Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN LAAC 2025/07/22 (2024-2026) DRAFT Committee on Legislative Approvals and Acquisitions 12th Session West Hawaii Civic Center 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Highway, Building A Kailua-Kona, Hawaii July 22, 2025 CALL TO The regular meeting of the Committee on Legislative Approvals and Acquisitions ORDER: was called to order at 1:04 p.m., in the Council Chambers, Kailua-Kona, by Ms. Heather L. Kimball, Chair. ROLL CALL: Present: Ms. Heather L. Kimball, Chair Mr. Dennis "Fresh" Onishi, Vice Chair(came in"later) Mr. James E. Hustace, Member Ms. Jenn Kagiwada,Member Ms. Ashley L. KierkieWicz, Member(videocofiference from Hilo) Ms. Rebecca Villegas, Member Absent& Excused: Ms. Michelle Galimba, Member Mr. Holeka Goro Inaba, Member Mr. Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Member STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, FROM THE Statements from the Public on Agenda Items. PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS: (There were none.) BILLS FOR The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, ORDNI ACES: Bills for Ordinances, LAAC-12 July 22,2025 Bill 67: AMENDS SECTION 25-8-33 (CITY OF HILO ZONE MAP) ARTICLE 8, CHAPTER 25 (ZONING) OF THE HAWAI`I COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), BY CHANGING THE ZONE MAP CLASSIFICATION FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL -10,000 SQUARE FEET (RS-10) TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL-10,000 SQUARE FEET (CG-10) AT WAIAKEA, SOUTH HILO, HAWAI`I, COVERED BY TAX MAP KEY: 2-2-022:022 (Applicant: Correa Ohana, LLC) (Area: 33,180 square feet) The Windward Planning Commission forwards its favorable recommendation for the requested change of zone, which would allow the applicant to demolish the existing single-family dwelling and garage and construct a multi-family apartment complex. The property is located at 1198 Kirio`ole Street-, Reference:_ Comm. 375 Intr. by; Council Member Kimball (B/ ) and Comm. 375.1: From Planning Director Jeffrey Darrow; dated June 24, 2025, transmitting a PowerPoint presentation for Bill 67. Motion to Approve: Ms. Kagiwada moved to recommend passage of Bill 67 on first reading. Seconded'by Mr. Hustace. CHR. KIMBALL: At this time I would like to invite Director and the Deputy Director of the Planning Department to come up and present. I don't know if you need assistance connecting the slides. If everyone can just bear with us one moment while we get the Planning Department set up. While we are waiting I just want,to make note to folks there's a Communication in your pinkies 375.2, which is a,supplemental map to Bill 67. This corrects an error in the map. Mr. Clerk, should this be treated as an amendment because it's a new exhibit? Nei. Okay. Thank you. Council Member Kierkiewicz, can you see the slide deck on your screen? MS. KIERKIEWICZ: I can see it. Thank you. CHR. KIMBALL: Perfect. Alright we'll go ahead and go into the presentation. Director. (Note: At this time, Planning Director Jeffrey Darrow and Deputy Director Michelle Ahn came forward and provided a PowerPoint presentation to the members of the Committee. For viewing of the subject presentation, see the DVD copy of the meeting proceedings on file in the Clerk's Office, or online at http://hawaiicounty.gov.granicus.com. A copy of the PowerPoint presentation is made a part of the record, see Comm. 375.1.) Page 2 LAAC-12 July 22,2025 CHR. KIMBALL: Thank you, Director. And do we have the applicant available? MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Chair. I just want to confirm that the applicant, Mr. Correa and his son are both here in Hilo Chambers and we have Deputy Corporation Counsel for Planning Jean Campbell also present. Thank you. CHR. KIMBALL: Thank you very much, Council Member Kierkiewicz. So if there are any additional remarks that the applicant would like to make before deliberations, you're welcome to do so now. (Note: At this time, Applicants Hank Correa and Hank Correa III came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. CORREA: Well, as Jeff said, good morning to everyone. I should say good afternoon. CHR. KIMBALL: Good morning. If you could just introduce yourself for the record. MR. CORREA: Yeah: This is Hank Correa." I'm the managing member of Correa Ohana. MR. CORREA III: I'm Hank Correa III, I'm here on behalf of the applicant. MR. CORREA: So no, we don't have any further statements. If there's any questions we'd lave to answer them. CHR. KIMBALL;: Alright. We will move forward then with deliberations. Starting over here in Kona. Questions? Council Member Kagiwada. MS:KAGIWADA: Thank you. Alright. This is kind of a little remedial but bear with me. This is'not a question for the applicant but for the department. In order to do the proposed multi-family housing; is that what you would call it, multi- family housing? MR. DARROW: Yes. MS: KAGIWADA: It is required that this go to general commercial 10,000? MR. DARROW: It doesn't have to, but the general commercial