Sierra Club Asks Council:
Restore Green to Maui Island Plan

Although Councilmember Elle Cochran made a motion to return green areas to the plan (which the Council had removed), other members blocked the motion.  Here is the Sierra Club testimony.

Sierra Club Maui Group Dec 4, 2012

PO Box 791180

Paia, HI 96779

RE: County Council Meeting of Dec.7, 2012 Agenda Item K.


Aloha Council Chair Mateo and Council Members

On November 27, we asked the Council to support stronger language in Chapter 8

policy 8.3.a

This is the one policy in Chapter 8 that describes how the proposed Protected Areas, now shown on “Diagrams” E-1, NW-1, N-1, NE-1, S-1, SE-1, and WC-1 should be viewed during the County’s planning process.

Currently Policy 8.3.a specifies two things:

1..Diagrams of protected lands should be reviewed when a proposed land use may impact a protected area.

2. The County Council and the Administration should be notified if a protected area may be compromised.

We and many other community groups are concerned that this language does not indicate a clear policy on the County’s commitment to adequately plan for our “green Infrastructure.”

We respectfully ask that the Policy 8.3.a language be amended to include concepts supported by a number of the Alliance of Community Association members. (exact language below)

This would keep the majority of the existing language of Policy 8.3.a. and add two more concepts

1. Direct review bodies to support project development designs that exclude the proposed Protected Areas shown on the diagrams from impacts and give them appropriate protection.


—–This language connects the dots and gives a clear planning policy directive. It commits to a reasonable and cost effective preservation strategy through project design (which can include the Transfer of Development Rights referred to in Table 8-2) .

—-It directs County development review to support “smart growth”–growth directed away from natural and cultural resource zones and balanced by preservation. The public supports this approach and Many MIP policies do as well.

  1. Specify that Protected Area on the “Diagrams” are included during the Community Plan update process. This aspect is not mentioned in the current policy language, yet, many of these areas are already on existing Community Plan maps.


—Adding this language allows Policy 8.3.a to be consistent with existing community plans.

and gives a specific implementation process for communities and decision makers to follow to implement preservation goals.

Please consider making these important changes before the MIP is passed.

No one understands why the Directed Growth Maps have changed. For five years everyone: public, planning staff and citizen review bodies all supported maps that showed both growth areas and “green” areas. Thats how the decisions to recommend growth boundaries were made. The County Charter calls for the General Plan to include “existing and future land use patterns and planned growth.” Our former maps did this. Preservation is a “land use pattern.”

If the Council is unwilling to revert to the maps the public thought they were supporting: maps with growth balanced by preservation, then the Council MUST act to give Policy 8.3.a meaningful language, such as that suggested below:

Amend MIP policy 8.3.a to read: (proposed new language in bold and underlined)

“The Protected Areas in Diagrams E-1, NW-1, N-1, NE-1, S-1, SE-1, and WC-1 should be concurrently reviewed with Table 8-2 and with any proposed State Land Use, Community Plan Amendment, or County Zoning application or other land use approval that may result in an adverse impact on a Protected Area. The Maui Planning Commission, County Council and the Administration shall support development project designs which exclude the proposed Protected Areas from project impacts and afford them appropriate levels of protection.   Updated Community Plan maps shall include Protected Areas described in the MIP and found on Diagrams E-1, NW-1, N-1, NE-1, S-1, SE-1, and WC-1, or as modified during  CAC review.”

Existing Policy 8.3.a

The Protected Areas in Diagrams E-1, NW-1, N-1, NE-1, S-1, SE-1, and WC-1should be concurrently reviewed with Table 8-2 and with any proposed land uses that may result in an adverse impact on a Protected Area. The County Council and the Administration should be notified if a Protected Area may be compromised by a development proposal.”

Mahalo Nui

Lucienne de Naie, Conservation Chair