CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU :1 - Granicus

PLANNING COMMISSION

CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU650 SOUTH KING STREET. 7Th FLOOR • HONOLULU, HAWA

96813PHONE: (808) 768-8007 • FAX: (808) 768-6743

DEPT. WEB SITE: ~vw.hpncIuIudDo.prg • CITY WEB SITE:

KIRK CALDWELL www.honolulu ~OV CORD D. ANDERSON, Vice ChairMAYOR ARTHUR B. TOLENTINO

STEVEN S.C. tIMTHERESIA C. MCMURDO

KEN K. HAYASHIDAWILFRED A. CHANG, JR.GIFFORD K. F. CHANG

ARTHUR D. CHALLACOMBE

October30, 2018

The Honorable Ernest Y. MartinChair and Presiding Officer

and CouncilmembersHonolulu City Council530 South King Street, Room 202Honolulu, Hawaii 96813

~0

Dear Chair Martin and Councilmembers: n.’niLi

SUBJECT: Proposed Amendment to Chapter 21, ROH 1990, as Amended(The Land Use Ordinance), Relating to Detached Dwellings :1

The Planning Commission held a public meeting on October 17, 2018 on theabove subject matter. Written concerns, comments, and testimonies were received.The public hearing was closed on October 17, 2018.

The Commission voted on two motions. For City Council-initiated bill, ResolutionNo. 17-276, CD1 (attached as Bill A), the Commission voted unanimously, 6:0, to notrecommend approval.

The Planning Commission voted unanimously, 6:0, to accept therecommendation of the Acting Director of the Department of Planning and Permitting(DPP), to adopt the proposed amendment to the Land Use Ordinance, relating toDetached Dwellings (attached as Bill B) with the following amendments:

• The Floor Area Ratio should be limited to a maximum of 0.6.• The side and rear yards should be landscaped, not impervious or paved.

DEPT. COM. 713

The Honorable Ernest Y. MartinChair and Presiding Officer

and CouncilmembersOctober 30, 2018

Attached is the report from the Acting Director of the DPP, original copy ofResolution 17-276, CD1 (attached as Bill A), the DPP’s draft bill (attached as Bill B),and portion of the Planning Commission’s October 17, 2018 draft transcript onDetached Dwellings.

Sincerely,

C~~~son,ViceCZairPlanning Commission

Enclosures

ACKNOWLEDGED: ACKNOWLEDGED:

__ JLAiKirk CaIdwell - K. Sokug Acting DirectorMayor ‘‘artment of - ning and Permitting

Roy ~ Amemiya, JrP’Managing Director

Authorization ____________ ~1 AI~IUC(4V~EPA MENT OF PLANNING AND PERMITTING

Advertisement ~ Y AND COUNTY OF HONOLULUPublic Hearing P.(k. L’l 2.O(Z 6 0 SOUTH KING STREET 7 FLOOR • HONOLULU HAWAII 96013__________________________________________ PHONE (808) 768-8000 • FAX (808) 768-6041

DEPT WEB SITE www.honpluludoo.org • CITY WEB SITE. www honolulu.po’w

KATHY K SOKUGAWAKIRK CALDWELL ACTING DIRECTOR

MAYOR TIMOTHY F. T. HIU

DEPUTY DIRECTOR

0 EU~4E H. TAK~fl~SHIDEPUTY DIREf~R

-u (~)

September 4, 2018

MEMORANDUM

TO: Kaiulani Sodaro, Chairand Members of the Planning Commission

FROM: Kathy K. Sokugawa, Acting DirectorDepartment of Planning and Permitting

SUBJECT: Proposed Amendment to Chapter 21, ROH 1990, as Amended (The LandUse Ordinance), Relating to Detached Dwellings

The Department of Planning and Permitting (DPP) is pleased to submit for yourreview and recommendation two bills, which would amend certain sections of the LandUse Ordinance (LUO) to regulate large detached dwellings. The first is a CityCouncil-initiated bill transmitted to the DPP by Resolution No. 17-276, CD1 (attached tothe staff report as Bill A). The second is an alternative version proposed by the DPP(attached to the staff report as Bill B). The DPP recommends approval of Bill B.

Bill A, associated with Resolution No. 17-276, CD1, proposes to:

• Require a Major Conditional Use Permit for large detached dwellings;• Limit the density for one-family and two-family detached dwellings;• Limit the number of wet bars within each dwelling;• Increase the parking requirement for detached, duplex, and farm dwellings; and• Add definitions for “Dwelling, Large Detached” and “Wet Bars.”

Bill B incorporates several elements of Bill A along with some recommendationsput forward by the Large Detached Dwelling Task Force created by the City Council,under Ordinance 18-6. The Task Force was comprised of a broad range ofstakeholders, including community members, public agencies, and professionalorganizations. Our recommendation is also based on numerous discussions with the

Memorandum to Kaiulani SodaroSeptember 4, 2018Page 2

development community and members of the public. Finally, we analyzed permit dataover the past decade to develop our recommendation.

The DPP supports the basic intent of Bill A, which is to better regulate the size ofdetached dwellings and preserve the character of our residential neighborhoods. In thatregard, Bill B proposes to amend the LUO by incorporating the following additionalstandards for any residential development with a floor area ratio (FAR) between 0.6 and0.7:

• Provide two additional parking spaces over the current LUC requirement; and• Provide eight-foot side and rear yards, instead of five feet.

Bill B also incorporates a maximum FAR cap of 0.7 in Residential Districts.Additionally, Bill B proposes stricter maneuverability requirements for dwelling useswithin all zoning districts. Where four or more parking spaces are required, the spacesmust be arranged so that all vehicles can enter the street in a forward facing mannerand no maneuvering into or from any street is necessary in order for a vehicle to leave aspace. Finally, tandem parking will be limited to a maximum of two stacked parkingspaces for required parking.

We believe these standards will force the development on residential sites to “fit”the site so that spill-over effects of large dwelling units are not felt so strongly within ourneighborhoods. Enclosed you wiN find an analysis, the Council-initiated bill (Bill A), andthe DPP bill (Bill B). We would be happy to answer any questions that you may have aspart of your deliberations.

Attachments

LAND USE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT — A COUNCIL-INITIATED PROPOSALRELATING TO DETACHED DWELLINGS

RESOLUTION NO. 17-276, CDIStaff Report

September 4, 2018

I. Introduction

Large residential dwelling units have become a flashpoint for Qahu, particularly inneighborhoods with modest, aging homes, where existing dwellings are beingdemolished and sometimes replaced with larger homes. Today’s residentialdevelopment standards, which have been in place and are mainly unchanged since thelate 1 960s, were designed to maximize flexibility for property owners. We find now thatadditional development standards are necessary to preserve and protect the characterand livability of our residential areas. Neighborhood opposition and concern cangenerally be categorized into two camps: 1) Physical impacts, sheer size of thestructure, parking congestion, and elevating property values, 2) Illegal occupancies,short term rentals, group living, dormitory use, and additional dwellings.

