HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN PCPLUD 2024/08/06 (2022-2024)Policy Committee on
Planning, Land Use, and Development
18' Session
Hawaii County Building
25 Aupuni Street
Hilo, Hawaii
August 6, 2024
CALL TO The regular meeting of the Policy Committee on Planning, Land Use, and
ORDER: Development was called to order at 10:00 a.m., in the Council Chambers,
Hilo, by Ms. Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Chair.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Ms. Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Chair
Ms. Cindy Evans, Member (via videoconference from Kona)
Ms. Michelle M. Galimba, Member
Ms. Jenn Kagiwada, Member
Ms. Heather L. Kimball, Member
Ms. Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Member
Ms. Rebecca Villegas, Member (via videoconference from Kona)
Absent & Excused: Mr. Holeka Goro Inaba, Vice Chair
Mr. Matt Kdneali'i-Kleinfelder, Member
STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business,
FROM THE Statements from the Public on Agenda Items.
PUBLIC ON
AGENDA ITEMS: (There were none.)
CHR. KlERKIEWICZ: If we could please proceed with Communications.
COMMUNI- The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business,
CATIONS: Communications.
Comm. 948: REQUESTS THE FORMATION OF AN AD HOC COMMITTEE PURSUANT
TO COUNCIL RULE NO. 7 AND SECTION 92-2.5 OF THE HAWAPI
REVISED STATUTES TO DEVELOP RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
REVISIONS TO CHAPTER 11 OF THE HAWAI'l COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016
EDITION, AS AMENDED), ENTITLED "HOUSING"
From Council Member Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, dated July 18, 2024.
Motion to Close File: Ms. Kimball moved to close file on Comm. 948. Seconded
by Ms. Lee Loy.
PCPLUD-18 August 6, 2024
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Folks, if you don't mind, it's my
communication but I also just want to for efficiency sake, move us through the
conversation. I am proposing to establish an ad hoc committee. This is one of the
tools that we have available to us as a legislative body. So, it can be no more than
four members of this body to do a comprehensive review and a rewrite of
Chapter 11, which is related to affordable housing. There are a couple —
MS. EVANS: Chair?
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Yes.
Point of Order: MS. EVANS: Question on point of order. I know it's a communication, is it okay
for you to conduct it or do you need to turn the chairmanship over to your vice
chair?
MS. KIMBALL: It's okay, Council Member Evans. That is only required for
resolutions and bills.
MS. EVANS: Thanks for the clarity. Thank you. I yield.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: No problem. You're fine. There were a couple of
legislative items or reports that this Council has seen. We've adopted a resolution
requiring or suggesting that the Office of Housing and Community Development
address our housing crisis with urgency. Last year we received a report from the
Auditor's Office that identified ways in which the office can improve its operations
in relation to excess credits. And last week this body received a copy of a
presentation from Keyser Marston regarding an analysis and recommendations to
improve Chapter 11.
I've cleared it with the Clerk that we can as a body review and develop and write
Code essentially. And so, that is something that I'm proposing to do is assemble
three individuals and myself to meet between August through the end of November
in partnership with the Office of Housing and Community Development to start to
dissect the Keyser Marston report and come up with suggested changes to Chapter
11. I'd like to hear from folks who might be interested in serving before I make a
determination on who will be serving on the Committee. Ms. Lee Loy.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. Yes. I am interested. First of all, thank you so
much for putting this forward. I think there's pieces of legislation in chapters that
we tinker with and often times they are band -aid solutions and reactive solutions to
what we have before us. I think a comprehensive overhaul and or look and tailoring
of Chapter 11 is overdue.
I'm just going to speak to why I would love to be considered. I think there's a lot
of work that can be done not only within Chapter 11 but understanding how
Page 2
aNURWOMFI.,
August 6, 2024
housing actually works from a construction perspective. Having done a lot of work
with our Construction Codes and the complete overhaul of that I think makes me a
great champion for understanding the dynamic approach you have to have to
housing. I think I'm finally —I've always been a champion for our Native
Hawaiian population, and I recognize that affordable housing and how that's
delivered within our homestead communities are a little unique and different but
can still be tailored into what we do here locally in Chapter 11. Asking for your
humble consideration. I yield.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Council Member. Council Member Kimball.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you first of all, for putting this forward. As Council
Member Lee Loy said, I think this sort of evaluation is long overdue, but we have a
lot of data now to support some of the understandings about what needs to be
changed as far as what's working and what's not, as well as, you know, a lot of
state resources with respect to housing and the housing fact books that have been
produced by you here.
I would like to just put a plug in for Vice Chair Inaba, who of course is not here
today, but he and I had worked pretty extensively on some revisions of
Chapter 11, did a lot of the background homework from other jurisdictions, and I
will say, in most cases addressed the issues that were brought forth in the report.
So, given that, I'm busy, and that he has that sort of that attention to detail that we
all know and love. I would like to suggest that he would be an ideal candidate to
participate in the ad hoc. Thank you.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Council Member. Council Member Kagiwada.
MS. KAGIWADA: Thank you. And thank you for putting this forward. I also
would second the notion that Vice Chair Inaba would be a really good addition to
this working group. I'm interested in joining for sure. Housing has become, you
know, something that is very important and something I've been learning a lot
about fast. I was just recently appointed —had a NACo (National Association of
Counties) presidential appointment as a Vice Chair for the Housing Sub Committee
for NACo, and so, interested in kind of waiting in with the national folks to see
what's being done nationally and bringing back ideas that way too. So, yeah. I am
interested in participating as well. Thanks.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you very much. Turning it over to Kona. Council
Members Evans or Villegas?
MS. EVANS: Chair?
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Council Member Evans, you have the floor.
Page 3
PCPLUD-18
August 6, 2024
MS. EVANS: Thank you. I'm interested in joining the group with a different,
maybe a little bit of a different perspective. I believe that we have to create trust,
and this was very timely, this report, because of the issue that we had on affordable
tax credits. There was a lot of people very uncomfortable with the affordable tax
credit program. And I really liked that the report came out and really part of it was
addressing that. And it was interesting because I was thinking there was going to
be several laws that could be created from the report as I read it, and when I saw
that you had proposed this group, I went, "Whoa, this is a different way of flushing
it out and having this bigger conversation."
