|
We ran into a snag. And the complaints that we had from the agricultural community was that for the smaller
<br />farmers because there was a requirement for plan approval and because the Council had amended plan approval
<br />to trigger a drainage study that for the small operations and smaller numbers of tourists the drainage study was
<br />an impediment because it required hiring an engineer and it was maybe $5,000 to$6,000 to get a drainage study.
<br />And they were saying that, hey, if we are not putting up new structures, if we’re not putting in asphalt, if we’re
<br />not, you know, doing improvements, cause improvements you’d have to go get a building permit, in other
<br />words, just saying if we are just using what we already have, why do we have to go get this drainage study? So
<br />that was one of the concerns.
<br />
<br />And the other thing is we lumped agricultural tourism regardless of size of operation into one category. So it
<br />took a while looking at it. And we basically tried to come up with at least a two-tiered, actually, it's a three
<br />tiered system, which the current ordinance defines agricultural tourism as having up to 30,000 visitors a year.
<br />And beyond 30,000 you have to go get a special use permit. So what I did is I took that existing number of
<br />30,000 and I broke it into two categories. Minor tourism which would be less than 15,000 tourists a year and
<br />would only have access through 15-passenger vans and single cars, as opposed to tour buses. And for those they
<br />basically wouldn’t need to have that plan approval and it wouldn't trigger a drainage study. So this would take
<br />care of the coffee farmer, you know, or, you know, some of these smaller operations where they’re just putting a
<br />sign up. And, you know, sometimes in many cases they have like a self-guided tour, they’ll have a little
<br />package of, you know, material that explains what the farm is doing. And it’s an opportunity for the farmers to
<br />try and get people to come and buy things at their roadside fruit stand, which is a permitted, already a permitted
<br />use. But it’s to enhance the experience, and perhaps they can also sell some coffee mugs and other things that
<br />have the name of their farm on it. So we tried to break it down into two tiers from 0 to 15,000 people a year.
<br />And we broke that further down by weekly traffic and daily traffic, because obviously you didn’t want a
<br />situation where you had 15,000 people show up on one day out of the year. And so we broke it down by
<br />numbers, you know, and also by the size of the vehicles that could access the property.
<br />
<br />The feeling was that any operation that we would define as major tourism, ag tourism, which would be more
<br />than 15,000 and those types of operations that would have larger tour buses which would have more of an
<br />impact on the roads, which would have bigger issues with turning radius, and also would require certain parking,
<br />you know, accommodations for those larger vehicles, that those should have a drainage study, have a plan
<br />approval, and tell us, you know, how are you accommodating these larger groups that are going to come to your
<br />property. And then we left in the requirement that if it is more than 30,000 it has to be a special use permit,
<br />which would then require public hearings and notices to the neighbors and stuff like that. And so basically I just
<br />tweaked the existing ordinance that is in place to try and break it into two different categories. And also we
<br />added some additional definitions of what, you know, ag tourism is, what is agriculture. There may be need to
<br />add additional definitions as this goes through, you know, to the Council because we are still getting comment
<br />in.
<br />
<br />I gave copies to the HATA, which is the Hawai‘i Agricultural Tourism Association. I also took copies to our
<br />local agriculture committee that is working on, you know, where do we go with ag, what do we do, how do we
<br />enhance ag. And they’ve asked and sent emails out to different farmers that are on their lists. And so we’re still
<br />receiving some input from them. And basically their response has been that they think this is the right direction
<br />to go. They think there might be a few tweaks here and there. Like the one e-mail we had is like, you know, I
<br />guess I didn't put botanical garden in but they're saying that they consider that to be agricultural tourism already.
<br />And so, you know, it’s a work in progress but it is trying to respond to the concerns that we have heard. And
<br />we've heard from other counties. They had been waiting to see what we did with this, cause they are going to
<br />try and use this as a model to try and adopt ordinances in the counties.
<br />
<br />Of course all of this, some of this may be moot, depending on what the State Legislature does. Because they are
<br />tweaking it and we are still not sure what they are doing, because we don't have any provisions in ag tourism for
<br />overnight accommodations. If you want to have overnight accommodations you still have to come and get a
<br /> 2
<br /> EXHIBIT A
<br />
<br />
<br />
|