The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCOM 0042.003 2004-2006 38099939590 P. 01 DEC-16-2004 11:17 AM HIPC AIONAKA a AaaOCTATE6, L2MRED ALSTON HUNT FLOYp a LNG A9MroRD a WRISTON MA1WAll LEE,MIARO ~LANNINt3 OONFBpENCB tMNK tap HAWAII Ro. EeKnr . NAMI~A NMNAR uPMn~ 9ELT COLLINa HAWAII, LIMITED GOEE SCHUTTE p1lMING l wucMT CASTLE a OOOK! WAIKOLOIL LLC CENTEI( HOMES CENTRAL pAtlP[C BANK Dewmbar 16, 2004 r CLARK REALTY tORPORATION DAN EOLTON ~ - ~ DE LU2 CNTERpRI$ES, 2NC. lARL E. aAKKCN Angel Pllago & pater Hoffman EAST-WEyT CANSUL11Na SERVICIe, LLC CerChairo pIRST MAWArMN EANK t+OmmlttN On Plannl GRCCNWlU. FARMS, INC. ~ MAWAi[ LANO COMPANY 21S Aupunl Street HAWAII PIANiNG Mill, LIMITED HqO, HI 98720 HAWAII ELlCTRIt LIGHT COMPANY - MoLUU~ co PANttsi50 RL": BILL 789, DRAFT 1 I BILL 789, DRAFT Q /BILL 765, ORAt~'T 3 HUALgLAI DEVELOPMCNT COMPANY COUNTY OF IiAWAII GENERAL PLAN IMANAKA, KUDO a FWIMOTO KAHUA RANCH LIMYTEp KAI HAWAII, INC. Dear Co-Chairs Pllago tt Hoffman: KAMEMAMCMA [NVESTMENi CORD, KAMlMAMEHA $CHOOlS 1 am John Ra g ( ) KEgULAKEKUA MNCH?MCN75 testlrying in r~ab to~ine three (31varo~ ni of the nGener'elnPlan beforo y u today. KULIA RANCH As an organfzatlon ws have been Intimately involved in County and State planning Kf'.AUHOU KONA CONSTRUCRON CORP. ieSUea for OVer 3O Pa paled in the eunerlt General Plan raviebn KOCAYASHI GROUP, LLC years $nd have rti01 KDHALA rtANCM, LLC process by attending numerous public forums and BUbmNting verbal and written sum s oaesnon coMPAnr testimony. lANINAU PROplRTTCS, LLC voRANCe a AsaotlATCS Wa belhve the solid work and thoughtful analyele presented in Draft 3 is an MscPARMa Of HAWAII excellent springboard for final completkln of the Oenerel Plan in the near future. MARYL GROUP, INC. MAUNA KCA PROPERTIES While We share the frustration Of many in regard t0 tlIe lengthy process and many Mauna unI sERnce, rnt. delays, we beNeve that vigorous and focused anon oan Incorporate Important M[CANDLF$§ LANG 8 GTrLE COMPANY proposed changes and still reach a contusion In a tlmel manner. Ws belkve McCORRLSTON MILLER MUKAi McKINNON y M e E PAtlp[C, INC both Drafts 2 and 3 make subatantlal knprowmeMs to fha overall ronnat end MENENUNE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY content of the Plen and deserve your Sedoua Consideration. MooeRS errrERPRtsES, LLc NATURE CONSERVANCY Op HAWAII OCEANIC nMC WARNE0. CAEIE OF HAWAII We have a number of specific comments: OKAMARA a ASSOCIATCS PACIP[C RESOURCE PARTnER3H[P . There le a substantial dlfhrenC@ In the VkW between the Plannln Director PARKER RANCH, INC. Q PeR HAWAII and the Planning Commission ffi set out M Me Planning Commission's DONONOlO MNgt, LlMrrto letter Of October 19, 2007. H,,,,.r,~II the Plannin Committee will We QUEEN EMMA pOUNDATION "r'°"' y p 9 QUEEN LtL1UOKAlANf TRUST attention t0 !hose changes suggested by me Planning Commission that R.M. Towle cDRPORAnoN were not adopted by the Planning Director In this latter in response dated IfIEMM OWENSEY PIANNCRS ARCM[TECHTS NOVembBr r~p~ SAM O. NIROTA. INC. sANOwldt ISLES COMMUNICATIONS • We have concerns with the proposed County Conservatbn Designation sspM INTERnanoNAL, Inc. which could potsntialty supereade uses permitted in the State Lend SURCTY KoHAU CORPORATION Conservation DleMct. Aa y, rmE cuARArm Escaow seavlces, iNC. pointed out in earlier testimon Wre believe the Tsa coapoRanon proposed change of tlealgnation of H•1, South Kona 1 from Extensive Ag WAIMEA WATER SlRVICE, Inc. to County Conaervatbn raises a rogulatory taking tscue. WATER MRCSOURECES INTERna7iONAL, INC. • In regard t0 the designation of Important Ag Lands (IAL) We have two WES THOMAS ASSOCIATES, INC. comments. In general Wa believe these designafbns should reflect either wESr HAWAII coNGETe current agrlcuhurat activhy or realistic future agricultural activity. To the WILSON OKAMOTO CORPORATION WIMBERLY ALLISON TONG 6 GOO degree that IM's designate IAL fOr other purposes such as open spex, conservetlon, etc., it only dilutes the category, It also dilutes the category when we Quarry dealgnaled IAL to virtuaAY render the teasifll:atbn msaningbss, as Is the currant state today. To put these Aq deelgnaYans in some perspective, the following State Depertrnent of Agrloukuro data is inbrostinq o At the helgM a<both sugar and pineapple production in the State, their combined acreage totskd about 323,000 acme. o