HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0106.013 2004-2006 ~ estimony on Bills 29, 30, 31, and 32
to rezone and redesignate 14 acres of agricultural land in Kailua-Kona ~
for a shopping & residential development ~
O
for presentation at the Hawaii County Council meeting on April 12, 2005 ~
by Doug Perrine Z v
76-223 Haoa St. ~ ~ n~°
Kailua-Kona HI 96740
329-4523
Did any of the council members notice the interesting juxtaposition on pages 5-6 of West
Hawaii Today on Saturday, Apri19? (I hope that all the council members read the papers from
both sides of the island.) On the left side was an article asking residents of Kona, Kohala, and
Hamakua to conserve water because "...water sources and water distribution systems are
strained." Facing that article, on the right side, is an article about the plans of Puaa
Development and Suffolk Investment to build a 93,600 square foot shopping center and 350
multi-family residential units. It would have been nice to have had a quote from a member of
the Hawaii County Council's planning committee in the article explaining where the water is
going to come from for this new development. After all, the proposed development will be in
the heart of Kailua-Kona, where a water supply shortage is not a recent crisis due to lack of
rainfall, but rather along-term crisis that has resulted in over-pumping of the aquifer supplying
most of Kailua, leading to saltwater intrusion and elevated levels of sodium in Kailua's water
supply - a situation which directly affects the health of some Kailua residents. Once an aquifer
is contaminated by saltwater intrusion, there is no way for engineers to reverse the situation -
the water source is essentially within the time scale of the lives of our great-great grandchildren.
Given the critical nature of the water supply situation, the question that council members
should be asking is not "where will we get the water for the proposed development," but rather
"where will we get the water for the Pualani development, right across the street?" That
development is just "coming on line" for water consumption, as new houses are built and
landscaped. That development was approved a long time ago along with many others that were
stalled due to a slumping economy and stagnant real estate market. Now the economic situation
has reversed and builders are working as fast as they can. Reports published in the newspaper
predict that the number of houses in Hawaii County will double in the next ten years, based
upon developments that have already received all the necessary permits. Most of this growth
will occur in Kona and Puna -the two parts of the island where nearly all aspects of the
infrastructure are already stretched to capacity.
I have mentioned water as just one example, but residents of Kona are all painfully aware that
roads, schools, sewage systems, electric supply, police, fire, and hospital services have all failed
to keep up with the explosive growth here.
For ten years or more, the previous Councils enjoyed the luxury of approving nearly
every proposed development without having to face the consequences and provide the
necessary services, due to the developments going on hold and not being built out. Now the
bulldozers are already working overtime, and the current Council will have to "pay that bill,"
and ensure that roads and schools are built, police and firefighters are hired, wells are dug and
water lines laid, etc. Because past councils failed to plan for the future, the present Council is
faced with "planning for the past," as well as the future. This is a big order for a county that is
already facing large fines for violation of an EPA order to replace its gang cesspools. Even if
the Council had the political will to raise taxes to pay for its share of the necessary
infrastructure, that would do nothing to address items such as schools and highways, which are
the responsibility of the state. If this proposed development is built, along with the others that
are already approved, without four-laving Queen Kaahumanu Highway at least from Kainaliu to
the airport, traffic will simply stop, cutting off most Kona residents from the hospital, among
other things. It would be the height of irresponsibility to continue approving new development
in this area when you have no way of providing for the developments that are already under
construction.
During the last election cycle, there was much talk by the mayor and some current
members of the council of the concept of concurrency -that the timing of development must be
matched to the availability of the supporting infrastructure. If this concept is somehow
applicable only to the proposed Clifto's development, and not to all the other developments that
our present infrastructure simply cannot support, then I do not understand its value. To be fair
and effective, the principle of concurrency must be integrated into all county decisions and
applied to all re-zoning applicants in a uniform way.
Applying concurrency provisions to all applications is a separate process from ruling on
the merits of any particular project, and it does not at all address the question of whether growth
and development of Hawaii County is the vision and wish of a majority or minority of its
residents. Applying concurrency provisions is simply responsible governance, and addresses
infrastructure deficits in two ways: while slowing construction starts on new development, it
also encourages creation of the necessary infrastructure. Apparently the Hawaii County
government has no more influence than its citizenry in persuading the state officials in far-away
Oahu to address our critical shortages of schools and roads. Applying concurrency provisions to
rezoning requests shifts the burden to a group with more influence in the state government: the
developers. Successful developers are successful because of their ability to get things done in a
timely fashion -something neither the State nor the County has excelled at. If schools, roads,
water and sewage treatment are what stands between them and starting their projects, they will
most likely find a way to see that these things are accomplished. If not, at least our gridlock will
be no worse. If the Council is making decisions that result in a declining quality of life for
current residents of the county, it is making the wrong decisions. I believe many Kona residents
would cite the deteriorating traffic flow on Queen K as a major factor already affecting their
quality of life. Other effects of runaway development without adequate planning and support
will become more apparent later. Thank you for making the responsible decision to tie
development to all the services required by those developments.
~ \
L