January 22, 2010
Should O’oma Be Protected From Development?
About Aaron Stene
11 Responses to “Should O’oma Be Protected From Development?”
Leave a Reply
-
Please support my sponsor:
Support The Kona Blog
If you enjoy this site, please consider donating
January 23rd, 2010 at 11:51 AM
The proposed development plan of 200 acres of coastal, conservation-protected land is window dressing — a pretty picture to be used as a tool to take o`oma’s State conservation protection away to allow for its sale to the highest bidder. Contrary to landowners’ claims, the plan does NOT fit with the Kona Community Development plan, is NOT a community-generated plan, is NOT going to be kind to the environment, will NOT provide the recreational, cultural, and spiritual needs of the community, will NOT provide needed nor sustainable employment, on and on…)
The next door kohanaiki development sits idle. So do hundreds, if not thousands, of already approved commercial and residential spaces. There is absolutely NO REASON to change the land use classification of this critical, natural coastal, conservation-protected open space to allow for urban development except to help the bottom line of the speculators who own the property.
If you want to help stop this travesty from occurring, please attend the march 3-4 State Land Use Commission hearing. and be sure to distribute and sign the petition.
Mahalo to aaron for posting the poll, the petition, and my comments. And mahalo to the community for its decades-long commitment to protecting the Kohanaiki/O`oma coastline from unnecessary and misplaced development.
January 23rd, 2010 at 12:50 PM
Janice, yer my hero. I’m so glad that you picked this island to live on!
And to your few detractors, our island wouldn’t be half as wonderful without yours and others nit picking to mitigate measures that look out for our community, on your own time and your own dime. I salute you.
January 23rd, 2010 at 12:54 PM
The O’ma Beachside Village project includes an agreement with the National Part Service for reports and monitoring of all engineering aspects of the project to prevent any environmental damage. The project is in compliance with the Kona Community Devleopment Pllan (KCDP) and any claims to the contrary need to be specified as to what exactly in the project is not in compliance with the KCDP. Public access to the beach is maintained with a Public Shoreline Park and Coastal Preserve. Please review the project information before rejecting the project – additional residential properties are need in North Kona. The Village design is exactly what is required by the KCDP. The link to the project is: http://www.oomavillage.com/
January 23rd, 2010 at 2:32 PM
The developers at O’oma need to dedicate the shoreline area as a park and preserve the access and cultural uses. There is a strong community need for this resource. The land is not otherwise good for development. It is too close to the airport and front valuable beach resources. They, like Kohaniki, should preserve the beach for public use.
January 23rd, 2010 at 6:10 PM
With all due respect to those opposed to this development, I noticed the shoreline setback is well over 1000′, and 200 acres of coastal open space is nothing to sneeze at. If we want to preserve our natural playgrounds, one way of doing it is to work with developers who realize the community’s interests must be acknowledged, and are willing to set aside the things most highly prized by us.
I have heard the comparison put forth by O`oma officials that if this foot print was imposed over in the village, all the buildings makai of Lanihau would have to be torn down and the land turned into open space.
I am astounded. Beachfront land left open? Unheard of! Waikiki would be open space back to Kuhio Avenue–no Moana, Pac Beach, Hyatt, Royal Hawaiian, Sheraton or Hilton Hawaiian Village.
The Hilo Bay front was scoured by tsunami, and that’s the only reason it is open space today. If not for its geographic knack of funneling seismic energy, by now we’d probably have a Four Seasons Resort or HHV #2 there by now.
All across the state, developers have been wont to build as close to the shore as possible because 1) that’s where the big buck are, and 2) they didn’t really care whose playground or native use they were bulldozing.
I think it might be possible that the current developer “gets it” about not pulling another Kohanaiki on us. Perhaps someone should ask them point blank: Is it your intention to take away our playground like all the others who have come before?
January 23rd, 2010 at 8:14 PM
The comment regarding the dedication of the shoreline area as a park and to preserve access and cultural resources is very important. I hope all who have this concern will review the project plan and EIS.
