×

Warning message

The installed version of the browser you are using is outdated and no longer supported by Konveio. Please upgrade your browser to the latest release.

Draft Review

Comment Period: September 18, 2023 through April 1, 2024
File name:

-

File size:

-

Title:

-

Author:

-

Subject:

-

Keywords:

-

Creation Date:

-

Modification Date:

-

Creator:

-

PDF Producer:

-

PDF Version:

-

Page Count:

-

Page Size:

-

Fast Web View:

-

Choose an option Alt text (alternative text) helps when people can’t see the image or when it doesn’t load.
Aim for 1-2 sentences that describe the subject, setting, or actions.
This is used for ornamental images, like borders or watermarks.
Preparing document for printing…
0%
Document is loading Loading Glossary…

Summary

All Hide

Hawai'i 2045 General Plan

Expand

Introduction

Hawaiʻi Island is a community of rooted heritage, constant change, and unique beauty.

As our community navigates our future, integrating a sustainable balance between environmental stewardship, social and community equity, and economic sufficiency is paramount. We should be confident in our ability to meet our current needs and the needs of our future generations to come, ensuring that our keiki are able to stay here and raise their keiki.  We must be ready, willing, and able to consistently pursue bold actions that address our challenges and help us arrive at a better future. 

Steering our island in the right direction takes all of us. Setting the best path for our future relies on ensuring buy-in for solutions and accurately and collectively representing community sentiments.

Hawai’i Island is an exemplary leader with healthy and resilient communities that are built by sustainable development, a thriving and diversified local economy, and collaborative environmental stewardship. 

The General Plan serves as a 25-year blueprint for the long-term growth and sustainable development of Hawaii County. It envisions a future that balances growth with the preservation of the county's unique cultural and natural resources.  A sustainable future is not a distant dream but an attainable reality.  A reality that can only be achieved through the powerful combination of government and community collaboration. The task ahead of us is substantial, and it calls for unity, vision, and unwavering dedication.

Purpose

  • Guide county decision-making related to land use, development, and resource management.
  • Inform residents, businesses, and stakeholders about the county's development priorities.
  • Shape future legislative and funding decisions.

Key Themes and Goals

  • Sustainable Growth & Development: Encourage growth in areas with existing infrastructure, while minimizing impacts on sensitive environments and agricultural lands.
  • Cultural & Natural Resource Protection: Safeguard the county's unique cultural sites, traditions, and natural resources.
  • Infrastructure: Enhance and maintain critical infrastructure including roads, public transit, water, and wastewater systems.
  • Housing: Promote the development of affordable housing and support diverse housing types for all residents.
  • Economic Development: Foster a diversified economy that offers a range of employment opportunities and supports local businesses.
  • Public Health & Safety: Strengthen emergency preparedness and improve public health facilities and services.
  • Recreation & Open Spaces: Develop parks and recreational facilities, and preserve open spaces for the enjoyment of residents and visitors.

Implementation Strategies

  • Zoning & Land Use Regulations: Update regulations to align with the goals of the General Plan.
  • Public-Private Partnerships: Collaborate with private entities to achieve mutual development and conservation objectives.
  • Community Engagement: Continuously engage residents and stakeholders in the decision-making process.
  • Investment: Prioritize funding for projects that align with the General Plan's vision and goals.
  • Monitoring & Evaluation: Regularly review and assess the implementation of the plan to ensure its effectiveness and relevance.

Conclusion

The Hawaii County General Plan is a living document that reflects the aspirations and values of the community. Through careful planning and collaboration, the county seeks to create a sustainable, vibrant, and resilient future for all its residents.

Document Assistant

Hide

Welcome to your personal document assistant, powered by AI.

You can ask me questions and I will review the document to provide answers with page references for you. Please be patient, it might take a second and note that I might not always get it right - if you have questions it's easy to check the page sources or contact staff to clarify.

Start with a general question and then follow up with additional questions to narrow the focus of the response if needed.

What would you like to know?

Powered by Konveio
View all

Comments

Close

Commenting is closed for this document.


