Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-16-2009 PH Bill 2339 FUBLIC HEARING DECEMBER 16, 2009 A public hearing of the Council of the County of Kauai was called to order by Jay Furfaro, Chair, Planning Committee, on Wednesday, December 16, 2009, at 2:46 p.m. at the Council Chambers, Historic County Building, 4396 Riee Street, Lihu`e, Kauai, and the presence of the following was noted: Honorable Tim Bynum Honorable Dickie Chang Honorable Jay Furfaro Honorable Daryl W. Kaneshiro Honorable Lani T. Kawahara Honorable Derek S. K. Kawakami Honorable Bill "Kaipo" Asing, Council Chair The Clerk read the notice of the public hearing on the fallowing: 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, which were passed on first reading and ordered to print by the Council of the County of Kauai on November 18, 2009, and published in The Garden Island newspaper on November 25, 2009. The following communication was received for the record: • Dave Arakawa, Executive Director, Land Use Research Foundation of Hawaii, dated December 16, 2409 The hearing proceeded as follows: Mr. Furfaro: For the general public, I would like to make note that I have requested that before we start the public hearing that we have a presentation from the Planning Department, in particular the assistant director. There is a lot of history with this approach to this proposed ordinance. It actually goes back to when I was an the planning commission and there was an attempt to structure a bill that actually reduced density in open space areas that were actually more aggressive than some of the ag areas. And I would like to ask the councilmembers if I can so remind you that this is a public hearing for public testimony,,. This will come up in my committee in the new year for our particular (~ues~lons, but because i~ is such an important issue, I wanted to ask the planning 1 department to actually make a presentation before the public: has a gaud ar better understanding, if there is any public testimony. So on that note, this is an evolution of this bill aver several years, and I will ga ahead and ask the planning department to make a short presentation, Mr. Nakamura: Vice Chair, for the record, just we have one written testimony that was circulated to the members. Mr. Furfaro: Yes, thank you very much Mr. Clerk. The floor is yours. IMAI AIU, Deputy Planning Director: Thank you Vice Chair Furfara. I'd like to begin using a PowerPoint {see Attachment I hereto} that basically breaks dawn the mechanics of the bill. Okay, I will try and be as quick here as po~;sible {I understand the agenda is very full today.) and keep this very simple. The purpose of this bill is to address the problem of agricultural sprawl that we have going an throughout the island, and the bill attempts to do this in two ways: through addressing the density of Open zoned lands and the subdivision standards of Open zoned land. So I'd like to begin by basically reviewing what the standards are far density and subdivision as they exist today. Agricultural densities are basically at... One acre, you get one pause. Yau get an additional house for every three acres, up to a maximum of five. That cap of five is pretty important. Open densities, the... "What we are concerned with here is the language in bald that pertains to lands within the State Land Use agricultural district-it's basically one house per five acres. It's important to Hate that there is no cap an the Open zoned land. Sa if we are to compare the two, it's... Natice...well, at different densities, the lower-sized lots, the Open zoned lands are actually more restrictive. Here at 70 acres, you will get basically one unit in the Open zone; you've already got three if you're in Agriculture. Here at...what is that, I3 acres, this is where the ag mazes out at 5, but again, you're only going to have two in Open zone. Here at 25 acres, notice that they're the same density-five units each one. And once you get up to something like a hundred acres, Haw you start getting 20 units in Open and only ~ in Agriculture. So the proposed fix far that is, out of what came out of the General Plan, was looking at the ag standards versus the open standards, and it was...pretty much generally agreed and at least came out in the general plan that the ag standards are pretty goad; that type of management should ga an on the Open zoned land. So the first strategy is to act on ag land institute a cap of five units. So you move from that hundred acres of Open zoned land with 2~} units will Haw just have five units. If you look at that same density comparison Haw, you'll notice that the Open zoned becomes much mare restrictive than the Agriculture zoned. Next let's take a look at the subdivision standards for ag lands. When I put this on the slide, the subdivision standards ran off the page, and I let it da that, because they'xe...it just kind of illustrates how fang and complicated the ag 2 subdivision standards are. So we'll go through them kind of one by one, and graphically, so... Basically, the basic point