Changes In Laws For EIS Process, Conservation District
In an administration-sponsored bill, the Legislature amended the state law governing the Conservation District (Chapter 183) by (finally) making its terminology reflect that in the state’s land-use law (Chapter 205). Chapter 205, it may be recalled, expanded the forest and water reserve zones established in Chapter 183, making them part of the larger category, which, since 1961, has been known as the Conservation District. Chapter 183, however, has until now referred only to forest and water reserve zones.
The amendment to Chapter 183 makes more than nominal changes to the statute. It does away entirely with one type of nonconforming use. As has been explained on several occasions in past issues, there have been two types of nonconforming uses: those uses to which land was actually being put at the time it was placed in the Conservation District, and so-called prospective uses — uses that owners may have intended to undertake, but which never actually were in place on the land in question. This latter category of nonconforming use has been effectively eliminated with passage of what has now become Act 59 of the 1992 legislative session.
The measure will have the effect of mooting the attorney general opinion discussed in the [url=/members_archives/archives_more.php?id=803_0_32_0_C]editorial[/url] of our March 1992 issue. In practice, however, so long as the DLNR is allowed to continue awarding conditional use permits, the effect of this legislation will be minimal. Except for owners of land within the Limited subzone, people who otherwise would have sought nonconforming use permits will now be required to obtain a conditional use permit instead.
Another bill passed by both chambers brings a long-sought amendment to Chapter 343, the state law regulating environmental impact statements. The change allows for the public to comment for 30 days on environmental assessments before agencies make a determination of no significant environmental impact (the so-called “negative declaration”). After the comment period ends, the accepting agency is required to respond in writing to all comments received and to prepare, then, a final environmental assessment, supporting either a negative declaration or the decision to prepare a full environmental impact statement. (This is House Bill 3946.)
Separately, the Legislature approved adding to Chapter 343 the requirement that environmental impact statements consider cumulative impacts of an action; made mandatory an EIS or an environmental assessment for all projects proposed within the state Special Management Area or in areas of critical habitat for endangered species; and gave people wanting to appeal environmental assessments the opportunity to request dispute resolution services rather than taking the matter to court (the option to appeal to court remains, however). (See House Bill 2391.)
One bill closely watched by the environmental community was not enacted this year. That bill, which would have established a new department of environmental protection, failed to make it out of committee. The Legislature did pass another measure, however, that requires the governor to prepare an organizational plan for the department so as to allow it to become functional (subject to legislative approval next year) by January 1, 1994.
After years of study and debate, the state Commission on Water Resource Management has approved petitions for designating water management areas for Windward O`ahu and the entire island of Moloka`i. Environment Hawai`i will be publishing soon an edition exploring the ramifications of these decisions.
Also, the commission has released the final report of the Hawai`i Stream Assessment. The assessment, undertaken jointly by the state and by the National Park Service, has been more than four years in the making. One of the most important elements in the assessment has been compilation of a computer data base, which, the report states, “is expected to be expanded and updated periodically by the National Park Service’s Cooperative Park Research Unit and the state Department of Land and Natural Resources.” The data base is available on diskettes in either dBase IV or ASCII formats, according to the report.
Volume 2, Number 12 June 1992