It might be asking too much for our government officials to cast constantly critical eyes on developers who come seeking land-use approvals, to ensure that project intentions align with core intentions of an affected community. But, it is dismaying when the best that our land-use gatekeepers can be is a rubber-stamp for self-interested projects.
That polar spectrum of governmental operations emerged recently: positively, in the withdrawal of a controversial proposal for a nature park and zip-line operation near residential neighborhoods in Waimalu; but negatively, in a proposal to subdivide Dillingham Ranch in Moku-leia for “fake farm” lots.
In the Waimalu case, the state Department of Land and Natural Resources stepped up to firmly vet the zip-line venture; in the Dillingham application, the city Department of Planning and Permitting revealed itself as a meek entity, and that does not serve the public interest.
Towne Development of Hawaii Inc. on Aug. 19 withdrew its application for a conservation district use permit for a nature center and seven pairs of zip lines on its 447-acre property above the Royal Summit neighborhood.
The project technically was an allowed use of the acreage, but it encountered major pushback from residents and area elected officials, who worried that the estimated 15 tours daily requiring 33 roundtrip van runs would turn the area into a tourist hub, with unwanted impacts such as traffic.
The DLNR, realizing these valid concerns, kept pressure on the developer to justify consequences, and was awaiting an environmental impact statement. Before the EIS’ October deadline, though, the project was withdrawn.
Contrast such vigilance with DPP’s timid defense of proper land use in the Dillingham Ranch proposal.
Real estate firm Kennedy-Wilson Inc., of Beverly Hills, Calif., wants to subdivide the ranch’s agriculture-zoned acres into 106 house/farm lots: 91 of at least 5 acres apiece for uses ranging from fruit orchards to livestock grazing, plus a 125-acre parcel with a 15-home cluster with orchard trees.
The $30 million project is proposed as an “agricultural subdivision” under state and county rules that allow farm dwellings as adjunct to primary agricultural operations on ag-zoned land. The rules’ intention is to sustain actual, viable farming enterprises — not be a pretense to create luxury mansions in the country with little or no farming.
At an Aug. 10 North Shore Neighborhood Board meeting in which area residents panned the plan, the board in a 12-0 vote asked the city DPP to disallow the subdivision. Even so, most were resigned that DPP would issue the permit; DPP noted that since its role was largely ministerial, it must issue a permit if a plan meets all criteria.
But what DPP failed to share was that Kennedy-Wilson’s subdivision application had expired five days before the neighborhood meeting. Further, DPP should be critically questioning the farm-use intention as deficient — which is precisely what the state Department of Agriculture has done and continues to do.
“We’re perpetuating gentlemen’s estates that produce no agriculture on agricultural land,” state Agriculture Director Scott Enright told the Star-Advertiser’s Andrew Gomes.
Therein lies the foundational objection: Ag-zoned lands should remain primarily for ag purposes, with a permitted accessory dwelling. Instead, the Dillingham Ranch project all but dismisses the agricultural condition: a revised plan in June eliminated a farmers cooperative involving lot owners, which was sorely needed for compliance, and said lot buyers would be left to decide how to conduct agricultural activities on their property.
DPP should be seeking ways to tighten enforcement of already loose rules, not enable exploitation of them. This is imperative since the Dillingham Ranch subdivision, if successful, would be Oahu’s largest ag subdivision — and such weak adherence to policy and lax oversight would set a bad precedent.
