would be developed by Finance Department and
approved by County Council via a public process]
■ The agricultural section of the CDP needs a lot of
work. Frankly, I am very disappointed that it
doesn't seem like any stakeholders have been
involved in the formulation of these ideas,
despite holding hearings. [No Change:
unfortunately this comment does not site specific
revisions or gaps.]
■ Create strong relationships, business
care facilities (i.e. birthing center, elder care,
etc.). [No Change: see Section 6]
■ Farmers' relationship also with pre-school, home
school, charter schools, etc. [No Change:
supports K6kua Action 66]
■ Target (the Store) uses office employees' food
waste to make some of the compost they sell.
[No Change]
Hakalau Food SHARE (see Facebook) Tuesdays 3-
6pm at Hakalau Veteran's Park; example of what
we can do to feed each other; emphasis on
organic; completely open to public. [No Change:
supports Policy 112, 113, 114, Kokua Action 67]
Distribution & food prep (commercial kitchen) is
very expensive so people we know can't use it.
[Revision: see proposed revision to Community
Action 44 for commercial /community kitchens]
Value added Ag essential to profits so really need
commercial kitchen to be accessible cheaply;
profitable farmers & use of farmers. [Revision:
see proposed revision to Community Action 44
for commercial /community kitchens]
■ Need more sustainable, local food. [No Change]
■ Need to provide more locations for farmers to do
value - add commercial kitchen, etc. [Revision:
see proposed revision to Community Action 44
for commercial /community kitchens]
opportunities with farmers and hospitals, health How are we able to isolate organic farms from
GMO so they can keep their designation?
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 6: Build a Sustainable, Local Economy
■
■
(Costco is willing to buy but there's not enough
local, organic options.) [No Change: outside
scope of CDP]
Community Natural Farming - spaces for inputs
(created & stored); infrastructure (already
spending on research & development. [No
Change]
Ag research centers in every community - subsets
that can make up a bigger network. [No Change:
supports Community Action 42 and 47, K6kua
Action 70, 72]
Shared equipment and machinery.[ Revision: see
revised Community Action 44 for support
agricultural cooperatives]
Hard to make ag economically viable. [No
Change]
Ift
Access to the certified kitchen for initial value
added processing, juicing, smoothie making,
kimchi, salad mix making, sandwich making for
sale down at the Point or in Bed & Breakfast.
[Revision: see proposed revision to Community
Action 44 for commercial /community kitchens]
We should be able to sell orange squeezed from
our own oranges at any market, especially if the
customer is watching. Using a cutting board
makes it a health department "No -no." This is
not even common sense. Basic value, added with
economics, transparent marketing and customer
reaction being instantaneous, should prevail.
How about I have liability insurance for possible
disappointed customers, and the health
department follows common sense? [Revision:
see proposed revision to Community Action 44
for commercial /community kitchens]
■ Example of Hakalau Farmers Market - true
community food sustainability. [No Change:
supports Policy 112, 113, 114, K6kua action 67]
■ Laupahoehoe Farmers Market - limited - needs to
grow more organic - needs to expand what's
"allowed". [No Change: supports Policy 112,
113, 114, K6kua action 67]
■ Encourage more vendors & organics at local
farmers market. [No Change: supports Policy
112, 113, 114, K6kua action 67]
■
The county regulations regarding honeybees
should be reviewed. I think currently an apiary
(size/number of colonies not defined) must be
1,000 feet away from a non -Ag zoned boundary.
This is not based on what is known about honey
bee behavior. There are U.S. cities with
ordinances permitting rooftop apiaries on high
rises and backyard hives (number of hives
limited) in residential neighborhoods. [Revision:
Ag zoning rules relating to distances for
apiary/piggery. Need clear definitions, possibly
adopt different distances.
Some kind of education for beginning
homesteaders as an alternative to corporate
agriculture. [No Change: supports K6kua Action
70]
Inter -island shipping produce; what about super -
ferry?