Plan erroneously marks properties makai of Paukaa Drive and Honolii place, which are urban expansion, not natural. Google Earth and County tax map keys clearly show residences between these roads and ocean. Same error probably exists with other costal properties. This was pointed out in earlier draft, but never corrected.
0 replies
The South Kohala Community Development Plan (CDP) Action Committee (AC) submits the following comments on the Draft General Plan 2045. The compiled comments correspond to the South Kohala CDP, Table 8.1 Implementation Matrix. The table is broken down into the four towns and villages of South Kohala (Waimea Town Plan, Waikoloa Village Plan, Kawaihae Community Plan, and Puako Community Plan). The AC encourages the implementation of the following SKCDP strategies as they align with the General Plan. Waimea Town Plan Prioritize preserving Ag Lands and Open Spaces based on viewplanes, cultural sites, and historical sites. Preserve hillsides and grading for these areas, and change zoning to protect these lands. The AC also supports the development of more affordable housing and pedestrian access for the Waimea Community. • 1.1 Acquire conservation easements for critical Pu'u parcels • 1.2 Require a Use permit for grading on Steep Land • 2.1 Acquisition of Fee Interest or of Conservation Easements of Open Space Areas in EastWaimea • 2.2 Internal Transfer of Development Rights • 3.1 Self-help housing • 3.2 Non-profit housing corporation(s) • 4.1 Walkways and Bikeways for Waimea Waikoloa Village Plan In addition to the following action items, the AC strongly recommends prioritizing the completion of the Daniel K. Inouye Highway between Mamalahoa Hwy and Queen K. Hwy, from mauka to makai. • I.I Finance and construct a second access road to Queen Ka'ahumanu • 2.1 Finance and construct a community center and community park • 3.1 New elementary school, middle school, and high school Kawaihae Community Plan • 1.1 Complete the development of the Ouli Well Field and transmit the water from Ouli to the Kawaihae area in order to provide additional sources of potable water for the area o Revise 1.1 to focus on the area from Kawaihae to Kailapa Hawaiian Homes o Adding infrastructure for housing in Hawaiian homes o New action plan for an evacuation route for Kailapa subdivision Puako Community Plan • I.I Establish a fuel break along Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway and the northeastern section of Puak6Road • 1.2 Upgrade existing emergency warning sirens to have a battery electrical power backup in case of power outages • 1.3 Construct the Paniau Evacuation Route • 2.1 Construct a sanitary sewer system for the Puako Beach Lots
0 replies
Following the above language, amend the text to include these general definitions: Transit- Oriented Development ( TOD). The development of compact, mixed- use villages which would integrate housing, employment, shopping, and recreation opportunities. Villages would be designed around transit stations/ stops which would reduce the need for daily trips and financially support the expanded transit system. Source KCDP Pg. 4. 6 Village Types Defined— Transit- Oriented Developments ( TODs) vs. Traditional Neighborhood Developments ( TNDs). Both TODs and TNDs are compact mixed- use villages, characterized by a village center within a higher- density urban core, roughly equivalent to a 5- minute walking radius ( 1/ 4 mile), surrounded by a secondary mixeduse, mixed- density area with an outer boundary roughly equivalent to a 10- minute walking radius from the village center ( 1/ 2 mile). The distinction between a TOD and TND is that the approximate location of a TOD is currently designated on the Official Kona Land Use Map ( Figure 4- 7) along the trunk or secondary transit route and contains a transit station, while TND locations have not been designated and may be located off of the trunk or secondary transit route at a location approved by a rezoning action. Source KCDP Pg. 4- 28
0 replies
This is important to ensure that proper mixed- use master planning is carried out for the area. See the recommendation from KCDP below:4 Makaeo Village ( Regional Center) A major retail center is planned near the Old Airport Park. As a mixed- use village, the plan is to introduce residential uses into the mix, design a complementary relationship to the Old Airport Park, and integrate a transit hub or major park and ride facility for commuters". Source KCDP Pg. 4-40
0 replies
Regarding Draft GP Map 3, it is suggested that the property that now appears as the newly proposed High Density Urban and Medium Density boundaries located mauka of the Old Airport and makai of Queen Ka' ahumanu Hwy be instead designated as a Regional Center and Neighborhood TODs as designated in the Kona CDP Official Land Use Map, Figure 4.7.
0 replies
Land use Map 3 should indicate the TODʻs that have been identified on Kona CDP figure 4-7, Pg. 4-36. See map below **ATTACHED MAP IN EPIC)****
0 replies
Proposed amendment to table 6: Urban land use by adding TOD and TND to the list of "GP Designtaion: in column 1 (see above) since it is the stated intent of the General Plan (see page 46) to adopt policies to include both TODs and TNDs.
0 replies
Add GP Designation: Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Transit- Oriented Development Floating zone (TOD) Mixed use developments located at strategic points along a regional transit system. TODs consist of moderate and high density housing, along with completing public uses, jobs and services Traditional neighborhood development (TND) Minimum land area. The minimum land area the for a new community shall be consistent with the zoning codeʻs requirement for project districts which corresponds to the urban and secondary core. KCDP Pg4-41 High density village design guidelines Medium density village design guidelines
0 replies
The problem is that the General plan, you're closing off comments April 1 and people have to log on. I would contend that a very small percentage of people know about this, and know the influence this will have for the next 20 years of life on the Big island. This hasn't been properly advertised, there has not been meetings where you can sit, talk, and raise questions. Where you can talk with other people and hear other people, that is what needs to be done. There was a letter to the editor in yesterday's newspaper, it was in the Hilo paper. I would assume that it would be in the West Hawaii today. It's a woman from Kana, I don't know her. But she writes about this very fact, that why don't we stop everything for now. What would be the reason to push ahead if so, many citizens here haven't had input but deserve input. They are the tax payers, they are the ones that make this go, not the planning department it's the citizens here that make this place go. Why don't we have a series of meetings in Hilo, which is left out of the whole CDP process, if you notice all the other districts have CDPs. Hilo is left out of it and has been left out since 1972, its ridiculous. Why don't we stop it and do the citizens a favor and lets do a series of town halls here so people can discuss the zoning and all the things that are going to impact our lives. Please call me back
0 replies
p47. 'Rezonings that promote infill are encouraged and should be conditioned to ensure connectivity to the surrounding developments and, where applicable, to provide mixed use opportunities to make the area more pedestrian-oriented. " -Support the rezoning of land to multiple residential near places of employment, shopping facilities, educational, recreational, and cultural facilities, and public facilities and utilities. 8.10 Development of TODs and TNDs are encouraged within locations of the centers shown on the General Plan Land Use Map. These locations are approximate and become fixed during rezoning.
0 replies
The quotes that follow, where I have emphasized those related to ZONING, force me to wonder that the present Zoning can be altered to fit this PLAN. The **quoted statement does not erase the former quotes. The most important quote is from p 47. REZONING will take place! "The General Plan also provides the legal basis for all the other elements of the County's planning structure. As such, the General Plan is the highest order, or "umbrella" plan. It establishes the boundaries within which the County must operate. The planning system as illustrated below consists of a comprehensive Countywide General Plan, and includes Community Development Plans, Urban Development Plans, Special Area Plans, and Agency Functional or Strategic Plans as implementation mechanisms that carry out the goals, objectives, policies or standards, and actions of the General Plan." "Notably, "[n]o public or project, or subdivision or zoning ordinance, shall be initiated or adopted." unless the same conforms to and implements the general plan." (§3-15(c)). The Charter further states that "[zloning, subdivision, and other ordinances shall contain the necessary provisions to carry out the purpose of the general plan."The 2045 General Plan often relies on further implementation actions, such as zoning and budget ordinances, to move Hawai'i Island in the direction of our goals. " ** "Further, it contains no authority to change previously existing subdivisions or zoning."
0 replies
Aloha Planning Department and County Council Members- The GP website is not generating a new password for me, nor do I like the website's terms or conditions that my comments can be modified so I am writing to Long Range Planning and County Council members. (See, attached terms and conditions. (1) Change proposed GPLU map, expanding the Low-Density Urban designation at Pepeekeo Point mauka of Beach Rd.. This is inconsistent with the terms of the April 12, 2002, SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT FOR BOARD OF APPEALS AND SUBDIVISION OF CONTINENTAL PACIFIC, LLC LANDS which limited the number of lots in the Urban area to eleven lots. See, attached Settlement Agreement. There is no sewer here. (2) Change proposed GPLU map, TMKs (3)2-1-6: parcels 002 and 003. These parcels are currently in commercial uses compatible with the resort zone uses across the street. The proposed GPLU designation should be changed to Resort to be consistent with the resort zoning across the street and Reed's Bay shoreline, Reed's Bay Ice Ponds, and Banyan Drive scenic area which are all listed in the 2005 General Plan Table 7-3. Natural Beauty Sites, District of South Hilo, under the public trust doctrine. (3) Change proposed GPLU map at Hu Honua Bioenergy, LLC's TMK (3)2-8-8-104, (which proposes to expand the Industrial designation). Change it back to the 2005 LUPAG and the Hamakua Community Development Plan designation, which limits the Industrial designation. The site is sloped, floods from stormwater run-on and the facility is outdated technology which will never get all of its approvals because the 21 million gallons a day of thermal wastewater heats up the marine waters in violation of the Clean Water Act. (4) Change proposed GPLU map at TMK (3)2-1-1-12 (Lessor: State of Hawaii, Golf Course parcel) (which proposes to make the whole 62 acre site Urban Expansion). Change back to Open designation. This ignores climate change mandates and historic tsunami inundation maps. Change it back to Open based on tsunami maps, and rising ocean which will submerge Reed's Bay Beach Park, Liliuokalani Gardens, and Banyan Drive on East side. Plans must provide for moving these open spaces inland and rerouting Banyan Drive to make way for those recreational uses currently of high value to the community and the tourist economy. Please acknowledge this email and include my comments in your review
0 replies