Neighbors have raised concerns about dwellings with excessive bedrooms, bathrooms,wet bars, and laundry facilities. However, it is not necessarily the number and type ofrooms and amenities that cause problems in a neighborhood. Rather, the largenumbers of people that the dwelling can accommodate generates externalities — impactsto the surrounding neighborhood that are not common to most residential areas. Forexample, a dwelling that can accommodate many people will generally need more cars.Where there is insufficient on-site parking, competition for street parking will increase.Traffic congestion may also increase, which can cause public safety issues, especiallywhen emergency services are needed.

The Department of Planning and Permitting (DPP) reviewed the issue, evaluated localdevelopment trends over the last decade, researched other municipalities’ zoningcodes, listened to testimony given during public meetings, and reviewed thearchitectural plans of large homes to identify patterns related to large dwelling units.The DPP also discussed the matter with the Large Detached Homes Task Forcecreated by the City Council. In doing so, we have concluded that a select number ofnew regulations will help curb the physical impacts and illegal use of large dwellings,while allowing homeowners and builders to have considerable design options.Additionally, our proposals will not inhibit the ability of extended families ormultigenerational households to live in the Residential Districts.

II. Legislative Background

On December 6, 2017, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 17-276, CD1 initiatingamendments to Chapter 21, Revised Ordinances of Honolulu (ROH) relating todetached dwellings attached as Bill A. The stated purpose of the Resolution, asdocumented in the Zoning and Housing Committee Report CR-448, datedNovember 16, 2017, was to address the development of large detached dwellings, theirimpacts on the surrounding communities, and the problem of transient rentals in largeresidential structures.

Bill A associated with Resolution No. 17-276, CD1 would:

• Require a Major Conditional Use Permit for “large detached dwellings;”• Limit the density for one-family and two-family detached dwellings;• Limit the number of wet bars within each dwelling;• Increase the parking requirement for detached, duplex, and farm dwellings; and• Add definitions for “Dwelling, Large Detached” and ‘Wet Bars.”

On March 13, 2018, Ordinance 18-6 was signed into law to regulate large residentialstructures for an interim period. Ordinance 18-6 has temporarily halted the constructionof “large detached dwellings” while the DPP researches the matter and recommends apermanent solution. Ordinance 18-6 specifies that a building permit may not be issuedfor a dwelling with a floor area ratio (FAR) greater than 0.7 unless certain developmentstandards are met. Ordinance 18-6 will expire with the enactment of an ordinanceexplicitly repealing or superseding it, or two years after the effective date of Ordinance18-6 (March 13, 2020).

Ordinance 18-6 also required the creation of a Task Force whose members wouldprovide input and advice to the Planning Commission and the Department of Planningand Permitting (DPP) on long-term solutions to the problems associated with theregulation of large detached dwellings. The Task Force met three times since itsformation in June 2018.

The original intent of Resolution 17-276, CD1 was, in part, to address the issue oftransient rentals. However, the City Council’s deliberations revealed that there are likelyto be more reasons why such dwellings are being built. In any event, the issue ofshort-term rentals in Residential Districts is being addressed separately.1

Another Land Use Ordinance (LUO) amendment that may protect the character ofexisting neighborhoods is one that incentivizes construction in Apartment, Apartment

1 A draft bill in response to Council Resolutions 17-52, 17-134, 17-136 and 17-164 has been delivered to the PlanningCommission for review. That draft bill will address the illegal use of all short-term rentals, whereas the draft billattached to this report will address the size and design of large homes.

2

Mixed Use and Business Mixed Use Districts. Resolution 18-78, CD1, introduced onApril 3, 2018, is intended to increase the supply of affordable, rental housing in districtsthat already accommodate a higher density. While more research is being conductedon Resolution 18-78, CD1, this combination of LUO amendments should help preservethe character of existing residents of neighborhoods by deflecting demand to apartmentdistricts. There are two pending enforcement bills related to short-term rentals knownas the “False Statements Bill” and the “Seller Disclosure Bill”. The False Statements Billwould clearly delineate that lying to city officials is misdemeanor with stipulatedpenalties. The Seller Disclosure Bill would require disclosure documents for residentialsales transactions to include a DPP-signed form indicating whether short-term renting isallowed on the property.

Ill. Regulations

Existing Regulations: Currently, the LUO regulates the size of dwellings via lotcoverage, yards (required open space between a structure and the property line),height, height setbacks, and parking. Today, dwellings within the Residential Districtsmust not:

• Exceed the maximum lot coverage of 50 percent;• Encroach into the 10-foot front yard and 5-foot side and rear yards; or• Exceed the 25-foot height limit (30 feet if the lot is sloping).

Dwellings within the Residential Districts must provide:

• Two parking spaces per unit plus one per 1,000 square feet over 2,500 squarefeet of the dwelling unit’s floor area, must be provided on-site, and

• Height setbacks equal to one-foot for each two feet over for any portion of thestructure exceeding 15 feet along the side and rear yards, and one-foot for eachtwo feet over any portion of the structure exceeding 20 feet along the front yard.

Proposed Regulations: DPP’s recommendation, attached as Bill B, is to place adensity cap, or a maximum FAR2, in the Residential Districts. This will directly tie themass or volume of the building to its lot size. We recommend that at an FAR of 0.6,additional development standards will apply, and an FAR of 0.7 should be the overallcap. At 0.6 FAR, a landowner with a 5,000-square-foot lot could build a3,000-square-foot home (not including the garage or carport), and a landowner with a10,000-square-foot lot could build a 6,000-square-foot dwelling. At 0.7 FAR alandowner with a 5,000-square-foot lot could build a 3,500-square-foot home (notincluding the garage or carport) and a landowner with a 10,000-square-foot lot couldbuild a 7,000-square-foot dwelling.

2 FAR means the ratio of floor area to total area of the zoning lot (i.e. FAR = floor area + lot area).

3

Under this proposal, any landowner or developer who sought an FAR between 0.6 and0.7 would have to:

• Provide two additional on-site parking spaces over the base LUC requirement;and

• Increase the side and rear yard setbacks to eight feet.

We are also proposing stricter parking space and maneuverability requirements for allproperties in the Residential Districts.

We do not recommend adopting some of the other proposals related to large detacheddwellings, including limits to the number of bedrooms, wet bars, and laundry rooms.Such regulations are difficult to enforce, easy to evade, and unnecessary given ourresearch and the recommended new regulations.