Again, I think there probably could have been a couple bills already introduced by
legislators because I thought there was some really good, summary takeaways from
that report. I think this process of us getting together and talking about it will be
beneficial, you know, because there was a lot. Again, there was an awful lot that
was really in that report and, you know, it's time to really drill down on this
Chapter 11.
Again, affordable housing in my district that's going off with construction and it
tends to be, I hate to say, they're building homes that are worth more than
$750,000, we're in the millions and multiple millions in my district and the people
in my district are really, really wanting affordable housing. So, I think we need to
tackle this, and we need to get more affordable housing in the pipeline, at least in
North and South Kohala. So, I would ask for your consideration, and it would be an
honor to work with my colleagues. Thank you. I yield.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Council Member Villegas, any comments?
MS. VILLEGAS: No thank you. Not at this time.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Back here in Hilo. Council Member Galimba.
MS. GALIMBA: Thank you. I also want to thank you for this effort to look at
Chapter 11 with an ad hoc committee. I am very interested in this topic; however, I
also can also see that some of my other colleagues probably have more background
on this. So, I would put myself in sort of Team B, so to speak. I'll be there if you
need me. But I just wanted, at this time, to sort of raise up some of the things that
are some of the issues specific to my district, which would make me interested in
being on this committee. And reading the Keyser Marston report and seeing that
there are really negative incentives for the development of affordable housing at
this time. And it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with
Chapter 11, it's like an economic and regulatory disincentive to some degree. And
that fact leads folks having to go and live in substandard subdivisions and
conditions that are just really not acceptable, although, they're just trying to find a
roof over their heads. So, that is really kind of my interest in this. And so, maybe
Page 4
August 6, 2024
just want to shout out to that in this consideration of this Chapter 1.1 rewrite.
Thanks.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. I think everyone spoke in on this issue. And I
also want to invite or acknowledge that Administrator Kunz from Office of Housing
and Community Development is here. We have been coordinating on this idea of
establishing an ad hoc, and I'm of the mind that the more minds the merrier. And
you have a lot of folks that are very interested, passionate, and actually have done a
lot of research around what could be, you know, something for our County to
explore to incentivize affordable housing development here on Hawaii Island.
Administrator, did you want to just provide any comments about this committee and
your office's collaboration with us on it?
(Note: At this time, Housing Administrator Susan Kunz came forward to
address the members of the Committee.)
MS. KUNZ: Good morning. Susan Kunz. Office of Housing, Housing
Administrator. I'm very thankful for this process and us engaging in this
conversation to put together this group. You know, we've worked really hard with
the consultant and a lot of discussions going on. And I think it's also equally as
important to get comments and input from our community through all of you and
your knowledge. So, I'm excited about working with the group and I'm glad to see
so many are interested in engaging. So, let's see how this process works out and
I'm here to support whatever Office of Housing needs to do to make this move
forward.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you for being such a willing partner in this
endeavor. I don't know if anybody's actually established this kind of ad hoc before.
But I think it's so important to do. We cannot just make amendments to Chapter 11
and create a Frankenstein Code. I think we need as many, you know, hands and
seats at the table to do a very holistic review. A lot of data is out there, and we also
have to reflect on the experiences we've had where we thought we were
incentivizing housing, but we haven't seen any sort of tangible results to that.
MS. KUNZ: Yes. I agree.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: And so, I feel very strongly about setting this ad hoc up.
Just so folks have a sense of meeting cadence. We are going to be meeting weekly
starting next week through the end of October. I'd like to make sure that there's
island -wide representation by this body so in addition to meeting in person, we will
also have Zoom capabilities so that folks can fully participate. But this is going to
require a significant investment of time and brainpower, but I think at the end of
this, we will be able to offer something up for the next Council to deliberate on
when they are seated. That being said, we also will be having members from
Page 5
PCPLUD-18 August 6, 2024
Corporation Counsel and the Planning Department be part of this very exciting
endeavor.
Okay. So, in terms of the ad hoc committee, I will be leading the ad hoc, chairing
this particular committee. Council Member Inaba had also reached out to express
interest and certainly want to ensure that he is part of this, so he is going to be on
the Committee. I also want to invite Council Member Lee Loy to join us given here
extensive background in development arena, doing large Code updates, but also the
connection you have within your leadership roles within NACo, you've done a lot
within the housing and infrastructure space and have access to technical experts on
the national level that I think would be really relevant here. And I also want to
invite Council Member Jenn Kagiwada, who has also newly appointed Vice Chair
on one of the NACo sub committees and who has been a very passionate member of
our Council advocating for more affordable attainable housing options for our
community.
So, that rounds up the committee. Council Members Kierkiewicz, Lee Loy, Inaba,
and Kagiwada, will be on the Chapter 11 ad hoc committee. I need a motion to
postpone this communication to the call of the Chair.
Vote on Motion Ms. Lee Loy moved to postpone Comm. 948 to the call of
to Postpone: the Chair. Seconded by Ms. Galimba and carried by the
(Approved) following voice vote:
Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Galimba,
Kagiwada, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas,
and Chair Kierkiewicz — 7.
Noes: None.
Absent: Committee Members Inaba and
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder — 2.
Excused: None.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Mr. Clerk, we are now moving on to bill for
ordinances.
BILLS FOR The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business,
ORDINANCES: Bills for Ordinances.
Page 6
PCPLUD-18
STATEMENTS
FROM THE
PUBLIC ON
BILL 123:
(DRAFT 3)
August 6, 2024
The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business,
Statements from the Public on Agenda Items.
The following individual registered to speak and came forward when called by
the Chair:
Chuck Flaherty:
Bill 123, Draft 3 (Comm. 677.23), comment.
Bill 123: AMENDS CHAPTER 19, ARTICLE 1 AND ARTICLE 13, CHAPTER 23,
(Draft 3) ARTICLE 9, AND CHAPTER 25, ARTICLE 1, ARTICLE 2, ARTICLE 5, AND
ARTICLE 6, OF THE HAWAPI COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS
AMENDED), RELATING TO OHANA DWELLING UNITS
Removes each instance of the term "ohana dwelling" from the County Code and
inserts the term "accessory dwelling unit", and adds provisions for the
establishment of an accessory dwelling unit.
