January-February 1986 Home   Newsletters

March-April 1986

May-June 1986

March General Meeting
President's Message (Dorothy Lum)
Status Offender Resource Handbook
Voter Service Project
Tour Energy House
Report of Planning and Zoning Committee
Convention Center Issues
Water Conference of Jan. 17, 1986
City Council Advisory Committee
Issues at Large
Vote Count - Schedule of Needs
City Council Observers
Registrars Needed
Calendar
County Revenues

Report of Planning and Zoning Committee

The last few weeks have seen an unusual volume of activity. Among other issues, Committee prepared and gave testimony as follows:

Urbanization of Agricultural Land.

2/12 Supported amendments to zoning code requiring a two-thirds vote of the City Council when changing "important agricultural land" to a more intensive use (i.e., residential, apartment, commercial, industrial, etc.) and defining "important agricultural land" in accordance with the ALISH (Agricultural Lands of Importance to the State of Hawaii) System.

Development Agreement Bill, Draft 2

2/5 Testified at Planning Commission opposing Draft 2 of "development agreements" bill permitting vesting of development rights before detailed plans 'ii filed, building permit issued, or construction undertaken.

2/3 Land Use Zoning Ordinance

Testified before City Council in support of proposed Land Use Ordinance, commenting on our approval of conditional use permit process for non-residential uses in residential districts, on strengthened provisions to protect agricultural districts, on the newly proposed "country" and "light industrial" districts in suburban areas, and other provisions. However, we opposed the proposed exemption of lanais from floor area calculations in apartment areas and the proposal to let required yards count as open space for floor area bonuses downtown, both of which would increase permitted densities.

2/3 General Plan Change.

Testified at Planning Commission public hearing against proposed General Plan amendment combining Ewa and Central Oahu Development Plan Areas, raising serious questions on the impact this would have on the planned Secondary Urban Center, on the preservation of prime agricultural lands, on mass transit, etc. (Note: Planning Commission on 2/19 voted unanimously to reject the proposed amendment.)

1/13 Streamlining of Development Plan (DP) Procedures.

Testified before City Council in favor of Bill 149, which attempts to streamline the admittedly cumbersome planning process and prevent development plans from becoming mere duplicates of the zoning maps.

1/13 Development Plan Amendment Process

Testified before City Council against Bill 150, which would have subjected the development plan amending process to rules and regulations promulgated by the Chief Planning Officer rather than, as is now the case, by ordinance of the City Council. We were particularly concerned about the impact this change could have on the proposed "social impact management system" and on the annual review process, -

12/4 Development Agreements Bill

Testified at Planning Commission public hearing on development agreements bill, on the grounds that it would permit vesting (guarantee of right to build under regulations no longer in effect) before courts traditionally have found it fair to do so; that such early vesting would hamstring the county's ability to plan and to provide for the best interests of the public; and that by permitting agreements to be processed simultaneously with development plan changes needed to legalize the agreement, the county would be obligated to provide the necessary zoning, thus contracting away its legislative powers. Planning Commission will decide on March 19 whether to recommend the bill to the City Council.

12/1 Elimination of Development Plan (DP) Annual Review Package.

Letter to Chairman of City Council expressing our serious concern and ! opposition to the Chief Planning Officer's proposal to eliminate the annual review of the development plans, allowing processing of all amendments to the plans by independent consideration instead of, as now, primarily in a "package". We testified that the present procedure makes it "easier to spot trends, analyze cumulative impacts and do the kinds of forecasting that makes for good planning... it is much easier for neighborhood boards, community associations and individuals to study an annual review package than respond to proposals throughout the year as they come up.

Objected also to the fact that his very proposal was not part of this year's annual review package and therefore did not receive much public input or attention.

January-February 1986 Home   Newsletters May-June 1986