April 1984 Home   Newsletters

May-June 1984

July-August 1984

New Attitude toward Planning? (Astrid Monson)
President's Message (Dorothy Lum)
New Executive Board Takes Office
Third Phase Added to National Security Study (Dottie Gullicksen)
Convention Highlights
Join the Action - Voter Service
Launching a New Study
Available for Purchase
National Conference on Women, the Economy and Public Policy
New 'Voter' Editor Announced
Improvements Suggested for Neighborhood Boards (Jean Aoki)
Comparable Worth
Membership Update
Wanted -- Urgent! 30 Vote Counters

A New Attitude toward Planning?

Has a better day dawned for planning on Oahu? The City Council on May 23 took a firm stand against a number of changes proposed in the 1983-84 annual review of the Development Plans.

In many important respects the Council's decisions were in line with League positions and recent testimony. The Council refused to go along with designating hundreds of additional acres of windward agricultural and preservation land for urban development which could have greatly increased the area's population growth over that specified in the General Plan.

There were, of course, some Council decisions we opposed such as the 5-4 vote to allow high density buildup in the five acres of land on Date Street. This will encourage redevelopment for higher income apartments. The area is now low-rise with moderate rent apartments.

Various Council members repeatedly stated that the City had made basic policy determinations in the General Plan to regulate growth, population and development; that the existing DPs were designed to implement them; and changes should not be made lightly or allowed to destroy the GPs objectives.

This represents a basic difference as compared with the previous Council Now the planning process has come out into the open. There was much more debate at the public hearings held in various parts of the island by both the Planning Commission and the Council, and even in the Council itself. League members who monitored the Council's Planning and Zoning deliberations in April were provided with detailed written analyses of each change under discussion and could, for once, follow what was going on.

No reasonable person would claim that plans are cast in concrete and can never be changed. But changes should be reviewed from the perspective of their contribution to the general welfare of all and not be based solely upon the benefit to individuals or special interest groups.

We support the Council's new philosophy and will monitor the 1984-85 annual DP review process, which has already started, with great interest.

Astrid Monson
Chair, Planning & Zoning

April 1984 Home   Newsletters July-August 1984