HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD Background and Recommendation (PL-CCI-2026-000015)-1-
BR-CCInitiated-Bill126.ja.3.2.26
COUNTY OF HAWAI‘I PLANNING DEPARTMENT BACKGROUND AND RECOMMENDATION
COUNTY COUNCIL INITIATED BILL 126 (PL-CCI-2026-000015) AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 25, ARTICLES 1, 3, 4, 5 AND 7 OF THE HAWAIʻI COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), RELATING TO SPECIAL DISTRICTS
The County Council has referred a bill for an ordinance to amend Chapter 25,
Articles 1, 3, 4, 5 and 7 of the Hawaiʻi County Code 1983 (2016 Edition, as
Amended), relating to Special Districts.
PURPOSE OF BILL 126
The purpose of Bill 126 is to establish the Downtown Pāhoa Commercial (DPC)
zoning district to:
• Encourage a dynamic town where environment, culture, commerce,
and community coexist harmoniously.
• Support diverse economic development, with an emphasis on locally
owned businesses.
• Celebrate the historical and cultural heritage of Pāhoa in alignment
with applicable design guidelines of the Pāhoa Village Design (PVD)
district.
• Enhance the quality of life of residents and visitor experiences through
improved infrastructure and amenities.
• Provide opportunities for recreation, dining, cultural practices, creative
activities, education, business and commercial services, and
community programs in a safe and walkable environment.
• Promote housing availability and community-driven economic growth
through mixed residential-commercial development.
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO HCC CHAPTER 25 (ZONING)
1. Bill 126 (Planning Department Exhibit 1) seeks to amend the Zoning
Code to add, delete, and amend articles related to the establishment of
the Downtown Pāhoa Commerical (DPC) zoning district as a special
district. A summary of the proposed bill’s amendments to the Zoning Code
-2-
follows:
• Adds the Downtown Pāhoa Commercial zoning district (DPC) to the
list of Special Districts in Section 25-3-2.
• Adds definitions for “co-working and innovation hub”, “creative
media space”, and “cultural enterprise” as new land uses permitted
in the DPC.
• Adds a new division to Article 7 that identifies the purpose and
applicability of the DPC, identifies 53 permitted land uses, and
establishes a height limit of 35 feet, a minimum building site area of
7,500 square feet, a minimum building site average width of 50
feet, and no minimum yards, except as required by plan approval.
• Amends Section 25-4-59.2 by deleting current parking
requirements and adding that properties in the DPC do not require
off-street parking and loading, except as may be required by plan
approval.
Accompanying Bill 124 proposes to change the zoning of properties within
downtown Pāhoa Village, through a voluntary opt-in process, from Single-Family
Residential- 10,000 sq ft (RS-10) and Village Commercial-10,000 sq ft (CV-10) to
Downtown Pāhoa Commerical (DPC) zoning district. The purpose of the DPC
district is stated above and the requirements for establishing land uses in the
DPC zoning district, including a list of the variety of permitted land uses, are
shown in Bill 126 (PD Exhibit 1).
The purpose of the RS district is to provide for lower or low and medium density
residential use, for urban and suburban family life. Requirements for establishing
land uses in the RS zoning district, including a list of the variety of permitted land
uses, are shown in Section 25-5-1 to 8 of the Zoning Code (Planning
Department Exhibit 2 - Zoning Code Requirements for Single Family
Residential Districts).
The purpose of the CV district is to provide for a broad range or variety of
commercial and light industrial uses that are necessary to serve the population in
rural areas where the supplementary support of the general business uses and
-3-
activities of a central commercial district is not readily available. Requirements for
establishing land uses in the CV zoning district, including a list of the variety of
permitted land uses, are shown in Section 25-5-120 to 128 of the Zoning Code.
(Planning Department Exhibit 3 - Zoning Code Requirements for Village
Commercial Districts)
AGENCY COMMENTS
2. Department of Land and Natural Resources – Commission on Water
Resource Management (Planning Department Exhibit 4 – March 2,
2026 Memo)
3. Puna Community Development Plan Action Committee (Planning
Department Exhibit 5 – March 5, 2026 Letter)
AGENCIES – NO COMMENT OR CONCERN
4. Department of Health, Department of Public Works – Building Division,
Police Department
AGENCIES – NO RESPONSE
5. Department of Land and Natural Resources – Land Division and
Engineering Division, Department of Public Works – Engineering,
Department of Environmental Management, Department of Water Supply,
Parks and Recreation Department, Fire Department, Real Property Tax,
Pāhoa Mainstreet Community Association
PUBLIC COMMENTS
6. Planning Department Exhibit 6 - Dephlia Rackley et al Testimony
received by the Planning Department on March 22, 2026
7. Planning Department Exhibit 7 - Lorn Douglas Testimony received by
the Planning Department on March 22, 2026
8. Planning Department Exhibit 8 - Bryan Rupp Testimony received by
the Planning Department on March 25, 2026
9. Planning Department Exhibit 9 - Marty Robinson Testimony received
by the Planning Department on March 25, 2026
10. Planning Department Exhibit 10 - Tiffany Edwards Hunt and Jeff Hunt
Testimony received by the Planning Department on March 29, 2026
11. Planning Department Exhibit 11 - Namele Naipo-Arsiga Testimony
-4-
received by the Planning Department
PLANNING ANALYSIS OF THE IMPACTS OF BILL 126
As proposed, Bill 126 will revise and update existing zoning code sections
relating to Special Districts, including adding a division to address the new
Downtown Pāhoa Commercial (DPC) District.