Reference: Comm. 677.23
Imr. by: Ms. Kimball and Ms. Kierkiewicz
Referred to Planning
Commissions: January 30, 2024
Postponed: July 8 and July 23, 2024
(Note: There is a motion by Ms. Kimball, seconded by Ms. Galimba, to
recommend passage of Bill 123 on first reading.)
(Note: The following Communications transmitting proposed amendments to
Bill 123, Draft 3, were circulated:
1. Comm. 677.24, from Council Member Heather L. Kimball, dated August 5, 2024;
2. Comm. 677.25, from Council Member Heather L. Kimball, dated August 6, 2024;
3. Comm. 677.26, from Council Member Heather L. Kimball, dated August 6, 2024)
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Council Member Kimball, you have some
amendments that you would like to offer up?
MS. KIMBALL: Yes. Thank you. So, I'd like to just dive first into the
amendments and then I actually have some response to Mr. Flaherty's concerns as
well as a couple of things that are not being presented to you as amendments today.
So, I'd like to start with Communication 677.24.
Motion to Amend: Ms. Kimball moved to amend Bill 123, Draft 3, with the
contents of Comm. 677.24. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Before you move into that, I just want to make sure our
friends in Kona have these communications in front of them.
Page 7
PCPLUD-18
August 6, 2024
MS. VILLEGAS: Yes, we do. Thank you for checking, we're good.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Perfect. Thank you. And we also have Planning Director
Zendo Kern here to weigh in with department mana`o on the proposed amendments.
Council Member Kimball.
MS. KIMBALL: Yes. Thank you. So, at the request of this body, Director Kern
and I were able to meet with Kauai and City and County of Honolulu Planning
Departments to talk about any restrictions that they have with respect to accessory
dwelling units (ADU). I will start by saying that in Kauai County they have
ADU's, ARU's (Additional Rental Unit), and guest houses, and they are all pretty
much the same. They do not have a size restriction. Although, they have in general
smaller lot sizes than we do and that by because of setbacks and whatnot becomes a
smaller dwelling. They also are limited to one per residential lot and it's one of the
three. So, if you have a guest house, for example, you can't have an ADU.
City and County of Honolulu, they have `ohana's and ADU's. `Ohana's are
restricted for family, blood relatives. They strongly advised us against doing that.
It is practically unenforceable and very difficult, and there's always a lot of
complaints and, "Well, that's my aunty," and whatever. So, strongly recommend
that we not do that. They have a provision that if the lot is under 5,000 square feet,
the limit is 400 square feet for the dwelling and if it's over 5,000 square feet, it is
800 square feet. Their sense was that this was too small. Again, smaller lot sizes in
general than we have here in Hawaii County. But the other thing that actually
spoke to me was they said but keeping it small keeps it in affordability in terms of
the overall price per square foot.
So, I did meet yesterday with Director Pause and the Building Division Chief and
Deputy and we landed on 1,250 square feet, which seems remarkably precise. But
it is actually based on looking at the major kit home suppliers, so, Argus, Honsador,
and HPM (HPM Building Supply). This size should accommodate most of those
kit homes especially if you exclude, which we are here, the lanai, the garage or the
carport. And so, the thought was, you know, make it big enough; three bedrooms,
two bath. A family could fit in this unit. But to still put a size restriction on it so
that we are keeping these in the affordability range. I'm happy to have Director add
into any of our conversation, if I missed anything. But he's giving me the thumbs
up. So, that is the proposal here that the unit size would be limited to
1,250 square feet. Thank you.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Council Member. Any questions or comments
on the proposed amendment? Council Member Kagiwada.
MS. KAGIWADA: Thank you. Generally in support. This is just an overall, I'm
just checking for understanding here, overall size limit. So, it still could be say, a
Page 8
lye 041 _ NMI.
August 6, 2024
one bedroom and be kind of fancier, like bigger living room and all that because
you would still have the same size limitation, whether it's a one, two, or three
bedroom, correct?
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: That's correct.
MS. KAGIWADA: Okay. I just wanted to double check with that. I mean, I guess
I'm supportive. I do like the idea of making sure that we try to keep these
affordable if possible. Thank you.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Checking over in Kona.
MS. EVANS: Chair, I have some questions, and we have Director Pause with us.
I'd like to invite him up.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Council Member Evans, you have the floor.
MS. EVANS: Thank you.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Director Pause, welcome.
(Note: At this time, Public Works Director Stephen Pause came forward to
address the members of the Committee.)
MR. PAUSE: Good morning.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Good morning.
MS. EVANS: So, I noticed that we're, and this is about what size we want to allow
and I'm curious, was there ever any size restrictions on guest houses? Because I'm
noticing that we want to get rid of guest houses. So, now we're moving from guest
houses into ADU's. And so, these guest houses could end up being nonconforming
because they don't fit into this size. So, how is that going to work with us as we
move, getting rid of guest houses and getting rid of `ohana's and there must have
been some type of size limit on them, and now we're moving into this. Can you
give us a sense of transition?
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Council Member Evans, I just want to take you back to the
amendment that we're on, which is related to accessory dwelling units. There is no
discussion on the floor or any proposal to get rid of guest houses. Just want to be
really clear.
MS. EVANS: Right. But this is really critical for me to see if I want to agree to
this 1,250 square feet. I need to know about these guest houses, what sizing,
Page 9
PCPLUD-18
August 6, 2024
because I'm not sure. I think this is too big right now. That's why I'm asking this
question. Thank you.
MR. PAUSE: Steve Pause, Director of Public Works. I'm not sure that I could
comment on sizes for guest houses. Director Kern may be more knowledgeable on
that. I will tell you though, in our discussions about the size, the two things that
Council Member Kimball brought up; one was affordable. So, we wanted to have
it —and building prices right now, I think on a good day is $400 a foot. On a bad
day, it's even higher than that. But making it affordable and also as Council
Member Kimball mentioned, the package homes, the preapproved plans that we
now have, I think we an excess of 15, maybe 20. But this seemed to be a sweet spot
that fit within that 500 to 1,250 or so square feet that we see in preapproved plans.
So, that was sort of the logic for it.
And one other thing we talked about was, just to be clear, to call it major living
area, so it's exclusive of carports; it's exclusive of garages, and lanai's. But I don't
have a recollection of what limits for sizes of guest houses may be in the Code
presently. And again, I would defer to Director Kern. He may have that
knowledge.