My letter is my petition https ://link-... We stand to keep The Big Island in a place where the Island's resources are safe for the entire population and visitors. We ask that you look at all these articles about Big Island resources and learn that the island's resources are limited and are already being affected negatively. Please, read these articles and learn through other sources as well, how all the development that has already been built, and the many years of new development that has already been approved for the future, will affect the island's resources. We stand and ask that you stop before approving more and more developments and learn what is happening to the island's resources and what will happen to the island's resources after the years of development that is already scheduled for the future. Because a lot of development is having negative impacts on the island's resources as of today. What will future development do to the island's resources if there are already resource issues happening today? Please, learn how to take island resources seriously because you have approved many more years of development to come and today the island's resources are having issues. What will the future look like if you don't start taking island resources seriously? What is happening to Big Island Resources 1) Hawaii Deals with Burgeoning Waste Management Problem As landfills face closure and waste-to-energy projects stall, various counties in Hawaii are dealing with waste management issues. Waste360 Staff January 10, 2020 "Hawaii Island is in the enviable position of having a landfill with anywhere from 20 to 100 years of capacity left to take in trash. But the island still wrestles with significant issues like plastic products that are no longer being recycled." https: //link ... 2) "Big Island Now readers seem to agree that there's likely no single solution for slowing down the timeline of the West Hawai'i Sanitary Landfill reaching capacity. The West Hawai'i Sanitary Landfill, the only remaining landfill on the Big Island, is forecast to reach capacity within the next 20 to 25 years." https ://bigislandnow.com/2023/09/17/big-island-now-poll-no-27-results-mo... 3) Hawaii Island Has Decades of Landfill Space But Still Faces Challenges In Dealing With Its Waste Hawai'i Public Radio Published January 9, 2020 at 5:00 AM HST "Hawaii Island is in the enviable position of having a landfill with anywhere from 20 to 100 years of capacity left to take in trash. But the island still wrestles with significant issues like plastic products that are no longer being recycled. For the past four decades, trash from the east side of Hawaii Island has been dumped in a landfill outside of Hilo. But now trash from all parts of the island is being trucked to a facility north of Kona." link... 4) "What happens to Hawaii Island's trash and recyclables? BY MICHELLE BRODER VANdyke HAWAII ISLAND PUBLISHED 11:30 AM ET DEC. 17, 2022 By Michelle Broder Vandyke Hawaii Island PUBLISHED 11:30 AM ET Dec. lThe future of the landfill The West Hawaii Landfill will be full in about 20 years. Finding a location for the next landfill is a concern, according to the DEM officials. They said it will be challenging to find a location for a future landfill because of stringent regulations and costs related to planning, environmental regulations, design and construction that will take many years to complete. It will also require community support." link­ happens-to- ... 5) "The overwhelming plastic waste Hawaii visitors leave behind By Natasha BourlinAug 24, 2023 Hawaii saw more than 9 million visitors last year. Those tourists' first stops are often big-box and convenience stores, where they buy bottled water, plastic sand toys, single-use bodyboards, noodles, floaties and inner tubes for their trips." https: //link ... 6) "A county commission drafts ordinance aiming to ban recyclables at West Hawai'i landfill By Megan Moseley September 6, 2023 • 1 :00 AM HST * Updated September 6, 2023 • 2:02 PM Hawai'i County's Environmental Management Commission is developing an ordinance that aims to prohibit the amount of recyclable materials ending up in the island's only working landfill." link­ draft-ordinance-aims-to-ban-recy... 7) "Hawai'i County issues mandatory 25% water restriction for North Kona August 7, 2023 • 5:21 PM HST A mandatory 25% water restriction has been issued for various communities in North Kona due to the failure of the Honokohau Deepwell over the weekend." https ://bigislandnow.com/2023/08/07/hawaii-county-issues-mandatory-25- wa... 8) "Hawai'i Water Supply Closely Monitored As Severe Drought Continues by Big Island Video Newson Nov 6, 2023 at 3:28 pm STORY SUMMARY HAWAI'I COUNTY - Officials say a special focus will be placed on the South Kohala Water System, which is more susceptible to drought conditions." link ... 9) "Big Island Concerns About Water Quality Prompt A Lawsuit Over A Kona Sewage Plant Kealakehe sewage plant discharges more than 1 million gallons of wastewater into a lava pit near the ocean. By Paula Dobbyn/ February 6, 2024 Settlement talks are scheduled in an environmental lawsuit involving a county-operated Big Island sewage plant in Kona." https: //www .civilbeat.org/2024/02/concerns-about-water-quality-prompt-a-... 10) "Researchers find sewage from an oceanfront Big Island community reaches nearshore waters Hawai'i Public Radio I By Russell Subiono, Sophia McCullough Published December 20, 2021 at 5: 56 PM HST There are nearly 50,000 cesspools on the Big Island, with tens of thousands posing a risk to water resources, according to the Hawai'i Department of Health." link- 20/researcher ... 11) Has this issue been fixed? It's going on 3 years since this article was written. "Kona coast faces stark wastewater tradeoffs Current situation There are approximately 88,000 cesspools across the state, releasing more than 200,000 cubic meters of wastewater per day to the environment. link 12) "BIG ISLAND NEWS HECO restores power after initiating emergency outages on Big Island by: Elizabeth 'Ufi Posted: Jan 30, 2024 / 09:43 AM HST Updated: Jan 30, 2024 / 04:15 PM HST An unexpected loss of several large Hawaii Electric generators left some residents on Big Island without power for parts of the morning on Tuesday, Jan. 30." link­ outa... 13) Hawai'i State News Update: Hawaiian Electric initiates rolling outages throughout Big Island February 13, 2024 • 5:23 PM HST * Updated February 14, 2024 • 4:21 PM The emergency outages are being initiated in various areas around the entire island to prevent loss of power to an even greater number of customers. The timing and extent of the outages will depend on the amount of demand on the system and the availability of generators." https: //bigislandnow.com/2024/02/13/hawaii-island-customers-asked­ to-red... 14) "LOCAL NEWS HECO issues rolling power outages around Big Island by: Emily Cervantes Posted: Feb 13, 2024 / 05: 11 PM HST Updated: Feb 13, 2024 / 09: 12 PM HST Hawaiian Electric initiated rolling outages for Big Island after several large generators became unavailable and reduced output Tuesday night." https: //link... 15) "Here's how power outages can have repercussions for Hawai'i's water supply Hawai'i Public Radio I By Savannah Harriman-Pote Published February 13, 2024 at 10: 59 AM HST Water departments on O'ahu and Hawai'i Island have advised customers to conserve water ahead of possible storm­ related power outages this month. But what does the power grid have to do with the water supply? It is impossible to separate Hawai'i's power system from its water system, said Kawika Uyehara, deputy director of Hawai'i County's Department of Water Supply." link­ on-haw ... These articles show that Big Island resources are currently being affected negatively from the development on island, there are years of new developement that has already been approved, and even more development is still being approved before learning if the island's resources can handle more development. We stand to say LEARN WHAT IS HAPPENING TO THE ISLAND'S RESOURCES before approving more development because this is an island, it's not the mainland. We stand and say that Big Island resources needs to be FULLY considered before any more new development is approved for the safety of ALL who live here and visit. There are many, many developments that have been approved for years to come and we stand and say we need to learn how the island's resources will be affected when these developments are finished before you keep approving more and more developments! We stand and say NO DEVELOPING ON BURIAL GROUND. The history of the island needs to be preserved and the burial grounds need to be respected at all costs. We stand and say NO more approving of future developments because there are hundreds of acers that have been approved for future development and the Big Island needs to address these resource issues before more land is approved for development. We stand and ask to make it mandatory for vacation rentals and ALL resorts and hotels to provide drinking water machines to their guests to help stop all the empty water bottle waste on the island. We stand and ask to make it mandatory for vacation rentals and ALL resorts and hotels to provide shampoo, conditioner, body wash in bulk containers rather than continuously using different containers for every new guest, to help stop all the empty bottles waste in the limited landfill. Can Hawaii Planning Department put in a stipulation in all development applications that to build on The Big Island they must sell a high percentage of their homes to locals at an affordable rate first before selling to newcomers because this is an island, and the island's resources need to be seriously considered? A stipulation put in to be able to build could help the local homes shortage as well as slow the increase in population and help with the island's resources. An example, of a stipulation could be, to build on the Big Island they must sell 50% of their homes to native Hawaiian locals who have lived on the island for 10 years or more, 25% to regular locals who have lived on the island for 10 years or more and all at an affordable rate and sell 25% to newcomers at whatever rate they want. A Big Island building stipulation that would offer 75% of homes that developers build, sold to locals in order for the developer to be approved to build on the island would help the island's resources because it would slow the population growth to help keep the island's resources safe for all who live here. The articles above prove that island resources are already have serious issue and this needs to be taken seriously, ASAP. To have a building stipulation, this would help the locals who have lived here for years be able to purchase a home before big investors, as well as help, slow down homes from becoming vacation rentals instead of family homes, and will help decrease the fast increase in population until the Planning Department can know for sure that the island's resources can handle a serious increase in population. We ask for a Population Enviormental Impact Report to be done on what would be a safe population for the Big Island resource landfill, water, sewer, power... as shown in the articles above, resources are already being affected and it's 2024. Also, there are mostly only 2 lanes throughout the entire Big Island and some places where cars cannot pull over if an ambulance needs to get by. The traffic has seriously increased and if the island's population keeps increasing there will be hours and hours of constant serious traffic in the near future, how will ambulances get by in emergencies? What if there is a tsunami and people need to get to higher ground? Will they be able to get to higher ground in time with such an increased in population causing a serious traffic? The island's small road infrastructure isn't made for a high population and that needs to be taken seriously. What is a safe population for the Big Island? A Population Environment Impact Report can tell us. We ask this to be done. We ask for another hospital to be built, as well as a trauma center and dive chamber to be put on the island to accommodate all types of injuries because of all the years of new future development that you have already approved. Alii Drive is only two lanes and right now there are three big developments in progress, and over 10 more acres of land on this street has just been approved for even more development on this street. Did you research to see how this one road can handle more development before your approval? Did you research and check on the island's resources before you approved this and many other developments all over the Big Island? We stand to slow down development to learn how roads will handle all the new homes that Hawai'i has already approved for years to come before more development is approved because right now there is serious traffic issues all over Big Island? We stand to say what are you doing about the growth in homeless on the island? We stand and ask that this be taken seriously. What about parking? All of the Big Island towns have parking issues, especially during high tourist seasons and especially Ironman. With more subdivisions comes more cars and the island towns are already overcrowded with parking issues. How will parking Improve with more houses? Is the Hawaii Planning Department considering the parking issues? We stand for you to find a way to improve the parking issues before approving more development. There are over 50,000 cesspools on The Big Island. Have these all been upgraded to ensure they will not pollute the land and ocean? This needs to be addressed ASAP before more development is approved. We stand that all cesspools be upgraded ASAP to ensure safety for the land and ocean around the island. If you agree with this info, please sign this petition. There are possibly thousands of new homes that have been approved for future development and are currently being built right now. This petition states that we strongly OPPOSE approving any and all new development applications because the island's resources are currently having serious issues, as you can see from the articles above, and many more homes have already been approved for future years developments. We oppose these applicates below, and all new development applications because it is known that the Big Island's resources can't handle more development as you can see the island's resource issues from the articles above. Tax Map Key 7-8-004: 059 & 060 size of property 1.3 Acres Tax Map Key: (3) 7-3-065:044 approx. 