APPENDIX A

Document Sample
APPENDIX A Powered By Docstoc
					APPENDIX A
PAC MEETING DISCUSSION NOTES AND
PRESENTATION MATERIALS
                                                                                                        Helber Hastert & Fee
                                                                                                        Planners, Inc.
Helber Hastert & Fee
Planners, Inc.                                                                                          NS SCP PAC #1 Meeting Record
                                                                                                        July 19, 2007
                                                                                                        Page 2 of 4
August 15, 2007
                                                                                                            in active agricultural use). This is a major concern for the community. What happens to the
                                                                                                            “unimportant” lands?
MEETING SUMMARY

To:          North Shore Sustainable Communities Plan Five-Year Review Project File                     •   The process of identifying IAL is an opportunity for community involvement. It should be a
                                                                                                            community-based (“bottom-up”) process where the community works together with
                                                                                                            government agencies and landowners to determine which lands are best suited for IAL
From:        Corlyn Orr
                                                                                                            designation.
Subject:     Planning Advisory Committee Meeting No. 1
             July 19, 2007, 7:00 – 9:00 pm                                                              •   The availability and delivery of water to meet desired quantities and suitable qualities is the
             John Kalili Surf Center, Hale‘iwa Ali‘i Beach Park                                             key to supporting agriculture. Existing water resources such as the Wahiaw Reservoir and
                                                                                                            the North Shore’s aquifers, as well as existing irrigation systems, need to be maintained.
                                                                                                            Federal funds are available for infrastructure improvements.
PAC Attendees: Antya Miller, Bob Leinau, Carol Phillips, Dan Nellis, Diane Anderson,
               Doug Cole, Gil Riviere, Jacob Ng, Jeff Alameida, Jenny Vierra, Jerry Driscoll,
               John Hirota, Kalani Fronda, Kathleen Pahinui, Lisa Izumi, Martha Smith,                  •   The North Shore can become O‘ahu’s bread basket, but the community needs to support
               Mike Lyons, Norm Fujioka, Susan Matsushima                                                   agriculture and take action to make agriculture important. Farmers need partnerships with
                                                                                                            landowners to grow agriculture; landowners need to be committed to work with farmers.
DPP Attendees: Ray Young, CAPB Project Manager
                                                                                                            Partnering with government agencies is also needed.
HHF Attendees: Scott Ezer, Corlyn Orr, Wendie McAllaster
                                                                                                        •   Development trends in other regions of the island should be considered when addressing
The first Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) Meeting for the North Shore Sustainable                         agriculture issues. Urban development occurring in other areas of O‘ahu is putting more
Communities Plan (SCP) Five-year Review Project was held on Thursday, July 19, 2007 at the                  pressure on retaining North Shore’s agriculture lands.
Hale‘iwa Ali‘i Beach Park John Kalili Surf Center. The workshop was scheduled from 7:00 to
                                                                                                        •   Preserving agriculture lands will limit the amount of land available for housing. This affects
9:00 pm. The purpose of the meeting was to introduce the project and the community planning
                                                                                                            the amount of land available for affordable housing, which is desperately needed.
process to the PAC, review the current SCP vision, and identify major development trends and
issues of community concern. Handouts included a meeting agenda and Powerpoint
presentation.                                                                                           •   Perpetual agriculture easements and economic incentives are needed to support
                                                                                                            agriculture. The land use regulations that allow existing agriculture lands to be converted
                                                                                                            and developed should be evaluated.
Scott Ezer convened the meeting at 7:10, opening with a brief welcome and introduction of DPP
and HHF attendees. Scott proceeded with a presentation of the project, including an overview
                                                                                                        •   Real estate speculation is also driving up the cost of agriculture lands.
of the existing SCP, the proposed community involvement process/project schedule, the use of
scorecards/indicators to measure how well the Plan is being implemented, and the role and
                                                                                                        •   The BWS Watershed Management Plan and City’s Wastewater System Plan should be
function of the PAC.
                                                                                                            incorporated in the Plan as Special Area Plans.
Group introductions followed, as each PAC member introduced themselves, the interest or
organization that they represented, and the issue they were most concerned about. Scott then            Appropriate Visitor Accommodations
presented the major issues of community concern, which were identified by community
members during informal interviews and meetings conducted between April-May 2007. The                   •   The #1 question asked at the North Shore Chamber of Commerce office is about the
                                                                                                            availability and pricing of visitor accommodations. Legal visitor accommodations are
group discussed each issue in detail. Comments provided during the discussion are
                                                                                                            needed, and existing TVU laws need to be enforced. Possible visitor accommodations in
summarized as follows.
                                                                                                            Hale‘iwa may include a small inn modeled after the historic Hale‘iwa Hotel with beach
                                                                                                            cottages for families. Honolulu should look at how other areas have addressed the issue
Challenges to Retain and Protect Existing Agricultural Lands
                                                                                                            (e.g., Whistler, Canada).
•     The criteria for lands that may be considered for Important Agricultural Lands (IAL)
                                                                                                        •   Short term rentals are driving up real estate prices, reducing the inventory of long-term
      designation does not include fallow lands (i.e., lands that are not being cultivated or are not
                                                                                                            rentals, and displacing local renters. They are also incompatible with neighboring homes,
                                                                                                            resulting in safety, noise, and traffic concerns for adjacent homes.

               Pacific Guardian Center x 733 Bishop Street, Suite 2590 x Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
                Tel. 808.545.2055 x Fax 808.545.2050 x www.hhf.com x e-mail: info@hhf.com
Helber Hastert & Fee                                                                                 Helber Hastert & Fee
Planners, Inc.                                                                                       Planners, Inc.

NS SCP PAC #1 Meeting Record                                                                         NS SCP PAC #1 Meeting Record
July 19, 2007                                                                                        July 19, 2007
Page 3 of 4                                                                                          Page 4 of 4

•   The question, “Is there a need for additional visitor accommodations? What is an                     types (such as multi-family units) that are economically feasible for the developer and
    appropriate form and location for new accommodations?” should be rephrased to: “Is there a           affordable for the buyer.
    need to replace illegal short term vacation rentals (i.e., less than the legal 30-day rental
    period allowed by existing zoning) and replace them with legalized units? What is the            • How are others approaching affordable housing? Other entities are providing affordable
    impact to long-term rental market supply of regulating the vacation rental industry?”              housing, should look to other groups (for example: HRI, Puhi Kauai, Big Island).

•   Are B&Bs a solution? The original SCP included B&Bs, but the Council deleted it (due to          • Changing demographics in the community are a different issue from affordable
    concern that the proposal didn’t specify owners had to live on-site.)                              housing/economic development opportunities (Each issue should have its own slide).

•   The community supports a small hotel in Hale‘iwa similar to a proposal many years ago to         Provision of Appropriate Infrastructure
    develop a small hotel at Puaena (not the eco-camp). The Waialua Town Plan states that
    the community would like a small country inn.                                                    •   The SCP is not being implemented. For example, the SCP calls for sidewalks in Hale‘iwa
                                                                                                         town, but the current administration cancelled the contract after the contractor had already
•   The proposed Turtle Bay expansion will affect Hale‘iwa with an increase in the number of             been selected. Why should the community put time into the SCP if the City is not going to
    visitors driving through the region.                                                                 implement and follow the Plan?

•   The Superferry will change travel patterns. It is possible that neighbor island residents will   •   The SCP is a guideline for land use and future development. The community should not get
    come to surf, and need a place to park/stay.                                                         hung up on the implementation of individual projects.

Population Trends                                                                                    •   Does the City actually use the SCP? How many times has DPP actually referred to the
                                                                                                         SCP?
• The concept of new affordable housing is a myth and is not attainable. Multi-family homes
  that are available for $200-$300,000 are not selling because they are still priced too high for    •   The City takes too long to process permits (should not take 2-3 years to get a building
  people to afford them (i.e., people can’t afford what is defined as affordable). What is               permit approved). The City is investing in the island as a whole, but very little is being done
  affordable? Who is the market? Knowing income data would help to define what’s                         for the North Shore. The community needs to feel that the government is cooperating;
  affordable.                                                                                            responding to the community’s needs and providing the necessary infrastructure and
                                                                                                         services (community feels like the North Shore is not being valued and not getting its share
• The lack of affordable properties is causing local residents to be displaced by                        of improvement projects).
  outsiders/transplants who can afford it, exacerbating the problem of providing housing for
  existing residents. The cultural and economic diversity of the North Shore is important.           •   Poamoho Estates - should raise taxes on such properties, current tax rate is not legitimate.
  Waialua Town is losing a lot of people because of the real estate market. It’s sad to see
  kids in Waialua unable to afford homes.                                                            •   SCP should consolidate existing plans (e.g. bike plan, ag plan, etc.)

    Waialua Town lost residents and residences when the sugar plantation shut down. Building         Recent Developments and Planning Initiatives
    homes in Waialua would provide housing to replace homes demolished after the sugar mill
    closed (not intended to add more homes). The Waialua community would like to see a               •   Current land use regulations enable developments that are inconsistent with the SCP. For
    blend of market priced homes and affordable homes for the future. Replacement of the lost            example, a significant zone change should require an EIS, not an EA.
    inventory would help to revitalize the Waialua community.
                                                                                                     • Existing parcels are being redeveloped at greater densities, which raises concerns about the
• Preserving existing plantation homes is important for the area’s cultural/historic character         physical, social and visual impacts of future residential density. How much more density can
  and to preserve the community’s heritage. Renovation of existing plantation homes should             existing residential areas handle? The SCP should address infill development by identifying
  be considered as an alternative to provide affordable housing since restoration may be less          opportunities for infill (amount and location).
  costly than new construction. Multi-family options need to be considered; affordable single-
  family housing is not realistic.

• The existing SCP focuses on the physical design and form/character of residential areas,
  and emphasizes single-family housing types. SCP revisions should provide for housing
                                                                                                   Meeting Agenda


                                                                                       • Describe the project and
                                                                                         community planning process
                                                                                       • Present the current North Shore SCP
                                                                                       • Review major development
                                                                                         trends and recent challenges
                                                                                       • Discuss the community’s vision


                             NORTH SHORE
                           SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES PLAN
                                  FIVE-YEAR REVIEW   1                                                                                            2
                          Planning Advisory Committee Meeting #1   July 19, 2007




         Meeting Objectives                                                           Project Purpose and Objectives
                                                                                   • Review and update the existing SCP
                                                                                     (adopted July 2000)
  • Present the project purpose and scope                                            – Measure progress toward achieving the vision, policies,
                                                                                       principles and guidelines contained in the Plan
  • Confirm PAC membership and the
                                                                                     – Identify relevant land use, land development and socio-
    PAC’s function/role                                                                economic trends, future development proposals and
                                                                                       emerging issues
  • Review the current North Shore SCP
                                                                                     – Develop a “scorecard” of community indicators to
  • Identify major issues of concern                                                   measure progress toward achieving the Plan’s vision
                                                                                     – Identify appropriate Plan revisions to address existing
  • Confirm the SCP vision elements                                                    SCP components that may require modification
                                                                                     – Identify policies and issues that should be addressed in
                                                                                       a General Plan Update, and any Special Area Plans or
                                                                                       more detailed planning initiatives that may be
                                                                         3             appropriate                                                4




            Planning Team                                                          Honolulu’s Land Use Planning System

• City and County of Honolulu
  Department of Planning and Permitting
  – Raymond Young, Planner

  PlanPacific, Inc
• PlanPacific Inc.
• Helber Hastert and Fee, Planners
  – Scott Ezer, Principal
  – Corlyn Orr, Senior Planner



                                                                         5                                                                        6




                                                                                                                                                      1
North Shore SCP Report Organization                                     North Shore SCP Vision Statement
                                                                                  “The North Shore in the year 2020 retains
 Five Chapters                                                                   the unique qualities that have long defined
                                                                              its attractiveness to residents and visitors alike.
   •   North Shore’s Role in O‘ahu’s Development                         It has maintained its scenic open spaces, enhanced
       Pattern                                                              its coastal resources, and has carried the flavor
   •   Vision for the North Shore’s Future                                      of its Hawaiian heritage, cultural diversity,
                                                                                       and plantation past forward in the
   •   Land Use Policies, Principles and                                              revitalization of its communities.”
       Guidelines
   •   Public Facilities and Infrastructure Policies
       and Principles
   •   Implementation
 Open Space, Land Use and Public
 Facilities Maps
                                                                 7                                                                  8




          Key Vision Elements                                                       Open Space Map
                            • Establish Rural Community, Agriculture,
                              and Preservation Boundaries
                            • Support the diversified agriculture
                              industry
                            • Enhance the region’s recreational and
                              educational potential
                            • Designate Hale‘iwa and Waialua towns
                              as “country towns”
                            • Retain the Waialua Mill site as the
                              regional industrial center
                            • Limit additional new housing to areas
                              contiguous to Hale‘iwa and Waialua
                              towns and establish rural design
                              guidelines
                            • Provide adequate public infrastructure,
                              facilities, and services
                            • Retain cultural and historic resources
                            • Adapt the ahupua‘a concept in land use
                              and natural resource management
                                                                 9                                                                  10




               Land Use Map                                                      Public Facilities Map




                                                                11                                                                  12




                                                                                                                                         2
          Community Involvement Process                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  What are Scorecards and Indicators?

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    • Scorecard: “tool to evaluate the effectiveness of the SCP
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      and measure the progress made in implementation.”
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    • Indicator: “measurement to track changes in a system
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      over time”
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Example: oil pressure, temperature and battery charge t ll h
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              – E     l    il          t       t     d b tt      h     tell how
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                an engine is working and can reveal potential problems
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    • Key Criteria for Indicators
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              – Relevant, valid, measurable, consistent and reliable,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                understandable, accessible and affordable




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        13                                                                                         14




                                            Sample Scorecard                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              Role and Function of the PAC

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  • Serve as core advisory group to guide
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    the planning process
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  • Represent various interests and opinions
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    of the larger North Shore community
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  • Attend and participate in PAC meetings
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    and community workshops
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  • Share project information and network with
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    other members in the community
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  • Encourage community attendance and
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    participation at the community workshops

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        15                                                                                         16




                                                            PAC Roster                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  Issues of Community Concern
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                (Major Development Trends and Recent Challenges)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            Natural Resources
                                                                                                                                                                                          Business/Tourism
                                                                                                               Sunset/Pupukea




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           Transportation
                                                                                                Original CAC




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       • Challenges to retain and protect existing
                                                                                                                                                                            Agriculture




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Real Estate




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            Landowner
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              Recreation
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Education
                                                                                                                                                                Mokul ‘ia
                                                                                                                                Kawailoa

                                                                                                                                           Hale‘iwa

                                                                                                                                                      Waialua




                                                                                                                                                                                                                     Cultural
                                                                                                                                                                                                             Civic




1. Dan Nellis
                                Affiliation
                                    Dole Operations                                                                                                   z                      z
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         agricultural lands
2. Martha Smith                     Monsanto                                                                                                                                z
3. Richard McCormack
4. Susan Matsushima
                                    Pioneer Hi-Bred
                                    Alluvion                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                                                            z
                                                                                                                                                                             z
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       • Appropriate visitor accommodations
5. Antya Miller                     NS NB No. 27, NS Chamber of Commerce                                        z                                                    z 
6. Jerry Driskell
7. Josh Heimowitz
                                    North Shore Soap Factory (Waialua)
                                    Camp Erdman, NS Chamber of Commerce Chair
                                                                                                                                                                 z
                                                                                                                                                                 z
                                                                                                                                                                     z
                                                                                                                                                                     z                                                                                                                                                                • Population trends
8. Bob Leinau                       NS NB No. 27                                                               z                                                      z                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                           z                           z                                                                                                      
9. Carol Phillips
10. Dave Bramlett
11.
11 Doug Cole
                                    NS NB No. 27, Defend O‘ahu Coalition
                                    Rotary Club of Wahiawa-Waialua
                                    Sunset Beach Community Association                                          z
                                                                                                                                z                                      z
                                                                                                                                                                       z                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       • Provision of appropriate infrastructure
12. Jake Ng                         NS NB No. 27, Waialua High School Foundation                                                                     z                z                                                        
13. Jeff Alameida
14. Jenny Vierra
                                    NS NB No. 27, Waialua Community Association
                                    Friends of Waialua                                                                                               z
                                                                                                                                                                 z     z
                                                                                                                                                                       z
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      • Recent and proposed projects/planning efforts
15. John Hirota                     NS NB No. 27, Friends of Waialua                                                                                  z               z
16. Kathleen Pahinui                Friends of Waialua, Mokul ‘ia and Waialua Comm Assns                                                              z                z
17. Mike Lyons                      NS NB No. 27 Chair, NS Chamber of Commerce                                                             z                          z
18. Stew Ring                       Mokuleia Community Association                                                                                              z     z
19. Betty Jenkins                   kupuna, Hale‘iwa MainStreet                                                                                       z                                                              z
20. Aimee Kumura                    Waialua Elementary, Vice Principal                                                                               z                                                                         z
21. Geraldine Meade                 NS NB No. 27                                                                z                                                                                                               z
22. Sharon Nakagawa                 Dept. of Educaiton                                                                                               z                                                                         z
23. Diane Anderson                  Sundance Realty, NS Outdoor Circle                                                          z                                                                                                            z
24. Marianne Abrigo                 Marianne Abrigo Realty, NS Chamber of Commerce                                                                               z                                                                           z
25. Gil Riviere                     NS NB Transportation Comm., Keep the NS Country                                                                   z                                                                                                                        z
26. Paul Sensano                    Harbormaster, Hale‘iwa Harbor                                                                                                                                                                                                            
27. Lisa Izumi                      Castle and Cooke                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       z
28. Kalani Fronda                   Kamehameha Schools, NS Chamber of Commerce                  œ                                                                                                                                                                                                    z
29. Norm Fujioka                    Fujioka's Market, NS Chamber of Commerce                                                     z                                                                                                                                                                        z
shading indicates current NS NB No. 27 member                                                                            4            2          3         9          5
  indicates member of original CAC, œ indicates organization was represented on original CAC
z indicates primary interest,  indicates secondary interest                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            17                                                                                         18
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             Aerial Photo Source: http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/coasts/data/oahu/oblique_north.xml




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        3
           Challenges for Agriculture                                               Appropriate Visitor Accommodations
                                       • Providing a higher quality
                                         water source                                        • Increase in illegal short-term vacation rentals
                                       • Maintaining existing                                          – Impacts to rental housing market and real
                                         irrigation systems                                              estate prices
                                       • Securing long-term leases                                     – Compatibility with surrounding residential
                                       • Affording the tax on                                            uses
                                         agricultural lands                                  • Is there a need for additional visitor
                                       • Maintaining a sustainable                             accommodations,           so
                                                                                               accommodations and if so, what type?
                                         agricultural industry
                                                                                             • What is an appropriate form and location for
                                       • Identification of Important                           new accommodations?
                                         Agricultural Lands




                                                                       19                                                                                                                                   20
                                                                            Aerial Photo Source: http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/coasts/data/oahu/oblique_north.xml




                   Population Trends                                            Provision of Appropriate Infrastructure
                                                                            • Transportation Systems
                                                                                    –   Capacity of existing highway
• Changing face of the community                                                    –   Emergency bypass road
                                                                                    –   Alternative transportation systems
    – social and cultural differences of changing                                   –   Sidewalk construction in Hale‘iwa
      demographics                                                          • Drainage
                                                                                    – Flood hazard in Waialua and
                            g
• Need for affordable housing and economic                                            Hale iwa
                                                                                      Hale‘iwa
  development opportunities to keep the                                             – Coastal water quality
  younger generations on the North Shore                                    • Water Systems
                                                                            • Wastewater Treatment
                                                                            • Parks and Recreational
                                                                              Facilities



                                                                                                                                                                  Photo Source:
                                                                       21                                                                                                                                   22
                                                                                                                                                                  http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/coasts/data/oahu/ground_
                                                                                                                                                                  north/images/083_haleiwa.jpg




           Recent Developments and                                               Challenges to the North Shore’s Vision
              Planning Initiatives
• Projects of Concern
   – Poamoho Estates
   – Sunset Beach Colony (Velzyland)
   – Proposed Burger Subdivision
     (Kawailoa)
• Integration of Current Planning
  Efforts and Recent Land
  Acquisitions
   – Waialua Town Plan (2004)
   – Kamehameha Schools North Shore
     Plan (ongoing)
   – P p kea Paumal Natural Area
     acquisition
   – OHA’s acquisition of Waimea Valley
   – BWS Watershed Management Plan
     (Fall 2007)

                                                                       23                                                                                                                                   24




                                                                                                                                                                                                                         4
                    Next Steps                                         Contact Information

• Community Workshop #1                                   • Project website address
  – August 2007 (tentative)                                 – http://honoluludpp.org/Planning/NorthShore/NS-
                                                              5yr/NorthShore.pdf
  – Place TBD
• Next PAC Meeting
                 g                                        • HHF contacts
                                                              Email: l        @hhf
                                                            – E il colsonorr@hhf.com
  – Summarize findings from community workshop and
    identify SCP revisions                                  – Phone: 545-2055
  – Discuss “scorecard” and indicators                      – Fax: 545-2050
                                                            – Mail: 733 Bishop Street, Suite 2590
                                                                    Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96813


                                                     25                                                        26




                                                                                                                    5
                                                                                                Helber Hastert & Fee
                                                                                                Planners, Inc.
Helber Hastert & Fee
Planners, Inc.                                                                                  NS SCP PAC #2 Meeting Record
                                                                                                October 30, 2007
                                                                                                Page 2 of 5

November 6, 2007                                                                                SCP Amendment Proposal

                                                                                                •   Kamehameha Schools (KS) and Castle & Cooke expressed surprise at receiving
MEETING SUMMARY
                                                                                                    DPP’s letter requesting landowners’ to identify any SCP amendments they might need
                                                                                                    to implement their development proposals. KS indicated that they were not planning
To:        North Shore Sustainable Communities Plan Five-Year Review Project File
                                                                                                    to submit an amendment proposal request. Castle & Cooke commented that they had
                                                                                                    to contact DPP for clarification about the information being requested.
From:      Corlyn Orr

Subject:   Planning Advisory Committee Meeting No. 2                                            •   The current SCP amendment process allows a landowner to request an SCP
           October 30, 2007, 7:00 – 9:30 pm                                                         amendment subsequent to this ongoing five-year process through an independent
                                                                                                    review (requiring City Council approval). Otherwise, the landowner would have to wait
           Waialua Courthouse Building
                                                                                                    until the next SCP Five-Year Review.
PAC Attendees: Antya Miller, Bob Leinau, Carol Phillips, Dan Nellis, Dave Bramlett,
                 Diane Anderson, Gerry Meade, Gil Riviere, Jacob Ng, Jeff Alameida,             • How can smaller landowners be informed about DPP’s amendment proposal process?
                 Jerry Driscoll, John Hirota, Josh Heimowitz, Kalani Fronda, Kathleen             For example, what about smaller projects that do not require an SCP map amendment
                                                                                                  but will change the neighborhood character and density (e.g., Berger Subdivision)?
                 Pahinui, Marianne Abrigo, Paul Sensano, Stew Ring
                                                                                                  Issues related to infill density, building footprint, appropriate architectural design, and
Other Attendees: Ron Nishihara (Castle & Cooke), Reed Matsuura (Councilmember
                                                                                                  open space and viewplane preservation should be addressed as part of the Five-Year
                 Donovan Dela Cruz), Mark Cunningham (Defend O‘ahu Coalition
                                                                                                  Review when the relevant SCP sections are discussed.
                 [DOC]), Zenna Galagaran (DOC), Kayte Killebrew (DOC), Mark Manley
                 (DOC), Bob Nakata (DOC), Margaret Primacio (DOC),
                 Tim Vandeveer (DOC), Julian Miller                                             Act 183, Important Agricultural Lands (IAL)
DPP Attendees: Ray Young, CAPB Project Manager
                                                                                                • What happens to lands not designated IAL? Is it true that the lands determined to be
HHF Attendees: Scott Ezer, Corlyn Orr, Rachael Edinger
                                                                                                  “unimportant” AG lands would be reclassified as State Rural Land Use District? None
The second Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) Meeting for the North Shore Sustainable              of the land on O‘ahu is currently designated as Rural, and the Rural District may
Communities Plan (SCP) Five-year Review Project was held on Tuesday, October 30,                  contradict the land use pattern envisioned by the community (e.g., allowable uses in
                                                                                                  the Rural District may include uses that the community finds undesirable). The
2007 at the Waialua Courthouse Building. The purpose of the meeting was to present the
                                                                                                  proposed legislation does not implement such a change.
performance assessment matrix and discuss possible revisions to Section 3.1 Open
Space and Natural Environment and Section 3.2 Agriculture of the SCP.
                                                                                                • Ron Nishihara (Castle & Cooke) clarified that the IAL designation is intended to be a
Scott Ezer convened the meeting at 7:15. Meeting ground rules were presented, followed            special designation overlaying the existing State AG Land Use District. Intended to
                                                                                                  protect AG lands and promote diversified AG, Act 183 establishes stricter approvals to
by a brief recap of Community Meeting #1 and an overview of the performance
                                                                                                  reclassify or re-zone IAL at both the State and County levels (two-thirds majority vote
assessment matrix. The purpose, format and content of the matrix were reviewed, and
                                                                                                  needed for IAL lands vs. majority vote for other land use classifications). It is untrue
PAC members were encouraged to review the information and provide their written/verbal
                                                                                                  that lands not designated as IAL would fall out of the AG District and be reclassified as
comments to HHF.
                                                                                                  Rural.
The proposed revision approach – including the strategy for the next 3-4 PAC meetings
                                                                                                • Act 183 also includes provisions to establish incentives for landowners to seek IAL
and DPP’s SCP amendment proposal letter to landowners – was presented, followed by a
                                                                                                  status for their property. Castle and Cooke’s effort to map their IAL is dependent on
discussion on Act 183, Important Agricultural Lands (IAL) and possible revisions to
                                                                                                  the financial incentives being developed.
Section 3.2 Agriculture.

The meeting discussion is summarized as follows.                                                • Is there a relationship between the SCP and IAL? How can the community affect the
                                                                                                  IAL maps when designating land as IAL is the responsibility of the landowners?
                                                                                                       Response: The SCP indicates the community’s preference for land use.
                                                                                                       Statements expressing the community’s desire for the use of AG land are
                                                                                                       appropriate.

             Pacific Guardian Center x 733 Bishop Street, Suite 2590 x Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
              Tel. 808.545.2055 x Fax 808.545.2050 x www.hhf.com x e-mail: info@hhf.com
Helber Hastert & Fee                                                                         Helber Hastert & Fee
Planners, Inc.                                                                               Planners, Inc.

NS SCP PAC #2 Meeting Record                                                                 NS SCP PAC #2 Meeting Record
October 30, 2007                                                                             October 30, 2007
Page 3 of 5                                                                                  Page 4 of 5

• The “Transfer of Development Rights” (TDR) is a regulatory tool that allows a                  described on pages 3-22 and 3-23, with specific locations identified on page 3-23 (see
  landowner in a “sending area” to transfer (sell) their development rights to a landowner       2nd paragraph).
  in a “receiving” area. TDR has been used successfully in other areas to protect AG
  lands. TDR may not be appropriate for the North Shore if the long-term goal is to          • The policy about converting AG lands to large-lot residential subdivisions (pg 3-24, 2nd
  protect all existing AG lands from development. The use of TDR should be                     bullet) should be strengthened. Consider changing the word “discourage” to “prohibit,”
  considered carefully, since there may be unintended consequences (e.g., there have           and change “accessory to agricultural activities” to “accessory to meaningful or
  been cases where TDR has reduced the value of the land so that farmers no longer             credible agricultural activities.” Language describing the need to enforce agricultural
  have equity in the land and cannot secure loans.)                                            subdivisions should be added also. HHF will check with the Real Property Office to
                                                                                               see how agriculture is defined for tax purposes.
Possible Revisions to Section 3.2 Agriculture
                                                                                             • Residential uses on AG lands should be addressed in the SCP section on Residential
• Photo on page 3-19 is no longer current, needs to be replaced.                               Communities.

