HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0027.051 2000-2002
Bonnie Gpodsll 4 a0a-967-7775 ~3I7I01 Cvt 32 PM 2110
80111118 C3OOdell www.bonni~ooodoll.cam Plainnin8 for Sustt+inabflity
Box 6, Volerano HI 96786-0006 (806) 967-7776 (hix 966-7606) omawphn®Inbrpac.n~t
yfarch 8. 2001
Mayor Harrv Ktm
Chnstopher Yuen, Planmag Director
James Arakaki, Chair, and'~4embers of the County Council
County of Hawau
25 Aupum Street
I-ltlo, Hawau 96720
RE. Discnmination in County of Hawau General Plan and possible implications for
Shipman rezoning request curnntly before the County Council
Dear fir Ktm, Vfr Yuen, fir Arakakt, and IVfembers of the County Council,
Thu is in response to'.vlr Yuen's letter of February 16 requesting clanfication of my letter
of January 29 regazding discnmination in the General Plan Draft document It is also to
caution the County adminutraUon and Council regarding possible implicaUoas of any land
use actions they may take based oa the current County General Plan
This is what is going on, a very condensed history•
In 1998, a group of citizens who were members of the CrUZens Advtsory Committee of the
Hawau Long Range Land Transportation Plan (FIIRI_TP) formed an ad-hoc committee
called the Sustainability Committee to file civil rights complaints against the State of
Hawau and the County of Hawaii for ruing false data rn the preparation of the HLRLTP in
order to deny services to the 70,000+ lots in the small-owner subdivrsions. Further, we
asserted, the sen~ices were thereby diverted to the future planned developments of
landowners like W.H Shipman, Kamehameha Schools, Queen Ltltuokalam Trust, Waikoloa
Land, the State Housing Finance and Development Corporatron, and others I am the
spokesperson for the Sustainabtliry Committee
The two HLRLTP mechanisms of this diversion were
1 Projections of no population growth in the small-owner subdn tstons after about 1995,
and, to the case of Puna, a drop in population in the subdivisions after 2010.
2. The representation of the small-owner subdivrsions in the computer model, TnuiPlan as
they aze shown in the County General Plan, as "orchards and extensive agnculture"
rather than as their actual use, which is restdenual, lazge-lot residential, intensive
Comm. No. Z • 51
File No.
Pr~s~nr~o
Ref. To:
Ref. Da~° MA 7 20(]~
Bonnie Goodell 4 eoe-~~-ins ~13I7I01 y1 33 PM '?3I10
Bocrtve Goodell Borwe Btssen/Sisstainabiliry Committee re GP DRAFT & Zoning March S, 2001
agnculture, and mined use This misrepresentation of land uses violates both the
directions for use of the TraztPlan computer model and federal planning requirements
The Federal Highway Administration investigated our complaznt and found that all our
allegations were supported They were very specific A complete copy of the Federal
Investtgattve Findings may be found on my websrte, www bonmegoodell.com I strongly
suggest that you download a copy of the Investtgattve Findings and read them very
carefully The local consultant providtng the land use and population data for the HL.RLTP,
from 1993 until 1998, was Mr VPilliam Moore, who all dunng that time was also employed
by W H. Shipman to plan for its development around Keaau. and to obtazn W H Shipman's
Boundary Amendment from the Land Use Commission.
