Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0734.003 1998-2000 .+4r.. Harry A. Takahaslri Managing Director Stephen K. Yamashiro Henry Cho Mayor Deputy Managing Dvector '~iA.".M'it it (i~nun~~ IIf ~ttfi~ttit 25 Aupuni S[reet, Room 215 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720-4252 • (808) 961-8211 • Fax (808) 961-6553 KONA: 755706 Kuakini Highway, Suite 103 Kailua-Kona, Hawaii 96740 , - (808)329-5226 Faz (808)326-5663 September 27, 2000 - Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council County of Hawaii 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Chairman Arakaki and Members: County Council Initiated Request: Bill No. 240 Communication No. 734 -Amendment to Chapter 25, Zoning Code. Relating to Bed and Breakfast Establishments As required by Chapter 4, Sec. 5-4.3(C), Hawaii County Charter, transmitted herewith for the County Council's consideration and action is the Planning Commission's letter and enclosures regarding the above-referenced request. Sincerely, ~It~1,.' ~1~~~(i~L(i~(~'v~- Stephen I~. Yamashiro Mayor L091 SOOMAY Enclosures cc: Planning Department ;~3~~~,,'~ File No.,. '~:.1 beef. To: Ref. Date 2 $ ZOtrii trw Stephen K Yamaehiro ~IIliIT#~1 II~ ~I~1ItITt PLANNING COMMISSION 25 Aoponi Stree4 Room 109 • Hilo, Hawaii %720-9252 (BOB) %1-8288 • Pax (BOB) %1-9615 SE° 2 1 2000 Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council County of Hawaii 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Chairman Arakaki and Members: County Council Initiated Request: Bill No. 240 Communication No. 734 -Amendment to Chapter 25, Zoning Code. Relating to Bed and Breakfast Establishments The Planning Commission at its duly held public hearing on September 15, 2000, voted to forward a favorable recommendation on the County Council's Proposed Bill No. 240 to amend Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawaii County Code relating to Bed and Breakfast Establishments. The Planning Commission is recommending favorable consideration be given to the proposed amendments to Chapter 25, Zoning Code, of the County of Hawaii relating to Section 25-1-(b)13, Article 1, relative to Definitions; Section 25-2-23, Article 2, relative to Plan Approval for bed and breakfast establishment; and Section 25-4-7, Article 4, relative to Bed and Breakfast Establishments. The intent of the amendments is as follows: I. To allow a bed and breakfast establishment within two (2) dwellings and a guest house on a building site. This is clarified in that a bed and breakfast establishment maybe located within a single family dwelling, second dwelling unit, and/or guest house. A second dwelling unit is a separate or attached unit and may include an ohana dwelling. It is further clarified that a guest house is defined and restricted in accordance with the Zoning Code as follows: Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 2 a) Section 25-1-5(b)(55) - "Guest house means an accessory building used as sleeping quarters for guests by the occupants of the main dwelling and having no cooking facilities." b) Section 25-4-9. Guest houses. "One guest house may only be established on a building site that is at least seven thousand five hundred square feet in area. A guest house shall not exceed five hundred square feet in gross floor area, shall not be more than twenty feet in height, and shall not have a kitchen." Therefore to clarify further, the variations for a bed and breakfast establishment could be: within the operator's dwelling, one additional dwelling and a guest house; within two permitted dwellings and a guest house; within a duplex dwelling and a guest house; within the operator's dwelling and a guest house; within the second dwelling and a guest house; within only the operator's dwelling; within only the second dwelling unit; or within only the guest house. 2. To delete the Plan Approval provision for bed and breakfast establishment. Bed and breakfast establishment is already a permitted use within the RD, RM, RCX, V, CN, CG and CV. However, plan approval is required for all new structures and additions to existing structures in those districts. For Use Permit and Special Permit, the applicant is already required to submit the proposed plans with the application and most of the information required by Plan Approval. If further information is needed, the applicant could reflect those on the required plot plan, including landscaping, pazking, etc. With regards to documentation relating to transient accommodations tax license and general excise tax license, compliance with requirements of Department of Health and Americans with Disabilities (ADA), one of the conditions of approval for a permit is that the applicant needs to comply with all applicable agency requirements. 3. To clarify that bed and breakfast establishment is not listed as permitted use within the RA, FA, and A zone districts. To clarify that in the RA, FA, and A districts that are within the state land use urban district, bed and breakfast establishment may be permitted provided a use permit is obtained for such use. 4. To clarify that breakfast meals must be approved by the Department of Health, and that the serving of breakfast meals is to only registered guests on the building site, and further clarify the term "food service establishment" such as restaurants. 5. To delete the limitation that bed and breakfast establishment is not permitted on a building site where an ohana dwelling was approved. The proposed bill is to also allow bed and breakfast establishment within a second dwelling unit, which may include an ohana dwelling. Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chainnan and Members of the County Council Page 3 6. To allow an additional six (6) for existing bed and breakfast establishments to secure the required permits or approvals. After receiving public testimony and considering the proposed amendments, the Commission expressed that the type of breakfast meals meet with the approval of the Department of Health. The Commission also expressed that the limitation to the five (5) bedrooms be retained, due to concerns regarding monitoring the bed and breakfast operation. The Commission further expressed that a few years ago, the existing bed and breakfast establishments were previously given several months wherein to secure the necessary approvals or permits. Therefore, the Commission strongly proposes that six (6) months rather than the original proposed twelve (12) months be given for existing bed and breakfast establishments to secure the required permits or approvals. The accompanying draft bill is provided for your favorable consideration. Unless otherwise noted, material to be deleted is bracketed and material to be added is underscored. We are also enclosing a copy of the staff Background Report, transcripts of the hearings, and correspondence submitted at the hearing for your information. Sincerely, Richard B. Baker, Jr., Chairman Planning Commission cc: West Hawaii Office PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAII HEARING TRANSCRIPT July 21, 2000 A regularly advertised hearing on the COiJNTY COiJNCIL'S PROPOSED BILL 240 (Bed and Breakfast Establishments) was called to order at 10:25 a.m. in the County Building, Councilroom-Room 201, 25 Aupuni Street, Hilo, Hawaii, with Vice Chairman Geraldine Giffin presiding. PRESENT: Earl Fujikawa ABSENT: Richard Baker, Jr. Geraldine Giffin Florence Kubota Mildred Mosher Francis Smith James Souza Grant Togashi Virginia Goldstein, Planning Director AliceKawaha, Staff Planner Susan Gagorik, Staff Planner Al Jeremiah, Deputy Corporation Counsel Bruce McClure representing Department of Water Supply Kelly Gomes representing Department of Public Works And approximately 7 people from the public in attendance. GIFFIN: While the staff is putting up the information regarding Agenda Item No. 4, I thought I would move right along. The applicant for Agenda Item No. 4 is the County Council; and it is an initiation of proposed Bill No. 240 to amend Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawaii County Code relating to Bed and Breakfast establishments. GAGORIK: Okay. GIFFIN: You have everything up that you need up? No? GAGORIK: Yeah, I don't need that actually. GIFFIN: You don't need anything up? 1 GAGORIK: I don't need anything. GIFFIN: Okay, the County Council has submitted proposed Bi11 No. 240 amending Chapter 25, Zoning Code, relating to bed and breakfast establishments. The proposed bill includes allowing bed and breakfast establishments also in an ohana dwelling and thereby eliminating the ohana dwelling limitation, eliminating the plan approval requirements, eliminating the limitation of the number of bedrooms, allowing an additional 12-month period for existing bed and breakfast establishments to submit for the necessary permits, and minor grammatical changes. Staff? GAGORIK: I think you basically summarized all the changes that are being proposed. Do the Commissioners have any questions that I can address? GIFFIN: Okay, Commissioner Kubota. KUBOTA: Susan, I have a couple of questions on the agencies' comments and how they're reflected in our conditions. For instance, No. 6 from the Fire Department, I didn't see any recommendation Of course, the ordinance comes from the Council, but could we, should we, may we add these conditions or considerations to the ordinance as they now exist? No.6, Fire Department is one, DLNR is another concern that they voiced; and I didn't see them reflected in the existing conditions. GIFFIN: Just for your reference, Commissioners, she's referring to page 5 of the background report, Item No. 6 and Item No. 8. KUBOTA: And also, and also No. 11. GIFFIN: On page 6. KUBOTA: On page 6, I'm sorry, I should have led you to those pages. From the Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism, it has to do with exterior signage. There is a reference in the conditions but it's not specific to what these people are concerned about. GOLDSTEIN: If I may respond just to the last comment from the Depaztment of Business, Economic Development, the State, asking that we not allow signage because of its impact on the neighborhood. We disagree with that. I think some of the more of the impacts to the neighborhood will come if there are no signs because they will be going around the neighborhood, not from, the visitors would not necessarily be familiar with the location of the bed and breakfast. And then, I think we've run into concerns by neighbors saying that they will stop at my house, you know, asking for directions. And I think if there are signs that that will eliminate that concern. So we disagree on that particular point. MOSHER: I have a question also. 2 GIFFIN: Sorry, Commissioner Mosher. MOSHER: Yeah, to be, to continue on that. I read in the County Code that in residential districts those kinds of signs are permitted if for business use. GOLDSTEIN: Yes. And there is a restriction in terms of its size MOSHER: The size? GOLDSETIN: Yes. MOSHER: But it is a permitted use? GOLDSTEIN: Yes, yes. GIFFIN: Susan, do you want to go ahead and answer those concerns that Commissioner Kubota raised, specifically on page 5, Items 6 and 8? GAGORIK: The, No. 6 from the Fire Department? GIFFIN: Yes. GAGORIK: We felt that ofren times some of the requests are more specific so it'd be more easier to address these issues as conditions of the permit rather than make a general requirement for al] B&Bs. You know, it depends where it's located, if it's in a residential area, in an agricultural district, how many rooms. And sometimes the parameters for looking at these requirements are better in a condition, conditional requirement. KUBOTA: I, oh, excuse, Madam Chair? GIFFIN: Yes, Commissioner Kubota. KUBOTA: Just to respond to that, I feel that if the ordinance states these and delineates what needs to be checked, you can do it on a case by case. But if it is so general it might be overlooked. GIFFIN: Director Goldstein. GOLDSTEIN: Well, in general, I think some, as Susan Gagorik has pointed out, you know, in general the feeling is that some of the further details should be considered in the specific permits rather than to be included in an enabling ordinance. Nevertheless, if, it's the Commission's, I think, prerogative to forward those kinds of suggestions to the County Council should you feel that there is enough of a concern that some sort of 3 general statement might be made or general amendment might be made with the ordinance. GIFFIN: Commissioners, what's your feeling on that? Do you concur with Commissioner Kubota that this is one concern we should raise with the Council? Commissioner Togashi? TOGASHI: Gee, I finally said something today. But, anyway, I don't have any problems with what Commissioner Kubota is saying; and, on the other hand, too, I can see the point of view of the Planning Department, too. And I guess maybe by, in weighing the two different opinions I would kind of side of the, where the Code isn't too cumbersome, I guess. So I would, I guess, side, in this case, with the Planning Department. GIFFIN: Any other comments? MOSHER: Regazding that particular item? GIFFIN: Yes. None? So, FUJIKAWA: I GIFFIN: Commissioner Fujikawa? FUJIKAWA: On this particulaz here, supposing we grant them the bed and breakfast establishment on the ohana, what happens when they sell, resell the property? Would that be recognized as a commercial GIFFIN: Oh, excuse me, Commissioner Fujikawa, we are speaking of the Fire Deparhnent's memo May 23rd, Item No. 2 on page 5. FUJIKAWA: Oh, I see. GIFFIN: Okay. Any more feedback? Would anyone with the exception of Commissioner Togashi be in opposition to having this comment be forwazded to the County Council? GOLDSTEIN: You're not taking, necessarily taking action today GIFFIN: No. GOLDSTEIN: You're going to continue? GIFFIN: Right, right. Okay, let's go on then to Item No. 8, which is the second item Commissioner Kubota brought up on page 5. Susan? 4 GAGORIK: Item 8 addresses the issues from the Historic Preservation Division in regards to historic properties and possibly the requirement of requiring paved driveways and parking. In light of the fact that a B&B is considered an accessory use to a single family dwelling, we do not agree with that position of having to require paving for that type ofuse GIFFIN: Okay. GAGORIK: And we have not in the past for any of the B&Bs. GIFFIN: Okay. GAGOffiK: We may have, actually, I need to con•ect that. We have, maybe ten years ago when we first approved B&Bs we required paving; but we did also at that time see that it was an unnecessary requirement. GIFFIN: Commissioner Kubota, are you comfortable with the staff's answer? KUBOTA: Excuse me, I didn't get the gist of it. Susan, one more time, please. GAGORIK Oh, okay, yeah, I kind of said several things at one time. When B&Bs KUBOTA: No, I was not paying attention. GAGORIK: When B&Bs were first reviewed and approved under the Use Permit and Special Permit requirements, we had strict requirements; and we really made it cumbersome for them to establish themselves. It required road paving to the site, in addition to paved parking, driveway. And over the period of review and time we realized that B&Bs as defined aze considered uses that are accessory to the use of the structure as a dwelling, which means the main use is still a dwelling. So we do not agree with the fact that we should require dwellings to have paved driveways in any azea. GIFFIN: Okay. Commissioner Kubota? KUBOTA: I'm comfortable, thank you. GIFFIN: All right, getting back to Commissioner Fujikawa, you were referring to where in our background material? FUJIKAWA: It also referred back to the section, Item N0.6 on the Fire Department. You're talking commercial right now. So ohana would be converted to commercial after the person wants to sell? 5 GIFFIN: I think we need clarification from our Director. GOLDSTEIN: When we grant these permits, they run with the land. So in that sense, it wouldn't matter who's, who owns the, or whether it's sold or not. GIFFIN: Commissioner Mosher. MOSHER: Yeah, I have, oh, my, my, my. Okay, on the ordinance as recommended by our Planning Director, Section 3, Section 25-4-7, the brackets aze all mixed up. So which is to be eliminated and which is not to be eliminated? I read it to say bed and breakfast establishments shall be permitted in the RD, RM, RCX; and then bracketed to be removed is RA, FA, and A; and to be included is V, CN, CG and CV, then to be eliminated, provided? Am I reading this right? GAGORIK: Yes. MOSHER: Okay, so GAGORIK: So, basically, that means although permitted MOSHER: Shall be permitted GAGORIK: Although permitted previously, you know, the RA, the FA and the A were previously permitted in the urban district, the proposal is now to require that they have a use permit. MOSHER: Bed and breakfast establishments shall be permitted GAGORIK: In the RA MOSHER: In those three districts? GAGORIK: Right. GIFFIN: iJh huh, period. MOSHER: No, more than three. GAGORIK: And then with V, the CN MOSHER: V, CN, period? GAGORIK: CG and CV. 6 MOSHER: And then "districts," so the period is after "districts?" GAGORIK: Right. MOSHER: Is that correct? GAGORIK: Correct. MOSHER: Okay. And then to be included, "Abed and breakfast establishment may be permitted...provided that a use permit." Okay, my concern is what are the consequences if the applicant does not secure plan approval from the Director? No, that's to be eliminated. Okay, my brackets were, I wasn't reading it right. KUBOTA: Madam Chairman. I think she's done. GIFFIN: Commissioner Mosher, are you pau? MOSHER: Well, I don't know. A special permit shall also be required for any B&B located in either the State Land, what happens if they don't get that, if they don't get the permit? GOLDSTEIN: They don't operate. MOSHER: They're illegal? GOLDSTEIN: Yeah. MOSHER: And what happens when they're illegal? Who enforces GOLDSTEIN: We have to cite them for violation. MOSHER: Okay, thank you. GIFFIN: Okay, Commissioner Kubota. KUBOTA: Yes. I'm ready, but I forgot my question. Oh, I know. A point of clarification. According to Section 27-4-7 in the amendment on page 4, a reference to only operator rather than make a distinction between owner/operator and lessee/operator? That sentence? GIFFIN: Yes. KUBOTA: Okay. The clarification that I want is if I were to rent, hypothetically, if I were to rent an ohana dwelling from the owner I could then turn it into a B&B myself as an operator? 