The purpose, applicability and designation of the DPC district is detailed in
the first two sections of the new division addressing the DPC district. The bill
indicates that the purpose of the DPC district is to encourage a dynamic town
and support diverse, community-driven economic development. Additional goals
focus on strengthening historical and cultural heritage, enhancing quality of life
for residents, providing opportunities and promoting housing availability. In the
presentation on August 28, 2025, the bill’s introducer noted that the list of
permitted uses for the DPC district is intended to be specific and realistic so as to
create opportunities for Pāhoa landowners to establish a business. It was
additionally noted that the Puna community has expressed the desire to support
agricultural endeavors and to allow for uses such as agricultural processing and
light manufacturing in downtown Pāhoa, in addition to allowing for new
opportunities that focus on cultural uses.
Regarding broad trends in the list of permitted uses for the DPC district, as
compared with those uses currently permitted in the CV district, the Planning
Department notes that Bill 126 proposes to remove nearly all overnight
accommodation uses, including bed and breakfast establishments, hotels, lodges
and short-term vacation rentals. Boarding facilities, rooming or lodging houses
are retained as a permitted land use, although the density criteria of the CV
district is removed. Additionally, it is noted that a broad category of schools, such
as elementary, intermediate, high school, is not included as a permitted land use
in the DPC district, rather several unique school categories are added,
specifically business schools, photography, art, music, dance or other similar
schools, and vocational schools.
PERMITTED LAND USES:
The Department completed a comparison of permitted land uses in the
proposed DPC district versus the current Single-Family Residential (RS)
-5-
and Village Commerical (CV) zoning districts to determine: 1) what land
uses that are currently permitted will not be permitted in the DPC zoning
district, 2) what land uses currently not permitted will be permitted in the
DPC zoning district, and 3) changes to land uses that are currently
permitted and will still be permitted in the DPC zoning district.
There are seventeen (17) land uses permitted by right and ten (10) land
uses permitted by issuance of a Use Permit by the Planning Commission
in the RS zoning district.
There are forty-nine (49) land uses permitted by right and three (3)
permitted by Use Permit in the CV zoning district.
The following twenty-two (22) land uses are not currently permitted in the
RS and CV zoning district but will be permitted in the DPC district:
- Agricultural products processing, minor.
- Agricultural tourism, as permitted under section 25-4-15.
- Bakeries.
- Botanical gardens, nurseries and greenhouses, seed farms,
plant experimental stations, arboretums, floriculture, and similar
uses dealing with the growing of plants.
- Breweries, distilleries, and alcohol manufacturing facilities.
- Broadcasting stations or studios (radio and television).
- Car washing, provided that the facilities are not detrimental to
the character of the district.
- Catering establishments.
- Co-working and innovation hubs.
- Creative media spaces.
- Cultural enterprises.
- Display rooms for products sold elsewhere.
- Food manufacturing and processing facilities.
- Ice storage and dispensing facilities.
- Laundries other than those utilizing steam cleaning equipment,
provided that facilities are not detrimental to the character of the
-6-
district.
- Modeling agencies.
- Libraries.
- Schools, business.
- Schools, photography, art, music, dance or other similar studios
or academies.
- Schools, vocational.
- Storage and sale of seed, feed, fertilizer and other products
essential to agricultural production.
- Wholesaling and distribution operations.
The proposed list of permitted uses for the DPC district removes eighteen
(18) uses that are currently included in the CV zoning district, as follows:
- Automobile sales and rentals.
- Bed and breakfast establishments.
- Cemeteries and mausoleums.
- Commercial parking lots and garages.
- Convenience stores.
- Crematoriums, funeral homes, funeral services and mortuaries.
- Crop production.
- Day care centers.
- Hotels.
- Laboratories, medical and research.
- Lodges.
- Model homes.
- Repair establishments, major.
- Schools.
- Short-term vacation rentals.
- Telecommunication antennas and towers.
- Temporary real estate offices.
- Utility substations.
Additionally, the DPC list of permitted uses includes modification of twelve
(12) uses from the CV list, as follows (material to be repealed is bracketed
-7-
and stricken while new material is underscored):
- Boarding facilities, rooming or lodging houses[, provided that the
maximum density shall be one thousand two hundred fifty
square feet of land area per rentable unit or dwelling unit].
- Dwellings, double-family or duplex, [provided that the maximum
density shall be one thousand two hundred fifty]with a minimum
density of five hundred square feet of land area per rentable unit
or dwelling unit.
- Dwellings, multiple-family, [provided that the maximum density
shall be one thousand two hundred fifty]with a maximum density
of five hundred square feet of land area per rentable unit or
dwelling unit.
- Farmers markets. [When the vending activity in a farmers
market involves more than just the sale of local fresh and/or raw
produce, plant life, fish and local homegrown and homemade
products for more than two days a week, the director, at the
time of plan approval, shall restrict the hours of use,
maintenance and operations and may require improvements as
determined appropriate to ensure its compatibility with the
existing character of the surrounding area.]
- Hospitals, [sanitariums, ]old age, [convalescent, ]nursing and
rest homes.
- Manufacturing, processing and packaging light [and general,
except for concrete or asphalt products, where the products are
distributed to retail establishments located in the immediate
community, as approved by the director]provided that the
activities are not detrimental to the character of the district.
- Photography and art studios.
- Printing and [P]publishing [plants for newspapers, books and
magazines, printing shops, cartographing, and duplicating
processes such as blueprinting or photostating shops, which are
designed to primarily serve the local area]including print shops
-8-
and publishing houses, and digital media production studios.
- Retail establishments, provided that they are not detrimental to
the character of the district.
- Theaters, auditoriums and indoor sports arenas.
As some parcels in the DPC district are currently within the Single-Family
Residential (RS) district, the following uses that are currently permitted
within the RS district are not included on the list of uses permitted in the
DPC district:
- Cemeteries and mausoleums.
- Crop production.
- Household henneries, as permitted under section 25-4-18.
- Model homes, as permitted under section 25-4-8.
- Short-term vacation rentals situated in the general plan resort
and resort node areas.
- Telecommunication antenna and towers, as permitted under
section 25-4-12.
- Temporary real estate office, as permitted under section 25-4-8.
- Utility substations, as permitted under section 25-4-11.
