3/11/2008 Kate Gardner, The Molokai Times
The Office of Hawaiian Affairs’ critical analysis of the La’au Point Draft Environmental Impact Statement calls aspects of the DEIS “preposterous.”
The OHA statement, attributed to administrator Clyde W. Namu’o and submitted to Molokai Properties Limited by the Feb. 22 deadline, was released to the public March 2.
In a press release issued Friday, Colette Machado, OHA trustee for Molokai and a known supporter of the La’au Point development, responded to the criticisms of the document by her office by recommitting to the “implementation of the overall Community-Based Master Land Use Plan for Molokai Ranch ... I still believe in and remain hopeful that the community-based plan is the best strategy to keep Molokai, Molokai.”
This, continued her statement, “must include a thorough Environmental Impact Statement that addresses all of the valid concerns about potential impacts to the cultural and natural resources of the shorelines adjacent to La’au Point.”
Machado said that she, “support[s] all constructive criticism of the [Dec. 21, 2007] DEIS. For example, it was helpful for OHA to point out that the DEIS disclosed that a maximum potential dwellings could be 300 rather than 200.”
Machado wrote in her statement that she called Peter Nicholas, chief executive officer of Molokai Properties Limited, to clarify the issue, and he said, “This was an unfortunate typographical error, and I can now clarify that the actual maximum is 200, not 300 dwellings.”
Machado wrote that many of the OHA comments addressing new sections of the DEIS were based on misinterpretation. Under the proposed zoning described in the DEIS, Machado believes development of the area will be limited to 200 lots, “There is a long discussion bemoaning the rezoning of agriculture-zoned lands, but no acknowledgement that some of these lands will be rezoned into conservation, or that under the current Maui Community Plan that 1,500 houses could be built on these agriculture-zoned lands.”
The length of the OHA letter prevented Machado from specifically addressing all of the OHA concerns, however the tone of the document seemed to characterize administrator Namu’o’s opinion of the DEIS provisions.
When he addressed the 382-acre buffer zone intended to protect the mauka area of the development, Namu’o quoted the DEIS, “The mauka area will be defined by a deer and livestock fence to minimize conflicts with adjacent subsistence hunting,” and will “protect the open space and coastal conservation areas from degradation by livestock and deer.”
Namu’o wrote in response, “OHA finds it amusing that a fence will accomplish these two stated objectives. Surely a fence may stop a deer, but not a bullet … something more substantial than what OHA imagines a 382-acre deer fence to look like will need to be arranged [to achieve protection from hunters.]”
Namu’o continued, “We also suggest that this fence and buffer space could be seen as being more about creating a feeling of exclusivity than stopping stray bullets from potentially killing people....
Read More or Watch It!
