Cafe

[oink]

quote:

---

That's pretty cynical Bob.

---

Yeah but it was funny as heck and appears close to the truth.

Pua`a
S. FL
Big Islander to be.

[csgray]

There is a place on Maku'u in HPP (a huge subdivision which has more residents than the small town I grew up in, and NO commercial area) which is applying for their special use permit after their ongoing garage sale morphed into a small market. If they can get it to fly it will be a good indicator of what the future will hold for similar enterprises in HPP.

I wish we had a cafe here in HPP where we could go get a good breakfast on the weekend, which could serve as the community gathering point we sorely lack. If you offered mail boxes too you would have built in foot traffic since most of HPP doesn't have mail service.

Carol

[JerryCarr]

Thank you, Carol, for this news and insight. I can't wait for the Census to be published, because it lists HPP as a distinct reporting entity, meaning we will know pretty closely just how many people live here. It was 7,051 in 2000, and we might reasonably expect it to be around 10,000 by now. Does anybody know of a community that size ANYWHERE that does not have a grocery store, cafe, service businesses, gas station, or even a convenience store? Like Carol, I grew up in a much smaller community that had all those things plus parks, a police station, full service public library, public swimming pool, and a small historical museum.

The County of Hawaii powers that be have always had a simple solution to this situation: "Drive to Hilo." The Puna CDP seeks to remedy that through the village centers concept, but the implementation of the plan seems to be taking forever. I know that things won't change overnight, but something this century might be nice.

[Bob Orts]

quote:

---

Originally posted by JerryCarr

Does anybody know of a community that size ANYWHERE that does not have a grocery store, cafe, service businesses, gas station, or even a convenience store? Like Carol, I grew up in a much smaller community that had all those things plus parks, a police station, full service public library, public swimming pool, and a small historical museum.

---

There probably isn't any. But keep in mind that outside of Puna and Kau, nobody understands what's being discussed. They see HPP as a private housing subdivision. To outsiders, it's not a community like Honokaa, Kailua, Hilo or Capt Cook, it's a private residential subdivision. You might as well be asking for the right to raise cows in Kona Village Resort or to allow garage sales in Mauna Lani Resort. That's why the fuel tax sharing plan is such an uphill battle, because all they are hearing is giving tax revenue to private developers for private streets in private subdivisions. To some degree, they think that the people didn't want these commercial development within their residential streets otherwise they would have had dedicated commercial areas.

It's not impossible to change the thinking, but since infrastructure needs require state approval, you have to convince not the few local district politicians, but all the others. As for commercial zoning and approval, they look at that as a pure local issue and they won't get involved unless it threatens their political position with their voters.

I was in Honolulu last week and I can tell you, there is little support for any fuel tax revenue sharing for private subdivisions, and they find it hard to believe there is no commercial zoning within reasonable distance. Unfortunately, they are applying the same standards to other counties and they look at the areas outside the private residential subdivisions and they don’t see anything out of the ordinary. They are so very reluctant to meddle in the internal private subdivision affairs; which is how they view areas like HPP.

[JerryCarr]

quote:

---

[i] As for commercial zoning and approval, they look at that as a pure local issue and they won't get involved unless it threatens their political position with their voters.

---

Well, HPP is somewhat unique in that it actually does have areas (20 acre parcels) set aside for commercial development, as well as for schools, parks, and other civic use. The problem is that these parcels were never zoned for those uses. HPP would be the ideal place to implement the Village Center concept from the Puna CDP because of those parcels. Zoning is only one problem, though, because the roads and utilities would no doubt need to be upgraded to handle such development. The HPPOA owns most of those parcels, but the Watamull family still owns at least one of the more commercially viable locations. It's all very complicated.

[Bob Orts]

On those lots that are set aside for commercial development, has any attempt been made to locate commercial development on any of them? There are lots all over the Big Island that were zoned residential or agricultural (and even conservation) that have had zoning changed to accommodate commercial development. Not having the correct zoning in and of itself is not an indicator or government obstruction. But if attempts were made and rejected, that changes the dynamics of the issue.