From another perspective, the recent attention to large homes and the adoption ofOrdinance 18-6, which instituted the “moratorium” on large dwellings, appear to havesignificantly reduced the number of building permit applications for large homes. Assuch, Ordinance 18-6, is an effective model for more permanent legislation. Ourrecommendation, which revises the standards in Ordinance 18-6 and is based on moreextensive research, will be manageable and straightforward.

IV. Density and Dwelling Sizes

Data analysis and historical trends: Our data, collected primarily from buildingpermits issued between 2007 and today, reveal certain patterns of development. Forexample, between 2007 and 2018, the median size for a dwelling across the island hasremained steady at about 3,000 square feet. See Graph 1. During those years, themedian home size was largest in 2008, at approximately 3,600 square feet. Graph 1also shows the largest home constructed each year. While the data reveal that eventhe largest home sizes have not trended upward, the largest homes are “outliers” thatskew the statistics and public perception. We have found that the majority of thedwellings with more than eight bedrooms are being built in Kalihi, Kaimuki, and Manoaon lots in the R-3.5 and R-5 Residential Districts.

Graph 1: Single-Family Dwelling Floor Area Range (2007-2017)

18,000 ————-- —--————----

largest16,000 157264

14,570 amedian

14,000 —---- —--—- _.—.•--_•--_-

12000 —-—-————----—-—-——-—--

— 10,705 10 555_____ 9862

8,270 —

8,000 7~751

6,000 —

4,000

2,000 -

0 --—— -—

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

__ V

Over the same period, out of approximately 2,000 new dwelling units constructedannually, an average of 34 dwelling units were at least twice the average home size(i.e., approximately 6,000 square feet). This number of large homes has remainedrelatively steady. However, since Ordinance 18-6 went into effect, the number ofbuilding permit applications for homes has dropped dramatically, from 59 in 2017 to 8between January and June of 2018g.

Graph 2 illustrates how the average FAR varies by lot size and zoning designation.Between 2007 and 2017, the median FAR on lots with 5,000 square feet was 0.4, wherethe median FAR on lots with 20,000 square feet was 0.2. The average FAR in theR-3.5 Residential District is approximately 0.6; approximately 0.4 in the R-7.5 District;and, approximately 0.3 in the R-10 District. While dwellings in the R-7.5, R-10, andR-20 Residential Districts tend to be larger, they also cover a smaller proportion of thelot, so the FAR tends to fall as the lot gets larger. Still, Graph 2 reveals that the largesthome often exceeds an FAR of 1, meaning the floor area of the dwelling unit is equal toor greater than the lot area.

~ The data was gathered from Building Permits Applications for dwellings with more than eight bedrooms.

5

Graph 2: Single-Family Dwelling Floor Area Ratio (FAR) by Zoning District

Single Family Dwelling FAR by Zoningby Percentile

2.0 -—~ —--—-———-——-—-——--— —-———-——~———-———— --

1.8 ._____._______.__.____....__._._.___.~....U Median

1.6 —--—————-——-————-—--——- ———-—--.--——-———--—-—-———-——.—

&~ 1.4

c 1.2C

~ 1.0

~ 0.80

0.6

rProposed Density Limits: Based on this data, the DPP recommends that additionaldevelopment standards apply to zoning lots where the development exceeds an FAR of0.6. An FAR of 0.6 should accommodate the great majority of all prospective homeowners, including those who wish to live with extended families4.

Some members of the Task Force advocated for a maximum FAR cap of 0.7, meaningthat no building under any circumstance may exceed an FAR of 0.7. The DPP agreesthat this will help contain the out-of-proportion massing of large homes while retaining agood deal of flexibility. The data show that the general trend is for median FAR todecrease as lot size increases. While FARs of 0.6 and 0.7 are larger than what manyother municipalities allow, such FARs will still allow ohana dwellings to thrive and maylower the cost of housing.

FAR was chosen as the method to regulate large dwellings because it will be easier toenforce and more difficult to falsify on plans than bedrooms, wet bars, and laundryrooms. A single maximum FAR across all zoning districts, as opposed todistrict-specific FARs will be easy for property owners and developers to understand.Based on historic trends, we still expect most homes to be constructed well below theproposed maximum FAR.

This proposed density limit would apply to all permitted and conditional uses within theResidential Districts. This means that, for example, new day care and meeting facilitiesmust also physically “fit” into the existing residential neighborhood, unless a ConditionalUse Permit application provides compelling evidence to the contrary.

This FAR would apply to the entire lot. It includes all dwellings and other habitable spaces on the lot.

6

V. Dwelling Design and Occupancy

We analyzed common elements of dwelling units that are not currently regulated underthe LUO, including the number of bedrooms, wet bars, bathrooms, and laundry facilitiesin dwelling units with at least eight bedrooms between January 2017 to February 2018.This revealed that some recommendations from Resolution 17-276, CD1, and thosediscussed during the public hearings on the “moratorium” bill, will not necessarily limit orreduce the size of a dwelling unit. However, other recommendations, such asincreasing the number of on-site parking stalls, will influence house size on sites withdwelling units between an FAR of 0.6 and 0.7.

Bedrooms: Regarding bedrooms, we find architectural plans very often show a lowbedroom count, but label other areas as dens, libraries, sewing rooms, offices, or evenwalk-in closets. In reality, however, these areas might be used as bedrooms.Currently, the building code has basic safety requirements for bedrooms. Buildinginspectors will enforce these requirements when conducting an inspection if they find aroom set up as a bedroom with inadequate egress. However, to avoid building coderequirements (or new legislation for large homes), beds can be hidden duringinspections or easily removed for follow-up inspections. After the inspector leaves, it isrelatively easy for a homeowner to replace the furniture and continue using the spaceas a bedroom. This illustrates how difficult a maximum bedroom requirement is toenforce.

Wet bars and laundry rooms: Many in the community believe that wet bars andlaundry rooms are a problem in large houses because they believe each wet bar will beconverted into a full kitchen after the building permit is issued, thereby establishingadditional dwelling units within the structure. Although we do not yet have significantevidence from post construction investigations, our data collected from building permitplans suggests that this is not a pervasive problem. Many of the homes we reviewedwith at least eight bedrooms had more than one wet bar and/or laundry area, but thenumbers were not particularly excessive; across the data set, the average number ofwet bars and laundry areas was only 1.5. Most of the homes had only one wet bar andlaundry area. Defining exactly what constitutes a wet bar and laundry area anddetermining the appropriate threshold for them has also proved problematic based onthe wide range of features available to homeowners today. In essence, the work thatwould go into regulating wet bars and laundry rooms would be unlikely to result insmaller dwellings with fewer impacts on neighborhoods. Therefore, we have concludedthat additional regulations are not needed.

