City inspectors cite some for ‘monster’ houses but not others

A tenant at a three-story, 11-bedroom, six-bathroom Palolo Avenue house said earlier this month she was told by her rental agent that the owner wanted her refrigerator and stove removed before a scheduled city inspection in an effort to hide an illegal kitchen.

She refused, she told the Honolulu Star-Advertiser.

The tenant, who asked not to be identified for fear of being blackballed by future potential landlords, is among a growing number of residents reporting questionable activities in monster homes popping up from Pearl City to Hawaii Kai, as well as Windward Oahu and the North Shore.

The phenomenon is confined primarily to older Oahu neighborhoods since homeowners in most newer residential subdivisions such as those in Mililani, Ewa and Kapolei are restricted from large expansions by strict community association covenants.

After the tenant at the 2251 Palolo Ave. home refused to remove her appliances, the owner was cited by the city. An inspector with the Department of Planning and Permitting found that the 11-bedroom, six-bathroom house was not just home to the homeowner’s family of three.

The house was also occupied by five “boarders,” or people unrelated to the homeowner’s family. City law allows no more than three people not related to the primary occupant’s family from living in a single- family dwelling.

The notice of violation issued by DPP states the inspector found three kitchens, one on each of the three floors, and ordered two of them removed.

DPP has yet to issue fines, which likely are to be $500 initially, and $250 daily until the violation is corrected, DPP spokesman Curtis Lum said.

‘Do your due diligence’

Baozhu Jiang, the owner of the house, did not dispute the city’s findings. But she told the Star-Advertiser that she feels it’s justified since many of her neighbors also have many occupants, as many as 20 or more. Jiang said she can’t be certain whether the people in each of those homes are related, but believes it shouldn’t matter.

Jiang was issued an earlier notice of violation in March 2016 where an inspector concluded 10 additional boarders besides the owner’s family were living in the house. The notice ordered her to remove two kitchens.

As for the tenant, she said neither she nor her roommate knows what will happen next. They have not been told to leave, she said, noting that they have a contract to stay through Feb. 28.

The two women moved into the house only a few months ago. “It was the perfect place in so many ways,” she said. But the two have learned their lesson to do their homework before renting somewhere. “Do your due diligence on the property that you’re renting. … Google everything that you can, and look up zoning laws and fire codes,” she said.

‘Landowner’s choice’

But not everything that looks illegal is.

An eight-bedroom Maunalani Heights house that sprang up recently at 4057 Koko Drive, where there are also plans for a second home of similar size, has been in the news lately as an example of what’s wrong with current zoning laws.

The lot size is 10,555 square feet, meaning 5,277 square feet can be developed. Approved project plans call for a total of 5,275 square feet to be developed — two square feet less than the maximum allowed.

Property co-owner Joe Zhang has taken issue with the characterization of his new home as “a monster house.” An eight-bedroom house is neither unreasonable nor uncommon, he said. “If I have 28 bedrooms or over 10 bedrooms, yes,” he said in a text message in response to a request for comment. However, he said, “I feel that’s totally the landowner’s choice on how they want their house to be built. Some people like lots of yard space, and some don’t.”

Zhang said he doesn’t intend to rent out any rooms in the house to nonrelatives, but that he is not in a position to say the same about the second, still unbuilt house, because it belongs to his uncle.

The lot has eight parking stalls and a long driveway that can hold more parked cars, so the development won’t have an impact on street parking, Zhang said.

‘Not per approved plan’

Neighbors who own and live in the house above Zhang’s have complained that the new house blocks their view. Zhang insisted it’s within his right to build it.

The neighbors were right.

While the two houses on the lot meet allowable buildable area requirements, the city has cited the project several times for other violations. The owners were cited last month for not following its approved plan. “The floor to ceiling height at that garage level has been increased by 6 inches,” the citation said. “The overall height of the structure, the height at the garage level is not per the approved plan.”

The city ordered work stopped pending “a survey for the overall height of the dwelling on the lot and the location of the building on the lot.”

In August the owners were cited for constructing retaining walls without proper building permits and were ordered to pay double the regular permitting fees.