I personally made testimony to the Land Use Commission, the Department of Education,
and through numerous memos to the County Planning Department (as lead consultant for
the Puna Community Development Plan) from 1992 on, that the misrepresentation of land
uses for the small-owner subdtr tstons, and the associated failure to provide services and
correct land use analyses, was a violaUoa of them tights I also alleged, and still mazntazn,
that the residents and landowners of those subdivisions have been and are being
substantially harmed by that misrepresentation and by the associated fazlure to provide fair
treatment in all county and state services, including at least planning, water souroe
development, transpoRaUon, schools, police, fire protection, parks, and access to federal azd,
such as from FEhlA, HUD, and USDA
Correcting this land use misrepresentation and disparity in services has tmphcations for the
all land use decisions on the Btg Island. For instance, m the County General Plan, Urban
Expansion Areas, such as the one around Keaau, have been justified by land rue analyses
which purport to show that there is iasuffictent area of urban land to support what would be
needed for anticipated future growth. Obviously it would be impossible to reach the
conclusion that Puna needed additional urban lands if the land uses rn the existiag
subdivisions were not misrepresented You can find maps illustrating what I mean on my
website, on the page explaining the civil tights complaznt about the HL.RLTP
The Sustatnability Committee and I, personally, have already communicated with Mr
Hayashi, at the beginning of the review process, to clanfy how the General Plan is the basis
of the dtscnminatton Therefore, I have attached copies of those communications. My
website also contains a Level of Services Study which I suggest be compared with all the
facilities maps and facilities elements is the existing and DRAFT General Plan
Bonnie Goodell 480a-%7-7775 X317/01 m134PM X4/10
Bomve Goodell Bomve BisseNSistaznab~l~ty Commiaee re GP DRAFT' & Zoning ytarch 8, 2001 3
Thank you for your attention This letter is co-signed by Bonnie Bissen because she has
made a complaint to the Legal Aid Society of Hawau
Sincerely.
Bonnie Goodell Bonme Buren
Attachments
Copy of 213198 memo
Copy of Letter of September 16, 1998 to \orman Hayashi
cc Mike Cruise, Legal Aid Society of Hawau
BonnieGoodsll 4908-967-7775 t1r317/01 ~-136 PM L~5/10
Bornue Croode111Botaue Bissen'Suvtaznabihry Comminee re GP DRAFT & Zomng Mazch 8, 2001 4
Date. 213198
TO. County Planning Department
FROM: The Sustainability Committee of the Citizens Advisory Committee of the Hawazi
Long Range Transportation Aan Roger Evans, John Luchau (Hawaiian Paradise Park),
Knsune Kubat (Clear Rumm~gs), Jon Olson (Puna Community Council), Ron Reilly'
(,Mayor's Bike/Pedestrian Commission, People Advocating for Trails Ilawai'i), David
Taylor (President of Puna Commumty Council and Puna Traffic Safety), Keith Wallis (E
Mau :Va Ala Hele, Wazmea Trails and Greenways); David Skaife (Mayor's Bike'Ped
Advisory Committee), Bonme Goodell (planner); Bev Byouk (Ocean View')
Subject Input to the First Public Meetings [or the General Plan i:pdate
Members of the DOT's Commumty Advisory Committee (CAC) have been told repeatedly
that our input-on things Iike recognizing and plamung for the substandard subdivisions,
creation of more two-lane networks instead of L.-4 style highways, land use for fewer and
shorter cat tops and for encouraging walktng, biking and public trans-is more properly
put to the County General Plan
We therefore request the following general improvements to the County' General Plan
I All maps and text must show all anticipated development Wherever the County is
approving building permits for residential densities, that azea must be shown as Urban
Where lot sizes are one acre or larger, but the ma~onty of the actual use is not fanning, it
must be shown as mined use This regwres a change in the designation and descnptton of
most of the buildable lots on the Big Island
Why'
• "If it walks lile a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck " Calling a house with no farm
a fans dwelling, or calking a subdivision with 3,000 quaRer-acre lots and ag zoning
`orchards" or "non-conforming subdivisions" does not, in the eyes of the law or the eyes of
the public make it so It merely makes County planning incompetent The law is cleaz
that the services for which the County is responsible are determined by the actual
development and building permits issued by the County, not the name the County chooses
to call it
• If the County does not want to provide urban services in agncultutal zomng, then the
County had the power and legal nght to refuse building permits not in conformance with
the zoning or Land Use District requirements If, however, the County permits
development, then that permitted development is the actual land use It is the County's
maps and documents which are non-conforming, not the subdivisions.
