Grading & Grubbing Testimony this Monday, May 19

[Rob Tucker]

MarkP: Have you read the PCDP or are you just reacting to people's reactions?

[MarkP]

Reacting to peoples reactions. There are so many ways that increasing restrictions would have unintended consequences, some good, some bad. I myself am very flexible and could tolerate a lot of restrictions but asking the government to forbid grubbing and grading while at the same time they technically are requiring you to grow a crop is just such a glaring inconsistency that I want to throw it in peoples faces. Whatever rules are put in place have to be workable or they are worse than useless.

[Rob Tucker]

From a practical point of view Hawaii County is the only place I have ever lived where grubbing and gradiing is allowed to proceed with little or zero oversight. The intention is not to bring agriculture or residential life to a halt. It is to try to prevent excesses of forest destruction.

Such actions have worked in other states for many, many years and are simply part of the process. Because Hawaii is 30 years behind the times on many issues does not mean that it must remain so.

[MarkP]

I admit I haven't looked at the specific proposals closely enough, but I do still see a problem with the state expecting you to farm a 1 acre parcel of lava while simultaneously preserving it. Of course many of these subdivisions would not have been developed in the first place if the planners had really given a damn about anything except taking the money and running. We are also one of the few places in the US where you can legally use a cesspool. As I understand it, cesspools are just not an environmentally sound way to dispose of sewage but there doesn't seem to be the will to require anything else.

[Rob Tucker]

Actually the PCDP contains a proposal to ban cesspools in Puna for the future.

Some will not like that. They may prefer to spend less and risk sacrificing the marine environment and aquifers.

The PCDP is a community driven set of proposals derived from participation of about 1,300 Puna residents who took the time to participate.

[DanielP]

quote:

---

Originally posted by MarkP

I admit I haven't looked at the specific proposals closely enough, but I do still see a problem with the state expecting you to farm a 1 acre parcel of lava while simultaneously preserving it. Of course many of these subdivisions would not have been developed in the first place if the planners had really given a damn about anything except taking the money and running. We are also one of the few places in the US where you can legally use a cesspool. As I understand it, cesspools are just not an environmentally sound way to dispose of sewage but there doesn't seem to be the will to require anything else.

---

Mark, I am not sure which side of the regulatory fence you are on.

I own Ag lots and I ripped and rolled 1/2 acre of my 12 acres to plant coffee. Coffee is happy and I used a sction of the land where the Native forest was not thriving as well as adjacent areas. I did this out of choice. There is very minimal requirement on the level of Ag. use that is required on these lots. These 1-3 acre lots really should be zoned Rural Residential.

I think that septic tanks are a good but expensive idea. You can't just rip the Pahoehoe, throw in leach line and cinders. There needs to be a level of soil, which percs at the proper rate, for the effluent to anaerobically break down. The rainfall also becomes an issue, as it can push the effluent down before it has had time to properly decompose. Otherwise the septic tanks are a self delusion.
I am concerned and curious about how the water tables on BI work and what the impact of cess pools is.

I am a tree-hugging developer. As I said, there must be balance.

Aloha, Dan

[Mitzi M]

From what I have read, the Native Forest Protection Ordinance does focus on NATIVE forest. There's a line in there that says under this plan you'll be able to cut down your "buffer zone" if it's not native forest. Basically, it would require a plot plan, an inspection to evaluate what vegetation and other features are on your property and a land disturbance permit.

I'm not a huge fan of more government all up in our business but I'm also regularly horrified by what I see happening to the land here. Most of the people I've worked with really do WANT to save the natives on their land but it turns out to be harder than you'd think to make that happen. More than once I worked on a project where unbeknownst to them, the person's land was already partially cleared by a neighbor's dozer operator. I see situations all the time where owners who asked the contractor to leave certain trees or areas untouched came back to find they were dozed anyway. Once they're cut down, our native forests grow back very slowly (if at all). It won't happen in our lifetimes. Because of the many invasive species, it may not happen at all.

One of the first things people with cleared property ask me to help them with is screening from roads and neighbors. They want fast screens and shade trees. Often they aren't even aware of what used to be there before the dozer. It may not be perfect, but this ordinance seems to be pretty well thought out. It seems like a lot of people have put some good thought and work into it and I think it's at least a good starting point. Ohia forest does seem abundant here on the Big Island. If you are oblivious to how lucky that makes us, go try and find ohias on Oahu.

[leilaniguy]

I'm all for saving as much native forest as possible, but it may be hard to enforce any new rules in the small-lot subdivisions. I owned a lot in Nanawale that was all Uluhe, except for a nice grove of Ohia smack in the middle. There was no way to build and stay in the lot setbacks without removing every tree.

[Bob Orts]

quote:

---

Originally posted by MarkP

It's not that I object to preserving the rainforest, but I find such an open ended, arbitrarily defined, and difficult to enforce proposal to be inconsistent with how useful law gets done.

---

My sentiments exactly. It's not the purpose or rationale I find troubling, it's the lack of specifics. I have no issue with reasonable zoning requirements that incorporate certain vegetation, clearing, preservation or land alteration regulation, but it needs to be laden with a heavy dose of common sense and practicality.

[gtill]

Next step, invasive species removal! too much strawberry guava, take it out, it's enroaching on our native species! Fines for excessive micronia, fines for albesia!
when given power, watch out! How's about a sunshine clause in the law, say 5 years, then another vote! I can see major corruption here!