Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0632.009 2000-2002 From Patnck ;eguirant To. Counalmember B J Le~thead-Tcd Date 6/22/02 Time. 12:20,20 PM Page of 3 June 22, 2002 l : is t ~ The Honorable Councihnember r~~'.. B.J. Leithead-Todd, Planning Committee Chair Hawaii County Council 25 Aupuni Street, Suite 209 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 BILL NO. 220 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 23 (SUBDIVISION CODE) OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE, RELATING TO CONDOMINIUM PROPERTY REGIMES Dear Councilmember Leithead-Todd I am writing to express my opposition to the above mentioned bill, because of the harm it presents to me and my family as small property owners. I currently own a 18,760 square foot lot in Hawaiian Beaches which is zoned A-la, Agricultural district. There is currently a dwelling on the lot. It also has a valid Ohana Dwelling approval. We do not have a building permit to construct the second dwelling on the lot at this time. As such, because ofthis bill, we would not be allowed to "condominiumize" (condo) our property. I urge you to oppose the bill in its current form because it would remove our current right to convey ownership of the second dwelling to other family members. Approval ofthis bill would in fact contradict the Ohana Dwelling approval we currently have by making it difficult to keep the property in the family. My reasons for opposing this proposed amendment are further enumerated below. My mother, my wife, and I currently own our property at 15-2741 Aama Street because my father recently passed away in November of last year. My mom spent some time alone in the house after his death but could not bear the loneliness of a big house. To help, my sister and her family moved from Oahu to live with her. Although they sacrificed much, my sister and her family gave up their jobs, to support our mom. Her family's company helps my mom through the grieving process. I would like to be able to build a second dwelling for my sister and her family in the hopes that some day they could purchase it and have a house of their own. We need to be able to condo the property so that we can convey ownership of the second dwelling to my sister and her husband. CBrtainly, there are other ways to convey ownership (such as putting everyone on the same deed} but the condo process is the only way that would allow the two homes to be mortgaged and insured separately so that what affects owners of one home does not affect the owners of the other. While I love my sister, I do not wish to be her landlord, or share her liabilities, nor would she wish to share mine. Mixing land or money with family members is a sure way to create discord in a family. Ccsmrri. N2aa F°il~ No. lief. 'ho; inf. gate 2 2002 From: Patrick Segwrant To Counalmember B J Leithead-Tod Date. 6/22/02 ?ime 12:20:20 PM Page 3 of 3 Councilmember Leithead-Todd June 22, 2002 Page 2 I also have a special needs son, his name is Parker. It is important that my wife and I be able to plan for his financial future when we are no longer able to care for him. The ability to convey ownership of both houses separately once they are constructed will give us the most flexibility in planning for his future. Additionally, I feel the proposed bill is unnecessary because it duplicates parts of the current state condo law and the influence the Director of Planning has in the condo process. What will happen when the state law changes? Velill the adopted law become obsolete? All condos must currently go through a building and zoning clearance to certify that the proposed conveyance of ownership is consistent with building or zoning codes. If a proposed condo does not comply with either of these codes, these directors only need say so and the condo cannot be processed. So why do we need more legislation to do what those departments are currently doing anyway? I am further concerned at the way information is presented in the bill and the way it discriminates against single-family owners. It states that condos "divide" land, are only for multi- family and commercial properties, and creates a result similar to subdivision. I believe these statements to be false. I urge you to consult with the State Department of Commerce and Consumer affairs, I am sure they will tell you that condos do not divide land -they just convey ownership. Development and building rights are given by the County. Condos also allow single- family properties to be conveyed, not just multi-family and commercial properties. The bill does not acknowledge this; nor does it acknowledge the number of parcels that have the right to build two dwellings which would be adversely affected. And while the bill further exempts cluster and planned developments, it does not exempt those properties which akeady have ®hana Dwelling approval. I hope that this offers another perspective on this issue and the harm it presents to other small homeowners like ourselves. It would be unfortunate that the "small guy" gets hurt with a bill that appears to be focused toward those who more frequently abuse the process. As a result, I hope you oppose this bill or advocate for its amendment. The currexrt exemption which requires projects to have valid building permits is unfair. The exemption should be expanded to include those projects which have the right to build two dwellings through the zoning code and/or have valid Ohana Dwelling approvals. I would be happy to provide you with more specific language to amend the current proposal. If you have any questions or wish further assistance, please call me at 375-4477. Sincerely, Patrick Seguirant