of the Ag subdivision standards is the larger the lot gets, the more restrictive the subdivision standards gets in order to try and keep a larger lot size. So if you have 10 acres of ag, you can subdivide that into 10 one-acre lots. If you have... in this example, 14 acres of ag, you hit a different standard. You can do four one-acre lots, and then the rest have to be two-acre lots. Next, if you . have...we'll take 25 acres of ag, you've now hit upon a different standard again. You can still do four one-acre lots, but the rest of your lots have to be three acres. Start getting up into 50 acres, and basically you can divide it into five-acre parcels. So the lot sizes are getting larger as you go along. When we start getting up into lots of hundred-acre size, you can subdivide it into 10 parcels, that's your cap, none of which can be smaller than five acres. And then lastly, once you get into the really large parcels, you start getting into this scale, which is, you can take 75 acres and divide them into 10 lots, none of which can be smaller than five acres, that's this bottom row here. Then you can twenty percent of the lots, so in this case we have a 900 acre parcel we're looking at, it's 180 acres, and you can divide that into lots no smaller than 25 acres. In this case you'd probably end up with something around six 30-acre parcels. Then the rest of this you cannot subdivide; this is considered the remnant parcel. So these are part of the standards that we looked that said, well, hey that's pretty good, that gives us out of the 900 acres, we saved a lot that is still an intact large parcel for agriculture. If you look at the Open subdivision standards, this is what becomes important here, is that they can just subdivide it into five-acre lots, the same as the density basically. So if we are to compare that, again you'll see that at the smaller lot size, the Open zone is more restrictive, but it becomes much more permissive at the larger size. So that same 10 acres, Ag, Open, you get 10 one-acre parcels in the Ag, which you're only going to get two in the Open. If you look at a 50-acre parcel, this is an important part in what the 50 acre size comes in, because 50 acres of Ag can be divided into five-acre lots, 50 acres of Open can be subdivided into five-acre lots. The standards become the same at this point for the lot size. And then here's where the big...most a lot of the problem areas come in. The Ag subdivision standards that we have that get us this large remnant parcel, if that were 900 acres of Open, you can subdivide it into 180 five-acre lots. So what we're looking at is then, again, the subdivision standards that was agreed in the General Plan seem to work pretty well for us, so we're going to...the proposed solution is to institute those same standards now into the Open subdivision. The Open subdivision, like I said, already carries a minimum lot size of five acres, so we start at the 50-acre standard of a five-acre lot. So any lot not more than 50 acres in size can subdivide into five-acre lots. Lots that have (inaudible) of 100 acres, this range is actually 50 to 300 acres, so this 100-acre lot would fit into that standards, you can subdivide into 10 or fewer parcels. So in this particular case, you know, we've gone with five five-acre parcels and five 15-acre parcels, but you're free to choose however 3 you really want to do that. And then, again, the large parcel, which is really a lot of the concern is (inaudible) or well it brings it about, we've instituted the same standards that you would find in the Ag parcel. Seventy-five acres you can divide into 10 parcels, twenty percent of the lot can then be divided into parcels no smaller than 25 acres, and you get the remnant parcel. Now lastly, all the examples I've been giving you are basically the lot is either Open or Ag. The reality that sits out there for most of our lots is that they're a mixed zone. You're going to find a mix of Ag and Open on just about every large parcel that is the intent of this bill. So in this case, just to kind of look at what happens today, this is a theoretical lot of 200 acres of Open, 200 acres of Ag. The 200 acres of... Sorry, I did that backwards. But the 200 acres of Ag would be subject to that 20()-acre standard, which is, again, 10 or fewer parcels. So you'd subdivide that up into your 10 parcels, probably look at haw you could get the mast density out of it, but that's,,, Yau'd do something like this: The 200 acres of Open, you could divide into the five-acre parcels; you get 40 lots out of that. To institute the standards we have proposed here, the subdivision standards, just the subdivision standards, the 200 acres of Ag would of course remain the same, but now this 200 acres of Open you would subdivide into, again, the 10-acre lots. Now you're going to get ten 20-acre lots out of it, or 10 lats...yau're going to (inaudible), but for simplicity I've gone with 20 acres, We've done one more thing in this bill to help limit the ag sprawl, and that is we've added in this