The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCOM 0718.001 2012-2014 mir March 13„ 2014 by first class mail Mr.Zendo Kern Chairman, Planning Committee of Hawaii County Council 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, HI 96720 c-) Re: Change of Zone Application (REZ 13-000167): 1 Request: Change of Zone from RM-2.5 to RM-1.5 364 Hualalai Street, Hilo, HI 96720 - Ti TMK: 3-2-4-028:009 Dear Mr.Zendo, -:.) ate La/ -- I am the applicant for this change of zone application from RM-2.5 to RM-1.5. I have met with the a' concerned neighbors on December 18, 2013 prior to the Planning Commission hearing and its unanimous approval on February 6. I believe the proposed site plan mitigated most of the reasonable concerns expressed by the neighbors. Apart from the Planning Director's recommendation that this change of zoning complies with all the County's planning and housing elements under the Medium Density Urban designation, my proposal is to build much needed workforce (affordable) housing for the 60%to 100% area median income(AMI)group. As far as I know it will be the first substantial project of this nature in the city of Hilo. It is designed for those being left out of the residential market, i.e. those who are employed with earned salary more than what is qualified for low-income housing but not sufficient to buy or rent high cost quality market rate housing in their communities close to where they work.Workforce housing may target government workers, police officers,firemen, students,teachers, nurses, secretaries, etc. Other than the contentment of social conscience and the need for more affordable housing, a new workforce housing project in a community like Hilo offers an array of benefits to its residents directly and indirectly. Constructing workforce housing is more than creating quality affordable housing, it generates needed jobs, stimulating local economy and serves as catalysts for improving their neighborhoods. The National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) estimates, in the first year, a typical 100-unit workforce affordable housing development will have the following impact: • $8.7 million in additional wages for local workers and profits for proprietors of businesses. • $3.3 million in additional taxes for federal, state, and local governments. • 116 additional jobs, about half of which are in the construction sector. • Job creation spurred by such development continues after the construction phase. After the units are occupied, 30 jobs remain in the wholesale and retail trade, dining and drinking establishments, local government, health, education, and social sectors. The latest study by the Hawaii Housing Finance&Development Corp projected 19,000 units will be necessary to fill housing for people in the State making $61,800 or less. There is a real need for this kind of projects to providing needed housing and to spur economic growth. VINCENT T.C.TAI, ARCHITECT 2184 Round Top Drive 7/8. / Honolulu.HI 96822 808-941 3778 Tel Comm.No 253-830 8892 Fax Ref.To: fPG Ref.Dote MAR 1 R 9n14 , Page 2 As one may suspect, it is not true that the proposed workforce or affordable housing project will depress the property value of neighboring single family homes. Of the many studies on this subject, I present the following article from the `Shelterforce' publication-the Journal of Affordable Housing Community Building published by the National Housing Institute-summer 2012. : "When a housing development containing affordable units is proposed, neighbors, other town residents, and public officials often oppose it, claiming that a series of negative outcomes will result. The fears tend to relate to increased traffic;additional school costs;increased demands on other municipal services, such as fire and police;stresses on water and sewer systems; concerns about developer quality or experience;decreases in property values; various types of environmental degradation;and, perhaps least tangible of all, adverse changes in the character of the town. These claims may often mask underlying biases and racist attitudes. Contrary to these common assumptions, several studies have consistently found that, if affordable housing is well designed and is well managed, there appear to be no negative impacts of that housing on the property values of neighboring houses. Other studies have shown that population growth associated with new affordable housing does not necessarily yield higher municipal costs, and there is actually less increase in school costs related to the construction of multifamily developments than there is with new single-family houses." The existing already approved (on November 24, 2010) proposal per zoning RM-2.5 (see attached) is for 47 townhouses (1,300 sf to 1,440 sf living area) at market rate and 12 affordable housing units for total of 59 units.The attached proposal of this application for change of zone (see attached) per Zoning RM-1.5 is for 88 affordable units (mainly one-bedrooms at 592 sf living area). Below is a table that shows the comparison between the two proposals in terms of total living area, number of bedrooms. A. EXISTING APPROVED(Nov. 24,2010)59-unit SCHEME PER RM-2.5 ZONING No. unit Living area Total area No. bedrm _ Total No. bedrm 2-bed townhouse market rate 42 1,300 54,600 SF 2 84 3-bed townhouse market rate 5 1,440 7,200 SF 3 15 1-bed affordable 8 625 5,000 SF 1 8 2-bed-affordable 4 890 3,560 SF 2 8 TOTAL 59 70,360 SF 115 B. PROPOSED WORKFORCE 88-unit SCHEME PER RM-1.5 ZONING No. unit Living area Total area No. bedrm Total No. bedrm A-1-bed affordable 76 592 44,954 SF 1 76 B-2-bed-affordable 6 752 4,509 SF 2 12 C-3-Studio affordable 6 400 2,400 SF 0.5 3 TOTAL 88 51,863 SF 91 DIFFERENCE -A. AND B. 18,497 SF 24 -36% -26% Vincent T.C.Tai,AIA,Architect Architecture Planning Interior Page 3 As shown above,the proposed scheme per Zoning RM-1.5 contains substantially less total floor area (less 36%) and less number of bedrooms(less 26%) compared to the already approved scheme per Zoning RM-2.5. Due to the fact that the proposal per Zoning RM-1.5 is to develop all affordable housing, almost all the units are one-bedroom dwellings with much smaller footprints or living floor areas. Consequently,the total building area is less despite the total unit count is more. I proposed side yard setback to be 20-feet minimum along the properties zoned RS-7.5 (except for one property to the north). i.e. double the code minimum requirement of 10-feet. Due to the smaller footprints, the buildings are grouped tighter together which resulted in substantially more open space and retaining more existing vegetations and trees. I also agreed to install a 6-feet high chain linked fence along the property adjacent to properties zoned RS-7.5 despite of the majority of the neighboring properties do not have such fencing. As for traffic,the TIAR shows the increase is so minimal that all approach delay changes are less than one second. The survey was taken for the AM peak hours from 7:15AM to 8:15AM and the PM peak hours from 3:45PM to 4:45PM. I intend to work with the City's traffic division to install stop signs or traffic lights where necessary. As for the potential flooding caused by the dry stream on Popolo Street and outside of the subject property, I understand there is some kind storm water or drainage easement within the neighbors' properties which is supposed to be maintained such that storm water does not flow into my property. There is no existing natural water courses, drainage way or improvement within the subject property. Since the stream is outside of the subject property, I intend to approach the DPW and see how they deal with this issue. I respectfully urge the County Council to approve this application. The subject property is an ideal urban infill site suitable to provide needed workforce housing in Hilo. Sincerely, 141/1/1'0 VINCENT T.C.TAI,AIA, Owner and Applicant cc: Mr. J.Yoshimoto, Chairman, Hawai'i County Council w/enclosures Members of the Hawaii County Council w/enclosures Vincent T.C.Tai,AlA,Architect Architecture Planning Interior