• Reference to “Bishop Estate” should be changed to “Kamehameha Schools”.                    • What about requiring that infrastructure be in place before a parcel is developed and
                                                                                               increasing the minimum lot size of an AG parcel to 20 acres? The high cost of land
• HHF would be revising/updating the description of existing AG conditions (pgs. 3-19 to       and infrastructure development would make it nearly impossible for small farmers to
  3-23), as needed.                                                                            purchase land. This would hurt small farmers, and does not seem supportive of AG.

• Act 271, which was passed last year, allows landowners to carry multiple leases on         • It was suggested that roadside stands selling AG products should be required to
  one TMK if the primary land use is AG. The bill includes some language describing            provide adequate facilities (e.g., a roadside stand set up along Kamehameha Highway
  the allowable use of the land.                                                               without adequate space to pull off the highway could create a traffic hazard). In
                                                                                               response, it was stated that roadside stands contribute to the rural character and are a
• The current SCP allows for outdoor recreation on AG lands. The term outdoor                  valuable and necessary market outlet for farmers to sell their produce. Imposing
  recreation should be clearly defined to omit overnight accommodations so that hotels         stringent development standards on roadside stands would deter the establishment of
  cannot be developed on AG land.                                                              much-needed AG markets.

• The definition of AG should be expanded to include renewable energy (biodiesel             Possible Revisions to Section 3.2.2 Planning Principles
  crops) and forestry products.
                                                                                             • The planning principle to “protect productive AG lands” (pg 3-24, 1st bullet) should be
Possible Revisions to Section 3.2.1 General Policies                                           revised to reflect current conditions (i.e., protect all AG lands, not just those that are
                                                                                               productive or are being used for diversified AG/pineapple cultivation). Simplify the
• Considering the recent “Important Agricultural Lands” designation, the use of                statement to read, “Protect AG lands. The continued productive use of AG lands
  “important” to describe agricultural lands (page 3-23, 1st and 3rd bullet) should be         should be encouraged.”
  deleted/changed.
                                                                                             • The 2nd sub-bullet under “Protect productive AG lands” should address the need to
• Is the policy statement about best management practices (BMPs) (pg 3-23, 2nd bullet)         “upgrade/expand” AG infrastructure.
  necessary? Why are BMPs part of the City’s land use plan when the City is not
  responsible for enforcing BMPs? Dan Nellis (Dole Foods, Inc.) explained that the U.S.      • Adding language to encourage organic farming would discourage non-organic AG
  Natural Resources Conservation Services (NRCS) requires farm plans and technical             activity.
  certifications to regulate and enforce BMPs.
                                                                                             Other Comments
• There should be a process that allows for community involvement/input about
  activities on AG lands (e.g., need local representation/participation on the West O‘ahu    •   Meeting materials should be mailed in advance to limit the number of pages that PAC
  Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) Board).                                            members are required to print on their own. HHF will be sending a follow-up email to
                                                                                                 PAC members to identify which individuals would prefer to receive hard copies.
• The policy calling for AG support facilities at Kawailoa (pg 3-24, 1st bullet) does not
  include details about where such facilities would be located. AG support activities are
Helber Hastert & Fee
Planners, Inc.

NS SCP PAC #2 Meeting Record
October 30, 2007
Page 5 of 5

•   PAC meeting materials should be posted on DPP’s website so that interested non-
    PAC members would have the opportunity to review the materials.

•   It may be useful to invite guest speakers knowledgeable about certain subjects to
    attend/participate in future meetings (e.g., DPR staff at Parks/Recreation and Public
    Facilities discussion, land use expert to define outdoor recreation and address
    allowable uses on AG land).

•   The revised SCP should include an appendix with recommendations for the type of
    information that should be developed for the next five-year review process. Regional
    AG statistics and housing data would be useful.

Due to time constraints, the discussion on Section 3.1 Open Space and Natural
Environment was deferred to the next PAC meeting. Non-PAC members were invited to
share their comments. Mark Cunningham (Defend O‘ahu Coalition) offered comments on:
(1) the recent UH Waiale‘e AG Station closure and its impact on AG; (2) the importance of
developing renewable energy resources; (3) the value of food crops vs. ornamental AG
crops; and (4) suggesting a conflict between the purpose of the SCP and the proposed
Turtle Bay Expansion.

Meeting was adjourned about 9:30 pm.
WORKING PAPER #4
NORTH SHORE SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES PLAN FIVE-YEAR REVIEW
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
GOAL (SCP Vision Elements) OUTCOME (Desired End State)                          STATUS / PROGRESS TO DATE                                 COMMUNITY COMMENTS (Community Meeting #1)
1. Establish Rural         Residential, commercial and industrial uses           • Only known commercial development outside the           - Desire to limit growth, even in the Rural Community
   Community, Agriculture, are limited to within the Rural Community                Rural Community Boundary has been at Helemano            Boundary
   and Preservation        Boundary                                                 (ORI Anuenue Hale and Dole Plantations, 2003),         - Need quotas on development; should focus
   Boundaries to Protect                                                            but the land use designations have not changed           development on resident needs and limit tourist-
   Agricultural, Open                                                            • Industrial uses are centered around Waialua Mill          based activities and facilities
   Space, and Natural                                                            • Agriculture subdivisions perceived to be large-lot      - Strong desire to protect open space, maintain view
   Resources                                                                        residential projects                                     corridors, and retain ocean views
                                                                                 • Infill housing and commercial projects proposed         - Allow for higher density in Hale‘iwa and Waialua
                                                                                    within the Rural Community Boundary have been            towns to retain open space elsewhere
                                                                                    controversial (Sunset Beach Colony, Burger
                                                                                    Subdivision, Paalaa Kai, Pupukea Village at Sharks
                                                                                    Cove)
                              Agriculture or uses directly supportive of the     • Agriculture remains the primary use of agriculture     - Need to make sure that AG lands are used for AG.
                              agriculture industry are the primary use of           lands, although some lands have been used for           Sense that AG subdivisions are not working, need
                              all lands within the Agriculture Boundary             residential and commercial development (AG              stricter enforcement of AG subdivisions
                                                                                    subdivisions, ORI Anuenue Hale at Helemano)           - Need to balance between AG and housing
                              Lands within the Preservation Boundary are         • Lands designated for Preservation have been            - Stream water quality and maintenance of
                              preserved for their natural, cultural or scenic       maintained                                              streams/ditches should be a priority
                              resource value and are protected from              • OHA acquisition of Waimea Valley ensures long-
                              incompatible uses.                                    term preservation
2. Support and Promote a      A healthy agriculture industry generates            • Majority of former sugar plantation lands occupied    - Complexity of issues around the future of AG
   Diversified Agriculture    economic opportunities that are appropriate            by new agriculture uses (small truck farmers, seed   - Region has potential to support a variety of crops
   Industry                   to the region’s open space and rural                   corn, coffee)                                        - Incentives/programs to support farmers and
                              qualities.                                          • Influx of large corporations relying on genetically     landowners (education for new/immigrant farmers,
                                                                                     modified organisms (GMO) to produce seed corn.         high school programs, AG theft neighborhood watch)
                                                                                  • UH Waialee Livestock Research Farm closed,            - What are the long-term effects of current agriculture
                                                                                     future of Agriculture Station (?)                      practices (like GMO, pesticide use)?
                                                                                  • Waialua HS Agriculture Program terminated due to
                                                                                     lack of enrollment
                                                                                  • Number of AG businesses/employees, amount
                                                                                     (and value/revenue) of AG products produced
                                                                                     (CHECK FOR DATA)
                              Important agriculture lands are protected          • Designation of Important Agriculture Land (IAL) has    - Need buffer zones between core AG lands and
                              from encroachment by incompatible uses                not occurred yet                                        secondary AG uses and between housing/other urban
                                                                                 • Pupukea-Paumalu property (former Lihi Lani               uses
                                                                                    project) re-zoned to AG-2 District                    - Establish local authority to monitor activities on AG
                                                                                                                                            lands (like the soil/water conservation districts)




October 9, 2007
Page 1 of 5
WORKING PAPER #4
NORTH SHORE SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES PLAN FIVE-YEAR REVIEW
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
GOAL (SCP Vision Elements) OUTCOME (Desired End State)                        STATUS / PROGRESS TO DATE                                COMMUNITY COMMENTS (Community Meeting #1)
                           Long-term investments support productive            • Upgrading Wahiaw WWTP to R-1 quality would             - Appropriate ag infrastructure, including higher quality
                           agricultural uses                                     expand crops that can be grown with water from           water source and transmission systems, is needed
                                                                                 Wahiaw Reservoir                                       - Need government assistance to support agriculture
                                                                               • Many farm operations limited by short-term leases
                                                                               • KS agriculture investments exceed more than $1.5
                                                                                 million
                                                                               • Federal grant subsidized repair of Helemano and
                                                                                 Mokul ‘ia water siphons
                            Industrial and commercial activities support       • Dole Plantation (Helemano) expansion provides         - Educational programs to promote “eating/buying
                            or service agricultural production                   market for agriculture products                         local” (public service announcements, farmers
                                                                               • Farmers markets established (Waialua Farmers            markets)
                                                                                 Market, Sunset Beach North Shore Country Market)
                            Agricultural support facilities are operated at    • Limited number of agriculture support facilities at   - Need to develop facilities (processing plant, kitchen,
                            Waialua Mill and Kawailoa                            Waialua Mill, including O‘ahu’s only coffee mill        cannery) that allow lesser-quality crop products to be
                                                                               • Kamehameha Schools North Shore Plan includes            used/marketed
                                                                                 agriculture support facilities at Kawailoa
3. Enhance the Region’s     Access to the shoreline is expanded.               • Sunset Beach Colony (Velyzland) included public       - Open space and access to the ocean is important
   Recreational and                                                              beach access (remains closed due to liability         - No shoreline development
   Educational Potential                                                         issues)
                                                                               • Completion of planned beach park improvements
                                                                                 would expand shoreline access (Ali‘i Beach Park,
                                                                                 Kawailoa Beach Master Plan, Waialee Beach Park
                                                                                 Master Plan)
                            Existing beach parks are improved with             • Planning to construct new facilities and expand       - Beach parks are in need of more parking, restrooms,
                            supporting facilities and expanded where             various beach park is ongoing, including at             and lifeguards
                            feasible.                                            Laniakea, Chun’s Reef, Leftovers, Banzai Rock,        - Improve pedestrian safety for park users crossing
                                                                                 Kawailoa, Kaunala, Uppers, Kahawai, and Waialee         highway to reach beaches
                                                                               • Highway realignment at Laniakea would provide         - Traffic backlogs on the highway due to lack of parking
                                                                                 land for new facilities                                 at beach parks
                            Access and recreational opportunities to           • Recent changes in land ownership at Waimea            No comment
                            mauka areas (Mokul ‘ia, Hale‘iwa and                 Valley and Pupukea-Paumalu provide unique
                            Pupukea) is expanded, with appropriate               opportunities to expand recreational and cultural
                            environmental, educational and cultural              access to mauka areas
                            interpretive programs
                            An International Science, Mathematics, and        •   No progress made to establish a technology center    No comment
                            Technology Teacher Training Center and a
                            resource center for technology training and
                            long-distance learning have been
                            established.

October 9, 2007
Page 2 of 5
WORKING PAPER #4
NORTH SHORE SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES PLAN FIVE-YEAR REVIEW
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
GOAL (SCP Vision Elements) OUTCOME (Desired End State)                     STATUS / PROGRESS TO DATE                                 COMMUNITY COMMENTS (Community Meeting #1)
                           More community-based parks with better           • No skateparks constructed to date, although Banzai      - Public performance space desired
                           maintenance and amenities support the              Skate Park construction is ongoing                      - New developments should include more community
                           community’s recreational needs                   • Right to use Puuiki Park by organized youth teams         benefits
                                                                              is being negotiated
                                                                            • Planning for Sunset Beach Recreation Center
                                                                              ongoing
                            Pedestrian paths/bikeways link parks,           • Haleiwa Town Master Plan and efforts to acquire        - Need bikepath between Waimea and Hale‘iwa
                            schools, and Waialua and Hale‘iwa town            funding for Hale‘iwa sidewalks project ongoing         - Should implement existing bike plan
                            centers                                         • Waialua Beach Road bikeway (Weed Junction to           - Better pedestrian facilities (sidewalks/crosswalks) in
                                                                              Crozier Drive) completed                                 Hale‘iwa
                                                                            • No bikeway between Waimea and Hale‘iwa                 - Strengthen town core and minimize need to drive
                            A public golf course provides additional        • Turtle Bay Resort is the only golf course (private)    - No comment
                            recreational and employment opportunities         between Kaena Point and Kahuku. No other golf
                                                                              courses planned
4. Designate Haleiwa and    Design guidelines ensure that the rural         • Hale‘iwa Special Design District remains intact        - Keep country town character by maintaining distinct
   Waialua Towns as         “small town” character is retained              • Waialua Town Master Plan (2004) provides general         boundaries between towns (do not let development
   “Country Towns”                                                            design guidance for Waialua                              sprawl)
                                                                                                                                     - Maintain North Shore’s architectural integrity
                                                                                                                                     - Reasonable height limits
                                                                                                                                     - Enforce the Hale‘iwa Special Design district, and
                                                                                                                                       expand to the entire region
                                                                                                                                     - No big box retailers, promote small local businesses
                            Hale‘iwa is the region’s main commercial       •   Pupukea Village (Sharks Cove shopping complex)        - Provide public restrooms in Hale‘iwa town
                            center for visitors, with new developments         shelved (despite being within one of the SCP’s        - Better pedestrian facilities (sidewalks/crosswalks) in
                            concentrated along Kamehameha Highway              designated Rural Community Commercial Centers)          Haleiwa
                            and revitalization efforts to promote the      •   Businesses in Hale‘iwa town are healthy. Limited
                            town’s rural character                             commercial space available in Hale‘iwa (CONFIRM
                                                                               VACANCY RATE?)
                            Small scale country inns in Hale‘iwa provide   •   No small scale country inns in Hale‘iwa               - Need for legal visitor accommodations that fit with the
                            overnight visitor accommodations to attract    •   Recent growth of illegal short-term vacation rental     rural character
                            more visitors                                      activities is seen as problematic                     - Need inventory of existing visitor bedrooms (legal and
                                                                                                                                       illegal)
                                                                                                                                     - No hotels or resorts. Turtle Bay Expansion is the
                                                                                                                                       biggest development pressure – will decrease
                                                                                                                                       affordability and increase congestion
                            Waialua town is the region’s center for        •   Waialua Town Master Plan completed (2004)             No comment
                            agricultural activity and commercial/civic     •   New Waialua Bandstand constructed
                            services for area residents, supplemented      •   Current business activity in Waialua centered
                            by technology and education industries             around Waialua Mill

October 9, 2007
Page 3 of 5
WORKING PAPER #4
NORTH SHORE SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES PLAN FIVE-YEAR REVIEW
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
GOAL (SCP Vision Elements) OUTCOME (Desired End State)                           STATUS / PROGRESS TO DATE                                  COMMUNITY COMMENTS (Community Meeting #1)
5. Retain the Waialua Mill Waialua Mill is expanded as the region’s               • Waialua Mill website lists more than 30 tenants, with    No comment
   Site as the Regional    industrial center, including industrial uses             7 vacant spaces
   Industrial Center       that support the agriculture industry and
                           other general industrial uses.
6. Limit New Housing to    New housing in Waialua is located mauka               •   No new housing has been constructed in this area.      - Need to quantify housing needs for North Shore
   Areas Contiguous to     of the mill camp (between Puuiki and                      Land for housing remains available                       residents; should have a building moratorium until
   Haleiwa and Waialua     Goodale Avenues)                                      •   CONFIRM WITH BUILDING PERMIT DATA                        demand is known
   Towns and Establish
   Rural Design Guidelines New housing in Hale‘iwa is located north of           •   No significant new housing has been constructed in     - Need to quantify housing needs for North Shore
   for Rural Residential   Paalaa Road on lands outside the flood                    this area. Land for housing remains available            residents; should have a building moratorium until
   Development             plain                                                 •   CONFIRM WITH BUILDING PERMIT DATA                        demand is known
                           New residential areas are compatible with             •   Design and character of new residential areas          - Infill new development in existing developed areas for
                           the region’s rural character, and are                     (Sunset Beach Colony at Velzyland, new home              higher density
                           developed according to established rural                  construction) have not been compatible with the        - Balance between open space and affordable housing
                           design guidelines and rural development                   region’s rural character                               - Plantation style housing
                           standards.                                            •   Rural design guidelines and development standards      - Need for rural subdivision standards
                                                                                     have not been established
                                 Site planning and design incorporate            •   Recent residential developments have not               - Should regulate expansion of existing structures
                                 alternative development options that                supported open space preservation                      - Tax new developments for open space preservation
                                 encourage open space preservation.
                                 Existing plantation homes are rehabilitated     •   Median home price in Paalaa Kai was $445,000 in        - Need low interest loans for locals
                                 and are affordable to existing residents.           2007, which is not affordable for the majority of      - Affordable housing for existing residents is needed
                                                                                     existing residents
7. Provide Adequate Public       Wastewater systems provide adequate and         •   North Shore Regional Wastewater Alternatives Plan      - Wastewater treatment is a concern affecting future
   Infrastructure, Facilities,   appropriate level of service to                     underway (City Dept. of Environmental Services)          development and coastal water quality
   and Services                  accommodate the region’s needs.                 •   Number (and %) of properties served by cesspools,
                                                                                     septic tanks, and the City’s wastewater system
                                                                                     (CHECK WITH DOH FOR DATA)
                                 Drainage system improvements mitigate           •   Engineering study for Hale‘iwa Road drainage           - Need for infrastructure improvements to address
                                 storm runoff and flood hazards, and                 improvements completed                                   coastal water pollution
                                 agricultural practices minimize soil erosion.   •   Kaukonahua Stream dredging study/planning (from        - Drainage and flooding across the region needs to be
                                                                                     Otake Camp to Kaiaka Bay) ongoing                        addressed
                                                                                 •   Comprehensive study of the Waialua-Kaiaka Bay
                                                                                     Watershed remains unfunded
                                 An adequate circulation network (roadways,      •   Traffic bottlenecks at Pupukea, Waimea Bay,            - Fast track Laniakea Bypass Road for immediate relief
                                 transit, bikeways) serves the region.               Laniakea. $1.2 million allocated for Laniakea          - Preserve 2-lane highway
                                                                                     Bypass environmental study                             - No new development until capacity of Kamehameha
                                                                                 •   Funding for Waimea rockfall mitigation pending           Highway is known
                                                                                 •   Drum Road rehabilitation from Helemano to Kahuku       - Existing traffic exceeds capacity of existing circulation

October 9, 2007
Page 4 of 5
WORKING PAPER #4
NORTH SHORE SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES PLAN FIVE-YEAR REVIEW
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
GOAL (SCP Vision Elements) OUTCOME (Desired End State)                       STATUS / PROGRESS TO DATE                                 COMMUNITY COMMENTS (Community Meeting #1)
                                                                                scheduled for completion in 2008                          systems
                                                                              • Neighborhood Board pursuing Army to allow public        - Public use of Drum Road is needed
                                                                                to use Drum Road for emergency access                   - Need regional emergency access road to expedite
                                                                                                                                          both evacuation and public safety response
                             Pedestrian paths/bikeways link the various      •   SAME AS OUTCOME 3-6                                    - SEE OUTCOME 3-6
                             residential communities with parks, schools,
                             and town centers of Hale‘iwa and Waialua.
                             Waialua Public Library remains open.            •   Waialua Public Library open limited hours (Tues-Fri   No comment
                                                                                 9-6, Sat 9-2). Closed evenings, Sunday, and
                                                                                 Monday
                             Maintenance of existing parks is a priority.    •   Annual City dollars spent on maintenance of parks     - Better restrooms and increased staffing needed to
                                                                             •   Amount spent on park renovation (CHECK 2000-            address poor park maintenance
                                                                                 2005 CIP)
                             Alternative energy sources such as solar        •   Number (and %) of homes/facilities with solar         - Need to do more to promote green/sustainable
                             are being used.                                     energy systems (CHECK WITH HECO FOR DATA)               development (such as rebates, solar, catchment)
8. Retain Cultural and       Native Hawaiian cultural and archaeological     •   OHA acquired title to Waimea Valley                   - Waialua’s landmarks (smokestack and banyan tree)
   Historic Resources        sites are protected, and significant historic   •   Hale‘iwa Special Design District remains intact         are in poor condition
                             features that contribute to the area’s rural    •   Reuse of Waialua Mill structure for
                             character and plantation heritage are               industrial/business use
                             preserved.
                             Historic site restoration and interpretive      •   Preservation/restoration of Waimea Valley ongoing     No comment
                             programs are integrated into parks and          •   Camp Erdman collaborating with DLNR to manage
                             shoreline/mauka recreation systems.                 Kaena Point State Park
9. Adapt the Ahupua’a        The effects of land use on coastal waters       •   BWS North Shore Watershed Management Plan             - Protect North Shore aquifers and maintain North
   Concept in Land Use and   and the nearshore environment is                    starting late-2007                                      Shore water for North Shore use (no more water
   Natural Resource          considered in land use planning,                •   Community workshops for the Kaiaka Bay                  transfers). Need clear understanding of various North
   Management                implementation decisions and land-based             Watershed Demonstration project are ongoing;            Shore aquifer systems and re-evaluation of existing
                             actions.                                            comprehensive study of the Waialua-Kaiaka Bay           sustainable yields
                                                                                 Watershed remains unfunded                            - Study of stream flow and nearshore water quality is
                                                                             •   Projects are in compliance with existing land use       needed to address flooding/water quality concerns
                                                                                 regulations                                           - Sense that the existing SCP and zoning laws are not
                                                                                                                                         being enforced or implemented properly




October 9, 2007
Page 5 of 5
                                                                                           Meeting Agenda
                                                                          • Welcome and Purpose
                                                                          • Ground Rules
                                                                          • Community Meeting #1 Follow-Up
                                                                          • SCP Performance Assessment
                                                                          • SCP Revisions (Chapters 3 and 4)
                                                                             – Approach for SCP Revision
                                                                             – Agriculture
                                                                             – Open Space and Natural Environment

                        NORTH SHORE                                       • Next Steps
                      SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES PLAN
                             FIVE-YEAR REVIEW   1                                                                                              2
                     Planning Advisory Committee #2   October 30, 2007




     SCP Update Process                                                     Ground Rules for PAC Meetings
                                                                         PAC role and function
                                                                            – Represent various interests and opinions of the larger North
                                                                              Shore community
                                       • Prepare performance
                                         assessment                         – Serve as core advisory group to guide the planning process
                                                                         PAC meeting objectives
                                                                            – Discuss and propose changes at the PAC level prior to
                                                                              presentation / input from the larger community
                                                                         Discussion protocol
                                                                            – Allow PAC members to speak first
                                                                            – Public participation welcome: limited comment after PAC
                                                                              discussion and through other public input opportunities
                                                                            – Give everyone a chance to talk once before you speak twice
                                                                            – Keep it short and share the floor with others, stay on topic
                                                                            – All contributions are valuable
                                                                    3       – Always be respectful and courteous, despite differing opinions   4




Community Meeting #1 Follow-Up                                                  Performance Assessment
                                                                          • Former “Scorecard of Community Indicators”
  • Meeting Record                                                        • Purpose

  • Break-Out Group Comments                                                  – Evaluate the effectiveness of the SCP
                                                                              – Identify the status/progress made in achieving
  • Vision Elements Questionnaire                                                   Plan’s
                                                                                the Plan s Vision
                                                                          • Will be used to help identify SCP areas needing
                                                                            revisions (i.e., new or re-phrased language)
                                                                          • PAC comments on Proposed Performance
                                                                            Assessment Handout?



