Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-16-2010-Doc15929• • MINUTE S PLANNING COMMITTEE March 10, 2010 A meeting of the Planning Committee of the Council of the County of Kauai, State of Hawaii, was called to order by Councilmember Jay Furfaro, Chair, at the Historic County Building, Room 201, Lihu`e, Kauai, on Wednesday, March 10, 2010, at 9:15 a.m., after which the following members answered the call of the roll: Honorable Tim Bynum Honorable Jay Furfaro Honorable Daryl W. Kaneshiro Honorable Lani T. Kawahara Honorable Bill "Kaipo" Asing, Ex-Officio Member Excused: Honorable Derek S. K. Kawakami Honorable Dickie Chang, Ex-Officio Member Minutes of the January 27, 2010 Planning Committee Meeting. Upon motion duly made by Councilmember Bynum, and seconded by Councilmember Kawahara, and unanimously carried, the Minutes of the January 27, 2010 Planning Committee Meeting was approved. Minutes of the February 10, 2010 Planning Committee Meeting. Upon motion duly made by Councilmember Bynum, and seconded by Councilmember Kawahara, and unanimously carried, the Minutes of the February 10, 2010 Planning Committee Meeting was approved. Minutes of the February 24, 2010 Planning Committee Meeting. Upon motion duly made by Councilmember Bynum, and seconded by Councilmember Kawahara, and unanimously carried, the Minutes of the February 24, 2010 Planning Committee Meeting was approved. The Committee proceeded on its agenda items, as shown in the following Committee reports which are incorporated herein by reference. Bill No. 2298 A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 8, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE AND SINGLE-FAMILY TRANSIENT VACATION RENTALS [This item was deferred.] JAY FURFARO (COMMITTEE CHAIR): Okay I'm going to ask for a motion to approve for the purpose of discussion. LANI KAWAHARA (COMMITTEE MEMBER): Move to approve. • TIM BYNUM (COMMITTEE MEMBER): Seconded. Mr. Furfaro: Thank you. There has been a lot of dialog on this particular bill as it relates to amendments, we have members that want to amend two, two, nine, eight (2298), but at the same time it might exceed the original purpose. The discussion we're having now might be one where this bill gets deferred until next week when I know there are members that want to actually introduce a new bill and put it on the agenda next week. Have some of those ideas dialog at the table and send it over after the first reading to the Planning Department and the Planning Commission. I believe there is that opportunity in my... am I correct in that we might be moving for a new bill to be placed on for first reading? Mr. Bynum: Yes. Mr. Furfaro: Yes? Okay. So based on that note, I'm going to ask for some public comment but my plan is to defer two, two, nine, eight (2298), with the potential of a new bill being on next weeks agenda. So on that note is there any dialog or anyone who wants to speak from the public? No? I'm going to call the meeting back to order and ask that we can defer two, two, nine, eight (2298). Mr. Bynum: Mr. Furfaro: Ms. Kawahara: Move to defer. Is there a second? Seconded. Upon motion duly made by Councilmember Bynum, and seconded by Councilmember Kawahara, and unanimously carried, Bill No. 2298 was deferred. Mr. Furfaro: Is there any further discussion? Oh I'm sorry no discussion on the deferral. Ms. Kawahara: Oh! Mr. Furfaro: I'm very sorry. It supersedes the other... I do hope to get the new bill from my colleagues so that we can get it on next week for first reading. Mr. Bynum: Yes sir. Mr. Furfaro: Okay let's move to bill two, three, one, eight (2318). Mr. Bynum: Got to call for the vote? Mr. Furfaro: Oh again... I'm delinquent here today I'm sorry. May I have the vote on the deferral? Mr. Bynum: All those in favor? 2 • • Mr. Furfaro: Yes. Committee Members: Aye. Mr. Furfaro: Thank you. And I'm also an aye, may you record it as four (4) ayes for the deferral. I'm now going to go to bill two, three, one, eight (2318). Could I have that bill read? Bill No. 2318 A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 8, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, RELATING TO THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE (Farm Worker Housing) [This item was deferred.] Mr. Furfaro: And I want to tell you that's great reading, thank you. Ms. Kawahara: Thank you L.C. Mr. Furfaro: I'm nervous for you. But great first job. On this note I want to actually have a motion to approve for the purpose of discussion. Mr. Bynum: So moved. Ms. Kawahara: Seconded. Mr. Furfaro: Thank you. This bill has been on our agenda for awhile as it relates to many things between the Farm Bureau active organic farmers in the Moloa`a area and other issues that are coming up that I wanted to make Committee Members aware of. You know the fact of the matter is with the Important Ag land bill coming up in the near future, there are, there is currently the potential that additional farm working housing will be approved to support Important Ag lands, now with that being said and the reason why I was most willing to co-introduce this along with Councilwoman Yukimura at the time is without any clear guidelines that we would set in an ordinance, it would be very difficult for the Planning Department to actually deal with an application once the Important Ag land is laid over. In other words, I think it's extremely important that we set some guidelines that allow us to send some parameters to the Planning Commission. Now through a lot of effort from a lot of organizations we do now have a draft... a draft amendment, that I'm not looking for introduction today but I am looking to have it circulated for the public today and then I would like to take a few minutes to highlight what's in that draft amendment. Is that satisfactory with the members? Ms. Kawahara: I think that's great. Mr. Furfaro: Okay. So could we... (Inaudible) draft proposals and I'll highlight them today. Thank you. Now I'm going to... if you can bear with me a little bit here, I'm going to go through some of the major items that we have put into the amendments. First and foremost we are now saying that the gross sales for proceeding with revenues must be verified with tax returns at thirty- five thousand dollars ($35,000). Secondly, we are talking about property dedication to agricultural use as this ordinance moves forward, so a farm dedication. The housing must be used exclusively for farm worker housing and immediate family. 3 • • This allows up to eighteen hundred (1,800) square feet of structures and it caps it at three (3) so in other words you can have a twelve hundred (1,200) square foot house with a six hundred (600) square foot dorm, you could have three (3), six hundred (600) square foot dorms but under no circumstances would we allow more than three (3) structures and this will reference accessory use, deliberately accessory use and not changing the fact that the parcel has density. It has accessory use while a farm plan is in place. The pot-plot plans, excuse me... I got a bit of a cold today; I'm a little under the weather. The plot plans would be reviewed at the application when it goes to the Planning Commission. The reference is made several times over about accessory use as it ties to a master plan, that there would be no charge, that these units must be rent free to workers and can include electricity, but they could charge for the use of water. The employees must work at least nineteen (19) hours and it is calculated that if someone is getting approximately twelve (12) hours of credit for housing that follows the HLTD guidelines, at the same time it references twelve (12) hours for housing, nineteen (19) hours for actual paid work, makes that person athirty-one (31) hour minimum work week, almost afull-time employee. There are some questions we still have for the County Attorney and when this comes back in my Committee, we are considering four (4) other issues. First, how to ensure the owner of the farm who applies for farm worker housing has his own residence where he might live in Kilauea or Kalaheo, we're still looking for some verbiage there. Second, it's how the Important Ag land affects the County's efforts to implement the farm worker housing ordinance and again