HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0664.029 2008-2010 JUL -30 -2010 07:06 From: 18663166988 Page:1 /2
?IPC
Ron Terr Principal CsL 1' 7
Geometrician Associates
PO Box 396 t
Hilo H196720 s CAJ
July 30, 2010
J Yoshimoto, Chair Donald Ikeda, Chair
and Members of the Hawai`i County Council and Members of the Committee orr Planning
HAWAII COUNTY COUNCIL HAWAII. COUNTY COUNCiL
25 Aupuni Street 25 Aupuni Street
Hilo, Hawai `i 96720 Hilo, - Hawai `i 96720
RE: LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR AMENDMENTS TO PUNA COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT PLAN ( "BILL 194 ")
Dear Chair Yoshimoto, Councilmembers, Chair Ikeda and Members of the Committee on
Planning:
I am consulting environmental scientist who conducts Environmental impact State ie.nts and +�
environmental analyses for various land use regulatory documents. Over the 20 yews that my
firm has been working in Hawai' i, 1 have been called on hundreds of times to analyze the
consistency of government and private projects With Community Development Plans (CDPs)_
Although 1 supported the Puna CDP during its }ormulation, 1 had a number of c ncems about
deficiencies in the document when it was adopted, which the Council indicated the:: would
address in future amendments. 1 believe that these concerns are adequately addre ; i , Bill 194
initiated by the County Council on December ] R, 2009, and I concur with the E la-_ i-eg
Director's May 11, 2010 favorable fcCOmmenc_a':orr tc ar =mc td the Puna CDP.
1 have been concerned with several elements o tt e CDP that seam to unduly r .c
character of commercial development in a district. whose challenges truly require _:i iovadon and
flexibility. These restrictions, if unaddressed, will tend to kill commercial projecN= - -. the cradle
and cause consumers °o vote with their feet by shopping in Hilo, defeating the hay :seeded
diversification of land use and cre4tion of community in Puna that the ccntcr;i > of the CDP.
Similarly, the CDP makes reference to a number of land use toots ' , icatir g Lc;rrw), laws and
government bodies which the County did not, does not, and may never have at its disposal and/o•
have control over, The. specification of these missing elements ma' hinder the implementation of
the CDP.
O
I spent seven years of my career working with the Department
community groups and businesses to find a solid waste transfer sion s i 1 t _ can View
community. We endured many riotous meeting,, dozens of angry ie:ters and a
lawsuit before ultimately getting a site. 1 strongly suggest that the .ral_sfer :,tats not be moved;
instead, provide funding to rationa'-ize access and patrol the area_
C.ori . y *sa • 1.
Ref. To:
Ref. Date AUG 0 2 2
JUL -30 -2010 07:07 Fr ocr.' S .S :S7 :,7z' Fase:2'2
I am similarly concerned with the .ar guage it he current Plan that culls for extreme measures to
protect groundwater in the two-mile wide cor..: r,r between the Ainaloa subdivision and
Pahoa. T understand the concern a:,e r.he sinccri :7 of the individuals who proposed and continue
to support these measures- Howeve ~,r, these app. it to be extraordinarily expenSivC solutions in
search of a problem. as 1 am not aw re of any rr, : :,, groundwater iss ,cs in tills area:, ?t seems
particularly unfair to burden the Hawaiian co €;:µ.-.unity with very costly infrastructure and home
wastewater systems that have not bccn shown ! needed. Although there may be some
genuine concerns anti merits to the idea (partic , iarly for the upper N°atershcd in'Wao Kele 0
Puna, 1 suggest that we first condu..: a scientific and professional water quality study and a cost-
benefit analysis before aewa:]y irnpinenting a drastic ides L, 'Lilo same token, 1 believe
we should adopt the =trileradrrien s :crated to 1 <_apolio, where a geni nc problem is J.c.nown to exist.
Accordingly, 1 COfCE:r V, 1a the PialiiLig Dile.' . .i-'s favorable recommendation t -,,i lend the
Puna CDP and respect fL y r'ecrcts > f;at the ..:. ity Council approve tae prope. J amendments
to the Puna CDP contained in .Bill as :` e arti consistent wit) Isle goats, oh cci vcs, and
policies of the General Plan.
Sincerely
P en.)124*0.1
Ron Terry