provision to the general provisions, which basically says, once a lot has mare than 50 acres of Open zone in it, you will,,.for the purposes of determining which of those standards you fall under, between the, you know the 50 acres to the 50 to 1.00 acres, up to the 300 acres, for determining which subdivision, you are going to consider not just each 200 acres individually, you are going to apply this as just one lot, Yau are going to say, this is now a 400-acre lat. Sa the difference becomes, now, whereas you had 10 lots, 10 lots on each side, you will now are going to subdivide this by the 300 acre standard, which means you are going to go with the 75 acres into 10 lots, the 20 percent of the lot into lots smaller than 25 acres, and again, you get a lot larger remnant parcel, Sa hopefully when...the intent is all three of these things will start to institute stricter standards, standards that we have said will help us preserve large tracts of viable agricultural land, those large pieces, because as you can see, we're starting to get up into the higher and stricter standards that we already have instituted for ag land. That is it. Hopefully that was simple. Thank you far your time, really appreciate it. I know it's going to be a long day, sa I will finish up right there. Mr. ~'urfaro: Imai, thank you very much for making that presentation for the public. This will be on the Planning Committee's agenda coming up in the new year. I also want to make reference that we should paint out that when we have grades of greater than 30 degrees, there is some change in the Open areas that is not counted far density, But for my colleagues, I would like to say to you, in the next couple ~f days I'm going to leave in your mailboxes, you have 4 Imai's presentation, but I will leave in your mailboxes the calculations that we currently have on the ag areas, sa that you have something to compare. On that note, we did have one written testimony, am I correct, and we have one registered speaker, JaAnn Yukimura, I saw her here. Oh, okay. Jt3ANN YUI~IMUR.A: Thank yau. Committee Chair Furfaro, members of the Council, JaAnn Yukimura far the record. I want to thank Deputy Planning Director Aiu for a very clear explanation of Bill 2339. It really shawl why we're having so many problems with our so-called ag subdivisions. And thank yau Vice Ghair Furfaro for arranging far the presentation. I submitted testimony an November 18 in favor of this bill, and I noticed just now because I brought my old testimony along that I had a typo an the bill number. So am clear now, it's 2339, and this is the bill we're talking about. It's my opinion that proposed bill draft number...well now it's Bill 2339, will provide critical support for protecting the rural character of Kauai and preventing sprawl, which are key goals for our community as articulated in the General Plan, As we know, one of the main problems of our planning process is the lack of implementation fallow-up, and so I want to congratulate and thank the mayor and the planning department far initiating this very important implementation action as recommended in the General Plan. By s'upparting this bill, yau will be supporting good planning. I think passage of this bill would be a fitting way to validate and honor the vision and hard work of all those who put time and energy and passion into updating our General Plan, which is...was in the year 2000, and I know that Committee Chair Furfaro was part of the Planning Commission back then. Mr. Furfaro: That's correct... and part of the General Plan. Ms. Yukimura: And part of the General Plan Committee. There were many others involved, and it was a goad update in many ways, and yau know, it'll only be of value if we can actually implement its recommendations. Sa I urge passage of this bill, Mr. Furfaro: Thank yau. Ms. Yukimura: Any questions? Mr, Furfaro: JoAnn, I just want to let know, we don't have a specific date in our calendar right now for this in January, but it will be in January. Sa... Ms. Yukimura: Are you meaning it may not be on the next committee meeting in the new year? Mr. Furfaro: There's na more committee meetings for this year. 5 Ms. Yukimura: Right, but is this likely to be on the first committee meeting of the year`? Mr. Furfaro: I'm hoping it would be. Ms. Yukimura: Okay. Mr. Nakamura: Vice Chair, it will be on the January 13 Planning Committee agenda. Ms. Yukimura: January 13. Thank you very much. Mr. Furfaro: So that is the first committee meeting next year. Ms. Yukimura: ©kay, thank yau. Mr, Furfaro: fJur calendar just came out if anybody wants one. So we have them available. Ms. Yukimura: {Jkay, great. Thank you. Mr. Furfaro: Thank you. Is there anyone else that would like to testify on this bill? If not, I am going to go ahead and end this public hearing on this bill. Thank you very much. There being no further testimony on this matter, the public hearing adjourned at 3:04 p.m. Respectfully submitted, PETER A. NAS~;AMI.TRA County Clerk /ao ~ltt. 6 c~ ~ 3. ~ ~ y,. ~ - LAND LTSE RESEARCH FOUNDATION OF HAWAII . qoo Bishop street, Ste. t928 ~ Honolulu, Hawaii g68i;~ Phone Sat.