The plan specifies that no residences will be located within 1,100 feet of the shoreline. As to the shoreline area concern, two of the project areas include a Public Shoreline Park (18 acres intended to be an extension to the neighboring shoreline parks to the north and south)) that will include a parking area, comfort station and community pavilion or similar public-use facility. About 57 acres will be reserved for the Coastal Preserve containing archeological and cultural sites, including burials. “The intent is to keep the lands within the Coastal Preserve undisturbed except for trails that may run between the Villages and the shoreline.” Under Open Space, the project plan states “… the Village will also include a network of trails and pathways that will connect the Villages to the shoreline.” This information is from the O’oma Beachside Village website.
While I am encouraged by the plan intent, I am most impressed by the caveat in the environmental protections Agreement with the National Park Service under Enforcement that states the covenants shall run with the land.
Responsible development includes consideration of all environmental, shoreline, cultural and historic factors with preservation agreements that ALL run with the land. This is language that can be requested by the public in any development proceeding and will prevent a developer from flipping a property without enforceable conditions. Developers who have used that tactic in the past have created an adversarial relationship between developers and the community. We need to request and ensure that the correct language is included in any Land Use Boundary Amendment and any other development proceeding in all sensitive areas.
January 24th, 2010 at 10:03 PM
Damage to the environment by existing coastal development has proven beyond all doubt, thanks to scientific study, that there is no way to mitigate cumulative effects.
That is why the National Park Service is seeking to intervene in the O’oma petition.
Quite simply, the developer’s plan is an illegal taking of public trust resources.
January 25th, 2010 at 5:28 PM
I would like to encourage the O’oma developers to keep their mitts off this park and allow it to be left alone, as state protected. I would like to further encourage this tenacious developer to: 1. Do what is right and good for our keiki and community 2. Preserve as much coastline for public park and recreation as humanly possible. 3. and “if” you’d really like to “help” our community: contribute and dog-ear project funding $ for this park’s maintanance . . . expressly for infrastructure for parks and rec., roads/access, utilities, and hey while we’re at it, how about education? Please consider contributing to our Kona-community’s sustainable development for the people of Kona. Thank you.
March 1st, 2010 at 9:14 PM
Conservation Lands should never be reclassified in favor of development. These lands must be preserved and protected for the future of all. The future of Hawaii, it’s residents, it’s visitors, human and otherwise, it’s lands, waters, skies and ocean must always be considered over speculative-short-term monetary gain or comfort.
Changing the zoning of any Conservation lands by a State Government Agency in favor of development would only serve to show a total disregard for the future of people, creatures, plants, environment and would reflect a very disturbing, lack of knowledge. The O’oma, 2nd Kaloko, North Kona, Hawaii lands, adjacent to Kohanaiki, is one of the very few Coastal Conservation Lands and a favorite beach-recreational area along our North Kona Coast.
Please don’t give it up in any way. shape or form!
PLEASE DON’T CHANGE THE ZONING. KEEP IT CONSERVATION!
State of Hawaii Land Use Commission Hearing, 10 AM, Wed & Thur, March 3 & 4, Waikoloa Marriott. Stand up and be counted! or email written testimony by Wednesday to Dan Davidson, Executive Director
luc@dbedt.hawaii.gov
March 2nd, 2010 at 9:55 PM
please come to the hearing Wednesday, 10:00am at the waikoloa marriott (thurs 9:00am; but there’s some discrepancy about whether the LUC will let the public testify that day. AND they changed the hearing time to an hour earlier.).
speak in favor of protecting Kona’s open, conservation space and say “NO WAY” to empty developer promises that get varied and amended away as soon as we’re not looking.
mahalo for all the work our island community has been doing — and has done in the past — to save our irreplaceable, natural, coastal resources, especially at `O`oma/Kohanaiki.
and thanks again to aaron for his help and hard work, as well.
May 5th, 2010 at 10:15 PM
I strongly disagree to the change of O’oma. There is no reason for this to happen. Save our land now! Lets not let another loving place slip out of our hands. The places local enjoy with family and friends are diapering more and more. This takes the magic away from enjoying the beach with the land developing. It’s not welcoming to go to the beach knowing what was before standing trees and is now a big building.
It’s all a waste of money and who these days can afford it. The economy is bad right now who’s going to pay it? The locals? This is our lands we have the total right to simply go to the beach! Without any gated area for limited people! I have so much passion for surfing. At pine trees my family and I go there EVERY weekend. Surfing is our family event pine trees is were we can as a family do what we all love together. Why would anyone want to take that away? So ask yourself … do you really what to destroy this and ruin the culture?
I really hope you take all of what I have said under recommendation.