• Log scares me • Nobody asked me • Responsibility with DOT Log scares me I’m glad to see the article about that huge log at Lydgate (“Possible safety threat at Lydgate,” A1, Sept. 16). I swim there after work
• Log scares me
• Nobody asked me
• Responsibility with DOT
Log scares me
I’m glad to see the article about that huge log at Lydgate (“Possible safety threat at Lydgate,” A1, Sept. 16).
I swim there after work about every other day and watch that thing every time I swim in front of it, imagining what an extra big wave could do.
It’s scary.
I urge the people responsible for this area of public safety to do something about it before a sudden storm seriously threatens to punt that monster into the pool.
It wouldn’t be fun to deal with it in the middle of a huge storm, so please take the “better safe than sorry” strategy and get rid of it while it’s accessible.
It is a little embarrassing that it has been there for months and months and it takes a lawyer from San Jose to bring the issue to notice.
I think it should have been removed a long time ago.
Donna Alalem
Kapa‘a
Nobody asked me
Help me understand something.
When the subject of the Superferry came up, it was decided by the governor and the Department of Transportation, that an EIS was not necessary. I understand that there was some opposition but it seemed there was more excitement than opposition. Now, two years later after much investment on the state’s part and the Superferry’s part, the protestors of our island decided for everyone we didn’t want it.
Nobody ever asked me. I must have missed the vote that we all had regarding the issue. I get the feeling the protestors are barking up the wrong tree. Why are they fighting the Superferry and not our government? Shouldn’t they be on the governor’s doorstep and not harassing the riders and Superferry officials? They are doing what was OK’d. Doesn’t make sense to me.
I want the ferry. There is always room for competition. Don’t we want alternatives? What is being built right now at Nawiliwili, some kind of pier expansion? This port improvement is for who? I have not heard of the EIS for that project. Will we wait again till it’s completed then fight? Why are our elected officials (JoAnn Yukimura and Gary Hooser) fighting on the side of a small number of protesters and not on the side of the majority of supporters? I may be wrong but I don’t think so. Officials should be neutral unless a vote was taken and they felt they should support the majority. I applaud Mayor Bryan Baptiste for not wanting to take sides. Either way he chooses will have opposition from someone.
The island issues are becoming more and more complex and it seems special interest groups are now wagging government’s tail without the input of all voters.
Traffic issue from the Superferry? What about the existing traffic caused by growth of development without improving infrastructure first. Why are developers getting OKs to build, build, build without first paying for and improving our roads, sewer water, etc.? I don’t see protesters out stopping construction equipment.
Let the ferry run and do an environmental assessment while running. They have done much on their part voluntarily without being told and feel they have more than tried to be a good citizen but are being made to be the bad guy. I am sure they invested $300 million just to push Hawai‘i around.
Choice is what our country is about and while I do feel it is everyone’s right to fight for their opinion why don’t we direct it to the right outlet.
Let’s put more energy to fighting development without improvement. Who will take care of all our visitors if we have a lack of affordable housing and rentals? Workers need to be able to afford to live here to work here.
I can go on and on but I won’t.
Fred Imbriani
Kapa‘a
Responsibility with DOT
Prior to my retirement I spent the last 35 years devoted totally to environmental reviews/permitting, covering several thousand permits and reviews for virtually every major governmental and industrial activity including original work relative to harbor operations at a major U.S. port. I also visited three major ports in Germany for an exchange of information on environmental issues and solutions. The research covered cruise ships, cargo vessels, freighters, tankers, etc., as well as harbor vessels and land activities. I have managed enforcement activities, have lectured, and testified as an expert witness.
I should be flabbergasted by the still ongoing controversy regarding this straightforward Superferry project, but when examining it more closely, I no longer wonder. For years we were treated to political pandering, public relations campaigns, lawsuits, vandalism, shrill accusations and shameless exploitation of well-meaning and concerned citizens. Yet I have seen only representatives of these endeavors; environmental review professionals were noticeably absent.
A look at the statute, rules and other pertinent documentation provides the first clues; they are written in a manner supporting political interference and governmental micromanagement so prevalent in Hawai‘i at all levels. Ambiguities and lack of proper definitions are just two examples. When all fails, the law is changed as drafted into House Bill 702 and Senate Bill 1276.
Take the environmental assessment of March 2005 conducted by the Department of Transportation for the Nawiliwili pier modifications to accommodate increased cruise ship traffic. You immediately notice that the applicant (DOT) and the approving agency (DOT) are the same — how convenient. Add the absence of environmental review professionals in that agency and you have the “perfect storm,” something I have not seen in 35 years doing work in almost 40 states.
DOT approved a “finding of no significant impact” (FONSI) omitting consequential secondary effects such as the cruise ships and other activities very much contrary to applicable rules. The Environmental Council played an advisory role, not a decision-making role, at least none that was visible to the public. Note that there was only one objecting comment by a UH professor. By the way, cruise ships are sources of air pollution from propulsion engines, electric generators and onboard incinerators (if installed) and they are sources of water pollution from waste discharges, bilge water discharges, ballast water discharges and, yes, they have killed whales too.
The Superferry exemption ruling by DOT was based on an exemption list prepared by, guess who, the DOT. I do not know how the list was supported or what participation the public was allowed, but it seems logical to assume that secondary effects were no more considered here than in the EA. However, it is also false to knowingly accuse Superferry of violations of the law for not doing an EA/EIS when that responsibility rested with DOT.
As a pragmatist on these matters I take no sides other than that of law and rules, and I let the chips fall where they may. I am so glad that I am retired.
Hartwin Weiss
Princeville