Additionally, the following use currently permitted within the RS district is
proposed to be modified on the list of uses permitted in the DPC district:
- Meeting facilities, including special events, as permitted under
section 25-4-17.
There is no provision for Use Permits in the new DPC district code
sections, to address uses that are not included on the list of permitted uses for
the DPC district.
HEIGHT LIMIT
The height limit in the DPC district is set at thirty (30) feet, which matches
that in the CV district, but is less than the RS district which is thirty-five (35) feet.
MINIMUM BUILDING SITE AREA AND AVERAGE WIDTH:
The minimum building site area is the same as the RS and CV districts,
set at seven thousand five hundred (7,500) square feet.
The minimum building site average width is set at fifty (50) feet, which is
-9-
smaller than the minimum of sixty (60) feet for the RS and CV district.
MINIMUM YARDS:
Minimum yards in the DPC district will match the requirements of the
Commercial Downtown Hilo (CDH) district, which has no front, rear or side yard
requirements, except as required by plan approval. The minimum yards in the RS
district range from 15-25 feet for front and rear yards and 8-15 feet for side yards
based on building site size. The minimum yards in the CV district are 15 feet for
front and rear yards and none for side yards except where the adjoining building
site is in a residential zoning district it shall conform to that zoning district.
PARKING:
Amendments proposed to Section 25-4-59 will remove the requirement for
off-street parking and loading for any property wholly within the DPC district,
except as may be required by plan approval. Street parking is currently available
along a portion of one side of Pāhoa Village Road, but, as stated by the bill’s
introducer in a public presentation on August 28, 2025, since downtown Pāhoa is
land limited, there needs to be an established, alternative parking area,
potentially at the County recreation center, for use by employees and patrons of
Pāhoa businesses.
According to supportive comments provided by the Puna CDP Action
Committee, Bill 126 recognizes Pāhoa’s role as a regional town center and
“expands permitted uses beyond those allowed under the existing Commercial
Village zoning to include light industrial and economic support uses such as
agricultural processing, co-working spaces, creative media studios and cultural
enterprises” which the CDP Action Committee believes “would support
entrepreneurship and broaden economic opportunities for property owners and
local businesses.” Additionally, the CDP Action Committee notes that interested
property owners in Pāhoa Village will be able to opt-in to the proposed rezoning
to the DPC zoning district. However, the Planning Director notes that the
proposed ordinance will require additional language to explain the opt-in process
and proposes adding the following, to be inserted in the appropriate section of
Bill 126 as determined by County Council:
-10-
- Application of the DPC zoning district shall be voluntary and activated
only upon the property owner’s written election. Upon receipt of the
election, the Director of Planning shall verify ownership and
administratively apply the DPC zoning district to the subject parcel
without the need for further legislative action. Until such a time as the
property owner elects to change the zoning district to the DPC zoning
district, the property shall remain subject to its underlying zoning
classification and regulations. Property owners may request a change
of zone to the DPC district designation at any time.
- Upon the effective date of a DPC Election, existing uses and structures
that conform to DPC standards are deemed conforming, and existing
uses and structures that do not conform to DPC standards are deemed
legal nonconforming uses and structures.
There was some public concern over whether existing homes become
nonconforming upon passage of the proposed bill. As reflected in the
recommended “opt-in” language above, until a property owner “opts-in” to the
DPC district via a change of zone action, the property remains under control of its
current zoning. Upon successful rezoning to DPC, all uses and structures that do
not conform with DPC standards are deemed “legal nonconforming.”
There was a similar concern raised about the ability to rebuild damaged or
destroyed dwellings to their existing conditions if they are deemed “legal
nonconforming” under provisions of this bill. Under the current Zoning Code
(HCC Section 25-4-63), if a building where a nonconforming use is conducted is
destroyed or damaged by 50% of its value or more, it cannot be rebuilt the same
way unless the use follows current Zoning and Building Codes. If less than 50%
is damaged, the structure can be repaired and continue to be used the same way
as before, but the repairs must be finished within one year of the damage. The
Department of Public Works decides how much damage there is and whether the
building can be restored and continue its nonconforming use. If there is a desire
to go beyond these provisions, the Zoning Code and likely the Building Code
would need to be amended to allow for it.
-11-
According to staff discussions with the Department of Public Works, the
Pāhoa Village Road right-of-way through downtown Pāhoa is variable and is
insufficient in some areas for future widening and roadway improvements.
Should zero front yard setbacks be approved in the DPC, any improvements,
such as future sidewalk extension would need to occur within the County right-of-
way. Additionally, due to Pāhoa Village Road’s limited right of way width, which is
variable, future on-street parking may be limited to one side of the roadway. The
County Council may want to consider requiring a yard setback from a future road
widening line in areas where additional right-of-way is needed.
According to staff discussions with the Department of Water Supply
(DWS), a water system improvement project for Pāhoa Village has been
identified for funding through the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA). However, there are currently other FEMA-funded water system
improvement projects under construction in lower Puna. As a result, the Pāhoa
Village water system improvement project is contingent upon the availability of
FEMA funds once those ongoing projects are completed.
The bill’s purpose section refers to improved infrastructure and amenities,
a safe and walkable built environment, and promotion of housing availability
through mixed residential-commercial development. Those objectives are
consistent with the PCDP, but the Council may wish to consider how
implementation of the district will coordinate with infrastructure capacity,
circulation, pedestrian improvements, and the broader revitalization of central
Pāhoa. The PCDP ties successful town-center development to targeted public
investment and infrastructure support, not zoning alone.
PLANNING DIRECTOR’S RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Director is supportive of the intent of Bill 126 and
respectfully recommends including additional language to explain the opt-in
rezoning process, as outlined in this report, along with the following revision to
address the requirement of Plan Approval:
Include a provision at the end of the bill to require Plan Approval for new
structures and additions on parcels within the DPC district by inserting the
following statement:
-12-
“Section 25-7- Other regulations.
