2016.9.2 DOC1 HCDP Summary of Community Input

Home

IAL policies in State law without the LUC's and State's permission. Also there is no State statute listing IAL land uses; and the LUC has not confirmed any of the county lands IAL under the County Mandatory Designation program. This situation puts landowners in a confusing situation. Should a landowner conclude that State IAL is already in force by virtue of the 2005 GP and may be further in force when the CDP is approved? Would a landowner who disagrees with a County IAL thus be subject to some kind of statute of limitation? Is the County ready to issue a binding opinion about whether a particular parcel qualifies for list as State IAL now? Or are the County IAL provisions intended to become binding only when the State completes its IAL process (even if the GP :46 CDP do not specifically say so)? So my suggestion is that: 1. The County and CDP change the LUPAG "IAL' designation wording to reference a "agriculture" or "Ag" designation; and 2. The GP should be amended and a caveat should be included in the CDP that any reference to "IAL" or "Important Agricultural Lands" will not be binding until the entire LUC IAL process is completed and a State bill is passed to define the land uses for Important Agricultural Lands. (the other option being to remove the IAL references in the GP and CDP) IRMW I also think it is not too early to start thinking about how to approach the designation of IAL parcels to the LUC. In the June 1 comments I submitted some suggestions about what the designation process might include, the criteria for designating a parcel IAL, and why our parcel would not qualify for IAL. A couple other comments about the designation process are: *there are many reasons why the Laupahoehoe Homestead lands should be re -zoned Rural (vs. agriculture) which is, by definition, not IAL *Planning assured us at the 5-25-16 meeting that not all of the current LUPAG County IAL would be designated as State IAL *the State IAL includes criteria that would exclude many Hawaii County agricultural parcels from IAL the experience of both Kauai and Oahu, so far, has been that less than half of the agricultural zoned parcels become State IAL (leaving the other parcels to be subject to the current agricultural zoning) *despite the concerns of some in the public about losing agricultural land to housing, there is actually a good balance between agriculture and development: for instance, Hamakua agricultural zoning is 163,193 acres (not including open and no zone/government land) while various housing or commercial zoning takes up 687 acres (less that 1% of the total ag and development zoning). Since 2006 Hamakua has gained jobs; and investments in the community have grown source: Hamakua Agricultural Plan. see also "Can Hawaii Feed Itself" (http://www.hawaiibusiness.com/can-hawaii- feed-itself/) and "The Coast is Clear" http://www.hawaiibusiness.com/the-coast-is- clear/ *The IAL designations should be for the "best and most productive agriculturally zoned lands... according to uniform standards and criteria that are flexible, fair and acceptable." source: Hamakua Agricultural Plan. (see other criteria in the June 1 comments) *Rural uses (small farms) are also productive source: Hamakua Agricultural Plan; We are HAMAKUA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) I Section 3: Preferred Land Use & Settlement Patterns