3.418 Acres Tax Map Key 7-8-010 :077 size of property 74 Acers Keauhou area Tax Map Key 7-5-003 :023 size of property 129 Acers Queen K Hwy area Tax Map Key 7-7-008:121 size of property 11 Acers Alii Drive area Tax Map Key 7-7-004:063 size of property 8 Acers Alii Drive area Tax Map Key 8-1-007:013 size 1.74 Acres Tax Map Key 8-1-008: 004 size 6.875 Acres Tax Map Key 7-9-007: 055 size 2 Acers Tax Map Key 7-5-017:040 Tax Map Key 7-5-019:049, 050,054 size 47.389 Acres Tax Map Key (3) 8-1-036: 001 & 002 size 54 Acres Tax Map Key 3-709-5-79 size 94 Acres Tax Map Key (3) 7-5-020:066 9.9 sq. ft Tax Map Key (3) 7-5-018:071 size 3 Acres Tax Map Key 7-6-021:016 & 017 size 68 Acres Tax Map Key 7-6-008: 012 size 10 Acres Tax Map Key (3) 7-5-018: 095 My website with other petitions is link Thank you for your time.
0 replies
My letter is my petition https ://link-... We stand to keep The Big Island in a place where the Island's resources are safe for the entire population and visitors. We ask that you look at all these articles about Big Island resources and learn that the island's resources are limited and are already being affected negatively. Please, read these articles and learn through other sources as well, how all the development that has already been built, and the many years of new development that has already been approved for the future, will affect the island's resources. We stand and ask that you stop before approving more and more developments and learn what is happening to the island's resources and what will happen to the island's resources after the years of development that is already scheduled for the future. Because a lot of development is having negative impacts on the island's resources as of today. What will future development do to the island's resources if there are already resource issues happening today? Please, learn how to take island resources seriously because you have approved many more years of development to come and today the island's resources are having issues. What will the future look like if you don't start taking island resources seriously? What is happening to Big Island Resources 1) Hawaii Deals with Burgeoning Waste Management Problem As landfills face closure and waste-to-energy projects stall, various counties in Hawaii are dealing with waste management issues. Waste360 Staff January 10, 2020 "Hawaii Island is in the enviable position of having a landfill with anywhere from 20 to 100 years of capacity left to take in trash. But the island still wrestles with significant issues like plastic products that are no longer being recycled." https: //link ... 2) "Big Island Now readers seem to agree that there's likely no single solution for slowing down the timeline of the West Hawai'i Sanitary Landfill reaching capacity. The West Hawai'i Sanitary Landfill, the only remaining landfill on the Big Island, is forecast to reach capacity within the next 20 to 25 years." https ://bigislandnow.com/2023/09/17/big-island-now-poll-no-27-results-mo... 3) Hawaii Island Has Decades of Landfill Space But Still Faces Challenges In Dealing With Its Waste Hawai'i Public Radio Published January 9, 2020 at 5:00 AM HST "Hawaii Island is in the enviable position of having a landfill with anywhere from 20 to 100 years of capacity left to take in trash. But the island still wrestles with significant issues like plastic products that are no longer being recycled. For the past four decades, trash from the east side of Hawaii Island has been dumped in a landfill outside of Hilo. But now trash from all parts of the island is being trucked to a facility north of Kona." link... 4) "What happens to Hawaii Island's trash and recyclables? BY MICHELLE BRODER VANdyke HAWAII ISLAND PUBLISHED 11:30 AM ET DEC. 17, 2022 By Michelle Broder Vandyke Hawaii Island PUBLISHED 11:30 AM ET Dec. lThe future of the landfill The West Hawaii Landfill will be full in about 20 years. Finding a location for the next landfill is a concern, according to the DEM officials. They said it will be challenging to find a location for a future landfill because of stringent regulations and costs related to planning, environmental regulations, design and construction that will take many years to complete. It will also require community support." link­ happens-to- ... 5) "The overwhelming plastic waste Hawaii visitors leave behind By Natasha BourlinAug 24, 2023 Hawaii saw more than 9 million visitors last year. Those tourists' first stops are often big-box and convenience stores, where they buy bottled water, plastic sand toys, single-use bodyboards, noodles, floaties and inner tubes for their trips." https: //link ... 6) "A county commission drafts ordinance aiming to ban recyclables at West Hawai'i landfill By Megan Moseley September 6, 2023 • 1 :00 AM HST * Updated September 6, 2023 • 2:02 PM Hawai'i County's Environmental Management Commission is developing an ordinance that aims to prohibit the amount of recyclable materials ending up in the island's only working landfill." link­ draft-ordinance-aims-to-ban-recy... 7) "Hawai'i County issues mandatory 25% water restriction for North Kona August 7, 2023 • 5:21 PM HST A mandatory 25% water restriction has been issued for various communities in North Kona due to the failure of the Honokohau Deepwell over the weekend." https ://bigislandnow.com/2023/08/07/hawaii-county-issues-mandatory-25- wa... 8) "Hawai'i Water Supply Closely Monitored As Severe Drought Continues by Big Island Video Newson Nov 6, 2023 at 3:28 pm STORY SUMMARY HAWAI'I COUNTY - Officials say a special focus will be placed on the South Kohala Water System, which is more susceptible to drought conditions." link ... 9) "Big Island Concerns About Water Quality Prompt A Lawsuit Over A Kona Sewage Plant Kealakehe sewage plant discharges more than 1 million gallons of wastewater into a lava pit near the ocean. By Paula Dobbyn/ February 6, 2024 Settlement talks are scheduled in an environmental lawsuit involving a county-operated Big Island sewage plant in Kona." https: //www .civilbeat.org/2024/02/concerns-about-water-quality-prompt-a-... 10) "Researchers find sewage from an oceanfront Big Island community reaches nearshore waters Hawai'i Public Radio I By Russell Subiono, Sophia McCullough Published December 20, 2021 at 5: 56 PM HST There are nearly 50,000 cesspools on the Big Island, with tens of thousands posing a risk to water resources, according to the Hawai'i Department of Health." link- 20/researcher ... 11) Has this issue been fixed? It's going on 3 years since this article was written. "Kona coast faces stark wastewater tradeoffs Current situation There are approximately 88,000 cesspools across the state, releasing more than 200,000 cubic meters of wastewater per day to the environment. link 12) "BIG ISLAND NEWS HECO restores power after initiating emergency outages on Big Island by: Elizabeth 'Ufi Posted: Jan 30, 2024 / 09:43 AM HST Updated: Jan 30, 2024 / 04:15 PM HST An unexpected loss of several large Hawaii Electric generators left some residents on Big Island without power for parts of the morning on Tuesday, Jan. 30." link­ outa... 13) Hawai'i State News Update: Hawaiian Electric initiates rolling outages throughout Big Island February 13, 2024 • 5:23 PM HST * Updated February 14, 2024 • 4:21 PM The emergency outages are being initiated in various areas around the entire island to prevent loss of power to an even greater number of customers. The timing and extent of the outages will depend on the amount of demand on the system and the availability of generators." https: //bigislandnow.com/2024/02/13/hawaii-island-customers-asked­ to-red... 14) "LOCAL NEWS HECO issues rolling power outages around Big Island by: Emily Cervantes Posted: Feb 13, 2024 / 05: 11 PM HST Updated: Feb 13, 2024 / 09: 12 PM HST Hawaiian Electric initiated rolling outages for Big Island after several large generators became unavailable and reduced output Tuesday night." https: //link... 15) "Here's how power outages can have repercussions for Hawai'i's water supply Hawai'i Public Radio I By Savannah Harriman-Pote Published February 13, 2024 at 10: 59 AM HST Water departments on O'ahu and Hawai'i Island have advised customers to conserve water ahead of possible storm­ related power outages this month. But what does the power grid have to do with the water supply? It is impossible to separate Hawai'i's power system from its water system, said Kawika Uyehara, deputy director of Hawai'i County's Department of Water Supply." link­ on-haw ... These articles show that Big Island resources are currently being affected negatively from the development on island, there are years of new developement that has already been approved, and even more development is still being approved before learning if the island's resources can handle more development. We stand to say LEARN WHAT IS HAPPENING TO THE ISLAND'S RESOURCES before approving more development because this is an island, it's not the mainland. We stand and say that Big Island resources needs to be FULLY considered before any more new development is approved for the safety of ALL who live here and visit. There are many, many developments that have been approved for years to come and we stand and say we need to learn how the island's resources will be affected when these developments are finished before you keep approving more and more developments! We stand and say NO DEVELOPING ON BURIAL GROUND. The history of the island needs to be preserved and the burial grounds need to be respected at all costs. We stand and say NO more approving of future developments because there are hundreds of acers that have been approved for future development and the Big Island needs to address these resource issues before more land is approved for development. We stand and ask to make it mandatory for vacation rentals and ALL resorts and hotels to provide drinking water machines to their guests to help stop all the empty water bottle waste on the island. We stand and ask to make it mandatory for vacation rentals and ALL resorts and hotels to provide shampoo, conditioner, body wash in bulk containers rather than continuously using different containers for every new guest, to help stop all the empty bottles waste in the limited landfill. Can Hawaii Planning Department put in a stipulation in all development applications that to build on The Big Island they must sell a high percentage of their homes to locals at an affordable rate first before selling to newcomers because this is an island, and the island's resources need to be seriously considered? A stipulation put in to be able to build could help the local homes shortage as well as slow the increase in population and help with the island's resources. An example, of a stipulation could be, to build on the Big Island they must sell 50% of their homes to native Hawaiian locals who have lived on the island for 10 years or more, 25% to regular locals who have lived on the island for 10 years or more and all at an affordable rate and sell 25% to newcomers at whatever rate they want. A Big Island building