-Shipping /transport costs [No Change: outside
scope of regional CDP]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 6: Build a Sustainable, Local Economy
■ Resources about crops & where they grow best
(for new farmers). [No Change: supports K6kua
Action 70]
■ Charge military fair market value & give farmers
$1/yearleases
-subsidize farmers instead of military. [No
Change: outside scope of regional CDP]
■ Who/how ag lease rates are set? [No Change:
direct question to State Dept. of Ag and County
Finance Dept.]
■ Agriculture education/exposure for kids
(especially local kids). [No Change: supp
K6kua Action 66 and 70]
■ More locally grown food sold locally - processing
& sales at one location. [No Change: supports
Section 6.2]
■ Promote healthier cattle
-i.e. lowline cattle - higher production per space;
better quality; smaller breed NL IML
-Need slaughter facilities for beef & poultry. [No
Change: cattle type and health is beyond scope
of regional CDP; Pa'auilo Slaughterhouse and
new mobile slaughterhouse may fill need]
■ Organic poultry (eggs & broilers). [No Change]
■ Locally grown blueberries? (Regarding: Expand
Agriculture Market Opportunities (i.e. Branding
for Hamakua products & buy local campaigns)
[No Change: supports Section 6.2]
■ Helps smaller farmers to be able to grow stuff.
(Regarding: Provisions allow farmers to live/work
on land). [No Change: supports Section 6.2]
■ Need ag support - resources, information,
marketing support. [No Change: supports Section
6.2]
■ Rules for forming co-ops : future research item
■ Would be advantageous; other communities
have had success. [Revision: revise
Community Action 44 for support of
agricultural cooperatives]
ML
■ Aquaculture — more focus on aquaculture on land
(not in coastal waters)
o Listed as K6kua Action at this time. [No
Change: supports K6kua Action 71]
Infrastructure:
o Community Kitchens
o Use sugar cane infrastructure for
Community-based efforts
o Integrate local area Ag plan into the CDP
o Like Hamakua's; Co-ops, Hamakua
Harvest, Incubator Kitchens
o Responsible development in Ag
[Revision: See proposed revisions to
Community Action 44 on farmer co-ops and
commercial kitchens]
■ Food Safety Modernization Act = Federally
Mandated Food Safety Act [No Change: supports
Section 6.2 and proposed revisions on co-ops &
commercial kitchens]
■ Value added will be important. [No Change:
supports Section 6.2]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 6: Build a Sustainable, Local Economy ..
■ Only 2 certified kitchens in area. [Revision: see
proposed revision to Community Action 44 for
commercial /community kitchens]
■ Highlight need for commercial/certified kitchens
and similar set up for cleaning and processing
fresh produce.
o Ensure they do not become personal -one -
business runs and uses
o Assign a lead role to County in any
partnerships to provide potable water for
washing. [Revision: see proposed revision to
Community Action 44 for commercial
/communit kitchens]
ag? Farm to school; more nutritious food. [No
Change: supports Kokua Actions 66, 67, and 70]
■ Certified kitchens on state lands - state
supported. [Revision: see proposed revision to
Community Action 44 for commercial
/community kitchens]
■ Local food to local schools. [No Change:
supports Kokua Action 66]
y Trial programs to involve college students to
envision the future use of agriculture on Hawai'i
■ When referring to Community or Kokua Action Island. [No Change: supports Kokua Actions 66,
for farm to schedule programs, need to refere 67, 70, 71 ]
Board of Education, not just DOE so that bothlit ill
iJJV
Charters and DOE schools are included.
