Planning Department faces scrutiny
By NANCY COOK LAUER
Stephens Media Hawaii
Proposed developments in South Kona and Kohala sparked concerns Tuesday over whether the county Planning Department is paying enough attention to Community Development Plan committees when making decisions.
Regional Community Development Plans, or CDPs, are created to translate broad General Plan goals, policies and standards into implementation actions as they apply to specific geographical regions around the island, according to the Planning Department. CDPs are also intended to serve as a forum for community input into land use, delivery of government services and any other matters relating to the planning area.
But some County Council members say county development tools such as planned unit developments and minor use permits for special management areas give an appointed administrator too much power because there is limited to no opportunity for public comment.
Planned unit developments, or PUDs, are of particular concern to South Kona/Ka‘u Councilwoman Brenda Ford. She pointed to a recent court ruling that found the county at fault in granting the proposed Waikakuu Ranch development as an example.
“PUDs are being used by developers to avoid scrutiny,” Ford said. “I hate PUDs. I think they are an abuse of the system, abuse of the public and (they) disallow public comment.”
Planning Director Duane Kanuha, in a discussion with the council Planning Committee, defended the department’s PUD approvals.
“It’s part of the whole review package,” Kanuha said. “The criteria is in the code.”
Patricia and Richard Missler , whose neighborhood is next to Waikakuu Ranch, sued the Hawaii County Board of Appeals for a decision supporting a Planning Department approval of the PUD plan. The Misslers’ attorney argued the county failed to take the Kona Community Development Plan into consideration when approving the PUD, and failed to conduct site inspections and environmental surveys.
Judge Ronald Ibarra ruled the planning director acted in violation of the development plan and failed to uphold the county’s duty to protect natural resources. The council was scheduled to get an update on the case late Tuesday.
Several members of the public echoed that sentiment testifying before the Finance Committee on an unrelated development, where the council is being asked to accept a shoreline access trail from Kohala Kai LLC. The proposed development contains seven oceanfront lots ranging in size from five to 28 acres on a 63-acre tract north of Kawaihae Harbor and just south of Keawewai Gulch. The lots are expected to be sold for $4 million and up.
Four testifiers, opposing the public access easements that were a condition of development of the luxury development, said the public is being shortchanged and the North Kohala Community Development Plan committee wasn’t informed.
“It doesn’t seem like our CDP means anything,” said Mike Isaacs, of the Kohala Historic and Cultural Preservation Group. “It seems to me the Planning Department makes all the decisions.”
Larry Brown, with the Planning Department’s Long-Range Division, said the Kohala Kai approvals pre-dated the creation of the CDP.
After learning that the developers are providing only three parking spaces, that a trail along the shoreline has been moved closer to the ocean than the original historic trail and that parts of a historic trail have been paved over, the Finance Committee voted 9-0 to postpone a vote on the easements, Resolution 140, until it could get a thorough briefing on the original 1999 agreement and the changes to the SMA permit that have occurred since.
“It sounds to me, it’s a mess,” said Puna Councilman Zendo Kern, the former chairman of the Windward Planning Commission.
Email Nancy Cook Lauer at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Rules for posting comments
Comments posted below are from readers. In no way do they represent the view of Stephens Media LLC or this newspaper. This is a public forum.
Comments may be monitored for inappropriate content but the newspaper is under no obligation to do so. Comment posters are solely responsible under the Communications Decency Act for comments posted on this Web site. Stephens Media LLC is not liable for messages from third parties.
IP and email addresses of persons who post are not treated as confidential records and will be disclosed in response to valid legal process.
Do not post:
- Potentially libelous statements or damaging innuendo.
- Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
- Copyrighted materials of any sort without the express permission of the copyright holder.
- Personal attacks, insults or threats.
- The use of another person's real name to disguise your identity.
- Comments unrelated to the story.
If you believe that a commenter has not followed these guidelines, please click the FLAG icon below the comment.