Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0211.017 2004-2006 ~JM<r os x~~+. dy; FRED C. HOLSCHUH, M.D TEL: 961-8538 Council Member "r'oY+~"' Hawaii County Council 25 Au nni Street ~"i /lilo, Hawnii 96720 L=~.'J ~~iil 1 t j' 1 Telephone: (808) 961-8255 Fncsimi(c (R08J 961-8912 May 17, 2005 MEMORANDUM TO: K. Angel Pilago and Pete Hoffmann, Co-Chairs, Planning Committee and Members of the Planning Committee FROM: Fred C. Holschuh, M.D. ~ KE: Bill 80 Bill 80 broadly seeks to prohibit luxury features within subdivisions in the state agricultural district. It also presumes to protect the affordability and productivity of agricultural lands. . In recent years, we have all witnessed an amazing spike in the prices of homes and land throughout the State of Hawaii. We have seen such bubbles in the real estate market before. Like a tsunami, they tend to sweep everything along in a great wave. We see the unimproved lot market booming. We see a boom in the planned subdivision market. Condominium prices rise right along with the single family home market. All this is driven by people seeking homes and equity, as people naturally do. Meanwhile, much of the vast inventory of ag lands leR by the plantation era remains fallow and unproductive. Astute observers say outright what Bill 80 does not: we have far more lands classified in agriculture than we have farmers who are ready, capable, capitalized, and willing to farm. Bill 80 does not address this problem. Instead, it seeks to regulate and frustrate lifestyle preferences by prohibiting certain amenities, including the size of one's home. This year, our state legislature considered a similar bill, House Bill 109. In its original form, it proposed that "a subdivision or development is not agricultural, and does not consist of farm dwellings if it includes any of the following: (I) lots situated along golf course fairways; (2) a gated entry; (3) covenants that restrict agricultural uses; or (4) private country club facilities, members' accommodations, hotels, or other resori facilities;" In its wisdom, this bill was amended by aseven-member legislative conference committee that included Senator Russell Kokubun and House Representatives Dwight Takamine and Bob Herkes from the Big Island. Their amendments supported efforts to create more rural districts by: (1) allowing the counties to work with the l.,and Use Commission to develop policy and recommend boundary amendments to expand and enhance the use of rural districts; and (2) convening an advisory group to redefine rural districts. Comm. No. 2 ~ ~ • ~ I Ref. To: Prese Rc~f. Date Memorandum Re: Bill 80 May 17, 2005 Page 2 House Bill 109, as adopted, does prohibit golf courses on ag lands prospectively after July I, 2005. However, it does not adopt the other restrictive standards now proposed by Bill 80. It has not yet been signed into law by Governor Lingle. [ts guidance, however, should be respected. We should follow its lead. We should not create new standards not otherwise found in state law. Four years ago, the state Land Use Commission rejected a petition to adopt restrictive standards by yule such as those proposed by Bill 80. We should also follow the direction of the LUC in this matter. Bill 80 may place the County of Hawaii at risk for costly and divisive litigation. A number of ag subdivisions within our county contain golf courses, large houses, and "resort-like features." [s it the intent of Bill 80 to dismantle such existing subdivisions, or features within subdivisions? It was precisely this concern that prompted Mayor Kim to go to Honolulu to testify before the legislature on House Bill 109. Mayor Kim asked the legislature to protect homes within the ag district that have already received subdivision approval, as well as projects already containing golf courses and club facilities. "County government made commitments that have to be honored," he said. Bill 80 says that it shall apply prospectively to subdivisions that have not received final subdivision plat approval. We should seek a Corporation Counsel opinion regarding the possibility of litigation that might stem from this proposed ordinance. The County already is facing potentially staggering damages due to a lawsuit that may soon be filed by Hokuli a lot owners. We should be careful not to add to the County's liability, or its taxpayers. For these reasons, I recommend that we file Bill 80. Instead, we should become fully familiar with House Bill 109 and House Bill 1640, relating to important agricultural lands. These bills task the counties to propose lands for reclassification into the rural district, and to support a process for the designation of important ag lands. These are the real tasks before us: to protect and refine our historically rural character, and to protect important ag lands with genuine incentives for real working farmers. Neither the legislature nor the Land Use Commission has adopted the restrictions proposed by Bill 80. Nor should we. Let's follow the lead of state law closely in these matters. Thank you.