-4717 Pax x,36-os32 Via Fax: (8081241-6gg..9 December ;t6, 200g Honorable Bill Kaipo Asing, Council Chair Members of Kauai Council 444 Rice Street, Suite 23j Lihue, Kauai, Hawaii gb76b Comments and Concerns regarding Bill No. 2339. A Bill for an Ordinance Amending .Article 8 of Chapter 8 of the Kauai County Code 1987, As Aimended, Relating to Development Standards in the Open District Honorable Chair Asing and Council Members: My name is Dave Arakawa, and I am the Executive Director of the Land Use Research Foundation of Hawaii {LURE), a private, non-profit research and trade association whose members include major Hawaii landowners, developers and a utility company. One of LURF's missions is to advocate for reasonable, rational and equitable land use planning, legislation and regulations that encourage well-planned economic growth and development, while safeguarding Hawaii's significant natural and cultural resources and public health and safety. This measure appears well-intended and LURE supports the intent of the proposed bill, however, we have several major comments and concerns regarding Bill 2389: and respectfully request that Bill 2889 be rre-referred to Committee to review and evaluate the major comments and concerns eacpressed below, Background. AS you know, many of LURF's members are involved in agriculture, and over the years, LURE has been supportive of Agricultural concerns. LURF has joined with the Hawaii Farm Bureau Federation (Farm Bureau) in support of the appropriate use of agricultural lands for viable agricultural production, the process for designation and preservation of Important Agricultural Lands ("IAL") and the establishment of IAL incentives to encourage the designation of LEI.,. LURE worked with the Farm Bureau and a consensus-based coalition other agricultural stake holders toward the successful passage of Act 183 by the State legislature in 2005. In 2008, LURE again worked with the Farm Bureau and the same stakeholders to recommend that the legislature pass a bill implementing the I13L incentives at the state level through the passage of Act 233 {2008), which became HRS 2aS-4~.~. Bill 2gg9. The purpose of this bill is to close the County Open District "density bonus" as discussed in the County General Plan by imposing controls on development of land A'I'IACIiMEN'i 1 32-16-2Q09 Public I~ie.a~cing Honorable Bill Kaipo Asing, Council Chair Members of Kauai Council December z6, 2009 Page 2 zoned County Open and Agriculture Districts within the State Land 1Jse Commission Agricultural District, specifically by imposing a density cap and limitations on the subdivisions containing mixed zoning of County Open and Agriculture Districts. L1:1RF's Comments ~ Concerns. LURF has the following major comments and concerns: i, Inconsistency of Subdivision Criteria - , Proposed Bill No, 2389 is confusing from the perspective that there seems to be two different sets of subdivision criteria, as follows: First, in Section 8-~.4 (d), the proposed amendment establishes that, "Fox parcels which contain multiple zoning designations, each designation shall be considered individually in applying the standards of this Chapter, with the exception that any lot or parcel located in the State Land Use Commission Agricultural District and containing fifty (S0) acres or more in the County Open District shall be considered together with the County Agriculture district for the purpose of determining parcel acreage to apply subdivision standards." Second, in Subsection (c){q.}, the Bill stipulates, "For contiguous lots or parcels of record in common ownership existing prior to or an September 1, i9~2, within an area designated as "Agricultural" by the State Land TJse Commission the following standards shall apply. Parcel area shall be calculated in accordance with Section 8-s,4 (d): {A} Parcels not more than fifty ($o}acres, maybe subdivided into parcels not less than five {S) acres in size. (B) Parcels larger than fifty (~0) acres, but not more than three hundred (300) acres maybe subdivided into io or fewer parcels, none of which maybe smaller than five (S} acres... What set of criteria would determine haw a parcel of land is to be subdivided In the first provision, take a parcel that is say 40 acres in size with 20 acres zoned Open and 20 acres zoned Ag. This parcel would be allowed 5 lots for the Open and ~ lots in the Ag portions or a total of io lots. The second set of provisions seems to indicate that this 4o-acre parcel would only be allowed 8 lots because none of the lots can be less than 5 acres in size. If this is clearly not the intent, then the two sets of criteria need to be clarified. 2. Inconsistency with the Important Agricultural Lands (IAI.) Law. The new provisions of BiIl 2339 which restrict the number of farm dwellings seem inconsistent with the recent IAL law relating to employee housing, which generally provides as follows (HRS 205-45.x, originally Act 233 Session Laws of Hawaii 2008) which provides as follows §2og-4~.