Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-09-04 TSKOHALA CDP PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAI‘I HEARING TRANSCRIPT SEPTEMBER 4, 2008 A regularly advertised hearing on the SOUTH KOHALA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANwas called to order at 4:54 p.m. in the County of Hawaii, Aupuni Center Conference Room, 101 Pauahi Street, Hilo, Hawaii, with First Vice-Chairman Rell Woodward presiding. PRESENT: Rell Woodward ABSENT & EXCUSED: C. Kimo Alameda Takashi Domingo Lani Bowman Frederic Housel Rodney Watanabe Andrew Iwashita Shelly Ogata Ivan Torigoe, Deputy Corporation Counsel Christopher Yuen, Planning Director Norman Hayashi, Staff Planner Phyllis Fujimoto, Staff Planner L`hi`Bnsskd+Rs`eeOk`mmdq And approximately 10 people from the public in attendance. SOUTH KOHALA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Review of the draft South Kohala Community Development Plan (CDP) submitted by the South Kohala CDP Steering Committee and its consultant, Townscape, Inc. WOODWARD: Now we’ve got the South Kohala Community Development Plan, second hearing. And Allen Salavea just gets to stay where he is cause he did that one, too. And we do have two people signed up for public testimony. You’re on. SALAVEA: Thank you, Mr. Chair. My name is Allen Salavea. I’m the project manager for the South Kohala CDP. I have Sherman Warner to provide some resource or reference for the Planning Commission if they should have any questions. At this time we have nothing additional to add to the South Kohala CDP. So if you folks have any questions, we’d be happy to entertain them. WOODWARD: Any questions for Mr. Salavea? All right, seeing none would you like to testify, sir? Are you going to testify? WARNER: Yes. EXHIBIT D 1 WOODWARD: Okay. If you’ll raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth here today before the Hawaii County Planning Commission? WARNER: Yes. WOODWARD: Very good. If you’ll speak into the microphone; and first give your name and address; and then you can proceed with your testimony. WARNER: Sherman Warner, Post Office Box 1185, Kamuela. And I would just like to say that prior to being a Steering Committee Member I was one of the community facilitators. And in the process of doing that work, I facilitated meetings in Waimea, Puako and Kawaihae and attended community meetings in Waikoloa as an observer; and in all of those cases, you know, what I’ve learned was that there was tremendous unanimity about, from the community and all of those various communities about what the priorities were. I facilitated meetings at the beach of the Kona High Canoe Club, in very fancy homes. I facilitated meetings that took place at the meetings of the DHHL Homesteaders. And what was truly remarkable to me was at the end of these meetings people would often ask, “Now that we’ve told you what our priorities are, how do they compare? How does our neighborhood compare with any other neighborhoods?” And they were very, very consistent. The priorities came not, you know, if you looked across the board it wasn’t that something was a top priority for 51 percent of the people as opposed to 49. It was very, very strong in that the community was united in supporting what we then put into the plan. And I would like to thank everybody from the Planning Department, the Commission, everybody who was involved in giving the community the chance to participate in this grassroots effort to determine their future. Thank you. WOODWARD: Any questions from the Commissioners? All right, seeing none, thank you, sir. You can be seated. We have two people signed from the public to testify - April Lee and I don’t know if, it’s Margaret, I don’t know if it’s Will or Wille. WILLE: Wille, Wille. WOODWARD: Okay. Do we have April Lee or did she -? WILLE: She left. SALAVEA: She left. WOODWARD: Gave up. Okay. All right, Ma’am, if you’ll raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth today before the Planning Commission of the County of Hawaii? WILLE: I do. WOODWARD: Very good. If you’ll give us your full name and address and then you’re welcome to begin your testimony. WILLE: Margaret Wille, Waimea, 65-1316 Lihipali Road, Kamuela. Three points, One, and this has to do with, I handed out a handout and I just really want to draw attention to EXHIBIT D 2 this point. And one of our policies, and I want to sort of put it before you as somewhat of an analytical framework that I think should impact on your decision-making in sort of a different way of looking at issues that come up or balancing issues before you. And that is this district policy “5.1 Proposed uses of natural resources shall be duly evaluated by the responsible public entities to ensure that each such use is consistent with the sustainable long-term health of the eco-system, including the direct and indirect impact on coastal waters.” So in terms of, I think maybe it was about two or three years