gives a wide variety of options that can be done as part of this particular project if needed. The multi-family residential zoning allows very little flexibility as far as the addition of any type of accessory commercial or options as far as that. Right now it appears that this developer is proposing to do multi-family. I think what he was looking at was being consistent with the area. The area right in that particular Page 3 LAAC-12 July 22,2025 section of Hilo is mainly general commercial so he was following that particular pattern that is being established in that area. MS. KAGIWADA: Isn't the yellow; isn't that residential 10 (acres)? MR. DARROW: Correct. That's the original zoning, but you see the transition of the general commercial. MS. KAGIWADA: Okay. I know that like you said going to commercial allows a lot of flexibility so we're voting basically to allow,the possibility of commercial here instead of what is actually being talked,about right now. Is that correct if we change the zoning to commercial? MR. DARROW: And that's been our message pretty much whenever we come before the commissions and the Council with it comes to change of zones, that we look at it as we're approving the zoning. We're not necessarily approving a project. The applicant is required by the Code as well as the application to present a project but at any given time something could change, and the zoning could allow other types of uses permitted in that zoning. MS. KAGIWADA: Okay. And the reason that I guess your recommendation wasn't necessarily to go with the multifamily is because there isn't a lot of multi- family in this area. Is that your thoughtprocess on that? MR. DARROW: I mean, normally the applicant proposes the zoning. We may, you know, I don't recall a time where we, not to say there wasn't, but I don't recall a time where we said we will support this and not that. Normally they propose it, we look at it, we look At the criteria, if it meets the criteria we'll support it'andthat's mentioned in this particular area. A majority of the zonings that came in previously were general commercial. MS. KAGIWAI)A: Alright. Okay. Well, Mr. Correa, I do like the project you're proposing. I just have a little bit of concerns about what happens if for some reason that doesn't go through, and you end up then with a zoned commercial area and what that means. So I'd like to hear what other people have to say. But that's just my general thoughts on this. But thank you. The project looks good that you're proposing. I yield. MR. CORREA: Thank you. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Council Member Kagiwada. Anyone else over here in Kona? Seeing none. Checking in with Council Member Kierkiewicz, any questions, comments? MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Yes please, Chair. Thank you. Page 4 LAAC-12 July 22,2025 MS. KIMBALL: Go ahead, Council Member Kierkiewicz. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Aloha, Mr. Correa. Great to see you. Thank you for suggesting this kind of project. There's such a need for housing particularly in the Hilo area. I was curious if you could share with us who the intended audience was for the housing that you proposed? MR. CORREA: You said intended audience; who'd we meet with? MS. KIERKIEWICZ: The intended audience, so who do you envision living in these quarters? MR. CORREA: So I'd like to say we pride ourselves on the fact that we control a great deal of rentals personally and through companies and every one of them at this point meets the affordable housing guidelines as far as set by the County, everyone, and well over 100. So based on the current rentals we have I think the audience, 80 plus percent of mainly local people applying, and it may be even higher than that, but we don't know,you know, until we pursue applicants. So I couldn't say. But as of right now with the pool of rentals that we do have, easy 80 percent of local residents. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: And just based on your experience in the industry it sounds like there is a huge need for affordable rentals in this area. MR. CORREA: No question. I mean, we can post a rental and get 20 applicants in two days. And so there's certainly a need. You know, unfortunately it's become very expensive to do it. We're fortunate that here with my sons we literally,,you know,take it upon ourselves. I was in a trench this morning putting in a water lateral with'my two boys on another housing project that we're doing. So luckily we can keep prices down in the sense of cost. And our ultimate goal, you know, hoping we can work with housing is to,you know, certainly do affordable housing rental units. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay. Folks often talk about wanting to target,you know, local families and providing something affordable and I was curious if you had a range in your minds that you would want to offer this onto the market; the one and two bedrooms? MR. CORREA: Rentals? MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Yeah. What would you rent them for? MR. CORREA: So,you know, as of right now the numbers we use was the numbers we got from the County. So I'm not real familiar with that matrix. I think it's quite confusing. So for one-bedroom right now is $1,276; two-bedroom Page 5 LAAC-12 July 22,2025 $1,658; three-bedroom slips me. But those are the numbers we're targeting as of now, you know, based on what we feel cost of construction will be. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: That's really helpful. So I noted in the Planning background that it said that the overall cost of the project is $900,000? MR. CORREA: Yeah, that's probably per building. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay. MR. CORREA: Yeah. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: I was like, wow,you've really found,,a magical way to make housing affordable; the development of it. MR. CORREA: No, no, no. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: So that was an error. It's about$900,000 for each unit. But I also noted that there is a parking lot that,going to be installed; 40 stalls. MR. CORREA: Yeah. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Is that inclusive in'the,cost? MR. CORNEA: I believe so. If per building,you know, as of right now, I mean, I'm doing a t2 unit building on Kukuau and we're projecting that kind of range. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay. R. CORREA: So it's probably somewhere in the range of$900,000 per building. So accurate and inaccurate in some respects. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay. And then the financing is secure on your end? MR. CORNEA: Yeah. We're not looking, you know, we don't want any money from any government agencies and such. So this is all in house,yeah. MS:'KIERKIEWICZ: No. That's helpful to know because often times we have proposals from developers where really great ideas, but they haven't quite figured out how to build the whole capital stack. So I'm just curious to know if all the financing is in place. MR. CORREA: Yeah. That wouldn't be an issue,yeah. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay, great. Thanks for that. Page 6 LAAC-12 July 22,2025 MR. CORREA: But things can change of course,yeah. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Absolutely. We live in an age of uncertainty. Thank you for your honesty here. And I think this might be a question, I don't know if maybe for Corporation Counsel or Planning Department. There is a,you know, one of the conditions of approval is related to an agreement with the Office of Housing and Community and Development(OHCD). How do they know that they must enter into said agreement with the applicant? Are we, you know, nowhere in this ordinance are we transmitting a copy to OHCD? I still know that we're trying to refine the workflow between OHCI),and Planning and ensure that collaboration and the communication. But I just wautto make sure that they get the message so that they can add these units to their housing inventory and that they are working with the Correa's to support this much needed housing development. MR. DARROW: I can answer that,,Chair. Thank you for that question, Committee Member Kierkiewicz. Normally what happens is the applicant reaches out to the Office of Housing and Community Development prior to plan approval. So before we will issue plan approval they have to have that agreement in place. Typically it's for 20 percent that's required, but as mentioned we had requested that revised condition be added that gives the"ability for them to be able to enter into an agreement between 50 to 100 percent and to be able to receive some relief from fair share. And again, our goal is to try to just exactly what's happening here is to try to get developers to consider doing affordable housing and getting some sort of benefit through it. It's not much but it's something that we can do. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you for that. I'd like to work with you on some kind of friendly amendmentthat gets the conversation going between housing and the applicantsooner rather than later just so that everybody's aware and that the applicant, you know, can fulfill I think the intention of the project. And it sounds like you want to build,housing. When we grant this particular zoning, as Council Member Kagiwada said, there's a whole list of other potential avenues that you can do on'the property. And we have to be okay with all of those things. But often times applicants come, and they present a project and usually that is what helps to inform and in some cases drive the decision on whether or not to grant the rezoning. So I just want to make sure that Housing is in the know sooner rather than later. So, Director Darrow, I'm going to reach out with you because I just want to tighten that process. MR. DARROW: No problem. MR. CORREA: If I can? We've met with Housing at least on two occasions at this point,you know,prior administration and this. So we've been talking about it for a little while. Page 7 LAAC-12 July 22,2025 MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Love that. Thank you for being proactive. I just want to make sure that it's formalized because not in all cases do we have an applicant that is going out to meet with OHCD. So for everyone's comfortability I just want to make sure that it is part of the ordinance. And then,just final question. You agree to fulfill all of the conditions of approval that are stated here in this bill today? MR. CORREA: Yeah, absolutely. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay. That's helpful. MR. CORREA: So again, the ultimate goal is to provide housing. And,you know, we want to move in that direction: I'm doing it rightriow on other projects but, you know, I'm very hopeful that,will work out, you know,that fair share cost is a big number. So we're very hopeful that we can work out getting that waived and we can pursue this. So that's the ultimate goal. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay. Great. Thank you for being here today. Thank you, Chair. I yield. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Council Member Kierkiewicz. Anyone back over here? Council Member Hustace MR. HUSTACE: Thank you, Chair. Director Darrow, if you could just enlighten us on some of the other uses in the general commercial in the vicinity; and to what extent have those properties been utilized given that zoning? MR. DARROW. Okay. Council Member, give me one second. So typical uses in the commercial zoning,in the'CG zoning N4R. HUSTACE: ,Sorry. I think I'm just looking for within that vicinity of this proposed project:'What other projects have used that general commercial to its greatest extent? I Was looking for kind of what representation of the neighborhood perspective. MR. DARROW: I'm taking a look at our background and recommendation. They said that directly west is the sight of Hale Loa, which is a public housing facility; Hawai`i Public Housing Authority. It believe it's right behind this project. I don't know if staff—they just identified the similar zoning; they really didn't go into detail as to what those particular uses are being on that area. Let me just take a look at an aerial and see. Maybe the applicant might know more specifically the four corners right around this property that have uses. I believe one came in that was a medical facility on the corner of Kamana and Kino`ole, and then I think the other was offices across the street, conversation of an existing structure. Page 8 LAAC-12 July 22,2025 MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Director Darrow, we have our Google maps pulled up here in Hilo so Deputy Corporation Counsel Jean Campbell can help with that. MR. DARROW: Yeah. It looks mainly like the office type buildings. It doesn't look like commercial cases in this particular area. MR. HUSTACE: Okay. Thank you. Just kind of looking for that overall sense and feel for that community there. And then the other question I had is regard to Condition N. What's the determination on the rane'here from 50 to 100 percent when it comes to affordable rates; how is that? It's quite a spectrum there. Has the office had some you work with the applicant on and identifying either it's 50 percent or all the way up to 100 percent, or some number between? MR. DARROW: So for example, typically a developer comes in, does the rezoning, they do a housing project;they're required to do 20 percent affordable housing whether they do it through building or credits or however they do it. In this particular case if they come in and they propose and OHCD confirms that they're doing 50 percent affordable, we will take away 50 percent of the fair share. Is that the question you're asking? MR. HUSTACE: To a certaih'extent. But it's just there's two spectrums offered in that condition whether it's at the minimum of 50 percent or all the way up to 100 percent. MR. DARROW.: No, no. It's in between. Between 50 MR. HUSTACE: But we're not identifying what that is thought, right? You're giving tie applicant some range within that? MR. DARROW: Correct.' Yeah. MR. HUSTACE:�And that's based upon their conversation with OHCD then? MR. DARROW: Right, yeah. MR. HUSTACE: Which I think Council Member Kierkiewicz says I think the applicant has attested that they've spoken with them, but Council Member IRierkiewicz is trying to say that maybe this hasn't been quite settled though, and the conversation hasn't been flushed out to a point where we're kind of in this flux point. MR. DARROW: Normally we recommend that they go speak to them. In this particular case what ended up happening is the applicant was moving forward through commission, and we asked to postpone to have them go and meet with Office of Housing to confirm that that would work as far as this condition. That's Page 9 LAAC-12 July 22,2025 how we actually came about drafting up this condition. And so we ended up including this language. We actually had it at little different. We had to go and readjust it for the Council. So now it seems like the Corporation Counsel is okay with the wording; Office