~ Important agricultural land; farm dwellings and employee housing. A landowner whose agricultural lands are designated as important agricultural lands may deuetap, construct, and 2 Honorable Bill Kaigo Acing, Council Chair Members of Kauai Council December ib, 2oc~g Page g maintain farm dwellings and employee housing for farmers, employees, and their immediate family members on these lands; provided that: (i} The farm dwellings and employee housing units shall be used exclusively by farmers and their immediate family members who actively and currently farm on important agricultural land upon which the dwelling is situated; provided further that the immediate family members of a farmer may lice in separate dwelling units situated on the same designated Iand; (2} Employee housing units shall be used exclusively by employees and their immediate family members who actively and currently work on important agricultural land upon which the housing unit is situated; provided further that the immediate family members of the employee shall not live in separate housing units and shall live with the employee; (g} ? tte total land area upon which the farm dwellings and employee ht~using units and aII appurtenances are situated shaft not occupy more than flue per cent t~f the total important agricultural land area controlled by the farmer or the employee's employer or, f1j'ty acres, whichever is less; The farm dwellings and employee housing units shall meet all applicable building code requirements; (5) Notwithstanding section 20~-~.~(a)(i2), the landowner shall not plan or develop a residential subdivision on the important agricultural land; (6} Consideration may be given to the duster development of farm dwellings and employee housing units to maximize the land area available for agricuIfuraI production; and (7} The plans for farm dwellings and employee housing units shall be supported by agricultural plans that are approved by the department of agriculture. [L 2ao8, c 23~, §2] Emphasis added. We would strongly recommend that prior to adopting Bill 23gg, that the Corporation Counsel shoxild review Bill a33g, to determine whether it is consistent with the I.AL law. 3. Bill X339 may not be consistent with Bill 231$ {2oOg) Agricultural Workforce JFIausing bill. We also are concerned that Bill 2339 may not be consistent with Bill 2gi8 (2009}, which is the current Agriculture workforce housing bill being proposed by the Council. Bi1123i8 was recently deferred to January 20.0 while an Ad-Hoc Committee of members, including the Kauai Farm Bureau, the Koolau co-operative and former Councilwoman JoAnn Yukimura work on the bill with county departments of Finance, Water and Planning. The purported purpose of Bill 2318 is to include agriculture farm worker housing as one of the ih uses and structures that require a use permit in agricultural districts, As drafted, Bi1123z$ has a number of requirements including requiring that the farm generate at least $x,000 of gross sales of agricultural products each year for 2 consecutive years and the living space does 3 Honorable Bill Kaipa Acing, Caunct~ Chair Members of Kauai Council December rb, 2009 Page ~ not exceed i2oo square feet. Some farmers are proposing amendments to the existing bill including reducing the gross sales to $i2,ooo per year instead of the $3S,ooo currently proposed. In November 2009, Bill 2J1$ (2oog} was deferred by the Planning Committee until January 20~.o to allow the Ad-Hoc working group to identify three main issues facing the bill, which include; (1} how the properties will be taxed; (2} haw they will combine their catchment systems with the county's water meters to keep the farm land adequately hydrated; and {3} if the housing permits will run with the land - resulting in a permanent increase in density - or temporarily with the farm as long as it is in operation. See Attached Exhibit "i" article "Farm Worker Housing Bill Deferred.", Garden Isle, November 2, 2ooga. To avoid any inconsistencies between Bill 23Sg and Sill 2:318, we would respectfully recommend that the adoption of Sill x339 be deferred until the conclusion afthe current public review of Sill 2318 relating to .Agricultural workforce housing. 4. It is unclear how the adoption of Sill X339 may impact the outcome of the ongoing Kauai County I.AL Pilot Study. Kauai County is the only county currently undergoing an IAL Pilot Study with the University of Hawaii Department of Urban and Regional Planning to assist the State Z and Use Commission on the designation of IAL. The purpose of this study is to assist the County of Kauai in identifying important agricultural lands. The Study wi11 involve a series of Stakeholder/Technical Advisory Committee meetings and general public meetings where the goals areas follows; ~l} work with the Kauai community; (2} refine methods developed during the pilot study; (S} examine legislative criteria; (4) identify IAL; and (5} create policy recommendations relating to agricultural lands to support the