Bathrooms: In contrast, the number of bathrooms in homes with at least eightbedrooms is regularly excessive. Between January 2017 and February 2018, largehomes contained an average of nine bathrooms. A review of floor plans suggested thatthe bathrooms were intended to accommodate short-term rentals. However, theDepartment of Environmental Services is looking at ways to insure an accuraterepresentation of various types of dwelling units in terms of sewer capacity

requirements. We do not support duplicative requirements on plumbing. Therefore, weare not recommending a change to the LUO relating to bathrooms at this time.

Occupancy: Similarly, we have heard recommendations to further limit occupancy indetached dwellings, i.e. to reduce the likelihood that large dwellings will be convertedinto multiple lodging or housekeeping units. However, this is complicated, particularly inHawaii where housing types have traditionally supported extended, multi-generationalhouseholds living together. Currently, the LUO recognizes a diversity of housingarrangements as a “family.” “Family” means one or more persons, all related by blood,marriage, or adoption, occupying a dwelling unit or lodging unit. There is no maximumfamily size when people are related to one another. Also, when such a family occupiesa dwelling, they may also house up to three roomers within their homes. A family mayalso be defined as no more than five unrelated persons. In addition, eight or fewerpersons who reside in an adult residential care home, a special treatment facility orother similar facility monitored and/or licensed by the State of Hawaii can occupy asingle-family dwelling. These existing definitions remain reasonable and help meet thehousing needs of our students, people who need to pool limited incomes for shelter, andpeople who need special care. These regulations are abused when homes areconverted into illegal short-term rentals. The issue of occupancy will be betteraddressed through the Council Resolutions related to short-term rentals.

All of this evidence reveals that while large dwelling units have received a lot ofattention recently, we have not seen a proliferation of them based on historicdevelopment patterns. It also suggests that an FAR of 0.6 is reasonable for additionalstandards and an FAR cap of 0.7 is appropriate, given the current median home sizeson zoning lots. The data also reveal that tracking the number of wet bars and laundryrooms will not necessarily be effective in limiting the adverse impacts of a home on itsneighbors.

VI. Residential Yards and Heights

Required Yards: The purpose of required yards is to provide a minimum separationbetween structures for the purpose of light and air access. We find that the massing ofa dwelling unit that exceeds an FAR of 0.6 tends to create a large two- or three-storystructure that often spans much of the depth of the zoning lot and is often located at theminimum five-foot setback line. Additionally, roof overhangs and eaves are allowed toproject 30 inches into the required yard within the Residential District. As a result,neighboring property owners are experiencing a substantial loss of light and air due tothe increased “bulk” and length of the new, larger homes. Therefore, additional sideand rear yards can help to minimize the physical impact on neighboring properties. Werecommend eight-foot side and rear setbacks, which would create a distance of at least13 feet (5+8) between a regular-sized dwelling on one lot and a large dwelling on theneighboring lot, or 16 feet (8+8) feet between two large structures. This will mitigate theimpacts of larger structures on lots with an FAR between 0.6 and 0.7 by increasing the

amount of ambient light that surrounds dwellings on properties and the air that flowsaround them.

Residential Heights: While concerns regarding excessive building heights have beenraised during discussions on large homes, property owners have not been exceedingpermitted heights. However, large homes do have a mass and volume that can bemitigated with height setbacks, so as the height increases, the building is stepped back.Since height setbacks are measured from the buildable area boundary line (requiredyards), the increased yards will make the existing height setback standards moreeffective.

VII. Parking Requirements

One- and two-family detached dwellings require two parking spaces per unit plus onespace for every 1,000 square feet over 2,500 square feet of the dwelling’s floor area(excluding the area dedicated to the carport and garage). Public testimony revealedfrequent concerns about increased congestion and competition for on-street parking.Most of the sites that have generated complaints relating to large dwellings have eithertoo little on-site parking, or the on-site parking is laid out in such a way that the vehiclesmust queue on the street to allow other vehicles to enter or exit the property. Thisinconvenience leads to the increased use of on-street parking, even though constructiondrawings show adequate on-site parking. While the Department of TransportationServices is experimenting with several ways to better manage on-street parking, revisedLUO regulations could contribute to decreasing pressure for on-street parking.

Vehicular Maneuverability: Current regulations for parking areas with more than fourparking spaces require that all maneuverability must occur on site so that the vehiclesenter and exit the site in a forward-facing manner. Single- and two-family dwelling unitsare exempt from this requirement. Applying these standards to dwellings that requirefour or more parking spaces will both relieve traffic tension and force the landowner toincorporate an appropriate amount of space on the lot to accommodate the on-sitemovement of vehicles.

Furthermore, the zoning code currently allows tandem parking for single- and two-familydwelling units but does not specify a limit to the number of vehicles that may be“stacked.” As a result, some homes have tandem spaces stacked five vehicles deep.We recommend tightening this regulation by specifying that residential tandem parkingis limited to two stacked vehicles for any required parking spaces. This will help limitthe traffic impacts of large residential dwelling units.

Number of Parking Spaces: Two additional on-site parking spaces over the base LUOrequirement should be required for dwellings between FARs of 0.6 and 0.7. Forexample, a 3,000-square-foot dwelling below an FAR of 0.6 would require three parkingspaces. If a 3,000 square-foot dwelling exceeds an FAR of 0.6 up to 0.7, it would berequired to provide five on-site parking spaces. See Table 1 for an example.

Table 1: Parking

Required Parking Required ParkingDwelling Size (FAR Below 0.6) (FAR between 0.6 and 0.7)

2,500 2 43,000 3 53,500 3 54,000 4 64,500 4 6

Note: When computation of the total required parking spaces for a zoning lot results in a tractional numberwith a major fraction (i.e., 0.5 or greater), the number of spaces required shall be the next highest whole number.

These additional requirements, along with the aforementioned maneuverabilitystandards would ensure that the size of the zoning lot is sufficient to accommodate thelevel of development proposed. A few of the Task Force members advocated for aneven greater amount of on-site parking. However, the combination of the 0.7 FAR cap,the quantity of parking stalls, required maneuverability, and height setbacks will helpdictate the maximum size of a house. The more parking, the smaller the house.

VIII. Discretionanj Permitting

The DPP recommends against requiring a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for largedetached dwellings. CUPs are designed and required for potentially incompatible usesin a zoning district. For example, schools and meeting facilities have a legitimatereason to be located in residential areas but may have impacts that are similar tocommercial uses, with large gatherings, noise, and traffic generation. The minor CUP isdesigned to allow the DPP to evaluate the use and impose conditions to mitigate theimpacts of the long temi use of the site.

Uses requiring CUPs are approved with conditions only when they satisfy certain criteriaintended to make them more compatible with the existing neighborhood. Specifically,the DPP must find that the proposed .LL~ will not alter the character of the surroundingarea. In the case at hand, whether the dwelling structure is large or small, the permittedresidential y~ is the same. A small house is not fundamentally different from a largehouse in terms of the characteristics of the use evaluated under a CUP, like hours ofoperation, commercial activities occurring on the site, and number of large gatheringsper year. Furthermore, CUPs allow the DPP to modify certain zoning standards whereappropriate. Consequently, in many cases a landowner can request greaterflexibilitywith a CUP.