ago I came and I was testifying before this Commission, and I think it was on the General Plan Amendments. And someone, I think it was maybe Mr. Domingo who said when things get, you know, the economic issues and the environmental issues, how do we balance those sometimes or how do we look at those issues. And I hope that some of you addressed this in your CDP; and I think that this does a little bit, just in terms of process or framework. And it really addresses this, what’s called the precautionary principle and a provision out of the Hawaii Constitution sort of stating the Public Trust Doctrine. And there was a, I think it was a 2006 Hawaii Supreme Court case that said that doctrine or that stewardship responsibility is imposed not just on the State but also on the counties. So, again, I’m just stressing this. I’m going to read just one provision which is out of our CDP, couple sentences here, that “It is on the basis of this constitutional ‘Public Trust’ provision that decisions involving land and water must be guided by the ‘Precautionary Principle’ when we weigh our private wants against the ability of the environment to accommodate those wants. The precautionary principle requires long-term vision and mandates that government entities favor caution and conservation in any case in which information is uncertain. The burden of providing that the resource is adequate and that its proposed use is consistent with the sustainable health of the ecosystem falls on the party proposing to use the resource.” So, again, it’s just when you’re balancing, how do we balance it, taking that into consideration. Second point I just want to stress is something that you all were grappling with in the Campbell case; and I guess I just want to really support what Ms. Bowman said about how do we weigh County, community associations, and what they have, and what requirements versus say something that’s in the CDP or the General Plan. And when you were talking about it I was reading the, I have a copy of the Puna Plan, and I’m just sort of stressing the need to integrate public services, such as schools, and that DOE sort of reigns against that. And, so again, I’m just really supporting that you look at these. I know they haven’t all passed and they’re not sort of in a framework of analysis. But I think that that’s an issue that you’re going to be confronted with – how does one evaluate whether, okay, if, how big does it make it a school, how big, what is the type of activity? And I think here where you have a community association saying, well, if we do this for this cottage industry what about other businesses like B and Bs, that to really look at the CDP where it’s sort of stressing say schools and the need for medicine, the need for having facilities closer to home. Again, when you’re, like how do we handle this, how do we weigh this - look to these documents to sort of help. I think it will help that decision-making process. And I guess just really the third comment I want to make is looking at this plan again as part of a process and encouraging you to not think of yourselves as much as sort of the parent decision- maker but really encouraging the elements, the parties and the landowners to, you guys come together, you guys work on this, we’re not just going to figure everything out for you within the framework of these plans. And I think stressing to the Action Committee how are we going to get those going - you have so many people on these Steering Committees with knowledge and information - and maybe doing some kind of training session, or getting them together so that EXHIBIT D 3 that information gets used and focus on getting those ad-hoc committees to deal with a lot of these issues. And so you will also use them as a resource, that it’s get information to help you make more informed decisions; and I think that’s really what Director Yuen was saying on these lists and why these are important. It’s really getting at they make a more educated decision. And thank you again. Obviously I hope you -. But if you have anything, little things here and there that you say, oh, well, that’s for the action committee, that’s why this is one step in the process. Thank you very much. WOODWARD: All right, thank you. We won’t be making a decision on this this evening. We’ve got one more meeting in West Hawaii and that’s when action will be taken. But does anybody have any questions? No? All right, well, thank you very much. I think that concludes our agenda. LUCE: Mr. Chairman, I have, I’ve been sworn in already and I have no further oral testimony. I would like to ask staff to pass out a short note to you; and I’ll see you next time. WOODWARD: All right. th LUCE: Okay. It’s dated April 30, similar to the other North Kohala one. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The discussion ended at 5:07 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon M. Nomura, Secretary EXHIBIT D 4