                                                                    5                                                                          6




                                                                                                                                                   1
 North Shore SCP Vision Statement                                                          Key Vision Elements
                                                                          • Establish Rural Community, Agriculture,
                                                                            and Preservation Boundaries
          “The North Shore in the year 2020 retains
         the unique qualities that have long defined                      • Support the diversified agriculture industry

      its attractiveness to residents and visitors alike.                 • Enhance the region’s recreational and
                                                                            educational potential
 It has maintained its scenic open spaces, enhanced
                                                                          • Designate Hale‘iwa and Waialua towns as
    its coastal resources, and has carried the flavor                       “country towns”
                          heritage          diversity
        of its Hawaiian heritage, cultural diversity,                     • R t i th Waialua Mill site as the regional industrial
                                                                            Retain the W i l       it     th     i   li d t i l
               and plantation past forward in the                           center
              revitalization of its communities.”                         • Limit additional new housing to areas contiguous to
                                                                            Hale‘iwa and Waialua towns and establish rural design
                                                                            guidelines
                                                                          • Provide adequate public infrastructure, facilities,
                                                                            and services
                                                                          • Retain cultural and historic resources
                                                                          • Adapt the ahupua‘a concept in land use and
                                                                     7      natural resource management                                           8




            SCP Revision Approach                                                   SCP Amendment Proposals
• PAC to discuss changes and additions needed to                           • DPP sent letter to landowners announcing
  address community concerns/issues and recent land
  use proposals                                                              amendment submittal requirements
• PAC discussions of Chapters 3 and 4 by Land Use                          • November 15 submission deadline
  category (3-4 PAC Meetings)
   – Agriculture, Open Space (PAC Meeting #2)                                Amendment proposals th t meet DPP’
                                                                           • A    d     t         l that   t DPP’s
   – Residential Communities, Commercial Areas, Visitor Facilities
     (PAC Meeting #3)
                                                                             minimum submittal requirements will be
   – Parks and Recreation, Public Facilities and Infrastructure
                                                                             presented at the next PAC meeting
     (PAC Meeting #4)
• HHF to incorporate discussion when preparing Draft
  Revised SCP

                                                                     9                                                                            10




North Shore SCP Report Organization                                                Agriculture - Vision Elements
                                                                             • Agriculture or supportive uses are the primary use of all lands
Five Chapters                                                                  within the Agriculture Boundary
    1. North Shore’s Role in O‘ahu’s Development                             • Healthy agriculture industry generates economic opportunities
                                                                               that are appropriate to the region’s open space and rural
       Pattern                                                                 qualities
    2. Vision for the North Shore’s Future                                   • Important agriculture lands are protected from encroachment by
    3. Land Use Policies, Principles and Guidelines                            incompatible uses
                                                                               Long-term
                                                                             • Long term investments support productive agricultural uses
    4. Public Facilities and Infrastructure Policies and
       Principles                                                            • Industrial and commercial activities support or service
                                                                               agricultural production
    5. Implementation                                                        • Agricultural support facilities are operated at Waialua Mill and
Maps                                                                           Kawailoa
     1. Open Space
     2. Land Use
     3. Public Facilities
                                                                     11                                                                           12




                                                                                                                                                       2
                    SCP Land Use Map                                                    Agriculture – Community Concerns
                                                                                       • Vision Elements Questionnaire responses
                                                                                          – 94% (60) strongly agreed or agreed with vision element
                                                                                          – 3% (2) strongly disagreed or disagreed with vision element
                                                                                          – 3% (2) blank responses
                                                                                       • Ensure AG lands are actively used for AG (enforce AG zoning and AG
                                                                                         subdivisions, no “fake farms”)
                                                                                       • Provide buffer zones between core AG lands, secondary AG uses and
                                                                                         housing/other urban uses
                                                                                       • Need appropriate AG infrastructure (irrigation systems, availability of higher
                                                                                             lit    t            dt       i i        t
                                                                                         quality water source and transmission systems)  )
                                                                                       • Develop production support facilities (farmers markets, processing facilities)
                                                                                       • Support AG enterprises (tax incentives, long-term leases, landowners’
                                                                                         commitment to AG, local markets and educational programs to promote
                                                                                         “buying local”)
                                                                                       • Protect existing AG lands from other uses
                                                                                       • Identify Important Agricultural Lands (IAL)




                                                                               13                                                                                         14




         Act 183, Important AG Lands                                                 State Agricultural Land Use District Boundary
State Land Use Commission to designate IAL through
   1. Petition from landowner
   2. County IAL identification and mapping process
IAL Criteria (per Act 183)
   –   Currently used for AG production
   –   Soil qualities and growing conditions support AG production
   –    a d de t ed under G p oduct ty at g syste s (e.g.            S )
       Land identified u de AG productivity rating systems (e g ALISH)
   –   Land types associated with traditional native Hawaiian AG uses or unique
       crops and uses
   –   Has sufficient quantities of water
   –   IAL designation would be consistent with County Plans (e.g. GP & SCP)
   –   Contributes to maintaining critical land mass for AG operating productivity
   –   Has or is near support infrastructure conducive to AG productivity
For Discussion
   – Should the County consider the SCP Agriculture Lands as IAL?
   – Or should there be a different map for IAL?                               15                                                                                         16




        Section 3.2.1 General Policies                                                     Section 3.2.2 Planning Principles
Existing policy statements address
                                                                                       Existing planning principles
    – Appropriate use of AG lands, including residential use
      accessory to AG activities (e.g., farm dwellings)                                     – Protect productive Agricultural lands
    – AG support (AG facilities, tax incentives, long-term                                  – Promote diversified agriculture
      leases)                                                                               – Promote the development of agricultural support
Possible revisions or additions?                                                              facilities
    – Modify discussion of non-AG uses on AG land?                                          –E                   lt
                                                                                              Encourage aquaculture uses
    – Provide for adequate AG infrastructure (maintenance                              Possible revisions or additions?
      of irrigation systems, higher quality water
      source and transmission system)?                                                      – Stricter regulations and enforcement to ensure AG
                                                                                              lands are used for AG uses?
    – Incorporate IAL?
                                                                                            – Address irrigation needs (maintenance of existing
    – Others?
                                                                                              infrastructure, higher quality water source)?
                                                                                            – Others?
                                                                               17                                                                                         18




                                                                                                                                                                               3
          Section 3.2.3 Guidelines                                               Open Space – Vision Elements
        Section 3.2.4 Relation to Maps                                     “Establish Rural Community, Agriculture, and Preservation
  Existing guidelines call for:                                            Boundaries to Protect Agricultural, Open Space and Natural
                                                                           Resources”
    –Intensive cultivation of arable AG lands
    –Limited outdoor recreational or other uses                            “Adapt the ahupua‘a concept in land use and natural resource
                                                                           management”
    –Residential uses accessory to AG
    –Marketing and educational programs/tours                              Areas outside the Rural Community Boundary
                                                                                       p                g
                                                                               – Are important to the region’s rural character
     Educational
    –Educational programs to support the AG industry
                                                                               – Contribute agricultural, open space, natural, cultural or scenic
    –Creation of an AG demonstration area (“museum”)                             resource value
    –Research, training and technology activities to promote                   – Include AG lands, important wildlife habitats and sensitive
     aquaculture                                                                 ecosystems, watershed/mauka areas, forest reserves. shoreline
    –Siting and design of accessory buildings to minimize                        areas, wetlands, gulches/streams/drainageways, scenic
     visual impact                                                               resources, parks and cultural/historic sites

  Possible revisions or additions?
    –Recognize long-term preservation of Pupukea-Paumalu
    –Others?                                            19                                                                                             20




  Open Space – Community Concerns                                                 Section 3.1.1 General Policies
Vision Elements Questionnaire responses
                                                                           Existing policy statements
  – 98.5% (60) strongly agreed or agreed with vision
    element                                                                  –Retain rural character
  – 1.5% (1) strongly disagreed with vision element
                                                                             –Protect significant natural features
• Protecting open space resources is a
  priority                                                                    and ecologically sensitive lands
• Effects of recent developments on rural                                    –Preserve cultural and historic
                            ,
  character and recreational, cultural and                                    features
  scenic/open space resources
  – Older residential properties being                                       –Provide recreational resources
    redeveloped at greater densities (affects
    open space, obstructs views)                                             –Protect scenic views
  – AG subdivisions encouraging residential use                              –Define community boundaries
    of AG lands
  – New development considered a threat to
    open space; need a balance between
                                                                           Possible revisions or
    development and open space preservation                                additions?
  – Fear of development sprawl (desire to
    maintain open space between towns)                                       –Any needed?
                                                                      21                                                                               22




     Section 3.1.2 Planning Principles                                          Section 3.1.3.1 Mountain Areas
   Existing planning principles                                            Existing guidelines
       – Adapt ahupua‘a values into land use/resource management            – Maintain, protect and/or restore native forests and ecosystems
       – Protect agricultural lands, recreational resources and             – Identify and protect endangered species habitats and ecologically sensitive
         ecologically sensitive lands                                         areas
                                                                            – Encourage reforestation and expansion of forested areas
       – Preserve scenic views
                                                                            – Avoid disturbances caused by utility corridors
       – Ensure accessibility to recreational areas
                                                                            – Support public-private partnerships to preserve and manage resources
       – Limit impacts from utility installations                           – Acquire and maintain public access easements
       – Locate new developments within or next to existing                 – Support state efforts to seek private landowner agreements and gain
         developments                                                         access to trails
                                                                            – Maintain and enhance mauka trail systems (per the Na Ala Hele Program)
   Possible revisions or additions?
                                                                            – Identify historic trails/roads of cultural and recreational value
       – Add guidance about density and character of infill
         developments?                                                     Possible revisions or additions?
       – Modify “location of new developments” principle to address         – Incorporate OHA acquisition of Waimea Valley and City’s acquisition of
                                                                              Pupukea-Paumalu
         open space between developed areas?
                                                                            – Others?
       – Others?
                                                                      23                                                                               24




                                                                                                                                                            4
      Section 3.1.3.2 Shoreline Areas                                                        3.1.3.3 Wetlands
Existing guidelines                                                         3.1.3.4 Natural Gulches, Streams & Drainageways
–   Preserve rare coastal resources                                      Wetlands (guidelines)                     Natural Gulches, Streams &
–   Protect nearshore coral reefs                                         – Preserve and maintain all wetlands
                                                                                                                   Drainageways (guidelines)
                                                                            and wildlife habitats                   – Preserve aesthetic/biological values
–   Support research to determine causes of coastal erosion
                                                                          – Protect Ukoa Pond                       – Minimize soil erosion and nonpoint
–   Discourage development/activities which result in beach loss                                                      source pollution
                                                                          – Promote an aquaculture center
–   Maintain and expand public beach access to the shoreline                and nature reserve around Loko          – Limit uses in these areas
–   Maintain and enhance existing views along the highway                   Ea Pond                                 – Preserve and maintain natural
–   Provide adequate setbacks along the shoreline                                                                       t         d drainageways
                                                                                                                      streams and d i
                                                                                                                    – Design stream modifications to
–   Preserve and enhance fish/aquatic species populations and habitats
                                                                                                                      mitigate impacts on habitats
–   Acquire lands for coastal recreation and shoreline access                                                       – Integrate drainage improvements
–   Base expenditures for coastline maintenance on actual site usage                                                  into the regional open space network
–   Place sand from dredging projects on local beaches                                                              – Establish permanent instream flow
                                                                                                                      standards
Possible revisions or additions?
– Modify “nearshore coral reefs” guideline with specific                                              Are existing guidelines adequate?
  guidance/actions to address coastal water quality?                                                Any suggested revisions or additions?
– Others?                                                           25                                                                                  26




            3.1.3.5 Agricultural Areas                                     3.1.3.7 Scenic Resources & Scenic Views
                   3.1.3.6 Parks                                              3.1.3.8 Utility Corridors & Greenways
                                                                                                                   Utility Corridors and Greenways
                                                                          Scenic Views (guidelines)
                                                                                                                   (guidelines)
                                                                            – Conduct planning to preserve open
                                                                              space and views                        – Provide sufficient easement width
                                                                                                                       to permit tree growth
                                                                            – Evaluate the visual impact of land
                                                                              use proposals                          – Provide sufficient width for
                                                                                                                       landscaping to obscure views of
                                                                            – Locate future overhead utilities         overhead transmission lines
                                                                              mauka of the highway
                                                                                                                     – Use utility corridors for pedestrian
                                                                            – Encourage cooperation to                 and bicycle routes
                                                                              maintain/enhance views
                                                                                                                     – Encourage the use of indigenous
                                                                          Possible revisions or additions?             vegetation
                                                                            – Expand guideline to address          Possible revisions or additions?
                                                                              impacts of new development on
                                                                              existing scenic resources?             – Add specific guidance for
                                                                                                                       equipment that supports new
                                                                            – Any others?                              technologies (antennae sites,
                                                                                                                       windfarm facilities, etc.)?
                       Policies and guidelines listed in                                                             – Any others?
                                   Sections 3.2 and 3.3
                                                     27                                                                                                 28




                          Next Steps                                                         Contact Information
                                                                              • Project website address
PAC Meetings #3 and #4                                                           –http://honoluludpp.org/Planning/North
     – Tentative dates: November 20 and December 4                                Shore/NS-5yr/NorthShore.pdf
     – Present landowner-proposed map amendments
                                                                              • Website to download North Shore SCP
     – Discuss revisions
         • Residential Communities
                                                                                 –http://www.honoluludpp.org/Planning/
         • Commercial Areas, Visitor Facilities                                   DevSust NorthShore asp
                                                                                  DevSust_NorthShore.asp
         • Parks and Recreation, Public Facilities and Infrastructure         • HHF contacts
     – Present Revised Performance Assessment                                    –Email: colsonorr@hhf.com
Community Meeting #2                                                             –Phone: 545-2055
     – January 2008 (tentative)
     – Present Performance Assessment and proposed SCP                           –Fax: 545-2050
       revisions
                                                                                 –Mail: 733 Bishop Street, Suite 2590
                                                                    29                   Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96813                                        30




                                                                                                                                                              5
                                                                                                 Helber Hastert & Fee
                                                                                                 Planners, Inc.
Helber Hastert & Fee
Planners, Inc.                                                                                   NS SCP PAC #3 Meeting Record
                                                                                                 November 20, 2007
                                                                                                 Page 2 of 5
December 7, 2007
                                                                                                        Response: The census is completed every 10 years, which means the next census
                                                                                                        will be completed in 2010. Although the information is somewhat dated, HHF prefers
MEETING SUMMARY
                                                                                                        to use the current Census information for this SCP update.
To:          North Shore Sustainable Communities Plan Five-Year Review Project File
                                                                                                 •   Three hundred “seasonal, recreational or occasional use” housing units for the North
                                                                                                     Shore seems low. The current number is probably higher – the real estate market has
From:        Corlyn Orr
                                                                                                     changed since 2000. Transient vacation rentals (TVUs) were not an issue in 2000;
                                                                                                     demographics have changed since then and the North Shore is increasingly becoming a
Subject:     Planning Advisory Committee Meeting No. 3
             November 20, 2007, 7:00 – 9:30 pm                                                       vacation community.

                                                                                                 •   About 51% of O‘ahu’s visitors (2.4 to 2.5 million people) visit the North Shore each year
PAC Attendees: Antya Miller, Bob Leinau, Carol Phillips, Dan Nellis, Gil Riviere,
                                                                                                     (Hawai‘i Tourism Authority). This adds about 40% more people to the North Shore’s
                 Jeff Alameida, Jerry Driskoll, Josh Heimowitz, Kalani Fronda,
                                                                                                     daytime population. Can the General Plan’s regional population share for the North
                 Kathleen Pahinui, Lisa Izumi, Marianne Abrigo, Stew Ring
Other Attendees: Reed Matsuura (Councilmember Donovan Dela Cruz),                                    Shore (1.7% of the island-wide population) be adjusted to include the de facto population
DPP Attendees: Ray Young, CAPB Project Manager                                                       to provide a more accurate estimate of the North Shore’s population base?
                                                                                                         Response: A General Plan Revision would be required. At best, this project can
HHF Attendees: Scott Ezer, Corlyn Orr, Wendie McAllaster
                                                                                                         indicate that the General Plan projections do not reflect the community’s desires.
The third Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) Meeting for the North Shore Sustainable
                                                                                                 •   The large number of visitors being absorbed is a concern. The increase in the visitor
Communities Plan (SCP) Five-year Review Project was held on Tuesday, November 20,
2007 at the Waialua Community Association Gym. The purpose of the meeting was to                     population increases the need for infrastructure to accommodate the tourist base, while
discuss possible revisions to Section 3.5 Residential Areas and Section 3.1 Open Space and           the improvements typically encourage more visitors and more development, which is not
                                                                                                     desirable.
Natural Environment of the SCP.
                                                                                                 •   PAC recommends a General Plan revision to change the population growth projected for
Scott Ezer convened the meeting at 7:05. Meeting ground rules were presented, and the
group agreed to focus the discussion on issues that affect the region as a whole. Specific           the North Shore (i.e., lower the 1.7% population projection to accommodate less growth).
concerns related to a particular segment of the community could be discussed outside the             North Shore does not have the capacity to continue to maintain 1.7% of O‘ahu’s future
                                                                                                     population. As O‘ahu’s population increases, 1.7% of O‘ahu’s population will be an
meeting via email.
                                                                                                     increasingly larger number. We do not want to look like Kailua or K ne‘ohe in the future.
An overview of land use, population and housing characteristics for the North Shore based
                                                                                                 •   The reality is that most new construction has been expansion of existing structures,
on the 1990 and 2000 Census and projections from the Department of Planning and
Permitting was presented, followed by a discussion of possible revisions to Section 3.5              rather than building new units. Local residents are adding rooms to existing homes to
                                                                                                     accommodate extended families, as the cost of housing escalates.
Residential Areas and Section 3.1 Open Space and Natural Environment.

The meeting discussion is summarized as follows.                                                 Possible Revisions to Section 3.5 Residential Communities

                                                                                                 •   Remove Pupukea-Paumalu (former Lihi Lani) from the Rural Growth Boundary and
Land Use, Population and Housing Characteristics and Projections
                                                                                                     change SCP land use map designation to reflect the City’s recent acquisition. 450
                                                                                                     housing units previously proposed by the former Lihi Lani project should not be absorbed
•     Why does it feel like there’s so much growth despite a small number of zone changes?
                                                                                                     in other areas.
        Response: Some new housing development has occurred, and density is increasing.
        The population and the number of visitors have also increased.
                                                                                                 •   Need to incorporate Waialua Town Master Plan into current SCP. Sections around
•     The population data is based on the 2000 Census (7 years old). Can the figures be              Goodale-Pu‘uiki have enough land area to absorb the 300-400 additional units proposed
                                                                                                     in the Waialua Town Master Plan. Future residential development in this area doesn’t
      adjusted to reflect the present-day situation?
                                                                                                     have to be single-family parcels. Attached, multi-family housing forms are necessary to
                                                                                                     provide housing that is affordable to existing residents. The primary goal is to keep
                                                                                                     existing residents on the North Shore.

              Pacific Guardian Center x 733 Bishop Street, Suite 2590 x Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
               Tel. 808.545.2055 x Fax 808.545.2050 x www.hhf.com x e-mail: info@hhf.com
Helber Hastert & Fee                                                                             Helber Hastert & Fee
Planners, Inc.                                                                                   Planners, Inc.

NS SCP PAC #3 Meeting Record                                                                     NS SCP PAC #3 Meeting Record
November 20, 2007                                                                                November 20, 2007
Page 3 of 5                                                                                      Page 4 of 5

•   The necessity for appropriately-priced housing is not just related to affordable housing     •   Adoption of rural development standards is already included as part of the current SCP
    (which targets individuals making between 80%-140% of the median income). Those in               (pg 3-45), but the City has not established such standards yet. Rural development
    the “gap group” – who make too much to qualify for affordable housing but can’t afford to        standards would be one possible tool to help guide development.
    purchase a home at the current market rate – are not being serviced. Proposed SCP
    revisions should also include references to the need for “gap group” housing.                Possible Revisions to Section 3.5.3 Guidelines

•   Need to add language to revised SCP that addresses affordable housing need.                  •   Revise first sentence (pg 3-45) to incorporate Waialua Town Master Plan (i.e., multi-
                                                                                                     family housing around Waialua).
•   Agrees with current SCP language to keep future housing within the Rural Community
    Boundary. Revised SCP should clearly express community’s desire that new housing be          Possible Revisions to Section 3.5.3.2 Rural Residential
    located around Waialua and Hale‘iwa to meet the needs of existing residents.
                                                                                                 •   Add language to allow the development of smaller lots (such as zero lot line properties)
•   Development of 1,400 new housing units on the North Shore as projected by DPP does               for affordable and/or ”Gap housing; make sure to identify the areas where such density
    not seem possible without impacts to the existing rural character and scenic resources.          and development is desired (around Waialua and Hale‘iwa).
    Continued housing growth to accommodate 1,400 units is not desirable. References to
    housing projections (1,400 units) or the number of units allotted for each sub-area should   •   Developers need incentives to build affordable housing. Plan should include language
    be deleted in the revised SCP. Although an inventory by sub-area would provide                   that addresses need for developers’ incentives.
    guidance for functional planning, the PAC wants to maintain flexibility and not specify
    locations for new housing. Each housing proposal should be evaluated individually.           •   The community will need to change their mind-set and accept the increased density
                                                                                                     associated with non-traditional single-family development (e.g., affordable and multi-
•   Homelessness and the need for services/facilities to assist the homeless population is           family housing). The Neighborhood Board did not support a recent proposal for a cluster
    not a land use issue (i.e., SCP should not identify locations for homeless shelters or           housing development on Paalaa Road, although the project was consistent with the NS
    temporary housing facilities). At most, the revised SCP can note the homeless issue and          SCP (designated Rural Residential) and was zoned R-5.
    the need for social services/facilities to assist the homeless population.
                                                                                                 Possible Revisions to Section 3.5.3.4 Special Needs Housing
•   SCP should not prohibit residential use of agricultural lands. Housing on AG land is
    acceptable, as long as the housing supports “legitimate” agriculture.                        •   Current language references “low and moderate income sectors.” Should Gap housing
                                                                                                     population be added? (HHF to check on definition). Can temporary housing (to service
Possible Revisions to Section 3.5.1 General Policies                                                 homeless population) be added to this section?

•   Last bullet (pg 3-44) calls for special needs housing. Consider revising language to         Possible Revisions to Section 3.1.2 Planning Principles
    emphasize need for affordable/gap group housing, not specific to the “special needs”
    population.                                                                                  •   Change “Protection of Recreational Resources” to “Protection and Maintenance of
                                                                                                     Recreational Resources” (pg 3-50, 4th bullet).
Possible Revisions to Section 3.5.2 Planning Principles
                                                                                                 •   Add reference about “ocean resources” to the 4th bullet (pg 3-50). Ocean resources are a
•   Subdividing existing parcels and building new homes with larger footprints are increasing        major asset and recreation resource for the North Shore; need to add references to other
    density. How can the impacts of increased density be addressed when existing laws and            sections. Current SCP does not address aquatic resources.
    zoning regulations allow for this type of development? Would additional language
    specifying desired building envelopes, footprints, heights, etc. be useful to preserve       Possible Revisions to Section 3.1.3.2 Shoreline Areas
    existing density, character, and viewplanes? A significant impact is perceived because of
    the large floor area for new homes. They are not “rural” and they frequently cover too       •   Revise description to include Sharks Cove Marine Life Conservation District and Kaiaka
    large a percentage of a parcel. The existing open space requirements for residential             Bay.
    need to be re-examined.
                                                                                                 •   Strengthen language about off-road vehicle use in ecologically sensitive areas (change
                                                                                                     “discourage” to “prohibit” in the last bullet, pg 3-9). More areas designated for off-road
                                                                                                     vehicles are needed.
Helber Hastert & Fee
Planners, Inc.

NS SCP PAC #3 Meeting Record
November 20, 2007
Page 5 of 5


•   Insert “and other marine life” after “protect nearshore coral reefs” (1st bullet, pg 3-10).

•   City and State need to prioritize and coordinate resource management (e.g., land area
    adjacent to Sharks Cove is owned/managed by the City, while the MLCD is under State
    jurisdiction). Add new bullet to address management of ocean resources: “Encourage
    interagency and private sector participation and cooperation in the creation,
    maintenance, and enhancement of ocean resources.”

Possible Revisions to Section 3.1.3.3 Wetlands and 3.1.3.4 Natural Gulches

•   Verify that the wetlands (pg 3-11) and gulches (pg 3-13) listed in the Plan are correct.

Possible Revisions to Section 3.1.3.7 Scenic Resources and Scenic Views

•   Cell phone antennae sites are a new issue not addressed in the current SCP. Can the
    SCP encourage clustering of sites, particularly emphasizing the use of existing sites?
    HHF to check if cell towers are mapped.

•   Language about undergrounding existing utilities should be strengthened.
    Undergrounding would enhance viewplanes, increase highway safety, and improve utility
    service (refer to HECO Oahu Utilities Undergrounding and Visual Impact Mitigation
    Studies, 2003).

New technologies (solar, wind, alternative energy sources) that are desired 20 years into the
future should be incorporated. Evaluation of windfarm proposals on a case-by-case basis
would address concerns about possible visual impacts.

Other Comments/Questions

•   Map amendments and boundary adjustments will be presented and discussed at a future
    PAC meeting.

•   There were no SCP Amendment Proposals submitted for the North Shore. Several
    proposals were received for Ko‘olau Loa (to be presented at their December 11 PAC
    meeting).

The next North Shore PAC meeting is scheduled for Tuesday December 4, 2007, time and
place to be announced. The next meeting will focus on possible revisions to Section 3.6
Commercial Areas and Section 3.8 Visitor Facilities.

Meeting was adjourned about 9:30 pm.
                                                                                                           Meeting Agenda
                                                                                            • Welcome
                                                                                            • Ground Rules
                                                                                            • Feedback on PAC Meeting #2
                                                                                                               p
                                                                                            • SCP Amendment Proposals
                                                                                            • Population/Housing Characteristics and Projections
                                                                                                            (   p            )
                                                                                            • SCP Revisions (Chapters 3 and 4)
                                                                                               – Section 3.5 Residential Communities
                                                                                               – Section 3.1 Open Space and Natural Environment
                                                                                            • Next Steps

                                          NORTH SHORE
                                        SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES PLAN
                                              FIVE-YEAR REVIEW    1                                                                               2
                                       Planning Advisory Committee #3   November 20, 2007




   Ground Rules for PAC Meetings                                                                  PAC Meeting #2 Follow-Up
PAC role and function
   – Represent various interests and opinions of the larger North
     Shore community                                                                                                        e mail
                                                                                            • Draft meeting record sent via e-mail
   – Serve as core advisory group to guide the planning process
PAC meeting objectives                                                                      • Comments on Performance
   – Discuss and propose changes at the PAC level prior to                                    Assessment M t i
                                                                                              A        t Matrix
     presentation / input from the larger community
Discussion protocol                                                                         • SCP Amendment Proposals
   – Allow PAC members to speak first
   – Public participation welcome: comment after PAC discussion                               – DPP sent letter to landowners requesting
     and through other public input opportunities                                               amendment proposals by November 15
   – Give everyone a chance to talk once before you speak twice
   – Keep it short and share the floor with others, stay on topic                             – No proposals received to date
   – All contributions are valuable
   – Always be respectful and courteous, despite differing opinions                  3                                                            4
                SCP Land Use Map                                                                                                                  Zoning Districts Inventory
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   • 97% of the land area is zoned
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     for Agriculture or
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     Preservation, with about 56%
                                                                                                                                                                             Residential           Apartment                                         zoned either AG-1 or AG-2
                                                                                                                                                                                                                              Industrial
                                                                                                                                                                                                   19 ac (0.1%)
                                                                                                                                                                            723 ac (1.0%)                                    43 ac (0.1%)
                                                                                                                                             Military/Federal                                                                                 Business
                                                                                                                                              350 ac (0.5%)                                                                                  41 ac (0.1%)




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            AG-1
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      29,129 ac (37.8%)
                                                                                                                                           Preservation
                                                                                                                                         31,924 ac (41.5%)




                                                                                                                                                        Country                                                             AG-2
                                                                                                                                                     1,174 ac (1.5%)                                                  13,591 ac (17.7%)
                                                                                                      5                                                                                                                                                                                        6
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    Source: Department of Planning and Permitting




Zone Change Approvals 2000-2007                                                                                                                   O‘ahu Agriculture Trends
              Project                               Zone Change                    Acreage
 Hale‘iwa Commercial Development          R-5 to B-1                                   0.7                                                                                                                • Agriculture has been steadily declining on O‘ahu
                                                                                                                                                 Number of O‘ahu Farms                                      since 1978
 Robichaux Property                       AG-2 to COUNTRY                                 2.2
                                                                                                          1,200                                                                                           • Decrease in the number of farms, average size of
 Aloha Ke Akua High School                AG-1 to AG-2                                 24.9                               1,053
                                                                                                                                           976           938
                                                                                                                                                                                                            farm, and the acreage in farmland
                                                                                                          1,000
                                                                                                          1 000
 L      D Saints Ch
 Latter-Day S i        lE       i
                 Chapel Expansion         AG-1 AG-2
                                          AG 1 to AG 2                                  3.9
                                                                                        39                                                                            892
                                                                                                                                                                                 880
                                                                                                                                                                                            794
 Pupukea-Paumalu (Lihi Lani Property)     R-5, COUNTRY and P-2 to AG-2              1,003.0                800                                                                                           O‘ahu Farms by Acreage (1978-2002)
                                                                                                                                                                                                         Farms by size:       1978    1982                     1987          1992     1997    2002
                                                                                                           600
  District                             1998 Acreage 2007 Acreage        Acreage Change                                                                                                                    1 to 9 acres           822                   768      707          696       664    574
                                                                                                           400                                                                                            10 to 49 acres         161                   141      156          136       156    152
  R-10 Residential                            10.1            10.1               0                                                                                                                           to
                                                                                                                                                                                                          50 t 179 acres          36                    27       31           28        28     34
                                                                                                           200
  R-7.5 Residential                           89.0            89.0               0                                                                                                                        180 to 499 acres        16                    17       21           17        17     15
                                                                                                              0
  R-5 Residential                            674.5           656.1             -18.4                                      1978            1982           1987     1992           1997       2002
                                                                                                                                                                                                          500 to 999 acres         2                     8        7            5         3      5
                                                                                                                                                                                                          1,000 acres or more      9                     8       16           10        12     14
  A-1 Low Density Apt                         15.8            15.8               0                                                                                                                        TOTAL FARMS         1,046                   969      938           892       880    794
  A-2 Medium Density Apt                       3.7             3.7               0
  B-1 Neighborhood Business                   30.4            31.1              +0.7                                                                                                                                                        Land in Farms on O‘ahu
                                                                                                                                                 Average O‘ahu Farm Size
  B-2 Community Business                      10.4            10.4               0                                                                                                                                 140,000
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                126,000     125,932      130,771
  I-1 Limited Industrial                       1.8             1.8               0                                  160
                                                                                                                                                   139                                                             120,000
                                                                                                                    140
  I-2 General Industrial                      28.9            28.9               0                                  120
                                                                                                                                     129                                                                           100,000                                            91,998
                                                                                                                                                                103                                                                                                                 79,927
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     9 92
  I-3 Waterfront Industrial                   12.0            12.0               0                                  100                                                           91          89                    80,000                                                                   70,705