stipulation that would offer 75% of homes that developers build, sold to locals in order for the developer to be approved to build on the island would help the island's resources because it would slow the population growth to help keep the island's resources safe for all who live here. The articles above prove that island resources are already have serious issue and this needs to be taken seriously, ASAP. To have a building stipulation, this would help the locals who have lived here for years be able to purchase a home before big investors, as well as help, slow down homes from becoming vacation rentals instead of family homes, and will help decrease the fast increase in population until the Planning Department can know for sure that the island's resources can handle a serious increase in population. We ask for a Population Enviormental Impact Report to be done on what would be a safe population for the Big Island resource landfill, water, sewer, power... as shown in the articles above, resources are already being affected and it's 2024. Also, there are mostly only 2 lanes throughout the entire Big Island and some places where cars cannot pull over if an ambulance needs to get by. The traffic has seriously increased and if the island's population keeps increasing there will be hours and hours of constant serious traffic in the near future, how will ambulances get by in emergencies? What if there is a tsunami and people need to get to higher ground? Will they be able to get to higher ground in time with such an increased in population causing a serious traffic? The island's small road infrastructure isn't made for a high population and that needs to be taken seriously. What is a safe population for the Big Island? A Population Environment Impact Report can tell us. We ask this to be done. We ask for another hospital to be built, as well as a trauma center and dive chamber to be put on the island to accommodate all types of injuries because of all the years of new future development that you have already approved. Alii Drive is only two lanes and right now there are three big developments in progress, and over 10 more acres of land on this street has just been approved for even more development on this street. Did you research to see how this one road can handle more development before your approval? Did you research and check on the island's resources before you approved this and many other developments all over the Big Island? We stand to slow down development to learn how roads will handle all the new homes that Hawai'i has already approved for years to come before more development is approved because right now there is serious traffic issues all over Big Island? We stand to say what are you doing about the growth in homeless on the island? We stand and ask that this be taken seriously. What about parking? All of the Big Island towns have parking issues, especially during high tourist seasons and especially Ironman. With more subdivisions comes more cars and the island towns are already overcrowded with parking issues. How will parking Improve with more houses? Is the Hawaii Planning Department considering the parking issues? We stand for you to find a way to improve the parking issues before approving more development. There are over 50,000 cesspools on The Big Island. Have these all been upgraded to ensure they will not pollute the land and ocean? This needs to be addressed ASAP before more development is approved. We stand that all cesspools be upgraded ASAP to ensure safety for the land and ocean around the island. If you agree with this info, please sign this petition. There are possibly thousands of new homes that have been approved for future development and are currently being built right now. This petition states that we strongly OPPOSE approving any and all new development applications because the island's resources are currently having serious issues, as you can see from the articles above, and many more homes have already been approved for future years developments. We oppose these applicates below, and all new development applications because it is known that the Big Island's resources can't handle more development as you can see the island's resource issues from the articles above. Tax Map Key 7-8-004: 059 & 060 size of property 1.3 Acres Tax Map Key: (3) 7-3-065:044 approx. 3.418 Acres Tax Map Key 7-8-010 :077 size of property 74 Acers Keauhou area Tax Map Key 7-5-003 :023 size of property 129 Acers Queen K Hwy area Tax Map Key 7-7-008:121 size of property 11 Acers Alii Drive area Tax Map Key 7-7-004:063 size of property 8 Acers Alii Drive area Tax Map Key 8-1-007:013 size 1.74 Acres Tax Map Key 8-1-008: 004 size 6.875 Acres Tax Map Key 7-9-007: 055 size 2 Acers Tax Map Key 7-5-017:040 Tax Map Key 7-5-019:049, 050,054 size 47.389 Acres Tax Map Key (3) 8-1-036: 001 & 002 size 54 Acres Tax Map Key 3-709-5-79 size 94 Acres Tax Map Key (3) 7-5-020:066 9.9 sq. ft Tax Map Key (3) 7-5-018:071 size 3 Acres Tax Map Key 7-6-021:016 & 017 size 68 Acres Tax Map Key 7-6-008: 012 size 10 Acres Tax Map Key (3) 7-5-018: 095 My website with other petitions is link Thank you for your time.
0 replies
Issue 5: Where is the "plan" in this Draft General Plan? There is no 'Future Land Use Map' showing the details addressed in the Plan (it would be a proposal that would require much effort to enable with State and County approvals (land use, zoning, ordinances, etc.)). But without a 'to-be' destination, we will be adrift. Issue 6: Inadequate Implementation Indicators and Monitoring Mechanisms The Implementation Indicators are inadequate and the Monitoring and Evaluation Plan will not provide a clear 'report card' on progress. The Plan states the objectives are measurable, achievable, and time-bound milestones toward achieving the goal. But this plan does not present the goals and objectives in this form. Below are 'example Indicators' from pg 201 of the Draft. All public utilities have been lumped under one goal. The objectives are neither specific, measurable, nor time-bound. The indicators are not aligned with the objectives. (e.g. stating specifics that show objectives to alleviate our CURRENT and chronic water rationing and power use reduction (rolling brownouts) situation). Section 3: Public Utilities EXAMPLE INDICATORS Goal: Our communities are adequately served by sustainable and efficient public infrastructure, utilities, and services based on existing and future growth needs, sound design principles, and effective maintenance practices. Objectives: 20. Improve the efficiency, reliability, and sustainability of essential infrastructure systems. 21. Strive towards energy self-sufficiency. 22. Advance policies, programs, and initiatives for public and/or private investment in broadband and telecommunications infrastructure. 23. Increase the protection of existing and potential sources of drinking water. 24. Planned and developed municipal sewer capacity is expanded to serve our Urban Growth Areas and reduce sewage-related impacts on water quality. 25. Increase green infrastructure practices. • Utilities are planned for our urban areas • Energy efficiency• Reduce water consumption per household• Increased use of permeable surfaces and landscaping Example Indicators Utilities are planned for our urban areas Energy efficiency Reduce water consumption per household Increased use of permeable surfaces and landscaping The Monitoring Mechanism (see reference below) states that "Measurable indicators, or performance measures, will be used to monitor progress toward the objectives". Unfortunately, this Draft does not provide them. It says "...indicators may vary over time as progress is made and each department is responsible for reporting on the indicators that are relevant". Every objective should have appropriate and fixed indicators or tracking/reporting will not be reliable or useful over time. The Evaluation Plan (see reference below) is required to the extent possible: "An implementation status report annually serving to monitor progress towards achieving the goals and objectives identified within the General Plan. To the extent possible, the report should contain measurable indicators related to the ooals and objectjyes of the plans that make up the County Planning System." This appears to state that the measurable indicators only apply to goals and objectives of the supporting plans and not the General Plan. Status reports on the General Plan progress can be as vague as the GP goals and objectives, themselves. In conclusion, the Draft General Plan 2045 should not see the light of day. We expect and need better. • It doesn't comply with either County or State requirements for County General Plans. • It violated the principle of clearly showing deltas between the prior adopted Plan and the current draft amendments; • It does NOT provide a coherent destination (what the future is to look like) or the roadmap of comprehensive actions that will get us there. • It does not link goals, specific objectives that together achieve each goal, with progress measures. It does not prioritize objectives (actions) to guide implementation planning and budgeting processes. o While there are many good ideas in the Draft, they are too many to complete in 20 years, and they are not organized as stated: Goal > Objective (with indicator) model . Objectives are too broad (e.g. there is only one objective for Wastewater "Planned and developed municipal sewer capacity is expanded to serve our Urban Growth Areas and reduce sewage-related impacts on water quality." It lists 16 Priority Actions (these might actually be mislabeled objectives as there was no goal included) But not all of them contribute to accomplishing the 'Objective' (three do not pertain to municipal sewer systems in Urban Growth Areas). There are no progress measure indicators and they are not time bound (or priority stack ranked, or dependency linked - any of which would have helped make implementation possible). o The Monitoring and Evaluation Plan effectiveness is crippled by not providing prioritized time-bound objectives/actions with performance measures. (and made worse by its making indicator measures optional) HULi PAC's concerns are clearly and comprehensively stated. The Draft General Plan 2045 is NOT a plan we can use. It has no clear vision, no destination, no clear implementation path. It merely lays the groundwork for future Planning Directors and Mayors to say they made no promises and they have no accountability.
0 replies
Issue 1: Noncompliance with 2005 GP Review Process The largest issue with the Draft General Plan 2045 is that the Planning Director IS NOT COMPLIANT with the review process mandated in the 2005 General Plan (Q§). The Draft General Plan 2045 does NOT contain the set of recommended amendments. It is a complete rewrite. Amendments that are linked to the previously adopted General Plan help the community and other reviewers understand the context and need to justify each amendment, and timestamp each change to be clear about what was adopted when. The Planning Director shall initiate a comprehensive review of the General Plan and prepare !! set of recommended amendments • Planning Director shall initiate a comprehensive review not more than 10 years after the date of adoption of the previous amendments resulting from a comprehensive review. - • ... and shall be submitted to Council not more than 13 years after the date of adoption of the previous amendments. • The Planning Director shall establish a deadline for Council-initiated amendments during the comprehensive review which shall be not less than 120 days after the initial notice under section 16.1(2). Issue 2: Noncompliance with State's GP Purpose and Expectation The second largest issue is that The Planning Director HAS NOT COMPLIED with the State's stated purpose and expectation of what shall be included in the General Plan. Pursuant to HRS 226-52 and 226-58 (see reference below) - the County GP includes overall themes, goals, principals, objectives and policies, as well as implementation priorities and actions to carry out policies - including land use maps, regulatory measures, standards, programs. projects and interagency coordination. [Neither clearly define all these terms]. • (4) County general plans that shall indicate desired population and physical development patterns for each county and regions within each county. In addition, county general plans or development plans shall