7 GIFFIN: Madam Director. KUBOTA: What is, what is the relevance of this? GOLDSTEIN: In, in filing for the application though, you, you would still need. You could, but you would need the owner's permission. KUBOTA: Right, right. If I have the owner's permission, the landlord's permission, and rented that an ohana unit rather than living in it myself I could turn it into a B&B and rent it out to someone else? That's the effect of the change in E? MOSHER: No, you've got to live on the property. KUBOTA: Uh? No, it doesn't say that. GOLDSTEIN: No. GIFFIN: I had that question, too. GOLDSTEIN: I'm not real clear, to tell you the truth. GIFFIN: Okay. Because they don't make a distinction between owner/operator and lessee/operator. I could lease the place from the owner and operate it. GOLDSTEIN: That's correct, right now. MOSHER: As I read it Madam Chair? GIFFIN: Yes. MOSHER: Section 3 KUBOTA: Where are you, on what page? MOSHER: There's no, it's the ordinance. It's, well, it's the second page of the ordinance. KUBOTA: Wait, just a minute. Let me get that, let me get that. MOSHER: Proposed ordinance, and No. (2) KUBOTA: Section? 8 MOSHER: At the bottom, the last paragraph; and I might not read it right, but I read it to say the operator of the B&B shall reside on the same property, on the same building site as that being used for the B&B establishment. So you have to KUBOTA: Yeah, I read that some place, too. But this is, this is the one that confuses me. That's why I'm posing the question. Because it doesn't say that. The ordinance says it. MOSHER: The ordinance says it. KUBOTA: But in our, what is this? TOGASHI: Background report. KUBOTA: Background report, it says something else, as I understand it. MOSHER: I was going by the ordinance. KUBOTA: So I'm asking for clarification, that's all I'm doing. GOLDSTEIN: Okay. I'm going to have to ask for help from staff. GIFFIN: This is not an agenda item that we're going to act on today. It's something that is, if I understood the Director correctly, will be continued. GOLDSTEIN: Yes, because we usually, when we deal with ordinances we usually hold hearings both in Hilo and in Kona. So, you know, but this is the time to raise your questions. GIFFIN: Any other questions? Alice, did you have something you wanted to say? KAWAHA: Yes. Just to clarify, Commissioner Kubota, on the operator, if you look at the background, it's just to give you what the changes are occurring in the proposed ordinance. And so in the proposed ordinance we bracketed out owner/operator or lessee/operator to just say operator. And so in the background it's just to state that, you know, rather than have it as, that different distinction, we just call it as operator. KUBOTA: Yeah. I understand that. KAWAHA: And, but then the operator still has to reside on the building, on the building site. KUBOTA: Oh, okay. So 9 GIFFIN: Commissioners? Oh, I'm sorry. KUBOTA: So where is that stated other than So, okay. I guess what I'm asking is what is this reference to Section 25 on page 4, at the top of page 4, what is that reference to? KAWAHA: It's looking at the, this whole listing is referring to the proposed bill. KUBOTA: Yeah. KAWAHA: So in that Section 25-4-7(b)(2), which if you look at your proposed ordinance, so we're just saying that reference to only operator rather than make a distinction between owner/operator. And that's the change that we're making there. It's just to say we're making that change there. KUBOTA: Okay, you tell (Ms. Gagorik clarified the ordinance for Commissioner Kubota.) GIFFIN: While that's being cleared up for Commissioner Kubota, Commissioner Souza, you had a question? SOUZA: On a different subject. GIFFIN: Yes. SOUZA: On, the original ordinance said, I don't see it any place else, proposed ordinance, it says only breakfast meals maybe offered to guests. Shouldn't we define what a breakfast is? It goes on to say that bed and breakfast shall not operate as a food service establishment. I can understand that. But the fact that you say that you can serve a breakfast and not defining the breakfast then they could go the whole route that probably would need Boazd of Health type of inspection. So I would suggest that if we can define breakfast to make sure that, you know, that the competition between bed and breakfasts, different bed and breakfast units, would not be based on the type of breakfast that they can say they provide. GIFFIN: Director Goldstein, you want to comment on that? GOLDSTEIN: No comment. GIFFIN: Okay. Staff, regarding Commissioner Souza's comments on breakfast and not being specific? You know, in the past there used to be, remember? 10 KAWAHA: Continent, used to be continental breakfast and GIFFIN: Yes, could not be cooked and on, and on, and on. KAWAHA: Yes. I would think that on this, if they served cooked meals they still would have to comply with Department of Health. They would still have to comply with Department of Health requirements. GIFFIN: Commissioner Souza. SOUZA: My concern, and I've got other concerns here, my concern on this is, oh, what word, there's a word, the policing of this. GIFFIN: Monitoring. SOUZA: Monitoring, there's no monitoring. So I feel that we should make this as conspicuous that the bed and breakfast operator can follow. Because if they decide to serve ham and eggs and everything that goes with it, who monitors that? So if you say continental breakfast, it's specific to the operator that's what he's going to Breakfast is to me, just what is breakfast? It could be chop suey and rice. GIFFIN: Commissioner Souza, I think your comments are well taken. Alice, I think all of these comments we're going to just compile, right? GOLDSTEIN: Yeah, yeah. GIFFIN: Okay. GOLDSTEIN: And then respond later. GIFFIN: Right. SOUZA: Right. GIFFIN: And you have more, Commissioner Souza? SOUZA: Yes. I question why, again, on, because of the monitoring we don't have no policing per se. It says to delete the limitation on the number of guest bedroom but retain the number of guests to ten. I feel, again, that that's, to monitor that that this is just loosening up the amount of people anybody You know, the temptation for me to get ten bedrooms and get 20 people there without any policing, knowing that there is no policing, would be great. So I would rather, on this one, limit, still limit the bedrooms which when they submit plans they can, we know that that's what they're going to operate and it won't go over ten. I would say limit the bedrooms. I1 And the other item I have is to allow an additional 12 months for existing bed and breakfast establishments to secure their required permits of approval, I think 12 months if at all is too lenient. I think that, didn't we have already a grace period? GOLDSTEIN: There was. GIFFIN: Yes. SOUZA: And there was a long grace period, and that grace period was over last June or July. You know, the bed and breakfasts that have been operating illegally have been out there for a long, long time; and I don't think we should allow them any more grace period. GIFFIN: All right. GOLDSTEIN: Okay. GIFFIN: Any other comments? SOUZA: One last GIFFIN: Sure. Commissioner Souza. SOUZA: One last comment. I'm surprised, you know, when we went out over this few about a yeaz back or whatever, there was a lot of concern from the bed and breakfast organizations. But I see them completely absent now GOLDSTEIN: No, no, it isn't that they're absent. SOUZA: No GOLDSTEIN: If I may say something. This particular proposal was developed by Councilman Tyler in conjunction with the Bed and Breakfast, so one assumes that they are, Association, they're in, they support this. SOUZA: Agreement with the GOLDSTEIN: Yes, yes SOUZA: Thank you. GIFFIN: All right. That's the assumption GOLDSTEIN: Yeah. 12 GIFFIN: Yeah, I read that, too. Any other comments, Commissioners? All right, moving right along then. GOLDSTEIN: The public MOSHER: Do we have to move, this is continued on to a Kona meeting? GIFFIN: No, the Director has just reminded me that we need to take public comment; and I think there is a member of the public who would like to testify. Please come forward. Is there anyone else who would like to testify on this agenda item? Oh, you've already been sworn in, of course, for a different agenda item. Will you please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Hawaii County Planning Commission? ANDERSON: I do. GIFFIN: Please give us your name and address. ANDERSON: Bazbaza Anderson, 131 Kaiulani Street in Hilo. Okay, I'm going to sort of skip around on this. First of all, I am a Board Member of Hawaii Island Bed and Breakfast Association; and I own a bed and breakfast here in Hilo. I own the Shipman House. We're, we aze in favor of this. This cleans up a lot of lose ends; and it's almost like going through, like a teacher going through a paper and wiping out a lot of extra garbage. Somebody mentioned signs. They aze very important to the B&Bs and to the neighborhoods. You're limited to 8 square feet of sign, which is about like this. It's not very big. It saves the neighbors a lot of door knocking and answering questions. I do have a comment about the historic part. This is the first time I've heard about the paved parking requirement. We aze a historic site and I would say yes, they should be paved, they should have a paved pazking area to protect the historic sites. You don't want people pazking on the grass. I don't know what, well, right now you have any kind of hard surface, I think, or nonmuddy surface which would be okay. But my feeling is it should be a specific paved spot to protect the site. I'm really glad the ohanas have been eliminated because up until this goes through if my mother-in-law or mother, both of whom are widowed, had to come and live with us, we wouldn't have a place to put them. We'd have to pick between an ohana situation or our livelihood. So I'm glad that has been eliminated. I'm not organized here. Sony about that. I think that's about it. 13 GIFFIN: Commissioners, any questions of this testifier? Director Goldstein. GOLDSTEIN: Just one quick question in reference to the paving and the requirement for paving. Are you thinking only if the bed and breakfast is, say, a historic structure? ANDERSON: Yes. GOLDSTEIN: Not necessarily a bed and breakfast that's in the country and not an historic structure? ANDERSON: No, just historic places. GOLDSTEIN: Okay, thank you. ANDERSON: Yeah. GIFFIN: Any other questions or comments? Okay, moving right along. I'm Sony, I forgot your name, could you please restate it. OLIVER: My name is Patty Oliver, and I have the Hilo Seaside Retreat at 1941 Kalanianaole Avenue. I'd like to say, in respect to breakfast, the Health Department has prescribed to me the kind of breakfast that I can serve specifically. So since I am permitted, I do have to adhere to the Health Department regulations in that regard. More specifically, it's packaged food and no dairy and no cooking. Fruit, fruit is okay if you haven't cut it open so I'm a member of the HIBA, the Hawaii Island Bed and Breakfast Association. I have not been instrumental in drafting this. But I'd like to say that I know that there's some 50- plus members of the organization. They are not all permitted, probably most of them are but the ones that aren't aspire to be permitted. And I have a feeling that this has been drafted to attempt to encompass and include more people than now can be included and perhaps maybe even to round up some of the mavericks that are out there and have been out there for eons of time, actually. And, also, there is a great lot of fear out there for these people. I mean, it is their livelihood; and they would like to be legal, but they're afraid. So I think that the Association is taking those kinds of concepts into consideration in drafting this, so to be more inclusive as opposed to exclusive. And I realize that it's then your duty to determine what the exclusions should be. Thank you. GIFFIN: Commissioner Souza, any questions or comments? 14 SOUZA: As I gather from what you said, that the - a B&B is also regulated by a set of rules from the Health Department, which covers what kind of breakfasts. Then I really don't have a problem, except that, a minor thing, but then say breakfast as approved by the Health Department. But I would have no problem if it's regulated as she said. GIFFIN: Okay. I have a question of, I can't, Barbara? ANDERSON: Anderson. GIFFIN: Barbara Anderson, that's right. You said that you were on the Board ANDERSON: Yes. GIFFIN: Of the Bed and Breakfast Association. How much input did the board have on this ordinance with Councilman Tyler? ANDERSON: I don't believe the board, as a board, did.. There were several board members and B&B members who did, and they worked very closely with him. GIFFIN: But they were specifically selected to work with him on this ordinance? ANDERSON: I'm not sure if they were selected or if they were, I think they volunteered on their own. GOLDSTEIN: Yeah. ANDERSON: And they happen GIFFIN: Okay. ANDERSON: To be on the board. GIFFIN: Okay. ANDERSON: And not all GIFFIN: And do you know ANDERSON: Of them were. GIFFIN: Do to you know if they were across-section of the whole Island or were they predominantly Kona? 15 ANDERSON: Mostly Kona. GIFFIN: Okay. Commissioner Souza, that could kind of help answer some of the other questions you had. Any other questions? Commissioner Togashi. TOGASHI: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I was just wondering about all the permits, like in the case of Ms. Oliver, what's going to happen to all those permits? Do the conditions under which they were granted still apply to their permit or, presumably, this law here is less stringent. Is a new law going to apply to their permits, as well, or automatically apply or GOLDSTEIN: I would TOGASHI: Are they held to the old conditions? GOLDSTEIN: I would prefer that Corporation Counsel answer that. I mean, I think I know but I'm not real sure so And the question was whether the, essentially whether the permit conditions under which some of the, the people who have bed and breakfasts and which are, in many respects, stricter than this proposed ordinance, and say should this proposed ordinance be adopted, which applies to them, can they go ahead and already use their ohana dwelling if it was specifically restricted under the permit itself? GIFFIN: Sir. JEREMIAH: We11, like any type of new regulation or old regulation, they remain in, the old one remain in effect. And with the passage of a new regulation or ordinance, in this case, then there will be provisions, you know, to update whatever the new law will say; and they'd have to abide by the new law. Unless, per se, they would do some grandfathering, which I doubt, so you'll be covered by the law which will, you know, be adopted. GIFFIN: I'm sorry, Commissioner Togashi, does that answer your question? TOGASHI: I know in many of the permits there is a general catch-all phrase to comply with all of the rules, regulations. And what does that mean? The rules and regulations in place at the time the permit was granted, or comply with the rules and regulations that are currently in effect? JEREMIAH: It usually says all rules and, applicable rules and regulation. Now if you amend the rules, that's a new, that's a change in rule. You're not going to, you know, you change a rule, you know, a public rule, you know, to better it usually or to control something; and the one that's adopted, the latest one, controls. TOGASHI: Right. 16 JEREMIAH: Yeah, so you would be, you would be TOGASHI: Because I know like, for example, not so much permits, but I know that, for example, many of our zoning requests has that catch-all phrase, and the zoning is going to be like 20 yeazs down the line. And my understanding was that whatever rules aze in place when they start developing that property are going to hold for their application which was granted 20 yeazs prior. That's my understanding. GOLDSTEIN: If you're referring to, say, something that was granted, like a rezoning, in 1974 and the TOGASHI: Or even, like for example, I know without, for example, Queen Lili `uokalani Trust I know has come in for very general types of rezoning for 20 yeazs down the line. GOLDSTEIN: Right. TOGASHI: And, you know, whatever rules 20 yeazs down the line are going to . be what they're going to be held by, not GOLDSTEIN: Yes. TOGASHI: Something that is currently, at the time the zoning was GOLDSTEIN: If you mean things like the setbacks, heights and things like that, yeah. It would, the prevailing, when they construct it, at that TOGASHI: Right. GOLDSTEIN: Point then it TOGASHI: Right. GOLDSTEIN: That's my understanding. TOGASHI: And similarly I guess that's what you're saying too, then, yeah. Yeah. GIFFIN: Commissioner Mosher. MOSHER: But I'm still confused. Ifpeople, if someone got a permit and they were prohibited from using the ohana dwelling as a B&B at the time they obtained their permit for the B&B, can they now, with this ordinance, should it pass this way, can they 17 then start using the ohana although their permit does not permit them to use the ohana, or do they have to come in and get their permit amended? JEREMIAH: The regulating agency who issues the permit would be the body to, you know, to recondition the permit. MOSHER: So they would have to come back in to us to ask to have the permit GIFFIN: Amended. MOSHER: Amended to comply with the new ordinance? JEREMIAH: Again, the regulating agency who would enforce the permitting of bed and breakfasts or whatever, any type of use, would be, would have to look at it again. MOSHER: So it's not something that's automatically JEREMIAH: No. MOSHER: To be done by the holder of a permit, according GOLDSTEIN: I think that's MOSHER: To what you're saying. JEREMIAH: Yes. GOLDSTEIN: I think that's true, not automatically but MOSHER: Okay. GAGORIK: If I may add, Commissioner Mosher, the way the ordinance is written now, you can't, you cannot actually even apply if you have a ohana right now. Remember when we had several hearings, we had them convert the ohana to a farm dwelling first. So if they are operating now with an ohana, it's an illegal use; so they would still have to come back to us for a special permit or use permit anyway. So there should not actually be any B&B operating with an ohana dwelling. MOSHER: That's right. GAGORIK: Yeah. MOSHER: That's what I mean. They were prohibited from using the ohana dwelling. 