The Sierra Club v. D.R. Horton-Schuler Homes, LLC

Summary

The Hawaiʻi Supreme Court reviewed the Land Use Commission’s reclassification of approximately 1,525.516 acres from the agricultural district to the urban district for the Hoʻopili development. The court held that Article XI, section 3 of the Hawaiʻi Constitution and the important agricultural lands provisions of Hawaiʻi Revised Statutes chapter 205 did not require the Commission to delay reclassification pending a county-initiated designation process. The court also concluded that reliable, probative, and substantial evidence supported findings that the reclassification conformed to the Hawaiʻi State Plan, would not substantially impair agricultural production, and was reasonably necessary for urban growth, and it affirmed the circuit court.

Holdings

1. Article XI, section 3 of the Hawaiʻi Constitution is not self-executing and does not require the Land Use Commission to stay agricultural-land reclassification proceedings while the county important-agricultural-lands designation process is pending.
2. Act 183 and Part III of Hawaiʻi Revised Statutes chapter 205 do not prohibit the Land Use Commission from reclassifying land before the county important-agricultural-lands designation process is complete.
3. The reclassification satisfied HAR § 15-15-77(b)(6) because the regulation is disjunctive and the unchallenged finding that the reclassification was reasonably necessary for urban growth independently supported the decision; substantial evidence also supported the finding that the reclassification would not substantially impair agricultural production.
4. The Land Use Commission erred by failing to expressly conclude under HRS § 205-4(h) that the reclassification did not violate Part III of chapter 205, but the error was harmless because the Commission's findings established that the property was not and would not be designated as important agricultural land.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Article XI, section 3 of the Hawaiʻi Constitution required the Land Use Commission to stay reclassification proceedings until the county important-agricultural-lands designation process was complete.
2. Whether Act 183, codified in Part III of Hawaiʻi Revised Statutes chapter 205, required the Land Use Commission to stay reclassification proceedings pending formal designation of important agricultural lands.
3. Whether the Land Use Commission's reclassification violated Hawaiʻi Administrative Rules § 15-15-77 by failing to establish that the reclassification was consistent with the Hawaiʻi State Plan, would not substantially impair agricultural production, or was reasonably necessary for urban growth.
4. Whether the Land Use Commission failed to comply with Hawaiʻi Revised Statutes § 205-4(h) by omitting an express conclusion that the reclassification did not violate Part III of chapter 205.

Disposition

affirmed