LC
is
a charter in the middle of our coast so we want
to be included. [Minor Edits: will add Charter
school to Kokua Action 66 &ther pertinent
policies]
■ Ag Theft Inspector may have been funded for
Prosecutor's Office. [No Change] N_
■ Allow small industrial lands by these towns
o Build (centralized?) processing facilities for
communities -->package-->sell
o Need certified kitchens
[Revision: see proposed revision to Community
Action 44 for commercial /community kitchens]
■ Don't have the younger generation engaged in
farming. Need to get kids out there both in the
forest & fields. Need more programs to support
this. How do we get kids to support smaller, local
Develop a program to encourage families to grow
ulu tree; how to cook ulu. Give ulu tree and train
on care of tree. Plant ulu & other edible
vegetation at parks, public spaces and schools.
[No Change]
6.3 Expand Health and Wellness
Industry
■ Too bad to have lost the pharmacy & we need to
explore having a pharmacy in Honoka'a
-Access to medication for seniors and young
people
-face to face rapport with a pharmacist is
important for health care and information on
how medication counteract with each other. [No
Change: issue noted, however research shows
that changes to insurance regulations at a
Federal level prompted many small pharmacies
to close — outside the scope of a regional CDP]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 6: Build a Sustainable, Local Economy
■ Senior care as an industry should be pursued
-good fit with lifestyle. [No Change: supports
Section 6.3]
■ Explore economic growth that mirrors the
integrity and character of Honoka'a town. For
example, Elder care residential & treatment
facilities (as we have 50 -bed hospital here and
elderly population.). [No Change: supports
Section 5.2, 5.11, and 6.3]
Sharing mana'o to also focus on: Medical
facilities, health clinics, pharmacies available in
the Hamakua District.
o Hilo & Waimea is located (for some) too far
outside this district, restricting/limiting
appropriate z
especially in 1
aging popula-
Section 5.11,
6.5 Develop a PI
Industry
■ Signs at district/moku boundaries [This
comment is also included in Section 6.5 Develop
a Place -Based Visitor Industry] [Revision:
Community Action 12 — "including signs at
district moku boundaries — ahupua'a names.]
■ Hamakua is an "Eco -Destination," in addition to
branding products, the natural beauty and sites
could be part of a branding of the whole coast.
o Where does the Hamakua coast begin and
end when considering a "branding of the
coast"?
■ Gastro tourism. [No Change: fits under Se n
6.5]
■ Not every road is appropriate for visitor traffic.
[No Chane: issue noted] 1W
■ Gastro tourism. [No Change: fits under Section
6.5]
■ A visitor center. [No Change: fits under Section
6.5]
[No Chane: supports Section 6.5]
Promoting more visitor stays within agriculture
lands helps to promote a symbiotic relationship.
[This comment is also included in 4.3 Protect
Agricultural Lands & Open Space] [No Change:
Supports Policy 119, 120, 121Kokua Action 73]
Bring international tourism through pedestrian,
hiking and bicycle trails. [This Comment is also
included in Section 4.8 Establish and Manage
Public Access and Trails] [No Change: See section
4.8]
6.6 Revitalize Local Retail & Hamakua's
Town Centers
■ Vacant properties not being maintained. [No
Change: See Policy 15, and Community Action 1]
■ Honomu is dead but our town is so quaint & that
can be used. [No Change: See Policy 15, and
Community Action 1]
■ History of sugar plantations on Hamakua should
be mapped and made available; include signage
alone Hiehwav and promote knowledee of Mill
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 6: Build a Sustainable, Local Economy
sites. [No Change: see Policy 47 and Community
Action 7]
■ Monthly Festivals in small towns along coastline -
Promote town beauty to make them
destinations. [No Change: Supports Policy 121,
Policy 47, Community Action 7, Section 6.6]
■ WAILEA FOOD SHARE HAKALAU -as a model of
how to get things done, take care of each other
as well as other activities within community -
taking back vacant buildings/land, bridging local
& new -comers. (Example of intercultural
exchange of plantation era) [No Change:
supports Policy 112, 113, 114, K6kua Action 67]]
■ More restroom facilities [this comment
made at the Strong Towns Station] [No
see Policy 123]
■ A recognition of town history. Civic or town
historic markers highlighting a walking tour or
pathway to discover town charm. This nurtures
civic pride, town walkability & economic stimulus
for businesses. This way, we nurture civic pride
and a mindset that "Honoka'a" is a stop along the
coast rather than a "drive-thru town." All of this
makes a healthy additive that enriches
community. [Revision: See revised County Action
Policy 72 regarding Honoka'a improvements]
■ l We didn't need to travel far to get our food back
in the day. [No change.]
