HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0675.343 2022-2024P /POWD
.bill (Z
COW, 67.E
Frorn: Chris Hall
Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2024 1:10 AM
To: Council Testimony
Subject: Urging Flexibility in Bill 121
�
c�
c,.
C C=:)
Subject:
Urging Flexibility in Bill 121 for Unique Properties
Aloha Chair Ashley Kierkiewicz and Members of the County Council:
My name is Christopher Hall, and I own a vacation rental property in Kailua Kona with five bedrooms
and a bonus room. I am writing to let you know about my concerns about the recent amendments to
Bill 121, particularly COM 0675.160, which imposes a maximum renter limit.
The proposed amendment would restrict my property to a maximum of 12 guests, which is insufficient
for its unique design and capacity. The original bill allowed for planning director discretion, a
necessary flexibility given the diverse nature of properties. My home, with its unparalleled ocean and
coastline views, is designed to host larger groups safely and comfortably. It's a "generational" home
that allows the grandparents to rent a property that brings the family together. Grandparents, their
adult children, and grandchildren stay together. This new limit says four grandchildren maximum. My
Keiki room holds four, so that would leave at least one bedroom and the sofa sleeper empty.
Now, I understand the idea of too many people in a home. My home is large enough that a large
group has plenty of interior space for activities. Limiting homes to 5 bedrooms or a maximum of
guests is arbitrary and ignores the true size of the home in accommodating guests. Most public
buildings are limited in guests based on the size of the building. Think about a 5-bedroom home that
is only 1500 square feet. Wouldn't most of those people be spending their time outside making noise
that upsets neighbors? They wouldn't have a dining room to play games or puzzles, their rooms
would be too small to sit and enjoy, and the kitchen wouldn't have enough room for more than one
cook.
I want to remind the council of some general benefits my home provides to Hawaii. My place brought
in over $40,000 in tourism taxes, paid over $70,000 to my management company and paid almost
$22,000 for cleaning. I also pay a substantially higher property tax rate. It is one home that provides a
place for families of up to 16 people to enjoy Hawaii with amenities that keep them in the home.
Without my home as a vacation rental, that family would need up to 5 hotel rooms, and substantially
less money would go to providing jobs in the area. Also, limiting my place to 12 means that my
customers will need another vacation home to rent, thus increasing demand for vacation homes. With
all these rules, restrictions, and benefits, some might think it is the council's goal to increase the
number of vacation rental properties in Hawaii.
This rigid limit could significantly impact my rental business, as I have existing bookings that conform
to current regulations but exceed the new limits. If the amendment is passed as it stands, it is
important to consider a non -conforming use certificate for properties like mine that currently follow the
1
Comm.
Re"O'
Ref. Date 'S
rules and do not have complaint issues. It is also important to consider that you are punishing the
"good" properties while trying to correct a problem with other properties.
I strongly urge the council to reinstate the provision for director authorization. This is crucial to ensure
that properties like mine can continue to operate without restrictions that harm all parties involved.
Sincerely,
Christopher Nall
Manager,,Kailua Kona Investments, LLC
803-431-1632