Council amends Kona Vistas ordinance to bar short-term rentals, then postpones time-extension to Aug. 21 after daylong public testimony

The Hawaii County Council on July 10 amended language in a proposed ordinance extending zoning entitlements for the Kona Vistas/Royal Vistas project to bar use of any dwelling within the project as a timeshare or short-term vacation rental, then postponed final action on the developer’s 10-year time-extension request to an August 21 hearing in Kona.

Why it matters: The extension request — advanced by applicant Kona 3 LLC for about a 175-acre entitlement that dates to the 1980s — prompted dozens of hours of public comment and sharp debate over whether the site’s flood corridors, archaeological features and infrastructure capacity make further development inappropriate. Opponents argued the extension would allow a long-dormant project to resume without current safeguards; supporters said the developer will protect most of the land and deliver housing for local workers.

What the council did: Councilmember Kaguada introduced an amendment requiring the applicant to record a restrictive covenant prohibiting timeshares, short-term vacation rentals and other transient accommodations on any unit in the project; the amendment passed and was folded into the draft ordinance as communication 896.96. After extended questions of planning staff about floodplain mapping, county-owned drainage TMKs, the project’s affordable-housing obligations (the State Land Use Commission’s earlier 10% requirement and Chapter 11’s current 20% standard) and cultural-resource recommendations, the council voted to postpone the amended ordinance to Aug. 21 and asked that the next hearing be held in Kona and include a possible council site visit.

What speakers said: Kanaka Maoli constituent Mikaela Ikeuchi told the council the Cultural Resources Commission recommended preserving the land in perpetuity and urged members to reconsider support for the extension. “This project is opposed by the Cultural Resources Commission,” she said during Zoom testimony, listing habitat, water and flood concerns. Opponents across Kona cited potential flooding, trail and burial sites, and traffic concurrency problems; supporters including labor and union representatives and local clinicians said West Hawai‘i needs more workforce housing. Applicant attorney Michael Matsukawa said the land’s 1920 court adjudication of roads does not create public ways through the subject area and emphasized that the developers had produced an environmental assessment, cultural studies and archaeological monitoring plans.

Applicant commitments and points of dispute: Kona 3 LLC representatives told the council they had spent years and more than $1.5 million preparing traffic, cultural and biological studies, and they offered to record deed restrictions and provide on- and off-site infrastructure improvements. The applicant said approximately 8% of the site lies in FEMA-designated floodways and argued the majority of drainage areas lie in county-owned channels; opponents disputed that characterization and pointed to historical trails, burials and flood history in testimony and letters from trail and soil-conservation groups.

Affordable housing: Planning staff told the council the original Land Use Commission order required 10% of units on-site; project conditions now contemplate additional Chapter 11 obligations that would raise the practical affordable-housing requirement (the planning deputy noted the project would be required to earn extra affordable-housing credits under Chapter 11). Several council members pressed for clearer, enforceable affordable-housing commitments recorded in writing before any ordinance is adopted.

Next steps: The council postponed action to Aug. 21 and asked the administration, planning staff and the applicant to supply clarified language on affordable-housing obligations, drainage/flood protections tied to DPW and DOT approvals, and cultural protections tied to SHPD and lineal-descendant consultation. The council also asked staff to agendize a possible public site visit in Kona before the hearing.

The council made no finding on final approval; the postponement means the existing zoning status remains unchanged until the council acts on the ordinance at the rescheduled hearing.