■ Does the CDP encourage businesses like small
pharmacies to stay in towns? [No Change: CDP
does promote small businesses however -
■ Appreciate Historic Honoka'a Town except ■
limited parking. [Revision: See revised County
Action Policy 72 regarding Honoka'a
improvements]
changes to insurance regulations at a Federal
level prompted many small pharmacies to close —
outside the scope of a regional CDP]
Robb, 1W
Western Week for Paniolo Culture for the area.
[No Change: Supports Policy 121]
6.7 Encourage Green Industries
■ Before I go to work & after I come home - stores
are closed. Would like some access to stores. Promote green business models: how to create
Seems like hours are geared toward visitors &
retirees. [No Chane]
■ [Honoka'a] Up the hill (right before get to the
mart) zoned for parking
-parking
-bus access
[Revision: See revised County Action Policy 72
regarding Honoka'a improvements]
business with carbon & waste management in
mind. [No Change]
■ Cost benefit analysis to do solar, use Hawai'i
county compostable supplies (i.e. one time use
products, green business). [No Change]
■ Bring in industries that are eco & community
friendly. [No Change]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 6: Build a Sustainable, Local Economy . •
■ Electrical vehicle charging stations
-Is there a plan to dedicate a certain amount of
stalls to charging stations?
[No Change: State Law Act 89 from 2012
requires new parking lots with 100 cars to put in
a charging station.
http://energy. hawai i.gov/testbeds-initiatives/ev-
ready-program/electric-vehicle-ev-charging-
stations-in-hawaii]
6.8 Preserve Informal Economies and
Living off the Land
■ Subsistence: Aquaponics for average home. [No
Change]
■ What are rules or ideas on subsistence? 1
(Objective 12 to compliment Ag economy)
o Fresh & Local
o Rather grow it than buy it. [No Change]
NL
Change: the CDP supports subsistence and
recreation — these are not at odds]
NOTE: These comments fall under the following
categories:
1. Miscellaneous comments that do not directly
relate to the Draft CDP itself or are outside the
scope of the CDP, and/or County jurisdiction;
2. Miscellaneous comments that could not be easily
categorized and/or do not call for specific
revision or CDP action;
3. Miscellaneous comments that relate to the CDP
Process
comments that do not directly relate
06 the Draft CDP itself or are outside the scope of the
CDP, and/or County jurisdiction:
■ People who are doing least impactful subsistence
activities are not represented in plan at Count
level. [No Change: unclear how CDP could
'represent' this — through policy or community
action? CDP seeks to support subsistence but ■
not mandate subsistence.]
Ilk
NL
■ Grow own food; power, self-reliance. [No
Change]
■ Does the maintenance of BLM land create lack of
natural resources to communities who desire to
be self-reliant? [No Change]
■ Hunting, fishing & gathering in coastal areas is
not just recreation - it is subsistence. [No
Demo "good stewardship". [No Change]
Welfare Trap: income - allow time frame for
transition; provide incentives; mandatory
volunteer work if not in school or working. [No
Change]
■ Hear responses from County (Mayor, etc.). [No
Change]
■ Mail delivery in small communities like lower
Papa'ikou. [No Change: mail is federal and
outside scope of CDP]
■ Are immigrant grave sites and burial grounds
protected? If not, what options for protection
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Misc. Comments
are there? "Many immigrant graves along
Hamakua Coast. Nothing to prevent
development, but archaeological review needed
to proceed with development. When Hawaiian
bones found, development stops but what legal
protection is available to stop development to
preserve/protect "immigrant" bones. [No
Change: mandated regulations are in place when
any human bones are found on a site]
■ Inter -island ferry - Support local business. [No
Change]
■ State controls huge amount of land. Example of
O'6kala Coastal Area State Owned. [No Change]
■ Lack of response or acknowledgement of receipt
■
from State agencies to resident
concerns/comments (i.e. Hakalau landslide: n(
response on coastal resource; i.e. Endangered
Hawksbill Turtle & Monk Seal. [No Change]
Cocktail hours after elections suggested as a way
to get our priorities known to State & Federal. '
[No Change]
■ Suggestion: Create strong, small neighborhood
links thru establishing Kumiai-type groups. [No
Change: This is a good idea — but these kumiai
groups can be created without CDP.]
