When the Wailea 670 (Honua’ula) development was granted a zoning change from agricultural 30 conditions were imposed as Maui County law. Sierra Club observes that not all these conditions are being met and has filed a lawsuit challenging the Wailea 670 EIS.
Additionally, the Sierra Club has submitted testimony to the County Council for the annual review of Wailea 670 (Honua’ula) condition compliance pointing out the conditions that the developer is violating. This is the testimony:
From: Sierra Club Maui Group May 21, 2013
PO Box 791180, Paia, HI 96779
To: County Council Planning Committee
Re: Agenda Item CC 13-156PC Honua’ula Partners LLC Annual Compliance Report
Greetings Committee Chair Couch and Committee Members
Sierra Club Maui volunteers participated for many years in the rezoning review process for Wailea 670/Honua’ula. We supported the Council’s work in setting conditions on the project to mitigate potential impacts.
We urged HPL to issue an updated Environmental Impact Statement to inform the public and policymakers about what was planned. Since that was not done, the Council worked extra hard to craft conditions to provide for needed infrastructure improvements, mitigate traffic, drainage and lighting impacts, create recreational opportunities for local youth and protect cultural and natural resources found on the site.
HPL is required by condition 29 to submit annual compliance reports on the 30 conditions. Citizens expect these rezoning conditions to be implemented in good faith.
We urge the Council to get independent information about the status of compliance. For example, condition 20 requires marine monitoring studies. The data from these studies is required to be transmitted to the Dept of Health (water quality data) and the Division of Aquatic Resources (ecological data.)
The 2013 compliance report informs you that “ annual reports have been continually updated, transmitted to the Department of Health.” Key information about full compliance is ommitted.
No mention is made of whether the ecological reports are sent to the DAR. No mention is made of whether the reports sent to the DOH are being used as part of the State’s Integrated Report of Assessed Waters prepared under Clean Water Act Sections 303(d) and 305(b), as is clearly the intention of Condition 20
Our inquiries to DAR administration is that they have no record of receiving any reports from the HPL consultant for the agreed upon monitoring area.
In reading the 2012 Integrated Report of Assessed Waters a number of Maui marine locations covered by this monitoring condition are consistently listed as having insufficient data. While the data may be transmitted to the DOH, it may not be in format that the agency can easily use.
It is our hope that the Council could close the information loop and make sure that the agencies who this condition is meant to benefit are receiving the information that has been described in the language of the condition in a form where it can be useful. The whole point is to have a science-based process to recognize any impacts to nearshore water as they may develop, and seek to mitigate harm being done.
If the data is not getting delivered, or not getting plugged into the right part of the process, it makes Condition 20 totally ineffectual.
Mahalo for your attention to this matter
Sierra Club Maui Group