Hokulia Bypass Litigation

[Konaguy]

The Honolulu Advertiser had an article on the stalled Hokulia bypass road today. My picture is in the article, along with my opinions about this legal mess.

[timkona]

Re: Hokulia Bypass Litigation

(in a nasal voice, despairingly)

"It'll never woorrrk. We're dooooomed"

Look on the bright side. All those stop and go cars, with idling motors, are emitting lots of unburned hydrocarbons, crushing fuel efficiency, and increasing our dependence on foreign oil. Plus, there is the time lost in commuting that helps to destroy families in South Kona and Ka'u. Not to mention all the jobs within Hokulia itself that would be generated, building houses, and roads, and landscapes, and swimming pools, and giving lots of Southside workers a shorter commute.

Good thing that road will never get built. Brilliant !!

[GnosticWarrior]

Re: Hokulia Bypass Litigation

You must understand that what sets America apart from other countries is our private land ownership rights. There are laws in place to condemn such private land for the benefit of the public. It is the duty of the govt. to follow the proper protocol in acquiring such land. And the land owner should have the right to exercise all his legal options. It appears that is where this issue is at.

The govt. has a problem of starting development before they were able to secure possession of the land. Plus, from what I see the problem with eminent domain is that the govt. maybe cannot offer compensation to what a private developer would offer for the same land. Look at how much the trailer park owners at Briny Breezes where offered by the developer there!

I believe that the govt., especially when its a non-federally funded project, tries to low ball the compensation to the landowner. So I cannot blame the landowner to exercise his rights for the govt. to prove their case of the public need and compensation to move this project forward. If they started off with the highest compensation possible maybe it would have been settled already.

What would you do if you were the private landowner? I think govt. has more cases of abusing their powers of eminent domain versus truly using it for the public good. Can't blame the landowner to keep govt. in check.

[Konaguy]

Re: Hokulia Bypass Litigation

As I've said many times before, ""the needs of the overall community outweigh the rule of law and the landowner's rights in this situation." The Coupe's have been fighting this condemnation for 7 years. While the traffic bottlenecks in South Kona have grown worse and worse.

My faith in the judicial system and the laws that govern us has been severely tested by this litigation. Yes laws are supposed to be in place to protecting us. But in this case, the judicial system and these laws is harming the overall community. Who has to suffer through bumper to bumper traffic.

The whole litigation really begs the question, is there some ulterior motive driving the Coupe's. As far as I understand, the Coupe's tried to develop their land twice in the 1980s. But both times, the LUC denied them. Then in the mid 1990s the Hokulia was approved without any LUC blessings by Hawaii County.

Both times the Coupe's tried to develop their land, it was going to be on a similar scale of the Hokulia project. It probably slipped through the Coupe's mind why did our projects get denied,but the Hokulia project went through ?

[Pua'i Mana'o]

Re: Hokulia Bypass Litigation

Kona, would you please give us a simple paragraph, encyclopedia-style, summarizing the Hokuli'a issue? I know I am not the only one who would really appreciate it.

[Konaguy]

Re: Hokulia Bypass Litigation

Kona, would you please give us a simple paragraph, encyclopedia-style, summarizing the Hokuli'a issue? I know I am not the only one who would really appreciate it.

1250 Oceanside Partners originally envisioned the Hokulia project in the mid 1990s. Lyle Anderson bought the Hokukano lands (which is where Hokulia sits today) over a period of years for 41.5 million in the late 1980s. These lands were used for grazing cattle. These lands had very little agriculture viability aside from grazing cattle.
Originally when it was called the Villages at Hokukano, it was going to have a 27 hole golf course with a resort component and a significant amount of house lots. That was scaled back during the initial government entitlement process to allay public concerns about the project.

Now this is where it gets fuzzy at least for me. The County of Hawaii approved the project after a three year entitlement process which culminated in a developers agreement between Hawaii County and Oceanside 1250 in 1998. LUC action on this project was deemed not required.

Among the conditions imposed by Hawaii County on 1250 Oceanside Partners was the requirement they build a bypass road between Captain Cook and Keauhou. Construction on the Hokulia project and the phase I of the bypass road commenced in 1999. The bypass road required 20 landowners to sell a part of their land for the bypass road. Which as far as I know, only the Coupe's provided the only resistance to selling any of their land.

Negotiations for the 2.9 acres dragged on for nearly 2.5 years between Oceanside and the Coupe family. When in late 2000 the Coupe's went to court to block the County of Hawaii from condemning a part of their land for the bypass.

Around this time, there was heavy rains above the Hokulia project. This caused severe flooding and runoff from the Hokulia project. A group called Protect Keopuka Ohana went to court and sued 1250 Oceanside for runoff violations that allegedly damaged the reef in front of Hokulia.

Due to this litigation, it brought more legal scrutiny of the Hokulia project. The Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation joined PKO's case when there was allegedly desecration of burials and archaeological sites in the Hokulia project .Ultimately PKO questioned the legality of using agriculture land to build luxury homes on (even though there was a viable agriculture component of Hokulia). This multifaceted litigation dragged on into 2003. When Judge Ibarra enjoined the Hokulia project from any further development. This order barred Oceanside from completing the basic infrastructure at Hokulia, the completion of Phase I of the bypass, and barred the County of Hawaii from issuing building permits to the 150 or so lot owners who bought lots in Phase I of Hokulia.