Criteria for approving a CUP for a large house would end up looking very similar to thedevelopment standards the DPP is proposing, which can be administered throughministerial, rather than discretionary permits. This is preferable for speed, clarity, cost,and efficiency. Additionally, the DPP’s proposal avoids additional barriers to the

development of housing, pitting neighbor against neighbor, and elevating the cost ofhousing.

IX. Definitions

New definitions of large detached dwellings and wet bars to the LUO. A large detacheddwelling is not being added as its own use within LUO. Instead, the developmentstandards for detached dwellings are being expanded. Additionally, the DPP’srecommended bill adequately explains when a dwelling would need to comply withadditional development standards. Our analysis of the data revealed that the number ofwet bars has not been excessive to the point that defining and limiting them would be aneffective deterrent to the development of large dwellings. As the DPP does not proposea limit on wet bars, it is not necessary to add a definition of wet bars.

X. Comparisons with Other Jurisdictions

Other communities have also struggled with new homes that are significantly largerthan, or are out of character with, those of their neighbors. The majority of the cities wereviewed made simple adjustments to their zoning regulations, such as adding lotcoverage and density maximums, increasing setbacks, or limiting impervious surfacecoverage.

A few members of the Task Force advocated for new requirements pertaining toimpervious surfaces. Based on the City’s interest in containing storm water on site, thisidea warrants consideration. Unfortunately, the City’s experience with the new stormwater regulations (adopted in August 2017) is still quite limited, so the necessary dataregarding how best to capture storm water via limiting impervious surfaces is not yetavailable. Additionally, any new regulations pertaining to impervious surfaces mayrequire more extended permit reviews and create a very large number ofnonconformities. Since building permits are not required for concrete patios at grade,there is no readily available data about impervious surfaces on residential lots. Thescale or percentage of lots that would become nonconforming with new limits toimpervious surfaces would be very difficult to determine. This would also makeenforcing such a regulation challenging when renovations are being proposed

Some communities incorporated a design review into the permitting process to handlelarge dwellings. However, those communities were significantly smaller than Honoluluor had a large, dedicated staff committed to facilitating one-on-one communications witharchitects and designers. Very few municipalities limited the number of bedrooms orbathrooms allowed within a dwelling. The municipalities that chose to regulate floorarea generally have an FAR limit of 0.5 or lower. For example, Portland, Oregon has a0.5 FAR. In Los Angeles, California, parcels with a lot area of 7,500 square feet andunder are restricted to an FAR of 0.45. In general, we found the municipalities thatlimited density used an FAR that ranged between 0.4 and 0.6.

Xl. Summary of Recommendations

The potential adverse impacts that large dwellings have on the surrounding communitycan be addressed with a few additional standards relating to FAR, required yards, andparking. The DPP believes that the revisions described below and in the attached draftbill will accomplish the intent of Resolution 17-276, CD1. The DPP’s proposed Bill Brecommends that any application for a detached dwelling that exceeds the 0.6 FARwould be required to:

• Provide two additional parking spaces over the current LUO requirement; and• Provide eight-foot side and rear yards, instead of five feet.

All development of single-family and two-family dwellings, including any approvedohana and accessory dwelling units on residential zoning lots would be limited to amaximum cap of 0.7 FAR. The proposed requirements for vehicular maneuverabilityand tandem parking spaces would also apply to all dwelling uses. These standards canbe reviewed during the building permit process, so no lengthy discretionary permit willdelay the development of new housing. Finally, there will be no new administrativeburden to the applicant because the necessary information (floor area, yard dimensions,and parking) are already required on building permit applications.

Additional research is needed to better address the limitation of impervious surfaces ona lot and the issue of occupancy violations. The DPP is not opposed to discussing alimitation on Impervious surfaces. However, the DPP would like to allow more time toresearch the effects of the new storm water standards on lots before proposing alimitation on impervious surfaces. Issues relating to occupancy violations require moreresearch. However, the DPP believes that proposed legislation related to short-termrentals will provide a valuable step towards a solution.

XII. Conclusion

An objective of the Oahu General Plan is to provide decent housing for all the people ofOahu at prices they can afford. Policies under this objective, dictate that controlsshould provide decent homes at the least possible cost, streamline approval and permitprocedures for housing, and encourage innovative residential development which willresult in the more efficient use of streets and utilities.

For these reasons, the DPP concurs with the intent of Bill A to amend the LUO to betterregulate the size of detached dwellings within the Residential Districts. However, theDPP is not recommending approval of the proposed Bill A as initiated by the CityCouncil via Resolution No. 17-276 CD1. Instead, we recommend adoption of theproposed alternative Bill B, which sets an FAR threshold within the Residential Districts,triggers more rigorous development standards for any development that exceeds the

FAR limit, and tightens parking requirements. These standards will be imposed via theexisting ministerial plan review process, which will better meet the objectives of theGeneral Plan. Bill B will set an absolute cap of 0.7 FAR and will require that detacheddwellings between 0.6 and 0.7 FAR have sufficient on-site parking and vehiclemaneuverability, to limit their adverse impacts on traffic and on-street parking. Theproposed increase in yard setbacks will help reduce the effect of large dwellings onadjacent properties. The alternative bill, coupled with the short-term rental legislationthat the DPP sent to the Planning Commission, will help mitigate the illegal use ofresidential dwellings and preserve the character of the surrounding communities.

BILL A

CITY COUNCILCITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU •‘ 4

HONOLULU, HAWAII PlO. I -

RESOLUTION

PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 21, REVISED ORDINANCES OFHONOLULU 1990 (THE LAND USE ORDINANCE), RELATING TO DETACHEDDWELU NGS.

