SC Minutes 19December2016 DRAFT - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

fields and questions if other areas off of the coastline will be identified for future industrial use. Mr. Moniz asked for clarity on how the revisions relating to the industrial area on Hakalau Point came back to the Steering Committee. Mr. Whitmore clarified that staff had researched previous meeting minutes, audio files and public comment to be clear on this point. He reiterated that concerns were first raised by community members back in May at a Focused Discussion on coastal development in Pepe'ekeo at Kula'imano Community Center. There were only a few Steering Committee members in attendance and the property owner of the area in question was not in attendance. These community comments were put forth by staff to the Steering Committee during their subsequent review of community comment. The idea of changing the land use map of Hakalau Point to the Open designation was brought up during public testimony at the September 10, 2016 meeting. It was Mr. Moniz who questioned whether the idea to consider other options regarding Hakalau Point was agendized properly for the September 10, 2016 meeting. Staff was in agreement with Mr. Moniz and re- agendized Hakalau Point on September 28, 2016. During the September 28, 2016 meeting, Mr. Kurokawa recused himself from the vote to be consistent with the guidelines the Steering Committee had been using from its start. Mr. Whitmore again stated that the CDP as written, the land use map of the CDP, does not affect the current uses of Hakalau Point. It does not change the zoning. Ms. Gloor shared that while in many cases legacy industrial uses (not zoning) near rivers or on coastal properties were removed during the initial evaluation process, this was not the case for the Hakalau Point property due to its industrial zoning. The CDP is not recommending a change of zone for any of the industrial zoned areas within the planning area. Prior attempts to try and "relocate" industrial areas further away from the coastline proved difficult and are really not within the scope of the CDP. Ms. Gloor clarified that contrary to statements made during Public Testimony, there are no Special Management Area (SMA) Permits waiting on the CDP. Mr. Kurokawa apologized for his mistake and explained a little about what brought about the conflict of interest — During the process with the Public Open Space (PONQ - the community, and I'm part of the community, had asked me to help them - help visualize so they would have a graphic for what could be. I was very hesitant, and so - but I did, just to help that process, the public process which went through the PONC process and it ended up number three. I agreed to help them just put down some ideas, and that was the mistake that I made, and it's sort of come around to taint this process, and I don't want it to taint the whole CDP process. I did help them draw something up but I did also make very clear that it's just an idea for the PONC process and that if we were to move forward in the negotiations with the land owner that — I stipulated that it would be very important that the community - the landowner and the community — if the negotiations proceeded, that we would have a very transparent and open community process to determine what that might end up being. That unfortunately, I've watched through this public process, the newspapers -the media, kind of get twisted it in a way. I did agree to an interview with the Tribune Herald, and then it came out — it's not quite the way that I had shared all of this stuff, and I don't really care to get into all of that stuff. But, the bottom line is for me — our role as Steering Committee members is to be active proponents and advocates for the community's voice. Page 111