This impasse dragged on for 2.5 years, when the plaintiffs and Oceanside 1250 came to a settlement in 2006. The settlement required Oceanside to
petition the LUC to move substationally most of the Hokulia project from the agriculture district to the rural district, reduce the density of the Hokulia
project from 750 lots to 665 lots. Also 1250 Oceanside would work to get the bypass road completed. Which where are today.

[timkona]

Re: Hokulia Bypass Litigation

Another month goes by, and still no Hokulia Highway. No Alii Parkway to connect to it either.

Traffic crawls along toward Kainaliu, in a stop-n-go nightmare, while copious amounts of unburned hydrocarbons from inefficient slow revving motors help to further destroy our atmosphere.

The irony is that Jack Kelly, Charles Flaherty, et al, The Burial Council, and probably the Coupe family, all consider themselves environmentalists. By their very actions, they are clearly NOT environmentally minded. The worst part is that the lack of cognitive ability, or logical thought processes, prevents any of them from seeing the error of their ways, environmentally speaking.

This is a really good example of what I mention in my signature about dogma being much more important that logic. Stubborn ignorance is the worst kind of ignorance.

[Konaguy]

Re: Hokulia Bypass Litigation

The next major court hearing in the Hokulia bypass condemnation litigation is is going to be July 2, 2007 in Judge Ibarra's courtroom. I'm cautiously hopeful that things will work out. Bear in mind it will take up to 2 years for the bypass to be completed, if the Coupe condemnation litigation is resolved. The Napoopoo intersection will take 18 months to re-align/construct alone.

As for Alii Parkway, it is programmed in the STIP for FY 2009-2010. There is still some outstanding burial issues that need to be resolved before the
road can be constructed.

Lastly,as far as I understand PKO/Jack Kelly/Charles Flaherty etc wanted the bypass opened all along. It was Oceanside that balked at opening
it. Along with the fact that Haleki'i Street cannot be used as a primary thoroughfare and the Coupe condemnation litigation.

Best possible scenario, the Coupe condemnation litigation is resolved in July. Phase I of the bypass is completed (its 80% done) and opened to the public during
the time Phase II is under construction.

[Konaguy]

Re: Hokulia Bypass Litigation

The Coupe condemnation trial is scheduled to start on July 9th, 2007 at 1:30pm in Judge Ibarra's courtroom. The estimated completion of this non-jury trial is August 3, 2007.

I wrote this letter to the editor (Which amazingly West Hawaii Today did not publish, but the Hilo paper did).

http://www.hawaiitribune-herald.com/.../letters03.txt

"I've been closely following the Coupe condemnation trial with great interest for the last couple years. I've read the legal arguments presented from both sides. It boggles my mind why the Coupe family has fought this condemnation in the courts for close to seven years. To me, their legal arguments don't make any sense.

It is indisputable that the public will benefit from the Hokulia bypass. It will eliminate the current bottleneck from Honalo to Kealakekua.

It seems the basis of their case is the belief that they'll be unfairly taxed by Hawaii County when they "up zone." But the reality is, back in 2000, Oceanside offered to not take action to get Hawaii County to collect any fair-share contribution from the Coupes. This was a huge concession by Oceanside in an attempt to resolve this impasse. But it was rejected by the Coupes.

Overall it seems to me the Coupes have been unreasonable with their demands for compensation for 3.3 acres. None of the other 20 landowners had a problem with their land being condemned or with the fair-share contributions when they "up zone" their lands.

It seems to me since the Coupes' legal arguments don't make sense, that they have an ulterior motive here. Maybe they are frustrated that their Hokulia-style project in the early 1980s was rejected, but Lyle Anderson's Hokulia project was not. An even more dastardly reason for this madness is they want to make the Kona community suffer a traffic nightmare. But, hey, we live in the land of aloha, so the latter shouldn't be happening, right?

Aaron Stene

Kailua-Kona"

[beaker]

Re: Hokulia Bypass Litigation

When can we break Konafornia off the island and ship it over to HonoluluAngeles? What an eyesore that place is. Lots of bellyaching over there, too. Pfffff

[Konaguy]

Re: Hokulia Bypass Litigation

When can we break Konafornia off the island and ship it over to HonoluluAngeles? What an eyesore that place is. Lots of bellyaching over there, too. Pfffff

I could say the same thing about Hilo too. Hilo is a big rainy eyesore.

Also at least to me, a lot of the bellyaching is legitmate. The infrastructure disparity between Hilo vs. the rest of the island is huge.

[Pua'i Mana'o]

Re: Hokulia Bypass Litigation

dear god not this again.

[Konaguy]

Re: Hokulia Bypass Litigation

dear god not this again.

Yeah, well Beaker started it. It must be a Hilo thing ?

[beaker]

Re: Hokulia Bypass Litigation

I could say the same thing about Hilo too. Hilo is a big rainy eyesore.

No, that's Puna.

[Konaguy]

Re: Hokulia Bypass Litigation

No, that's Puna.

Ummm its Hilo. Puna does rain, but its pretty.