viability of the agricultural industry. See attached as Exhibit "2", Kauai IAL Study Brochure}. Because it is unclear how the adoption of Sill X339 may impact the outcome of the ongoing Kauai County IAL Pilot Study, we would respectiF~illy recommend that the adoption of Bill 2339 be deferred until the conclusion of the Kauai IAL Pilot Study. S, The decrease inland valuation caused by this bill should be reflected immediately in Kauai County real property ta?x assessments. We assume that the current real property tax assessments for Open-zoned Agricultural lands reflect the highest and best use of those lands under the current law which would allow a certain number of residences and density. However, this law would reduce the existing allowable density in the Open zone, thus reducing the value of that real property. If this bi11 passes, we would strongly recommend the following provision be added, to accurately and appropriately recognize the fact that the land value would be reduced. "The County's real property tax assessment divi.~ion shall adjust values immediately to address the impact of the reduction in land values resulting from the enactment of this bill." 4 Honorable Bill Kaipo Asing, Council Chair Members of Kauai Council December i6, 2009 Page g Based on the above, we respectfully request that Bill 2339 be deferred by the Council and re-referred to Committee for review and evaluation of the above manor concerns. Thank you for the opportunity to express our comments and concerns regarding Bill 2339. Print Version 5 Farm worker l~ttsing bill deferred http://www.kauaiworld.cottl/ar6eles124Q911 tlt)2fnewslkal~ai newstdoc4... ~ ~a7 News > Kauai Neves Farm worker housing bill deferred e~ -- ~- -• By Michael Levine • 71re Gartisn Island Pui~shad: Monday, November 2, 2tM9 3:10 AM HST LIHU'E -The 4{aua'i County Council`s Planning Committee this week deferred until January a biEl that would allow farms to provide housing for their workers, potentially providing a boon to island agriculture. Planning Committee Chair lay Furfaro confirmed what he had stated earlier in the week: An ad hoc committee of members of the Kauai Farm Bureau, the Koolau ca-operative and former Counciiwornan IOAnn Yukimura is continuing its work an the bill in conjunction with the county departments of Finance, Water and Planning. Furfaro has said the three main issues facing the bill are how the properties will be taxed, how they will combine their catchment systems with the county's water meters to keep the farm land adequately hydrated, and if the housing permits will run with the land -~- resulting in a permanent increase in density - or temporarily with the farm for as long as it Is in operation. The Kauai Farm Bureau and other supporters of agriculture have expressed concerns that the bill, despite its positive intentions, could be used as a loophole for developers and the real estate industry to further inflate the price of ag land and price out working-class people. The Planning Committee voted unanimously to defer Biil No. 2318 until its first meeting In January. Capynght ~ 2004 - Kaual Pubishing Company [x] Cbse Window 1 l7f 1 zallsrat}o~ ~~:az a.Nt EXHIBIT "1" . d'" N+aw can 1 be involved in this ~ , ~ n itiative~' ,,--~-~, Pro~,ec# Team _ ~ 1.) Attend our Kick-tiff Meeting: ~~~~a'£t InfO!"n1at1O1'1 Wednesday, September 30, 2009 s 5:30 pm to 7:30 pm ~ ~ ` ~ ~~~- Proj~cfi Coordinator: Kauai War Memorial _ ~ ~ - Lea Kaiaokarrial're Check out our website: ' ~ 3 '~-.'"' < ~Ct~~unty of Kauai Planning Department • ~,r ~ http;//sites.~aaele.camisite/kauaiial/ 4444 Rice Street #473 t , P' Submit a Statement of Interest to be 88.241.4061 ~ ~ ~:r.. considered far our StakehalderjTechnical 'k. ; Advisory Committee {STAG} due an ar by ~ ~ ~ y P;raject Ca!n~;ct; k C}ctober 9, 2009. ~ , Watch far more public meetings to came! Made 8rurtner ~ r '"~..---'' •.Universitj~ of Hawaii.at Manna ~epartni'ent of Urban &~ftegional Planning -.,, ~ ~ ri:'~ Kk~ f ~ a- xcy ae ~ ` 2~' 24 Maiie Way Saunders 1G7 P1"1 ~ f~ ~ ` ~ _ ~y ~r~ ~Hono{ulu;`W1~9,6822 ~ ~ ~ ~~'r:. ,508.956~.7~81 ~ ~ ; Rg'~`~" .rrw ~ ~ s ~a r ~ yv Proiect~rnai1: ~ ~ r~ uhrn.ial@`~mail.com - ~ ,,~- { ~a~~ Lj~r f ` S.a S^' X41 V ` ~i ~Y - Project Background H+e~lw are IAts identified? U 2008, the University of Hawaii Department of Urban & Regional Planning (UH DURP} completed a pilot study Lands meeting the following criteria shall be given •~•r far the State the Land Use Commission on the designation of Important Agricultural Lands (IALs) using the consideration by the State Land Use Commission: framework from Act 183, SLH 2005. The pilot study examined legislation relating to IAL, gathered data and Land currently used for agricultural production; developed a method for identifying IALs, focusing on the Koloa-Paipu District on Kauai. The study included bath 2. Land with sail qualities and growing conditions that an urban growth model as well as alternative policy scenarios. support agricultural production of food, fiber, or fuel- and energy-producing craps; '~rr::¦ Fulfilling the legislative mandate in Act 183, the County of Kauai subsequently approved funding to contract 3. Land identified under agricultural productivity rating .