Plan Approval is required for all new structures and additions to existing
structures in the DPC district, except for construction of one single-family
dwelling and any accessory buildings per lot.”
The Director recommends this addition because the minimum yards
section states that there are no setbacks except as required by Plan Approval yet
does not include a section for requirements for Plan Approval.
Based on the analysis provided, the Planning Director recommends that
the Windward Planning Commission forward a favorable recommendation
on Bill 126 to the County Council with the recommended revisions outlined in this
report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
The Windward Planning Commission (WPC) is required to take action on
Bill 126 as described in Section 25-2-43(b) of the Zoning Code (Planning
Department Exhibit 12- HCC Section 25-2-43(b)). This bill was transmitted by
the County Council to the Department on February 4, 2026, which means the
WPC is required to transmit its recommendation to the council by June 4, 2026.
The WPC shall recommend approval in whole or in part, with or without
modifications, or rejection of the proposed bill, and the recommendation will be
forwarded to the County Council for their consideration and decision. In the event
the WPC fails to act on the proposed bill by this date, such inaction shall be
considered as an unfavorable recommendation by the WPC.
S OF
JOSH GREEN,M.D. RYAN K.P.KANAKA'OLE
GOVERNOR KE KIAAINA ACTING CHAIRPERSON
KENNETH S.FINK,M.D.,MGA,MPHe
Y
MOSES K.N.HAIA,III,J.D.
WAYNE K.KATAYAMActi@/f LAWRENCE H.MIIKE,M.D.,J.D.
9r I c+' JUANITA N.REYHER-COLON
HANNAH KIHALANI SPRINGER
STATE OF HAWAI`I KA MOKU`AINA 'O HAWAI`I CIARADEPUTYW.K.K
DIREECTORCTOR
E
DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES I KA'OIHANA KUMUWAIWAI'AINA
COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT I KE KAHUWAI PONO
P.O.BOX 621
HONOLULU,HAWAII 96809
Mar 2,2026
REF: RFD.6630.8
TO:Ms. Lauren Yasaka,Acting Land Administrator
Land Division
FROM: Ciara W.K. Kahahane, Deputy Director
Commission on Water Resource Management
SUBJECT:Special Districts as set forth in Chapter 25, Articles 1, 3, 5, and 7 of the Hawai'i County Code
FILE NO.: RFD.6630.8
TMK NO.:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the subject document. The Commission on Water Resource
Management(CWRM)is the agency responsible for administering the State Water Code (Code). Under the Code, all
waters of the State are held in trust for the benefit of the citizens of the State, therefore all water use is subject to
legally protected water rights. CWRM strongly promotes the efficient use of Hawaii's water resources through
conservation measures and appropriate resource management. For more information, please refer to the State
Water Code, Chapter 174C, Hawaii Revised Statutes, and Hawaii Administrative Rules, Chapters 13-167 to 13-171.
These documents are available via the Internet at http://dlnr.hawaii.gov/cwrm.
Our comments related to water resources are checked off below.
1. We recommend coordination with the county to incorporate this project into the next update of the county's
Water Use and Development Plan (WUDP). Please contact the respective Planning Department and/or
Department of Water Supply for further information.
2. We recommend coordination with the Engineering Division of the State of Hawai'i, Department of Land and
Natural Resources(DLNR)to incorporate this project into the next update of the State Water Projects Plan
SWPP).
3. We recommend coordination with the State of Hawai'i, Department of Agriculture(HDOA)to incorporate the
reclassification of agricultural zoned land and the associated agricultural water demands into the State's
Agricultural Water Use and Development Plan (AWUDP). Please contact the HDOA for more information
at https:Hhdoa.hawaii.gov/contact/.
RI 4. We recommend that water efficient fixtures be installed and water efficient practices implemented
throughout the project to reduce the increased demand on the area's freshwater resources. Reducing the
water usage of a home or building may earn credit towards Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design (LEED)certification. More information on LEED certification is available at
http://www.usgbc.org/leed. A listing of fixtures certified by the EAP as having high water efficiency can be
found at http://www.epa.gov/watersense.
5. We recommend the use of best management practices (BMP)for stormwater management to minimize the
impact of the project on the existing area's hydrology while maintaining on-site infiltration and preventing
polluted runoff from storm events. Stormwater management BMPs may earn credit toward LEED
certification. More information on stormwater BMPs can be found at
http://planning.hawaii.gov/czm/initiatives/low-impact-development/.
RI 6. We recommend the use of alternative water sources,wherever practicable.
RI 7. We recommend participating in the Hawaii Green Business Program, that assists and recognizes
businesses that strive to operate in an environmentally and socially responsible manner. The program
description can be found online at http://energy.hawaii.gov/green-business-program.
1 8. We recommend adopting landscape irrigation conservation best management practices endorsed by the
Landscape Industry Council of Hawai'i. These practices can be found online at
Ms. Lauren Yasaka
Page 2
March 2, 2026
https://hawaiiscape.com/index.php. Additional information can be found at
https://dlnr.hawaii.gov/cwrm/planning/conservation/.
9. There may be the potential for ground or surface water degradation/contamination and recommend that
approvals for this project be conditioned upon a review by the State Department of Health (HDOH)and the
acceptance of any resulting requirements related to water quality.
10. The proposed water supply source for the project is located in a designated water management area, and a
Water Use Permit is required prior to use of water. The Water Use Permit may be conditioned on the
requirement to use dual line water supply systems for new industrial and commercial developments.
11. The Hawai'i Water Plan is directed toward the achievement of the utilization of reclaimed water for uses
other than drinking and for potable water needs in one hundred per cent of State and County facilities by
December 31, 2045 (§1 74C-31(g)(6), Hawaii Revised Statutes). We strongly recommend that this project
consider using reclaimed water for its non-potable water needs, such as irrigation. Reclaimed water may
include, but is not limited to, recycled wastewater,gray water, and captured rainwater/stormwater. Please
contact the Hawai'i Department of Health,Wastewater Branch, for more information on their reuse
guidelines and the availability of reclaimed water in the project area. Contact information can be found at
https://health.hawaii.gov/about/contact/.
