LIHU‘E — Eastside residents may soon lose some of their oldest neighbors, the majestic and ancient coconut trees that could be removed to make room for two planned resorts sitting on 32 acres in the heart of Waipouli. Concerned community
LIHU‘E — Eastside residents may soon lose some of their oldest neighbors, the majestic and ancient coconut trees that could be removed to make room for two planned resorts sitting on 32 acres in the heart of Waipouli.
Concerned community members were able to delay the trees’ removal, at least temporarily, by convincing the Planning Commission last week to defer its decision on whether to recommend permits that would give the projects the green light. The issue will be revisited one week from today.
If completed, the resorts would add to Waipouli a total of 535 multi-family units, 12 hotel rooms, and 964 parking stalls.
If approved, the projects will be carried forth by Coconut Plantation Holdings and Coconut Beach Plantation.
While some public testimony addressed concerns of pollution and potential desecration of burials, the majority of speakers were concerned with the potential increase in traffic in an area already riddled with long jams.
Rayne Regush, speaking in behalf of the Sierra Club’s Kaua‘i Chapter, said Judge Kathleen Watanabe’s September decision to strike down three conditions dealing with road upgrades and water treatment facilities, it was to correct rather than delete them.
Attorney Dan Hempey, representing 1000 Friends of Kaua‘i, a local environmentalist group, said that despite promising on three occasions to fund and build merge lanes on the highway facing the proposed project, the developers, while still agreeing to fund the project, now want the Department of Transportation to build the lanes.
Coconut Beach Development attorney Joseph Stewart disagreed.
“We feel that it’s inappropriate at this point to try to tell the DOT what to do and when they can do it,” Stewart said. “That is something up to their discretion in what they may or may not do.”
“It’s inappropriate and unnecessary,” he said. “We will be already committing our responsibility in terms of financial contribution.”
The Coconut Beach Development attorney suggested that the language in the requirement should be eliminated because it sets a condition that the permit can only be issued after the DOT builds the merge lanes. According to him, that term is “an unacceptable condition and contrary to the law.”
Commissioner Stuart Hollinger had a different opinion.
“The language that is crafted there is standard language for all the developers,” he said. “You folks are not being singled out.”
Commissioner Camilla Matsumoto asked Stewart if he was comfortable initiating conversation with the DOT regarding the construction of the merge lanes.
“Some of what you just said is speculative,” Matsumoto said. “If you engage in conversation with (DOT), it might be helpful.”
Stewart insisted that the developers were willing and able to pay the DOT to build the merge lanes, but not to wait for it.
Hollinger made a motion to defer the permits, and was unanimously followed by other commissioners.
