Few in Favor of Ka Iwi Development

by PAULA BENDER
Sun Correspondent
Archived February 2008 article

At its regularly scheduled meeting for Tuesday, January 29, the Hawaii Kai board was to be provided more details by McCorriston regarding the traffic, noise, archaeological and biological surveys conducted of the two sites. A June 2006 proposal by QRM sought a minor conditional-use permit for the development of the preservation-zoned land, but it was rejected by the city as not showing a significant enough connection between the cabins and recreational use of the land. Councilmember Charles Djou and the City Council have since passed legislation to raise that standard for permits to a major conditional use, requiring public hearings prior to their approval.

At the January 8 meeting, McCorriston primarily showed plans for two scenarios. Initially, there was a proposal to develop both Mauuwai Valley, near Kalama Valley and behind Hawaii Kai Golf Course, and the Queen's Rise hillside, mauka of Kalanianaole Highway with vistas that overlook Makapuu Bay and lookout; with 83 and 98 cabins, respectively. Other features include lodges, swimming pools, parking, and public access to hiking trails. McCorriston said the cabins would be 800 square feet each, “grouped to be visibly unobtrusive," in 8-plexes designed to “preserve as much of the land as possible." McCorriston said the proposal actually means that only five percent of the land would be developed, and 95 percent would remain in its natural state.

Another scenario would occupy much more land. If the cabin clusters were undesirable, then the developer would build the units separately, requiring more land, and resulting in the cabins being more obvious. There was no support for either of the scenarios from the crowd, and McCorriston was subject to the occasional heckle.

Perhaps in anticipation of the resistance, McCorriston then told the group that the developer would consider donating Queen's Rise to an eleemosynary trust or nonprofit of some sort that would guarantee that it would not be developed in perpetuity, if it were permitted to develop Mauuwai Valley with just 83 cabins. McCorriston said that the developer wanted to make a significant effort to address community concerns, while realizing economic returns.

“I challenge you to find any developer willing to do this - to give away hundreds of acres of land worth millions and millions of dollars," McCorriston said.

Despite the offer, the crowd was unfazed, and no one sided with McCorriston or QRM on any of the scenarios.

“Although the current proposal by QRM has improved with respect to viewplanes, the primary question is still whether the proposed development is a legal and permitted use of P-2 Preservation land," said Hawaii Kai Neighborhood Board Chairman Greg Knudsen. “The outcome of this issue could have statewide implications."

At the January 8 meeting, Knudsen said that he felt the board had inadequate information regarding the latest proposal, which had yet to be filed with the city's Department of Planning and Permitting. If satisfied with the information provided at the January 29 meeting, the board will vote on whether to recommend QRM's proposal to the City Council, or not.

“Also at stake is the definition of a permitted 'cabin,'" Knudsen said. “In QRM's latest formal proposal, the cabins were 8- to 12-unit buildings with each unit being 800 square feet with two bedrooms, a living room and kitchen. The structures would be up to 10,000 square feet with three-story elevations."

At the start of the meeting, McCorriston told the crowd that when these lands were first purchased by Henry J. Kaiser in 1966, all parcels were designated residential in the master plan and that vacation cabins were an approved use. As the attorney who worked on the proposal for developing Waimea Valley, McCorriston is no stranger to public outcry regarding land development issues.

“If you want to make a change, do something about it. Get help from your political leaders," he said. “Just because you oppose, doesn't give you the right to take the land away."

McCorriston said that if the people do not want to see the land developed, then they should find a way to pay just compensation to the landowners.

“It's significant that these questions are being asked in an area that has successfully fought back earlier development proposals," Knudsen said. “Thanks to such groups as Save Sandy Beach, the Ka Iwi Coalition, and Livable Hawaii Kai Hui, this area remains as one of the last open and pristine regions on Oahu."

Phil Estermann of the Save Sandy Beach and Ka Iwi Coast coalitions, groups that oppose the proposed development, concurred. He said that ultimately, buying the land to protect it from being developed should be considered.

“This is a magnificent natural resource that we have in our neighborhood," Estermann said. “Don't let a proposal like the one [McCorriston] has made divide us. Stay strong all the way."