I said that in the beginning when the Important Ag lands are approved, that state bill already says they're entitled to farm worker housing but the guidelines for that might come from the State Ag Department and like many other items the Agricultural Department currently have no rules that deal with that definition. So this bill would help us address that and give some direction to our Planning Commissioners when applications come in. Third of course is the how to limit speculation and the use of farm worker housing to create sprawl. We have some language in a proposal... in the proposed amendments to address this issue but the merits still require further discussion. We also are reviewing with the County Attorneys fines and abilities for the county to place a lien on property that could or could not lead to legal action. And then one of the definitions here is we're still dealing with is, the farm as it might engulf several CPR lots... I'm sorry CPR units that cover a common lot. So those are the four (4) items that we still need time to dialog on. But I know I went through them briefly and I did pass out a draft but I think what I covered in the narrative is pretty close to the principles that we want to have in place when all of a sudden people are applying for farm worker housing within the Important Ag land allocation. So I'm going to open this up to some questions from the public but my intent today also is to defer this for two (2) weeks, so that people actually have a draft in their hands, they can digest it, and then we can have dialog when my Committee convenes again. You know the main point here is the Planning Commission given the authority maybe even under current statutes, there needs to be rules that deal with the issue and (inaudible) farm worker housing, especially with the Important Ag lands in the horizon and assuming that such authority will be enacted it's very, very important that we have these guidelines set. So at that, I'm going to suspend the rules and ask if anybody would like to come up and speak or if they would like to digest the draft at this point, again the idea is we have all of these covered in one amendment and it will need to be timed. Mr. Mickens would you like to come up? There being no objections, the rules were suspended. GLENN MICKENS: Thank you Jay. For the record, Glenn 4 • • Mickens. I've only briefly gone through your draft that Tim has introduced. It looks like a good draft to me. My biggest question is no matter what you put in writing, who's going to enforce it? It always appears to me no matter what an ordinance or anything that is passed, we don't have the personnel, we don't have the people to enforce it and I... just quickly reading over this saying... I think it's excellent. You know I think it closes a lot of loop-holes and everything but again without the proper enforcement mechanism, I think it's... the only thing can possibly happen, I don't think we have enough Planning inspectors if the Planning Department is in fact the ones are going to enforce this thing. I don't think we have enough Planning inspectors to be able to really go around to all the elements, all the CPR units and everything to make sure that these rules are being enforced. Anyway it's just my opinion on this thing but I do think from what little I read of it and I'll read it more thoroughly but I think it's a very good proposal. Mr. Furfaro: Well I appreciate the fact that you acknowledged it's a... given some good framework and parameters as many people that have been working on this, Farm Bureaus, Moloa`a Farm Groups and so forth to come up with the things we could put in this ordinance for guidelines but your question is correct, I, myself have in the past supported more inspectors for Planning, I plan to continue and I plan to speak soon to the. Planning Commissioners to make sure they also understand my point whether it's the new TVR, bill that might come up and/or this farm worker housing parameters, I agree they need more staffing. Mr. Mickens: With all the things that Kaipo spent so many hours put those pictures up here about the CP... about the vacation rental things... you know I thought it was tremendous Kaipo, of what you did and the work that you did but again we you know... it kind of died because I don't know we don't have the enforce mechanism... but anyway Jay, I appreciate what you're saying, thank you. Mr. Furfaro: Thank you Glenn. JoAnn please come up. JOANN YUKIMURA: JoAnn Yukimura for the record. I want to thank you Councilmember Furfaro for your leadership on this matter. I also want to thank Councilmember Bynum for introducing the amendments and the legal analyst Peter Morimoto who's been also working very hard on this as well as all the farmers and the Farm Bureau and Malama Kauai and many others who been working on this for almost two (2) years now. This... the amendments you see before you reflect a lot of hard work in grappling with a very complex issue. From the beginning we've been trying to walk this tightrope of being able to provide farm worker housing which is very necessary and legitimate for those who are trying to produce food for this island and at the same time make sure it's a loophole for speculation and sprawl. And it's been very difficult to walk this line and we haven't yet found that full balance but we're much, much closer I think than we've ever been and that's because of the hard work and I also want to acknowledge Ka`aina Hull and the Planning Department because they've been actively involved and I think this has been a model for how we should do legislation in both the shoreline setback law and the vacation rental law. We tried to involve the Planning Department and they were more reticent but now are becoming more involved. and it's very helpful with Ka`aina's full participation to identify the things we need to address in the Planning Department's concerns which all make for a stronger, better bill I think. I would... I don't want to make comments yet on all the amendments because I think our group needs to go back and talk about them but I 5 • • do see a real effort to that... to try to stay on that tightrope and I just want to say that we come a long way, we still have quite a ways to go and those of us who have been working on it, are committed to see this to the end and to work hard to make sure that it's a good bill. I do believe it is good preparation for the IAL lands, my concern has long been, we're going to identify what one IAL lands but we're not going to know how to regulate them and if we don't know how to regulate them, all that happens is what's happening today, Ag subdivisions with country estates rather than real farms so we have to bite this bullet and address this issue. This is a good effort toward that and so thank you very much. Mr. Furfaro: JoAnn, I do want to also thank you... you know the bill introduced two (2) years ago (inaudible) co-introduce, you stayed very focus in getting us to this point, I want to thank you... Ms. Yukimura: You're welcome. Mr. Furfaro: And again also point out my reason of signing on is, Important Ag lands are going to be upon us and we don't have any guidelines. Ms. Yukimura: Right. Mr. Furfaro: And if we sit and wait for this... the State's Agricultural Department to give us some, it may never happen and then everything gets distorted as to what the intent was. Ms. Yukimura: Or it may happen without the kind of thinking and dialog and discussion that... that has gone on for two (2) years and it takes time to grapple with these issues so, yes I don't think our efforts have been in vain at all and I think there are good prep and we still have some work to do. Mr. Furfaro: Thank you. Anyone have any questions? DARYL W. KANESHIRO (COMMITTEE MEMBER): I have a question. On the current bill there's a money amount which says that you specifically need to meet this certain requirements, do you believe that that we should have a money amount as a requirement to qualify for... Ms. Yukimura: Yes. That's a very fair question because the original bill didn't have a money requirement and when Planning Department suggested a monetary requirement following Maui's example, those of us originally with the bill protested but as we've