A plan to replace a 60-year-old low-rise beachfront hotel property with a modern high-rise tower as part of Kyo-ya Hotels & Resorts’ $700 million project goes before the zoning board of appeals this month.
Four environmental groups are appealing a partial variance granted to Kyo-ya Co. for its new planned Diamond Head Tower adjacent to the historic Westin Moana Surfrider hotel. The new tower would partially encroach on a 100-foot building setback from the shoreline.
Kyo-ya’s architect on the project, Robert Iopa of WCIT Architecture, has modified the tower to satisfy the partial variance granted, so that it steps back in height from the ocean to the street side, taking away from the overall height of the project.
The tower would replace the existing 140-room beachfront tower DiamondHead of the Moana. The existing tower is a wide, eight-story building built in 1952 that stretches from the historic hotel to the lot line next to the Honolulu Police Department’s Waikiki substation.
It’s part of Kyo-ya’s redevelopment of the Sheraton Princess Kaiulani complex across the street. Construction on that project, which would add a 350-foot time-share tower, is set to begin in late 2012 or early 2013 and take nearly three years to complete, according to Kyo-ya President Greg Dickhens.
The two projects are projected to create nearly 3,400 construction jobs during the three-year period, said John White, executive director of the Pacific Resource Partnership, which has joined labor unions in supporting Kyo-ya in defending the variance.
Kyo-ya had received some opposition to the Princess Kaiulani project from Unite Here Local 5 because of the time-share component but has since worked out an agreement with the hotel workers union.
But the beachside hotel and residential tower, which would be the first new hotel on Waikiki Beach in 30 years, has drawn complaints from environmental and community activists, who claim the tower will be built too close to the beach and that its height will block existing views.
Hawaii’s Thousand Friends, the Ka Iwi Coalition, the Surfrider Foundation, Kahea — The Hawaiian Environmental Alliance and Diamond Head resident Michelle Matson in January filed an appeal of a partial zoning variance for the project granted by David Tanoue, director of the city’s Department of Planning and Permitting. Their appeal is scheduled to be heard by the appeals board on April 21.iews.
The plans, as created by WCIT Architecture, call for a narrow 282-foot tower, which would be 26 stories. It would be separated from the existing historic hotel by 60 feet and would add a 15-foot public easement between the tower and the police station.
The ground-floor lobby and motor court either would be open or glass-enclosed, which would open up new pedestrian views of the ocean from Kalakaua Avenue.
“Our commitment to reinvest will not only upgrade the accommodations in this aging property to the high standard modern travelers demand, but will also open up significant street-level ocean views and public beach access across private land right in the commercial heart of Waikiki,” Dickhens told PBN, in a written statement.
Kyo-ya applied for a variance arguing that the company met a required three-prong standard: First, it would be deprived of the use of the land if the 100-foot setback were enforced, noting that it would allow use of just 7 percent of the land. The company also said the land was unique because it is the narrowest parcel on Waikiki Beach, and because it also has a historic structure already on it. And, lastly, Kyo-ya argued the new tower would not alter the character of Waikiki.
The petitioners argue that the project would erode the shoreline and obstruct views of the ocean. They also argue that Kyo-ya could renovate the existing eight-story building instead of tearing it down.
The petitioners feel the variance was improperly granted because Kyo-ya didn’t meet the three-part test, “The reality is that Kyo-ya is already enjoying a nonconforming structure that is taller than what is allowed by the special regulations [for Waikiki Beach], grandfathered in,” said Marti Townsend, spokeswoman for Kahea.
Tanoue noted that the City Council had already placed requirements on the project when it gave approvals for the entitlements, such as preserving the 110-year-old Moana wing and creating the 15-foot public easement.
There are also setback requirements for the side of the property along Kalakaua Avenue, he said.
Dickhens also says that claims the new tower would create excess shadowing on Waikiki Beach are unwarranted, and has noted that the new tower will be smaller than the Hyatt Regency Waikiki’s ewa tower across the street.
“The Diamond Head Tower will have only incremental shadowing limited to the early morning hours of the summer months. The potential shadowing would be almost entirely covered by the Hyatt Regency Hotel, which is situated mauka of the
Diamond Head Tower,” he said.
Rick Egged of the Waikiki Improvement Association, which also has filed documents supporting the project, said his group believes “it’s important for Waikiki to have a current product mix to be competitive nationally and internationally.’
“We need to able to have projects like this successfully completed,” he said. “We are comfortable the issues that have been raised, while certainly important, are outweighed by the advantages of being able to upgrade the product mix for Waikiki.”
The Land Use Research Foundation is supporting Kyo-ya’s variance because it feels it’s important that landowners or developers are treated fairly when they apply for permits, said Executive Director David Arakawa.
He noted that some of the critics have claimed Kyo-ya is building a “castle in the sand.”
