HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-08-31 Marilyn Johnson and Van Eden, Eric Rosse, and Dina Zellner Testimony
From: Marilyn Johnson
To: Planning WPC Testimony
Subject: PL-SPP-2026-000140 concerns/testimony
Date: Monday, August 31, 2026 12:47:00 PM
We are residents of Kehena Beach Estates subdivision, writing in regards to application PL-
SPP-2026-000140, submitted by Mark Sidmore and Caleb Rhodes.
We are concerned about this special use permit application. We request that additional
questions be asked of the petitioners, and there be clarification of how the county will
manage the use of this property.
Our concerns and questions:
1. We question whether this application was submitted according to Chapter 25-4-7, with
the applicant’s goal of establishing the Bed and Breakfast special use permit prior to the
September 1, 2026 deadline for Chapter 25-50. Given the hearing is occurring after the
September 1, 2026 deadline, we ask for clarification whether any special use permit
granted under this application will be managed and enforced under Chapter 25-4-7, or
under the new Chapter 25-50, which has more stringent registration and renewal
requirements.
2. Chapter 25-4-7(b)(7) requires adequate parking stalls. The applicants have identified on
their application parking stalls to be accessed from La’au Loke Street. However, the
applicants currently operate an NUC STVR on this premises, with the guests parking in
the Highway 137 right-of-way (ROW). We request confirmation that, if this special use
permit is granted, a) they commit to appropriately prepare their designated off-street
parking as required by law, and b) they commit that guests will not park in the ROW,
which is their current practice.
3. Chapter 25-4-7(b)(5) states that the bed and breakfast can have no more than 10
guests. The applicants have specified the number of bedrooms for rent, but have not
specified the maximum number of guests they intend to allow. This is an important
concern given that historically, prior to the current ownership, a large open space room
on the premises was used as a dormitory-type accommodation. As residents of the
community, we want to ensure no further such dormitory operation is intended.
4. Chapter 25-4-7(b)(1) states “The bed and breakfast establishment shall … not alter or be
detrimental to the character of the surrounding area.” The premises in question is on
Highway 137. There are already four existing transient accommodations along this
stretch of highway. Therefore, for this reason and this reason alone, we do not object to
the continued operation of a transient accommodation at this location. To be clear, our
preference is that no transient accommodation be allowed in Kehena Beach Estates. We
are an ohana that cares for each other. A large transient population dilutes the
community, and is definitely detrimental to the single family residential character of our
community.
As a positive comment - we respect that the applicants are filing applications with the intent
of following the transient accommodation law. We also appreciate that they have made
considerable improvements to their property during their ownership.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. We look forward to getting clarifications for our
concerns during the hearing.
Marilyn Johnson and Van Eden, 12-7196 Mauka Nui St
Eric Rosse 12-7206 Mauka Nui St
Dina Zellner 12-7233 Ki'i Nani St