12. A Well Construction Permit(s)is (are)are required before the commencement of any well construction
work.
13. A Pump Installation Permit(s) is (are) required before ground water is developed as a source of supply for
the project.
14. There is (are)well(s)located on or adjacent to this project. If wells are not planned to be used and will be
affected by any new construction, they must be properly abandoned and sealed. A permit for well
abandonment must be obtained.
15. Ground-water withdrawals from this project may affect streamflows,which may require an instream flow
standard amendment.
16. A Stream Channel Alteration Permit(s) is (are) required before any alteration can be made to the bed
and/or banks of a steam channel.
17. A Stream Diversion Works Permit(s) is (are)required before any stream diversion works is constructed or
altered.
18. A Petition to Amend the Interim Instream Flow Standard is required for any new or expanded diversion(s)of
surface water.
19. The planned source of water for this project has not been identified in this report. Therefore,we cannot
determine what permits or petitions are required by CWRM, or whether there are potential impacts to water
resources.
20. The proposed water source(s)and projected water demands for the project, both potable and non-potable,
should be identified. If the project will be provided water by a local water system we recommend
consultation with them to ensure that system capacity is available to supply water for this project.
OTHER:
If you have any questions, please contact Ryan Imata of the Groundwater Regulation Branch at(808)587-0225 or
Katie Roth of the Planning Branch (808)587-0216.
Gregory Henkel
Jennifer Scheffel
C. KimoAlameda Ph.D.ovNty qs„,Martha Morishige
Mayor
Vacant
Melissa Leilani DeMello, Vice Chair
Stephanie Bath
Leila Kealoha
f;`,' " Susan Osborne, ChairEOF•NF'
Frances Brewer
County of Hawaii
PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN ACTION COMMITTEE
Aupuni Center • 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 • Hilo, Hawai'i 96720
808) 961-8288 • Fax (808) 961-8742
March 5, 2026
Chair Louis Daniele III
and Members of the Windward Planning Commission
County of Hawaii
101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3
Hilo, Hawaii 96720
Email: WPCtestimony(a)-hawaiicounty.gov
Aloha Chair Daniele and Members of the Windward Planning Commission:
SUBJECT: Puna Community Development Plan Action Committee Letter—
Pahoa Special District Legislative Suite (Bills 124, 125, and 126)
The Puna Community Development Plan (CDP) Action Committee writes to express its
strong support for the Pahoa Special District Legislative Suite, a coordinated package of
three bills introduced by Council Member Ashley Kierkiewicz.
This legislation reflects the vision and goals articulated by the community through the
Puna CDP, the IGlauea Recovery and Resilience Plan, the Eruption Economic Recovery
Plan, and the Revitalize Puna initiative. Together, these measures represent an important
step toward implementing community-driven strategies for recovery, revitalization, and
long-term resilience.
Bill No. 126 establishes the Downtown Pahoa Commercial Special District, recognizing
Pahoa's role as a regional town center. It expands permitted uses beyond those allowed
under the existing Commercial Village zoning to include light industrial and economic-
support uses such as agricultural processing, co-working spaces, creative media studios,
and cultural enterprises. This expansion would support entrepreneurship and broaden
economic development opportunities for property owners and local businesses.
Chair Louis Daniele III
and Members of the Windward Planning Commission
March 5, 2026
Page 2
Bill No. 124 provides an opt-in rezoning mechanism allowing property owners to transition
from Commercial Village (CV) zoning to Downtown Pahoa Commercial (DPC). This
approach ensures participation is voluntary while enabling interested property owners to
immediately benefit from the expanded range of permitted uses.
Bill No. 125 clarifies the application of the Pahoa Village Design Guidelines and
establishes a transparent, sustained, and community-led design review framework. This
process will help ensure that future construction and renovations respect and reinforce
Pahoa's distinctive small-town plantation character.
Collectively, this legislative package lays critical groundwork for economic revitalization,
stability, and long-term resilience in Puna. It creates flexible, community-informed
pathways for growth that align with the vision of the Puna CDP Action Committee: Malama
Puna A Mau Loa!
The Committee extends its appreciation to Council Member Ashley Kierkiewicz and her
team for their continued collaboration and engagement throughout the development of
this initiative. The Puna CDP Action Committee strongly endorses this legislative suite.
Me ke aloha nui,
fjaq OJbome
Susan Osborne(Mar 5,2026 15:10:33 HST)
Susan Osborne, Chair
Puna Community Development Plan Action Committee
JH
hawaiicounty.gov\depts\PL\PL\planning\public\wpwin60\CDP\CDP-Puna\Action Committee\Meetings\2026\2026 Letters
Subject: **4-2 WPC** Oppose/continue Bills 124,125 and 126 affecting Pahoa Village
From: Dea Rackley
To: Planning WPC Testimony
Date: Sunday, March 22, 2026 9:58:32 AM
Subject: Oppose / Continue Bills 124, 125, and 126 affecting Pāhoa Village
Aloha Chair and Commissioners,
I strongly urge you to defer and not advance Bills 124, 125, and 126 unless and until the County provides a full
public analysis of the impacts on existing Pāhoa residents, property owners, and businesses.
These bills would change zoning in Pāhoa Village to Downtown Pāhoa Commercial, update the Pāhoa Village
Design District, and establish new development standards for the DPC district. Before any recommendation is made,
the public deserves clear answers on:
Which existing residential properties would be affected;
Whether existing homes become nonconforming;
Whether homes damaged by fire or storm may be rebuilt as residences;
The exact changes to permitted uses, building height, and yards/setbacks;
Expected impacts on assessed value, taxes, rents, traffic, drainage, parking, and infrastructure;
How these changes protect the historic character and livability of Pāhoa rather than accelerating speculative
redevelopment.