                                                                                                                                                                                                           Acres
                                                                                                            Acres




                                                                                                                    80
  AG-1 Restricted AG                      29,156.9        29,128.1             -28.8                                60
                                                                                                                                                                                                                    60,000

                                                                                                                                                                                                                    40,000
  AG-2 General AG                         12,560.9        13,590.6           +1029.7                                40
                                                                                                                                                                                                                    20,000
  Country District                         1,924.3         1,152.6            -771.7                                20
                                                                                                                     0                                                                                                  0
     1
  P-1 Restricted Preservation             29,307.1
                                          29 30 1         29 30 1
                                                          29,307.1               0                                                1982            1987          1992            1997        2002                                1978        1982        1987          1992          1997     2002

  P-2 General Preservation                 2,816.8         2,605.5            -211.3                                                                            Year                                                                                           Year

  F-1 Military/ Federal Preservation         349.6           349.6               0                    7                                                                                                                                                                              8
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          Source: State of Hawai‘i Data Book, 1990-2005
                                                      Source: Department of Planning and Permitting
             1990-2000 Population Trends                                                                                                   Employment Characteristics
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 • Agriculture accounts for less than 5% of
Total population                                     Total Households
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   North Shore’s employment
                 1990    2000 % change                                      1990        2000   % change
Honolulu County 836,231 876,156    4.8%              Honolulu County       265,625     286,450      7.8%                                    North Shore Employment by Industry (2000)                                            • Education, Health and Social Services
North Shore      15,729  18,380  16.9%               North Shore             4,825       5,893    22.1%                                                                   Agriculture (4.8%)                                       Industry accounts for the largest
                                                                                                                                           Public Administration
                                                                                                                                            and Other Services                                                                     percentage of employment (19.1%),
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   p        g       p y        (     )
Mokul ‘ia CDP
       ia         1,667
                  1 667   1 839
                          1,839  10 3%
                                 10.3%                      ia
                                                     Mokul ‘ia CDP             664         709      6.8%
                                                                                                    6 8%
                                                                                                                                                  (11.5%)                                      Construction (8.8%)                 followed by Arts/Entertainment,
Waialua CDP       4,052   3,761   -7.2%              Waialua CDP             1,178       1,128     -4.2%                                                                                                                           Recreation, Accommodation/Food
Hale‘iwa CDP      2,194   2,225    1.4%              Hale‘iwa CDP              710         770      8.5%                                                                                                                           Services (13.6%)
Pupukea CDP       4,140   4,250    2.7%              Pupukea CDP             1,268       1,455    14.7%                                                                                                 Manufacturing (4.1%)
                                                                                                                    Educational, Health,
                                                                          Household Size                              Social Services
                                                                                                                      S i lS i
North Shore Age Distribution                                                                     1990     2000           (19.1%)                                                                              Transportation (7.3%)
                        1990                2000      % change            Honolulu County        3.02     2.95
Under 5 years        1,202    7.6%       1,511   8.2%     0.6%            North Shore            3.18     3.05
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Mean Travel Time to Work (Minutes)
5-17 years           3,120   19.8%       3,149 17.1%     -2.7%            Mokul ‘ia CDP           n/a     2.38                                                                                                                                        1990     2000      change
18-64
18 64 years          9,730
                     9 730   61 9%
                             61.9%      11,846 64.5%
                                        11 846 64 5%      2.6%
                                                          2 6%            Waialua
                                                                          W i l CDP               n/a     3.31
                                                                                                          3 31                                                                                                Retail and         Honolulu County        24.8     27.3         2.5
65 years and over    1,677   10.7%       1,874 10.2%     -0.5%            Hale‘iwa CDP            n/a     2.88                                                                                              Wholesale Trade      North Shore              n/a    32.9         n/a
                                                                                                                        Arts, Entertainment,                                                                   (15.0%)           Mokul ‘ia CDP          32.0     35.5         3.5
                                                                          Pupukea CDP             n/a     2.92              Recreation,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Waialua CDP            28.5     32.9         4.4
                                                                                                                        Accomodation/Food
   Median Household Income                                                                                               Services (13.6%)                                                                                        Hale‘iwa CDP           31.2     33.0         1.8
                                               Poverty Status (Individuals)                                                                                                                                                      Pupukea CDP            31.4     41.9        10.5
                        1990          2000                                                                                                                                                        Professional, Scientific,
                                                                                                                                                                                                  Professional Scientific
                                                                       1990             2000      % change                                                                                             Management,
   Honolulu County     $40,581       $51,914   Honolulu County 60,096 7.5%          83,937   9.9%      2.4%
                                                                                                                               Finance, Insurance,
                                                                                                                                                                                                   Adminstrative, Waste
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Percent Self-Employed
                                                                                                                                  Real Estate,                            Information                                                                       1990      2000 change
   North Shore           n/a         $45,000   North Shore             n/a   n/a     2,426 13.5%         n/a                  Rental/Leasing (4.4%)                          (1.8%)
                                                                                                                                                                                                  Management Services
                                                                                                                                                                                                          (9.7%)                 Honolulu County              5.5%      6.3% 0.8%
   Mokul ‘ia CDP       $37,045       $50,100   Mokul ‘ia CDP          122 7.3%         180 10.7%       3.4%                                                                                                                      North Shore                    n/a     8.7%    n/a
   Waialua CDP         $33,428       $46,763   Waialua CDP            322 8.0%         439 11.7%       3.7%                                                                                                                      Mokul ‘ia CDP                7.5%      7.1% -0.4%
                                               Hale‘iwa CDP           292 13.0%        387 17.6%       4.6%                                                                                                                      Waialua CDP                  4.0%      4.6% 0.6%
   Hale‘iwa CDP        $32,000       $39,643                                                                                                                                                                                     Hale‘iwa CDP                 8.7%      8.7% 0.0%
                                               Pupukea CDP            361 8.9%         637 15.2%       6.3%
   Pupukea CDP         $38,382       $56,146                                                                                                                                                                                     Pupukea CDP                 16.5%     14.6% -1.9%
                                                                                                               9
                                                                   Source: US Census Bureau, 1990 and 2000 Census                                                                                                                                                         10
                                                                                                                                                                                                                               Source: US Census Bureau, 1990 and 2000 Census




             2000 Housing Characteristics                                                                                                  Age of Housing Inventory
          Total Housing Units                                                                                         1,800
                                                                                                                      1 800
                                                              • Housing inventory islandwide and on the                                                                                                                                  • 27% of North Shore’s housing
                              1990      2000 % change           North Shore increased from 1990 to 2000,              1,600                                                                                                                units are 50+ years old
          Honolulu County    281,683   315,988  12.2%           while the % of occupied units has declined
          North Shore          5,287     6,648  25.7%                                                                 1,400                                                                                                              • Average age of the typical
                                                              • Percentage of owner-occupied units                                                                                                                                         single family unit on the North
          Mokul ‘ia CDP
                 ia              745       883  18.5%           islandwide has decreased
                                                                                                                      1,200                                                                                                                Shore is 41 years old
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           Sh     i            ld
          Waialua CDP          1,258     1,219   -3.1%        • North Shore has a larger percentage of
          Hale‘iwa CDP           838       867    3.5%          Seasonal/ Recreational Use units than O‘ahu           1,000
          Pupukea CDP          1,450     1,690  16.6%           as a whole                                                                                                                                                             1999-2000
                                                                                                                        800                                                                                                            1994-1998
                    Occupied Units
                                                                                                                        600                                                                                                            1990-1994
                                            1990                2000           % change
                    Honolulu County    265,304     94.2%   286,450     90.7%       -3.5%                                                                                                                                               1980-1989
                                                                                                                        400
                    North Shore          4,825     91.3%     5,893     88.6%       -2.7%                                                                                                                                               1960-1979 (25+
                    Mokul ‘ia CDP          624     83.8%       709     80.3%       -3.5%                                                                                                                                               years old)
                                                                                                                        200                                                                                                            1959 and earlier
                    Waialua
                    W i l CDP            1,219
                                         1 219     96.9%
                                                   96 9%     1 128
                                                             1,128     92 5%
                                                                       92.5%       -4.4%
                                                                                    4 4%                                                                                                                                               (50+ years old)
                    Hale‘iwa CDP           770     91.9%       770     88.8%       -3.1%                                  0
                                                                                                                              Mokul ‘ia CDP                 Waialua CDP                 Hale‘iw a CDP                 Pupukea CDP
                    Pupukea CDP          1,297     89.4%     1,455     86.1%       -3.3%

Percentage of Occupied Units that are Owner-Occupied                                                                                            Honolulu County           North Shore          Mokul ‘ia CDP          Waialua CDP         Hale‘iwa CDP       Pupukea CDP
                                                                                          ,
                                                                 Vacant Units for Seasonal,                            1959 and earlier
                       1990               2000        h
                                                   % change
                                                                 Recreational or Occasional Use (2000)                 (50 + years old)           73,236 23.2%             1,799 27.0%             153      17.3%         557    45.7%      402     46.2%        369 22.0%
Honolulu County 137,910     52.0% 156,290 49.5%        -2.5%
                                                                 Honolulu County      6,856       2.2%                 1960-1979
North Shore        2,279    47.2%      2,595 39.0%     -8.2%                            304       4.6%                 25+ years old)           155,068 49.0%              2,328 35.0%             334      37.8%        519     42.6%      305     35.1%        766 45.6%
                                                                 North Shore
Mokul ‘ia CDP        158    25.3%        269 30.5%      5.1%                             88      10.0%                 1980-1989                 41,340 13.1%              1,243 18.7%             259      29.3%         70      5.7%      111     12.8%        265 15.8%
                                                                 Mokul ‘ia CDP
Waialua CDP          700    57.4%        619 50.8%      6.6%
                                                       -6.6%     W i l CDP
                                                                 Waialua                 15       1 2%
                                                                                                  1.2%                 1990 1994
                                                                                                                       1990-1994                 24,643
                                                                                                                                                 24 643  7.8%
                                                                                                                                                         7 8%                622 9 4%
                                                                                                                                                                                  9.4%              77       8 7%
                                                                                                                                                                                                             8.7%         34      2 8%
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  2.8%       25      2.9%
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     2 9%            10.4%
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 175 10 4%
Hale‘iwa CDP         261    33.9%        292 33.7%     -0.2%                                                           1994-1998                 17,121  5.4%                566 8.5%               53       6.0%         32      2.6%       21      2.4%         59 3.5%
                                                                 Hale‘iwa CDP            43       5.0%
Pupukea CDP          626    48.3%        756 44.7%     -3.5%                                                           1999-2000                  4,580  1.4%                 90 1.4%                7       0.8%          7      0.6%        5      0.6%         48 2.9%
                                                                 Pupukea CDP            104       6.2%
                                                                                                     11                Total Units              315,988                    6,648                   883                 1,219                869                1,682    12
                                                                Source: US Census Bureau, 1990 and 2000 Census                                                                                                                         Source: US Census Bureau, 2000 Census
                                                                                                                                         2003 Hawai‘i Housing Policy Study
2003 Hawai‘i Housing Policy Study Highlights
                           HOUSING UNITS                                                                                                 g        y               y
                                                                                                                                      Single-Family Distribution By Land Area
                                                   Sunset Beach to Kaena
                                                     Point (TMK Zone 6)         O‘ahu Total                                                            Distribution of Single Family Parcels
                           Single Family Units               2,931                150,957                                                            Sunset Beach - Kaena Point (TMK Zone 6)
                           Condos                             381                  91,913                                                                                      <5000 SF (7%)
                           Apartments                         153                  39,602                                                    >1 acre (16%)
                                                                                                                                                     (   )                                                                     • More than 50% of the North
                           Military Units                      0                   21,843                                                                                                                                        Shore’s single-family properties
                           Student Units                       0                   4,270                                                                                                                                         are between 5,000 and 9,999 SF
                           Cooperative Units                   0                   2,881
                                                                                                                                    1/2 to 1 acre
                           TOTAL                             3,465                311,466
                                                                                                                                        (5%)
                           % SF Owner Occupied               45%                   69%
                           % Condo Owner Occupie             23%                   36%
                           TOTAL OWNER                                                                                            15000 SF to 1/2                                                                5000-7500 SF
                           OCCUPIED UNITS                    41%                   44%                                               acre (6%)                                                                      (36%)

                                                            Condo                         Total     Units/Square Mile
                                            SF Average     Average     SF Median          Land        of Land Area
                                                                                                                                   10000-14999
                                                                                                                                   10000 14999 SF
                                           Interior Area Interior Area Land Area          Area      (Housing Density)
                                                                                                                                        (9%)
    Aiea-Pearl Harbor (Zone 1)                    1,645            785        6,000            38                  977
    Downtown-Manoa (Zone 2)                       1,645            701        7,488            18              4,556
    East Honolulu (Zone 3)                        1,734          1,152        7,306            35              1,030
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             10000-
    Waimanalo Kailua (Zone 4)
    Waimanalo-Kailua                              1 567
                                                  1,567          1 084
                                                                 1,084        7,903
                                                                              7 903            73                489                                     7500-9999
                                                                                                                                                         7500 9999 SF                                                        5000-   7500-   14999 15000 SF 1/2 to 1
    K ne‘ohe-Kawela Bay (Zone 5)                  1,336            703       10,646            60                104                                        (21%)                                                  <5000 SF 7500 SF 9999 SF    SF    to 1/2 acre acre >1 acre TOTAL
                                                                                                                                                                            Aiea-Pearl Harbor (Zone 1)                 2,554   7,656   2,231   1,302         323   314    268    14,682
    Sunset Beach-Kaena Pt. (Zone 6)               1,228            760        7,943           115                 30                                                        Downtown-Manoa (Zone 2)                    2,299   3,737   2,756   3,638         579   348    260    12,118
    Wahiaw (Zone 7)                               1,287            726        7,350            38                353                                                        East Honolulu (Zone 3)                     3,747  10,714   7,003   4,941       1,123   556    317    28,602
                                                                                                                                  Source: SMS Research and Marketing        Waimanalo-Kailua (Zone 4)                  1,749   7,396   8,449   5,374         922   733 1,909     26,604
    Waianae Coast (Zone 8)                        1,165            629        7,339            68                169                               ,
                                                                                                                                           Services, December 2003          K ne‘ohe-Kawela Bay (Zone 5)
                                                                                                                                                                              ne ohe-Kawela                              427   1 256
                                                                                                                                                                                                                               1,256     458     728         224        1,071
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    302 1 071     4,398
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  4 398
    Ewa-Pearl Harbor-Mililani (Zone 9)            1,547            862        6,000           165                521                                                        Sunset Beach-Kaena Pt. (Zone 6)              218   1,012     625     256         179   146    480     2,931
                                                                                                                                                                            Wahiaw (Zone 7)                              274   2,234   1,000     616         295   206    231     4,864
    TOTAL                                         1,561            798        6996            610                511                                                        Waianae Coast (Zone 8)                     1,450   2,928     934     783         339   482 1,726      8,652
                                                             Source: SMS Research and Marketing Services, December 2003    13                                               Ewa-Pearl Harbor-Mililani (Zone 9)        11,177    27,769    5,065     2,649      506     339
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                14
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               537    48,106
                                                                                                                                                                            TOTAL                                     23,805    64,702   28,521    18,714      511   3,426   6,799   150,957




 DPP Population Projections vs. GP Policy                                                                                                              DPP Housing Projections
                                                    1980      1990       2000      2005         2010        2020         2030
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             Change
                           North Shore              12,921    15,729     18,380    18,347         19,033     20,081      20,798
                                                                                                                                                                        1980        1990             2000           2010         2020         2030          2000-2030
                           O‘ahu islandwide        762,564 836,231 876,156 912,907             952,673 1,037,260 1,117,313

                           Share of O‘ahu total      1.7%       1.9%      2.1%       2.0%           2.0%       1.9%        1.9%                North Shore               3,578        5,287              6,648        7,001        7,611          8,099         1,451

                                                                                                                                               O‘ahu                   252,038 281,683 315,988 348,285 388,722 428,415                                        112,427
                    46.0                                                                                                                       Share of
                    %
                                                                                                                                               O‘ahu t t l
                                                                                                                                               O‘ h total                1 4%
                                                                                                                                                                         1.4%          1 9%
                                                                                                                                                                                       1.9%              2 1%
                                                                                                                                                                                                         2.1%         2 0%
                                                                                                                                                                                                                      2.0%          2 0%
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    2.0%          1 9%
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  1.9%          1 3%
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                1.3%
                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Source: Department of Planning and Permitting, October 2007




                                         17.0
                                         17 0
                                         %
                           13.0
                                                               11.6%
                           %

                                                  5.3%                                            4.0%
                                                                                                  4 0%
                                                                         1.4%      1.7%

                                                                                                                           15                                                                                                                                                   16
                                                                                               Source: DPP Annual Report, 2005
       Number of New Housing Units                                                                   Residential Communities - Vision Elements
                                                                                                                 “Limit New Housing to Areas Contiguous to Hale‘iwa and
                                        40                                                                       Waialua Towns and Establish Rural Design Guidelines for
  40                                                       37
                        35                     34                                                                            Rural Residential Development”
  30                                                                                                 • New housing in Waialua is located mauka of
                                                                                                       the mill camp (between Puuiki and Goodale
  20                           19                                                                      Avenues)
                13                                                                                   • New housing in Hale‘iwa is located north of
                                                                                                       Paalaa Road on lands outside the flood plain
  10
                                                                                                     • New residential areas are compatible with
                                                                                                       th region’s rural character, and are
                                                                                                       the   i ’       l h     t      d
   0                                                                                                   developed according to established rural
                                                         • 163 total new housing units                 design guidelines and rural development
 -10
  10                                                       constructed on the North                    standards
                                                           Shore between 2000 - 2006
                                                                                                     • Site planning and design incorporate
        -15                                                                                            alternative development options that
 -20
       2000   2001    2002    2003    2004    2005      2006                                           encourage open space preservation
                                                Source: City Building Permit Records, October 2007   • Existing plantation homes are rehabilitated
                                                                                               17
                                                                                                       and affordable to existing residents                                18




Residential - Community Concerns                                                                            Conventional vs. Creative Development
• Vision Elements Questionnaire responses
   – 90% (57) strongly agreed or agreed with vision element
   – 8% (5) strongly disagreed or disagreed with vision element
   – 2% (1) blank responses
• Design and character of recent residential developments (Sunset
  Beach Colony at Velzyland, new home construction) has not been
  compatible with the region’s rural character and desire to preserve
  open space
• Need for affordable housing (sale and rent) for existing residents
• Increased housing prices and property values/taxes causing “locals”
  to move away while new residents who can afford homes move in
• Land available for housing is limited by the preservation of
     i lt    l d
  agricultural and open space areas
• Renovation of existing plantation homes is desired
• Increase in illegal short-term vacation rentals (under 30-days) reduces
  the i    t      fl
  th inventory of long-term rentals, increases rental/real estate prices
                         t        t l i             t l/  l t t     i
  and negatively impacts neighboring homes (safety, noise, traffic)
                                                                                               19    Source: “Rural by Design” by Randall Arendt, 1994                     20
                                                                Section 3.5 Residential Communities
Conventional vs. Creative Development
                                                                  • 1,300 new units within the Rural Community
                                                                    Boundary, assuming build-out of existing
                                                                          t lands
                                                                    vacant l d
                                                                  • 1,100 previously-approved units
                                                                     –   770 units at Pupukea/Sunset (445 at Lihi Lani)
                                                                     –   150 units in Hale‘iwa
                                                                     –   60 units each in Kawailoa, Waialua and Mokul ‘ia
                                                                     –   200 units in Hale‘iwa and Waialua adjacent to
                                                                         existing built-up areas
                                                                  • Possible revisions or additions?
                                                                     – Incorporate City acquisition of Pupukea-Paumalu?
                                                                     – Incorporate Waialua Town Master Plan
                                                                                 d ti     for 300-450      h   i
                                                                       recommendations f 300 450 new housing units? it ?
                                                           21                                                               22




  Section 3.5.1 General Policies                                 Section 3.5.2 Planning Principles
Existing policy statements
   – Capacity within the Rural Community Boundary to             Existing planning principles
     accommodate existing/future housing needs
                                                                    – Follow density and height guidelines
   – Direct future residential development to Hale‘iwa
     and Waialua                                                    – Adopt rural development standards
   – Establish rural development and subdivision                    – Promote compact development
     standards
   – Encourage creative site and housing design options             – Use open space features to define
     to preserve rural character                                         i hb h d boundaries
                                                                      neighborhood b     d i
   – Provide housing appropriate for an aging population
                                                                    – Provide bicycle and pedestrian-oriented
Possible revisions or additions?                                      streets
   – Address need for affordable housing?
   – Provide guidance for new housing in existing                Possible revisions or additions?
                      ?
     residential areas?                                             – Any needed?
   – Any others?                                           23                                                               24
   Section 3.5.3.1 Rural Guidelines                            Section 3.5.3.2 Rural Residential
                                                             Existing guidelines
Existing guidelines                                            – Typical single-family homes (lot size ranges from
  – Single-family homes on relatively large lots                 5,000
                                                                 5 000 SF to 1 acre))
    (1 unit/acre, 25-foot building height)                     – Densities range from 5-8 units/acre, or 10 units/acre
                                                                                         p        p
                                                                 when alternative development options are used
    Apply     i lt l bdi i i           d
  – A l agricultural subdivision and rural   l                 – Employ rural development standards
    development standards                                      – Avoid monotonous rows of garages and driveways
  – Minimize visual impacts of utility structures                along neighborhood streets
  – Ensure compatibility between land uses                     – New development should be compatible with the
                                                                 character of the surrounding neighborhood
Possible revisions or additions?                               – Employ building design that provides visual interest
  – Any needed?                                                  and individual identity
                                                             Possible revisions or additions?
                                                        25     – Any needed?                                             26




 Section 3.5.3.3 Low-Density Apartment                        Section 3.5.3.4 Special Needs Housing
Existing guidelines
                         complexes,
  – Includes townhouse complexes flats and low-rise
                                                low rise             gg
                                                              Existing guidelines
    apartments in Mokul ‘ia, Hale‘iwa and Waialua               – Locate housing within or near Hale‘iwa or Waialua
  – Maintain existing apartment-zoned district boundaries         towns within close proximity to public transit,
                                                                  community services and commercial activities
    10-20 i /             i      40-foot building h i h
  – 10 20 units/acre; maximum 40 f       b ildi height
                                                                – Up to 20 units/acre allowed; proposals subject to
  – Enhance the compatibility of apartment districts and
                                                                  community and agency review
       j
    adjacent uses
                                                                  Maximum 25 f
                                                                –M i                 b ildi height
                                                                             25-foot building h i h
  – Maintain a sense of residential scale and provide
    greater privacy and identity for housing units              – Ensure building design is compatible with adjacent
                                                                  residential areas
  – Ensure building design is compatible with adjacent
    low-density residential areas                             Possible revisions or additions?
Possible revisions or additions?                                    y
                                                                – Any needed?
  – Any needed?
                                                        27                                                               28
     Open Space – Vision Elements                                              Open Space – Community Concerns
“Establish Rural Community, Agriculture, and Preservation                    Vision Elements Questionnaire responses
Boundaries to Protect Agricultural, Open Space and Natural                     – 98.5% (60) strongly agreed or agreed with vision
Resources”                                                                       element
                                                                               – 1.5% (1) strongly disagreed with vision element
“Adapt the ahupua‘a concept in land use and natural resource
management”                                                                  • Protecting open space resources is a
                                                                               priority
Areas outside the Rural Community Boundary                                   • Effects of recent developments on rural
   – Are important to the region’s rural character                             character and recreational, cultural and
   – Contribute agricultural, open space, natural, cultural or scenic          scenic/open space resources
     resource value                                                            – Older residential properties being
                                                                                 redeveloped at greater densities (affects
   – Include AG lands, important wildlife habitats and sensitive                 open space, obstructs views)
     ecosystems, watershed/mauka areas, forest reserves. shoreline
     areas, wetlands, gulches/streams/drainageways, scenic
          ,         , g                        g    y ,                        – AG subdivisions encouraging residential use
                                                                                 of AG lands
     resources, parks and cultural/historic sites
                                                                               – New development considered a threat to
                                                                                 open space; need a balance between
                                                                                 development and open space preservation
                                                                               – Fear of development sprawl (desire to
                                                                                 maintain open space between towns)
                                                                        29                                                                         30




      Section 3.1.1 General Policies                                              Section 3.1.2 Planning Principles
Existing policy statements                                                      Existing planning principles
                                                                                    – Adapt ahupua‘a values into land use/resource management
  –Retain rural character
                                                                                                            lands,
                                                                                    – Protect agricultural lands recreational resources and
  –Protect significant natural features                                               ecologically sensitive lands
   and ecologically sensitive lands                                                 – Preserve scenic views
   P
  –Preserve cultural and hi t i
               lt l d historic                                                        Ensure accessibility t recreational areas
                                                                                    – E               ibilit to       ti    l
   features                                                                         – Limit impacts from utility installations
                                                                                    – Locate new developments within or next to existing
   Provide
  –Provide recreational resources
                                                                                      developments
  –Protect scenic views                                                         Possible revisions or additions?
                  y
  –Define community boundaries                                                      – Add guidance about density and character of infill
                                                                                      developments?
Possible revisions or
                                                                                    – Modify “location of new developments” principle to address
additions?                                                                            open space between developed areas?
                                                                                       p    p                     p
  –Any needed?                                                                      – Others?
                                                                        31                                                                         32
       Section 3.1.3.1 Mountain Areas                                                      Section 3.1.3.2 Shoreline Areas
                                                                                     Existing id li
                                                                                     E i i guidelines
  Existing guidelines
                                                                                     –   Preserve rare coastal resources
   – Maintain, protect and/or restore native forests and ecosystems
   – Identify and protect endangered species habitats and ecologically sensitive
                                                                                     –   Protect nearshore coral reefs
     areas                                                                           –   Support research to determine causes of coastal erosion
   – Encourage reforestation and expansion of forested areas                         –   Discourage development/activities which result in beach loss
                                     y      y
   – Avoid disturbances caused by utility corridors                                  –   Maintain and expand public beach access to the shoreline
   – Support public-private partnerships to preserve and manage resources            –   Maintain and enhance existing views along the highway
   – Acquire and maintain public access easements
                                                                                     –   Provide adequate setbacks along the shoreline
   – Support state efforts to seek private landowner agreements and gain
     access to trails                                                                –   Preserve and enhance fish/aquatic species populations and habitats
   – Maintain and enhance mauka trail systems (per the Na Ala Hele Program)          –   Acquire lands for coastal recreation and shoreline access
   – Identify historic trails/roads of cultural and recreational value               –   Base expenditures for coastline maintenance on actual site usage
  Possible revisions or additions?                                                   –   Place sand f
                                                                                         Pl               dredging     j t
                                                                                                   d from d d i projects on l       l beaches
                                                                                                                                local b   h
   – Incorporate OHA acquisition of Waimea Valley and City’s acquisition of          Possible revisions or additions?
     Pupukea-Paumalu
                                                                                     – Modify “nearshore coral reefs” guideline with specific
                                                                                            y                         g               p
     Others?
   – Oth ?                                                                             guidance/actions to address coastal water quality?
                                                                              33     – Others?                                                           34




                    3.1.3.3 Wetlands                                                             3.1.3.5 Agricultural Areas
   3 1 3 4 Natural Gulches, Streams & Drainageways
   3.1.3.4         Gulches                                                                              3.1.3.6
                                                                                                        3 1 3 6 Parks
Wetlands (guidelines)                     Natural Gulches, Streams &
 – Preserve and maintain all wetlands
                                          Drainageways (guidelines)
   and wildlife habitats                    – Preserve aesthetic/biological values
 – Protect Ukoa Pond                        – Minimize soil erosion and nonpoint
 – Promote an aquaculture center              source pollution
   and nat re reser e aro nd Loko
       nature reserve around                – Limit uses in these areas
   Ea Pond                                  – Preserve and maintain natural
                                              streams and drainageways
                                                   g
                                            – Design stream modifications to
                                              mitigate impacts on habitats
                                            – Integrate drainage improvements
                                              into the regional open space network
                                                                             flow
                                            – Establish permanent instream flo
                                              standards

                                        gg              q
                             Are existing guidelines adequate?
                           Any suggested revisions or additions?
                                                                                                            Policies and guidelines listed in
                                                                              35                                        Sections 3.2 and 3.3
                                                                                                                                          36
 3.1.3.7 Scenic Resources & Scenic Views                                                             Next Steps
    3 1 3 8 Utilit Corridors & Greenways
    3.1.3.8 Utility C id       G                                                   PAC Meetings #4 and #5
                                        Utility Corridors and Greenways              – Tentative dates: December 4, mid-January
Scenic Views (guidelines)
                                        (guidelines)
 – Conduct planning to preserve open                                                 – Discuss revisions
   space and views                       – Provide sufficient easement width
                                           to permit tree growth                        • Commercial Areas, Visitor Facilities
 – Evaluate the visual impact of land
   use proposals                         – Provide sufficient width for
                                           landscaping t obscure views of
                                           l d       i to b           i      f                       Recreation,
                                                                                        • Parks and Recreation Public Facilities and
 – Locate future overhead utilities        overhead transmission lines                    Infrastructure
   mauka of the highway
                                         – Use utility corridors for pedestrian         • Sustainability Concepts
 – Encourage cooperation to                and bicycle routes
                                                  y
      i i / h          i
   maintain/enhance views                                                            – Present Revised Performance Assessment
                                         – Encourage the use of indigenous
Possible revisions or additions?           vegetation
 – Expand guideline to address
                                                                                   Community Meeting #2
                                        Possible revisions or additions?
   impacts of new development on                                                       February 2008 (t t ti )
                                                                                     –F b            (tentative)
   existing scenic resources?            – Add specific guidance for facilities
                                           that support new technologies             – Present Performance Assessment and proposed
 – Any others?                             (antennae sites, windfarm facilities,
                                               )
                                           etc.)?                                      SCP revisions
                                         – Any others?
                                                                            37                                                         38




                  Contact Information
    • Project website address
       –http://honoluludpp.org/Planning/North
        Shore/NS-5yr/NorthShore.pdf
        S      / S    /     S        f
    • Website to download North Shore SCP
        htt //      h    l l d      /Pl  i /
       –http://www.honoluludpp.org/Planning/
        DevSust_NorthShore.asp
    • HHF contacts
       –Email: colsonorr@hhf.com
        Phone: 545 2055
       –Phone: 545-2055
       –Fax: 545-2050
        M il       Bishop St   t S it
       –Mail: 733 Bi h Street, Suite 2590
               Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96813                                      39
                                                                                                  NS SCP PAC #4 Meeting Record
                                                                                                  December 4, 2007
Helber Hastert & Fee                                                                              Page 2 of 4
Planners, Inc.