MS. EVANS: Is Director Kern with us?
(Note: At this time, Planning Director Zendo Kern came forward to address
the members of the Committee.)
MR. KERN: Aloha, Chair. Good morning, Members. Zendo Kern, Planning
Director. Thanks for the question related to guest house. The guest house square
foot limit is 512 square feet. The distinction of the guest house is you actually don't
get a kitchen. And so, you're able to do a guest house of 512 square feet. You can
have basically a refrigerator and like a sink in there, but no cooking apparatus. So,
it's kind of a glorified detached bedroom, if you will. And over the course of the
last few years and before that, there's been kind of the conversation around
detached bedrooms and guest house, and what we tried to do is basically say if the
house is further than 50 feet away, we're looking at that as a guest house. If it's
closer with some type of connectivity to the main house, it could be deemed as a
detached bedroom. So, in our view of the `ohana or ADU's and the guest house,
they're very different things.
MS. EVANS: Okay. So, the square footage given that Oahu, I believe Chair
Kimball mentioned, will the setback requirements on the specific lot end up
determining what you're going to agree to for maximum size, so we don't have to
get into any lots less than 4,000 square feet. You can't get over 800 square feet or, I
mean, will that just automatically work its way out when they come in and make a
proposal?
Page 10
PCPLUD-18
August 6, 2024
MR. KERN: Yeah. That's the way that we're looking at. The setbacks will be,
you know, fixed based on the zoning district that they're in. And then the person
that's looking to do an ADU will have to look if they want to do it attached or
detached. If they're detached, there's a separation between buildings. So, once
you're in that type of urban environment, there's going to be a limitation of really
what you can fit in there. And once you calculate, this is between buildings and
setbacks, you know, I think in many cases somebody would be hard pressed to fit
many on there and that will dictate what they can fit as well as the infrastructure.
MR. PAUSE: Right. Thanks, Director Kern. I was going to also mention the
availability of wastewater discharge. So, is your lot big enough to put another
septic system; does the current house connect to a cesspool; is there sewer
availability? So, in addition to setbacks, the ability to dispose of wastewater is
going to come into play here as well, in terms of size.
MS. EVANS: Okay. So, we don't have to get really drilled down. This will take
care of itself.
MR. PAUSE: Exactly.
MS. EVANS: Okay. Thank you. I appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. I
yield.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: No problem. Council Member Villegas, any questions or
comments?
MS. VILLEGAS: Director Pause just hit the nail on the head talking about the
wastewater and what happens in that realm. Thank you, Council Member Kimball
for, you know, doing this due diligence to come up with a number for how big it
should be. I suppose I still, I mean, my house is this size because it was a 1974 kit
home from HPM. It was HPM or Honsador. So, there's just an inkling in the back
of my head that we're setting ourselves up for something. We're trying to solve
this housing crisis, but we may be compounding another kind of crisis on some
properties. Yeah, there's just something that doesn't quite sit right, unfortunately,
for me. So, I just feel like there's something I'm missing. But I see the
intentionality for doing good and providing more housing for our community, but I
also see the potential for —I don't know. There's some here that just doesn't sit
quite right, but I'll continue to digest that and see if I can put my finger on it. So, I
yield.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Anyone else here in Hilo regarding
Comm. 677.24. Again, to reiterate, this would set a maximum square footage for
living area for an ADU that's 1,250 square feet. You can build smaller. You might
have to actually build smaller if there are resource constraints related to
infrastructure availability. But the max size would be 1,250 square feet. And it
Page 11
PCPLUD-18
August 6, 2024
also notes here that number does not include a lanai, garage, or carport, and then the
height limit is going to be prescribed based on the zoning district it's in. So, I think
it's very clear. And I appreciate you reaching out to other counties to see what has
and hasn't worked for them to inform how we proceed here in Hawaii County.
Council Member Lee Loy, you have your light on?
MS. LEE LOY: Yeah. Thank you. In support. I think where we started the
conversation was, I think, just too big. And I believe it was this, and maybe
Director Pause, you can help me. I know you landed or help land into this
1,250 square feet. Part of my challenge to you was when we came up with this
number, if there was an analysis about construction waste. Were we able to get
that?
MR. PAUSE: Unfortunately, Council Member Lee Loy, no. We were not able to
get that. I think a lot of our mindset was sort of geared toward or steered towards
these preapproved plans and these kit homes. And one could surmise that if you're
buying a kit home, there should be a whole lot less waste than just doing a stick
build. But to answer your question, I was not able to, or I did not follow up on your
question about waste.
MS. LEE LOY: Okay. No worries. Maybe I can lean into some of the partners
that we have regarding that. Director Kern, here we are limiting the height size
also, I'm just thinking about the variance process, and I know it says this here, but
would that foreclose on an opportunity for someone to apply for a variance to make
the height adjustments?
MR. KERN: Thanks for the question. No. The way that we read it, a person
would still have the ability to apply for a variance, which we rarely see high
variances.
MS. LEE LOY: Sure. You know, I'm in support. I think people are going to use
this and they're going to walk it out in all kinds of ways. And I think we'll just
cross those bridges when we get there. I think what makes sense, makes sense. But
if we start with a building footprint size, we can start also looking at the cumulative
impacts as it relates to wastewater, right, roads, other things. But unless we provide
a backstop, and this is that backstop, we'll never be able to program all the other
stuff that it impacts. So, I am in support of this because we need to start
somewhere. Thank you, Chair. I yield.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Council Member Kagiwada.
MS. KAGIWADA: Thank you, Chair. One more question. What are the parking
requirements for a building this size? Say, is it based on the number of bedrooms;
is it similar to the primary home?
Page 12
August 6, 2024
MR. KERN: Yes.
MS. KAGIWADA: Okay.
MR. KERN: Unless there's a provision that we specifically carve that out, it would
be the same as the primary home.
MS. KAGIWADA: Okay. So, it'll be for a three bedroom it would be?
MR. KERN: Two stalls, I believe. I have to double check that.
MS. KAGIWADA: Two stalls. Okay. Alright, I just wanted to double check with
that because obviously that would be an influence on what people are able to build
as well. Okay. Thank you. I yield.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay.
MS. EVANS: Chair, here in Kona?
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Council Member Evans, go ahead.