grappled with this issue of speculation and how to draw the line between real farmers and country estaters, it seems to be a very important requirement. Mr. Kaneshiro: So my second part to the question would be then, how would we be able to encourage start up farms? Ms. Yukimura: Yeah... Mr. Kaneshiro: How would we be able to do that? Ms. Yukimura: That's a question that has come up constantly in our discussions and we are wanting to encourage start up farming 6 • • because we know that's a big hurdle to establishing these farms. I think in our grappling with the issue, we've come to the conclusion that we can't really address it in this bill but we are committed and the Farm Bureau is, I think... well I shouldn't speak for the Farm Bureau but they also are wanting to encourage start up farming, so I think we have a group of people who want to look at that question next after this is... this bill is passed to help establish farmers. And then work on the issue of start up farmers and the encouragement of start up farmers will be partly of how we construct the law and zoning and permits, but it's other things besides that, it's financing, it's training, it's having land to start with you know, all of those things so we would like to try to address it on a comprehensive basis. Mr. Kaneshiro: So in your perspective then, if the land is dedicated to Ag, I'm just using that as an example, the requirement of having the land dedicated to Ag is not strong enough to meet the requirements of a farm worker housing. Ms. Yukimura: Yeah we really looked at that... it's a necessary but not sufficient requirement for making the distinction between farmers and non-farmers and that's become kind of clear to all of us, so we did add it in because it wasn't in the original bill. Mr. Kaneshiro: I understand that. Ms. Yukimura: Yeah but it's not enough and that's why we added the income and even that we worry about, we still have to see how it's implemented, we've had to actually address some of Mr. Minkins concerns you know there is now a requirement that it not be on slab construction which makes it more moveable. This idea of fines which turns into a lien so that if people refuse to...assuming that there's a clear adjudication that it's no longer a farm and that the house needs to be removed, then for every day that they fail to remove it beyond the deadline for removal, then it turns into a fine which can turn into a lien, which would then make enforcement even more feasible. And so we are really trying to explore these ways to make it an enforceable bill, a clearly enforceable bill because then it's easier for the Planning Department and you know I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that they need more people unless they can really show how many enforcements they've done a year successfully and you know that they really need those extra bodies because a lot of times it's just in how you set those procedures, how you train the enforcement, how you lay the ground for prosecution you know and it may require more but not always anyway so... so we tried to look at a lot of things and I'm still get up at nights thinking we may not have looked at everything and it's on the balance of thinking you know how do you restrict it so it's real farmers but you're not so restricted that you actually discourage the farmers too? So it's a really hard line to walk. Mr. Kaneshiro: Okay and then you know these are some of the discussions we are going to be involved (inaudible) Ms. Yukimura: Yes. Mr. Kaneshiro: Moved along and work on this farm worker housing. Ms. Yukimura: Yeah. 7 • Mr. Kaneshiro: I just wanted to pop some of the questions up. Mr. Furfaro: And as I mentioned on the fines after this six (6) months again we're referencing it and it will be recorded as accessory use, we are waiting for information from the County Attorney about process for the fine and then turning the fine into a lien (inaudible). Are there anymore questions for JoAnn Yukimura? I think we're going to be engaged in a lot of the dialog in two (2) weeks so. Ms. Yukimura: Thank you. Mr. Furfaro: Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Is there anyone? Please come right up. LOUISA WOOTEN: Hello, my name is Louisa Wooten for the record and I appreciate this opportunity to speak on this bill that has been long and... it's a long road we're hauling here and now I know that I may not come to anymore meetings because it's getting very difficult to come to these meetings for me. But as to what Mr. Mickens was saying I just know that there's many farmers here that have had visits from the Planning Inspectors already, bona fide farmers that are trying to farm with a legal farm worker housing. And so I don't think enforcement can be that big of an issue for the Planning Department if they're actually visiting bona fide farmers. I feel that this bill is getting more and more geared toward real, real farming and I think. putting the gross annual sales is getting it up there to thirty-five thousand dollars ($35,000) although many on our Committee was resistant to that, I'm liking it more and more. I don't think this bill can be perfect in all aspects for everyone, one side is not going to fit everyone but we are starting to where we can rule out the speculators and I think that's really, really, really important to ever getting farm land into the realm of real farmers because as it exists right now with the way the cost of land is so high, if we can just address these sort of things so that it is bona fide farmers that are going to benefit from this, I think the tighter the better within not ruling out the people that want to farm and I understand Mr. Kaneshiro's concern about startup farms and you know as you say that can possibly be put into some kind of wordings so that that can be because we do want more people to get into farming. It's... as it is right now hardly... hardly anyone want to get into farming because of all the many, many obstacles. But I think that we're getting there, I think that we're very, very close and I think we need this as soon as possible, get this bill on the books so that my farmers can have legal, safe, clean and comfortable farm worker housing because we need them and all these folks behind us need a place to live so that they can grow food for our island and so I really appreciate all of... just really appreciate all you've done Jay and Tim, people coming out to my farm... I mean that's awesome, Kaipo, so neat to have you guys come out and I just feel the sincerity that this is going to happen and I really, really appreciate but I will say you probably won't have to listen to me give anymore testimony because I just don't have time, I got baby goats arriving right now and I got to go home to them but thank you so, so much. Mr. Furfaro: If you need a couple other copies of the draft, there's some more there in case you want to share some with the people... Ms. Wooten: Share them out, okay thank you. • Mr. Furfaro: Ms. Wooten: Out in Koolao. • Thanks so much Jay. Mr. Furfaro: If not, I'm going to call the meeting back to order because we're going to have this dialog in two (2) weeks, is... everyone okay with that? We've got drafts up here, if you want to take one to others who have participated. I also... Melissa come right up. MELISSA MCFERRIN: Just for the record, my name is Melissa McFerrin with Kauai Farm Bureau, Roy Oyama was here earlier but he needed to leave and fly to Oahu but I just wanted to convey while this... during the time that this has been deferred, we have been working as Jay said together with the... Jay, together with the County and Planning has been very active in answering questions as well as Building Department, Real Property and we very much appreciate this kind of cooperation to look at all of those issues that were brought up in the Summer. Both issues regarding enforcement and criteria, as well as issues of access which was... which has been an issue with CPR question to some of the bona fide farmers and I realize that there are other broader discussions about the CPR issue and Roy wanted me to convey that in the future that is really something that needs to be looked at but we appreciate that within the context of this bill that