• The State Planning Law, Chapter, Chapter 226, directs General Plans to show all desired
development and projected population. It does not set a time horizon. The development
the County actually permits in fact determines the expected population The GP must
Bonnie Goodell 460&967-7775 L~3/7/01 ~136PM X6/10
• Bormme Goodeil'Bornae 8isseNSustaznab4ity Comminee re GP DRAFT 6c Zoinng :vtarch 8, 2001 5
either show build-out of permitted land use or show how the development rights will be
withdrawn
• The Planning Director has verbally committed to malting this basic change
II Apply the County's own Land Zoning Bank policy for projecting future subdivision
and zoning needs where the existing inventory of buildable pazcels is insufficient for the
next five to ten year;, based on actual use as descnbed in paragraph I
Why?
• The Land Zoning Bank is a prescnbed part of community development plans Its
function is to inventory the available vacant land in each zomng classification and then
determine if there is sufficient available land to meet the development needs for the next 5-
l0years Only if there is imsufficient vacant land in a given zomng classification does the
Land Zoning Bank allocate a "fund" of "zoning acres" that may be drawn upon to upzone
in that area If there is ample vacant inventory, no rezoning should occur Tlns function, if
it is to function at all, must be reflected in the GP The County and the State (in them
Boundary• analyses), have both made a mockery of this pnnciple by assuming that, for
instance in Puna, 16,000 pazcels, each one-half-acre or less in size, do not count as existing
inventory of bnildable residential parcels because they are zoned for agnculture. Additional
residential subdivisions are thereby ~ustdied.
III The GP must plan locations of pazks, fire stations, police stations, stores and other
daily commerce, employment, waste disposal, public water, utility s}•stems and
transportation links for all anticipated development shown as a result of compliance with I
and II The County must requue the State to pror ide, for the GP, all the schools, state
pazks and other state facihties
Why?
• IIRS Chapter 226 and the function of planning require this. Planning accomplishes the
purpose of health, safety, and management of the public purse by anticipating needs in time
to make arrangements for them at the lowest possible public cost Waiting to identify
needed publrc lands until pnvate property must be condemned is contradtctory to the
function of planning
• It is not fair to property owners for them to have to invest in them pnvate property while
the threat constantl}' hangs over them of condemnation for public use Thrs threat occurs
when go~erninent creates development rights that will require public infrastructure and
services, but fails to plan for those publrc land needs
IV Provide within the GP review a process for all communities to choose between two
different development styles• suburban sprawl or compact "livable" communities. Provide
realistic descnptions of the two options including infrastructure, environmental and energy
Bonnie Goodell 4 BO&967-7775 ~3l7l01 ~ 1 39 PM =7110
• Boruve GoodeWBorniie Bissen'Sustaznability Comminee to GP DRAF•I.6r Zoning 'March 8, 2001 6
costs, cost of living, exclusionary vs. inclusionary land use patterns, traffic congestion,
traffic safety, and highway costs, accessibility for those without personal autos, number
and length of automobile traps required, two-lane "maznstreet and country road"
transportation networks vs "pods" along limited access, multi-lane highways, visual
preference surveys, impacts on surrounding commumues, protection of agnculture, and
actual tax burden Provide the Ahwahnee Principles as examples of plamm~g pnnciples in
use by communities which have chosen livability Provide presentations of plans based on
livability, by qualified presenters who favor livabihty, as well as advocates for sprawl
patterns GP, and the plamm~g of public improvements and zoning, as pet III must then
reflect commumty choices.
