HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-2-21 Revision Summary for Steering Committee ReviewREVISION SUMMARY FOR STEERING COMMITTEE REVIEW
IAF:
I
REVISION SUMMARY:
INCLUDING PLANNING DIRECTORS RECOMMENDATIONS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.
Purpose and Authority of the CDP........................................................................................................ 2
2.
Recommended CDP Revision Process...................................................................................................2
3.
Types of Input & Revisions.................................................................................................................... 2
4.
Included in this Document....................................................................................................................3
5.
How to Read this Document.................................................................................................................3
6.
Revisions by CDP Section: ..................................................................................................................... 4
CDP Section 3: Preferred Land Use & Settlement Patterns..................................................................4
CDP Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and Cultural Resources.................................................7
CDP Section 5: Strengthen Infrastructure, Facilities, and Services.....................................................11
CDP Section 6: Build a Sustainable Local Economy.............................................................................12
1
Hamakua CDP: Recommended CDP Revision Summary February 2018
1. Purpose and Authority of the CDP
A Community Development Plan (CDP) is an official plan authorized by the County of Hawai'i General
Plan that translates the broad goals and objectives of the General Plan to the unique needs and
conditions of a region. CDPs are the forum for community input into establishing County policy at the
regional level and coordinating the delivery of County services to the community. County of Hawai'i
CDPs implement but do not supersede the General Plan. If the CDP and the General Plan are in direct
conflict, the General Plan shall be controlling.
The Hamakua CDP is adopted by County ordinance and is a long-range plan with a 20 -year time horizon.
2. Recommended CDP Revision Process
The Hamakua Community Development Plan Draft was approved by the Steering Committee on
December 19, 2016. To initiate the CDP review and adoption process, the Planning Director issued a
memo requesting comment from a wide range of County, State, and Federal agencies in February 2017.
Comments were also received from the Administrative Permits and Planning Division of the Planning
Department, as well as a few community members who provided feedback during the Agency Review
period (February 2017 -June 2017).
3. Types of Input & Revisions
The comments and subsequent revisions to the CDP based on the feedback received during the Agency
Review period can be summarized into the following categories:
■ Non -substantive: These include typographical errors, formatting inconsistencies,
recommendations for clarifying language that did not change the intent or purpose of the
strategy, and expressions of support for CDP strategies;
■ Substantive: Differences in interpretation or opinion about CDP strategies, recommended
revisions based on changes in statute/code since the CDP was drafted, recommended changes
based on further analysis of existing statute/code;
■ Lack of understanding: These include feedback that expressed a misunderstanding of CDP
strategy or its application, lack of familiarity with CDP strategies and their inter -relationships,
confusion about the relationship of the CDP and the GP, a lack of understanding about the
rationale behind CDP strategies, or a lack of understanding about the jurisdiction of the CDP
and/or the Planning Department.
Hamakua CDP: Recommended CDP Revision Summary February 2018
4. Included in this Document
This document is a summary of the revisions to the CDP based on the feedback received during the
Agency Review period. It includes a few substantive revisions, but it primarily includes non -substantive
revisions to demonstrate edits made based on agency suggestions, even if this revision did not change
the intent or purpose of the strategy. Rationale for each revision is provided after the revision.
What is not included in this summary: glossary edits/additions, format changes, minor clarifying
language revisions that did not change the intent of the strategy, typographical corrections, edits to the
names of entities listed, and edits to explanatory descriptions that do not change policy language or
intent.
5. How to Read this Document
The strategies are listed in the order that they are appear in the CDP and are listed by their
corresponding CDP section. The strategy language itself is in italics, and if there is an explanatory
description included with the strategy in the CDP, it will be shown in regular text. Revisions are shown
in Ramseyer format (also known as "track changes" format). However, in cases where a strategy was
heavily revised and the Ramseyer format makes it difficult to read, a revised 'clean' version of the policy
will be shown after the edited version. The rationale behind the revision is also provided. If you have
further questions on the background of any strategy, please refer to the Appendix V5 CDP Policy
Rationale for more information.
CDP draft and process documents can be found here: http://hawaiicountycdp.info/hamakua-cdp
Hamakua CDP: Recommended CDP Revision Summary February 2018
6. Revisions by CDP Section:
""' " ^ction 3: Preferred Land Use & Settlement Patterns
Policy 1: With the adoption of the Hdmdkua CDP, Figures 2-13, are adopted as the Land Use Guide Map
for the Hdmdkua CDP Planning Area. Future land use decisions in the Hdmdkua CDP planning area shall
be consistent with the Land Use Guide Map, unless the CDP and the General Plan are in direct conflict, in
which case the General Plan shall be controlling.