18 GAGORIK: Or from even applying with. Because the criteria, the way it's written now, it says no bed and breakfast maybe established with an ohana dwelling. MOSHER: Correct. GAGORIK: So nobody actually came in with an ohana dwelling to us. MOSHER: Right. I understand that. GAGORIK: Yeah. MOSHER: Can they So now they will have to come in and amend GAGORIK: No, they MOSHER: Their GAGORIK: No, they would, there wouldn't be any permits issued to people with ohana, so it would be a new application. MOSHER: Okay. GIFFIN: Ms. Oliver. OLIVER: I would like to address this question. When I applied for my permit, I did have an ohana permit on the property, and I had to tum it in in order to get the bed and breakfast permit. So MOSHER: Yeah, that was just a couple years ago. OLIVER: Yes. So I'm presuming were I to want an ohana again, I would have to reapply. GIFFIN: Any other questions of the women, or of staff, or of legal counsel? Commissioner Souza. SOUZA: If I may go back to Ms. Anderson again. Something has been bothering me and I don't know, I don't understand her original statement about having pavement. Did I understand you to say that you're in favor of having paved parking lots at historical sites? ANDERSON: Yes. 19 SOUZA: Which is in complete opposite of what the Historic Preservation Division says. ANDERSON: They said you didn't have to have paved parking lots? GAGORIK: No, they said you'd have to. SOUZA: It says, "While we understand the need for off-street parking, we would prefer to have some alternatives added to the paving materials or pazking requirements for historic property. Historic properties often include historic landscaping that would be destroyed by excessive asphalt or concrete paving." ANDERSON: My understanding was that they had asked for paved parking; and we did have to put in the paved parking for ours. GIFFIN: Were you able to get a copy of this ANDERSON: No. GIFFIN: Background Report? ANDERSON: No. GIFFIN: Were you ANDERSON: But I didn't ask for one either. GIFFIN: Would it be possible to forward copies, just so that you have the same information that we do GAGORIK: Yes. GIFFIN: And I think that that would be very important. ANDERSON: All right. OLIVER: Thank you. GIFFIN: Any other questions? TOGASHI: No. GIFFIN: Okay. Commissioner Mosher. MOSHER: I move that we continue this hearing on to the next Kona meeting. 20 GIFFIN: Should we be KUBOTA: Second. GIFFIN: Thank you. It has been MOSHER: On proposed amendment to Chapter 25. GIFFIN: It has been moved by Commissioner Mosher and seconded by Commissioner Kubota that we continue the hearing on proposed amendment to Chapter 25, Zoning Code, Hawaii County Code, relating to bed and breakfast establishments. Any discussion? If not, staff. GAGORIK: Commissioner Mosher? MOSHER: Aye. GAGORIK: Commissioner Kubota? KUBOTA: Aye. GAGORIK: Commissioner Fujikawa? FUJIKAWA: Aye. GAGORIK: Commissioner Souza? SOUZA: Aye. GAGORIK: Commissioner Smith? SMITH: Aye. GAGORIK: Commissioner Togashi? TOGASHI: Aye. GAGORIK: Madam Chairman? GIFFIN: Aye. GAGORIK: Madam Chairman, the vote passes with seven ayes to continue. 21 GIFFIN: Thank you. And, Susan, will you please give the two ladies copies of the Background Report. GAGORIK: Okay. GIFFIN: Thank you. The discussion ended at 11:03 a.m. Respectfully submitted, ~~,~_ti.... . ~ 1. ,.~:z Sharon M. Nomura, Secretary Planning Commission 22 PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAII HEARING TRANSCRIPT August 4, 2000 A regulazly advertised hearing on the application COUNTY COUNCIL'S PROPOSED BILL 240 (Bed and Breakfast Establishments) was called to order at 3:13 p.m. in the Aston Keauhou Beach Resort, Kahalu`u Ballroom III, 78-6740 Ali`i Drive, North Kona, Hawaii, with Chairman Richard Baker, Jr. presiding. PRESENT: Richazd Baker, Jr. ABSENT: Mildred Mosher Earl Fujikawa Geraldine Giffin Florence Kubota Francis Smith James Souza Grant Togashi Virginia Goldstein, Planning Director Daryn Arai, Staff Planner EleanorMirikitazu, Staff Planner Pam Hazlow, Staff Planner Al Jeremiah, Deputy Corporation Counsel Glenn Ahuna representing Department of Water Supply Kiran Emler representing Depaztment of Public Works And approximately 13 people from the public in attendance. COUNTY COUNCIL -Continued hearing of proposed Bill No. 240 and revisions to amend Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawaii County Code relating to Bed and Breakfast establishments. BAKER: Our next agenda item is the County Council, it's a continued hearing of proposed Bill No. 240 and revisions to amend Chapter 25 of the Zoning Code of the Hawaii County Code relating to Bed and Breakfast establishments. Staff. ARAI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As you may recall, the last hearing on this bill was held on July 213`. With that was accompanied the Director's recommendation dated July 10~'. As you mentioned, this is a continued hearing from that July 10"', 2151 hearing. The Director's recommendation and draft bill has not changed since that previous hearing. So if you have any other questions 1 BAKER: Okay. Any questions for staff, Commissioners? ARAI: Excuse me. I'm sorry, I forgot, failed to mention, since that last hearing, we have received two correspondences, one from Mr., Terry and Meredith Neumann and the other from Carne and Linda Gray Howell. Both of them were sent in support of the proposed bill. BAKER: Okay. Thank you. Any other questions, Commissioners, for the staff? If not, then I would like to call the public, Mr. Curtis Tyler, also Colette Hirata, Diane Shriner, and Meredith Neumann. Also, we have a Terry Neumann. If you can come up, we'll swear you all in at one time. Please raise your right hands. Do you swear and affirm to testify truthfully before the Hawaii County Planning Commission? TESTIFIERS: I do. Yes. BAKER: Thank you. Mr. Tyler. You already were sworn in so TYLER: I was, sir, but not BAKER: Go ahead. TYLER: On this matter. Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak today. This is a culmination of about three years worth of work on the part of not only the Planning Commission, the Planning Department Staff and the Director, the Corporation Counsel, the Hawaii Island Bed and Breakfast Association, and myself. I think what you have before you today represents, in my estimation anyway, the way government ought to function. It's a collaborative effort that has had input from many different sources, as I mentioned. My reason for taking this on was, number one, I heard some, in testimony before this body where you were having some difficulties, where people, well intentioned, well meaning individuals, who were trying to add to the economy and their own well being, were getting frustrated. And so I thought it was time that we sit down and try to resolve our differences, if there were differences or misunderstandings or lack of communication, to try to come up with something. And I approached the Hawaii Island B&B, since they had come to me early in my first term, and talked about some of the difficulties they were having. I also approached the Planning Director, and we talked about some of the things that we agreed on and some of the things we didn't agree upon. And I'm happy to tell you that the bill which I introduced before the Hawaii County Council, which by the Zoning Code has come before you, is a culmination of that. In addition, you have a recommendation from the Department and the Director for some further amendments, and I'm sure you've had an opportunity to go over these. I just wanted to give you my comments, since these are subsequent to the introduction of the bill. I also wanted to disclose to you that I have had meetings with Director Goldstein 2 and her staff regarding these proposed changes, and I just have some very short comments. And I thank you for the opportunity again to speak on this important issue. If you will go to page, go to your recommendation, and go to the first page of what is called the Planning Department Bill, which are proposed amendments to Bill 240, which was introduced at the Planning Committee of the Hawaii County Council, you will notice that Section 1 actually is a new section. And it was recommended by the Director and staff that this be added in order to further clarify the definition of what a B&B establishment was. And I can tell you that this has resulted in some further discussion and, including confusion with myself as to what really is meant here. And I can, not being an administrator but being a legislator, my intent, I wanted to let you know what the intent here is. The intent of this bill is to afford the opportunity for B&B establishments who have, who aze compliant with the law to be able to conduct business. The intent is not to circumvent the law to have illegal hotels, something other than a bed and breakfast organization, and we know, and I'm sure we'll heaz today from individuals who have bona fide, such bona fide establishments. So in clarifying this, it's my, in adding this Section 1, it's my understanding that we needed, instead of just addressing the ohana issue, which was one of the initial ones, that we really needed to look at the fact that there aze guest houses and there aze also second dwellings. So my intent here, in supporting this, is to say that to the extent that a single family dwelling, a second dwelling unit, and/or a guest house aze permitted and receive the necessary legal permits to be built or to be on the property, then these aze to be included. Those that do not meet those law, the law, aze not to be included. In other words, I'm not trying to aid and abet illegal structures by saying oh, well, it's a second dwelling, let it be there. These definitions are, excuse me. The inclusion of these single family dwellings, single dwelling, second dwelling unit, and guest house, actually, there are other definitions as to what those aze, so I don't want anyone to make any mistake about that. There has been some question as to is this an either/or, and I think that the background report has attempted to clarify this issue by saying, such as, this is what it means. It's right in the beginning of the background report, I'm sure you've read it. Some members of the B&B community have expressed some concern here that maybe this is a little too restrictive. I want to just also say that the issue of how many rooms is allowed, my bill proposes, and the Planning Director concurs, that, along with the Corp. Counsel, that it's not necessazy to have that. My reason for bringing that forwazd is there's a limitation on how many people, how many people. It's ten, no more than ten people. Now there's no limitation in terms of building. The Building Code or the Zoning Code, etcetera, says, well, if it's a single family dwelling, you can only have so many bedrooms. So it was my intention not to have a conflict with the existing code, but it is my intention, as the introducer and 3 proposer of this, that the numbers be limited to ten. Now the question of does an infant count as one of the ten, I think we have to use our commonsense here; and I'll defer to the administrators. I'm not going to inter, try to micromanage your situation here. I also want to state, for the record, that it is also my intention in introducing here, this here, is to address the 90-plus, maybe it's 95, maybe it's 99 percent of the operators who are interested in complying with the ]aw, who aze interested in having a legal operation, who are, you know, tax paying citizens. This is not to be addressed to the one percent or less, or perhaps more, who azen't going to pay attention to the law. It is my firm belief that constructing law for one percent of the population is a big mistake because at some times we disenfranchise the other 99 percent. And I don't think that was the intention of the founding fathers. So I just needed to give that to you. Section No. 2 is also a new section inasmuch as the Planning Director felt that we should go even one step further and we should eliminate plan approval application requirement. I think the reasons are very sound and further simplifies the process. The last thing we, I think we should do for the administration or, in fact, even those who are, who are applying for a permit, is to complicate the issue. If it's not needed, don't do it. And I think, to her credit, and to the staff's credit, the Planning Department is recommending this; and I concur with it. Section No. 3 is really where my bill began. And Section A has some few changes in order to comply with Section 205 HRS; and I concur, I concur with those because we don't want to get sideways with the State law. And you all know about this, you've heazd this on more than one occasion. So that was an excellent change. The, in number, I'm on Page No. 2 of that proposed Planning Department bill, right at the bottom, Pazagraph 2, the last sentence, you'll notice that that is being taken out. And the reason for it is that it just further complicates the issue. I mean, somebody who has a lease has a lease. It might be a one-yeaz lease, it might be a two-year lease. Let's not try to micromanage how somebody leases their land. TOGASHI: Excuse me, Councilman Taylor TYLER: Yes, sir. TOGASHI: Tyler. TYLER: Yes, sir. TOGASHI: Since you're on Section 2, can you also clarify what you mean by cleazly or customarily incidental? TYLER: Yes. 4 TOGASHI: Customarily incidental rather than accessory and subordinate to the TYLER: Yes, sir. That's a very good question. Thank you for asking that. This language grew out of an opinion which the Planning Commission received from the Corporation Counsel, suggesting that perhaps some of the reasoning behind your decision making was flawed. And I'm sure you will recall that. As you can see, it's a pretty thick file here. It's Opinion No. 98-1, which was provided by Mr. Wurdeman, dated January, 13 January 1998 to Mr. Kevin Balog, then the Chairman of the Planning Commission. And he talks in there about the need to clarify this. And I spent a lot of time on this language, and actually I went a couple of steps beyond what he was recommending in order to let there be no doubt in the mind that this was, this had to be incidental. This was not a primary purpose. Otherwise, we might be thwarting the Zoning Code. And I submitted this to the, to Mr. Wurdeman prior to bringing this before the Council. Obviously, the Planning Director and I talked about this, but, and Staff, but Mr. Wurdeman said that he found no flaws whatsoever in this. And he was glad that, I think his comment was something along the lines of he was glad that somebody finally addressed this important issue. I'm not sure, Mr. Togashi, Commissioner Togashi, if I answered your question but TOGASHI: I was just, I guess, confused about "customarily." "Clearly," I can understand. But customarily meaning regularly, or is that what you TYLER: Yes. TOGASHI: Mean? TYLER: Yes. TOGASHI: Customarily? TYLER: This language actually came from Mr. Wurdeman, and it's in that opinion. And I don't presume to practice law, although I've certainly been accused of that, but I don't presume to do it out of respect for those who have gone to law school and passed the bar, but So I can't specifically answer that except to say that I would refer you to Opinion 98-1, because that is the basis on which this was put forward. Other questions about that section? Okay. The, I want to go to Page 3 here, I'll wrap this up very quickly, Mr. Chairman. The Paragraph No. 5, the new Paragraph No. 5, actually is, where on the building site is added, is to further clarify, and make no mistake about what was intended here. This is not for registered guests living next door or down the street. This is for people who are there. And this is to comply with the law and also to try to address, you know, some guardhouse lawyers, someone, with all due respect to the lawyers in the house. 