A City Council committee agreed to defer action on contentious measures tied to the last undeveloped phase of Haseko’s 1,100-acre Ewa Beach development.
The Zoning and Planning Committee move, taken last month, marks the second time the bills have stalled amid development plans hampered by legal challenges and other issues.
>> Bill 62 would rezone about 69 acres to allow for a mix of resort, apartment, industrial, business and preservation uses around a recreational lagoon, the area’s planned focal point. The development’s initial plans for a marina between Oneula Beach Park and White Plains Beach were scrapped.
Haseko may build 4,850 residential units and 950 visitor units in the area. The rezoning request would not affect those figures.
>> Bill 63 would amend the boundary of the special management area to reflect a lagoon with no ocean outlet.
Both bills passed second reading in April. If approved at a third full Council reading, they will be adopted.
Additionally, resolution 15-206, which would grant a special management area use permit and shoreline setback variance for, among other things, a pedestrian walkway, covered pavilions and boardwalks within the 60-foot shoreline setback area, was also deferred.
Councilman Ikaika Anderson, who was serving as committee chairman at the June 16 meeting, recommended deferring the measures, citing possible legal concerns with imposing changes to a unilateral agreement. Anderson said he would seek legal advice from the city’s corporation counsel before moving forward.
Haseko’s Ocean Pointe and Hoakalei development, which has been under construction for nearly two decades, is continuing to strike a divide among some Ewa Beach residents.
Supporters of the company’s vision cite social and economic benefits that a resort area will bring to the community. Opponents don’t want to see development near the shoreline of popular Oneula Beach Park, also known as Hau Bush.
Last year, in response to Haseko’s rezoning request, several area residents testified against resort zoning near the shoreline. In an apparent compromise move, the Council agreed to change 8 acres of resort zoning close to the shoreline to 4 acres each of business mixed-use and neighborhood business zoning. About 7 acres of land adjacent to Keoneula Boulevard mauka of the lagoon was also changed from business mixed-use to resort zoning.
Some homeowners also sued Haseko after it announced in 2011 that a lagoon would be built rather than a marina.
In the class-action suit, jurors agreed that Haseko had engaged in an unfair and deceptive act or practice and awarded the homeowners $27 million in special and punitive damages. Circuit Judge Gary W.B. Chang, however, set aside the award, ruling that the law does not allow a jury to award punitive damages in an unfair and deceptive act or practice claim. Also, Chang said, the homeowners had failed to adequately prove they had sustained damage from the switch to a lagoon.
Lawyers representing the homeowners have filed a motion for a new trial on damages. Chang has yet to issue an order on the motion.
Also discussed at the Zoning and Planning Committee meeting was a letter drafted by Steven Chung, Haseko’s attorney, which details lagoon-related safety concerns and measures.
It states that water safety experts advise putting in place an age limit for access and other precautions due to the 19-foot drop at the lagoon’s edges. In addition, the letter noted that limited visibility and strong winds could create difficult swimming conditions.
Councilwoman Kymberly Pine, who represents the Leeward Coast and is a Haseko homeowner, said: “Haseko promoted this as a safe lagoon in all of their brochures.” However, due to the potential dangers tied to a lagoon, “the developer needs to really take a step back and evaluate this. And so does the Council,” she said.
Pine had initially pushed for amendments to the unilateral agreement that she said would ensure open access to the lagoon based on prior marketing and other representations made to homeowners. But after reading Chung’s letter, she said she questioned whether the Council should approve the requests.
Raymond Kanna, Haseko’s executive vice president, said a lagoon is already permitted under existing zoning and that the rezone request is to reconfigure uses around a lagoon instead of a marina. While Haseko’s marketing materials had depicted a vision for the lagoon, “there was no guarantee that such vision would be implemented,” he said.
Kanna said “to suggest that the basin is too dangerous to be used as a lagoon is to suggest that it would also be too dangerous to use as a marina, which is nonsense.” He said the lagoon would attract kayakers and other paddlers, and that a separate swimming area is being developed.
“Haseko’s vision from the beginning has been to create a mixed-use planned community with residential, light industrial, commercial, resort and recreational components where people can live, work and play,” Kanna said in a statement. “There have been many changes that have been made to the Ocean Pointe-Hoakalei master plan over the decades. This is normal for any mixed-use project with a long development timeline.”
Several residents testified in support and opposition to Haseko’s requests at the meeting.
State Rep. Matt LoPresti, who is the lead plaintiff in the class-action lawsuit against Haseko, contended that approving the developer’s requests was premature given the ongoing legal challenges. LoPresti (D, Ewa Villages-Ocean Pointe-Ewa Beach) said advertised marina amenities prompted him and his family to pay about $100,000 more for their home than a comparable property down the street.
Upon purchasing the home, LoPresti said his family resolved to “deal with the traffic out to Ewa Beach because we’ll have a resort marina that we’ll be able to go home to.”
Other residents told committee members that Haseko’s development will benefit the community.
Richard Balicoco, an Ewa resident, said Haseko’s development is “the best plan for the Ewa (and) West Oahu region.” The lagoon, he said, will provide “significant benefits to Ewa and Oahu in general.”