As with the General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) map, the CDP Land Use Guide Map
designates preferred future development patterns by indicating the general location of various land uses
in relation to each other. To maintain consistency, the land use category definitions used in the CDP
Land Use Guide Map are identical to those ebor+engyused in the 2005 General Plan LUPAG map. The CDP
Land Use Guide Map also sets Urban Growth Boundaries for every town/village in the Planning Area
where the Low Density Urban designation ends.
Revision Rationale: Changes reflect clarity on the purpose of the Urban Growth Boundary. UGB also
added to glossary and added a link to Policy 6.
Policy 2: ^'„,., ,,."GQ .4 ve'e pg n*Land use designation changes that would result in new State Land Use
Urban or new Countv zonina for residential. commercial. or industrial uses outside a desianated Urban
Growth Boundary shall not be ec-Gte4 GbvG , f en ,.eGstG' G.eGs ^^^'approved within the Special
ManagementArea. T49 is is „f4, et-eEdg +ti„ 1,,,.G6en 4 4 e 9 n 4, 949 G " (L 91 9 Gr -e n the „ffc-i
GR,a Use o i:,.,, A4Gp. (HRS 205-A; GP 8.3(d))
Revised Policy 2: Land use designation changes that would result in new State Land Use Urban or new
County zoning for residential, commercial, or industrial uses outside a designated Urban Growth
Boundary shall not be approved within the Special Management Area. (HRS 205-A; GP 8.3(d))
Revision Rationale: We received comments from the Planning Division and Administrative Permit
Division that the original language of this policy was ambiguous. The revision clarifies what is meant by
'new urban development' and stipulates clearly that land use changes that would create new urban uses
outside UGB would not be allowed in SMA.
Policy 4: In order to preserve larger lot agricultural lands for productive agricultural use, allow rural
development on lands near urban areas where an intermediate land use between residential and
productive agricultural areas is consistent with the surrounding uses and rural character. This is
reflected in the location of "Rural" (R) areas on the CDP Land Use Guide Map, which is intended to
4
Hamakua CDP: Recommended CDP Revision Summary February 2018
facilitate changes of zone to "R , .d.e.Q+:.f Gni 4gr-i .,.4,.--G� Dist -.:et. (94 ) e- the "Family Agricultural
District" (FA).
The intermediate land use between residential and productive agricultural areas is intended to serve as:
• —A low density area that provides a transitional use buffer area between strictly residential and
eengnq aTcommercially productive agriculture areas, and,-
-A
nd,
—A mix of personal or family -scale productive commercial or subsistence agricultural use on all
newly established parcels in the Rural area, and,-
-Areas
nd,
Areas with parcels having a median size of between 2 – 3 acres but snot to facilitate
subdivision of parcels less than 1 acre in size.
r-eG 9e y 4 "„+"Agricultural areas outside the Urban Growth Boundary and outside designated Rural
areas are to be preserved for agricultural uses, open space, scenic viewsheds, and natural beauty areas.
See Policy 5, below.
Revision Rationale: Comments from Planning Division noted that change of zone to FA is more
appropriate since the State Land Use District for the areas designated to be Rural in the CDP are within
the SLU Agricultural District; whereas the RA zone is intended to be used for areas within the SLU Urban
or SLU Rural District. Other revisions shown were to provide clarity.
Policy 5: In the CDP Land Use Guide Map, the Urban Growth Boundary between developed areas
(designated "Low/Medium Density Urban") and lands designated as Agricultural or Rural
4tPport t Agr c6lt6*e LG ad" _e.r er are intended to be pGrceel
speei icdirect growth in the Hdmdkua CDP planning area. Areas that are clearly beyond44e designated
Urban Growth Boundaries shall be preserved as rural or agricultural lands to maintain open space, scenic
view planes, and natural beauty areas.
This policy clarifies that the urban gFewth boundary ta-blished- vi in the Hamakua CDP Land Use
Pe4W Guide Map establishes PaF&2lspecific Urban Growth Boundaries (UGBs WheReVeF r.--.,.+".i4j at the
intersection between Urban and Rural/Agricultural land uses. The CDP strategy ofrgmapping
parcel -specific Urban designations whenever possible adds clarity and specificity, increases transparency
into the land use designation process, and more accurately reflects the County's and the Community's
land use goals and intentions.