we're trying to keep it to bona fide farmers and establish some real criteria and also at the same time consider some of this situations that are happening in agriculture so that it is practical and is workable. I appreciate Councilmember Kaneshiro's question about will this support new agriculture, that is actually a conversation that we had as a group which is that is a realization that we came to that the financial aspect was important as a screening mechanism and that it does limit it to established farms and if the approach is to help established farms survive and also take and be... provide safe, legal housing, perhaps this can be a model for some things to occur in the future and as the Farm Bureau, we are also concerned with new farms but that this is another separate discussion which needs to occur which may not be covered under this bill. Mr. Furfaro: Thank you again for that testimony. I want to thank you for acknowledging some members of the County staff, Peter Morimoto for being tagging along with me, Kaaina from Planning, everybody seems to have come together to pound this out but I do want to say that first and foremost Important, Ag lands are just ahead of us and it will cause us to revisit, how do we address new startup farms when Important Ag lands are upon us. Ms. McFerrin: Absolutely. And one other acknowledgement is the farmers, themselves, I know they're very busy and I mean hundreds of hours have been spent coming to meetings... Mr. Furfaro: Yes. Ms. McFerrin: As Louise acknowledged and we are a grass roots organization as this draft comes in, we will be circulating it and we do... we do look for feedback from the farmers as well as the other members of the community so that we can participate actively and work together for a better Kauai. Mr. Furfaro: And thank you also for that (inaudible - coughing)... because we are very, very happy that the farming community, Louisa, all of those from the Moloa`a Group, the Koolao Group, the Farm Bureau have all 9 • • really come together to work on this. We'll have more dialog in two (2) weeks. Keone? Yes. KEONE KEALOHA: Aloha Council Chair, Chair of the Planning Committee and Councilmembers. I appreciate it... I know we like to make best use of time, so I'll keep this sort. My name is Keone Kealoha, I'm the Executive Director of Malama Kauai. Our organization has been involved with the discussions on this particular policy since the beginning and we appreciate the invitation to be a part of that, over the past two (2) years and forty (40) or so meetings, we have come to the point that we are today and we appreciate the time that you're going to allow the public to look over the amendments that have been introduced and to offer some... hopefully complementary feedback on those items. I just wanted to also mention that I am member of the IAL staff... Mr. Furfaro: Yes. Mr. Kealoha: And as such I really want to make sure that that process is all that it can be and working within this group and on these types of policies, it allows me a deeper understanding of some of the intricacies so I appreciate this opportunity. Mr. Furfaro: Keone, I do want you to know I've acquired a list of that Commission and I do intend to forward the draft bill to those individuals as well. Mr. Kealoha: Great. So just in general I just wanted to say that I personally and as the Director of the organization support the intention of Bill two, three, one, eight (2318), for the farm worker housing. It is obviously something that we need, it's timely with the labor cost and the housing cost, this is one of the major hurdles that farmers are facing so we also understand that the thing that has really held us up is making sure that the loopholes are close as much as possible and we appreciate and respect the time of the Council to take the time that it has in order to get this right. I think that what we had realized as a group is that we may have to start by focusing on a smaller group of farmers and expanding that circle over time so that we do it has a smart way, that we are... not opening up the flood gates and say having ninety percent (90%) of the applicants not really be the farmers that we're trying to assist so, again I look forward to speaking again before you again in two (2) weeks at the next Committee Meeting. Mr. Furfaro: Thank you very much. Mr. Kealoha: Mahalo. Mr. Furfaro: On that note before we have any questions, we need to take a caption break, I'm a few minutes beyond where I should be I think? So let's break for ten (10) minutes on a caption break. There being no objections, the Committee recessed at11:13 a.m. The Committee reconvened at 11:27 a.m., and proceeded as follows: Mr. Furfaro: Thank you very much. On that note, I'm going to call the Committee back from recess. Did any members have questions for Keone Kealoha? If not, I'm going to ask if there's anybody else in the public that 10 s • wishes to speak on this matter. Seeing none, I'm going to call the meeting back together and ask if there's any further discussion but really I do want to have this come up at the next Committee meeting and just for the general public, it looks like that Committee meeting is not going to be the tail end of March but it's going to be the first week in April because that's the week that the County Council is moving to some temporary facilities so if we could distribute that to the farming members, it will be the first week in April. Mr. Bynum? Did you have anything? Mr. Bynum: Yes, thank you very much Mr. Chair. I really appreciate the testimony today and I agree with a lot of it, particularly Ms. Yukimura did a good job about outlining the balance that we're trying to seek and I agree with her that there's been a really good public process on this and that the county and the Council, the community have been working together. I really want to acknowledge Malama Kauai for you know helping bring the community together and helping coordinate the input and the Farm Bureau and I can go down the whole list but you know this is... has been a very good collaborative efforts thus far. Now we're getting into the details and hopefully we will you know come to a consensus and an agreement in the long run. I did want to address a couple of issues that came from testimony, one was regarding enforcement, you know the Planning Department has been integral in this part because they have to live with this and they have concerns and they've expressed those eloquently and Kaaina Hull particularly has done a really good job. But it's incumbent on us because enforcement is a big issue. What do you do if a home gets built for farm worker housing and the farming ceases? It's a big deal to move a home and to enforce that and so that's very reasonable concerns that's coming from the Planning Department but it's also incumbent on the Council to be focused on that and pass bills that have addressed these issues and are enforceable without being over the top kind of efforts necessary so the... regarding CPR's in general, I'm... you know this is an issue the county has struggled with and hasn't addressed it and it impacts many areas. I'm hearing recently that it's impacting Financing, that Finance world has changed and some of the mainland decision makers don't understand this using condominium property regime for land division and you know the... at Richardson School of Law, the Dean is David Callies, I think his name is and he recently said that the state has failed abysmally to give us guidance and direction on how to manage agricultural lands, that the courts might have addressed it but haven't and so it's really incumbent on the counties to lay this out, so I really appreciate the wisdom from our Planning Chair of saying, we got to get in front of this because we don't have a great history of getting good stewardship from the State, in fact we have a history of having the State trying to help us and hurting us in the process. I think that's a really significant thing. And we need to address, it's part of what made this difficult is we haven't really addressed CPR's in a broader issue.. We basically have a situation where you don't control your own destiny when you're on a CPR, if your neighbor hasn't done something or gotten in trouble, you're in trouble too. And that just goes against our basic sense of fairness in the community so hopefully eventually as a county we will be able to address the broader issue of CPR's. The last thing is regarding the thirty-five thousand dollars ($35,000) of gross sales. This isn't profit from a farm, it's gross sales. And I've heard this question posed and I'm o en to hearing an answer but if you don't have thirty-five thousand dollars (35,000) of sales in a year, how can you afford to build a home or even hire a worker? And so I know there's startup issues and I know this will be part of our dialog but I was pleased to hear in testimony today that people are understanding that that maybe an important component of this bill, thank you. for those opportunity to comment Mr. Chair. 11 • • Mr. Furfaro: Thank you. Anymore comments from the Committee? I also want to point out that I think Mr. Kaneshiro made a very good point about encouraging farms to get started, I think that's going to have to come in an expanded approach. Thank you for those comments Mr. Kaneshiro. I also want to point out that the Committee also recognizes and I think we heard that testimony from Farm Bureau and other farmers here, maybe the first step is to make sure that we set some parameters and give opportunity to bona fide farmers that are exsisting in operation. Is there any further? Mr. Chairman. BILL "KAIPO" ASING (EX-OFFICIO): Yes. I'd like to just say and express my concerns. I do have some very serious concerns on the farm worker housing bill. I believe that the intentions are good. I hope we don't make any bad policy decisions. And I can go back in history and see all of the bad decisions, policies and ordinances that we've done to shoot ourselves in the foot. We started with the Ag subdivisions, and then came the CPR process and I know because I sat here witnessed the first CPR process and you know I call him the god-father of CPR. Yeah I can just see him here in front of us and you know go through that process and we could not do anything because it is ownership, that's all it is. I saw that bad process, I saw us lose Kilauea. Kilauea is gone. And I see us even going to a worst place because it's not only the Ag and maybe I'm off base, if I'm going off base you can stop me because we headed in that direction with our TVR, bill, we're going to lose more now. It's going to be worst. And we've just... we were in a bad place and we're going to go worst in that area. Then I saw the additional farm dwelling on Ag and Open lands. We did a bad policy ordinance at that time, fifteen (15) years ago and a few years ago, we corrected that. You know, I didn't vote for that in the beginning, the very first time it got on the floor, I said "no." And we kept on extending, extending, extending and it just got worst. So you know I see that, I can see the many problems that we're going to have to look at to make sure in fact that we're not going to lose this now. And if you talk about saving Ag lands, I don't know if you're going to save Ag lands and I'm dust trying to give you a history of the kinds of things that we did, bad decisions, awful decisions that we've made and I can see us coming with some awful decisions around the corner. Not only on this one but on the TVR,, losing Ag lands. So I, you know I'll keep an open mind and I'll try to work through this but at the same time I want everyone to know that I have very, very serious reservations, very serious reservations about this bill on where it's heading and the effect that it's going to have on us long term. We've lost the North Shore but we stand a chance of losing the island and I think that's the concern that I have so I'll be... like I said I'll work with an open mind but I want you to know, I know what history has taught me. Many, many concerns. With that, thank you. Mr. Furfaro: Thank you, Mr. Chair and I do want to say that there are issues on the horizon from the State that will be mandated to us about allowing farm worker housing, I'm saying that this approach now is about being pro-active and setting strict parameters. This is imperative that we do this. I also want to say that it is like the phasing out of additional dwelling units on Ag land. It was certainly in place far before I was on the Council but through the guidelines we have set up, there was a way to have people dismantle any future intention by having them declare their intent now. And those are the kinds of things and policies that should have been placed now because they were consistent with what the general plan said we needed to do. We needed to stop the proliferation of TVR,s, we have done that. We needed to find a way to exit by having people declare on the ADU's, there's no opportunity to come back now and this even as I talked earlier, this is a very restricted bill but it's about trying to have farms that are bona fide farms with high end revenue to be able to say we are a bona fide 12 • • farm, we are entitled to house our workers. And this bill I think that Mr. Kaneshiro brought up needs to be even looked at again on how we encourage, ENCOURAGE more agriculture activity. To save Ag land just for the savings is a big question for us here. To save Ag land so that people can farm them, we need to have the vehicles in place and as commented earlier by members of the public, this bill is pretty tight but I don't know everything, I don't pretend to know everything but without the vehicles in place, we're going to be lost when people just overlay a district map and say to us, "these are your Important Ag lands and the State said they're entitled to housing." If we don't have guidelines in place for the Commission, we've lost it again so I thank you for that comments Mr. Chair, I know you've been twenty-eight (28) years on the Council and have seen many of these things, I've only been on the Council for seven (7) years but the reality is, you have to build in the parameters. Mr. Bynum did you want to say something? Mr. Bynum: I did. And I wanted to acknowledge that I think the Chair's cautions are very appropriate for us to hear and I've spent a lot of time since I've been on the Council researching the past and how the land use decisions were made and I read many transcripts from old Council meetings and I believe that our Council Chair was right in many instances, was a lone voice or one (1) of two (2) who gave cautions that were not heeded at the time and we went on land use... went down land use paths that have been very difficult for our island and not the good way to go so I believe that in many times he was correct. Mr. Furfaro: Please note, I'm not arguing that he wasn't correct. Mr. Bynum: Right. Mr. Furfaro: I want to make sure you understand this but what I'm arguing is that we have the ability to put the controls in place. Mr. Bynum: Right. Mr. Furfaro: I agree we've gone through difficult times. Mr. Bynum: And I'm only speaking for myself in saying that you know but I think also Mr. Furfaro, you're accurate too, for whatever reason in the past when we find ourselves at a difficult place and we're trying to rectify those concerns, we have to do it in a way that's fair, legal and appropriate. And it's complicated and convoluted so you know, I think you're both correct but I did really want to acknowledge that and the research I've done, Mr. Asing gave appropriate caution that in heated in the past and you know and he's dramatically illustrated the consequence of that and I agree with him about the losses we've experienced particularly in the North Shore and we still have issues before us. We're still the only county that hasn't clearly identified that Ag is for Ag and we still are allowing the (inaudible) residential use, new ones to occur on agricultural land and we'll be discussing that at a workshop next week, so thank you. Mr. Furfaro: And I do want to again thank you for introducing my amendments by request but in this school I'm saying, you put the parameters upfront and you guide it and you manage it because that's exactly what we had to do with the ADU's. That's what's in the bill that we're going to have a workshop. It says you need to find a way to manage the old legislation so that you can get out of it. 13 • • Mr. Bynum: Right. And I think my earlier comments about the dean of our School of Law at University of Hawaii is saying counties... you know you need to do just that, just what you said. You need to put those parameters in because the State hasn't done that for us historically so I agree with you. Mr. Furfaro: I think that's what leadership is all about. Mr. Bynum: Yep. Mr. Furfaro: Thank you. Any other comments on this before I ask us to let this be moved to the next Committee meeting? No? May I have a motion? Mr. Bynum: Ms. Kawahara: Deferring it? Okay. Second. Mr. Furfaro: Committee Members: Mr. Furfaro: Move to defer. Seconded. Is that what we are doing? All those in favor say "aye." Aye. Thank you. Upon motion duly made by Councilmember Bynum, seconded by Councilmember Kawahara, and unanimously carried, Bill No. 2318 was deferred. Mr. Furfaro: I think we have one more item in Planning. Bill No. 2339 A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE 8 OF CHAPTER 8 OF THE KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN THE OPEN DISTRICT [This item was deferred.] Mr. Furfaro: I'm asking to defer this only until three, sixteen (3/16), we have a scheduled workshop to look at those bills all together and I'm looking for that motion. Mr. Bynum: Move to defer. Mr. Furfaro: Thank you. May I have a second? Mr. Kaneshiro: Seconded. Mr. Furfaro: Thank you very much. All those in favor say "aye." Audience (testimony) Mr. Furfaro: Oh I'm sorry. I'm sorry. 14 • Mr. Kaneshiro: Mr. Bynum: Mr. Furfaro: Come right up. I'll withdraw my second. I'll withdraw my motion. Thank you Mr. Kaneshiro, Mr. Bynum? There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Mr. Kealoha: I'll have to learn the process a bit more so I know when to interject. Thank you for the record my name is Keone Kealoha. Just a very quick mention, I have submitted some testimony when this went through the Planning Commission... the Planning Department and I just wanted... I didn't know if that was attached to this as it came forward but I wanted to reiterate a point that was made at that time for your consideration. I reviewed the copy of the Planning Department's staff report and agree with the findings and the proposed amendments. I support the intent of Bill two, three, three, nine (2339). It doesn't however address the potential ramifications of a Senate Bill two, six, four, six (2646), and I wanted to just point that out as you go forward in your deliberations. Senate Bill two, six, four, six (2646) allows for large landowners to fast track reclassification of fifteen percent (15%) of state zoned agricultural lands to the urban or rural districts in exchange for labeling eighty-five percent (85%) of lands as important agricultural lands. This contradictory eighty-five, fifteen (85-15) incentive formula could allow for rampant rural development without a requirement for community input or to address any state or county land use planning, such as the General Plan or Area Treatment Plans. This is done through a special declaratory order from the Land Use Commission laid out by SB twenty- six, forty-six (2646), thereby short circuiting government oversight and denying local communities the ability to protect their rights. This measure removes any community planning process by failing to require rural reclassifications to conform with existing county plans. The Land Use Commission has no jurisdiction to deny under SB twenty-six, forty-six (2646), when the conditions are met. The SB twenty-six, forty-six (2646) greatly reduces the criteria that must be met in order to receive reclassification, by an order of seventy- five percent (75%). This loophole could fuel suburban sprawl, luxury fake-farm subdivisions, and golf courses which are all allowed under rural classification but prohibited under agricultural classification. Please consider the potential density impacts that could occur as a result of SB twenty-six, forty-six (2646) and use this opportunity to further strengthen Bill two, three, three, nine (2339) by including additional language. In order to ensure consistent use of lands zoned Ag or Open by the county, we recommend that an additional amendment be included that either: 1. places the same restrictions being proposed in Bill two, three, three, nine (2339) for lands zoned Open to land reclassified as Rural if the reclassification was obtained by invoking SB twenty-six, forty-six (2646) or 2. set up a review process within the County Planning Department that require density limits that are consistent with county level plans to be placed on lands reclassified rural through SB twenty- six, forty-six (2646). 15 • Because SB twenty-six, forty-six (2646), limits the ability for the Land Use Commission to deny reclassification request we feel this additional clause would enable the county final oversight on matters of density on lands zoned agricultural district (A) or Open district (O) that are reclassified to rural especially when that reclassification could take place without consideration for county level land use plans. Thank you. Mr. Furfaro: Keone, first of all I want to tell you, we do have your testimony. Mr. Kealoha: Okay. Mr. Furfaro: I want to make note that the reason we're deferring this is because we're going to have to workshop two, three, three, nine (2339) only addresses Open districts, okay? Bill two, zero, two, two (2022) was a bill that was formulated after the General Plan was passed and so it has some further restrictions but it also has some opportunities that we need to know about as it deals with clustering so that we remain with Open space because of the clustering. We just going to talk about it in a workshop. We do have your letter. Mr. Kealoha: Okay. Mr. Furfaro: And if you're not aware of it, the County of Kauai, all already have in place, I know it because it was my bill. Anyone moving forward for a new golf course, if they portray it as a golf course, the reality is they loses density. They can never convert it back and much remains Open space and we have that ordinance in place. But thank you for your testimony. And I'm sorry I missed your hand. Mr. Kealoha: I appreciate you fitting me in. Mr. Furfaro: We hope to see you at the workshop on the sixteenth (16th). Mr. Kealoha: Alright, thank you. Mr. Furfaro: Go ahead. Mr. Bynum: Keone, thank you very much for this testimony today. I think it was really timely and I just wanted to ask a couple of questions. Mr. Kealoha: Sure. Mr. Bynum: I was trying to pay close attention but did you say there is some movement in this legislature to change this law? Or this bill? Mr. Kealoha: Um SB twenty-six (26), I believe was passed. Mr. Bynum: Right, right. So you know SB twenty-six, forty-six (2646) is a great example of what I was saying earlier where the State intervenes on what level that is traditionally is County level Land Use policy and it 16 • was part of a package of farm worker incentives so there were good things in the bill. And then this was put in kind of in the last minute, this eighty-five, fifteen (8515) and you know I've testified against the bill at the time, even though it happened really quickly right at the end of the legislative session. Particularly about what you have talked about rural, the bill said that any change of zoning had to be consistent with the General Plan as it relates to Urban. Mr. Kealoha: Urban only. Rural. Mr. Bynum: And it specifically did not say as it relates to Mr. Kealoha: That's right. Mr. Bynum: And on Kauai under our current rules, it's virtually R four (4) I mean it's a really high level of density. We have had a landowner use the eighty-five, fifteen (8515) rule (a) and (b), and in the `Ele`ele in the coffee lands, luckily they did not try to invoke urban zoning or you know that's the land that the coffee's growing on now and so this is a great concern and I really glad you brought it up and if we... I want a copy of your written testimony because if there's a way for us to address it, that's a thought, I haven't had. So I'd like to follow up on that but I really wanted to thank you for your testimony because this again illustrates this thing where the State doesn't help us. Right? Let the Counties dictate their own destiny according to the will of the