2019-04-24 BDHRA Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

GADDIS: Thanks, that was a really good summation, Mr. Kanuha. Go ahead Mr. DeLima. DELIMA: Yeah, I don’t quarrel with anything Mr. Kanuha indicated. I do wanna indicate though that when those HRA decisions were made in the 60s, that was prior to a lot of the case law regarding taking of private property by zoning. So there have been cases in the 70s and 80s that indicated that designating open is a taking of private property because you do not allow the private owner reasonable economic use of his property. The 35-year designation, the purpose of that was to balance what they call, I forgot the term where you kind of give the person an opportunity to make some money over a period of time and that was to be compensate for the open designation, but there’s been cases that kind of suggest that that may be not enough. So, I think there’s a balance that needs to occur. The designation obviously was open because of the fact that we had a big tidal wave in 1960, but at the same time, you, you know, there’s a idea of equal protection and treating people fairly, so you cannot say one person, okay you open, but right across the street we’re gonna allow economic activity of a different nature. Or down the road you’re gonna allow something of a different nature. And on the top of that, even though you are not going to allow a person to have a small little designation of mixed commercial use, we’re gonna increase this whole density less than 200 yards away. So there is food for thought. But we just gotta make sure everybody feels that they’re being treated fairly and that nobody’s getting squashed. No offense but Mr. Bockrath is not getting any younger either, we’re all getting older every day, so. GADDIS: Mr. Kanuha—I’m sorry, was somebody else chiming in? No. Mr. Kanuha, so if there were any, if there were to be any kind of agency action as far as giving some sort of opinion one way or the other on something like General Plan amendments, when would that have to be accomplished by so that there’s something on the record from this agency if they wanted to make any kind of a voice one way or the other on amending General Plan, like you mentioned. KANUHA: My understanding of the scheduling for that program is that it’s, it’s not gonna happen anytime real soon. I think the timeframe to move it into the realm of public hearings, public meetings, things of that nature, will probably be around maybe the end of summer. September, someplace like that. GADDIS: Okay, that helps. Yeah. So I’d just like to open for discussion really quickly looking ahead to the next meeting, you know they’ve discussed sort of this conundrum that these landowners are in. You know you have General Plan versus current zoning, you know you have some landowners that are sort of stuck in their current uses. I just want to open for discussion putting on the next agenda a discussion about any potential amendment, any potential support for amendments to the General Plan for areas on the peninsula that are in this sort of situation. Anybody have any comments on that? Feedback? Putting that on the next meeting agenda. Okay, if someone wants to make a motion to put on the next agenda discussion of potential General Plan amendments along the peninsula, or at least agency support or non-support for potential General Plan amendments, we could, if we’re gonna discuss that we may as well put it on, make a motion for that. Page 11 of 13 Banyan Drive Hawaiʽi Redevelopment Agency April 24, 2019 Minutes