John Whalen, 71, was at the point in his life when, with his daughter well into pursuing her own career, he contemplated winding up his own.

He could travel, he thought, possibly return to Ecuador where he first worked as a planning intern.

He’ll be leaving the private consultancy he founded in 1990, Plan Pacific, at the end of this month.

The powers that be took that as an invitation to draft him for public service, he said — the task at hand being the chairmanship of the Hawaii Community Development Authority (HCDA).

“It became a point where people knew that I was retiring,“ Whalen added with a laugh, “and I had no excuse to say, ‘I don’t have time to do things.’”

This is a return to government work (albeit an unpaid job this time) for the former director of the city Department of Land Utilization, later renamed the Department of Planning and Permitting.

Whalen held that post for five years, and when he left to start his company, he was satisfied that he had shepherded some important public policy changes, including the creation of special districts on Oahu.

Now at HCDA, the board is riding herd on the management of special state-controlled areas, Kalaeloa and Heeia among them.

But it’s the redevelopment of Kakaako that has produced the most controversy, now that the towers are rising. There is worry, for example, that many of the small industrial shops will be displaced, he said.

Among the most contentious issues lately is the Howard Hughes Corp. proposal for a rental project, with HCDA pressing the company for a longer term for the rents to be kept at affordable levels.

Whalen has a background in environmental planning — his first job with the city came just after passage of the environmental impact statement law, when his skills were required.

There’s also a sensitivity to issues such as poverty that was sharpened through work on land reform initiatives in Latin America, and it remains with him. Control of the land, he said, is the surest route to ensuring affordable housing for the long term.

“Maybe that’s what we should be asking for from developers,” he said. “‘Give us the land. We’ll do it. We don’t expect you to carry the subsidy for this term. It’s not what you really want to do, anyway. You know it, we know it.’

“If we can control that land, we can keep housing affordable, permanently.”

QUESTION: When you left the city, what accomplishments were you happy about?

ANSWER: When I had come in … the city was contemplating a new zoning code, which is quite an effort. I really wanted to see that completed and put in place, and it was. It’s not just the adoption but the actual integration of the new code into the administration. A lot of details have to be worked out in terms of how it’s interpreted, and the rest.

Q: What were the big changes in zoning?

A: There are new classifications. Mixed-use zoning was one of the big things that happened. There were some other things that were new: procedures for putting in non-residential uses in residential zones — for example, churches and daycare centers …

In urban Honolulu, what had been happening is, right after statehood — when jet travel came in, it pretty much coincided in 1959 — there was a lot of enthusiasm for development. There was just this rush of building, and it didn’t really happen in the right way.

So we have all these anomalous conditions: older urban neighborhoods, where we have high-rises next to a single-family dwelling. It looks like it was unplanned, and to a large extent, it was unplanned.

We’re going to have more urbanization and development in our urban core, but let’s do it in a manner that makes sense. …

Q: Some people say that Kakaako should be developed by the city. What are the pluses and minuses of having it managed by HCDA?

A: The pluses are that the state has much more formidable bonding capacity than the city does. So this was an area that needed a lot of infrastructure improvements in order to realize its potential as part of the urban core, and a mixed-use neighborhood in particular.

The other thing that I think recommends it as a redevelopment agency under the state is that, in theory at least, it can continue a steady course because of the way the board is set up — that these are appointees, they are not elected officials — so that we can focus on long-term issues. …

There are always some changes. The Legislature has come in and has made changes to the legislation over time, as a result of reaction to what people perceive as going off course for a better future for this part of urban Honolulu.

Q: It’s an abiding and pervasive distrust of development interests in Hawaii.

A: Yeah. … There have been things that have raised people’s suspicions about the development process.

Q: When you were an outside observer, did you ever think, “What’s going on with that?”

A: Sure. There’s been some concern about what’s happening in Kakaako. I think part of it is that in any redevelopment district, you’re only going to see partial results. And you might have early partial results that you’d rather not have seen.

But as the district kind of fills out, and really becomes a community, something more positive emerges.

Q: What is the concern about the car repair shops?

A: … These are usually like family owned. And if the business is the owner occupant, their whole retirement savings and life savings are wrapped up in that little piece of property where they repair cars or provide other kinds of industrial services. So it’s a human impact on them.

But the other part of it is that these businesses actually provide valuable services to the community. They’re located there because of convenience for their customers. … It has a real place in the urban life of Honolulu.

Q: Is there going to be some retention of that?

A: Well, I think there can be, but it’s going to be really challenging.

I think one thing is, in other cities where there has been an interest in preserving industrial uses in particular, they provide special taxation policy for those uses.

For example, you have a little car repair shop. And the way property taxes work, you are assessed on highest and best use. What if that owner has no intention of doing some big condo there, or retail establishment, but just continue their business as it is? It’s going to have much lower value.

So if the city were to recognize that, and allow for that property to be dedicated for that period of time … just like we do now with agricultural lands: You can dedicate land for agriculture use for 20 years, as long as you keep it in farming. I think you could do the same thing with industrial service uses in Kakaako, just to keep it going.

Q: Would the hope be to preserve the businesses for the long term, or only to prevent disruption for the current owners?

A: Well, I think it would be wise to try to continue that for the long term. I think probably other things would need to be done to really make that viable. For example: industrial condominiums. You have several repair businesses, they don’t all need to have car storage, individually. They could share. Or there could be shared work space. … It could be more land-efficient.

Q: Can you talk a little about HCDA’s board recently advocating for longer-term affordable rentals?

A: I don’t think HCDA has really addressed that, in terms of housing security. There’s been a lot of statements about having Kakaako as a mixed-income community.

But how well we’ve been actually able to achieve that is another matter, because for rental housing in particular, we’ve seen so much evidence now of the turmoil, the chaos that happens when an affordable rental project falls out of its regulated term. Kukui Gardens is probably the largest, recent example. And in that case, we were able, through nonprofits and state assistance, to scramble and put together a package to salvage a good portion of that housing for long-term rental housing. …

I can’t say too much about the Howard Hughes project right now because of the contested-case hearing, and I have to be careful what I say — although I would love to say some things! (Laughs)

Q: Is it too late to push for any significant changes in affordable-housing requirements?

A: I think there’s still an opportunity. I actually think the rules — even the rules under which the two major landowners are currently operating — I think there’s enough leeway in there for us to request more, for a longer term. And that’s probably what the dispute is about. So we’ll see how that gets ultimately resolved. I think there might be room for movement, but we’ll see.

And I think we have to try to do what we can, because otherwise there aren’t that many opportunities for new rental housing, at least that are sort of privately initiated. …

Especially for rental housing, it’s very difficult for a private, for-profit developer to do something. They have to use resources that are available for government financing, even if it’s indirect, like tax-credit financing. 

So that’s what I would encourage them to look at: using those tools that are available to make this rental housing affordable for a reasonable term.

In my view, 30 years is not enough. It’s not enough because it just postpones the problem.

Q: But 15 is where it’s at.

A: Fifteen is where it’s at, yeah.

At least 30 years, in my view, is a reasonable time. That’s what most mortgages are, for 30 years. It provides some form of housing security.

The idea that people can live in rental housing, save money and then go buy a house is an enchanting notion (laughs). The reality is, I don’t think 15 years is enough time for most people who need to rent instead of buy.

All kinds of things come up. They have to save money for a down payment, which is getting more and more substantial as the years go by. There might be educational loans they’re paying off, there might be family emergencies. … Life gets in the way, you know, of all these great dreams.