of Housing is okay with the wording, we're okay with the wording. It's just that relationship that happens normally after change of zones are approved where they go before they either get final subdivision approval or final plan approval to be able to solidify that agreement. MR. HUSTACE: Thank you, Director. Thank you, Chair. MR. DARROW: Yeah. I hope, again, I think that's what you asked. MR. HUSTACE: Yeah, it is. Thank you; Director. MR. DARROW: Thank you. CHR. KIMBALL: Thank you, Council Member Hustace. Council Member Onishi. MR. ONISHL Thank you; Chair. First of all, on the map you have Kamana Street twice. There's a new one. Okay. MR. DARROW: Council Member Kagiwada was kind enough to let us know. MR. ONISHI: Yeah. Thank you. CHR. KIMBALL: It's in your pinkie folder under Communication 375.2. There's a corrected snap. MR. ONISI: Okay. Thank you. Okay. So in regard to changing of the zone, right, !know n'the past on my previous Council, we had a property on Kino`ole Street,and it was in'the'same kind of similar situation like this. So the Council put in a condition that it had to be for student housing, and it was for ten years. And so is that a possibility in having that condition part of that requirement here? MR. DARROW: Everything's possible. Again, what we try to do is we try to avoid using the rezoning process as a means of spot zoning or almost like a use permit or a special permit where you're approving specific projects. Normally we look at it, is this zoning correct and good for this area? MR. ONISHL Right. MR. DARROW: Can this infrastructure support this zoning? Now again, they're required to come in and propose a project, which this applicant is, but we've seen many times where things have changed, right? Page 10 LAAC-12 July 22,2025 MR. ONISHL Right. That's where some of the concerns from the Council Members. We just want to assure that if we do change it, it is targeted to what the proposed project is. MR. DARROW: Yeah, but— MR. ONISHL No, I know. So that's why this condition might have to be added, right? But unless we just keep it multi-family if the target,is for multi-family use on this property. MR. DARROW: I mean, the problem with that would be I'm not sure, we'd have to talk with Jon. That may have to start all over again just like with our previous MR. ONISHL So maybe I should,refer to the Council Member of that district, yeah, and you know, work with Planning and the developer to make sure that you're satisfied and making sure that the target or the proposed project will be done. But something, you know, it's up to you. I'm just suggesting. But I can understand what you're saying. And I've seen it and like I said during our previous we did put a condition because some of the Council Members had concerns that they weren't gbing;to use it for housing. And so we did that ten years for student housing. And now I see that property is being rezoned again. MR. DARROW: It was reverted back to the original. MR: ONISHI: Yeah. Yeah. But okay. And then the other thing, okay, so for like affordable housing within the 50 to 100 percent; so if the project goes through'.they commit to that, do they have like—well I don't know if this question is for you or for County Housing. But the 180 days, it has to stay at that certain price and after like 180 days then it can go to market valued? No? You can come up.' Okay. Kehau. Because I know in the past we had issues. You can introduce yourself; (Note: At this time, Housing Administrator Kehaulani Costa came forward to address the members of the Committee.) 1S. COSTA: Kehau Costa, Housing Administrator. What is your question? MR. ONISHL No, okay. So like I've had in the previous before like projects where they have to I guess commit to like affordable housing, this certain percentage, and after like 180 days or so if there's no one that is interested then it can go to market value. MS. COSTA: You're talking about resale of affordable housing? Page 11 LAAC-12 July 22,2025 MR. ONISHL Yeah, or MS. COSTA: Homeownership? MR. ONISHL Yeah. MS. COSTA: That is in Chapter 11. So the resale of affordable housing should be in Chapter 11. I'm not familiar with the 180 days. I'd have to look into it. MR. ONISHL I think that's more for if he's sellingthis affordable housing, right, or the projects, yeah? Not rent. This is going,to be totally rental. MS. COSTA: Yeah. Yes. Yes. MR. ONISHL Okay. Okay. Okay,„thank you. And Planning,traffic, it might propose 24 units on this property? So it could be about 48 vehicles coming out of that certain area. MR. DARROW: Could you repeat that? MR. ONISHL Okay. So there's like proposed 24 units? MR. DARROW: Correct. MR. ONISI;; And so if you times it by two cars per unit, it could be 48 cars, vehicles? I m not looking at parking. I'm just looking at traffic because of like on'Kilauea Street you have a leffturn right turn lane in the middle, which is really good right, so that people turning into this bigger lots or bigger housing areas, they won't block the traffic; And so if you're on Kino`ole Street heading