COM 0964.017 2004-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Honorable Stacy K. Higa, Chair and Members of the County Council COUNTY COUNCIL Page 3 August 16, 2006 This procedure is consistent with the actual practices followed in Hawaii County during the 1980's and 1990's. When a development came forward seeking a resort where it was not shown on the LUPAG map, it applied for and received a LUPAG map amendment to "resort", not "urban expansion," and was put on the list of resort areas as an intermediate or major resort. Some examples are Kuki'o, Kohanaiki, Awake'e, O'oma, and the "Hawaiian Riviera". On the other hand, the Manini'owali project, which was prohibited from having a hotel by the conditions of a land exchange, applied for and received an "Urban Expansion" designation. The proposed urban expansion LUPAG map amendment E-4 was meant to facilitate future zoning that would allow some urban uses around the harbor, such as commercial development, or businesses providing repairs and services to boats and ocean-related businesses. The future operation of the harbor, and its expansion, could have a synergistic relationship with land-based businesses on state land. The current LUPAG map shows the area around the harbor as "Open" and it is in an "Open" zone, where very few uses are permitted. Current laws governing commercial leases on state land, such as H.R.S. sec. 171-41(a), sec. 171-42, and sec. 171-60, require that these leases be consistent with county zoning. Thus, to have some future businesses around the harbor on state land, there should be a two-step process of amending the General Plan to urban expansion, then follow-up zoning for those uses. This is the basic idea behind E-4. I continue to oppose allowing a large growth-generating resort at Honokohau for the reasons stated in my earlier July 17 letter. A representative from Jacoby Development argued to the Council that the project could be accommodated within an "urban expansion" General Plan designation because this could allow CV ("Village Commercial") zoning or PD ("Project District") zoning. A hotel is a permitted use in a CV zone "when the design and use conform to the character of the area, as approved by the director", Haw. Cty. Code sec. 25-5-122(a), and it can be a permitted use in a PD zone. It is true that a hotel could be allowed by zoning in a CV zone, or a PD zone, that is not in an area designated as "Resort" in the General Plan. We have a few examples of small hotels in CV zones, like the Hotel Honoka'a Club or Kamuela Inn, that are not in "resort" areas listed in the General Plan or shown on the LUPAG map. But it would be stretching the concept to call such hotels a "resort." Like many issues in land use, this is a question of scale. A small hotel in a CV or PD zone may not have a great impact, but General