people, right? Not according to the will of the legislature and perhaps on behalf of large land owners and I mean now that I said that, A&B didn't do anything...didn't do this at all so they didn't ask for this provision. They didn't use that in a way that would have been difficult for the County so I just wanted to make sure I don't come across as... like I'm criticizing that move because I'm not... in that instance. Okay. Mr. Kealoha: Yeah and I want to just be clear as well that the recommendations that I made at the end are just ideas of what... how to have more control over the density (inaudible) lots at the county scale with the consideration for the plans that we have, our General Plans, our area treatment plans, I don't know if those have legal standing but I'm hoping that perhaps some resources might be able to be allocated to look at what the county may be able to do in order to have more control over the density that's given out. Mr. Bynum: I think that's a good summary and a good idea to look if we do have that option so. Mr. Furfaro: Keone thank you but you know that's exactly in that bill in the farm worker piece... (Inaudible) BC(mic) Mr. Furfaro: When you know they're designating issues for farm worker housing and we don't have the parameters set up. Mr. Kealoha: Right. Mr. Furfaro: .Keone, I think Councilmember Kawahara had a question? 17 Ms. Kawahara: No I wanted to make sure I had a copy. Mr. Furfaro: Okay, okay very good. Thank you so much and I'm going to check... I just want to make sure we're clear I think in the County of Kauai rural density is (r) two (2); it's not (r) four (4). JoAnn, you want to come up and speak? Yeah. I'm going to have that confirm. Mr. Bynum: ADU still applies in Rural. Ms. Yukimura: JoAnn Yukimura for the record. Before I begin my... what I wanted to say in answer to your question, the minimum lot size for Rural is half an acre so that makes that (r) two (2) but with an ADU which is allowed because Rural is not Ag and we got rid of ADU's on Ag but they're allowed on Rural yet so it's essentially (r) four (4). Mr. Furfaro: Yeah and no matter if it's (r) four (4) or not based on your calculation you just made, the zoning right now is (r) two (2). Ms. Yukimura: (r) two (2). Mr. Furfaro: You can get additional dwelling unit, that's makes it an (r) two (2) with additional dwelling units but I just wanted to make sure that we have the right facts, Rural is (r) two (2). Ms. Yukimura: Mr. Furfaro: It is it is a zoning. (Inaudible). Ms. Yukimura: Yeah so if you do a build out analysis you would... you would allocate four (4) units probably to it. That are potentially build out able, you know? But I speaking on this Open density bill, I just wanted to say following up on the Chair's exposition of the history of land use on Kauai that this Open density bill before you is really meant to correct an error also a bad land use decision... Mr. Furfaro: Yes. Ms. Yukimura: That was made at the time of our CZO and it is true that sometimes we don't have the power to control the legislature and we don't have... we weren't there when the original decision was made but we do have power to correct it and that's what you're trying to address here in the Open density bill. I want to commend Keone Kealoha for raising the issue of this interface with the State bill which was in my mind very terrible and detrimental provision in IAL bill; I believe that was in the IAL bill. The one that defines Important Ag Lands, this fifteen, eighty-five... fifteen percent (15%), eighty-five percent (85%), and we actually... some of us on the Council tried to get that bill reversed but you know even this Council refused to put that on HAC's (inaudible) agenda to reverse that bill but it's a very bad bill, it's very arbitrary, it takes away County home rule, it allows for the deterioration of Ag land basically. And so I'm glad that Keone had bought it up and you might be able to mitigate its damage in this Open Space bill so it's really something to look... the Open density bill... it is something to look at. Thank you very much. Mr. Furfaro: JoAnn, I do want to share with you, we all 18 • know the benefits of two, three, three, nine (2339) but in the discussion and I think Chairman Asing also strongly suggested that we look at two, zero, two, two (2022) simultaneously to see if we can massage it into the right density. " Ms. Yukimura: Well I think it's a good idea to revive or look at this old bill that's been pending for so long but my concerns about that original bill is it's so complex even Planning Department wasn't sure to apply it and this cluster thing is something to be careful of, it sounds good on it's face but if you just have cluster here, cluster there, cluster here you still going to have suburban sprawl in the long run. I mean because if the clusters, we you have enough clusters it's going to turn into sprawl. And so that's something to really look at and you have this workshop set up to look at so that's a good idea. Mr. Furfaro: Yeah and that's exactly what it is just to look at those options. Ms. Yukimura: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Furfaro: Any questions? Thank you JoAnn. Is there anyone else that would like to speak on two, three, three, nine (2339)? No if not, I'm going to call the Committee back in session and we'd like to move to defer this. Mr. Bynum: So moved. Mr. Furfaro: Thank you. Is there a seconded? Mr. Kaneshiro: Seconded. Mr. Furfaro: All those in favor "aye". Committee Members: Aye. Upon motion duly made by Councilmember Bynum, seconded by Councilmember Kaneshiro, and unanimously carried, Bill No. 2339 was deferred. Mr. Furfaro: Thank you. That ends the agenda for the Planning Committee. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:59 a.m. Respectfully submitted, o~Q q/V1~~ ~ GC6-~ Darrellyne M. Simao Council Services Assistant I APPROVED at the Committee Meeting held on April 7, 2010: JA r, 'ttee 19 ~ ~pG1ffQ (March 10, 2010) - - FLOOR AMENDMENT Bill No. 2318, Relating to Farm Worker Housing INTRODUCED BY: Tim Bynum (by request) Amend the definitions of "Farm worker" and "Farm worker housing" in Bill No. 2318 to read as follows: "`Farm worker' is a farm owner, employee, contract worker or intern who works no less than nineteen (19) hours per week in farm-related operations on a farm. For the purposes of farm worker housing, a farm owner can qualifv as a farm worker only when he can demonstrate that the affected lot has been subject to a condominium property regime (C.P.R.) and that his respective C.P.R. unit does not qualifv for any allowable residential density [`Farm worker housing' means housing over and above the residential density allowed in the Agriculture District, as established in Section 8-7.5, which meets the following criteria: a) Is accessory to a farm that has generated at least $35,000 of gross sales of agricultural product(s) per year, for the preceding (2) two consecutive years, for each farm worker housing unit on the lot, as shown by State general excise tax forms and Federal Schedule F forms. b) The owner or lessee of the respective lot on which the farm worker housing is being proposed shall provide a farm plan to the Planning Department that demonstrates the feasibility of the respective farm's commercial agricultural production. c) ~ Is used exclusively for the housing of farm workers and their immediate family. d) For afamily -the living space does not exceed 1200 square feet in area e) For a single person -the unit does not exceed 650 square feet in area f) If the farm ceases operation or fails to meet the definition of a farm, the owner shall remove all farm worker housing from the subject parcel within four (4) months of the triggering event (the cessation of a farm or failure to meet the definition). If the farm worker housing is attached to a primary dwelling unit that is part of the density allowed on the subject property, only the additional kitchen shall be removed, and not the additional structure itself. At the time the owner is allowed another kitchen to create a farm worker housing unit, the owner shall sign a unilateral agreement giving the Planning Department the right to make two (2) unannounced inspections per year by the Planning Department for the purpose of ascertaining compliance in the case 1 .