HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOR-16-107526 Hawaii County Planning Department
' Attn: Hamakua CDP/ LeAna Gloor, Project Manager
MIS SEP 14 An 11. 08
RE:CDP Designation for Barney and Pamela Elders parcel (TMK 3-5-004-005)
PLANNii
COUNT Y OF HAWAII
Below please find a summary of discussion points in advance of our meeting scheduled on 7/19/16:
Current Designation/Zoning, Parcel 005: Low Density Urban (LDU)/Ag20
Proposed Hamakua CDP Designation: Important Agricultural Land (IAL)
We are petitioning a change in the proposed designation from IAL to LDU based on the following
considerations:
1. Parcel 005 is not suitable for IAL designation based on the following criteria:
1.1. Size of parcel (3.9 acres/approximately 2.3 acres suitable for pasture/less than 1.5 acres suitable for
farming)
1.2. Soil type (B and C)
1.3. Slope (16%-25%)
1.4. Machine tillability(suitable on less than 1.5 acres)
1.5. Productivity(mitigating factors are land values, amount of amendment required for productivity)
2. On-the-Ground Reality
2.1. Homestead lots along Kihalani Homestead Rd.- none larger than 15 acres
2.2. Development already occurred
2.3. IAL is not an appropriate Urban Growth Boundary
3. Fairness
3.1.1. Reduced property values
3.1.2. Bought property as LDU/Ag 20
3.1.3. What happens when owners "age out" of farming?; are current structure(s)on property
grandfathered if destroyed (due to age,fire on other disaster)?
4. Need for LDU
4.1. Only 617 acres designated as LDU (53,587 acres are designated for agriculture); 11.6%change in
population from 1990-2000.
Attachment:Letter from Pam Elders to Planning Department,5/19/16
107526
•
' May 19, 2016
Hawai`i County Planning Department
Attn: Hamakua CDP / LeAna Gloor, Project Planner
101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3
Hilo, HI 96720
FEEDBACK RE: Designation of Parcel 055 as Important Agricultural Land
(IAL) in the proposed CDP for Hamakua.
Aloha Ms. Gloor and CDP, County of Hawaii:
First, I would like to thank members of the Planning Department and CDP
committee members for their commitment to preserve the natural beauty and rural
character of the Hamakua Coast, goals I endorse. The Hamakua draft CDP reflects
the hard work and thoughtful planning of those who participated in its production.
When we purchased our 3.955 acre parcel in 2004 (TMK 3-5-004-055), it was as it
is now, designated Low Density Urban (LDU) with a paved, County-maintained
road as well as water and electrical service. At that time, the acreage had been
retired from cane sugar production since the early 1990s and was overtaken by
Guinea Grass. Three structures on the property had fallen into severe disrepair and
were a neighborhood eyesore. We have spent the last 12 years rehabilitating the
property to align with its LDU designation as well as the applicable Ag20
restrictions.
At present, approximately 2.3 acres of our property is used as pasture since it is
unsuitable for row crops due to its steepness, rocky soil and two swales which
prevent easy access front to back. The remaining approximately one and one-half
acres hosts two houses (separately metered), and their detached garages as well as a
small area of semi-level land along a portion of its makai boundary which is
suitable for part-time, small-scale agriculture and gardening activities.
Needless to say, upon reviewing the CDP, I was surprised to note that it proposes a
change in our LUPAG designation from LDU to IAL (Important Agricultural
Land). I am writing to request that our parcel retain its LDU designation for
the reasons outlined below.
1
• Applicability of IAL designation to Parcel 055
a. Potential for sustained high agricultural yields because of soil type, climate,
topography, or other factors: Parcel 005 has characteristics which should exclude
it from the IAL designation, as noted below.
1 . Soil: the soil is O`okala - a poor soil which requires amendment to achieve
productivity;
2. Slope: the gulch-side slope of the property is approximately 25% and the street-
side slope is approximately 16%1;
3. Machine Tillability: without extensive and costly grading, tilling would be
dangerous without a large tractor on about half of property due to its slope and
rocky soil composition; the upper plots are tilled by hand;
4. Climate: heavy rains wash away the topsoil and deplete the soil of nutrients
which require heavy amendment to be productive.
5. Size: Parcel 055 is 3.955 acres, of which, approximately 1.5 acres is suitable for
.small-scale/subsistence farming (not counting the back pasture). At a purchase cost
of over S63,000/acre, farming on such a small plot is marginal. In fact, from the
bottom of Kihalani Homestead Road to the crossover road, there are no properties
neater than 15 acres in size. Kihalani Homestead reflects the rural, homestead
nature of this area aptly described in CDP Policy 4 ["...lands near urban areas
where cm intermediate land use between residential and productive agricultural
areas is consistent with the surrounding uses and rural character'7 and the Rural
District description ["...lands primarily comprised of small farms mixed with low
density residential lots that have a minimum lot size of one-half acre... '7. In fact,
the fragmentation of the land into homestead parcels along the length of Kihalani
Homestead Road does not accommodate the type of large-scale farming envisioned
by Act 183, the State IAL law.2
b. Need for LDU: The 2005 Hawaii County General Plan' lists 53,587 acres
designated for agriculture, of which 21,632 are IAL (12.4% of the total North Hilo
acreage). Only 617 acres (.0035 of the total North Hilo acreage) are reserved for
LDU development and a mere 71 acres designated Rural. When considering the
11 .6% change in population from 1990-2000, one must question whether the
removal of LDU acreage such as Parcel 055 is warranted.
