HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0493.062 2000-2002 R~~?v~ ,.,w
Mme---- gY
-
l. _ ~.z
Bye-__--._ _.~:f_ ~ ----~-...e..,~
To: The Hawaii County Council Planning Committee ~ aunty ~ourv,:~i_
Date: June 19, 2002 ~ ~
Welcome!
For the past two years there have been many workshops discussing the revision of the County General Plan.
The Planning Department held a series of workshops throughout the island gathering input from the public.
Testimony from the public at these workshops was overwhelmingly in favor of land designations that serve to
conserve our counties coastal resources.
The Planning Department and its director have responded to the public in proposing the placement of several
sensitive areas on our island into conservation in the new General Plan and we heartily applaud their efforts.
Government is mandated to serve the people and we feel the Planning Department has done just that.
The placement of the Keopuka Lands adjacent to Kealakekua Bay into conservation is imperative to main-
taining the pristine quality and wilderness nature of the bay.
Two years ago, thousands of citizens responded to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the
Keopuka Lands project saying they wanted to see this area protected.
Keep Kealakekua Wild is currently conducting a campaign asking citizens to send cards and letters to Mayor
Harry Kim in support of the Planning Departments recommendation to save our precious coastlines. Hundreds
have responded thus far.
The Conservation Zone should encompass all the lands up to the Old Government Road as depicted on the
LUPAG maps in the present draft of the plan. Even with this protection the likelihood of destruction of cultural
and historical resources is still high. As well, the view plane from Kealakekua Bay will be affected by the
presence of homes along the hillside.
The land that is proposed for development derives much of its development value due to its proximity to the
ocean and the wild open coastline that it proposes to alter forever.
Coastal developments use public resources for private profit and there is no recompense available that can
make up for the degradation of our coastal and cultural resources.
The county must remember that there are no "God given" property rights. Property rights grow out of our
legal system that changes over time.
Native Hawaiians also have property rights that exist parallel to western-based rights.
The U.S. constitution does not provide for a right to develop land for maximum profit. The definitive Su-
preme Court rulings have shown that here is only a "taking" when a property owner is deprived of gill economic
value of the property.
When a buyer purchases a property with the intention of developing it for a profit, that buyer is taking a
calculated gamble. Part of that gamble is the inherent risk that the current regulations might be tightened.
File No.
Ref. ~o:
fief. Bate ~U~ ~ L(1(1,[
The Supreme Court has been clear that they do not provide security for a developer's gamble. As the Court
has said, "Those who do business in the regulated field cannot object if the legislative scheme is buttressed by
subsequent amendments to achieve the legislative end."
The courts have specifically supported government regulation of adjacent private land to protect public land
and water resources.
Ka`awaloa and Kealakekua Bay, as well as Kohanaiki, and the lands near Pu`uhonua O Honaunau, are
prime examples of this scenario.
In such cases as Just a Marinette County and Audobon Society a Superior Court of Alpine County, regula-
tion of development on lands adjacent to public lands such as parks and preserves has been found not to be
considered a taking.
Extensive lava tube systems lie beneath the surface of Keopuka. I would estimate 60 to 70% of the landmass
is riddled with cave systems. Any development in this area would involve collapsing of these systems and the
importation of massive amounts of soil to the site, just like what has occurred and continues to occur at Hokulia.
These caves are living cultural artifacts that contain evidence of prehistoric habitation, as well as hidden
burials and familial artifacts known only to the families who have passed down this knowledge for many gen-
erations. Some of these caves are expansive, long caverns with ceilings as high as seventy feet. The destruction
of the caves would destroy forever any opportunity for these families to continue to actively conduct their
religious and cultural practice. These caves are also used as homes for hundreds of pueo (Hawaiian short-eared
owl) who nest on the cave walls.
Consider this quote from a recent study by noted historian Kepa Maley.
"One consultation participant, a descendent of the Makekau line, spoke with particular concern about
proposed development at Keopuka. She explained that for generations her family has been caretakers of impor-
tant high-ranking ilina, which remain hidden in cave systems, but which could be impacted by land alteration.
Elders of her family regularly walked the trail from Ka`awaloa to Keopuka on visits to care for family sites and
she continues to do so today."- A Cultural-~Iistorical Study: Na Ala Hele- Lartds of Keauhou to Kealakekua by
Kepa Maley.
The archeology survey done for this property in 1989 was done at the same time as the one done for Hokulia
by the same company.
The Hokulia survey, even though approved by SHPD, has been shown to be grossly inadequate and has
resulted in the inadvertent discovery and destruction of numerous burials and important sites.
These surveys are the work of "contract" archeologists and, as in any contract, the person paying the bill is
the one who decides the extent of the effort to be made relative to budgetary restrictions and the level of interest
in finding archeological evidence.
It is not in the interest of landowners, whose only interest in the land may be the profits they can glean from
its development, to find extensive archeological evidence on their land.
Mr. Anderson's well-timed statement that he will donate portions of Keopuka to be put into Conservation
must be taken with a grain of salt. Time and again agreements made by Anderson companies, with the commu-
nity and lineal and cultural descendents of the Hokulia property, have been left unfulfilled.
A case in point is a February 2000 agreement to build a six foot stone wall around the entire base of Pu `u
Ohau to protect the Pu`u which as a whole is considered a sacred burial site. That wall has never been built,
home lots are planned on the northern flats of the Pu`u and Anderson is now approaching the State Historic
Preservation Division to invalidate their original agreement.
The members of Keep Kealakekua Wild and Protect Keopuka Ohana encourage the County Council to adopt
the General Plan Revision in whole without further delay.
Al
fy ack Kelly
Coordinator, eep Kealakekua Wild
Vice President, Protect Keopuka Ohana