5 And then going to proposed new Pazagraph No. 6, I wanted to note, for the record, you know that you have received comments from the State Historic Preservation Division suggesting that in historic districts perhaps the restriction to just concrete, asphalt, concrete surface or chip seal might be too limiting. And I spoke with the Planning Director about this; and I think maybe when it comes to the Council, if we need to further amplify that, we can do so. So I, I have no other, nothing to add, nothing to propose to you at this time. And the rest of it remains as it was originally submitted to the Council, excuse me, to the Planning Committee by me. And with that Oh, one final comment. There was a, there was some communication received from the Depaztment of Business, Economic Development and Tourism, suggesting that perhaps the whole signage situation needed to be left out of there. And I do not concur with their observation or their request to change this. I think that this is an administrative matter. The Sign Code, faz from perfect, but in constant review, is something that is an administrative matter. And those matters aze given higher priority under the State constitution, so the County can do what it wants to there. And if there's a problem, then we can address it; but I'm not awaze that there is a problem. And I would assume that if, that people would want.to have some signage. Otherwise, they'd be going to the wrong house; and that might not make some of the neighbors happy. So I just wanted to shaze that with you. I'll be happy to answer any questions. Thank you. BAKER: Commissioner Togashi, any questions? TOGASHI: Yeah, I did want to add, Councilman Tyler, that TYLER: Yes, sir. TOGASHI: At the Hilo meeting, at the Hilo hearing when this was first heazd, there were a lot of comments that were made by the various Commissioners; and perhaps you should get a copy of those comments. I thought they were very good comments. TYLER: Yes, I did read those and TOGASHI: You did read those? TYLER: The one that I remember, specifically, and I'm sorry, I didn't address it, if I might, Mr. Chairman, was Commissioner Souza's comment about why are we giving them another year? If I recall correctly, Commissioner Souza, I think it was you to whom that remark was attributed. Once again, my sense of this is not for government to restrict but for government to make opportunity available and for government to, unless there's something to the contrary, to afford citizens the opportunity to comply with the law. Now, obviously, you're not going to let somebody murder somebody two or three times, so I'm not talking about that. You made a decision this morning based on something that occurred. What I'm trying to do here is say, well, we 6 now have, hopefully, some new, more flexible, easier to administer rules, and let's give the folks, let's let as many citizens as want to become law abiding citizens. That's my intention. And, I mean, it's, we could make it two years, we could make it six months. But I think what we're trying to do here is, and I've talked to the B&B Association about this, is to make it a reasonable amount of time. And notice it says as long as the applications have been put in, and that was the suggestion of the Director. Once again here, we're not trying to be punitive, we're just trying to afford people the opportunity that want to to comply. And those that want, well, then the hammer comes down on the date. So, I hope, Commissioner Souza, that answers your question, sir. If not, I'll be happy to SOUZA: It, you gave your opinion. I still disagree because remember before this ordinance had been introduced, I think the Planning Director gave up, over a year of what you, what word I want to, what linear, what's that word? TOGASHI: Compliance? SOUZA: Huh? TOGASHI: Compliance? SOUZA: Yeah, you know on that TYLER: Yeah. Leniency. SOUZA: There's another word but anyway TYLER: Leniency, yeah. SOUZA: Yeah. That if they would come in, that they would not be punished. And with the past year, and I'm not against giving them some free time, but I think that we should limit it to a small frame as possible so people see the urgency to comply. I think with one yeaz, you can just procrastinate. TYLER: Well, I daze say, Commissioner Souza, if they procrastinate, the hammer will come down in accordance with the law, should it pass by the Council. But we may have a slight difference of perspective here. We have many laws on the books today, which I'm sure each of us is familiar with our own pet peeve or pet law, that cannot be enforced. We don't have the manpower, we don't have the ability to do this. And so my question here is let's not try to see how many lawbreakers we can come up with so we can slam a hammer on them, let's see how many people we can get to comply. And it's just adifferent GIFFIN: Perspective. 7 TYLER: I can't imagine that everyone in the Planning Department or the Police Department or the Planning Commission wakes up in the morning and say how many people can we slam in the public today. No. I can't imagine any of you feel that way. So that's where I'm coming from, and hopefully that will give you some additional information. Thank you. BAKER: Thank you. Next speaker. HIRATA: I'm Colette, oops. I'm Colette Hirata. I'm the current Chair of the Hawaii Island B&B Association. I reside at 44-2541 Keahua, up in Kalopa. And we, as an association, fully support this bill with the exception of one item. And that is No. 3 that states that the B&B establishment may be located on a building site within a single family dwelling unit and a guest house and/or ohana dwelling. We feel that adding the wording of "on a building site" will certainly add some clarity, however, we ask that you consider possibly changing the wording to be less limiting to B&Bs established in permitted, non-conforming dwellings and/or guest houses. An example that we thought might be better is that the bed and breakfast establishment maybe located on a building site within any permitted single family dwelling units and/or guest houses. If the buildings are already permitted as dwellings, then why can't they be allowed to be used as a B&B? If they are permitted as dwellings then, obviously, they can be rented out to long-term renters who, as we know, present much more of an impact to the neighborhood than a small B&B. As long as it's permitted, is a permitted dwelling, even though non- conforming to present Zoning Codes, we feel it should be grandfathered in. One of our previous members went through a terrible time with this, as some of the Planning Commissioners may remember. And they were able to obtain permits for multiple single family dwellings, however, would not be able to use all of them as B&Bs under this present bill as it goes through now; and we just want to make sure that that doesn't happen to anyone else. It was not a pleasant experience for the Planning Commission or for the applicants. Other than that, we fully agree with the rest of it. BAKER: Commissioner Giffin. GIFFIN: I just have one question. HIRATA: Okay. GIFFIN: Do you represent the B&B Association? HIRATA: Yes. GIFFIN: And so your comments aze from the membership? HIRATA: Yes. These aze comments that we have received over this bill. 8 GIFFIN: Okay. BAKER: Commissioner Togashi. TOGASHI: I'm just curious as to how many illegal B&Bs aze, you estimate are operating out there. SHRINER: Did you say legal? TOGASHI: Illegal, the illegal B&Bs out HIRATA: Illegal? Oh, I don't know. SHRINER: Did he say illegal or legal? TOGASHI: Illegal. HIRATA: How many illegal. BAKER: Illegal. HIRATA: B&Bs there are. Hundreds. SHRINER: Sure, hundreds. HIRATA: Yeah. Of our association members though, I believe we've got a fairly high percentage have gone through the permit process and aze now legal. We are encouraging our members. And we are hoping that once this bill goes through we, as a board, aze looking at making it mandatory for all of our members to go through the permit process. BAKER: Commissioner Giffin. GIFFIN: So could you tell me how many members you have? HIRATA: I believe our most current one is 48 or 49 members right now. BAKER: Any other questions for the testifier? Thank you. Ma'am, you're next. SHRINER: I'm Diane Shriner, Lion's Gate Bed and Breakfast, a legal bed and breakfast, P.O. Box 761, Honaunau, Hawaii. I have been a part of this process as past chair of the B&B Association. Our goal has been to get people legal, paying their taxes, doing what's correct and right. We are a 9 voluntary organization in the sense that people must pay fees to join us. They must be inspected, that they have quality control, and these kinds of things aze important to us. And as the State representative for the Professional Association of Innkeepers International, we are the State agency, and we do have to move to the direction that we are following all County, State legal issues; and that is the next leap of faith we're making, that membership will include all legal properties. And this has been a growth process. Like anything, we are a growing organization. We have issues that we have to deal with and, like anything else, it takes time. But the next step will be to be a member of our association, you need to be legal. I think it's really important. I think where you're going is good, where this bill is going is good. The only thing that hearing this today verbally as opposed to reading it, I'm womed about that word "incidental." What does this mean to someone like Virginia? So I, if I can address you, what does "incidental" mean? If they don't have to go through the, going before the Commission, they can go through the Planning Deparunent? The B&B, we aze a farm, we're a macadamia nut farm and coffee fazm. Well, I'll tell you, there's some pretty bad farm years, and we couldn't be farrrters without the B&B. So what does "incidental" mean? Some years, the incidental is not incidental for us. We are doing this as a business, not as an incidental. GIFFIN: Not as a hobby? SHRINER: Not as a hobby, yes, right. It's too hard a work to do as a hobby, I'll tell you that. BAKER: Planning Director. GOLDSTEIN: I'm looking for the, again, this, the wording that the B&B use, that it be cleazly and customarily incidental to the primary use ofthe SHRINER: The building? The GOLDSTEIN: The dwelling. SHRINER: The dwelling. GOLDSTEIN: The dwelling itself. Part of that comes from, as Mr. Tyler said, from the Corporation Counsel's opinion that that's really the word that, the words that ought to be used. And what it really means is that it has to be, in that sense, secondary to the primary use of the dwelling. SHRINER: Of me living there? GOLDSTEIN: Yes. 10 SHRINER: I am taking GOLDSTEIN: Or from SHRINER: One bedroom, but my guests are taking three bedrooms so GOLDSTEIN: But your primary use is that it is a SHRINER: It's our home. GOLDSTEIN: It's your home? SHRINER: Right. GOLDSTEIN: Yes. SHRINER: Okay. GOLDSTEIN: That's what the SHRINER: That satisfies me. GOLDSTEIN: Yes. Okay. GIFFIN: As compared to your property, which you were talking about. SHRINER: As opposed to my property, right. BAKER: Yeah. Any other questions for the testifier? Commissioner Fujikawa. FUJIKAWA: I have a question of legal counsel here. If a subdivision has, in the CC&R, no bed and breakfasts, how do we look at the issue like that? Do we, can we override it? GOLDSTEIN: If I may answer for Corporation Counsel, just because he's new and hasn't been privy to some of the earlier statements from Corporation Counsel in the past. We do not enforce CC&Rs. CC&Rs are a private matter between FUJIKAWA: Right. GOLDSTEIN: The developer and the owner or the community association and the owner. That has nothing, we cannot go in and enforce it, in other words. FUJIKAWA: Okay. So it's up to them, themselves, within their own policy. 11 GOLDSTEIN: Yeah, whoever has jurisdiction over that CC&R. FUJIKAWA: But GOLDSTEIN: That's a civil matter. FUJIKAWA: Thank you. SHRINER: If I may inject, there is a bed and breakfast, Batson's Bed and Breakfast on Maui, and they had CC&Rs; and the judge ruled that being a residence and being a B&B was like use, in the sense that he allowed them to have their B&B with the CC&Rs. GOLDSTEIN: I'm assuming that's because, again, the dwelling unit for the resident was the primary use. SHRINER: That's con•ect. BAKER: Okay. Any other questions for this testifier? Commissioner Togashi. TOGASHI: I have one question of the Planning Director. Remember on a, maybe a couple months ago we had a case involving a farm dwelling; they had requested a B&B. I believe it was the Eastlands had requested a B&B in a farm dwelling. What happens if the farm dwelling becomes void for whatever reason, that, you know, they're not maintaining an Ag activity and it becomes void? What happens? Does the It's, the B&B becomes primary, right, in that case? I know we went around this issue about the GOLDSTEIN: If TOGASHI: Farm dwelling thing. GOLDSTEIN: Yeah. And, technically, to me, it's still that because, and the farm dwellings usually relate to, almost always relate to the State Land Use Agricultural District. And if they are not using the property for farming, however that's defined, or agricultural use, that technically there is a violation. TOGASHI: So they cannot also operate a B&B then? GOLDSTEIN: Unless there is an Ag activity. TOGASHI: Right, because then the 12 GOLDSTEIN: Okay. TOGASHI: B&B becomes a primary use, yeah. BAKER: Yeah. Okay, so that's TOGASHI: Okay. BAKER: Next testifier. M. NEUMANN: Yes, I'm Meredith Roe Neumann, and I am co-chair with my husband Terry, for Governmental Affairs for the B&B Association. And we have had the privilege, handed to us by Diane, of working, picking, kind of picking up where she left off with this new Zoning Code and also with Curtis Tyler, who has very, very graciously given us a tremendous amount of his time and effort. And I guess I really would like to take the opportunity to thank all of you that had collaborative efforts with Curtis, because I know that made a big difference. And, basically, I guess, I'm here to let you know that, again, as another member of HIBA, I support, we support, and I'm sure Terry can speak for himself, this new Zoning Code Bill No. 240. BAKER: Thank you. Any questions for the testifier? Hearing none, Terry. T. NEUMANN: My name is Terry Neumann, and I'm co-chair of the Governmental Affairs Division of the Hawaii Island Bed and Breakfast Association. About 18 months ago, we started looking at the fact that the bed and breakfast industry in Hawaii, even though it is still fairly new, is starting to mature. And one of the aspects of bed and breakfasts is that they provide a need for a type of an accommodation for people who do not want to stay in resorts. We get a lot of European travelers, many foreign travelers that much prefer smaller properties. Some of the benefits, as you well know, of abed and breakfast is the personal attention, and also the fact that people can have quiet time if they want. They don't have to have input of other people azound them, and it gives those individuals also a better chance to see what it's really like to live in Hawaii. Resorts, for the most part, even though they are in Hawaii and they've got beautiful grounds and everything, they don't really give a true picture of what it is really like here. You, many of the resorts, like especially the Hilton down in Waikoloa, has been compared to Disneyland. It's a great place to go. There are wonderful things to do there. They've got dolphin shows and water slides and all those things, but that really isn't Hawaii. And in looking at the industry, with the problems that Hawaii has faced for the last nine yeazs, and especially the Big Island which has shown a classic case of a depression, we need to address all the needs of the tourists, and provide the need and opportunities for any tourist who wants to come here. And if we azbitrarily limit or eliminate certain aspects of tourism, that hurts us because, basically, we're aone-industry 13 economy over here. We have other small industries such as macadamia nuts and coffee that do help bolster the industry but, in general, our main industry is tourism. And we really have to support and look at all the needs of the tourists and accommodate all of their needs. Thank you. BAKER: Commissioners, any questions for the testifier? Planning Director Goldstein. GOLDSTEIN: I just need to make one more comment, and that is to say that I really appreciated Councilman Tyler's efforts to try to bring some resolution to this overall problem so, in that sense, I do have to say thank you, Curtis. TYLER: You're welcome. BAKER: Okay. Thank you. No further questions from the Commissioners? SHRINER: I'd just like to say one other quick thing, that it seems odd that we'd be trying to get other people legal, that's competition, but it really isn't. We refer to each other in the association without commissions. We know the people who will treat the guests well, so we usually pass them along. And this is really important to us that people get out there, they be legal, they be upfront; because otherwise, the tourists could have a bad impression of a B&B on the Big Island. BAKER: Thank you for that comment. Okay. Commissioner Giffin. GIFFIN: Mr. Chairman, I just verified with the Director that we do not have to make a decision today and that I move that we continue until our next meeting. FUJIKAWA: I second. BAKER: Okay. A motion was made by Commissioner Giffin and a second was made by Commissioner Fujikawa. We're in discussion. Mr. Tyler has something to say. The hearing is open so you TYLER: Yes. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. May I ask Commissioner Giffin why she wishes to continue this? GIFFIN: Unlike you, I didn't have the privilege of looking at the minutes from our Hilo meeting. And I know that if my recollection is correct, for example, there was the owner from the Shipman House TYLER: Right. GIFFIN: Who came to Hilo to testify, and she was against the concept of not paving, right. 