~r~ with UH DURP to identify IALs county-wide. The purpose of this study is to assist the County of Kauai in systems, such as the agricultural lands of importance identifying important agricultural lands. to the State of Hawaii {ALI5H}system adopted by the board of agriculture on January 28, 1977; The study will involve a series of StakeholderfTechnical Advisory Committee {STAG) meetings as well as general 4, Land types associated with traditional native public meetings. UH DURP will work with the County of Kauai Planning Department to: Hawaiian agricultural uses, such as taro cultivation, or • Work with the Kauai community unique agricultural crops and uses, such as coffee, • Refine methods developed during the pilot study vineyards, aquaculture, and energy production; • Examine legislative criteria 5. Land with sufficient quantities of water to support Identify Important Agricultural Lands viable agricultural peoduetiorr, f s • Create policy recommendations relating to agricultural lands to support the viability of the agricultural 6, Land whose designation as important agricultural industry {ands is consistent with genera(, development, and community plans of the county; ,parr ~ 7. Land that contributes to maintaining a Critical land I~ What are iA~s? mass important to agricultural operating activity; and 7 MP Pursuant to Act 183, SLH 2005, Important Agricultural 8. Land with ar near support infrastructure conducive to Lands [IALs} are: agricultural productivity, such as transportation to • capable of producing sustained high yields when markets, water, or power. treated and managed according to accepted farming methods and technology; • contribute to the State's economic base and produce ' :.~- s', r~ . agricultural commodities for export or Ioeal ' 1~?r`~~ _ consumption; and ' • are needed to promote the expansion of agricultural activities and income for the future, even if currently 1~~'hat IS the f uf'ure C), f ~ ~ not in production. i = agriculture an Kaual? dpria~Ina9[lrxlsd ~npa(fYme.b~St9~ed Haan (AI.ISHF AGRICULTURAL DENSITIES Section 8-7.5 Permitted Residential Densifies. Permitted residential densities shall be calculated as follows: (1) Dne (i) dwelling unit for each parcel ane (1) acre or larger. (2} One (t) additional dwelling unit For each additonal three {3) acres in the same parcel, provided that no mare than five (5) dwelling units may be developed an any ane {t} parcel. (3} A parcel or contiguous f ~ ~ als in common ownership at record existing prior to or an Sep#emher ~ 1572, which is smaller than one {1}acre, may devebp ane {4} t u.. (Drd. Na. t&d, August t7, 4872; Sec. &7.5, R.C.O. 1976} C}PEN DENSITIES Section 8.8.5 Develapmerri Standards far ConsirucGo_n and Use Within An Open District. (b) Residential Densities, Except as otherwise provided in this Article, no more Than one (1) single family detached dwelling unit per three {3) acres aT land hall be pemtitted when the parcel is totaled within an area designated'Urban' or'RuraP by the Stale Land Use Commission, and na more than one (1} single family detached dweiting unit per five (5) acres of land shaft be permitted when the parcel #s lacakad within an area designated as "Agriculture" by the State land Use Cotrrmission, provided that the provisions at this Article shah not prohibit the construction a main[enanae of one (t) single family detached dwelling with necessary associated land coverage on any Iegat parcel or tot exsting prior io ar on September 4, 7972. COMPARATIVE DENSITIES lot Size Dien Zane Density A_gricuhure Zane f]ensity t Acre 0 units 7 Unii d Acres 0 units 2 Units 7 Acres i Units 3 Units 10 Acres 2 Units d Units 13 Acres 2 Units 5 Units 25 Acres 5 Units 5 Units 100 Acres 20 Units 5 Units A'i'IACI~NrI 2, ~ ~2-16-20Q9 Public Hearing DENSITY CAP The fallowing language is added to Section 8.8.5 'and provided that no more than five (5f dwelling units may be developed on any one parcel.' CURRENT tAW PROPOSED tAW rc~ w ~ rs} t+-S Urv~Ta t00 AtYL5 r"EH-a2 -• 1<Xf Av"~•,~'._~ UN' S DENSITY CQMPARIS(~NS t.o{ Si;,e Open_ lone f.}ensi~„yt AgriwRure Zane Density 7 Acre 0 units 7 Unit 4 Acres 0 units 2 Units 7 Acres 7 Units 3 Units t0 Acres 2 Units d Units 13 Acres 2 Units 5 Units 25 Acres 5 Units 5 Unfits 100 Aarax 5 Units 5 Units AG SUBDIVISIQN (b} Method of Calculating Altawabie Subdivision of Agdcullure lands, (1}Contiguous lots or partets of record in common ownership existing prior to or on September 1, 1972, n6 target than three hundred {300} acres may be subdivided only in accardante with iha following cri(eda: {A} Parcels not more than ten (i0} acres may be subdivided into parcels not Tess than one (1 }acre in size. {B} partets larger than ten {14} acres, but not more than twenty {24} acres, may be subdivided into parcels not less than two {2} acres in size, except that nai more than four (4} lots in the parse[ may be one (i) acre in size, (C}Parcels larger than tweny (20) acres, but not more than thirty (34} acres, may 6e subdivided into parcels not less than three (3} acres in size, except that not more than four {4} lots in the parcel may be one {i }acre fn sire. (D) Parcels larger than thirty (34} acres, but not more than fifty {50} acres, may be subdivided into partets not less than five (5} arras in size. {E} Parcels larger than fifty (50} acres, but not more than throe hundred 2 AG SUBDIVISION STANDARDS ___i___ 10 ACRES AG 10 - 1 ACRE LOTS Parcels not more than ten (10) acres may be subdivided into parcels not less than one (1) acre in size. AG SUBDIVISION STANDARDS 41 ACRE LOTS 16 ACRES AG n-<AVrctJ Wf5 Parcels larger than ten (10) acres, but not more than twenty (20) acres, may be subdivided into parcels not less than two (2) acres in size, except that not more than four (4) lots in the parcel may be one (1) acre in size AG SUBDIVISION STANDARDS T_ T o J'; ) I j w I I I I U L~ i Q ~ J ~ ~ 7-~3 AGRE LOTS 25 AGRESAG Parcels larger than twenty (20) acres, but not more than thirty (30) acres, may be subdivided into parcels not less than three (3) acres in size, except that not more than four (4) lots in the parcel may be one (1) acre in size. 3 AG SUBDIVISION STANDARDS I ; ~ --r- - _ _,- I _- ~xl ACRES AG q6.5 AGR, ;t_CTS Rarcels larger than thirty {30} acres, but not mare than fifty (50} acres, may be subdivided into parcels not less Phan five {5} acres in size. AG SUBDIVISION STANDARDS 5.6 ~cnE 1.015 -.- IIYO ACRESAL°. Parcels larger than fifty {50} acres, but not more than three hundred {300} acres may be subdivided into ten {'i0} or fewer parcels, none of which may be smaller Phan five {5) acres. AG SUBDIVISION STANDARDS _ . , , , r-r'` +--..-.._:.AG t47.5 ACRE .4 iS Conm- sus lots ar p ~ rls of record in common wmership existing to or on septtmber 1, 1972, larger than three hundred {3D0) acres may be subd~~ided only in accordance with the following criteria: A maximum of seventy-fvt (75}acres may be subdivided into n01 more than ten {tD) parcels, none of which Shall be Smaller Than r1Vt {~3) aCi'eS. An additional twenty percent {20%) of the Io:al parcel area or three hundred {30D) setts, whichever is [tss, may be subdivided inlo parctls, none o! which Shall be sma#Itr than twenty-five {25) accts. The 6atance of €ht arcel area shaft not be subdivided. OPEN SUBDIVISION No parcel or Iot shall be created which is less than three {3} acres in size within an area designated as `Urban or'Rural" by the State Land Use Commission, or Tess than five {5} acres in size within an area designated as'AgricutWre' try the State Land Use Commission, except wiihin an `Urban' area a let or parcel may be created which is one acre or mare in size iF the existing average slope of the 3of or parrzl thus created is no greater than ien percenf {10%}. SUBDIVISION STANDARDS COMPARISON ~ - ~ ~ t I - - 10 ACRES AC, 10 - 1 ACRE LOTS ~ ~ I 50AGRESOPEN 2-5ACRE LCTS SUBDIVISION STANDARDS COMPARISON j a~~ea¦ia aien~alg , _ __-_ - _ I i__. d l g l~ l e l - ~ I r t nFaislmia _______50 aCRE5OPEN ra -S ACRE LOTS SUBDIVISION STANDARDS COMPARISON ,,-. ~ ~ _ l ~..- ~.i .j PROPOSED SUBDIVISION STANDARDS Parcels not more #han fifty (50) acres, maybe subdivided into parcels not fess than hve {5) acres in size. } ~ 13 ~d ~ ~ 8 C7 0 _ D I i ~ k•GE2E54i'Ft+ :~kE. 4:; - PROPOSED SUBDIVISION STANDARDS Parcels laryar;hen fiftJ' (St?J acres, bu# not mo~~- than fhrae hundred (3(JOJ acres maybe subdivided into ten (f O) or sewer parcels, none of whieh maybe smafkr than five {5) s u es _ s-snore~,o~_ - - + ~I~:® rte, lUO ACRG4(WEN S~SRCRE STS ~.T PROPOSED SUBDIVISION STANDARDS ~ , , U of s R maztmum of saverHy-hve {75) acres ma y be a ~bdiveded into not More than ten jtOr parcels, none of whrctr shag be smatter than hve {5) acres. An addihonat twerMy percent {20°,ln) of the total parcel area or three hundn:d (306} acres, whrcheverrs less, may be subdivided into parcels, none of which shaft be smaller than twenty-Frye (25) acres. The balance of ttre areal area shall net Ge subdivided, MIXED ZONE SUBDIVISION CURRENT 4.AW iF -i- i i i m - ~ ____d, ~ i ~ .X.1501`L~ ~ •~.SnGhF 'ii5 MIXED ZONE SUBDIVISION PROPOSED SUBDIVISION STANDAF2DS )fin , raFS n~ ~~~~~- I it C ___J 1 i~~ t r~_ cw _-it-~_FN r 10-2A AGP_-_:=":i Parcels taryer than hRy {SOJ acres, but not more t8,r three hundred {366} acres maybe subdivided into !an {t OJ or fewer parcels, none of wfiict7 may be smatter than five {SJ acres 7 MIMED ZONE SUBDIVISION PROPOSED SUBDIVISION AND CUMULATIVE ACREAGE ANDARDS ~u, ..-srs na a- _ ~ { 1 s_ For parcels containing muHiple zoning dasignafions each design ~ ~ lion shall 6e considered individtralty in applying the slander ofthis Ghat#er, with the exception that any lot or parcel located in the State Land Usa Gammission Agriculhrrat t7isfrici and containing filly (50} saes ar more in the Gounfy Open District shall be consideretl together with the Courrfy Agriculture fJisrrid For the purpose oldetermining pares! acreage M apply subdivision standards. V