▪ Hawaii Land Use Roundup

Last week was a busy one -- quite a few local stories about land use and property law.  Here's a rundown:

• "It's a tale of 2 ridges - and 17,500 homes" -- The Advertiser reports on, and contrasts, two large-scale residential projects in Central Oahu.  One of the projects, Koa Ridge, resulted in a Hawaii Supreme Court decision on the trigger points to an Environmental Impact Statement, Sierra Club v. State of Hawaii Office of Planning, 109 Haw. 411, 126 P.3d 1089 (2006), which I blogged about here. Compare this story to the next one, from Kauai, and there is the same dynamic at play: we all complain about the lack of "affordable" housing, but often complain when new housing is built because it isn't going in the "right" place, will increase traffic, and on and on.

• "Kauai passes ban on big-box stores" from the Honolulu Advertiser reports on the Kauai County Council's ordinance prohibiting wholesale or retail establishments in excess of 75,000 square feet.  We've got a lot of "big box" stores, and consumers seem to like them, but it appears that at least the council is saying "no mas."  There is a slightly different dynamic regarding location of these stores in Hawaii versus the mainland US.  Many times, when mainland communities reject such stores, they simply locate over the city/county line in a neighboring community that welcomes the influx of spending and tax revenue.  Local shoppers simply go next door.  In Hawaii, however, where the jurisdictional breakdown is by island, if one county rejects the stores there is nowhere else to go to allow that island's shoppers to patronize them.   UC Hastings published a good summary of the legal and policy issues in 2004 in "California Responds to Supercenter Development - A Survey of Ordinances, Cases and Elections."

• "Development projects affecting Garden Isle style," reports on the growing conflict between current residents and permitted or proposed development on Kauai's south shore.  It's a common dynamic -- those that have, seeking to preserve a community's "character" (i.e., the community as they found it), against "developers."  We all get a bit conservative when it comes to changing our neighborhoods, I suppose.  The reason I say "common dynamic" is that this story constantly repeats itself across Hawaii -- and in any other popular locale for that matter -- many of which can become victims of their own success.  As long as Hawaii remains beautiful, temperate, and populated by very nice people, others will want to relocate here.  The question is, where will they go?  Loihi, perhaps (see next story)?

• "Parcels on Loihi for sale in spoof" -- the Star-Bulletin also reports a parody web site is selling lots on Hawaii's newest land, Loihi, for $40 a pop.  Now, before you run out and plunk down your hard earned cash for your piece of the rock, realize that Loihi is currently 3,000 feet underwater, and isn't expected to break the surface, according to the story, for another 10,000 years.  Talk about the time value of money.  Anyhow, the "developer" of Loihi has probably forgotten that even once it breaks the surface, Loihi can't be privately sold, except by the State of Hawaii (if it's around then, or led by Dr. Zaius), since according to the Hawaii Supreme Court in State ex rel. Kobayashi v. Zimring, 58 Haw. 106, 566 P.2d 725 (1977), new land formed by volcanic eruptions is public land, belonging to the State. 

• "Suit: County discriminating against small farmer" in the Maui News tells of the opening shots in a newly filed federal civil rights lawsuit against the County of Maui and several of its land use officials.  Can't say much about it until I actually see the pleadings, but the news report sure makes it appear to be a fascinating case involving claims of racial discrimination, disparate treatment, and assorted land use claims. 

• "Artificially expanded beachfronts lots to be halted" in Kauai's newspaper details a resolution by the Kauai County Council to prevent the introduction of "artificially induced vegetation" on beachfront land.  My thoughts here. 

• "Ewa Beach vexed by airplane traffic" -- reports on property owners whose homes are in the landing path of Honolulu International Airport objecting to airplane noise caused by jets using one runway (the one over their homes) versus the other, which is entirely over water.  Overflight noise, aviation easements, and disturbances can create issues of eminent domain and governmental noise liability, but it's hard to tell from the report whether those issues may be present in this case.