14 GOLDSTEIN: For historic GIFFIN: Historic GOLDSTEIN: Properties. GIFFIN: Properties. GOLDSTEIN: That's correct. GIFFIN: And before I made a decision, I wanted to review those minutes. And the signage I agree with. Because at first I thought, oh, you know, that would be kind of obnoxious, but it was brought to our attention by members of the B&B Association who came to the Hilo hearing that that is important and that really it was more important to their neighbors because often times guests get lost. But I did want to have that privilege of reviewing the minutes before I made a decision today. TYLER: Okay. Well, just if I may comment, thank you very much, Commissioner Giffin. The issue of the historic, State Historic Preservation recommendation is not before you today because, unless one of you wants to make an amendment. But certainly I'm going to speak with the Director and the Corporation Counsel on this before we make any further amendments. I think what you have before you today is a proposal that's a combination of not only the efforts that are represented by the Corp. Counsel, the Director, the Staff, and the members and non-members of the Hawaii Island B&B, of which, you know, I've received a lot of input, but it's a further refinement by, recommended by the Director. And I guess, my hope is that if you do continue this or defer it, that you won't do so for long because it needs to get back to the Council so we can, assuming that we have a meeting of the minds here, so this can become law and we can get on with implementing this. So I just wanted to share that with you, and I appreciate your wanting to read, you've maybe watched me on TV where I said I can't give my absolute yes vote on this because I haven't read some of it myself. So thank you very much. GIFFIN: You're welcome. BAKER: Well, we're on the discussion. Commissioner Souza. SOUZA: Mr. Chairman, I agree with Councilman Tyler that we shouldn't, you know, continue this and procrastinate. On the other hand, I agree that another meeting, I support the postponement because I feel that with a postponement, the Planning Department can give us the new, everything that has been suggested has changed in one form where we can digest. Right now, we have old forms that's our 15 scratchings; and I think it would be just more easy then if we have it all conform that we can digest it better. BAKER: Okay. All right, any other discussion before we take a vote? Hearing none, I'll take a voice vote. All in favor of continuing, say aye. COMMISSIONERS: Aye. BAKER: Opposed? Okay. Carried. We will continue this until the next Hilo agenda. Thank you. NEWMAN: Thank you. The discussion ended at 3:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, 1 Sharon M. Nomura, Secretary Planning Commission 16 PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAII HEARING TRANSCRIPT September 15, 2000 A regularly advertised public hearing on the AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 25 ON BED AND BREAKFAST ESTABLISHMENTS was called to order at 11:55 a.m. in the County Building, Councilroom-Room 201, 25 Aupuni Street, Hilo, Hawaii, with Chairman Richazd B. Baker, Jr. presiding. PRESENT: Richazd B. Baker, Jr. ABSENT: Grant Togashi Eazl Fujikawa Geraldine Giffin Florence Kubota Aurelio Mina Mildred Mosher Francis Smith James Souza Russell Kokubun, Planning Director Alice Kawaha, Staff Planner Susan Gagorik, Staff Planner Phyllis Fujimoto, Staff Planner Al Jeremiah, Deputy Corporation Counse] Bruce McClure representing Department of Water Supply Kelly Gomes representing Department of Public Works And approximately 15 people from the public in attendance. COUNTY COUNCIL -Continued hearing of proposed bill to amend Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawaii County Code relating to Bed and Breakfast establishments. BAKER: Our next agenda item is Item No. 6, and that is the County Council, it's a continued hearing on the proposed bill to amend Chapter 25 of the Zoning Code of the Hawaii County Zoning Code relating to the Bed and Breakfast establishments. Staff. KAWAHA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. At the last, well, we had two meetings on this proposed ordinance which was held July 215`, the first meeting, and August 4~'. I passed out a summary of the Commissioners' concerns. It should be, it was in your folder this morning (SEE ATTACHMENT 1). KUBOTA: Alice, inhere? In here? 1 KAWAHA: Yes. BAKER: Yes, it was in the handout that we had this morning. KiIBOTA: Yeah, but Ididn't BAKER: It's in bold letters. It's County of Hawaii Proposed Amendments to Charter 25, Chapter 25. KAWAHA: It's two pages and it has 6" at the top right-hand corner. BAKER: Top right-hand comer, written in pen. Okay, those who don't have it raise your hand, we have some extra copies. KAWAHA: Anyone else? BAKER: Mr. Souza, you have yours? SOUZA: Yes. BAKER: You're on the ball then. SMITH: Alice? KOKUBUN: Smitty doesn't have. BAKER: Smitty. Okay. Okay, so Alice will go over this with us? KAWAHA: Well, yes. Okay, No. 1, it was brought up by the Commission that, regarding the Fire Department's comments relating to standards to, that provisions regarding consideration be given to accessibility of emergency vehicles, fire trucks, and ambulances. And our response was that, well, bottom line is that we should go on a case-by-case situation. And, if need be, it be included as a condition of the permit, whether it be use permit or special permit. GIFFIN: Alice, why? Why don't we have a standard? KAWAHA: But that's where I think at that meeting it was whether we wanted to have that addressed in the enabling ordinance or as the permit comes up. And so the Department's position was to go through the special permit process. GIFFTN: I know, but my question is why. KAWAHA: Yeah, well, it may not cover or it may not pertain to all B&Bs that are being proposed because you also have B&Bs where it is already permitted in certain zones. And 2 that provision of B&B pertains to whatever zones, not only through special permit or use permit but also permitted zoned areas such as the resort azea, the commercial azea. So that's the reason why we preferred to go through the, as a condition of the permit. GIFFIN: You know, I have no feeling either way. It's just that I thought the whole tenor of the ordinance was to make it more user friendly for the public, yeah, when they were trying to do their B&B permits. And not knowing and just thinking that they might have to go through this individually without a frame of reference, I think just off the top of my head it might make it more, well, less user friendly for the public. That was my concern. That's why I wanted to know why the Department wanted to do it on a case-by-case basis, you know. KAWAHA: Yeah, okay. BAKER: Any other questions? KAWAHA: So, but it's, you know, if the Commissioners prefer to amend this accordingly, then, you know, we could send that up to the Council. GIFFIN: Okay, that was going to be my first question before you got even to No. 1. Where will our comments go from here? KAWAHA: County Council. GIFFIN: Okay, okay. BAKER: Commissioner Mosher? MOSHER: Even if it's a permitted use within the zoning, they still need to get a permit, don't they? KAWAHA: Within, if it's in commercial zoned area MOSHER: Yeah. KAWAHA: Or resort MOSHER: Yeah. KAWAHA: All they need is the plan approval process. GIFFIN: They don't need a permit for that. KAWAHA: They don't need any use 3 MOSHER: They don't need the B&B spec KAWAHA: For use, for residential RS zones, you need a use permit. But in the commercial/resort zoned area, the RD, RM, well, I'm Sony, commercial and the resort area they're an outright permitted use without any permits, except just the plan approval, administrative approval. MOSHER: But that, with the plan approval, don't they still have to follow regulations? KAWAHA: Yes. GIFFIN: But that's why I'm saying KAWAHA: And that's why they have GIFFIN: It should be spelled out. KAWAHA: Yeah. They would still have to follow GIFFIN: Follow regulations. KAWAHA: Other agencies' regulations; and they would be Fire Department, Public Works, what other agencies that they would have to get approval from in order to establish that use. BAKER: Any other questions on Agenda Item No. 1 on the Report No. 1? No. 2? KAWAHA: Mr. Chairman, I would, I guess, as we go through this, I would, I'm not sure if the Commissioners want to go one by one and see whether they want to amend it accordingly or wait till we go through all these or GIFFIN: Yeah, and I want to hear from the public. KAWAHA: Yeah okay. BAKER: So why don't we just have this, call the public up and get testimony, public testimony then, if you're not going to go through all of them till later? KOKUBLJN: I think Alice meant she wanted the Commission to go through what she had. BAKER: Yeah, that's why I told her go to No. 2. 4 KAWAHA: Okay. No. 2, there's some comments from the Department of Land and Natural Resources Historic Preservation Division regarding requirement of paved off-street parking. And these are pertaining to historic sites or historic properties. And, also, on this, we felt that on a case-by-case basis, because it's not all properties that are historic sites; and so it's only pertaining to those specific permits that would be before you. GIFFIN: Yeah. KAWAHA: Yeah. GIFFIN: And even the letter that we received this morning from Barbara Anderson, you know, saying that her comments were, she misunderstood the letter But she does go on to say, and she's here this morning and it would be best for her to answer to that. But she, I think, is speaking to the effect that it's individual, not just because they're, you know, historic that they should be treated one way. Because they're different modes to the building, that should be the consideration rather than the fact that they aze designated historic. You see what I mean? So that's different from what you were saying. KAWAHA: Okay. Also within the, in that portion, I did state that according to the Zoning Code, such as in the residential or RA, RA paved pazking aze not required; and so, you know, with that, they could just have gravel, or wherever there's no standing of water or muddy situation. And I think Historic Preservation kind of had looked at that portion where there's no, to be exempt and to be included in that portion of the ordinance or that language. SOUZA: Mr. Chairman? BAKER: Commissioner Souza. SOUZA: I have a question. Alice, as I understand it, no, your recommendation is that we, no strict requirements on paved parking or asphalt pazking. But when you come to historic sites and realizing that each historic site has a different feature to worry about, how would you, how would you, can we as, can the Commission make that stipulation in the B&B? KAWAHA: As a condition? SOUZA: As a condition of what kind of parking to use, that they must replace it with I see a conflict here that, you know, we, I see the need to protect, if it's a historic site; I see the need to protect its originality. But how do we do it on a case-to-case basis? KAWAHA: It would be through the conditions of approval. SOUZA: Thank you. BAKER: Okay. Next, Item No. 3. 5 KAWAHA: This is regazding the comments from Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism regazding exterior signage. We or staff do not agree with that comment; and we felt that, you know, more impacts would be caused if no signage was installed. And we did have public testimony saying that, you know, signage is important. BAKER: Any questions on this? Next, No. 4. KAWAHA: Okay, moving on. Commission brought up about breakfast meals that are offered to guests, that they should have some, or we should define what breakfast meals means because of also enforcement or monitoring of such operation, we looked at that. And, also, due to public testimony by one of the B&B operators that she had been adhering to the Department of Health regulations, we felt that we would add that word after "only breakfast meals approved by the Department of Health." So as a condition of the approval, that the operator would have to serve only breakfast meals approved by that agency. Any questions? BAKER: Okay, No. 5. KAWAHA: Okay, moving on to No. 5. Commission expressed, and this is regarding the limitation of no more than five guest bedrooms, the Commission expressed that there's no monitoring or policing and there maybe the temptation to have aten-bedroom home or you may have two, maybe two dwellings with, you know, combination of bedrooms. And so Commission expressed that they should retain that limitation on the bedroom. And staff didn't have any recommendation, well, our recommendation was to delete, yeah. BAKER: Okay, No. 6. KAWAHA: And going on down to No. 6, this is regarding the additional 12 months for existing B&Bs to secure permits. Commission also expressed, you know, why allow another kind of, sort of like a grace period when that was given couple years ago. And, again, our recommendation was to, Department recommendation was to include this additional 12, another, I guess another grace period for existing B&Bs to come in. BAKE: Okay, Commissioner Souza. SOUZA: Alice, are you saying that you still agree with the 12-month grace period? KAWAHA: Yes. SOUZA: Thank you. MOSHER: Well, where does this go now? BAKER: Goes to the County Council. 6 SOUZA: Public testimony right now. MOSHER: Yeah, I know, after public testimony. KAWAHA: No, then Commissioners would have to have discussion as to whether any of these items that I've pointed out, whether they wanted to amend the ordinance to include any new language, or leave as it, or MOSHER: It won't go back to Kona? GIFFIN: No. BAKER: No. MOSHER: You mean this is it. FUJIKAWA: Good. BAKER: Okay, no further questions for staff. We'll call up for public testimony. Those wishing to testify on this agenda item, please come forward so that we can sweaz you in. Anyone else in the public wishing to testify on this agenda item? We have couple more seats up here. If not, then will you please raise your right hand, Ma'am. Do you swear to testify truthfully before the Hawaii County Planning Commission? HIItATA: I do. BAKER: Okay, your name and address, please, for the record. Please speak clearly into the mike. HIRATA: I'm Colette Hirata. I live in Kalopa at 44-2541 Keahua Road. I'm a member of the B&B Association and I'm on the boazd. I spoke at the last hearing. I did just briefly want to make a notation on No. 5. This, I'm speaking on behalf of myself this time and not as a member of the board. I personally agree with eliminating the limitation of five bedrooms. I feel, I have, myself have concerns that people are going to be tempted to stray and not abide by the ten, the ten guest limit. I feel that could be a problem. Other than that, I agree with the rest of it. BAKER: Okay, any questions for the testifier? So I have one if no one else. So you're saying that if you eliminate the number then that will allow them to have as much as they want and because we have a number they're going to do it anyway? Probably, they might have the temptation to do it anyway, and there's no enforcement? 7 TTTT A T A tl _ T aL aL _ l:.v a ~ .L _ al C _ _ a _ _ _ _ _ ~ .l • . nrrcr~ r ri: z es. r, w,u, u,c uuuuuy, when ,ney nrsr come to ror tnetr permtt, by limiting it to five bedrooms, that will be caught when they first go for their permit by the Planning Department when they first come in with their permit. If they have more than five bedrooms it will be caught at that point. And I fee16 rooms and above is already covered by inns. MOSHER: Yeah. HIRATA: So they can already go and apply for an inn permit versus a B&B permit. So we're into eliminating them all together. They do have other recourses. BAKER: So you feel there is the proper, by taking out the number ofpeople, do you think there's a proper, there are proper controls there? HIRATA: Yes. GIFFIN: So she's suggesting that we keep five? HIRATA: Exactly, yeah, we keep the five, and we keep the way it is right now and just not remove that. BAKER: Okay. Any other questions? Commissioner Mosher, for her? MOSHER: No, not for her; for Alice, probably. If we extend a, No. 6, giving people 12 months more to apply, are we going to be sending letters out to all the known people that are, don't have, are we going to send letters out and ask them to please apply? Or how are we going to let the people who aze operating these B&B be aware that they have 12 months to be legal? KAWAHA: Well, for one thing, we don't know all the existing B&Bs. So to compile a list and to notify them, you know, we have no way. MOSHER: No, I mean, like they advertise, you know, in the papers. And, will there, I mean, why put something in here if it's just going to be in here? KAWAHA: Well, one way we can do is also notify the B&B Association. And maybe, in tum, they can notify, you know, those that they may be awaze of that aze not, that permits have not been approved. I mean we have to use that kind of channel probably to get it out BAKER: Or maybe we can have the Council pass an ordinance and then we send the sheriff after all these illegal guys. I don't know. Anyway, moving on. MOSHER: Moving on. BAKER: The next testifier. 