October 12, 2008
Search on:     Choose date:   Font size:
    
     
Banner
Banner
Banner
Maui Weekly ad for block ad purchase
Home > News > Commentary
Home
News
Column
Arts & Entertainment
Where to Eat
Calendar of Events
Classifieds
Real Estate
Contact Us
RSS News FeedGet RSS News Feed Add RSS to My Yahoo


Thursday, May 22, 2008
Protecting Honolua

Commentary contributed by Tamara Paltin · Kahana

GPAC plans are good, but lack ‘airtight wording’ to prevent development.

After reviewing the draft Heritage Resource Map, I was very pleased to see that the GPAC plans to include the Honolua ahupua‘a within the Heritage Resource area boundaries. The area is so important to the public on so many levels, and it is all interconnected from the mountain to the sea. Honolua Bay already has the protection of being a state marine life conservation district (MLCD), but there is no protection for the lands mauka of this MLCD—even though what happens mauka will surely affect what happens makai.

History has shown (Honolua Ridge I and II) the runoff/erosion/destruction caused by development above this “protected area.” We do not need to see it again with more development overlooking the North ridge of the bay. What we need is airtight wording to prevent the development that would detract from our Heritage Resource areas, development that would crush a declining ecosystem.

My main concern is that Maui Land and Pineapples’ Field 55 and 56 mauka of the highway overlooking Honolua Bay will be developed into either a rural or agricultural subdivision. This will negatively affect the health of our protected MLCD.

Some suggestions for closing loopholes: in heritage resource areas, agricultural/rural  subdivisions should be subject to more rigorous processes than urban subdivisions, which include Environmental Impact Statements and public hearings to be held in the same district that the Heritage Resource area is in. Setting a minimum lot size of 20 acres would be a step in the right direction.

Overall, I liked the wording in the Heritage Resource area document, I just think that it needs to add more protection for these special areas judging by the result of our 1990 General Plan, which stated there should be no urban development north of Kapalua and south of Puamana. The plan was good, but where is the means to enforce the vision? It may also be necessary to define specifically what makes a subdivision rural or agricultural, as we see what Launiupoko and Honolua Ridge are not.

Recent Stories:


Fast Food Should be Regulated

Government Shouldn’t Legislate Fast Food

Fish Fiction

Obama

Cat Sanctuary Clarifies Position

Cat Crisis

The Time is Now

Stick to the Plan

Kihei Greenway

Election Time

All articles, events, letters, etc. Maui Weekly 2007
Maui Web Design by Bump Networks, Inc.
LOCAL NEWS  |  MAUI CRIME WATCH  |  A&E NEWS  |  FEATURES  |  POLICE SCANNER  |  MAUI MOVIE LISTINGS  |  EDITORIAL  |  WITH ALOHA  |  COMMENTARY  |  MAUI HOME & GARDEN  |  THE BOOKSHELF  |  LETTERS TO EDITOR  |  NEWS AT A GLANCE  |  BUSINESS BRIEFS  |  WHATUPCOUNTRY  |  SOUTH MAUI  |  REAL ESTATE MAUI  |  ELECTION NOTES  |  CORRECTION  |  RESTAURANT REVIEW  |  HEALTH, WEALTH & SPIRITUALITY  |  BENEFITS & FUNDRAISERS  |  MAUI SKYZ  |  FINANCIAL FOCUS  |  FAST TRACK TO FITNESS  |  60… TO LIFE!  |  CONSIDER THIS…  |  THE SMITH SURVEY  |  MALAMA AINA  |  MAI, HO‘IMI MAUI  |  LET’S TALK… MORE  |  GOVERNOR’S OFFICE  |  TV TIMEOUT  |  FUNDRAISERS, VOLUNTEERS & EVENTS  |  BUSINESSWISE  |  THE BAREFOOT GARDENER  |  SIGNS FROM THE GODDESS  |  MAUI PERMA CULTURE  |  STRANGE BUT TRUE  |  NO. 10 KIHEI ISLANDER  |  DECISION 2008