Pāhoa is not just vacant land on a map. It is a living historic town. A zoning overhaul of this scale should not move
forward without a parcel-level impact review and meaningful community process.
For these reasons, I ask you to continue Bills 124, 125, and 126 until the County releases complete impact
information and holds additional community outreach focused specifically on affected Pāhoa residents and
businesses.
Mahalo,
Dephlia Rackley
Rocky Ishibashi
Rhea Davis
Jennifer Jackson
Keegan Mcgreger
[Pāhoa resident / owner / business / community member]
Sent from my iPhone
Subject: WPC 4-2 ZOning 124, 125 and 126
Date: Sunday, March 22, 2026 5:22:34 PM
From: Lorn Douglas
To: Planning WPC Testimony
Aloha WPC members,
Hawaii has had huge development and I can't say that what has happened to Honolulu, Maui and Kona is a testimony for development. There are
very few historical towns left and Pahoa is certainly one of them. Please do
not support these bills, we already have Subway, McDonalds, Pizza Hut
etc....
Thanks for your consideration and please vote NO!!!!!
Lorn Douglas Lower Puna
--------------------------------------------(o)(o)
----------------------------------------oOO--(_)--OOo
Albert Einstein: "What I most admire about your art is your universality. You don’t say a
word, yet the world understands you!"
Charlie Chaplin: "True. But your glory is even greater! The whole world admires you, even
though they don’t understand a word of what you say."
Subject: Subject: Oppose / Continue Bills 124, 125, and 126 affecting Pāhoa Village
From: Bryan Rupp
To: Planning WPC Testimony
Date: Wednesday, March 25, 2026 4:31:05 AM
Aloha Chair and Commissioners, I strongly urge you to defer and
not advance Bills 124, 125, and 126 unless and until the County
provides a full public analysis of the impacts on existing Pāhoa
residents, property owners, and businesses.
These bills would change zoning in Pāhoa Village to Downtown
Pāhoa Commercial, update the Pahoa Village Design District, and
establish new development standards for the DPC district. Before
any recommendation is made, the public deserves clear answers
on:
Which existing residential properties
would be affected;
Whether existing homes become nonconforming;
Whether homes damaged by fire or storm may be rebuilt as
residences;
The exact changes to permitted uses, building height, and
yards/setbacks;
Expected impacts on assessed value, taxes, rents, traffic, drainage,
parking, and infrastructure;
How these changes protect the historic character and livability of
Pahoa rather than accelerating speculative
redevelopment.
Pāhoa is not just vacant land on a map.
It is a living historic town. A zoning overhaul of this scale should not
move forward without a parcel-level impact review and meaningful
community process.
For these reasons, I ask you to continue Bills 124, 125, and 126 until
the County releases complete impact information and holds
additional community outreach focused specifically on affected
Pāhoa residents and businesses.
Mahalo,
Bryan Rupp
Pāhoa resident
Subject: Oppose / countinue bills 124,125 and 126 affecting pahoa village
From: Doodle Bug
To: Planning WPC Testimony
Date: Wednesday, March 25, 2026 7:08:05 PM
Aloha Chair and Commissioners, I strongly urge you to defer and not advance Bills 124, 125,
and 126 unless and until the County provides a full public analysis of the impacts on existing Pāhoa residents, property owners, and businesses.
These bills would change zoning in Pāhoa Village to Downtown Pāhoa Commercial, update the Pahoa Village Design District, and establish new development standards for the DPC
district. Before any recommendation is made, the public deserves clear answers on:
Which existing residential properties
would be affected;
Whether existing homes become nonconforming;
Whether homes damaged by fire or storm may be rebuilt as residences;
The exact changes to permitted uses, building height, and yards/setbacks;
Expected impacts on assessed value, taxes, rents, traffic, drainage, parking, and infrastructure;
How these changes protect the historic character and livability of Pahoa rather than
accelerating speculative
redevelopment.
Pāhoa is not just vacant land on a map.
It is a living historic town. A zoning overhaul of this scale should not move forward without a
parcel-level impact review and meaningful community process.
For these reasons, I ask you to continue Bills 124, 125, and 126 until the County releases
complete impact information and holds additional community outreach focused specifically on affected Pāhoa residents and businesses.
Mahalo,
Marty Robinson
Pāhoa resident
Subject: Testimony in Strong Support of Bill 124 and Bill 126 – Pahoa Revitalization
From: Tiffany Edwards Hunt
To: Planning WPC Testimony
Cc: ; Kierkiewicz, Ashley; Darrow, Jeffrey W.; Council Testimony;
Date: Sunday, March 29, 2026 5:59:58 PM
To: Windward Planning Commission
From: Tiffany Edwards Hunt & Jeff Hunt
Date: March 29, 2026
Subject: Testimony in Strong Support of Bill 124 and Bill 126 – Pahoa Revitalization
Chair and Members of the Windward Planning Commission,
My name is Tiffany Edwards Hunt, and I am submitting this testimony on behalf of myself and my husband, Jeff Hunt. We have owned commercially zoned property in Pahoa for a
couple of decades. We stand in strong support of Bill 124 and its companion, Bill 126, which together will establish and govern the new Downtown Pahoa Commercial District.
We are heartened to see this district described as a way to encourage a "dynamic town where environment, culture, commerce and community co-exist harmoniously." As long-time
stakeholders, we have seen Pahoa suffer tremendously over the years:
We witnessed the devastating Luquin’s Mexican Restaurant fire.
We felt the economic toll when lava threatened to cross Pahoa Village Road in 2014-2015.
We saw the 2018 Kilauea lava flow wipe out 700 homes in our surrounding area, and we were among those with homes that were inundated.
We endured the COVID-19 pandemic and tried to continue to operate our business despite the challenge of a government shutdown.