Revision Rationale: The references to the two types of agricultural designations were simplified into
"agricultural" areas. Comments were received from the Planning Division that since not all the UGBs are
parcel -specific in the CDP, clarifying was language needed to the explanatory blurb following the policy.
Policy 6: Until the General Plan identifies appropriate areas or criteria for Industrial development to
occur in the Hdmdkua Planning Area, industrial uses may be permitted outside LUPAG Industrial
designated areas through the following regulatory review processes:
Hamakua CDP: Recommended CDP Revision Summary February 2018
• LUPAG Amendment and Change of Zone: If the subject property is located in the State Land Use
Urban district, a LUPAG amendment and change of zone request to the appropriate industrial zoning
dcould be considered; the "Gnge 4zene 1449 -444 -he the
ke GWGte the c*#e ete.s 4the pr-ep and evaluated on a case-by-case basis,-
Special
asis,
Special Use: If the subject property is located in the State Land Use Agricultural or Rural District, and
the project type is consistent with a permitted use of either limited -industrial (ML) or commercial -
industrial zoning (MCX), the special use permit process would be the appropriate review mechanism
to evaluate the specific parameters of the proposal and set any mitigating conditions.
Any requests for Industrial uses shall be carefully evaluated for potential impacts and consistency with
th.p G^^^r^' P'^^ CDP policies and objectives. Gf G -6c -64G,- ete , HRS 205 (including the
egFland study bureau's detailed land agricultural land productivity rating), and the General Plan
Pe4e,, 1 n n a ( ._ Industrial development shall be located in areas adequately served by transportation,
utilities, and other essential infrastructure- (General Plan Policy 14.4.3 (e)).
Revision Rationale: The Planning Division noted that a LUPAG Amendment would be necessary for this
type of Change of Zone to Industrial so this language was added. The Planning Division also noted that
use permits on highly productive Agricultural lands are not appropriate as per criteria set forth in HRS
205, and so the criteria was included to ensure consistency with State land use requirements.
Policy 8: In new, previously zoned Residential subdivisions in coastal areas, subdivisions &4G4should be
encouraged to develop as Cluster Plan Developments (C.P.D.) pursuant to HCCSection 25-6-20, in order
to achieve CDP obiectives in relation to preserving open space, recreational areas, or RYFG'
scenic views a s.
Revision Rationale: Removed the "shall" due to it inferring a legal mandate that was followed by the
less enforceable intent to "encourage" cluster developments; also edited for clarity to ensure intent of
protecting viewsheds is clear.
Policy 13: Angen4 Gh Gp ter- 2=5 4 theZen in fie Gn4 G lapter- 2:3 4 t -he =SY/94ro4_,;e.Q Ge 4e ke '"'4ke1441
Revision Rationale: Policy 13 was deleted after consultation with Planning Division and further analysis
of State Land Use law in regards to minimum lot size in the SLU Agriculture District. This policy was
deemed not feasible under current State land use regulations. Note: the subsequent Policy 14 (now
Policy 13) was revised to remove the reference to Clustered Rural Subdivisions referenced in the deleted
policy.
Hamakua CDP: Recommended CDP Revision Summary February 2018
CDP Section 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and Cultural Resources
Policy 18: Amend and/or create County Codes and Planning Department Rufe-3 Mules to
^develop shoreline and building setbacks {fier-the H6n96k„^''^P A'^^^ ^^ r-eG ^+ the ^^"4^"+
9eigh+ 4 the 4epe s ess thGn nn fee G n9iningung nn feet s^+H^, k sG4 ^ moi,,.
19),4 n9iningung 440 f ^+ p',,,. ^ address environmental, health, and safety "64{{ . 6'^+^Hwine4 9), ^
^'^^i^^' ^ G'ysi-priorities.
This shall A- Rly apply tE) PFE)PeFtieS that are lie-e-satedev.xithiR the SSIMA, and abUttiRg BF WithiR fi;.9P- h, Rdred
acpci i vi cvvcri jai jai ca iccc BF icon, a is nere ine set as F "Re shall ew-rccc
� -- -'-- ^- IM - ^^ ---'-i--' i - -'-i------ -'--- I— -- -t -'----1 ' -'-- ^- I--- - n n
■ Develop objective guidelines for determining and defining the "top of cliff"—." (HRS 205A-1, and
HAR Section 13-222-2, Planning Department Rule 11.) and add references to "top of cliff" to
Criteria for Shoreline Setback Variances in Planning Commission Rule 8.
