Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0745.025 2010-2012 Bill 266- Ag tourism bill Page 1 of 1 Murashige, Laura From: Janice Palma-Glennie [palmtree7©hawaiiantel.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 10:48 PM U To: council testimony Subject: Bill 266-Ag tourism bill Attachments: Ag tourism testimony- Bill 266 to send.doc Aloha, council members, Please find a copy of my testimony related to draft 3 of bill 266 attached. I feel strongly that this ordinance continues to need review and changes, as you will read in my testimony. Mahalo for consideration of my views. Sincerely, Janice palma-glennie Comm. ��s• Z� Ref.To: 10/17/2012 Ref. Dote uCT PO Box 4849 Kailua-Kona, HI 96745 Re: Bill 266, draft 3 Aloha, council members: Several of my major concerns regarding Bill 266, draft 3 linger and, I believe, still need to be addressed before a final draft of this bill is passed. They include the following: • Rules concerning the income from ag products vs value-added products as well as the space used for actually growing products vs selling so- called value-added products or activities have been stricken from the rules. Why was Section 25-4-15, 5 and 6 deleted?A significant portion of profits on ag land should be required to come from actual ag activity. • Section 1. NOISE considerations. Noise restrictions are glaringly omitted from this ordinance. When I've called to complain about construction noise or "garden party" noise, the police have told me that anyone can make loud noise related to ag 24/7 on ag land. If that's not true, then please add it to this law. Also, what does "recreation" mean in relation to ag.? Dirt bikes, ATVs, and other off-road motorized vehicles are used on farms; but these vehicles must be specifically excluded from ag tourism permits. Otherwise, dangerous and intrusive noise coming from these vehicles will increase. • Section 2. Definition of "Minor" Agricultural Tourism needs fine-tuning to determine visitors/day, not per week, as requested by the public on several occasions. 350 visitors per day is huge in otherwise quiet, rural areas. My subdivision's five house lots get about 10-15 friends and relatives visiting per week. Rural ambiance is part of why many people choose to work the land and live an agricultural lifestyle rather than live in tourist areas. Is it possible that these rules could constitute a legal "takings"of property owners'rights when restrictions that make ag land unique from commercial or tourism-zoned lands are lessened? • SECTION 6. 25- 4- 15, sec. d, 2 gives hours of 8:00am to 6:00pm. Again, noise restrictions are nil, and that is a long time to hear loudspeakers, quads, live music concerts, amusement ride noise, or other sounds that were never part of the area prior to this law going into effect. • Section 6, sec 25-4-15, sec f. Why is unpermitted, formerly illegal, ag tourism activity allowed to continue for UP TO SIX MONTHS while there's a determination of violation? Illegal "garden parties" with up to 200 people and a band playing until 11 :00 pm could have continued for 6 more months in my neighborhood under this section of the law, making a mockery of the efforts of law-abiding residents. • Sec j of Section 25-4-15 is very weak. Only frequent, surprise visits to ag tourism venues will insure that visitor count is correctly and honestly recorded. Only some will choose to take agriculture to the tourism level, yet so many others will be affected by that choice. How do the rest of us protect ourselves, especially when the county has been so lax in uniformly enforcing its land use rules? What are the penalties for not following these rules and who will decide if they are enforces/ As stated, my #1 concern is that already over-burdened planning dept employees won't be charged with the impossible task of uniformly adequately, and fairly enforcing more new land use rules. Mahalo for consideration of my views and for your continued commitment to make this ordinance fair and enforceable. Sincerely, Janice Palma-Glennie Additional concerns not in above text: • Section 3 "g) Plan approval shall be required [for the establishment of any] prior to the construction or installation of any new structure or development, or of any addition to an existing structure or development which is to be used for major agricultural tourism activity, as permitted under section 25-4- 15(b)." What's required in "minor"ag tourism area regarding this? • "Section 25-2-71 g) Plan approval shall be required [for the establishment of any] prior to the construction or installation of any new structure or development, or of any addition to an existing structure or development which is to be used for major agricultural tourism activity, as permitted under section 25-4-15(b)." Says "major". What are the requirements in "minor"? • Section 25-2-75. Are off street parking, loading/unloading, and turn-around space to be accommodated in "minor"ag tourism areas as it is for "major"? • Section 6 - Section 25-2-75. Plan approval application requirements for major agricultural tourism. 4) New and existing facilities to be utilized principally for the agricultural tourism activity shall be clearly indicated on the plot plan and shall not exceed one thousand square feet in total area, not including parking and vehicular accesses. Why isn't parking and vehicular access included in this equation? It takes away from the availability of land for true agricultural use.