Our regional town center, as outlined in the Puna Community Development Plan, is in great need of revitalization. We believe the zoning changes in Bill 124 and the updated standards in
Bill 126 are vital steps toward that recovery.
Beyond zoning, we hope the County will use this momentum to address the significant
challenges of homelessness and vagrancy. We ask that the County proactively work with community partners to reinvigorate the "Weed and Seed" program that thrived here more than
a decade ago.
Furthermore, we suggest the County prioritize the revitalization of the old Pahoa Council
Office. We urge the County to pursue whatever renovations are necessary to make that building habitable and work with a social service partner to inhabit the space. Having a
dedicated service provider located in the heart of the village would be a transformative step for our community’s well-being.
--
We are in desperate need of parking options. Because on-street parking is minimal and many Pahoa lots are small and logistically challenging, we urge the County to:
Widen hours of operation and remove restrictive fencing for the Pahoa District Park and the Pahoa Swimming Pool.
Open the back area of the old Pahoa Council Office (the former Pahoa Police Substation) for public parking.
We thank our elected officials for the clear communication regarding these bills, specifically Councilwoman Ashley Kierkiewicz, who did a significant amount of "front-loading" to
support Pahoa property owners.
Note on Mailing Address Change: Finally, please note that our mailing address has changed.
We request that the Planning Department update its records for our correspondence to: 15-1682 Second Avenue, Keaau, HI 96749.
Thank you for your consideration of our testimony.
Sincerely,
Tiffany Edwards Hunt & Jeff Hunt
Tiffany Edwards Hunt
Big Island Press Club Past President
Tiffany Edwards Communications Founder HSTA Government Relations Committee Member
& Big Island Educator
Ask me about my educational tours! June 2026 Spain
June 2027 Ireland, Scotland & UK June 2028 Thailand, Cambodia & Vietnam
(808) 938-8592
KVIKS Media Foundation Board Member
Testimony in Strong Opposition
Bills 124, 125, and 126 – Downtown Pāhoa Commercial District
East Hawaiʻi Planning Commission Hearing – April 2, 2025
Submitted by: Namele Naipo-Arsiga
---
Aloha Chair and Members of the Commission,
I am a resident of Puna and I am submitting this testimony in strong opposition to Bills 124, 125,
and 126.
My opposition is simple: Pāhoa and the surrounding Puna community do not have the
infrastructure to support the scale of commercial development these bills would allow. Passing
these bills does not create that infrastructure. It simply opens the door to businesses and
developers while leaving our community to absorb the consequences.
That is not “Activate Puna”. That is negligence.
**These Bills Open Pāhoaʻs Door to Outside Development — Without Building Anything Our
Community Needs**
Who do these bills actually serve? The small local business owner in Pāhoa is already here. The
artist, the farmer, the family running a plate lunch shop, the kupuna renting a small commercial
space — they do not need a new zoning designation to do what they are already doing. What
they need is infrastructure. They need reliable water. They need safe roads with sidewalks
accessible for all ages. They need a community that is not being priced out from under them.
Large commercial districts attract developers and investors who look at a newly designated
commercial corridor and see opportunity — the opportunity to build at scale, to acquire multiple
parcels, to consolidate and develop in ways that local residents and small business owners cannot
compete with financially.
We have watched this happen across Hawaiʻi. Kakaʻako was going to be revitalized for local
communities. Kailua was going to be protected by design guidelines. In both cases, the zoning
changes that were supposed to preserve character instead created the conditions for
displacement. The buildings got taller. The rents went up. The local businesses that gave those
places their identity could no longer afford to stay.
The development these bills attract will not build that infrastructure. It will consume what little
we have — and leave our community to live with what remains.
**There Is No Water**
Most of lower Puna runs on rainwater catchment and private wells. There is no municipal water
main serving Pāhoa Village at commercial scale. Bill 126 permits breweries, food processing
facilities, car washes, laundries, and medical clinics by right — all of them heavy water users.
None of these businesses can operate responsibly without a reliable, high-volume water supply
that does not exist here.
Beyond supply, the geology beneath Pāhoa is young, porous lava. There is almost no natural
filtration between the surface and the aquifer our community drinks from. Commercial
wastewater — chemical runoff, cleaning agents, food processing discharge — moves directly
into that aquifer. There is no sewer system to intercept it. The county is proposing to welcome
large commercial operations into a community where the ground water is one spill away from
contamination, with no infrastructure to prevent it and no plan to address it.
**There Is No Road**
Pāhoa has one road in and one road out. Pāhoa Village Road is a single corridor. It is already
congested during peak hours. It is already difficult for kupuna, for families with young kēiki, and
for community members with disabilities to navigate safely.
Bill 126 eliminates all off-street parking requirements for the entire DPC district while
simultaneously permitting over fifty commercial uses by right — bars, restaurants, breweries,
theaters, event facilities, wholesaling operations. The vehicles those businesses generate have
nowhere to go except onto that one road and into the surrounding residential streets.
This is not a theoretical concern. It is a daily lived reality for everyone in lower Puna who drives
through Pāhoa to get anywhere. Adding a large commercial traffic volume to a single-corridor
road with no parking, no sidewalks, and no transit alternatives does not serve our community. It
traps it.
And it does something far worse in an emergency. Pāhoa Village Road is the evacuation route for
tens of thousands of lower Puna residents. We lived through 2018. We know what that road looks
like when people are trying to leave and lava is moving. Increasing commercial density and
eliminating parking on that corridor without a single traffic study or evacuation capacity analysis
is not a planning oversight. It is a public safety failure that this community cannot afford.
**There Is No Wastewater System**
Lower Puna relies heavily on individual cesspools and septic systems. The State of Hawaiʻi has
already mandated under Act 132 that all cesspools be eliminated by 2050 because of the threat
they pose to groundwater and coastal water quality. These bills would encourage large-scale
commercial development — with the wastewater demands that come with it — in an area where
the primary disposal method is already under a state mandate to be phased out. There is no
county wastewater infrastructure to replace it. The county would be simultaneously telling
property owners to upgrade their cesspools while rezoning their land in ways that demand more
from those same failing systems.
