Posts: 8,459
Threads: 1,032
Joined: May 2003
Yep. It is a "general" plan as the name implies. Concentrates on things like "urban expansion zone". No specific zoning proposals.
One of my frustrations is that Hilo and Puna now have about the same populations. Hilo has approx. 2,000 acres of commercial zoning.
Puna has approx. 35.
That is why we joke that the plan for Puna is three words..... Drive To Hilo.
Assume the best and ask questions.
Punaweb moderator
Posts: 50
Threads: 2
Joined: Nov 2010
I was at the Council meeting and heard the discussion. No one was against this property being zoned commercial. The problems were water pressure at the site and parking. The sentiment expressed by several Council members was that the Pahoa Design District plans are in the works so they felt that if the owners came back later after the plans had been finalized they could look at their request for zoning change again.
Clayton
@Rob
My issue is not that the proposed rezoning is wrong or should be different. I just feel that the owner of any property who intends to do any development should be the ones determining what proper zoning they need. Not the seller of a property - who quite frankly is only trying to get this property rezoned - at a minimum – to inflate the potential sale price - while at the maximum - doing something I have seen done on the mainland literally thousands of times.
Further, you say:
“The owners of the property could probably use your advice. It would seem that any incoming businesses to Pahoa must meet the approval of their neighbors and any passing tourists. Perhaps rezoning by referendum is best?”
Purely a statement- totally void of any reality, truth or real meaning. Like me asking if you stopped beating your wife. The owners of this property are solely motivated in selling this property – and could care less about the future of the property or Pahoa.
I would think if this was such of a big concern for you politically as well as for the good of Pahoa, you would be burning mad that Fred skipped the vote. Instead you just continue to bait James into what his response would be. Me – even though at this moment I am off Island and was unable to attend in person this hearing, although I sent my written comments in, I could care less about James’ opinion and am, once yet again, ashamed of MY elected representative. Perhaps maybe we should ask what Emily thinks?
And further, why don’t you become our elected representative? You clearly have each and every answer – regardless o f what anybody thinks!
@Kapohocat
This is purely all about personality. You and a few others – for whatever reason – do not agree with the Hunts, specifically Tiffany. My comment about personality disorders was specifically targeted at Rob’s statement (as well as his statement being very flippant) – and I quote – “I am a bit alarmed about one aspect of this application. The organized opposition seems to be personality based.”
Just reading Rob’s take on this whole matter – the flippant comments – just puts this whole matter into the “I don’t like the Hunt’s” so I am for the rezoning – regardless of the points Tiffany, or anyone else for that matter, brings up.
I would call the allowing of a seller of a property - with no intent of actually developing the property themselves – to rezone a property to more or less be the definition of "hit or miss" zoning regulations.
Bottom line here – make the rezoning process a “slam dunk” for the NEW owner. Instead of the head banging ineptness the process really is. As well as outlaw any potential rezoning solely to allow a property seller to capture a higher price.
Posts: 274
Threads: 16
Joined: Jun 2010
quote:
My issue is not that the proposed rezoning is wrong or should be different. I just feel that the owner of any property who intends to do any development should be the ones determining what proper zoning they need. Not the seller of a property - who quite frankly is only trying to get this property rezoned - at a minimum – to inflate the potential sale price - while at the maximum - doing something I have seen done on the mainland literally thousands of times.
There is no way a sole proprietor could take this risk (of purchasing a property on the gamble that they could get the zoning changed to fit their needs). So the only CAPITAL you'll get moving into the community is from large multinational corporations (the burger kings, longs, trumps and targets of the world). And the purpose of these large corporations is to siphon off as much $$ from a community and ship it back to their shareholders.
http://www.wedekingphotography.com
Posts: 1,839
Threads: 48
Joined: May 2007
Perhaps a landowner has a potential buyer who says: I would buy your property to put in my store if it were only zoned commercial, but the county is so inconsistent with their zoning process that I just can't take the risk.
There really needs to be a general plan update to address the current needs of the community. Commercial zoning should have clear criteria to meet.
"Pahoa Design District plans are in the works" So is PMAR. Coming very soon. not.
Posts: 1,955
Threads: 100
Joined: Aug 2005
Contract Vendee zoning changes ( sale contingent on zoning approval ) are common in the rest of the country
Posts: 1,839
Threads: 48
Joined: May 2007
In Hawaii County is there not a two step process?
1. Zoning,
2. Use Permit
The Zoning defines the general allowable use of the land.
The Use Permit addresses the specifics of a particular project;
ie. Motel or Restaurant or Flower Stand.
A new Use permit is required every time the type of use changes, the zoning doesn't.
Posts: 1,581
Threads: 26
Joined: Jun 2007
quote:
Originally posted by DanielP
In Hawaii County is there not a two step process?
1. Zoning,
2. Use Permit
The Zoning defines the general allowable use of the land.
The Use Permit addresses the specifics of a particular project;
ie. Motel or Restaurant or Flower Stand.
A new Use permit is required every time the type of use changes, the zoning doesn't.
Dan, no clarification yet?
Zoning establishes what will be allowed within the area set for that zoning. They will include many items, some that are called by right and others by permission.
"By Right" means that once the zoning is established, you can conduct those allowed uses without any additional zoning considerations or approvals. "By Permission" means that within that zoning, there are some of those allowed uses that due to their potential to be disruptive or incompatible with the community, additional permission is required for that particular use.
Let’s say they establish a zoning called Retail. Within the Retail Zoning you can have retail stores, you can have café’s, you can have a small personal service business, and you can have small office operations. Those uses are "By Right". Now, within that zoning they also allow retail auto service stores and retail liquor sale, but due to the potential disruption or incompatibility, an additional authorization (Use Permit) is required before that particular listed allowed zoning use can occur. The USE itself is allowed but with the requirement of additional permission to ensure that it is neither disruptive nor incompatible with the community.
So as it addresses your question, Use or Special Use Permits are a sub section of the zoning process but is only required for those uses that are allowed in the zoning but must undergo an additional approval process due to its potential for disruption and/or incompatibility.
Posts: 1,839
Threads: 48
Joined: May 2007
Thanks Bob.
In the county where I lived most of my professional life, use permits were required whenever there was a change of business or change of owner.
Dan