January 3, 2008                                                                                   •   PAC recommends a General Plan revision to lower the population distribution projected
                                                                                                      for the North Shore and accommodate less growth (e.g., the General Plan currently
MEETING SUMMARY                                                                                       identifies the North Shore’s population at 1.7% of the islandwide population).

To:          North Shore Sustainable Communities Plan Five-Year Review Project File               •   Change “adjacent to rural community boundary” to “within rural community boundary” (pg
                                                                                                      3, 2nd bullet).
From:        Corlyn Orr
                                                                                                  •   SCP should not prohibit residential use of agricultural lands. Housing on AG land is
Subject:     Planning Advisory Committee Meeting No. 4                                                acceptable, as long as the housing supports “legitimate” agriculture.
             December 4, 2007, 6:30 – 9:00 pm
                                                                                                  •   Amend or revise statement in the draft meeting record indicating “no concern about the
PAC Attendees: Antya Miller, Bob Leinau, Carol Phillips, Dan Nellis, Dave Bramlett, Diane             visual impact of windfarms” (pg 5, 3rd bullet). Evaluation of windfarm proposals on a
                 Anderson, Gil Riviere, Jerry Driscoll, Kalani Fronda, Kathleen Pahinui,              case-by-case basis is desired to address concerns about visual impact.
                 Lisa Izumi, Marianne Abrigo, Mike Lyons, Stew Ring
Other Attendees: Bob Nakata (Defend O‘ahu Coalition)                                              Possible Revisions to Section 3.8 Visitor Facilities
                 Mark Cunningham (Defend O‘ahu Coalition)
DPP Attendees: Ray Young, CAPB Project Manager                                                    •   Consensus among PAC that the Kauaian Institute report (Market Segment Assessment
HHF Attendees: Scott Ezer, Rachael Edinger, Corlyn Orr                                                Transient Vacation Rentals on O‘ahu, September 2005) should not be used to describe
                                                                                                      the illegal transient vacation rental (TVR) problem. Since the study uses the Internet to
The fourth Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) Meeting for the North Shore Sustainable                  identify TVR properties, it underreports the number of TVR and should not be considered
Communities Plan (SCP) Five-year Review Project was held on Tuesday, December 4, 2007                 an accurate inventory of rental properties. For example, one advertised property may
at the Waialua Community Association Cottage #2. The purpose of the meeting was to                    represent/make referrals to 5 unadvertised properties, but the inventory would only count
discuss possible revisions to Section 3.6 Commercial Areas and Section 3.8 Visitor Facilities         the one advertised property and the 5 other properties would go uncounted. The report
of the SCP.                                                                                           prepared under the direction of Marsha Weinert identified 6,000-7,000 TVR units
                                                                                                      Statewide, which the PAC feels provides a more accurate representation of the TVR
Scott Ezer convened the meeting at 6:35. Meeting ground rules were summarized, followed               problem.
by a review of the draft meeting record from the previous PAC meeting (held on November
20). An overview of the North Shore’s business/employment patterns and visitor industry           •   Is there a way to harness the high demand for visitor units and turn TVRs into an asset
characteristics was presented, followed by a discussion of possible SCP revisions.                    for the community? Considering that the demand for TVRs seems to be increasing, can
                                                                                                      the situation be addressed and regulated so that TVRs provide community benefits?
The meeting discussion is summarized as follows.                                                      PAC members generally agreed that TVRs are not compatible with surrounding
                                                                                                      residential areas, and that enforcement/regulation would be the only solution to address
Revisions to PAC #3 Draft Meeting Record                                                              the number of illegal TVR.

•     450 housing units previously proposed by the former Lihi Lani project should not be         •   Delete references to “small-scale country inns” and any other form of visitor
      absorbed in other areas.                                                                        accommodations in the revised SCP. The SCP should focus on enhancing residents’
                                                                                                      lifestyles and limiting the adverse effects of visitors. Visitor facilities could be
•     Development of 1,400 new housing units on the North Shore does not seem possible                reconsidered during the next five-year review; prohibiting visitor accommodations during
      without impacts to the existing rural character and scenic resources. Continued housing         the interim allows for enforcement of rules on illegal TVUs. PAC discussed the possibility
      growth to accommodate 1,400 units is not desirable. References to housing projections           of considering new visitor accommodations if it follows all of the legal rules. Suggested
      (1,400 units) or the number of units allotted for each sub-area should be deleted in the        new language should read, “Due to the pressures of already strained infrastructure and
      revised SCP. Although an inventory by sub-area would provide guidance for functional            public services – overly crowded roads, wastewater issues, limited police presence, and
      planning, the PAC wants to maintain flexibility. Each housing proposal should be                inadequate State/County agency enforcement – as well as real estate market pressures,
      evaluated individually.                                                                         the community does not support any form of visitor accommodations in the North Shore
                                                                                                      SCP area. Until community concerns about illegal vacation rentals are resolved and
•     Revised SCP should clearly express community’s desire that new housing be located               enforcement mechanisms to resolve the current situation are in place, additional
      around Waialua and Hale‘iwa to meet the needs of existing residents.                            legalized accommodations for overnight visitors should be prohibited.”

               Pacific Guardian Center x 733 Bishop Street, Suite 2590 x Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
                Tel. 808.545.2055 x Fax 808.545.2050 x www.hhf.com x e-mail: info@hhf.com
NS SCP PAC #4 Meeting Record                                                                        NS SCP PAC #4 Meeting Record
December 4, 2007                                                                                    December 4, 2007
Page 3 of 4                                                                                         Page 4 of 4

    Revised SCP should also indicate that the “SCP supersedes certain portions of the                   but the new landowner plans to replace the store. The current SCP language identifying
    Waialua Town Master Plan.”                                                                          the location of the country stores is acceptable.

    Discussion leading to this conclusion included the following:                                   •   Incorporate all of the Waialua Town Master Plan recommendations into the SCP, with the
                                                                                                        exception of the country inn recommendation. Development of a town core as
       1. Although the current SCP calls for “country inns…allowed only within the Hale‘iwa             recommended in the Waialua Town Master Plan would provide for new restaurants and
          Country Town and Waialua Country Town districts…subject to a case-by-case                     businesses in Waialua.
          review process…developed during the implementation of this plan,” the LUO has
          not been revised accordingly. Country inns would require Resort zoning, which             •   General Plan policy for secondary resort areas – “Manage the development of secondary
          could inadvertently lead to future resort development, or creating a Conditional              resort areas in a manner which respects existing lifestyles and the natural environment,
          Use Permit for country inns specific to Hale‘iwa..                                            and avoids substantial increases in the cost of providing public services in the area”
                                                                                                        (Chapter II Economic Activity, Objective B, Policy 7) – is consistent with the community’s
       2. Smaller inns (30-40 rooms) are not economically feasible. Market feasibility                  desire to preserve the area’s rural lifestyle and ensure infrastructure capacity is adequate
          studies prepared for the Waialua Town Master Plan (Dr. John Knox) indicated that              to accommodate proposed developments.
          a minimum 130-140 rooms are necessary to be cost effective.
                                                                                                    •   The group has a divergence of views about taking a position on the proposed Turtle Bay
       3. A small inn would not address or eliminate the TVR problem. People who choose                 expansion until the Ko‘olau Loa community has taken a position on the issue. Since this
          TVRs are looking for the experience of living on the North Shore, which is a                  issue directly affects Ko‘olau Loa (i.e., is within the Ko‘olau Loa SCP boundaries), the
          different clientele from those who would stay at an inn. Also, the number of                  North Shore SCP should not comment directly on the issue unless or until Ko‘olau Loa
          rooms provided by an inn would not be enough to accommodate all the visitors                  requests such support. However, it should be recognized that SCP boundaries are only
          who stay in TVRs.                                                                             geographic boundaries, and the proposed expansion will have spillover impacts to the
                                                                                                        North Shore, especially as it relates to infrastructure (highways). Turtle Bay markets the
       4. The intent for including a recommendation to support a country inn in Hale‘iwa                resort’s location as the O‘ahu’s North Shore. Unless or until Ko‘olau Loa requests such
          Town was to provide a link to the much revered, historic Hale‘iwa Hotel. An inn of            support, discussion in the SCP about Turtle Bay should be limited to the subject areas
          similar scale was seen as another way to restore and promote the historic                     that would be impacted, such as public services and infrastructure.
          character of Hale‘iwa town. Several different parties have expressed interest in
          developing a country inn, but to date, there has been no activity beyond talking,         Other Comments/Questions
          and no real developer on the horizon. There may be several reasons for this,
          including: (1) high development costs (i.e., real estate prices, infrastructure costs);   •   Revised SCP should include a summary of the area’s land use and cultural history.
          (2) the lack of LUO provisions supporting a country inn; and (3) the very real issue          Language from Section 3.4 Historic and Cultural Resources (pg 3-40) could be used as a
          about the limitation of the scale of the inn, and the ability of the developer to make        starting point for the write-up. The PAC would provide information and draft language to
          an operational profit.                                                                        assist HHF with this effort. Possible resources that were discussed include the North
                                                                                                        Shore Chamber of Commerce website, Kamehameha Schools staff, and personal
•   Does the seasonal demand created by the surf industry need to be considered?                        knowledge from Tom Shirai.
    Although most surfers stay longer than 30 days, the seasonal demand for housing affects
    the number of units available for local residents. The PAC agreed that short-term TVR           •   Sustainability concepts will be discussed at the next PAC meeting. HHF will send PAC
    (rental for less than 30 days) were of greater concern than long-term rentals by surfers            members the State of Hawai‘i Draft 2050 Sustainability Plan for review prior to the next
    staying for the winter season.                                                                      meeting.

Possible Revisions to Section 3.6 Commercial Areas                                                  The next North Shore PAC meeting will be scheduled in January 2008, time and place to be
                                                                                                    announced. The next meeting will focus on possible revisions to Chapter 4 Public Facilities
•   Strengthen description of Rural Community Commercial Center (RCCC) to ensure that               and Infrastructure, and sustainability concepts.
    any proposal for development or redevelopment of the RCCC is limited and size and
    scope, and is intended more for residents than tourists. Revise SCP to indicate that rural      Meeting was adjourned about 9:00 pm.
    community commercial centers “service the immediate community” (pg 3-54, delete
    “primarily”)

•   Country stores provide a necessary service to the surrounding community, and should be
    maintained in their current locations. Kammies Market was demolished a few years ago,
                                                                                                          Meeting Agenda
                                                                                            • Welcome
                                                                                            • Ground Rules
                                                                                            • PAC Meeting #3 Follow-Up
                                                                                            • Business, Employment and Visitor Industry
                                                                                              Characteristics
                                                                                            • SCP Revisions (Chapter 3)
                                                                                               – Section 3.6 Commercial Areas
                                                                                               – Section 3.8 Visitor Facilities
                                                                                            • Next Steps
                                         NORTH SHORE
                                        SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES PLAN
                                              FIVE-YEAR REVIEW    1                                                                       2
                                        Planning Advisory Committee #4   December 4, 2007




    Ground Rules for PAC Meetings
PAC role and function
                                                                                                  PAC Meeting #3 Follow-Up
   – Represent various interests and opinions of the larger North
     Shore community
   – Serve as core advisory group to guide the planning process
                                                                                                                            e mail
                                                                                            • Draft meeting record sent via e-mail
PAC meeting objectives                                                                      • Comments on Performance
   – Discuss and propose changes at the PAC level prior to
     presentation / input from the larger community                                           Assessment M t i ?
                                                                                              A        t Matrix?
Discussion protocol
   – Focus on regional issues
   – Allow PAC members to speak first
   – Public participation welcome: comment after PAC discussion
     and through other public input opportunities
   – Give everyone a chance to talk once before you speak twice
   – Keep it short and share the floor with others, stay on topic
   – All contributions are valuable
   – Always be respectful and courteous, despite differing opinions                  3                                                    4
                        SCP Land Use Map                                                                                               Zoning Districts Inventory
                                                                                                                                                                      Apartment
                                                                                                                                                     Residential                         Industrial
                                                                                                                                                                     19 ac (0.1%)
                                                SEE INSET                             INSET                                                         723 ac (1.0%)                       43 ac (0.1%)
                                                                                                                       Military/Federal                                                                   Business
                                                                                                                        350 ac (0.5%)                                                                    41 ac (0.1%)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        • Less than 1% (41.5 acres) of North
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          Shore lands are zoned for
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          business use (B-1 or B-2 zoning)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                    AG-1
                                                                                                                                                                                                              29,129 ac (37.8%)         • No Business Mixed Use districts
                               SEE INSET                                                                              Preservation
                                                                                                                    31,924 ac (41.5%)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          (BMX-3 or BMX-4 zoning)



                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           1998      2007     Acreage
                                                                                                                                                                                                                   District                               Acreage   Acreage   Change
                                                                                                                                                                                                                   R-10 Residential                        10.1       10.1        0
                                                                                                                                                                                                                   R-7.5 Residential                       89.0       89.0        0
                                                                             INSET                                                                                                                                 R-5 Residential                        674.5      656.1      -18.4
                                                                                                                                                                                                                   A-1 Low Density Apt                     15.8       15.8        0
                                                                                                                                                                                                                   A-2 Medium Density Apt                    3.7       3.7        0
                                                                                                                                                                                                                   B-1 Neighborhood Business               30.4       31.1      +0.7
                                                                                                                                     Country y                                             AG-2
                                                                                                                                                                                     13,591 ac (17.7%)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                   B-2 Community Business
                                                                                                                                                                                                                   B2                                      10.4       10.4        0
                                                                                                                                  1,174 ac (1.5%)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                   I-1 Limited Industrial                    1.8       1.8        0
                                                                                                                                                                                                                   I-2 General Industrial                  28.9       28.9        0
 • Country Town designations in Waialua and Hale‘iwa Town;                                                                                                                                                         I-3 Waterfront Industrial               12.0       12.0        0
   defined as a “mixed-use center of commerce and                                                                                                                                                                  AG-1 Restricted AG                  29,156.9 29,128.1        -28.8
   community activity”                                                                                                                                                                                             AG-2 General AG                     12,560.9 13,590.6 +1029.7
                                                                                                                                                                                                                   Country District                     1 924 3
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        1,924.3    1,152.6
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   1 152 6     -771 7
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               -771.7
 • Rural Community Commercial Center at Pupukea;                                                                                                                                                                   P-1 Restricted Preservation         29,307.1 29,307.1          0
   defined as a “small cluster of commercial and service                                                                                                                                                           P-2 General Preservation             2,816.8    2,605.5     -211.3
                                                                                                           5                                                                                                       F-1 Military/Federal Preservation      349.6      349.6       60
   businesses to serve primarily the immediate community”                                                                                                                                                                        Source: Department of Planning and Permitting




         1990-2000 Population Trends                                                                                                                  Labor Force Population
                             Total population                                                                                                                             Percentage of Population in Labor Force
                                              1990    2000 % change                                                                                                                                                                                                    1990
                                                                                                                                  100.0%
                             Honolulu County 836,231 876,156    4.8%                                                                                                                                                                                                   2000
                                                                                                                                                                                            83.5%
                             North Shore      15,729  18,380   16.9%                                                                                                                                     76.4%
                                                                                                                                  80.0%             71.1%                                                                                                  73.6%
                                    ia
                             Mokul ‘ia CDP     1,667
                                               1 667   1,839
                                                       1 839   10 3%
                                                               10.3%                                                                                                         66 7%
                                                                                                                                                                             66.7%                                                                                  70.1
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    70 1%
                                                                                                                                                             64.7%                                                      64.5%
                             Waialua CDP       4,052   3,761   -7.2%                                                                                                                                                                      61.4%   60.7%
                             Hale‘iwa CDP      2,194   2,225    1.4%                                                              60.0%                                                                                         54.4%




                                                                                                                        Percent
                             Pupukea CDP       4,140   4,250    2.7%
                                                                                                                                  40.0%
Total Households                                        Median Household Income
                    1990       2000 % change                                1990                  2000
Honolulu County    265,625    286,450   7.8%            Honolulu County    $40,581               $51,914                          20.0%
North Shore          4,825      5,893  22.1%            North Shore          n/a                 $45,000                                                               N/A
Mokul ‘ia CDP          664        709   6.8%            Mokul ‘ia CDP      $37,045               $50,100                            0.0%
Waialua CDP          1,178
                     1 178      1 128
                                1,128   4 2%
                                       -4.2%            Waialua CDP        $33,428
                                                                           $33 428               $46,763
                                                                                                 $46 763                                             Honolulu        North Shore              Mokul ‘ia
                                                                                                                                                                                                     ia                 Waialua             Hale iw
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            Hale‘iw a        Pupukea
Hale‘iwa CDP           710        770   8.5%            Hale‘iwa CDP       $32,000               $39,643
Pupukea CDP          1,268      1,455  14.7%            Pupukea CDP        $38,382               $56,146       % of Population in Labor Force (2000)                                                             Labor Force Population (1990-2000)
                                                                                                                                 Population Population % Population                                                                                1990    2000 % change
                   Poverty Status (Individuals)                                                                                    16 years
                                                                                                                                      y       in Labor   in Labor                                                Honolulu County                  463,572 447,320   -3.5%
                                           1990                 2000         h
                                                                          % change                                                and over      Force      Force                                                 North Shore                        n/a     9,490      n/a
                   Honolulu County 60,096 7.5%              83,937   9.9%      2.4%                            Honolulu County       691,015     447,320      64.7%                                              Mokul ‘ia CDP                       1,122  1,155    2.9%
                   North Shore             n/a   n/a         2,426 13.5%         n/a                           North Shore            14,218       9,490      66.7%                                              Waialua CDP                         1,986  1,624  -18.2%
                   Mokul ‘ia CDP          122 7.3%             180 10.7%       3.4%                            Mokul ‘ia CDP            1,512      1,155      76.4%                                              Hale‘iwa CDP                          981  1,019    3.9%
                   Waialua CDP            322 8.0%             439 11.7%       3.7%                            Waialua CDP              2,984
                                                                                                                                        2 984      1,624
                                                                                                                                                   1 624      54 4%
                                                                                                                                                              54.4%                                              Pupukea CDP                         2 271
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     2,271  2,344
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            2 344    3.2%
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     3 2%
                   Hale‘iwa CDP           292 13.0%            387 17.6%       4.6%                            Hale‘iwa CDP             1,678      1,019      60.7%                                                               Source: US Census Bureau, 1990 and 2000 Census
                   Pupukea CDP            361 8.9%             637 15.2%       6.3%                            Pupukea CDP              3,344      2,344      70.1%
                                                Source: US Census Bureau, 1990 and 2000 Census             7                                                                                                                                                                       8
         Business Patterns 2000 to 2005                                                                                                                    Employment Characteristics
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             • Less than 5% of North Shore residents
                               WAIALUA (96791)                                2000             2005                                                                                                                                            work in the Agriculture industry

                               Number of establishments                          48               70                                                                                                                                         • Education, Health and Social Services
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               Industry accounts for the largest
                               Number of employees                             361              403                                                                                                                                            percentage of employment (19.1%),
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               p        g        p y       (     )
                                                                                                                                                                  North Shore Employment by Industry (2000)                                    followed by Retail and Wholesale Trade
                               First quarter payroll                  $1,446,000      $2,188,000                                                                                             Agriculture (4.8%)
                                                                                                                                                                 Public Administration                                                         (15.0%), and Arts/Entertainment,
                               Annual payroll                         $6,484,000      $9,914,000                                                                  and Other Services                                                           Recreation, Accommodation/Food
                                                                                                                                                                        (11.5%)                                   Construction (8.8%)          Services (13.6%)

                               HALEIWA (96712)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                         Manufacturing (4.1%)
                               Number of establishments                        158              187                                     Educational, Health,
                                                                                                                                          Social Services
                               Number of employees                           1,412            1,728                                          (19.1%)                                                                             Transportation (7.3%)
                               First quarter payroll                  $6,345,000      $8,828,000
                               Annual payroll                       $26,057,000 $39,307,000

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Retail and
                               TOTAL                                                                                                                                                                                           Wholesale Trade
                                                                                                                                                  Arts, Entertainment,                                                            (15.0%)
                               Number of establishments                        206              257                                                   Recreation,
                                                                                                                                                      Recreation
                                                                                                                                                  Accomodation/Food
                               Number of employees                           1,773            2,131                                                Services (13.6%)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                     Professional, Scientific,
                               First quarter payroll                  $7,791,000 $11,016,000
                                                                                                                                                       Finance, Insurance,                                               Management,
                               Annual payroll                       $32,541,000 $49,221,000                                                                Real Estate,                      Information
                                                                                                                                                                                                                      Adminstrative, Waste
                                                                                                                                                      Rental/Leasing (4 4%)
                                                                                                                                                      R t l/L     i (4.4%)                                           Management Services
                                                                                                                                                                                                (1.8%)
                                                                                                                                                                                                (1 8%)
                                                       Source: US Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census                                                                                                                        (9.7%)


                                                                                                                      9                                                                                                                                                             10
                                                                                                                                                                                                                  Source: US Census Bureau, 2000 Census




                  Employment Characteristics                                                                               Where Do North Shore Residents Work?
                                                                                                                            Where Residents Work (2004)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                               Place of Residence
                             North Shore Employment by Occupation (2000)                                                                                                                                                                            Kawela
                                     Production,
                                                                                                                                                                                         Mokul ‘ia Waialua Hale‘iwa Pupukea                          Bay    Kahuku             Laie
                                 Transportation, and                                                                                             Mokul ‘ia                                   3.2%     0.0%     0.0%     0.0%                           1.4%    0.0%             0.0%
                                   Material Moving                                            Management,                                        Waialua                                     4.7%     3.4%     0.0%     0.0%                           1.4%    0.0%             0.0%
                                        12%                                              Professional and Related                                Haleiwa                                    10.5%   10.1%    16.0%     10.9%                          10.0%    2.1%             0.0%



                                                                                                                            Workplace Location
            Construction, Extraction,                                                              31%                                           Pupukea                                     1.9%     1.8%     1.9%     5.8%                          17.1%   10.3%             2.1%
               and Maintenance                                                                                                                   Kawela Bay                                  2.6%     3.5%     4.4%    10.0%                          22.9%    9.6%             1.9%
                      11%                                                                                                             L          K h k
                                                                                                                                                 Kahuku                                      0 0%
                                                                                                                                                                                             0.0%     0 0%
                                                                                                                                                                                                      0.0%     0 0%
                                                                                                                                                                                                               0.0%     2.3%
                                                                                                                                                                                                                        2 3%                           2.9%
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       2 9%    8 8%
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               8.8%             0 8%
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                0.8%
                                                                                                                                                 Laie                                        0.0%     0.0%     0.0%     1.2%                           7.1%   22.2%            75.4%
                   Farming, Fishing                                                                                                              Hauula/Punaluu                              0.0%     0.0%     0.0%     0.0%                           0.0%    0.0%              3.3%
                     and Forestry
                                                                                                                                                 Kualoa/K ne‘ohe/Kailua                      1.9%     0.0%     3.7%     2.8%                           0.0%    1.6%              0.5%
                         3%
                                                                                                                                                 Central O‘ahu
                                                                                                                                                         O ahu                               5.6%     9.2%     5.5%     1.8%                           1.4%    3.4%              0.5%
                                                                                                                                                 Pearl City/Aiea/Waipahu                     0.0%     3.7%     2.7%     3.2%                           0.0%    1.8%              0.0%
                                                                                                                                                 Honolulu                                  38.3%           37.8%         37.4%            36.4%          24.3%     26.1%         9.8%
                        Sales and Office                                                                                                         Other Locations                            31.1%          30.5%          28.3%            25.7%         10.0%        14.2%      5.2%
                                                                                           Service
                              22%                                                                                                                                                                                                    Source: US Census Bureau, Local Employment Dynamics
                                                                                            21%
                                                                                              %
                                                                                                                                       Mean Travel Time to Work (Minutes)                                              Percent Self-Employed
                                                                                                                                                            1990     2000                          change                                                   1990        2000 change
                                                                         • 31% of North Shore residents work in
Source: US Census Bureau, 2000 Census                                      Management and Professional occupations,                    Honolulu County        24.8     27.3                             2.5            Honolulu County                        5.5%        6.3% 0.8%
                                                                           followed by Sales and Office occupations                    North Shore              n/a    32.9                             n/a            North Shore                              n/a       8.7%    n/a
                                                                           (22%),
                                                                           (22%) and Service occupations (21%)                                ia
                                                                                                                                       Mokul ‘ia CDP          32 0
                                                                                                                                                              32.0     35 5
                                                                                                                                                                       35.5                             35
                                                                                                                                                                                                        3.5            Mokul ‘ia CDP
                                                                                                                                                                                                                              ia                              7 5%
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              7.5%        7 1% -0 4%
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          7.1% -0.4%
                                                                         • About 3% of residents work in Farming,                      Waialua CDP            28.5     32.9                             4.4            Waialua CDP                            4.0%        4.6% 0.6%
                                                                           Fishing and Forestry Occupations                            Hale‘iwa CDP           31.2     33.0                             1.8            Hale‘iwa CDP                           8.7%        8.7% 0.0%
                                                                                                                      11               Pupukea CDP            31.4     41.9                            10.5            Pupukea CDP                           16.5%                12
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         14.6% -1.9%
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          Source: US Census Bureau, 1990 and 2000 Census
                          Where do North Shore Employees Live?                                                                                                                                                                          Statewide Visitor Trends (1966-2006)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            Statewide Annual Visitor Arrivals (1966-2006)
                                                Where Workers Live (2004)
                                                                                                                         Workplace Location                                                                                          8,000,000
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                • Number of visitors to
                                                                                                                                                                Kawela                                                               7,000,000
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  Hawai‘i has increased
                                                                                          ia
                                                                                   Mokul ‘ia Waialua  Hale‘iwa Pupukea
                                                                                                      Hale iwa                                                   Bay   Kahuku Laie