W hy~
• The current GP has goals and policies which descnbe livable communities (convenience,
accessibihty, protection of agnculttire, etc.). But the actual practice within the County and
within the State Depaztment of Transportation is to implement auto-dependent sprawl,
which is more expensive for both the tax base and in cost of living than compact
development The public must be given real choices after comprehensive education about
the actual differences
• Sprawl development, which creates single-occupancy vehicle commuting requires
highway lane additions for which federal funding is not and will not be avazlable. On
average, it costs $30,000 to highway improvements for each commuter vehicle added to the
highway That cost will have to be shouldered to a large extent by local taxpayers if we do
not make the land use/traasportation pattern support alternative access
V ti4ake an Element for ACCESS, both traditional choices to give people in every
community the option of anon-commuter lifestyle. shoreline and mauka access, and for
bicycles and pedestnans Incoipoiate in this element the detailed shoreline access plan
prepared in 1979 by the Planning Department as well as provision for master planning
access systems within each district and review of all subdivision applicataoas for inclusion
of access ways
a~ny~
• The Department of Public Works and the State Department of Transportation both
continually cite the lack of improvements or even consideration of these kinds of access
ways on the fazlure of the County GP to provide for them
• The continuation of Hawaiian cultural practices and values regarding the public trust is
one of the most valuable things Hawazi has to offer to the world culture As such it is also
of mayor economic value to us as a visitor destmation
tZ Include geologic hazards -lava flows, earthquakes, subsidence, locally generated
tsunami - as an Element, equal to Drainage. Include measures to lower the risk to health
Bonnie Goodell 4808-967-7775 ~3l7101 G1 39 PM !~ah0
• Bornue Goodell/Boraue &ssenrSusiaznabilm~ Comminee re GP DRAFT & Zoning Mazch 8 200]
and safety, such as downzomng to prevent further subdrvrsion, tnursfer of development
nghis to areas of lower hazard, and special zoning designations
Why?
• Geologic hazards affect the health and safety of the populace Land use affects the level
of nsk for the population affected by the hazard and the economic health of the whole
population which bear; the cost of disaster, loss of public improvements, and economic
dislocation Denial is not an acceptable public policy
BonnisGoodell 4609-967-7775 4C 317/01 0141 PM ~9I10
' Bormre Goodell'Borwe Brsserv5ustarnabilny Committee re GP DRAFT & Zoning >-larch 8, 2001 8
Bonnie Goodell Pl~nnlna for BusGins~billty
P.O. Box 6, Voloerno HI 96786-p00d (808) 967-7776 (fax E296) omxpAan®brbrpac.nnt
September 16, 1998
Mr Norman Hayashi
Planning Deparffient, County of Hawair
25 Aupuni Street
Hilo, Hawan 96720
Subject Recap of our Meeting on Wednesday, September 1, reiteratron of need for equal
treatment of substandard aubdrvieione.
Dear Mr Hayeshr,
Thank you and Darren for the spirited drscusaran of the issues regarding the substandard
subdivrsions I think this dieouasion helped me to understand some sources of the `buck
passing"between government agenoree that perpetuates unequal treatment of these
subdrvrsrons
As you know, I contend that the planning, servrces and basrc economre ud'rastrvcture that
should be going to the subdtvrerons is being duected instead to the future developments of
the pohtrcally well-connected large landowners whose market for future subdivisrons rs
substantially dependent upon the failure of the older subdtviaions I also contend that the
County of Hawaii General Plan has been the prunary vehicle for carrying out this diversion
of recognrtron and raourees, whrch I and the reef of the Sustainabrlrty Commrttee contend
rs a vrolation of crvrl nghta and envtronmental~ustrce.
I appreciate your candrdness about the role of the GP. I have perceived that the GP should
comply' wrth HRS Chapter 226, the State Plan, requirements that "County general plans
shall be formulated on the basis of sound rationale, data, analyses " It was your
contentron at our meeting that the (iP ra gurded by Section 3-6 of the County Charter, to be
".A statement of the most desirable use of land "You interpreted that to direct you as a
planner to plan for "what should be"under good planning, rather then condone bad
planning Therefore, as you stated, rt ra not the GP's role to show what is in exrstence. rf
that represents bad planning, but rather whet ~ "desirable," so that the substandard
subdn•rsrons, as `bad planning" should not be condoned by recognIIron in the GP
You said that } ou do not know the source of the DOT's data for the Iiawatr Long Range
Transportation Plan One of my attachments rs a letter to me from HDOT planner Juha
