|
process, the more we seem to change as we go along. So even in this particular item there’s been
<br />several amendments that have happened up to this point, and we’ll bring those to your attention as
<br />we go.
<br />
<br />Before I start, just to let you know, you should have received a yellow copy as well as a green
<br />copy. Hopefully, you have both of those.
<br />
<br />The Planning Director is initiating amendments to Chapter 25, the Zoning Code, Articles 1, 2, 4, 5
<br />and 7 of the Hawai‘i County Code 1983, the 2016 Edition, as amended, relating to meeting
<br />facilities and community buildings.
<br />
<br />The reason for the amendments is that the references within the Zoning Code for “meeting
<br />facilities” and “community buildings” are very similar in definition and use. The Planning
<br />Director is proposing to combine these two uses and definitions into a single, comprehensive
<br />definition by maintaining and expanding upon the definition of “meeting facilities” and to remove
<br />all references to “community buildings.” Over the many years there has been confusion regarding
<br />the meaning and definition of “meeting facilities” versus “community building” and vice versa.
<br />Given the similarities, this bill attempts to simplify things through a single definition with a single
<br />set of applicable requirements.
<br />
<br />The current definition reads as follows: “Community building” means a public or privately-owned
<br />building for civic, social, educational, cultural, and recreational activities, which is not operated
<br />primarily for financial gain; “Meeting facility” means a permanent facility for nonprofit
<br />recreational, social or multi-purpose use, which has no overnight accommodations, and which may
<br />be for organizations operating on a membership basis for the promotion of members’ mutual
<br />interests or may be primarily intended for community purposes. Typical uses include private
<br />clubs, union halls, community centers, and student centers.
<br />
<br />The proposed change to the definition would take, would combine the two – and to keep in mind
<br />this has changed already, so, and that is what’s on your yellow and your green forms: “Meeting
<br />facility” means a public or privately-owned facility, which is not operated primarily for financial
<br />gain, that is used for recreational, social, civic, cultural, or multi-purpose functions, and which has
<br />no overnight accommodations. The facility may be used for organizations operating on a
<br />membership basis for the promotion of members’ mutual interests or for community purposes.
<br />Typical uses may include private clubs, union halls, community and association centers, but not
<br />educational facilities, such as schools.
<br />
<br />We’ve also, from past experiences, have initiated the requirement for a Use Permit mainly in
<br />Residential zonings. So in the RS, RD, RM zoning, to do a meeting facility would require a Use
<br />Permit, which allows the surrounding property owners to be able to comment on the particular
<br />facility and be able to request conditions such as hours of operation, amounts of events, those
<br />types of restrictions. Additionally, there would be a requirement, which currently actually is
<br />required to require Special Permits in the State Land Use Agricultural District for RA, FA, and
<br />Agricultural zonings. But further on we’ve added in the section that if it’s located within the
<br />County Agricultural zoning, or the RA or FA zoning, but within the State Land Use Urban
<br />District, it would require a Use Permit. So that’s the additional change.
<br />
<br />2
<br />EXHIBIT B
<br />
<br />
|