April 1988 Home   Newsletters

May 1988

June 1988

Vote '88
President's Message (Arlene Ellis)
Welcome
Testimony on US - USSR Missile Treaty (Nancy M. Neuman)
Reapportionment - Yes! (Anne Lee)
Channel 20 (Katherine Loew)
More Exemptions from Land Use Controls? (Astrid Monson)
Membership Dues
OMPO May Meeting
1988 Constitutional Questions
Publications

More Exemptions from Land Use Controls?

In a rare display of unanimity, League joined all four county governments, Oahu's city Council, and even the developer-financed Land Use Research Foundation (LURF) in opposing Senate Bill 3287 before the House Committee on Housing and Community Development on March 24.

The bill in essence exempts "from all statutes, ordinances, charter provisions, and rules of any government agency relating to planning, zoning, construction standards for subdivision development, and improvement of land and construction of units thereon," any development project sponsored by the State Housing and Development Corporation which includes an affordable housing component, and eliminates the current provision that such projects are subject to Council review and approval.

Arlene Ellis in stating our position, said that "though we strongly approve of the comprehensive land purchase and affordable housing program recently proposed by Governor Waihee and have long worked to retain Oahu's General Plan for a secondary. Urban Center in Ewa, we cannot support Bill 3287 in its present form".

"Our position," Arlene continued, "is not based on home rule issues. We strongly opposed Mayor Fasi's Waiola Estates proposal because it ignored both State and County planning controls. We have consistently opposed the many proposals to exempt development from either or both Land Use Commission control and County planning and zoning ordinances.

Just in recent months there has been talk of exempting the Convention Center, the Ewa Second City, the Waterfront, enterprise zones, and now not only State assisted housing but also private projects, from County planning, zoning, and construction regulations. Not much would be left if all these were exempted."

She concluded that "if Senate Bill 3287 is needed at all--and we doubt that it is--it should be narrowed in scope so as to achieve a better balance between the State corporation's desire to 'cut through the red tape' and the county's right to implement its own planning, zoning and other policies and objectives and its obligation to provide public services for the people who live in the new developments. Whether the project is private, State or County, the impact is the same.

"Even if it takes a little longer, we urge that neither level of government try to exclude the other from the planning process, but that both dovetail their respective objectives and responsibilities to the mutual benefit of each--and of the people in whose interest both are supposed to be working."

The bill has been adopted, in somewhat different forms by both houses of the Legislature and approved by the Governor.

Astrid Monson
Chair, Planning and Zoning

April 1988 Home   Newsletters June 1988