Tsumoto addressing that issue It has been the County's contention, reiterated by you at
our meeting, that HDOT, in failing to pronde for transportation services and infrastructure
for the substandard subdivisions, incorrectly relied on the County GP, rather than actual
land use for then transportation modehng for the HI,RTP I find this confusing. When I
was preparing the second draft of the Puna Community Development Plan, et the trine the
HLRTP process was beginning, my recommendation that the subdivisions be redesignated
Bonnie Goodell 4 BO&967-7775 X317/01 ~ 1 42 PM 310/10
• Bornue Goodell'Bornue B~sseru'Sustatnabilny Committee re GP DR?~F7' & Zoning March 8, 2001 9
and upzoned to reflect actual use was rejected by the Planning Director "because the
County does not wish to provide them with services "
I thank you for your invdation for me to suggest language for the GP regarding substandard
subdlvlsions and Puna I have developed a library of sample materials for descnbing
sustainable, livable communities, and for integrating transportation and land use I attach
some sample language submitted by mein 1995 for the CDP, and a copy of the Ahwahnee
Pnnciples, which provide the overall goals for many of the Livable Communities plans
across the country However, it ~s not appropnatc forme as a planner to substantially
participate until I em confident that the County and the State are committed to extending
equal treatment to the substandard subdrvislons
Sincerely,
Bonnie Goodell
Attachments
Bonnie Goodell 4 808-967-7775 ~317/Ot !91 32 PM ~ 1110
- RUSH TO mayor's office
FAX 961-6553
FROM Bonnee Goodell
PAGES (INCLUDING THIS COVER) 10
I have sent this via hard copy Huth signatures today, but am
faxing from my computer because time may be critical Call
me at 967-7775 if you have questions Bonnie Goodell
Wednesday, Meth 7, 2001
N . om PI f
Hoot 8, VWo~rw MI 967860008 (808)987-7776 (iax 9867606) a .h~!'
March 8, 2001 ' 1 ITi r~; ~ ~ F TI 8 0 4
Mayor Harry Kim r;r ,;I
C er Yuen, Planning Director
James Arakaki Chair, and Members of the County Council
County of Hawau
25 Aupuni Street
Hilo, Hawaii 96720
RE: Discrimination in County of Hawau General Plan and possible implications for
Shipman rezoning request currently before the County Council
Dear Mr. Kim, Mr. Yuen, Mr. Arakaki, and Members of the County Council,
This is in response to Mr. Yuen's letter of February 16 requesting clarification of my letter
of January 29 regarding discrimination in the General Plan Draft document. It is also to
caution the County administration and Council regarding possible implications of any land
use actions they may take based on the current County General Plan.
This is what is going on, a very condensed history:
In 1996, a group of citizens who were members of the Citiuns Advisory Committee of the
Hawaii Long Range Land Transportation Plan (HLRLTP) formed an ad-hoc committee
called the Sustainability Committee to file civil rights complaints against the State of
Hawaii and the County of Hawaii for using false data in the preparation of the HLRLTP in
order to deny services to the 70,000+ lots rn the small-owner subdivisions. Further, we
asserted, the services were thereby diverted to the future planned developments of
landowners like W.H. Shipman, Kamehameha Schools, Queen Lilruokalani Trust, Waikoloa
Land, the State Housing Finance and Development Corporation, and others. I am the
spokesperson for the Sustainability Committee.
The two HLRLTP mechanisms of tlrrs diversion were:
1. Projections of no population growth in the small-owner subdivisions after about 1995,
and, in the case of Puna, a drop in population in the subdivisions after 2010.
2. The representation of the small-owner subdivisions in the computer model, Tr'anPlan, as
they are shown m the County General Plan, as "orchards and extensive agriculture"
rather than as their actual use, which rs residential, large-)ot residential, intensive
Boncue Goodell/Bonnie BissenlSustaznabdity Committee re (}P DRAFT & Zoning March 8, 2001 2
agriculture, and mined use. This misrepresentation of land uses violates both the
directions for use of the TianPlan computer model and federal planning requirements.
The Federal Highway Administration investigated ow complaint and found that all ow
allegations were supported. They were very specific. A complete copy of the Federal
Investigative Findings may be found on my website, www.bonniegoodell.com. Istrongly
suggest that you download a copy of the Investigative Findings and read them very
carefully. The local consultant providing the land use and population data for the HLRLTP,
from 1993 until 1998, was Mr. William Moore, who all dunng that trine was also employed
by W.H. Shipman W plan for its development around Keaau, and to obtain W.H. Shipman's
Boundary Amendment from the Land Use Commission.