8 ANDERSON: I'm Barbara Anderson. I live at 131 Kaiulani Street here in Hilo. And I'm just here to answer the question about the pavement. First, I have a question. Doesn't the preservation, oh, question for Alice. KAWAHA: I'm sorry. Okay. ANDERSON: Okay. Doesn't the Preservation Office usually give an opinion on a permitting process if it's a historic KAWAHA: I'm sorry. ANDERSON: Does the Preservation Office usually give an opinion if it's a historic building applying for a B&B Permit? KAWAHA: I think this is the first time we've received comments from them on this particular, on this comment. GIFFIN: No, she doesn't understand the question. Say it again. ANDERSON: Okay, if a historic building is applying for B&B permit, does the Preservation Office usually get involved? KAWAHA: Oh, yes ANDERSON: Yeah. KAWAHA: Yes. I'm Sony. ANDERSON: So. KAWAHA: Yeah, we do send a copy of the application to that agency for review and comments, not only for historic but for any other kinds of applications. ANDERSON: Okay. Mr. Souza, you asked if, how they would decide what, what would be appropriate. The Preservation Office does have an opinion, usually. For us, we already had a paved area so we extended it. But I know for some other things, they did, they did have an opinion on how it should be done; and the Planning Department went along with it. BAKER: Any questions for the testifier? If not, then we want to thank you for your input. So now back to the issue before us. These concerns that were raised by the Commissioners and has been reported and responses by staff, do we, is there any action, Alice, that we need to take? 9 GIFFIN: Yeah, because we may not agree. SOUZA: Mr. Chairman? BAKER: What was that comment? GIFFIN: I said, yeah, because we may not agree BAKER: Yeah, I know. GIFFIN: With the staff's recommendation. BAKER: I know. But I want to go through the process, yeah? GIFFIN: Yeah. BAKER: So I'm asking her how we're going through the process. Do you want to take a vote now one by one or we're going to go for lunch because I have a meeting 12:30, lunch, so Okay, so do we want to, is it proper that, you want to take action now on this and debate this, or do you want to, should we I would like to suggest that we, I understand we have a 12:301unch appointment. But unless, since the public is here, they're going to have input; you guys want to continue to discuss this? SOUZA: Let me try to make a motion. BAKER: Sure. SOUZA; Mr. Chairman, I move that we go along with the Planning Staff in their recommendations, all of the recommendations, one to 6. BAKER: Motion was made. SMITH: Second. BAKER: A second was made to agree to go along with the recommendations by staff to the concerns that were raised by the Commissioners. SOUZA: Mr. Chairman, I made the motion but, and we can amend the motion. I have a real problem with the 12-month grace period. That's the only one. And I made the motion because I can live with it. I don't know how the Commissioners, other Commissioners feel, if they do like me. But if you recall back some time, there was a grace period of how, I don't know how long, but it was a long time. And, to me, giving them another one year is procrastination. That's all it is. I, you know, this thing has been long in the works. We've 10 reached out into the community for comments; and I really feel that we should cut down that 12- month grace period at the 6, even to 3, but 6. I think 6 is a good compromise. BAKER: Okay. So I am hearing from Commissioner Souza, he made a motion, there was a second. But he is amending his motion on Item No. 6 from 12 months to 6 months. SOUZA: I'm not sure that I can amend my own motion. SMITH: I seconded the first one, not the second. BAKER: Yeah, okay. So, anyway, that's why we didn't reach the decision when you spoke up; and I didn't want to just cut you off. But we had a motion and a second, and I was going to the discussion. So he's discussing his concern. Is anyone wishing to amend his motion? If not, we're going to take action if there's no further discussion on the motion as was presented. GIFFIN: I'd like to amend the motion to reflect his sentiments on Item No. 6. The reason I concur with him is because I feel that those who did come forth during the grace period initially, they did what was asked of them. These other people who didn't, what are we saying to them? What's the message that we're giving to them? It's okay, you know, to not adhere to what the County is asking? I don't think so. BAKER: Okay. So my question then is what is, to staff, what is the remedy or where is the power to, what we can do to people who don't even bother at all to comply? What we're going to do with them? Planning Director? KOKUBUN: Oh, I'm sure they're, if they're in violation of the Code then there's a certain civil remedy to that. BAKER: Okay. Then I hope that the Department will take action, if you can find out who they are. KBUOTA: Mr. Chairman? Mr. Chairman? BAKER: Yes, Commissioner Kubota. KUBOTA: If that is the sentiment, why are we even talking 6 more months? BAKER: Well, that was an amended motion and KUBOTA: I'd like to ask Commissioner Giffin why are we extending it 6 more months. GIFFIN: I was extending it 6 more months because that's what Commissioner 11 Souza asked. And I just felt anything is better than extending it for 12, I really do. Cause I think it extends, it says the wrong message. KAWAHA: Mr. Chairman, if I can also add that with this proposed ordinance there is also a change in what a bed and breakfast establishment allows. BAKER: So what you're saying, and that's what I was thinking. The criteria has changed a little so they will allow some of those other people who couldn't make it under the other existing regulations now to come forward and be, have an opportunity to become legal. So that's why you wanted to have a grace period again. Correct? SMITH: The 6. BAKER: So, Commissioner Giffin has a 6-month grace period and is there any second? SOUZA: Second if I can. KUBOTA: I'll second it because you can't. SOUZA: Okay, use her second, use Flo's. GIFFIN: You know, as a point of discussion eazlier, Alice, you were saying that maybe you could use the B&B Association to, you know, for a list of names and things like that. Maybe they can help with the policing. They know the people who are legal and the people who aze illegal, and it's to their advantage to clean up those who aze not. You know, why not use the Association in that regard. BAKER: Well, any more discussion? There's a motion and a second. SMITH: This is an amendment? BAKER: Amendment to the original motion. SOUZA: Twelve months to 6. MOSHER: So right now we're just voting on 6 or 12 months? GIFFIN: Yeah. BAKER: From 12 to 6. GIFFIN: For No. 6. 12 MOSHER: No, 12, yeah, for No. 6. GIFFIN: Yeah. MOSHER: Okay. BAKER: All in favor say aye? COMMISSIONERS: Aye. BAKER: Oppose? SMITH: Nay. GIFFIN: Passed. BAKER: Okay, so it does carry with one nay. Now we need to vote on the complete or is there any other amendments to this report before we vote on the complete thing that was presented? MOSHER: You know, I get very confused when I look at five sheets of paper that you're suppose to put together. Isn't it possible to put the whole thing on one, get everything put together instead of "x"ing and putting in parenthesis and underlining? KAWAHA: Well, by law we have to do a Ramsayered version so that readers can see what was the previous language and what's new. GIFFIN: What was and what's being proposed. KAWAHA: Yeah. And when that gets passed, should that get passed through the Council, then they remove all those Ramsayered MOSHER: Yeah, but when you're looking at it, I guess my brain can't think that they could KAWAHA: What particular one are you looking at, which particular MOSHER: The whole thing. KAWAHA: Oh. MOSHER: The whole thing. It's just very confusing. You've got to go back and forth. Cause I see that I have underlined from our last meeting a whole bunch of things in here. 13 Like Section 3 on the Ordinance, page 2, I have a whole bunch of things underlined. And I forgot what I underlined it for. KAWAHA: If, yeah, well, what, I guess you were MOSHER: It was Section 3, 25-4-7(a). KAWAHA: Yeah, so if I may read what it'll MOSHER: What the proposed KAWAHA: It will be, yeah. It would read as "Bed and breakfast establishments shall be permitted in the RD, RM, RCX, V, CN, CG and CV districts. MOSHER: Wait, wait, wait, wait. Oh, okay, the RA is eliminated. KAWAHA: Yeah, RA, FA and A has been, is proposed to be deleted. Okay, then following the CV districts, the rest of the sentence where it says, "provided that plan approval" up to the period, "such use," that is being deleted. MOSHER: Deleted, okay. KAWAHA: So the period ends at "districts." MOSHER: Okay. KAWAHA: Then the next sentence, "Abed and breakfast establishment", etc. And what has been deleted is after "for each such use" then it says "and", you see the bracket? MOSHER: Yeah. KAWAHA: Yeah, the rest of the sentence is proposed to be deleted. MOSHER: Okay. Okay. You don't have to go further on. It's KAWHA: Okay. KUBOTA: Oh, thank you. I thought you were going to go through your whole list. KAWAHA: Yeah, I remember from the last meeting that in reading that was kind of difficult. BAKER: Okay. I think that our concerns were addressed by staff and pretty much why, that's why we went over those list of concerns. And if we didn't have any more questions 14 on the list of concerns and amendments to them, then I think it's proper that we vote on the recommendation to the County Council, which is before us, where the Planning Director has recommended a favorable consideration be given to the proposed amendment to Chapter 25 of the Zoning Code. So I think, at that time, I think a motion is in order. SOUZA: Oh, okay. I'm not sure that I'm following you. But right now we have a motion on the floor. BAKER: There is none. KAWAHA: The main, main motion. MOSHER: We voted already. SOUZA: To change to accept the amendments as proposed by staff. BAKER: We voted on from 6, 12 to 6. SOUZA: We voted on the amendment only. BAKER: Yes. But now we need to vote on accepting the KUBOTA: The recommendation. SOUZA: No, no, no. Well, okay BAKER: Chapter 25. Okay, that's why it's going to accept, it's going to accept the whole thing to go to the County Council. SOUZA: I beg your pardon. I made a motion, and then the motion was amended to change 12 months to 6. That amendment passed. BAKER: Correct. SOUZA: So now we need to vote on my motion as amended. KUBOTA: As amended. SOUZA: And then we make another motion to accept like you suggest. BAKER: Okay, motion in order? Take a vote on the first motion. KAWAHA: Okay, we took a motion on the amendment from 12 to 6. 15 GIFFIN: Already done. BAKER: Yeah, yeah. KAWAHA: That was 7 to 1. So now we're taking up the, the 6 that Commissioner Souza made a motion? BAKER: I guess so. KAWAHA: Yeah, it would be the 6 item with amendment to that 6, was already done. KUBOTA: That's right, that's right. We're back to the main motion with amendments. KAWAHA: Yeah. KUBOTA: And that amendment is from 12 to 6. KAWAHA: Okay. KUBOTA: So the main motion now reads BAKER: Twelve to 6. KUBOTA: The whole thing BAKER: The whole thing except, except KUBOTA: To allow an additional 6 months. That's what it just says, okay. KAWAHA: Yeah, yeah. And I think, Mr. Chairman, what the ultimate proposed ordinance would be as is, except for it will be 6 months. BAKER: Yes. FUJIKAWA: Correct. BAKER: That's right. KAWAHA: That's the ultimate proposed ordinance that would be going up to Council. But, I think that's why we have to do the other motion, vote on Souza's motion and also with what will be going up to the Council. 16 BAKER: It has to be separate, okay, so Corp. Counsel, you want to say something, you want to clear up this mud? JEREMIAH: Yeah. KAWAHA: Although it's the same thing but JEREMIAH: We eliminated the 12 to 6. Mr. Souza's main motion is the balance, all the amendments which the staff has proposed. And now you're saying one more motion to take that five amendments and include it in the draft. That's what you're saying? KAWAHA: Right. Because then what will, with this proposed ordinance what would be changed is to add that wording "approved by the Department of Health" regarding breakfast meals; and, also changing "12 months" to "6 months". I'm Sony I forgot about that breakfast meals. But those would be the amended portion of the proposed bill. JEREMIAH: Call for Jimmy's motion. BAKER: Okay. Well, we'll vote on Jimmy's motion. SMITH: Mr. Chair? BAKER: Yes, sir. SMITH: Since I don't agree with the amendments made to that, I withdraw my second to Mr. Souza's motion. BAKE: Okay. The second was withdrawn so Mr. Souza's motion is no longer there. It's dead. GIFFIN: I second. BAKER: Second by Commissioner Giffin. Let's take a vote. MOSHER: So where are we? BAKER: We're going to take avote GIFFIN: Right there, same place. BAKER: On the original motion. Call for the motion. You don't know what the motion was? KAWAHA: Yes. Because he 17 BAKER: His motion was that the article that we read, the County Council proposed amendments that we went through 1 through 6, he made a motion to accept that. And then later on he raised the concern about amending it. And then a motion was made and that was voted. So now that we need to vote on his original motion, was to accept 1 to 6 as it was originally presented KAWAHA: No, as amended. BAKER: With the amendment in there now because it was amended. GIFFIN: No, as it was amended. KUBOTA: With the amendment. MINA: With the amendment. BAKER: Yeah. KAWAHA: With the amendment. BAKER: Yes. KAWAHA: So one through 6 with the amendment? BAKER: With the amendment. No. 6 is amended now from 12 to 6. KAWAHA: Okay. Commissioner Souza? SOUZA: Aye. KAWAHA: Commissioner Smith? GIFFIN: No, I seconded. KAWAHA: Oh, I'm sorry. Commissioner Giffin? GIFFIN: Aye. KAWAHA: Commissioner Fujikawa? FUJIKAWA: Aye. KAWAHA: Commissioner Kubota? 18 KUBOTA: Aye. KAWAHA: Commissioner Mina? MINA: Aye. KAWAHA: Commissioner Mosher? MOSHER: Aye. KAWAHA: Commissioner Smith? SMITH: No. KAWAHA: Chairman Baker? BAKER: Aye. KAWAHA: Chairman, there are seven ayes, one no. Motion has been carried. BAKER: Now we need a motion to accept the recommendation of the Planning Director with the changes in there to go to the County Council. Is that correct, Alice? KAWAHA: Yeah. The, it would be, that's right, where, this proposed ordinance with the amendments. BAKER: With the amendments we just passed KAWAHA: Yes. BAKER: To be forwarded to the County Council. GIFFIN: Yes. MOSHER: Do you have any idea when it will be on the Council's agenda and when we can anticipate all of these applications coming in, what month next year? KAWAHA: I believe, well, Councilman Tyler initiated the proposed ordinance; and I'm pretty sure he's trying to move that GIFFIN: This year? KAWAHA: Yes, before the new Council people come in. 19 BAKER: So someone making a motion? MOSHER: I move that we adjourn for lunch. BAKER: Okay. KAWAHA: No, were we going to take the motion? JEREMIAH: You need another motion to adopt the recommendation. MOSHER: Were we going to take the motion? MOSHER: Oh, I'm sorry. SOUZA: Mr. Chairman, I move that we approve the amendments to Chapter 25 as recommended by Planning Commission, plus those amendments, Planning Director, plus those amendments we approved today. MINA: I second. BAKER: Okay, a motion was made by Commissioner Souza and a second by Commissioner Mina that we send a favorable consideration to the County Council on Chapter 25, Zoning Code, and relating to the B&B breakfast establishments, with the recommendations of the Planning Director and with the amendments that we have agreed to today. Any discussion? Hearing none, staff. KAWAHA: Okay. Commissioner Souza? SOUZA: Aye. KAWAHA: Commissioner Mina? MINA: Aye. KAWAHA: Commissioner Fujikawa? FUJIKAWA: Aye. KAWAHA: Commissioner Giffin? GIFFIN: Aye. KAWAHA: Commissioner Kubota? 20 KUBOTA: Aye. KAWAHA: Commissioner Mosher? MOSHER: Aye. KAWAHA: Commissioner Smith? SMITH: No. KAWAHA: Chainnan Baker? BAKER: Aye. KAWAHA: Chairman, there are seven ayes, one no. Motion has been carried. The discussion ended at 12:34 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon M. Nomura, Secretary 21 ~r COUNTY COUNCIL PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 25, RELATING TO BED AND BREAKFAST ESTABLISHMENT The proposed amendments include allowing bed and breakfast establishments also in an ohana dwelling and thereby eliminating the ohana dwelling limitation, eliminating the plan approval requirements, eliminating the limitation of the number of bedrooms, allowing an additional 12-month period for existing bed and breakfast establishments to submit for the necessary permits, and minor grammatical changes. Concerns raised by Planning Commission as follows: 1. Background Report Page 5, Item #6: Fire Department's comments to 25-4-7(b), relating to standards. Said agency requests to add provisions regarding consideration be given for accessibility of emergency vehicles, fire trucks and ambulances. STAFF'S RESPONSE/RECOMMENDATON: Some of the B&Bs request are more specific so it would be better to address these issues as conditions of the specific permit rather than to be included in an enabling ordinance for all B&Bs. Further, it depends on the location, if it is in a residential azea, in an agricultural district, or the number of rooms. Sometimes the pazameters for looking at these requirements are better in a conditional requirement. 2. Background Report Page 5, Item #8: Department of Land and Natural Resources-Historic Preservation Division's comments to 25-4-7(b)(6), relating to requirement of paved off-street parking. Said agency states that excessive asphalt or concrete paving would destroy the historic landscaping and therefore, requests that paved parking not be required for historic properties and/or include alternative paving materials such as brick, grass pavement and stones. STAFF'S RESPONSE/RECOMMENDATION: When B&Bs were first reviewed and approved about ten years ago, there were strict requirements and it made it cumbersome for the B&Bs to establish themselves. It required road paving to the site in addition to paved parking and driveway. Subsequently however, we realized that B&Bs as defined are considered uses that are accessory to the use of the structure as a dwelling, which means the main use is still a dwelling. Therefore, we do not agree that we should require dwellings to have paved pazking/driveways. According to the Zoning Code, in the RS, RA, FA, A, and IA districts, paved parking is not required and any material may be used for the parking spaces that will eliminate erosion, mud and standing water. NOTE: Public testimony given that there should be a specific paved parking area, not on the grass, only ifthe B&B is a historic structure, so as to protect the historic site. 3. Background Report Page 6, Item #11: Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism's comments to 25-4-7(b)(7), relating to exterior signage. Said agency states that any type of signage should not be permitted, as it alters the character of the residential neighborhood. STAFF'S RESPONSE/RECOMMENDATION: We do not agree with DBED&T. There will be more impacts by the neighborhood if there are no signs because the guests would stop by a neighborhood's house to ask for directions to the B&B establishment. NOTE: Public testimony given in support of signage. 