The county probably had to approve the development plan for the subdivision. If those commercial areas were part of the original plan, the county would be hard pressed to prevent commercial development. They could get away with denying a zoning change or Use Permit for something totally out of character for the area, especially if the land was never intended for that use. But, if the plans were always to develop a lot as commercial and was part of the original plans, the County would have some heavy legal problems if they refused a compatible use on the sole basis of zoning. There are enough precedents set for rezoning that a savvy developer could get a favorable court ruling if it came down to that.

But, the county holds all the cards if nobody has ever tried.

[JerryCarr]

I should have mentioned that, to my knowledge, no formal application for zoning changes to the 20 acre parcels has been made. What little we have in HPP in the way of legal businesses are either agricultural or operating under Special Use Permits. Therefore, I won't presume to know what the County's approach to rezoning would be. Some politicians (mayor and councilwoman) have promised us a park, and if they deliver, I think some sort of zoning would be required. Commercial would likely be a whole different ball game, though, and one has to expect that at least some of the nearby residents would object.

As far as the "development plan" for the substandard subdivisions, I'm tempted to say "what plan?," but the presence of those 20 acre parcels indicates that somebody, at least in HPP, was thinking about the future needs of a populated community. The commonly assumed history of these subdivisions indicates that the County didn't seem to really think that they would ever be built out or need the amenities of civilization. I'd have to say that if they were thinking about such things, it doesn't show. I guess I need to do some more research, and I'll start with HPP since I'm most familiar with it and have access to the office and some of its records.

[Bob Orts]

Jerry, here's a starting point. Go to HPP's offices and ask to see the HPP Community Master Plan that was in existence on November 19, 2007. Particularly, what properties were designated for other than residential and agricultural purposes. Those are the properties that the County of Hawaii has approved for development and zoning changes when requested.

Some of those large lots do have restriction that prevents commercial development unless for educational, recreational, or community services purposes. Because of those deed restrictions, they can only be for the stated purpose. The remained of those other than residential or agricultural lots are approved for commercial development.

There are a bunch of small details and requirements in the resolution approving acceptance of HPP's commercial development, but I can't find anything anywhere that says HPP can't move forward with their commercial development on those authorized lots. It may just be that HPPOA has never tried to move forward on this. I do know that Watumull Properties considered it but felt there wasn't enough of a need to make development financially viable at this time. It seems any interest from commercial businesses with enough money to proceed wants to be along 130 or 11, not "buried" in side streets.

That's the impression I'm getting. I don't think its so much the CoH obstructing commercial development in HPP, more like nobody is interested in developing anything as approved. This may be similar in other areas as well. I also see attempts to create commercial use on lots not approved for commercial use, and the CoH has a legitimate requirement to stop those because it violated both County Zoning and R184 that accepted the HPP Community Master Plan. But if you can get hold of the actual map showing which lots were designated for commercial development as of 11/1997, that should give you an idea of what lots will get zoning changes if and when someone request it. Until someone ask, the current zoning remains.

[JerryCarr]

Thanks, Bob. I have heard references to the HPP Master Plan, but never seen the document. I'll start there.

[Bob Orts]

These are the documents you need to obtain:
HPP Master General Plan in existence on 11/1997. This is outlines HPP's future development.
HPP Master plat in existence on 11/1997. This shows all the lots, roads, and what is designated for other than residential/agricultural development. it should also show which of those development lots are restricted to educational, community or recreational purposes.
CoH Resolution 184 from 1997. This was the unanimously approved resolution of the Council that said development within HPP will be based on HPP's development plan.

I still have not found anything that rescinded that resolution, so it should still be valid. I suspect that the CoH will not approve any zoning change request from any lot that was not designated for development on that date. That could be a problem because things change and what was appropriate in 1997 may not be the best land use in 2010.

It would be interesting if any development or zoning change request were made to the CoH for any of those approved developable lots. It would be even more interesting if the CoH denied development or zoning change request for lots that were designated in 1997. That would be in violation of their own binding resolution.

As for all the other subdivisions, I would guess they all had to file similar plans and may also have similar CoH approvals for development.