WHEREAS, the City’s zoning maps and the Land Use Ordinance (“LUO”)establish zoning districts and zoning district regulations for the utilization of land in theCity pursuant to Section 6-1 514 of the Revised Charter of the City and County ofHonolulu 1973 (2017 Edition); and

WHEREAS, each zoning district is designated for certain uses and restricted forother uses in order to encourage orderly development in accordance with adopted landuse policies, including the Oahu general plan, and the applicable development plans orsustainable community plans, and to promote and protect the public health, safety, andwelfare; and

WHEREAS, the residential districts (R-3.5, R-5, R-7.5, R-1O, and R-20) aregenerally intended for development of one- and two-family detached dwelling units, anda “detached dwelling” is defined as a building containing one or two dwelling units,entirely surrounded by yards or other separation from buildings on adjacent lots.Multifamily dwellings (consisting of three of more dwelling or lodging units) are notpermitted in the residential districts; and

WHEREAS, the apartment districts are generally intended for development ofmultifamily dwelling units, including walk-up and high-rise apartments; and

WHEREAS, communities in residential districts throughout the City have reporteddevelopment of large residential structures, some with upwards of 20 bedrooms, andmultiple kitchens and wet bars, which appear to be intended for use as apartmentdwellings in violation of the LUO; and

WHEREAS, in most cases where large residential structures have been built, theDepartment of Planning and Permitting (“DPP”) has approved building permits andcertificates of occupancy for such structures based on compliance with zoningregulations, which do not restrict the number of bedrooms or wet bars allowed inresidential districts, and do not increase off-street parking requirements for largedetached dwellings, based on the assumption that there will be no illegal multifamilyuse; and

OCS2O17-1235111117/2017 3:40 PM

CITY COUNCILCITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU 4

HONOLULU, HAWAII No. i -

RESOLUTION

WHEREAS, in cases reported by the community and in news reports, these largeresidential structures are later illegally converted to use as long-term rental apartmentbuildings, housing multiple families in violation of law, or are used illegally as short-termtransient vacation rentals; and

WHEREAS, the DPP, upon receMng complaints from the community, has citedlandowners for violations in cases where the department was able to determine that aviolation occurred, however the number of large residential structures in residentialdistricts appears to be increasing; and

WHEREAS, to address the rapidly increasing rate of development of largedetached dwellings in residential districts, and the impacts thereof on the surroundingcommunities, the City Council desires to specify a maximum density for detacheddwellings, limit the number of wet bars allowed in detached dwellings, require aconditional use permit (major) for large detached dwellings, and increase the off-streetparking requirements for detached dwellings with more than 2,500 square feet of floorarea; and

WHEREAS, Section 6-1513 of the Revised Charter of the City and County ofHonolulu 1973 (2017 Edition) (“Charter”), provides that “[amy revision of or amendmentto the zoning ordinances may be proposed by the council and shall be processed in thesame manner as if proposed by the director [of planning and permitting]”; and

WHEREAS, the term “zoning ordinances,” as used in Charter Section 6-1 513includes both amendments to the LUO and to ordinances designating particular parcelsof property in terms of the LUO; and

WHEREAS, Chapter 2, Article 24, Part A, Revised Ordinances of Honolulu 1990(“ROH”), establishes procedures and deadlines for the processing of Council proposalsto revise or amend the general plan, the development plans, the zoning ordinances, andthe subdivision ordinance, and clarifies the responsibility of the Director of Planning andPermitting to assist the Council in adequately preparing its proposals for processing;now, therefore,

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City and County of Honolulu that theDirector of Planning and Permitting and the Planning Commission are directed,pursuant to Charter Section 6-1513, and ROH Chapter 2, Article 24, Part A, to processthe proposed amendment to ROH Chapter 21 (the “Land Use Ordinance”), attachedhereto as Exhibit A, in the same manner as if the proposal had been proposed by theDirector; and

OCS2OI 7-1235/11117/2017 3:40 PM

CITY COUNCILCITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU

HONOLULU, HAWAII

RESOLUTION

No. 17476. CDI

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Director of Planning and Permitting isdirected to inform the Council upon the transmittal of the Director’s report and theproposed Land Use Ordinance amendment to the Planning Commission; and

BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that, pursuant to ROH Chapter 2, Article 24, Part A,the Clerk shall transmit copies of this resolution and the Exhibit attached hereto to theDirector of Planning and Permitting and the Planning Commission of the City andCounty of Honolulu, and shall advise them in writing of the date by which the Director’sreport and accompanying proposed ordinance are required to be submitted to thePlanning Commission.

DATE OF INTRODUCTION:

INTRODUCED BY:

Trevor Ozawa

October 4. 2017Honolulu, Hawaii Councilmembers

0CS2017-1235/11/17/2017 3:40 PM

EXHIBIT A


HONOLULU, HAWAIICERTIFICATE

Title RESOLUTION PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 21, REVISED ORDINANCES OF HONOLULU1990 (THE LAND USE ORDINANCE). RELATING TO DETACHED DWELLINGS.

Voting Legend: * = Aye wlReservations

11/16/17 ZONING AND CR-448 — RESOLUTION REPORTED OUT OF COMMITTEE FOR ADOPTION ASHOUSING AMENDED IN CD1 FORM.

12106117 COUNCIL CR-448 AND RESOLUTION 17-276, CDI WERE ADOPTED.9 AYES: ANDERSON, ELEFANTE, FUKUNAGA, KOBAYASHI, MANAHAN, MARTIN,MENOR, OZAWA, PINE

I hereby certify that the above is a true record of action by the Council of the CIty and County of Honolulu on this RESOLUTION.

RO14~~4OR, CHAIR AND PRESIDING OFFICER

Introduced: 10/04/17 By: TREVOR OZAWA

RESOLUTION 17-276, CDICommittee: ZONING AND HOUSING

ciri CLERK

ORDINANCECITY COUNCILCITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU BILL

HONOLULU, HAWAII -

A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE

RELATING TO DETACHED DWELLINGS.

BE IT ORDAINED by the People of the City and County of Honolulu:

SECTION 1. Purpose. The purpose of this ordinance is to address the problemof the illegal use of large residential structures in residential districts.

SECTION 2. Table 21-3 (“Master Use Table”), Revised Ordinances of Honolulu1990. is amended by amending the “Dwellings and Lodgings” category to revise the“Dwellings, detached, one-family” and “Dwellings, detached, two-family” uses to read asfollows:

0CS2017-1235111/17/2017 3:40 PM


HONOLULU, HAWAII

ORDINANCE

BILL ______


“TABLE 213MASTER USE TABLE

In the event of any conflict between the text orthis Chapter and the following table, the ten of the Chapter shall contra The following table Is not Intended to cover the WeitdldSpedal Distilot please reM~ to Table 21-&6(A)

~E1: Ac = Special accessory use subject to standards in ArticlesCm = Conditional Use Pennit-minor subject to standards in ArticleS no public hearing required (sac Article 2 for exceptions)C = Conditional Use Permit-major subject to standards in Article S public hearing requiredP Permitted useP/c Permitted use su~ect to standards In ArticlesPRU Plan Review Lisa

ZONING DISTRICTS

USES(Na: Certain uses ate defined ‘7inAslidelOj -

,~ ‘9p ~ 47 t ‘7 ¶ —

~±II1±~iIiiiL1J~n~2tDWELLINGS AND LODGINGS

p p p P P P P P p P PDwellings. detached. oneJamly

P P ~ p p p p p p pDwellings, detached, two-family ~ ~

‘I

Where a proposed use Is not specifically listed above, the director shall review the proposed use and, based on us characteristics and Its similarity to the useslisted above, shall determine the regulatory requirements for that use.

tCommerclal use subject to special density controls (see Table 21-3.3 and Section 21-3.9O(c)(4)).