address the unique problems and needs of each county and regions within each county. County general plans or development plans shall further define the overall theme, goals, objectives, policies, and priority guidelines contained within this chapter. State functional plans shall be taken into consideration in amending the county general plans; The Draft General Plan 2045 is poorly organized and missing needed information; the Planning Department should have clearly shown what progress has been made over the last 18 years, and link specific needs, including new State regulations, to the new amendments. Issue 3: Noncompliance with County GP Purpose The third largest issue is The Planning Director has NOT COMPLIED with the County's stated purpose of the General Plan. • Pursuant to Charter section 3-15 (see reference below) ... shall be consistent with proper conservation of natural resources and the 6 preservation of our natural beauty and historical sites; the most desirable density of population in the several parts of the county; a system of principal thoroughfares, highways, streets, public access to the shorelines, and other open spaces; the general locations, relocations and improvement of public buildings, the general location and extent of public utilities and terminals, whether publicly or privately owned, for water, sewers, light. power, transit, and other purposes; the extent and locatjon of public housing projects; adequate drainage facilities ... No detailed maps were included that referenced the locations or relocations of public infrastructure or buildings. Many of us expect the General Plan to contain a huge body of fairly explicit information (e.g. how many people live in each shaded polygon on the maps and how many subdivided house lots or development project units have been approved in each area, and what is each utility's and social service's current and projected capacity to serve each area. Where must growth be limited until the infrastructure can be upgraded to safely support the added demand). Without this, the General Plan is not usable, other than providing aspirational value statements (which are not helpful when prioritizing and budgeting CIP projects.) Issue 4: Does Not Achieve 20 Years Minimum Adequacy The plan does not achieve minimum adequacy to serve for 20 years. • Proposes extending the planning horizon by 5 years (initiate the next comprehensive GP review in 15 and submit to Council by 20). We are concerned that this Draft is a complete rewrite and doesn't clearly identify what content comes forward from the 2005 and 2019 and what are new amendments (with clear rationale on the need or problem they address). We are concerned that it is not actionable. It delegates and relies on additional detailed Plans (listed below). However, most of these are out-of-date and the Planning Department has said it will take considerable time to review and update them (years to decades). This leaves us without a roadmap of what the County intends to do specifically in each small geographic area (e.g. Small Town Center, Rural Village, Sea Level Rise Exposure Area, Transit Corridor, Commercial/Industrial Parks, Recreational and Open Space areas) and it doesn't prioritize and balance competing compelling needs and actions. CoH Planning System and GP Framework: • GP is first level - contains long-range strategies for the entire County • Implementation mechanisms that carry out the goals, objectives, policies and actions: o CDP (7) ■ Hamakua (2018) ■ Hilo (1975) - 'Envision Hilo' (2005 - not adopted by Council) 'Downtown Hilo Multi-Modal Master Plan (2018 - signed by the Mayor and Public Works and Planning Directors) ■ Puna (2008) ■ Ka'u (2017) ■ Kona (2019) ■ South Kohala (2008) ■ North Kohala (2008) o Urban Development Plans (none found online) o Special Area Plans (none found online) o Agency Functional Plans - Water, Wastewater, Transportation, Solid Waste, Parks & Rec, Climate Action (none found online) • The Draft states (pg 206) that Agency Functional Plans shall identify priority issues and specific needs of the agency and may, but is not required to, be adopted by ordinance or resolution. This Draft not only delegates and keeps hidden the Agency Plans from the General Plan, these detailed Agency 'action plans' don't require adoption. And they were not included with the General Plan to assess their scope and status. Their last revised date and next revision timelines were not included in the Draft GP. These Agency and CDP and other Plans are critically substantive (or should be).
0 replies
We are HULi PAC, a group of volunteer, grassroots community advocates living and working on Hawaii Island. We work with backyard community-based advisors in each moku of our island to uplift knowledge from our community and deliver community-directed mana'o to sitting representatives and leaders. Our values encompass a holistic approach to life, emphasizing harmony, respect, and interconnectedness and include Aloha, 'Ohana, Kuleana, Malama 'Aina, Pono, Ho'oponopono and Mana. These values form the foundation of Hawaiian culture, guiding individuals and communities in their daily lives. They serve as a reminder to honor the past, preserve the land, and nurture relationships with others, fostering a sense of harmony and well-being. HULi PAC is taking the time to provide comments regarding the County of Hawaii General Plan 2045 and its process because we have major concerns about the Planning Department's compliance with the process and purpose of the General Plan, as well as with significant components, including implementation, monitoring and evaluation, and a lack of specific long range strategies consistent with the seven adopted Community Development Plans and any existing Agency Functional Plans. This Draft General Plan 2045 lacks legal and ethical integrity, and should not see the light of day. We expect, need and demand better. Mayor Mitch Roth has stated that "The General Plan gives our community the opportunity to navigate the future of our island home in a way that it is sustainable and truly in the best interest of us all." Yet, we find it dangerous when, throughout the document, there is no clarification or specification of the words "stakeholder'' (mentioned 47 times), "government" (mentioned 24 times), and "private and non-profit agencies" (mentioned 20 times). Furthermore, there is strikingly not a single reference to homeowners, the general populace or property owners. No partnership is mentioned with residents and property owners. Not once. HULi PAC holds major concerns that the changes made to the 2005 General Plan are very difficult to identify due the 2045 GP draft being a full rewrite and thus the community has had a very difficult time navigating through the process which is designed to be transparent and comparative, presumably to minimize public concerns. Yet during this process, the lack of community scoping and marginalized approach to the County's community outreach felt disingenuous and even sneaky in the poster board presentations, and lack of a cohesive and detailed presentation in an organized group setting in order for us to understand the changes made against the 2005 General Plan and the 2019 General Plan amendments. The inability to list and observe community concerns as a collective adds to the lack of transparency, and meetings weren't even recorded for future viewing and understanding for residents that couldn't attend them in person. That alone created a super exclusive forum, far from creating inclusivity on such a large island and further marginalized our minority community. Even more glaringly, the design and manner of the Planning Department's community outreach was culturally inappropriate and uncomfortable for many Kakaka Maoli and other multigenerational kama'aina residents who are already disenfranchised and marginalized. Auwe, in contrast to the Mayor's statement, the community did not have the "opportunity to navigate the future of our island home in a way that is sustainable and truly in the best interest of us all." In addition, we question whether the Planning Department has collaborated directly with our CDP working groups; in the last public meeting in 2023, every CDP group articulated the lack of respect and collaboration and their many years of community-directed input went unheard.
0 replies
Aloha, I am a member of HuliPAC. I've studied its thorough, thoughtful analysis of the proposed General Plan (attached below). I agree with its conclusion that the General Plan process, and therefore then its substantive components, are so lacking in transparency, inclusivity, egalitarian rigor, and ethical and legal integrity that it must not be adopted. We fault the US Navy for how it treats us (Red Hill) and we fault the US Army for how it treats us on our own island. And we, our own local county government, treat ourselves in ways that are wincingly similar. Let's all do better by returning to our fundamental Hawaiian principles and start again with a General Plan. Let's lead by example - let's treat each other the way we say we want others to treat us. I believe in us.
0 replies
Please remove any mention of possible "Micronuke" plants from the County of Hawaii General Plan. Building nuclear power plants and disposal of nuclear waste in Hawaii is prohibited by the State Constitution as amended in 1978 which I was a part of. The County of Hawaii should be taking action against the US military for its decision to leave depleted Uranium radiation in place instead of cleaning it up. Common sense says -- leaving it in place is disposal of it. Du has been used in spotting rounds for nuclear weapon training at PTA and likely other DU Weapons. I urge the County to press the military to clean up its depleted Uranium radiation nuclear waste and Pohakuloa in the center of our island.
0 replies
I approve the comments below, that will be submitted. Who are the "Stakeholders" and "private interests" that has been mentioned nearly 50 times in the Hawaii County General Plan2045? "STEWARDSHIP PLAN FOR HAWAI'I COUNTY"
0 replies
In general, the GP2045 has some great content and greatly enhances acknowledgement of cultural rights and resources. However, for a large number of reasons, many of which have already been communicated to the Director and PD in comments received to date, it has been practically an insurmountable challenge for the general public to conduct an effective, informed review of the GP2045. Without exception, members of the general public have struggled with the Konveio platform upon which the GP2045 and GPLU map have been placed. It doesn't work with all browsers, which members of the public had to discover for themselves. In addition, during community "informational meetings" PD staff admitted they were themselves still learning how to use the platform and software packages. Sometimes the GPLU map was inaccessible. In addition, insufficient information and documentation has been provided to allow the general public and decision-makers to be reasonably assured the existing GP has been fairly considered and addressed within the GP2045. The "Policy Rationale" document is a start, but should start with the existing GP and CDPs and work its way to the GP2045 to show the extent to which they have or have not been considered and/or included. As such, the GP2045 should be withdrawn and additional work done to enable the general public, the planning commissions, and the county council to be reasonably informed of all amendments the 2045GP is proposing to make to the 2005GP. In addition, the PD should conduct open forum presentations of the GP2045 by section and take public comments in real time, as was done when the GP review process was begun back in 2015. Here are some of the reasons supporting withdrawal of the GP2045 by the Director with a resubmission after additional work has been done to allow for a true comparison and general public review of the GP2045 with the existing 2005GP, along with some questions: 1. At some point subsequent to the initial GP review process began in 2015, the Director and/or Planning Department made the decision to draft the GP2040 with completely new language and formatting, rather than amending the 2005GP. This decision was unprecedented in light of the fact the GP review process had been conducted within the same structure and content organization for over 40 years. The existing GP was passed in 2005, but the GP review process began in 2000 and was based upon the same structure and content of the 1989 GP. The 1989 GP review process was based upon the same structure and content as the 1978 GP. The existing GP, 1989 GP and 1978 GP all contained the same elements with each having updated goals, policies, standards, and courses of action. Even the 1971 GP had a similar structure and content organization. Therefore, the existing GP is easily compared to the 1971, 1978 and 1989 GPs, as amended. Those GP review processes also used Ramseyer formatting to clearly identify changes for the general public and decision-makers, such as the planning commission and county council. Changes to the LUPAG maps were specifically pointed out and explained. This provided an enonnous amount of history and institutional planning knowledge and context. Questions: When and why was the decision made to draft and release in 2019 a completely rewritten general plan, GP2040? Why weren't obvious challenges to the general public's ability to review and comment not considered? 