■ Development by Steve & Dylan Shropshire -also
in Ninole on the Makai side of Highway. Right
now this appears to be a "scar" on the land,
which seems to be inappropriately close to the
Cliffside and disregard for runoff into the ocean.
Please visit if you have not already to view their
development work which appears to be
inappropriate. [No Change: specific project
compliance or permit violations should be
reported to DPW; are outside the scope of CDP]
■ What are rules for building traditional Hawaiian
Hale on lots for WOOFERS, etc.? [No Change:
Not within scope of CDP. Building code is based
on International Building Code (IBC) and
International Residential Code (IRC) both 2006;
State HRS allows for certain ag exemptions for
structures but not residences — refer to Dept. of
ti Public Works, Building Division or
http://www.hawaiicounty.gov/public-works-
building
Mise us comments th uld not be easily
categorized, or are statements regarding current
conditions, and/or do not call for specific revision or
CDP action:
Wa'a Hamakua - Navigation Teaching [No
Change]
Left Foot Steppin' -Volunteer Org [No Change]
Knowledge of past & elevate same values &
behaviors that worked so well before. [No
Change]
■ Big properties next to natural waterways. [No
Change]
■ How can we design our own life and
communities? [No Change]
■ Methods/ways to keep community members
connected to what is happening in the
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Misc. Comments
community they live in, not work in. [No
Change]
■ Livable wage for a single parent with 1 child is
$60K. [No Change]
■ Spend our money to have a better way of life.
[No Change]
■ Who do we call to get info for leasing land? [No
Change]
■ Mauka areas traditionally built without permits
because permits were hard to get. [No Change]
■ Future boomers needing to downsize. [No
Change]
■ Create systems that perpetuate & maintain what
we already know - what we innately know but
■ Community association should have someone
regularly attend county meetings, etc. [No
Change]
■ Education in "how to access system/process" -
how things work. [No Change]
■ City official meet with local area groups to
facilitate "how to access." [No Change]
Entity to coordinate information/communication
between State, County, and Federal Government
to avoid duplicates. [No Change]
■ Weave an entity/system/process/hui that makes
a palatable connection between community
have forgotten; avoid the current status of kee
starting over only to fail again; adopt ways &
methods that return us to basic know-how that ■
works, survives & thrives
-Simple & genuine. [No Change]
Miscellaneous comments that r late t ounty ■
functions or CDP Process:
■ Like the layout of the boards - easy to read &
follow. Can tell it has been a long, but thorough
process. [No Change]
■ Agencies, etc. need to conduct business to
accommodate community members' availability,
not the other way around. [No Change]
needs & action steps. [No Change]
Community needs "place at table" EARLY in
decision-making. [No Change]
Having information to use - How to use info of
CDP (i.e. land use) NOW with current projects.
[No Change]
Bring together collaborating entities with
common needs or opportunities. [No Change]
■ How to keep people informed regarding small
area -specific groups? How to inform of "rights"?