MS. EVANS: Thank you. I wanted to inquire. When we originally looked at the
square footage, I believe it was 2,000 square feet. And my question —because I'm
trying to find it. I'm going back through the original drafts trying to find it. Was it
2,000 square feet under roof or was it 2,000 square feet living area when we started
out with this?
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Council Member Kimball, can you please respond?
MS. KIMBALL: Council Member Evans, the initial draft of Bill 123 did not have
any size limit at all. There was an amendment introduced at last committee hearing
that set it at 2,000 under roof. After talking with Director Pause the language that is
in there now is more appropriate to say living area and then that excludes these
additional areas that are not used for housing. So this is according to the Building
Department, the more appropriate language.
MS. EVANS: I agree with the appropriate language. But it could still be
2,000 square feet under roof. And I just want everybody to point that out because
there's a huge difference between under roof. I mean, I know my house has
1,200 square feet of lanai. And so, it's interesting because I think when you
compare it to the minimum yard requirements, the minimum yard requirements may
dictate what the size of the lanai and the carport and the garage are in addition to the
living area. And I think we've got to look at it wholistically as to what we're doing
here. Yeah. I'm just raising it because there's a huge difference now. We could
still allow 2,000 square feet of building on the lot the way we're writing it because
Page 1.3
PCPLUD-18 August 6, 2024
what you're saying is 1,250 square feet living area, and then they can add a carport,
they can add a garage, they can add a lanai. That's a lot. So, we're definitely doing
that.
The other thing is, when they originally started, it was only going to affect lots of
10,000 square feet or less. If we've removed that, then you know, there's so many
moving parts to this. It's really nice if we could see them wholistic. And I know
we're doing an amendment one by one, but one is really impacting the other. So, I
see where you're headed. I just right now would really like to kind of understand
the big picture. So, with that, there's my comments. Chair, thank you. I yield.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Mr. Clerk, if we could please go through a roll
call vote for this amendment.
Vote on Motion The motion to amend Bill 123, Draft 3, with the contents of
to Amend: Comm. 677.24 was carried by the following roll call vote:
(Approved)
Ayes: Committee Members Galimba, Kagiwada,
Kimball, Lee Loy, and Chair Kierkiewicz — 5.
Noes: Committee Members Evans and Villegas — 2.
Absent: Committee Members Inaba and
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder — 2.
Excused: None.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Next communication.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. And before I introduce this next amendment. I do
want to reflect on what Council Member Evans has said which is that these
amendments are part of the larger whole of the bill and there are several constraints
that would limit the size in addition to what was just passed. It has to do with the
setbacks that are required by the Zoning Code; it has to do with the availability of
space for an individual wastewater system, parking requirements. There were
several things. We just wanted to put an upper limit in this situation that all of
those other criteria are met. Similarly, this next amendment being proposed,
Communication 677.25, has another limit. Again, it's the upper limit considering
all other requirements are met.
Motion to Amend: Ms. Kimball moved to amend Bill 123, Draft 3, as amended,
with the contents of Comm. 677.25. Seconded by Ms. Lee
Loy.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Council Member Kimball.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. So, this again is an upper limit. Again, you have to
consider that there are a number of other constraints that would determine how
many units could be built on a site, but this is the upper limit. Worked with
Page 14
a '
August 6, 2024
Director Kern on this because we need to have the flexibility in zonings that allow
for more than one primary dwelling. So, the way that this should be read is that the
maximum number dwellings on a site would be four; the primary dwelling and up
to three accessory dwelling units. In the event that the zoning allows for more than
one primary dwelling, each of those primary dwellings could have its own
accessory dwelling unit. Maybe I'll let you speak to this a little bit more, Director
Kern, as you proposed the language to this. But again, Kauai had a limit of one.
So, there would be two dwellings per site. They tend to have smaller building sites.
We are, per state law, required to allow two in residential areas with the passage of
(State Bill) SB30-26, I may have that number wrong, but I believe that's correct.
Director Kern's going to correct me on that number.
MR. KERN: (State Bill) 32-02.
MS. KIMBALL: 32-02. Thank you. I'm sure that other one is also important. But
the City and County of Honolulu did not express a limit in the number but, Director
Kern, do you want to just —I think it might be useful to kind of just describe the
scenario where the second half of this clause would relate when you have the ability
to do more than one primary dwelling. And then just speak a little bit about the
difference between Kauai, City and County of Honolulu, and even Maui, to us in
terms of the typical sizes we have with respect to the Zoning Code.
MR. KERN: Sure. Thank you for the question. So, in certain cases with the
residential zoning, to the RS district, you can sometimes be allowed more than one
primary dwelling on a parcel. Case and point, if you have RS-10 zoning and you
have a 20,000 square foot lot, you're allowed a density of two without subdividing
it. And those would be two primary dwellings. So, looking at it, we thought that if
a person was going to utilize that, having the ability to tie an ADU to a primary
would make sense. If they're just going to say one primary, then you're just
counting your additional ADU's. So, looking at it, it seemed to not make sense to
preclude that especially if they were kind of attached, the primary and the ADU.
For example, if you had a place that you could get two in town, in that case I use
RS-20, that would get you four, but it would be tied to that primary and then
somebody may decide to subdivide it in the future, which then those would be tied
together. If they don't design it right, the subdivision of that would be quite
challenging or basically prohibited by the design. So, that was the concept to not
limit those that already kind of have that approved density in that way.
And then, lot size wise, we're talking with Kauai and Oahu. They're generally
closer to like the 5,000 square foot to 7,000 square foot lot. Our minimum lot size
right now in the urban area is 7,500 square feet and most of our lots are generally
10,000 square feet to 20,000 square feet; a lot of 15,000 square feet. So, they kind
of agreed that our makeup was a little bit different, and our size would merit that.
think another takeaway from all of them was a lot of their legislation and
Page 15
August 6, 2024
restrictions they did were based on fear at the time. And they were like, we would
actually like to see it more open. We would like to come back and revisit these.
And anytime you're dealing with new legislation, it's challenging. You know, you
folks are here trying to make these decisions and there's pros and cons to it. And
that was kind of the takeaway was, I think they would lean into it a bit more and it
was kind of nice to hear them from actually having had this in motion and
practicing this from a zoning and land use perspective already. They were
supportive of what we're looking at. I hope that answered your questions.