~ • i where the farm worker housing must be removed. Said agreement shall be recorded in the Bureau of Conveyances or the Land Court, as the case may be. Nothing in the agreement shall prevent the Planning Department from making as many properly executed announced inspections as may be necessary for the enforcement of other planning laws. g) Said housing shall be located on the subject parcel where the farming is occurring and the owner shall not, subsequent to obtaining the required zoning permits for the farm worker housing, subdivide said housing from the farm nor form any condominium property regime around said housing. h) Said housing may be portable and or temporary, but in all cases shall meet all health, safety and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (O.S.H.A.) requirements. i) A property shall be eligible for farm worker housing only when all of the subject property's respective maximum permitted residential densities, as established in Section 8-7.5, have been permitted and constructed. j) The owner of farm worker housing shall annually certify to the Director of Planning that the Farm Worker Housing meets the conditions of subsection a through i above and shall give written consent to the Planning Department for an annual announced inspection by the department k) Prior to the issuance of the building permit, the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that the applicant has recorded in the Bureau of Conveyances or the Land Court, as the case may be, the above conditions, explicitly stating that the use permit does not run with the land but is personal to the specific applicant, and that any subsequent owner must secure a separate use permit for farm worker housing.] `Farm worker housing' means [housing that is accessory to a farm, over and above the residential density allowed in the Agriculture District, as established in Section 8-7.5, for which a Use Permit is obtained pursuant to Section 8-7.9] the use of a building or portion thereof designed and used exclusively for the housing of farm workers and their immediate families who actively and currently farm on the land upon which the housing is situated." Amend Bill No. 2318, by adding a new Section to read as follows: "SECTION 4. Article 7 of Chapter 8, Kauai County Code, 1987, as amended is hereby amended by adding a new section to read as follows: 2 C Sec. 8-7.9 Special Standards For Issuance of Farm Worker Housing Use Permits. (a) The Director shall not accept and an application for. a farm worker housing use permit shall not be deemed complete unless the applicant can demonstrate that: (i) the farm has generated at least thirty five thousand dollars ($35 000.00) of gross sales of agricultural product s) per year, for the preceding~2) two consecutive years for each farm worker housing structure, as shown by State general excise tax forms and Internal Revenue Service Schedule F forms: (ii) the owner has, as of the effective date of this ordinance, dedicated the property upon which the farm worker housing will be located to agricultural use pursuant to Section 5A-9.1 of the Kauai County Code; and Div) at least one of the following conditions are met: (1) The owner or lessee of the respective property on which the farm worker housing is being proposed has provided a farm plan to the Planning Department that demonstrates the feasibility of the respective farm's commercial agricultural production, or (2) The farm is entitled to Agricultural Rates provided by the Department of Water. (b) No use permit for farm worker housing shall be approved unless: (1) The application meets the use permit standards established under Section 8-20 of the Kauai County Code; and ~2) The Planning Commission finds that based upon the type of agricultural activity, size of farm, and farming methodologies, the applicant has demonstrated a clear and compelling need for farm worker housing and the number and size of structures applied for. (c) In addition to conditions of approval that the Planning Commission may impose pursuant to Section 8-20.5~b), a use permit for farm worker housing shall be subject to the following conditions: ~1) The farm worker housing shall be used exclusively for the housing of farm workers and their immediate family; (2) A maximum of three (3) farm worker housing structures may be built on the property that is the subject of the permit. The total floor area of all structures combined shall be limited to 1,800 square feet and no structure may exceed 1, 200 square feet of floor area. For the purposes of farm worker housing,, the total floor area shall mean the sum of the horizontal areas of each floor of a building, measured from the interior faces of the exterior walls. The total floor area shall include enclosed attached accessory structures such as arages or storage areas, but it shall exclude unenclosed attached structures such as breezeways lanais, or porches; (3) The structures shall have post and pier foundations. No concrete slabs shall be used in constructing the farm worker housing; ~4) The structures shall be located on a plot plan approved by the Planning Commission; (5) If the farm worker housing is attached to a primary dwelling unit that is part of the density allowed on the subject property and the use permit for farm worker housing is revoked only -the additional kitchen and plumbing shall be removed and not the additional structure itself. _If the owner is allowed another kitchen to create a farm worker housing unit attached to the primary dwelling, the owner shall sign a unilateral agreement giving the Planning Department the right to make two (2) unannounced inspections of the propertyper year. The inspections shall be conducted between the hours of 9:00 a.m and 5:00 p.m. The Planning Department may conduct additional inspections in discharging its duties under the Kauai County Code; and ~6) The owner or lessee of the property shall not charge the farm workers or their families for rent or electricity. (c) The property that has been dedicated to agricultural use pursuant to Section 5A-9.1 of the Kauai County Code shall only be eligible for farm worker housing when the maximum permitted residential densities, as established in Section 8-7.5 have been permitted and constructed on the lot or parcel upon which the property is located. If the applicant can demonstrate that the property has been subject to a condominium property regime C.P.R.), and that the maximum allowable residential density for the respective C.P.R. unit has been permitted and constructed the Planning Commission may waive the requirements of this provision. (d) The land upon which the farm worker housing is located shall not be subdivided to create separate lots for the farm worker housing and the farm. e) The owner of farm worker housing shall _annually__c__ertifv_to the Director of Planning that the Farm Worker Housing meets requirements and conditions set forth in Sections 8-7.9 (a and (b) above and shall give written consent to the Planning Department for an annual announced inspection by the department. ,~f) Prior to the issuance of the building permit, the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that the applicant has recorded in the Bureau of Conveyances or the Land Court, as the case may be, the requirements and conditions set forth in Sections 8-7.9 (a) and (b) respectively, explicitly stating that the use permit does not run with the land but is personal to the specific applicant, and that any subsequent owner must secure a separate use permit for farm worker housing. SECTION [4.] 5. If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity does not affect other provisions or application of the Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are severable. SECTION [5.] 6. Ordinance material -to be repealed is bracketed. New ordinance material is underscored. When revision, compiling, or printing this ordinance for inclusion in the Kauai County Code 1987, the brackets, bracketed material, and underscoring shall not be included." (Material to be deleted is bracketed. New material is underscored.) \\cok-nas-02\home\Floor Amendments\Farm Worker Housing\Amendment-v.5 (permit).doc 5