Moro raoently... • For Oahu, total acreage in crop went from 23,300 In 1897 ?.o. sox sass to 19,300 in 2001- a decrease of 4,000 scree. Within KAMUELA, nAwAn saT~a this, pineapple went up 200, but other (diversified) crops 1.3 TEL: soe.ass.sass Comm. No. hAx ~«.saso Ref. To: Praur?is4 P.af. UGte~Ff ~ n ~nnn 18088859590 P. 02 DEC-16-2004 1l :18 AM NLPC went d ,200 acres. Oahu ha about 130,000 acr., .ssHkd/Yoned for agrlafttrro. • For Mat....ouMy, total acroape in crop waM ham 66,800 in 1907 to 48,100 in 2001- a dscroase 017,500 acres, Wlthih this, sugar went down 7,700 sores, pinaspple stayed conshnt, and other (dlveroi8ad) apps went up 200 acne. itAaul has about 400,000 acres daasllNdloned for a0rkulturo. • For KauN, total acroaga in crop went from 28,100 in 1997 to 12,800 in 2001 - a decrease of 13 300 acres. Within this, sugar went down 15,000 acres and other (diversified) crops went down 300 acres. Kauai has about 140,000 sass daaarrtearroradfor agrlalturo. • For the Big Npnd, total acreage M crop stayed constant at 11,900 acres in 1997 and 2001, all attributable to other (drvarsified) props. This does not include plantation forestry. Hawaii has about 1,200,000 acres dasslRedrzaned for agrialhrre. ~ statewide, tota~aereape In sop went from t43,800 in 1'999'7 W 114,700 in 2001- a decrease o/ 28,900 acros. Within this total, super went down 22,700 acres, PIn~PPIe went up to 200 (same ea Oehu), but other (diveroified) crops went down 8,400 acros. Stetewlde, them are about 1,930,000 awes daasMlediioned for agrialture. The arrant General Plan proposes pkcinp 388,2$3 acres in the IAL category. • Speclficapy we disagree with the following proposed IAL designetluna. o Hamakua-1: The tAL district should tap bebw the Hamakua Ditch System. o North Kohala-1: The IAL district slaultl tall below the Kohale Dttch System o S. KOhela•1: The tAl distrct should fap'above the Kohafa Mountain road above the Hawaii Preparatory Academy and should folbw the rainfall belt dosar to Welmea town in the Pu'ukapu rogbn. a S. Kohala-4: The IAL designation should not inrkrde the Mauka Waikoloa, Keamoku and Wapci'l lands as they do not have sufficient rainfall nor could they be ecwrombelly irrigated. o N. Kona-2; N. Kons-3; N. Konen; S. Kona•1: Mauka lends atwvs the coffee belt and rat otherwise suited for agriculture such as the Kaloko Lands (valuable waterehad) should ba deleted from proposed IAL o N. Kone•4; S. Kona-1: The makel lands below the coffee belt (rainfall Ilne) enould be eliminated hom the Proposed IAL In rogard b the process of designating an IAL District, leaf year at the Legislature all of the County Planning Directors, Including Mr. Chris Yuen, eatlmeted that tt would take an avenge o/ (2) years at a cost of rouphiy Sb00,000.00 459h to axurately assess and map the intlivMual IAL Districts }or each County. Clearly this is an eRoR which needs a mare thoughtful analysis. Rural DNMct In general, we believe the County should utilize the rural district to a greater degrce in General Plan tlesipnations. At the State level I bepeve the intent is to make the rural district more'ueer blandly' to agrlalture with right to faun leplelation, etc. IYS important to understand that property taxes wig not rice if AO use (dedicatlon) antlnues on rural dass111ed lands. The County has the mapping capability to overky all exlatlng 1-3 acre Ag subtlivbbns on the General Plan maps. We strongly support redaasifying all of these lends as County General Plan Rural, malntalninptha arroM unina~(,ensity. Phase ropuaet the Planning Department to prepare these maps as a poMt of disassion. Formattlnp W~ support the improvements In formatting adopted In Grafts 2 and 3. CommunNy Developmstft plans We support the language in Draft 3 which adds language to better assess and prloritixe the varying needs around the island to determine the bgical order of developing Community plena. Finally, we weM to stress that devebpmant conditions and agreements haw ohenped considerably in many instances since the introtluctlon or Draft 1. The areas tlf Knhanaiki and Keopuka are prime examples es well as the Hokupa tlevebpment. At the very least, the newly adopted 6ensrol plan must reflect these changes. Thank you for the opportunity to comment and wa look forward to working witll you on the timely edoptan of the General Plan. Regards, John B. Ray Prosident Hawaii Leeward Planning Conference