HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-10-03 Puna CDP GP Q&APuna CDP Action Committee
General Plan (GP) Questions and Answers
Thursday, October 3, 2024
Land Use
Q: Who is responsible for changing zoning?
A: It is typically up to the property owner to apply for a change of zone. The
General Plan does not change any landowner’s existing zoning. While the
General Plan Land Use (GPLU) designations suggest the best and highest use
of the land, the zoning remains the same.
Q: The General Plan outlines the maximum allowable land use for a particular area.
What does it mean when someone applies to rezone their land?
A: When someone applies for a rezone, they are requesting to change the zoning
district of their property to allow different uses within the framework
established by the General Plan. The plan defines the upper limits of land use,
and rezoning seeks to align specific property uses within those limits.
Q: Why does the General Plan designate Waikōloa as a major city, along with Hilo
and Kona, but not Puna, even though Puna has a larger population?
A: Waikōloa is an urban area, whereas Puna is a more rural area in nature. The
lots in Puna are more spread out, while urban areas like Waikōloa have denser
populations and more concentrated development. This difference in land use
and population density distinguishes urban areas like Waikōloa from rural
areas like Puna. The General Plan’s population data is sourced from the latest
Census Bureau data and how it defines urban areas.
Q: Why is the term “stakeholder” used in the General Plan instead of
“homeowners”?
A: The term “stakeholder” in the General Plan includes both homeowners and
non-homeowners. It is a broader term that encompasses everyone who has
an interest in the community, not just those who own property. The definition
is also included in the Glossary of the plan (page 19).
Puna General Plan Community Meeting
Page 2
Housing
Q: Can you explain the County’s current formula for affordable housing? Whose
responsibility is it to adjust this?
A: The County’s Office of Housing and Community Development (OHCD) is
responsible for overseeing the definition of affordable housing in the County,
but it is also driven by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD). The GP looks at affordable housing based on what is considered
affordable and attainable for local residents. For further specifics on the
formula, please refer to the guidelines from OHCD and HUD.
General Plan Process and Implementation
Q: Why was the year 2045 chosen, and can the General Plan be amended to address
future needs?
A: Yes, the General Plan can be amended after adoption. It is considered a living
document that can evolve to meet changing circumstances. Typically, a
comprehensive review is conducted 10 years after the plan’s adoption as part
of the regular planning cycle. The date of 2045 was selected as a long-term
planning horizon to guide growth and development.
Q: Why doesn’t Hilo have a CDP?
A: Given the process of adopting the General Plan, it may be considered that Hilo
would better benefit from an urban development plan rather than a regional
plan, although this is still to be determined. The latest Hilo CDP is dated 1975.
Further, the greater Hilo area has several other planning documents and tools
that other towns and regions do not have and that help to guide development
in and around Hilo. These include but are not limited to: the City of Hilo Zone
Map (HCC 25-8-33), Downtown Hilo Multimodal Master Plan, Banyan Drive
Redevelopment Authority Plan, EnVision Downtown Hilo, Hilo Bayfront Trails
Master Plan, DHHL Master Plans for each of its areas (like Panaewa and
Keaukaha), University of Hawaiʻi at Hilo Master Plan, State Airport Master
Plan, etc.
General Comments
• The General Plan lacks clarity, particularly in sections like 2.2 Biocultural
Stewardship and 1.13 Incentive Private Land Management, which are difficult to
understand. I disagree with some of the language in the plan, as I believe it could
significantly impact the Big Island in the coming years. Our island’s resources and
infrastructure must be prioritized, especially concerning water, roads, and the need
Puna General Plan Community Meeting
Page 3
for a new landfill. Parking issues are also a concern. It’s crucial to address these
existing problems before permitting any new development.
• The General Plan contains a lot of idealistic language, using terms like
“sustainability” and “conservation”. It seems to encourage people to move closer to
cities rather than living on rural land. One concern is that if these policies to protect
the land aren’t followed, the land could potentially be acquired. Small farmers, like
me, are feeling the pressure due to rising taxes and the increasing hurdles we face.
The County’s zoning regulations will particularly impact Puna, as we are required to
prove that we operate as agricultural businesses. Many of us don’t sell our crops, we
give them away. What we really need are food processing facilities to create shelf-
stable products for export, which will require designated industrial lands.
• One of the strengths of the General Plan is its broad approach. I particularly
appreciate Objective 1, Policies 1.1 through 1.6. Holding the County accountable for
grubbing and grading will be especially beneficial in Puna. It would be helpful to
update the grubbing and grading policy to "review, update, and enforce" these
activities, as this is not currently being done.
• Innovation requires collaboration and creativity from everyone. Unfortunately,
“sustainability” has turned into a top-down buzzword, often implying a form of
control rather than genuine progress. These kinds of terms are diluting the purpose
of the document.
• This plan should be entirely rewritten. Terms like “stakeholder” and “clustered
housing” are not appropriate and should be replaced with “homeowners” and
“farmers”.