The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCOM 0176.175 2006-2008 Page 1 of 1 Murashige, Laura ~ , From: David Arakawa [darakawa@lurt.org] , i, Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 20077:19 AM To: counciltestimony@co.hawaii.hi.us Cc: 'Gladys Quinto'; patliu@hawaiiantel.net Subject: HAWAII -LURF Testimony re Bills on Council agenda 1117/07 Attachments: 071106 Bill 51 Draft 5 LURF Testimony.doc; 071106 Bill 151 Draft 2 LURF Testimony.doc Aloha, My Name is Dave Arakawa, and I am the Executive Director of the Land Use Research Foundation of Hawaii (°LURF"), which is headquartered in Honolulu. We understand that Bill 51 and Bill 151 are up for Second reading at 1:45 p.m. this afternoon, and LURF would like to submit the attached testimonies for Bill 51 (in support) and Bill 151 (in opposition). We are unable to make the Trip to Hilo today, and would appreciate if you could file the attached testimonies for us. Please feel free to contact me by e-mail or phone, if you have any questions. Mahalo, Dave David Z. Arakawa Executive Director Land Use Research Foundation of Hawaii 700 Bishop Street, Suite 1928 Honolulu, HI 96813 Direct: (808) 521-4717 x11 Mobile: (808) 783-9407 Fax: (808) 536-0132 E-mail: darakawa@lurf.org www.lurf.org comm. Pto. I ?(o. ! 75 Ref. To: hw~ Ref. Date 11/7/2007 ~ ~~P LAND USE RESEARCH ~ FOUNDATION OF HAWAII boo Bishop Street, Ste. tgz8 Honolulu, Hawaii 968r3 Phone 5u-g7r7 Fax 536-ot3z November 06, 2007 The Honorable Pete Hoffman Council Chair & Presiding Officer and Members of the Hawaii County Council 333 Kilauea Avenue, 2ntl Floor Council Room Hilo, Hawaii 96720 counciltestimonvCa~co.hawaii.hi.us Bill 51, Draft 5, Amendment to Chapter 27, Flood Control, Hawaii County Code 1983 (2005 Edition), as Amended, Relating to Stormwater Management. (Updates Chapter 27 to conform to Federal Flood Insurance Program standards) Dear Chair Hoffman and Council Members, My name is David Arakawa, Executive Director of the Land Use Research Foundation of Hawaii ("LURE"), a private, non-profit research and trade association whose members include major Hawaii landowners, developers and a utility company. One of LURF's missions is to advocate for reasonable and rational land use planning, legislation and regulation affecting common issues in Hawaii, including, but not limited to infrastructure, housing, development, and transportation. LURE supports stormwater management legislation which is based on federal and state requirements, and would also support additional requirements which are based on scientific or engineering principles, practices and considerations. BACKGROUND Background of Bill 51. DPW's original text. It is our understanding that the original text of Bill 51 was drafted by the Hawaii County Department of Public Works Department ("DPW") and was intended to be a "housekeeping" measure. DPW's originally proposed revisions to the Hawaii County Code would ensure compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), thus guaranteeing access to Federal disaster assistance and low- interest loans from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The original version of Bill 51, drafted by DPW, satisfied all federal and state requirements. Arbitrary revisions by Council member. Sometime after DPW submitted its original draft of Bill 51, a council member made drastic revisions to Bill 51 -adding arbitrary , 1 requirements which were not based on scientific or engineering principles, practices and considerations; which far exceed the requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program ("NFIP") and other federal and state requirements; which will result in additional unnecessary professional and construction costs which will be passed on and could result in price increases too high for Hawaii County residents who are first-time home buyers and small business owners. Furthermore, the additional arbitrary requirements proposed by tfiat council member would unlawfully restrict the use of private property and thus constitute an unconstitutional taking of land. Recent revisions to Bill 51, Draft 5 by Council member Stacy Higa. We understand that Councilmember Stacy Higa has recently made amendments to Bill 51 to bring it closer to its original intent and has implemented recommendations by DPW, as well as from engineering and architecture professionals. Hawaii County has been put on notice that its rules and regulations must comply with requirements of the NFIP. We have been informed that according to the review of government and private experts, Bill 51, Draft 5, complies with NFIP and FEMA requirements. RECOMMENDATION LURF supports Bill 51, Draft 5, to ensure compliance with various federal and state regulations, and respectfully recommends that the Council pass an ordinance that exclusively addresses the requirements necessary for compliance with the NFIP and FEMA. Thank you for the opportunity to express our views on this matter. Cc: Corporation Counsel, County of Hawaii J:\Counties\County of Hawaii\Bill 51\071106 Bill 51 Draft 5 LURF Testimony.doc 2 gym' a,,.,,. LAND USE RESEARCH FOUNDATION OF HAWAII 70o Bishop Street, Ste. 19x8 Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 Phone 5u-4717 ~ Fax 536-0132 November 6, 2007 The Honorable Pete Hoffman Council Chair & Presiding Officer and Members of the Hawaii County Council 333 Kilauea Avenue, 2nd Floor Council Room Hilo, Hawaii 96720 counciltestimonv2~co.hawaii.hi.us RE: Bill 151, Draft 2, Amendment to Chapter 27, Flood Control, Hawaii County Code 1983 (2005 Edition, as Amended) Dear Chair Hoffman and Council Members, My name is David Arakawa, Executive Director of the Land Use Research Foundation of Hawaii ("LURE"), a private, non-profit research and trade association whose members include major Hawaii landowners, developers and a utility company. One of LURF's missions is to advocate for