The state agency entrusted with vetting more than 30 new towers planned for Kakaako needs a clear process that invites thoughtful input one that is navigable by the public, not just by its appointed nine-member board, its staffers and developers.

So it is a good thing that the Hawaii Community Development Authority is shoring up the "community" aspect of its mission by instituting a more-rigorous hearing process for projects seeking its approval.

The HCDA was created in 1976 to oversee development in Kakaako and enjoys more self-governing latitude in how it operates than most other agencies. Now under growing scrutiny and pressure for greater transparen-cy, it has rightly evolved its public hearing process to invite more participation via a quasi-judicial process.

Beyond three-minute testimony already allowed at public hearings, those seeking a more active role in HCDA’s decision-making now are expressly invited to file a motion to "intervene," a status that includes using expert witnesses and cross-examining developers.

Indeed, there has been ambiguity in how HCDA operates. Even many who routinely follow, and participate, in Kakaako discussions are left uncertain about the procedural ground rules.

Recently, for example, opponents of The Collection tower proposed at South Street tried to appeal HCDA’s approval but the HCDA ruled that no appeal was permitted since its public hearings constituted contested cases. That seems the likely fate also for appeal petitions pending against two other HCDA-approved projects 801 South St. Building B and the 803 Waimanu St. midrise condo.

In earlier years, before the current spate of projects began popping onto the wider public’s radar, HCDA’s role was more of an expeditor. Development permit hearings before the HCDA board typically involved a presentation by a staffer describing the proposal and the staff’s recommendation, and the developer making a presentation. Public testimony was generally limited to three minutes per person, and testifiers could not ask questions. After two hearings, the HCDA’s appointed board made its decision.

In the last two years or so, the HCDA has approved eight mostly high-rise condominiums, the start of this Kakaako boom. But now, with so much at stake as the massive redevelopment vision becomes reality, more scrutiny, not less, must occur. At least 30 condo towers are planned, in tandem with retail and commercial uses not to mention a couple of rail stops in the district and expected transit-oriented development.

Tops among the transformative plans under HCDA auspices:

» Howard Hughes Corp., owner of the 60-acre Ward Centers property, aims to build 22 condo towers, under an already approved master plan to develop up to 4,300 residential units on its acreage through 2024.In addition to residences, its $7.5 billion plan calls for doubling the retail, dining and entertainment options that currently exist.

» Kamehameha Schools’ conceptual master plan, which HCDA approved in 2009, covers nine blocks mauka of Ala Moana Boulevard and allows for 2,750 housing units in seven towers and a few other midrise buildings, plus commercial space.

» The Office of Hawaiian Affairs hopes to optimize 31 acres around Ala Moana Boulevard; its nine mostly waterfront parcels were part of a $200 million settlement with the state for ceded-lands claims. Senate Bill 3122 now moving in the Legislature would allow condo development on three of OHA’s parcels, reversing an important 2006 law banning residential use in the area. In order to realize value from its largely undeveloped parcels, OHA says it needs that law change as well as much development permitting from HCDA.

Clearly, a more-rigorous HCDA process for proposed buildup should encourage, not limit, public participation. The onus must remain on developers to justify their projects, and clarity is in the public’s interest.

Building heights and project density, appropriate setbacks from streets, adequate green space, traffic impact and mitigations, and adequate sewage capacity and water supply these are the broad-stroke concerns that every proposed project must be compelled to address satisfactorily.

With so much hitting Kakaako in a relatively short period, HCDA bears the considerable responsibility of adhering to wise master-planning policy. Crucial to that are community engagement, transparency and smart decision-making that will create a district to be proud of.

This latest step, toughening the vetting procedures on proposed projects, is a decision in the right direction.