Neighborhood boards seek greater notice for small SMA projects; planning department warns of added delay

A proposed change to the Special Management Area (SMA) process drew debate at the Honolulu City Council over how much public notice and neighborhood-board review should be required for projects currently classified as “minor” SMA applications.

Raquel Achiu, vice chair of the North Shore Neighborhood Board, testified that developers sometimes subdivide or phase projects to avoid SMA major review, using cost/value thresholds to keep individual phases below the major threshold. She told the council that the result can be minimal disclosure to communities and limited review of environmental, cultural and shoreline impacts.

The proposed ordinance (Bill 56) would require additional neighborhood-board notice for minor SMA filings to give communities earlier opportunities to vet projects. Supporters said the change would force fuller, more accurate submittals and reduce a pattern of projects being broken into smaller applications in order to avoid major SMA review.

Department of Planning and Permitting Director Don Takeuchi Apuna told the council his department opposes the change as drafted, saying the current minor-SMA process includes a 10-day period to receive a completed application and 45 days for processing; adding a 60-day neighborhood-board review would more than double timelines and could burden many small property owners. “A minor SMA is for smaller-valued and lower-impact projects,” Apuna said during committee discussion, and he warned that additional mandatory neighborhood-board hearings would increase cost and processing time for routine projects.

Sponsor Council Member Weier said the intent is to give communities notice and the opportunity to provide information to staff before decisions are made, and she emphasized the proposal could reduce litigation by making the process more transparent. Other council members, including those representing rural districts, said they worry a new step could be onerous for small homeowners who lack resources to attend additional hearings.

Discussion vs. decision: The council passed the first-reading motion for bills on pages 7–10 (which included Bill 56) and sent the measures to committee; members recorded reservations on Bill 56. Council Member Kea Aina said he would vote with reservations and preferred further committee discussion.

Ending: The item will return to committee, where council members expect to balance the neighborhood boards’ call for earlier notice against the planning department’s warning about added time and cost for minor projects.