MS. KIMBALL: Yeah. Thank you, Director. And thank you for reminding me of
that concept of our conversation with both Kaua'i and City and County of
Honolulu. You know, the counties were required at one point in time to develop
these 'ohana or ADU codes, and at the time density was —people were afraid of
density. We know that if you don't support density, you end up with sprawl. And
we want to keep people closer to services, to schools, to infrastructure. And so, it
was really telling for us to hear that they are working on ways to actually get to
where we're going because their code was developed at a time when it was very
fear based. So, I think that was a really important part to highlight of our
conversations with the other counties. So, look for my colleagues' support on this.
Happy to answer any questions.
CHR. KEERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Anyone here in Hilo with questions or
comments? Council Member Galimba.
MS. GALIMBA: I think this is related to the amendment but stop me if it isn't.
I'm looking at this and it's limiting the number of ADU's on a site. But I'm kind of
looking at it from the agricultural perspective and self-limiting for most urban
residential zoning but potentially you could have a very big lot in the agricultural
district. However, the main body of this Bill 123, says that in state agricultural
district that you have to have agriculture, and it has to be an additional farm
dwelling, which is the controlling element there. I'm just wondering, do we have
ag zoning that is not state land use ag and how much of that do we have; and I guess
what are the lot sizes generally?
MR. KERN: Thank you for the question. Yeah, we do have areas where the
underlined state land use is rural or urban and the overlined zoning is agricultural.
And so, in that case state land use ag or ag doesn't rule and they would actually be
allowed to do the count that we have that we're looking at here. Rural zoned land,
we have about 803 acres on the entire island of state land use rural. The overlap of
agricultural zoning onto state land use urban, I don't have those exact numbers. We
don't see it that often. There are some places we've noticed in Waimea, right by
Waimea Park, right behind the town center, those are I think zoned AG- 1, state land
use urban. We generally find those right in the kind of, that either plantation kind
of urban areas or the kind of the fringe areas; Waimea is a good example. Once you
Page 16
PCPLUD-18
August 6, 2024
exceed that, it's all state land use ag. I can see if I can find out some additional
information on how often that happens. I would say not that often.
MS. GALIMBA: Thank you. Yeah. I think I'm generally supportive, but I would
like to maybe see a little bit more of some of this on the margin potential cases.
MR. KERN: Sure thing. And to completely answer your question, I'd say a lot of
those end up being around one to three acres, from my recollection. And the
agricultural zoning does not allow that same type of density that residential would.
So, that RS-10 example that I gave, I'd say a three -acre ag parcel zoned AG-1,
you're not going to get one unit per each of that density. You would only still be
allowed the one primary. And then in this case if it wasn't state land use ag, you
would be allowed the three. If it was state land use ag, you'd be looking at
additional farm dwellings if you were doing agriculture.
MS. GALIMBA: Okay. Okay. So, the 803 acres of state land use rural, where is
that; do you know offhand?
MR. KERN: It's splattered throughout the island.
MS. GALIMBA: Okay. Thank you.
MR. KERN: It's very little when you really look at it. Yeah.
MS. GALIMBA: Thanks.
MR. KERN: You're welcome.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Checking over in Kona, any questions or comments?
MS. VILLEGAS: Yes please, Chair.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Council Member Villegas, you have the floor.
MS. VILLEGAS: Yeah, when we talked about this when it came forward a few
weeks ago, I remember Council Member Inaba mentioning something that really hit
home to me is that I was feeling like a one to one was a more responsible way, more
relevant, to ease us into these ADU units. And I still feel like a three to one is a
really, really, a lot. And so, it's not quite landing perfectly for me. I would've
liked to have seen this be a one to one. So, just kind of how I'm feeling personally
on this. I yield.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Council Member Evans.
Page 17
August 6, 2024
MS. EVANS: Yeah. Chair, just to clarify with the Planning Director. So, let's say
I'm in the FA, family agricultural. I have the ability to do two dwelling units. And
so, based on what you just said I could end up doing two more accessory dwelling
units. So, this property will end up with four houses on it?
MR. KERN: Council Member, if I can clarify the question. So, the parcel we're
using as an example is an FA, family agricultural zone parcel?
MS. EVANS: Yes.
MR. KERN: If it's going to be a family agricultural zoned parcel you'd be allowed,
depending on the state land use, it would either be a primary dwelling or a first farm
dwelling.
MS. EVANS: Right. And so, if this is —because the way I'm reading it, I'm just
trying to march it out here. If you end up with two primary dwelling units on this
parcel, you could end up with two more accessory dwelling units, or would it be six
more dwelling units?
MR. KERN: So, Council Member Evans, can you explain how you're arriving at
getting two primary dwellings on the family agricultural zoned property?
MS. EVANS: Okay. Because the way this is written, it says an accessory dwelling
unit is a maximum of three per building site, okay, except, and this where I'm
getting exception, where a building site is permitted to have more than one primary
dwelling.
MR. KERN: Okay. Thanks for that clarification. The only zoning district that
allows for that is a residential zoning district. The family ag or the agricultural
zoning does not allow for that type of unit per density count. So, you could have a
family ag zoned parcel, let's say that was three acres in size that was zoned
FA-1, meaning your minimum lot size is one acre. That parcel would still only be
allowed one primary dwelling or one first farm dwelling.
MS. EVANS: So, if you have one primary dwelling then this would allow them to
do three accessory dwelling units?
MR. KERN: If the state land use was rural or urban, yes. If the state land use was
state land use agriculture, which majority of our island is, no.
MS. EVANS: Okay. And we're putting out a draft General Plan, so we may see
rural urban changes that might be coming. I'm just trying to figure out kind of how
this is going to play out. So, I'm glad that you said that. FA depends on if it's a
rural or urban zoning designation, will determine how many ADU's?
Page 18
August 6, 2024
MR. KERN: Yes. That's going to be one of the primary factors. And the General
Plan won't automatically create those zoning districts. It will just allow for that
future land use pattern that could occur, and if there is a state land use boundary
amendment or a change of zone, that would come to the County Council for
approval.
MS. EVANS: Okay. Alright. Good. Thank you. I yield.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Back here in Hilo, Council Member
Kagiwada.
