HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0885.022 2022-2024From: Marty WakatCD
Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 10:12 AM µ" '
To: Council Testimony
Subject: Bill 166
I have submitted testimony in person twice and am unable to this third time as I am out of the country fork my 5 h-
birthday. The council has heard our testimony and voted unfavorably for this bill, This third hearing is not a'clean slate'
for the bill to pass if no one is present to object. My neighbors have all submitted testimony previously as well and we all
feel that further destruction of Kaloko rain forest is not prudent, The owner of this parcel bought it with the full intent of
having it subdivided. He told me himself he does not have the money to develope the property himself and bought it
purely with the intent of having the county board subdivide the property for him so he can then split the cost with
others.
Previous testimony submitted via email is below........
Aloha,
My name is Marty Wakat and I live in the Kaloko Mauka Subdivision directly next to the property in question. I have lived
in Kaloko Mauka area for nearly 20 years and have lived on Heneli Place for over 12 years. I want to go on record
objecting to Bill 166 which is the proposed zoning change for the 20 acre parcel on the corner of lower Hao and Heneli
Place. Councilwoman Kagiwada initially said my objection was a case of 'I got mine but they can't have theirs'. Not only is
this statement incorrect, but also uneducated and offensive. I bought my property as a 3 acre plot. I didn't buy a larger
plot specifically with the intention of separating it out and splitting it into many smaller lots. Not only did I adhere to the
20/80 guideline of making sure no more than 1/5th of the property was developed, but we have done our best to make
sure every ohia tree on the property was left. My driveway curves down and around existing trees and the overall design
of the property was done keeping the integrity of the forest in mind. As was stated by the councilwoman, there are
already many smaller 3 and 5 acres lots located all around the property in question to be subdivided. Having larger
parcels located in between and around smaller lots helps to maintain the integrity of the forest. There are only a few of
these larger parcels left located in the lower area of Kaloko Mauka. Keeping these larger parcels intact is essential to
mitigate the ongoing destruction of the Kaloko Rain Forest.
Kaloko rain forest is an Important ecosystem for all of Hawaii island and not only impacts humans, but more directly the
countless flora and fauna that inhabit the area. Already mentioned, the Hawaiian Hoary bat is a federally protected
endangered species endemic to Hawaii that has been spotted in this exact area. The i'iwl also has been spotted in this
area recently which is very unusual at lower altitudes of 2500ft where this area is located. This 20 acre area of forest has
hundreds of Ohia and countless koa trees also in risk if the entire lot is subdivided and they decide not to adhere to the
20/80 clearing plan for Kaloko Mauka subdivision.
To my understanding, the new owner of this property has not even walked or surveyed the entire 20 acres property so
has no idea what flora or fauna will be disturbed or if there are any archaeological remains as an archaeological study is
no longer required. When asked if their current permit would allow for clearing more than 20% of the property and
possibly a complete grubbing of the lot, their answer was vague and did not say specifically yes or no. Would there be 4
new driveways created off of Hao or would a single street be built and then the 4 properties would have the driveway off
of that?
Without specific answers to these questions, approval of this bill would be an ill advised decision by the council board
and could contribute to a permanent destruction of some of the last remaining rain forest located up Kaloko,
Comm, No
1 Ref. TO:
Rof. O-Ac JUL V-- 2_024