Moving Forward on Shoreline Setbacks

posted in: February 1991 | 0

Reorganization of Hawai`i’s management of coastal issues seems almost certain this session. Two reports recommending changes have been presented to the Legislature — one from the Hawai`i Ocean and Marine Resources Council (under the auspices of the Department of Business and Economic Development), the other from the Office of State Planning, which supervises Hawai`i’s Coastal Zone Management program. Legislation growing out of the HOMRC proposes placing coastal programs in a new Office of Marine and Coastal Affairs, within the governor’s office. An even more sweeping reorganization may be in the works, if the CZM program and other functions are included in a new Department of the Environment.

Equally important is legislation — proposed by the OSP — relating specifically to management of the coastal zone area as defined in Chapter 205A — amendments that grew out of the CZM reassessment undertaken last year and written up in the OSP’s report to the Legislature. The most significant of the proposed changes may be summarized as follows:

First, the area subject to CZM program review would be expanded to include all land areas. An amendment in 1989 expanded the CZM area to all land except forest reserves. However, as awareness of the relation between near-shore problems and upland activities has grown, so, too, has the realization that, especially in an island state, the exclusion of activity in any land area from CZM review makes no sense.

Second, the exemption that allows builders of single-family houses to escape the Special Management Area permit process would be narrowed. As things stand, anything that a builder says is a single-family house — and which is not part of a larger subdivision — is not subject to the requirement that it obtain from county authorities an SMA permit. As a result of discussions between the OSP and the counties, the proposed amendment would require builders of single-family houses to obtain the “approval” of counties before construction could commence. Each county would then promulgate rules for the granting of such approvals. While the proposed amendment states that the procedures would be “consistent with the objectives, policies, and guidelines” of Chapter 205A, this language still gives the counties a fair deal of discretion in deciding how restrictive or permissive they will be in their approvals.

Finally, and most important, shoreline setbacks — the areas along the coast in which construction is generally forbidden — are increased in non-urban areas to “not less than 150 feet” from the shoreline, with the setbacks to remain in place even when or if the land is later placed in an urban district. As a concession to counties and to cope with owners of non-urban parcels that may be undevelopable with the 150 foot setback requirement, the OSP has proposed allowing counties to reduce the setback for any existing lot when that reduction is needed to “preserve a buildable area,” provided that in no case is the setback to be less than 50 feet from the shoreline.

Volume 1, Number8 February 1991

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *