07-14-2009, 08:30 PM
In my first post above, I speculated that if they haven't pulled a permit in awhile (since the PASH decision, that's only 1995), they may not be required to provide access, but if they develop they will. I found this online re Turtle Bay:
Obviously I'm not an attorney, but from what I understand the laws about shoreline access don't require private landowners to create NEW access until such time as they want to get approval on some sort of development, pull a permit. Then the public access can be required as a condition of the approval.
quote:http://archives.starbulletin.com/2002/10...tory1.html
In search of a response, Turtle Bay asked for guidance from the former Supreme Court senior associate justice who wrote the 1995 PASH decision, Robert Klein.
Last month, Klein told the Koolauloa Neighborhood Board that a critical issue in the Turtle Bay case is that the property in question is fully developed, according to the meeting minutes. Under Klein's PASH decision, developed property is exempt from a provision in the state Constitution that governs Native Hawaiian rights.
The issue of beach entry could be raised during the city approval process for Turtle Bay's redevelopment plans, said Steve Holmes, who since 1991 has served as councilman for the district that includes Turtle Bay.
In reviewing developments proposed in a special management area, the City Council can set terms that ensure there is adequate entry for the public to use beaches and shoreline in "all development" on the property, according to a city ordinance.
Obviously I'm not an attorney, but from what I understand the laws about shoreline access don't require private landowners to create NEW access until such time as they want to get approval on some sort of development, pull a permit. Then the public access can be required as a condition of the approval.