2. On February 8, 2022, the Director gave the county council an update on the progress of the GP review process. Community testimony and county council members expressed concern that it had been was extremely difficult to compare the existing GP with GP2040 because the formatting, structure, and language had been completed changed. During his response to the council, the Director revealed they were doing additional work on GP2040 in order to bring elements of the CDPs into the GP review process. He "promised" that existing GP would be easier to compare to the new draft. However, not only is the new draft GP2045 not easier to compare to the existing GP, but it bears no relation whatsoever to first draft GP2040. No explanation has been given by the PD or the Director, despite numerous complaints and questions from the public. Questions: When and why was the decision to draft a completely new rewrite of the GP2040? Why didn't the Director keep his promise to the county council and the general public that GP2045 would be easier to compare with the existing GP? 3. The PD hired an outside contractor to assist with drafting the GP2045. The PD decided to use the contractor's online platforms to place the GP2045 and GPLU maps within two separate A.I.-assisted software packages. This decision was made without regard to the general public's ability to access and navigate online content, much less to have the time and expertise to learn the two software packages necessary to read and comment on the GP2045 and GPLU map. The contractor's online website shows that the platform and software are primarily intended for in-house work communication for businesses and government agencies. Yes, the platform has been used on occasion by governmental agencies, but the PD did not follow those agencies' example of engagement with the public. If it had, the PD would have broken up the GP2045 into sections to be presented and discussed in open community forums and charrettes, rather than being pigeon-holed into "informational meetings" that attempted to teach how to navigate to and within the two software platforms while having the entire GP2045 presented as well. It would have allowed for open discussion in a community setting, rather than being relegated to an individual screen. It would have allowed those who do not have the technical expertise or access to prerequisite technology to actively participate, learn, and comment. At numerous times, members of the public, including fonner county council members asked that additional public meetings be held using a more informative, open forum format, such as charrettes. In addition, community-based working groups could have been organized by the PD with volunteer subject matter experts to provide support for the PD and the general public in the GP review process. Question: Why did the PD and/or the consultant not listen to members of the public who suggested the using a process similar to the successful one that assisted in drafting and getting the Kona CDP passed within two years? Who were the members of the "Advisory Group" and is there documentation of the results of their work? 4. At some point during the public comment period, the PD placed a document "Policy Rationale" on the contractor's platform. Personally, I only learned about this document about three weeks ago. I do not have a record of receiving notice that this document had been posted and wonder if an e-mail was sent from the PD to participants who had signed up to receive e-mails. Regardless, this document lists GP2045 Objectives 4-34 and 38-49 with the Policies listed under each. Beneath these are specific references to the existing GP, "2019 draft General Plan", and the six Community Development Plans that support these GP2045 Objectives and Policies. This comparison was done the exact opposite of the comparison that should have been made. The content of the existing GP and six CDPs should have been presented with references to where the substance of that content is (or is not) addressed in the GP2045. Question: Why was the Policy Rationale document not prepared and presented to allow the public and decision-makers reasonable assurance that GP2045 effectively addresses all goals, policies, standards, and courses of action within the existing GP? Why were Priority Actions in the GP2045 not similarly compared to existing GP Courses of Action? 5. When reviewing the agendas and minutes of the six CDP Action Committees, it is clear the Planning Department did not sufficiently prioritize and advocate for CDP AC review and comment on the GP2045. For instance, it was only during the last Kona CDP AC meeting that it was pointed out the GPLU maps where inconsistent with the Kone CDP maps. Question: Do other CDP maps conflict with the GPLU map? Will the PD make a better effort to guide and engage with the CDP AC and their communities? 6. The changes contained within the GPLU map are not specifically identified and explained. People must learn how to use the "swipe" tool and how to apply data layers in order to identify changes. The PD should withdraw the GPLU until it is able to present it to the public with all changes clearly identified and explained, especially since the GP2045 and GPLU map trumps subdivision and zoning. Question: For instance, why is the Hokuli'a development moved from "Agriculture" to "Rural" when variances to infrastructure have been granted over the past twenty years because it is designated as agriculture and there is an outstanding petition before the state Land Use Commission to have the subdivision redistricted? How does this change related to Policy 9.1 "Support rezoning and State Land Use reclassification to Rural in alignment with General Plan Rural designation."? Are county resources involved? Is the State Land Use District a layer contained within the GPLU map to allow for review and comment? How does this policy relate to the proposed county legislation related to Transient Accommodation Rentals and Additional Dwelling Units? Why have "Open" and "Important Agriculture Lands" been removed when the county has a Public Access, Open Space, and Natural Resources Preservation Committee? Doesn't Priority Action 9.b. undermine the state Agriculture Land Use District? 7. The GP2045 does not contain the term "scenic corridors", despite the fact that enabling county legislation was passed in 2006 to provide for scenic corridors and the l 989GP and existing GP contain language for the highway from the Mamalahoa Highway/Napoopoo Road junction to Keauhou to be a scenic corridor. Question: Why is this scenic corridor removed from the GP2045? Why is the Scenic Resource Protection Programs and Strategies report not an Appendix to the GP2045? 8. During a Kona CDP AC meeting, a representative of the PD stated that the GP2045 was going to have an Appendix. Question: Will there be an Appendix to the GP2045 and, if so, shouldn't the release of the GP2045 have been delayed to allow for public review, consideration, and comment of that part of the GP2045? 9. Collaborative Biocultural Stewardship is a great addition to the GP2045, especially considering that lack of guidance in the existing GP and the fact there is no thin red line between constitutionally-protected environment and cultural resources and traditional and customary practices. Still, it is still a new concept for the county and the general public. Please refer to these articles related to biocultural resources. link Biocultural restoration m Hawaii also achieves core conservation goals and link The Legal Framework behind Biocu ltural Rights. As the latter article states, "Currently, there are an increasing number of international and national laws, policies, court cases, declarations, and guidelines concerning indigenous peoples, local communities, and the protection of the environment, which provide rights regarding access to land, benefit-sharing, traditional knowledge, carbon emissions, protected areas, and much more. These rights are essentially fragmented: addressed by different bodies, found in diverse sources, and differently treated by different courts, Consequently, indigenous peoples and local communities must engage with a plethora of legal sources to obtain protection for interconnected aspects of their lives which are all part of the same biocultural landscape." The legal environment in which this concept exists within the context of current county law needs to be better explored to ensure that the Policies and Priority Actions under this section manifest the best intentions of Collaborative Biocultural Stewardship.
0 replies
On A Final Note In the early 1600's the Roman Catholic Church was Europe's religious, political and scientific authority. It supported a geocentric doctrine, which placed the earth at the center of the universe. At that time, Galileo Galilei supported Copernican heliocentrism, which placed the sun at the center of the solar system, Galileo based his support and scientific writings on actual telescopic observations of the sun, moon, planets and stars. After an Inquisition the Church admonished, punished and censured Galileo. He was placed under house arrest and was forced to recant his support of Copernican heliocentrism. A decision that damaged the Church's reputation for over 300 years. Finally, in 1992 the Church acknowledged that the Inquisition was wrong to not listen to and accept Galileo's scientific findings. The moral to this story.. popular doctrines and flavors of the month will eventually give way to the truth. Ultimately, the truth will prevail and the truth will utimately show that efforts to reduce emissions of man-made atmospheric CO2 will have no effect on the earth's climate and global warming. Millions and billions of dollars spent on a fool's errand. Accordingly, for the reasons and facts stated above, I urge you to remove plans to eliminate man-made CO2 from the County of Hawaii's Plan 2045. Solar radiation is the earth's primary heat source and Henry's Law, which has been a fundamental law of physics since 1850, shows that the temperature of the earth's land and water surfaces govern the levels of atmospheric CO2, not the level of man-made CO2, which is so small that it cannot be measured. For those of you who do not have the time to read all of the articles referenced above, click on the graphic below to watch the movie "THE COLD TRUTH", which provides similar information. This movie premiered on March 20, 2024.
0 replies
The UN's plans to virtually eliminate all livestock and materials that emit CO2 into the atmosphere is indicative of the control that the UN is striving to have over people's lives. Eliminating livestock and ranching would devastate Hawaii's economy. Read more here: link­ agenda-2030-and-the-sustainable-development-goals The County of Hawaii is a poor rural area. Spending taxpayer funds and other valuable resources to eliminate man-made atmospheric CO2 is a misuse of these resources. Certainly, there are more worthy projects that would benefit the people that live in Hawaii. Cleaning up the beaches and ocean, planting more trees, improving schools, roads and meeting other infrastructure needs would be a much better use of these resources. Solar and wind energy sources are inefficient, unreliable and costly. They require redundant energy geneeration systems and fossil fuel backup supplies to meet Hawaii's energy needs when the sun is not shining and when the wind is too weak or too strong for wind turbines to operate. In addition, solar farms are a blight on the landscape that require large tracts of land that could be better utliized for the development of more housing, agriculture, farming, ranching, industry and other economic drivers that would provide jobs and higher standards of living. Communities that have adopted solar and wind energy sources have seen their electricity costs increase significantly. As shown in the chart below, Hawaii's cost of electricity is already 3 times higher than the U.S. average. The cost of covering for the intermittency of the wind and solar power generation is hidden, giving the false impression that the cost of intermittency is not something caused by the addition of wind and solar facilities. ***attached images in EPIC***