For setbacks on parcels with sea cliffs over 40' in elevation, the following setbacks are recommended:
In addition to the minimum shoreline setback established by Plannina Dept. Rule 11, the
building setback should include a lateral safety buffer distance of 40' from the minimum
shoreline setback*, plus the distance equal to the average elevation of the cliff within the subject
Parcel; or,
b) In addition to the minimum shoreline setback established by Plannina Dept. Rule 11. the
building setback should include a lateral safety buffer distance equal to the anticipated 100
Years of erosion as determined by a coastal erosion study. This study, including a cliff stability
analysis and/or a geological analysis, shall be conducted by a licensed civil engineer.
This policy shall only apply to properties that are located within the Special Management Area and
abutting the shoreline. For lots with sea cliffs over 40' with an average lot depth of two hundred feet or
less, the shoreline setback line shall be determined by Planning Department Rule 11.
The County of Hawai'i's current working definition of "top of cliff" is as follows: The "top of the Pali"
(top edge of the sea cliff) is defined to be the highest elevation along the seaward boundary of a
property where the relative change in the slope of the terrain towards the sea is in excess of twice the
general slope towards the sea of the terrain along this highest elevation and that the terrain: (1) has a
Hamakua CDP: Recommended CDP Revision Summary February 2018
general slope seaward of not more than 10%; (2) is reasonably safe for pedestrian access to and along
its length; and (3) does not show evidence of being periodically exposed to natural elements, including,
but not limited to, high surf, wind and rain, to the extent that the ground is essentially devoid of
naturally occurring vegetation.
See also Policy 19, Policy 20, and Policy 39 related to inland cliffs, and section 4.2.5 Kokua Action.
* Note: In situations where the minimum shoreline setback established by Planning Dept. Rule 11 would not reach
the top of a sea cliff, the building setback should be a lateral setback distance of 40' from the top of cliff, plus the
distance equal to the average elevation of the cliff within the subject parcel. [This note will be displayed as a
numbered footnote in the CDP]
Revised Policy 18: Amend and/or create County Codes and Planning Department Rules to develop
shoreline and building setbacks to address environmental, health, and safety priorities.
■ Develop objective guidelines for determining and defining the "top of cliff" (HRS 205A-1, and HAR
Section 13-222-2, Planning Department Rule 11) and add references to "top of cliff" to Criteria for
Shoreline Setback Variances in Planning Commission Rule 8.
For setbacks on parcels with sea cliffs over 40' in elevation, the following setbacks are recommended:
a) In addition to the minimum shoreline setback established by Planning Dept. Rule 11, the building
setback should include a lateral safety buffer distance of 40' from the minimum shoreline setback*,
plus the distance equal to the average elevation of the cliff within the subject parcel, or,
b) In addition to the minimum shoreline setback established by Planning Dept. Rule 11, the building
setback should include a lateral safety buffer distance equal to the anticipated 100 years of erosion
as determined by a coastal erosion study. This study, including a cliff stability analysis and/or a
geological analysis, shall be conducted by a licensed civil engineer.
This policy shall only apply to properties that are located within the Special Management Area and
abutting the shoreline. For lots with sea cliffs over 40' with an average lot depth of two hundred feet or
less, the shoreline setback line shall be determined by Planning Department Rule 11.
The County of Hawai'i's current working definition of "top of cliff" is as follows: The "top of the pali"
(top edge of the sea cliff) is defined to be the highest elevation along the seaward boundary of a
property where the relative change in the slope of the terrain towards the sea is in excess of twice the
general slope towards the sea of the terrain along this highest elevation and that the terrain: (1) has a
general slope seaward of not more than 10%; (2) is reasonably safe for pedestrian access to and along
its length; and (3) does not show evidence of being periodically exposed to natural elements, including,
but not limited to, high surf, wind and rain, to the extent that the ground is essentially devoid of
naturally occurring vegetation.
See also Policy 19, Policy 20, and Policy 39 related to inland cliffs, and section 4.2.5 Kokua Action.
