This November, O'ahu voters could decide on tightening rules for building homes on agricultural land.

A proposal under consideration to solidify "growth boundaries" would mandate six votes in the nine-member City Council instead of the current five to get an exemption and build outside the boundary. The council is currently weighing whether to put the measure on the ballot.

Proponents say clear boundaries would focus development in parts of O'ahu that are already relatively congested and thus protect green areas.

Opponents say limiting growth to just certain areas will drive up housing prices and unduly discourage development.

An existing city neighborhood plan and other development plans map out urban growth boundaries — but they are guidelines, which means they can be changed by a majority vote by the council.

If approved by the voters, the current growth boundaries would require a two-thirds majority vote in the council to change.

The city hasn't decided yet where the new growth boundaries will be. That decision would come only if voters approve the concept.

Council member Gary H. Okino said the growth boundaries are a necessary tool for controlling and focusing development on O'ahu.

"I think it's important we send a message to the public that we care about this island," said Okino, who co-authored the resolution with council member Donovan M. Dela Cruz. "There are a lot of developers trying to make a quick buck, and that can lead to land wasted, development that is not concentrated — and it makes our infrastructure more inefficient. ... (Growth boundaries are) valuable for the environment, it's valuable for the agriculture industry and it's valuable for quality of life."

Jeff Mikulina, director of the Sierra Club Hawai'i, supports growth boundaries.

"If we have clear urban growth boundaries, it would send a message (to developers) that this is where we want to focus growth. It would decrease speculation that drives up land prices for farmers. We're on an island and there are clear limits here more than any place," Mikulina said. "We need to decide where we want to grow and what we need to protect."

Better solutions?

Developers, many members of the business community, and some council members are opposed to such boundaries.

The Honolulu Chamber of Commerce, the Hawaii Development Council and the Land Use Research Council, a developers' lobbying group, all submitted written testimony objecting to tightened growth boundaries.

Those groups say boundaries can also make it too expensive for developers to build affordable housing.

"If the council, or whoever was proposing it, was really serious about open space and agricultural lands, why are you proposing a charter amendment saying you need six votes instead of five votes? Making something harder does not solve the problem," said David Arakawa, director of the Land Use Research Foundation. "If they are very serious about this, there are a whole bunch of other things they could do. If they wanted to preserve open space, put their money where their mouth is and put up money to buy open space. They could do a lot of things more to help agriculture and preserve open space than add a vote."

The resolution to place the proposal on the ballot was introduced Feb. 13 and was approved on two of three required votes. A public hearing was held in March, and the matter was referred back to the council's executive matters committee June 4. The committee deferred action on the resolution when it met June 25.

The resolution states that the boundaries will encourage higher-density development within the designated areas, thereby reducing the costs of providing infrastructure such as water, wastewater treatment, roadways and public transportation. It would also focus development within the existing urban core.

TRANSIT CORRIDOR

Transit-oriented development, planned to complement the city's $3.7 billion fixed-guideway project, is routinely touted by Okino as an example of how urban development can best be focused. The entire transit route falls within current growth boundaries.

The city administration supports the resolution, citing successful implementation of similar plans in the city of Portland in the 1980s that exist today.

"I think it's a very important device if properly used," said Henry Eng, director of the city department of planning and permitting. "In the overall perspective, yes it is (right to contain development). ... We are looking at the various development plans and sustainable community plans and updating them, and we have no objection to proceeding with this (resolution)."

Dela Cruz said the issue should be put to a vote.

"If the public actually believes this is not a good policy, they will vote against it. If we're going to make sure to focus density in the urban core, this is another tool that allows us to do that," Dela Cruz said. "Hopefully, this persuades developers, the city and the state to redevelop, re-energize and revitalize existing communities."

Council member Todd K. Apo opposes the plan, saying it is not necessary to put language into the city charter regarding growth boundaries.

Transit-oriented development will go a long way toward preventing urban sprawl and focusing development, he said, and requiring a two-thirds vote for development exemptions limits the council's ability to respond to growth issues in the future.

"I would say it's not worth locking us in. The charter is meant to be broad-brushed and I think we're getting into too much detail," said Apo. "It doesn't allow us the flexibility we need."