0 replies
Thank you for providing the opportunity to comment on the County of Hawaii's General Plan 2045. While this Plan contains many worthwhile and beneficial actions, taking steps to eliminate man-made CO2 from the atmosphere is not one of them. Hawaii's Environmental Plans Hawaii's recently enacted laws and plans to eliminate man-made atmospheric CO2 are based on the assumption that the United Nation's IPCC climate change narrative is valid. It is not. It is seriously flawed for the following reasons: • It fails to recognize how atmospheric CO2 is absorbed and released by the oceans and other bodies of water as set forth in Henry's Law, which is a primary law of physics. Read more here: link • It fails to consider the full impact of the sun and solar radiation as a primary source of energy that heats the earth's and ocean surfaces. Read more here: link • It fails to consider the impact of cloud cover on the reflection and absorption of solar radiation and termperature at the earth's surface. Read more here: https:// climaterealists.ca/clouds-not-co2-key-to-understanding-climate-nobel-winner/ • It fails to recognize that CO2 from all man-made activity is so small that it cannot be measured in the natural environment due to: (1) the natural variations of total CO2, (2) measurement interference with atmospheric water vapor, and (3) large uncertainty in estimates of the amount of human-produced CO2. In fact, human-produced CO2 is not measured but only estimated and modelled based on estimated fossil fuel production from many countries, some unreliable with uncertainties as high as 20%. Read more here: link • It fails to consider the findings of the more than 1,900 scientists and informed professionals who, in contrast to statements by the IPCC's politicians, declare that there is no climate emergency. Read more here: link • It fails to realize that CO2 is essential for the survival of all plant life on which all other life is based. Green plants and other organisms survive by using sunlight to synthesize foods from atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) and water. No atmospheric CO2, no plant life. No plant life, no human life. Read more here: http:// link • It fails to realize that higher levels of atmospheric CO2 are more beneficial than lower levels of CO2 as shown in the chart below: Finally, there is a growing awareness that the IPCC's climate change narrative, which claims that man-made CO2 is the primary cause of global warming, has nothing to do with climate or science, but is really about gaining and exerting more political power and control over it's member countries. It is all about politics, money and control as noted in the two articles below... **Attached images in EPIC***
0 replies
Please add my voice to that of the Sierra Club of Hawai'i and HULi PAC, among others, in finding the Draft General Plan 2045 defective. I attended the original informational meeting in Kailua Kona, leaving my comments on post-it notes. I endeavored to discuss my perspective and concerns with representatives there. Since then I have attempted, more than once, to navigate the Konvieo system holding this confusing document- only to give up in frustration. I could not figure out what was being changed from the 2005 text or maps, or why changes were being made. I could not find where community voices were considered. In short, I couldn't find the "plan" in the "General Plan." I agree with and refer you to HULi PAC's well-researched, comprehensive and comprehensible document, dated March 29, 2024 (copy attached). To quote from their introduction and conclusion: "The Draft General Plan 2045 is NOT a plan we can use. It has no clear vision, no destination, no clear implementation path. It merely lays the groundwork for future Planning Directors and Mayors to say they made no promises and they have no accountability." "... [it] should not see the light of day."
0 replies
I agree with these comments. Please read "STEWARDSHIP PLAN FOR HAWAI'I COUNTY"
0 replies
I do not live on Hawaii, but am concerned about what is happening there. I have visited Hawaii multiple times and would like to return. But the rezoning they are currently planning takes away the people's rights. I agree with the comments in the following PDF "STEWARDSHIP PLAN FOR HAWAII COUNTY"
0 replies
Comments on the General Plan layout, organizaiton and topical presentation 1. The lack of a Table of Contents made navigating, reviewing, and commenting on the draft plan very difficult. 2. Lack of consistency in the numbering convention used throughout the document. a. Major Subjects Listed as "sections" b. Subsections also listed as "sections". c. Some major subjects included a table at the beginning of the section showing numbered subsections and others did not. i. Some components of the subsections were not numbered.
0 replies
KS comment: Please clarify how Action 23.i relates to wastewater (ie. sewage) and reuse of wastewater. We agree this program has the potential to assist large landowners with continue forest stewardship activities and promotes the protection of important watersheds. But need clarity on its relationship to wastewater treatment and reuse.
0 replies
KS comment: We are seeking clarification on large new developments and respective housing requirements as these amendments could drastically change the scope of initial development plans and impact the feasibility of projects. The definition for "large new developments" will need to be developed to guide the implementation of this action to ensure alignment with the spirit and intent of the overarching policy (ie; acreage, no. of units, type of units, etc.).
0 replies
KS comment: Consider different time horizons for various projects given the uniqueness of each project.
0 replies
KS comment: Requirements and encumbrances of this policy could result in unfair burden on landowners. Determination of significance should also consider public and landowner input.
0 replies
KS comment: The implementation of this policy should not result in an unfair taking. If the County's intent is that public access easements be granted, this guideline should consider and provide for balancing of public access (managed and maintained by the County) with a landowner's need to manage security to surrounding areas and the protection of the significant natural and historic resources.
0 replies
KS comment: The extent to which invasive species need to be removed in a development or on a land parcel with development activities could make projects unfeasible. Additionally, this could potentially be impossible if invasive species are not controlled on neighboring properties.
0 replies
KS comment Depending on the extent of requirements for facilities, this could make projects unfeasible and hinder development and economic stimulus to the local economy.
0 replies
KS comment: Resulting cost burden could unfairly harm landowners and the split of responsibility between public and private entities should be considered under this guideline.
0 replies
Clarification is needed on when private treatment systems are not required (e.g., definition of feasibility and compatibility as it relates to connection to nearby treatment plants and the County's long-range plans).
0 replies
KS comment: Definitions and requirements surrounding water neutrality could make projects unfeasible and hinder development and economic stimulus to the local economy. Clear and standardized definitions will help ensure fairness in implementation.
0 replies
Concurrently, an evaluation framework needs to be created to determine the appropriateness and type of access that should be allowed; including roles and responsibilities for management and oversight. This is both to protect public health and to steward the resource.
0 replies
Tables 19 & 20 KS comment: This section has the potential to develop an equitable method to define landowner requirements for public access but could significantly impact some landowners more than others. The uniqueness of various landscapes and sites should be considered in developing standards and requirements.
0 replies
KS comment: Depending on allocation of costs, this could make projects unfeasible and hinder development and economic stimulus to the local economy. The split of infrastructure burden between public and private entities should be considered under this guideline. Landowners and developers should not bear a disproportionate burden, or be forced to contribute more than their fair share of local and regional infrastructure costs as this could hinder development and economic stimulus to the local economy.
0 replies
KS comment: Depending on requirements and extent of buffer areas, this could make projects unfeasible and hinder development and economic stimulus to the local economy and agriculture production.
0 replies
KS comment: Clarification is needed as to whether this policy applies only to rezoning applications or if the policy could also apply to subdivision and other permit requests for existing Resort (V) zoned areas on the makai side of Ali'i Drive.
0 replies
KS comment: Careful consideration should be given as additional requirements could make projects unfeasible and hinder development and economic stimulus to the local economy. Each project is unique and the specifics of each project should be considered when contemplating requirements. However, some standardization and clear guidelines will help ensure fairness in implementation.
0 replies
KS comment (Policies 6.3, 7.1, 7.6 & Action 7.b): Depending on the extent of restrictions, performance requirements, and regulations, this could make projects unfeasible, hinder development and economic stimulus to the local economy. Definition of vulnerable areas, high-risk hazard areas and high-risk zones may be subjective with potential for unfair treatment of projects; clear and standardized definitions are necessary to help ensure fairness in implementation.
0 replies
KS comment: If this zoning category is created, an RPT code amendment is needed to incentivize landowners and defray carrying costs of managing conservation land. A lack of incentives and concessions for landowners could hinder investment and development in other areas.
0 replies
Due to the geological makeup of the majority of Hawai'i Island, underground power utilities will increase construction costs and lessen affordability of housing in the county.
0 replies
KS comment (Objective 45, Policy 45.15, Objective 49, Actions 49.a, 49.b, 49.c, 49.d): These policies have the potential to significantly increase costs related to the land planning and entitlement process and "Natural Beauty Site" establishment, maintenance, and protection, which could make projects unfeasible and hinder development and economic stimulus to the local economy. The plan should include language to allow for exceptions to these policies, where appropriate. Question: Can it be assumed that scenic overlooks, Natural Beauty Sites, and Scenic Resources Protection Program will be publicly funded and managed?
0 replies
in addition, a more nuanced approach to public access should be developed through this process as the current requirements do not differentiate between typical developments (ie; resort, commercial, residential) and resource management and stewardship activities seeking entitlements.
0 replies
KS comment: This policy expands public access requirements for landowners and could result in an increase in costs and liability risk, making projects unfeasible. This guideline should consider and provide for balancing of a landowner's need to manage security to adjacent areas and the protection of cultural and natural resources.
0 replies