2Commerclal use subject to special density controls (see Table 21-3.5 and Section 21-3.140-1(c)).

~C” for delac±ied dwdjfrjcs that are late delached dwelllnas” as defined ii Section 21-10.1.

0CS2017-1235/11/17/2017 3:40 PM


HONOLULU, HAWAII -


SECTION 3. Section 21-3.70-1, Revised Ordinances Honolulu 1990 (“Residentialuses and development standards”), is amended by amending subsection (c) to read asfollows:

“(c) Additional Development Standards.

(1) Maximum Height. The maximum height of structures [shall] ~iii bedetermined by the building envelope created as the result of theintersection of two planes. The first plane [ch~Il] wifi be measuredhorizontally across the parcel at 25 feet above the high point of thebuildable area boundary line. The second plane [chall) ~flj run parallel tograde, as described in Section 21-4.60(b), measured at a height of 30feet. If the two planes do not intersect, then the building envelope[chalfl will be determined by the first plane (see Figure 21-3.10).

(2) Height Sethacks.

(A) Any portion of a structure exceeding 15 feet [shall] must be setback from every side and rear buildable area boundary line one footfor each two feet of additional height over 15 feet (see Figure21 -3.10); and

(B) Any portion of a structure exceeding 20 feet [shell] must be setback from the front buildable area boundary line one foot for everytwo feet of additional height over 20 feet.

£31 Density. For one-family and two-family detached dwellings, the maximumdensity is a floor area ratio of

£41 Wet Bars. The number of wet bars in each dwelling unit cannot exceed

0CS2017-1235111u1712017 3:40 PM

ORDINANCECITY COUNCILCITY AND COUNTY OP HONOLULU BILL

HONOLULU, HAWAII


SECTION 4. Table 21-6.1, Revised Ordinances of Honolulu 1990 (“Off-streetParking Requirements”), is amended by amending the “Dwellings, detached, duplexand farm” use entry In the “Dwellings and Lodgings” category to read as follows:

‘I

Table 214.1Off-street Parking Requirements

US& I Requirement2

DWELLINGS AND LODGINGS

Dwellings, detached, duplex and farm 2 per unit pIus 1 per [1,000] ~QQ square feet over2,500 square feet (excluding carport or garage)]

SECTION 5. Section 21-10.1, Revised Ordinances Honolulu 1990(“Definitions”), is amended by adding definitions of “large detached dwelling,” and “wetbar” to read as follows:

“Dwelling. Large Detached. “Large detached dwelling” means a one-family ortwo-family detached dwelling with a floor area ratio that exceeds

“Wet bar” means a bar or serving counter in a dwelling or lodging unit that isequipped with a sink and running water.”

SECTION 6. Ordinance material to be repealed Is bracketed and stricken. Newmaterial is underscored. When revising, compiling or printing this ordinance forinclusion in the Revised Ordinances of Honolulu, the Revisor of Ordinances need notinclude the brackets, the material that has been bracketed and stricken, or theunderscoring.

0CS2017-1235/1111712017 3:40 PM

ORDINANCECITY COUNCILCITY AND COUNTY OP HONOLULU

HONOLULU, F-IAWAII BILL


SECTION 7. This ordinance takes effect upon its approval.


INTRODUCED BY:

Honolulu, Hawaii

APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY;

Councilmembers

Deputy Corporation Counsel

APPROVED this _____ day of

MayorCity and County of Honolulu

20

0CS2017-1235111/17/2017 3:40 PM

ORDINANCECITY COUNCILCITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU

HONOLULU, HAWAII BILL


AMENDING CHAPTER 21, REVISED ORDINANCES OF HONOLULU,LAND USE ORDINANCE) AS AMENDED, RELATING TO DETACHED

BE IT ORDAINED by the People of the City and County of Honolulu:

SECTION 1. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of this ordinanceadverse impacts of large detached dwellings in residential districts.

1990, (THEDWELLINGS.

is to address the

Large residential dwelling units have recently become a flashpoint for Oahu, particularlyin neighborhoods with modest, aging homes, where existing dwellings are beingdemolished and sometimes replaced with larger homes. Today’s residentialdevelopment standards, which have been in place and are mainly unchanged since thelate 1960s, were designed to maximize the rights of property owners.

We find now that additional development standards are necessary to preserve andprotect the character and livability of our residential areas. A select number of newregulations may help curb the problem, while leaving much of the flexible developmentstandards in place. Revisions to the Land Use Ordinance should not inhibit the abilityfor extended families or multigenerational households to develop in the residentialdistricts.

SECTION 2. Table 21-3, Revised Ordinances of Honolulu 1990, as amended(“Master Use Table”), is amended by:

DPPLDD.1 8

D—71 3(18)


HONOLULU, HAWAII

ORDINANCE

BILL


“TABLE 21-3 MASTER USE TABLE

In the event of any conflict between the text of this Chapter and the following table, the text of the Chapter shall control.The following table is not intended to cover the Waikiki Special District; please refer to Table 21-9.6(A).

= Special accessory use subject to standards in Article 5— Conditional Use Permit-minor subject to standards in Article 5; no public hearing required— (see Article 2 for exceptions)= Conditional Use Permit-major subject to standards in Article 5; public hearing required= Permitted Use= Permitted use subject to standards in Article 5= Plan Review Use

ZONING DISTRICTS

‘I,C,a

USES ~~‘ a a —

cti~:Certainusesaredellned .- d 4 ,~ ,~ ~ IinMlcIelO.) ‘~ (5 o v ‘~‘ ‘2 ~ a ‘~‘ ~

°- a .s_ ~.s_ ..s_ ..~ .s_ ..a.. ...a. .a.. ...a.. .a ~. ...~.. ...... k.DWELLINGS AND LODGINGS

Accessory Dwelling Units Ac Ac

eoardlngfacillties P P P P P P P P —

Consulates P/c P/~ P P P P P P P P P P P

Duplextinits P P P P P P P P P PDwellings, owne?s or — AC Ac Ac Accarelaker’s,accessoryDwellings for cemetery ACcaretakersDw&thig~dtaehe4one- ~

Dwelllngs,deteohed,tWO- Pie Pie p p p p p p P Pfamily ——

Dwellings, multifamily p p P p p p p Plc P

Farm dwellings P/c P/c

GroupIi’tdngfaciil~es c c c C C C C C C C C C Cm

Guest houses (R-20 only) Ac

Hotels P P Cm Cm

RoornerWRoort~ng AC Ac AcSpecialneedshousinglorthe — C C C C C C C C —

elderlyTimesharing P/c P

Transient vacation unite P/c P —

Vacation cabins C

2

KEY Ac

Cm

CPP/cPRU

DPPLDD.1 8




SECTION 3. Table 21-3.2, Revised Ordinances of HonoluluDistricts Development Standards”), is amended to read as follows:

“Table 21-3.2Residential DIstricts

Development Standards

1990 (“Residential

DistrictDevelopment Standard

R-3.5 R-5 R-7.5 R-1 0 R-20Minimum 3,500 5,000 7,500 10,000 20,000lot area One-family dwelling(square detached, and other

feet) uses

Two-family dwelling, 7,000 7,500 14,000 15,000 25,000detachedDuplex 3,500 3,750 7,000 7,500 12,500

30 per duplex 35 per 65 for 100Minimum lot width and depth unit, 50 for other duplex units dwellings, 100

(feet) uses 65 for other for other usesuses

Front 10 for dwellings, 30 for other uses~ Side and rear 5 for dwellingstZ, 15 for other 5 for dwellings1’2, 15 forother usesuses

Maximum buildIng area 50 percent of the zoning lot

Maximum FARZ 0.6

Maximum height (feet)3 25-30

Height setbacks2 per Sec. 21-3.70-1(c)For duplex lots, 5 teat for any portion of any structure not located on the common properly line; the required side yard is zero feet

for that portion ot the lot containing the common wail.2For detached dweilinas exceedino a FAR of 0.6. see Aitle S additbnel develooment standards‘Heights above the minimum of the given range may require height setback or may be subject to other requirements. See theappropriate section for The zoning district for additional development standards concerning height.”

SECTION 4. Chapter 21, Article 5, Revised Ordinances of Honolulu 1990, asamended (“Specific Use Development Standards”), is amended by adding a new Sectionfor “Dwellings, detached, one-family and two-family” to be appropriately numbered by therevisor of ordinances and to read as follows

“Section 21-5.1 90A Dwellings, detached, one-family and two-family

j~ The purpose of this section is to regulate detached dwellings in order to preserve

3DPPLDD.18


HONOLULU, HAWAII -


the intent of Residential Districts and protect the character of existingneighborhoods.

fifi The total floor area of a site developed with a one-family detached dwelling, two-family detached dwelling, ohana dwelling, and/or accessory dwelling unit in anycombination may exceed a floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.6 on a zoning lot in theR-3.5. R-5. R-7.5. R-1 0. and R-20 zoning districts. subiect to the followingconditions:

(1) Two additional off-street parking spaces must be provided above therequirements of Article 6; and

(2) The side and rear yards must be eight feet.

The above not withstanding, no development on any residential lot shall exceedFAR of 0.7

SECTION 5. Section 21-6.40, Revised Ordinances of Honolulu (“Arrangement ofparking spaces”), is amended by amending Subsection (b) and (c) to read as follows:

Sec. 21-6.40 Arrangement of parking spaces

(a) Except for landscaping elements as provided under Section 214.70(b), allspaces shall be unobstructed, provided that building columns may extend amaximum total of six inches into the sides of the parking space. A wall isnot considered a building column.

(b) Where four or more parking spaces are required, [othor than for ono familyor two family dwollingo,] the parking lot should be designed or arranged ina manner that maneuvering into or from any street, alley or walkway isnecessary in order for a vehicle to enter or leave a space, and which allowsall vehicles to enter the street in a forward manner. For residential useswith four or more parking spaces utilizing the same driveway, an adequateturn-around area must be provided on site to meet this provision.

(c) AU spaces must be arranged so that any automobile may be moved withoutmoving another except that tandem parking is permissible in any of theseinstances:

(1) Where two or more parking spaces are assigned to a single dwellingunit and/or parking space is assigned to an accessory dwelling unit.

4DPPLDD. 18

CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE_____CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU BILL__________________

HONOLULU, HAWAII


(2) For use as employee parking, except that at no time can the numberof parking spaces allocated for employees exceed 25 percent of thetotal number of required spaces. [Alec, for omployoo parking,“tandem” parking is limitod to a configuration of two stackod parkingstalls.]

(3) “Tandem” parking is limited to a configuration of two stacked parkingstalls.

K3N 141 Where all parking is performed by an attendant at all times, andvehicles may be moved within the lot without entering any street, allor walkway

[+41] j~ For public assembly facilities and temporary events when userarrivals and departures are simultaneous and parking is attendantdirected.

Section 6. Table 21-6.1, Revised Ordinances of Honolulu 1990 (“Off-streetParking Requirements”), is amended by amending the DWELLINGS AND LODGINGScategory to read as follows:

“Table 21-6.1Off-street Parking Requirements

Use1 I Requirement2DWELLING AND LODGINGS

Dwellings, detached Z, duplex and farm 2 per unit plus 1 per 1,000 square feet over 2,500square feet (excluding carport or garage)

Dwellings, multifamily Floor Area of Dwelling or RequiredLodging Units Parking per Unit600 sq. ft. orless 1More than 600 but lessthan 800 sq. ft. 1.5800 sq. ft. and over 2Plus 1 guest parking stall per 10 units for all projects

Notes:1. Where a proposed use is not specifically listed above, or it falls under more than one use listed above, the director will

review the proposed use and, based on the characteristics of the use, determine its equivalent and applicable off-streetparking and loading requirements.

2. All references to square feet refer to floor area.3. ParkIng standards for individual uses shall prevail if they are not pail of a commercial use that meets the definition of

“shopping center:4. Where a proposed use Is not specifically listed above, or it falls under more than one use listed above, the director will

review the proposed use and, based on the characteristics of the use, determine its equivalent and applicable off streetparking and loading requirements for the BMx-4 district.

5. All references to square feet refer to floor area.6. Where a proposed use Is not specifically listed above, or it fails under more than one use listed above, the director will

review the proposed use and, based on the characteristics of the use, determine its equivalent and applicable off street

5DPPLDD. 18


HONOLULU, HAWAII


parking and loading requirements for the Waikiki special distdct.For detached dwelllnas exceedina a FAR of 0.6. refer to Sec*ion 21-5.1 90A.

DPPLDD. 18




SECTION 7. Ordinance material to be repealed is bracketed and stricken. Newordinance material is underscored. When revising, compiling or printing this ordinancefor inclusion in the Revised Ordinances of Honolulu, the Revisor of Ordinances need notinclude the brackets, the material that has been bracketed and stricken, or theunderscoring.

SECTION 8. This ordinance takes effect upon its approval and repealsOrdinance 18-6, which regulated for an interim period the issuance of building permits forlarge dwellings in residential districts.


INTRODUCED BY:

Honolulu, Hawaii

APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:

Councilmembers

Deputy Corporation Counsel

APPROVED this ____ day of 20

KIRK CALDWELL, MayorCity and County of Honolulu

DPPLDD.1 8

CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU :1 - Granicus

Documents

Transcript of CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU :1 - Granicus