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                rs
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     6,000,000
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     (835,000
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  800% since 1666 (835 000




                                                                                                                                                                                                                Number of Visitor
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     5,000,000
                                                Mokul ‘ia                             12.4%    15.4%       5.1%   0.0%                                            0.0%    0.0%  0.0%                                                                                                                                                                              visitors in 1966 to 7.5
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     4,000,000
                                                Waialua                               14.0%    25.2%     11.0%    4.8%                                            6.7%    2.2%  0.0%                                                                                                                                                                              million in 2006)
                                      sidence




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     3,000,000
                                                Haleiwa                                4.1%      2.8%      9.7%   2.8%                                            4.7%    0.0%  0.0%
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     2,000,000                                                                                                                  • Average number of
                                                Pupukea
                                                  p                                    0.0%      6.3%    14.8%   19.2%                                           23.6%   16.1%  0.6%                                                                                                                                                                              visitors present per day
                 Employees Place of Res




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     1,000,000
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     1 000 000
                                                Kawela Bay                             0.0%      0.0%      0.0%   3.0%                                            2.9%    0.0%  0.0%                                                        0                                                                                                                     has increased from 21,000
                                                Kahuku                                 0.0%      0.0%      0.0%  10.0%                                            6.7%   18.3%  3.4%                                                           66      70      74      78      82                          86         90     94      98        02      06         in 1966 to 188,000 in 2006
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             19      19      19      19      19                          19         19     19      19        20      20
                                                Laie                                   0.0%      0.0%      0.0%  12.4%                                            7.8%    9.7% 68.3%                                                                                                                       Year
                                                Hauula/Punaluu                         0.0%      0.0%      0.0%   4.3%                                            5.8%    8.6%  8.4%
                         s'




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             Statewide A     D il N   b    f Vi it    (1966 2006)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             St t id Average Daily Number of Visitors (1966-2006)
                                                Kualoa/K ne‘ohe/Kailua                 0.0%      2.1%      0.0%   0.0%                                            0.0%    2.7%  2.2%
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         200,000
                                                Central O‘ahu                          6.6%      4.2%    12.6%    7.3%                                            7.0%    7.6%  0.6%                                                                                                                     180,000
                                                Pearl City/Aiea/Waipahu                5.8%      7.7%      1.1%   0.0%                                            0.0%    0.0%  0.0%                                                                                                                     160,000
                                                                                       6.7%      0.0%      0.0%   0.0%                                            0.0%    0.0%  0.0%




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                sitors
                                                ‘Ewa                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     140,000
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         120 000
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         120,000




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    Number of Vis
                                                Honolulu                              19 8%
                                                                                      19.8%    11 2%
                                                                                               11.2%       6 1%
                                                                                                           6.1%   4 3%
                                                                                                                  4.3%                                            2.7%
                                                                                                                                                                  2 7%    8 1%
                                                                                                                                                                          8.1%  3.6%
                                                                                                                                                                                3 6%
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         100,000
                                                Other Locations                       30.6%                                   25.2%          39.5%         31.6% 32.1% 26.9% 12.8%                                                                                                                        80,000
                                                                                                                                                    Source: US Census Bureau, Local Employment Dynamics                                                                                                   60,000
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          40,000
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          20,000
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                0

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      66     70     74        78      82       86       90      94      98       02      06
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    19     19     19        19      19       19       19      19      19       20      20
                                                                                                                                                                                                       13                                                                                                                                                      Year                                   14
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            Source: State of Hawai‘i Data Book 2006, Table 7.03




                                                O‘ahu Visitor Trends (2000-2006)                                                                                                                                                                    North Shore Visitors’ Behavior
                                                                  Oahu Visitor Arrivals (2000-2006)
                             5,000,000                                                                                                                                                                                               • 51% of O‘ahu’s overnight visitors visited the North Shore in
                             4,500,000
                                                                                                                                                                                         O‘ahu
                                                                                                                                                                                      Average Daily                                    both 2003 and 2005 (2.1 and 2.4 million per year, or 5,753
                                                                                                                                                                   O‘ahu Annual        Number of
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           6 575           average
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       and 6,575 per day average, respectively)
                rs
Number of Visitor




                             4,000,000                                                                                                                    Year     Visitor Arrivals      Visitors
                                                                                                                                                            2000         4,719,244            84,910
                             3,500,000                                                                                                                      2001
                                                                                                                                                            2002
                                                                                                                                                                         4,250,863
                                                                                                                                                                         4,276,077
                                                                                                                                                                                              79,699
                                                                                                                                                                                              82,121
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     • 86% of visitors said they would be likely to return to the
                             3,000,000                                                                                                                      2003
                                                                                                                                                            2004
                                                                                                                                                                         4,074,141
                                                                                                                                                                         4,464,551
                                                                                                                                                                                              76,776
                                                                                                                                                                                              83,718
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       North Shore on their next visit
                             2,500,000                                                                                                                      2005         4,731,843            89,588
                                                                                                                                                            2006         4,627,484            87,953
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     • Visitors with a high propensity to visit
                             2,000,000
                                                        2000      2001      2002      2003
                                                                                      Year
                                                                                                                       2004      2005        2006
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 – Stayed in Hawai‘i longer than 8 days
                                                                                                                      100,000
                                                                                                                                      O‘ahu A
                                                                                                                                      O‘ h Average Daily Number of Visitors (2000-2006)
                                                                                                                                                   D il N   b    f Vi it    (2000 2006)                                                            Younger d
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 – Y       demographics
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   hi
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 – International and first time visitors
                                                                                                                       90,000
                                                                                                             sitors




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         g                                              p
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     • Highest satisfaction levels with the “natural” experience
                                                                                             Average Daily Vis




                                                                                                                       80,000
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       (country atmosphere, beaches, big waves/surf)
                                                                                                                       70,000

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     • Highest levels of dissatisfaction with beach parks/facilities
                                                                                                                       60,000
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       (10%) restaurants (9%) and shopping (9%)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       (10%),
                                                                                                                       50,000                                                                                                                                                                                                             Source: North Shore Visitors Satisfaction Survey, DBEDT 2005
                                                                                                                                 2000        2001       2002       2003
                                                                                                                                                                   Year
                                                                                                                                                                               2004         2005       15
                                                                                                                                                                                                        2006                                                                                                                                                                                          16
                                                                                                                                           Source: State of Hawai‘i Data Book 2000-2006, Tables 7.06 and 7.07
Trends in O‘ahu’s Visitor Unit Inventory                                                                                          Trends in O‘ahu’s Visitor Unit Inventory
                                                                                                                                                                                                            O‘ahu Inventory of Available Visitor Units (2006)
           • Number of visitors units Statewide increased almost 400% between 1966 and 2006
             (increase of 57,700 units from 14,800 in 1966 to 72,500 in 2006)                                                                                                   30000                                                             Hotel                              • Hotel units account for the
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 77.2%                                 largest segment of O‘ahu’s
           • O‘ahu units accounted for 74.7% of the Statewide total in 1966, compared to 46.9% in                                                                               25000                                                                                                  current inventory (77.2%)
                                                22 900            11 100            34 008
             2006 (O‘ahu inventory increased by 22,900 units from 11,100 in 1966 to 34,008 in 2006)
                                                                                                                                                                                20000                                                                                                • The total number of visitor




                                                                                                                                                               vailable Units
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       units on the North Shore (809)
                                     Statewide and Oahu Visitor Units (1966 to 2006)                                                                                                                                                                                                   accounts for 2.4% of the
                   80,000                                                                                                                                                       15000
                                                                                                          Statewide                                                                                                                                                                    islandwide total (34,008)




                                                                                                                                                              Av
                   70,000
                    0 000                                                                                                                                                       10000

                   60,000
                                                                                            *                                                                                                                       Condo/Hotel
                                                                                                                                                                                                                      13.9%
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               Time
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               share
                                                                                                                                                                                5000
                                                                                                                                                                                              Apt/Hotel   B&Bs                     Hostel                       IVU            4.9%          Other
 Number of Units




                                                                                                                                                                                                0.8%      0.1%                     0.7%                         .9%                          1.3%
                   50,000                                                                                                                                                          0

                   40,000

                   30,000
                                                                                            *       Island of O‘ahu               An Individual Vacation Unit (IVU) is defined
                                                                                                                                  as “an individual condominium unit (not in a
                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Inventory of Visitor Units (2006)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              North Shore
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        (Includes Properties Between          Percent of
                                                                                                                                  hotel rental operation), house, cabin, villa or                                                                                      O‘ahu            Mokul ‘ia, Schofield & Hauula)    Islandwide Total
                   20,000                                                                                                         cottage with very limited service, often with                                                                                            Available                     Available                    Available
                                                                                                                                  only basic cleaning supplies provided.”                                                                                    Properties      Units       Properties        Units         Properties     Units
                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Apartment/Hotel                             11            300               1             57        9.1%       19.0%
                   10,000                                                                                                         Other includes “residential condominium
                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Bed and Breakfast                           25             50              ---            ---          ---         ---
                                                                                                                                  units, timeshare units, motels, lodges, inns or
                                                                                                * No survey conducted in 1995     any other form of property not included in the                                        Condo/Hotel                                 32          4,728              ---            ---          ---         ---
                       0                                                                                                          other categories”                                                                     Hostel                                       7            244              ---            ---          ---         ---
                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Hotel                                       67         26,261
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 ,                  3            701        4.5%        2.7%
                         66     70       74      78     82     86       90           94            98         02          06         Source: 2006 Visitor Plant Inventory, DBEDT                                        Individual Vacation Unit (IVU)              56            308              17             34       30.4%       11.0%
                       19     19       19      19     19     19       19           19            19         20          20                                                                                              Timeshare                                    6          1,655              ---            ---          ---         ---
                                                                 Year                                                                                                                                                   Other                                        9            435               3             17       33.3%        3.9%
                                                                                                                            17
                                                                                    Source: 2006 Visitor Plant Inventory, DBEDT                                                                                         TOTAL                                      213         34,008              24            809       11.3%
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       18
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        2.4%




                                                                                                                                                                     O‘ahu Transient Vacation Rentals
O‘ahu Permitted Transient Vacation Units                                                                                                                                           (Per Internet Search of Advertised Properties)
                                                                                                                                                                                              Number of O‘ahu Transient Vacation Rental (TVR) Properties by Area (2005)
  • 998 properties operating                                  Permitted Transient Vacation Rentals on O‘ahu (2005)
                                                              (single-family structures and cottages/cabins)                                                                                  Windward (K ne‘ohe to Waimanalo)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         Homes
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             434
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    B&Bs
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       127
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               Total
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 561
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          % Total
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           50.2%
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         • 1,117 O‘ahu properties
    as permitted transient                                                                                         Percent
                                                                                                                                                                                              North Shore (Mokul ‘ia to Pupukea)
                                                                                                                                                                                              Ko‘olau Loa (Kawela Bay to Punaluu)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             246
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             109
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        21
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         5
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 267
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 114
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           23.9%
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           10.2%           found on the Internet in
                                                                                                         Units     Share
           ti    it
    vacation unit (TVU) on                                    Windward (K ne‘ohe to Waimanalo)              85       58.6%
                                                                                                                                                                                              Urban Core (H
                                                                                                                                                                                              Ub C        (Honolulu)
                                                                                                                                                                                                               l l )
                                                                                                                                                                                              West O‘ahu (‘Ewa Beach to Makaha)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              97
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              59
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        17
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         2
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 114
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  61
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           10 2%
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           10.2%
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            5.5%
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           comparison to 145
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           permitted single-family
    O‘ahu in December 2004                                    North Shore (Mokul ‘ia to Pupukea)            32       22.1%                                                                    TOTAL                                          945       172     1,117                       TVU; suggests that 87% of
                                                              Ko‘olau Loa (Kawela Bay to Punaluu)           17       11.7%                                                                                                                                                                 the single-family TVR
    (i.e., those with a non-                                  Urban Core (Honolulu)                         11        7.6%                                                                        Oahu Transient Vacation Rentals (2005)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           properties on O‘ahu’s are
                                                                                                            0         0 0%
                                                                                                                      0.0%
    conforming use certificate                                West O ahu (‘Ewa Beach to Makaha)
                                                              TOTAL
                                                                    O‘ahu ( Ewa
                                                                                                           145      100.0%
                                                                                                                                                            600
                                                                                                                                                                                    127                                                                         Homes                         tl
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           not legal
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   l
    from DPP)                                                                                                                                               500
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                B&Bs
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         • Windward O‘ahu had the
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           greatest number of TVU
  • Of the 998 total, 85% (853)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            (561 properties, 50.2%)
                                                                                                                                                     ties




                                                               • Over 275,000 of visitors statewide stayed in
                                                                                                                                                            400
                                                                                                                                       mber of Propert




                                                                 a B&B or vacation rental home in 2004, up                                                                                                                                                                               • The North Shore accounted
    were multi-family units,                                     16% from the previous year; vacation                                                                                                                                                                                      for 23.9% (267 properties)
    with 784 units in Waikiki                                    rentals grew more rapidly than B&Bs                                                        300
                                                                                                                                                                                                          21                                                                               of O‘ahu’s total TVR
                                                               • O‘ahu hosted 130,700 visitors in B&Bs and
                                                                                                                                                                                        434
  • 15% (145) of O‘ahu’s
                 O ahu s                                         vacation rental homes in 2004 (96,000 in                                                   200
                                                                                                                                     Num




                                                                 homes and 34,000 B&B patrons, or 2.2%                                                                                                                                                                              TVR include “all single-family structures (homes
    permitted TVU were                                           and 0.8% of O‘ahu visitors)
                                                                                                                                                            100
                                                                                                                                                                                                          246                5                17                                    and B&Bs) operating as visitor accommodations;
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   2                excludes accommodations that are not hotel
    single-family units                                        Source: O‘ahu Market Segment Assessment Transient                                                                                                           109                97
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  59
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    rooms or multifamily structures (hostels,
                                                                       Vacation Rentals, The Kauaian Institute (2005)                                                                                                                                                               apartments, condos or timeshares)”
                                                                                                                                                             0
                                                                                                                                                                                  Windward             North Shore    Ko‘olau Loa        Urban Core           West O‘ahu
                                                                                                                                                                                (K ne‘ohe to          (Mokul ‘ia to (Kawela Bay to       (Honolulu)         (‘Ewa Beach to
                                                                                                                                                                                 Waimanalo)             Pupukea)       Punaluu)                                Makaha)
                                                                                                                             19                                                                                                                                                                                                        20
                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Source: O‘ahu Market Segment Assessment Transient Vacation Rentals, The Kauaian Institute (2005)
North Shore TVR Inventory                                                                                                                     y
                                                                                                                                  TVR Inventory in the Pupukea Area
                                  TVR PROPERTIES          Census           BEACHFRONT TVR
                                                          Housing  %          Housing    %
                                 Homes B&Bs Total          Units Housing TVR   Units Beachfront
              Pupukea               160    9  169           2,335  7.2%    63     866       7%


Nort Shore
              Hale‘iwa               54    9   63             869  7.2%    26     242      11%
              Mokul ‘ia              23    0   23             883  2.6%    10     423       2%
   th
              Waialua                 9    3   12           1 219
                                                            1,219   1 0%
                                                                    1.0%    5     182       3%
              Subtotal              246      21      267   5,306       5.0%     104     1,713          6%
              Kawela Bay              7       1        8     439       1.8%       3       299          1%
Ko‘olau Loa



              Laie                   28       1       29   1,024       2.8%      16       302          5%
              Hauula                 30       2       32   1,086       2.9%       2       214          1%
              Kaaawa                 19       1       20     550       3.6%       4       150          3%
              Punaluu                17       0       17     440       3.9%       4       305          1%
              Kahuku                  8       0        8     518       1.5%       4       130          3%
              Subtotal              109       5      114   4,057       2.8%      33     1,400          2%
              K ne‘ohe               26      12       38 11,475        0.3%       6       843          1%
Windward




              Kailua Beach          259      83      342   3,486       9.8%      88       519         17%
              Lanikai               113      22      135     758      17 8%
                                                                      17.8%      37       108         34%
              Waimanalo Beach        36      10       46     363      12.7%      25        63         40%
              Subtotal              434     127      561 16,082        3.5%     156     1,533         10%
              Kahala                 34       2       36   1,635       2.2%      15       365          4%
   olulu




              Hawai‘i Kai            28       1       29   1,843       1.6%      16       596          3%
              Diamond Head           19       1       20     572       3.5%       7       304          2%
Hono




              Waialae Niu             9       0        9   3,045       0.3%       3       523          1%
              Other Honolulu          7      13       20 151,564       0.0%       0        NA          NA
              Subtotal               97      17      114 158,659       0.1%      41     1,788          2%                                  Source: O‘ahu Market Segment Assessment Transient Vacation Rentals, The Kauaian Institute (2005)
West O‘ahu




              Makaha                 30       1       31   3,197       1.0%      12       717          2%
              ‘Ewa Beach             13       1       14   3,515       0.4%       4       920          0%
              Kapolei-Ko Olina       12       0       12   4 937
                                                           4,937       0.2%
                                                                       0 2%       0         0          0%
              Maili                   4       0        4   1,537       0.3%       4        94          4%
              Subtotal               59       2       61 13,186        0.5%      20     1,731          1%
              O‘AHU TOTAL           945     172    1,117 197,290       0.6%     354     8,165          4%                21                                                                                                           22
                Source: O‘ahu Market Segment Assessment Transient Vacation Rentals, The Kauaian Institute (2005)




TVR Inventory in Lanikai
            y                                                                                                                     TVR Inventory on Waimanalo Beach




                                                                                                                                           Source: O‘ahu Market Segment Assessment Transient Vacation Rentals, The Kauaian Institute (2005)




                               Source: O‘ahu Market Segment Assessment Transient Vacation Rentals, The Kauaian Institute (2005)
                                                                                                                         23                                                                                                           24
           TVR Inventory in Kailua                                                                                                           SCP Vision Elements
                                                                                                                                “Designate Hale‘iwa and Waialua Towns as ‘Country Towns’”
                                                                                                                          • Hale‘iwa is the region’s main
                                                                                                                            commercial center for residents and
                                                                                                                            visitors, with activities concentrated
                                                                                                                            on Kamehameha Highway
                                                                                                                          • Waialua is a plantation town for
                                                                                                                            residents of Waialua and Mokul ‘ia;
                                                                                                                            is the center of agricultural activity,
                                                                                                                            resident services and the region’s
                                                                                                                            high technology industry
                                                                                                                              g            gy         y
                                                                                                                          • Building scale and character reflect
                                                                                                                            the towns’ historic “small town”
                                                                                                                            character and rural landscape
                                                                                                                          • Small-scale country inns in both
                                                                                                                            town cores keep visitors in the area
                                                                                                                            longer
                       Source: O‘ahu Market Segment Assessment Transient Vacation Rentals, The Kauaian Institute (2005)

                                                                                                                    25                                                                           26




                 Community Concerns                                                                                                Section 3.6 Commercial Areas
  Vision El  t Q    ti    i
• Vi i Elements Questionnaire responses
   – 98% (63) strongly agreed or agreed with the vision element                                                             •   Country Town designations at Waialua and Hale‘iwa
   – 2% (1) did not respond                                                                                                 •   Rural Community Commercial Center designation between
                                                                                                                                Pupukea Road and Pahoa Road
                                                                                                                                  p
  Limit         i ld   l      t t H l ‘i      dW i l      t    th
• Li it commercial developments to Hale‘iwa and Waialua; strengthen
  town core and minimize need to drive                                                                                      •   Country Stores
                                                                                                                                 – Ted’s Bakery
• Establish rural design standards to preserve and promote “country
  town” character (architectural integrity reasonable height limits
  town                           integrity,                  limits,                                                             – Sunset Beach Store
  density)                                                                                                                       – Kammies
• Promote small local businesses (no big box retailers)                                                                          – Sharks Cove
• P
  Provide public restrooms in Hale‘iwa town
      id    bli     t      i H l ‘i    t                                                                                         – Paalaa Kai
                                                                                                                                 – Waialua Junction
• Improve pedestrian facilities (sidewalks/crosswalks) in Hale‘iwa
                                                                                                                            •   Possible revisions or additions?
                 p                     y
• Construct bike path between Waimea Bay and Hale‘iwa Town
                                                                                                                                   Strengthen description of Rural Community Commercial Center
                                                                                                                                 – St    th d       i ti   fR lC          it C       i lC t
• Provide trolley system between Hale‘iwa and Turtle Bay with secure                                                               (addressing previously-proposed Sharks Cove shopping
  parking in Hale‘iwa                                                                                                              complex)?
• No hotels/resorts; limit new developments to Waikiki and Ko ‘Olina
                                                               Olina                                                             – Incorporate Waialua Town Master Plan recommendations for
                                                                                                                                   commercial areas?
• Need for legal visitor accommodations that fit with the rural character
                                                                                                                    27                                                                           28
                                                                                             GP Objectives & Policies – Resort Areas
    Preferred Waialua Area Concept Plan
                                                                                              II. Economic Activity
                                                                                                            B.
                                                                                                  Objective B To maintain the viability of
                                                                                                  O‘ahu’s visitor industry
                                                                                                          6
                                                                                                 – Policy 6. Permit the development of
                                                                                                   secondary resort areas in West Beach,
                                                                                                   Kahuku, Makaha and Laie
                                                                                                 – Policy 7. Manage the development of
                                                                                                   secondary resort areas in a manner which
                                                                                                   respects existing lifestyles and the natural
                                                                                                   environment, and avoids substantial
                                                                                                   increases in the cost of providing public
                                          Source: Waialua Town Master Plan, June 2004              services in the area
                                                                                        29                                                          30




           Section 3.8 Visitor Facilities                                                                         Next Steps
•   Existing SCP allows “small-                                                                PAC Meeting #5
    scale country inns within the
    Hale‘iwa and Waialua Country y
                                                                                                 – Tentative mid-January 2008
    Town districts, subject to a                                                                 – Discuss revisions
    case-by-case review process”                                                                    • Parks and Recreation, Public Facilities and
•   Possible revisions or                                                                             Infrastructure
    additions?
                                                                                                    • Sustainability Concepts
     – Address community concerns
       about short-term vacation                                                                 – Present Revised Performance Assessment
       rentals?
     – Clarify permitting mechanism for                                                        Community Meeting #2
       “country inns” (Per the LUO,                                                              – Tentative February 2008
                     y
       hotels are only permitted in
       Resort and BMX-4 zoning                                                                   –P       tP f
                                                                                                   Present Performance A         t d          d
                                                                                                                        Assessment and proposed
       districts)?                                                                                 SCP revisions
     – Incorporate Waialua Town
       Master Plan recommendation for
       a small country inn at Kaiaka
       Bay?                                                                             31                                                          32
                                                                                                      NS SCP PAC #5 Meeting Record
                                                                                                      January 8, 2008
Helber Hastert & Fee                                                                                  Page 2 of 5
Planners, Inc.
                                                                                                          affect North Shore infrastructure (especially Kamehameha Highway); and (2) the
January 14, 2008                                                                                          consideration of such spill over impacts should not be construed as tacit approval or
                                                                                                          acceptance of the expansion, as most, if not all, PAC members oppose the expansion.”
MEETING SUMMARY
                                                                                                      •   Amend paragraph in draft meeting record about visitor accommodations to note that the
To:          North Shore Sustainable Communities Plan Five-Year Review Project File                       PAC discussed the possibility of considering new visitor accommodations. However,
                                                                                                          most PAC members felt there should not even be a discussion of new visitor
From:        Rachael Edinger                                                                              accommodations until the City and County can achieve control and eliminate the majority
                                                                                                          of current illegal accommodations (TVRs, B&Bs).
Subject:     Planning Advisory Committee Meeting No. 5
             January 8, 2008, 6:30 – 9:00 pm                                                          •   Add the word “estate” after real in “real market pressures” (pg 2, 8th bullet).

PAC Attendees: Jeff Alameida, Dave Bramlett, Jerry Driscoll, Gerry Meade, Antya Miller,               Sustainability Definitions and Concepts
                 Dan Nellis, Gil Riviere, Kalani Fronda, Kathleen Pahinui, Carol Phillips,
                 Jacob Ng, Stew Ring, Paul Sensano, Ron Nishihara (for Lisa Izumi)                    •   PAC members Stew Ring and Kathleen Pahinui distributed a hand-out they prepared on
Other Attendees: Mark Cunningham (Defend O‘ahu Coalition)                                                 definitions for sustainability to be added to the NS SCP. The PAC felt that these
DPP Attendees: Ray Young, DPP Project Manager                                                             definitions are broad enough and accurately encompass what they want to say about
HHF Attendees: Scott Ezer, Rachael Edinger                                                                sustainability for the NS.

The fifth Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) Meeting for the North Shore (NS) Sustainable              •   Discussion on how, if at all, it is possible to make the impacts of visitors sustainable. Can
Communities Plan (SCP) Five-year Review Project was held on Tuesday, January 8, 2008 at                   visitors be “managed”? Or can only businesses that cater to visitors be managed? The
the Waialua Community Association Cottage #2. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss                   number of visitors is not an easy thing to control. A lengthy discussion ensued covering
definitions of sustainability, and possible revisions to Section 4.1 Infrastructure and Section           the impact of tourists to the de facto North Shore population, and the effect this has on
3.1 Parks and Recreation of the SCP.                                                                      the daily lives of residents. This is especially true when it is considered that the NS SCP
                                                                                                          area has no resort zoning.
Scott Ezer convened the meeting at 6:30. Meeting ground rules were summarized, followed
by a review of the draft meeting record from the previous PAC meeting (held on December               •   It is important to educate visitors that come to the North Shore, more so than ‘manage’
4). An overview of sustainability concepts and various definitions along with proposed                    them. Let them know what true Hawai‘i is.
revisions to the NS SCP maps were presented. Kamehameha Highway traffic data was
presented, followed by a discussion of possible SCP revisions.                                        •   Hanauma Bay provides an example of both managing the number of visitors and
                                                                                                          educating them.
The meeting discussion is summarized as follows.
                                                                                                      •   Could there be a way of having a toll to access the NS? At $1 per car, that could bring in
Revisions to PAC #4 Draft Meeting Record                                                                  significant money that could be used for North Shore projects.