towards Aamakua, if you want to turn left you're going to back up traffic, right? And so that's the thing I'm concerned about. MR. DARROW: There are certain projects that reach a particular level that trigger the need for a traffic impact analysis report(TIAR). This particular project is well beneath that trip generator that requires that report. That's why a traffic study wasn't done. This is considered a smaller type project. MR. ONISHL Okay. So possible 48 vehicles is something small? MR. DARROW: It's less than 50, but it's not looked at as per what you think how many is per unit. And so it was I believe 24 trips that they look at 24 dwellings or units. MR. ONISHL Okay. Page 12 LAAC-12 July 22,2025 MR. DARROW: But even if you were to put two, it still is under the threshold that requires that particular type of report. MR. ONISHL Okay. But I just wanted to bring that up so on record we know about the traffic, so in case people start complaining then we've discussed that before. MR. DARROW: I am not sure. MR. ONISHL I yield, Chair. CHR. KIMBALL: Alright, any further comments? Council Member Kagiwada. MS. KAGIWADA: Thank you, Chair. Mr. Correa, are you still there? I can't see. MR. CORREA: Yes. MS. KAGIWADA: Hi. Can you just explair 'to us why you are going for commercial ten instead of multi-family here? MR. CORREA: Well truthfully it's an option. So ultimately I would love to do housing, that's what I've always done. t mean, if you look at our track record we have one commercial property, everything else is either single family or multi- family. 'Ym very hopeful that'I'll be able to work it out with Housing. And as long as the rents can justify the cost and there's not going to be a big profit there, then,my ultimate goal is to do the affordable housing. If that doesn't pan out and, you know, maybe the rents dip down, costs go up,then the commercial would allow maybe for a mixed use opportunity, you know, a little mom and pop shop in the front, with multi-family. I'm not sure, but it just gives an option. If I just went"£or, you know, residential or multi-family and if I cannot come up with an agreement with housing then now I'm in a position where it's moot,you know, the property becomes useless. You know, another piece that sits in a prime location is'not going to be developed. So it's an option and that's the reason. And I think'it's the reason everybody pursues commercial, you know, versus multi-family. Multi-family would just be one avenue and one avenue alone. In commercial you can do multi-family, you could do a little office building,you knew, so just an option. MS. KAGIWADA: Okay. Same question about,you know, when I look all around here it's mostly the new rezoned areas are commercial 20 and you're going for commercial 10. Why are you going for commercial 10 instead of 20 like most of the other rezoned properties around there. Page 13 LAAC-12 July 22,2025 MR. CORREA: That I couldn't answer. I mean, I don't know one way or the other as to why we chose 10 over 20. MS. KAGIWADA: Okay. Okay. Well I like the possibility of doing this dense additional affordable housing in the area. I don't have concerns about the traffic, but I am still just, you know, it is hard to see these properties when you come in with a project for housing and then potentially it's not going to that's not the way you're going to go. You're going to go with commercial buildings or something like that. So I just have to remind myself that we are not really looking at this project that you're proposing at all. Whatwe're looking at is should this go to commercial. So thank you for bringing",it in. Thank you. I yield. MR. CORREA: Thank you. CHR. KIMBALL: Thank you, Member Kagiwada. Anyone else? Follow up? MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Chair? CHR. KIMBALL: Go ahead, Council Member Kierkiewicz. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: 141, hi. Mr. Correa, we're just really wrestling with this because over time there's been a l6t of broken trust that we're having to repair, where developers come in'and they sell us on this really wonderful projects that could result in meaningful housing opportunities for community only to not develop the housing. They need more time; they do a commercial project, and that's kind of what we're wrestling with right now because the zoning, as members have eluded to, allows for so many different avenues for you to go down should the housing piece not work out. And I'm wondering, Deputy Corporation Counsel Jean'Campbell, if there is a way to acknowledge that in the ordinance where we—is it possible for the Council to revisit this should the housing development ot'go forward? We're all kind of dancing around that question and I'm sorry to put you on the spot, but I think we need to know the answer to that question; Thank you. (Note: At this time, Deputy Corporation Counsel Jean Campbell came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MS: CAMPBELL: Good afternoon. Deputy Corporation Counsel Jean Campbell. I guess what I'll offer is the County