KCDP Final - 2008 (Volume 2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

The Public Involvement Process Phase 2: Mapping the Future — to address critical questions and identify where future growth should occur (The Mapping the Future workshop was held in February 2006). Phase 3: How Do We Grow? Charrette Part 1 and 2 — to identify preferred development patterns (this phase consisted of two charrettes held in March and June 2006). Phase 4: The Working Groups — to identify objectives and actions for inclusion in the specific elements of the CDP. An extensive outreach effort was established to ensure that residents heard about the public involvement activities and were invited to participate. Outreach included involving local networks and special interest groups, the development of an extensive mailing list of participants, and the distribution of flyers and invitations. The four phases are described in detail below. Phase 1: Gathering Ideas Introducing the CDP process: 1. Focus Group Interviews Two meetings were held in In September 2005, the consultant team conducted a series of focus September 2005 to present to group structured interviews with stakeholder groups that included special residents the proposed process for the CDP, to announce the schedule interest groups, representatives of the tourism industry, businesses, of future events, and to gain an representatives of the development community, large and small property understanding of the public's expectations for the Plan. The owners, native Hawaiians, long-term residents, and newcomers. These meetings were held at the interviews were structured to expose perceptions and attitudes on issues. Kealakehe and Konawaena high Seven key perception that emerged from the interview are listed below: schools. A key outcome of these meetings was the decision to 1. Land use — low density gated development patterns inconsistent structure the Gathering Ideas phase with the area's culture and character; of the project as an open ended and 2. Transportation — heavy congestion due to lack of North South and on -demand set of small meetings with residents and special interest East West connectivity and limited choices in transportation groups to be conducted in all parts alternatives; of the region. This format ensured 3. Housing affordability —due to the high price of land and a lack of broader participation, easier access to the process, and a degree of affordable housing products in the vicinity of where jobs are; informality that enabled frank and 4. Demographics — with population getting older and the income gap open discussion of ideas and between newcomers and residents getting wider; issues. 5. Environmental degradation — through deforestation, increased occurrence of flash floods, water and air quality deterioration, and lack of controls on slope development; 6. Cultural preservation — with widening conflict between the protection of ancestral lands from use and development; and 7. Governance — with concerns about fairness of revenue reinvestments in Kona. Kona Community Development Plan 2.2