Everybody needs role models and Kaua’i has several for the next generation. Santa Fe, N. M. is one of my favorites, based on our common size, geographical remoteness, racial diversity, and dependence on tourism. Some 40 years ago, a group
Everybody needs role models and Kaua’i has several for the next generation.
Santa Fe, N. M. is one of my favorites, based on our common size, geographical remoteness, racial diversity, and dependence on tourism.
Some 40 years ago, a group of farsighted Santa Fe citizens had the vision to amend their building code to require that all new structures conform to the adobe style type of construction that was a part of the city’s unique heritage.
The business and construction industry hated the regulation, as it increased costs and construction time. However, those citizens with a more long term vision believed that the requirement guaranteed that Santa Fe’s uniqueness would always be preserved.
Today, Santa Fe touts itself as “The City Different”, and consistently ranks as a favorite travel destination worldwide.
On my last visit there, I looked up the President of the Santa Fe Chamber of Commerce, and asked what the business community thought of the building code restriction now.
The response was that business is booming, that today’s results speak for themselves, and that “I guess it was all worth it.” Why is Santa Fe so popular and economically strong? Because people come for its uniqueness, which in turn attracts more commerce.
Another favorite model is Portland, Ore. Here, too, there are several parallels, although on a larger scale.
Thirty years ago, Portland’s downtown area radiated pretty much the same charm as downtown Lihue today. Also, Oregon’s primary industry, logging, had peaked, and was as close to extinction then as Hawaii’s sugar industry today. Another group of concerned citizens, led by a visionary Mayor, got together and mapped out a plan for Portland’s future.
The centerpiece was an imaginary line drawn around Portland, known as the Urban Growth Boundary. The idea was to revitalize downtown Portland by limiting commercial growth to a defined area, and also to encourage downtown housing within that boundary.
The idea was to create a vital, defined commercial district by day, which stayed alive at night by people who also lived there, which would also eliminate much commuter traffic.
Now, less than 30 years later, Portland’s vehicles display the City logo with the words: “Portland. The City that works”. No one is laughing.
Portland is the model for numerous cities nationwide for liveability, light rail, and plain user-friendliness. As a result of pro-active marketing, log chips were replaced by computer chips, and the “silicon forest” was born.
In both Santa Fe and Portland, it all started with a vision, converted to words. Success followed not because the words represented flowery aspirations. Success came from specific, clearly defined limits announced within a General Plan.
In Santa Fe and in Portland, no “grey areas” were tolerated. There were no exceptions to the plain meaning of the black and white words of the building code in Santa Fe, or the black ink circle around Portland’s downtown core.
On Kaua’i, we are now preparing to move from our vision, and our talk, to a written draft for our own General Plan Update. The final version will define our future to 2020.
It’s the most important work of our generation.
Kaua’i is at a crossroads, and the document will determine the path we take into the future, as it did for our role model communities.
As part of this process, a lot of words have been spoken in favor of not overwhelming our fragile infrastructure with more developments; for preserving our unique heritage; and for preserving our rural flavor, our view planes, and our open spaces.
Who could possibly oppose such lofty aspirations?
However, those who value short term enhancement of cash flow, power, or property values more than anything else usually don’t say so.
How many times have you heard someone announce publicly, “You know, all this talk about the environment and keeping Kauai Kauai is a bunch of baloney”? They act more covertly.
It’s much more prudent to keep your head down, make rosy projections, promise jobs, make assurances, and work from within. And it’s even easier when the language of the General Plan is fuzzy.
Then, it’s a little tower on Hau’pu Ridge here, a little upzoning for a 700 unit timeshare development there, and pretty soon the General Plan becomes the General Scam.
To approve more towers, more timeshare units, or more airport runway space is like looking at Kaua’i through a straw. If we are going to preserve our unique rural, Hawaiian heritage, it is imperative that we look at Kaua’i through a wide angle lens, and see ourselves as a holistic, integrated membrane, like a spider web.
That is exactly how the visionary leaders of Santa Fe and Portland made or kept their communities unique. They had the courage to say “no” to any proposal that didn’t fit into the overall plan.
Inherent in maintaining our heritage is that word “no”, based on clearly defined limits. It simply means, like it meant for Santa Fe, and Portland, and other similar communities, that limits are enforced here.
The great paradox for the business community is that for them, just like for everybody else, “No” means “Yes.” Setting strict limits means Kaua’i preserves its uniqueness, which has been proven by other visionary, disciplined communities to be a huge positive for both lifestyle and for commerce.
Therefore, what we should be looking at as our General Plan Update goes to its first draft, is: How specific is the language? How clearly are limits defined? Is the language just huggable nonsense about “preserving our view planes and rural lifestyle”, which can be interpreted to fit almost any agenda?
Or does it impose specific limits like “no additional towers or man-made alterations or additions of any kind to Hau’pu Ridge”, which can be interpreted only one way.
The way it is written will determine if we get a meaningful General Plan, or a General Scam.
The initial decision to prevent input into the first draft by the Citizens Advisory Committee and the general public was an incredibly poor start by our Planning Department.
Although that decision was reversed following public outcry, lets hope it does not foretell an attitude to just get this annoying, time consuming process over with.
The real test of our government’s intentions will be reflected in what specific, clearly defined limits are written into the plan. Stay tuned.
Sam Blair is an attorney in private practice on Kauai with the firm of Blair and Wong. His column appears every other Sunday, and he can be reached at srblair@aloha.net.