potentially subjects ourselves to legal challenge if we zone something, you know, and essentially like for this one, if we make it general commercial and then we say, but you can't do x,y, z things on the list because when we rezone something we rezone it for all of the uses that are available in the zoning district. And again, we potentially subject ourselves to legal challenge if we say you cannot do some of the things that are actually simply available to that zoning. Page 14 LAAC-12 July 22,2025 I will note to answer Committee Member Hustace's question. There are quite a number of doctor's offices looking at the map within a block or two. There's a restaurant; there's some realty offices; there was a hair salon. So there's quite a number of different varieties of uses in this area that have all taken advantage of the general commercial as well as the housing that obviously exists in the area. But yeah, I would strongly recommend against trying to subtract uses that are simply permitted by that zoning. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay. That's helpful to know. And maybe we shouldn't be talking about the explicit use for that property; right. Like it just doesn't make sense if at the end of the day we have to be okay with all of the uses that are articulated in that chapter or that section of the Zoning Code. MS. CAMPBELL: Agreed. I think that it is a little awkward for the Council and I think for the Planning Commissions as well., The was that our system is get up is applicants are encouraged to come,in with a project, but this is not'a project approval, right? I think the project disacussions'help,to imagine what the property could be, but it's also just a very smallpicture, which is obviously what all of you are wrestling with right now. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Yeah. Thank you for that,Deputy Corporation Counsel. Chair, I yield. CHR. KIMBALL: Thank you, Council Member Kierkiewicz. Anyone else? Director? MR. DARROW.- The one thing Imight add is in these particular rezonings where there is the possibility of another particular use in the future and this covers quite a number of rezonings that we've had. We've put in a condition similar to Condition Iy and what that says is should the applicant develop a land use which the Planning Department in consultation with the Department of Public Works determines will generate over 50 peak hour trips in traffic impact analysis report shall be submitted for review and approval by the Department of Public Works prior to plan approval. The applicant shall implement when required by the Department of Public Works at no cost to the County any transportation system improvements to Kino`ole Street that may be deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works. Sowe take into consideration the possibility that in the future that land use may change and it may require improvements. And so that has happened in the past. A particular use gets established; later on it changes; it comes in for plan approval, we end up saying you're tripping the need for a traffic report. They go through that, and they have to do the improvements. So I just wanted to add in that particular condition that we have in there. Thank you. Page 15 LAAC-12 July 22,2025 CHR. KIMBALL: Thank you, Director. Council Member Kagiwada. MS. KAGIWADA: Just clarification. You said that's already in there? MR. DARROW: Condition I. MS. KAGIWADA: Okay. Thank you. CHR. KIMBALL: As an example. Alright, I'll just chime in with a couple of things. First just speaking to just the comments made by DCC (Deputy Corporation Counsel) Campbell,you know,Lwould'agree that we have to make the decision on the land use, the zoning, sortof absent of the project proposal. And it would be probably a bad idea to move forward with restrictions on what is allowed under the commercial as a precedent and legally. However, we have seen these types of ordinances come through with statements to the effect of as represented by the applicant, there shall be x and x thing happen. So not saying in this particular case but as an example, as represented by the applicant there shall be at least ten affordable units developed by the such and such a time. Not saying that's the right one butwhat I would suggest in the interim here is that Counc l,Member Kagiwada, since this is in your district, maybe you have a conversation with the Correa's to see if there's anything that they're willing to put down on paper inthe ordinance that would be their representation with respect to housing on what they're going to do with this project: Forthe,Director and Deputy Director, I am curious about your language in Condition N here and this waiver of the fees based on the percentage of affordability. I'm presuming that that is in the event that the applicant goes and pursues a 201H,application that the fees would be waived? MR. DARROW:, That is if the applicant was pursuing a 201H application we wouldn't be here right now. They would be coming before you with a resolution exempting, requesting to