4. 25-4-7(b)(5) states that only breakfast meals may be offered to guests. Commission suggests that breakfast meals should be defined as they have expressed concerns on monitoring/enforcement of operators serving extensive breakfast meals. STAFF'S RESPONSE/RECOMMENDATION: Previous language in the Zoning Code, stated that the operator was limited to serving only continental breakfast. ~ However, this was amended in 1996 with the present language. If the B&B operator served cooked meals, they would have to comply with the Department of Health's requirements. To address this concern, staff recommends the following language: "Only breakfast meals approved by the Department of Health. may be offered to guests." NOTE: Public testimony given that she has to adhere to the Department of Health's regulations. Said agency prescribed to her the kind of breakfast she can serve specifically. 5. Deletion of 25-4-7(b)(4) relating to limitation on no more than five guest bedrooms. Commission expressed that because there is no monitoring/policingpcr se, there may be the temptation to get ten bedrooms and get 20 people. Therefore, the limitation on the number of bedrooms should be retained. 6. 25-4-7(d) relating to additional twelve months for existing B&Bs to secure permits. Commission expressed that to allow an additiona112 months for existing B&Bs to secure their required permits of approvals is too lenient, as grace period was previously given. HCouncilB&BOl.agk-7/ 10/00 COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT BACKGROUND REPORT COUNTY COUNCIL INITIATED PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 25 (ZONING CODE), HAWAII O NTY OD .RELATING TO BED AND B FA FACT TAB I HM NTR The County Council has submitted proposed Bill No. 240 amending Chapter 25, Zoning Code, relating to Bed and Breakfast establishments. The proposed bill includes allowing bed and breakfast establishments also in an ohana dwelling and thereby eliminating the ohana dwelling limitation, eliminating the plan approval requirement, eliminating the limitation of the number of bedrooms, allowing an additional 12-month period for existing bed and breakfast establishments to submit for the necessazy permits, and minor grammatical changes. (See Exhibit A) 1. After further review of Bill No. 240, the following aze the purpose and proposed amendments to Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawaii County Code, relating to Section 25-1-5(b)13, Article 1, relative to Definitions; Section 25-2-23, Article 2, a relative to Plan Approval for Bed and Breakfast establishments; and Section 25-4-7, Article 4, relative to Bed and Breakfast Establishments. The intent of the amendments is as follows: a. To allow a bed and breakfast establishment within two (2) dwellings and a guest house on a building site. This is clazified in that a bed and breakfast establishment may be located within a single family dwelling, second dwelling unit, and/or guest house. A second dwelling unit is a separate or attached unit and may include an ohana dwelling. It is further clarified that a guest house is defined and restricted in accordance with the Zoning Code as follows: 1) Section 25-1-5(b)(55) - "Guest house means an accessory building used as sleeping quarters for guests by the occupants of the main dwelling and having no cooking facilities." 2) Section 25-4-9. Guest houses. "One guest house may only be established on a building site that is at least seven thousand five hundred square feet in area. A guest house shall not exceed five hundred squaze feet in gross floor area, shall not be more than twenty feet in height, and shall not have a kitchen." Therefore to clazify further, the variations for a bed and breakfast establishment could be: within the operator's dwelling, one additional dwelling and a guest house; within two permitted dwellings and a guest house; within a duplex dwelling and a guest house; within the operator's dwelling and a guest house; within the second dwelling and a guest house; within only the operator's dwelling; within only the second dwelling unit; or within only the guest house. b. To delete the Plan Approval provision for bed and breakfast establishment. Bed and breakfast establishment is already a permitted use within the RD, RM, RCX, V, CN, CG and CV. However, plan approval is required for all new structures and additions to existing structures in those districts. For Use Permit and Special Permit, the applicant is already required to submit the proposed plans with the application and most of the information required by Plan Approval. If further information is needed, the applicant could reflect those on the required plot plan, including landscaping, pazking, etc. With regards to documentation relating to transient accommodations tax license and general excise tax license, compliance with requirements of Department of Health and Americans with Disabilities (ADA), one of the conditions of approval for a permit is that the applicant needs to comply with all applicable agency requirements. c. To clarify that bed and breakfast establishment is not listed as permitted use within the RA, FA, and A zone districts. To clarify that in the RA, FA, and A districts that are within the state land use urban district, bed and breakfast establishment may be permitted provided a use permit is obtained for such use. -2- d. To delete the limitation on the number of guest bedrooms but retain the maximum number of guests (10) permitted within the bed and breakfast establishment at any one time. e. To clarify that serving of breakfast meals is to only registered guests on the building site, and further clarify the term "food service establishment" such as restaurants. f. To delete the limitation that bed and breakfast establishment is not permitted on a building site where an ohana dwelling was approved. The proposed bill is to also allow bed and breakfast establishment within a second dwelling unit, which may include an ohana dwelling. g. To allow an additional twelve (12) months for existing bed and breakfast establishments to secure the required permits or approvals. 2. Therefore, the following are the proposed amendments, including some grammatical changes: a. Section 25-1-5(b)13: Allow a bed and breakfast establishment within a single family dwelling, second dwelling unit, and/or guest house. Add reference to Section 25-4-9 relating to guest house to be consistent with Section 25-4-7(b)(3) and to clarify the restrictions of a guest house in accordance with the Zoning Code. b. Section 25-2-23: Delete in its entirety the plan approval requirements for bed and breakfast establishments. c. Section 25-4-7(a): Clarify that RA, FA, and A districts do not permit bed and breakfast establishment. However, further clarify that 1ZA, FA, and A districts within the state land use urban district, bed and breakfast establishment may be permitted provided a use permit is obtained. d. Section 25-4-7 (b)(1) -Clarify that a bed and breakfast establishment is subordinate and incidental to the principal residence use, and would not change the character of the surrounding area. -3- e. Section 25-4-7 (b)(2) -Reference to only operator rather than make a distinction between owner-operator and lessee-operator. f. Section 25-4-7 (b)(3) -Clarify that a bed and breakfast establishment may be located within all three or a combination of a single family dwelling, second dwelling unit and/or a guest house. g. Section 25-4-7 (b)(4) and (5) -Delete reference to limitation of number of bedrooms. h. Section 25-4-7 (b)(7) - Add the wording "on the building site" to clarify that the registered guests refer to only those guests on the building site. Also to clarify food service establishment such as a restaurant. i. Section 25-4-7 (b)(9) - Change the wording from "this code" to "the Hawaii County Code" to clarify Chapter 3 as set forth in the Hawaii County Code. j. Section 25-4-7 (c) -Delete in its entirety as the proposal is to allow bed and breakfast establishment within a second dwelling unit, which may include an ohana dwelling as per the Zoning Code definition. k. Section 25-4-7 (d) -Proposal is to delete requirement for plan approval and thus require the securance of the necessary permits or approvals. 1. Section 25-4-7 (e) - Provide an additional 12-month period for existing Bed and Breakfast establishments to secure the required permits andlor approvals. AGENCIES' COMMENTS 3. Department of Public Works -Engineering Division (May 12, 2000 Memo): "We have reviewed the subject application forwarded by your memo dated Apri127, 2000 and have the following comments. 1. All building construction shall conform to current code requirements. 2. The minimum setback shall be maintained as follows: residential structures - 3 ft. side and 3 ft. rear; commercial structures - 5 ft. side and 5 ft. rear." 4. Department of Water Supply (May 17, 2000 Memo): "We have reviewed the proposed bill and have no specific comments on its contents. -4- "For your information, as a part of the special permit review process for those seeking to operate a bed and breakfast and who have a water service with the Department, we require that they install a backflow preventer as a condition of obtaining the special permit. 5. Police Department (May 11, 2000 Memo): "Staff has reviewed the above-referenced amendment and has no comments or objections to offer at this time." 6. Fire Department (May 23, 2000 Memo): "Request that another section be added under (b), stating that consideration be given for accessibility of emergency vehicles, fire trucks, and ambulances (UFC 10.207): 1) width of pavement, 2) grade, 3) turning radius; and proximity of water source (UFC 10.301): 1) hydrant, 2) catchment." 7. Office of Housing and Community Development (May 5, 2000 Memo): "The Office of Housing and Community Development (OHCD) has reviewed the subject request and offers no comments or objections. "Thank you for the opportunity to comment." 8. Department of Land and Natural Resources, Historic Preservation Division (May 19, 2000 Letter): "Thank you for your transmittal on proposed Bill No. 240. We encourage the rehabilitation of historic property as bed & breakfast establishments as this activity seems to have minimal impact on the historic character of these properties. Our only comment is in regards to Item (b)(6). While we understand the need for off-street parking, we would prefer to have some alternatives added to the paving materials or parking requirements for historic property. Historic properties often include historic landscaping that would be destroyed by excessive asphalt or concrete paving. We recommend including historic property as an exemption, along with property in RS, RA, FA and A districts, for paved parking stalls and/or include additional paving materials such as brick, grass pavement and stones as alternatives. "Thank you for the opportunity to comment." 9. Department of Transportation (June 15, 2000 Letter): "Thank you for providing us with the County Council initiated bill for our review. -5- "The proposal to amend the zoning code with respect to Bed and Breakfast establishments will not impact our State highway facilities." 10. State Land Use Commission (May 3, 2000 Letter): " We have reviewed the subject document forwarded by your memorandum dated Apri127, 2000, and have no comments to offer at this time. "We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the subject document." 11. Department of Business, Economic Development & Tourism (May 22, 2000 Letter): " We find Section 25-4-7(b)(7) that addresses the use of exterior signage for bed and breakfast establishments to be contradictory and not in keeping with Section 25-4-7 (b)(1), that requires that bed and breakfast establishments not alter or be detrimental to the character of the surrounding area. Since most bed and breakfast establishments are in residential neighborhoods, signage of any type should not be permitted, as signage on a residential dwelling ~ alter the character of the establishment and the surrounding area. We should follow the example of other communities where bed and breakfast establishments prosper without the need for external advertising. "Thank you for providing us the opportunity to comment on the proposed amendment. " AGENCIES - NO RESPONSE 12. Civil Defense, Department of Parks and Recreation, Real Property Tax Office, Department of Land and Natural Resources -Land Division, Department of Health, Department of Agriculture, and Natural Soil Conservation Service PUBLIC COMMENT 13. The department has not received any comments from the Hawaii Island Bed & Breakfast Association nor from the general public on the proposed amendment. -6- (0,µ1Y Of Hqw'' iS~~f~t,' )1~A.IV LEITHEAU~'I'ODD - ~~6~~. Phone: (808) 961-8261 Councilmembcr ~ ~ FAX: (808) 969-3291 cur°'.; z: a' ~TF O.'.N'pJ~ COUNTY COUNC_IIa County of Hawaii Hawaii County Building _ G 25Aupuni Street '^;n~ Hilo, Hawaii 96720 c,`,=~",~-a; r~, April 19, 2000 ~ ~j.~~? ~ ~ '3 r30(~~ c~ + 1 L. L i ` t~tEifiT?' OF HANlAIf YtAnMJPfG c~ DEl'I; \c'.. ~ TO: Richard B. Baker, Jr., Chair \-~~'•~~L Planning Commission FR: Bobby Jean Leithead-Todd, Chair t\4~ Planning Committee RE: Communication No. 734, Bill No. 240 Relating to Bed and Breakfast Establishments At the April 18, 2000 Planning Committee meeting, it was unanimously voted upon to refer the aforementioned bill to the Planning Commission as designated in the Hawaii County Zoning Code, Chapter 25 of the Hawaii County Code. Bill No. 240 was drafted by Council Member Curtis Tyler, and includes some minor grammatical changes and eliminates the plan approval requirements. Our Committee did not entertain any discussion on this measure. Should you have any questions, please feel free to call either myself at extension 8261 or Barbara Hashimoto at extension 8493. encl. n. EXHIBIT , COUNTY OF HAWAII~.~ ~ STATE OF HAWAII BILL NO. 21, 0 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 25, OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983 {1995 EDITION), RELATING TO BED AND BREAKFAST ESTABLISHMENTS. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII: SECTION 1. Section 25-4-7, Article 4, Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawaii County Code is amended as follows: "Section 25-4-7. Bed and breakfast establishments. (a) Bed and breakfast establishments shall be permitted in the RD, RM, RCX, RA, FA, A, V, CN, CG and CV districts, provided that plan approval for any bed and breakfast establishment is secured from the director [prior to the establishment of such use]. A bed and breakfast establishment may be permitted in the RS districts provided that a use permit is obtained for each such use [and that plan approval for each such use has been secured from the director]. A special permit shall also be required for any bed and breakfast establishment located in either the state land use rural or agricultural districts. (b) A bed and [bed] breakfast establishment shall be subject to the following [restrictions and] standards: (1) The bed and breakfast establishment shall be [accessory and] subordinate and cleazly or customarily incidental to the principal use as a residence by its [owners] owner or lessee[.] and not alter or be detrimental to the chazacter of the surrounding area. 1 (2) The owner-operator or lessee-operator of the bed and breakfast establishment shall reside on the same building site as that being used for the bed and breakfast establishment. For purposes of this section, alessee-operator means a lessee holding a lease of five years or more[,] for the residence and land on which the bed and breakfast establishment is located. (3) The bed and breakfast establishment may be located on a building site within a single-family dwelling unit, [and a] guest house ~ pursuant to section 25-4-9), [on a building site.] and/or ohana dwelling. [(4) The bed and breakfast establishment shall contain no more than five guest bedrooms for rent to guests. (5) In the RS and RD districts, the minimum lot size for a bed and breakfast establishment with three to five guest bedrooms shall be fifteen thousand square feet, and any lot less than fifteen thousand square feet shall not have more than two guest bedrooms. In the RA, FA and A districts, the minimum lot size for a bed and breakfast establishment with three to five guest bedrooms shall be the minimum lot size specified for the applicable zoning district.] [(6)]~ The maximum number of guests permitted within a bed and breakfast establishment at any one time shall be ten. [(7)]js~ Only breakfast meals may be offered to guests. The serving of breakfast for a fee to individuals other than registered guests shall be prohibited. Abed and breakfast establishrr~ -a shall not operate as a food service establishment, unless a food service establishment (i.e. a restaurant) is listed as a permitted use within the zoning district[.] and the required germits have been acouired. [(8)]~ One paved (with concrete, asphalt concrete surface or chip-seal) off-street parking stall shall be provided for each guest bedroom, in addition to the required stall(s) for the 2 dwelling unit[: provided] e, xcent that in the RS, RA, FA and A districts paved parking stalls shall not be required as long as the material used for the parking stalls.will eliminate erosion, mud and standing water within the parking stall area. [(9)](7~ Exterior signage which advertises the dwelling as a bed and breakfast establishment shall comply with the requirements for residential signage as set forth in chapter 3 (advertising and signs) of this code. [(c) No bed and breakfast establishment shall be permitted on any building site on which an ohana dwelling, approved by the director, is situated.] [(d)] ~ Any bed and breakfast establishment which has not received [plan approval] the required permits shall be considered illegal under this chapter[.], unless otherwise noted herein. [(e)] ~ Any bed and breakfast establishment existing as of the effective date [of adoption] of this section[, which conforms] and conformin¢ to the standards contained in section 25-4-7(b)[, and) which has not received [plan approval, and, as applicable, has not been issued either a special permit or a use permit] the permits required under section 25-4-7 (a) may continue [as anon-conforming] such use [until September 30, 1997, at which time any such] for twelve months followine the effective date of this section. After this date continued use without [receipt of plan approval and, as applicable, a use permit or a special permit,l havine submitted the necessary permit applications shall be considered illegal under this chapter. [Prior to June 30, 1997, any person may apply for plan approval and for a use permit or a special permit for any bed and breakfast establishment existing as r,f the date of adoption of this section conforming to the standards of section 25-4-7(b) and not otherwise permitted, and upon issuance of the required permits and approvals, the use shall be considered a permitted use.] 3 [(f)] ~ The conditions contained in any use permit issued for a bed and breakfast establishment prior to the adoption of this section shall continue to apply to the bed and breakfast establishment, notwithstanding provisions to the contrary contained in this section." SECTION 2. Material to be repealed is bracketed. New material is underscored. In printing this ordinance, the brackets, bracketed material and underscoring need not be included. SECTION 3. If any provision of this ordinance, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance, is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end, the provisions of this ordinance are declared to be severable. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall take effect upon its approval. pTRODUCED BY~ U ~pli \ V COUNC MBER, CO TY OF HAWAII Hilo, Hawaii Date of Introduction: Date of 1~` Reading: Date of 2nd Reading: Effective Date: ZEFERENCE: Comm. 734 a „YY O! NY,~ J. CURTIS TYLER, III ~ ; .Tel: (808) 961-8273 - ~ RCr' Cowmilmemher 'Fax: (808}969-3291 `.R aR NR. r COUNTY COUNCIL ~ (,Otl)41J Of t'IAiUAl7 Huroaii County Building 25 Aupurti Street April 4, 2000 Hilo, Haroaii 9n720 TO: James Y. Arakaki, Chair FROM: J. Curtis Tyler III Councilmember RE: Amendment to Zoning Code, Chapter 25 Relating to Bed and Breakfast Establishments (Section 25-4-7) Please refer the attached bill regarding Bed and Breakfast Establishments to the Planning Committee for further discussion and consideration. The bill, which has been reviewed and approved by the Corporation Counsel, includes some minor grammatical changes and eliminates the plan approval requirements. Thank you for referring this important matter. If you or your staff have any questions, please feel free to call me. Att. i3- 11 Comm. ro. _ 73 File No. /ZN& Ref. To: J'G Ref. Date APR 0 5 2000 77-6399 Nalani St., Suite 1-A Kailua-Kona, Hawaii 96740 Kona Telephone: (808) 326-5684 Fax: (808) 326-5697 :,PF.-18-5E 11:15 f+M R.. E. LHNI 9EfE F'. X31 COUIIiy COUnCII ` 1:_ , County of Hawaii Hawaii County Building ~O ~li'i 1 ` ?i"~ 1 ? ~ j 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawaii 96720 ~ : To the Attention of: Bobbi Jean Leithead Todd and Council Members From Terry & Ginger Neumann Board members -Hawaii Island Bed & Breakfast Association Re: Amendment to Zoning Code, Chapter 25 Relating to Bed & Breakfast Establishments (Section 25.4.7) The above mentioned amendment is of great interest and importance to us and the other members of our board and association. The changes made are most beneficial and take into consideration the necessity to simplify the process for all concerned in the permit process. We promote a high code of ethics within our group, giving our members pride while helping them to establish fine accommodations for a certain group of tourists who travel to our wonderful island. We deeply appreciate your time and attention to this matter and believe that the changes will be of great benefit to the County where taxes are concemed. The Bed & Breakfast Industry on our island adds important tax dollars to the benefit of our county. Our income is most often spent on this island as well as guest expenditures, which benefit local business such as restaurants, shops, and tourist sites. The Hawaii Island Bed & Breakfast Association supports this bill and we would like to thank you for the time you are spending in review of it, Respectfully submitted, Terry and Ginger Neumann Kailua-Kona Comm. No, 3 •,~yy00/ File No. /•/GC, /Z/V(a, Ref. To:~ xee. Date APR 1 8 ~ ~~~~~c 131 Ka'iulani Street Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Phone/fax (808) 934.8002 Reservations: (800) 627.8447 From: Barbara Andersen, owner Date: September 14, 2000 To: Hawai' i County Planning Commissioners Re: Proposed bi11240, revisions to amend Chapter 25 (PARKING AREA TREATMENTS FOR HISTORIC HOMES AS B&B's) When I testified before you on July 21s`, here in Hilo, I bad not yet read the letter from the Office of Historic Preservation, and I had misunderstood what the letter was about. I frilly agree with the Office of Historic Preservation. Each historic building that applies for a B&B use permit should be looked at individually when it comes to determining the parking area stiuface. One needs to keep the parking area appropriate to the historic nahue of both the house and its landscaping. Each historic house has its own character, and the surface materiaUh•eahnent should be determined with that unique style in mind. One of the rules of historic preservation is that IF changes need to be made to the original, they must be as close as possible to what would have fit in with the time period or architectural style. I found the different surface area suggestions made by the Historic Preservation Office to be interesting, creative and appealing. Historic buildings in Hawaii are a special part of our legacy, as well as au important 'draw' for the eco-tourist who wants to see the "real" Hawaii. It is very important that we do everything possible to preserve quid maintain our historic buildings for resident and visitor alike. G ~ mtg by S` y,;~~ ~1 at ~,E.~ $ ~ Read CQPY 05-11-00 13:33 FrarKIKK03 LA + T-944 P.01/02 F-996 rI 2000 SEP 11 FP1 `4 22 PLANNING DFEARTMENT September 11, 2000 COUNTY OF HAWAII Ta: Alice Kawaha From :Len Sutton Rc : Testimony fur County Council Bill # 240 To be heard at the Pl:utning Commission Hearing on September 15 - Item # 6 Ucar Alice - Please accept this fax as written testimony for the abuve mentioned. lam currently of Island and wil! be unable to attend this meeting. Can you make the appropriate copies cf my testimony and make sure the Commission Members, and Vuginia Goldstein receive topics Very 't'ruly Yours Len Sutton C ~,~ti~,~~:ai~. 09-11-09 13:33 Fran-KIKKOS ' LA + T-944 P.81/02 F-886 September 11, 2000 2~~0 SEP 11 F~1 w 22 PIJ~NNING ~~~F tPtAVAUT COUNTY O pear Sir or Madattt - My natus is Len Sutcoa anti I own and operate 'tlts Inn at ICulaniapia". We art a County permitted I3td arui ]3rtalcfast and have been in operntion for two years this last august. I am writing ronctrniag [he proposed wording that is under deliberation by your commission - County Council bill#240 -that has been sputtssred by Cums Tyler. law very much in agreement with tits proposed wording and would urge rhos commission to vote ro pass these amendntsnrs us ptoposrtl and make them the pertttaucra rules governing Bed And Breakfast on [ht Island of Hawaii. By adopting [hose measures the County will improving the unders[anDability of existing rules, regulation. and guidelines chat detirte our industry and imptntie the pro~~ess of coming on ling as a legal Bed and Breakfast. tf tttcse establishmetus are properly reg~l:rted by the County and enforced by priva[e organizations such ax H1BBA, [htn this •'cot[age" industry will prosper. My own quest for my B&B permit was a tortuous, embarrassing, and Difficult road that was almos[ impossible ro navigate as tits talcs and guidelines changed ofrtn anti sornedmes without apparent logic. I bslieve drat this Bill clarifies the existing wording in a posilivs way, allowing the talcs to be mom easily interpreted and zufoRcd and gives all of us firm guidelines to follow. Wtth the passags oT'this Rill. B&cB's Island wide will have an opportunity to bectame legal. Membership into HISBA as of January 1, 2Wl will require a t'ut[niy Permi[, or [lee owners must be involved in the pertait[ing process. This would b.: an irruntdiate resul[ of the successful passage of BiU +Y 240_ Very Truly Yours Lcn Sutton PLANNING DEPARTMENT COUNTY COUNCIL PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 25, RELATING TO BED AND BREAKFAST ESTABLISHMENT The proposed amendments include allowing bed and breakfast establishments also in an ohana dwelling and thereby eliminating the ohana dwelling limitation, eliminating the plan approval requirements, eliminating the limitation of the number of bedrooms, allowing an additional 12-month period for existing bed and breakfast establishments to submit for the necessary permits, and minor grammatical changes. Concerns raised by Planning Commission as follows: 1. Background Report Page 5, Item #6: Fire Department's comments to 25-4-7(b), relating to standards. Said agency requests to add provisions regarding consideration be given for accessibility of emergency vehicles, fire trucks and ambulances. STAFF'S RESPONSE/RECOMMENDATON: Some of the B&Bs request are more specific so it would be better to address these issues as conditions of the specific permit rather than to be included in an enabling ordinance for all B&Bs. Further, it depends on the location, if it is in a residential area, in an agricultural district, or the number of rooms. Sometimes the parameters for looking at these requirements are better in a conditional requirement. 2. Background Report Page 5, Item Department of Land and Natural Resources-Historic Preservation Division's comments to 25-4-7(b)(6), relating to requirement of paved off-street parking. Said agency states that excessive asphalt or concrete paving would destroy the historic landscaping and therefore, requests that paved parking not be required for historic properties and/or include alternative paving materials such as brick, grass pavement and stones. STAFF'SRESPONSE/RECOMMENDATION: When B&Bs were first reviewed and approved about ten years ago, there were strict requirements and it made it cumbersome for the B&Bs to establish themselves. It required road paving to the site in addition to paved parking and driveway. Subsequently however, we realized that B&Bs as defined are considered uses that are accessory to the use of the structure as a dwelling, which means the main use is still a dwelling. Therefore, we do not agree that we should require dwellings to have paved parking/driveways. According to the Zoning Code, in the RS, RA, FA, A, and IA districts, paved parking is not required and any material maybe used for the parking spaces that will eliminate erosion, mud and standing water. NOTE: Public testimony given that there should be a specific paved pazking area, not on the grass, only if the B&B is a historic structure, so as to protect the historic site. 3. Background Report Page 6, Item #11: Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism's comments to 25-4-7(b)(TJ, relating to exterior signage. Said agency states that any type of signage should not be permitted, as it alters the character of the residential neighborhood. STAFF'S RESPONSE/RECOMMENDATION: We do not agree with DBED&T. There will be more impacts by the neighborhood if there are no signs because the guests would stop by a neighborhood's house to ask for directions to the B&B establishment. NOTE: Public testimony given in support of signage. 4. 25-4-7(b)(5) states that only breakfast meals may be offered to guests. Commission suggests that breakfast meals should be defined as they have expressed concerns on monitoring/enforcement of operators serving extensive breakfast meals. STAFF'S RESPONSE/RECOMMENDATION: Previous language in the Zoning Code, stated that the operator was limited to serving only continental breakfast. However, this was amended in 1996 with the present language. If the B&B operator served cooked meals, they would have to comply with the Depaztment of Health's requirements. To address this concern, staff recommends the following language: "Only breakfast meals,~pproved by the Department of Health. may be offered to guests." NOTE: Public testimony given that she has to adhere to the Department of Health's regulations. Said agency prescribed to her the kind of breakfast she can serve specifically. 5. Deletion of 25-4-7(b)(4) relating to limitation on no more than five guest bedrooms. Commission expressed that because there is no monitoring/policingper se, there may be the temptation to get ten bedrooms and get 20 people. Therefore, the limitation on the number of bedrooms should be retained. 6. 25-4-7(d) relating to additional twelve months for existing B&Bs to secure permits. Commission expressed that to allow an additional 12 months for existing B&Bs to secure their required permits of approvals is too lenient, as grace period was previously given. Hawaii Planning Commission In reference to: Proposed Bill No. 240 and revisions to amend Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawaii County Code relating to Bed and Breakfast establishments. 'GO JUL 31 Ail 11 32 Terry and Meredith Neumann COUNTY OF HAWAII 74-4969 Kealakaa Street P L A N N I Pd G DEPT. Kailua-Kona, Hawaii 96740 K t7 Pd A O F F I C E Written individual Testimony -Open Hearing on August 4, 2000 -Number 8 on the agenda (open hearing) We will attend the meeting and be available to answer questions. We aze members, aswell as co-chairs of Governmental Affairs, of the Hawaii Island Bed & Breakfast Association and have worked with Councilmen Tyler and Pisicchio on Proposed Bill No. 240 over the last year. The Bed & Breakfast Industry in Hawaii is a necessary component of the Tourist Industry. In the past this industry seems to have been perceived as a hobby for empty nesters, while in reality, it is one of the oldest and most respected tourist accommodations in the United States. As the industry in Hawaii is still very young, there seems to be a reasonable amount of suspicion regarding these types of accommodations, when in reality a Bed & Breakfast serves the needs of many who wish to experience what it is `really' like to live in Hawaii. It would never be assumed that every tourist traveling to our islands would choose the same hotel, the same snorkel tour, the same tour bus, the same restaurant and it follows that not all tourists choose to stay in hotels and resorts, perhaps preferring a smaller, less congested accommodation. As diverse as our island is, so too are the travelers to our islands. In regazds to Bed & Breakfast establishments as a whole, they should be perceived as an asset to any community, by virtue of the fact that they must and do keep their property and grounds in pristine condition compared to the average home. This is necessary for the success of the business. Compared to a residence of similar size they are quieter and have fewer car trips per driving age person as is evidenced by almost any residential neighborhood in the State of Hawaii. Bed & Breakfast establishments have another wonderful asset. Being locally owned and operated. Almost all the money generated is spent in the local community and they also support many other local businesses, such as restaurants, sport fishing charters and tour companies without compensation. Bed & Breakfast establishments PaX their property taxes. As an important facet of the tourism industry, we would like to be viewed as professionals. Ow average work day can often be 10 hours or more. This cannot be considered a hobby, but a serious business in which we take pride. This new Bill has been a wonderful collaborative effort on the part of some of the members of the County Council, the Planning Department, members of many of our public agencies and members of the Hawaii Island Bed & Breakfast Association. The members of our association are grateful for all the time and effort given by those who we realize have the responsibility of many issues with regazds to running our County. Because the past zoning codes regarding B&Bs had inconsistencies and was difficult to interpret, we feel this new Bill will serve to make the permit process more cleazly defined, making it easier for individuals who wish to operate a Bed & Breakfast establishment, to obtain the necessary permits and meet the requirements in a timely fashion. In closing we wish to thank you for giving us this opportunity to express our opinions and give suggestions on something so critically important to us. Kerry and Linda Greathouse 2Q0~ J'J~ 31 P~1 2 55 P.o. BoX I27 Mountain View. HI 96771 p~p,NNI~G DEPARTMEN COUN (Y OF HAWA11 July 29, 2000 County of Hawaii Planning Commission Dear Planning Commission Members: We support proposed bi11240 and the revisions to amend chapter 25 (zoning code) of the Hawai i County Code relating to Bed and Breakfast establishments. The new bill and amendments should remove some of the ambiguity that is currently present in our county Bed and Breakfast regulations. Clarity in the B&B regulations is an important step in improving the relationship between our businesses in Hawaii County, the Planning Department and Planning Commission. Sincerely, Kerry Greathouse HIBBA Treasurer and Linda Greathouse Hale Nui Bed and Breakfast