•     Amend paragraph in the draft meeting record about the proposed Turtle Bay expansion             •   Carrying capacity as a concept is a challenging issue. Achieving balance is a concept
      that indicates “… the North Shore SCP should not comment directly on the issue unless               and goal that is more doable. The group has strong concern for the carrying capacity of
      or until Ko‘olau Loa requests such support” (pg 4, 4th bullet), by replacing that bullet with       the NS, especially with regards to the number of people and fresh water.
      the following language: “The PAC has spent considerable time discussing the proposed
      Turtle Bay expansion; specifically they have discussed whether it is appropriate for the        •   Water needs to be taken into account both island-wide and for the NS community. Do
      PAC to take a position regarding the expansion. The PAC cannot reach consensus on                   not want to export NS water to support development in other areas (i.e. Ewa). There are
      this issue. Some PAC members believe it is inappropriate for the North Shore PAC to                 also groundwater contamination issues that need attention.
      take a position on a land use issue which is part of the Ko‘olau Loa SCP. Other PAC
      members believe the magnitude of the expansion is so significant, the spill over impacts        •   “Protect those cultural, social, and built resources that identify the sense of community
      to the North Shore validate the North Shore PAC taking a position.”                                 and rural quality of life for current residents and future generations.”

      The PAC does agree on two corollary issues related to the proposed Turtle Bay                   •   It was pointed out by the consultant that there may be a need to review a consideration of
      expansion: (1) the NS SCP should reflect concern about the spill over impacts that would            a definition of sustainability across all SCP areas for consistency. The sentiment of the
                                                                                                          PAC leaned toward an observation that each SCP area is unique and might need a more
                                                                                                          focused discussion of sustainability.
               Pacific Guardian Center x 733 Bishop Street, Suite 2590 x Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
                Tel. 808.545.2055 x Fax 808.545.2050 x www.hhf.com x e-mail: info@hhf.com
NS SCP PAC #5 Meeting Record                                                                      NS SCP PAC #5 Meeting Record
January 8, 2008                                                                                   January 8, 2008
Page 3 of 5                                                                                       Page 4 of 5

                                                                                                  •   Language in SCP regarding Kaena Point should be changed to read “Protect the natural
SCP Maps Proposed Revisions                                                                           resources of Kaena Point from potentially damaging vehicular traffic and rule out any
                                                                                                      proposal to construct a roadway around Kaena Point.” (p. 4-8, 1st bullet).
•   The wastewater icon in the vicinity of Paumalu should be removed from the SCP Land
    Use Map, as it was probably intended to support the former Lihi Lani project. This should     •   Possible to have a bypass lane for buses and vanpools? Is there room for this?
    be consistent with findings of the North Shore Wastewater Management Study in
    progress.                                                                                     •   Projected needs for police and other services are based on resident populations only.
                                                                                                      Need to add visitor numbers to this. Language in the updated SCP should read “Include
•   Some members objected to the Kealia Point proposal because they felt that the project             visitor population in determining allocations of resources and facilities for the North
    should be presented to the NS Neighborhood Board and Mokuleia Community                           Shore.” (p. 4-7, 3rd bullet). In addition, add the actual numbers of visitors and include the
    Association prior to consideration by the PAC.                                                    year the data is from (approximately 7,000 visitors per day, as of 2005).

Possible Revisions to Section 4 Public Facilities and Infrastructure                              •   The PAC is wary of saying they want to add capacity to Kamehameha Highway. The
                                                                                                      planned Kamehameha Highway Safety Improvements, Hale‘iwa to Kahalu‘u project
Kamehameha Highway                                                                                    (Project No. 9 2006-2015) is supported. Adding capacity for safety reasons is
                                                                                                      acceptable, but not for increasing the number of vehicles (and people) who could come to
•   Discussion about the impacts of additional cars; there is overwhelming anecdotal                  the NS. The North Shore has reached a “tipping point” in dealing with de facto
    information that documents the breakdown of the regional highway arterial under                   population. This is a fundamental assumption in looking at impacts of visitors to the
    conditions of stress. This no longer includes only days when the surf is large during the         North Shore, particularly if you compare the average number of daily visitors to the
    winter. It also includes weekend days throughout the year. Also, the situation has                resident population. Visitors increase de facto population by close to 40%.
    accelerated negatively in the last 2-3 years. Current conditions have reached a critical
    stage, especially when acknowledging that the highway has not been greatly improved           Water Systems
    since it was first built. The proposed Turtle Bay expansion will only exacerbate an
    already intolerable condition. It does not seem possible to add the expected amounts of       •   There is a desire to keep the water within the moku. This is currently expressed in the
    cars to the road.                                                                                 SCP and this language should be retained, and strengthened, if appropriate.

•   The group has concerns about how the gridlock on Kamehameha Highway impacts                   •   Sections 4.2 Water Systems and 4.3 Wastewater treatment need to be updated with
    emergency vehicles.                                                                               most current data.

•   Several roadway projects have not been implemented as it was assumed they would be.           Harbors
    Money has not yet been allocated for the projects.
                                                                                                  Paul Sensano provided the following information on Hale‘iwa Harbor:
•   Alternative transportation options should be a priority. Ideas include: pedestrian
    enhancement (walkways over and under highway); shuttle buses; circular bus routes;            •   The harbor has grown from 77 berths to 128 berths in the past 10 years, and there is a
    update of bus routes servicing the NS; a transit center in Hale‘iwa (a current concept City       large wait list for berths. Dry dock or dry land storage is needed to support harbor
    plan); encouraging bike plans (existing bike plan projects should be fast tracked);               facilities. The PAC feels that provision of dry docks should be included in the SCP.
    potentially prohibit tour buses at certain times from travelling on Kamehameha Highway;
    private enterprise (someone with a van that drives along and picks up and drops off           •   There are no plans to expand the harbor breakwater. Mid to long term, the current plan
    people--concern this would be regulated by the Public Utilities Commission).                      is to stay within the existing harbor footprint. Any additional slips must be accommodated
                                                                                                      within existing footprint.
•   Add language in Section 4.1.5, General Policies to provide for residents in evacuation
    situations and ensure emergency vehicles have access to and from the NS. Potential            •   Eight commercial operators are currently in the harbor. This is all that is allowed by
    language could be “Safety and emergency access roads are needed, including possibly               permit. This indicates the increasing demand for commercial use of Hale‘iwa Harbor.
    the following private roads: Cane Road behind Dillingham Ranch in Mokuleia and roads              However, the first priority for the harbor should be for recreational users, with a
    connecting with Drum Road including Cane Haul Road (Twin Bridge Road) in Haleiwa,                 continuing long waiting list for those users.
    Kawailoa Road, Ashley Road, Pupukea Road and Motocross/Kaunala Road.
    COMSAT/Girl Scout Camp (Paumalu) Road is for evacuation only as it doesn’t connect            •   There is a need for public restrooms, in Hale‘iwa as well as at the harbor.
    with Drum Road.”
                                                                                                  •   Need for more DOCARE officers to service the North Shore.
NS SCP PAC #5 Meeting Record
January 8, 2008
Page 5 of 5

•   Kaiaka park was previously considered as a site for additional harbor facilities as
    Hale‘iwa became too congested. It could still serve this function and revert to state
    management. However the mixed use of Kaiaka Bay nad Kaiaka Bay Park must be
    carefully studied by the State and the City because of adjoining current and future uses of
    Kaiaka Bay Park (City), Haleiwa Elementary School (State) and a suggested boat harbor
    (State) to satisfy the needs of the North Shore Community.

Other Comments/Questions

•   Ensure the NS SCP contains a general sentence somewhere that all laws and EIS
    requirements should be followed for all projects.

•   Transient accommodation tax (TAT): what portion of this tax is the NS getting? Scott
    Ezer to follow up with research on this and provide to the PAC.

    Follow up: TAT is covered under Chapter 237D, HRS. In Section 237D-6.5(b) (3), the
    statute addresses how the tax monies collected are to be distributed. 44.8% of total
    revenues are to be distributed to the counties. 44.1% of the 44.8% (or 10.2% of the total
    revenues collected) are to be distributed to the City and County of Honolulu. There are
    no apparent restrictions on spending the money for the counties. The language appears
    to mean that the monies are paid into the respective County’s general fund.

•   Ensure that section 4.4 has renewable energy language in it.

•   One perspective suggests that the city should concentrate on maintaining existing parks
    before acquiring land for new parks or developing others. Another perspective suggests
    that we should not pass up the opportunity to acquire new land for future parks; the land
    could be lost to other uses.

•   All PAC members who have SCP language additions or changes should e-mail the exact
    wording to Scott Ezer (sezer@hhf.com).

The next meeting will be a Community meeting, which will be targeted for sometime in mid-
late February 2008, time and place to be announced. (Subsequently, this date is now
targeted for mid-April). The community will be presented with what the PAC has been
discussing, with a chance for small group discussions. The next North Shore PAC meeting
will be held after the Community Meeting.

Meeting was adjourned about 9:15 pm.
                                                                                                       Meeting Agenda
                                                                                             • Ground Rules
                                                                                             • PAC Meeting #4 Follow-Up
                                                                                             • Definition of Sustainability
                                                                                             • Proposed SCP Map Revisions
                                                                                             • Public Facilities and Infrastructure
                                                                                               – Overview
                                                                                               – Possible Revisions
                                                                                             • Next Steps
                                          NORTH SHORE
                                        SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES PLAN
                                              FIVE-YEAR REVIEW
                                       Planning Advisory Committee #5 January 8, 2008
                                                                                                                                      2




    Ground Rules for PAC Meetings
PAC role and function
                                                                                                 PAC Meeting #4 Follow-Up
   – Represent various interests and opinions of the larger North
     Shore community
   – Serve as core advisory group to guide the planning process
                                                                                            • Draft meeting record sent via e-mail
PAC meeting objectives                                                                      • Any comments?
   – Discuss and propose changes at the PAC level prior to
     presentation / input from the larger community
Discussion protocol
   – Focus on regional issues
   – Allow PAC members to speak first
   – Public participation welcome: comment after PAC discussion
     and through other public input opportunities
   – Give everyone a chance to talk once before you speak twice
   – Keep it short and share the floor with others, stay on topic
   – All contributions are valuable
   – Always be respectful and courteous, despite differing opinions
                                                                                        3                                             4
                   Sustainability                                                Sustainable Development
                                                                            “Development which meets the needs of the
        SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT:                                            present without compromising the ability of
  A 2-WORD PHRASE WITH A 1,000 MEANINGS                                     future generations to meet their own needs.”
                                                                                            - Brundtland Commission, United Nations (1987)
                                                                       • Recognizes the relationships
 “Man everywhere is a disturbing agent.                                  between:
 Wherever he plants his foot, the harmonies of                             – Natural resources
                                                                                                                         Social Equity

 nature are turned to discords”                                            – economic prosperity
                                    - George Perkins Marsh, 1864           – social equity
                                                                       • Meshes the need to preserve,
                                                                                                                         Sustainable
 Metropolitan growth “is fast absorbing the rural                        enhance, and interrelate
                                                                         economic prosperity, the                                        Economic
 hinterland and threatening to wipe out many of                          integrity of natural
                                                                                                           Environment
                                                                                                                                         Prosperity
 the natural elements favorable to life…”                                ecosystems, and social equity
                                          - Lewis Mumford, 1956

                                                                   5                                                                                  6




            Sustainability Context                                              Sustainable Development
“Sustainability implies….a vastly reduced energy budget for
cities and a smaller, more compact urban pattern interspersed
with productive areas to collect energy, grow crops for food,           New Development Terms
fiber, and energy, and recycle wastes…”                                 •    Smart Growth
“Sustainable communities acknowledge environmental                      •    New Urbanism
constraints – from limited groundwater and wetlands to global
                                                                        •    Traditional Neighborhood Development
climate change…”
                                                                        •    Green Development
“Sustainable communities work within physical and biological
limits”
                                                                        •    Low Impact Design

“Economic and social changes that promote human prosperity
and quality of life without causing ecological or social
damage”

                                                                   7                                                                                  8
   Draft Hawai‘i 2050 Sustainability Plan                                               Guiding Principles of Sustainability
                            (October 2007)                                              (Draft Hawai‘i 2050 Sustainability Plan, October 2007)
                                                                                        •   Our sustainability goals, actions and measurements are
   “Sustainability in Hawai‘i means achieving a                                             guided by balancing economic prosperity, community and
                                                                                            social well-being and environmental stewardship
   quality of life that:                                                                •   We respect and live within the natural resources and limits of
        – Respects the culture, character, beauty and                                       our islands
          history of our state’s island communities                                     •   Sustainability cannot occur without a strong, diversified and
                                                                                            dynamic economy
        – Strikes a balance between economic prosperity,                                •   Our cultural traditions, history and sense of place are
          social and community well-being, and                                              honored
          environmental stewardship                                                     •   We make decisions based on meeting the present needs
                                                                                            without compromising the needs of future generations
        – Meets the needs of the present without
                                                                                        •   The traditional values and principles of the ahupua‘a system
          compromising the ability of future generations to                                 guide how we manage our resources and behaviors
          meet their own needs”
                                                                                        •   Everyone — individuals, families, communities, businesses
                                                                                            and government — has a responsibility for achieving a
                                                                                            sustainable Hawai‘i
                                                                                 9                                                                                       10




    SCP Land Use Map Proposed Revisions                                                SCP Open Space Map Proposed Revisions
                                    • Change “Rural Residential,” and “Rural”                                               • Change “Rural Communities” at Pupukea to
Existing SCP Land Use Map             designations at Pupukea to “Agriculture”                                                “Agriculture”
                                    • Move Rural Community Boundary makai of                                                • Move Rural Community Boundary makai of
                                      proposed “Agriculture” area                     Existing SCP Open Space Map             proposed “Agriculture” area

                                   Proposed SCP Land Use Map                                                                Proposed SCP Open Space Map




                                                                                 11                                                                                      12
   SCP Public Facilities Map Proposed Revisions                                                       Kealia Point Amendment Proposal
                                                 • Change “Rural Communities” at Pupukea to
Existing SCP Public Facilities Map                 “Agriculture”                                                                                • TMK parcels 6-8-002:010
                                                 • Move Rural Community Boundary makai of                                                         and 014 (5.6 and 7.5 acres,
                                                   proposed “Agriculture” area                                                                    respectively)
                                                                                                                                                • State Agricultural District
                                                                                                                                                • P-2 Preservation Zoning




                                                                                              13                                                                                14




SCP Vision Elements (Public Facilities & Infrastructure)                                                   Vision Elements Questionnaire
“Enhance the Region’s Recreational
 and Educational Potential”                       • Use of Best Management Practices
                                                                                                                     Responses
                                                    minimizes soil erosion from
  • Improve park facilities and expand              agricultural lands                             “Enhance the Region’s Recreational and Educational Potential”
    beach parks when feasible; make
    maintenance and improvements to               • An adequate circulation network for             • 90% (58) agreed or strongly agreed with vision element
    existing beach parks and additional             all modes of transportation                     • 8% (5) disagreed or strongly disagreed with vision element
    access to the shoreline a priority              (roadways, transit, bikeways and
                                                    pedestrian paths) links the region              • 2% (1) did not respond
“Provide Adequate Public
 Infrastructure, Facilities and Services”         • Other priority needs include retention         “Provide Adequate Public Infrastructure, Facilities and
                                                    of Waialua Public Library and
  • Infrastructure does not detract from            maintenance of existing parks
                                                                                                    Services”
    scenic amenities, recreational                                                                  • 93% (60) agreed or strongly agreed with the vision element
    opportunities, open space or other            • Proven alternative energy sources,
    amenities                                       including solar, are encouraged                 • 5% (3) disagreed or strongly disagreed with the vision element
  • New major facilities are centrally located    “Adapt the Ahupua‘a Concept in                    • 2% (1) did not respond
  • Adequate, environmentally sensitive            Land Use & Natural Resource
    wastewater treatment systems have              Management”
                                                                                                   “Adapt the Ahupua‘a Concept in Land Use and Natural
    minimal impact on groundwater and                                                               Resource Management”
    ocean resources                               • Planning and implementation of land
                                                    use decisions and land-based actions            • 89% (57) agreed or strongly agreed with the vision element
  • Improved drainage controls mitigate
                                                    consider the effects on coastal                 • 5% (3) disagreed or strongly disagreed with the vision element
    storm runoff and flood hazards;
    adequate drainage infrastructure                waters and the nearshore
    ensures continuous runoff                       environment                                     • 6% (4) did not respond
                                                                                              15                                                                                16
                      Community Concerns                                     Community Concerns
General Infrastructure Issues
• More funding desired for North Shore improvements
                                                                  Water Systems
• Need better cooperation and coordination between
                                                                  • Upgrade Mokul ‘ia’s existing water distribution system
  private landowners and government agencies                      • Protect North Shore aquifers and watersheds
Transportation Systems                                            • Incorporate BWS North Shore Watershed Management
• Existing capacity, condition, safety and traffic on               Plan (pending)
  highway is unsatisfactory                                       Wastewater Treatment
   – Resolve traffic congestion and bottlenecks
     (Pupukea, Waimea Bay, Laniakea)                              • Replace existing wastewater treatment systems and
   – Complete Waimea rockfall mitigation                            protect coastal water quality
   – Keep Kamehameha Highway two lanes                            • Incorporate North Shore Regional Wastewater
   – Limit new development until highway capacity is                Alternatives Plan (ongoing)
     clearly understood
   – Address highway condition during storms and surf             Drainage and Flooding
   – Lack of beach parking impacts highway traffic
   – Need regional emergency bypass roads                         • Need infrastructure to correct existing drainage and
• Improve alternative transportation systems                        flooding problems across the region
   – Bikeway between Waimea Bay and Waialua                       • Address potential flood hazards in Waialua and Hale‘iwa
   – Pedestrian facilities in Hale‘iwa and Waialua                • Waialua-Kaiaka Bay Watershed Study remains unfunded
   – Hale‘iwa – Turtle Bay Trolley System
                                                             17                                                               18




                 Community Concerns                               Public Infrastructure Map Symbols
  Public Safety Facilities
  • Increased police presence (more staffing)
  • Waialua fire station replacement
  • Water tanker near communities needing better fire
    protection
  • Additional water reservoirs to support fire fighting
    capability
  • Emergency response units at Sunset Beach
  • Emergency shelters outside of flood plain that can
    accommodate the existing population
  Parks / Recreational Facilities
  • Improved facilities (restrooms and parking) and better
    maintenance
  • Concern about the increasing number of visitors using
    the beach parks
                                                             19                                                               20
                                                                                             1
        Kamehameha Highway Baseline                                                                                   Proposed Turtle Bay Expansion
DOT Traffic Counts – February 2003 (Weekday)                                                                              Traffic Impact Analysis
  –    Taken north of Hale‘iwa Bypass/Kamehameha Hwy Intersection
                                                                                                                                                                                          • Year 2028 Scenario assumes
  –    14,685 total vehicles per day                                                                                                                                                        full build-out
                                                                                                                                   Total       Vehicles/Hour        Vehicles/Hour
                                                                                                                 2005
  –    950 vehicles/hour (VPH) during AM weekday peak hour (11-12)                                                                Vehicles    Entering the Site    Exiting the Site           – 2,500 new hotel rooms
                                                                                                           AM Peak Hour            1,063             755                  308                 – 1,000 recreational homes
  –    1,268 VPH during PM weekday peak hour (315-415 pm)                                                  PM Peak Hour            1,822             776                 1,046                – 48-acre beach park

Kawailoa Beach Park Field Counts – May 2005 (Saturday)                                                     Saturday Peak Hour      2,065            1,124                 930
                                                                                                                                                                                       Proposed Roadway Improvements1
                                                                                                                  1985
  – 1,607 VPH (715 westbound, 892 eastbound) during peak hour                                              PM Peak Hour                                                                • Construct the West Kuilima Drive
                                                                                                                                    977              475                 502
                                                                                                                                                                                         (Alpha Road) and Kamehameha
2010 Projections (based on DOT traffic count data)                                                         Saturday Peak Hour       910              417                 493             Highway intersection
  – Highway traffic projected to increase 3.28% annually                                                                                                                               • Construct improvements including
                                                                                                                                                                                         left turn storage and deceleration
  – 1,870 VPH (832 westbound, 1,038 eastbound) during Saturday peak                                                                                                                      lanes on Kamehameha Highway
    hour                                                                                                                                                                                 at Kuilima Drive and Marconi
                                                                                                                                                                                         Road
  – LOS “E”, V/C ratio increase to 0.60                                                                                                                                                • Signalize Kuilima Drive, West
                                                                                                              Source: 2005: Proposed Turtle Bay Resort Master Plan
 2000 Kawailoa Traffic Projections (forecast in 1985)                                                                 Traffic Impact Analysis Report Update, September                   Kuilima Drive (Alpha Road), and
                                                                                                                                                                                         Marconi Road intersections with
                                                                                                                      2005
                                                                                                                                                                                         Kamehameha Highway
 í13,400 vehicles per weekday; 17,996 vehicles per Saturday                                                          1985: Kuilima Resort Expansion Revised EIS,
                                                                                                                     Group 70 International (Austin Tsutsumi                           • Construct bus turnouts along
                                                                                                                                                                                         Kamehameha Highway fronting
 í1,080 VPH peak weekday; 1,511 VPH peak Saturday                                                                    Associates)
                                                                                                                                                                                         the resort
 1                                                                                                                                                                                      1 Source: Turtle Bay Resort Roadway
     2000 Data from 1985 Kuilima Expansion Revised EIS, All other data reported from Kawailoa Beach                                                                                      Improvements Implementation and Phasing
     Park Improvements Traffic Assessment Report, August 2005                                                                                                                            Plan, November 2005

                                                                                                      21                                                                                                                           22




Existing and Proposed Bicycle Facilities                                                                     Ongoing or Proposed Roadway Projects
                                                                                                              Federal Projects
                                                Existing bike facilities include:                             • Drum Road Rehabilitation from Helemano to Kahuku scheduled for
                                                1. Ke Ala Pupukea Bike Path                                     completion in 2008
                                                2. Hale‘iwa Bypass Signed Shared Roadway                      State Projects                                                   No future highway capacity
                                                                                                                                                                               improvements identified for the North
                                                                                                              • $1.2 million allocated for Laniakea                            Shore in the ORTP 2030
                                                                                                                Bypass environmental study
                                                                                     Inset
                                                                                                              • Funding for Waimea rockfall mitigation pending
                                                                                                              • Kamehameha Highway Safety Improvements,
                                                                                                                Hale‘iwa to Kahalu‘u (Project No. 9, 2006-2015
                                                                                                                timeframe (O‘ahu Regional Transportation Plan 2030)
                                                                          Inset
                                                                                                              City Projects
                                                                                                              • Waialua Beach Road street and bikepath
                                                                                                                lighting improvements (FY 06) pending
                                                                                                                construction
                                                                                                              • Pupukea Road rockslide potential inspections and improvements
                                                                                                                ongoing (FY 06)
                                                                                                              • Guardrail Improvements at Waialua Beach Road, Alapio Road,
                                               Source: Bike Plan Hawai‘i 2003                                   Pupukea Road and Hale‘iwa Road ongoing (FY 06)
                                                                                                              • Hale‘iwa sidewalk construction cancelled
                                                                                                      23                                                                                                                           24
    Section 4.1 Transportation Systems                                                      Section 4.2 Water Systems
                                                                                 • Year 2000 water demand = 2.8 mgd
    Includes roadways, transit (bus service),                                    • Year 2030 projected demand = 3.4 mgd
      bikeways, airports and harbors                                             • Ongoing or Proposed Projects
    Possible revisions or additions?                                                – BWS Six-Year Capital Improvement Program (FY2007-2012)
                                                                                         • Kamehameha Highway-Sunset Beach 16-inch main (Paumalu Stream
    • Address current highway capacity concerns and                                        to Kaunala Street and Kahae Road to Pupukea Road)
      potential impacts of the proposed Turtle Bay                                       • About 8 miles of waterline replacement projects
      expansion?
                                                                                    – Mokul ‘ia Water System Feasibility Study funded (FY08)
    • Identify priority improvement projects?
                                                                                 • Possible Revisions and Additions?
    • Strengthen guidance for regional emergency access                             – Incorporate BWS North Shore Watershed Management Plan
      road?                                                                           (2007); BWS long-range plans for water development are not to
    • Any others?                                                                     export water
                                                                                    – Include language to address condition of existing water distribution
                                                                                      systems?                    2005 Sustainable Yield (million gallons per day)
                                                                                                                              Sustainable     Water use     Unallocated
                                                                                    – Any others?                 Aquifer      Yield (SY) Permits Issued        SY
                                                                                                                          Mokul ‘ia           12          8.3         3.7
                                                                                                                          Waialua             40         30.3         9.7
                                                                                                                          Kawailoa            39          1.5        37.5
                                                                                                                          TOTAL               91         40.1        50.9
                                                                            25                                            Source: O‘ahu Water Management Plan Overview, BWS   26




      Section 4.3 Wastewater Treatment                                                  Section 4.6 Drainage Systems
                                                                                 • Hale‘iwa Road Drainage
Ongoing or Proposed Projects                                                       Improvements Engineering
•   North Shore Regional Wastewater                                                Study Completed (2003)
    Alternatives Plan ongoing
Possible Revisions or Additions?
                                                                                 • Ongoing or Proposed Projects
                                                                                   – Kaukonahua Stream Dredging
•   Maintain reference to subregional                              Future            (planning and design)
    wastewater treatment plants located in                         WWTP
    Waialua, Haleiwa and Sunset Beach?                                             – Kiikii-Kaukonahua Stream Dredging
                                                                                     (planning)
•   Any others?
                                                                                   – Kaiaka Bay Watershed Demonstration
                                                                                     Project (ongoing)
                                                          Future                   – Waialua-Kaiaka Watershed Restoration
                                                          WWTP                       Study (pending Federal funding)
                                                                                 • Possible revisions or additions?
                                                                                   – Add policy to address coastal water
                                                                                     quality?
                                                                                   – Strengthen language requiring
                                                                                     infrastructure improvements (eg. dams)
                                               Existing
                                               WWTP                                  and maintenance of existing
                                                                                     infrastructure?
                                      Future                                       – Any others?
                                      WWTP
                                                                            27                                                                                                28
  Section 3.3 Parks and Recreation                                                HHF Contact Information
Ongoing or Proposed Projects
• Mokul ‘ia Beach Park Water       • Ka Waena Beach Lifeguard
  Main Service                       Tower Replacements                    •   Email: sezer@hhf.com
• Waialua District Park Gym        • Banzai Rock Beach Support Park
  Renovations                                                              •   Phone: 545-2055
                                   • Sunset Beach Recreation Center
• Hale‘iwa Ali‘i Beach Park John
  Kalili Surf Center Renovation
                                     Improvements                          •   Fax: 545-2050
                                   • Velzyland Lifeguard Tower
• Hale‘iwa Beach Park Erosion
  Study
                                     Replacement                           •   Mail: 733 Bishop Street, Suite 2590
                                   • Waialee Beach Park Master Plan
• Kawailoa Beach Master Plan                                                         Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96813
  (Chun’s Reef)
Possible revisions or additions?
• Add policy for “long-term development of a public
  golf course” for consistency with the Vision for the
  Future?
• Any others?
                                                                      29                                             30
                                                                                                    Helber Hastert & Fee
Helber Hastert & Fee                                                                                Planners, Inc.
Planners, Inc.
                                                                                                    NS SCP PAC #6 Meeting Record
                                                                                                    May 28, 2008
                                                                                                    Page 2 of 4

                                                                                                                o    An inn in Hale‘iwa honors the heritage of the town.
June 24, 2008
                                                                                                                o    The illegal rentals in the community are such a problem that it’s important to
MEETING SUMMARY
                                                                                                                     have an option to accommodate people in something other than a resort.
To:                    North Shore Sustainable Communities Plan Five-Year Review Project File
                                                                                                                o    The Hale‘iwa Town Plan calls for a small country inn.
From:                  Rachael Edinger
                                                                                                                o    Revised SCP language should delete the language that stipulates an inn
Subject:               Planning Advisory Committee Meeting No. 6                                                     should be limited to 40 rooms, and instead, let the market decide what the
                       May 28, 2008, 6:30 – 8:00 pm                                                                  size will be. Also, cottages and bungalows should be allowed.