“We would like to see, when these decisions get made by the decision makers, that they make it based on facts and not emotional allegations or hyperbole,” he said. “We want to preserve that process, to preserve a process where government approvals are based on fact or the law.”
Urge the County Councilmembers to once-again stand with the people, override the Mayor’s veto!!
Click and send your letter to the Council!
Letters of support are due by Monday, Nov. 10th.
The Star-Bulletin’s report on why Mayor Kim vetoed, with commentary from KAHEA community-coordinator and pa’i'ai lover, Bryna:
Kim vetoes ban on gene-modified taro, coffee
By Rod Thompson
Oct 31, 2008
HILO » Big Island Mayor Harry Kim vetoed a bill yesterday that would make it a criminal violation punishable by a $1,000 fine to research or grow genetically engineered coffee or taro on the Big Island.
The bill was passed 9-0 by the Hawaii County Council on Oct. 8, meaning there are more than enough votes to override the veto.
Kim cited two general concerns: that police cannot enforce such a law and that the world needs research on genetically modified crops to ensure food supplies.
“How would the Police Department make a determination on which taro or coffee has been genetically engineered?” Chief Lawrence Mahuna wrote to Kim. The department has no equipment or personnel who know how to test for genetically modified organisms, and no money to upgrade its capabilities, Mahuna said.
Hmmm. If the police can’t detect the presence of GMOs, how will local people & pollinators be able to prevent spreading GMOs? Or unknowingly consuming them?
Maybe the feds should require that all GMOs must also be engineered to glow in the dark. Biotech can do it with jellyfish genes. Not sure what the longterm effect on the rest of the natural world would be though. Then again, at least those GMOs could be traced.
Kim added, “There is global demand for new, improved, safe and dependable plant genetics, and Hawaii is a special place for research because of its location and its year-round growing environment.”
Where is there a global demand for GMOs? I have never heard of rallies of people begging for GMOs, or consumer inititatives to support GMOs. Weird. I’ve only heard of international biotech corporations demanding laws to allow them to operate experiments & business without public informed consent. In fact, I dont think most americans even know what GMOs are, or that they are eating GMOs without labels or fair choice.
Over a thousand people wrote in support of this bill– to protect their local coffee and taro. How important are our local needs & demands to the Mayor?
There are many successful & emerging programs to develop sustainable farming practices and natural varieties of traditional plants to encourage drought resistancy, etc. Here’s a great example. No need for GMOs to feed the planet.
Council Chairman Pete Hoffmann scoffed at both statements.
In the case of a violation, scientists would report anyone undertaking forbidden research, and police would act on that information, Hoffmann said.
Regarding research on other crops, the bill does not impose a ban on them, and there is no intention of widening the ban to include other crops, he said.
Such a widespread ban has been the fear of opponents of the bill. On Oct. 8 the Hawaii Island Chamber of Commerce testified, “This bill is just the beginning of an anti-science agenda.”
Hoffmann called such fears “a bunch of nonsense.”
Indeed. It makes me sad when they say we hate science, cause really we don’t. I love science, especially agronomy & botany. Taro growers practice science for a living. We’re not stupid.
Its kind of like saying that spraying chemicals is science, so if you don’t want to inhale pesticides then you must be anti-science, and you must be against progress too!
Hoffman is looking into calling a special meeting of the Council to override the veto, since he anticipates public testimony would last all day, he said. Previous testimony was overwhelmingly in favor of the bill, he said.
Kim repeated a call for more public education about genetic modification, including the strict state and federal regulations it must meet.
Ok. Right, kinda. Education -around TRUTH- starts with labelling, consumer choice and political transparency. Those “strict” regulations were designed and put in place by the biotech industry itself with the purpose of reducing restrictions on their risky business. The biotech industry now corruptly influences the federal FDA & EPA. For example, they are allowing a 1500% increase (!) in approved levels of glyphosphate chemical herbicide applications, all for the recently developed RoundUp Ready GMO-sugar beets. That is not strict, that is simply special interest political favors.
Mayor Kim should know better. We’re still cleaning up heptachlor from the pineapple days… lets be careful about what these biotech chemical corporations may forget to tell us about exactly what they are doing to our ‘aina.. and our economy.
The only truly strict laws to protect food safety are those that regulate Organic certification. And no, GMOs do not qualify for Organic certification.
Representatives of the Biotechnology Regulatory Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture and from the state Department of Agriculture have offered to discuss these matters with the Council, Kim said.
Will these powerful biotech-backed agencies be appearing at a public hearing? If what they have to discuss wasn’t or couldn’t be explained at the past 3 public hearings, then what are they up to?
Its not over yet, YOU can help! Please send the county council a letter of support for the GMO-ban today- its quick & easy! Take a minute to demonstrate your support for protecting Hawaii’s local agriculture, people, and culture from genetic modification.
Letters of support are due by Monday, Nov. 10th.
]]>