I personally made testimony to the Land Use Commission, the Department of Education,
and through numerous memos to the County Planning Department (as lead consultant for
the Puna Community Development Plan) from 1992 on, that the misrepresentation of land
uses for the small-owner subdivisions, and the associated failure to provide services and
correct land use analyses, was a violation of their rights. I also alleged, and still maintain,
that the residents and landowners of those subdivisions have been and are being
substantially harmed by that misrepresentation and by the associated failure to provide fair
treatment in all county and state services, including at least planning, water sowce
development, transportation, schools, police, fire protection, parks, and access to federal aid,
such as from FEMA, HUD, and USDA.
Correcting this land use misrepresentation and disparity in services has implications for the
all land use decisions on the Big Island. For instance, in the County General Plan, Urban
Expansion Areas, such as the one around Keaau, have been,justified by land use analyses
which purpoR to show that there is insufficient area of urban land to support what would be
needed for anticipated future growth. Obviously it would be impossible to reach the
conclusion that Puna needed additional wban lands if the land uses m the existing
subdivisions were not misrepresented. You can find maps illustrating what I mean on my
website, on the page explaining the civil nghts complaint about the HLRLTP.
The Sustainability Committee and I, personally, have already communicated with Mr.
Hayashi, at the beginning of the review process, to clarify how the General Plan is the basis
of the discnmination. Therefore, I have attached copies of those communications. My
website also contains a Level of Services Study which I suggest be compared with all the
facilities maps and facilities elements in the existing and DRAFT General Plan.
Bomue Goodell/Bomue Bissen/Suammalnl~ty Committee re GP DRAFT 8c Zamog March 8, 2001 3
Thank you for your attention. This letter is co-signed by Bonnie Bissen because she has
made a complaint to the Legal Aid Society of Hawaii.
Sincerely,
`
Bonme Goodell Bonnie Bisa n
Attachments:
Copy of ?l3/98 memo
Copy of Letter of September 16, 1998 to Norman Hayashi
cc: Ivhke Cruise, Legal Aid Society of Hawaii
Date: 2/3!98
TO: County Planning Department
FROM: The Sustainability Committee of the Citizens Advisory Committee of the Hawaii
Long Range Transportation Plan: Roger Evans, John Luchau (Hawaiian Paradise Park);
Kristine Kubat (Clear Runnings); Jon Olson (Puna Community Council); Ron Reilly
(Mayor's Bike/Pedestrian Commussion, People Advxating for Trails Hawai'i); David
Taylor (President of Puna Community Council and Puna Traffic Safety); Keith Wallis (E
Mau Na Ala Hele, Waimea Trails and Greemways); David Skaife (Mayor's BikelPed
Advisory Committee): Bonnie Goodell (planner); Bev Byouk (Ocean Vrew).
Subject: Input to the First PabNc Meeth~ for the General Phm Update
Members of the DOT's Community Advisory Committee (CAC) have been told
repeatedly that our input-on thrngs like recognizing and planning for the substandard
subdivisions, creation of more two-lane networks tnstead of LA style highways,1and use
for fewer and shorter car trips and for encouraging wallung, biking and public trans-is
more properly put to the County General Plan.
We therefore request the following general improvements to the County General Plan.
I. All maps and text must show all anticipated development. Wherever the County is
approving budding permits for residential densities, that area must be shown as Urban.
Where lot sizes are one acre or larger, but the majonty of the actual use is not farming, it
must be shown as mrxed use. This requires a change in the designation and description
of most of the buildable lots on the Brg Islamd.
~9T
• "If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck." Calling a house with no
farm a fern dwelling, or calling a subdivision with 3,000 quarter-acre lots and ag zoning
"orehazds" or "non-conforming subdtvisrons" does not, in the eyes of the law or the eyes
of the public make rt so. It merely makes County planning incompetent. The law is
clear that the services for which the County is responsible are determined by the actual
development and building permits rssued by the County, not the name the County
chooses [o call it.
• the County does not want to provrde urban services in agricultural zoning, then the
County bad the power and legal right to refuse building permits not rn conformance with
the zoning or Land Use District requirements. If, however, the County permits
development, then that permitted development is the actual land use. It is the County's
maps and documents which are non-conforming, not the subdivrsrons.