exempting the zoning, right? CHR. KIMBALL: The zoning. So MR.DARROW: In this particular case what's happening is we're finding out that a lot of developers are not going down the 201H road because of the cost of prevailing wages. That's one thing that's weighed heavy on the cost of the overall development. So now we're seeing them coming in for rezoning and we're trying to provide some sort of relief on making that project a little more affordable and this is the only thing that we can do as far as conditions and rezoning. There's one other that utilized this particular condition and that was the one in Honoka`a with Honoka`a Villages, I think it was called Plantation Villages. Page 16 LAAC-12 July 22,2025 CHR. KIMBALL: Plantation Villages, yeah. MR. DARROW: Yeah. CHR. KIMBALL: That was a PUD (Planned Unit Development). MR. DARROW: Yeah. We worked with housing to be able to actually create this as a standard condition now. So again, encouraging developers that they could seek relief because we've heard a lot that sometimes dust the cost of fair share per unit really makes the project more unaffordable. So it just helps in whatever way we can help. CHR. KIMBALL: So I want to just highlight this to my colleagues because even though I appreciate and support the policy intent behind this, this is in effect, the Planning Department legislating policy that hasn't been created err supported by the Council. Again, support it butjust, I mean,we are voting on it as the law, as this ordinance. However, it is policy being developed by the administration and being placed in these ordinances that we have not actually legislated around. It might be something that we would consider doing to have a policy that's actually elevated to the level of code that says we don't do fair share when these conditions are met. I have a little bit of concern with,the process here because it's kind of outside of the normal thing where we would legislate it first and then we would adopt it and include it into the ordinances. Again, support the intent though The fair share,if there isn't any commercial, the fair share is I just want to confirm, only applies to any residential development whether it's single-family or multi4iunily. There's no fair share associated with commercial. R. DARROW: That's my understanding. Yes. You'll see the different breakdowns under the fair share condition between single-family and multiple- family;; CHR. KIMBALL: Okay. That's all the questions I have for right now. Anyone else before—I did have one sort of theoretical thing which is you mentioned that our Code requires that the proposed project is included in the application. That's in Chapter 25 and where? Just out of curiosity. MR.DARROW: I'm sorry. What is the question? CHR. KIMBALL: Where is the requirement that a project be included with the rezoning application? MR. DARROW: It's in our application but I believe it's under the requirements for change of zone. If you give me a second I can find that. Page 17 LAAC-12 July 22,2025 CHR. KIMBALL: You can give it to me after. MR. DARROW: Okay. CHR. KIMBALL: I find this is a consistent problem in terms of decision making that there's the sense that we're making a decision on projects that is represented and that's not really ever the case. It's this land use appropriate and in this location. So at least for me,you know, looking at the surrounding area I think that the commercial is okay here. It fits in with some of the other properties. But to the other comments made today, like we desperately need these. As a parent of a child that's been looking for a rental, we're in desperate need of affordable rentals and smaller units. I'll go to you, Council Member Kagiwada. And then I want to move forward. MS. KAGIWADA: Thank you. To the applicant, how do you feel about me proposing postponement till thenext meeting so that we can meet and talk about this? MR. CORREA: That would be perfectly fine. You know, I mean, this has been dragging on for a couple of years now. MS. KAGIWADA: Sorry. Well We have never met on this. So I'd be happy to meet with you and discuss. Okay. MR.,CORREA: Yeah. And I'd love to show you what I've done, what we're doing and, you know, maybe you'll be convinced that this is truly our pursuit. MS. KAGIWADA: Okay. With that I would like to propose postponement. CHR. KIMBALL: To I believe August 5tn? MS. KAGIWADA: August 5t',yes. Motion to Postpone: Ms. Kagiwada moved to postpone Bill 67 to (Approved) August 5, 2025. Seconded by Mr. Hustace and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Hustace, Kagiwada, Kierkiewicz, Onishi, Villegas, and Chair Kimball—6. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Members Galimba, Inaba, and Kdneali`i-Kleinfelder—3. Excused: None. Page 18 LAAC-12 July 22,2025 CHR. KIMBALL: Seeing no further business on our agenda, we are adjourned. ADJOURN- There being no further business, Chair Kimball adjourned the meeting MENT: at 1:58 p.m. Approved: Ms. Heather L. Kimball, Chair (Date) Legislative Approvals and Acquisitions Committee HI/tk Page 19