HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0230.002 2004-2006
MqY-16-c~705 15:20 FROM: T0~808 361 8912 ~.2 3
May 16, 2005
~tUall L- tiandr[SUrl r~
Y.U. dox 437297
l~amuela, Hl 96743
fete Hoffman
Hawati County Council
Hilo, Hl 96743
3
hc: 13111 80, Agricultural Subdivision Restrictions
T)etu Pctc:
1 am concerucd about two aspects vl'Bill 80 regarding agricultwal subdivision
restrictions which the Hawaii County Council will be considering on `Tuesday, May l7.
My tirst concern is the prohibition of bates and litnited entry. (;ales are a necessary pan
of farming and ranching. They serve u, contain livestock and to safeguard crops, farm
equipment and harvested produce from tmauthorized persons. Thell of agricultural
products and equipment is a very real problem on this islv,d. T understand that the intcrt
is to prevent "gated communities", but the language of the bill must be specific so that
appropriate Ilse of subdivided agricultural land can contilue.
M}' second concern is the restriction of thr farm dwelling size to less than 3500 square
feet. This is a flagralnt discrimination against farmers as a class of people. Legitimate
I'arrning operations ma} have larger than average size homes to accommodate housing or
extended family members and even non-relations who work on the farm, as affirrdablc
housing fur agricultural workers is becoming more scarce every day as real estate prices
escalate. Additionally, mu,y farmers. by necessity, utilize square footage of the primary
dwelling, for storage of faun equipment, packaging materials and produce, for packing
areas. office space, and entertaining of potence] customers. Additionally, if a tanner is
flnanctally successful enough to build a large house, should he be prevented from that
because of his vooation:' Aftet all, the eturent property tax rate for a farm dwelling is
almost twice that of the homeowner's rate, and successful farmers have both direct and
utduect positive effects on the local economy. The square Footage restriction does
nothing to preserve agricultural land, es we could still lose important agricultural land to
large subdivisions full of house less than 3500 square feet. Once again 1 understand that
the Council is trying to ensure Icgiti[nate use of agricultural land, and Iwhole-heartedly
applaud their efforts However, the square footage restriction is misguided and
discriminator}
Pannera utvest much of themselves in cultivating their land and raising livestock, and it i,
not an easy jvb_ As a farmer who comes from a long line of farmers, T can tell you that
selling a piece of the farm is a painful experience. Sut sometimes economic situations or
itille+itance issues force the sale ufpaxt of a fans to ensure the continue operation of the
Comm. No. ~3 Z
Ref. To: f°~~
Ref. Uote MAY 1 LUUJ
MAY-16-2805 15:20 FROM: T6:868 961 8912 3.3
main larm. If Bill 8ll is not carefully worded to specifically distinguish luxury pseudo-
agricultural communities from legitimate, the ultimate effect will be to Force more and
more Farmers to sell their eutin farms. 'l hen only the very wealthy will be able to affhnl
u, hold oruo undeveloped Lwd.
T appreciate ~hr. County Council's intent to preserve agricultural land. Please nz<~tke sure
that the Sill actually encourages the sustainahility of Canning on llic Bib lsl.~rtd.
Respectfully, 1
Susan L. Sanderson