The Honolulu City Council delayed final approval of the Mana‘olana condominium-hotel tower Wednesday, sending the issue back to the Zoning and Planning Committee for further work.

A last-minute groundswell of concerns by affordable housing advocates persuaded the Council to take another look at what’s being required of California-based Mana‘olana Partners in exchange for the 36-story, 109-residential-unit, 125-hotel-room tower to be built higher, at a greater density and with less parking than typically allowed for the area.

Council Zoning Chairman Trevor Ozawa, in asking for the matter to be sent back to his committee’s next meeting on Sept. 22, said he wants all sides to consider what’s being proposed, “have a more thorough discussion, take a couple of weeks, figure out exactly what the issues are and fine tune it.”

The Interim Planned-Development Permit sought by the developer is the first of its kind and the way the Council handles this application will affect what happens elsewhere, he said. “I don’t want to get it wrong. I don’t think any of my colleagues want to get it wrong,” Ozawa said.

AT LEAST half a dozen nonprofit advocacy groups said the $2.4 million in in-lieu fees that Mana‘olana Partners is required to pay toward affordable housing development is both inequitable and inadequate given the benefits the developers would reap with the concessions.

Bob Nakata, a representative for Faith Action for Community Equality and the Housing Now Coalition, said he and his agencies aren’t opposed to the development. But the Interim Planned-Development Permit being sought by the developer allows for exemptions from certain land use laws if a development project is within a transit-oriented development zone.

“We have supported rail and TOD very strongly … because we felt this was a way to get affordable housing,” Nakata said. “It is a bit disappointing to find things we thought would be part of the negotiating process with the developers are instead practically being given to them.”

Other groups urging the Council to consider tougher requirements included the Hawaii Appleseed Center for Law and Economic Justice, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, PHOCUSED, Partners In Care and Hawaii Habitat for Humanity.

Several of the groups wanted the developer to provide physical units rather than cash contributions.

IN AN effort to meet that concern, Ozawa proposed a new draft of Resolution 16-172, giving the developer the option of paying $2.4 million in cash or purchasing or developing 16 affordable rental units within economic reach of those making no more than 60 percent of an area’s median income. The units must be within a half mile of a Honolulu rail station.

Ozawa said the 16-unit idea was not calculated using a formula but from discussions with both Department of Planning and Permitting officials and representatives of the developers Wednesday morning. After the meeting, Ozawa told reporters he felt the value of the 16 units would be more than the $2.4 million cash option.

During the meeting, Mana‘olana partner James Ratkovich said his company could provide for the 16 units and still make a profit.

Art Challacombe, city Department of Planning and Permitting deputy director, said he wasn’t sure the language pertaining to the 16-unit option jibed with existing affordable housing laws. After the meeting, Challacombe said Ozawa did the right thing to send the matter back to committee.

A slew of representatives from the building, trades and construction industries testified in support of the bill, touting the need for additional jobs.

Kathleen Kagawa of Hawaii Five-O Properties, which manages the existing buildings on the two parcels, said her company fights crime, homelessness, trash and unsanitary conditions on a daily basis.

“This is the entrance to Waikiki, the economic industry that drives our largest industry,” she added.

Keith Kurahashi, an agent for Mana‘olana, said the applicant “followed the process to the letter” for an Interim Planned-Development Permit. The purpose of transit oriented development areas “is to develop more transit ridership along the rail line,” he said. “You want to encourage developers to develop large projects along the rail line that will build ridership from the residents as well as the employees. This development will do exactly that.”