* Note: In situations where the minimum shoreline setback established by Planning Dept. Rule 11 would
not reach the top of a sea cliff, the building setback should be a lateral setback distance of 40' from the
top of cliff, plus the distance equal to the average elevation of the cliff within the subject parcel. [This
note will be displayed as a numbered footnote in the CDP]
8
Hamakua CDP: Recommended CDP Revision Summary February 2018
Revision Rationale: This policy was revised extensively based on comments from the Planning Division,
Administrative Permits division, input received from the public, and further analysis on the building
setbacks for steep slopes and cliffs. One main revision was to use both the authority of the shoreline
setback combined with the authority of the zoning code to establish building setbacks for safety and
environmental reasons (in this case for coastal and also for inland cliffs in the new Policy 39). The
original policy was noted not to address:
1. Cases where the minimum shoreline setback did not reach the top of the cliff/pali;
2. The inclusion of the 'top of pati' language was tied to (original) Policy 22, but both policies were
mutually dependent on each other for full implementation and so they were combined into Policy 18.
Note: this policy provides recommendations for code and Planning Department rule amendments and
requires follow-up actions; it does not provide a new shoreline setback in effect upon the adoption of
the CDP.
Original Policy 20: this policy related to prohibiting cesspools in the SMA; this policy was deleted
because the Dept. of Health issued new rules essentially banning the construction of new cesspools in
2016, and passed Act 125 in 2017, which requires the replacement of all cesspools by 2050.
Policy 22: When considering applications to consolidate and resubdivide pre-existing lots of record, the
Director of Planning 4+G4should endeavor to keep the lot sizes consistent with the minimum lot size, and
only permit lots less than one acre in the State Land Use Agriculture District and the County of Hawaii
Agricultural District if the applicant clearly demonstrates that an unreasonable economic hardship
cannot otherwise be prevented or land utilization is improved relative to the objectives and policies of
the CDP. (HRS 205-5(b); (GP 14.2.3(s)).
Revision Rationale: This policy was edited to remove the legal mandate language of "shall" when the
verb used is to "endeavor" to keep the lot sizes consistent. This policy was not intended to be an
absolute mandate as is evident by the language relating to allowing for "unreasonable economic
hardship," etc.
Policy 34: In the Hamakua CDP Planning Area, applications for Use Permits for wind energy facilities and
telecommunications antennasLtowers shall include viewshed and, as appropriate, line -of -sight
analysis to demonstrate how the request does not cause substantial, adverse impact to the community's
character, including open space, public views, and areas of natural and scenic beauty, and propose
conditions to mitigate scenic impacts. (HCC 25-2-60 & 64)
Hamakua CDP: Recommended CDP Revision Summary February 2018
gneeu.c J c^Require the use of place -appropriate wireless concealment strategies in the development or
upgrading of telecommunication towers as a way to mitigate visual impacts (e.g., cell towers disguised
as palm trees).
Revision Rationale: Based on comments from the Planning Division, this policy was strengthened to
"require" concealment strategies be used when deemed appropriate, instead of merely to "encourage"
them. This is based on further analysis of HCC 25-2-60 & 64.
Policy 39: Amend Chapter 25 of the Zoning Code to establish building setbacks for inland cliffs.
Recommended factors to consider for establishing setbacks include:
■ Slopes greater than 40%
■ Cliff height and geology type
■ Cliff identification and mapping strategies
See related Policy 18 and Policy 40.
Revision Rationale: This follow-up action was added after consultation with the Planning and
Administrative Permit Divisions. The issue of building setbacks for inland cliffs is a health, safety, and
environmental issue extremely pertinent in the Hamakua Planning Area (e.g., in the deep gulches).
Currently there are no building setbacks for cliffs, and some development in close proximity to steep
slopes has been noted and will continue if safety setbacks are not established.
Kokua Action 19: Provide sufficient funding to the Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resource
Conservation Service (NRCS), Pacific Islands Area (PIA), the Farm Service Agency, U.S. Forest Service
(Laupahoehoe section of the Hawaii Experimental Tropical Forest), and the Fish and Wildlife Service
(FWS) to adequately implement critical conservation programs-, including invasive species management
and Rapid 'Ghia Death research and mitigation.
Revision Rationale: These changes were made based on input received from the U.S. Forest Service.
Policy 48: Where possible through permit conditions, easements, or acquisitions, the County of Hawaii
shall establish: public access to and along the shoreline to significant historic sites, public transit along
the top of cliff, streams, mauka trails, facilities, and access to &4esareas for gathering, hunting, and
other recreational purposes.
