Mayor Bryan Baptiste announced yesterday that he will introduce three new bills related to land use as well as a revised version of the temporary agriculture subdivision moratorium that failed before County Council in February. The updated moratorium, which was
Mayor Bryan Baptiste announced yesterday that he will introduce three new bills related to land use as well as a revised version of the temporary agriculture subdivision moratorium that failed before County Council in February.
The updated moratorium, which was drafted by the county attorney, will include a provision for variances and the duration will be limited to one year from the time of its passage.
The three new bills, Baptiste said, are an attempt to address council concerns about the previous moratorium’s effectiveness and legality.
“It’s important that we don’t just wait for the moratorium but deal with some specific issues quickly and effectively,” he said.
The first bill requires a Class IV permit entailing a public hearing for subdivisions of agricultural-zoned parcels. The current permitting process is administrative.
The second bill classifies a condominium property regime as a subdivision, which brings CPRs into the county’s purview. Currently CPRs are real estate designations of land ownership that further break down subdivided parcels, allowing for increased density on a given piece of ag land.
“We feel to stop the proliferation of density, ag lands (CPRs and ag subdivisions) should be treated equally or as one and the same,” Baptiste said, noting that an existing ordinance preventing more than one subdivision on ag land would apply to CPRs if the second bill were passed.
The final bill places a density cap on open-zoned land, similar to the current five-house limit per ag parcel. The bill also sets subdivision standards for parcels with split open/agricultural zoning or open zoning linked with state land use district agriculture.
According to county officials, 3,700 acres of ag land has been subdivided or received approval since 1999. The result has been an additional 382 lots and 374 units, effectively doubling the density of the land. Between 2002 and 2006, 241 new lots were created; however, only 17 new farms registered with the Farm Bureau.
Councilman Mel Rapozo, who cast one of four votes to shelve the bill in February, effectively killing it, is just as concerned now with the legality of all four bills as he was in February.
He said the last moratorium proposal seemed like the mayor’s attempt to present “feel-good” legislation that didn’t pass legal muster. The bill contradicted its own purpose, he continued, by excusing certain development such as affordable housing.
The county has no insurance coverage when it comes to land use cases, and Rapozo stressed that such legislation must be legally sound to protect tax payers from footing the bill.
“You can’t infringe on land ownership rights because if we do the backlash is very expensive,” Rapozo said.
Councilman Ron Kouchi, who also voted to shelve the bill, said some of his questions about the moratorium’s statutory authority remain unanswered.
“The question is why that length of time,” he said of the moratorium’s end date, “and is that legally defensible?”
Kouchi said he had not been contacted by the mayor regarding the new legislation and questioned whether Baptiste had the authority to re-submit a bill less than one year after it was voted down.
Baptiste said yesterday that the bills are a vehicle to bring the issue to the public.
“I simply believe that the preservation of ag land is key for us keeping our rural character,” Baptiste said. “You have to be careful when you take agriculture out of ag land and put it into another form of land usage.”
The mayor plans to send the land use bills to the County Council sometime next week.