• The State Planning Law, Chapter, Chapter 226, directs General Plans to show all
desired development and projected population. It does not set a time horizon. The
development the County actually permits in fact determines the expected population.
The GP must either show build-out of permitted land use or show how the development
rights will be withdrawn.
• The Planning Director has verbally committed to making this basic change.
II. Apply the County's own Land Zoning Bank policy for projecting future subdivision
and zoning needs where the eusting inventory of buildable parcels is insufficient for the
nett five to ten years, based on actual use as descnbed in paragraph 1.
• The Land Zoning Bank is a prescribed paR of community development plans. [ts
funCLOn is to inventory the available vacant land in each zoning classification and then
determine if there is sufficient available land to meet the development needs for the nett
S 10 years. Only if there is insufficient vacant land in a given zoning classification does
the Land Zomng Bank allocate a "fund" of "zoning acres" that may be drawn upon to
itpzone in that area. if there is ample vacant inventory, no rezoning should occur. This
function, if it is to function at all, must be reflected in the GP. The County end the State
(in their Boundary analyses), have both made a mockery of this principle by assuming
that, for instance in Puna, 16,000 parcels, each one-half-acre or less in size, do not count
as existing inventory of bmldable residential parcels because they are zoned for
agriculture. Additional residential subdivisions are thereby justified.
111. The GP must plan locations of parks, fire stations, police stations, stores and other
daily commerce, employment, waste disposal, public water, utility systems and
transportation links for all anticipated development shown as a result of compliance with
I and II. The County must require the State to provide, for the GP, all the schools, state
parks and other state facilities.
~y9
• HRS Chapter 226 and the function of planning require this. Planning accomplishes the
purpose of health, safety, and management of the public purse by anticipating needs in
time to make arrangements for them at the lowest possible public cost. Waiting to
identify needed public lands until pnvate property must be condemned is contradictory to
the function of planning.
• It is not fair to property owners for them to have to invest in their private property
while the threat constantly hangs over them of condemnation for public use. This threat
occurs when government creates development rights that will require public
infrastructure and services, but fails to plan for those public land needs.
IV. Provide within the GP review a process for all communities to choose between two
d4fferent development styles: suburban sprawl or compact "livable" communities.
Provide realistic descriptions of the two options: including infrastructure, environmental
and energy costs; cost of living; exclusionary vs. inclusionary land use patterns; traffic
congestion, traffic safety, and highway costs; accessibility for those without personal
autos; number and length of automobile trips required; two-lane "mainstreet and country
road" transportation networks vs. "pods" along limited access, multi-lane highways;
visual preference surveys; impacts on surrounding communities; protection of
agnculture; and actual tax burden. Provide the Ahwahnee Principles as examples of
planning principles in use by commumhes which have chosen livability. Provide
presentations of plans based on livability, by qualified presenters who favor livability, as
well as advocates for sprawl patterns. GP, and the plamm~g of public improvements and
zoning, as per III. must then reflect community choices.
Why?
• The current GP has goals and policies which describe livable communities
(convenience, accessibility, protection of agriculture, etc.). But the actual practice within
the County and within the State Department of Transportation is to implement auto-
dependent sprawl, which ~s more expensive for both the tax base and in cost of living
than compact development. The public must be given real choices after comprehensive
education about the actual differences.
• Sprawl development, which creates singlo-occupancy vehicle commuting requires
highway lane additions for which federal funding is not and will not be available. On
average, it costs $30,000 in highway improvements for each commuter vehicle added to
the highway. That cost will have to be shouldered to a large extent by local taxpayers if
we do not make the land use/transportation pattern support alternative access.
V. Make an F]ement for ACCESS, both tradiUOnal choices to give people in every
community the option of anon-commuter lifestyle. shoreline and mauka access, and for
bicycles and pedestrians. Incorporate in this element the detailed shoreline access plan
prepared in 1979 by the Planning Department as well as provision for master planning
access systems within each distnct and review of all subdivision applications for
inclusion of access ways.
