Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> i <br /> COBLENTZ, <br /> PATCH, DUFFY one krty Buiklrg Sui[e 700 4,639,.4600 <br /> &BASS LLPAn°"`''E'~ ~~~~.~K«~~ tax: 415.989.,663 <br /> AT I.AW 9d,11-41,? web: www.cohlm¢law.ran <br /> G2gory D. Hendrickson <br /> Email: gdh~coblerdzlaw.com <br /> May 31, 2007 <br /> Honorable Pete Hoffman, Chairperson <br /> Hawaii County Council <br /> 25 Waupun St. <br /> Hilo, Hawaii 96720 <br /> Re: TESTIMONY IN OPPOSITION TO BILL 51 DRAFT 3, AN ORDINANCE <br /> AMENDING CHAPTER 27, FLOOD CONTROL, HAWAII COUNTY CODE <br /> 1983 (2005 EDITION), AS AMENDED, RELATING TO STORMWATER <br /> MANAGEMENT <br /> Dear :Chairperson Hoffman and Members of the Hawaii County Council <br /> As a full-time resident of Kealakekua and as an attorney that has practiced <br /> conservation law for the past 10 years, I am writing to express my opposition to <br /> amendments recently proffered to Bill 51 by Councilperson Ford. While I have concerns <br /> with several provisions in the Bill I am particularly concerned with and have chosen to <br /> address with this testimony, language that has been included in Section 12 of the Bill <br /> providing for a new subparagraph (g) for Chapter 27, article 4, section 27-20. The new <br /> subparagraph states: <br /> (gl In Hawaii County. agricultural subdivisions may exist in areas uahill from <br /> urban areas and may have severe flooding consequences; therefore. new agricultural <br /> subdivisions shall comoly with all reauirements of ArtiGe 4, Section 27-17-26. in that <br /> redirected flood channels shall meet base fk>od elevation levels. and aooropriate design <br /> and structures shall tte arovided to retain all rainfall up to a 100-year storm event on the <br /> agricultural land on which the rainfall feN. <br /> My objection to this provision is that (1) it lacks qualitative consideration for the basis of <br /> the subdivision triggering the sign cant retention requirement of the provision; (2) it <br /> lacks even simple proportionality to balance its significant requirements against the <br /> proposed activity; and (3} it has unacceptable ecological implications. <br /> Qualitative Issues: <br /> Proposed subparagraph (g) requires "retention of all rainfall up to a 100-year <br /> stone event on the agricultural land on which the rainfall felP' should any subdivision of <br /> agricultural land occur. This provision ignores the fact that there are a variety of <br /> reasons for effecting a subdivision of land, some of which would not implicate increased <br /> Comm. No. { ~ 0 ~ <br /> Ref. To:'hs - ~ <br /> Ref. Dvte JUN 1 2007 <br /> <br />