The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCOM 0027.062 2000-2002 James 1Vic~uen i~awai'i island Planning advocates F~Ci~ 2, fox 6813 Kea'au, ~9i 9~7~9 'fi fi~ i~i~Y ~~i~ C°Pi °1P C~3~3C1~ '~i~Ea 6 i° tl~Y S, Shipman application for honing Change ~ Kea'au Gateway Project Cear Chairperson Arakaki and Council Members: ~~_.~~.a.___~.' ~n~~E although it has been several months since the last hearing regarding the Shipman ~at~way Pro3~ct, i want to remind you that, although we do not have the luxury of time and resources \to attend each and every hearing on this proposal, the ma~~rity ®f Puna resides conti~~e t® (~t~i~t3S tih-e S€~~an +~ateway pr~~ect as pr~~sas~ci. i wi#I again reiterate the reasons +~rhy the project is unacceptable: 1. e w~ w I n m r ri M II m ioh ~ ~ l r n r I- n rvi R ...The population r~ center of`Puna is not in liea'au, but mach further down highway 130 betwn tT#a7~~aaiian Paradise mark and Pahoa. Pot many Duna residents, building another large rates! c~;nter in Kea'au will not significantly decrease the driving for certain goods and suppli€;s row found in 4~iilo. 2. Th a w r ' i s ff sti i II tr ~ va! hen l m l Of what use will the bypass be if ~htprna~, is allowed tc turn it into afoot-way traffc signal for their shopping center? ~iready, the bypass is not a true bypass, as drivers headed onto Hwy. 130 have to stop at a tragic light to make a left-hand turn. Con't destroy the remaining value of the bypass by allowing Shipman to turn it into a congested four-way stoplight! 3. r 'll + h r , v rii ~ l 'i € r iv • ¢ ~ .The project design shows no iMagsnation. ~'or example, this proect could a I°~awai'ian-themed retail village with unique local shops that would support local residents and be a visitor attraction all by itself. Instead, Shipman is proposing a faceless shopping center that will be an eyesore for residents and visitors alike. V!d'here are the architectural and design standards to ensure that develo,prnents of this type wilt be attractive and a real asset to the community? Co we really think that tourists want to come here to shop at ^ strip mall with the same ~Ilc~9onaids, gas stations and Safeways they have at home? 4. Th ¢ w r' i f l r I f r ' h r set f f "build it and they w## comeA approach- to planning witi only result in more sprawl, worse traffic, an undesirable place to live and an unattractive destination for visitors. Until our communFty and ;ror~al pia~~ ~r in place, we cannot allow projects of this Magnitude to destroy the rura# any ~~~~r" c b~~~€fy of the Puna district. imet's get our coMMUnity plans in place first, and then ~ut~d :ccordrng ~ ~ ~ 5. 'I• f ' Est but certainly not least, Shipman has always made promises to the-local community, but has consistently failed local residents. Consider the following: a. r i f .h hi ri .Several years ago, over the loud- and vocal protests of local residents, Shipman bulldozed the historic older buildings i€~ Kea'au village (saying they were structurally unsound}, but promised to rebuild sireilar structures in the same quaint, plantation style, and even provided architectural drawings of such structures. What did- Shipman eventually build? tcConalds and a gas station! b. ~ in i r r ' I have obtained copies of correspondence betw~n Shipman and the state ~®T showing that Shipman obtained, under the table; approval from the state to include much of tl`Se basic infrastructure for theirfour-way stoplight as part of the initial Kea'au Sypass construction! `The approval by the ®®T was based on aShipman-provided traffic analysis (TZAR) that has been judged as seriously inadequate by an outside transportation professional. This would have all continued to be a secret if Andy Levin had not pursued Shipman and the state ~®l° about their private arrangement. ices this scenario demonstrate good faith by Shipman on behalf of the community, or does it reveal a company dishonestly pursuing its own self-interests? c. I i n f i n r i n f v' .After the County Council tabled the Gateway project last year, Shipman hired biro Sumada to oversee their development projects in Kea'au. 9~t a community meeting held in Kea'au, 4~Ir. Sumada announced that Shipman was sponsoring a Kea'au Citizen's Advisory Committee, and that those interested should put their names on the sign- up sheet. I had signed up as the only representative of Flawai'i Island Planning Advocates, but was never invited to the mee#ing. When I called Moir. Sumada to fnd out why, he indicated that there were already enough people coming, and that I would not be allowed to attend. I-lowever, I was told by someone attending the first meeting that there were probably 8-10 representatives in attendance from just one local ICea'au church group! It became clear to me that Shipman is truly not interested in hearing from the local community-- particulariy from anyone that might challenge them and their development plans for I~u;~a. We are at a critical juncture in our island's growth and development, and many of us are :still hopeful that, ands: 1l4tayor Kim's administration, the beauty and uniqueness of this island can be preserved. I-lowever, poorly conceived proposals such as the Gateway project cannot be allowed to go forward until they are approved by local residents and are part of community-based plans that clearly spell out how fat}.are development gill proceed. Until then, €~una residents Sill be happy to drive a few more miles into Flilo, rather than end up with a bypass nightmare that will do nothing to raise our quality of life. _