Lands adiacent to Forest and Natural Area Reserves shall be assessed for public access potential and
public access may be included as a condition of subdivision. (HRS §205A-26; GP 6.2(b); 7.3(a); 8.3(r))
Revision Rationale: This addition was based on input received from DLNR.
10
Hamakua CDP: Recommended CDP Revision Summary February 2018
CDP Section 5: Strengthen Infrastructure, Facilities, and Service:
Policy 78: Water system improvements shall correlate with the County's desired land use development
pattern. Work with Department of Water Supply to ensure that adequate infrastructure is available in
appropriate locations to support infill growth within t4.—Hdmdkua CDP Urban f--4.—Hdmdkua
�-y oundaries.
Towns identified in the Hdmdkua Planning Area where water availability ismay be inhibiting infill
capacity are as follows:
• Pepe'ekeo,
• Hakalau-Wailea,
• Honoka'a,
Continue to evaluate growth conditions to coordinate improvements as required to the existing water
systems.
'^,^^County water distribution systems shall not be extended outside the gFBWth bewR ar- Urban
Growth Boundaries established in the Hdmdkua CDP Land Use °e-'iesier and °e4w uide Map, with the
exception of water designated specifically for and limited to agricultural irrigation and livestock.
Revision Rationale: The area of Ninole was removed from this list as it is noted the intent of the policy is
specific to growth boundaries, which refer to urban growth boundaries; however, Ninole is in the Rural
area State Land Use District and it is not designated as an urban growth area in the CDP Land Use Guide
Map.
Community Action 32: Coordinate with Civil Defense to develop emergency evacuation plans for
, Laupdhoehoe, and the valleys of Waipi'o „wand 'Gup6h ,, ee PeintWaimanu.
Revision Rationale: Waimanu Valley was added to this list for campers to be evacuated; based on input
from DLNR.
Community Action 34: For communities identified by DOFAW as Communities at Risk (CAR), develop
Community Wildfire Protection Plans (CWPPs) and work towards gaining Firewise recognition.
http://dlnr.hawaii.gov/forestry/fire/community-risk-reduction/ http://www.firewise.org/usa-recognition-program.aspx
Revision Rationale: This Community Action was added after input was received from DOFAW regarding
wildfire risk in Planning Area communities.
Policy 108: 4f When the Y..., ,+ :+4tii„ GQd . 4tii„ ec-Gt4 f fier- uti4t„ 4nes ipeb ,, . GH
bens) is un4er-gr-eun4fier- the pbor-pese 4p-eser- 4ng 4„4 County develops a scenic
resources, + protection program, the underground siting of utility lines (power and communications)
11
Hamakua CDP: Recommended CDP Revision Summary February 2018
should be a condition of subdivision, in identified priority viewshed areas. (HCC§23-55, GP 11.3.2 (a �
11.3.3)
Revision Rationale: This policy was edited to facilitate implementation and set criteria for when
underground siting of utility lines would be required; based on input from the Planning Division.
Policy 110: Use alternative energy sources te-pe*,exat County facilities within the Planning Area.
■ Add electric vehicle charging stations at appropriate facilities;
■ Add solar lighting in appropriate parking areas;
■ Add photovoltaic systems and/or solar hot water systems to appropriate facilities.
Revision Rationale: This policy was edited based on input received from the Department of Economic
Development & Tourism & the Office of Planning relating to sustainability and energy conservation
initiatives.
CDP Section 6: Build a Sustainable Local Economy
Originally Policy 115:
Revision Rationale: This policy was deleted because it became unnecessary after revisions by the State
Legislature to HRS 205 allow open farmers' markets and road side stands in the SLU Agricultural district
as permitted uses.
Policy 118: Evaluate County Zoning Code Section 15-5-72(a)(17) relating to "livestock production of
piggeries, apiaries, and pen feeding of livestock shall be [..] located no closer than one thousand feet
away from any major public street or from any other zoning district."
■ Define what qualifies as G " ' an "apiary"-
■ Determine if the minimum distance of 1,000 feet from any public street or other zone is appropriate
for each use referenced, recommend revision to minimum distance if research justifies adopting new
minimum distances.
Revision Rationale: Reference to "piggery" was deleted upon further consultation with Administrative
Permits Division; it was determined that Ch. 25 of the zoning code already defines the term piggery.
12
Hamakua CDP: Recommended CDP Revision Summary February 2018