reasonable and rational land use planning, legislation and regulation affecting common issues in Hawaii, including, but not limited to infrastructure, housing, development, and transportation. LURE supports storm water management legislation which is based on federal and state requirements, and would also support additional requirements which are based on scientific or engineering principles, practices and considerations. LURE supports flood control legislation which is based on federal and state requirements, and would also support additional requirements which are based on scientific or engineering principles, practices and considerations. However, in the case, we must express our strong ouuosition to Bill 151, based on the following: • Bill 151 includes additional arbitrary requirements which are not based on scientific or engineering principles, practices and considerations; • The additional arbitrary requirements far exceed the requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program ("NFIP") and other federal and state requirements; The additional arbitrary requirements will result in additional costs and will be passed on and could result in price increases too high for Hawaii County residents who are first-time home buyers. • The additional arbitrary requirements restrict the use of private property; and • The additional arbitrary requirements thus constitute an unconstitutional taking of land." 1 BACKGROUND Bill 151 is a result of problems with Council revisions to Bill 51. Drafts 2. 3 and 4. We understand that Bill 151 is an attempt by a Council member to address the problems and complications caused by that Council member's revisions to Bill 51. We have been informed that the text for the original Bill 51 was originally intended by the Hawaii County Department of Public Works Department ("DPW") to be a "housekeeping" measure, proposing revisions to the Hawaii County Code to ensure compliance with various Federal and State regulations including those of the Federal Emergency Management Administration and that the original DPW draft bill satisfied the federal and state requirements. However, due to certain initial arbitrary amendments made by that Council members in Bill 51, Drafts 2, 3 and 4 ("additional arbitrary requirements") - - - professional engineers, developers and others described Drafts 2,3 and 4 of Bill 51 as "extremely problematic," and have raised, among other things, the following concerns regarding Bill 51: • Additional arbitrary requirements which are not based on scientific or engineering principles, practices and considerations; • conflicts with existing law and rules; • Additional arbitrary design standards more restrictive than federal and state requirements; • Additional arbitrary technical requirements based on ambiguous and undefined terms; • Additional arbitrary requirements which unreasonably restrict use of private property and increase costs of building affordable and market homes and business buildings; • Procedural inaccuracies; • Potentially detrimental impacts. As a result of the overwhelming criticism, several public informational meetings were held, which included Council members, DPW representatives, professional engineers, the members of the community. The County did the right thing by allowing professional and public comments. New Bill 151 still has major problems. While the County allowed the professionals and public to attend informational meetings, it appears that the professional engineers and community did not take part in the drafting of this new Bill 151. As explained in the August 3, 2007 transmittal to the Council Chair, this new Council bill was created based on private discussions between one Council member, the administration and staff from two Hawaii County departments and the Office of the County Clerk. It is claimed that Bill 151 reflects the effort of this small group to satisfy the minimum NFIP requirements and includes "additional changes to Chapter 27 as well." Many of these "additional changes." however, are arbitrary and are not based on scientific or engineering principles, practices and considerations. As a result, Bill 151 is still plagued with the same critical flaws described above 2 CONCLUSION We have reviewed the most recent provisions of Bill 151, Draft 2, and have communicated with professional engineers, the Hawaii community and developers. Based on this review, LURF is strongly opposed to Bill 151, Draft 2 in its present form, for reasons including, but not limited to, the following: • Bill 151 includes additional arbitrary requirements which are not based on scientific or engineering principles, practices and considerations; • The additional arbitrary requirements far exceed the requirements of the Natlonal Flood Insurance Program ("NFIP") and other federal and state requirements; • The additional arbitrary requirements will result in additional professional and construction costs which will be passed on and could result in price increases too high for Hawaii County residents who are first-time home buyers and small businesses. • The additional arbitrary requirements unreasonably restrict the use of private property; and • The additional arbitrary requirements thus constitute an unconstitutional taking of land." Based on the above, LURF respectfully requests that Bill 151, Draft 2 be killed, as it is not in the best interests of the Hawaii community. LURF continues, however, to fully support the intent of the original Bill 51 - to ensure compliance with various federal and state regulations, and respectfully recommends that the Council pass Bill 51, Draft 5, which exclusively addresses the requirements necessary for compliance with the NFIP. Thank you for the opportunity to express our views on this matter. Cc: Corporation Counsel, County of Hawaii J:\Counties\County of Hawaii\Bill 51\071106 Bill 151 LURF Testimony.doc 3