                                                                                                                o    The intent is to not allow a huge structure, and the language of the SCP
PAC Attendees: Marianne Abrigo, Dianne Anderson, Dave Bramlett, Jerry Driscoll, Kalani
                                                                                                                     should clarify this point.
                 Fronda, Josh Heimowitz, Lisa Izumi, Bob Leinau, Gerry Meade, Antya
                 Miller, Dan Nellis, Jacob Ng, Kathleen Pahinui, Carol Phillips, Stew Ring,
                 Martha Smith                                                                                   o    Want it to make sense for the community; e.g., a plan that will enable a good
                                                                                                                     project
Other Attendees: Reed Matsuura, Councilmember Dela Cruz’s Office
DPP Attendees: Ray Young, DPP Project Manager, Bonnie Arakawa, Chief, Community
                                                                                                    •   It was pointed out by Scott Ezer that there are currently no land use mechanisms to allow
                 Planning Branch, DPP
                                                                                                        an inn in Hale‘iwa. Options for zoning controls would be to: zone it ‘resort’; or treat is as
HHF Attendees: Scott Ezer, Rachael Edinger
                                                                                                        a conditional permit with set criteria and standards.
The sixth Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) Meeting for the North Shore (NS) Sustainable
                                                                                                    •   Need to look at who was at the community meeting, what their interests were, who they
Communities Plan (SCP) Five-year Review Project was held on Wednesday, May 28, 2008
                                                                                                        represented in the community. Why were they in support of an inn? Would they benefit
at the Waialua Community Association Cottage #2. The primary purpose of the meeting was
                                                                                                        from an Inn?
to discuss subjects where there appears to be a difference between the direction the PAC
has suggested for revisions to the SCP, and comments received at the Community Meeting
No. 2 (CM #2) held on April 15, 2008. One week prior to the PAC meeting, PAC members                •   Some PAC members were worried about the precedent that would be set by allowing the
                                                                                                        inn, and therefore felt that restrictive language regarding inns needs to be in the SCP.
were e-mailed information to be discussed, which included the Community Meeting #2
summary, and a matrix of all comments received during the breakout group discussions
                                                                                                    •   Some PAC members were concerned that the location of the proposed inn suggested by
showing which subjects varied between the PAC and those discussed in CM # 2. The
                                                                                                        the Waialua Town Master Plan at Kaiaka Point was inappropriate and should instead be
PowerPoint presentation from the Community Meeting was also included in the meeting
summary.                                                                                                located in the town district. Waialua has less commercial activity than Hale‘iwa and
                                                                                                        doesn’t have the history of an inn that Hale‘iwa does. In addition, unlike Hale‘iwa,
                                                                                                        Waialua does not have special district regulations, and therefore there are no design
Scott Ezer convened the meeting at 6:30. The meeting discussion is summarized as follows.
                                                                                                        rules that govern development in Waialua.
Delete Small-Scale Inns from Hale‘iwa and Waialua Towns
Comments received at CM #2 indicated opposition to the proposed changes by the PAC                  •   Even though the Waialua Town Plan talks about an inn, it is important to take this in
(deletion of small-scale inns in the SCP). Those who attended CM#2 expressed their desire               context - the plan is economically-driven (rather than design oriented). The inn idea was
                                                                                                        one possibility of what could revitalize Waialua.
to continue to provide for opportunities for a small-scale inn in Hale‘iwa and Waialua Towns.
Many participants suggested that the market should determine whether or not such facilities
                                                                                                    •   Some PAC members would reluctantly support leaving language in the SCP regarding
are built.
                                                                                                        inns, but there needs to be language saying ‘no resort zoning’ and acknowledgement that
•     Antya Miller had e-mailed suggested SCP language relating to small-scale inns that could          the Waialua inn is for economic reasons.
      address the concerns expressed by the community. Since not all PAC members had
                                                                                                    •   There was a general consensus among the PAC to drop reference to a small-scale inn in
      received it, she summarized her position:
                                                                                                        Waialua.


                 Pacific Guardian Center x 733 Bishop Street, Suite 2590 x Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
                  Tel. 808.545.2055 x Fax 808.545.2050 x www.hhf.com x e-mail: info@hhf.com
Helber Hastert & Fee                                                                              Helber Hastert & Fee
Planners, Inc.                                                                                    Planners, Inc.

NS SCP PAC #6 Meeting Record                                                                      NS SCP PAC #6 Meeting Record
May 28, 2008                                                                                      May 28, 2008
Page 3 of 4                                                                                       Page 4 of 4

•   One PAC member expressed a desire to hear about what the youth of the community                  rural community commercial center is a small cluster of commercial and service
    think. The PAC needs to consider what jobs might be available for future workers as they         businesses which service primarily the immediate community…” (p.3-54).
    grow up, and how to get them to come back or provide opportunities for them to stay in        Other Comments/Questions
    their community.
                                                                                                  •   Make sure the SCP language on park maintenance is strengthened.
•   It was pointed out that many at the Community Meeting may have been so adamant
    about keeping in the language allowing for an inn, in reaction to the problem regarding       •   SCP should acknowledge Haleiwa Town Plan.
    the explosion of illegal vacation units in the region.
                                                                                                  •   Overall the language of the SCP should be strong, take out all of the ‘should’ and replace
•   Perhaps “rooms” is not the correct unit to measure density for the inn. Instead, we could         with ‘shall’—this was put in during the original writing of the SCP, and was subsequently
    use square footage, or something else. The Backpackers Inn can accommodate 125                    taken out by the planning commission. Would like to at least try again, and if it is taken
    people, but you don’t really notice this number of people; this facility seems to blend in        out, the PAC would see where this was done.
    well with its neighborhood.
                                                                                                  The next steps are to incorporate the revisions to the SCP language that’s been discussed in
•   A 40-room inn is not going to affect the large quantity of people who want to stay on the     the PAC and community meetings. The draft plan will be reviewed by the City and
    North Shore. Illegal vacation units are in the 100’s; so one inn won’t take care of all of    distributed to the PAC for review, and followed by meetings with the Community and the
    the demand. By comparison, Koele Lodge on Lanai has 102 rooms.                                Neighborhood Board.

•   Need SCP language to be “brutally” clear, so that DPP can easily enforce it.                  Meeting was adjourned about 8:00 pm.

•   Modify SCP language to address differences between Waialua and Haleiwa (esp. lot
    sizes).

•   Bungalows are troublesome for reasons related to security and enforcement.

Overall the PAC was not in full agreement concerning the exact SCP language for inns.
Those who were initially opposed to any mention of an inn in the revised SCP agreed that
they could live with the language currently in the SCP, as long as it also includes language
that precludes resort zoning, the limit on size remains, and reference to cottages and
bungalows is not included.

Rural Community Commercial Center (RCCC)
Some comments received during the Community meeting suggested letting the market
decide the size and form of development at the RCCC.

•   HHF mentioned that historically, B-1 Neighborhood Business District zoning build-out
    densities were one-half of that permitted by code.

•   The existing SCP language is clear, and says the RCCC should attract visitors and
    residents, and there are specific guidelines presented for building form; this should allay
    the community’s concerns.

•   To clarify and strengthen the paragraph, it was suggested to move the last sentence of
    the paragraph to the first sentence so that the paragraph starts “The area between
    Foodland market and the adjacent commercially zoned properties between Pupukea
    Road and Pahoa Road is designated as a Rural Community Commercial Center. The
    Helber Hastert & Fee                                                                      Helber Hastert & Fee
    Planners, Inc.                                                                            Planners, Inc.

                                                                                              NS SCP PAC #7 Meeting Record
                                                                                              October 8, 2008
                                                                                              Page 2 of 5
October 21, 2008
                                                                                              x   Incorporating concepts of sustainability
MEETING SUMMARY
                                                                                              x   Accepting the landowners proposal to change the land use designation at Kealia Point
To:                  North Shore Sustainable Communities Plan Five-Year Review Project File       from Preservation to Agriculture

From:                Corlyn Orr                                                               NS SCP Revision Process/Schedule

Subject:             Planning Advisory Committee Meeting No. 7                                Scott presented DPP’s proposed schedule:
                     October 8, 2008, 6:30 – 8:30 pm
                                                                                                  o    The PAC and DPP would review the Preliminary Draft concurrently, with all
PAC Attendees: Marianne Abrigo, Jeff Alameida, Dianne Anderson, Dave Bramlett,                         comments due in writing by October 20.
                 Jerry Driscoll, Kalani Fronda, Josh Heimowitz, Antya Miller, Dan Nellis,         o    HHF would review comments and prepare the Public Review Draft of the revised
                 Jacob Ng, Kathleen Pahinui, Carol Phillips, Stew Ring                                 North Shore Sustainable Communities Plan for publication on November 1.
Other Attendees: Reed Matsuura, Councilmember Dela Cruz’s Office                                  o    Community Meeting #3 presenting the Public Review Draft tentatively scheduled for
DPP Attendees: Ray Young - Project Manager, Bonnie Arakawa - Community Planning                        November 18.
                 Branch Chief, Kathy Sokugawa – Planning Division Head                            o    HHF would then prepare final draft of the revised North Shore Sustainable
HHF Attendees: Scott Ezer, Corlyn Orr                                                                  Communities Plan for Planning Commission review.

The seventh Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) Meeting for the North Shore (NS)                PAC members raised two concerns with the proposed schedule:
Sustainable Communities Plan (SCP) Five-year Review Project was held on Wednesday,
October 8, 2008 at the Waialua Community Association Cottage #2. The primary purpose of           o    Process does not allow PAC enough time to review the draft and consider proposed
the meeting was to answer questions and receive comments on the Preliminary Public                     individual revisions and/or comments as a group. PAC would like the opportunity to
Review Draft Revised North Shore Sustainable Communities Plan (referred to as                          review comments from other PAC members, and come together as a group to
“Preliminary Draft”). An electronic copy of the Preliminary Draft was distributed to PAC               discuss revisions/comments. It is important to the PAC that the Public Review Draft
members via email on October 1, 2008.                                                                  reflects the group’s consensus.
                                                                                                  o    The City Planning Team’s (DPP and HHF) proposal for concurrent review limits the
Scott Ezer convened the meeting at 6:30. The meeting discussion is summarized as follows.              PAC’s ability to influence the document. The PAC is concerned that DPP’s position
                                                                                                       on various provisions of the Public Review Draft may be contrary to those of the PAC,
Summary of Major Proposed Revisions                                                                    and that the Public Review Draft will not be an accurate portrayal of the community’s
                                                                                                       sentiment, as represented by the PAC. It is important to PAC members that they are
Scott opened with an overview of the major proposed revisions, as summarized at                        able to review DPP comments and see the rationale for any DPP revisions to the
Community Meeting #2. Major proposed revisions include:                                                Preliminary Draft. Citing their past experience with the preparation and review of the
                                                                                                       original NS SCP, the PAC would like the opportunity to present the City administration
                                                                                                       with a draft that fully represents the community’s sentiment.
x     Language that addresses Turtle Bay Resort expansion and its impacts on North Shore
      infrastructure
                                                                                              The PAC proposed that they be allowed to review/comment on the Preliminary Draft before
x     Strengthening the description of the Rural Community Commercial Center to ensure that
                                                                                              DPP review. DPP would then receive and comment on the “community’s” version of the
      development proposals service the immediate community, are limited in size and scope
                                                                                              Preliminary Draft, before publishing the Public Review Draft. This two-phase review process
x     New language to control illegal visitor units                                           would enable the PAC to see DPP’s changes and their rationale for the changes, and make
x     Stronger language (from “discourage” to “prohibit”) regarding the conversion of         the review process more transparent. It would be acceptable for DPP to makes changes to
      agricultural land to “fake farms”                                                       the document, as long as the PAC has their own chance at the document. This would help
x     Removing Pupukea-Paumalu property from Rural Community Boundary area                    to address the PAC’s fear that their proposals and concerns may not be accurately
x     Support for emergency by-pass road and evacuation routes across the SCP area            represented before the Planning Commission and City Council.
x     Deleting small-scale inns from Waialua Town
x     Incorporating most of Waialua Town Master Plan recommendations
x     Incorporating references to the North Shore Wastewater Management Plan and North
      Shore Watershed Management Plan
Helber Hastert & Fee                                                                            Helber Hastert & Fee
Planners, Inc.                                                                                  Planners, Inc.

NS SCP PAC #7 Meeting Record                                                                    NS SCP PAC #7 Meeting Record
October 8, 2008                                                                                 October 8, 2008
Page 3 of 5                                                                                     Page 4 of 5


It was agreed that:                                                                             North Shore Sustainable Communities Plan
                                                                                                Planning Advisory Committee #7
    o    Written comments on the Preliminary Draft (from both the PAC and DPP) are              October 8, 2008
         due to HHF by October 20. Comments not submitted by the deadline will not be           Original Notes – transcribed at the meeting
                                                                                                (page 1)
         considered.
                                                                                                    x    Suggest using language in the 1st policy under 3.71 for Section 3.6.2.1, relating to industrial uses
    o    Following the October 20 comment deadline, HHF would compile the PAC’s
         comments and distribute to all PAC members for their review.                               x    Haleiwa Mauka Park – not shown as existing or future on land use maps; project has been eliminated

    o    HHF would convene PAC meeting #8 (targeting the last week of October) to discuss           x    Page 2-9: appreciate having low impact development reference
         and resolve the PAC comments on the Preliminary Draft, if necessary.
                                                                                                    x    Suggestion to incorporate language from the Waianae SCP re. rural subdivision standards (per Stew
    o    HHF would prepare a Revised Preliminary Draft based on the outcomes of PAC                      Ring handout), maybe on page 3-39 line 16-19 or wherever it fits best.
         Meeting #8, and submit to DPP for review. DPP would then review and comment on
         the PAC’s Revised Preliminary Draft, and direct HHF on the preparation of the Public       x    Page 5-4, last line of section 5.5: would like to see EIS required for significant zone change. HHF to
         Review Draft to incorporate the PAC’s proposed revisions as may be deemed                       clarify language. It was suggested that “or an EIS, if required” be added to the end of the sentence.
         appropriate by DPP.
                                                                                                    x    In general,, when appropriate, change “should” to “shall”
    o    After receiving DPP’s comments, HHF would circulate DPP’s comments to the PAC,
                                                                                                    x    Strengthen language about ag land and fake farms. Current draft does not solve the problem. Need to
         along with electronic copy of the Public Review Draft. A ninth PAC meeting would                be more specific about what defines ag (eg. Does having 20 cows define ranching?). There is a lack of
         follow if the PAC was dissatisfied with DPP’s revisions and the Public Review Draft.            enforcement because inspectors are unable to enforce current ag. laws (because of how they’re written)

    o    HHF would distribute copies of the Public Review Draft to the public for comments          x    City Council AG Task Force looking at proposals to address fake farms. DPP to provide language to
         only after the PAC had a chance to review.                                                      strengthen AG section.

PAC Comments on the Preliminary Draft                                                               x    Residential section: would like to see number of units. Also need to specify that it’s a mix of housing to
                                                                                                         meet various economic needs. Proposes limit of 400 units for Haleiwa, change “400-500 new homes”
(see attached pages)                                                                                     to “units”. Also want to have language that ensures adequate infrastructure is in place when units are
                                                                                                         developed (need to review Section 4., page 4-1)
Meeting was adjourned about 8:40 pm.
                                                                                                    x    Page 4-13, line 6, change “discourage” to “prohibit”

                                                                                                    x    Page 3-8, lines 13-17: add “and shoreline beaches”

                                                                                                    x    Page 3-6, lines 16-20: add “dogs, cats and rats”

                                                                                                    x    Page 3-61, lines 17-18: Suggest deleting “40 rooms” (although this needs to confirmed with the PAC).
                                                                                                         Clarify Plan to say that there should only be one inn in Haleiwa.

                                                                                                    x    Add language to Parks and Rec section to note need for parking at park facilities.

                                                                                                    x    Section 3.5: want to add anecdotal data about tourism influx. 51% of all tourists visit North Shore;
                                                                                                         about 7,000 visitors per day – see 2005/2006 DBEDT Tourism Study

                                                                                                    x    Visitor Accommodations: make it clear that B&B and vacation rentals are no go until current situation
                                                                                                         is enforced.
Helber Hastert & Fee
Planners, Inc.

NS SCP PAC #7 Meeting Record
October 8, 2008
Page 5 of 5


North Shore Sustainable Communities Plan
Planning Advisory Committee #7
October 8, 2008
Original Notes – transcribed at the meeting
(page 2)

    x    Page 2-9, line 44: need to clarify rural streetscape design – want to add wider street skirts

    x    No specific reference to limiting the need for nighttime lighting in the Plan

    x    Page 2-12, line 28: add “Identify and provide protection for residents from flooding and other natural
         disasters”

    x    Page 3-30, line 29: delete Aweoweo Beach Park, not large enough to expand

    x    Page 3-10, line 5: add Waialua Lotus Fields to wetlands; near Wailua Beach Road/Haleiwa Beach Road
         intersection

    x    Page 4-3, line 9: need to better define Kamehameha Highway realignment

    x    KS’s Papailoa residential proposal would be inconsistent with the current density in the area, based on
         the proposed guidelines for Rural Residential.

    x    Considering the deteriorating condition of Hale‘iwa Beach Park shoreline, Plan needs to include
         language about the impacts of hardened shorelines and the need to accommodate natural erosion
         processes and shoreline retreat.
 Helber Hastert & Fee                                                                             Helber Hastert & Fee
 Planners, Inc.                                                                                   Planners, Inc.

                                                                                                  NS SCP PAC #8 Meeting Record
                                                                                                  November 17, 2009
November 24, 2009                                                                                 Page 2 of 4

MEETING SUMMARY                                                                                       x    Added language regarding the importance of rural standards for residential subdivisions
                                                                                                      x    Clarified intent of Rural Community Commercial Center
To:               North Shore Sustainable Communities Plan (NS SCP) Five-Year Review                  x    Specified number of new housing units in Hale‘iwa town
                  Project File                                                                        x    Expanded preferred uses in Waialua Town industrial area
                                                                                                      x    Added language about the number of tourists visiting the North Shore
From:             Corlyn Orr                                                                          x    Added statement about the need to address illegal vacation rentals
                                                                                                      x    Removed reference to the country inn in Waialua, clarified desire for one country inn in
Subject:          Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) Meeting No. 8                                          Hale‘iwa, and added statement that “resort zoning is not appropriate”
                  November 17, 2009, 6:30 – 7:45 pm                                                   x    Added statement that there be no further expansion of resort accommodations at Turtle
                                                                                                           Bay, primarily because of spillover impacts to the North Shore SCP area
PAC Attendees: Marianne Abrigo, Dave Bramlett, Jerry Driscoll, Kalani Fronda,                         x    Added statement of support for a Laniakea bypass or Kamehameha Highway
                 Brian Griffiths, Laura Kodama, Bob Leinau, Antya Miller, Dan Nellis, Kathleen             realignment, to reduce impediments to traffic flow
                 Pahinui, Carol Phillips, Stew Ring, Gil Riviere                                      x    Clarified desire to maintain Kamehameha Highway as a two-lane highway
Other Attendees: Reed Matsuura, Councilmember Dela Cruz’s Office                                      x    Added language about the need for secondary access
                 Dean Minakami, Castle & Cooke
DPP Attendees: Ray Young, Project Manager                                                         DPP Revisions
                 Bonnie Arakawa, Community Planning Branch                                          x Added discussion explaining how the concept of “sustainability” relates to the City’s
                 Kathy Sokugawa, Planning Division Chief                                               planning system and the DP/SCPs
HHF Attendees: Scott Ezer, Corlyn Orr                                                               x Updated population and housing projections using 2035 as the planning horizon
                                                                                                    x Updated housing statistics using 2009 data
The eighth PAC Meeting for the North Shore (NS) Sustainable Communities Plan (SCP) Five-
                                                                                                    x Rewrote key vision elements to be active statements from the perspective of the year
Year Review Project was held on Tuesday, November 17, 2009 at the Waialua Community
                                                                                                       2035 (e.g., changed “Retention of cultural and historic resources” to “Preserve and
Association Cottage #2. The primary purpose of the meeting was to answer questions and
                                                                                                       protect…”
receive comments on the revisions DPP made to the document since the PAC’s last review.
                                                                                                    x Replaced Rural Community, Preservation and Agricultural Boundaries with “Rural
DPP’s next steps will be to circulate the Public Review Draft for public comment. An electronic
                                                                                                       Boundary” for consistency with other DP/SCPs
copy of the November 3, 2009 Public Review Draft was distributed to PAC members via email
                                                                                                    x Added policies/guidelines to address outdoor lighting
on November 3, 2009.
                                                                                                    x Added discussion of “Important Agricultural Lands (IAL)/Act 183, 2005” to the Appendix
Scott Ezer convened the meeting at 6:35. Scott opened the meeting by thanking all attendees         x Reorganized policies and guidelines to reflect DPP’s guidance about what constitutes a
for their continued dedication and commitment to the project. He followed with a synopsis of           policy and guideline
HHF’s and DPP’s efforts since the last PAC meeting, including several months for DPP to work
with a consultant tasked to review all of the regional SCPs and suggest revisions that would      Comments and the meeting discussion is summarized as follows.
ensure consistency between the SCPs, and many hours spent discussing/deliberating DPP’s
proposed revisions.                                                                                   x    Current November 3, 2009 Draft generally reflects the sentiments of the PAC. There are
                                                                                                           several instances where the revisions made by DPP have improved upon and/or
Corlyn Orr then presented the major revisions attributable to the PAC and DPP.                             strengthened the language that the PAC wanted.

PAC Revisions                                                                                         x    The next steps following this PAC meeting will be to hold Community Meeting #3 and
  x New vision element added to describe the North Shore’s principles of sustainability                    publicize the Public Review Draft (targeting week of December 14 for meeting). It is
  x Recognition of Pupukea-Paumalu public acquisition due to community’s lobbying                          possible that comments received on the Public Review Draft will result in revisions to the
  x Various additions and/or revisions to clarify/strengthen intent of plan                                document. Following the public review process, the Draft NS SCP would be reviewed by
     - "Discourage off road use on coastal dunes…” changed to “Prohibit….”                                 the Planning Commission, then by the City Council. Tentatively, the schedule includes
     - “Discourage an ocean outfall…” changed to “Do not permit…”                                          transmitting the Draft NS SCP to the Planning Commission in late Spring 2010. Since
     - Language to clarify agriculture: “Do not allow ‘fake farms’ or ranching as a ruse”                  changes are possible at each stage, it is important that PAC members and the
     - Expanded aquaculture policy to specify, “clean-up of former Dillingham Quarry”                      community remain involved in the review process.
  x Added statement about emergency use of Drum Road, and using former cane haul and
     agricultural roads for emergency access.
Helber Hastert & Fee                                                                                   Helber Hastert & Fee
Planners, Inc.                                                                                         Planners, Inc.

NS SCP PAC #8 Meeting Record                                                                           NS SCP PAC #8 Meeting Record
November 17, 2009                                                                                      November 17, 2009
Page 3 of 4                                                                                            Page 4 of 4

    x    The City is required to review the General Plan every 10 years. DPP is in the process of          x    There has been a recent increase in the service industries/population servicing the
         contracting a consultant to conduct the General Plan review. The upcoming review                       second home market (e.g., landscaping, housekeeping services). Although the NS SCP
         could identify possible changes to the General Plan that could bring it more in line with              does not specifically address this growing sector, statements describing the need for
         the SCPs.                                                                                              affordable housing have been added to the revised Draft.

    x    Many positive changes have been made as a result of the SCP review process,                       x    City has rural development standards for Agricultural and Country zoned land; No rural
         comparing this draft to the NS SCP that was adopted in 2000. It will be important for                  development standards for Residential zoned land. There are no State Land Use Rural
         PAC members to show their support for the current draft at the Community Meeting.                      Districts on O‘ahu.

    x    Change references to “A Country Inn” to “ONE Country Inn.” Also, on page 3-83, line               x    City Council is considering a bill that would limit the size of farm dwellings to 1,500
         27, change “…should be allowed….” to “may be allowed.” The current use of “A” (as                      square feet.
         opposed to “ONE”) is ambiguous. These revisions would clarify the desire for only one
         country inn.                                                                                      x    Modifications to the Hale‘iwa Special District Design Guidelines would be needed to
                                                                                                                regulate lunch wagon siting/use.
    x    Chapter 5 Implementation Matrix identifies agencies with implementation responsibility.
         This adds a level of accountability that was not in the 2000 NS SCP.                          Proposed Schedule
                                                                                                       DPP plans to distribute the Public Review Draft via mailout and DPP’s website. Community
    x    The issuance of residential building permits does not typically address impacts to view       Meeting No. 3 is possible for the week fo December 14, which would be followed by a 45-day
         planes, although building height limits are regulated by the permit process. View plane       public review period and a proposed comment deadline of February 1, 2010. Thereafter,
         protection is considered as part of other types of development permits, such as a Zone        preparation of the pre-final Plan would take approximately two months. Submittal to the
         Change or a Special District permit. Important existing views will be documented as part      Planning Commission is anticipated in late Spring 2010.
         of the overall NS SCP Five-Year Review project.
                                                                                                       Meeting was adjourned about 7:45 pm.
    x    The SCP is not meant to be a regulatory tool like zoning. Although the NS SCP is
         adopted by ordinance, it is difficult to enforce because it is a guidance document for land
         use. There is a need to establish codes, enforceable standards and implementing
         actions to support the policies and guidelines established in the SCP.

    x    Use of agricultural lands and support for agriculture is important for the North Shore.
         There is a need to ensure that the treatment of agriculture and agricultural lands is
         consistent across SCP regions.

    x    The statement added to the Appendix describing the mapping of IAL is an
         acknowledgement of ongoing State/County efforts. The intent is to use the AG-
         designated lands indicated on the SCP Land Use Map as the starting point for IAL
         identification. Currently there is no State funding for mapping of IAL. The same
         language will be used in all SCPs.

    x    The North Shore is short of public restrooms and the SCP should include statements
         addressing this concern.

    x    The reference to “7,000 visitors per day” (page 3-83, lines 8-15) reflects the number of
         tourists (not local residents) who visit the North Shore. The current draft needs to be
         revised to note the additional impacts of local residents visiting from other parts of
         O‘ahu. Suggest that the first paragraph in Section 3.8 be moved to Section 3.5
         Residential Communities, with a condensed summary in Section 3.8.