MS. KAGIWADA: Thank you, Chair. I'm supportive of this amendment because
I'm an advocate for two very important things I think when we're looking at
housing, and that's providing housing for our residents and making sure that we
support density over sprawl. So, those two things I think this amendment helps us
go more that direction, so I'm very supportive. Thank you.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Anyone else? Council Member Lee Loy.
MS. LEE LOY: Yeah. Thank you, Chair. Yes, in support. I think and maybe I'm
just channeling Mr. Inaba at this point. I'm just throwing it out there, willing to
pass it here but just food for thought. When I read this, I thought accessory
dwelling units shall be restricted to a maximum of three per site, period. When a
building site is permitted, so on so forth, a maximum of one, right, to keep it nice,
tight, and clear. Sometimes periods help rather than comma's. But in support of
this. Just leave it to the author if that's something we want to tailor up or clean up a
little later. I'm going to support this amendment. Thank you, I yield.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Council Member Kimball.
MS. KIMBALL: Yeah. I'd like to get this in today and I will work with LRB
(Legislative Research Branch), and I will consult with the comma, period master
himself, Mr. Inaba, to determine if we need a little tweaking on the grammar there.
But just to be clear, there is no density limit right now in this bill. So, yeah, I'll just
say it. There's no limit now. This proposes a limit. Anyway, call for the question.
Chair, I think we're good unless you have any comments.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: You know, I will be supporting this. We've talked I think
for so long about increasing density or infrastructure, services, jobs, amenities, are
located, and I think this helps to solve for that. It think it's also kind of wild to
imagine that we're just going to see a proliferation of folks building three more
ADU's on their property because I'm just doing some napkin math here. Director
Pause said earlier it's about $400 a square foot to build. If you build at the max of
1,250 square feet, that's half a million dollars. And to kind of max out, that would
be a $1.5 million investment. And I don't know how many folks have that kind of
Page 19
PCPLUD-18 August 6, 2024
cash in the bank to build. I think this presents opportunities, right? It kind of
unlocks some of the barriers that we have faced in trying to increase density where
the infrastructure is. So, I think this is a good move. And I appreciate that we've
consulted other counties to kind of arrive to this space; good to know what's kind of
worked or not worked for them to inform what we do here because you can't put
the toothpaste back in the tube. Alright, we have a motion on the floor. Mr. Clerk,
if we could please do a roll call vote. Thank you.
Vote on Motion The motion to amend Bill 123, Draft 3, as amended, with
to Amend: the contents of Comm. 677.25 was carried by the following
(Approved) roll call vote:
Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Galimba, Kagiwada,
Kimball, Lee Loy, and
Chair Kierkiewicz — 6.
Noes: Committee Member Villegas — 1.
Absent: Committee Members Inaba and
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder — 2.
Excused: None.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Final amendment, Council Member Kimball.
MS. KIMBALL: Yes. Thank you.
Motion to Amend: Ms. Kimball moved to amend Bill 123, Draft 3, as amended,
with the contents of Comm. 677.26. Seconded by Ms. Lee
Loy.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Council Member Kimball.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. This was not something that we have not previously
discussed with respect to this bill, but it came up in our conversation with City and
County of Honolulu —no, was it Kauai or City and County? I can't recall. One of
the other counties.
MR. KERN: It was Kauai
MS. KIMBALL: It was Kauai. You're right. They have this provision that
basically prohibits HOA's (Homeowners Association) and the development of
CC&R's (Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions) from limiting the ability to
develop ADU's. Of course, this is going to be a moving forward thing. It's not a
retroactive thing. They have kind of fought tooth and nail, their Planning
Department, to get this language put in and they're really glad it's in there. I heard
about it, and I thought, yeah, you know, this makes a ton of sense as one of the
ways that we see ADU's being restricted.
Page 20
99ORW1711WI.,
August 6, 2024
So, basically what this proposes that unless there's any other condition of approval
tied to a property, going forward there won't be any association bylaws,
agreements, deed restrictions, that will exclude the ability to —will limit or prohibit
the constructions of ADU's. So, look forward to my colleagues discussion around
this. But I think it's a really nice provision and I thank Kaua'i for bringing it to our
attention.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Council Member. Anyone here in Hilo,
comments or questions? Turning it over to Kona.
MS. EVANS: Chair?
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Council Member Evans, go ahead.
MS. EVANS: I mean there's a lot of condominium law on the books. And just for
clarity, this particular language is specific just to condominiums or is it beyond
that? Because I'm seeing, or any other agreement that runs with the subject land,
kind of, it's pretty doggone broad. So, can you explain kind of the application of
this?
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Council Member Kimball.
MS. KIMBALL The answer to your first question is no, that would not be
specifically exclusively limited to condominiums. It certainly would apply to CPR
(Condominium Property Regime), regimes, bylaws, and other covenants CC&R's,
or deed restrictions. One of the reasons I essentially copied the language from
Kaua'i, and one of the reasons I wanted to mirror their language exactly is it's
already been tested from the legal standpoint on their side. So, we have some
assurances that this is allowable.
MS. EVANS: Is Corporation Council in the Hilo Chamber?
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Yes, Council Member Evans. Judge Strance is here, and
she is approaching the table.
MS. EVANS: Thank you.
(Note: At this time, Corporation Counsel Elizabeth Strance came forward to
address the members of the Committee.)
MS. STRANCE: Good morning. Elizabeth Strance. Corporation Counsel.
MS. EVANS: Thank you. I guess this is the legal question of —you buy something
that has a deed restriction and then we come along and pass this and it says that the
Page 21
PCPLUD-18 August 6, 2024
deeds restriction will not —basically, this law will override the deed restriction.
Does that set us up for lawsuit?
MS. STRANCE: If it were drafted that way, it might. But it's not drafted that way,
Council Member Evans. This is a law that would have prospective application, so it
would not affect any properties that are currently governed by CC&R's that would
have those restrictions.
MS. EVANS: Okay. But deed restrictions can be put on and not necessarily be
part of the condominium regime. People may just decide to put deed restrictions
because they, you know, they care about the neighborhood or, you know, they have
something personal they want to make sure that the next generation whatever
doesn't do something to this property that's been in the family a long time, and you
put a deed restriction on it and then all of a sudden this says you can't do that. So,
would the title companies, you know, who will, you know, there's going to be
people, now the title companies and everybody, the lawyers are going to be very
privy to the fact from the day forward no one can put deed restrictions on the
construction of accessory dwelling units. Am I correct?
