The plan for a multimillion-dollar flood control project that aims to prevent a disaster in Waikiki and the Ala Wai watershed now will include a more comprehensive environmental study, according to a notice filed by the Army Corps of Engineers.

That’s good news for those who have urged the federal agency to take a closer look at the environmental impacts of the project.

The problem, according to community members, is that project officials didn’t notify the dozens of people who have been participating in the public planning process and who signed up for an email list to hear about the latest developments. The action also wasn’t described on the project’s website.

Instead, the agency on Feb. 22 put a notice only in the Federal Register, the voluminous daily bulletin of U.S. administrative and executive rules, regulations, orders and notices.

When members of Protect Our Ala Wai Watersheds and other interested parties found out about the notice by chance weeks later, they were a bit steamed, confused and left wondering if the federal agency was planning an end-run around the public.

“It was upsetting,” said Sidney Lynch, president of Protect Our Ala Wai Watersheds. “They talk about being transparent and wanting public participation. Then this thing comes along and blows the whole transparency thing out of the water.”

The corps is now expressing regret for the miscommunication.

“Unfortunately, we failed to let you all know about this notice at the time of the publication. We apologize sincerely for that lapse,” the agency said in a message sent Thursday to the project’s email list describing the decision to conduct a more comprehensive environment impact statement rather than a less comprehensive environmental assessment.

The email was sent nearly one month after the Federal Register notice appeared. The project website was updated just days earlier.

The agency not only apologized, but extended the 30-day comment period on the proposal from the original March 24 deadline to May 8.

In addition, the corps, along with its partners at the city, will conduct an additional public meeting in April to explain the state and federal environmental planning requirements involved in the action.

Public interest in the study and increased transparency helped spur the decision to pursue an EIS over an EA, the corps’ Honolulu District said in a statement to the Honolulu Star-Advertiser.

“An EIS is a more rigorous, robust analysis than an EA and while it will require more legwork, the results will be more informative. The study team has accounted for the additional time and resources necessary to execute an EIS, so there should be minimal impacts to the overall schedule,” the statement said.

The agency added that the intent of this comment period is to collect community input on the decision to conduct an EIS and not on specific aspects of the study’s proposed plans.

Those proposals, as of December, include three potential action plans: One focuses on water storage and is dominated by detention basins to hold stormwater. Another is aimed primarily at water conveyance, featuring a lot of channels and flood walls.

The third — and the likely favorite to look much closer to the final plan — is a combination of the two, featuring both detention and water conveyance projects, including flood walls around the Ala Wai Canal, at Ka­naha, Woodlawn Bridge and Koali Road, and detention basins at Manoa Valley and Makiki district parks and Ala Wai Golf Course.

Project officials, who have not yet attached a price tag to the proposals, say the final plan is likely to help vulnerable Waikiki and communities along Makiki, Manoa and Palolo streams withstand the size of a storm that would occur only every 20 to 50 years.

They are continuing to further evaluate the proposals and plan to release a “Tentatively Selected Plan” by June, they said.

Over the past year and a half, during several rounds of pubic hearings — both virtual and in person — officials with the corps pledged to keep the public abreast of its work and be as transparent and inclusive as possible. A website was dedicated to the project, and so was an email list to help keep the public up to date. The agency also scheduled additional periodic public meetings to present its work and learn what community members want.

But Elton Fukumoto, a member of the Manoa Neighborhood Board, said the project has been failing as far as communications are concerned.

Fukumoto, who has been closely tracking the proposed flood control project, said he learned about the proposed EIS from a friend who brought to his attention a letter penned by a union urging its members to support the project listed in the Federal Register because of the potential work it could generate.

“I was utterly surprised and taken aback,” he said.

Fukumoto also said he’s disappointed the corps didn’t respond to an invitation to come before the Manoa Neighborhood Board and address concerns its members have about the impact of a proposal to create a detention basin to hold stormwater at Manoa Valley District Park.

Without that visit, the board passed a resolution in February opposing the use of the park as a retention basin, fearing the construction of 6-foot berms and flood walls, the excavation of play fields and other impacts.

“Apparently, their strategy is to not give out much information about this project,” Fukumoto said.

In Thursday’s email from the corps, the agency said, “We know and appreciate that the community has been asking for more meetings and opportunities to discuss the study. Sadly, we do not have the resources to meet as often or as in-depth as any of us would like, such as at multiple neighborhood board meetings.”

SHARE YOUR OPINIONS

Comments on the EIS proposal can be submitted:

>> Online: honolulu.gov/alawai/contact

>> Email: alawai@honolulu.gov

>> Mail: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Honolulu District, 230 Otake St. (Attn: POH-PPC, Ala Wai), Fort Shafter, HI 96858-5440