How to safeguard rights? How to access
available resources, procedures, etc.? [No
Change]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Misc. Comments
■ Crucial to have timely follow-up & follow-thru on
How to elevate status of County to have effective
raised issues. Who follows thru? [No Change]
partners at State & have more priority? Not a
question of money, but of using expertise,
resources, etc. [No Change]
■ Who takes action? Hawai'i Wildlife Fund, Recycle
Hawai'i, Friends of the Park, Surfrider
Foundation, UH -Hilo Sustainability Committee,
Current "processes/procedures" NOT working
Blue Zones HMSA, CERT (Civil Defense), RSHCA,
well. [No Change]
Keep Hawai'i Beautiful (Keep America Beautiful
Affiliate), CHORE Services, Natural Farming
Hawaii, Health & Wellness. [No Change]
What's the priority?? Not consistent. [No
Change]
■ Kokua action difficult as agencies operate in
"silos". [No Change]
e dialogue at all government levels to
Censure
nty issues are prioritized in funding
■ Community representative designated as "public
evels. [No Change]
relations" coordinator - manages
communications between community & vario
%
agencies (i.e. local, state, federal, etc.). [No
■ Several comments received that "processes" DO
Chane]
NOT work because they try to FIT comments into
existing, rather than explore new venues/ways.
��
[No Change: as far as what tools are available
1AMENNEM■ Would likely need to occur on a level even more
and what new tools can be used —the CDP is
specific than Hamakua. [No Change]
attempting to look at both and implement what
is feasible to achieve community objectives.
Note: a regional CDP cannot completely reinvent
■ Gathering & maintaining momentum towards
the wheel and must be legally feasible and not in
community change among community members
conflict with other existing higher authority
important. [No Change]
regulations — i.e., it cannot conflict with U.S.
constitution , HRS, etc.]
■ For upcoming event (speak out) - use multiple
sturdy, non -glass road signs with bright colors; 2
in each direction. 1) CDP 1 Mile Turn Ahead, and
2) CDP time & date posted day before (in time to
catch evening traffic/morning traffic)
■ County property in limbo - need assistance in
making it available for local business use - next
mayor. [No Change]
■ ISSUE: Within County jurisdiction vs need to
VOICE A VALUE STATEMENT. [No Change]
■ Thanks so much for providing this important
informative event. I believe the direction of the
CDP as presented here is pointing toward right
action. [No Change]
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Misc. Comments
■ This presentation was well thought out. Can't
imagine a better overview. Each of the
storyboards and volunteers were/was interesting
and informative. Really happy I came. Thank you
for the hard work and positive energy. [No
Change]
■ Penalty for contractors for going beyond the time
of their project?
Or, work at night & close off more lanes to finish
under budget & early.
■ How do we get local families to "speak outs" and
similar gatherings so that their voices can be
heard? [No changel
■ Within County Planning Department: to have a
person(s) to "shepherd" proposals thru the
permitting process. [No Change: outside CDP
scope and not feasible/appropriate for Planning
Dept. personnel to 'shepherd' private proposals
through entire County regulatory system.]
- How is time factored into decisions on contract I
proposals? (Not just cost). [No Change]
■ Like to see some "teeth" - when city agency
contacted; no response. [No Change]
■ Make presentations at Ahualoa Community
Association - Meeting to gather
input/information. [No Change: note: CDP Team
has met with Ahualoa Community Association
since this request was made.
Idsommonsh-11, 't
■ Require Planning Department and Planning
Commission express their rationale if actions
taken are not consistent with the CDP before a,�
decision is finalized to allow public comment in
advance of decision. [No Change]
■ Are gates allowed on Roads in Limbo if you own
both sides of the road and all owners agree? [No
Change: public roads are to remain open;
however specific road questions should be
addressed to DPW.]
■ Effective community outreach needed No
Changel
Focus group on existing proposed projects
exploring multi-use/function on parcel. [No
Change]
Are other State plans tracking on the CDP for
economic actions? [No Change]
In
HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Misc. Comments