MS. STRANCE: You're correct that going forward, people will be presumed to
know the law and that they cannot impose these types of restrictions going forward.
MS. EVANS: Okay. Alright. Thank you. I yield.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Anyone else? Okay. Mr. Clerk, roll call vote.
Vote on Motion The motion to amend Bill 123, Draft 3, as amended, with
to Amend: the contents of Comm. 677.26 was carried by the following
(Approved) roll call vote:
Ayes: Committee Members Galimba, Kagiwada,
Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and
Chair Kierkiewicz — 6.
Noes: Committee Member Evans — 1.
Absent: Committee Members Inaba and
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder — 2.
Excused: None.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. I don't see anymore amendments in our folder,
and we are at the end of our agenda, and back to the main motion of
Bill 123, Draft 3, as amended today with three communications. What is your
pleasure, Council Member Kimball?
MS. KIMBALL: Yeah, thank you. I wanted to just go over a couple of things that
I didn't come back with amendments about and then respond to the testifier, and I
Page 22
August 6, 2024
want to respond particularly to this testifier because in know that some of the other
Council Members shared their concerns that were raised.
Let me just start first by talking about `ohana versus accessory dwelling unit. We
did explore whether or not it would be appropriate to say accessory dwelling unit
(`ohana) or some other way including in here that those words are interchangeable.
I was strongly advised that that is not consistent with how we develop code. Code
is meant to be succinct, to be clear. And so, there isn't an amendment being put
forth to reinstate that term. And as I said before, City and County of Honolulu
strongly, strongly recommended against making `ohana's be for family only. The
other thing that I will say about that is that the reason again that we chose to say
accessory dwelling unit was because of the eligibility for various mortgage and
lending programs to support development of these units and the fact that for
mainland institutions, the word `ohana might not be a recognized term. So, that
amendment is not forthcoming, unless somebody else wants to try it, but LRB's
going to tell you no.
And then, the next thing I wanted to speak to was this idea of the accessory
dwelling unit and one of them being about to be used as a TAR (Transient
Accommodation Rental). Mr. Flaherty mentioned that this is an amendment that
should go back to the Planning Commission. I just want to make sure that this was
a recommendation that the Planning Director made in their notes to the Planning
Commission and both Planning Commissions supported this amendment already, to
allow for one TAR. So, that has already been reviewed by the Planning
Commissions, but what I will also say is we need to have the flexibility for people
to redesignate ADU and primary dwelling because of the ability to do lending and
all of that stuff. When we put that flexibility in, defacto, we created an opportunity
for people to say, to rent an accessory dwelling unit by moving into it and
redesignating their primary residence, right. So, what the language that was
proposed with respect to the TAR's is in alignment with what would actually
happen on the ground. What I think is actually more important is we've restricted
that to one ADU, so we're just being much more clear.
Would it be ideal to not have any ADU's be used as TAR's? Sure. But as we had
talked about, sometimes having an ADU on your property as a TAR, sometimes
having a TAR is the way you stay in your home. And so, we're keeping that
opportunity open. I think that there are other ways, like what we're looking at with
long-term rentals versus short-term rentals and tax policy and what not,
homeowners exemption or not. But we kind of steer or we do the social
engineering, we want to see happen. But having that ability to make one ADU a
TAR was already going to happen because of some other mechanisms but, there are
reasons for it, and I realize there's hesitation.
One thing I might suggest for the folks that have hesitation because of what's going
on in their particular area is we can certainly look at saying, except in these places
Page 23
PCPLUD-18
August 6, 2024
where we already have accommodations in the vicinity, or something like that. I
don't want to make any specific suggestions but that is something that could be
considered if there are folks concerned about this in particular areas.
The last thing I wanted to just talk about, and you've mentioned, you brought this
up briefly, Council Member Kagiwada. One of the other pieces of conversation we
had with City and County of Honolulu was respect to parking. And the parking for
these ADU's is going to be another limiting factor in terms of what size you can
build, where you can put it, all of those things. They have something that I really,
really loved which reduced the parking requirements if you were close to a mass
transit location. And so, I would like to move this forward today. But I do intend
to potentially introduce another amendment that would allow for that with respect
to the parking requirements because I think that is really a great way to promote
transit centered development. So, with that, I yield, Chair, and happy to take any
further questions from the body.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. On that last kind of suggested amendment, it
aligns quite nicely with the General Plan. I heard a little article on HPR (Hawai`i
Public Radio) this morning about wanting to move more of our communities to
utilizing our mass transit system, so that helps to encourage that. Any questions or
comments on the bill? Council Member Kagiwada.
MS. KAGIWADA: Thank you, Chair. Yeah, and just to add to that —sorry, a little
leeway, but to add to that discussion about transit hubs. I hope we can also look at
areas that are actually walkable to lots of amenities and things that people need. So,
in our town areas more specifically, that's especially where it's very hard to provide
extra parking. And so, if people need fewer cars because they can walk to things, I
hope we can look at that as well.
Overall, on the bill, I just want to say that I, you know, was not in favor of having a
short-term vacation rental or vacation rental be part of any of this, but I do
understand that the mechanics mean that, you know, we don't have a lot of control
over that anyway. So, I do hope my colleagues will look forward to having these
discussions about maybe not, you know, outright banning it, but looking at ways to
encourage these to be used for housing for our residents. So, thank you and I yield.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Anyone else here? In Kona? Okay, seeing or
hearing none, there is a motion on the floor to forward Bill 123, Draft 3, as
amended. Mr. Clerk, roll call vote, please.
Page 24
PCPLUD- 18
Vote on Bill 123
(Draft 2)
(Approved)
1UV WON
Approved:
August 6, 2024
The motion to recommend passage of Bill 123, Draft 2,
as amended, was carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Galimba, Kagiwada,
Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas,
and Chair Kierkiewicz — 7.
Noes: None.
Absent: Committee Members Inaba and
Kdneali'i-Kleinfelder — 2.
Excused: None.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: That brings us to the end of our agenda.
There being no further business, Chair Kierkiewicz adjourned the meeting
at 11:14 a.m.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you for joining us.
Ms. Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Chair
Policy Committee on Planning,
Land Use, and Development
AK/tk
(Date)
Page 25