Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0227.013 1996-1998 :::,::1::::::::~::: •'EE ei . ielil!i V a n P E R N I S °°II:III S All I T H 11Y7 A N C I L 1 ~ October 31, 1997 ~ ~ Bobby Jean Leithead-Todd Chairperson, Planning Committee Hawaii County Council 25 Aupuni Street Hilo. Hawaii 96720 RE: Bill 276 Draft 2 (Subdivision Codel Deaz Ms. Leithead-Todd: I am providing these comments concerning the proposed replacement of the 1975 Subdivision Code. The single greatest abuse of our Subdivision Code, as well as both County and State land use plans, regulations and laws, is subdivision by "condominiumizing". This is often called "doubled density condovision". Although all the other Counties have controlled this abuse, this County continues to allow itself and its people to be abused by this scam. There is an easy and proper way to correct this problem in the subdivision code redraft you are considering, as will be presented below. For over a decade I have been observing and studying the problems caused by doubled density condovision. The long term results I see are destruction of neighborhoods, increased infrastructure burden placed on the County and its taxpayers, proliferation of lawsuits involving neighbors, Realtors, developers and the County, voiding of established subdivision covenants, decline in value of properties neighboring doubled density properties, circumvention of County and State land use and subdivision laws and the disrespect for government that follows, and developer avoidance of irurastructure obligatiol.s. i3ow, as the years .,ave past, uninformed owners of "condominium" lots and houses are finding their lack of compliance or inability to comply with State condominium laws meant for true condominium projects, and shared facilities and liabilities (e.g. water meter, access) are creating increasingly severe problems. Lenders too have learned, and some will not or are hesitent to place new loans on "condominium" lots and houses. Some of the better Realtors now have a policy now of not representing sellers or buyers of such "condominiums" because of potential or actual liability problems. As the years pass, I think these problems will increase. There is no hard evidence that this abuse significantly addresses any "affordable housing" issue. Due to the developers' willingness to pay more for properties that can be thus doubled in density, the prices of such land go up. And the developed product goes on the market at as high a price as an equivalent fee J v o ATTORIffiY! AT IAN A IAW COPMPATIIXI y MARKVanPERNIS DAVID E. SMITH GARY W. VANCIL - Wm. I. ZIMMERMAN A f11I18 B, FNAIAIAI ®N'T&l. ]]-107F HI7AIN.AI ROAD - P. O. BOX 183], KAB.UA-KONA l1AWAB 96IA! - PHONa (8087 ]29-3!!I, PAX (808) 329fi18! ~ pp J J kk Bobby Jean Leithead-Todd October 31. 1997 Page Two simple lot and home. In Kona, I am not aware of any double density condominium unit being sold within the County's affordable housing limits. Those who advocate more doubled density are those who profit from them, not land use planners, homebuyers, or the public generally. If there are 300 condominiumizations going on per year, even if one or two at a time, there is a 300 lot subdivision being developed each year, with no infrastructure contribution, in violation of State and County land use laws, and with the short and long term infrastructure problems they generate to be paid for by us taxpayers. The easy solution to re-establish the validity of the County's subdivision code and "home rule", is as follows: In the Subdivision Code, in its definition of "subdivision", use wording which in essence says: "subdivision" is the division or creation of more than one parcel, lot, or unit, including by application of a Condominium Property Regime, out of or from one parcel or lot. This will have the effect of bringing doubled density condominium developers into the same County process as other subdivtders. Although you may hear arguments that condominiumization falls under State law, this argument has no real relevance to this issue. There is no question that the County has exclusive jurisdiction and control as to defining and controlling a subdivision and zoning, i.e. to have its own Subdivision Code and Zoning Code. The above language does not prevent or interfere wth condominiumizing or State law governing the same. It merely uses the County's home rule in a proper way to define where and under what circumstances development can take place, just like any other zoning or subdivision decision. Please feel free to contact me in this matter. Thank you for your consideration and efforts. Sincerely, VAN PERMS, SMITH & VANCIL By ~ AN PE I MVP/az-g cc: All County Council Members