Generally.slopes of 15%to 25%are considered suitable only for limited agricultural uses.
Act 183:"Discourage the fragmentation of important agricultural lands and the conversion of these lands to nonagricultural uses."
3 Hawaii County General Plan 1.tJPAG.
2
c. Current value of parcel: the CDP raises concern that rising land values threaten
viable agricultural endeavors,4 however in many areas, especially those with water
and electric service, the "affordability train" has already left the station: the current
and inherent value of parcels such as Parcel 055 has already reduced the economic
viability of agricultural production. The valuation of Parcel 055 supports the
parcel's current LDU designation (in addition to the presence of a paved, county-
maintained road as well as infrastructure such as water & power, close proximity [.4
miles] to local services such as a school, restaurants, library, swimming pool, Belt
Road, etc.) while at the same time, making our agricultural work possible.
d. Parcel-specific designations which promote consistency between the State and
Comity designations and reduce arbitrariness: the CDP emphasizes LUPAG land
use designations will not alter State zoning or applicable restrictions. With that
being said, the "on-paper" change to IAL does not eliminate the "on-the-ground"
reality: Parcel 055 is too small to sustain high yields for export or local
consumption nor could it be considered vital for future self-sufficiency needs of the
island.{ Considering the current approved uses, size, and unsuitability of Parcel 055
for prime agriculture, the logical action would be to retain the current LDU
designation which would do more to promote consistency and reduce arbitrariness.
If application of the IAL designation to our small property is meant to serve instead
as a transition area of small farm/residential land uses between the urban LDU and
the larger lot agricultural areas"or simply, "to shrink the urban designations, " it is
being done by a mis-application of the IAL label. A more appropriate, less
arbitrary action would be to allow it to remain LDU or create a Rural zone. The
CDP states that homestead areas such as Kihalani Homestead Road "accommodate
an excess of rural development in the agricultural mauka areas " as a rational for
not using a Rural designation. It would seem more consistent to use the Rural
designation if in the opinion of the planners, these properties are already fulfilling
that function. Why characterize these lots as IAL if in fact, their actual function is
Rural? Or why not keep them as LDU, a designation which more aptly describes
their "homestead" character?
''Act 183: "Limit physical improvements on important agricultural lands to maintain gffordability[my emphasis]of these lands for
agricultural purposes."
S Policy 29,Rationale,Criteria for the designation of State Important Agricultural Lands.Draft 1-lamakua CDP.
3
•
d
• Creation of the urban growth bourrdarv: the UGB would more appropriately be
applied to the upper boundary of Parcel 055 for all the reasons stated in this letter.
The State Ag20 uses already prevent growth and Parcel 055 does not meet IAL
requirements.
f Reduced Property Value/Fairness: the CDP states "Development and
construction in agriculturally designated areas shall be limited to agriculture, or
via the Special Permit or Use Permit process (which allows for agriculturally
related economic infrastructure, cottage industries, renewable energy, open area
recreational uses, and community facilities) unless otherwise permitted by law. "6 If
one of the structures on Parcel 055 burned down, it appears with a IAL designation,
we would not be able to rebuild without going through the Special Permit/Use
process, an expensive, uncertain, and lengthy undertaking. If we wanted to sell our
property, we believe its value would be significantly reduced with an IAL
designation. The reduction of our substantial investment due to an arbitrary use
designation constitutes a taking without compensation.
I request that our lot retain it's LDU designation or be designated a Rural area
which would serve as a barrier between LDU and agricultural areas.
Thank you for your consideration of my request.
Sincerely,
,/') 1)/7
Pam Elders
PO Box 371, Laupahoehoe, I11 96764
nflick@baymoon.com
6 Policy 2,1
4
•
C
O
9
Z
m
2
4
D
2
r N
m
.; 4--; • - ''':-.----' .
m t
2
pNI
g
NI
3 d
y
viP
N.
is_r_c ____„. ,,,,,4Pk- '''.(",. . - '
, ._
1r,� Jr
> ,..: l` j
ff�: . t w r
G3 r ,,‘ 11,- q itil 05 p-
\i -'1I 04 0
o �r oc n P 1.171
ci
e
.,. g. 00 .
v``espope .
/j _L J I G C'
f
c
:17
g ren E
• ' i - a o Q a _ o J Q
I ..P. j- a = Q r v ! -
\----___
7 i Tl r CS
f_., -,
!,_._ 4cEr n
;� C
...___J I f i 00 i
i" • ( 1 ; i f p
311
0
R (11