**There Is No Plan**
Not one of these three bills is accompanied by a fiscal impact analysis, a traffic study, a water
capacity assessment, a wastewater infrastructure plan, or an environmental review. The map
establishing the DPC boundary was drawn by the Planning Department in January 2026. This
hearing was scheduled two months later. The testimony deadline gives working people in our
community less than one week to respond to a zoning change that will affect their land, their
taxes, their safety, and their daily lives for generations.
The infrastructure does not exist. The studies have not been done. The community was not
meaningfully consulted. And the businesses these bills invite — breweries, wholesalers, food
manufacturers, car washes — are not small local enterprises that need a new zoning designation
to thrive. They are commercial operations that require the kind of roads, water, wastewater, and
utilities that lower Puna simply does not have.
Approving these bills does not build that infrastructure. It just makes our community responsible
for the consequences of its absence.
I am asking this Commission to reject Bills 124, 125, and 126 in their entirety and to tell the
County Council that before any commercial rezoning of Pāhoa moves forward, the infrastructure
must come first — the water, the roads, the wastewater systems, the safety plans. Build that
foundation, do the studies, consult the community, and then talk about what kind of future Pāhoa
wants.
Until then, the answer is no.
ZONING § 25-2-42
25-27 SUPP. 17 (1-2025)
(3) Within ninety days after receipt of the application from the director, unless a
longer period is agreed to by the applicant, the commission shall transmit the
proposed change of zone ordinance together with its recommendations thereon
through the mayor to the council. The commission shall recommend approval
in whole or in part, with or without modifications, or rejection of such
application. In the event that the commission fails to act on the application
within the ninety-day period, the application shall be considered an
unfavorable recommendation by the commission, and the application shall be
transmitted through the mayor to the council with such recommendation.
(1996, ord 96-160, sec 2; ratified April 6, 1999; am 2005, ord 05-136, sec 3; am 2012, ord
12-90, sec 1; am 2024, ord 24-87, sec 1.)25-2-42
Section 25-2-43. Amendments initiated by the council and director.
(a) Any amendment initiated by the director shall be reviewed by the commission.
(1) The amendment shall be submitted to the commission with the director’s
justification and recommendation on the amendment.
(2) Upon receipt of a proposed amendment from the director, the commission shall
hold at least one public hearing. Notice of the hearing by the publication shall
be provided by the commission in accordance with section 25-2-5, except that
when a proposed amendment involves a specific parcel of land, notice shall be
provided by the commission in accordance with subsections (c) and (d).
(3) Within sixty days after receipt of the amendment from the director, the
commission shall transmit the proposed amendment together with its
recommendations thereon through the mayor to the council. The commission
shall recommend approval in whole or in part, with or without modifications,
or rejection of such amendment. In the event that the commission fails to act
on the amendment within the sixty-day period, such inaction shall be
considered as unfavorable recommendation by the commission, and the
amendment shall then be submitted through the mayor to the council with
such recommendation.
(b) The council shall refer any proposed council-initiated amendment to this chapter to
the director and the commission with requests for their respective comments and
recommendations thereon, prior to the first reading of any such amendment. The
director and the commission shall each submit comments and recommendations on
the proposed amendment to the council within one hundred twenty days from the
date that the amendment is transmitted by the council to the director and the
commission.
(1) The director shall submit comments and any recommendations to both the
commission and the council within the one-hundred-twenty-day review period.
§ 25-2-43 HAWAI‘I COUNTY CODE
SUPP. 17 (1-2025)25-28
(2) The commission shall hold at least one public hearing on the proposed
amendment. Notice of the hearing by publication shall be provided by the
commission in accordance with section 25-2-5, except that when a proposed
amendment involves a specific parcel of land, notice shall be provided by the
commission in accordance with subsections (c) and (d).
(3) The commission shall transmit the amendment together with its
recommendations thereon through the mayor to the council. The commission
shall recommend approval in whole or in part, with or without modifications,
or rejection of such amendment. In the event that the commission fails to act
on the amendment within the one-hundred-twenty-day review period, such
inaction shall be considered as an unfavorable recommendation by the
commission.
(4) After the one-hundred-twenty-day review period has expired, the council may
proceed to act on the proposed amendment as it deems appropriate.
(c) Notice by mail to surrounding owners and lessees of record of properties within the
boundaries established by section 25-2-4, shall not be required for any amendment
initiated by the council or the director. In lieu of mailing written notice to
surrounding property owners and lessees of record, the director shall publish notice
of the commission’s public hearing in at least two newspapers of general circulation
in the County, once a week for three consecutive weeks, with the last notice to be at
least ten days prior to the hearing. The notice shall specify the time, date and place
of the hearing, its purpose and a description of any property which may be involved.
(d) Notice to owners of any properties specifically subject to the proposed amendment
shall be provided by mail from the director, no later than thirty days prior to the
commission’s public hearing on the amendment.
(1996, ord 96-160, sec 2; ratified April 6, 1999.)25-2-43
Section 25-2-44. Conditions on change of zone.
(a) Within any ordinance for a change of zone, the council may impose conditions on
the applicant’s use of the property subject to the change of zone provided that the
council finds that the conditions are:
(1) Necessary to prevent circumstances which may be adverse to the public
health, safety and welfare; or
(2) Reasonably conceived to fulfill needs directly emanating from the land use
proposed, with respect to:
(A) Protection of the public from the potentially deleterious effects of the
proposed use; or
(B) Fulfillment of the need for public service demands created by the
proposed use.
Within any ordinance for a change of zone that includes any such conditions,
except for ordinances reverting zoning to a previous zoning district designation or
to an open zoning designation, the director shall specify the time by which all
conditions shall be completed. The time during which required plans, reports,
studies, or relevant permit applications are under review for approvals by