~1hy1
• The Department of Public Works and the State Department of Transportation both
continually cite the lack of improvements or even consideration of these kinds of access
ways on the failure of the County GP to provide for them.
• The continuation of Hawaiian cultural practices and values regarding the public trust is
one of the most valuable things Hawaii has to offer to the world culture. As such it is
also of major economic value to us as a visitor destination.
VI. Include geologic hazards -lava flows, earthquakes, subsidence, locally generated
tsunami - as an IIement, equal to Drainage. Include measures to lower the risk to health
and safety, such as downzoning to prevent further subdivision, transfer of development
rights to areas of lower hazard, and special zoning designations.
~y~
• Geologic hazards affect the health and safety of the populace. Land use affects the level
of risk for the population affected by the hazard and the economic health of the whole
population which bears the cost of disaster, loss of public improvements, and econonuc
dislocation. Denial is not an acceptable public policy.
4
Bonnie Goodell Planning for Sustainabllity
P.O. Boor 8, Vobano NI 98786-0008 (808) 987-777b (fau 8206) cnwpl~r~lnt~rpro.n~t
September 16, 1998
Mr Norman Hayashi
Plannvtg Department, County of Hawair
25 Aupwu Street
Hrlo, Hawau 96720
Subject Recap of our Mceting on Wednesday, September 1, rerteration of need for equal
treatment of substandard subdivisions
Dear Mr Hayashi,
Thank you and Darren for the spinted drscussron of the issues regarding the substandard
subdrvrsrons I think this discussion helped me to understand some sources of the "buck
passing" between government agencies that perpetuates unequal treatment of these
subdivisions
As you know, I contend that the planning, services and basic ewnomic infrastructure that
should be going to the subdivisions is being directed instead to the future developments
of the politically well-connected large landowners whose market for future subdivisinns
is substantially dependent upon the failure of the older subdivisions I also contend that
the County of Hawau General Plea has been the pnmary vehicle for carying out this
dtversion of recognition and resowces, which I and the rest of the Sustainability
Committee contend is a violation of civrl nghts and environmental justice
I appreciate your candidness about the role of the GP I leave perceived that the GP
should comply month HRS Chapter 226, the State Plan, regwrements that "County general
plans shall be formulated on the basis of sound rationale, data, analyses " It was your
contention at our meeting that the GP is gwded by Section 3-6 of the County Charter, to
be "A statement of the most desiable use of land "You interpreted that to duect you
as a planner to plan for "what should be" under good planning, rather than condone bad
planning Therefore, as you sffited, it is not the GP's role to show what is in existence, if
that represents bad planning, but rather what is "desirable," so that the substandard
subdivisions, as "bad planning" should not be condoned by recognition in the GP
You said that you do not know the source of the DOT's data for the Hawarr Long Range
Transportation Plan. One of my attachments is a letter to me from HDOT planner Julia
Tsumoto addressing that issue It has bcen the Courity's contention, reiterated by you at
our meeting, that HDOT, in failing to provide for transportation services and
infrastructure for the substandard subdivisions, incorrectly retied on the County GP,
rather than actual land use for then transportation modeling for the HI,RTP I find this
confusing When I was prepanng the second draft of the Puna Community Developmem
Plan, at the nine the HLRTP process was beginning, my recommendation that the
Bonnie Goodell Page 2 3/7/0j
subdrvis~ons be redesignated and upzoned to reflect actual use was rejected by the
Plann?ng Drrector "because the County does not wish to provide them w?th services "
I thank you for your rnv~tahon for me to suggest language for the GP regarding
substandard subdtvrsrons and Puna I have developed a library of sample materials for
describing sustarneble, hvable commumhes, and for integrating transportation end land
use I attach some sample language subrmtted by me m 1995 for the CDP, and a copy of
the Ahwahnee Principles, which provrde the overall goals for many of the Livable
Commumtres plans across the country. However, rt is not appropriate for me as a planner
to substar?Ually participate untrl I am confident that the Coutny and the State are
comrmtted to extending equal treatment to the substandard subdrvrswns
Sincerely,
Bonnre Goodell
Attachments
a...,.,,. r.....,+nu Peon o anmi